Okay, good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to the conference. I'm Mark Murphy, software analyst with J.P. Morgan, and it is great to be here with Raul Villar, who is the CEO of Paycor, as well as Rachel White, who runs investor relations. So first off, I just want to thank the both of you for taking the time to travel here and to welcome you to the conference. Thanks, Mark. Maybe we can begin with just a brief introduction, especially of the company, for the benefit of anyone in the audience here who might not be familiar yet. Yeah, good afternoon. By the way, everyone that attends this session gets a free drink downstairs at the bar, so we really appreciate your attendance. Just put it on his tab. But the 4:30 P.M. time slot, we're really appreciative of that. So Paycor is a human capital management company. We target companies between 10 employees and 2,500, and we're really focused on empowering frontline leaders to be more effective with their teams, to drive better outcomes for the business. Yep. By the way, this time slot, I do want to thank you, because you're allowing me to not be on an earnings call—that is gonna be happening right now, so it works out. So let's go into, for a moment, some of the core differentiators of the business. You know, we listen across this whole SaaS, payroll, and HR space, and you know, Paycor for a while is positioning as HR that empowers leaders to build winning teams, and that's very differentiated. You also, on even including the recent earnings call, you're talking about being flexible and open. You've talked about having these very robust talent solutions. Can you double-click on the kind of the meaning of those core differentiators and maybe which types of businesses are going to see that as a best fit? Yeah, so I mean, clearly, we believe that to drive better outcomes requires better leaders. And so for everyone in the audience, if you just reflect upon, like, when you've had a good leader, how excited you were to go to work, and when you've had a bad leader, that difference. And so we're trying to develop tools to help leaders be better, and that starts with, you know, goal setting as a team, consistent one-on-one feedback on an ongoing basis, and ongoing development plans with learning capabilities. And so we're really pressing into that. We believe that is a true difference maker. It's what our clients want. They want to be more effective as an organization. Secondarily, HCM system of record continues to expand, becomes more powerful in the back office of the organization, and it's even more important than the ERP or the CRM in many organizations. And we want that system to be able to talk to the other business applications that our clients use. So we're really pressing forward with the most open platform in HCM, the most two-way integrations, to make it easier for our clients to leverage our data across the enterprise. If we take that understanding, and then we look around at what has happened, you know, across the landscape, there have been some struggles. And, you know, meanwhile, Paycor is continuing to win all these product excellence awards. That pace hasn't slowed down. Do you sense that any of your competitors might have fallen a bit behind, maybe, you know, ended up with a more legacy-feeling product? We're just wondering if there's, like, kind of an incremental opportunity for, in the evaluations, someone might look at Paycor and say, "You know, it's kind of standing out a little more clearly from the rest of the field. Yeah, like any category, I think there's a natural evolution of the category. And so if you harken back to the beginning of this category, it was payroll service bureaus with ADP, Paychex, and Ceridian. And then, you know, that evolved, and it went to a single database structure with Paycom and Ultimate. And now we're into an open ecosystem with microservices and the ability to move data freely, and that's what we represent. So I would say it's just the evolution of the platform. It's more modern, and it's more appealing to companies that want to share information. Okay. And if we also, as we listen again across the broader landscape, there are other providers that are emphasizing some other different, kind of, element of their product. So, you know, there's a notion of employees doing their own payrolls. There's the notion of on-demand pay. There's a notion of, you know, making more of a continuous calculation engine. I think maybe some of them perhaps are, you know, emphasizing AR or marketing up an AR capability a little bit incrementally. What do you think of the legitimacy of some of those efforts? And, you know, how much... Do you think there's much kind of realistic differentiation there? How many people in the audience did their own payroll today? Yeah, I could see all the hands. Anyways, I want to clarify- Yeah For the webcast, that was zero hands. Okay. No, I mean, I think, you know, every company has an area they're trying to flex into within HCM to differentiate themselves. You know, on-demand pay, you know, almost every HCM provider provides that. Most are through a third party. Those that do it themselves probably have better economics. It's just, it's a payments play, and, you know, it's just a long opportunity to significant revenue growth, from that perspective. But ultimately, we're focused on the core aspect of leadership within a business, and we believe that's more sustainable, than, you know, someone doing their own payroll. Have you memorized your tax tables yet? I just wanna make sure you know it, if you got correct gross to net done on your payroll check. I know it's higher in California. Yeah, sure. That's one thing I've noticed. Okay, so how about... And I think, I think a lot of this, Raul, you're, you're kind of, you're kind of speaking to, it, it's an ongoing, perpetual evolution, right? I think is your way of looking at it. How do you perceive the, you know, kind of the presence out there, if you ever come across it, if we really look down market? You know, there has been a little bit of change there, right? You have some recent entrants that maybe... I, I don't think we were as visible at the time of the IPO, and I'm talking about everything from Rippling to Zenefits to, to, to Gusto and that, and, and, and that type of a business. Is there some type of a change there, or do you think it's just the constant evolution of the players that you'd be seeing? Yeah, I think it's pretty much business as usual, and I would just harken back to the category has a really big moat around it, and there's 2 big components to scale. One is the engine required to handle the tax and compliance and the labor laws that change, you know, over 10,000 jurisdictions in the U.S. alone. And then secondly, in the mid-market enterprise space, HCM still requires a face-to-face sales rep, and, you know, that tends to be a really big investment. So when I think about the competitive dynamics, the three traditional companies, ADP, Paychex, and Ceridian, that started in, you know, 1960 and 1970s, are still in the market. The three pays and Ultimate started in the 1990s, still there. And we've had two recent entrants of scale in the last 25 years, Workday and Rippling. And so besides that, all the rest is noise. And they come and go. I think Zenefits, that was gonna be the last big, big hit, and I don't think that worked out. But, but, you know, ultimately, we see those companies combined, those three. I think we saw them 10 times last quarter. Oh, okay. So it's- Yeah. It's that few and far between. Well, they're down market. Yeah, okay. I mean, I think Rippling's a PEO. Mm-hmm. I think. I think that's what they wanna be, or maybe they want to deliver computers. I don't... I'm, I'm not quite sure. Okay. So, then if we, if we broaden out again and think about Paycor's innovation strategy and where you're focused, is there much reason to try to, you know, put much focus on the core payroll engine? You know, or, is there a feeling that the innovation is kind of moving beyond that? Like, the payroll system works, it works fine, right? It's reliable. We don't need to mess with it. Where maybe going forward, the differentiation is gonna shift more on the HR side because... I mean, I would think, Raul, and you're moving upmarket as well, those companies need to think about it more. There's an aging workforce, there's a shortage of skilled labor, there's wage inflation, you're trying to manage remote workers, right? Is there, is there a point where, you know, the focus is solely on the strategic side? Well, I think value differentiation is much harder on the payroll side, right? It's government-mandated, gross to net, and it doesn't modify outside of compliance changes. So what we're focused on investing on the core payroll engine is just to continue to make it open and accessible, and create more and more microservices and open endpoints, you know, for our customers. The value differentiation for us is all about the talent. We think talent's gonna be bigger than payroll, both front-end acquisition, back-end management. There are so many layers within talent that we believe that in the future, there'll be more monetization of talent than payroll. Wow, okay. I want to come back to that because we know your talent bundles have been growing very rapidly, so I'll come back—I want to circle back to that in a couple minutes. I feel like we would be remiss if we didn't talk about what you've been doing in the Tier One cities, right? This has been a multi-year initiative. There's a transition. We always think back to the time of the IPO, right? One of the transitions is going from a regional provider to a national provider. Part of that is pushing into the Tier One cities. You've been doing it, but you've been doing it for a while. So I think we are wondering, what inning are we in? You know, have you established the right mix, maybe already, of sellers in Tier 1 cities, and we kind of look at it and say, "The heavy lifting is behind us? Yeah, just to provide a little context, we focus on the top 50 cities in the US. Tier One is the top 15, Tier Two is the next biggest 15, then Tier Three is 31 through 50. And we essentially are 40% covered in those markets, so I would say we're in the middle innings. Okay. We've significantly added, you know, almost 400 sellers. I'm sorry, 40% in which markets? You're saying across- All the top 50 cities in the U.S. Of the top 50. Yeah. Okay. In Tier One, we're slightly under that. We're in the mid-30s. And so we're gonna continue to add head count into those markets for the foreseeable future. We probably have, you know, a good 5 years of strong head count growth to get to where we think optimal coverage is in this market segment. So we feel good about the progress. The tiers all operate similarly. The great thing is, it's the same competitors, same pricing, same product suites. You know, some Tier One cities tend to buy a little more talent than maybe a Tier Three city, but outside of that, we haven't seen any difference. Okay, so you're 4-5 years in to moving into Tier One cities, is that about right? And you think there's 5 more years to go of pretty, you know, fairly rapid hiring into that? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. How about the macro demand environment? Because as we step back, and if we were to just look at SaaS, HR, and payroll, you know, companies, that subset that you mentioned, a moment earlier, you know, some of them have slowed by as much as 20 points, the growth in the last 12 months. You know, Paycor, for Paycor, it's been more manageable. You've had, you've had a little top-line deceleration, but nothing like that. But you did mention... There was a comment on the recent earnings call that it's, it's a tougher macro backdrop than, I think, than when you said when you started the year. I was wondering if you can walk through for us just how it's manifesting. You know, is it the same kind of - is it the same change in the buyer behavior we've seen more broadly across the software landscape, where just greater scrutiny, longer sales cycles, or are you, are you talking about something else? Yeah, I think we're talking about something slightly- Mm-hmm ... different. I think the category as a whole, you know, for the previous 24 months, had a couple of tailwinds. Same-store sales growth was increasing, you know, post-COVID, 3%-4% a year. We had the ERTC tax credit tailwind, which was government stimulus, post-COVID. And obviously, we had interest rate increases- Mm-hmm ... you know, going through. So those three components provided a significant tailwind. There, there's some debate about whether we had a pull forward post-COVID for software technology sales. Mm-hmm. I think it's hard to prove one way or the other. That all being said, you know, we're starting to feel the pressure this year of those tailwinds becoming headwinds. And when we talk about macro, Adam, on the call, he's really talking about same-store sales growth, which has been declining sequentially every quarter. Yeah. Mm-hmm. and in the beginning of Q4, we saw some elements, some days, of negative same-store sales growth. That's employees on our existing customers, so people not adding or subtracting off the existing. Now, we're not, we're not negative now, but ultimately, at the end of the quarter, we'll see how- It- -how we- I'm sorry for... Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt. No, it's okay. Just when you say Q4, for the benefit of the audience, which months are you talking about, where you feel like- That's great. Yeah. April through June- April- of this year. April through June is when- Yeah. Is when you started feeling that. Okay. Yeah. So, we're seeing that decline, and we were just being cautious about whether that flipped from positive to negative. Yeah. Okay. It hasn't been sudden, right? It's been trending that way for a couple of years now. Yep. Like, kind of gradual decline- Yes ... on the hiring. I'll come back to that in a moment. So maybe the other side of this role being the bookings, you know, the bookings cadence. I think when... I'll say prior slowdowns, I mean, I guess honestly, we it really means the great financial crisis. Yep. But when we go back and look at that, the SaaS payroll market, you know, seemed to hold in a little better, right, than other areas of software. And, you know, typically people will say, "Well, why?" And you say, "Well, well, it's a replacement market." We, you know, there was pre-existing budget, right? And there's an impetus to try to be, you know, moving to the cloud, right? So it is more resilient than a, you know, kind of missionary selling for a new technology. Do you see any different dynamics in the current cycle, or do you think that we could go through another cycle and say there's bookings resilience? Yeah, I was running SMB sales at ADP during that crisis. Unfortunately, that's how old I am. And I think we're nowhere near that from my vantage view today. Mm-hmm. I think it's a mission-critical application that goes through replacement cycles, and if the average transaction is $35,000, right, in the mid-market for Paycor, they're either paying $40,000 or $45,000 or $25,000. Mm-hmm. So it's like a $10,000 incremental, positive or negative decision. Does not require the office of the CEO to make the decision, doesn't have to go to a committee. It tends to be a CFO, CHRO decision within their current operating budgets. And so what we really position is the ROI, right, becomes more important now, you know, for each of the modules. So we have an ROI calculator that we walk through, you know, from recruiting to onboarding to the actual payroll, HR- Mm-hmm ...workforce management, talent retention, all the way through to provide a 3-5x return on investment. So, you know, in these times, I think it's resilient. And when people buy modules in HCM, they don't downsell. Like, they land with a deal. They don't land and expand at a rate- Mm-hmm ... that you would see in some other software companies. Because when they land HCM, they say, "Yes, I want HCM, I want payroll and HR, and I want workforce management, but I don't want benefits." They then ingest that because there's sometimes workflow changes, they ingest it, and usually 12-18 months after, they'll be open to other solutions unless there's some kind of business change or key contact change. ... I see. Okay. So this environment doesn't remind you of 2008, 2009, you know, clearly that's, which is a good thing. You do think the elements are in place, that it could be a pretty resilient. It'd be relatively resilient for new bookings again, whenever the next- Yeah, I mean, we've seen really steady demand at the top of the funnel. MQLs, first appointments, win rates have been consistent. The competitive mode hasn't changed. So we don't see any dynamics that would say that we would be concerned about our bookings. We wanna continue to expand bookings. Okay. So one other aspect of this, I don't know, Raul, if you or Rachel want to try to speak to this, but when we look back at recurring revenue growth in your March quarter, and that growth was 14%. If we adjust for the impact of forms filing, then it's 20%. And so, that feels like probably a bit of a temporary headwind of about six points. Can you walk us through what happened there, I guess, just with the ACA and the ERTC forms? And is there any window into... You know, like, we're trying to understand if that effect maybe is bottoming out. Has it bottomed out? Does it bottom out at some point? And then we would kind of look forward and say, "Okay, well, now we're getting more normalized comps. Yeah, so there were really two form filing dynamics in the quarter, Mark. One was the year-end form filings, which is things like W-2s and ACAs. Those depend on the number of job changes in the year on the W-2 side of things. Right. So we had a combination of a little bit of pull forward from Q3 into Q2, and we saw some lighter volumes. And in general, those form filings grow closer in line with employee growth versus our overall recurring revenue growth. And then on the flip side, the Employee Retention Tax Credit, or ERTC, that is a COVID-era government stimulus program that's winding down- Mm-hmm. into 2025. So we've continued to see that revenue kind of decelerate throughout the year, and we expect it'll continue to be a slight headwind into next year, but it's mostly wrapped up at this point. Okay. So I mean, does this put us in a position where we're kind of through that ish? Yeah, so- this, that effect and getting- Yes. So most of our form filings, year-end form filings revenue comes in every Q3. Right. It's been kind of high-teens% of revenue the last couple of fiscal years, and it was closer to mid-teens% of revenue. I think the bulk of that was the ERTC deceleration that we've seen. We're expecting an incremental, call it one-ish point headwind of ERTC into fiscal 2025. Okay. One point, one point feels a lot more- In percent. It's a lot more manageable than the 3 and the 3. Yeah. You point ahead of us. It'll be concentrated in the first half of the year. Okay. Okay. So you mentioned as well on that earnings call a week or two ago, that you're planning to moderate your sales headcount growth as well, I think you said into the low to mid-teens. I believe if we looked at... I mean, very, very roughly, you know, I think the prior three years, that was compounding, you know, maybe near close to 20%- Mm-hmm. High teens, 20%. And I think you also said that three-quarters of the field sellers are still ramping to full productivity. Can you just kind of double-click on, you know, the slower hiring pace and what's causing that? Yeah. So, I'll click on both that- Okay. and your side. Mm-hmm. So we wanted to hire to 20% this year, and we ran out of time to get to the 20%. So it's not from a lack of want. It, it was a lack of capability. When you, when you say a year, you mean end of June? End of June. Okay. Our fiscal year, sorry. Mm-hmm. Yep. So, you know, we had a job type that we created two years ago that sold $50-$250, that just didn't hunt and had too much turnover. So, you know, we have shifted out of that job, and we made the decision in Q2. It takes about a quarter to make the territory changes, do all the change management required, and then effectively make that change. We were hopeful that we'd be able to moderate turnover in Q3 to a level to enable us to get to 20%, and we didn't. So we just wanted to be transparent that we weren't gonna get to the number, 'cause we've talked about hiring at 20% consistently, for the last couple of years. And so, you know, we think we're gonna finish in, you know, low teens to mid-teens, and then we're gonna stay at that level until we know the model's working the way we want it to- Mm-hmm. before we put gasoline back into the car. Okay. About 50. So that, that's pretty much in that segment that pursues companies with 50-250 employees? Yeah. Okay. So but it is, you know, I was thinking back on that and, you know, reviewing the earnings call again. I think it's rare that a company would have, you know, three-quarters of the field sellers that are still ramping, you know, to full productivity. Because I think, you know, ordinarily, I think a lot of companies, you're trying to hire them, get them ramped to full productivity in a certain period of time. I don't know if it's 12, 15, 18 months, it could be longer. So I mean, are they becoming productive at, like, overall, are they becoming productive at the rate that you envisioned? And I think there was something about... I don't know if you ever share anything on kind of the churn within this segment. It sounds like it probably wasn't really the, you know, the selling environment necessarily. No. Yeah. So I think two things. One is, in HCM, at least at most of the companies that I'm familiar with, it is three years to get fully ramped. Three? So- Okay. - 12 months, you're at one third. 24 months- Okay. You're at two-thirds. Month 25, you're at full, but then you have 11 more months- Okay. to go get the full productivity. Mm-hmm. So it's 36 months to the end of the tail. So when you think about us growing 20% per year for the previous 3 years, that's 60+ churn. It gets us to about 75%- I see. Being new. Now, what happened, you know, unfortunately, the downside of the 50-250 segmentation was that that job didn't hunt. But the positive side was that the upmarket job that we created was a home run, and so we have significant tenure and productivity in that. So despite our self-inflicted issues with turnover, we've grown person months worked to an all-time high, which is the number one indicator you should look for. Person months worked? Yep. How many-- So if you take all your salespeople times how many months they've worked, divided by the number of salespeople- Okay. - a person months worked. Mm-hmm. It's really a direct reflection of productivity, 'cause tenure drives productivity up until year three, then you are who you are. Okay. Like, if you're a zebra, you're a zebra, right? So you are who you are. And so, we've been able to drive person months worked to an all-time high, and our overall productivity increased year-over-year. So it's not that this was a sign of the macro. We, our solutions are selling in the market. We're winning share. We're, our win rates are at record highs. It's just that, we created a job that just didn't work at this time in our life cycle. Okay. That's very helpful, and I had kind of lost track of that kind of 3-year time to ramp. Let's talk about for a moment the you know, vertical strategy that you've had. Because again, I think back to the time of the IPO, and it was more... I think we would say we're going from horizontal payroll to vertical expertise, right? And you have, I think at least 3 or 4 kind of core industries- Yep. that you talk about. You've got food and bev, manufacturing, healthcare, professional services, I believe. I know that, it'll rotate a little bit. But have any of those industries met with better success than others, or are they all sort of equivalent? No, I mean, first of all, they're about 50% of the overall category, TAM, so they're big buckets. They're outsourcers by nature. So, we slightly overperform there. But I would say in general, like, our industry mix is in line with the US industry mix without- Mm-hmm. - with these four being subtly over. Okay. I would say you can see, like in same-store sales, the differences in the U.S. economy. Like right now, you see more pressure in same-store sales in retail and food and beverage that are probably, you know, more impacted by inflation, some you know wage, minimum wage requirements- Mm-hmm. - those type of things. And we're seeing real strength in government, believe it or not- Yeah, yeah. and, healthcare. So, which is another government-backed business. Yeah. I mean, if you're in government, it's good. Yeah, it's the place to be. Okay, I wanna actually come back to that, in a moment when I ask you a little bit more about the macro. But for now... So, let's go into this and talk a little bit about the actual labor market dynamics out there and the payroll growth, because I... You know, I have to hand it to you, Raul, you were one of the first. You might have probably were the first, that I think was starting to see the potential for this kind of soft decel in the hiring and employment levels. And, Paycor kind of anticipated that ahead of the curve and basically factored it into guidance, right? And I think some other companies have been a little surprised by it afterwards. So we look back now, when we look at non-farm payroll growth, if you go back actually, I think it's two years ago, that I think that was running at close to 5%. Right. Then we look at it today, it's definitely sub 2%. I mean, it feels like it's probably heading towards 1.5%. You had said that your same-store employment figures came down, I think you said 0.5%. And as you mentioned a few moments ago, the guidance is accounting for some potential contraction in employment. So, how would you think this through and put the labor market into perspective? So we have historically tracked really tight with non-farm payroll, and we saw a dislocation between us and non-farm payroll at the end of the fifth, the calendar year, right? So the calendar fourth- June 23. No, calendar fourth quarter. Oh, I'm sorry. Cal- So- Okay, yeah. Mm-hmm. October through December, I believe it was 1.8. It's non-farm payroll. It's not 1.8. So I can assure you the HCM companies have better data than the government, and so we're all below 1.8. So it wasn't 1.8. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. We called it out on the call. They revised- They did. - downward. They did. And so now we're just saying it's like, it's below one, and trending to zero. So that's what we're seeing. And we saw some negative days, that we called out on our call, in the fourth quarter. Doesn't mean the fourth quarter will be negative, it probably won't be, but, but, but ultimately, it's taken another step down- Mm-hmm - below 1. Yeah. And so, you know, from our perspective, unless something changes with interest rates, that's not gonna change. Yeah. And I do want to just say again, you've had a great forward-looking call. You've been very anticipatory on that, and you know, we've appreciated that. The original data showed hundreds of thousands of jobs added, I think even last year in Q3. Mm-hmm. Then the revision came out, and they actually said that that was slightly negative. Yep. Right? So the fine-tuned, more precise data kind of got a little worse. I was gonna ask you about the vertical trend because you did - you touched on this a moment ago. I mean, it sounds like basically, basically, you're - you know, what you're kind of saying is, if it's related to government budget, it's in a good spot in terms of hiring. Yeah, the other- And if it's- The other segment that went up is information. So think about all the AI stuff that's going on, information technology- Really? Category went up in the quarter. And we're seeing more strength there than before. Okay. So, you know, that's the one private area that I would say is seeing strong growth. Okay. So you're not sure if your same-store sales growth would quite flatten out or tip negative in the June quarter, but the guidance is sort of embedding a possibility that at some point, you know... I I mean, that's a normal part of the, obviously, a normal part of the employment cycle, right? Yeah. It- I mean, I think we're trying to be prudent with our guidance. We've seen it's been steadily declining. I mean, whether it gets to negative or not, we'll see, and we're hopeful it doesn't. Yeah. I think we're all hopeful. Okay, we're down to three minutes. I thought I would just check and see if we have any questions in the audience. If you do, go ahead and raise your hand, and we will run a microphone to you. Train tickets? Getting off the hook easily. All right. Then let's go into this. What do we want to conclude on? Let's talk a minute on generative AI. I think at some point you had touched on the kind of strategic incorporation of AI into the business, I mean, kind of from an internal perspective. I'm wondering if you're seeing any efficiencies from that. That... I mean, is there anything where you'd look at it and you'd say, "Because of AI, we're more efficient, we're covering more ground, we're our developers are writing more code, or we're we can, we can, you know, support our customers more efficiently? I think the two early areas that we're most optimistic about are in the marketing function, being more efficient, whether it's copywriting, looking at our online, ads and algorithms there. I think that's been really helpful. And then, obviously, there's a huge opportunity on the advocate side. You know, how to get people to the right answer at the right time, you know, the right scripting, and really improving that user experience. But it's the early innings. I mean, in theory, it should expand margins. Yeah. But it's like outsourcing, right? A lot of companies said outsourcing was gonna expand margins. And so you have to drive the business to expand the margins. So I do think it will expand our service margins over time and our COGS, but we're just in the early phases there. From a platform product perspective, you know, I think there's two areas. We're trying to leverage it to help make the HR professional or the finance professional more efficient and then provide them more data insights, right? And those two things right now, you know, we're trying to do, whether it's with job descriptions, right? Mm-hmm. Being able to spin those up really quickly or all the analytics we can provide, you know, upon the request, across the platform, I think are really helpful. Obviously, you know, we help, you know, with Smart Sourcing, you know, being able to find the most optimal candidates they should put in an interview process. So there's lots of flavors of AI across the platform today. We'll continue to add them in, but a lot of times, it's just making the existing process more efficient. Do you think that there would, that there could be some willingness to pay as you... Like, if you pull your customers and say, "Hey, if we put Gen AI in these products" because you're talking about it from a marketing standpoint, writing copy, that's not gonna really apply to that. They may be on the advocate side or something like that. Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm. You know, can you make a product that'll help employees answer some of their own questions and find that to be monetizable? I think so. I mean, on the smart sourcing side, we've been able to monetize that. I think on the HR assistant side, you know, there's a possibility. If you think about the ability to replace HR generalists in a company- Yep -by having, you know, an AI bot answer all the questions that they have about their handbook, like, I think is, is something that would probably be able to generate, you know, additional PEPM. But a lot of it, it's more about what are we gonna provide the user. They don't, you know, they're not asking in the, in the mid-market that we serve for AI products. They just want more efficient products with more insights. Well said, and great note to end on, and we're right on time. Raul, Rachel All right I cannot thank you enough. Thank you much. Again, for taking the time to be here. I really appreciate it. Thank you.