Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Ninety One results presentation for the full year to 31 March 2026. I will then explain the performance of our business over the reporting period. Kim McFarland, our Finance Director, who is in London today while I'm in Cape Town, will then present the financial review. I will then conclude before we take questions. You can submit questions during the presentation via the chat function. Percent to GBP 171.8 billion. This was driven by portfolio growth, the take on of Sanlam Investment Management, and a return to annual net inflows. Net inflows were GBP 2.8 billion for the year. The operating margin expanded from 31.2% to 32%. This led to growth of 12% in our adjusted earnings per share, resulting in a 10% year-on-year dividend growth. It is important to draw strength that the inspiration from our long and full history of 35 years. This is a resilient business which tends to recover after tough periods. Through many market cycles, Ninety One has managed to grow from start-up into the global business it is today. We continue to serve investors, their advisors, and S.A. market. In the rest of the world, we serve the largest and most sophisticated asset owners and asset platforms, as well as a select group of financial advisors. We have ample opportunity to grow market share in the years to come. How many people, currently at Ninety One and those who worked for Ninety One in the years before, who contributed to the growth of our company, especially the clients who supported us throughout. I'm delighted to report growth in revenue and earnings after three tough years. The long-awaited improvement in the relative attractiveness of emerging markets as both diversifier and credible investment opportunity has finally manifest itself over this period. This is important to a firm like ours, which is associated with the emerging market asset class. The investment management industry, of course, continues to become ever more competitive. The partnership with Sanlam, which we announced last year, has been formally established at the beginning of February this year. The relationship is strong, and the partnership is starting to deliver. We are indeed optimistic about the potential for this partnership. We accelerated AI adoption, and Ninety One is actively moving from experimentation to business model adaptation. AI is a huge opportunity for us, and if not comprehensively adopted and integrated into our business, could become an existential threat. It was Lenin who said that there are decades when nothing happens, and then there are weeks when decades happen. We operate in a world of change, geopolitically, technologically, and climate related. AI is changing everything. The value of the companies we invest in, the way we work, and the pace at which we work. As a 35-year-old start-up, yes, a 35-year-old start-up, we simply must embrace this change. During the past year, conditions improved for Ninety One. For most of the period, markets broadened and emerging markets have regained legitimacy. Fee pressure persists, competition is as intensive as ever. At our interim update, we told you that we are organizing our business efforts in three opportunity-facing units, supported by the Ninety One Foundry, which incubates new initiatives outside of those directly in the operating scope of the other three units. This structure is now fully operational, with clearly identified and accountable leadership teams in charge of each of these units. The format is designed to create focus with an eye to long-term succession. The International Public Markets unit, comprising of all our regions outside Africa, delivered net inflows across the board besides the U.K. I have said this for some time, but I remain confident that our U.K. business will turn around and resume growth in the years to come. We have a strong pipeline. We were a little unfortunate with unforeseen outflows towards the back end of the year, as well as delayed inflows in this unit. Asia- Pacific was the largest contributor to net inflows, mainly from global equities in the first half and gold, natural resources, and local currency fixed income strategies in the second half. Global exchange-traded fund assets under management for the entire industry have grown to almost GBP 20 trillion, with one-third listed outside the U.S. Over the reporting period, we worked hard to position Ninety One for a slice of the business that will flow via active ETFs. We announced a strategic partnership for active ETFs with the third largest ETF provider in the world, State Street Investment Management. This is off the back of our multi-decade outsourced relationship with the State Street Group. These ETFs will be co-branded. In South Africa, we issued our first domestic active ETFs under the Ninety One brand. The Sanlam UK book has also now been fully absorbed into this business. In South Africa, the structural outflows from the S.A. institutional retirement funds were compounded by the unexpected loss of a longstanding mandate elsewhere in the region. The funds platform has once again delivered healthy growth, while the unit trust and ETF business remained positive, driven by our income funds. The Sanlam integration has now moved to business as usual, as the final systems conversion will take place shortly. I want to congratulate the team for the way in which they have dealt with this. The relationship with Sanlam is strong, and we look forward to exceeding expectations over the medium and long term. The private markets unit made progress over the past year. We substantially strengthened our EM private credit platform and secured seed capital for new funds. In the interest of focus, we decided to exit from developed market private credit, although we still have developed market public credit offerings in our portfolio. In The Ninety One Foundry, we have identified a set of exciting initiatives. The establishment and strengthening of our in-region emerging markets investment capabilities in the Middle East and Asia was driven from the Foundry. Last year, we announced a joint venture with a Singapore-based alternative investment manager, Arc Avenue Asset Management, which has close links to IDG Capital and its partners in the venture and growth capital community of Asia. This transaction has now received all regulatory approvals and has been fully operational from the 18th of May this year. This substantially improves our ability to understand the IPO pipeline in the region and the rapidly evolving technology landscape and growth investment opportunity set in Asia. In the Middle East, we have secured seed capital for our first domestic credit vehicle run from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and we have moved one of our senior investors to Riyadh to lead the build-out of the local team covering the region. The second project of the Foundry is to establish and commercialize a digital finance capability, which helps us align with the inevitable change in the way in which financial services will access some of our offerings digital action, evolution of client preference, as well as administrative efficiency. Digital finance can also play a substantial role in supporting financial inclusion, and we will provide further and more concrete updates in due course. The third project of the Foundry is to rethink our business for the AI era and encourage experimentation beyond what will happen in the major business units. We have been investing in and establishing relationships with partners to accelerate this as we are committed to transform ourselves into the active investment manager of the future. Although we have deployed machine learning for many years, the new tools and the improved organization and management of our data will create great opportunities for us to do things differently and better in future. It is important to take the entire firm with us, which is easy in theory, but a great deal harder in practice. Let me give you an update on our progress on this front. Within our framework of advocate, equip, and use, we can measure adoption rates by Claude licenses and token usage and experimentation within the projects which we monitor. The firm-wide enthusiasm for the new tools is growing in leaps and bounds. We have allocated substantial managerial resource to data organization and presentation of data within the firm. We hope to see a much improved data score by the time we report again. This will improve our ability to transform the business, which of course will drive productivity as well as client outcomes. All efforts on this front have been fully expensed to date. We have not changed our business priorities, including our commitment to sustainability. Our business model remains client-focused, people-centric, capital light, and technology and AI enabled. Ninety One is a specialist in emerging market investing across the capital structure, including differentiated credit with in-region capabilities in Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, augmented by a strong partnership in Latin America. We also have a well-established multi-style global equities platform and multi-asset offering. This must translate into best-in-class active investing and client engagement over time. Equity markets have been supportive but gave away a substantial part of their gains in the final month of the year, affecting flows and revenue estimates. Since the year-end, there has been a recovery. Markets have narrowed again. This puts pressure on systematic broad alpha strategies. This graph shows the drawdowns for the final month in red. The orange numbers represent the result for the year. To bring this alive, the Johannesburg All-Share Index was up by 7% for the first 11 months, but ended the financial year with a rise of 44%. You are all aware of the sharp rebound in markets subsequent to year-end. The same argument follows for fixed income. This chart also highlights the substantial positive performance differential between emerging market and developed market bonds. Although these are the most concentrated markets since we started Ninety One 35 years ago in 1991, active managers need to be aware that there have been similar periods of substantial concentration in the past, which, of course, then paved the way for long periods of deconcentration, which in theory are good for active investment management or stock picking. This is an update from a previously used slide to show evidence of modest and renewed interest in active emerging markets investing. We are a long way from the enthusiastic pursuit of emerging markets after the great financial crisis of 2008. It is clear that the momentum is improving. We believe that emerging markets remain a structural growth opportunity. Assets under management grew by GBP 41 billion over the year to GBP 171.8 billion at year-end. This was driven by a GBP 19.9 billion growth in the portfolio, GBP 18.3 billion from Sanlam, and GBP 2.8 billion of net inflows from other business. All asset classes except multi-asset have recorded positive net inflows. I have mentioned the flows by client group earlier when we discussed the opportunity facing unit. Noteworthy here is the decline in net outflows from the U.K. client group over the last three years. We are seeing a good pipeline, and I would finally expect that to turn positive in the coming year. The U.K. and European teams are now working as one unit. We also expect South Africa to turn around in the coming year. In September last year, things looked very good and indeed improving on the performance front. Unfortunately, the quality equity style, which is a significant part of our equities book, started to underperform the mainstream benchmarks. This is a style-related issue and not surprising in these markets. We have full confidence in our team and their ability to continue to deliver for clients over time. Secondly, in South Africa, we continue to struggle in the multi-asset space. We are confident that the improvements we made in this area, including personnel changes, will bear fruit in the near future. Notwithstanding this, our emerging market investment performance remains strong across the capital structure, and the house is firmly focused on performance as we go into the new financial year. People and culture are central to the long-term success of Ninety One. Despite the long tenure of many leaders in the firm, we continue to remind you that we're building an intergenerational leadership. With the establishment of the opportunity facing units, we have substantially empowered the next generation of leaders. Active talent management is vital for our future, and we believe that competitive compensation and equity participation are essential tools for good talent management. Our people remain net investors in the business, and they now collectively own 29.4% of the firm after the dilution from the Sanlam transaction. Ninety One wants to be known as a talent-friendly, people-centric business with an owner culture. Thank you. I now hand over to Kim McFarland, our Finance Director, to take you through the numbers. Kim, over to you. Thank you, Hendrik. I am here to present a set of strong financial results for the year ended 31 March 2026. I would like to highlight that our core operating business has produced good results, and we have completed the Sanlam transaction. To note, management fees increased by 9% and adjusted operating expenses increased by 8%, with the core business recurring results increasing by 11% to GBP 169.3 million. Management fees were at GBP 617.3 million. This is as a result of the increase in average AUM from GBP 129 billion to GBP 151.8 billion, alongside a decline in the average fee rate to 40.7 bps. The rate of decline in the fee rate has slowed since the interims. For the last six months, the average was 40 basis points, resulting in the average fee rate for the year of 40.7 basis points. The factors were once again the mix of a growth in lower fee rate portfolios, including the Sanlam assets, and the decline in the higher fee rate portfolios. Looking forward, we're anticipating an average fee rate between 38- 40 basis points. This is aligned to our previously stated view of a decline of one to two basis points per annum. Adjusted operating expenses of GBP 448 million includes the interest expense on the lease liabilities for our office premises and the full bonus accruals, but excludes non-operating expenses. The adjusted operating profit of GBP 211.3 million is up 12% from the prior year. Other income is predominantly a combination of operating interest and a number of fair value market adjustments on seed investments. A similar portion of this is the FX losses driven by the stronger sterling to U.S. dollar. The adjusted operating profit margin increased from 31.2% back to 32%, largely where it was at the interim results. Ninety One's profit before tax, after considering the non-operating adjustments, on which I will go into more detail, increased by 2% to GBP 207.5 million. On the non-operating adjustments, adjusted net interest is the interest earned on the corporate bank balances. The large share scheme net expense is as a result of new awards to staff and accelerating vesting of prior awards, so in effect, reversing the prior year credits recognized. Remember, we fully expense the bonus accruals within adjusted operating expenses irrespective of how it settles. IFRS requires the amortization of these bonus-related share awards over four years, which is then reflected as a share scheme net credit. There are corporate-related charges not considered as operating expenses. The amortization of the intangible asset is as a result of the Sanlam transaction. The effective tax rate for the year was 26%, down slightly from the 26.5% in the prior year. The above factors resulted in a profit after tax of GBP 153.5 million, up 2% from last year. Our adjusted EPS shows a 12% increase to GBP 0.174, in line with the increase in adjusted operating profit. This is the analysis of the absolute movement in adjusted operating profit from FY 2025 to FY 2026. It clearly shows that management fees increased, but this increase was partially offset by the increase in employee remuneration. This is the analysis of the movement in adjusted operating expenses. Adjusted operating expenses increased by 8% to GBP 448 million. Employee remuneration represented 65% of the total expense base, and in the prior year, it was 63%, and increased by 11% to GBP 289.9 million. This was driven by an increase in fixed remuneration consistent with the increase in headcount and annual inflationary increases, as well as an increase in variable remuneration in line with increased adjusted operating profit. Over 50% of employee remuneration remains variable, and the resulting compensation ratio was 44%, up slightly from 43.4% in the prior year. Business expenses increased by 3% to GBP 158.1 million. We have again analyzed the cost changes. At a high level, we have broken down the movement as follows. Inflation-linked increase of GBP 2.8 million. An FX-linked decrease of GBP 1.7 million, a small impact. However, there has been a pickup in technology and AI spend of GBP 5.6 million, which will continue as we invest in our systems, and other cost decreases of GBP 2 million. Many cost categories decreased in the year, but this was offset by the noted increase in technology spend. Looking ahead, we're expecting the business expenses to increase across the board. This will be driven by inflation, the impact of the additional staff, ongoing technology spend, and the new Cape Town offices. This is showing the business expenses and total expenses as a percentage of average AUM and basis points over a six-year period. The adjusted operating profit margin over the period is also reflected here. Business expenses have increased over the period, largely driven by the investment in our IT systems. Total and business expenses as a percentage of average AUM have declined, aided by the growth in average AUM. The adjusted operating profit margin has remained in the range of 31%-35%, and this shows the scale benefit of the Sanlam transaction. The capital position as at 31 March 2026. Ninety One's qualifying capital was GBP 253.4 million at the end of March 2026. In line with our dividend policy, the board has recommended a final dividend of GBP 0.074, taking the full-year dividend to GBP 0.134 per share, an increase of 10% in line with the increase in adjusted operating profit. After the dividend payment, there'll be an estimated capital surplus of GBP 163.4 million. This will result in a capital coverage of 241%. During the reporting period, we continued with our share buyback programs, and this resulted in the return of capital of GBP 27.4 million and a reduction of 17.3 million shares. By taking this into account, this proposed dividend, the interim dividend, and the buybacks in the year, we will have returned GBP 155.4 million of capital to our shareholders. In the same period, we issued in total GBP 125.7 million of PLC and limited shares for the Sanlam transaction, which completed at the beginning of February 2026. As at the close of last night, we had returned a further GBP 7.6 million of capital, resulting in a closing share count of 1,00 1.6 million. In line with our capital light model since listing six years ago, we have returned over 60% of our initial market capitalization to shareholders. A few updates regarding the Sanlam transaction. The SA transaction completed at the beginning of February 2026 with a further GBP 16.5 billion of AUM onboarded. The take-on of the bulk of the Sanlam assets was near the end of the financial year, there was limited earnings impact on the FY 2026 results. As previously mentioned, we will be weighting the shares issued to Sanlam for the determination of adjusted EPS for the March 2026 results. For the finals, this looks as follows. Simply put. To start with the number of shares issued at 31 March 2026 was 1,005.1 million. We issued 125.7 million shares for the Sanlam transaction. At the end of the year, the shares in issue, excluding Sanlam, was 879.4 million. Weighting of shares issued for Sanlam UK is 13.7 million multiplied by 289, which is the days since the transaction, divided by 365 is 10.9 million shares. Weighting of shares issued for the Sanlam SA is 112 times 59, which is the days since the transaction, divided by 365 is 18.1 million. Shares issued for adjusted EPS calculation will be 908.4 million. The intangible asset arising on the balance sheet for the Sanlam transaction will be amortized over 15 years. This is tax deductible in the U.K. but not in South Africa. On this final point, I will now hand back to Hendrik. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Ninety One is a resilient and robust business with positive momentum. The demand recovery for emerging markets is visible, our offering is competitive. We are indeed in a stronger position than a year ago. We are investing through the cycle in talent and technology to be future fit. The growth opportunity in Asia with Arc Avenue Asset Management, access to the ETF market with State Street Investment Management, and the distribution reach that the Sanlam transaction has added gives us two or three new compelling growth vectors. We are committed to cost and operating discipline, our focus remains on investment performance and client service. Over the past 35 years, we have built strong foundations for an exciting future. Thank you very much. We will now move on to Q&A. If you have a question and have not yet submitted it, please do so via the chat function at the bottom of your screen, stating your name and your organization. Varuni, over to you in London to handle the questions. At the moment, we have no questions. Just a reminder to use the chat function at the bottom to submit your questions, stating your name and organization. I have a first question from Marie Moore. Any thoughts on the Schroders comments that they needed more scale in active in order to succeed, and hence the merger with Nuveen? Marie, thank you very much for your question. I think you should ask Schroders to give you the answer on Schroders' issues. My simple point is that if you are good at what you do in active investing, and you don't have, very importantly, too wide an offering or product set, it's all about competence and quality rather than quantity. If you note, our operating margin is significantly higher than where Schroders was most of the last few years. It would give something away of that focus. At Ninety One, we're a focus specialist operating at a scale which helps us to reach the kind of clients we want to deal with across the world, but with clear areas of competence. We believe that is sustainable in the current world, even given the current fee decline rate. Size by itself doesn't mean anything. Size that works for you, for example, in passive, where you can really outbid the competitors in terms of price, or where size gives you an ability to be at the table irrespective of how good you are, is sometimes of help, but not always. For Ninety One, size is not the focus, and particularly not lateral expansion or lateral growth. In other words, if you grow in the areas where you're good at, and you therefore increase your margin and your focus, it is a good thing. If you just grow laterally and add different new product lines which don't reach scale by themselves, you will, in the end, generate not only lower returns for your shareholders, but also over the cycle, worse results for your clients because your organizational focus is dissipated. In our case, we're very clear. We concentrate on emerging markets across the capital structure, we are not in equity. Why? We think there could be a conflict between private credit and equity from time to time. That gives us knowledge of many countries, many the capital structure. We also are a global equity investor in public markets. We have more than one style, which gives us some diversification, but also a differentiated view on markets. That's one business. That's essentially one line. Then we have, we serve certain markets, with multi-asset offerings which suit and which are tailored to those markets. That's what Ninety One does. Therefore, we think we can stick to those areas and grow our business within those areas substantially without any significant lateral expansion. What we would do, though, is expand through partnerships. In other words, satisfy others through skills of other partners who can help when necessary, without defocusing or deviating, or letting Ninety One defocus from its core offerings. A second question from Marie. What was the management fee in basis points if Sanlam were excluded? Pre-Sanlam, you said the floor for fees was approximately 40 basis points. Now what is it? Thank you, Varuni. I will let Kim answer the fee question, but let me just add something to the previous. In South Africa, we obviously cover the domestic asset classes across the broad capital structure because here we play a slightly different role than the specialist position we have in international markets. These are very close adjacencies that one in any way has to understand if you operate in a small market like South Africa. Kim will talk about the fee trajectory. Thank you, Hendrik. Obviously, the take on of the Sanlam assets has had a negative impact on our fee rate. It's had a positive impact, as I think you can reflect through on the operating margin. Again, that's difficult to say at this point because it's early days, having only taken on the assets at the beginning of February. The fee rate did decline over the period. As you saw, it was a slower decline, and as I reflected, it was largely as a result. Yes, Sanlam had an impact because it was a large majority of fixed income mandates that came on board, but it's not the main reason that the fee rate declined over the period. A lot of it was through the mix, particularly the mix of some of the large mandates we've taken on at lower fee rates. I don't know if we've ever mentioned the fact that we've had a floor of 40 bps as a fee rate. It's obviously challenging for us, and I think I've now guided on the fact that the fee rate is at 40. We're now guiding between 38 and 40 bps. We've factored in the Sanlam impact, but I think we will still be challenged throughout the year, should we be taking on large mandates at lower fee rates. I think it's always important to note that we don't reprice our back book over the period. This hasn't actually had an impact on our numbers. Thank you. The next question is from James Slabbert at SBGS. We look at the profitability of business rather than the fee rate when we take it on. As Kim said, there is indeed a difference, and you can see that in the operating margin. Our industry remains extremely competitive, and that is something we've factored into our planning. The next question is from James Slabbert at SBGS. He comments, congratulations on a strong result. When we think of the asset management business, we see that some players in the market are rewarded for high margins despite outflows. How do you feel about the mix between flows and margins as an indicator of business health? Thank you, Varuni. James, thank you for your comment. Over time, we like a mix of beta and net flows to sort of be 50/50. Clearly, in recent years, that hasn't been the case. We've had a very strong market support, which helped our business, and flows were hard to come by. Net flows are an important indicator of healthy client relations and long-term growth potential. We still believe the core job is to invest your clients' money well according to their mandate, because then they will reward you or stick with you. As long as they understand the style you apply and the objectives you set out to meet, one can, maybe narrow markets make active managers look as if they underperform, but not really underperforming their targets. For us, first and foremost, it's about profitability of the business, or first and foremost, about serving clients well. Secondly, it's about doing it at a profitable way. Thirdly, it's about adding new business. We are not driven by a need for net flow over all periods, of course, it's desirous and particularly important in the long run that you add both net flow and benefits from market growth. That's really the magic source of a good asset management business. It's all based on delivering for clients and being seen and being recognized as capable specialists in your area, which then protects pricing power to the extent the industry allows. In a way, I think we're reaching a point and it will happen. We're now already starting to see interest rate rises coming on the horizon. As interest rates rise, I think the pressure on active fees, and as active fees approach where passives and ETFs are, I think we will reach a point where fee pressure will be commercial per mandate rather than structural per industry. It's not going to become a zero fee industry, but the industry has to prove its worth, which has been hard in the last few years. In a broadening market, in a market where opportunities are widespread and where portfolios are more diversified, that will become much easier. Why I'm confident. The next question is from Jonas Døhlen from Deutsche Bank. Could you provide any color on the asset class mix of the GBP 18.3 billion Sanlam take-on? The reported AUM bridge gives flows by asset class, but the residual includes both Sanlam and market foreign exchange. From the reported mix, it looks potentially more fixed income multi-asset heavy than we had assumed. Is that fair, or is it more of a function of market and FX movements by asset class? Thank you, Varuni. Jonas t hat is an astute observation, absolutely correct, and intentional. One of the attractions for us of the Sanlam acquisition or partnership was that it would shift our portfolio towards fixed income at a time when equity beta had worked hard for the business. We thought we had the capacity to run much larger fixed income portfolios, predominantly in South Africa. Even though the fee is lower, this is a margin enhancer and a portfolio stabilizer. No one can call markets, and maybe Elon Musk can do it better than all of us. What we do know is we're closer to markets being fully or overvalued equity markets than a year or two or three ago. Therefore, shifting, adding weight on the fixed income end is probably not a bad thing to have in your portfolio. This was intentional, and we think also we got some very good fixed income skills out of the Sanlam Investment Management team to support and strengthen the Ninety One team. We're very excited about this part of the business. I have two questions from FC deBeer at Avior. I'll ask them in turn. The first is: It seems we had a slowdown in net flows in the second half 2026, especially from Asia Pacific, which you note includes the Middle East. Maybe some more color on that change in the trend. FC, again, a correct observation. Two real drivers behind that. Firstly, the last two months of the year, things got a bit nervous, and then the war started, and people were holding back. Secondly, we had some equity down weights during the final quarter. We also had, which we talk about in the disclosed notes and in the annual report as well, we had some pressure on South African multi-asset, where we haven't performed as well as we should have. We spoke about the changes we've made. There we had to endure some outflows along with the structural outflows of the SA pension business. Why? Because in South Africa, people aren't creating jobs, and therefore pension funds and retirement funds are, in aggregate, a net outflow. That slowed it down. What we expected, which didn't materialize, is an acceleration in the allocations to international and emerging markets from the U.S. Why? That probably over Christmas was a bit slower, and then you got the uncertain first quarter. We think that will actually reestablish itself after we've had the absorption of all these massive IPOs in the U.S. and the interest that they are creating. What's happening on the side, though, is this very interesting Asian explosion in equity, not only returns, but in interesting equity opportunities on offer. The IPO boom in Hong Kong, through the entrepreneurial businesses available in Japan and Korea, Taiwan, and of course, the semiconductor boom and the related hardware boom that backs up the AI boom driven from largely the U.S. and China. We think that will attract capital internationally, and therefore some of it will come via our funds. We think the environment will improve, but we had a tough period since Christmas, largely structural or largely, sorry, cyclical given market conditions, but also partly self-inflicted. The second question from FC: Due to the fact that the bulk of the SIM assets came on board at the end of the year, how should we view the management fee basis points going forward? I think Kim will guide on that. Just to be clear, she guided on the existing book of business and fees, excluding the impact of Sanlam. The direction of travel, which is still one to two basis points per annum, structurally excludes any impact from Sanlam. You've basically had the last two months of that. Is there anything more? I don't think we disclose or split the fees. We don't want to report fees by client. Kim, if you would like to add to this, feel free. Thank you, Hendrik. I will sit with what I'm saying. Largely, Sanlam was onboarded in the last two months. We have looked at the averaging and the impact as far as the additional Sanlam assets are concerned. We are now guiding with the 1-2 basis points, which will take us between 48 and 50. That actually does include the Sanlam assets and the impact on those particular figures. That's where we're guiding, and it's what I referred to earlier. Thank you. Thank you, Kim. You meant 38 and 40. Jeez, 38 and 40. 38 and 40. Thank you. You said. Is that correct? Correct. Sorry, my apologies. 38 to 40. Cited and drives up the price of the share, which probably would be helpful, but not correct. Any other questions? Yes, we have a few more. The next one is from Dean Tlotleng from Steyn Capital Management. This question was asked before, but in case you want to add any more color. Net flows were GBP 2.8 billion for the year, but with GBP 2.4 billion of that in the first half, second half flows were essentially flat. Can you give more color on what drove the H2 slowdown? Was it timing with mandates won but not yet funded, or did redemptions and rebalancing offset the gross wins? Varuni, thank you. I gave that answer previously to FCA. I want to stick to the answer except to say yes, there were one or two things which are taking longer, which we expect in this year. I would say a fair reflection would probably have been GBP 1 billion net inflow in the second half versus over GBP two in the first half. That would have been a fair one. I felt a bit hard done by with a GBP 0.4, that's life. We don't just live reporting period to reporting period, it was a bit of a disappointment for us as well. The next question is from Marko Ras at Optimum Investment Group. Can you unpack the quality and sustainability of the GBP 2.8 billion net flows, especially given Asia-Pacific was the largest contributor, while Africa and the U.K. still saw outflows? How much of the flow improvement is broad-based and repeatable versus a few large mandates or product-specific wins? Thank you. I think given the market we play in, very large accounts can always have an impact. Whether they just adjust their own portfolios. Often, they adjust their portfolios. They have nothing against you. They simply change what they want to do, or they have capital needs for better opportunities than the classes you provide. That's the first thing. We will always be subject to that. I would say that number is very well within our reach on an annual basis. We can't predict quarters and six monthly periods, but that's a very sustainable number, particularly given that I've guided a return to positive flows in the U.K., where we've suffered negative flows for a while. The final point is we can't predict demand for our specific offerings. For example, we've just come out of a five-year period where, until a year ago, emerging markets were very unfashionable. We continued to do what we had to do for our clients, and we're ready to take the flow as it comes, and we expect substantial flows. Quality investing was the rage, the bond proxies that people bought after the financial crisis, stable companies that didn't need bank finance. Well, what performed last year? Very expensive growth stocks, energy, and financial banks. Those are not in the remit of those portfolios to buy. If clients take a truly long-term view and they have diversified portfolios, they'll stick, and they'll measure us against other quality managers. If they are momentum investors, which unfortunately big part of the market is, they may actually, at the bottom, sell out. We've seen that value managers, many of you on the call, have experienced that over time, where your performance is great over 20 years, but you tend to have the flows at unfortunate periods. At Ninety One, we can't guide for that. We have a diversified enough portfolio. We serve enough clients across the world that we will continue to survive, prosper, and do okay, but those are factors that can affect flows. I'm very comfortable that the number for last year is within our grasp within current conditions. The next question is from Siphelele Mdudu at Matrix. Some of it you've actually covered in your previous answer on fee pressure. I'll read it out anyway in full. Congratulations on a strong set of results. Could you provide some color on the fee pressure you're seeing in the market? In your interim results, you noted that certain large-scale mandates were secured at lower fee margins, albeit with greater persistency. How are you thinking about this trade-off between pricing and the quality or durability of assets under management going forward? Thank you, Varuni. Siphelele, I just want to correct your question. We don't think the large mandates are necessarily more persistent. The relationships are persistent. Once you get into one of these very large, whether it's a sovereign wealth fund, whether it's a very large pension scheme or insurance company, you have jumped a whole lot of hurdles that competitors who are not in that system cannot jump fast. It takes years to take on these mandates. You have persistency in terms of the relationship with the institution, and that is exactly what Ninety One is doing. We are building long-term relationships with up to 400 asset owners and asset platforms worldwide. That's it. We think we have a fraction of the assets we can have out of those relationships. What we can't predict is how they move money and how they reallocate. Last year, we benefited from some of the, particularly in the first half, big allocations, and then sometimes they down-weight you, so they're not necessarily more persistent. I think actually the most persistent business is direct retail. We don't do that. Direct retail comes with all sorts of other things, compliance cost, expensive and many expensive administrative platforms, many people. We should have larger accounts, more assets under management per head, stable head count in the future, and expanding profit margin, but probably, slightly more volatile earning stream. For us, the important thing is the relationship with the asset owner and the approval. Even if they fire you for short-term performance, they must still believe that you are competent enough to serve them later when conditions are better or when you do better again, or when another skill set in your firm is attractive to them. I think that's the business we try to build. It's persistency of relationship, not persistency of mandate. It comes with, you want to win the big mandates, you want to have a GBP 10 billion net year. Well, sometimes you've got to suffer the outflow when something is reallocated. At least you're engaging with the market with money. If I think about the Ninety One position, having internationalized originally out of South Africa, is we really wanted to go where the money is. In that sense, we are very comfortable, and we just have to live with the rough and the smooth. In the second half of this year, we probably didn't have all the smooth in our favor. I hope the model is clearly explained to you. We have three questions from Rahim Karim at Cavendish. I will ask them in turn, and I think this first question you partially covered in your answer just now, but his question is: Can we push you on the current conversations you have had with allocators and what the pipeline looks like across the business? Rahim, you ask that question every year, and every year I tell you I can't tell you. Now that you're in Cavendish, you first were at Investec when you asked it, now you're at Cavendish and you still ask the question. I think that the hint has been, the fact that large asset owners are discussing international diversification very actively. This has been slowed down by the massive capital requirements in the U.S., given the IPO opportunities coming their way, but it nevertheless, we believe, will come. It's positive. Secondly, remember, Ninety One offers international services to North American clients, not domestic, and of course then regional strategies across the world. In the South African case, I think we comfortable about a better flow picture. We are very confident that our multi-asset business will turn around. We have access to a deeper and different distribution channel through Sanlam, where we expect some proper flows. Also in Asia, where there's a lot happening and where our numbers are really good, particularly the Greater China numbers or China numbers. We think money is going to start flowing that way. We are quite optimistic, but not naively optimistic, and we're not signaling record years coming, but we can see money coming our way. The important point is it's extremely competitive. You have to have your numbers, which currently good in emerging markets, needs to be right up there. We're moving from a top half or top quartile industry to an industry where the top decile is rewarded with flow. That's more the challenge than whether there is business around. We also believe that private markets, the myth of private markets, or private markets are being seen for what they are, illiquid investments. Therefore, a desire for liquidity is growing, and therefore public markets, through passive, but also through appropriate active vehicles, will become more attractive. That's exactly what's happening now with the IPO boom. It's bringing people back to public markets. In short, we are more positive than two years ago. We have to prove that we can get better than the first half of last year, but we have enough opportunity to chase and therefore enough work to do, and we have enough interest from client. The question is when. Rahim's second question is: Can you talk to how you expect the compensation ratio to evolve in the next year? You have historically suggested this might increase slightly if markets recover, given the cost control which has taken place historically. Rahim, I think we are focused on making sure that our key people are shareholders and are therefore well-aligned. Even though we compensate people well, we will make sure that our compensation ratio also remains competitive in the market which prices our capital, as well as the market for talent. I don't see much change in that ratio in the year to come. If anything, there will be a great deal of discipline and questions asked about how compensation is dished out. Probably, we want to emphasize an owner culture rather than an employee culture in our business. Rahim's final question is: Given the capital coverage, the expansion of the buyback program makes sense. Can I ask why GBP 55 million and not more? Kim, you say. Kim, it's very tight. Well, that's probably the right answer, actually. We are very conservative on our allocations. You'll note in the announcement that went out today, there's a GBP 55 million program which expires at the AGM point later this year. We will continue to revisit it. It's really a point-in-time calculation, and at the same time, being conservative of where we actually are from a capital perspective. Rahim, if they keep smashing the stock price like today, we'll probably be out motivated for buying more. I have to get past the Finance Director. We have a related question from Jonas Døhlen at Deutsche. Excluding compensation, how should we think about the business expense run rate into FY 2027? The bridge points to the technology as the main driver of the increase. Is that recurring spend or more project platform investment with future efficiency benefits? I think Kim must answer that, Varuni. I think we could probably both answer it, to be honest. I think you're spot on your last point. There is an uptick in technology. In many ways, you will see the uptick in head count as was picked up, which is caused by a number of factors, not least of one was the take-on of Sanlam and the associated staff. Yes, there is an uptick you've seen in technology, and we are looking ahead, as I said earlier, of a continual increase in technology spend. However, yes, the plan is that this will reap the benefits of efficiency in the longer term. And it's something, Hendrik referred to it in some of his spend on some of the projects that we're undertaking within the business. At this point, we are investing largely for the future, but we would like, and we plan to see the efficiency and cost benefits in the future. Kim. Just Varuni, for Jonas, to comfort him. We have no large vanity projects to spend on, which will be either capitalized. This is really ongoing improvement spend staying with the program. We believe, as Kim says, that there will be eventual efficiencies, and there should be. The last two questions are from Piers Brown at Investec. I think you've answered the first one sufficiently, but I'll read it anyway, and then I'll also read you the second at the same time. The first question. You mentioned markets have narrowed since March, but also that the pipeline is strong. Can you expand on the geographies and asset classes you are currently seeing most interest? The second question is: Can you please elaborate on the Foundry initiative? Are there concrete AUM opportunities from these initiatives, or is it more about building expertise? Thank you, Varuni. Piers, nice to hear from you. Let me just start with the last question first. The Foundry is about pushing the boundaries. It's about doing things you wouldn't do in the normal course of your business as a disciplined, regulated financial firm. It's about thinking out of the box. I highlighted three things. One is building in-region investment capability in some parts of the emerging market universe. The first project was establishing a capability inside Saudi Arabia. We have raised the seed money for a credit fund in the Middle East region. That we wouldn't have had if we weren't there. Now we have to build the business from that. The notion is that you have a market there which is GDP-wise, multiples of South Africa. We've got a big business in South Africa with a young population which will continue to save, and where government will keep some assets in the domestic economy as opposed to the history when money was always sent abroad. There's a story there. That is a little out of the normal practice of our bigger units, which run with certain efficiency targets, et cetera. That's why we kept it there. The joint venture we have done in Asia with the growth and venture investor in order to get access and understand the pre-IPO pipeline is based really on investing better rather than anything else, but also accessing the interesting technologies of a region which is less understood in the West and applying that to our business. We will come back. Digital finance is the way half of finance is consumed. It's not Bitcoin and punting here on Donald Trump's latest cryptocurrency. This is actually about preparing Ninety One for a totally different way of financial services and investment consumption way beyond filling in a paper form for a mutual fund or trading an ETF on an exchange. It's very early-stage experimentation, but we think we could apply that, and there are some AUM targets linked to that, but obviously modest compared to the size of the overall Ninety One business. Varuni, I think the first question has been answered, but Piers could just nod if he's happy with that or send you a message. Thank you. In the previous, because I thought so. Thank you, Hendrik. We've just had one last question that's come in, again, from James Slabbert at SBGS. What are your thoughts on consolidation in the industry? Any view from your side on Ninety One as both an acquirer or potential target given share price decline would be appreciated. James, thank you very much for the question. I think Ninety One is not a typical M&A or acquisition-driven business. The Sanlam one was an extraordinary opportunity which we took, which is really building a relationship with a major distributor. I don't think we would be out there buying smaller boutiques or companies. What we want to use our shares for is to make sure people who are going to drive this business into the long term have adequate equity, and I think that's much more important for us. The other way we deal outside the normal organic channel is to build partnerships with people who have already spent the capital, the CapEx on the growth opportunity we want to pursue. For example, accessing the world's third-largest ETF platform as a sub-investment manager is far better than building your own platform and all the complexities that go with that. That's how you should see it going forward. We are tight on equity. When we stand here in a year or two in future, I think you would see us, and Kim quotes the number, what% was bought back since initial IPO, that number would be higher, not lower. We are capital considerate, and we are a capital conservative business. We will venture in terms of partnerships or in terms of talent acquisitions which matter, but we are not typical goodwill buyers. That's how you should see it. People have come and made offers to us in the past. They may come again, we have really committed to the fact that we as an employee group and a team here, as the directional shareholder of this firm, want to build it for the long term, and we are driven by the income coming out of it, not about the capital gain. We don't really care where the market prices our share in any given day, as long as our business is operating well. I think that creates the intergenerational business where people can really commit and devote their time, and that's why we have so many people who've been around for a long time and know what they're doing and who are appreciated by clients. I think that's the model we are building. Slightly anti the AI world. We are building a business where people will enjoy to work and hopefully engage with their clients properly, but they have to be efficient, they have to be competent, they have to meet up to the standards of the industry. That's our model. As a third-party shareholder, you are therefore invited to participate in that well knowing we are not driven by either a bunch of deals or the fact that we will just trade the business if anybody comes and offers a small premium. As fiduciaries of capital and as representatives of a wide group of shareholders, we obviously have to consider that when any offers are made. For now, we are really driven to grow this business in a world which is changing fast, and we see significant benefit if we do our job well. Varuni, I think we're done. Yes. No further questions. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. We really appreciate your time. Any further questions, please come to our IR team, and we look forward to talking to you later in the year again at interims. Thank you.