Getting started here. I'm Catherine Schulte, I cover Life Sciences and Diagnostics here at Baird. Very excited to have Revvity here with us today. From the company, we have Steve Willoughby, who heads up IR. Steve, thanks for being here. Of course, thanks for having me. To get started, just give us a quick kind of State of the Union on the company coming out of the quarter, kind of key themes that you're seeing in the business. Sure. I think the second quarter overall was good, in line, slightly ahead of our expectations, both in the top and bottom line. There are always moving pieces within the business. I think we've seen consistent stability in our life science business, with pharma, biotech, and academic government customers being under some pressure now for a couple of years, really. I wouldn't say too much dramatically changed during the second quarter. We saw continued low single-digit growth in our consumables. Consumables are very indicative of underlying lab activity. I think this was the fifth quarter in a row of sequential growth in consumables, so it's moving in the right direction. Glad that it's positive. It would be better if it was even more than just low singles as well. On the instrument side, instruments were down mid to high single-digits, again, consistent with where they were in the first quarter, also consistent with our outlook for the back half of the year. I would say given some of the uncertainties in the market environment right now, which there are several, customers are kind of taking a wait-and-see approach. There are people in the R&D labs working, but it's still having some impact on instrumentation for both pharma as well as academic and government. Outside of that, our software business, which I'm sure we'll get into, is continuing to perform extremely well. I would say when you look at our software business, which is about 9% of total company revenue, it has been growing sort of right through the last three years. Very consistent, strong levels of growth in software. Then on the diagnostics side, diagnostics is about half the company. Outside of China, diagnostics has been almost like clockwork. It's been very consistent, very good growth in the Americas, good growth in reproductive health. We have faced some new unexpected pressures in China, which I'm sure you'll ask me about, which did have an impact on the quarter and our outlook for the back half of the year. Outside of the piece in China, diagnostics also has continued to do quite well. Maybe if we start on the life sciences side of your business, you have life sciences solutions and then software. You're right, we'll get to software in a bit. Starting on life sciences solutions, I think that fell low single-digits in the second quarter. You're expecting it down slightly for the year. As we think about academic pressure, you know, MFN, pricing, drug tariffs, what do you think is having the biggest impact on that business relative to what you would expect in a normal market environment? I think it's hard to pinpoint one in particular. Obviously, the NIH and concerns over funding in academia, different policy changes, is having an impact on that customer base, which, academic and government for us is 12% or so of total company revenue. It's about a quarter of our life science business. Outside, and that's been more of, I would say, a recent change so far this year. The pharma biotech has been under pressure for, really starting in 2023, coming out of the pandemic. I would say it's been continuing. It's hard to say exactly what's currently driving the softer than historically normal levels of growth. I think it's probably the culmination of all of those things. I think with the number of uncertainties in the market, it's causing customers to pause. Where we are focused, which is, I would say, different than some of our peers, is we are really focused on preclinical R&D. We are upstream. We need scientists working in the lab doing innovative science. There were some restructurings and cutbacks in 2023 that really started to settle out in 2024. We've really seen stability since then, which is why I think you've seen sort of low single-digit growth in our consumables for the last five quarters or so now. On academic, I think academic government fell low single-digits in the second quarter, but you pointed to some signs of stability there. It seems like NIH awards have looked better in July and August. Are you starting to see some better sentiment from customers, or is it still a bit too early? I would say, again, it's also sort of, for right now, status quo as well. I think the low single-digit decline we saw from academic and government in the quarter, we also saw a low single-digit decline in academic and government in the U.S., which is maybe a little surprising to some folks, given the concerns in the marketplace. I think it really speaks to the nature of our products. We sell specialized consumables, reagents, and reagent kits and antibodies. Folks are buying our products for a very specific scientific purpose. I think the other thing is within academic and government, our business is heavily weighted towards those specialty consumables. We do sell some instrumentation in academic and government, which has faced some pressures because of the uncertainty, but it's a smaller, much smaller piece of the overall exposure. For pharma and biotech, that grew mid single- digits in the second quarter, as you mentioned, software had a pretty big quarter. That's right. That's heavily pharma and biotech. What was pharma biotech performance just on that life sciences solution? Around flattish. You know, when you exclude software, it was around flattish. That was with, I would say, similar levels of declines in instrumentation, offset by growth in reagents. It kind of speaks to, and not a lot has changed over the first half of the year. It's our assumption that it doesn't really, the environment doesn't necessarily change in the second half of the year either. Were there any performance differences between large pharma versus emerging biotech? Maybe remind us your split between those two. Sure. It's a common misconception because we are focused on preclinical R&D. Many times folks think that we have extremely large exposure to small biotechs, which is actually not the case. When you look at the roughly 35% of our total company revenue that is pharma biotech, roughly 85% of that is to medium and large-sized customers. When you boil it all down, only about 5% of our revenue is to what we consider to be pre-revenue biotech. I would say within that, the medium and larger-sized customers are probably doing still a little bit better than some of the small customers, but the small customers are a pretty small piece of the overall mix. As you mentioned, second quarter, reagents did well, instruments saw declines. It sounds like you expect instruments to continue their declines in the back half, but do you think there's a path to a return to instrument growth in 2026? I think there's a path to return to instrument growth eventually. Sitting in September, I think it's a little too early to call what exactly different businesses are going to be doing, you know, four or five, let alone 12 months from now. We have seen three years now of declines in instruments. I would say our instruments going into 2025 were within our medium-term expectations in terms of CAGRs. The continued declines we've seen here in 2025, because of some of the uncertainties that have popped up this year, has probably taken our, I would say, our six-year CAGR for instruments probably towards the middle, if not the lower end of our LRP assumptions, where exiting 2024 was solidly in the middle of our LRP assumptions. On the reagent side, you have flow, you've got more cell and gene the apy focus, CRISPR. Are there any areas within reagents where you're seeing outsized growth or share gains? One interesting thing within reagents, and again, it really speaks to the nature of our products, is if you think about what is going on, for example, in China. I'm sure you're going to ask me about some of the pressures we're seeing on the diagnostic side in China. On the life science side of our business in China, our life science business in China in the second quarter, as well as in all of 2024, grew in the mid single-digits. Our life science business in China is the majority of it is consumables. I would say our instruments in China grew modestly, which means that if the overall piece grew mid single-digits, reagents were doing much better than that. If you think about what is happening with the pharmaceutical industry in China, it's gone from, I would say, focus on generics to a focus on maybe, you know, me-too type innovation to really now more truly innovative science, which you're seeing with a number of these out-licensing deals. Our products are used in innovative science. Whether that innovative science is being done in China or in Europe or in the U.S., they need to buy our specialty consumables to do that innovative science. That's one area. I would say there's some other areas in our non-antibody business that, for example, high-content screening, where we have seen over the last 12, 18 months some improvement in demand, really tied to GLP-1 drugs. Exploring what else GLP-1 drugs can be used for, et cetera. Maybe getting to software, that's one area that's been outgrowing your LRP assumptions. Can we just talk through kind of the strength that you're seeing there and any timing or kind of comp dynamics that investors should be aware of? Sure. Software is roughly 9% of revenue, so a little over $200 million in revenue this year. It's a fantastic business. For those of you who aren't familiar with our software business, it's called Signals. What Signals really is, is workflow software. It's software that in the preclinical R&D lab, scientists are using to set up, document, report out, and analyze their experiments, collaborate with their colleagues. This is a business that in our LRP, we assume it will grow 9%- 11%. It's historically been doing a little bit better than that, more in the medium and long-term CAGRs of kind of 12%- 13%. This year, our assumption is that it will grow high teens, so even further above the long-term CAGRs. There is an element here where there is a little bit of lumpiness in organic growth because of contract timing and how revenue is recognized, whether it's on-premise versus SaaS. That can have an impact from time to time. I think the important thing to understand is a metric that we've been now providing for the last year called annualized portfolio value, which APV is really looking at the revenue growth on if you were able to streamline the revenue recognition. It's been growing in the 12%- 13% range for the last five years, the last 10 years. It's really kind of indicative of where the business is going in the future. I would say the software business also has a very, very bright future in front of it. We've talked about some new upcoming product launches, one in particular coming at the end of this year that is probably one of the more important new product launches really in the history of this business, expanded us into large molecule workflows, which we are not meaningfully played in so far in the past. It's been doing well. I think its future is very, very bright. Yeah, maybe just talk through the large molecule side. As you said, I think rolling out the end of this year and then launching more significantly next year, how does that change your positioning in the market, and any other kind of new product launches we should be thinking about in the next six to 12 months? Sure. I think with any software launch, it always sort of comes out in rolling iterations. We will initially launch the product and then have further iterations and expansions of its capabilities. I think it's one that will be very good to get out at the end of this year into 2026. It will take a little bit of time to ramp, just as with any normal software launch. I think it's one of those that, as this business continues to grow at an elevated rate off a larger and larger base, will allow it to keep growing at an elevated rate off a larger and larger base. It's important, I think, in terms of differentiation. We believe we will have a unified offering providing both small molecule and large molecule workflows all within one system, which we believe will be differentiated versus our competitors. Maybe going back on the life science solution side, you know, we're coming up on the four-year anniversary of BioLegend. How has that been tracking relative to your deal model? Any kind of key learnings or surprises from that asset? Yeah, so BioLegend is, to your point, we closed the acquisition in September of 2021. I think we're almost up on the exact day here pretty soon. The largest acquisition in company history, a little over $5 billion. Obviously, the market environment is a little different today in terms of pharma biotech and academic spending as compared to what it was in 2020 and 2021 when we acquired it. There have been some impacts just from the market environment, but I think both on a relative basis, its performance, as well as from a profitability, because it continued to do very well. I think it's, you know, a business that will pay very good dividends for the company overall as we go forward here. We've talked about some of the headwinds facing pharma and biotech. Are there any tailwinds for you or, you know, in the tax bill, any kind of good guys when it comes to stimulating R&D spend? As it pertains to the OBBB tax bill, I think it's hard to say. I think if there's any opportunities to have customers having more cash, that's a good thing. If they're able to expense R&D more quickly and generate some tax savings, I think that's a positive. I think it's too early to really say from customers, though, at this point. If we shift to China, you talked about seeing growth there on the life sciences side in the quarter. Was there any sort of pull-through or pull-forward that was happening there? No. No. I mean, we grew mid single-digits throughout 2024 when, you know, as you know, covering the space, you know, really there wasn't anybody else who was even growing in China in 2024, given the real lack of stimulus that occurred, which was a surprise to many. Given that our portfolio is so much more heavily weighted towards these innovative consumables, it allowed us to really outperform, I would say, the peers. It was fairly similar to what we saw throughout all of last year too. For diagnostics in China, maybe just provide some background on the DRG policy that got implemented, you know, when you saw that start playing out and how that differed versus your expectations. Yeah. There have been a variety of different things going on within diagnostics in China over the last couple of years, from various pricing pressures and pricing policies to DRG policies. We had been fairly insulated from most of them because of the relatively niche makeup of our business. While we do have some local market competition in China, I would say we have less given the nature of the types of tests that we sell. Near the end of April, going into the beginning of May, there was a policy change from the government there, which is having an impact on multiplex tests. We specialize in multiplex tests. Our diagnostic business that you're referring to, immunodiagnostics, really is focused on esoteric autoimmune conditions, so very rare autoimmune conditions, I would say. One of the things that makes us unique is having a very broad panel. If you're trying to find a needle in the haystack, you want as many opportunities or shots on goal to find what's wrong with the patient. The government is asking to reduce multiplex panels in turn for singleplex or single assays, and that's having an impact on volumes, which we started to see fall off in the month of May and continued in June. I would say it stabilized in July. We're now assuming that this business, which this year is about 6% of revenue, will be down 25% in the back half of the year. As we sit here today, that's probably a fair assumption that that level of pressure on this piece of the business will continue until we probably anniversary it in the first or second week of next year, or May of next year. Do you think at that point, once you anniversary this, does that get back to being a high single-digit growth business? Do you still feel good about kind of the long-term? We've assumed more in like the low to mid-single-digits in our LRP. No, we don't need the diagnostics business in China to, you know, our overall LRP for immunodiagnostics is 9%- 11%, but that's with much stronger growth outside of China. Given what you've seen, what others in the diagnostic space have seen in China, does this at all change your conviction in investing in that market or the long-term attractiveness of it? There have been some challenges that we are navigating through and continuing to navigate through. We will continue to take some actions because of the volume pressures that we're facing right now. I think there's still very strong volume growth in the underlying market. That is one of the key reasons that we entered into this area of autoimmune in the first place, eight and a half, nine years ago. Esoteric autoimmune is a market that is growing in the high single-digits globally, with very good underlying volume growth in areas like China as well. There's still increase in adoption, increase in appreciation for these autoimmune conditions, which is leading to very good market growth and why we got into the business in the first place. If we shift towards reproductive health, that performance has remained pretty solid despite some pressure on birth rates. Just talk through the strength you're seeing there and maybe touch on the Genomics England partnership. Sure. Yeah. Yes, if you've read the newspaper in the last couple of years, you've read about how there have been pressures on fertility, pressures on birth rates. We have been able to grow our overall reproductive health business quite consistently in the mid single-digits despite birth rate pressures. We do that through a combination of things: geographic expansion, menu expansion, new menu introduction, new assay introductions for rare diseases. It's been fairly consistent growth too. I would expect that probably continues. I think the Genomics England that you mentioned, we put out a press release a few months ago now announcing that we were awarded a contract with Genomics England, which is a piece of the UK government, where they have what's called the generation study going on, where they want to sequence 100,000 newborns. We were selected to do all of that DNA sequencing work for them. It's a contract that the work has started in July. I would say it becomes more significant as we go into the fourth quarter, which probably is a regular run rate at that point. It'll last at least two years. It'll be some incremental revenue for us both here in the second half of the year as well, even more incremental revenue in 2026. How much of an incremental driver could it be if you see more of this kind of sequencing at birth for that business? It's a good question. Genomics England is, I would say, maybe the first country that is looking to build a database of genetic data for newborns, but probably not the only. We'll see what happens in the future with other countries. On 2026, last week Max commented that if we assume the market is flat to slightly up next year, you grow a couple hundred basis points above that, you kind of be in the low single-digit range. He noted it wasn't guidance, but I think it's maybe been interpreted as such at this point. Any further comments you want to make on that framing? I guess just given what's going on in China diagnostics and kind of some of the unique exposures that you have relative to others in the tool space, is that market plus a couple hundred basis points still the right way to think about it? I think there are a couple of things. I think there's always puts and takes within a business and within a company around the world. There's always things that are going well, things that are more of a challenge. They change by year. I think our thoughts are, as we sit here in early September, there's still a long way to go before we even get to 2026. As you even use the word framing, a good framework is, we have seen stability. We've seen stability so far this year. We've seen stability over the last couple of years. I think when you look at our overall financial performance, we have been putting up numbers that are a couple hundred basis points above underlying market growth rates and even a couple hundred basis points above peers. I think for the time being, until we get more clarity and really consistency, understanding of what is going to happen, it's the best assumption in terms of a framework for now that it continues like it is. Yes, there's puts and takes for sure. I think that's probably the best outlook for right now. You put out that kind of 28% operating margin baseline for 2026. Given that framing, how should we think about margin expansion potential in various different top line scenarios? Sure. Our current guidance, the midpoint for this year for operating margins is 27.2%. As to your point, we said, listen, we will get to a 28% baseline for next year. We're doing that through a number of different, I would say, structural actions we're taking to reposition, help offset some of the unanticipated headwinds we're seeing so that the operating margin expansion timeline that we have talked about with investors doesn't change. I think any business probably needs more than 2%- 3% top line growth to really drive meaningful sales leverage, to drive margin expansion. I think a good framework for right now is kind of in that market zero to one, the nature of our businesses, just we are in higher growth parts of life sciences and diagnostics compared to the broader market. It should help us probably put up 200 basis points or so better than that, getting us to 28.0%, but you need more than 2% or 3% organic growth to start really getting more meaningful sales leverage. We have talked about our business, and I think we'll probably get into this, but our business has some of the highest incremental margins in the entire life science tool space. Our business is built to put up, you can call it 50 basis points of margin expansion when organic growth is more in the mid-single-digits. Our LRP is 6%- 8% top line growth, which should transpire into about 75 basis points of margin expansion. There is opportunity for more margin expansion, but we're already calling for 80 basis points on sort of low single-digit framework. Is there anything from a mix perspective? If you have software outperforming, you've got China diagnostics going to be down again next year. Does that have a margin impact at all? It could. Yeah, I mean, Life Sciences, our Life Sciences segment overall has, as you can see, higher operating margins. I think the other thing to think about both in the nearer term, but also certainly even maybe more so in the longer term, is some of our highest growth businesses also have our highest operating margins. As you know, hopefully eventually here things normalize. As things normalize, we will have natural margin expansion, just given the fact that our software business, our specialty consumables, as well as our diagnostics, have higher growth rates and just higher natural incremental margins. If we think about tariffs, I think a 12% impact this year, 50 basis points on the margin side. How does that evolve next year, just from an EPS standpoint and the margin framework that you laid out? We're taking actions to either offset and/or mitigate the tariffs impacts. We've already operationally navigated a lot of the tariffs as it pertains to U.S. to China. We're really focused on some of the diagnostic things right now, and we're taking some actions across a number of different parts of the business, as well as looking at potential other mitigation efforts as well. That's factored into the 28% baseline for next year. You announced some additional cost actions as well. Maybe where in the organization are those focused? How do you kind of balance, you know, navigating this policy and macro environment versus kind of making those longer-term investments? Yeah, I mean, we certainly don't want to disrupt growth and future growth. You know, continuing to invest in our R&D priorities for sure. I think you also need to adjust the business and the structure, you know, for the volumes that we have in different areas. We're taking some actions to accommodate that. Okay. Maybe just on kind of broader capital deployment priorities, it's now been over two years since the divestiture and kind of the rebrand to Revvity. What are your priorities here? Are there any holes in the portfolio that you want to address through M&A? I think a couple of things. One is, we have gone through the transformation. We did 11 acquisitions in two years during the pandemic. Then, about a year, year and a half later, we sold 30% of the company in many legacy product lines, including the legacy brand name. The whole business is different today. I think when you look at the business today, only about 30% of our revenue was part of the company eight, eight and a half years ago. It's a totally different business, management team, and even the name of the company is different. We've really gone through the transformation. I think every business is always continuing to evolve. To your point, though, it's been two years since we became Revvity, it's been four years since we've done an acquisition. We are still very interested in organic and M&A. I would say the bar has been raised for what we now are as Revvity. It needs to make very strong strategic fit, financial profile, financial return. Obviously, nothing that we've looked at has checked all those boxes. We're still very interested. Are there holes? I don't know if there's holes, but I think there are things that we would like to add over time to complement what we're already doing, particularly in areas that are the most attractive to us, like consumables, software, et cetera. At the same time, you've also seen us become more active in the share repurchase program. I think we've bought eight, almost 9% of the company back in the last 12 months. We bought back 3% of the company in the second quarter alone. With what has transpired here, we still have a very high degree of confidence in the medium and longer-term prospects for the business. I know the last couple of years have been challenging. I do think it is a temporary, it is a prolonged, it has been a prolonged temporary market environment that's been a little challenging. I think the financial potential for both our industry as well as our company still remains. We think it's going to be a very good financial return for investors, buying back our stock at these levels. Yeah, with a couple of minutes left, maybe just a bigger picture framing question. Do you think about the next kind of 12- 18 months? What do you view as the two biggest opportunities for the company? What do you think is maybe most misunderstood or underappreciated about the Revvity story? Actually, I would say maybe somewhat similar answers to both of those. I think that some of the biggest opportunities are within our software business. I think we've got, as we talked about a little bit, we've got a very good business today with a very exciting pipeline of new products coming out. That'll be very exciting as that business continues to grow. It's really, when you think about what our software business does, it helps drive efficiencies and provide better data analytics. That is where customers want to be spending money right now, is driving efficiencies and better data. I think that's one that is very exciting over the next 12- 18 months, but is also very much underappreciated by the street. I think another key priority for us is continuing to make good progress on our diagnostics business, particularly in the U.S., continuing to get some of our more recent product launches continuing to ramp, like latent tuberculosis, but also continue to get some more FDA approvals in the U.S. too. All right. With that, we are out of time. Steve, thanks for being here. Yes, thank you. Thank you everyone for joining us. Thank you.