Welcome and thank you for joining Exor's Half-Year 2025 Results Conference Call. Please note that the presentation materials and the related press release are available for download on Exor's website, www.exor.com, under the Investor and Media Financial Results section, and any forward-looking statements made during this call are covered by the Safe Harbor statement included in the presentation material. As a reminder, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, there will be a brief question and answer session. Please note that this conference is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Exor's Chief Financial Officer, Guido de Boer. Sir, you may now begin. Fantastic, and thank you for this introduction, and happy to have this half-year results call. As you'll see in the new format of our half-year reports, I hope that gave good insights, and I want to take you through the highlights in this presentation. Our NAV per share outperformed the MSCI World Index by about 5%, largely aided by the EUR 1 billion buyback. Companies did well, but a mixed bag of performance across the different companies, which we'll address a bit later. We're particularly pleased with the performance of Lingotto, performing with an 11% increase, mainly from the public investments part in the backdrop of a declining market. This half-year saw us monetizing EUR 3 billion of Ferrari stake, as well as some other items, leaving us with good firepower to monetize, to invest in the future. It leaves us with a very healthy debt ratio at 5.5% of our GAV. Moving to the key figures at the half-year, our gross asset value went down by EUR 2.5 billion, partly from value changes, partly from the buyback, and our NAV moved in line with that, while our NAV per share saw an increase, and our loan-to-value, as mentioned, is more or less half than what it was at the end of 2024. Our NAV per share growth went up by 0.9%. 3.2% of that growth is attributed to our buyback, given that we buy back our own shares at the discount. The positive impact on NAV compared to the number of shares that we reduce is delivering this growth. Even ex-buyback, our portfolio has done better than the MSCI World Index. This is an important measure because we want to outperform relative to the index. We also want to show absolute returns, and in that sense, obviously, we're disappointed that our TSR, even though better than the market, is negative, and we aim to improve that in the coming period. If we move to the overview, I first would like to present to you a new classification, and rest assured, I don't want to make a habit of this so that you need to change your models all the time. This was actually intended to provide you further insight and probably also ease for building your models. Given that Exor Ventures is now managed by an external investor, we moved that to the other funds moved by third parties into others, and you really see separately the performance of Lingotto, which are the funds operating under our own management. We thought it's useful not to group cash and cash equivalents under others, but show separately also if you want to look at a net debt basis to facilitate your analysis. I hope this is helpful, and if you have any comments or suggestions or requests for historical data, please feel free to reach out to the Investor Relations team. If we then move to the drivers of change in gross asset value in this new format, and maybe starting on the right-hand side, you see the change that I mentioned previously of a GAV of EUR 42.5 billion to EUR 40 billion, which split in EUR 1.1 billion of shareholder distributions, around EUR 100 million of dividends, and EUR 1 billion of buybacks. It's a decrease of GAV, but not necessarily reflective of performance, just a capital distribution. You see EUR 1.4 billion decrease in value, which is the real metric of. [Foreign language]. [Foreign language]. In distributions, if we take the EUR 1 billion in investments, you'll see, and we'll go into more detail later, EUR 438 million went into listed companies, principally Philips and a minor part in Juventus, and then a bit in commitments on Lingotto, and EUR 400. [Foreign language]. Which we invested in the Deal Media Disposals line. For EUR 3.5 billion, it breaks up quite simply in EUR 3 billion for Ferrari, and almost EUR 500,000 of proceeds from the reinsurance vehicles that we invested in as part of the sale of PartnerRe. Then we have the line change in value, which I propose we address in a bit more detail in the following slides. Performance of listed companies, I mentioned already the investments behind Philips, Juventus, and the disposal of Ferrari. If you then look in the change in value, you basically see that the change in value of Ferrari is marginal, where it started on the 1st of January and where it landed on the 30th of June. We were quite lucky in our timing that we did the trade at the all-time high in that period, but a very flat movement in between the start and the end of the periods. CNH, a similar story, and we measure our returns in Euros, and in Euros, it was flat, notwithstanding a strong movement between the dollar and the euro. The big driver of the decrease in value was the disappointing share price movement of Stellantis, as well as that of Philips, which started the year a bit above EUR 24, was at the half-year at EUR 20, and now ranges around EUR 24 again. The good thing is this EUR 700 million of loss has rebounded in the year to date, largely. Obviously, the positive news in the half-year was also the strategic transaction on IVECO, which in the run-up to that transaction led to a significant increase in the share price, and that is a monetization for Exor at a very attractive price, as well as a good home for Iveco for the future if that pending transaction will complete in 2026. Those are the key moves in listed companies. If we then move to unlisted companies, we had some smaller investments behind Via Transportation, where there were some shares available ahead of the IPO. I'm happy to say that following the successful IPO on NYSE last week, we'll move Via to the listed companies in the following reporting, and some existing commitments we had on Tag Energy and Shang XIA. You'll see the movements in value, where the largest one is Institut Mérieux on the back of the increase in share price of bioMérieux. Via Transportation, based on its strong performance. Welltec and The Economist, actually, largely FX movements, and the other amounts are relatively smaller. If we then move to Lingotto and others, you see we invested in private strategies around EUR 166 million, and you see a very strong performance of the public investments, notwithstanding the equity capital markets, in general, declining. We are very happy with how the Lingotto funds deliver returns, which are less correlated to the rest of the portfolio and outperforming the market. We then move to others. There you see funds managed by third parties. That also now includes Exor Ventures, and it was also including the reinsurance vehicles, where you see the EUR 500 million of disposals, so we are quite positive. The funds are doing quite well. The EUR -72 million is actually EUR -427 million FX, and both Exor Ventures, as well as the reinsurance vehicles in local currency, have been performing well. In listed securities, you see, again, the investment of EUR 317 million in bioMérieux, and the change in value is largely due to the decline in share price of Nomura, a smaller investment that we've done in the past. I think those are the main items to highlight in others. Cash and cash equivalents, I largely mentioned this previously. We had strong dividend inflows of EUR 624 million, of which we distributed, again, then EUR 1.1 billion to our shareholders. We raised disposals of EUR 3.5 billion, which we reinvested for EUR 1 billion, and we repaid bank debt for EUR 547 million and a bit of a bond, which leads us to a cash position now of EUR 1.5 billion, which is obviously very, very healthy. That is in line with a gross debt that, as I mentioned, with the reduction in bank debt and the bonds, now stands at EUR 3.5 billion rather than the EUR 4.1 billion at year-end. As you know of us, we try to have a very stable maturity profile. We have no cliff payments, and all the short-term obligations that we have here can easily be filled out of our cash positions. With that brief summary, I would like to open the floor to a Q&A. Over to you, at the operator. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you have a question, please press star, then one and one on your touch-tone phone. Once again, if you have a question, please press star, one and one. We will now take the first question. One moment, please. We will now take the first question from the line of Monica Bosio from Intesa Sanpaolo. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone, and thanks for taking my questions. I hope you can hear me well. I have three. First of all, on the future investments, my perception is that maybe the group priorities are more on the healthcare side. Do you see real true opportunities in the luxury segments? I'm just wondering because in the last conference, the company didn't see real opportunities in the luxury segments. The second question is on the size of the potential acquisitions. The press speculated a lot on this. Any comment from you on this side? Do you have any time or horizon for the completion of the new investments? The very last is not on investments, but maybe on disposal. Should we expect in the coming future some other disposal on top of [Lingotto]? Thank you very much. Fantastic. Thank you, Monica. Good questions, as usual. In terms of priorities, for us, when evaluating a potential acquisition, we look at fundamentals. Does it have the right strategic fit? How are the financial fundamentals, cultural alignment with us as an owner? What are the leadership strengths? What are their governance proposals? We base this on analysis of each individual company. It can be healthcare, it can be luxury. These are, in particular, industries where we have domain knowledge within the team, but it could even be outside that if the investment opportunity is sufficiently attractive for us. There's no a priori preference of healthcare over luxury. In terms of size, we basically have said that we are considering to do transactions which are meaningful in the perspective of our total GAV, and 5% is a percentage where this becomes meaningful. Again, we look at every individual opportunity to decide if it's attractive or not. On disposals, we continuously evaluate our portfolio to decide whether we should increase our stake, like we've done on Philips in the period, or whether it's a good time to dispose. If there's anything to update, obviously, you will be the first one to know. For now, there's nothing further to mention. Thank you very much. Monica, I hope this answers your questions. Yes, thank you. I came back to the queue. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Martino De Ambroggi from EQUITA. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody. Good afternoon, Guido. The first question is on the financial flexibility, because once you divest IVECO stake, you will have another EUR 1.3 billion cash in. Would you prefer to look for one more big ticket, as you mentioned, 5% of GAV, or buyback could be another priority? Specifically on the buyback, you don't need any divestiture to continue to buy back shares. You already finalized the EUR 1 billion buyback in one shot, but why are you not starting additional buyback, considering the high discount to net asset value? The third question is, sorry to be more specific on the name, but Armani is, I don't know, up for sale, probably not shortly and so on, but just from a theoretical point of view. Just theoretically, could it be an interesting asset for you, or are you absolutely out of the game, even if today is too early to talk about it? Very last, on Ferrari, when you sold the stake, you mentioned there was an excessive concentration in terms of asset value. Today, Ferrari is roughly 90% of the net asset value. The issue of too high concentration could come back, but what's your way of thinking about it for future in case the concentration further increases? Thank you, Martino. Good to have you on the call again. On buybacks, they are part of our resource allocation process. In a sense, the buyback, the discount is also an opportunity for Exor to reinvest capital and for investors that want to remain on to benefit from a NAV per share increase from that, which you've seen in this half-year. We've just done EUR 1 billion of capital returns. In terms of our market cap, that is something that's very, very sizable. As I mentioned, every time we do our portfolio review, we consider to increase or reduce the holdings in existing companies. We consider new investment opportunities that we have, and we consider buybacks, and we decide on what we feel is the most attractive choice or multiple choices between those. We'll continue to do that and consider buybacks as part of that process. Armani doesn't really have anything to comment on the individual transaction as we obviously never do that. Ferrari, the concentration has nicely reduced. It was 43% when we did the transaction. We're now at 39% of our gross asset value, which is the way we look at it. Indeed, if you look at it as our market cap, you probably meant 90% of market cap rather than net asset value. That is high, but then you could almost see Exor as buying Ferrari and getting the rest for free. In that sense, I would see this as a great opportunity for investors to buy into the Exor stock. Concentration, maybe to have that as a general point, we like concentration because our belief is that if we buy one share of every stock in the index, we perform like the index, and we want to outperform. We invest in companies where we have conviction, and Ferrari is absolutely one where that holds true. I hope this addresses the points you raised, Martino. Thank you, Guido. You are right. I mentioned as a percentage of NAV, but it was on market cap. One more follow-up on Lingotto, which made a great job because the performance was very strong. Could you remind us what were the main drivers for this performance? In terms of strategy, are you planning to open the doors or to accelerate on third-party assets, or is this something that is not on your table? Once for us to invest more or less behind Lingotto strategies is part of the portfolio review process, as I mentioned. If we would invest more behind existing strategies or if there's new ones, we will obviously announce that to the markets. For us, our strategy is not to grow assets under management and gain management fees. Lingotto was created to deliver performance to us. I think that is critical. We want to grow our assets under management through performance rather than capital inflows. As you see, we are delighted by the performance that it showed in this half-year, but which it has been showing over a longer period now. The quality of investors that we've been able to attract makes us obviously very pleased with having put the funds behind Lingotto. Is there any specific driver leading to such a good performance? I think they're great investors that know how to find the stocks that perform well. Yeah, you're right. Thank you. Thank you. We We will now take the next question from the line of Joren van Aken from the Degroof Petercam. Please go ahead. Yeah, hi, good afternoon. A lot of great questions have already been asked, but just one from my side. I remember Mr. Elkann saying a while ago that private valuations were higher than listed assets, and not long after that, you bought the Philips stake. Today, I'm hearing that high-quality assets in the private market still have very high valuations. Do you think that the bid-ask spread has narrowed sufficiently on the private side, or do you think that listed is still more attractive today? Thanks. I'm not sure if I've seen too much of a reduction in price expectations from private assets. I don't think that much has changed on private asset valuations. Public market valuations, I think that's your day job, so you know much better than me. Also, I would say there's a big disparity between certain types of companies, like the large tech companies, versus some slower-growing companies or companies that have a one-quarter earnings mix, which have then a disappointing share price performance. If you look in public markets, there's definitely opportunities to be found. Private assets can have their individual situations that the valuations are attractive. Apologies for not trying to evade your question with a clearer answer, but I think there's not a one-size-fits-all response to your question. Joren, I hope that's clear how we look at this. Thank you so much. I could try at least. Thank you. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Hans D’Haese from ING. Please go ahead. Good afternoon. Thank you for taking the questions. I wanted to state first, Guido, that really happy with the new tables layout and increased even better transparency. Already was really happy with the IFRS 10 change, and now this really helps also with the valuation drivers for listed companies and so on. Very good job. Regarding portfolio, we've seen that you've been very explicit in what sectors Exor would like to increase its exposure and for what amount. Thank you for that. In the meantime, we only saw a considerable increase for Philips, so we're waiting for other stuff. If now opportunities rise for acquiring minority stakes in other companies, in companies, for instance, that you already are an important shareholder, like for instance, The Economist, would you consider to increase your stake? Is this something that would fit in the portfolio? Are you sticking to, no, it should be healthcare and luxury? That's the one question. The second one, in light of market expectations of further U.S. dollar weakness, and considering that your stakes in CNH, in Clarivate, in Lingotto are dollar sensitive, what is your hedging strategy? Are you considering, are you doing something, or is this something that is not part of the strategy of Exor? The third and last question, what are your considerations about investing in Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies? Do you see them as an alternative for your cash position, or do you see them as a different asset class? Do you want to share your thoughts about this? Thank you for that. Yeah, with pleasure. Thanks, Hans. First, for the compliments, much appreciated because we've been working hard on providing information to you and all our other stakeholders, which is as clear as possible so that we can talk more about fundamental activities like you now ask about. Much appreciated. On portfolio, whether we would consider investing in existing companies versus, like for example, in Economist or in only healthcare technology and luxury, we are, in a sense, agnostic. Why have we said healthcare technology and luxury? Because these are sectors where we think there are structural tailwinds and where we've built up a domain knowledge. We know all the good players in the industry. We know sub-sectors of those industries which we like, and in that way, we feel we can uncover opportunities that maybe others don't see. That's why our focus is there. If we see another opportunity, either in our portfolio already, which obviously has many advantages because we know that asset, or outside, we're very open to consider those as well. We're not married to investing in healthcare, luxury, or technology. On the U.S. dollar, we don't do any hedging. Hedging, I think, is a useful measure for covering short-term exposures, which you cannot offset for a production company. Hedging your fixed cost if you import into a country when your sales and you cannot change your prices. For us, as a long-term investor, we don't see hedging as a valuable tool. There might be actually a short-term opportunity to say maybe with the devaluation of the U.S., on a relative basis, U.S. companies have become more attractive than six months ago. We look at it more from that perspective. Of utilizing the dry firepower that we have now, we're quite conservative on that and put it in cash spread over Euros and dollars across multiple banks, including many of you who are in this call. Stable banks across currencies at a decent return because this is not where we want to make our money. That's why crypto or Bitcoin would not be places where we would park our money. Where we want to take risk is in the long-term investments that we do and not in the short-term liquidity storage that we hold. That's how we look at it today. I'm not voicing an opinion on Bitcoin or crypto because there's many people who are much better positioned than I to speak about this. Thank you, Guido. Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Alberto Villa from Intermonte SIM. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, and thanks for taking my questions. A couple from my side, many have been already asked. Again, on Lingotto, congratulations to the team, a very great performance. Now it's 8% of the GAV. Is there any internal limitation you put yourself in terms of the size of the investment of your funds in Lingotto, or it could go farther in the future? The second question is a more general question about, let's say, when you consider investing in a company with the current geopolitical uncertainty and turmoils, if you're now looking more specifically to some regions rather than others, if there is any, let's say, change in the approach on a geographical standpoint compared to the past due to what has been happening in the recent past, and presumably we continue to be a very volatile environment on that side. Thank you very much. Thank you, Alberto. On Lingotto, I think the limitation breaks down maybe in two parts, one on individual funds and two on allocation to Lingotto as a whole. As I mentioned earlier, on Lingotto as a whole, we always take Lingotto as part of our portfolio review strategy, and we see do we want to allocate more or more to existing strategies or new funds, and we decide what kind of returns, risk, reward do we get against this, and we make an investment decision based on that. In terms of limitation, and I think it's a very important question which goes to the core of Lingotto, for us, it's key that the investors behind the Lingotto funds focus on performance and outperformance. The limitation is the size where adding further assets under management would go at the detriment of performance, and that would be the limitation. That's obviously different for different types of strategies, whether it's public or listed, and which markets they are. That's where the key limitation probably is for individual Lingotto strategies. Geopolitical is an important investment consideration, obviously. It is also a potential opportunity if those have led to significant price movements because we are a long-term investor. We do take that into account, but I cannot say that that has led to exclusion of certain regions or countries where we would say we're absolutely not looking there now. Thank you. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star, one, and one on your telephone. We will now take the next question from the line of Andrea Balloni from Mediobanca. Please go ahead. Yes, thank you. Good afternoon, everybody, and good afternoon, Guido. A few questions for myself. My first one is a follow-up to one of Martino, and sorry for asking again. This is about Ferrari. I was wondering, if you find some very good opportunities to invest in, would you even consider another partial disposal of Ferrari to finance the investment, or on the opposite, current stake you have in Ferrari is a level you are not willing to lower? My second question is about current holding discount that we see at 50%, despite the material share buyback you have recently done. What could be, in your view, a way to shrink this holding discount as of today? My very last question is on Philips. I remember when you have announced the acquisition of this stake, you mentioned that you were convinced to be able to extrapolate some value from a company that was clearly undervalued by the market. Just to understand, what time horizon you had in mind for this asset? Thank you. Thank you, Andrea. Good. On Ferrari, our view remains as what we said earlier in the year, that our commitment to Ferrari is as strong as ever. We didn't do this disposal about reducing our interest of the company. It was really a strategic decision to reduce our portfolio concentration, as well as creating room for the next back opportunity. We're actually extremely happy that Ferrari is still a significant part of our portfolio. As said, we do like concentration and are confident that Ferrari will be a strong contributor to future results. On the holding discount, what are we doing about it? I think calls like now, based on clear and transparent communication, are one important part of it. Even more important is we need to continue to show a sustained outperformance, both on an absolute and on a relative basis. I think it's interesting also to have a look at the long-term performance of Exor versus the MSCI World Index, because that's really why we want people to invest in our stock, because we are long-term investors. By compounding better returns than the index over a long time, we will create significant value for our shareholders. That's something we'll just continue to do. If you have other views of actions that we could take, I'm always happy to hear them from you, either reading it in your report or to have a call on that if you like. Philips, we continue to believe that the company has huge potential and that it's delivering on its potential. We're quite excited by its operational performance, and our conviction also remains strong and happy with the progress that they're making. Our time horizon is long. We're there for the long term. We don't have any specific horizons where we say at this moment we exit. There's not a year that I can mention to you of our planned horizon for an investment like this. Thank you. That clarifies. Thanks, Andrea. Thank you. This concludes the Q&A session. I would like to hand back over to Guido de Boer for closing remarks. I would love to thank all of you for your very thoughtful questions. I think this was all valuable and also gives us some good inputs to sharpen our strategy. I am very happy you all joined this call, and please reach out via the usual channels if you have any further information requests or would like to speak to us in any other way. Thank you, everyone, and have a nice day. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.