Okay, everyone. We are back with Ingersoll Rand. Let me just introduce myself first since we are on the webcast. This is Nicole DeBlase. I am Deutsche Bank's Multi-Industry and Electrical Equipment Analyst, and I am very pleased to introduce Vik Kini, CFO of Ingersoll Rand. We also have Max, who is now running IR for Ingersoll. Vik, I am going to start pretty high level and then drill down to the segments. For the people in the room, if you have any questions, I will stop every so often to ask, and please feel free to jump in. In the second quarter of earnings call, I think Vicente noted that July organic orders were up low double digits to mid-teens, which is a nice acceleration from 2% in 2Q. Can you just recap the drivers of this long cycle projects versus short cycle ITS versus PST, et cetera, the trends? For sure. First of all, thanks for having us. Max is not mic'd up, so I will just say thank you on both our behalfs here. As far as the orders profile, let me start with Q2, and then we can move into the July number just to ground ourselves. In terms of Q2, 2%, if I go by segment, I will really start with ITS. ITS, you saw more flattish organic orders. I think if you peel the onion back a layer, though, what you saw was on the short to medium cycle side, you saw comparatively better momentum. You saw something approaching more mid-single digits kind of order trajectory. Yes, obviously the piece that created a little bit more of the, I would say, more timing on the headwind was on the long cycle side. Specifically in Q2 was a little bit more European centric in some of our blower and vacuum kind of longer cycle systems. It should be noted that we have long cycle exposure across compressor, blower, vacuum, even our Precision Technologies pump business. So there is about 20%-25% of our original equipment is longer cycle in nature. One thing we would say here, and I think you have heard us for a couple of quarters, is that in terms of the long cycle funnel continues to remain healthy, but there had been that kind of elongation, for lack of a better way to say it, in terms of the decision making and ultimately getting to the finish line with POs and the orders. Now flash forward into July. To your point, a low double digit, mid-teens kind of organic up through, at the time we did earnings, to the first four weeks of July. I think you know it's not our norm to necessarily be talking about intra-quarter orders or anything of that nature, but I think the reason we wanted to provide that color was twofold. One, we kind of peel that onion back a layer. The short to medium cycle continuing to show, I'd say, comparable momentum to what you saw in Q2. I think that has continued as you would expect. The piece that kind of really drove that outsized July performance was the longer cycle side of the equation, and particularly through the ITS lens. The way I'd probably characterize it here is, as we've said, the funnels remained healthy. It just was kind of getting to that final, getting POs in place and things of that nature. In July, you saw it was actually a number of kind of longer cycle projects. Pretty good cross-section across regions and end markets. I wouldn't point to one region or one application or end market in particular. To your point, obviously, encouraged by what we've seen in July. We're not trying to strongly represent that that's the norm per se or anything of that nature. But, I think it does speak to the fact now that I think you're starting to see better momentum on the long cycle converting now into POs, combined with that short to medium cycle momentum we've now been talking about for a couple quarters. So Q2 now into July timeframe. I think we're really encouraged now by seeing that organic volume piece of the equation starting to take a little bit better foothold. In Q2, on the revenue front on ITS, you saw 4% organic revenue growth. Good contribution from both price and volume. Now also into kind of the back half, you're starting to see the volume trends starting to improve, which definitely is the first time we're seeing volume being a little bit more explicit in the course of the last 18 + months, which we're really encouraged by. Okay. That was really comprehensive. Thanks for that, Vik. Maybe a couple follow-ups. It felt pretty strongly, and it was kind of echoed in your comments right there, that you guys don't want us to extrapolate that low double digits to mid-teens through the rest of the quarter yet. I guess a couple questions on that. Any thoughts, and I'll throw to you. I'll try. Can that long cycle strength, if you look at what's in the funnel, I get that there was a boost from long cycle activity in July. Is it likely that that continues? Are you saying, oh, the funnel's maybe not showing as attractive of a setup for August and beyond? No, I wouldn't read. Okay. We're not going to necessarily try to comment any further on the Q3. I appreciate the effort. No, I think we're encouraged by what we're seeing. Like we said, July, the first four weeks, you saw good momentum on the long cycle, but the funnels themselves have continued to remain healthy. I think we've been talking about that elongation for a while and delays but not cancellations. I think July was definitely a proof point of that, but I think the funnels themselves continue to remain encouraging. As such, I think we would continue to expect to see long cycle project momentum and things of that nature on a go-forward basis. I think to your point here, I think we're very encouraged by now starting to see, I'd say, requisite contributions from both the short to medium and now the longer cycle piece as well. Understood. When you talk to customers about what's giving them that comfort in finally making the CapEx decision, what's changed? Yeah. Listen, I wouldn't say that there's been some dramatic catalyst that all of a sudden things change. I think some of this is just timing, to be very honest with you. Okay. A little bit more certainty in kind of where the markets are and things of that nature. Maybe some degree of any of the bottlenecks that may have existed historically are kind of getting loosened up and things of that nature. I think the piece, like I said, that's encouraging for us is it really wasn't just one region or a couple of larger projects. No, it was a little bit broader base than that. Okay. As such, I think we continue to be encouraged by the fact that, to your point, there's definitely still plenty of healthy long cycle funnel out there that this continues to hopefully be something that we see continue to click through here as we move through the balance of the year. Remember, this long cycle project on average are 6-18 months, roughly speaking, in terms of duration from PO to shipment. Okay. As such, a lot of what you are seeing now is starting to build the backlog out for that long cycle component into 2027. Makes sense. Okay, understood. You guys raised your total company full year organic growth guidance to 1%-3%, with earnings. I think 2Q organic was 4%, so you are kind of embedding a little bit of a decel in the back half. Why is that? Sure. Yeah. So yeah, just to take a step back here, we did raise the organic growth target by 1% at the midpoint on the full year. Obviously the way to think about that is it is effectively all volume and it is largely ITS driven. Okay. On the backs of, I would say, that good momentum you are seeing on the short to medium cycle side. To a degree, some of the longer cycle, some of that long cycle does have like POC, so you get a little bit of some of the revenue recognition kind of along the way, but the majority of that revenue profile is into 2027. Okay. The way I think about it here is 4% revenue growth organically in Q2. The implied guide for the back half is in that 3%-4% realm. It is comparable Okay I think, to what you are seeing in Q2, and I think a requisite kind of mix of price and volume. Obviously, we are slightly negative in Q1, so I think we are encouraged by, I think, the sequential trends we are seeing here. I should say that is obviously through the lens of ITS. PST comparatively has been a little bit more stable from that perspective or healthier. Then again, we continue to expect to see organic growth into the back half of the year as well on the PST side. Okay, understood. We will dig into those segments for sure. Maybe just a few more high level questions first. I think pricing, you guys said, is going to contribute about 2% to revenue in 2026. How sustainable is that level of pricing power as tariff surcharges potentially roll off or become less impactful? Any thoughts on just price cost into the second half? Yeah, sure. I think we've always said that the company, and I've been with the company for 15 + years, 1%-2% price is normal. Yeah in any degree of a normal environment. Now, I think we can also agree you probably haven't seen a normal environment for a little while, and you've obviously seen maybe outsized pricing as a result of supply chain or tariffs or things of that nature. That all being said, I think the 1%-2% realm and towards the upper end of that range as we sit here right now is, without question, I think a normalized expectation. To your point, yes, we were kind of in the midst now of rolling through a lot of those tariff related, not search, tariff related pricing actions. What you're seeing is in this year we're taking, I'd say, the more normal price, if you will. It's not a vanilla spread peanut butter approach. Effectively it's product by product, region by region. Every part of the business takes pricing actions at the point in time of the year that makes sense for their cadence. As such, you've even seen, I'd say, more normal course pricing actions in the first half of the year as well that will take root into the back half and things of that nature. I think the simple answer here is that 1%-2% pricing level, very normal, very consistent with what you've seen historically. I don't think there's any expectation that should be anything different into 2027 or any thereafter. Okay. Makes sense. Also wanted to ask about recurring revenue. I think the last data point we got was that it exceeded $450 million in 2025 and is still growing in 2026. Any thoughts on how recurring revenue as a percent of total sales might develop? Yeah. Maybe to take a step backwards here, I think we've said that exiting next year, we want to be on that $1 billion kind of trajectory, if you will. I think as we moved into, you've got it right, $450 million we eclipsed. It's worth noting that it wasn't but a few years ago, 2023, our investor day, where we were just scratching the surface of $200 million. Yeah. So, clearly the recurring revenue piece of the portfolio, not only has been probably the single biggest or one of the biggest, I'd say, organic growth initiatives, it's also been one of the higher growth pieces of the equation. I don't think anything's expected to change in any way, shape, or form in that context. I would say, from where we were in 2023, where just to kind of take a step backwards here, I think as most people remember and know, this model really kind of grew up in the compressor side of the business in North America, kind of the legacy Ingersoll Rand side of the business. And really now, I'd say, proliferating this across the portfolio, Europe, Asia, India, Latin America, the Gardner Denver portfolio of products, and even into parts of the portfolio, blower, vacuum, precision pumps on the PST side, that to be honest with you, years ago they didn't really think about recurring revenue. But if there's any degree of service and recurring aftermarket needs, there's probably a care or a recurring revenue type model that can be applied and exist. So, a couple things to think about here. The way you think about it is exactly right. We would expect that the recurring revenue piece of the equation would definitely be kind of the highest torque or the highest growth piece of the equation. It obviously comes through at healthy margin profiles. So again, over time, this is a piece that one, yes, will become a healthier mix of aftermarket. As you said today, just to use rough numbers here, aftermarket approaches 40% of the portfolio. That's approximately $3 billion and at $450 million, you can do the math, obviously the percentage there, that's a number that we would expect to grow as a percentage of the total pie or aftermarket over time. And one that actually we would expect to see good requisite contributions on both P&Ls. Obviously ITS will have the most outsized. Right. The compressor P&L will obviously be the piece that is still the biggest piece of that equation. But I think now we finally have what I would call very measurable baselines in blower vacuum pumps that we would expect to continue to grow. So, all things that I think should continue to grow and yes, that should be margin accretive over time. Okay. Great. I am going to move on to specific questions related to ITS now, unless anyone has anything they wanted to ask on high level stuff. Okay. So could we just double click a bit more on the short and medium cycle activity that you are seeing? Do we think that this acceleration that you guys have talked about in 2Q is finally the impact of PMI inflection that we have been waiting for? Yeah. I mean, I think we have always said there is maybe a bit of a lag between some of those leading indicators and what you see in the portfolio. The concept of being at that kind of, let us call it, mid-single-digit-ish type realm of short to medium cycle orders momentum, continuing to see Yes, we would point to that, I think, as signs of that. Now, obviously, as you know, we are very global in nature. About half our revenue base is North America, a third EMEA, and about 15% is APAC, with a meaningful piece of that being China. So we obviously have some of those geographic and regional kind of dynamics at play. But, I think broad strokes here, yes, we would point to, I would say, some of that improvement from a macro perspective, starting to see that kind of now starting to translate more. And, like I said before here, off of obviously what 2024 and 2025 were Yeah comparatively tougher sledding, for lack of a better way to say that. I think you are seeing comparative now improvement across effectively most of the major end markets. Okay, got it. Understood that it is broad-based across most end markets. What about regionally? Is the U.S. kind of leading the charge? Are you seeing improvement in Europe and Asia as well? Yeah. If we take Q2, I think North America was definitely kind of the best from an organic orders perspective, where I think you were approaching with high single digit type organic orders across the North America profile of, obviously compressor is the biggest piece, but the compressor blower vacuum kind of being that short to medium cycle side of the equation. So North America, definitely. Obviously, clearly North America was probably the most impacted last year in Q2 just because of the tariff dynamics. But that clearly, I think improving trends is definitely a piece of that equation. Europe obviously has been probably the most stable region over the last couple of years. I would say that is, nothing is dramatically changed there. Now, not all Europe is necessarily made equal. I would tell you the U.K., the Nordics, the France, the Italy, Spains of the world are probably the comparative better performers. Not surprisingly, Central Europe, particularly Germany, lesser so. Now, I would say our revenue profile in Germany is probably not as outsized as it may be in other parts of Europe. So, that is there. Then clearly Germany has clearly not been the star performer for a number of years, for lack of a better way to say it. Middle East, we have talked about pretty explicitly. Obviously, we have about a low single digit kind of revenue exposure there. Call it maybe 3%, 4%. That is obviously getting a bit more normalized here as kind of hopefully things continue to settle down, hopefully, in the Middle East. India has been probably the best performer of the portfolio. Double-digit growth for several years on end at this point in time. Asia, what I would point to on Asia is, I would say the non-China markets of Australia, Korea, Southeast Asia for us have been relatively stable, good performing. China, obviously, China has kind of reset over the last few years. That was roughly closer to 15% of the revenue of the portfolio maybe three years ago. Now it is closer to 10%, 11%. I think the good news here is that you are starting to see, I would say better trends from a volume perspective, just obviously off of a slightly lower baseline. So, I think we are encouraged by what we are seeing, particularly on the volume side of that equation. But I think in Q2, definitely from an orders perspective, North America was probably the leader of the pack. Okay. Okay, perfect. Understood. Can we actually spend some time on the China pricing challenges that you guys talked about on the second quarter earnings call? Maybe some background on when it started and if you have at least seen some stabilization at a minimum. Yeah. I think a couple of statements here. So, I think China has always been, comparatively speaking to North America, Europe, has probably been a little bit more of the more competitive pricing environment comparatively speaking. That is not a new statement. That has always been the case. Sure. Yes. I think what you saw in Q2, I think we said it pretty explicitly, you saw probably negative low single digit pricing headwinds in China specifically. I would say that it was probably a little bit more pronounced in Q2, but you have been seeing comparable numbers here. It just did not start in the first half of the year. Okay For lack of a better way to say it. As far as kind of that dynamic, listen, I think obviously a kind of a reset baseline in China in terms of the market. A little bit of a deflationary environment there comparatively speaking and maybe just the overall, not necessarily compressor, but the overall kind of industry, a bit of oversupply and kind of things of that nature. I think that is probably kind of the contributor to what you are seeing here. And I think we said it on the call here, we do not view that as something that is there long term. We view that as hopefully a little bit more transient over the medium term, right? Okay. So do not think of that as something that gets back to flat necessarily or whatnot maybe in the back half of the year. We would think that that is something that over the medium term, as some of those macro dynamics settle a little bit, will get back to more normalized levels. Now, to take a step back, what normalized probably means is we have talked about pretty explicitly 1%-2% for the overall enterprise. But that is probably with, I think China in a more normalized environment, more closer to flattish than where it is now. Okay. I do not think China being at North America or Europe levels is the reality. That is not something we have seen historically, nor would be the expectation going forward. Okay. Okay, understood. I guess, so if we are moving from pricing being a low single digit headwind to flat in China, how does that get resolved? Is there just excess inventory that we need to burn through? Yeah, I think it is just a little bit of timing. Okay. Frankly, just a little bit more of normalization in the market and things of that nature. Okay That is why we refer more to a kind of a medium term kind of a dynamic something in 2027 onwards. Got it. Not something that we necessarily say is going to necessarily be playing itself out overnight or here into Q3. I think right now things are fairly comparable. Taking a step back from a broader enterprise perspective, remember, we did take certain pricing actions here through the first half of the year. across the globe. As such, I think you would expect to see from a sequential perspective, Q2 into the back half of the year, slightly better pricing performance in the back half of the year compared to what you saw in Q2. Okay. Understood. I guess, just in general, are the competitive dynamics a lot different? Is there local Asia competition that you are up against in China that you do not necessarily see elsewhere? There is local competition, and I would say there is China competition and whatnot that you see in other geographies as well. Okay. Now, I would also say that in a lot of cases, we are not necessarily competing exactly in the same technology realms and things of that nature. I do think that when it comes to the efficiency of machines and the ability to service it on a global basis, I think our global service tech network and thousands of service techs who can do things like the recurring revenue and care model, that I think hopefully is what sets us apart. But, yeah, you see Chinese competition, for sure. You do see it, albeit maybe at the lower end of the market. Okay, got it. Maybe we can talk about some of the competitive dynamics within compressors more globally. When you compare yourselves to your biggest competitor, Atlas Copco, what would you say are your special sauce that makes Ingersoll Rand stand out? It seems to me like you are both really good companies. The product is kind of similar, but that is an outsider's perspective. What is your view? Yeah. Atlas Copco is a great competitor. Yeah. Obviously very global in nature, very competitive technology set. Maybe to take a step backwards here, by combining, I think the Gardner Denver and Ingersoll Rand portfolios, I think you really now created a much more global top to bottom offering set with regards to oil-free and oil lubricated. Historically speaking, where one part of Gardner Denver IR was stronger on small to medium, the other was better in medium to large. One had blower vacuum, one less or so. Now, obviously, by virtue of putting the two companies together, and now what you've seen post-merger, particularly through organic means, but also that kind of torque that you've seen from the inorganic piece, where we've done 80 + bolt-on acquisitions, and seeing us effectively go from something that, I wouldn't say nothing, but minimal, for example, like air treatment and dryers and all the kind of periphery that is in the ecosystem of air compression technology. Now we have, I think, one of the leading portfolios in areas like air treatment. I think one good line up there. Now, to your point here, the portfolios aren't exactly- Yeah exactly the same. Our ITS business is compressor, blower, vacuum, and power tools all under one portfolio, under one roof. They are obviously very similar across all of them, but then organized differently. I think even in the compressor and vacuum space, our technology suites are a little bit different. We cap out at centrifugal compressors. We do not play in those, the large, I think, LNG related kind of turbo machinery, turbine type compression technology. We also do not play on the semiconductor side of vacuum. I think in terms of where the portfolios match up and where kind of, I would say there is comparability, I would say very comparable performance, and I would say you say special sauce and things of that nature. I think for us, it is fairly simple here. It is leading technology, leading efficiency, being able to kind of prove out both efficiencies and total cost of ownership over the life of your technology and then being able to serve it through the aftermarket. As such, the fact that we have multiple thousands of service techs around the globe who can do things like the care model and that recurring revenue initiative we have talked about, and then being able to attach more offerings to our compressor to be able to serve the customer better. Once upon a time, it was compressor and your basic aftermarket. Today, you have gone all the way to compressor, aftermarket, recurring revenue, air treatment, and all the periphery in between. I think, and then things like Ecoplant and some of the connectivity features and things like that. I think that is something that you are not going to see change. It also is why, for example, right now, even despite some of the headwinds, for example, in China that we have talked about. Yeah. The reality is China in Q2 was up low double digits from a revenue perspective, organically, inclusive of the negative low single digit pricing. That kind of implies scratching the surface of mid-teens Yeah volume growth in Q2 in China. That should be a means to an end in the context of continuing to push the install base that you can then service through the aftermarket, albeit more medium term. I think good global competitor, we've always said that. I think we're encouraged by those improving volume trends that we're seeing to be able to kind of service it through aftermarket, which is obviously a big piece of our equation. Okay. Understood. A few follow-ups then. Maybe first, how would you kind of stack up market share versus Atlas Copco over the past few years? I don't really notice a trend. It seems to bounce around between the two of you if we're just judging based on organic growth, but just curious if you have any perspective. Yeah, we view it as very stable. Okay. I'm sure there's pockets where maybe we're doing better. I'm sure others would say there are pockets. You hear that kind of across the board, but we would view it in the core markets where we operate as relatively stable. I would also tell you that we've been pretty explicit that there are certain markets we've kind of historically represented them or talked about them as underrepresented or under-penetrated markets. In no particular order, Latin America, Middle East, India, and Southeast Asia. Okay. All markets we have a presence in, but all markets where, whether it's through official third parties or just operating in these environments for long enough, we have a general sense of where we think our share position is. I think it's probably fair to say the four areas I mentioned here, we know that our share is probably lower comparatively speaking to where we are in the U.S., Western Europe, and China. Fundamentally, we don't view that there's any reason that that should be the case. It's probably been historically either a lack of focus or lack of investment, whatever the case may be. As such, over the course of the last few years, you've heard us talk about these regions pretty explicitly. You've heard us talk about, we opened a new compressor manufacturing plant in Brazil. First time we actually have in-region compressor manufacturing. We opened a new plant in India late last year, our second compressor manufacturing plant, because we'd run out of capacity. Middle East and Southeast Asia, not necessarily requiring distinct footprint or manufacture footprint, but a lot of more commercial reinvestment and things of that nature. So, we would fully acknowledge that I think there are areas that we feel like we probably have over a medium term, maybe a little bit more of a disproportionate opportunity to grow, maybe just as a result of kind of our historical presence in said markets. Yeah. The manner to get there, whether it be commercial reinvestment, manufacturing footprint, or some combination of both, it's a little bit different market by market, but that's also why you've seen us not hesitant to continue to reinvest in the business even over the course of the last few years. Yes, that's been a little bit of the, some of the ITS margin profile. But, for us, that's a investment that's, again, for the benefit of longer term volumes, that should be the catalyst for growth going forward. Okay. Understood. One more follow-up from what you said earlier is mid-teens volume growth in China in 2Q. You came back into, because we know what the price situation was. Drove that. I am surprised to hear mid-teens growth from anything in China right now. Well, listen, I will start by saying obviously China is dealing with a lower baseline, so it was to you. So I will start with that. I think a couple of things here. One, does speak to the fact that, again, there is activity and volume on the ground. Let us start with that one. Two, I think Vicente referenced some, I think it was a word, it was sales investments, but let's say some targeted application wins in Q2 where think of probably some opportunities, whether it be customers or applications that maybe we haven't played as prevalently in historically that we've made a bit more distinct push into. Yes, some of the margin profiles there may not look exactly like the rest of the portfolio. We feel like those are investments that are, again, going to serve us well from a medium to longer term perspective. The other piece here, yes, our ITS China business is heavier compressor, just given that's where the legacy came from an IR perspective. What that also means here is the technologies that China, our business historically hasn't had as much access to. Blower, vacuum, and then air treatment, as well as a lot of the technologies that we have acquired, maybe in North America, Europe, India. That now that team can localize. I'll tell you, our China team, I'd like to say they all do well, but our China team probably sets the mark internally for localizing technology that differentiated for the market. Yes, obviously the conversation about China inherently becomes much more compressor centric, as you would expect. When you look at blower, vacuum, air treatment, some of the other technologies, frankly, you are seeing those have, albeit off of much lower baselines, much considerably higher growth rates just because they are products that our business hasn't historically had there, because they either came from Gardner Denver or via acquisition. I'd say it's a confluence of a lot of those factors. Again, I think it speaks to our China team. I would say, albeit a bit of a tough environment, continuing to drive differentiated performance by virtue or focusing on those factors that hopefully we can leverage to our strength despite a China market that's probably not the same as it was a number of years ago. Okay. Clear. So moving on to ITS margins, an area where there's been a few more challenges recently. I think they've been down year-on-year since the first quarter of 2025. Can we just talk through the big factors and why we expect improving margins half-on-half on the second half, especially after the tariff refunds were like $10 million in 2Q. I assume most of that was in ITS. Yeah. Which makes the ramp just look a little bit harder now. Yeah, for sure. So, not necessarily talking about any specific quarter, but we can talk about the last 18 months or so. Yep. Obviously you've been in an environment of tariffs and outside tariffs where we've been very explicit that, yes, we took requisite pricing action, but it was always meant to be effectively price offsetting tariffs at best. We were not looking to make margins on tariffs or anything of that nature. So, at best, that's margin dilutive, right? Two, you've obviously also been in an environment that, and again, I'll go back to why we're encouraged about what we're seeing going forward, but you've been in an environment where organic volumes have obviously been trailing. Sure. In fact, over the course of the last few years, whatever organic growth has been, it's been positive price and probably at best flattish volumes, and in certain cases, negative volumes. Yeah. When you have a portfolio that, I know we're talking ITS, but both of our segments play above 40% gross margin profile. Obviously, negative volume has its impact there. I would say those are obviously the two biggest factors. Yes, of course, quarter to quarter, you're going to have noise from the reinvestment we continue to make and other factors. That's always been there. Yes, that has created obviously the headwinds. Now, I'll also say a business that, ITS was effectively at 30% EBITDA margin. To be a margin business, but acknowledge and completely understand the dynamic at play in the question. As far as the go forward, and I think why we continue to have optimism about where we're going forward, a couple of factors here, and a lot of what we've already spoken about here. But a couple of things here. One, you are settling back now into that normalized 1%-2% pricing range. You've seen that. But yes, obviously we've taken actions here in the first half of the year that you'd expect to be a bit more visible in the back half. Okay. Item one. Item two, just to keep it simple here, you are seeing a better organic volume environment. Volumes help just no matter how you cut it. I think continuing to see bettering trends, particularly on a global basis, I think that will continue to help the margin profile, not just in the second half of this year, but also into 2027. I know we are not going to sit here and guide on 2027, but I think we are encouraged here by seeing contributions from both short, medium, and long cycle that should hopefully improve those trends on a go forward basis. Third item here is some of the items we talked about in Q2, for example, some of these targeted application wins and some of that outsized dynamic of China, which created either a mixed dynamic or things like that, we would not expect to repeat to the same degree in the back half of the year. The other piece of the equation here that I think is worth noting here is the productivity side. So, productivity, whether you look at it through the lens of classical direct material, so procurement, sourcing, or what we call I2V internally when we redesign our products, remember, that tends to be a little bit more visible in the back half of the year versus the first half, because effectively it is tied to your cost of goods sold. As your seasonality and your revenue base is typically higher in the second half of the year, particularly in Q4, you tend to see that follow. This year should be no different. So at least from that Q2 jump-off point, some sequential improvement in the back half. The last factor here, we talked pretty explicitly in the back half of last year into the first quarter of this year about restructuring. We took some pretty portfolio-wide restructuring initiatives, so it is kind of all businesses, all regions. ITS, though, is 80% of the revenue base of the company, so you would expect it was the largest piece of that. Those have largely been all digested here through the first half of this year. While we will continue to do reinvestment, while we will continue to invest on the commercial side, I would expect you to continue to see some improvement on the cost profile side of the business going into the back half of this year. I think, roughly speaking, just to use rough numbers here, the expectation on a full-year basis is that you are kind of approaching that 28%-ish EBITDA margin for the full year, which, yes, we would acknowledge is still down about 100 basis points year-over-year. But I think now serves as probably a better jump-off point into 2027, where I think you see this kind of growth algorithm and then the incrementals that come with it starting to resemble, I think, numbers of what you have historically seen in the past. Okay. So we should be, unless nothing changes from a macro perspective, we should be in a position where we can get back to the normal cadence of margin expansion in 2027. That would be the expectation. Understood. All right. Let's see. With respect to the top line, organic growth improved in Q2 quite a bit in ITS. I think it was actually better than what you guys had expected as well. So what drove the upside, and is it fair to think that this level of growth can be sustainable into the second half? Listen, I think some of that volume outperformance, China particularly, and areas like that, I think definitely with some of the contributors there in Q2. To keep it simple, we saw 4% organic growth in Q2 with a good contribution between price and volume. We're calling for 3%-4%, roughly speaking, as the implied guide in the back half, which for all practical purposes, is fairly comparable to what you see in Q2. So I think the simple way to say it is, yeah, we would expect to see bettering trends or comparable trends, I should say, for lack of a better way to say this, into the back half of the year. I think going back to how we started, the fact that you're also now starting to see improving trends on the long-cycle orders performance, again, not necessarily going to translate into revenue to that degree in the back half of the year, but also now starting to build some of that funnel into 2027, I think continues to give us signs of encouragement about the go-forward view. Perfect. I'm going to move on to PST, unless anyone wanted to touch on anything else with ITS? Okay. PST orders also accelerated really nicely to 7% organic growth. Can we attribute that mostly to, I think the prior year comp was a bit easier, or are you seeing your Precision Technology trends across both? The Precision Technologies business, not surprisingly, it has a beautiful look and feel that resembles ITS in some respects in the context of the geographic profile of North America, Europe, Asia, fairly comparable in terms of percentage-wise to ITS. So again, it's had its fair share of China impact over the last few years, things like that as well. It does have some long-cycle project exposure as well in parts of the Milton Roy portfolio and things like that. So again, not too dissimilar from what you see in ITS. But I think you've seen good, steady order performance and improvement there. The short to medium cycle there in businesses like ARO and Dosatron continue to show nice performance like we've been talking about. I think the piece here that's obviously been the torque on top of that, for lack of a better way to say this, is the life sciences piece, right? I think as we've talked about here, the life sciences business is essentially comprised of three main businesses. You have the legacy Gardner Denver, then IR Medical. Now we call it Flow Control Solutions, but it's the old Gardner Denver IR Medical business. That's $300+ million. It's selling miniaturized compression pump technology into medical lab, life sciences, OEM, and diagnostic-type equipment. You've got the second business, which is the biopharma business that came from ILC Dover. That's obviously been the best growth profile. We'll come back to that here in a moment. That's the business that sells powder handling technology and things like that, consumable technology into things like GLP-1s and APIs and ADCs, drug manufacturing. The third business is a squiggle, about $100 million, and that's the medical device business. The good news here is all three of them are showing good trends. Clearly, the biopharma one is probably the one that's showing the more outsized growth, comparatively speaking. I think the simple way to say it here is, one, you're seeing good volume trends across both sides of that business. I would definitely say in the context of year-on-year, particularly in the back half of the year in Q4, the comps are a little stiffer. Probably, comparatively speaking, probably more so because of the life sciences piece, which has, to be honest with you, over the last couple of years, been the best grower of the entire portfolio. That all being said, I think the order trends, I think the end market dynamics, we continue to be really encouraged there. I'd be remiss if I didn't say here that 31.5% EBITDA margins in Q2. So that trajectory to that mid-30s EBITDA margin profile that we've been talking about for a little while now, starting to see, I'd say, that really becoming in sight here. We do expect some sequential margin expansion in the back half of the year, quite frankly for some of the same reasons as we've talked about in ITS in terms of pricing and productivity, but also just to be honest with you, continued volume momentum. I think the concept of being at that mid-30s is on the horizon, I'll say that much. Okay. Great. You kind of touched on this a little bit. I wasn't sure if it was in relation to orders or revenue, but with the tough comps in Life Sciences, you guys do have a deceleration in organic growth embedded in the back half from what you did in 2Q. Is that because of the Life Science? That's largely what that is. Correct. Okay, understood. Then you hit on the margins, been completely the opposite of ITS here. Really strong, have continued to surprise to the upside. I guess, how do you think about the ability to reach mid-30s? I think the original target was to get there by 2027. Is that maybe a step too far? Yeah. Listen. A lot, but yeah. Listen, exiting this year is in that 31%-32% range on a full year basis is kind of, I think, what the expectation, closer to the higher end of that number. Yeah. We've talked about potentially upwards of 100 basis points per year. with normalized kind of growth. You're not that far off as you're exiting 2027. Okay. We'll put a finer point on it as we get to the back half of the year and give guidance. But starting to approach that mid-30s, which I guess you could define as 33% or there, you're not that far off is, I guess, a simple way to say it. Okay, fair. Got it. That is pretty much everything I had on PST unless anyone else wants to ask anything. Okay. [inaudible] $450 million last year. Okay. We will not provide guidance there, but I would say that should be a double-digit grower without question. So $450 million, we eclipsed in 2025. Expectation of continued momentum here and exit rate out of 2027 of approaching that $1 billion. Double digits. That is a big jump from the end of this. Does that add operational to this, but what would it be base case look like? Yeah. What would that picture look like to you? Yeah. Listen, we haven't recalibrated expectations yet, so I'll hesitate to kind of go and reframe the equation here. Let me just be very clear here. Double digits of, to use the numbers, $450 million getting to $500 million. No, I think the expectation is a bit more outsized than that. Just to put it in perspective, we've gone from sub $200 million to $450 million in two years, roughly speaking, from 2023 to 2025. Not trying to say, obviously, there's still acceleration that obviously needs to happen here. I think the way we'd say it here is we still very much are pushing the businesses to that billion-dollar run rate trajectory here. I think the simplest way to say it is continue to expect strong double-digit momentum. To be honest with you, 2027 just happened to be that kind of mark on the calendar, for lack of a better way to say this. This is not a momentum or this is not an initiative that ends, for lack of a better way to say this, in 2027. I would actually say quite the opposite. If you think about where we've come from, it took probably the better part of a decade to get to the $100 million, $200 million mark, and in two, three years, we've gone from $200 million to $450 million, and obviously aspirations for much larger numbers. What I will tell you right now is what was historically really just a North America compressor-based program, now you really see it across all parts of the portfolio. I think the simplest way to say it here is, whether you get to that billion-dollar run rate or something slightly less here, I think the simple way to think about it is that's still very accretive growth from a margin profile perspective. Again, I would say independent of where we may exit 2027 at, I think that momentum will not stop. I think we actually, to be honest with you, this is probably one of, if not the single largest organic growth initiative across the entire enterprise. That's been probably the same statement for two years, and I don't expect that to be any different for the next few years to come. Any others? Just wanted to talk a little bit about capital deployment. For sure. Deal activity feels like it has picked up a little bit recently for you guys. You have announced a few bolt-ons recently. What are you seeing in the M&A environment qualitatively, and do you think that that deal pickup could remain the case through year-end? Yeah, for sure. I think we continue to remain really encouraged about kind of just the M&A algorithm and kind of the end market or the kind of the market dynamics as we sit here right now. To keep it very simple, we are still targeting that 400 basis points-500 basis points of annualized inorganic growth. I think we have closed five or six transactions now, roughly speaking, for the first half of the year. You did see it on the earnings call. We closed a Lone Star Blower-based company. We also announced the signing of a filtration-based company, Fai Filtri, that is expected to close more towards the end of the year. As far as the funnel itself, it looks and feels very comparable to how we have talked about before. 200 + companies under funnel, 11 additional transactions under the LOI. Under LOI, which we typically have a pretty good hit rate of LOIs converting to closed transactions. Yes, I would fully expect that you will continue to see that momentum in the back half of the year. As you know, obviously, it can be a little bit timing and episodic, just with sellers getting to the finish line and stuff like that, but that is just timing, nothing else. Yeah. I think the market, I think the funnel, it is all bolt-on in nature. Frankly, the 11 under LOI and effectively the vast majority, if not all of the funnel, by and large, looks and feels very similar to the bolt-ons you have seen us do. I think Vicente did mention on the call that there were maybe one or two of maybe more of a billion-ish dollar purchase price. One that we walked away from just a valuation perspective, and another that is probably just still in the funnel at this point, not in our LOI. The fact that these are smaller bolt-ons, family-owned, privately-owned companies that we are cultivating 90% sole source, nothing has changed in that respect. I think we continue to be very encouraged by what we are seeing. I think at this point, since the merger till today, so 6+ years we have eclipsed now, I think it is somewhere 80 - 85 bolt-on transactions. I should also say, and Max, when he is not now doing investor relations, he has a other dual hat of being our M&A leader for our life sciences business, a role that he has been doing for two years, and he has done four or five bolt-on transactions. The ones you have seen in life sciences, those have been under Max's watch, but I think it is encouraging now that you have a life sciences platform that you can do very similar private, family-owned, low double-digit pre-synergy adjusted EBITDA purchase multiple type acquisitions in the life sciences realm, just like you have seen us been doing for the last five or six years in ITS and Precision Technologies. Got you. You look at that acquisition funnel today, are there plenty of opportunities on both sides of ITS, PST? Is one stronger than the other? Yes. I feel like I should share the mic with Max here. Yes. I think the simple answer is yes. Whether it be the LOI, the 11 under LOI or the larger funnel, good mix across both segments. I would also tell you very good mix across effectively our geographic perspective. At this point in time, you've seen us now do transactions in obviously North America, Latin America, you've seen a handful, clearly Western Europe, India, a handful even in the APAC realm, Australia. So, this model is pretty much as global as it gets, and I would tell you the funnel is fairly representative of that as well. Okay. Anything of the size of ILC Dover, a bigger transaction coming anytime soon, or are we still a little ways out from the next time you guys are going to do a bigger one? Yeah. I think the simple answer here is nothing on the horizon I could point to. Okay. As you know, things can change and if there's something that comes to the market that makes sense, we will definitely evaluate it. Obviously, the balance sheet continues to be very healthy, 1.7x net debt leverage. So, I think capacity-wise and ability from either a business perspective, integration, all that, no issues if it comes to bear. I think we're not going to be impatient in that respect either, right? Right. I think you've seen us, we've said every three to five years, you might see something that looks more like an ILC Dover-ish type size. In the interim, you're going to see us be very close to core on the bolt-on routine, and that's what you're seeing us do right now. Okay, understood. Last one is just buybacks did step up to $250 million in the second quarter. Might we see more buybacks in the back half, given where the stock is Sure and maybe there's an opportunity there? Yeah, I don't think you'll see us hesitate to lean in there. Last year as an example, we were able to, with the strong free cash flow nature of the business, probably a little bit of dry powder from a cash perspective we had. You saw a good mix between the M&A, the stated levels, up to $1 billion last year. Yeah. I think through the first half of this year, you've seen about $350 million. I don't think there'll be an aversion if the opportunity is there to step into the share repo. But clearly the M&A piece is still the focal point of the capital deployment strategy. Makes sense. Well, I think we're at time, Vik. Thank you so much for your time today. It was a great conversation, and thanks to everyone in the room for joining as well. Perfect. Thank you for having us.