As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. It is now my pleasure to introduce Matt Miller, Capital Markets, Investor Relations. Thank you. You may begin. Good morning, thank you for joining us for NETSTREIT's Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. On today's call, management's remarks and responses to your questions may contain statements considered forward-looking under federal securities law. These statements address matters subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ from those discussed today. For more information on these factors, we encourage you to review our latest Form 10-K and other SEC filings. All forward-looking statements are made as of today's date, NETSTREIT assumes no obligation to update them in the future. In addition, certain financial information presented on this call includes non-GAAP financial measures. Please refer to our earnings release and supplemental package for definitions, reconciliations to the most comparable GAAP measures, an explanation of their usefulness to investors. These materials can be found in the Investor Relations section of the company's website at netstreit.com. Today's call is hosted by NETSTREIT CEO Mark Manheimer and CFO Dan Donlan. They will make some prepared remarks followed by a Q&A session. With that, I'll turn the call over to Mark. Thank you, Matt, good morning, everyone. We appreciate you joining us today to discuss NETSTREIT's second quarter 2026 results. I want to begin by thanking our entire team for their outstanding execution and dedication. We have now grown the portfolio to over $3 billion in assets, we continue to see an elevated number of high-quality opportunities at accretive pricing, which should provide for an increasingly attractive growth backdrop as we head into 2027 and beyond. In the second quarter, we saw continued acceleration on the investment front. We closed $298.9 million of gross investments driven by well-priced assets in our core necessity and service-based sectors, including quick service restaurants, grocery, convenience store, auto service, and other essential retail categories. These investments were completed at a blended cash yield of 7.4% with a weighted average lease term of 9.8 years. As a complement to this, we executed targeted dispositions at a 6.8% blended cash yield, the proceeds of which were recycled into higher quality, longer duration opportunities that enhanced our portfolio quality and further reduced select tenant and industry concentrations. This robust start to the year reflects the depth of our sourcing platform and our team's ability to move quickly across a wide swath of opportunities while still staying disciplined in our underwriting criteria. With that in mind, we have seen an uptick in portfolio transactions in recent months, which historically have priced away from us given the large premiums these deals typically command. That said, we were successful in a couple of instances this quarter, which has fortuitously carried over into the third quarter. As a result, we have gained additional exposure without sacrificing our investment spreads to various high-quality tenants like Chick-fil-A, Sprouts, and Kwik Trip that usually price too aggressively for us in the one-off market. Also of note this quarter was the UPREIT acquisition of 20 Speedway properties that we previously invested in via a first mortgage in early 2023. This was a great example of our creative structuring within our debt program, providing a path to direct fee ownership at cap rates that are significantly above market. More specifically, we acquired the Speedway assets at a 6.75% initial cash yield, which we see as a strong risk-adjusted yield given the long-term leases, the investment-grade credit support, high unit level rent coverage, and the low basis in these assets. Turning to the portfolio, we ended the quarter with 859 investments leased to 156 tenants across 28 industries in 46 states. Our weighted average lease term is 10 years, and the percentage of investment-grade and investment-grade profile tenants is 56.5% of ABR. Unit level rent coverage across the portfolio remains healthy at 3.8 times. As expected, occupancy increased to 100% with the backfill of our loan vacancy, a former Big Lots location with A-rated TJ Maxx at a more than 20% increase in rent. While vacancies have been extraordinarily rare in our portfolio, we believe this execution highlights the strength of our asset management team and underwriting process. From a balance sheet perspective, we continue to maintain a conservative and flexible capital structure. Following the capital markets activities in the quarter, our leverage remains an industry-leading 3.2 times. With substantial liquidity under our revolving credit facility and the benefit of our previously raised forward equity, we are well positioned to fund accelerated growth without compromising our leverage targets. Turning to guidance, given the aforementioned strength of our balance sheet and continued momentum in our investment pipeline, we are increasing our full year 2026 net investment activity guidance range to $700 million-$800 million. We are also increasing the bottom end of our AFFO per share guidance to a new range of $1.37-$1.39. In summary, the second quarter continued upon our excellent start to 2026, highlighted by strong momentum on the investment front and opportunistic capital raising, which has prefunded our equity needs for the remainder of 2026. We believe our focus on healthy tenancy, strong unit level performance, high quality real estate, proactive portfolio management, and a low leverage balance sheet continues to position NETSTREIT for sustainable long-term growth and value creation. With that, I'll turn the call over to Dan to review our second quarter financial results in greater detail. We will then be happy to take your questions. Thank you, Mark. Looking at our second quarter earnings, we reported net income of $6.3 million, or $0.06 per diluted share. Core FFO for the quarter was $34.2 million, or $0.33 per diluted share. AFFO was $35.5 million, or $0.35 per diluted share, which was a 6.1% increase over last year. Turning to the expense front, our total recurring G&A in the quarter increased 6.7% year-over-year to $5.8 million, which similar to last quarter, has mostly resulted from staffing increases that occurred over the course of 2025. That said, with our total recurring G&A representing 9.5% of total revenues this quarter versus 11.3% in the prior year quarter, our G&A continues to rationalize relative to our revenue base. Turning to the capital markets, we remained optimistic on the ATM front, raising 9 million shares for $183 million of net proceeds as our cost of equity continued to improve throughout the quarter. Turning to the balance sheet, our adjusted net debt, which includes the impact of all forward equity, was $672.2 million. Our weighted average debt maturity was 3.6 years, and our weighted average interest rate was 4.3%. Including extension options, what can be exercised at our discretion, we have no material debt maturing until February of 2028. In addition, our total liquidity was $1.1 billion at quarter end, which consisted of approximately $20 million of cash on hand, $301 million available on a revolving credit facility, and $714 million of unsettled forward equity and $50 million of undrawn term loan capacity. From a leverage perspective, our adjusted net debt to annualized adjusted EBITDARE was 3.2 times at quarter end, which remains comfortably below our targeted leverage range of four and a half to five and a half times. Moving on to 2026 guidance, we are increasing the low end of our AFFO per share guidance to a new range of $1.37-$1.39, and increasing our net investment activity guidance to $700 million-$800 million. We now expect cash G&A to range between $16.5 million and $17 million, exclusive of transaction costs and severance payments. In addition, the company's AFFO per share guidance range now includes $0.05-$0.08 per share of estimated dilution, or 3.6 million-5.9 million shares for the full year, due to the impact of the company's outstanding forward equity calculated in accordance with the treasury stock method. Lastly, on July 16th, the board declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.225 per share. The dividend will be paid on September 15th to shareholders of record as of September 1st. With that, operator, we will now open the line for questions. Thank you. At this time, we'll conduct a Q&A session. To ask a question, press star one on your telephone keypad. A confirmation tone will indicate that your line is in the question queue. You may press star two if you would like to remove your question from the queue. For participants using speaker equipment, it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. One moment, please, while we pull for questions. Your first question comes from Haendel St. Juste with Mizuho Securities. Please state your question. Hey, guys. Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. First one is just on the implied volume for acquisitions into the back half of the year. It seems it's exhausted pretty meaningful deceleration. I guess I'm curious if it's conservatism, the volatility of the macro, maybe something else we're missing. Maybe shed some color on that. If the macro volatility is impacting your conversations at all from a pricing or maybe having deals take a bit longer. Curious on how that all is playing out and what your expectations into the back half are. Thanks. Thanks, Haendel. I think there is a little bit of conservatism built into that, but there is also we do not want to have a target out there with capital that we have not raised yet. If we do choose to raise a little bit more capital, I think there is likely some upside to that. As it more broadly relates to what we are seeing out in the market, I do not recall a healthier acquisitions market than what we are seeing right now, really across all the different avenues that we look to add properties, whether that be sale lease backs or even portfolio deals, as I mentioned in the prepared remarks. The one-off market blend and extends, we are really kind of clicking on all cylinders. There is really a great opportunity set with very attractive pricing that we are seeing. We are following the macro and kind of what is going on geopolitically. That has obviously had some impact on interest rates. We have not yet seen that have much of an impact on cap rates, but I would imagine if that sustains, and we continue to see upward pressure on the 5-year and the 10-year, that could potentially move up cap rates, but we just have not seen that yet. Got it. That is great color. My second question, I guess it pertains to some comments you made earlier in your discussion. You referred to some higher credit tenants like Chick-fil-A, I think you mentioned Sprouts. I guess I am curious, we have seen your IG grade share trickle down over the last couple quarters as you have pursued kind of optimizing your risk-adjusted growth, but your cost of capital has much improved. You are now, I guess, able to underwrite deals that perhaps you were not able to do 6, 12 months ago. Curious if your strategy, your IG capital deployment strategy might be evolving here, and if we might see that start to tick up a little bit. Curious on all your thoughts on that. Thank you. No, it is a good question. I think it is really the dynamic that there has been just a large number of portfolios that have crossed our desk and that we have had the opportunity to try to tackle. I think it is too difficult for one or two shops that historically have really paid up for those portfolios to take them all. A few of those have kind of come our way, which has allowed us to get some of those assets that historically maybe we would not have been able to. As it relates to this quarter being a little bit high on the investment grade profile, a good chunk of that was the Speedway OP Unit transaction that we did this quarter. I think that is maybe more of a one-off. We're just going to continue to try to find the best risk-adjusted returns. Right now, that has not really evolved other than the portfolio dynamic, which we have seen a little bit of that in the third quarter as well. I'd expect us to stick around that 30%, 35% investment grade profile, assuming the market dynamics continue. Got it. Thank you very much. Thanks, Haendel. Your next question comes from John Kilichowski with Wells Fargo. Please state your question. Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Maybe could you guys talk about the composition of what you bought in the quarter outside of the Speedway deal? Mark, you talked about some portfolios out there. Can you talk about the sectors that you're seeing some opportunity? Yeah, sure. I think the sectors that have shown up in some of the portfolio deals are similar, but there's maybe a few names. We mentioned Kwik Trip, Sprouts, Chick-fil-A that are in our portfolio. We just didn't have much of a concentration there, but it's created a unique opportunity for us to add some of those. We've also added some other names like Tire Discounters, some of the Darden brands that the cap rates have historically been pretty aggressive there. Some Brinker, Chili's assets as well we've added during the quarter, which haven't really been in our mix over the past call it a couple of years. It's very similar sectors, just maybe some other tenants that don't trade as much in the one-off market. The reason why I think we're seeing so many of these portfolio deals is, as you recall, maybe in 2021 when interest rates were near zero and cap rates were at all-time lows, you had a lot of players enter the space, look at putting financing on those transactions, get a really nice cash on cash, even though the cap rates were low, because they could borrow so cheaply. That debt's coming due, typically a 5-year term on most of that bank debt. That comes due. The refi looks a lot different, so selling the portfolios makes a lot more sense. We're just seeing a lot of opportunity there, and I think that's probably what's driving a lot of that. Each deal's got its own idiosyncratic reasons for why it comes to market or why it crosses our desk, but I think that's one theme that we've seen a little bit of. I think the mix in terms of sectors has been very similar to what we've tried to pull into portfolio. We've also gotten a little bit creative when we're buying some of these portfolios and simultaneously sold some assets at the same time. Some of these portfolios had some banks and things in there that maybe we're not as big of a fan, but they still trade a pretty good cap rate, so that can allow us to juice our net cap rate a bit, while I think getting a better risk-adjusted return. We've gotten a little bit creative in some of those situations. I think in terms of, you look at the categories and the industries that we've added to, it looks pretty similar to what we've done. It's just been a little bit different in how we've gotten into those transactions and then added further tenant diversity to the portfolio. Got it. That's very helpful. I guess that leads me into my next question, which would be a little bit chunkier on the disposition side in 2Q. Is that related to the Speedway deal? If we were to see more portfolio deals and net investments climbing, if you're able to do that, would you also expect that disposition number to run a little bit more elevated? Yeah, that's a good question. On the portfolio deals, if it's going to be a diversified portfolio, We've been very active on the disposition side, so that's allowed us to really build some relationships with some people to sell to, that we can rely on, that perform. I think you may see dispositions elevated a little bit in the event that we do some more portfolio deals. Each quarter's going to be a little bit different, so it's hard to predict. We've seen third quarter a little bit similar to second quarter in that we've done some portfolio deals and also been able to sell some of the assets that maybe we didn't want to own long term. Very helpful. Thank you. Next question comes from Jay Kornreich with Cantor Fitzgerald. Please state your question. Hey, thanks. Good morning. I just want to go back to the forward equity. The Treasury stock method accounting caused, I guess, $0.02 more of dilution this quarter as it relates to the annual guidance. Just wondering, when do you think that could hit a peak? And then just in general, as you seemingly have more than enough equity to meet your near-term investment needs really well into next year, yet your cost of equity continues to improve, I guess, what is your appetite to continue tapping incremental forward equity at these levels? Yeah. Hey, Jay. Appreciate the commentary. If you look at our total shares outstanding, relative to the weighted average share count, I think it's kind of at 38% today. That should normalize close to 15% as we get out through the course of 2027. Now it remains to be seen where the stock price grows relative to the outstanding forwards, but certainly from a standpoint on a percentage basis, the outstanding forwards will normalize, again, closer to 15%. I think what you'll probably see is that the amount of TSM dilution probably peaks in third quarter. Just kind of depends on where the stock price goes. Then we'll kind of drop off from there, not only nominally, but on a percentage basis as well. I think that answers the first part. I think the second part on kind of equity, you're right, we don't need to do anything if we don't choose. I think to the degree that the investment market remains as robust as it has, I think we'll likely utilize the ATM at some point in time in the third and potentially in the fourth quarter, just to stay well ahead of our capital needs. I think we can certainly choose to be selective given where our leverage is. We saw a kind of big front half coming for us, we wanted to get out ahead of that. With the S&P 600 inclusion, we had a ton of liquidity coming to the name, and we wanted to take advantage of that in the back half of June. That also kind of accelerated our needs relative to what we were expecting when we put out guidance in April of this year. Appreciate that, Dan. All helpful. Just going off the comment about the inclusion to the S&P 600 recently, which should bring liquidity and additional passive investors to the name. Are there any other incremental corporate goals we should be monitoring for other either index inclusion, new credit ratings, unsecured bond issuance, or anything else we should just have on the radar? As far as index inclusions, nothing comes to mind. Hopefully, we stay in the 600 a very long period of time because that results in quite a hefty ownership amongst passive funds. I think there's a lot of corporate goals, but as it pertains to the credit rating, or additional credit ratings, we already have a BB B- from Fitch. We're likely to go out to other agencies sometime early next year, which would then open us up to the public bond markets, which is something we're very excited about potentially tapping in 2027. I think that's the intermediate term goal for us. Thank you so much. Thank you. Your next question comes from Michael Goldsmith with UBS. Please state your question. Good morning. Thanks a lot for taking my question. I guess, just with the improved cost of capital, you've talked a little bit about getting into some portfolio deals and getting maybe into a little bit of higher quality tenants than you normally would have. Does that come at the expense of maintaining larger spreads in some of the more traditional tenants that you've been interacting with in the past? Or is this just like, "Hey, for the same price that we would pay for what would be traditional, we're able to improve the quality of our tenant base. Yeah, Michael. I think quite frankly, we were a little bit surprised that some of the portfolio deals we're able to get at the pricing that we did. I think that's really driven by the fact that there were just so many portfolios that came to market in a pretty short period of time. That made it difficult for some others to just buy them all. I would've thought that would've been a very unique quarter. We're seeing a similar dynamic play out in the third quarter. Yeah, I would say that if you look at the cap rate that we achieved this quarter, and I think really what drove that down to 7.4 from 7.5, which is minimal, was the Speedway deal at 6.75, the upfront deal that we did, that kind of drove that down. You take that out we're probably 7.5, 7.6. We really didn't have to deviate on pricing. We don't expect that to happen in the third quarter either. As long as that dynamic continues to play out in the market, we're going to participate. If it doesn't, we can surely transition quickly into more similar approach that we had in the fourth quarter and first quarter. Yeah. Hey, Michael, a lot of the 7.4 was rounding, and sometimes the 7.5 is rounding. The delta between where we've been transacting is actually less than 10 basis points when you factor in rounding. Got it. Thanks for that. My follow-up is, you continue to move into grocery with Sprouts, and the penetration of that within your portfolio of grocery overall remains elevated. Today, Albertsons reported, and stock is down quite a bit, with the company noting that core grocery faced increasing pressure from softer industry unit trends and a more cautious consumer. Clearly not all grocers are equal, but how are you feeling about the grocery within your portfolio? Just any update from the tenants within the grocery category would be helpful. Thanks. Yeah, sure. Obviously we pay attention to what's going on with the consumer, and what the margins we see across the board, with grocery. Really what we're seeing is the larger operators have been able to push pricing a little bit more and hold up a little bit better. Certainly having a very conservative balance sheet is extremely important in that industry. You don't want to combine any operating leverage with financial leverage. We feel really comfortable with the grocery assets that we have. They generate very strong sales, which kind of flows through to the bottom line with very high rent coverage in that sector. As long as we feel like we're buying good assets at or below market rents, with high rent coverage, we like the industry. You do have to be careful not to just partner with any operator, and be careful about which assets that you're buying. We feel really strong about the assets that we have in that sector and the rent coverage that we have. Thank you very much. Good luck in the back half. Thanks, Michael. Your next question comes from Smedes Rose with Citi. Please state your question. Thanks. Hi. It's Nick Joseph. Oh, sorry. Nick Joseph here with Citi. You had mentioned conservatism in the kind of guide potentially for the back half of the year on acquisitions. How much visibility do you have now that we're towards the end of July in the pipeline, and where does that pipeline stand today versus where it stood on average over the last year or so? Yeah, sure. We're seeing a very healthy acquisitions market. I think we're sitting in a very similar spot that we were three months ago on this call. No real reason to think that we should expect to see any real slowdown in the third quarter. That's really, we still have some sourcing to do for the third quarter, but a lot of that is done. We have virtually no visibility into the fourth quarter. Not only deals that we'll be able to access, also what the macro is going to look like and where cap rates are. We don't want to overextend ourselves, especially if there is the possibility of cap rates going up. We want to have that flexibility. Hi, this is Smedes. I just wanted to follow up on some of the comments you made a little bit earlier around grocery. Just for your tenants that are more or less focused on lower-end consumers, are you hearing anything from them, just in terms of trends that might give you pause and maybe think about the way you are underwriting some of those kinds of leases? Yeah. No, it's a good question. I think, the K-shaped economy is definitely real. The lower leg of that is certainly under pressure. If we're going to have a sector, which we don't, quite frankly, have a lot of exposure to the lower-end consumer, fortunately. I think what you really need to have there is you need to have a real value proposition. Whether that be a necessity-based product where they kind of need that to survive or need those products to survive, or there's a real value proposition to that consumer that will drive them to those stores. We really make sure that we've got very healthy rent coverages and corporate credit there, with a little bit less risk. Most of that's going to be with investment-grade tenants, locations that we know that they're committed to long term, that are generating very strong cash flows where we have some cushion, because the lower-income consumer is certainly under pressure. Thank you. Appreciate it. Your next question comes from Wes Golladay with Baird. Please state your question. Hey. Good morning, guys. Going back to the comments on having success on the portfolio deals, are you seeing a portfolio discount or just no premium? What are you seeing exactly on the pricing that's changed? It's kind of funny, Wes. We've seen some portfolios go off that are really well marketed, where there's several rounds of bidding, I think those are going off at a pretty substantial premium. The ones that are maybe a little bit smaller, I think if we're achieving the cap rates that we are for the quality of what we're pulling in, I wouldn't go as far as to call it a discount, but I'd say that it's very similar to for us kind of doing our 1Z, 2Z kind of small portfolios that we've done in the past. It's probably pretty close to no premium, no discount, so maybe at par. Some of the larger ones that we've seen, that we bid on and don't get quite frankly, I think are still going at a premium. Okay. That's all for me. Thank you. Thanks, Wes. Your next question comes from Greg McGinniss with Scotia. Please state your question. Hey. Greg McGinniss with Scotia. I wanted to go back to your earlier comment on the portfolio deals that were coming to market. I'm curious if you have any view on what's driving those deals to market. I know you mentioned expected moderation that's yet to materialize. If there's anything that you would expect to see in terms of a slowdown there, what would drive that? Yeah. Every deal has its own idiosyncratic reason for coming to market, so it's a little bit tough to overly generalize. Certainly we saw in 2021 and even early 2022, a lot of players kind of coming out of the woodwork, buying very high-quality properties and levering it up with very cheap debt. That debt's coming due, because five years have passed. Now they need to say, "Do I want to refinance this and watch my cash on cash deteriorate, or do I want to turn around and sell these assets because they're still marketable?" In a lot of cases, the people are deciding that the best outcome for them is to sell the portfolio to a larger institution. I think that's driving a lot of it. We're seeing more of that in the third quarter. If you kind of just extrapolate when people were being aggressive in 2021 and 2022, that could continue into 2027 if you just kind of add five years, to when people were buying those portfolios and assembling them. You never really know what the calculus is going to be for those people and what their financial situation is and where interest rates are. Okay, thanks. Last quarter, you mentioned the limited pool of sub 1x, one times covered assets. Did any of those get resolved in Q2, or any part of the disposition pool? Yes. We did dispose of one of those assets, we also had one that we were expecting to start to ramp, has ramped out of that bucket. We may continue to explore the couple that are left. Great. Thank you. Thanks, Greg. Your next question comes from Eric Borden with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my question. You've continued to add grocery, C-stores, QSRs, as you talked about in your earlier remarks. Just given the acquisition opportunities in those categories, how much further are you willing to increase exposure to those categories? What kind of concentration level would start to make you uncomfortable from a portfolio construction standpoint? It's a good question. We'd never like to turn down a good deal. You kind of never say never. I never want to kind of totally box myself in. We've always had a little bit of a soft ceiling in the kind of 15-plus% industry target. The industries that we really like where that gets a little bit softer. You get up around 20%, maybe we start looking at disposing some of the other assets in that category. We don't really want to see it get up to that level. If there's a good transaction and we really think it's our best risk-adjusted return, we may pursue those opportunities, look to dispose of some assets and whittle that down as you've seen us do in the past with some tenant concentrations. Great, thank you. My next question is just on the impairment you recognized in the quarter, the $4.2 million charge. Can you just provide a little bit more detail around that, whether or not it reflects an isolated asset-specific issue, or is there a broader theme there? That's typically going to be when we're selling a lot of assets, whether we bought them three, four years ago when cap rates were a lot lower and you've seen some cap rate expansion, just selling some assets and what we put them on the books for and what we sell them for. Anytime that you're selling a lot, you're going to have some impairments, it was largely offset with gain on sale. You had a lot of ones where we sold at gains and some at losses. A lot of times there's just you buy a portfolio, it's how you allocate it, or how the accountants want you to allocate it, quite frankly. There's not much of a read-through there, if you look at the gain on sale, I think that largely offset the impairments. All right. Appreciate it. Thanks for the time. Your next question comes from Michael Gorman with BTIG. Please go ahead with your question. Yeah, thanks. Good morning. I'm just wondering, following up on the Speedway transaction, are there more opportunities or are you seeing additional opportunities to use the UPREIT structure in the transactions market? If so, does that provide any kind of pricing advantage for you here, or are you generally competing with other public buyers for those types of transactions? Yeah, that's a good question. I try not to talk about other competitors on these calls, I did notice one of our competitors did their first OP Unit deal this quarter as well. I don't know if there's too much of a read-through there. Yeah, we love the UPREIT structure. We love doing these types of transactions when we can. Obviously right now our currency is very attractive to them and it's attractive to us. We used a stock price of $21 on the UPREIT transaction, which at the time was slightly higher than where our stock was trading. It's accretive, fewer fees. It's just a much more efficient way to deploy capital. People really like it because it allows them to avoid taxes, they end up being very sticky shareholders. Certainly love the structure. I wouldn't be surprised to see more in the future, they're going to be one-off and you kind of can't count on them. When they pop up, we're certainly big fans of using that structure. Great. That is helpful. Maybe just going back to the IG exposure. It has ticked down a little bit here. Is that more of a function of just as the portfolio grows, there is just less of a focus or less of a need because there is more diversification? Or is this kind of you all saying that you think IG is a little bit mispriced in the market, in terms of opportunities as you continue to build the portfolio? Yeah, sure. I think it is a little bit more of the latter. There is a lot of things that go into risk-adjusted returns, for us it is where could you expect there to be a loss on a property and what is that percentage look like versus the pricing that you are able to achieve in the market. There is a lot of things that go into the risk, the credit is really just one piece of it. The other two pieces that are equally as important, and in some cases more important are, is how sticky is that tenancy going to be and how committed to that location and mission-critical is it? That is going to be driven off of the rent coverage. If a tenant is deriving a lot of their cash flow from your location, they are going to stay there. If they are not making any money there, they are not going to stay there. Whether the credit goes away or not, at the end of the lease term, they are going to decide to leave your property anyway. How fungible is that real estate? How easy is it going to be to get somebody else in paying the same or more rent? Are there going to be a lot of TIs associated with that? There is just a lot that kind of goes into it. I think the easiest thing to point to is the credit. I think the easiest thing to kind of share with investors and get them comfortable is showing a high percentage of investment-grade credit. I think over time, we have been around for six years, I have had virtually no credit loss. I think we are proven underwriters at this point, I think just continuing to go out and getting the best risk-adjusted returns is really our focus. When interest rates moved up, you saw the non-investment grade, as kind of a general statement, saw the cap rates move up quite a bit. On the investment-grade side, there were still a lot of buyers willing to pay very low cap rates for those assets. The cap rates did not move up as much for that. You are just not getting the same risk-adjusted returns there in most cases. Not all cases. We just see the mix of where our efficient frontier is right now is kind of in that 30%-35% investment grade, which is really more of a byproduct of what we are buying. We are not really focused on that. It's just been fairly consistent of what has been a byproduct of where we're seeing the best risk-adjusted returns in the market currently. Great. Thanks for the time. Thanks, Michael. Your next question comes from Upal Rana with KeyBanc Capital Markets. Please state your question. Great. Thank you. I wanted to get your updated thoughts on the competition in the transaction market. With borrowing costs trending higher, are you seeing less competition overall? You mentioned a lot of the portfolio deals that did come online at once this quarter and you're able to grab a few at attractive pricing despite the higher quality. Just any color there would be helpful. Thanks. Yeah, sure. We continue to see virtually no competition from kind of the larger private institutions which grabbed a lot of the headlines. Our competition continues to be the 1031 market individuals and small family offices. Occasionally, the public REITs. When we're up against the other public REITs, we typically don't win those transactions. We view our competition is more the 1031 type buyer. They're typically borrowing, putting 50%, 60% LTV bank debt on their transactions. Those interest rates have made it more difficult for them to compete. I would say competition is significantly lower. Okay, great. I wanted to get your update thoughts on the watch list. As you made further progress on reducing the exposure of some of your troubled tenants again this quarter, I just want to get your thoughts there on those tenants and how much more there is to do. Maybe what's currently baked into your guidance for credit loss. Yeah, sure. We don't really have troubled tenants. I think maybe we had a few tenants that were out of favor. I think we've got those concentrations down significantly. We'll likely chip away a little bit on the margin here and there at some of those. Our real focus is really on, if you look at the histogram in our presentation, I think it's on page 13, that shows the corporate credit and the unit level coverage of those assets. We really want to kind of keep chopping the tail off of the weaker corporate credits and the weaker unit level coverage. You've seen some pretty strong progress there. We'll continue to do that. Okay, great. That was all. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll hand the floor over to Mark Manheimer for closing remarks. Thank you. Well, thanks everyone for joining us today. We certainly appreciate everyone's interest in NETSTREIT. Thanks. This concludes today's conference. All parties may disconnect. Have a good day.