Thank you, everybody, and good morning. Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for joining the webinar today. Thank you also for being a supporter of PIN. If we could move to the next slide, please. My name is Tony Morgan. I recently took over as chair, having joined the board just over a year ago. However, I admit I've known Pantheon for many years. In fact, when you've spent over 25 years working in private equity as I have, it's pretty much impossible not to know Pantheon. It's a firm I've held in very high regard for many years, so I was delighted to take over as chair in January. I'm joined today by Charlotte Morris, who's a senior partner at Pantheon and the lead manager of PIN. Charlotte, perhaps you could introduce yourself. I've met many of you, I'm sure. I'm Charlotte Morris, as Tony says, Lead Manager of PIN, a Partner at Pantheon. I've been with the firm for 20 years now, most of that time spent working on secondaries and, took over from Helen Steers as Lead Manager of PIN at the beginning of this year. We're hosting this webinar today. We're delighted that, so many of you can join us. It's the first time that we've done a webinar in this format, so we're really excited and, look forward to sharing a lot of information with you today. If we go to the next slide, there's a Q&A function within, Zoom. If you look at the bottom, you should have a Q&A box, and if you go there, submit a question, we'll have some time at the end to go through questions. You can choose to submit a question anonymously, or if you leave your name, if we don't happen to get to your question, we may have quite a few today, then we'll be able to get back to you separately. Maybe with that housekeeping out of the way, Tony will start us off today. I think you need to go off mute. I knew that would happen. Charlotte will do the vast majority of the talking today as the webinar mostly relates to what's going on in the underlying investment portfolio. I thought it'd be helpful to briefly set the scene on how the board is thinking about things before I hand over to Charlotte. If you read our recent interim report, you would have picked up my commentary that the private equity market has had a challenging few years. This is after a period of several decades, really, where private equity consistently outperformed the public markets. As a result of these challenges, the board recently undertook a significant piece of strategic work, looking at both our investment performance and investment strategy, and a lot of the things Charlotte's going to talk about today highlight some of the key analysis and conclusions from that review. This review resulted in us making a number of important changes to our investment strategy that I will remind everyone of in a second. Before I do that, I want to highlight a few key things we are focused on as a board. I think most importantly, we continue to see strong underlying growth in our portfolio companies. There are many things outside of our control, multiples, FX, interest rates. What we always want to see is continued growth in revenue and earnings, and that's the ultimate driver of long-term value growth in a portfolio like ours. We also continue to see strong exits showing embedded value in the portfolio. Our portfolio has a long track record of delivering exits at material uplifts to NAV. Again, this really speaks to underlying portfolio quality. I'm pleased to say our cash position and cash generation has been strong, and the board's also been actively looking at actions that we can take to increase shareholder value outside of improving NAV. I'm going to come back to that at the end of the presentation. If we could go to the next slide, please. As a reminder, working with Pantheon, we've recently made the following key changes to our investment approach. Firstly, a significant refocusing of our investment strategy to a much narrower set of private equity fund managers. We're targeting a core group of 25 best-in-class managers that we believe can consistently generate first and second quartile performance. This is down from around 90 relationships we have today. Secondly, a move to invest more consistently through the cycle to diversify our investments by vintage and avoid some of the vintage challenges we've experienced in recent years, and Charlotte will talk about. Thirdly, becoming an active seller of assets by using the private equity secondaries market to generate incremental liquidity from our balance sheet when it makes sense to do so. This approach will introduce more cash flow volatility into the business, so you should expect to see cash and debt fluctuate through the cycle, but we expect this approach to improve performance over time. With that as background, I'd like to hand over to Charlotte to take us through the presentation. Thanks, Tony. I'm first of all going to take a bit of a step back and look high level at private equity returns, what's happened in recent years in the market. Then we'll look into PIN's portfolio, the performance we've seen since 2022, in particular, what we've seen within the underlying assets. That will lead into why we feel good about where PIN is today and as we look forward, including the strategy evolution that we're taking the company through at the moment. There is a lot going on in the world, so we'll just at the end touch on some of the current market themes before wrapping up with our outlook for 2026. Here, just taking a bit of a step back. Private equity has consistently outperformed public equities over more than 30 years. We're showing here the median outperformance versus the MSCI in the sort of mid-green boxes, and the dark green is the top quartile performance at the top. You can see over time that there's been that consistent outperformance relative to public markets. What we're looking at here is Cambridge data, so one of the most used private equity data sets that is out there for benchmarking. You can see that there's that outperformance over time. When you look at prior peaks, like just before the global financial crisis and what we can see today in the 2021, 2022 vintages now, there are some similarities in the sort of subdued performance that you see in those vintages before you're getting to a bit of a market reset. Now, if we narrow in on the period since 2022 in particular, the past few years have been characterized by macro themes that everyone's aware of. You know, the rapid interest rate rises that we saw through 2022, 40-year inflation highs, a number of wars and conflicts globally, leaving geopolitical tensions and wider sort of uncertainty. Those themes have translated into the private markets in terms of a sharp decline in market activity, both new deals and exit activity that we've seen in recent years, fewer funds being raised, and really actually a bit of a reset of the private equity landscape and a difference in how managers can generate returns going forward and who the kind of winners and losers are going to be. If you look on the right-hand side of this page, across that phase since 2022, the beginning of 2022 is what we're showing here in this line chart. PIN's performance was in line with the wider private equity market. Again, we're showing Cambridge global private equity returns here. This is quarterly time-weighted returns, and in the green line, what you can see there is the MSCI All World. Private equity hasn't exhibited the kind of swings that you've seen in public equities. In our view, the performance tracking the pooled benchmark over what's been quite a difficult period is reflecting some level of resilience in the portfolio. Here now as we dig into to PIN specifically, and we're looking at longer term performance for PIN, what we're showing here is PIN's vintage IRRs compared again to the Cambridge All Private Equity median IRRs for each vintage. It's not a perfect comparison. You know, PIN has a mixture of funds and directs in each of these vintages. What you see in the Cambridge data is the actual funds raised in each of those vintages. However, what you can see here is from 2010 to 2019, PIN's performance has pretty much tracked the Cambridge benchmark. Since 2019, PIN's outperformed the Cambridge median, although you can see across the board performance over this period of the last five, six years has been weaker than what we've seen historically. Before we dive into the portfolio, though, I just wanted to recap where we are today, just level set everyone on the composition of the portfolio. Just over half of the portfolio is in directs with the remainder invested through funds. We're tilting towards the mid-market at half the portfolio, but growth at 18% and venture at 6% also represent another quarter of the portfolio that's important and a driver of growth. It's a global portfolio with you know, most of the exposures in the key private equity markets of North America and Europe. Finally, in terms of sector, tech and healthcare make up just over half of the company exposures in the portfolio. We'll come back to talk in particular about software later on. The funds part of the portfolio comprises primary blind pool commitments and fund secondaries, while the directs are a combination of co-investments and manager-led secondaries. Now, what we've presented on the page here, and I'm aware it's quite a lot of data here, so we will put these slides on our website after this webinar, and you'll be able to kind of go and look at these data points in detail because there is quite a bit of data through the presentation. We've broken out here the multiple and IRR performance, so not horizon returns, but overall multiple and IRR of the investments within the portfolio, and we've split it into two key periods. The 2010-2020 phase that represents more established returns and the kind of longer term picture, and then 2021-2025, the last five years or so, where we've seen the impact of those challenging macro conditions that I talked about and that we've seen through the recent years. You can see in the top boxes here over that 2010-2020 period, the returns are really solid with primaries and co-investments achieving the type of returns that we underwrite for those investment types. 2x in high teens for the primaries, it's right in line with that, and above 2x in high teens-low twenties for the co-investments on the right-hand side, where you can see that 2.2 is certainly delivering on the multiple and the IRR a little bit below. Fund secondaries in the middle here isn't part of our active strategy at the moment, but it has been historically and was over this 10-year period. The returns there are in line with the expectations of that part of the market, where you typically see multiples of 1.5x and mid- to high teens on the IRRs. Over this phase, the manager-led secondaries that are in the portfolio are quite a different profile in terms of the underlying companies and the deals compared to what we see today in the sort of 2019, 2020 onwards. The profile of deals that you see in the manager-led secondary part of the market are what are commonly referred to in the market as continuation funds or continuation vehicles, where a manager is keeping one of their assets and typically skewed towards top performing companies. The star assets within a portfolio that we see in today's deal flow. When we turn to sort of today's deal flow and what we've seen across 2021 to 2025 in the sort of second set of numbers here, you can see here the impact of the last few years, both in terms of on the primaries, the capital deployed has been slow from those amounts committed, as well as deploying into particularly peak valuations 2021, 2022, and seeing the moderation of those valuations in the following years. Our direct strategy, so manager-led secondaries and co-investments, deployed quite a lot of capital during the 2021 to 2022 vintages. We'll come back to talk a little bit more about that. The IRR performance of those deals is likely to be somewhat challenged by the longer hold periods that are now anticipated. We do still expect to generate good returns in multiple terms on those assets. When we think about the portfolio today, while this performance that reflects the evolution over the last few years is lower than what we have seen historically and lower than our overall expectations for the full hold of these assets, the holding multiples, so the valuation multiples for companies in the portfolio today, have largely reset to today's valuation environment. We see a lot of the noise and the impact of the last few years already reflected in today's NAV. If we dig into 2021-2022, in particular, a little bit further, of the unrealized portfolio, those 2021, 2022 vintages represent almost half of the paid-in capital on those deals, so the cost of those deals. We've shown here the returns across each of the investment types for 2021 and 2022, and it's clear that the returns of these different cohorts are overall 1.3x and about a 10% IRR, lagging the overall return that we've seen across 2010 to 2020, that more sort of mature phase where the performance sits at around 1.8x and 16% overall. As I said just before, these vintages made investments into companies at what were higher valuations. We've seen a negative impact coming through from the extended revaluation reset over recent years, but also the expected extended holding periods for these assets. You might have expected in normal market conditions 2021 assets to already be exiting by now, sort of five years into their hold. As these assets mature from now, we expect that the performance going forward will be driven by the operational performance, the growth in earnings and top line now that the valuations have been reset. The bar chart at the bottom here sets out the NAV of the portfolio split out by vintage, and that gives you a sense of the amount of deployment that happened in 2021, 2022, compared to that of 2023 to 2025, for example. Our net cash position in 2021 and 2022 led to recycling that higher than usual distribution activity in those years into higher than usual deployment. That profile of investing has hurt subsequent performance. If you take a step back, many of you will know that PIN has run a net cash position pretty much since inception, up until 2024 when we first went into a geared position. When we look back over the last few years, and on the next slide, turn to think about what's happened in primaries over that period, we've seen a couple of cycles play out through the last few years. 2022 was characterized by the tech rerating that you started to see at the back end of 2021 and into 2022. That clearly impacted venture and growth in particular, and you can see the falls both in 2022 and stabilizing, but also into 2023. While in 2023, the buyout returns were impacted by the rising rates and inflationary environment that came through in the second half of 2022 in particular. Then 2024, you can see that there was a recovery across all of the stages, and in particular, that bounce back that we saw in venture with a nearly 15% return over that year. 2025 so far has shown us a bit of a pullback with events like the tariffs announcements and FX headwinds flowing through into the valuations of the portfolio. The past three, nearly four years at this point, have been difficult for the wider private equity market, and that's been reflected in our portfolio. The portfolio has reset in terms of valuation downdrafts, some write-downs on a small number of assets that weren't able to withstand that rising rates environment. The portfolio is high quality, and we believe it's in a good place today, where the NAV now reflects the multiple contraction, the moderation of earnings growth rates. The impact of the market factors that we've seen in the last few years is really embedded in PIN's NAV today. We think that the portfolio has demonstrated in the last few years resilience in the face of that quite challenging market environment, and we think that positions it well for recovery from here. When we think about the composition of the portfolio, it is diversified. We have more than around 500 companies representing 80% of the portfolio. No company is more than 2%, so that diversification has given us a bit more stability in the portfolio. When we dig into the operating performance of the companies, we do see continuing operational growth. 12% weighted average EBITDA growth within our direct portfolio. We'll dig into that a bit more in a minute. We've continued to see uplifts across the portfolio. When we see the companies exiting, that's often where we see this bumper exit that comes through from the managers really doing the best when it comes to exit to identify the type of buyer that is willing to pay up for their asset and see a surprise on the upside at the point where they finally sell a company. Then just in terms of some of the other metrics around the portfolio, and again, this is data focused on the directs, in particular, where we have good coverage of all the data points within the portfolio. The portfolio is valued on average at 15x EV/EBITDA for the companies that are valued on an EBITDA basis, with net debt just under 5x at 4.8x net debt to EBITDA. So a reasonable position, and as I said before, reflecting the reset to today. The average age of the portfolio has ticked up slightly with those longer holds to 5.7 years, and we've seen pretty limited write-downs over the last three years across the portfolio. As I mentioned, we're sort of a handful of companies where with rates rising quickly and having a little bit more debt on their balance sheets, they've struggled to afford that. We've seen a few write-downs in the portfolio. When we dig into the directs here, and this is 53% of the portfolio, these are the companies, as I said before, that we have invested in through co-investments and manager-led secondaries. Where we're selecting a company that we get through the deal flow that we see from the manager relationships that we have. We're investing directly into a company, always alongside a private equity manager who is the one responsible for doing all of the day-to-day work, managing the strategy and growth of the business. These companies are either new assets for the manager in the case of a co-investment or ones that they've already owned for a period of time and therefore know really well, in the case of a manager-led secondary. They have attractive growth characteristics. That's why we tend to see and why we target returns that are over 2x on these transactions, and they've effectively passed through two layers of scrutiny. First of all, identifying the manager and the underwriting and diligence that we do on the manager's abilities, and then secondly, on the specific company opportunity where, on these particular opportunities, we typically see lower fees than what we would do on a fund position. Co-investments are generally no fees and carry. Manager-led secondaries are a negotiated fee, so lower than what you would see in a fund. This is a cost-effective way of capitalizing on the value add that we can see with the selected managers in the wider PIN portfolio. Co-investments are also typically invitation only, so they're not just accessible to any investor out there. When we look at that direct portfolio, and it's a good way of seeing the themes that are going on in the wider portfolio. We dig into this portfolio. We've got 86% coverage in these stats here. You've seen a 12% EBITDA growth only for the companies that are being valued on EBITDA and just under 13% revenue growth. Still seeing strong operating performance within the portfolio. What we've done here on this page is to set out a value bridge. We looked at this direct part of the portfolio where we had that 86% coverage, end to end, looking at June 2024 to June 2025, linking the operational performance, so the actual top line and EBITDA growth at the company level to what translated into valuation movements at the PIN level. That's why we've done this on this June to June period, so that we don't have any of the noise of adjusting to different periods. We can match the company performance with the valuations that we saw, coming through to PIN's portfolio. What you can see here is the strong operating performance that 13% or so in revenue terms, 12% that's contributing to valuation from EBITDA valued companies is amplified because these are leveraged businesses, and that contributed 15.7% increase in value across this cohort. You can see here in the gold bars that that strong operating performance has been offset by a number of negative value drivers, including increased net debt, multiple contraction, some companies that were written down to below 0.05x. Those are the kind of write-downs to practically zero or actually zero, and then a strong FX headwind of 4.8% over this period. When we dug into these companies understanding what has driven that increase in net debt, the majority of cases where debt was increased was where an increase in debt, more debt had been taken out to fund add-on opportunities. Buy and build strategies within the portfolio where the companies were acquiring businesses and using debt to fund those acquisitions. That also is part of the revenue contribution because this isn't just organic revenue. It includes a component that comes from the add-ons. It also is part of the EBITDA margins being sort of flattish, where the companies are investing in integrating those businesses and indeed also in part of the multiple contraction in that some of those add-ons are just valued at the price of the add-on rather than re-rating up to the platform multiple. When we take a step back from that and think about what that means. We should start to see some of the benefit from that add-on activity coming through, if that then in the future translates into cross-selling opportunities and synergies and improvement in efficiency, this investment in add-on activity, we hope will generate attractive, growth from here going forward. There was also a small impact from some dividend recaps, so where businesses had repaid, debt very quickly and were cash flow generative, companies, the managers had recapitalized those businesses and given dividend recaps back to the equity investors. When we think about what this means for the positioning of the portfolio, we've seen the impact of the valuation resets over recent years, and that is already embedded in the portfolio valuation today. We've seen the impact of the companies that have struggled with that rising rate environment in 2022, and we've seen that come through into the portfolio in these limited write-downs and write-offs. These aren't necessarily permanent write-offs, which is what we publish in the annual report and the interim report in terms of the write-offs data. This is a more cautious approach because it includes any companies that are still owned by the managers and where they're still working on returning value, and they haven't lost that business to the lenders. We hope this gives a bit more sort of insight into what's going on in the underlying portfolio, particularly over this last year period, and this is something that we'll continue to provide in the annual report and interim reports going forward to keep giving that insight into the portfolio. When we look at the portfolio level over the last three years, this is across the entire portfolio, we've seen a similar picture in terms of multiple contraction, FX headwinds, some limited write-downs impacting the overall returns. When we think about this, the subdued returns that we're seeing over recent years, in our view, are coming more from macro or financing factors as opposed to a deterioration in the core business fundamentals where we still are seeing that earnings and top-line growth within the portfolio. When we look at valuation, we can see that our portfolio companies and the data that we're showing here is again for that direct portfolio, so that throughout this presentation, it's on the same cohort of assets that you're seeing all of this data. The portfolio company valuations we think are reasonable, and they're lower compared to the MSCI. We've shown two different ways of presenting the MSCI here. In the gray box, we've got the aggregate method where you aggregate enterprise values and EBITDA. In the pale green boxes, we are computing the MSCI using each of the company's multiples and market cap weighting that to reflect that there is that concentration in the MSCI into the Mag Seven stocks. You can see here, whichever way you look at it, and in particular for the technology assets, we have a portfolio that on a relative basis is pretty reasonably valued and we think gives that reset that we've talked about has already been flowed through the portfolio. Overall, PIN's portfolio for this cohort is valued at 15x. We ourselves have that higher weighting in technology and healthcare that, as you can see here, are typically held at higher multiples than the market average. As I say, our exit data reinforces that valuation discipline, and we continue to see the uplifts that come through at the point of exiting the portfolio companies. You can see here what we're showing on the right-hand side, and many of you will be familiar with this slide from our investor presentation. On the right-hand side here, you can see that over time, we continue to see those uplifts at exit that demonstrate the embedded value within the portfolio. Alongside that value in the portfolio, we've seen a pickup in cash generation and an improvement in liquidity. The distribution rate, which you saw on the slide before, has been increasing over time after the last few years where it sort of troughed at 8%-10%. It's nearly doubled in the 18 months from the end of our FY 2024, so May of 2024 through to November of 2025. Over that 18-month period, it's doubled nearly from 8% to now at 15%. The coverage ratios that you can see here in terms of financing, undrawn coverage, are robust. In this market, we've started to see improving liquidity conditions with that gradual recovery in the M&A market and IPO market starting to come through. Overall, when we think about the quality of the NAV, where it's positioned today, and how we see it's positioned to grow going forward, having seen the impact of the valuation reset and the changing environment flow through into the NAV of the portfolio, we think the portfolio is well positioned to start to see a recovery towards stronger NAV performance coming through as we see a recovery start to come through in the market. I want to turn now and talk a little bit about the strategy evolution. Tony sort of gave an introduction to this at the start of the call. We announced much of this at our Capital Markets Day last September, and in an RNS that we published at the time. We've talked about what's happened in the portfolio in recent years, and as we dug into that performance with the board last year, we considered how now if performance improves from today. One part of that, as I say, is that wider market recovery. We don't wanna just be waiting for a recovery to come back. We looked at the factors that are within our control, and active capital management is a refinement of strategy that we believe, based on our modeling, can improve performance going forward by 2%-3% from better managing the vehicle, better managing the portfolio. The key elements of that are consistent deployment, managing new investment activity as well as divestment activity, allowing gearing now that we have a geared position to oscillate and go out in the trough of the market, come into a cash position in the peak of the market, and be much more actively managing the portfolio. On the next page here, when we dig into what that means in practice a little bit more, on the left-hand side here, you can see a few of the themes that that Tony touched on at the outset. Increasing the focus on core managers in the portfolio is an important one that we announced in our interim report and has been something that we have been moving towards over recent periods. Really thinking about in this new market environment, you may have read this in Bain & Company's Global Private Equity Report that they published last month. Our conclusions were very similar last year, that the landscape for private equity is changing going forward. The way that managers have generated returns in the past isn't necessarily gonna be as straightforward going forward. The environment has changed. We're no longer in that kind of super cheap debt environment, and the drivers of returns going forward may be different. For us, backing the managers that have the ability to generate returns in the new market environment is really important. Digging into how they've generated returns historically, how much of their returns have been reliant on use of leverage, how much have genuinely been driving growth in their companies, creating better companies, actually genuinely creating value in their assets, and being differentiated in what they do, that's gonna be important going forward, and so we're refocusing on those managers. We're continuing to execute on underwriting discipline within our portfolio, so not only in that fund selection and the managers that we choose, but when we review the asset opportunities that we receive from managers, really kind of sticking to our underwriting discipline. You can see in the bar chart here at the bottom how we've underwritten manager-led secondary deals, and you can see in those first two bars that the majority of the return is what we're expecting from top line growth, improving the efficiency of the business with EBITDA margins, not really relying on debt pay down, and having a smaller component that could come from multiple expansion, especially if you're investing in a business that has a consolidation play and you can benefit from multiple arbitrage on those add-ons, but also can create a scale business that has the possibility of a rerating that can give us some sort of upside potential. On the next slide here, just to kind of dig into for the funds piece of what we invest in, how we think about that at Pantheon. We are looking for specialization and, as I mentioned before, a repeatable strategy that can give that manager an advantage in the new market environment and over the long term. We look for specialists, and what do we mean by that? Sector specialists, so when it comes to talk about healthcare software in a moment, we invest behind software specialists. It's incredibly important to have managers that live and breathe their part of the market and really understand it. Country or regional specialists is important within Europe and Asia in particular, where you're investing with managers that are well-networked and understand the culture, speak the language, know how to invest and unlock value in those regions. Operational specialists, so that could be something like a buy and build strategy where they have the expertise to identify add-ons, to be able to truly integrate those businesses and not just end up with a sort of combination of different underlying assets where they haven't really consolidated the market. The ability to embed that skill set within a portfolio company and not just be doing it themselves in a way that isn't sustainable for the business, but allowing the business to take on that skill set and ability themselves so that they truly are building value into the company. You can see here at the bottom some of the sector themes, healthcare spending, whether it's from an aging population or emerging economies, spending more on healthcare. Some of the evolution in telemedicine that has evolved through the COVID-19 pandemic. In technology, you know, notwithstanding the noise that we've seen around software valuations recently, there are these long-term tailwinds and sector trends that we expect to persist around digitalization, the AI revolution, advances in big data that will continue to drive opportunity within tech, and then also evolving sort of consumer preferences. Within consumer discretionary, because of the way that sort of GICS codes work, you see things like education businesses that has been quite an interesting theme within consumer. On the next page, we dig in a bit more in terms of the directs and some of the themes that we've seen there. When we're looking at a specific company, we can dig into the really granular, how is the revenue, how's the financial profile of that business resilient? Is it investing in a sector that has attractive, structural tailwinds? Does it have a recurring revenue model that creates customer stickiness? What is the kind of end market cyclicality like? How can we invest in companies that have more defensive, resilient nature to them? We're looking at margins and how embedded and essential a particular product or service is, and how able is that business to then control the pricing and push through increases in costs and whether different macro cycles that you might see along the way. What does the deal structure look like? When we're looking at a particular asset, we can look at the capital structure that is in place, run sensitivities on what happens in different scenarios in terms of rates and cash flows. In some cases, negotiate downside protection or a preferred return, and explore how resilient to interest rate rises a particular business is. Really important, because we are always investing alongside managers, is coming back to selecting the managers in the first place and making sure that we're investing with groups that really understand the sector that they're investing in and really know what they're doing. Maybe just to kind of dig into some of the market themes and obviously AI and software is something that's been really topical recently. A little bit overshadowed by what's been going on in the Middle East, but certainly the beginning of this year, AI was dominating the headlines, and obviously was something that we have been thinking about across our portfolio. Our perspective on this, and as I said before, we invest with a lot of software specialist managers, the likes of Hg, Thoma Bravo, Francisco Partners, and at the venture end groups like Andreessen Horowitz in the U.S. What we have been doing over recent weeks is speaking to our managers, understanding what's going on in the portfolio companies and what they see and what their perspective on the market developments is. What is really clear is that what we call here the software profit pool, so how software vendors get paid, what they're doing and how their businesses and the business models are set up is being reshaped, and there will be winners and losers. That is very clear. Not everybody is gonna be you know, benefiting from the rapid development of AI. Software is being repriced, but it's more around who owns the data, who owns the workflow, who's kind of dictating the outcomes, and not necessarily the interface. Is it a software provider or the likes of ChatGPT or Claude? It's not really about that sort of interface piece. What's clear to us and our managers is that software isn't dead as a product type. It isn't going away. There are considerations that you need to think about in terms of, you know, the challenges that may come to that part of the market and how that plays out specifically within the companies in the portfolio, but also the opportunities that it brings. We've set out a couple of the thoughts here in terms of the sort of challenges that the market is dealing with. Coding itself isn't a competitive moat anymore, so the fact that you can create something in a piece of software that others had to try and do manually themselves, the fact that you've, you know, put all the effort and used the software engineers to create that isn't enough of a barrier and protection in itself. The pricing model around whether you're charging based on the number of users, and you've already seen that transition from a kind of license model through to SaaS. There is another kind of evolution from, as I say, sort of user-based pricing into what are users actually doing in that piece of software and more of a kind of consumption model, and that's something that will change the way that software is priced, and there'll be winners and losers. Obviously there are some kind of categories in particular. If you're using, you know, public data, scraping that and reformatting it, that kind of software is not gonna survive when AI for sure is replacing the ability to just go and do that and ask, you know, Claude or ChatGPT to scrape that data and come up with some analysis. There are parts of the market where software can have a competitive advantage and can see some resilience from what's happening with the development of AI. Being incumbent, having the data from your customers within your own piece of software can still mean that you have a right to win. The ability to kind of keep those customers, use their data that is private, proprietary to develop better software products, to innovate within your own software product. In the case of our software managers, by embedding your own AI tools and workflow into the software itself so that your customers don't need to go and layer on anything else from a separate, you know, AI provider or an LLM. They're built into the software, into a piece of software itself. AI can offer the opportunity to expand the TAM. If a software business is able to replace something that has been done historically by an individual into a tool within a piece of software, that can increase the TAM for that particular piece of software. There's a lot more nuance at the actual company level, and we'll start to see some of that coming through. When we think about how this relates to PIN's portfolio, we see high quality assets within our portfolio. They're alongside specialist managers. It's a little bit too early to say how this is gonna play out in terms of valuations, and we're keeping an eye on that, working closely with our managers, and in particular at the moment, assessing the risk within our portfolio and going through with our managers, understanding company by company how insulated from the AI developments or how much an opportunity there is within our portfolio. When we think about the valuations though, we, you know, see 19.9x-20x is a reasonable valuation multiple. I mean, it's obviously higher than you see in other sectors, but we think it's reasonable for the portfolio. Within our 34% that we have in technology, about a quarter of the portfolio is actually in software businesses specifically. Actually within that, only 14% is in buyout software businesses. You know, different parts of the market will be impacted in different ways. A lot of the discussion that is in the press at the moment is around buyout software businesses. We have the other 12% that is in growth and venture managers where you would expect them to be investing more in the AI businesses themselves and in more sort of startups and AI-led businesses. There are two other hot things here just to touch on, private credit. There's a lot going on here in the headlines. I think we are entering a phase of recalibration within private credit, where when you think about the targeted returns, the risk assessment, there's been a lot of capital raised in the sort of primary market for private credit over recent years. As you've seen rates evolve, in particular over the past four years, with that rapid increase and then some rate cuts coming through, there is a recalibration going on there and a natural adjustment to that moderating yield environment. We don't see this though as kind of structural re-weakness overall, and within PIN's portfolio, there are no private credit assets, so there's limited first order impact from what's going on in the market there. Then finally, the situation in the Middle East, obviously the most immediate impact of that is the companies that have operations in the region or firms that are really directly impacted by rising oil and gas prices. We have limited exposure to those sorts of businesses. What is likely to play out is more the sort of broader dynamics and the second order effects that we'll start to see. Oil and gas price rises is one of those, whether that starts to lead to accelerating inflation, what does it mean for cybersecurity risks and broader sort of infrastructure vulnerability and leading into macro uncertainty and sort of wider geopolitical tension. We're actively monitoring all of these factors. At the moment, we see limited direct impact in the portfolio, but it is a bit early to see how those broader impacts will evolve and as I say, we keep looking at the situation and how that might play out in our portfolio. Just looking forward from today, we think the market is starting to enter a bit of a cautious recovery. We saw volumes at the back end of 2025 in private equity really kind of recover in that Q3 and Q4 period in terms of new deal activity, but distributions remain below the long-term averages and we hope to see in 2026 a recovery coming through there, in particular as we start to see corporate buyers more active in the market. We talked quite a lot about valuations and the rates environment and how that has flowed through in the portfolio, and we feel like we are entering a more appropriate environment going forward. We hope that from today the outlook for longer term returns is remaining attractive, and we expect that the public markets that have outperformed over recent years, it's really been driven by those concentrated stocks, and that's very different from our portfolio that is diversified and less volatile over time. We hope that the sort of changes that we've been making and continue to make around strategy will set us and the portfolio up well for the near term. We've covered most of this, and maybe just in the interest of time, I might just skip to the last slide here. As I say, over the past three years, the portfolio has stayed in line with the private equity benchmarks. We've kept that diversification and have seen more stable returns. We haven't seen negative returns in the way that you had in 2022 in the public markets. We are seeing over the past few years that liquidity and distribution rate improving over time. The multiples within the portfolio have reset. We're still seeing strong operating growth in the portfolio. We're still seeing the bumps at exit from the carrying value, so demonstrating that embedded value and distribution rates that are recovering. As we look forward, the directs still have quite a lot of younger assets there where they're in the middle of their value creation, and we see growth to come there. We don't have that much reliance on multiple expansion or the use of debt, and as we see the continuing recovery in exit markets, we believe the position is portfolio. The portfolio is positioned more like we've kind of got through that cyclical trough and are starting to see a recovery. With that, might just hand back to Tony to wrap up from the board's perspective. Thank you, Charlotte, for the presentation. Before we start the Q&A, I wanted to just take a step back to the PIN board level and what we're focused on. I mentioned at the start of the presentation the changes we've made to our investment approach, as you see on the left-hand side of this chart. Our focus, I should say, is now shifted to making sure these are effectively implemented by Pantheon. But in addition to investment and portfolio management strategy, we're also focused on ensuring we have the right capital allocation approach and that we're allocating the appropriate amount of capital to new investments versus share buybacks. We know that share buybacks can be an important source of value creation, and is a key area of focus for a number of our shareholders, and that's why we've bought back over GBP 325 million of shares in the last three years, which is one of the largest, if not the largest amount in our sector. We've also been very focused on managing our own cost base, and we're pleased to have recently lowered costs in two key areas, the interest costs on our debt facilities and also the fees payable to our manager, and we've seen substantial cost reductions in those areas. Last but very much not least, we've continued to engage with our shareholders, listen to their concerns and suggestions. One suggestion was for us to share more information on what's happening in the broader private equity market, what's happening in our portfolio, and also what the board's looking at when it's making its decisions. I hope that you found this information we've presented today useful. Our hope is to continue to iterate this analysis and improve our reporting wherever we can going forwards. With that, I believe we're now ready to open the Q&A, so I'll hand back to Charlotte, I believe, who's managing that process. Yeah. That's right. We've had quite a few questions come through. We've got about five minutes or so. I'll just run through a few of these questions. One of the questions is, will the impact of private credit challenges inevitably impact private equity returns? I can take that one quickly. So far we don't think that will. I mean, private credit has been a source of capital for the mid-market, which is a large part of our portfolio. I think there will continue to be private credit managers pursuing that part of the market. The moderation that we're seeing in private credit markets, I think, is more about the sort of spectrum of managers that are there and the different types of credit and lending that they have been offering. Within our subset of that in the mid-market, we see a bit less of that. We are at the kind of high quality end of that, and we don't think that the challenges in private credit are likely to impact what our managers are underwriting for private equity. There's another question that is around the relative returns of directs and co-investments made by PIN. I think that might have been asked before we got to that part of the portfolio. If you want more detail on that, then feel free to get in touch with us. There's another question here around the visibility that we have on gearing of the overall portfolio. Do we keep it within limits? The underlying portfolio within the directs has gearing at 4.8x net debt to EBITDA. That's pretty similar to what we see across different Pantheon portfolios, and it's similar to what you see in the wider portfolio. That is deliberate, both in terms of, generally speaking, the mid-market tends to leverage their companies more modestly than we see at the larger end, and we have only about a quarter of the portfolio that's in the large and mega assets that are the parts of the market that tend to use debt more aggressively. It's sort of structural in terms of pursuing more in the mid-market, and obviously the kind of quarter that we have in growth and venture doesn't really use gearing. It's also deliberate in terms of when we underwrite the directs that we pursue. We spend a lot of time looking at the capital structure because that is something that can really wipe out value, and we saw that through the global financial crisis. That is within Pantheon. We are relatively cautious in the use of debt, whether it's at the company level. When we do secondary transactions, we don't typically use debt on those. When we structure our vehicles, we are relatively conservative in the additional debt. At those different levels, we are relatively cautious, and it's something that's actually very important for us and that we do review quite carefully. There's another question, maybe Tony I'll give this to you, that is about how long will it take to reposition the portfolio into the top 25 managers? Yeah, sure. I mean, given the nature of the types of relationships that we have, and as everyone knows, these are very long-term relationships to funds, under their own sort of timing would take quite a while to rebalance. What we've talked about previously is looking at selectively selling assets in the secondary market, to generate liquidity and to rebalance the portfolio. Certainly one of the key considerations as we look at asset disposal options would be to accelerate the repositioning of that. That's a key consideration. I would expect we could accelerate that repositioning by using that mechanism. Maybe just lastly, there are a few other questions, we will get back to people kind of directly, if we weren't able to answer your question. There's another question here that's asking, looking forward, do you expect to reduce the pace of investment in new deals in the SaaS space? That's a great question. I mean, I think there is a lot going on within software, and we've seen it just in terms of the pace of AI development really recently. It's the market landscape is changing dramatically. We pick up exposure to SaaS deals in two different ways. Within the fund commitments that we've made, we will continue to see new deals coming into the portfolio from software fund commitments, primary commitments that we've already made as those managers deploy that capital. As I mentioned before, they are software specialists, and they will be taking account of the market environment. They know what's going on. They've been thinking about these themes and, you know, how they should embed that in what they're doing in their own strategies over many years. None of this is new to them. They will select the right places and the right time to be deploying their capital into the market. When it comes to newer deals, so in particular, I'm thinking about the direct. The co-investments and the manager-led secondaries. We have seen deal flow in those assets coming through in the last couple of weeks, new deals being launched. I would say that the new deals that we're seeing in terms of co-invest or manager-led activity has been lower in that part of the market. There's naturally a little bit less deal flow coming to us from that sector. We have a high bar for those assets. That's not to say that we are pulling out of the sector altogether, but I think we do have a very high bar. As we undergo d ue diligence and underwrite those assets and dig into what's going on with those companies and how they are positioned for what's happening in the market, there is a higher bar there that I think means that in this kind of near term phase, I think it's likely that we see more limited deployment within the direct into SaaS in particular. So maybe with that, we're just coming up to the hour, just over the hour. I'd like to just extend my thanks to you all for joining today. Appreciate you taking the time, and we look forward to engaging further with all of you as investors. If there's something that we haven't covered today that you're interested in, please do send us any questions over the pin.ir@pantheon.com email or, you know, if you know us directly. We look forward to sharing more insight into the portfolio with you over the near term and speaking to you directly as well. Maybe with that, I just want to hand over to Tony for final comments. Not much to add from me. Again, I'd like to thank everybody for joining us today. I'd like to thank everybody for their continued support of PIN. As Charlotte mentioned, we have a number of open questions here that we didn't get time to answer today. We will work through those and do our best to answer them as best we can in the coming days. With that, I think we'll wrap up, and thanks very much.