All right, we're going to kick this off. We are very excited here to have Max Levchin yet again from Affirm. Max, thanks for joining us. Really looking forward to the conversation again. Thank you for having me. All right. At the investor forum in May, you framed a business around $100 billion in annual GMV. You laid out a 25% growth algorithm with 10 points each coming from your point-of-sale product, your direct-to-consumer franchise, as well as 1 points-5 points from some of the more fledgling products, international expansion, the bank distribution. When you look across those buckets, where do you see the biggest go-get, and what do you think needs to happen to get there? It's actually kind of designed to be not dependent on any one thing. We certainly have lots of road to go in the U.S. alone. In last year's holder letter, we pointed out that we're still fairly thin in terms of penetration into top 500 e-commerce retailers. Offline is still very nascent, so just growth of that type alone could take us to our goals, but we're certainly plenty ambitious. None of these, at least the ones you quoted, feel to me like, oh, man, I better put the A team on that. We don't have a B team, fortunately. We're a well-run machine, so B teamers don't survive. But some of the more interesting stuff that is in the other product bucket is what I consider to be the go-gets because they're exciting opportunities to expand the product offerings and just to widen the network. Yeah, makes sense. All right, you don't have a B team. I would argue you kind of have an A team. I would agree. You've been talking more recently about your own personal SWAT team and some of the exciting things you're getting to do with it. You made some leadership changes more recently that I think the goal was to give you more bandwidth to focus on this ZT 1 project initiative that you have. Can you talk a little bit about what has enabled that and how your day-to-day role in the organization could change? Sure. If all of you are paying attention to the comings and goings of my executive team, I apologize, but just on the odd chance not everybody's parsing through my team announcements, there's been no team changes. There's only been responsibility changes. I'm fortunate in a sense that the totality of my direct and their directs, with very few exceptions, have been at Affirm for five-plus years. My direct reports, I think average, last I looked, were something like seven or eight years. I've had a very successful partnership with a handful of people I consider my betters in certainly the ability to execute and many other things. The two players that have, two executives that have been my strongest supporters and folks I lean onto for everything, both sort of the emergencies and the long terms, are Michael, our now President and just recently Chief Operating Officer, and Libor, who is almost a Co-founder, has been at Affirm almost as long as I have, who started as our CTO and is also a President of ours. Very recently, I basically realized that the company's already effectively managed by these two guys and consolidated all responsibilities under the two of them, primarily from the recognition that they are, in fact, better operators than I could ever hope to be. I'm also not trying to improve as an operator. What I am trying to do is figure out how to grow Affirm, not just to $100 billion of GMV, but to $200 trillion, wherever the opportunities take us. This consolidation of reporting and zero people were asked to leave Affirm, and I'm very pleased to hear that even as I sort of moved the deck chairs a little bit, no one felt slighted and decided to leave the company. So the executive team is exactly as it was in the beginning of this change. What I've done is I've freed up significant amount of my own time to work with the team we know internally as ZT 1, Zero To One, and that team reports directly to me. It's a handful of engineers, handful of product managers, an analyst, and sort of full-time operator. It functions essentially as a lab, sort of a startup within a startup, if you will, where we work entirely on what we call the next set of S-curves. So the Affirm Card, now a large, maybe the most interesting thing we've come up with in the last few years, came out of ZT 1. The next set of to the moon and beyond, or to infinity and beyond curves that we hope to launch will come out of this team. Just to give you a tangible sense for what that looks like, my involvement with ZT 1 until these org changes was on the order of 45- 60 minutes per week, which was kind of the breath of fresh air that I wanted and was looking forward to every week because that was the moment where I get to nerd out and maybe even write some code sometimes, or certainly read and write some specs, which has now flipped into multiple times a week for a handful of hours. Tomorrow, as it happens, is my ZT 1 in person, which will start as early as I get off the bike and will end with probably very late at night. So I'll spend the entire day working with a handful of people just discussing prototyping, looking at data very deeply, et cetera. If it sounds like I am excited about it, I really am because I think that is the best insurance policy I can take out on making sure the card is not the last 100% year-over-year compounding project we have. The goal is to launch one of those every year. That is not the hard goal, but that is what will ensure we get to the $1 trillion of GMV, hopefully a handful of years from now. I guess with the amount of extra time you are spending now with that team, is that once a year timeframe significantly faster than what you have been able to do historically? Other than the card, are there other examples of things that have seen the light of day out of that project? Yes, there are. I will avoid calling them out simply because I do not want to set the expectations that each one is going to be as successful as the card. But I was bragging to someone else. I will give you a non-answer answer, but I am excited about this one today, so this is what you get. In the last letter, I pointed out that the rough total spend of a consumer that has the Affirm Card in their wallet is about twice the spend of an average Affirm consumer. So it roughly goes from $2,000 to $4,000, with a few dollars difference. Within ZT 1, we have built a product, and this product has been around for a little while. So this is something you can actually piece together by just looking at the various things we have released. Within that product, the consumer spend is now $8,000, which is slightly north of the target we set for the cardholder at peak. So this particular statistics print or dashboard glance as recently as the last 48 hours or so, I am obsessing over exactly what else can I know about this consumer. So who are these people? What have we done that they are so committed to Affirm that they are basically spending on the order of 80% of their disposable income using our instrument? It is not a huge group just yet, but I am going to spend a lot of time tomorrow figuring out how to make it as big as possible. That's great. One of the things it sounds like that has enabled you to spend so much more time with this group has been the ability to get so much more work done using AI tools, the ability for you to start writing more code on the main products than you have maybe in the past decade. You've talked a lot about the benefits to the organization in the shareholder letters the last couple of quarters and talking about the accelerated code pushes, just more development in general being done by AI. I know the business runs pretty lean already, but when you think about changes to the organization directly as a function of some of these AI toolings, what are the most important call-outs? Our philosophy has not changed. We're still very focused on do more with the same number of people versus any sort of a where can we cut fat or reduce headcount. That's not why we got into the AI game and that's not where we're headed. It's exciting to watch. Zane did not get his way. He's here somewhere. I promise you I will eventually print the curve that he wanted to show, which shows a very steady reduction in cost per feature shipped. Once we have a year worth of data, maybe we'll show, but it's an unbelievable chart. Just shows here's how many dollars we spent making a feature of Affirm Card or Affirm anything, and it just marches down and down. In the world where you can continue lowering the cost and increase speed, you don't want to reduce the number of people who can drive this kind of value. We don't expect to need or want to change the contour of the team, but we're able to drive productivity effectively the same headcount, which is kind of amazing. I'll stick with the theme of AI for another one. You've announced a number of integrations and partnerships around agentic commerce, and there've been a lot of ebbs and flows around the intensity of focus around agentic over the last year. Initially pushing really hard and then some of the frontier labs maybe reprioritizing earlier this year. There's a range of viewpoints from large merchants about how all this is going to work, who's going to own the customer relationship, who's going to be evaluating identity and consumer intent in agentic transactions. What do you hear from your partners on agentic? How do you think Affirm is positioned in some of the different versions of reality that could take place? I think I'm on the record as including this conference that commerce is not a monolithic thing. There are definitely things that fit very well into agent, do this for me, don't come back until you're done, all the way to complex and almost like a mating dance between me and the next bike I'm going to buy. I know which one I want, but it's really expensive and it's going to take a little while before I convince myself that that's what I need to go spend a lot of money on. Shopping is a form of entertainment. It's a form of learning. There's a lot of components to it and that will not change in a way that excludes the human. We derive a lot of pleasure from finding the things that we ultimately decide we have to own. A lot of the utilitarian stuff is already happening and it'll happen even more. Robot find me more milk is a thing that I can't outsource too soon. Robot buy me the best bike of 2026. Not at all. I'm going to read every list and I'm going to get as much as I possibly can out of that. I think that has always been my assumption. I think for a little while we lived in this strange world where some people decided to convince themselves that everyone else was wrong and in fact there's no value in shopping, there's only value in buying or using, and it just isn't true. Any student of basic psychology will readily tell you that's not how the world works. The reason advertising is important is because it gives you inspiration. It's not there to hammer you over the head with you must buy this thing. It's there to tell you what it'll feel like to own the thing that is in front of you. Different products are advertised differently. Toilet paper is not advertised the same way fancy bikes are advertised, but that's sort of nature of the beast. Advertising is the cornerstone of shopping and commerce, including agentic. You can readily see that the industry is pivoting towards that quickly. The headlines have recently changed from OpenAI engineers will write the robots that will buy whatever it is you want to OpenAI's advertising business is skyrocketing. Yeah. It is, in fact, because they realize that the other or one of the other viable alternatives in the world of LLM frontier development is none other than Google. By the way, it's the advertising business that pays for the GPUs, or in their case, TPUs, and so on. I think generally speaking, we're headed in the direction that, not to toot my own horn too much, but we've been predicting for quite some time at Affirm we'll get there. I think advertising is going to be very important. There's a bunch of really good work on standards that are being done to make sure that different LLMs, different chatbots come to the same approach to just information exchange, authentication, anti-fraud, discovery, and all of that is heading in the right direction. But I guess it'll take a while, and there's nothing wrong with that. I am generally very optimistic about agentic shopping, but I do think it is going to be a journey versus an overnight switch. Yeah. Makes sense. All right, pivoting to the card. Card has continued to compound, growing over 100%. It has moved from single digits to almost 20% of GMV. You have also been clear that I do not think you have ever really marketed it outside of the existing base and with a loyalty program on the way, an app redesign rolling out. Could we see more forceful marketing of the card in the roadmap? If not, what are the constraints that have kept you from leaning in harder to date on a more targeted advertising drive? Never say never, but we are pretty far from saturation of the card within our existing base, and so it is very hard to justify a spend of any size other than. We constantly test market by the way. Every time I say we never market anything, in spirit it is 100% true. Dollars and cents, it is like 99.5% true. We are not so proud of we know our way, no other way is interesting. We constantly test. We try to find out the answer to the question, all right, so if we wanted to go market a thing, what would be the cost of acquisition? We are extremely fortunate to be promoted by our merchant partners at their point of sale, effectively resulting in something that resembles zero CAC. That is a great business if you can have it, but it does not obviate the need to know what that CAC would be if you chose to advertise. We know what those numbers are. Bless you. They are not nearly compelling enough for us to go spend any meaningful money. We will continue testing, and at the point where these things being a possible CAC becomes somewhat interesting, we will do more testing. For now, we have underwritten 70-plus million Americans. We have transacted with 50 million-ish. The active numbers last trailing 12 were 26, 27 million, if I remember correctly. So that is a lot of consumers to give a card to that have a very real relationship with. By the way, when we count actives, unlike some of our esteemed competition, we are only counting people who have initiated a transaction in that period versus have been coming to our app to pay us back. So the actual addressable base at any given point is very large, and the active card base, big as it is, it is not even 10 million. It is a long way before we start saying, "Oh my God, where will the next card consumer come from?" So never say never. I think the more aggressive posture in marketing the card will look like us saying, "Hey, you have transacted with us once before. You really ought to learn about the card more than the current," which is very polite, sort of like, "We know you are busy. Your time is valuable. You are paying your bill. If you would like, there is a door, you can check it out. The card is behind that door." We could obviously be a lot more in your face and aggressive, and we tend to be very careful. I was complaining to our team yesterday about not getting enough emails from Affirm on Labor Day, and they said, "Just remember practice what you preach. Reach, not frequency." So we are not trying to saturate the airwaves with must get a card, but long before we start trying to talk about the card outside of the Affirm walls, we need to saturate the wall that we have, and that is a very large base. Yeah. One of the best areas of investment in the card and in customer acquisition is just the surface areas that your products sit on, the way that customers come in the front door, and the point-of-sale side of the business. I wanted to maybe talk specifically about the 0% strategy. It has been in a lot of focus over the last two years. I wanted to maybe take a step back because we often get asked about the mechanics for how you scale this product efficiently over the network without going to each individual merchant and negotiating custom MDRs and things of that nature. Yeah. Can you talk about just the channels that help you scale 0% distribution and make it easier for merchants of all sizes to participate in, whether it is the wallet partnerships, PSP partnerships, and so on? I think it also might be helpful to talk about how 0% offers work on the card when people use the Affirm Card. There is a lot of there. That is probably several layers in one question. I will try to hit them all, but if I skip something, feel free to point that out. There is a bunch of different things that have to come together for 0% programs to work across Affirm. In no particular order, there are five, as I am counting them in my head, different technologies that we had to build. One of the things that Libor likes to say, we embrace channel conflict. As an active participant in digital wallets and our own card, which we love for people to use, and direct integration with hundreds of thousands of merchants, and integrations with ISVs and platforms, inevitably, these days, you go to a merchant and there are three different ways or five different ways to pay with Affirm by going through different doors. It is very important for us that no door is better or worse than any other one. Otherwise, we are actively discouraging a partner from supporting us or promoting us. We have an entire initiative called UFP, Universal Financing Programs, where generally speaking, with very few exceptions, if you are at a merchant X and you are trying to pay with Affirm, you are going to encounter basically the same deal. There are some exceptions. Sometimes some promotion does not get updated in time, et cetera, but that is very much an exception, not the rule. The rule is if you decided to pull out your favorite digital wallet and then put it back in and pull out your card, if there is a zero available, you are going to find it in both places. If you are going directly, you are going to find it. That infrastructure has existed for a few years. We built it primarily as we scaled with digital wallets and ISVs, and that was quite an undertaking. It is more than just the technology. Obviously, technologically, there is some complexity around how do you settle, things like settlement time value of money comes into play, et cetera. The more important piece is the ability to change terms. As these terms come up in one source, they need to be reflected in all the other channels. There is also a legal component where the contracts with merchants, the things that they sign, allows us to change these pricings, et cetera, within the confines that they can figure, obviously, et cetera. UFP is one piece of it. The other piece of offering these zeros is the ability to offer them not as a blanket product. It is very easy to say, "Hey, let us just give everyone no interest at all. It will be great." You can imagine that is a very expensive affair, especially if we are talking about longer terms. Our calling card from the very beginning has always been these long-term loans, where you are not just getting a 0% loan for six weeks or three months. We will go as far as four years sometimes where consumer really pays no interest. If it is your first time, I rage against the idea of deferred interest because I hate the notion of we promise you a 0%, but do not read the fine print because it might flip and become retractively compounding some horrible sounding number. Anytime Affirm promises you a 0% loan, it is in fact a real 0% loan. You can be delinquent. You can take a break. I hope you don't, but if you take a break from paying us for a year, you'll still eventually pay 0% of interest because that's the promise we make. That's the brand we built. We are the transparency first lender, et cetera. To make sure it is not prohibitively expensive for the merchant who's paying for these zeros, we built what initially was known as Adaptive Checkout, eventually became AdaptAI, and then culminated in this thing called BoostAI, which all the acronyms or all the fancy terms boil down to one very specific thing. Any time through any of these doors where Affirm is offered, as consumer goes through based on the best possible, highest converting probability anyway, lowest cost to the merchant, that is the offer that consumer will see. It also has to be synchronized with the advertising the merchant can do, both technically and legally. There's many restrictions around, Regulation Z has a bunch of things to say about truth in advertising as it pertains to loans being offered. You can imagine there's a very complex piece of infrastructure that figures out something like if you're going to merchant X and you're looking at a price and it says as low as 0%, that typically means that we've already been able to underwrite you and decide that you're almost certainly going to qualify for a true 0%, and that's what you'll see as you check out. So that's AdaptAI and BoostAI together. Finally, not every merchant actually has the margin to subsidize zeros as much as they love them. By the way, 0% loans are fantastically conversion inducing. A typical impact for a merchant if they offer 0% for these longer-term, higher ticket items, something like an 80% increase in basket size and on the order of 25% increase in conversion. So these are outlier best marketing tool you can possibly imagine. These are also slightly less profitable for Affirm or any lender trying to do this because there's no consumer interest at all. Underwriting that goes into this has almost no room for error. If you screw up underwriting and you make too many 0% loans or too many low interest loans, you're going to end up with a book that's upside down. Underwriting is a key underpinning, which is why all these AI pieces had to come in to make sure that we don't offer offers we cannot support. To make sure we have enough margin to actually subsidize enough loans to make this as compelling as I just quoted for these merchants, of course, we talk to every vertically integrated merchant and say, "Look, you're probably sitting on a 40%, 50%, 60% gross margin. You would be foolish not to give us 7%, 8%, 9% of it so that we can turn this into a bonanza of 0% deals." Some merchants do this all the time, all day long because they love it. If you look no further than some of the famous sports brands or sports equipment brands of yesteryear, they typically run 0% programs the entire year. They don't wait for Christmas sales. Some of the brands that we work with decide that they only want to do this during sales, retail calendar, et cetera. Another way of funding these is what we call BSP, Brand Sponsored Promotions. This works really well for general merchandisers that have many brands on their shelves, virtual or otherwise, where it is the brand that is actually paying for the sponsorship. This is now a three-way transaction. Affirm is underwriting, promoting pricing, presenting the deal. The retailer ships, fulfills, et cetera, but it is the brand that is kicking in their margin to subsidize a 0% deal. In a normal time or normal world, this is a three-way deal that has to be signed every time. This does not scale. We did not invent this idea. This has existed in banking and cards world for quite some time. But it is typically limited to a few of these at a time because there is such a pain to actually make sure there is a meeting of the minds. So it is schedule dependent, budget dependent. It also reveals information about who has what margin to offer, which is never a good idea. Retailers and brands notoriously hide margin from each other. So we built a platform that allows us to facilitate these deals without revealing too much information while offering all the participants still a lot of transparency into what is happening. If I confused the hell out of you with all of this, don't worry too much about it. It works beautifully. I almost quoted the percentage of this BSP zero volume in our last letter, but decided to hold back. But it is a good number, and it is growing really well. But I will have one last PS on this one. So everything I just rattled off, if it makes sense, cool. I am glad you are following it. If it does not make sense, don't worry about it just yet. BSP is the largest project ZT 1 is working on. This is the next big thing that came out of ZT 1. It is now live enough where it is running hundreds of millions of dollars of volume, so it is far from experimental. I have a lot of confidence it will scale into a very, very large product for us, and it came out entirely of ZT 1. So by the time it is at the billion scale, I will also figure out a way to market it both to investors and to analysts. The good news is that it markets itself really well to merchants and brands, and consumers only need to understand that when they come into Affirm, they see a 0% deal. There is no asterisk. They are not going to get screwed. It is a true 0% deal. And so it is one of the finer examples where the product is easy to explain. The underpinnings are actually very, very complex. Yeah. There was a lot there, but I think a lot of it centered on just the creative ways that you guys think about distribution. Pivoting to some of the other distribution channels you have, I think the wallet partnerships have been a consistent callout in the letter, both as a driver of GMV growth as well as a big contributor to active merchant count, and particularly at non-integrated merchants, so merchants that you do not work with on a direct basis. How do you see wallets contributing going forward? How do you think about it both from a volume generator, but also from a customer acquisition channel as well? I think we have been very fortunate to be partnered with some of the best digital wallets, and the initial expectation for us was certainly it is another door. If people cannot go through it and find Affirm where they expect it, that is a problem. We have to address it. We mostly came at it with a point of view of we just have to make sure Affirm is supported inside blank, fill in your favorite digital wallets. The good and sort of maybe slightly unexpected news is that it has turned out to be something of a growth channel, customer acquisition channel for us, which we have been very happy to lean into and are continuing to do so. If you expand your definition or expand your mind slightly when you think of digital wallets to include some of the more agentic first sort of chatbot interactions, even things that have happened inside some of the browsers, most recently, you can pretty quickly see how this could be a huge source of new consumers. There are amazing features inside Chrome and really all the browsers that have come out recently as every one of these companies have prepared for kind of what shopping looks like in a world of AI. We integrate with, I think, all of those at this point, and it has been a great source of both transactions and recently user acquisition. I think it is the sort of thing that product speaks for itself. You can actually test it out and just see how well it works. I know some of our people, some of Affirmers believe that the best way to use Affirm is actually through one or some of the digital wallets. So it is definitely very much a first-class citizen as far as integrations go. That's great. Another distribution channel that's been a pretty big theme this year has been around ISVs, I think Intuit and QuickBooks in particular as well as ServiceTitan. What have you learned from the early innings with these big platform relationships? How did the product needs flex for services versus the traditional retail channels you operate in? How do you think about other verticals that are potentially good fits for ISV distribution? Yeah, it turned out to be a pretty amazing thing. We obviously knew what we were signing up for, trying to partner with folks at Intuit and ServiceTitan, et cetera, so we always understood there was a ton of opportunity and came to that with great gusto and ideas. The thing that we were blown away by is the richness of use cases, and it's always very easy to say, "Cool, but not today" when you speak to, I don't know, a cosmetic surgery clinic. Someone who runs one of these places will tell you, "Oh my God, half of my volume is financed, and I hate my provider. They're complicated. They overcharge. I don't have any transparency. Consumers don't like them. Would you guys please build something?" It's like, sure, but we have no idea how big it is. Partnering with ISVs gives you this instant sort of very compelling picture like, that's a $100 billion industry, you figure out 1% of that's a lot. That actually still adds up to the targets of today. ISVs are as much about just gaining volume, partnering with good people, but it's also about learning that things that appear nichey as you talk to merchants, and I spend a lot of time talking to merchants, and certainly our revenue team does, you sometimes would benefit greatly by just zooming out and saying, "Wait a second, what is that?" inside some giant ISV report that we get. Like, wow, that's a much bigger industry than I expected. That gives us inspiration to customize a product because we understand just how big the opportunity is. It did not enter my mind that elective medical was going to be an enormous opportunity for us until we saw just how big it is inside a couple of ISVs actually that serve that industry. Intuitively, it is big, but how big could it really be? They are like, "Actually, it is enormous, and we should be so lucky to go and build the right products for it." It is a source of engineering and product innovation for us. We are very committed to partnering more. Now that we have done a bunch of these deals, we actually understand what success looks like. We know where we can go fast, where we have to go step by step. Maybe one last thought on that one. I have said it before, maybe even from this stage, there is as big an opportunity in what we do in small business as it is in consumer. One of the things that ISVs teach you very quickly is that it really is that big, that there is plenty of B2B products that this genre of borrowing needs, and we will certainly have something to say about that at some point. Another good ZT 1 project, maybe. Okay, one, I think our last question probably, but you mentioned before we got on stage you were fresh off the tapes from London, I believe, 24 hours ago. Yeah. International expansion has been a big topic, part of the growth algorithm that you have articulated over the next couple of years. You have launched in several different markets, but I think the U.K. is probably farthest along. So maybe talk a little bit about early learning so far, the market receptivity, and then just how quickly that playbook can be compressed and replicated in newer markets. So far, so good. I was just in the U.K. last few days and met with a handful of merchants, some of the larger ones that we have either, one, haven't launched or are trying to win. The good news is that we were right when we said that the market wants our brand of product. Obviously, U.K. is a well-addressed buy now, pay later market. Australia, where we just launched with Shopify, is extremely well addressed. That's where one of the original players comes from, Australia. The risk was always, maybe they have it all figured out. We don't add a lot of value. That is not the case. In the U.K., the conversation's focused entirely around how longer terms really matter, how they love the transparency, how they love the no late fee posture. They love the clarity we bring to the idea of we will not market brand A to brand B customers just because both are paying us. Plenty of merchants are concerned with leakage of data. The way we built our company, I think, provides a lot of assurance that we will not quietly monetize our own customers against each other. Sure. I think that's been very successful so far. Obviously, U.S. is still growing so quickly, it'll be a little while before international volume starts becoming a big noticeable part of the overall, but it's growing really well. We have a handful of brands we're excited to hopefully bring over the line any minute now. We're definitely fully committed to it. One of the major thing that we did organizationally, we have now created a role of an SVP whose sole job is driving international strategy across the globe from the top, which it sounds like we didn't know what we were doing, and it sounds as though we didn't have a strategy, but now having someone who wields significant amount of power, influence, happens to be someone who's been at Affirm also for a dozen years. Having someone who's very senior, this woman, Pat, is going to do great for the team's confidence in our conviction, but also just access to top-level resources. Very excited about that. I'll be back in Europe in less than two weeks. I'm personally involved in a lot of the international work, too. Hopefully back in a year and more to say. Oh, yeah. I should hope so. All right. Well, that does take us to time, Max. There's always a lot to cover, but really appreciate the time and all the thoughts on the business, and thanks for being with us today. Thank you.