Okay, thank you everybody. I have a long disclaimer to read first, but before I get into the disclaimer, good morning everybody. We are pleased to have with us today Ted Pick, Chairman and CEO of Morgan Stanley. Thank you so much, Ted, for joining us today. Great to be here. Here's your disclosure. Oh, yes. I have to read this special one. This discussion may include forward-looking statements which reflect Morgan Stanley management's current estimates and are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially. Morgan Stanley does not undertake to update the forward-looking statements. This discussion, which is copyrighted by Morgan Stanley and may not be duplicated or reproduced without their consent, is not an offer to buy any security. Ted, thanks again for joining us this morning. Betsy, you are 35 years net at Morgan Stanley? That's correct. 35 years net, and this is the 16th? Yes, we're 16. Conference? Congratulations. Well done. Applause. Oh, thank you so much. Sounds like a great chat. Yeah, so you're running two years ahead of me at 33 net, and that's for all of you who know our firm as well as you do. That is what gives me the most joy, to work with people who have given their lives to the place and have made a difference, and this conference is part of that, and you personify that. Cheers to you. Ted, thank you so much. Very much appreciated, and I must say I thoroughly enjoy working with you as well. Fantastic. We got the mutual flattery thing going. Got a little cadence there. And you're wearing Morgan Stanley blue, so off we go. Oh, yes, I know to do that. I also just have been thrilled to see how you've moved into the CEO and the Chairman role. It's been a year since you were here last year as CEO, and since then you've picked up Chairman six months ago, and what a year it's been, right? This year has been a year for the record books. Last summer you kinda gave us that outlook, right? Last summer when you were here, you talked about the end of financial repression and the, quote-unquote, "end of the end of history." That seems pretty prescient. How are we doing on those two things? The end of the end of history, are we almost over with the end of the end of history, or this is gonna take a while? Sure. I think it's fair to say we're at the resumption of history. The first principles are, what is the firm's strategy? That is a strategy that's been years in the making. We raise, manage, and allocate capital for clients, and that is understood. It's understood by clients, by owners, by the regulator, and by the 2,300 managing directors and the 81,000 people at the firm. We raise, manage, and allocate capital for clients. To do that successfully, you need scale, you need real scale, and you need to be global. For us, what's been most important is to make sure that we have a Wealth Management business that has the kind of scale that makes us relevant today and for decades to come, and to build out a global investment bank that is relevant from Copenhagen to Abu Dhabi. Now, the moment we're in is complex, and it is complicated. It is both. Complex. Complex meaning intricate. We are all witnessing in recent weeks mass democratization of folks using various forms of chat. It's happening. We've gone from the most embryonic of AI, Gen AI, to, we'll call it, early innings. We're all comparing different sources, and it's happening multiple times faster, Moore's Law style, than Eric Schmidt predicted with the Yellow Pages in Google. So AI and the decades to come on that are the first strand of, we'll call it, complexity. The second strand of complexity is energy transition, sources and uses of energy, energy for the national interest, the international interest. That will be with us for decades. Those are two complexities. Now let's talk about complication. Complication means uncertainty. The complications associated with the U.S. attempting to re-architect industrial policy and address fiscal and trade imbalances through the three-pronged approach of tariffs, taxes, and dereg. So this bears on our firm and our strategy that we are scale, and we are global, and we are relevant to clients, whether they be high-net-worth clients, corporate clients, sovereign wealth funds, asset managers, that we're able to be there to give insight at a moment of, we'll say, structural volatility where people wanna talk to someone and get a sense for whether they should be contemplating action or not. You need the scale. You need to be global to have that ability to be close to the client in the moment we're in. Okay. And I do not think that the two strands of complexity are going anywhere soon, which is to say they will be with us, and I know that that complication is gonna be with us for the next period of time. The combination of that makes this quite a moment of, "Wow, there's a lot going on. How do I synthesize? How do I think about next best action?" That is where the financial advisor, the investment banker, the equity salesperson, the fixed income structure, the asset manager comes into play. An opportunity for opportunities. Correct. Okay. The environment really hasn't changed how you're thinking about managing the business. It's, it's, it has to be contextualized in how the business feels like it's progressing, all right? The reality is, if we think about the moment, the quarter, for example, against the backdrop of the strategy at large, let me talk about the moment specifically. Mm-hmm. It's an interesting one. We had, I'd say, max tariff vol uncertainty from the time of the earnings call where we talked about a pause, not delete, and that extended through the first half of the quarter. If you think about our wealth business, we had tax season, but the wealth business has continued to prosecute the mandate, as we want it to. Continues to progress. The markets businesses, coming off a torrid first quarter, experienced some of that pause, but with the S&P grinding higher, the wall of worry being climbed, the sense that perhaps the outlooks are, in fact, improving again, the markets businesses led by our equities business, but also the stability of fixed income have hung in there. I would call out the investment banking product. It's important to Morgan Stanley, of course. It's the edge of the wedge with respect to advice to the C-suite, although it's one line item of one business of one division, but it's important to the audience to get a sense for, we'll say, animal spirits in the boardroom. That is best encapsulated by M&A cadence and IPO frequency. The reality is that for the first half of the quarter, so well into May, the pause was a real pause. You didn't see deals getting priced on the IPO calendar, and the announcements had pretty much ground to a halt. What's changed in recent weeks is we've started to see the announcements pick up. We represented a sponsor, the Jordan Company, in the sale of Silvus to Motorola, an asset worth about $5 billion. Same kind of size. We advised AT&T in their purchase of Lumen's fiber business. Those are in the $5 billion range, both, strategic, announcements. Then, Toyota Industries, their privatization, your stomping ground, in the mid-30s. Cox Charter in the mid-30s. I'm calling out those four transactions, not just because we were a part of them, but because they represent different buyer types, corporate, sponsor, and they're global. Again, getting to global and scale. That is encouraging. We've seen those announcements, and we see them hitting the tape, and that's positive. Similarly, we've seen the ECM calendar picking up. Half a dozen deals are priced, IPOs, and they've traded well, and there are a whole bunch more in the pipeline. I do think investment banking specifically is a tale of two quarters, one that started slow, really pausing in a big way, and now has picked up, and I think we'll see how the last couple of weeks go, but it looks like it's gonna finish strong. I'm encouraged by that, in light of the complications that exist because it means that clients are actually engaging and taking action against our counsel. Excellent. As we think about a bit longer term, let's think a little bit longer in terms of generating growth and delivering growth. And, you know, you're managing Morgan Stanley as an integrated firm with four pillars of strategy, culture, financial strength, and growth, and the growth driven by investing across the firm. I did just wanna understand, where do you see opportunities to prioritize investment, as the integrated firm positions for, you know, what could be prolonged volatility, you know, or not? We'll see how it plays out. Just thinking about the priorities for investment and priorities for growth in each of the business leaves, maybe we could start with Institutional Securities. Yeah. I mean, let me say that I think it's important that you articulated the, I'm ambivalent about the idea of, you know, memorization. Memorization had its day when we were growing up. You had to memorize, and now it's sort of, why memorize when you can just look it up? I am now a fan again of having some level of common vocabulary amongst senior leaders at the firm, not because they're sort of compelled to say it, but because there's sort of a sense of repetition if there's a real belief system behind it. To say that we raise, manage, and allocate capital for clients, those are table stakes, but people say, "Okay, they have a clear and consistent strategy. It's durable. They know what it's about." So too with the four pillars. The four pillars, you know, you have to have a sense that the partners do not just say it by rote, but they understand what that means, and then it informs our activity, especially during periods of uncertainty. As you say, what are the four pillars? The four pillars very clearly are that clear and consistent strategy that I just articulated, that we have a culture, a culture of rigor, humility, and partnership that is born of our history from before the financial crisis and the 1997 merger, the financial crisis and the years after that, that we much are focused on enduring financial strength, the stability that the owners need to see in the currency over the long span of time, earnings, liquidity, capital, and then growth. Now, growth can mean two things. Growth can mean growth in businesses, or it can be global growth. Of course, I mean to say both. So p ut that against the moment we're in. I think, if you sort of were like, had a light onto our leadership team meetings, our operating committee over the last four months, what I'd say is we've segmented this into, and we talked about it at the Managing Director Open Forum. We've thought about red, amber, green, okay? Red, amber, green, not as a strategic phenomenon, but against the reality of we have these complexities, and then we have the uncertainty as we work through the three prongs that the administration is looking to achieve on. Not a lot of red. You know, we liked it in the fall. We're gonna keep going. Some amber, though. Some amber, do we really need to push forward on that, or should we reconsider it, deprioritize it? I think that's important. You don't wanna have the budget be a constantly revised document, but it shouldn't just be something that's checklisted. There should be some dynamism. And then green, what's green? This, of course, is why this conference and forums like it, yours being the best, are so important, which is where's the growth? What's green? Just tell us why we wanna be owners and part of the Morgan Stanley ecosystem. Green is the wealth funnel. Green is the wealth funnel. E*TRADE, workplace, financial advisor. That's the funnel, sort of an inverted Maslow's hierarchy of love, okay? That's the funnel. Investment bankers, the core advisor, the trusted advisor, first-class business in a first-class way, the financial advisor, the investment banker. Get after that. Durable markets businesses where you have performance from equities and from fixed income that can be modeled, and you could put a multiple on. It doesn't mean there's no risk, but it means it's largely financing business or it's largely cash tickets where we really are risk managing the thing super well. And then our investment management business where you have, solutions and you have, a look into alts. Those are all part of adding to the scale of what the firm is. They're all part of the global nature of the firm, and they're all part of raising, managing, and allocating capital. That's where we are green, green as a strategic matter. It is so important to me and to the team that we don't conflate tactics and strategy. It is the case that when you have, maximum tariff vol in the month after the quarter begins, that some people are gonna say, "Wow, this looks like it could be a real, a real pause." But the pipeline, the pipeline remain. In fact, in some places, the pipeline's actually grown. Interestingly, in some places, we've actually seen corporates moving. For all the talk about sponsor portfolio companies in the ground and the need to remanufacture and do the whole capital raising flywheel, that is, of course, the case, but it is the corporate community that I'd want to call out here because we had five years plus or minus, or certainly three, three and a half of the pandemic and then sort of the aftershock of the pandemic, and then we went into the election and all that's come from that with the three-pronged approach. I think the corporate boardroom around the world is saying, we do need to act. The world has higher structural volatility. We'll factor that into our cost of capital, whatever jurisdictional national interest risk, but we're gonna move forward on that. The reason I wanna mention that again is because that is all part of the activity-based green. Mm-hmm. Of what we wish to do, and especially if there's dereg, which I'm, I'm guessing we're gonna get to, that it's important that we stay on the green, but people know what the green is irrespective of a complicated moment. The green, again, is working the funnel and, working investment banking, working a durable markets business, working solutions inside of IM, and then working, by the way, auto-automation and digitization inside of our infrastructure businesses, and everybody has an equal seat at the table. That's how I'm thinking about green and top-down for the businesses. Excellent. That was very clear. How do we think about that deregulation that's on the coming? And Michelle Bowman, as you know, gave a speech on Friday outlining the, t. Can I deep dive a couple of the businesses, though? Oh, yes. The risk, the risk of killing the clock? No, I'm not. I, 'cause dereg 's important, but I just, I wanna just do a little more on the business. You cool with that? Yes. It's your show. Okay. Not right now. It's your s. All right. I know. No one can say we scripted. I'm super pumped up about the businesses. Really important. If you're cool with it for me to just dive a little deeper. Okay. Let's talk about the wealth management business. This is a $60 trillion space, as you know better than anyone, and we have a $6 trillion position. That's extraordinary. We have enormous scale at $6 trillion, but we only have 10% share. Extraordinary TAM growing, and we are $6 trillion out of $60 trillion, okay? I think about that, and I think about what that means in terms of things that we wanna focus on inside of the wealth product and inside the investment bank given the priorities I just outlined. We clearly wanna invest more in the funnel. We wanna invest more in our bank product, and we wanna invest more in alts. Think about that in the context of first client acquisition strategy, all right? Memory lane very briefly. In 2018, Morgan Stanley was partnered with 2.5 million households. We were in 2.5 million households, as you know better than anyone. Today, we're in 20 million, 2.5 million-20 million. It is a whole new ballgame in seven years. Second sort of metric or statistic, statistic around penetration. We talk about the funnel. We talk about bringing assets into the funnel. Again, reminder, the funnel is self-directed each rate at the top, workplace in the middle, the financial advisor, the 15,000 financial advisors, and the fee-based assets that can be modeled with a multiple. Not all assets are meant to go there, but that is the golden chalice, okay, for the firm, for the client, for the ecosystem, we believe for valuation on a long-term basis. We talk about assets coming in, but we should talk also about assets inside the funnel itself. When people say, "What is this workplace?" This workplace is for more than half the S&P. We are the monoline workplace administrator, i.e., we do stock plans. Stock plans, when the stock works over time, there are dividends, there are bonuses, there is accretion of value, and there is a monetization opportunity. I think now I need a financial advisor, and let's get her connected to a financial advisor so she can start planning for her family's wealth. In the last five years, $300 billion has moved from workplace to financial advisor inside the funnel, $20 billion in the last quarter alone. We call that reinvestment, and when times are good, that reinvestment is running at 10% per annum. It is not just the assets inside, outside the funnel coming in. It is the velocity of the assets inside the funnel working their way towards the financial advisor when it is appropriate. Those are two statistics around client acquisition strategy. Bank strategy. I would argue bank strategy, on bank penetration, we have been lighter than others. We have mid-teens penetration. The peer set is in the mid-20s. There is stuff that we need to do. We have been doing bespoke and tailored lending for high-net-worth individuals, folks inside of our corporate stock plans who should get preferred access. If you're gonna make loans, you need to raise deposits. How are you gonna raise deposits? Part of the way you're gonna raise deposits is by really making a regular way checking and banking services available to your client base through the wealth channel. We've been slower on that. We're quickening the pace. We're gonna get that done, and we are going to offer preferred services and have begun to do that for some of our corporate clients, raising deposits. The last piece on bank strategy is all the way across the firm, the integrated firm. There are places inside of the markets business where we could put assets onto the bank, and that just gets us to where the peer set already is. That has funding implications, and it's just a smart thing to do. Focus on bank strategy. That's second. Last on wealth management would be alts, okay? Alts. Of the $6 trillion of assets in wealth, $4.7 trillion of those are inside of the world of a financial advisor. The current weighting of alts in aggregate is 5%. We could debate in this moment where liquidity is getting repriced, whether the right level is 10% or the traditionally modeled 15% number. Maybe it's 10%, maybe it's 15%, maybe it's more, but it's somewhere in that range, yes, for kinda alt weighting for ultra-high net worth. That means that today we are structurally underweight in the system, $250 billion-$500 billion in alts. By the way, Morgan Stanley is by far the leading distributor in alts, and sometimes we've been more than the others combined. We're already there. It's not like you have to introduce the product to the client. It's just something that's gonna continue to build. That makes us relevant in the ecosystem to all the players, okay? That's a structural underweight. You say, "Okay, that's interesting." You'll sort of normalize into that, but what about innovation? Innovation. We have inside of the SEC right now, the commission is re-reviewing a product that's effectively a fund-of-funds product manufactured by the firm where we select managers. It would be to accredited retail investors. It's evergreen, single ticket. Wow, wow. Okay? We'll see how the product goes. Now you are, we are acting as manufacturer but sort of expert in the innovation to distribution of alts in a different way, in a diversified way to clients. Very briefly on the other businesses, what I'd wanna call out, Betsy, in Investment M anagement, Parametric, absolute jewel from Tom Faust and Eaton Vance, great firm, Parametric now, $575 billion of assets under management. We continue to grow that. Tax loss harvesting, portfolio optimization, it's a huge number, and we've hit escape velocity, and the innovation there is enormous. This is part of growth. It's not just where there's reweighting in the markets. It's about intellectual capital being brought to bear. There are alts business, which we haven't talked about as much, actually is up to $240 billion. We have $240 billion of private assets. It makes us relevant. We're gonna continue to scale that, and there are opportunities to, to effectively act and distribute. Finally, the I nvestment Bank, last year on the Investment Bank, it took a long time for the Investment Bank to make the slide deck, right? Decade plus. But it is in there in the context of durable returns, investment banking, financing businesses in securitized products group and fixed income, world-class credit organization, world-class prime brokerage and equities, world-class cash business. These kinds of businesses are durable. They fit in beautifully with the model, clear and consistent and durable strategy of generating returns. So taken together, those are some of the exciting things that are going on in the business, and they fit very much in the green, and that green very much fits in the encapsulation of what the strategy is. So it sounds like there's some very interesting growth opportunities ahead. Yes. How does deregulation fit into all of this in the sense that, you know, we know Michelle Bowman's agenda from her speech on Friday, and I'm just looking to understand, what are your thoughts on what that likely deregulation that's coming, or maybe I should say the lightening of regulation that's coming, means for markets in general and our industry and for Morgan Stanley? Right. So that's an important question and a pertinent one today. I think it is, it's a typical thing for a leader of a firm to get up and say, "We have too much regulation. We should have less regulation." That's sort of like, you know, kinda regular way thing. You've been hearing that forever. I think, the existential need for real regulation and re-regulation after the great financial crisis of 2008 was proven out by the enduring strength that was part and parcel of the build afterwards, where the G50s really built capital, liquidity, management credibility, and that was a long march, as we were very much on that path. That takes time. There was Dodd-Frank, and time marched on. As time went on, you know, capital, whether it's financial capital or human capital, it's like water. It finds a place. I think we know that some of the financial capital and then even some of the human capital started leaving the G-SIFIs. We were great training grounds, but maybe not the end destination. Less regulated firms started doing essentially some of the same activities and, part of the ecosystem, and we're thrilled to have them as clients or, or friend to me, whatever the positioning is in the ecosystem. It kept going. Contemporaneously, the lack of transparency and the lack of proportionality around some of the regulation for the incumbent legacy firms actually grew. We're going like in the wrong direction. We saw that with the vagaries of the CCAR exam and some of the horizontals and stuff. And I think our positioning, because we remember very well humility, humility of where we were in 2008, is, you know, we, when regulators jump, we're already in the air. I believe our competitors same kind of mentality, like, you know, you do as you need to do. I think it was getting to a point where we actually have run the risk of being less relevant when there is a market tremor, when there's event. We're relevant, and then it's like, okay, where's the problem gonna be? Now, history rhymes. That's super important to remember that. We are in a risk business and human nature, and that's why when people say dereg, I wouldn't wanna say less regulation. I would say repositioning of regulation around the reality that technology is moving so fast, okay? Let's think about what is relevant 5, 10 years from now with all the technology we've been talking about, and we can go in a hundred directions on that. Let's also talk about the fact that the end of financial repression has come, and the resumption of history is here. What does that mean? That means real interest rates, and that means real national interests. I'm using the word interest in different ways, okay? Real interest rates and real national interests. Real interest rates, of course, I mean interest rates, inflation, and the rest, cost of capital, and reconsideration of regional and national interests and global hegemony and all that good stuff. That means things are gonna happen. Not that things haven't happened for the last 10, 15 years, but when you're at zero, zero, and then the Fed comes in, you know, things are gonna happen, and there'll be success, and there'll be failure. It's called capitalism at some level on a global scale. It is opportune against that, and given the pace of innovation that's going on, and we could go a hundred different directions on that, that the regulator is best now positioned and should give real consideration to a repositioning to things that can happen in the system where the main firms can be, the G-SIFIs that have excess capital of, depending on the firm, hundreds of basis points, excess liquidity, tenured management teams, that we actually are relevant in not just powering the real economy, but to be helpful when there is a wobble, when history resumes. That is why I think it is opportune for a repositioning of some of the regulatory framework, not so much dereg, but a kinda repositioning of regulation so we kinda hit more of an even keel. You know, for me also, just to kinda toot the Morgan Stanley horn, I mean, we're in the talent business ultimately, right? Financial capital, pursuing capital. I want, we want people to come to Morgan Stanley for 20 years, 25 years, 30 years. It's a lot to ask, but not two years and then they go to the other place that's less regulated, okay? We want folks to be here, but we gotta show that we got game. We gotta show we're relevant, and we gotta make the case affirmatively to the ecosystem and to the regulator that we and our main competitors can handle, can shoulder that responsibility, not to necessarily be the axe in the system, but to have the kinda role that people traditionally associate the G-SIFIs with having. Of course, that's super important because we continue to scale. We continue to run a global business. It becomes part of the kinda the magic of fulfilling the strategy. And you see the repositioning of regulation as helping create the situation where you can be more relevant. Is that fair? We have excess capital, as you know. The levers are what we know them to be. I remember a time when we were paying script dividend. We kinda cadenced our way through it, and now we're $0.925 a quarter. We're on a cadence, and I like the cadence, okay? The dividend is sacrosanct. All right? And, you know, we're at 2.8% dividend yield, and shareholders like it, and it's not an elevated dividend yield because the currency's underperformed. It's that the dividend continues to work along on a reasonable cadence, okay? Dividend over the long term. The buyback, opportunistic. I think we've gone a bit against the grain where we haven't bought as much stock back because I've liked the idea, the team has liked the idea of accreting capital as we thought the complicated period was here, and we've accreted 10% additional capital, as you know, over the last five quarters. Been focused on the consistency of earnings. Consistency of earnings over these five quarters has been what it's been. That leads then investing in the business. You've heard me, green, green, green, lots of places to go. I would just say, sort of interesting that the inorganic question, of course, early on, let's say a year ago, we're just getting into our seats, right? What I would say is, the firm hasn't. The firm's been on this path, and we know the strategy. We're getting incoming, and I think the discipline has been really, you know, a necessity to get looks, to be educated, and then to sort of keep moving along on what we got. I would say that the opportunity to continue to scale, to continue to, to go inorganic is interesting in a world where potentially we may not be SLR constrained. I don't wanna put the cart before the horse. We have to see what, what, you know, what the regulator, what the Fed has to say. In the instance or if the numbers shake out where we're no longer SLR constrained, folks that know us well will see that on a CET1 basis, we have quite a bit of buffer, and that buffer presumably just, you know, would probably grow if we do our jobs. We have to do our jobs. There'll be opportunities that are out there to continue to scale, to continue to think about the global franchise, which is why I spent so much time talking again about first principles of what the strategy is and then what the four pillars are and then where we'd wanna grow. Because people say, "Wait a second. Are they entertaining something inorganic at this time?" We are not. You would hope that if opportunities come through, they would fit with the first 40 minutes of the chat, okay, that we're not going down a new path and changing the narrative. When you're a 10% player at $6 trillion, when you have $7.7 trillion of assets and you still are only a piece of a massive market called wealth and investment management, and when you're a global investment bank and you're a leader and you only have 13-14% share, there is a lot to go. That, I think, is really very exciting. Excellent. You did just bring up some of the metrics that lead into the key targets that you've got on client assets of $10 trillion, right? Right. At $7.7 million, did you say? Yes. Okay. You're really close to these targets, each one of them. Client assets is very close. You've got the pre-tax margin in wealth at $27.2. That's very close to the $30. And your ROTCE goal, you're very close to that as well. I guess the final question I have here for you, Ted, is, how do you feel about the last mile of hitting these targets? Is it organic? Just Just continue the, continue, or is there anything else that you wanna highlight on the key drivers to hit these targets that you've laid out? I think about what the leading analyst who has to make a decision, sell side on whether they like the currency, buy side, whether they wanna recommend it to the portfolio manager, is thinking about how to model the full value of the firm. Ultimately, that has to be premised on the kinda multiple. That means that we aren't thinking about these targets as a moment in time. The $10 trillion is simply compounding. If you believe that asset prices go up over time and you believe that, remember, there's $8 trillion- $10 trillion of assets that are held by existing clients away as part of this $54 trillion that we don't have. The compounding, the flywheel of wealth, the funnel that's beautifully, brilliantly managed, if we keep doing that and the fee-based asset phenomenon, it just makes life easier for the analysts to model what enterprise value is. If we can continue to do that in IM and the Investment Bank, it gets you to a place where there's real value having reached the $10 trillion and the 30% margin phenomenon, it's sort of an intermediate output. It's an output, but it's not PBT. I wanna grow PBT. The focus is not in the slide deck per se, but my goodness, we've been focused on the durability of EPS. Of course, we are activity-based. Of course, we're subject to how the market is and the economy is behaving. We're not recession-proof. The reality is, that if we develop this kinda consistency around earnings, it manifests itself, as you well know, in a higher earnings multiple. I think it is absolutely critical that when we get to the 30%, it's not a moment in time. We hit 30. Let's go on to the next, next topic. Let's do 30 in a natural way, not having starved the business. Right. Having invested in the business. Let's get to the 30 in the fullness of time, and let's be at that 30. In the aggregation of the rest of the businesses that we continue to generate EPS, that we continue to generate growth, growth in the businesses, durable growth, global growth, such that when you see the ROTCE pop out in a very good period, it is above 20%. In a tougher period, the lows are higher lows that we've been able to navigate, not just the complexity of AI, not just the complexity of global energy transition, but the complications of any given moment where there is going to be kind of a market window mentality that we have the kind of durability that we're able to generate, real returns above cost of capital. That's very clear, very thorough, and a focus on growth and sustainability. Ted, thanks so much for joining us today. Thank you. Thank.