Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Pollen Street Group half year results for 2026. I am Lindsey McMurray, and I will be presenting today with Crispin Goldsmith. Now for the first half AUM now sits at GBP 8.5 billion at the end of June. With this almost evenly split between private equity and credit, recognizing the fundraising cycle of the two strategies. As we have reported, private credit has been actively raising its flagship fund, together with some related SMA arrangements, which has resulted in a step up in credit AUM, so that total fee-paying AUM has increased by 18%. That has taken fee-paying AUM, has grown to GBP 5.5 billion. With the fundraising success in credit, which only becomes fee-paying once it is deployed, we have clear visibility and further growth in fee-paying AUM in the coming months and beyond. We have strong momentum in fundraising in addition to this, with the first close of our institutional open-ended fund, which we call Hanover Square, and we are preparing for Private Equity Fund VI in 2027. The setback for the period was in the investment company, where the return was 3.4%, which was significantly below target. This was the result of two specific issues, one positive and one less so. Positively, due to the larger fund size for Credit IV, we have an equalization effect for the fund position held on the investment company balance sheet. So overall, the franchise is stronger because of this, but we have a one-time effect on the balance sheet impact of 0.2%. On the negative side, we made an investment in Shawbrook at the end of 2024, and with the IPO, we now must recognize the P&L on a mark-to-market basis. Despite strong performance at the company level, the share price has declined in the first half, and this has resulted in a 3.8% impact on the balance sheet. Overall, the balance sheet return is 3.4%, but we consider this low return to be exceptional. We have periodically reported that we have healthy growth in AUM, weighted towards credit in this period. Further, the GBP 1.8 billion of credit raised, but not deployed, provides good visibility for growth in fee-paying AUM going forward and as we prepare for fundraising on the next vintage of both strategies. The strength and depth of investor relationship continues to build, and we are hugely grateful to the support from our investors as they have supported us in the success of Credit IV, but also early support in Hanover Square. In order to appreciate this, we are laser-focused on delivering performance, engaging actively as we look to raise further funds. The balance sheet on the whole, has performed in line with steady performance over many years. As outlined earlier, the performance in the period is impacted by the reduction in the share price of Shawbrook, affecting the value of that holding and also the equalization impact. While significant, this should not overly detract from the very strong performance across the rest of the portfolio. In terms of strategic focus, I mentioned that we are extremely laser-focused on performance to make sure we deliver what we set out for investors. In private equity, we are providing consistently strong performance in a much more complex environment. We are deploying at good pace with Private Equity V, now 74% deployed, and with preparations underway for Private Equity VI. In private credit, we are focused on scaling the business. We are 50% invested in that larger fund already. We have a very high-quality pipeline, and we have, as I mentioned, the first close in Hanover Square SCSp. If we look at the themes that are driving that performance across both strategies. In private equity, we are working on a number of Repeatable Thematics across the portfolio. Digital transformation, making sure each business has the data it needs to support KPIs to provide real-time insight to drive fast and precise decision-making. With AI-led product development, which is essential, especially across our software businesses. This actually enables us to transform data into intelligence, and it enhances the product leadership, especially in areas where we focus with regulatory and governance workflow, where we look to actually use AI to strengthen relationships with clients and to build and embed trust. Across the board, we are building structured go-to-market functions within each business. We call it the science of selling whereby we build robust, repeatable sales machines that have precision pricing and effective selling and cross-sale capability. At the M&A front, we embed an M&A function within each business to support geographic and product distribution, and that as well as consolidate our market presence. This is the systematic engagement that we apply across the portfolio to make sure whatever the macro environment, we are delivering strong performance for investors. On the credit side, it is all about scaling the business in line with the capital that we have raised. As I mentioned, the pipeline is stronger and higher quality than ever before, doubling in the first half of the year. The market where we operate continues to grow as banks continue to retrench. Our product offers attractive value and flexibility for the borrower, and we continue to build our reputation as a trusted partner. Importantly, we grow with our clients, and that provides an embedded growth in our book of credit assets, where we look to work with our partners as we build the relationship. We have successfully completed 20 upsizes within the business over the last year. So it gives a view that while we scale the business, there is actually embedded growth within the business that we have already built. That gives us confidence on the visibility to be able to deploy the increasingly larger funds at very attractive asset base. With that, I will hand over to Crispin to take us through the financials for the half year. Thank you. Thank you, Lindsey. I am pleased to see you all again and to update you on our half year performance. As I highlighted in the full year results, our revenue model is straightforward and quite predictable. So you will see a lot of overlap in what I say today with what I have said previously, and you can expect the same again in future. Our key growth drivers are fundraising and deployment, and we continue to perform strongly in both. Alongside the very successful fundraising for Private Credit Fund IV, the team focused on scaling deployment, as we have heard. This has shown through both in the first half growth in fee-paying AUM and in a building pipeline for H2. This AUM increase feeds into growing management fee income, which is our highest quality revenue stream, and in turn into increased profits. As I flagged at the time, for H1 2025, we benefited from GBP 8.4 million of catch-up fees related to Private Equity Fund V that would not repeat this year. As we consider the performance of the asset manager business, we do so on a like-for-like basis rather than a headline basis. The investment company returns for H1 fell significantly below target, as Lindsey outlined. This largely related to a position we hold in Shawbrook. The rest of the investment portfolio performed in line with our full year expectations. We have continued to generate high levels of cash across the two parts of the business, supporting continued high cash returns to shareholders. During H1, we returned GBP 25 million of cash to shareholders, which included GBP 7 million of share buybacks. We are pleased to announce an interim dividend today amounting to a further GBP 17 million cash return. As I have outlined previously, our LP investors commit to our funds typically for eight to ten years, and there is no opportunity for them to redeem early. Our management fees are a fixed percentage of fee-paying AUM, which is based either on committed capital or invested cost, not on valuation. This means that our management fee income is highly predictable and repeats over multiple years. For example, as I said at the full year results, PSC V has a GBP 1.5 billion of commitments with a management fee of 2%. So we earn GBP 30 million a year in management fee revenue from this fund and will continue to until the first close of Fund VI, at which point fees will move to being calculated on investment cost until the end of the fund life. Our other funds are similarly predictable. This is what makes up the GBP 33.9 million of management fee income for H1. Our performance fees are broadly balanced across credit strategies and private equity. In credit, the consistent month-on-month and quarter-on-quarter performance of those funds generates similarly consistent performance fees. In private equity, we currently only recognize carry for those funds accounted for at fair value. So it is calculated on a look-through basis to the fund valuation. Overall, performance fees were up 90% year-on-year, driven by a strong first half contribution from private equity. Nevertheless, we expect performance fee generation to be weighted towards the second half, as in previous years. So taking these two together, fund management revenue was up 22% on a like-for-like basis. Fund management costs were held at 2% growth for the period. So fund management EBITDA of GBP 16.1 million was up sharply by 73% on a like-for-like basis. As we have already mentioned, net investment income fell significantly below target for H1, and I will come back to this again later. So on the asset manager, we are delivering steady growth led by management fees. We have grown fund management EBITDA sharply on a like-for-like basis and doubled the level of two years ago. We have maintained the step-up in margin achieved in 2024. At the end of H1, we benefited from GBP 1.8 billion of credit capital, which will become fee paying once deployed. Combined with the strong deployment pipeline Lindsey outlined for H2, this gives visibility on continued fee-paying AUM growth, both for H2 and beyond. Taking all this together, I am pleased to confirm we are on track to deliver the full year consensus expectations for the asset manager. I presented this slide at the full year results, so I will just touch briefly on it again here. As a reminder that the bulk of value we expect to generate in performance fees over the long term from existing funds relates to Private Equity Fund V and Accelerator II. Those fees are already being recognized in the fund's accounts as their performance builds. The nature of how IFRS 15 is applied means we are not yet recognizing this in the group accounts and will not do so for a number of years still. In Lindsey's slides, we showed the split of the investment portfolio between its key segments. During the year, we have continued to move the investment portfolio from direct investments to fund investments. In particular, with a new commitment to Hanover Square SCSp, our institutional open-ended credit fund launched in June. At the period end, GP commitments accounted for 33% of investment assets, up from 29% at the end of December, with undrawn commitments of GBP 64 million. The PE fund investments were resilient in the period, with portfolio companies delivering strong operating performance and the private credit fund investments continuing to deliver strong, consistent returns. The direct investment portfolio delivered returns in line with expectations, with the exception of Shawbrook, which is shown separately as a mark-to-market investment and which, given its inherent volatility, will be excluded from comments on outlook or guidance going forward. The underlying net investment return for H1, excluding the mark-to-market investment and the effects of equalization, was 7.4%. Given the expected weighting of equity returns towards the second half, this is on track to deliver full year returns in line with expectations. The value of investment assets was broadly flat year-on-year, reflecting the strong cash returns to investors highlighted already. Share buybacks are a key pillar of our capital allocation strategy. We are opportunistic in how we deploy them whilst maintaining the balance sheet as a strategic resource to support AUM growth. We maintain a conservative gearing position on our balance sheet, both to optimize returns and as a tool for managing liquidity. At the end of June, net debt was 38% of gross investment assets with GBP 48 million of the facility undrawn. I will now hand back to Lindsey. At the beginning of the year, we set out to complete the fundraise of Private Credit Fund IV, which has been achieved and surpassed an expectation and now well underway to being deployed with almost 50% invested already. We have successfully entered the market with Hanover Fund to address a different pool of investor appetite. Private equity has been focused on portfolio management and preparation for the next vintage, and we continue to build up the team and the platform. With all of that growth and investment, our dividends continue to grow on a per share basis, and we engage in buybacks when the value for shareholders is evident. With that, I will open up to questions. Thank you. Yes. Hi, James Allen from Berenberg. Four questions, but they should be quite quick. First one, I noticed that your pipeline for the private credit business has increased from GBP 2.5 billion -GBP 5 billion. Obviously, the fundraise which closed in April was significantly bigger than expected. So I guess when you couple those two things together, the phasing in terms of the deployment of that private credit fund in H2, there is not a huge amount of execution risk there. Correct. Secondly, the equity mark-to-market numbers. I guess if you take the reduction in the Shawbrook share price in H1, let us call it a third, that would leave you with about GBP 12 million of equity in that, assuming a GBP 6 million write down. I think there is about GBP 19 million in there on the chart. So what else is in that number alongside Shawbrook? Thirdly, what is the target fund size for PE Fund VI? Finally, a lot of the peers, particularly in the U.S., reported quite a favorable exit environment in H1, but it feels like that is hardened somewhat in the second half. What are you seeing on that front? Thanks. Should I? Yeah. Well, so equity mark-to-market, sorry, it is a bit confusing. The number in the front part is the average for the period. That is just Shawbrook. The average is just a simple average of opening and closing, so that should all play through clearly. There is GBP 15 million value on the balance sheet. On the scaling point, yes. As I mentioned, the pipeline is very strong. The deployment has stepped up broadly to effectively double year-on-year. So we have good visibility. We have had a good start to a good Q2 and into Q3 already. So we have good confidence that deployment will occur as we expect. Target fund size for Private Equity Fund VI will be somewhere between EUR 1.75 billion and EUR 2 billion. There was one other question. There is U.S. peers exit environment. Yeah. Look, these are across our portfolio. I do not see it particularly more difficult second half to first half. I think we have assets that are specialist in their end markets, and we spend our time positioning the asset for, on one hand, the widest investor base. We have good visibility that we will continue to make a few exits before the end of the year. I would not say it is particularly notably more difficult. You need the right asset to go into the market, but I think we are making good progress on that. Thanks. Morning. Morning. Thanks for your presentations, both of you. Back to deployment, and thinking about the changing macro picture, and perhaps competition, how has that impacted your deployment? I appreciate it is up very strongly, but how are those two features figuring in your deployment? Thanks. Is this specific on both strategies, on credit, where we have been talking about scaling. In Europe, we have established and continue to build a reputation of being a bit of a go-to player in the market that we play. That is continuing to bring a very high quality of deal flow. There has been changes in the market. The banks sometimes come in, they go out, and that in-out behavior kind of helps solidify our position because we are effectively the necessary capital for our counterparties. Having a bank that is maybe there, maybe not there, is precisely the risk they do not want to have. In some cases, they will pay a premium to have us as being the persistent player in the marketplace. Of course, we have to assess the underwriting based on the macro, but that is the underwriting that we do. Going through some of our teachings on credit, we are always testing the collateral for very significant negative macro events. Our positions, our investments have been very resilient, and we have not seen any degradation in the underlying collateral pools or what we have been underwriting. The quality is very high. We monitor it very actively. Yes, there are players who come and go, but it is that sort of passing, kind of non-committed player that we stand up against and kind of provide a solid offering. That we are used to. Do you think the step back in competition will feature in pricing and therefore returns more obviously in the years to come? We've held pretty stable pricing across our credit strategy for quite some years now. I'd say that we have managed to maintain what are very attractive returns for senior credit. Do I think senior credit's going to significantly push up from here? Unlikely. It's more that we manage the risk underneath to make sure that we've got the right balance of risk and return. I wouldn't say that. I think we've held the returns where others in direct lending have seen quite significant compression. I wouldn't say that we're going to see a significant uptick in pricing. Resilient, I would say. Thanks. How about on the equity side? Again, on the equity side, we price our assets in order. We are looking to deliver 3 x money multiple for our investors' capital, and that's about making sure that we're getting the right assets at the right price. If you look at our track record, we are entering our investments at somewhere between 9x- 11 x of EBITDA, and the resilience of that over a longer period of time is something that is critical to delivering that track record. I don't see that's going to Sometimes it's a bit higher, and for certain asset classes, sometimes a bit lower. Broadly, that is what we set up to find, and I expect that to be consistent. Thank you so much. Rae Maile, Peel Hunt. One of the big changes second half from first half has obviously been the bond market environment. Is there any sign yet that that changes how institutional investors start thinking about the relative returns between private markets and public markets? In some cases, there are certain investors, in many cases, the way capital is allocated and the way that we are kind of engaging with the market is very much private credit allocations. Those still have structurally a long way to go to get to their target level. Yes, you will get certain investors who blend their portfolios and see fixed income across a more blended range. But I think we've got still enough runway in the overall move to kind of get to target credit allocations, and specifically in asset-backed, which itself is underweight within those private credit. I think we've still got structurally a way to go, but in certain cases, you do see some investors be a bit more relative value. Yeah. Okay. And we have no questions on the live session. With that, thank you for joining us, and as ever, we're available for any follow-up questions you may have. Thank you.