Joining us this afternoon. I'm Vijay Kumar, the med tech and life science analyst at Evercore. A pleasure to have with us Hologic. From the company, we have CFO Karleen Oberton, and I think from investor relations, we have Ryan Simon floating around, I think in the hallway. With maybe Karleen starting with you. I mean, fiscal 2023 was really, really strong for Hologic. And the guide, I think when I look at your fiscal 2024, excluding days, I think in a 5%-8% is above your LRP rate. Your comps were tougher, but despite that, the guidance is pretty solid. And I think people are still trying to struggle with, like, the drivers, you know, what is, what has caused this turnaround, right? Let's start with molecular. Grew mid-teens in 2023, pretty strong. Now, what are the big assays, you know, that's been, you know, driven this growth? Like, how big are these markets? Like, how much runway do you have for some of these end markets? Sure. Well, thanks for having us, Vijay. And yes, 2023 was a great year for Hologic. Ended on a strong note and really in a really strong financial position with an exceptional balance sheet, to help us deliver growth moving forward. But, you know, when we look at the growth drivers moving forward, maybe we'll start with molecular. You know, as we look at 2023, BV/CV was really the standout assay that drove growth, and I would say early innings still for BV/CV, and we see that, you know, an assay in the $100 million range, which still is accretive to growth, I would say in the medium term. Again, early innings with that. I think in 2023, we also had a strong contribution from our respiratory assays. We probably planned a little more conservatively that we don't anticipate a flu season quite like we had in 2023. But certainly, if demand is there, we'll be able to respond. And, you know, Biotheranostics is also growing faster than the average, and so I believe that will continue to be a growth driver in the molecular space moving forward. Gotcha. And, sorry, just maybe sticking with that molecular, I think in the past, you've given some stats about, in a number of instruments placed during the pandemic years and, what percentage of them are, you know, being used for non-COVID tests. Can you just remind us what those numbers are and, what are those non-COVID tests? Like, are they BV/CV or other tests? Sure. So what I would say at the highest level, growth is coming from across our menu. It's BV/CV's a leader, but all of our assays are growing. We've given and we have expanded the install base. We go back to 2019, prior to the pandemic, we had about 1,700 Panthers globally. At the earnings call, we said we're about 3,260 now globally, so a significant growth in that install base. We've also talked about our new customers. So new customers acquired since April 2020, over 90% of them are running at least one other assay besides COVID. Over 55% of them are running at least two other assays, so that is a testament to the stickiness of that Panther once it's installed. If we look even broader at all of our customers, in the U.S., so we went back to 2019, only 20% of our customers were running four or more assays. At the end of 2023, that was over a third, running four or more assays, and we've got 21 approved. So that allows you to understand that two things: One, it's driving revenues about driving content in the Panther, driving utilization. And two, we don't have to place any more Panthers for a while and still realize that level of growth. It's all about getting the content on the Panthers that are out there already. I think a lot of us are trying to do the math and utilization per instrument, trying to compare it versus pre-pandemic and trying to look at what the growth could look like. Is that the right way to think about when you look at that, you know, 3,200 and change in install base? Yeah. What's the right way to think about underlying molecular growth going forward? Yeah, I would say that we think about molecular growth moving forward is gonna be higher than our long-term revenue plan of 5-7. So think about molecular above 7, so high single, low double-digit growth. And then from a utilization perspective, we have not updated the utilization, but we have in our last corporate presentation, said that utilization per Panther has continued to improve over the last couple of quarters. So I think we've kind of starting to get to that point where we've, you know, recapitalized larger customers from Tigris to Panther, and it's getting back to a point where we can see that utilization growing. Just, on the utilization per Panther continuing to grow, Caroline, is that being driven by perhaps tests being shifted away from Central Lab to now perhaps a Panther, or where is this growth coming from? Yeah, I, I don't think i t's less of a shift, 'cause if you think about, well, there's consolidation too. There's closures of the patient, and then the labs continue to acquire, so either way, there's a shakeout for us. But I think it's some of our secret sauce is our physician sales force, where we're able to partner with our lab customers to get customer-level data to go out and educate physicians on guidelines and how-- what screening should be performed. So, again, the growth is broad-based across that complete menu, as well as international too. Think about international is growing faster than the US. Gotcha. Then maybe shifting gears to Biotheranostics. Mm-hmm. I think it's a pretty differentiated test. It's part of the guidelines- Mm-hmm. has pretty healthy reimbursement. I mean, can you just remind us on what is this test? What should be the TAM for this kind of a test? Mm-hmm. And what's driven this, like, 30% growth, I think, last year? Sure. Yeah, so, the Breast Cancer Index test is a test that a woman takes to understand whether or not she'll benefit from endocrine therapy. So think about endocrine therapy as something that typically post-diagnostic a woman has for five years and has pretty awful side effects, right? So, if you take a test that says, "Hey, you're not gonna benefit from this," that's a good thing both for her, that she doesn't have to take this test with, nasty side effects, as well as from the healthcare system. We don't have to pay to deliver that therapy. So, great test, differentiated test. You know, as you said, grew over 30% last year. We think it's gonna be another double-digit grower in 2024. Certainly growing faster than the rest of the molecular business. You know, and Vijay, you know, we really don't wanna put a cap on what this can be. You know, it's clearly is under penetrated at the time of acquisition. I think we said it was about 5% penetrated, so early innings. Gotcha. So we're still in early innings. And I, I think, the other part of, you know, when you, when you think about diagnostics is, cytology comes up. Mm-hmm. In that, I think the Street's concerned about the USPSTF guidelines. Maybe high level, like, why is the Street concerned about USPSTF, and what's the real risk from a change in guidelines here? Yeah, well, let me start by saying co-testing, Pap plus HPV screening, is the best for cervical cancer screening. We believe that, and even since 2018, there's been no new data that would dispute that. So at the highest level, with no new data, there's really no reason for the USPSTF to change coverage for co-testing or Pap alone. So let's start with that, and so this is something that we think about all the time, right? We wanna make sure we're getting the best care to women. You know, from a street perspective, you know, obviously, if the guidelines come up and co-testing wasn't covered, that is the concern, and rightfully so. But the reality is that less than 1% of physicians practice HPV primary. The predominant practice is Pap or co-testing. That's what physicians practice. Because physicians understand that HPV alone, primary alone, misses one in five cancers. It also leads to excessive colposcopies, which is a pretty invasive procedure for a woman, as often HPV primary will resolve on its own. So that, that's the reality of the situation, Vijay. I think as we think about it, again, we believe that co-testing will likely be covered. If it's not covered and it comes out in the draft guidelines, as was initially what happened in 2018, we'll certainly go into action, partner with KOLs and societies to course correct, hopefully. But again, the reality is, just because it's not covered, doesn't mean that private payers won't cover it, right? So the USPSTF is Medicare/Medicaid, right? And then there's just the behavior of changing physician practice. Again, predominant is Co-testing or Pap alone, is what physicians use to screen for cervical cancer. Gotcha. And within your current book of business, what percentage is Medicare versus commercial? I don't have that visibility, but I would think it's probably primarily commercial coverage, given the age we're talking about, where women often get the most screening. But what I would say is that our cytology and perinatal business globally is about $450 million, probably $400 million, roughly, is cytology, and only 60% of that is in the US. I see. And then, anything from a pipeline perspective within molecular, you know, that's exciting that we should look out for? Yeah. So certainly, you know, what's most exciting is BV/CV. While it's been the driver of growth over the past year, it will continue to be a driver of growth over the medium term. We do have a few other assays that are in development, whether it's GI or hospital-acquired infections. Those will likely be on the Panther Fusion platform. And those are probably more complementary versus blockbuster in nature. I would say that, you know, on the development front is the digital cytology, which is approved in the EU. You know, I think that could be exciting once it's approved in the US. That digital cytology, is that just automating the slides or even the primary analysis for diagnosis? Is there, like, a software algorithm component that- Yeah, so I think there's the ability to more accurately and faster read images, you know, with software, with some level of AI. But there's also the ability to capture an image in, if you, you know, think about hub and spoke, where you could have reading capability centralized, but, you know, acquiring the samples more dispersed. It allows for that digital transmission of the image. Gotcha. Is there... You know, when you think about a pricing rate, and this is something that comes up, I think one of the questions at Garten was, a lot of your peers, they've seen their install base expand over the pandemic years. Is there an excess capacity in the industry? Could pricing for the industry come down? Mm-hmm. What are you seeing from pricing trends, and what is the guide assuming for pricing? ... Yeah, so pricing pressure is not new to molecular diagnostics. This is something that we've always dealt with, and it's kind of part of our lock the socket strategy and why we have a menu of over 20 assays approved on the Panther and Panther Fusion. And so, you know, this is part of the ongoing dialogue with our customers that, you know, if a customer is running a couple of our women's health assays, and, again, we're having a discussion about, "Hey, why don't you take on BV CV?" They might say, "Well, I want some better pricing on my legacy assays." And that's okay, 'cause usually it's a win-win for us in that not only are we getting them to take on a new assay, but we're extending that life of that contract, and it just increases the stickiness of the Panther. Gotcha. And sorry, is the pricing in the guidance, is that like flat currently, or is that? Yeah, I would say that within the range of the guide, there's some pricing assumed. And again, this is not new. Because of the pandemic, this is something that we've always dealt with. Gotcha. And, and I know, switching gears to, within breast health, obviously on the gantry side, you had the benefit of, in a converting backlog, given the chip shortage. When you think about the, gantry backlog, like, how large is that backlog? Have you worked through most of it, or is that, is that still a sizable chunk for you guys? Yes. So, the backlog is giving us great visibility. I would say that we're gonna work through that backlog over the course of 2024 and into likely 2025. You know, I think, Vijay, what we've seen is, the ability to engage with our customers at a more strategic level. So there's not... You can't take for granted that you can order a gantry in a quarter and receive it that quarter. So we actually have-- what we're seeing in the backlog is some larger orders that we'll work through over multiple years. So talking to customers about their entire install base and an upgrade strategy versus just onesie-twosie. So, so actually, it's, it's enhanced, I would say, the quality of our backlog. I see. And any way to quantify the size of this backlog versus historical levels? I don't think we've quantified it per se. I think what we're saying is, you know, it's definitely over four quarters worth of backlog, again, giving us good visibility into that product line. Sorry, did you say you have 4 quarters worth of backlog? I said at least. At least. At least. At least. At least. That's pretty sizable. How have you seen any change in customer either cancellation rates or perhaps delivery dates? Are customers pushing out? No, we haven't seen any meaningful change in cancellation rates on any orders. In fact, anecdotally, we did have one cancellation, and it was because they found the product from a third party. They still wanted a Hologic 3D Gantry, but they were able to get it somewhere else. You know, we kind of worked that situation separately, but yeah, no meaningful change in cancellation rates. Just given the higher interest rates, any change in from customer, you know, CapEx budget outlook perspective? No, we really haven't heard much. Think about the gantry as a price tag in that $350,000 range. You know, probably a smaller price tag compared to, you know, a $1 million-dollar robotic instrument. Also think about the gantries are money makers for the hospital. They run or breast centers. They kind of operate all day long, and there's good reimbursement there. Gotcha. And just, when you think about innovation within that space, is there anything new that's expected to come within breast imaging? Yeah, well, we're certainly working on a next-generation gantry. I don't think expect any meaningful impact for 2024, but, you know, we're focused on image quality, workflow, and patient experience. So those are the three things you can expect that would be highlighted and focused on, on the next gen. But, you know, Vijay, we've been pretty deliberate in doing updates, whether it's software or other updates that are backwards compatible to that install base, so that people don't have to wait to get enhancements for the next gen. So really trying to get away from that boom-bust of a gantry replacement cycle that we've seen in the past and more of a steady cadence of gantry purchasing. When you look at the other parts within that segment, your service has become a really big component. It is. You know, and that, that's pretty high visibility of it. When you sell an instrument, a gantry, like, what's your attach rate on service? Where was that a few years ago? Has it increased? Yeah, so we have a pretty high attach rate on the 3D gantry, over 80%. You know, some real stickiness with those customers. But I would say, you know, opportunity in the rest of the breast health portfolio. So some of our other instruments, say, for instance, Brevera or Trident, only have about a 60% attach rate. So there's opportunity there, certainly to drive that attach rate, but really has been healthy on the 3D. Gotcha. You know, when you think about what else you could do within that segment, are there any other adjacencies which would make sense, just given you have such a leading position in that market? Yeah, so we're always looking across what we call the patient continuum of care, where the right spots for us to invest in and to be players. But I think more specifically recently, you know, both internally, investing in AI as well as making some bets with some other investments that we're making to make sure that we're a leader in AI at the appropriate time. ... and when you look at the LRP of 5%-7%, I, I think Steve in the past has mentioned perhaps, breast health segment should be at the lower end- Mm-hmm ... of the gap. You know, for me, I, I'd always thought of gantries as more of a replacement market. Mm. In my mind, it was always like a low singles, low single plus. So help us bridge that gap, you know, sort of, disconnect between the view it's a replacement market versus what gets us to a 5 plus. Yeah. So I think, I think you're not, you're not wrong in that. The gantry business in a normalized condition is probably at that low single digit. You know, the service is probably between the low to mid single digit, maybe approaching the mid if we grow that attach rate on other products. And then it's the interventional piece of the business that's probably growing, you know, a little stronger, high, mid to high single digits that's getting that overall division, coupled with international, is growing faster than the U.S. As you know, we still have opportunity to go direct in certain key markets that will elevate the revenue growth rate. I see. And could, perhaps international be an opportunity, within this segment? Yeah, so certainly international, you know, there's still opportunity to convert from 2D to 3D, as well as the opportunity potentially in newer markets, emerging markets for, you know, some lower technology as well. Understood. Perhaps switching gears to surgical. Yes. 6%-8% guide coming off of, I think, teens last year. Those are some pretty impressive numbers, right? Talk about visibility. What is driving this growth? Sure. So let me just clarify that. I think the guide for surgical is closer to 5-7. It's if you adjust for the selling days, you get to the 6-8. So that reported is the 5-7. You know, certainly 2023, there were some benefit of easier comps in the prior period. But yes, over the last two quarters, we're continue to see nice growth rate in surgical, and it's broad-based. It's continued high single-digit growth with MyoSure. It's double-digit low double-digit growth with Fluent and Fluent Management. Think about that as an instrument placement, along with a disposable, the FloPak, that's sold on a per-procedure basis. And then finally, it's the, you know, the acquisitions that we did, the laparoscopic portfolio, that is growing double-digits as well. Broad-based elements to that division's performance. How big is Fluent and lab portfolio within that segment? Is that like 20% of the segment right now, which is growing double digits? Yeah, I think it's approximately probably $100 million product line item. Again, nice recurring element to that product. Is there a TAM for Fluent? You said it's $100 million, which is growing double digits. You know, it's a little hard to quantify. I mean, I think, you know, we don't want to cap the potential there, as it could be used potentially for more and more procedures. And similar to MyoSure, I don't think we ever thought MyoSure would be the size it is, but we continue to drive procedure adoption for that product line. And then MyoSure growth, I think, last year was pretty impressive. Came back pretty strongly. Was this just procedure catch-up, or did something happen in 2023, which drove the strong growth? Yeah, I think there's probably, like, a little element of procedure catch-up, as well as, again, the easier comps in the first half of the year. But again, just driving commercial execution with our sales force and driving that revenue. You know, when I think about how large is your surgical sales force at this point in time? Well, we think that's a competitive secret, but it is our largest sales force. And so certainly, even from an M&A perspective, we're always looking at what else can we put in that bag of the sales force. Right, because that, that's where I was going with my next question. It's a bag with three or four products, right? Could you, even if not outright M&A, would it make sense for you guys to partner with someone else, market, you know, other products, innovative products in that segment? Yeah, I mean, I think the team is always looking at different opportunities to leverage that sales force, but I think, you know, something that's meaningful would likely come from M&A versus a partnership. Sure. And when you think about that M&A opportunity set within surgical, how's the funnel looking? You know, the funnel's good. The teams are active. You know, certainly, the recent acquisitions, particularly Bolder, really opens the door to more than just GYN surgical procedures, so that's, that's an exciting opportunity. Just remind us, what does Bolder do? What does Acessa do? Yeah, sure. So Acessa treats larger fibroids. So think about MyoSure treats, I think it's 0-2 in size, fibroids, smaller. And Acessa treats fibroids that might be on the outer side of the uterus and larger in size, using a laparoscopic procedure to do that. And then Bolder is vessel sealing capabilities, primarily within pediatrics at this point, but opportunity to expand. Gotcha. And who do you compete, you know, in these markets? Are you guys the market leader? Yeah, certainly on NovaSure and MyoSure, we're kind of market leaders, really in a niche perspective, but, you know, the competitors would be formidable in that area, you know, J&J, Medtronic. Gotcha. And when you think about the sort of broader women's health category, you know, certainly on the surgical side, you know, robotics obviously has been a pretty big theme out there. I'm curious what other kinds of procedures could you attack with an endoscopic, a minimally invasive approach, which doesn't compete against robotics? Well, that's an interesting one. You know, I'd have to give that a little more thought and talk with the teams to give you an appropriate answer on that. Understood. And then, you know, maybe on a few questions here on the guidance currently. LRP, you know, days adjusted 6%-8%, which came in above your, you know, typical 5%-7%, right? Is that 6%-8% just being driven by this backlog in breast health, or are we seeing strength in other parts of the business? Yeah, I would say certainly in the first quarter, the strength, you know, and we'll have an outsized growth rate for breast health in Q1, as Q1 2023 was a, another declining quarter. I think we've get to a harder comp for breast health in Q2, which was a larger quarter, in 2023. Okay. Okay. But then again, think about nice growth, you know, both surgical and diagnostics are in that 5%-7%, probably towards the higher end. I see. And without, I guess, the breast, the backlog within the gantry side, should it have been days adjusted within the 5%-7% LRP? So minimal impact on the days... The breast health impact from days comes from service, right? So the service revenue we take on a daily basis and a little bit on the disposable element, not really much impact on the gantries on the days. Okay. And then, I think, you also mentioned a light- Mm. respiratory season, Yes. What's the headwind from respiratory season that you're assuming within the guide? Yeah, so think about, you know, our respiratory portfolio is relatively new, really launched just prior to the pandemic. Prior to the pandemic, that portfolio did about $20-$25 million annually. Think about we did that level of revenue in Q1 alone of 2023. So we have not assumed that level of respiratory demand in fiscal 2024. So total respiratory higher than prior to the pandemic, but not that level of elevated testing we saw in Q1. I see. And so far, I think we're still tracking below last year, right? Mm-hmm. Right. Yeah. And given these days headwinds, is there—should they become like a tailwind when you're thinking about fiscal 2025 because you have an extra week? No, no. So the extra week was last year in 2023. Okay. It's a headwind in 2024, and God willing, there's no change in days 2024 to 2025. Gotcha. And then I think some below the line, you know, guidance assumptions, the interest income was something that caught a lot of attention. Just walk us through on what did the guide assume for interest income, just given your sizable cash balance, it seems a little conservative. It certainly is conservative. So we've assumed probably about $50 million of interest income. So that would have an assumption of deployment of most of our cash, you know, in Q2, our fiscal Q2, calendar Q1. I think, you know, that was just, we didn't want to count on it, so it's just upside. Okay. And just to be clear, sorry, what is the current guide assuming for interest income? So the current guide, we gave a range of net interest expense of $40 million-$60 million. Understood. And then, I think margins are something which comes up a lot, currently. I know there's been a lot of moving parts between the chip shortage, inflation, supply chain disruption. I think in the past you had said base business ex code should be around 30%, and then- Mm-hmm ... expect some margin expansion off of those levels. What is the base margin right now, and when do we get back to that 30% level? Yeah, so, let me frame it, step back and frame it a little higher on, in terms of earnings. So when we talk about our long-term revenue growth of 5%-7%, we will grow earnings faster, so thinking about growing EPS 10% a year. And so we'll leverage the entire P&L to do that. It won't solely be on operating margin expansion, I think there's a significant intentionality on our part to make sure that we're continuing to invest in R&D, so that we continue to have that nice organic pipeline. What I would say is in terms of baseline for margins, I think we point to Q2 of 2020, just prior to COVID, operating margin was around 31%, right? I think what we'll see is we'll likely exit the year at that rate, exit 2024 at that rate, and we'll see improvement as we move throughout the quarters. Sorry, exiting fiscal 2024, you should be at that 30% level? Yes. Given that you're exiting fiscal 2024-2030, but when you think about fiscal 2025, should we have, like, one year of abnormal step up in margins, you normalize that 30%, and then you smooth it out? Or, how should we think about the cadence of margin expansion? We haven't given 2025 guidance, so we're not going to give it here. But, you know, I think if we exit 2024 at that 31%, again, I think that's back to a normalized base that we would build from. Gotcha. You said EPS, double-digit EPS growth off of 5%-7% top line. Mm-hmm. Is that, like, double-digit if revenues came in at the low end of five? Like, are we still looking at, like, 10% EPS, or is that more of a- Well, I think what I said is that we'd grow it faster than the 5%-7%, so maybe if we're at 5%, it's, you know, 9%, 8%. But I think, you know, I think we would certainly adjust as we needed to, you know, to deliver our earnings. Gotcha. And when you think about the margin cadence throughout the year, right, like high twenties in Q1, exiting Q4, I think low thirties, what's driving that step up, you know, when you think about the progression? Yeah. So there's a couple of things that are happening. You know, we're one, we're working down the higher-cost chips. So I think we've talked about during the peak of the supply chain crisis, we had to secure our chips at exponential costs from, from what we normally would. So those are sitting on the balance sheet, and those will turn through the P&L as we work through the backlog. So that will, that's kind of a little front-end weighted. We'll also, we are also running dual facilities right now for our breast health division as we consolidate manufacturing into one new location. So that's, again, a burden that will kind of ease throughout the course of the year. And then, in general, some other things where we had higher inflationary costs, we'd expect to kind of ease the course of the year. In general, even though that gantry will have a higher cost associated with it, it is, the gantry itself, is accretive to the corporate average of gross margins. So is this a margin cadence entirely, almost being driven by gross margin step-up, or is there an operating leverage? No, there's operating leverage as well. So think about Q1 as our highest operating expense quarter, because this is the quarter where we have our national sales meeting, we have RSNA, which is going on this week in Chicago, the Radiologists' Convention, which is a considerable expense for us. And, you know, this is the quarter where all our merit and compensation kind of resets. So highest quarter of operating expense right here. Gotcha. And then, sorry, again, back to that cadence, Q1 versus Q4, how much of this, what percentage of that is the gross margin step up versus SG&A leverage? It's, it's both. It's both. I don't think we've given that level of detail at this point. Okay. And I think you mentioned running dual facilities within your breast health segment. Is that? When did that happen, Carolyn? I was not aware of this. Is that something new, or...? Yeah, so the project's been underway, if you think about it, for a couple of years. You know, obviously, this is something that impacts employees, so I don't think it was something that we were very vocal about, but it's really in this year where we actually have the dual operation, and that's why we're talking about it, and it's really the impact is this year. When is that expected to complete this transition? It's expected, late 2024, early 2025. '24. Is there, once you transition to the new facility, are there any advantages, benefits, or is this just expanding capacity? So I think there'll be, you know, we haven't quantitated, put a number to it, but qualitatively, we will, for the first time, have R&D, detector manufacturing and gantry manufacturing under the same roof. I mean, that has to have some natural efficiencies to it, to have all those teams working together under the same roof. So we're really, we're really excited about it. I see. And when you say working down higher-priced chips, so these are, these are chips which are on the inventory, which are now flowing through the P&L, right? Yes. There's pretty high visibility on the gross- Yes margin expansion cadence? Yes. Okay. And then, when you look at the cash balance here, I think when I look at the M&A history, you know, it's been an interesting evolution for Hologic, right? You've had some successes. Ones, I think when you went outside your core adjacencies didn't play out pretty well. How are you thinking about, you know, from a deal size perspective, hurdle rates that you're looking at? Yeah. So certainly, from a capital allocation perspective, M&A is at the forefront. That is our priority. BD sits within the division, so the divisions are out there identifying assets, cultivating relationships, and feel like we've got good pipelines of potential deals. I think we've been patient, on acting on, on deals. Again, we want to see things that are both revenue accretive and earnings accretive, and those things are a little harder to find, unfortunately, and they typically command quite a premium. So being disciplined as we look at those, those assets. Would you consider doing a margin dilutive or EPS dilutive deal if it was accretive to top line? I think we did several of those. I think we would certainly look at deals, and likely we'll have to look at deals that, from a percentage basis, are dilutive to operating margins from a percentage perspective, but are actually positive, I think, is where we'd like to look. Yeah, dilutive to margins, that I get, but what about deals which perhaps assets with negative margins? You know, for the right deal, you know, I think we'd consider it. Again, we've done several of those. I think we're prioritizing deals that are accretive to earnings. ... Gotcha. And what would those, you know, when you mention these areas, right, I'm assuming they're all in adjacencies. Can you give us a flavor of within those different buckets? Is this diagnostics? Is this, you know, surgical, where you're looking at? Yeah, I would say that all of the divisions are looking at different assets in different ways. I would say that, you know, diagnostics did a fair number of acquisitions in the 2021 timeframe, that they're still, you know, absorbing and working on. And, you know, I would say surgical is a really nice spot to look, right? I think there's probably a little more assets in the criteria that I talked about that are actually available. And I think that the surgical leadership team would like to not be the smallest division anymore. So I think that certainly is an opportunity for us. Gotcha. And what's your current exposure to ASE right now? Like, I'm assuming majority of your surgical business is ASE exposure. I don't think so. I don't think so. I think there is a balance there. Understood. From a pipeline perspective, anything else that we should be focused on? Yeah. So I'd say, you know, certainly, we talked about a next-gen gantry, that is under development. I wouldn't expect anything significant for 2024, but potentially in 2025. And again, working on quality of image, image improvement, workflow, and patient experience, trying to improve on all those things. I mentioned AI is certainly in active development, not only in breast, but in other divisions as well. You know, certainly digital cytology leverages AI. It's, it's approved in the E.U., and looking to, we'll be excited to get that in the U.S. And then diagnostics, we continue to develop assays, but believe that there's a lot of run room with the many that we currently have. Understood. When you think about these new products, should pricing on these new products be incremental? Should it be accretive? I think it depends on the nature of the product. You know, certainly some of the newer assays that have more analytes will have a higher price target in the diagnostics business. Certainly, a next-gen gantry is gonna have a higher price point than the legacy gantry. And digital cytology should have some incremental pricing as well. And the last time, I think, you know, when you launched the gantry, it was double-digit price increase. Is that in the ballpark? How- I don't think it's that much. I mean, we're already a premium-priced gantry, so I don't think we'll be able to have that quite a level of step change. Gotcha. And then just maybe from a big picture perspective, I look at the stock. You know, stocks lag, you know, for your growth, your visibility. I don't know if it's the USPSTF headline risk, but what, you know, what is the Street missing, you know, when you just look at the valuation versus the growth outlook you just laid out? Yeah. So I think couple of things. I think, one, the sector in general has been under pressure, and so we haven't, even though GLP-1s, really, we don't see an impact to us. Certainly, it's been, I think, part of the drag. I think the biggest is really this USPSTF concern about updated guidelines. I think we've talked about that at length. You know, at this point, we don't believe it's a significant issue, but I think it's an uncertainty that is out there. And I think as you, some of the questions that we addressed here, Vijay, whether it's margin, product mix, supply chain recovery, I think there's just been a lot of nuance to our story, a lot of detail that you have to dig in to understand what's really happening to the underlying growth drivers. I think at the end of the day, we keep delivering really strong growth. I think we keep delivering on our expectations and even raising expectations as we proceed. Gotcha. Just to hammer home that point, I think, I think it was the first time Hologic announced an ASR in the company's history. I think it was $500 million. It's the second time. Second time. The second time. We did a smaller one back in 2020, I think it was. Right. But yeah, so it was exciting to do that and, you know, excited about returning some capital to shareholders and, yeah, it was, it was a good thing to do. What's the timing of this completion for this ASR and, you know, share count for Q1? Yeah. So minimal impact for share count in the first quarter. Through the balance of the year, it's probably close to 7 million shares, and it should be completed, I think, in the second quarter, our second fiscal quarter. Fantastic. I think, with that, I'm out of questions. Otherwise, Karleen, thanks so much for being here. This was helpful. Thank you so much, Vijay.