All right. I think we're good to go. All right. Well, good morning, everybody. Welcome to Jefferies' 2026 Industrials Conference. My name is Stephanie Moore. I'm Jefferies' Transportation and Business Services analyst. We're really pleased to have RXO with us today. We have Jared Weisfeld, Chief Strategy Officer, and then obviously Drew Wilkerson is also here with us today, their CEO. Format will just be a fireside chat, and we'll kick it off from there. We appreciate you all joining. Thanks, guys, for being here. Thanks for having us. Well, I'm going to start with the topic that is of most recent to everyone. You put out an 8-K and a press release this morning, I believe, talking about the strength that you've been seeing quarter to date through August. Maybe, Jared, if you want to touch a little bit about what you put out in the release this morning and maybe just the overall freight environment as this quarter has progressed. Sure. Thanks for having us, Steph. This morning, we put out a release where we provided a positive update on our brokerage business based on the trends that we're seeing quarter to date, and if you break it down across both gross profit per load and truckload volume. From a gross profit per load standpoint, our expectation on earnings in August was that gross profit per load would decline throughout the quarter. In fact, we're seeing the exact opposite. In the month of August, we saw gross profit per load increase by more than 10% when compared to July, and that's a function of a few different things. Number one, spot continues to remain robust for RXO, now at about 50% of the mix despite soft freight market conditions, which speaks to the ability to capture incremental spots, projects, and mini bids across the company. We're also seeing us procure transportation quite effectively, which is helping us in terms of buy rates throughout the quarter to date. We're also just seeing continued momentum in the business with respect to capitalizing on those opportunities. You put all that together, we're seeing strong improvement on gross profit per load. Despite soft freight market conditions, we're still seeing truckload volume up low to mid-single digits year-on-year for the quarter, which is in line with our expectations during earnings last month. I know there's been a lot of concern in the industry just based on Cass Freight Index, overall spot rates weakening over the last six weeks. Despite that, I think it's a testament to the pipeline that we see in the company, the opportunities that we're executing on. It's the investment thesis of RXO. We're taking share. We're doing it profitably. We're growing gross profit per load, and those are all above expectations that we outlined during last quarter earnings. Thank you. Appreciate it. Maybe just as one final follow-up to that, could you remind us the Q3 guidance that you provided? What was the underlying assumption for gross profit per load at the midpoint? Sure. $35 million- $45 million of adjusted EBITDA was the outlook for Q3. From a gross profit per load standpoint, we had talked about our expectation for gross profit per load to decline from July through September. To reiterate what I just said with respect to the trends that we've seen in the first two months of the quarter, not only did they not decline, they increased by over 10% sequentially from July to August. The one other factor that I forgot to mention prior was that we're continuing to phase in new contract rates. Those higher contract rates, we expect, will be a tailwind throughout the remainder of this year into 2027 as well. Great. Well, thank you for the update. I think that while there's a lot to talk about, especially obviously the strength of your business and then the underlying industry backdrop, I think most of the questions that I've been receiving over the last couple weeks, and I'm sure you have as well, has just been in the wake of a large Supreme Court ruling, Montgomery, as well as some headlines about potential nuclear verdicts. I think as a whole, obviously, the market is really discounting broker equities here because of this, what I would say is kind of a tail risk as it relates to insurance costs or legal costs. Maybe to start here, how would you help us better understand this potential tail risk? I'd say the first thing is you have to realize that not everybody is starting from the same starting point. When you look at the tower of insurance that we've got, it already runs up to $100 million. That is similar to what you would see in most large asset-based carriers. There's only one other brokerage out there that I'm aware of that has the similar type coverage. A lot of other top five, top 10 brokers are going to have a long way to go just to be able to catch up to the same coverage that we have at RXO. The second thing that I'd say is when you start to look at our rating and what we're hearing from our insurance providers is that we have less claims, less accidents than what you even see in the asset-based world. When you look at our vetting process, that's something that has differentiated us for a long time. We built the business on just-in-time shipments. We built it on high cargo value shipments. When you look at how you vet carriers there, that you have to be differentiated in the quality of carriers that you're using. For us, our insurance providers have told us, "You have less claims. You have less accidents," especially whenever you look at it per 100 million miles than what is going on in the industry. The feedback that we've got right now is that we are going to do considerably better than what is out there in market. Thank you. Appreciate that. I think that if you look at this most recent verdict that came out of Texas that's impacted one of your peers, I think there was two pretty interesting points that came out of it. The first was that the vetted carrier actually had a satisfactory rating, which is actually a very good satisfactory rating, which is very hard, from my understanding, to actually obtain. The second was that the driver was deemed an employee of the broker despite the fact that it was actually not a W2 employee. It seems like there needs to be some kind of federal vetting standards, or there needs to be some kind of overarching influence that's coming in here in this environment. How would you just talk about the overall regulatory or federal landscape in this kind of post-Montgomery world? Sure, I could start. So, agreed. I think it is important. I think the administration understands that ultimately having a nationwide standard makes a ton of sense. To your point, Steph, 92% of carriers remain unrated. I think having the resources and dedication to put something like that in place makes a ton of sense. But I think it is also important to realize that at RXO, that is not something that we are just waiting for it to happen. We need to make sure that we are proactively making sure that we have got the right carrier base, incredibly strict vetting compliance from a standard standpoint. What it takes to haul a load for RXO is a lot, and we put in limitations in terms of, you start a carrier authority, you cannot drive and haul a load for RXO within the first 90 days. That first load that gets booked needs to be vetted by a human. We then leverage other third-party platforms as well to help in terms of carrier onboarding and vetting. So I think it is a pretty robust process that we have in place. No doubt about it, we would, of course, support nationwide standards. But I also think the administration and DOT, FMCSA very much understands that having free, frictionless trade across all contiguous 48 states is something that is necessary for the U.S. economy. It is not just a brokerage issue. It is a broader transportation issue. I think I agree with everything that Jared said, but one of the points that you made was about the employee. When you are hauling loads for multiple brokerages, how are you an employee of the company? It is not something that is even logical. So I think for us, we do not think that it is something that will get upheld, and we think we stand on the side that most of these companies, if not all of these companies, do not want to be employees for us. They want the ability to go drive for somebody else. They want the ability to haul a load for one of our competitors so that they can find the right load for their truck at that given time. I think, Jared, you brought up a really good point about having really tight vetting standards, and I think presumably in this environment, every skilled broker is probably going to be tightening their vetting standards here. What is the ultimate impact this could have on capacity? It's a great question, Steph. To frame it up, there are so many different ongoing aspects to the industry that are tightening supply. I think the largest one for sure is non-domiciled CDLs, which the FMCSA has estimated to be about 200,000 CDLs that are out there, and that alone can impact supply in the double-digit percentage. You then think about the other crackdowns that are occurring across the industry, from CDL mills to ELDs to cabotage. Then you layer on to your point in terms of just increased vetting standards that industry participants are engaging in now, post-SCOTUS. That is going to be an incremental tightening of supply. Overall, when you put those elements together, we think as much as 20%-25% of the for-hire truckload market will be exiting from a capacity standpoint, which is a non-trivial amount, and that informs our view with respect to the notion that this is the largest structural change to happen in the industry since deregulation in 1980. I think it's important to realize that this capacity is not coming back. So will there be a supply response at some point? For sure. But it's going to be the right supply response that operates under unit economics that makes sense, as opposed to 30%-50% below market. So that's our view, and it's not a trivial amount. To pull that together of what that means for the earnings power of RXO is the tighter capacity is when there's spots, projects, and mini bids, we win those. You can already see that whenever you see our spot percentage has increased to 50% around there right now. So what that means is it's a higher gross profit per load. So that means EBITDA is going up, that means free cash flow is going up. This is just the beginning. We feel like we're in the first inning of a recovery. The recovery is happening on the supply side. If you go back and look at what has happened during demand-driven recoveries, which has been every recovery I've been a part of in my 20 years of doing this until now, as demand comes back, that's whenever you really see us kick butt and take names. That's whenever you see us grow volumes by double digits. In the past upcycle, we were growing volumes 20% and 30% on a year-over-year basis, and we did it for multiple years. So maybe going back to our conversation at the start and obviously the update today and the strong performance you've seen quarter to date, is this a function of some of that shift? Are you already starting to see the impact of the SCOTUS ruling or that's starting to drive that incremental spot, higher margin spot loads flow into your business? Or is this more so a function of the improving freight backdrop? I'd say it's more a function of RXO specific in terms of the idiosyncratic share gains that we're seeing. But I want to be clear, the customer conversations have already started in terms of the impact from SCOTUS and a tighter supply environment and what that means as a Fortune 500, Fortune 1000 shipper. They want to be doing business with large-scale providers like RXO, and those customer conversations are already happening. Is that necessarily translating into real-time market share gains? It's probably too soon for that, which makes us even more bullish because I think that's still on the come. So when you think about this bid season and next bid season, incremental conversations with customers have absolutely started picking up along those lines in terms of, "Hey, walk us through your vetting processes. Why are you best in class?" And getting them comfortable with that and then taking the larger percentage of the pie. I think those are tailwinds to come. Give me a thought question, too. Is there a potential, though, that this does shift some shipper behavior back towards asset-based providers? No. I can tell you that I have a lot of interaction with Fortune 100, Fortune 500 companies. They want the right provider. Whenever we can walk into a large enterprise shipper and we can talk about our safety records versus asset-based carrier, we have a very good story to tell. I think it is not about asset versus broker. It is about finding the right capacity for the shipper. We have solutions that allow us to feel very asset-like for the shippers. We have over 2,500 trailers that we can deploy, and we are going to increase that number substantially over the next two years that we can deploy across the country. That allows us to look and feel like an asset-based carrier, but it gives us more flexibility to flex up for them from a capacity standpoint. If you think about calling an asset-based carrier today to pick up a load from New York to go back down to Charlotte, where I am from, they may or may not have capacity. We have capacity in that area. It is just at what rate? For us, that becomes a spot load. That is something that is going to be at a higher margin per load for us. I think, Jared, you brought up a good point about just the unit cost economics. I think inflationary pressures have been pretty persistent for the last several years, despite spot rates really obviously taking a nosedive during that time too, whether it is equipment costs, now obviously labor costs, but now obviously the conversation is around insurance costs. Kind of a two-part question. How should we think about the potential increase in insurance costs over time? How does that ultimately translate, though, too, into your ability to recover and what this can mean for the industry from a pricing standpoint? Sure. To set the stage for RXO, Drew just alluded to this, and we talked about this a little bit on earnings, but you think about the position that we are in heading into this renewal cycle into 2027. Not all brokers, not all transportation providers are created equal. We feel like we are on a very strong footing in terms of our position heading into next year. Based on conversations that we have had with our insurance carriers to date, we still feel very good that we will materially be better than the rest of the industry from an insurance premium increase standpoint heading into 2027. There is a lot of noise out there that I am sure you are hearing in terms of XYZ broker talking about a very large percent increase into 2027 and beyond. I think that goes to reiterate what we have been saying. We already have $100 million+ tower. We already have best-in-class vetting, best-in-class safety. It's evident in FMCSA metrics as well. To Drew's point earlier, low number of cases. We feel good about our portfolio that we have. We feel that we are adequately and appropriately reserved for. Heading into 2027, we feel like we are in a very good position, continue to believe that our premium increase will be substantially and materially better than the rest of the industry. I think this is where you're going also, Steph. Over time, this is going to be a pass-through, because at the end of the day, if you are, as a shipper, want to be doing business with a large-scale transportation provider, and you want that freight to get to where it needs to go in an appropriate manner with all the risk controls in place, there's a cost of doing business. We do think that over time, it'll get passed along to the shipper and then likely eventually the end consumer. We do think that it'll be somewhat transient nature as well, and it's just the higher cost of doing business. The last thing I'd iterate on this point, this positions us and the large-scale brokers, I think, in a much better way relative to some of the smaller medium-sized brokers that either will face an enormous bill from an insurance premium standpoint, or quite frankly, won't even be able to procure insurance. Over time, this is a tailwind for the business. Let's just be clear about that. Whenever you look at smaller brokers, they're not going to be able to operate in this environment. Mid-size brokers are maybe going to be able to catch up, but it's going to cost them a lot more to be able to do it. If you've seen a lot of press releases go out about how people are changing their vetting processes, you haven't seen that from RXO because we already had a very strong vetting process, and we had already had good feedback from our insurance provider. There wasn't a culling of our capacity to get it right post this. We were already setting the standard for the industry. Taking a step back, can we think about just the overall freight landscape? This has clearly been an area where supply has exited for some time due to obviously regulatory changes and the regulatory scrutiny we have seen. You called out a lot of those foreign issued CDLs, English language proficiencies. Now we have the post the SCOTUS ruling. You gave, I think, a pretty meaningful number in terms of exits to the industry. What is the timeline that you would think in terms of some of those exits actually panning out? I think we have seen a substantial percentage already exit. We think maybe about half. By definition, it is going to be a hard-to-track measure because we are talking a lot about shadow capacity that should not even be in the system. We think about half, so at least another, call it 50% to go. You think about what that means from a freight rate volatility standpoint. Just think about where spot rates are over the last few months relative to last year for the industry, up anywhere between 30% - 50% year-on-year, depending on the week that you choose, with Cass Freight Index being down. Not only being down, but being down every single month on a year-on-year basis since January of 2023. This is three and a half years of a negative demand environment from a shipment standpoint, and spot rates are up 30% - 50%. Think about what that means when you get to a normalized demand environment with respect to aspects of the economy that are quite soft right now. Housing is a great example. Mortgage rates are approaching 7%. Housing market is soft. Despite that, you are seeing spot rates up 30% - 50%, which is a testament to how much capacity has come out. When you fast-forward to an environment that is more normalized from a demand standpoint, you should expect freight rate volatility to be materially higher than where it is right now. To Drew's earlier point, this is structurally higher gross profit per load for RXO when you think about normalized earnings power. Thinking, taking this a step forward, I think a lot of investors are focused on what 2027 can look like for the industry and specifically for RXO. As we think about, obviously, we talked a lot about the supply trends here. What is the RXO playbook if demand remains as it stands today? Well, I think it has taken market share within our existing customers and bringing on new customers. The third thing that I would add is the growth within our managed transportation business. We have seen a significant growth in the pipeline there. We are seeing execution on what the team is being able to pull across. Every time we win in managed transportation, it gives us the opportunity, if we have got the right service and if we have got the right price, to be able to funnel business towards our RXO brokerage. We have seen great success with that. We expect that to be able to continue. When you look at our existing customers, we just talked about it. They are pulling down the number of carriers they do. It is not broker or asset-based carriers. They are looking at who they do business with, is how they are vetting them. On this next RFP cycle, I expect them to reduce the number of carriers again that they are working with, and we will be the benefactor of that. When you look at bringing on new business, we are really focusing on new verticals like data centers. That is something that has been a big tailwind for us on the brokerage side, and we are also focusing on SMB. We built the business off of large enterprise customers, and we built up our network to where we have power lanes across the country. Now we are focusing on selling SMB into those same power lanes so that they can tap into the capacity that we have built. We think that will be a big growth engine for us over the next three years. Then maybe touch a little bit about how the Coyote acquisition, how that fits into your strategy going forward and as you can leverage and is hopefully an improving freight landscape. Well, I think, two big call-outs from the Coyote acquisition on the positive side is we got into new verticals. We were not doing a lot of food and beverage at this point. We had a lot of industrial, a lot of automotive, a lot of e-commerce, but we were not doing a lot of food and beverage, and that is such a major sector to have access to. The second thing is we found out that they were doing their procurement on transportation different than what we were. We were working with a lot of small to midsize carriers. They were working with larger carriers and private fleets. We have been able to see that we buy transportation significantly better than what we did in the past. I think when you look at the results of Coyote, it definitely took us a little bit longer than what we thought it would to be able to get the numbers going up and to the right. But we're at a point now where one plus one is equaling more than two from where we started at. It took us a little longer for us to get there, but we're there now. When you look at the headwinds that we've been able to overcome, I think it's very well known that we had a large customer that walked away from a specific customer that's been a headwind for us for 12-18 months on the volume side in a big way. Even with that headwind, we're still growing volume. I think whenever you start to look at, no matter what's going on in the market, that we expect to take market share and we expect to do it at good margins. We've got a very strong conviction in where we're headed. Maybe continuing on what's more so in RXO's control. You've expanded your spot mix exposure from, I think it was close to 30% in the first quarter, and as you noted, still about 50% today. Can you talk about what do you view as the right mix for where we are in the cycle? Is there any trade-off we need to be thinking about as you go after profitable spot loads today and what that can mean from a contractual standpoint longer term? Well, let's break down what it actually looks like. To me, there's three segments of business. The first is your primary contract. You have to service that. You have to be in lockstep with the customer. That's what gives you the right to win on spots. If you do not do that, you cannot win on spots. So I think that tells you how well we are servicing the primary contractual business right now to have access and grow spots like nobody else in the industry is doing right now. The second piece of it is when you look at contract loads that are waterfall routing us. Those, you have a little bit more flexibility with how you manage, but you have to make sure that you're in lockstep with the customer, you're communicating. It may not just be rejecting the load, it may be providing a different rate that picks it up on the spot market as well there. That's something that on waterfall routing, guys, you have a little bit more flexibility is how you do it. The third is spot. I've already touched on, you don't get the spot without great service. I don't know that there's a perfect mix for where we think that it's going. I think what we've shown is, and we've said for three years, that as soon as spots project and mini bids come in, we will be the winner there. It is just starting to come in. You're seeing us that we are winning and we're winning in a big way. I want to stress, this is all without demand. We think that there is a huge opportunity over the next six, 12, 18, 24 months that we should be growing that portion of the business significantly, and it's at higher margins. You called out data center and some other industrial end markets as having maybe some healthier demand trends. I guess, what are you seeing from just an overall demand perspective across your end markets? To your point, housing remains weak. Can we see a freight recovery if housing continues to be to the levels we are at today? You're already seeing a recovery in rates despite housing, right? I think it's important to think about the reality is it's the intersection between supply and aggregate demand, whether or not we get there because supply's coming out based on new government enforcement and regulations, or whether or not it's from improved demand. The reality is, I think you're going to get to the same place, just in a different way. To the earlier points, to the extent that we do have a demand recovery, it's only going to exacerbate the freight rate volatility and move freight rates even higher from where they are today, and gross profit per load even higher from where they are today. In terms of what we're seeing in our business, we talked about this on earnings last month, but we had many verticals, including food and beverage that you just talked about, flip into double-digit positive territory on a year-on-year basis. You're starting to see the momentum of the business accelerate, and you're seeing that despite the fact that it is a soft demand environment, which I think speaks to the idiosyncratic market share gains that RXO is seeing. Got it. Maybe switching to some productivity tech investments, AI, all of that fun stuff here. I think it's an area that maybe some peers do spend a little bit more time talking about their AI opportunity and what they've been leveraging. I think you also have been doing a lot of work behind the scenes as well, too, and you have historically as well. Maybe just for those in the audience, talk a little bit about what actions have been taken for as long as you'd like to talk about from just a technology and AI standpoint. Well, to frame up in terms of just how we think about it across RXO, and I think it's a bit different than some of the industry, it's a combination of the best operators in the business with investments in technology to yield pretty strong results on making sure that we've got tech. The way we think about it is across volume, productivity, margin, and service. If you can execute across those four pillars while also doing it in tandem with the best operators in the business, it really is going to yield substantial results over the long term. It's not about, "Hey, how do you reduce your workforce by X% and replace with tech?" It's how do you grow volume by 30%, 40%, 50% and only have to grow head count by a fraction of that because you're becoming that much more productive. When you think about what that means to incremental margins, it's quite powerful because every dollar within our brokerage business that translates from gross profit down to EBITDA can drop through as high as 80 cents on the dollar. You're seeing the benefits to that even as of this morning on our release. We see the strong operating margin leverage in the business, being able to go ahead and leverage productivity and leverage the technology investments. We spend over $100 million a year in technology. How do we think about generating real strong returns from a return on invested capital standpoint? That's how we think about it holistically, and you're seeing us talk more and more detail every single quarter because we're seeing such improvements in the business. How do you balance investing in technology as well as optimizing labor and that human element, which ultimately is important to both sides of the coin, being the shippers and the carriers that you serve? Last quarter, we talked about productivity on an LTM basis being about up high single-digit percentage, which comes on the heels of double-digit productivity over the last couple of years. How do you think about continuing to advance the ball on productivity, making our people that much more productive, and allowing them to focus on those customer relationships? Similar to the earlier point on you think about the market environment that we're in right now, you don't win the spots unless you service the contracts. When you're servicing the contracts and you have those deep customer relationships because our people can be that much more productive and not have to waste time on remedial tasks and actually focus on the customer, that's what yields substantial results, what you're seeing right now. Let's say the volume environment does in fact turn, and you start to get a bit more constructive demand environment. From an incremental hiring or capacity standpoint, how much incremental business can you take on before having to look to add additional heads? We could probably handle right now, call it mid teen percent volume growth overnight, and we like to be staffed for growth. I think that's what allowed us to put up these numbers that you're seeing right now in terms of spot opportunities where, based on what we saw in the market six, nine months ago, making sure that we had the organization staffed appropriately for the market environment that we're in right now. It's that continuous state of improvement that we always talk about, making sure that you're staffed for growth, but also staffed in an appropriate way whereby you can continue to leverage technology, and you have that right combination of both labor and tech to lead to substantial results over time with strong incremental margins. I guess putting it all together, if we layer in the structural changes impacting the industry, which we touched on at length, especially on the supply side, and layer in the RXO company specific actions, whether it's cost, technology, changes from Coyote, how should we think about what a mid-cycle EBITDA or mid-cycle gross profit per load looks like? I think Drew and I both used the similar language on the earnings call that we're not even close to mid-cycle earnings. I think that also just to where we are right now. Let's walk through that. The business did $6 million of EBITDA in Q1. We did $40 million of EBITDA in Q2. Our outlook for Q3 was $35 million - $45 million. We obviously just provided a market update this morning, clearly indicating that we're doing better than the midpoint based on the assumptions that we outlined. I want to emphasize this because we didn't talk about that this morning. You think about the improvement in the underlying business. From Q2 - Q3, we typically see last year was almost a 20% decline in EBITDA. We've got seasonal headwinds on our last mile business. We talked about last earnings call, how there were incremental headwinds from a demand standpoint, which should not be surprising to anyone given the state of the housing economy. We're overcoming all of that and then some, given the strength in the brokerage business, which I think speaks to the strong incremental margins. You look at that progress that we've seen year to date with no improvement in demand, and you think about sort of where we are now versus normalized earnings. We talked about at least the mid-single digit margin on EBITDA for normalized earnings with upside to that based on all of the technology initiatives that we just talked about. It's also just not as simple as taking a 5%, 6%, 7% EBITDA margin and slapping it on current revenue, right? Think about normalized revenue per load. Think about continued advancements in gross profit per load based on the structural tailwinds that the industry has and RXO capitalizing on the spots. Think about doing that, so grossing up your revenue and then grossing up your gross profit per load to a normalized environment, and then talking about sort of that 5%, 6%, 7% type EBITDA margin against that baseline. You're going to yield results multiples of where we are right now. And then maybe help us understand or remember, what is the normal seasonality in earnings Q3 - Q4 historically? Yeah. There's no such thing as- Normal normal these days. Normal doesn't exist. But from Q3 - Q4, if you break it down by line of business, I'd say that the two biggest variables are going to be between brokerage and last mile. In brokerage, it's going to be a function of whether or not we have a peak season, and I think that it's still too early to tell. I think we're hearing different things from different customers. But we are, as an industry, susceptible to any changes in demand with increased freight rate volatility likely to happen if there is any changes in demand. But we do obviously have some peak business that we do every year from the acquisition of Coyote Logistics, which will be a tailwind sequentially. And then on last mile, also depends on whether or not we've got that incremental demand. But generally, last mile is better from Q3 - Q4. Understood. Maybe lastly, given the changes that are impacting the industry, how does that ultimately change your capital allocation framework or your priorities going forward as you think about maybe inorganic investments? Yeah. So I think our capital allocation strategy remains the same. First, we want to always invest into the business, invest into people, invest into technology so that we can be able to grow leaps and bounds above where we are today. The second is, there's always inorganic opportunities. And for us, there's going to be a very high bar for what's out there. But I do feel like M&A is heating up, and it has been heating up in the brokerage industry. So I think the next one or two years is going to be an exciting time, but there's a high bar for us. And we're not just going to be doing something for scale. We would be doing something that helps us grow in another mode of transportation, that helps us grow in SMB, it helps us grow and manage transportation. Those are the ways that we would be thinking about, or it'd be something that we saw as opportunistic within there. And then the last is always share repurchase. I think that's something that, as you start to look at, that's something that is in our playbook, is something that, depending on where it is, we want to be able to do that at the right time and weigh that return for shareholders on inorganic growth versus share repurchases, and would definitely be something that we're doing. Absolutely. Well, I appreciate your time. Thank you both. All right. Thank you. Thanks, Steph.