At this time, it is my pleasure to turn the program over to Michael Funk. Great, thank you very much, and thank you all for joining us here this morning for our most recent installment of One Year Later, sometimes Two for recently public companies. I am one of the mid-cap software analysts here at the bank. The format this morning is going to be approximately about a 40-minute fireside chat. If you do have any questions, you should see a dialog box on your screen. You can type them in there, and I'll read them across as they come. So really pleased this morning to have CCC Intelligent Solutions with us here. We have Chairman and CEO, Githesh Ramamurthy, as well as CFO, Brian Herb. The company came public a bit over a year or so ago, and I wanted to give Githesh an opportunity to begin just to level set the conversation, maybe for investors who are less familiar with CCC or investors who haven't visited it for a while. So Githesh, Brian, thank you very much for this morning. Michael, thank you, and welcome everybody to CCC. I'll give you a very quick overview. So CCC is a software and services platform company that provides a series of mission-critical services for what we have termed the auto insurance economy. This is made up of insurance companies, repair facilities, parts providers, so over 300 insurance companies, 27,000 plus repair facilities, parts providers, OEMs, and a pretty large ecosystem, and over $100 billion are transacted on an annual basis on this platform. We are essentially a SaaS platform, a native cloud-based platform with some of the world's first artificial intelligence deliveries in production. Now, in very simple layman's terms, if you've ever had an auto claim, think about all the things that take place behind the scenes. That is really where we come in, providing tools and technologies to all the people that are involved with you when you have an auto claim. Yeah, that's a great overview, Githesh. And I opened by saying that the theme of these calls is One Year Later, Sometimes Two. And we really invite the management team to discuss maybe how the story has changed over that period of time, which is a great question for you because a lot of times software companies will address, "Let's change from a macro perspective or competitively," which is a lot in the last 12 or 24 months for most software companies. For your company, for CCC, I think that the answer is probably not a lot has changed, but would love to hear your perspective exactly on what's changed in terms of forecasting ability, the demand environment, competitive environment for you and CCC. Sure. In many ways, we continue to execute on essentially the same mission we've had. We've continued to grow earnings and revenue throughout not only this last period, but for 20-plus years of recurring revenue, earnings growth year after year after year. And a lot of that has really been driven by innovation that we've delivered to our customers. So when you look at the fundamentals of the company in terms of revenue growth, earnings growth, what we deliver to our customers, that hasn't changed. But what we have added, which is of really great interest, is that we've started to speed the pace of delivering this innovation. These are new products, new solutions to a very large customer base that we have. And the thing that we are seeing is that many of our customers are dealing with macro issues. Our customers are dealing with macro issues, and it has actually been helpful in some ways for the demand environment because our customers are coming to us and saying, "I've got challenges with labor. I don't have enough labor. I have supply chain issues. I need more digital capabilities, more AI, more functionality." So that is actually continuing to evolve. So that, I would say, is really how we have continued to proceed, especially in the last 18 months or so. It's a great segue because investors are sorting through software, especially enterprise software, and trying to siphon out the companies that are must-haves versus nice-to-have type platforms. So can you describe some of the enhancements, some of the new product developments that you've released in the last 12 or 24 months, and how they're addressing that must-have for your customers versus a nice-to-have? Sure. We have a pretty broad suite, and I will highlight maybe three particular areas that would be of interest to people. So last November, November of 2021, we introduced Estimate STP. So this is the ability for a consumer, when they have an auto accident, instead of having an adjuster come out to see you, but to essentially have a phone where a link comes to your phone, you can literally, at your convenience, take pictures throughout the car. So we are working with 300, with a lot of insurance companies. We delivered a solution that allows a consumer to take the pictures, send it back to CCC, back to the carrier, but we can now write the damage, produce the estimate. This is one of the most fundamental areas of customer satisfaction as well as productivity for consumers. It can cost up to $200 just to send someone out to go see the car, to write the estimate, to do these things. And this is an example where we, after many years of development, we have about a trillion dollars of historical data. We've built very sophisticated deep learning, machine learning algorithms that are capable of doing this. And we delivered our first customer in November of last year. I think that was a press release with USAA, and it was out there. What we announced at the last earnings call a year later is that seven out of the top carriers in the country are now using this production platform in one way, shape, or form, and over 50%. So that's one example of innovation that is really directly dealing with this issue of delivering a mission-critical solution that improves cost efficiencies and improves customer satisfaction for the consumer. So that's just one example. Now, that's a great example. The key point for me is the efficiency gain for the P&C companies as well. I think you said $200, right, is the cost per adjuster going out. It's just real material cost savings for them. Maybe continuing on that theme of some of the secular shifts that you've seen in the P&C industry, and specifically as vehicle complexity has increased over the last five or 10 years and how much more mission-critical that makes the product you deliver, and that was to the insurance company, but also to the consumer and the repair facilities. Can you address that shift? Sure. As many of you probably deal with, the cars that you're buying have more cameras, more sensors, more computers. So the complexity around parts of vehicles has been increasing significantly, as well as costs of these things have been going up substantially. So one of the key things that we have developed and delivered, and I'll give you a specific example. When you have an auto claim, nowadays, all modern cars, you have to scan the car. That means you plug a computer into one of the ports in the vehicle, and the car itself tells you, "These sensors are damaged. These cameras need to be recalibrated." And there's a series of diagnostics information that comes out. In 2017, only about a very small 2-3% of cars needed to be scanned. Today, the number is north of 50% of vehicles that have to be scanned before the repair, after the repair, and has to be calibrated. So we delivered a solution called CCC Diagnostics that works with a series of diagnostics providers and integrates the functionality directly in for the repair facilities. So you have 27,000 plus repair facilities that are seeing millions of vehicles a year, and our diagnostic solution helps you understand the damage from the inside of the car, what needs to be done with the car, as well as provide transparency to the insurance carrier. So this is another example of how we're delivering something that directly deals with complexity. And we think when we look at this over the next five, 10 years, now everything that we see is that this complexity is going to continue to increase. So you're really sitting at the center of this ecosystem, right? There's a gravitational pull as the complexity increases and your solution becomes more important, right, for the end user, rather than the repair facility, the underwriter, or the claim, right? So that makes a lot of sense, which brings me to the thought about competitive environment, right? And this isn't easy code to write. You can't sit down over the weekend and roll out this type of solution. It takes years or decades of data and information and knowledge. So what is a competitive environment like? Who are your key competitors? And maybe, Brian, if you wanted to throw in some metrics around things like GRR, NRR, if you could offer those, we can think about what churn looks like and growth at existing. Maybe just discuss that topic for a moment. Yeah. Let me give an intro and then maybe Brian can talk about our churn and customer retention. Great. Thank you, Githesh. I'll turn that over to Brian after I do the first part. When you look at the first part, there are numerous competitors. It's a very competitive industry. There are lots of different players. What is unique about what we specifically provide in this environment is that we're able to stitch together a seamless set of functionality because we're 100% cloud. We've been 100% cloud, by the way, for a long time. There's no transition to the CCC cloud. Everything we've been delivering has been on the cloud. We can connect insurance companies, repair facilities, parts providers, OEMs, banks, and you name it. It's a very complex ecosystem, and we provide software functionality to every one of these parties. The network itself that is underneath CCC is a huge source of competitive advantage. So the network means that for an insurance company, we give them broad access to everybody else. For a collision repair, we give them broad access to parts providers, insurance companies, and the like. So every participant, every customer who's on this network benefits massively as the network keeps getting larger and larger. And obviously, the data assets we have are substantial besides the software. And by the way, we run an industry-leading Net Promoter Score of 80, which in the software world for enterprise software is many multiples of Net Promoter Score for enterprise software. So these are the things from a competitive standpoint that we think differentiate us. And also, the most important thing is how customers have been voting over the last decade or so. More customers over the last decade have chosen to go on our platform because of the scale, because of the innovation that we provide and the impact we have for their customer satisfaction and the efficiencies. So we've been the beneficiary over the last decade of more and more customers choosing to standardize on our platform, and maybe, Brian, I'll turn it over to Brian to talk about the specifics of what that means to us in terms of retention. Yeah. Happy to, Githesh. So the measure we use for churn is our gross dollar retention. And since we've come public, we've had gross dollar retention of 98%. And more recently, in the last two quarters, it's actually improved slightly to 99%. So we see very little churn off the base. And it really plays to what Githesh highlighted. It's the stickiness of the network. It's the NPS score. And it's the innovation engine that we continue to bring new products into the market. So we're really proud of the gross dollar retention at 99%. That's an incredibly high number for the software space. And maybe if I could stick with you for one second, Brian. So how should we think about the growth algorithm then and the drivers of it? I think it's something you have talked about a bit in the past. And Githesh, I think kind of set you up here talking about the new products and what customers need. So can you just walk us through the growth algorithm and how we should think about revenue growth this year, the next several years? Yeah. Happy to. So what we've laid out from a long-term growth target is we've talked about 7%-10%. That's an organic number. So we believe we'll do 7%-10% next year and beyond, doing that over time, doing that at scale. When you break it down, what makes up the 7%-10%? So 20% of the growth will come from new logos. And then 80% of the growth within the 7%-10% will come from our existing installed client base. And the way we look at that 80% is we actually break it into two parts. So half of it will come from products that have been in the market for a while. So those products will be products like Casualty, our Mobile product. It will be our upsell into the repair facilities, Engage, Parts. And then the balance of that 80%, the other half of it, will come from newer products that we've more recently brought into the market. And Githesh started to highlight some of those. It will be the Estimate STP. It will be Diagnostics. It will be our Subrogation product. It will be our Payments product. So these are the more recent products that we're just bringing into the marketplace. We expect those to contribute meaningfully over the next several years. And so that's how it breaks down. I would say or highlight that this 20% new logo, 80% cross-sell and upsell, that has evolved. If you go back over time, it's looked more like about a third of the growth has historically come from new logos and two-thirds from cross-sell and upsell. So we do see that the breakdown shifting over time as we go forward next year and beyond. Yeah. It's a great overview, and Githesh, I wanted to step back to one of my first questions because I think maybe for investors that are less familiar with CCC, they think insurance software, and maybe some people lump everyone in, whether it's companies like Duck Creek or Guidewire that do very different things than what you do, and where the growth algorithm is much more impacted by them transitioning customers to the cloud, maybe with products that have lower near-term return, longer payback. So can you just, I mean, differentiate for investors between what you do and what some of those other insurance software companies do, just so investors kind of better understand how you are different? Yeah. So one of the benefits of when we first transitioned to cloud, I would say first transition really for our insurance customers started about 20 years ago. So it's been two decades since we've had cloud-based solutions, and then about a decade ago since we put all our repair customers on the cloud-based solutions. And we've been working on our artificial intelligence solutions for about seven, eight years with many of our own PhDs in deep learning, machine learning, and so on. And one of the things we realized very, very early in this business is that when you're delivering mission-critical applications, time to payback is extraordinarily important. Meaning, if I put your solution in, can I get your solution rolled out in 90 days? Because if I can roll out a CCC solution in 90 days, prior to that, by the way, everybody wants to test it. So the ability to test your product, test your solution is extraordinarily important. So if it's cloud-based, we can bring someone up and running literally to do a pilot, to do a test very, very quickly. And then you've got to be able to prove that your product and solution actually delivers the value proposition you said it would, right? So the efficiencies we promised, the customer satisfaction improvements we expect. And for us, we have done very large rollouts to literally thousands of people, and we can literally do that in 90 days. So that means we have deep connectivity to every carrier. We are the platform for the vast majority of the collision repair market. And we can roll out a solution because it's cloud-based very quickly. And in 90 days, someone without investing tens of millions of dollars can literally be up and running in 90 days, do a rollout, and see the ROI. So as customers demand speed, mission-critical capabilities, that speed of ROI becomes extremely important. I'll give you another point. We had a customer in last week, and I was joking with them a little bit. I said, "Do you know we delivered 400 releases to you last quarter?" They said, "400 releases to us?" I said, "Yes." And they said, "We didn't even notice." Because the cycle at which we do releases, 1,700 releases a year, that throughput to be able to make changes on a national basis for a customer to be able to reflect that, that speed becomes very critical. No, it's a great point, and just thinking about kind of the macro sensitivity, and remind me here, Githesh and Brian, but there was a small headwind during COVID, right? As you saw lower incidents, right, but that is also a very small portion of your business, right, so you were actually kind of a net negative from COVID, but big picture, there's not a lot of economic sensitivity in the model. Is that correct? Yeah. So the way the revenue breaks down is at a total company level, we're 80% subscription-based. So it does not move with volume. And then 20% of the revenue is volume-based. Not all of that volume-based, though, is directly linked to frequency of accidents. And to the point you made, when we saw the year of COVID, that had a material impact on the number of accidents. So claims were down 25% in that year. And we still grew the business 5% and dealt with the reduction in claim. But we also saw a lot of distraction in the marketplace, really took new business sales down in the second quarter of that year. And we saw that recover in the third quarter, fourth quarter. And so for that year, we did 5% growth. And subsequently to that, we did 15% the following year. The guide for this year is 13% organic revenue growth. Coming out of COVID, we've seen an acceleration of revenue and coming out stronger than we went into COVID. No, it's a great point. And maybe let's continue that to talk about opportunity for margin expansion, increase in profitability as investors are increasingly focused on things beyond revenue, right? Whether it's EBITDA or free cash flow, thinking about real return metrics. Can you discuss that for a moment? Yeah. Happy to. So this year, we're forecasting that we'll do 39% on an EBITDA basis. And if you look at what we've done over time, if you go back to the end of 2019, we're about 30% margin. So we've seen 900 basis points of improvement over the last three years. And so, as I said, we're forecasting the end this year at 39%. What we're guiding towards, so we've set out in our long-term guide, is that we will move towards the mid-40s. And we expect to do that over a five to seven-year time horizon. So we do expect ongoing margin improvements and progressions from where we are now as we go forward. So we feel really good about margin progression at the same time of delivering our durable revenue growth in our long-term ranges. Yeah. That's great. And then another thing people have been talking about recently is even just thinking about balance sheets. Maybe just talk about your balance sheet and any kind of needs that you might have for refinancing the next year or two? We have a very efficient balance sheet. So when we did the transaction, we actually refinanced as we closed that deal. We have about $800 million of debt on the balance sheet. Last quarter, we reported cash of about $250 million. So on a net basis, $550 million. From a leverage perspective, we're about 1.8 times our Adjusted EBITDA as a leverage ratio. So it's a very efficient balance sheet. If you go back to when the company was private, based on the financial profile of the company, we would have leverage at much higher levels than we do now. Clearly, as a public company, we're not going to push them to where they were. But we certainly have room to move our leverage ratios up just because of the durability of the revenue, the amount of cash the business generates. We feel very comfortable about our balance sheet and overall our leverage ratios. Yeah. I mean, markets over time have supported four times leverage for companies growing 10%-40% EBITDA margin all day long, right? Exactly. That makes me think, Githesh, what do you do with that cushion? I mean, are there strategic or financial targets that could be interesting, that could be additive to that product set? How should we think about M&A? Yeah. I think if you think, I'll give you an example of a recent acquisition we made. That would be, I would call, an ideal acquisition. So we had spent a lot of time looking at the subrogation space, $20 billion spent on subrogation in the industry. By the way, just for your audience, subrogation means my policyholder hit another carrier's policyholder. And based on who is at fault, they collect from each other. That's really the concept of subrogation. And there's about $20 billion collected and moving back and forth in this process. A lot of it's very manual. So we found a company which had done a phenomenal job of building great AI algorithms around subrogation. And when we acquired this company, it has almost no revenue, very little revenue. But once you put that product on our platform with our scale, our cloud, our distribution capability, our customers, it makes for a fantastic fit because what we are really moving towards is straight-through processing, right? More and more and more of these components for straight-through processing. So that's an example of where a product, a solution that fits immediately in, and we can get it up and running pretty quickly. That's a great example. So we will look at every possibility. We have enormous R&D capabilities. As I mentioned, we do very sophisticated releases from artificial intelligence to mobile, and we do about 1,800 releases a year. But at the same time, there will be adjacencies and spaces where our capital structure allows us to efficiently go in and put this on our platform. So again, making sure that we are being very thoughtful about capital, how capital is deployed, what is the best, what's the best return in terms of efficiently using it for our customers, for our shareholders, for our employees. We have to balance all of those three things. I understand. And I've heard from a number of companies that maybe private company valuations hadn't come down as much or as fast as public company valuations that had kept them on the sidelines from M&A. Wondering your thoughts there and if you've seen any shift in expectation for valuation from private companies that you may be talking to? Nothing specific to report other than at a macro level, our general view is private company valuations usually lag by about six months behind public company valuations. And profitable private versus unprofitable private, you have different sets of valuations similar to public. And this is one of the reasons why for decades, we've always believed having a very strong financial profile in terms of profitability and balance sheet is not only very important for our customers who are relying on us, by the way, for five years, if not more. In fact, we had a customer sign a seven-year contract. So that financial profile underneath is super important. With that, we'll see how private markets develop over time. But there's always a lag in our view. And how are the international markets different than the U.S. market? And is there greater opportunity outside of the U.S. or North America for growth? And then how does that tie into your comments about M&A? Is M&A part of that strategy? Yeah. I would say if you look at the two large markets, Europe represents a sizable opportunity. But the key difference between, say, Europe and the United States is that there are very specific geographic nuances. Germany works differently from Spain. Spain's different from France. France is different from England. So you have all these nuances and differences in smaller geographies. So you can't have a single product or solution that rolls out across these countries. So for example, in China, where we have an operation, our revenues are still very, very small. But we process a large number of claims, but we have a standard solution that rolls out across all of China. So very homogenous market, very large market. So we're in a very good competitive position there. So back to your thoughts about M&A, we certainly think M&A is an opportunity to enter adjacent geographic markets. Yeah. Maybe next slide. I was just going to add one point. So just on the China breakdown, so China is about 1% of our total revenue. We're 99% US-based, and as Githesh said, on the international, when we think internationally, M&A will likely be the way we move beyond our markets today, right? So we don't look at organic builds as a real meaningful opportunity. There are interesting opportunities for us internationally, but those will come on the back of either partnerships or M&A activity. Got it. Makes sense. The shift here a bit, investors are increasingly focused on stock-based compensation, maybe something they didn't quite think about in 2019 or 2020. Just wondering how much of your stock-based comp is related to the SPAC? And then how should investors think about stock-based comp percentage of revenue normalizing over time? Can you walk us through that? Yeah. So last year, we did see the acceleration of some of our stock-based comp on the back of the transaction. So stock-based comp went up a fair bit, really related to the prior equity that had been issued from the last transaction. And that was accelerated when we went public. Since then, we have been issuing stock to the management team and to the broader organization as a public company. That will continue to build a bit. We do see that being around 13%-15% of revenue and stabilizing in that range, and then starting to work its way down over time when some of the new units start to come off and become fully vested. So 13%-15% is a good working assumption as a percent of revenue for stock-based comp. Okay, and is there a period when it normalizes at that level, the space in these events that you're talking about? Yeah. I mean, it's working its way up there now. And if you looked at last quarter, it was around that level. So we're operating there now and expect to be in that 13%-15% going forward. And then over time, say, a couple of years out, it will start to move its way down below the 15%. Okay. And always a hard question to answer, but one that I think people are interested in is private equity ownership. Is there any high-level thought, capital should look at that in terms of incremental sales in that ownership group? Yeah. I'd just say that our investors came in in 2017. That's the prior transaction Brian was referring to. So in 2021, some of that equity invested. So hence, stock-based comp went up. So our investors have been with us for a number of years. They're also very sophisticated and very thoughtful investors. If you look at what they've done with other companies they've invested in, deep belief in the company, its potential. And they'll be very thoughtful in terms of selling their positions down and be very disciplined in that process. I think that's very clear. We've had a number of questions come in through the system here. Just a reminder, just want to ask one. There's a dialog box on your screen. You can type it in direct, hit send. I will ask it as long as it is public market appropriate. But please ask if you have any more. We are approaching the end of our 40 minutes. I promised everyone to keep it tight today. Just wanted to invite maybe Githesh or Brian to offer any kind of closing comments they might have, anything that we haven't touched on today that they believe should be important to investors. Yes. I would just wrap up by saying we are probably more excited today in terms of the opportunities in front of us. We've had numerous meetings with customers, and we're continuing to see tremendous interest in many of our solutions across the board because they provide mission-critical capabilities in terms of operational efficiencies, the innovation people are requiring, and delivering a digital experience. So our view as we look at this over the next several years and what our customers are super excited about is our vision for straight-through processing. So straight-through processing, banks have applied it well over many, many years ago, is a concept of stitching together a seamless digital experience through various parties and delivering a very, very efficient model for the auto insurance economy. And we continue to build those out, continue to see a lot of excitement from customers. We're excited about that going forward. That's a great overview, and actually, I had one last question/comment from an investor that I will pass on, but it's something you already recognized, is that, "Market could welcome more liquidity in the stock," which I think to your earlier comment, we will get there, and your private equity owners are thoughtful and will make that happen at an appropriate point in time. Yes. Much appreciated, and thanks to everybody who is attending and participating, and thanks for everybody. Thanks, Brian. Thank you. Thank you to everyone who joined. Anyone with any questions, please ping me after, and I'll get back to you very quickly on that. So thank you all.