Thank you for standing by. My name is Jordan, and I'll be your conference operator today. At this time, I'd like to welcome everyone to the PulteGroup, Inc., Fourth Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. If you'd like to ask a question during this time, simply press star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you'd like to withdraw your question, press star one again. Thank you. I'd now like to turn the call over to Jim Zeumer. Please go ahead. Thank you, Jordan, and good morning. I want to welcome everyone to today's call to review PulteGroup's Fourth Quarter operating and financial results. Joining me on today's call are Ryan Marshall, President and CEO. Jim Ossowski, Executive Vice President and CFO. David Carrier, Senior VP Finance. In advance of this call, a copy of our Q4 earnings release and this morning's webcast presentation have been posted to our corporate website at pultegroup.com. We'll also post an audio replay of this call later today. I would highlight that today's presentation includes forward-looking statements about the company's expected future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those suggested by our comments made today. The most significant risk factors that could affect future results are summarized as part of today's earnings release and within the accompanying presentation. These risk factors and other key information are detailed in our SEC filings, including our annual and quarterly reports. Now, let me turn the call over to Ryan Marshall. Ryan? Thanks, Jim, and good morning. I hope that many of you have had the chance to review our new investor presentation we posted to our website in early December. If you haven't seen it, I would encourage you to take a few minutes to review the deck, which is available on our website. The document is designed to provide a comprehensive review of the fundamental goals, strategies, and results of our company. The process of creating a completely revamped investor presentation afforded us the opportunity to revisit many of the core tenets against which we have been operating for more than a decade. I have to admit that it was gratifying to see that we have consistently operated in alignment with the strategies established in 2011 and how well they have helped us navigate through the housing cycle. It is also gratifying to see that the underlying operating model has delivered such outstanding results. I would note that investors have recognized and rewarded us for this performance, as PulteGroup has ranked number one in total shareholder returns among homebuilders for both the past year and the past decade. This is a sustained record of success for which we are rightfully proud. PulteGroup's 2025 operating and financial results further demonstrate the value of our differentiated operating model that emphasizes diversification and balance across markets, buyer groups, and spec versus build-to-order production, as well as a highly disciplined approach to project underwriting and overall capital allocation. In a year that saw buyer demand and overall market dynamics be highly variable, I am pleased to report that our operating model helped us to generate annual revenues, margins, and earnings that rank among the highest in the 75-year history of PulteGroup. Among the 2025 financial results that I would highlight, we closed over 29,500 homes and generated home sale revenues of $16.7 billion. We reported full-year gross and operating margins of 26.3% and 16.9%, respectively, and we generated cash flow from operations of $1.9 billion. I would also note that we ended the year with $2 billion of cash after investing $5.2 billion into the business and returning $1.4 billion to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends. I have talked about this on other calls, but a critical driver to Pulte's results in 2025 and prior years is our highly diversified business platform. With homebuilding operations now established in 47 distinct markets, we benefit from having a strong presence in the Midwest, Northeast, and Florida, where on a relative basis demand in many of these markets has held up better. Relative strength in these areas helped offset pressure coming from the markets where overall home buying demand was softer, such as Texas and in many of our western markets. Beyond this broad geographic footprint, PulteGroup continues to benefit from having arguably the deepest and most balanced buyer base in the industry. At 38% first-time, 40% move-up, and 22% active adult, our 2025 closings were in line with our long-term targets. More importantly, our 2025 sales demonstrate the powerful impact such buyer diversification can have on our results. In a year in which demand was more challenged among first-time and move-up buyers, full-year signups among active adult buyers increased by 6% over last year and were up 14% in the fourth quarter over the fourth quarter in the prior year. In addition to the obvious benefit to our subsequent closing volumes, our Del Webb Communities routinely deliver our highest gross margins. Del Webb has been and will continue to be an important driver of PulteGroup's superior gross margins and, most importantly, high returns. While I think we all view 2025 as a more challenging year than anticipated, PulteGroup still reported $2.2 billion of net income, the fifth most profitable year in our history, and generated $1.9 billion in cash flow from operations. Consistent with our disciplined capital allocation process, we used our strong 2025 financial results to invest in the future growth of our company, investing $5.2 billion in land acquisition and development. Inclusive of 2025, PulteGroup has invested a total of $24 billion in land acquisition and development over the past five years. We believe our disciplined land investment will enable us to routinely achieve community count growth in the range of 3%-5% in 2026 and in the years beyond. As part of our keen focus on advancing a homebuilding platform that can consistently deliver strong financial results, as reported in this morning's earnings release, we have made the strategic decision to divest of our off-site manufacturing operations. ICG has proven to be a strong operator that can consistently deliver high-quality house shell components that has delivered many benefits to our extending homebuilding platform, but we have determined that our business and, in turn, our shareholders are best served by us focusing on our core homebuilding operations. After the sale, we will be able to benefit from any innovation in off-site manufacturing achieved by the building component suppliers, many of which are making significant investments in technology and innovation, while we focus on our core competencies. Having recorded another year of strong results, PulteGroup enters 2026 in an exceptional financial position with $2 billion of cash and a net debt-to-capital ratio of -3%. We also control a land pipeline of 235,000 lots that will allow us to continue growing community count in 2026. As such, I am optimistic about the year ahead and PulteGroup's ability to capitalize on any opportunities the market may present. Now, let me turn the call over to Jim Ossowski for a review of our fourth quarter results. Jim? Thanks, Ryan. Consistent with Ryan's comments, our fourth quarter performance capped another year of excellent operating and financial results, which I'm excited to review. We recorded net new orders in the fourth quarter of 6,428 homes, which is an increase of 4% over Q4 of last year. The increase in net new orders for the quarter reflects a 6% increase in average community count to 1,014 in combination with a 1% decrease in absorption pace to 2.1 homes per month. Reflective of the challenging demand conditions we experienced over the course of 2025, we realized a full-year absorption pace of 2.3 homes per month compared with 2.6 homes per month for all of 2024. For the fourth quarter, our cancellation rate as a percentage of starting backlog was 12%, compared with 10% in the prior year. For the fourth quarter, net new orders among first-time and active adult buyers increased 9% and 14%, respectively, over Q4 of last year. Comparatively, net new orders in our move-up business declined by 5% in the prior year fourth quarter. By buyer group, net new orders in Q4 2025 were 39% first-time, 38% move-up, and 23% active adult. This compares with 37% first-time, 42% move-up, and 21% active adult in the fourth quarter of 2024. As we have discussed on prior calls, new community openings are helping to increase our active adult business as we grow that segment towards our targeted range, 25% of total unit volume. For our fourth quarter, home sale revenues totaled $4.5 billion, which is down 5% from the fourth quarter of last year. Lower home sale revenues for the period reflect a 3% decrease in closings to 7,821 homes, in combination with a 1% decrease in the average sales price of closings to $573,000. By buyer group, closings in the fourth quarter were 37% first-time, 39% move-up, and 24% active adult. In the prior year fourth quarter, our closing mix was 40% first-time, 40% move-up, and 20% active adult. In response to the questions we have received, I would note that our Q4 closings included approximately 100 build-to-rent homes. Given our strategic approach to BFR, it has always been a small part of our operations and accounted for less than 2% of full-year 2025 closings. Our year-end backlog totaled 8,495 homes with a value of $5.3 billion, and we ended 2025 with 13,705 homes in production, of which 7,216 were spec homes. Consistent with our stated strategy, our spec inventory is down 18% from the end of 2024. We have remained disciplined in managing spec starts as we rebalance our product mix and work to increase the percentage of build-to-order homes in our production pipeline. Given the number of homes under construction and their stage of production, we expect to close between 5,700 and 6,100 homes in the first quarter of 2026. We also have provided a guide for full-year 2026 closings in the range of 28,500-29,000 homes. Based on pricing in our backlog and the anticipated mix of closings, we expect the average sales price of closings to be in the range of $550,000-$560,000 for both the first quarter and full-year of 2026. As Ryan discussed during his comments, given investment made in prior years and a land pipeline of 235,000 lots under control, we expect our average community count for all four quarters of 2026 to be 3%-5% higher than the comparable quarter of 2025. For our fourth quarter, we reported gross margin of 24.7%, compared with 27.5% in Q4 of last year. As noted in this morning's press release, our reported fourth quarter gross margin includes $35 million, or 80 basis points, of land impairment charges. In addition to these charges, Pulte's fourth quarter gross margin was impacted by a higher incentive of 9.9% of gross sales price. This compares with 7.2% in Q4 of last year and 8.9% in the third quarter of 2025. Higher incentives for the quarter were primarily the result of our effort to sell finished spec inventory as we closed out 2025. We currently expect to realize gross margins of 24.5%-25.0% for both the first quarter and for the full year of 2026, but recognize that the spring selling season will be a key driver of our financial results this year. Embedded within our margin guide is the expectation that our house costs in 2026 will be flat to slightly down relative to 2025. On a year-over-year basis, we expect our lot costs in 2026 to increase by 7%-8% from 2025. Our reported gross fourth quarter homebuilding SG&A expense of $389 million, or 8.7% of home sale revenues, includes an insurance benefit of $34 million recorded in the period. Prior homebuilding SG&A expense of $196 million, or 4.2% of home sale revenues, includes an insurance benefit of $255 million. We remain thoughtful in managing our overheads as we continue to identify opportunities to adjust spending levels while still meeting our high standards for build quality and buyer experience. For full-year 2026, we expect our SG&A expense to be in the range of 9.5%-9.7% of home sale revenue. Given the typical lower delivery volumes we realized in the first quarter of the year, SG&A expense in Q1 is expected to be approximately 11.5% of home sale revenues. In the fourth quarter, we reported other expenses of $99 million, which includes a charge of $81 million, resulting from the expected divestiture of our off-site manufacturing operations. For the fourth quarter, our financial services operations reported pre-tax income of $35 million, which is down from pre-tax income of $51 million in the fourth quarter of last year. Financial services pre-tax income for the period was impacted by a number of factors, including lower ASPs and closing volumes in our homebuilding operations and a lower mortgage capture rate. Our mortgage capture rate in the fourth quarter was 84%, compared with 86% last year. PulteGroup's reported pre-tax income for the fourth quarter was $655 million. In the period, we reported a tax expense of $154 million, or an effective tax rate of 23.4%. Our effective tax rate benefited from renewable energy tax credits recorded in Q4. Looking ahead to 2026, we expect our tax rate to be approximately 24.5%. Our expected tax rate does not take into consideration any discrete period-specific tax events that might occur. For the fourth quarter, we reported net income of $502 million, or $2.56 per share, which compares with a reported net income of $913 million, or $4.43 per share in the fourth quarter of 2024. For the full year, PulteGroup reported net income of $2.2 billion, or $11.12 per share. Our Q4 earnings per share was calculated based on 196 million diluted shares outstanding, which is down 5% from the prior year and reflects the impact of our systematic share repurchase program. In the fourth quarter, PulteGroup repurchased 2.4 million common shares for $300 million. Including our Q4 activity, we repurchased 10.6 million common shares in 2025 for $1.2 billion, for an average price of $112.76 per share. We ended the year with $983 million remaining under our existing share repurchase authorization. In the fourth quarter, we invested $1.4 billion in land acquisition and development, which was evenly split between the two activities. For the full year, we invested a total of $5.2 billion in land acquisition and development, of which 52% went for the development of existing land assets. Inclusive of our Q4 investments, we ended the year with 235,000 lots under control. This is comparable with the fourth quarter of last year, but down on a sequential basis by 5,000 lots from Q3, as we continue to carefully review each land deal and make tactical decisions to exit select transactions. It is fair to say that the slower housing environment is beginning to have an impact on the land dynamics of markets around the country. Depending on the market, the seller, and the underlying land asset, they're finding opportunities to renegotiate deals to adjust the timing, the price, or sometimes both. Our land teams have and continue to do an excellent job reviewing every transaction to ensure deals still meet our risk-adjusted return hurdles, given current prices and basis. Our local teams are also looking for opportunities to upgrade positions, which is land deals that were previously under contract, back to market. As Ryan mentioned earlier, we generated $1.9 billion of cash flow from operations in 2025 as we managed our housing starts, controlled land spend, and closed incremental homes in the fourth quarter. We will maintain the same disciplined approach in 2026 as we align investments into the business with buyer activity. Given current market dynamics and our expected 3%-5% growth in community count, we are projecting land acquisition and development spend $5.4 billion in 2026. Assuming this level of land spend and the expectation that house inventory will increase commensurate with an increased level of build-to-order home sales, we expect 2026 cash flow generation to be approximately $1 billion. And finally, we ended the year with exceptional financial strength and flexibility, as we had $2 billion of cash and a debt-to-capital ratio of 11.2%. Adjusting for the cash balance, our net debt-to-capital ratio at quarter-end was -3%. Now, let me turn the call back to Ryan for some final comments. Thanks, Jim. Appreciating the more challenging market conditions, I still look back on 2025 and say it was a good year. As you heard repeatedly, demand was highly variable as consumers responded initially to movements in interest rates and later to a slowing economy, which pressured jobs and, as important, consumer confidence. All that being said, monthly absorption rates followed a typical seasonal pattern for the year and through the fourth quarter. The first few weeks of January have also demonstrated the expected seasonal increase in demand as we move from December into the start of the new year. It's too early to glean much in terms of the strength of the entire spring selling season, other than to say we remain optimistic. As was the case through much of the year, in the fourth quarter, we continue to realize stronger homebuyer demand in key markets in the Northeast, in many parts of the Midwest, and the Southeast. Fourth quarter demand is seasonally slower, but on a relative basis, we saw positive homebuyer activity in markets that included Boston, the Northern Virginia D.C. area, as well as Chicago, Indianapolis, and Louisville, and then extending down into the Carolinas. Once again, I have to recognize the success of our Florida operations, which generated a year-over-year increase in fourth quarter signups of 13%. Beyond the strength of our land positions and our overall homebuilding operations throughout the Florida markets, data suggest that new and existing home inventories are generally stable to improving modestly. Obviously, a strengthening housing market in the state of Florida would be a huge boost to the industry. We closed out the year with our Texas and West markets continuing to experience sluggish demand trends, although we may be seeing some signs of bottoming in Dallas and San Antonio. At this time, I would tell you that improvements in the pace of sales are likely the result of pricing actions as we work hard to find a clearing price and turn assets. This is particularly true with regard to finished spec inventory that we needed to clear. Looking ahead to 2026, the industry enters a new year with improved affordability as mortgage rates are almost a full percentage point lower than a year ago, and whether through price reductions or incentives, new home prices have reset lower while consumers benefited from another year of income growth as wages increased by upwards of 4%. A more financially capable consumer, in combination with an improved affordability picture, puts the industry in a much better position heading into the 2026 spring selling season. Given these dynamics, I think consumer confidence will be a critical component to determining just how strong buyer demand will be in the months to come. Before opening the call to questions, I want to recognize and celebrate the entire Pulte team. Beyond the outstanding financial results, you continue to set the industry standard for build quality and customer satisfaction in 2025. You have been relentless in your efforts, and I am so proud of all that you've accomplished in these areas. Now, let me turn the call over to Jim Zeumer. Great. Thanks, Ryan. Now, prepare to open the call for questions so we can get to as many questions as possible during the remaining time of this call. We ask that you limit yourself to one question and one follow-up. Jordan, if you would, prepare to take question and answer. Prepare to implement question and answer now. Your first question comes from the line of John Lovallo from UBS. Your line is live. Thanks, guys. I appreciate you taking my questions. And Ryan, we share your optimism heading into the year versus heading into the beginning of last year. I think the setup is a lot better. But maybe starting with just SG&A, you guys did a really good job of managing that in the quarter, despite home sales being down about 5% year-over-year. Can you just help us with some of the levers that you may have pulled and what else can be done on the SG&A front? Yeah. You know, John, we didn't make a ton of kind of changes. I think we've always prided ourselves on being balanced and consistent. We put a lot of incremental investment into our people. We're five years in a row now recognized as a top 100 best company to work for. We make incremental investments in quality and customer experience. So aside from that, we've really just tried to run kind of a balanced, thoughtful business, not be wasteful, but make sure that we're investing in the right places. We have made some targeted reductions in force in a handful of markets. We did that in the November timeframe of last year. Pretty small numbers overall, but it was focused in some of the markets that you might expect that were a little slower, Texas and some of the Western markets. Beyond that, John, I wouldn't tell you that there's anything that I'd call out as extraordinary. Okay. That's helpful. And then I wanted to touch on ICG. I mean, we've been pretty big proponents of off-site construction and the benefits there. I can understand not wanting to vertically integrate it, but I guess the question is, what is your view overall on just technology infusion into homebuilding as a longer-term solution to the chronic undersupply? Yeah, John, I think that's the spot that I would highlight, is we are huge proponents of the innovation possibility and the ability to incorporate it into the homebuilding machine. And we've learned a lot over the last six years, gotten a ton of benefits in kind of what the overall housing operation has derived from the innovation that's happened there. We've just come to the conclusion that we think we're better off focusing on the core competency: buying land, entitling, developing, building homes. And including ICG and whoever the eventual owner of that will be, combined with many of the other national off-site manufacturers, they're making a truckload of investment in innovation, and we think we'll be able to continue to benefit from those innovations, that innovation spending into the homebuilding operation without necessarily being a direct owner of it. Yeah. Makes sense. Thank you, guys. Your next question comes from the line of Michael Rehaut from J.P. Morgan. Your line is live. Hi, thanks for taking my questions. Good morning, everybody. Good morning. First question, I'd love to get maybe dive in a little bit to the full-year gross margin outlook that you laid out on the call and appreciate that, given that it's maybe a step more in the direction of guidance than some of your peers are willing to do. Wanted to understand the assumptions, particularly as you anticipate your first quarter gross margin. It seems like being sustained throughout the year, and what that means in terms of the progression of the year, because you would think land costs maybe continue to go up throughout the year as just kind of a long-term trend. So I was just wondering the components of that as you think sequentially throughout the year, how you're thinking about promotions, if promotions or incentives stabilize. They obviously rose throughout 2025, labor, materials, and if there's any positive impact from the divestiture of ICG. Yeah. Hey, Mike, it's Ryan. Appreciate the question. And we take kind of the process of giving guidance very seriously, as I'm sure you can appreciate. We go through and we try to evaluate every element of every element of the P&L that contributes to the margin guide. Our expectations are really to see ASP flat through the year. We've kind of given a guide that's the same for Q1 and the full year. We do expect our house costs to go down slightly. The sticks and bricks, Jim talked about that in his prepared remarks. We're anticipating land costs to increase in the range of 7%-8%. We'd expect to see the discounts remain elevated. We'd hope and we'd be optimistic that we can pull back just a tad on those discounts, but broadly, we think they're going to remain elevated. We've strived to keep our margins best in class. We'll endeavor to do that in 2026 as well. As you know, ultimately, what we're focused on is driving the best return on investment. We manage kind of pace and price toward an outcome that gives us the optimal return for the shareholder. And look, we think it's worked. And it was the reason in my opening comments I said that strategy and the way we operate has generated the highest TSR, not only for the last year, but also the last decade. So I would say those are the big components of how we think about margin. No, that's great. Thank you for that. And I guess, secondly, you mentioned in your prepared remarks, Ryan, around maybe some of the inventory trends that you're seeing starting perhaps to stabilize in Florida. We've seen some of that as well, per our statistics. I was wondering if you could kind of go through your major markets, if possible, and particularly from a supply perspective, from an inventory perspective, as you look at your major markets, how the trends have been over the last three to six months, and if you would describe that stabilization as kind of broad throughout your footprint, or if there's some areas that are still rising, perhaps, or even some that are start ing to come in a little bit. Sure. Florida is an important market for us, Mike, and we've tried because it's such an important market to us, and we think all of housing, really, we've tried to talk about it every quarter. It's up 14% over last year, so we had good sales in the quarter. I'd start there. Generally, I would tell you every market is positive, but there are some outperformers. The outperformers, Fort Myers, Naples, the East Coast of Florida, so Palm Beach, Vero Beach, kind of Fort Lauderdale, Orlando continues to be exceptional. Tampa has been stable, but not as good as the others, and I'd put Jacksonville in that same category. Okay. When you talk about that, you're referring to the order trends, not the inventory, just clarifying. Correct. I'm speaking to order trends. That's right. That's exactly right, Mike. All right. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Sam Reid from Wells Fargo. Your line is live. Thanks so much, guys. Wanted to unpack the step-up in incentive loads from the third to fourth quarter. I believe they were up about 100 basis points sequentially based on the prepared remarks. It sounds like a lot of that was geared towards clearing spec inventory. So we'd just love to hear the levers that you pulled to clear the spec inventory, maybe delineate between price reductions versus buy-downs, and then talk a little bit about incentive loads into the first quarter and what's embedded in that guide. Thanks for the question, Sam. Yeah, the increase in the fourth quarter really was the incentives to move some of the speculative inventory. We closed 200 extra units over the high end of our guide, and so we got a little bit more aggressive in some places. So that's really where it's coming from. Financing incentives for the quarter were flat. It was really just had to get a little bit lean and a little bit more in some places, and so that's what we did in the fourth quarter. Sam, you had a question about Q1 that I didn't hear. What was your Q1 question? Just on the incentive loads into the first quarter, talking through the guide path there, Q4 to Q1. Yeah. I point you back to the answer that I gave to Mike. We don't specifically guide to incentive loads other than we've given you a margin guide for the quarter. And I made the comment that our expectation is incentives will remain elevated. All helpful. And then moving to stick and brick. So obviously, hearing that stick and brick is going to be lower in 2026. Any categories? So I'm thinking of material categories where you're getting price concessions. We'd just love to hear the wins that you might be achieving here to get the lower stick and brick. And then perhaps also talk through the labor component and just what you're seeing on the labor side. Thanks. Sure. So for your benefit, in the fourth quarter, our sticks and bricks were $78 a sq ft, so slightly less than what they've been for the past year. And as we said in our prepared remarks, they'll be flat to down slightly next year. Some of the things we've seen, a little bit of help on the lumber side, a little bit of help on the labor side. Materials, they're kind of ups and downs. The one thing I'd say is included in that, the impact of tariffs are in that guide of slightly down for next year. So again, I think our procurement teams are doing a great job. The labor's available in the market, and so we see it as a good opportunity for next year. Always appreciate the color, guys. Thanks so much. Thanks, Sam. Your next question comes from the line of Stephen Kim from Evercore ISI. Your line is live. Yeah. Thanks a lot, guys. Appreciate all the colors so far. Your spec levels look like they were pretty well contained by the time you got to the end of the fourth quarter. I'm curious if you think that there's additional reduction there. I think I have you at a little, basically at seven specs per community. I was wondering if you could give us some sense of where you'd like to see that as you head into 2026. And assuming that your specs will be less of a headwind, I'm curious why you're not assuming that you might see any reduction in your incentives. If I heard you correctly, Ryan, what I'm getting from your guidance is that your guidance does not assume any reduction in incentives. It feels a little conservative to me, so I'm just curious, am I reading that right, or is there something maybe that I'm missing? Maybe the spec level you think may actually rise next year for some reason. Just a little color there, combining those. Sure, Steven. Let me start with the specs. We're comfortable with where we're at right now, but we have worked very hard through the last 3 months-4 months to make sure that our start rate matches our sales rate and that we weren't adding to the specs that we have. Ideally, what we're really endeavoring to do is to move back more into a built-to-order builder where 60+% of our sales are built-to-order, 40% are spec. The last couple of years, we've kind of been inverted. We've been 60% spec, 40% dirt. It won't happen overnight, but we're moving the company slowly back in the direction of more built-to-order. We think that's better for the way that we have our capital allocated to the homebuilding business. Our margins are higher on built-to-order. So we're kind of threading that needle. Our financial services team has done a wonderful job helping to put some forward commitments in market that actually can be used on built-to-order homes. So we're finding a way to kind of get the best of both worlds and making sure that we're tackling the affordability challenge while still moving into or closer into a built-to-order model that we want to be. So as we go into the spring selling season, Steven, our goal is going to be to sell dirt in a higher percentage than spec while still having some spec available, especially in the entry-level price points. As it relates to the incentives, the spring selling season, I think, is ultimately going to kind of dictate what we're able to do with incentives. We would certainly be optimistic and hopeful that we can pull those down from where we're at. We've given the full-year guide that incorporates assumptions that we've made around the incentives, plus the increase in lot costs, which is not insignificant at 7%-8%, a little bit of a tailwind or a help from lower house costs. So we think the range is where we sit in kind of early or late January, early February. We think it's a pretty good range, but we're optimistic that maybe there's more. Yeah. Appreciate that. So if I can just put a little color around what you said, if you were to return back to sort of a BTO mix, I look and see that pre-pandemic, you all were running kind of like 3-4 specs per community, which is pretty significantly lower than where you are now. So if I'm reading what you're saying right, it sounds like there's going to be this transition that's taking place. As that transition does take place, your turnover rate, I would think, would go down. Your backlog turnover rate would go down because you wouldn't be carrying as many specs and be doing more built-to-order. Your closings guide that you've given, if I have your backlog turnover ratio going down, in order for you to hit your closings guide, it would assume that your order pace is going to be up year-over-year, close to double digits. And so I just wanted to make sure that I am doing the math properly here and that I haven't missed something. Yeah. Steven, not having the luxury of seeing your model, I probably wouldn't want to comment on your math. We'd certainly be happy to follow up with you on that. I would say we've got pretty complicated models on our side as well, and we've gone through and made assumptions on what our new communities are, what the absorptions are, what our sales rate's going to be, and what our monthly start rate's going to be. It really comes down to kind of that start rate. We do have the benefit of cycle times being back to the pre-COVID level cycle times at around 100 days. So again, we need the spring selling season to continue to cooperate with us and be strong. As long as that happens, we've got the production capability to put the starts in the ground that will allow us to deliver the closing guide that we've given. Okay. Great. Thanks, guys. Yep. Next question comes from the line of Alan Ratner from Zelman & Associates. Your line is live. Hey, guys. Good morning. Thanks for all the details so far. Ryan, you brought up an interesting point that I was hoping to touch on in terms of the forward commitments on built-to-order. I think a lot of builders have kind of talked about the fact that that's really difficult to do from a financial perspective just because you're paying for a longer lock period. So I would love to hear a little bit more about those programs that you're offering right now in BTO, what kind of rates you're offering the consumer. And I guess just extending that to the margin profile of BTO versus spec right now, if you could talk a little bit about what that differential looks like. Thank you. Yeah. Alan, what was the last part of that question? I missed it. Just the margin differential between BTO and spec right now. Oh, sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So Alan, in terms of kind of the forward commitments, it's really driven by the faster cycle times. So overall, for the entire enterprise, we're at 100 days on single-family. We've got some multi-family in there that takes a little longer. But on single-family, we're at 100 days, and we have some markets that are down into the 70s. So that's the predominant driver. And then the rates that we can offer on those longer-term rate locks, they're not quite as competitive or as low as what you might see on a spec offer, but they're pretty good. They might be within 50 basis points of what we would offer on a spec. So it depends on the community, but roughly, we're somewhere in the low fives, low to mid-fives, so roughly 100 basis points below what you could get kind of in the open market today. And then in terms of kind of margin differential between spec and built-to-order, depends, but suffice it to say that I think we've been fairly consistent with this. We have, in the hundreds of basis points, higher gross margins when it's built-to-order. And that is simply kind of derived from the fact that when the customer comes in and they're able to pick out everything they want, that really works well within our strategic pricing model that allows them to pick their floor plan, their options, their lot premium. And we've often—I don't think we quoted it this quarter, but what we can talk about is the dollars that we make off of lot premiums and options are real, and those margins are great. So that's the biggest kind of contributor to the margin outperformance is the customer picks what they want. Great. I appreciate that detail. And then second question on price point trends. I know you gave the data for, I think, sign-ups and closings. Sounded like active adult was up solidly year-over-year. But I guess just more qualitatively, if you could talk about the demand trends and kind of the pricing trends you're seeing at each of your price points and any notable shifts we've seen over the last, call it, couple of months alongside all the policy noise and interest rates hopping around. Any color you can give would be great. Thank you. Yeah. Alan, in terms of price, the biggest change in price came in the first-time segment. So last year, average price in first-time was $467. That's down to $438. So we're down about 6% in price on first-time, which is where the majority of the affordability pinch is really being felt. So I think we've leaned in. We've really worked to try and address affordability. Move up in active adult pricing has really been kind of flat. Hopefully, that kind of helps give you a little color on what you're after. Thanks a lot. Your next question comes from the line of Anthony Pettinari from Citigroup. Your line is live. Good morning. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit more about the 80 basis points of impairments in the quarter and maybe the drivers there. And I think some other builders have reported maybe elevated walk-away costs for their lot options. Are you seeing that or just any kind of color you can give us moving into the spring? Yeah. Thanks for the question, Anthony. So Ryan touched on it a little bit earlier and in some of our prepared remarks. We leaned in a little bit heavier on some incentives where we had a little bit more speculative inventory out there in the market. Of the 1,000 communities that we operate in, we had eight of them that we took a land impairment charge on, which was really just a matter we had to get a little bit more aggressive on pricing. And so we moved through the inventory, resulted in a charge. And so, as you said, that's what we quoted in here. The other thing that I would tell you is, and it was in our prepared remarks, we've been more disciplined as we've been looking at it. In the quarter, we put another 18,000 lots under contract, but we also walked from about 15,000. So we're always prioritizing our land book. And so within that, there was about $22 million of land charges, which is included in our other expense categories where we classified in the fourth quarter. Okay. That's very helpful. And then just switching gears, with regards to affordability, do you see the administration's restrictions on institutional ownership of single-family homes? Do you see that as being impactful in any of the major markets where you're operating? And then just more broadly, are there policies? I mean, a lot has obviously been floated, but are there policies that you think could help stimulate housing demand in kind of a sustainable way? So I'll take the build-to-rent question first. Jim shared the numbers for us and for both the four-year and the quarter, and they're really immaterial. We had 100 build-to-rent closings in the quarter, so pretty insignificant. Going back to the very beginning of when we even entered into the build-to-rent space, we strategically limited the percentage of volume that we were willing to put toward that. We felt that we wanted to dip our toe in the water, but we didn't want to be overexposed. I think hindsight being 20/20, that was a great decision. In terms of kind of markets where it could be impactful, significant, I just really don't see it being a big deal kind of anywhere. I know that there is the perception that it's moving prices and taking supply out of the market. I guess time will tell. We're certainly going to adhere to the executive order and some of the things that are being talked about. If those are the rules of the road, we're going to play by them, and it won't really have an impact on our business. Then, Anthony, I'm sorry, what was the other part of your question? Yeah. I'm just wondering if there were policies that you think could help with affordability or home construction and help with housing activity that would be sustainable and positive from your perspective. Yeah. We've had conversations with the administration, and the administration's been very active in leaning in and trying to address housing affordability. There's a lot being talked about. As I know you can appreciate, it's hard because housing remains very, very local. And so I think the entire industry, us included, are going to continue to work with the administration to try and create more supply, which ultimately will impact affordability. The American dream and homeownership is at the core of the American dream. And we want to make sure that we're doing everything that we can to keep that healthy, and I think the administration is as well. Okay. That's very helpful. I'll turn it over. Your next question comes from the line of Matthew Bouley from Barclays. Your line is live. Hi. Morning, everyone. Thanks for taking the questions. I wanted to ask another one on the build-to-rent side. I think, Ryan, you just alluded to that. I think I heard you say you were, I guess, if I paraphrase, glad you didn't lean as much into it as you could have. But I think the way that executive order was written the other day suggested purpose-built build-for-rent would still be potentially okay if that does all go through. So I'm curious if there's actually an opportunity to do more build-for-rent, or is it, given what you just said, the business is still too either cyclical or rate-sensitive, what have you, that it's ultimately not where you want to be focusing your investment? Thank you. Yeah. I would tell you, maybe taking the last piece, Matt, it's just probably not where you're going to see us lean in no matter what the executive order says. I just think there's better places for our capital that'll drive better returns for our shareholders. We'll see ultimately kind of what the rules end up being when the executive order is kind of fully clarified what purpose-built means. Does that mean the entire community is built-for-rent? Does that mean it never goes on the MLS? There's some, I think, open questions, but no matter how those get resolved, I don't see it being a huge part of our business. Got it. Okay. Perfect. Thanks for clarifying that. And then secondly, on the incentive front, you guys in the past have commented on your mix of, I guess, call it financing incentives versus other incentives, whether upgrades and options and so forth. Just curious if you can kind of comment on the trends in both of those and maybe how quickly can the different types of incentives sort of respond to this move lower in interest rates that we've had. Thank you. Yeah. I would tell you the financing incentives have stayed very consistent for the past 3, 4 quarters. Really, we've seen it more on the other incentives, so primarily discounting on some of the speculative homes we had. So as Ryan touched on, as we get to the spring selling season and we've gotten our spec levels down, there's hope that there's opportunities that maybe you can pull back on that other lever. But otherwise, financing incentives have stayed flat for us, what's expected. Okay. Thanks, Jim. Thanks, Ryan. Good luck, guys. Your next question comes from the line of Truman Patterson from Wolfe Research. Your line is live. Hi. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. A question on your volume performance in the quarter. From an orders perspective, you outperformed historical seasonal trends for the second straight quarter. With that in mind, should we think of the roughly 2.3 absorption rate that you did in 2025 as representing a floor for you guys here? And even if we don't get better demand conditions in 2026, would you expect to work to drive absorptions at 2.3 level or higher moving forward? Truman, I think we would certainly endeavor to do more. We'd always like to sell more. In terms of saying, "Are we at a floor?" that's hard to tell. The market will ultimately kind of dictate that. We have been pretty clear, though, in saying kind of the way we run our business, we need a minimum amount of volume that's got to go through every store. And we tend to target that around two. So we're above that, and we'd endeavor to do more in such a way that we can deliver the guide that we've given for the full year. So hopefully, that helps. Yeah. That is helpful. I think what I was trying to get at was kind of the minimum volume level that you guys would target. That two number is very helpful. And then second, a just follow-up question on specs. I think last quarter, you had mentioned your finished specs per community were about twice your target level. Sounds like you guys made some real effort to move some products in 4Q. So I may have missed it earlier, but where do your finished specs per community sit today? And with that in mind, what is your expectation for starts moving forward relative to sales? Thanks. Yeah. Truman, so as I mentioned, for the last four or five months, we've been matching our starts to our sales. So we haven't really added to kind of the specs in any kind of way. Our total specs are down versus prior year by about 1,500. So we've made a pretty significant dent in it. Spec finals sit at 2,000. That's the number that's probably a little higher than what I'd ideally like it to be just because you got a lot of capital tied up in those homes. So the number in and of itself isn't anything that we're overly freaked out about other than to say, "I think we can do better, and we'd like to have less finished homes sitting out there." Go back to the very first question that I addressed. Ideally, we'd like to see kind of our business revert over time back to a predominantly build-to-order model. We think it is a major contributor of our kind of return outperformance. And it's hard to do. It's hard to run a build-to-order business, but we think we know how to do it, and we've got a good model that we'll endeavor to put back in place. Thank you for all the color and good luck moving forward. Your next question comes from the line of Kenneth Zener from Seaport Research. Your line is live. Good morning, everybody. Good morning. Hi, Ken. Ryan, team, I wonder if we think about your business, which you report consolidated, and we look at it, if you could give some comments by your regional disclosure. I'm just using third quarter as kind of a trend line for you to comment on. Florida looks like it's basing. Texas is obviously still facing headwinds. The Midwest, North, doing excellent. But can you talk about the West? It's a broad area for you, but the gross margins, which historically would have been higher to compensate for lower asset turns, it's lower. What's happening in the West? Is it where affordability is most pronounced? So are incentives greater in the West than your other regions? Is it what we've seen last X, call it, quarters? Is there immigration issues or headwinds that are distinct in the West versus Florida or Texas? Can you just talk about why that region appears to have a structurally greater challenge on the gross margin side? Thank you. Yeah. Sure, Ken. I think we, along with the entire industry, have been pretty clear for over a year and a half that the West has been a more challenged environment, predominantly driven by affordability. It does have, especially the coastal markets, some of the highest home prices in the country. And as interest rates have gone up, that's certainly made that challenging. There's also a lot of tech employment on the West Coast. And the tech sector, I think, has gone through some challenges that have contributed to the employees in the tech sector being a little more hesitant in moving forward with buying these expensive homes. We are seeing it in the West. We have had very good success in Las Vegas. We've had some pretty decent success in Arizona. The Colorado market has been more challenged. It's expensive, and it saw a lot of the same post-COVID population surge, pricing surge that Texas saw. So I think it's going through some of the similar things Texas. So that's how I'd characterize the West. It's an important part of our business. But as we've highlighted, the fact that we have such a diversified geographic platform, even with some of the challenges in the West, we've been able to perform incredibly well because of what our Florida, Southeast, Midwest, and Northeast businesses have done. So another advertorial kind of pitch for why the diversity in geography is so important to kind of who we are. Thank you very much. Thanks, Ken. Your next question comes from the line of Michael Dahl from RBC Capital Markets. Your line is live. Morning. Thanks for squeezing me in. Just a couple of follow-ups. One to go back on the incentives. And sorry to harp on this, but if incentives were kind of up on your bps in the quarter, can you just comment on if you're 9.9 for the quarter, does that imply the exit rate was in the low double-digit range? And when you talk about remaining elevated, are you talking remaining elevated to that exit rate, which likely would have been kind of the highest level that you saw through the quarter and year? Or should we be thinking more in line with kind of the average levels that you've seen? Yeah. Mike, we're probably not going to slice the baloney quite that thin. So we were 9.9 in the quarter. We were 9 the prior quarter. So the exit rate probably was a little higher than 9.9 as we moved through some of the spec inventory that Jim talked about, which primarily was in the form of just outright price discounts. Financing, as Jim mentioned, was flat. It has been flat for the last three quarters. As we move into the current year, again, I wouldn't slice the baloney quite so thin on exit rate versus quarter rate. Just look, our expectation is that we're going to continue to lean into the forward commitments. It's a real important part of addressing affordability. We're going to make sure that we're priced right in a competitive way, both against resale and other new home competitors. Then all that said rolls up into the margin guide that we've given of 24.5-25, which kind of no matter the housing cycle, and particularly in this environment, I think is an outstanding absolute margin performance. So I guess I'd leave it there. Okay. Understood, Ryan. And then second one, just back on ICG, I guess your company and its predecessors had previous experience in owning some of these assets, exited. Then when you bought ICG, it was supposed to be kind of the next evolution and something that would be different. And I guess I'm just wondering what ultimately catalyzed your decision here that just for whatever reason, you reached the decision that this doesn't make sense. And can we think of this as nothing's ever final, but this is basically now your philosophical view going forward that you don't need to own assets like this in a vertically integrated way? Yeah. I think it's a couple of things. Number one, we bought it right as COVID was starting. So I think the supply chain challenges and some of the things that happened kind of in a post-COVID environment certainly slowed us down in kind of our ability to get some of the gains out of it that we wanted. We've also seen a lot of the other suppliers, off-site manufacturers, make tremendous investments into this space, and they've got way more scale than what we have. So when we think about what's the best kind of allocation of our capital, not only for the current operation, but also to grow, we just think that we're better—we are and our shareholders are better by putting capital to grow in other places. So as much as anything, it's really about kind of a capital allocation question. We really believe in the innovation that we got out of ICG. We believe we'll continue to benefit from that innovation. But it comes down to what's the best allocation of our resources. Both time, money, and focus is probably the short answer. So with that, I think we probably have time for maybe one more question, Operator. Your next question comes from the line of Jay McCanless from Citizens. Your line is live. Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one, just wanted to square up the commentary that Jim Ossowski made about being able to maybe reprice some land deals and relating that to the land inflation you talked about, 7%-8% for this year. Is there any chance y'all could work that number down as you rework some of these land deals? Great question, Jay. I would tell you the land that we're under contract or we're seeking to buy right now, the ones that we're renegotiating, those are 2027 and 2028 closings. So really, the increase that's in our guide for this coming year's land, we bought a couple of years ago. So really don't see the opportunity in the short term. But as we look to the long term, that's certainly our goal is to see if we can get some price out of it. Okay. Great. Then my second question: you guys the last couple of quarters have talked about Del Webb communities, more of them coming online. Just wanted to get an update on that and see if that's still going to be the case in 2026. Yeah, Jay, it is. You see it in the sign-up trends in the quarter and even in the full year. We're up to, in the most recent quarter, 24% of our closings were from Del Webb. 23% of the sign-ups in the quarter were Del Webb. So those new communities have opened in the last kind of 1-2 quarters. We've got some more that are coming next quarter, which is what we always said, that in 2026, you'd see us get back up to that kind of targeted mix of 25%. With that, we're going to wrap up this morning's call. We'll certainly be available over the course of the day for any follow-up questions. We thank everybody for your time this morning, and we'll look forward to speaking with you on our next earnings call.