Thanks everyone for joining us. With me today is Eric Kelleher. He's the COO and President of Okta. Eric, thank you again for joining us. Yeah. Great to be here. I will maybe kick it off. There's so much going on, there's a lot of questions I was putting together, I really want to start from your perspective. Much has changed with AI. If you think about the identity market year to date, what surprised you the most in terms of the changes that you're seeing? I think, for year to date, so if you go back six months ago, prior to the beginning of this year, our conversations with customers were fairly broad, and Okta's grown over the years from providing basic access management to also providing workforce and customer identity, and then also adding in Identity Governance, Privileged Access Management, and new security products like Identity Threat Protection, Identity Security Posture Management, and developer products with the Auth0 platform. Our conversations prior had really been about the breadth of all of those use cases for customers. We would talk about the identity security fabric, and that fabric was the combination of all those capabilities to help customers solve identity and secure identity for all their use cases across all their products and all their technologies. What surprised us this year, to your question, is while all of that is still true and we continue to innovate and develop for the identity security fabric and all those use cases, the only thing customers want to talk about today is how to protect themselves from the AI problem they know they have within their companies. Their employees are using AI. They're turning on agents internally. 91% of them report that they know they have agents that are live in production. 22-ish% of them believe they have them secured properly. That's what people want to talk about. They have an exposure today, and they need to contain it. I guess what surprises us about that is just how acute that transition has been, and it has really dominated our conversations. As Todd mentioned on the call last week, it's really been a driver of pipeline for our new products. We brought Auth0 for AI Agents to market in November, and Okta for AI Agents came out last month, on April 30th. Those products have really been built in consultation with customers, talking to us over the past six months about how specifically they need us to help them secure AI. Maybe we'll stick with the AI theme and to your point, it was AI agents GA for a couple of weeks. Todd, on the call last week, said it's the largest, I guess, pipeline build for a net new product. In terms of how you go to market, what are your reps doing to convert pipeline to actual dollars? We'll talk about the monetization, but just curious more so, what does that pipeline look like, and how are your sales reps converting those? Yeah, it's interesting because the space is so new, and it's evolving so rapidly, and the underlying technologies are evolving. A few months back, Gemini was the predominant platform in conversation, and then Anthropic would leapfrog it, and now ChatGPT-5.5 Cyber's out. And our customers are living in this world where they're not sure which technology is going to ultimately land, and so they need the flexibility to be able to protect against all of them. Our conversations have largely been talking to them about the importance of neutrality and the importance of having a broad solution that can allow for the rapid evolution of these platform technologies. And one of the challenges we have addressed and continue to address with this particular pipeline is it's a newer motion. It's adjacent to conversations we've had about securing human identity and securing non-human identity and service accounts, but agents are a newer conversation. For our sellers, they don't have depth, years of experience positioning these products. They're new products. They're just coming out. One of the things we've done to help them is we've stood up a tiger team of resources from a sales standpoint, a product standpoint, an engineering standpoint with forward-deployed engineers that are working actively with early customers and early enterprise customers to help us both design and build the products and convert pipeline. That team has been really driving our strategy and our engagement and our specific feature prioritization over the past many months, which is why we're confident the product that we brought to market is going to fit the need because it was really designed collaboratively with customers. Okay. I know it's a small sample set, but on the call, a lot of investors kind of focused on the commentary where I think you said I think it was more so on the callback, which was a customer comes in for an upsell, they buy IGA. If they were to attach AI, that component would be larger than the upsell. I know it's a small sample size, but can you just provide some color on what you meant? When you say larger in size, I assume absolute dollars? To the magnitude, and again, smaller sample set, but can you dissect that a little? Yeah. What Brett talked about on the call is that it's about 40% larger. It's significant. It really is testament to the value that customers place on the exposure that they're working to mitigate. As every successful cyber attack earns a headline, customers get more and more aware of the fact that they have an exposure that they need to mitigate against. That helps them understand they need to control for all the use cases. The challenge that customers have today, enterprises have today, is that they can't control their employees. Employees are able to spin up an agent and give it access to their email and access to their calendar and access to their Google Drive, which contains things that they don't even know they have access to. As that becomes more prominent and more acute, and as there's more issues in the press, companies don't want to be tomorrow's headline. They know they need to invest to increase their security posture and put them in a position where they can protect against having their own agents compromised or over-permissioned or impersonated. That's really what we're seeing. The level of investment we're seeing is that that's where customers see the biggest exposure today. If you think about Auth0 and then Okta, it sounds like Okta is having more success early on with AI, just given the deployment, because it's more internal versus Auth0 side. Maybe walk through those dynamics, and does that shift over time? I'm assuming it does. Yeah. I wouldn't agree with the premise of that question. We're having good success with Auth0 for AI Agents as well. You might not have heard us talk about it as much on the call because it's an upstream product. Auth0 for AI Agents is a tool for developers that helps them develop agents that can be secured. It allows, for example, for fine-grained authorization, where when an agent takes action, you validate not only that it is who it says it is, but also that it has the specific permissions to do the thing it's trying to do. That capability is hugely important. Token vaulting, which is included there, is hugely important. We continue to have good success with that product as well. From a enterprise security exposure standpoint, the more acute challenge our customers are facing right now is that they don't know three things, and we call answering these three things the blueprint for the secure agentic enterprise. They don't know where their agents are, they don't know what they can connect to, and they don't know what they're authorized to do. Okta for AI Agents is the platform that addresses those three areas, helping with the problem of discovery, how we find what agents are live in production for your company, and then helping with the problem of connection and ensuring that you know what those agents are able to connect to, and then helping with the problem of authorization and knowing what they're authorized to do. I guess the question I have is, and I would ask within identities, if you think of privileged access, which you have IGA, which you have further along the maturity curve, and then think about your core, what's more important or a bigger priority for customers in terms of securing AI? In terms of securing AI, governance continues to be a very strong contributor for us, and we don't see that slowing down. Governance plays a role in securing AI as well. For example, one of the use cases there is just-in-time provisioning. One of the challenges with agents is often agents are configured with standing privileges, meaning you allow an agent to connect to one of your systems, and it just has access to that system, standing access to that. One of the areas we can address that with governance is through just-in-time provisioning and de-provisioning, where you wake the agent up when it needs to do work, and then you turn it off immediately afterwards. You solve the problem of standing privileges through that. Governance is an inherent part of a solution for securing AI. The Okta for AI Agents platform, again, helps with those fundamental questions. First of all, knowing where the agents are so that you know which ones might have standing privileges and you know what to look at. Knowing what they've been given access to, what they can connect to. Again, it can help you understand what that exposure is. Knowing the verbs, the actions that they're allowed to take. Is the analogy where it's everyone needs governance, but not everyone needs privileged access, meaning maybe the CISO, someone in the security team. I don't personally need access to turn on and off MFA. Does that mean IGA is probably a bigger upsell than privileged access, or do agents need both? There's aspects of privileged access that really help with AI, especially, in particular, token vaulting is a feature of privileged access and also a feature of Auth0 for AI Agents. That token vaulting allows an agent to have credentials which are managed in a secure location and have business rules that requires them to be rotated. If you go back 10 years ago, people would configure a service account and hard code a user ID and password in a config file and be done with it, and that would live that way for years. We've all learned as an industry that doesn't work. It's a huge exposure. Privileged access will become increasingly important for more of those use cases over time. As far as our business is concerned, it's a newer product for us yet. It's not yet a land product. We have now matured Okta Identity Governance to where it's now a land product for us. In addition to being a frequent cross-sell for existing access management customers, we're also going in to displace entrenched legacy deployments from other vendors. Governance has matured to the point where it is now a point of entry for us, which is great. Privileged access is a couple of years behind governance in its maturity. We don't consider it a land product for us today. For the use cases that it supports around access management and governance, it's been very effective. Could you share what%, I guess, of net new customers come through IGA? We don't break that out. You keep me honest with that, do we? No. Okay. No. No. Sorry. No. Maybe talk about the monetization. This whole conference, everyone's been talking on the software side, how this plays out over time. How are you thinking about monetization of these agents, consumption, usage-based? Maybe just walk us through what that trajectory looks like. Yeah. Todd talked about that on the call last week. One of the challenges the industry has right now is the economics of AI and inference and compute are such that most vendors are bringing to market their AI offer with a consumption-based model. The challenge with the consumption-based model is customers don't know how to budget for it. Leading with a consumption-based model slows down your sales cycle materially. We have this issue internally as we're buying AI products and trying to figure out how do we budget for what our consumption is going to be. What we're doing with these early customers is we are entering into one-year terms, and we're only having a seat-based model for now. We've talked to all these customers coming in that for the first year, we're going to have a seat-based model, here's what it's going to look like, and they can budget for that. Then we have the understanding that during the year, we're going to learn their actual consumption so that if we were to add in a consumption-based component at renewal, they would have data to ground their budget cycle on. The reason that we landed on that is just by working with these customers over the past six months, is what would make it possible for you to get started. That's been very effective so far. Okay. Maybe jumping to, I think, some of the comments you made on go-to-market. You've made a lot of changes over the past, call it, six quarters. Most of last year was kind of ramping some of these net new reps. You called attritions basically at levels where you haven't seen it in a very long time t he more senior reps. At a good level. At a great level. To be clear, that could go the other way. Right. It sounds like you're kind of pulling back, I guess, a little bit on net new hires. Maybe just walk us through some of the commentary on the call in terms of why not step on the gas a little bit more. Yeah, it's interesting. We went through a couple years of needed go-to-market evolution, and one of the questions we would get in these conversations is, how much disruption is too much disruption? How are we managing productivity and tenure and time in seat? We're looking back. We're very confident the moves we made were the right moves. Our waves of specialization, we're now in our fourth, which I'll get to, but our first, a few years back, was to carve out a set of sellers to focus on public sector, federal and state and local and international. That team has had a very good run focusing on those buyers and that budget cycle and those purchase cycles. Two years ago, rolled out a hunter/farmer model in our Americas commercial business. We moved reps who had been accountable for all new logo acquisition and upsell, cross-sell and upsell. What we had found is that that business was shifting so much into cross-sell and upsell, and largely as we brought more product to market, they had more to sell, that we weren't spending enough time feeding the top of the funnel by bringing in new logos. We carved out a set of sellers, and put them in a hunter motion, where their focus was on new logo acquisition. We've talked about, it took about a year for that model to really get running at full speed. That's what we had expected and how we'd modeled and set guidance. This past year, five quarters ago, we rolled out a specialization model on our platform and our buyers. Whereas previously every rep sold everything, we divided the sellers into two populations, one that sells to the corporate IT and security buyer, the CIO and the CISO, and they sell the Okta platform to that buyer, and one that sells to developers, whether it's software developers or B2B SaaS or even in-house developers, and they sell the Auth0 platform. That specialization we rolled out January of last year, and we talked about this throughout the year. It's proven to be very effective. As a result of all of this, we have seen several quarters of improving rep tenure, as attrition's gone down and tenure's gone up and productivity has gone up as well. Overall, when you talk to the field organization, I was just at our club event a couple of weeks back, you can feel the optimism. People know that they can be successful and know that they can make money. When we look at capacity, to get back to your question, we want to be careful to add capacity to drive up bookings, but not to add so much capacity that we disrupt territories, that we disrupt books of business, that we have to reallocate accounts, and then people have to reset new relationships. We find that when people have accounts longer, they're going to sell more into those accounts. We don't want to carve territories to the point where reps lose some momentum and feel like they're losing some opportunity to be successful. We feel like we have that balance about right. We've added a bunch more capacity in Q1. We're adding less incrementally during this quarter and next quarter. We're going to measure based on our pipeline to make sure that we're not leaving deals on the table. We'll adjust as we go. Yep. You talked about public sector real quick. You had a good, strong Q1. What's driving that? It sounds like it was across the board, state, federal, and local. Overall, the team is well tenured and well productive, and they've got the product mix that those buyers need. I think one of the things to keep in mind also is Q1 is typically a low quarter for public sector. The federal fiscal year starts in our Q3. Q1 is typically, we don't typically have a lot of renewals or a lot of net new purchases at the federal level, certainly. State and local continue to be active, and we had some good federal deals in Q1 as well. The one thing that also stood out to me was just the step-up, I think, in partner-sourced bookings. Multimillion, I think, was up year-over-year. I guess more so that was part of your shift, and want to talk about shifting more of your pro services to your partners. Obviously, that broadens distribution, makes it a lot more stickier. They're going to push your product. What was the move behind that? Part of it was probably the go-to-market changes. If you think about just the partner-driven deals, how does that look throughout the year? It's two things. One, we've had for many quarters, our most exciting growth has been at the top of the pyramid. It's been up market. I think we did announce in this quarter that our customers over $100K in spend are now over 85% of our revenue. Our customers over $1 million represent over $1 billion in ARR. As we go upmarket, we're having bigger conversations, and as our product portfolio has expanded, we're having conversations that span multiple processes and multiple departments and multiple use cases. As that complexity increases. Our partners have an increasing need to be working with a Global System Integrator that can span broader parts of their business. We have been working with Global System Integrators across all this. What we realized this year coming into our planning cycle is that we could take a deliberate step to refocus our professional services resources on enabling those partners to get greater scale. That's the adjustment that we made, where we basically shifted 1% of revenue capacity towards partner enablement and working with those GSIs and these accounts. That's played out as we expected. It's both financially and from an engagement standpoint. We have active engagements at customers with all the major GSIs, and we're seeing that continue to improve. Ultimately what will happen is, as they build more experience, they build more bench capacity, they bring us more business. Because the GSIs sell what they have on their bench, and as they build Okta capacity on their bench, they're going to be bringing more opportunities to us. When does that become more meaningful in the model? Is that 2Q, Q3? Just maybe when does it really start to step up? Brett's comments last week was that we expect to start to see that contribute in Q2. Okay. Maybe going back to AI, the question I had for you, and again, it's been a question I've been asked this whole week, is incremental AI dollars being spent, where is that coming from? Is it being pulled from endpoint network, or is it new buckets of spend that CISOs are getting? It's both. It's people rebalancing their portfolio, but there is a lot of net new investment coming in. It's coming in because this is a board-level exposure. As this market evolves and as threat actors get more published, boards understand that this is a real security concern. The problem of having agents having standing privileges to corporate assets, the problem people are understanding that they're behind in data governance and ensuring that they're finding their humans have access to data they didn't know their humans had access to, but now agents are on, and they're 24/7, and they work at a much higher clock rate than their humans work. There's increasing exposure that needs to be managed and invested in. We're finding board-level engagement and investment in agentic security specifically. There's net new funding coming in. In addition to that, companies are looking internally at where they can harvest some savings to drive into this area as well. We feel it's very much a tailwind right now for the product, which is why we've innovated the way that we have with the offers we've brought to market. It sounds like consolidation's definitely a trend. Platformization, obviously, one of your competitors brought it up. Within AI, where's the most success? Is there a specific geography, a certain vertical that you're seeing more traction today than you probably would've expected three months ago? Not as in vertical or geo. These are pretty global needs. I think where we're having the fastest success in these conversations is where we're bringing in our specialists. The reason we've created a tiger team is they do nothing but talk to customers about this specific problem all day, every day. We direct that team to what we perceive to be the largest opportunities. We have activity in all of our geos. I wouldn't say that there's a single vertical right now that is standing out beyond others. If anyone has any questions, feel free to jump in. Maybe we'll talk about competition. Would love your input on what you're seeing or your expectations from Palo Alto with CyberArk. Obviously, that's more on the privileged access side. CrowdStrike's making a big push into identity. I think they came out with Falcon ID, which I think is more of your core. Slightly, but very lower on product. Where is this market evolving to? First of all, it's a huge pie. The market is enormous right now. Second, the one core differentiator that, and we talked about last week as well, is our neutrality is huge. Customers don't know which vendor is going to own which parts of the stack. They know that they need to be able to solve and secure identity across whatever technologies are coming in and out of the mix. That continues to be a core differentiator for us. We also have, from a distribution standpoint today, over 20,000 enterprises that already trust us to secure identity. For them, expanding their secure identity to include any use case with agents is a very natural, extended conversation of the work that we're already doing with them. We've done a really great job building those connections. From a partnership standpoint, I mentioned we have over 8,000 applications that are integrated with us. Those companies you mentioned, CrowdStrike and Palo Alto Networks, they're huge partners of ours. We have thousands of mutual customers. Those relationships obviously will evolve as we overlap more on the edges, but we see it on the edges right now, not in core head-to-head. Okay. Where do you think Palo will have the most success with CyberArk? I think where CyberArk is strong is on privileged access, as you mentioned. They have many years of incumbent access there. Their solution is legacy on-prem. They're working right now to bring it into a multi-tenant SaaS, and that's taking some effort for them. It will continue to evolve with Palo. For firms that are Palo customers that have a privileged access specific need, they know we're going to be a natural offer for that. Again, that's not a land product for us today, so we wouldn't expect to be head-to-head in those transactions. Where we're broader on access management and governance and security threat protection and posture management, we'll bring those offers in to help balance it out. Got it. Matt, please. For your early identity customers, to what extent do they have to have a consolidated identity stack across the three legs of the stool to make the best use of Okta's agentic products? The agentic products bundle all the capabilities that are needed from those stacks. If a customer buys Okta for AI Agents, they get the components of access, governance, and privileged access that are required to secure the agentic use case. That's how we've packaged it that way. If I had SailPoint for governance and CyberArk for PAM and I used you for access. Could I deploy your agentic solution or w ould I need to migrate? No, you could deploy it. Okay. Full feature set? Yep, the Okta for AI Agents, to be clear. Auth0 is on the build side, but on the governance side, yeah. Can you maybe help us understand where does CrowdStrike compete? Is it more complementary? Is it more competitive? Where do they fit in the stack? We don't see them head-to-head at all. We talked about this on earnings last week. The one named competitor that we see material is the same as it's always been, is Microsoft. The primary play they have is bundling. Right. For customers that have a very specific need for the small subset of capabilities that Microsoft can provide in the E5 and E7 bundle and are under cost constraints, that's a legitimate competitor, and that's something that we grapple with. Our win rates against Microsoft haven't materially changed in many quarters. That's something that is a constant conversation for us because if you're not using the breadth of our stack and you're only using a subset of access management, and you're already a Microsoft bundle customer, we have some exposure there. Our account teams are very driven right now in driving our stickier products that get us in great: Things like Workflows, things like Governance, and privileged access and our security products. As we add all of those in, we become even more of an established standard, and people build on us. Is there a stat that you can maybe share? How much overlap, how many Okta customers are using maybe parts of Entra, what Microsoft has? We don't have published those stats, but we have many customers that are also Microsoft customers. Is there a specific part of the Microsoft stack they're using that perhaps you guys don't have? Maybe walk us through, if it's a Microsoft customer using Okta and Microsoft, where is the overlap? It can be a customer that's migrating over time and coming more. It can be a customer that has a legacy Microsoft app that they're using that has been previously configured that they haven't yet brought over. Those use cases are very, very common. Usually it is either that or it is people not really using the Entra components, but they're using other components of the bundle. Okay. Maybe talking about some of the cores, maybe I'll start with Auth0. That business has continued to do extremely well, checks in the channel on the developer side. It's just a library of applications. Where does that business trend, and what are the investments that you guys are making into Auth0 today that you think will help sustain that growth? Auth0 continues to serve its core audience, which is developers. Those developers, historically, we've talked about Auth0 as a customer identity access management solution, which it is. The reason that we've used to lump those in as almost synonymous once upon a time was because the primary use cases people were using Auth0 for was to build applications that serves customers in a B2C model. That's expanding now. Developers are building additional things. We have a focus on B2B SaaS providers, people that are bringing applications to market. For those customers, you asked about innovation targets, for example. We are investing to earn FedRAMP authorization for the Auth0 platform, which it does not have today. The reason that we're doing that is because B2B SaaS vendors need to be able to sell their products to government. We need Auth0 to earn FedRAMP accreditation so that they can sell their products to government. That's an important investment. That's well underway for us right now. In addition to B2C, B2B, we are now seeing agentic development as the net new category. The reason that we've been investing in that product is specifically to serve that use case. Okay. I guess just how do you manage then investments across Okta and then Auth0? Today, the engineering teams are distinct. They both report into Ric Smith, our President of Technology, and that's a recent change we announced a month ago. Ric's charter with pulling them together is to make sure that we don't duplicate efforts. For example, we've spent many years earning FedRAMP authorization on the Okta platform side. It's FedRAMP High authorized. We don't want to have to repeat that and start from scratch with the work that we're doing on Auth0. He's looking for programs like that where we can get some commonality and some reuse of the skills that we've already developed in-house, and that'll work in both directions for us. Thank you. The other impressive, I think, stat in the quarter, net retention ticked up for the first time, I think from 106 to 107. Sounds like perhaps maybe there is an inflection maybe later in the year. Walk us through how much of that is the core buying net new seats, AI, is it IGA, is it privileged access? What drove the trajectory to take it higher and then throughout the rest of the year? Yeah. We've mentioned we expect it's going to travel around here, plus or minus a point for a while. It's all the things that you mentioned. Although I would not attribute privileged access specifically to being a material contributor, but cross-sell and upsell across the entire new product portfolio had another really strong quarter for us, and that always helps. As we've talked about in recent quarters, we've, at this point, flushed out the COVID cohort of exuberant purchasing in zero interest rate days. That's helped us on the NRR side as well. Those headwinds have abated, and the tailwinds of having new products that are available that are driving incremental value is really resonating as well. Okay. Yeah, you can see it. Are there additional head count? I guess, why are you talking about maintaining the current level? You're through your go-to-market- reorg, you lapped the large Auth0 customer loss in August, I think. Why wouldn't you expect improvement in the back half? It changes every quarter based on the mix of new business and based on the mix of cross-sell and up-sell. Our expectation is for it to trend about where it is. We're pleased to see it tick up from 106 to 107, and we're working to drive it further. For now, we're calling it where it is. If you think about the growth formula for the full-year guide, how much of that is just maybe an uptick in net retention, better up-sell or cross-sell, which you are seeing, versus just net new logo growth? How should investors, how should we think about the sustainability of, call it, high single digit, low double digit growth for the next one to two, three years? Obviously, you're not guiding. Walk us through, where is growth coming from? Keep me out of trouble on this. What do we say on this one? Yeah. It's a confluence of all of the major initiatives that we've been investing in over the last couple of years. Growth's going to come from improved go-to-market execution, new product, which includes some of the agentic, but that's a little bit further out, investing into the partner motion some of our revenue over to our partners, and success with large businesses. Yeah. We haven't talked about channel much here. The channel for us as well has been an area where we're pleased with the momentum that we have, and we're investing further in developing that. The GSIs are one example of that. What% of your bookings then today is partner driven? What does that look like 12 months-24 months from now? Yeah. We said that. Let me make sure I get the numbers right here. Over 80% are partner influenced, over 40% are partner sourced. That's when they actually source the deal and hand it over to us. We believe we can get those numbers up higher over time. That's why you see us making this move. Okay. Now, the partner influence versus partner sourced, who's getting the pro service dollars? Is that the partner sourced deals? For deals sourced with SI partners, they take prime on those deals. We'll support them with expert services. For partner influenced, it can go either way. It depends upon how the engagement is. Our preference is to prime as little as possible. We want to make sure we maximize the opportunity for our partners, but there are some use cases that are either bleeding edge with new product capabilities or require deep work with our engineering team, where it makes sense for us to be prime on those transactions. We try to minimize that so that our partners have the opportunity to build their depth of relationship with customers. Okay. Maybe one more financial question, and I'll just end it with another, maybe if you could help me keep me honest. If you think about the margin guide, op margin guide, free cash flow margins now high teens, if not 20%. As you think about going through the year, perhaps if you then double down higher on go-to-market, new reps, the investments in R&D across Auth0. Okta, what's the sustainability of margins in this trajectory there? We manage to Rule of 40, and so we balance the growth and free cash flow, and we work to keep them in balance and make sure we manage to Rule of 40. Right now, as we've talked about, we believe we should be growing faster, and so we are indexing our investment to elevate our growth rate as fast as we can. We feel confident we've demonstrated we can generate cash when we choose to generate cash. What we want to do is while we're focusing on efficiency, we want to make sure we don't starve investment opportunity that could accelerate our growth rates. That's how we think about that balance right now. Okay. Maybe this last question is, what's your pitch to investors today? Your stock has obviously outperformed since you guys reported. Execution has been a lot more flawless and more consistent over the past couple of quarters. If you look at the stock today, your guidance, the tailwinds from AI, the monetization opportunity I think most of us see within security, because every agent needs identity, authorization, need to authenticate what every agent has. Maybe, what's your pitch today, and then what does this story look like in a year? That's a pretty good baseline right there. Securing identity has never been more important than it is right now. Human identity, we've known that's been important for a while. Non-human identity and service accounts over the past seven, eight years, people have realized they have huge exposures there. Now agentic identity and exposure has really poured gasoline on the fire. From that overall perspective, there is an acute awareness of the importance of securing identity right now, which is going to help Okta. I would say in addition to that, the challenge that new players are going to have in this space is the challenge of distribution and connectivity. Our neutrality and the depth of our network effect of our existing integrations makes us almost plug and play for any customer with all these use cases. We believe we're very well positioned to take this market, and we're working our asses off to make sure that we do that. Excuse me. Todd mentioned on the call last week, we don't get paid for pipeline. Our pipeline right now is really healthy. We've got to convert it to bookings, and so we're very focused on doing that. Just one last follow-up. You talked about the monetization. One question I get often is, I think SailPoint puts out, their metric is for every one human employee, there's anywhere from five to 40, I guess, agents or chatbots, copilots attached. What are you seeing today? It depends who you talk to. The IDC's projection is that collectively, we'll have 1 billion agents live in production in three years out. It's hard for people to project, and as you just mentioned in the question, it's also important in how you define an agent. What's an agent versus a chatbot versus a piece of software tool that you use? I expect personally, and I can say on behalf of Okta, we expect there is going to be a lot more agents than there are people. All those agents bring with them security concerns and security exposure, and they expose data governance concerns and data exposures. We believe all of that is going to bring agentic identity security to the point where it becomes much more of a prominent conversation even than human, which is already critical for folks. One of the areas that we talk about frequently that remains true is over 80% of successful cyberattacks, over 80% of successful cyberattacks start with compromised identity. As the industry has learned that, as the industry has become aware of that, they understand that they cannot have a secure company if they're not properly investing to securing identity. We believe we have the right to earn that business to be that solution for them. Quantum question. I know it's a couple of years down the road. Is that a concern at all for customers today if you think about quantum breaking through basically any kind of encryption? From time to time, I'll talk to CISOs about their thoughts on quantum. What I can say is I'm not experiencing it as a top of mind concern today. It's on the radar, something that they should probably be thinking about. They have acute issues to manage today, and that's something to think about in the future. Not there yet. If there's any other questions, I think we end there? Eric? All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks.