Thank you for joining us here at the 54th, it's amazing to say that, 54th Nasdaq London Investor Conference, held in partnership with our great friends at Jefferies. This event has long served as a showcase for the vibrant community of driving growth across the global markets, and this year is no exception. We're delighted to welcome an outstanding group of investors from all across Europe for two days of meaningful dialogue with Nasdaq-listed companies. The companies you'll hear from over these days span diverse sectors, yet they share a common thread. That thread is a relentless commitment to solving hard problems through technology. Whether it's enabling a small business to reach customers on the other side of the world, pushing semiconductor manufacturing to atomic level precision, or democratizing access to financial markets for everyday people, these companies represent the full breadth of the technology value chain of innovation driving through the Nasdaq ecosystem. At Nasdaq, we remain deeply committed to supporting healthy, strong, and resilient markets across the globe. The environment today gives us reason for optimism. It certainly does. With the markets trading and the indexes trading at recent all-time highs, on the backs of exceptionally strong first quarter earnings, and the pipeline for IPOs, including a small one that might happen later this week, preparing to enter the public markets has never been more compelling. We at Nasdaq are proud to provide the technology and the infrastructure that allows companies to raise capital, connects investors with opportunity, and fuels economic growth across the globe. Thank you for attending our conference this year. We couldn't be more delighted to have all of you here today, and to hear from these amazing Nasdaq-listed companies. Now I'd like to invite Janet Harbison from Jefferies for some further words. Thank you. Morning, everyone, I'd like to add my welcome to Bob's, and thank you all for joining the 2026 Nasdaq Investor Conference here in London. My name's Janet Harbison, and I lead international equities at Jefferies. We are delighted to be partnering with Nasdaq for the 11th consecutive year on this event. It's a partnership we value enormously, and one that continues to grow in relevance every year. This conference is an important moment in the calendar, bringing together some of the most innovative public companies in the world with a highly engaged global investor audience. As I look around the room here today, it is clear that the appetite for direct dialogue with leading growth companies remains exceptionally strong. I'd like to thank our partners at Nasdaq, Bob, Daniel, Lisa, and Andrea, for their continued collaboration, energy, and commitment. I'd also like to thank the Jefferies team, particularly Abigail Charkham, for all the work that has gone into delivering this event. Most importantly, thank you to the companies and investors who have traveled to London to be with us. The debate in technology has clearly moved on, even from a year ago. Investors are no longer simply asking who has AI exposure. They're asking where AI is changing product velocity, customer acquisition, pricing power, infrastructure intensity, and margin structure. They're looking for evidence that AI is driving real revenue uplift, better conversion, lower cost to serve, or entirely new markets. That's what makes this year's agenda so timely. Across software, semis, digital advertising, marketplaces, and infrastructure, the key question is no longer whether the opportunity is large. It is which companies have the data, the distribution, the compute efficiency, and execution discipline to capture it profitably. That combination, innovation, scale, and financial discipline, is very much at the heart of the Nasdaq ecosystem. Nasdaq-listed companies continue to define many of the structural shifts shaping markets globally. This conference gives us the opportunity to hear directly from the management teams leading that change. From a Jefferies perspective, U.S. and international equities remain a core focus for our client base. We're very pleased to have colleagues here from across Europe and the U.S. Our role over the next couple of days is simple, to help facilitate high-quality conversations, connect investors with companies, and bring the full breadth of our global research and distribution platform to bear. We really hope that you find the next couple of days insightful, productive, and enjoyable. Before I hand over, one small but important ask from me. The U.S. Extel Survey closes this Friday. It's very important for Jefferies. We would be incredibly grateful, if you can, for your five-star votes, particularly for our technology team, many of whom helped make this conference possible. You'll see flyers around the room with details of the tech team in the survey. We're very pleased that Blaine Curtis, Samad Samana, James Heaney, and Aniket Shah are with us in person over the next two days. Many of you in this room have been instrumental in Jefferies' progress in equities and research. We're really grateful for your continued support. It is now my pleasure to introduce our opening company, AppLovin. We're delighted to be joined by Adam Foroughi, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, and Matt Stumpf, CFO. AppLovin is one of the most compelling technology stories in the market today. The company sits at the intersection of AI, performance advertising, and the mobile ecosystem. Its Axon platform has become a powerful example of how machine learning can drive measurable outcomes for advertisers at scale. Adam, Matt, thank you for being here. We're delighted to have you with us. Jefferies tech research team. We're very fortunate to be joined by Adam Foroughi and Matt Stumpf from the AppLovin team. Thank you guys for joining us. Appreciate it. Thanks for having us. Maybe just to start off, I think one of the things that's always defined AppLovin is just the focus on performance advertising. Basically, the idea that a business can come to you and spend $1 to make $2. Can you just talk about why that's been your focus more so than brand advertising, and how that's ultimately gotten the company from over $10 billion in gaming ad spend on the platform? Yeah. We started the business in 2011, at the time, advertising was predominantly brand advertising. In fact, over the history of advertising digitally, most dollars are spent on brand dollars. The challenge with brand advertising is you can't really prove to the advertiser in a measurable way that the dollars they're spending are yielding them an actual profit. Therefore, if you can't prove that, you need to ramp up a sales force, you're bound by generally ongoing monthly contracts, and it's just a really tough process to scale a business. Starting the company, I wanted to make sure that we were technology first, product first, and limited on sales investment. In fact, we have a very small sales team even to this day. In order to do that, we knew that we had to be able to deliver advertisers actually measurable profits for the dollars that they spend. If you tell a customer, "You spend $1 million on us in a month, you're going to make more profit from that million than what you spent, and you're going to get the user," then they'll want to spend more than $1 million. The value proposition is so strong in that case that you don't really have to sell that, though. You just have to show it to them in numbers. From 2012, when we launched, to today, that's really been the core value proposition in every category that we go into. Starting with games, we really focused there. We built a product over time that could actually accomplish that. In earlier era, when we were running from 2012 - 2020, the technology was pre-Machine Learning. It had to do that in a very manual way, but we built dashboards and analytics to show them they were generating profit. The system was not as systematic, but it still worked, and the company scaled. Now, since we launched the Axon 1 model and then subsequently in 2023, launched the Axon 2.0 model, the technology enabled us to really grow the business dramatically. We took that and automated the whole thing for customers. Now customers come in, they plug in their goal. Their goal usually translates to an IRR that they want to have. All of these gaming companies think about their business model the same way any investor would with their dollars that they spend. If they spend $1, they want an IRR from that dollar. That IRR better beat the S&P because otherwise, why don't you just put your money in the S&P? They're looking for healthy returns. If we can systematically scale their spend and achieve their return goals, then they will spend as much as possible and try to generate the max amount of scale. We are truly giving them an arbitrage. If that's the framework of the business, both in gaming and in now these new categories that we go into in the consumer vertical, we don't really have to sell a whole lot. We're giving them such a strong return that they're going to come to us. Therefore, we can scale this company to pretty large numbers. As James said last year, we disclosed in Q1 last year, the business has grown a ton since. Back then, $11 billion of advertiser run right now, much bigger. The company is very large scale, been able to do it with a sales team that's probably globally well under 100 people on sales and business development. You think about a business team that's that small supporting that much scale, with not a single commission-based person on payroll. That hasn't happened before in advertising, and it's only because the value proposition is so strong. Yeah, great. Good place to start and good introduction. Maybe just talk about the Axon 2.0 rollout. Obviously, that was a huge steppingstone for the company and has enabled these faster growth rates. Can you just talk about what went into that, ultimately, what's powering Axon, and why has that been the underpinnings of this growth? Yeah. We all talk about AI as large language models, but recommendation systems and ad revenue generation is one of the best outputs of these technologies. If we talk about AI as just a really modern understanding of how to use neural networks to create really good prediction and outputs, the advertising space has seen huge advancements over the past few years. When we concepted Axon 2.0 in 2022 and built it and delivered on it in 2023, and have grown up since, we really took our underlying technology from, I'd call it Machine Learning 1.0 and upgraded it to Machine Learning 2.0, made it cutting edge. When we released it to customers, it really was to do exactly what I said in the prior response, but do it automated at much larger scale. The system now can take an advertiser campaign, if there's a new game that's launched and that game has never been downloaded by a single person in the world, and that developer comes to our platform and says, "I would like users at this return," the system is so powerful that it can achieve that return in almost no dollars spent. You've got a scalable platform, fully automated, can work for any kind of game, and then now in this consumer vertical for much more than just games, and can do it in this automated performance and profit-based model for advertisers. That really unlocked our ability to scale the business from where we were in 2022, which I think was, if I recall, on the advertising side of the business, hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue to this year, analysts project us at around $8 billion of revenue. Three years, 10x because of this Axon 2.0 model. That's great. Before we bring Matt into the conversation, Adam, I did want to ask about specifically competition. Can you just talk about why the market for user acquisition isn't necessarily zero sum, and why you think there can be multiple winners? Because it's not kind of like a traditional brand model with fixed budgets. Maybe just explain how that works. Yeah. There's not a lot of companies in the world that do this performance advertising model. If I try to list them out, obviously I think this has driven Facebook to become the most powerful advertising company out there. Google does more bottom-of-funnel advertising, so a lot of their search revenue is a user already knows they want to buy shoes, and Google directs them to the right path, and then captures dollars for it, and they're the world's best at that. We try to play in the create discovery of a new product that the user didn't know that they wanted and price it on this profitability type model. Facebook does that well. A couple other companies in our space do that as well. If you can deliver profit to the customer that's true arbitrage, they don't have a reason not to spend with you. They will go, "Facebook, I want to spend and generate a profit on my dollar spent." They'll go, "AppLovin, I want to spend and generate a profit on my dollar spent." Anyone else who can offer that same solution, they will go spend dollars. They won't constrain their budgets. Again, you live in a world of arbitrage. We all learn if anyone took financial theory in undergrad, that was my focus. You learn arbitrages are maximized till they're gone. Well, the gone is the scale limits the arbitrage at some point, but these advertisers will go to every single channel to try to achieve their arbitrage goals if that channel allows for it. Great. Matt, I want to bring you into the conversation. Maybe just take a minute to sort of talk about the gaming advertising business. Obviously, today, still a majority of spend on the platform. You've talked about kind of the 20% - 30% sustainable growth, obviously been well north of that, but just help everyone in the room sort of understand the core drivers of that 20% - 30%. Yeah, sure. In order to understand our growth rate, you first have to understand just the overall mobile gaming ecosystem that is underpinning our growth. Within the gaming ecosystem, there's a couple components. External investors have visibility into, obviously, the in-app purchasing market because it's posted publicly, so you can see that kind of low single- digit annual growth rate. What you don't have visibility into is the in-app advertising component of the market, which we've mentioned several times is growing at a rate that's much faster than that, multiples of the in-app purchasing market. Behind those components as well, there's general market tailwinds that are also improving the mobile gaming ecosystem. Things like improving the value of the games, going from hyper-casual focused gaming more to casual gaming, which improves the value of the users. You also have now something that we're starting to experience, which is in-app purchase focused mobile gaming introducing advertising. It's still relatively early, but that should be also a tailwind in the future, right, as these IAP focused games start to move over to what's called hybrid monetization and bring in advertising to then improve the monetization of their users. That's kind of the base level. In addition to that, obviously our technology is the primary factor of the growth that we're seeing. Since we're penetrated fully within the mobile gaming ecosystem, it's not growth from new advertisers, it's really the technology continuing to improve and us being able to drive more scale to spend for those advertisers. Now, at the level that we're at, the scale of spend in the mobile gaming ecosystem, you can imagine that we're not going to be able to sustain that 20% - 30% over a 10-year period. At some point, on a percentage basis, it's going to have to start to decelerate. What we imagine is going to happen is, as we continue to grow on the consumer side of the business, at some point in the next three to five years, the mobile gaming business and the consumer side of the business are going to converge. That consumer growth is going to offset any deceleration that we're going to see on the mobile gaming side. We still feel very comfortable with investors expecting that kind of 20% - 30% over a very extended period. Can you kind of expand, could be Adam or Matt, but just on this concept of these model enhancements, sort of take us under the hood of what are those changes? I know they're team directed, but what are kind of specific types of unlocks that you'll get that drive kind of outsized growth relative to the normalized level? Just maybe conceptualize that for people. Part of it is internal research, part of it's external research. We live in a world where AI technologies today are at level X, then five years from now, how much better are they going to be? Is it going to be one half X? Is it going to be two X? Is it going to be five X? The field is getting better. You get more data, a better model that can process that data, trained to create a better output, more compute equals a better prediction. Whether it's a large language model or recommendation system, that catalyzes growth in a business. For our business, our model's job is to run a prediction to create that advertiser arbitrage at the largest scale possible for all the advertisers that we have in the system. As the team goes and tweaks the model, as we get more data into the system, more advertisers equals more data, more scale of ads served equals more data, we can write a more complex model that can process that data to create a better output. Every time that happens, it catalyzes a lift in our business. It increases the advertiser LTV at each individual advertiser because each one of them can now spend more at that arbitrage goal. Moving beyond gaming, I think what's really exciting now is the expansion to categories beyond that, your core vertical, you're calling it now consumer. You started with sort of direct-to-consumer shops. Just explain to the audience kind of what you're most excited about as it relates to this opportunity and how you see AppLovin becoming kind of a scaled alternative channel to Meta and Google. As we think about the business, we try to think about the business in very, very long- term thought. I think it was about three years ago, the business itself was around $1 billion of advertising revenue. I said we would potentially be able to compound 30% a year for 10 years and 10x the business plus, and get to $10 billion plus of advertising revenue. Analysts think we're going to get to $8 billion right now, this year, so it only took us three years and now add another year, assuming we keep growing at a nice rate to clear that mark. Where we are today, if we think about, okay, in 2026 we're at roughly $8 billion, what are we going to get to in 10 years if we compound 25% growth? That'd get to $70 billion plus of net revenue. In order to support that, because we're net revenue reported, you'd have to gross it up to gross spend, that'd be well over $200 billion of gross spend. How do you get there? The games category can't support that kind of scale. It can't even come close. Certainly the games user acquisition market we hope is going to grow a lot from here, and we hope to be able to be one of the companies that catalyzes that growth. We want that games market to be incredibly healthy and believe it will be, beyond that, we need to have other categories that are much bigger be able to support the type of dollars that we think we can collect on our platform servicing this billion-plus daily active users that exist inside games with a better advertisement. How do we do that? We launched into this consumer vertical with commerce 18 months ago. We're iteratively building a product. Today where that product is that typically we go to the customers and go, "How much of your wallet are we able to capture?" Again, that wallet might have grown in order to support the dollars that they give us because we're providing that arbitrage, but typically we get about 10% wallet. Other companies get more than that. We know that at the highest end, the best in the field might get 50%, 60%, 70% share of wallet. In order to improve our product in that category, we have to keep writing a better model, we have to improve the ad formats, and we have to get more customers so that we have more data into the model so that our predictions improve. We think that rate of 10% is only going to go up. We also have to go and launch more categories of advertisers. We talked about on the last earnings call getting into cost per lead. The reason we're building a cost per lead model is to be able to support categories like health insurance, auto insurance, healthcare. This unlocks much bigger TAMs as well outside of just the e-commerce category. What we are doing today is to start laying the foundation of work that will take us a decade to complete. We'll never get to completion, everything is iterative, but a decade to get to a great place. To be able to support what we hope is a 25% compounding growth rate over that decade. If we do that really well, this business will be a very large business. We'll have succeeded on trying to show a customer over 1,000 ads, 1,000 different products that are so relevant for them that the advertisement feels like content and drive a higher conversion rate and get this business to where we want to get. I'm glad you brought up the 10%. We kind of hear that as well in our checks. I'm just curious, what do you think it's going to take to sort of get to a bigger share of wallet? Is share even the right way to think about it if it's kind of growing the total pie for the amount that these customers- It's a good scoreboard metric. When we talk to the customers, one of our conversation points is like, "What products do you want?" Today we don't hear much as far as concern around the products and the targeting that we offer. The question is, okay, what else do you need? Well, scale is an important indicator of success. 10% is a starting point. If you think about this market, Google and Facebook are higher than 10%, everyone else is below 10%. It's not like we're starting at a bad place. We're starting in a place where we should be a requirement for anyone who's in this category buying advertisement to come to our platform because we're already better than every other platform outside of Google and Facebook. Over time, as we get more customers, we get more data. The model gets smarter with time, both from the data from more customers, but also from our team improving the model and pushing updates. We're starting from a place where we have very little advertiser density, we have very little advertiser data. We have a model that's only 18 months old. We go forward, we're only going to get better across all of those facets. If that happens, we're going to have a model that in theory should be able to capture more than 10% share of wallet. What does that get to? Don't know, but again, to support a scale of a business in that 25% compounding case of $200 billion where this becomes the majority of our business, we've probably got to be able to capture much more than 10%. It's almost with certainty with time and these data advantages that we'll get because we're starting at such a low point, we'll be able to get to a higher point of wallet as we go. I get this question a lot from investors, what is it about the mobile gaming audience that's just such a compelling use case for e-commerce advertising? I feel like a lot of the pushback we kind of get is like, oh, what data signal do you have? What's your kind of right to win from that category? Well, inside the mobile gaming category we're doing pretty well. I'd say right to win is maybe we're right now winning in our category. The audience is a 1 billion-plus daily active users. The audience of gaming is always going to be a subset of the audience on social. However, the power user inside casual games is materially different than the power user inside social. Someone who's scrolling Instagram for eight hours a day or TikTok for eight hours a day probably skews younger because they have the time to do it. Someone who's playing Mahjong for two hours a day probably skews lower. I don't know a lot of 18-year-olds who know how to play Mahjong. If you think about the profile of that person, well, that person probably has more money. They're probably a head of household. They're probably a shopper. We have a framework where the power users in casual games are a very good shopper audience. That's been proven through third-party audience studies. It's proven just conceptually by the type of games that are heavily played. The Candy Crush user, the Mahjong user, the Solitaire user, the crossword user, these are very good users in terms of having consumer behavior. The other part of the ecosystem that's very beneficial for advertisers is that the game customer is accustomed to a longer format. In between levels, the ad is like a television commercial, but they can skip it after a few seconds. A lot of the ads in roughly half of our business come from this rewarded ad unit, where a customer who's playing a game will say, "To get another life on this level and to play the level again, I'm willing to watch an ad." Maybe it's one of the only places in the world where a consumer actually asks to watch an ad, and they have to watch that ad for up to 60 seconds. They're getting something of economic value, but in those 60 seconds of watching that ad, they can't do anything else. They're on their mobile phone, they're watching a vertical video, and they have to complete that video in order to complete the transaction that they chose to opt into. That's a great framework for an advertiser. If you tell a brand, where in the world can you actually know that the consumer saw your ad, you get 60 seconds of their undivided attention. I don't know of another place in the world that that exists. If you can give that brand that starting point to be able to create intent and drive a conversion, then you power it with our machine learning technology, the possibilities are pretty great for that brand. Underneath all that, you've got a great audience. You've got that head of household who's sitting there, and that's the person who's watching the ad. You can create a lot of shopper behavior. Great. Then, Matt, just I think one of the most anticipated drivers right now, obviously, is the opening up of your platform to all advertisers sometime this month. I guess I'm just curious, what does GA, general availability, ultimately represent for the company, and what are, I guess, the specific tools, capabilities that are coming together as part of this launch? Yeah. We think about this launch not as a customer-focused launch, but more as a product milestone, if anything else. What we've done thus far for the consumer vertical is tried to launch new products for them focused on what they care about. Prospecting and discovery models, because advertisers within the consumer space target different sub-sectors of their consumer base. We did that last year. What we've been working on are tools for smaller advertisers to help them create new advertisements or generative AI creative tools that allow them to create interactive end cards, as well as the full video component of their advertisement. We're also working on MCP access, so that if companies want to run agentic-based campaigns and analytics, we've got that available to them as well. Adam mentioned the other piece, which is a lead gen model, which opens up new verticals to us that don't buy on a cost-per-purchaser basis, but buy on a lead gen basis. The goal being that by the end of June, that we've got at least a first iteration of a full suite of tools that are available to these consumers, the consumer vertical advertisers, so that anything that they could potentially want, they have access to, with the goal being that they can all come on board and basically just do one-click advertising. Obviously, it'll be a first generation. We'll continue to iterate and improve those tools for them in the future. We just want to make sure that they have anything that they would potentially want to come onto the platform. Got it. In terms of the go-to-market and kind of expanding access and getting more advertisers into the GA product that you have available, how do you think about that marketing investment? Is it something that's immediate behind the launch, or is it more kind of phased in in the second half? Just how are you thinking about marketing in general? Yeah. We think of it more organically. We could go and spend a ton of money tomorrow on performance marketing, what happens if you do that is you sometimes stress the platform, you lower the quality of your product. What we're focused on is the long- term, not the short- term. We want to make sure that as we ramp up spend, that the product is capable of handling that level of volume, that we're able to handle customer support requests, other things like that. We continue to retain that level of high quality for the advertisers because it's tough to make a first impression twice. What you'll see from an external perspective is that we'll ramp up that performance marketing spend in a very measured fashion over time, increase it, call it 25% on a quarter-over-quarter basis. We'll continue to do other types of marketing, just overall brand marketing for the company. Adam's been doing some podcasts. Yep. Get brand awareness out there and shows face a little bit more than we've done in the past, which has been none. That's been good for the company. Fair enough. Great. What's the constraint, I guess, on a customer being successful or even just getting a customer onboarded? I think in the past you talked about sort of that breakage rate of a customer where maybe they see the ad or they're exposed, but they don't necessarily join the platform. What is the constraint, and how are you doing in terms of reducing those constraints to success on the platform? There's two things that we identified, we'll identify more over time as we optimize the conversion funnel. One is that some customers just don't have ad formats built for our platform, whether it's video advertisement or our ads have another component that's called an interactive page. These advertisers may just not be accustomed to that format. We have something that's rolling out soon using generative AI tools to just have a one-click campaign creation where a customer who integrates can click Launch My Campaign, and they'll automatically get the video ad and the interactive ad out of the box and hopefully good enough to meet their needs. They can hook up their credit card, off they go. That should solve one of the big roadblocks that exists in the system today. The other one is this cost per lead model. The notion that today a customer comes in and they have revenue, and they're optimizing the profit, great. That's what I talked about is the value proposition of the company. We already support that. That's most of our business. Let's say they're trying to get auto insurance leads sold. That's not a revenue-based thing in the short- term, and therefore, how can they launch a campaign in our system? Well, there is no way for them to launch a campaign in our system. If we want to work with those companies, we have to allow them to buy leads. That is the point of that new model that we have in testing right now and we'll release. These are a couple areas we identified. Over time, it's our job to make sure that anyone who signs up who's a qualified lead who can actually go live on our platform, has a good experience. There's one reason, which is obviously revenue, but a lot of these customers that sign up aren't all that big. You can say there's not a lot of revenue associated with them. The greater reason that we care about is sentiment. We want to have the best experience for every one of these customers. If someone who's a small business signs up and gets ads out of the box and is impressed with the ads and can go live and starts growing their small business, well, it's much more likely they're going to tell a friend about our business than if they came in and they didn't have ads, and they walked away and said, "This system is way too complicated for me." That you end up with a bad Net Promoter Score. We think of our own platform as something that can potentially grow on its own if we create a good experience for all the customers that sign up. That's why we really focus on these- flows and optimizing it over time. How much inspiration are you taking from some of your peers? Obviously Meta has made it super easy for anyone, regardless of size, come up, start spending. Where are you guys on that front? Look, they're obviously the best. They've built a great platform over a decade. They've been the most innovative. You always take inspiration from the best. Mm-hmm. Great. I think you've talked about the ambition of getting to hundreds of thousands of customers, potentially over time, even millions of customers on the platform. I think at the last earnings call, you talked about the average self-serve customer that's coming on board is spending something like $70,000 annually. When you start to run the math, it looks pretty exciting. Just curious, how do you think about longer- term monetization potential of the advertiser base and ultimately what the go-to-market looks like to get to those ambitions? Yeah. I pulled that number off a few months live of the average customer cohort, you expect our LTV to go up over time as we improve our models. Even if you took that number, in my earlier example of saying, look, if we compound 25% a year for 10 years, this business has to support over $200 billion of ad spend. Well, 100,000 customers is $7 billion. A million customers ends up $70 billion. To support that level of scale, you probably need 3 million customers. We're going into a market where just in the consumer market of e-commerce, you have over 3 million shops that exist. Certainly the market can support it. Facebook and Google have over 10 million customers. In order to get millions of customers, we have to do our job right on all the things that Matt talked about in performance marketing our own brand marketing our own brand, making sure that our perception is really good, making sure that the product works for every kind of brand that wants to sign up and go live, and making sure that our share of wallet is substantial and substantially higher than the 10% it is today. If we can do all of those things over the next decade, we can support, based on the math, the scale of the company that would be required if we're compounding at 25% a year over a decade. Curious, how should investors be thinking about supply expansion? I know obviously your core business was kind of advertising within ad-supported games, but you've talked more about going into in-app purchase games that have been in-app purchase historically. Curious how you're thinking about that expansion and where that fits in the timeline of the demand side that you're very focused on right now. How does that fit in? It's super important for us over the next decade to get more supply. The reason it's important for us is we want to take our demand to all the eyeballs everywhere that are qualified. There's a few vectors that we're working on today. One is the publishers of games that are in-app purchasing games are very likely to start monetizing with ads. In-app purchasing monetization is maturing. Ad monetization continues to improve. There are two forms of ad monetization for them. One is a lot of these game developers who monetize an audience with in-app purchasing have a mature audience, and they don't want to run competitive games. Well, as we're scaling up our consumer vertical, we can show them and their audience ads for something that isn't competitive and intrusive to their own audience and should not be seen as something that's risky. If you just size that market, you go $100 billion TAM, Candy Crush, when Activision was public on their own, reported that when they launched their ad division and went non-games only and built up a 250-person sales force to do it, they started generating about 15% revenue from ads. Well, if you took the ecosystem and just said, let's just have it for the possible market, now you have 50 billion times 15%. You have a $7.5 billion two-publisher market, which if we're servicing that with just consumer ads, you'd have to gross up to our gross spend, but it doesn't become immaterial. That's a pretty big opportunity that is very beneficial to the in-app purchasing market and those developers, also very beneficial to us. The other piece of this is going outside of just the mobile gaming inventory. There's a lot of publishers in the world of apps and mobile websites that could use more advertising demand. There's just not a lot of companies that are focused on monetizing that demand with a true performance model like we have. Games are probably not going to place well there, but if you think about that world, it's other social apps, it's other sports apps, it's other news apps, other media properties. People watch television on their phone. People watch movies on their phone. There's so much consumption happening in this sort of what people call the open internet or the open app space. Today, the monetization is a lot weaker than is inside games. The CPMs that we see on games are multiples higher than what that world sees because games is so performance rich. If we can scale this consumer vertical and then take it and place it outside, we should be a very compelling participant in those auctions. The last area of this that we've talked about that's important to us is we do think that these brands deserve the shot to serve on television as well. Connected TV IP-enabled device, still sold the same way as linear TV. There is no true performance model like I've talked about that exists for brands on television today. It's not trivial. You're missing a call to action. You're missing the same data that you have on a mobile device. You're going to have to cross up the television to the mobile device to close the loop. Nothing is trivial about that, but we're working on that problem. If we can solve that creates a whole new space. It's challenging to grow something related to our current business if it's a whole new space because you're starting from zero in a market and trying to grow the market. If we're able to show customers that they can buy on television, and with certainty make a profit from that buy- Yeah That's a very scalable value proposition. That's another area that our core engineering team is focused on. Across these vectors, we think as you think about this business over the next five, 10 years, these are all very good growth vectors over that longer timeframe. Yeah. Just on the CTV point, what do you think is the biggest constraint to making that successful? Obviously, it's a lot different. You don't have the same clickability. The only way to sort of measure performance, I guess, would be if someone used a QR code or something like that. How do you think about ways to sort of make CTV actually performance-oriented and not just kind of upper funnel and- Unfortunately, no one uses- Yeah the QR codes. Exactly. You're missing that option. That would've been great if they did. You have to prove in an incrementality study that the ads served are better than the ads not served. In some form or another, the brand has to know with certainty that it works. Now, the problem with not having a QR code or a call to action is that the measurement becomes something brand new. When you have brand new measurement outside of the preexisting measurement systems, and you have to prove through incrementality, you're basically creating this market that didn't exist before. Not trivial. That's the work that we have to do. End of the day, when you're going into a market that didn't exist, it's like 15 years ago cloud didn't exist, and now obviously cloud is massive. It had to start with Amazon innovating and creating something new. Here, this doesn't exist. Nobody is selling CTV in this true performance model. It's something that we think we can solve. It's very hard to do. If we're able to do it, we're going to go sell it. It's something that in theory should be able to grow because, again, if the customer is seeing profit on the other side of it, they'll see it reflected in their numbers. They will scale. Then the question becomes how much can you scale each one of them to. Great. Last few, I think one of the things that stands out most about your business is just the margin profile. I think you're well north of 80% adjusted EBITDA margin. We don't really have a lot of companies in our universe that have that kind of margin profile. Like none. Is there another one? None. Yeah. Yeah. Just curious, yeah, kind of how you're able to sustain that, where you think margins go over time. Why is that the right margin level to have? Obviously, I'm sure you get questions of why not invest more, why not hire more. Yeah. Talk about the ethos. Both you guys can chime in. Yeah. I would look at it the other way around. Where could we potentially increase cost to impact the margin? You think about our primary components of cost, which are data center costs and headcount. Data center costs, we've been very consistent thus far over the past few years that around 10% of our revenue growth is reflected within the data center costs, and we've been in fact I think slightly under that recently. We don't expect that that should materially change. Obviously, the costs will go up. They'll continue to go up as we scale. There's more complexity to the model. There's more volume of traffic and everything else, so that'll continue to increase. It shouldn't change in terms of the overall profile. Headcount, we're just a very lean company in general, so we have slightly north of 800 employees in total. When you drill down into the kind of core components of the business, our ad tech business and all of our corporate team, we're around 400 employees. We just run very lean in the first place. While we're adding headcount in core areas to continue to support the growth, like in the consumer vertical, we're adding engineers if we can find engineers. that meet our very high thresholds, and that's really another component as well that we just have a very high bar. We're continuing to expand headcount there in the engineering team, as well as the business development team to support more and more customers on the consumer side. We're adding in like the tens of headcount, not the hundreds. Yeah. We don't imagine that the overall margin profile of the business should change materially from here. Around that 80%, I think we're pretty comfortable in going forward. Great. Then the last one, just on capital allocation. We saw kind of the increase in the buyback in Q1. generating significant free cash flow right now. How do you think about just the general kind of capital allocation priorities between M&A, which you've done more of in the past, but maybe less so now. Curious how you're thinking about that. Yeah. First and foremost, we want to make sure that we're not stifling the organic growth of the business, so that there's plenty of cash that's available to support the headcount growth and other new costs that come up, like performance marketing that we mentioned. We're doing that first and foremost, still we're generating significant excess cash. I think we're running around 70% cash flow margin, pretty substantial. We're looking at M&A on an ongoing basis and assessing the strategic benefit of potential companies, we've got a very high bar there as well. Obviously, there are not many companies out there that are running at the same level of operating efficiency as we are, and none at the EBITDA margins. Yes. Certainly. Any company on those fronts would be dilutive to the business. It's, well, is there a company that's out there that adds a significant level of strategic benefit, we look at those companies as ones that would add material data for the model that would continue to improve our ability to scale up the spend for advertisers, or dramatically increase the volume of advertisers that we're bringing onto the platform and cross-sell those advertisers into the existing platform. So far, we haven't seen any companies that check all those boxes. Right. What do we do with all the cash? We've decided to return the cash to shareholders. We've done that since 2022. I think we've spent almost $7.5 billion, probably one of the most successful buybacks in the history of the public markets. We've done really well there. We're buying back opportunistically as well. One of the downsides of the company is we're relatively volatile still, but the silver lining of that is it provides us an opportunity to take advantage of that dislocation in the value of the stock- Ramp up the buyback. We've been doing that as well. You saw it last quarter that you mentioned, right? We ramped up to $1 billion on a buyback, we plan to do that going forward as well. Maybe the last one before opening it up to the audience. Mentioned a little bit about M&A. I know you've done a lot of ad tech deals in the past. You were in the business of acquiring studios at one point and own that business as well. Obviously expressed interest in TikTok and first-party traffic in general. How would you think about the prerequisites for a deal that would add value to your platform? If you look back at the history of our deals, most of the deals were for data. The games companies were to build our Axon one model. Once we had the model and we had a good presence in the ecosystem, we stopped buying gaming companies, we subsequently offloaded those assets. When we bought MoPub and MAX, we were able to buy business relationships and effectively not people, culture, nor technology. We rebuilt those stacks, if you look back at the history and success of our M&A, the MAX business is a very large business now. We made a huge return on the investment in MoPub and MAX. If we buy in our wheelhouse, it's something that we think we can make a good return on, it would require a company that either could fit culturally with us, could provide us data, or could provide us something that's commercially beneficial inside this advertising ecosystem that we understand very well. Now, there's not a lot of that out there. Whenever we look at the space, we're certainly required to look at opportunities out there, it serves us well to do so, it's hard to find something that fits that framework. Because our team is so lean and we don't intend to change the lean structure of our organization, it's really hard to fit other cultures with ours. That creates a dynamic where if we thought we were going to buy and not have the ability to integrate, then we're not a particularly great buyer. The best transactions are those that you can integrate into a core stack and use our own preexisting scale to scale their business faster. We think about it around that framework, if we see something great, again, we will do something. We haven't in 4.5 years, in the absence of that, as Matt said, we think our stock is a good place to park cash, we continue to do it. Maybe with the last 10 minutes or so, if there's any questions, we'd be happy to take any questions from the audience as well.