As a reminder, this call is being recorded on Monday, February 23, 2026. It is now my pleasure to turn the call over to Mr. Ruben Velasquez, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Stepan Company. Mr. Velasquez, please go ahead. Thanks, Didi. Good morning, thank you for joining Stepan Company's Q4 and full- year 2025 financial review. Before we begin, please note that information in this conference call contains forward-looking statements which are not historical facts. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially, including, but not limited to, prospects of our foreign operations, global and regional economic conditions, and factors detailed in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings. In addition, this conference call will include discussions of adjusted net income, adjusted EBITDA, and free cash flow, which are non-GAAP measures. We provide reconciliations to the comparable GAAP measures in the earnings presentations and press release, which we have made available at www.stepan.com, under the Investors section of our website. Whether you are joining us online or over the phone, we encourage you to review the investor slide presentation. We make these slides available at approximately the same time as when the earnings release is issued. We hope that you'll find the information and perspectives helpful. With that, I would like to turn the call over to Mr. Luis Rojo, our President and Chief Executive Officer. Thank you, Ruben. Good morning, and thank you all for joining us today to discuss our Q4 and full- year 2025 results. I plan to share highlights of the performance, and will also share updates on our key strategic priorities, while Ruben will provide additional details on our financial results. 2025 was a transformational year for Stepan. We divested two manufacturing plants, made significant progress on the foundational work required to further optimize our global footprint, and positioned the company to execute against a more disciplined and resilient operating model in 2026 and beyond. I also want to highlight that we delivered the best year on safety results in our history. Congrats to the whole Stepan team on these excellent safety results. Despite a challenging macro environment, the continued pressure across the chemical sector, unprecedented raw material inflation and tariff impacts, we delivered full-year adjusted EBITDA growth of 6%. We delivered adjusted EBITDA of $199 million, reflecting disciplined pricing and cost management, favorable mix, and solid growth across all our strategic businesses. Organic volume increased 2% year-over-year, driven by strong growth in crop productivity, oil field, Tier 2, Tier 3 customers, global Polymers, and Specialty Products. This was partially offset by softer demand in global consumer commodity surfactants. Throughout the year, we maintained a disciplined approach to capital allocation. We generated positive free cash flow in 2025, and strengthened our balance sheet and reduced net debt. Our leverage ratio improved from 2.8x to 2.5x at the end of the year. We did all of this while continuing to invest in the business. Consistent with our long-standing commitment to shareholder returns, we increased our dividend for the 58th consecutive year, underscoring our confidence in the Stepan cash flow strength and long-term outlook. During the Q4 of 2025, the company paid $8.9 million in dividends to shareholders. Our board of directors declared a quarterly cash dividend on Stepan common stock of $0.395 per share, payable on March 13, 2026. This represents a 2.6% increase in our dividend versus the prior year. Importantly, in 2025, we demonstrated our ability to deliver earnings resilience, advance strategic priorities, and take decisive actions in a difficult operating environment. We successfully commissioned our Pasadena sulfonation facility, optimized our asset footprint through targeted divestitures, and established the foundation to implement Project Catalyst, which we will discuss later today. With that, I will turn the call back to Ruben to walk you through the financial details for the quarter and the year. Thank you, Luis. My comments will generally follow the slide presentation. Let's just start with slide five, which summarizes Q4 2025 performance. Q4 2025 adjusted net loss was $0.5 million, or down $0.02 per diluted share. Reported net income was $5 million, up 49% versus prior year, primarily reflecting the gain on sale of assets and certain non-recurring items. The decrease in adjusted earnings was mainly driven by lower surfactants operating income, lower capitalized interest expense, and less favorable effective tax rate, partially offset by improved Polymers performance and lower corporate expenses. Importantly, several of these drivers, including higher depreciation and the declining capitalized interest associated with the Pasadena startup, had no cash impact compared to the Q4 of last year. Consolidated adjusted EBITDA was $33.8 million, compared to $35 million in the prior year, a 3% decrease. The slight decline in adjusted EBITDA was primarily driven by a 3% decrease in surfactant organic volumes, due to softer demand in global commodity consumer product end markets and elevated raw materials costs. Polymers delivered year-over-year growth, driven by a strong volume performance in North America and Asia rigid polyols, and in global commodity phthalic anhydride. Specialty Products results were modestly year-over-year, due primarily to order timing within the pharmaceutical business. Cash from operations was $60 million for the quarter, and free cash flow was positive at $25 million, compared to -$0.2 million in the prior year. The improvement was driven by reductions in working capital and disciplined capital spending. We remain focused on strengthening liquidity and maintaining disciplined capital allocation. Slide six shows the total company pre-tax income bridge for the Q4 of 2025 compared to last year's Q4. Because this is a pre-tax view, the figures noted reflect operating performance before the impact of income taxes. Q4 pre-tax income declined year-over-year, primarily driven by lower Surfactants operating income and lower capitalized interest expense. These headwinds were partially offset by improved performance in Polymers and lower corporate expenses. Slide seven shows the total company adjusted EBITDA bridge for the Q4 compared to last year. Adjusted EBITDA was $33.8 million, slightly down from prior year. Surfactants decreased by $2.6 million, driven by lower organic demand and elevated raw material costs. Polymers increased by $1 million, reflecting an 11% growth and improving operating leverage. Specialty Products decreased by $0.4 million. Corporate expenses declined year-over-year due to continued spending discipline and the non-recurrence of CEO transition expenses recorded in the Q4 of 2024. Slide eight focuses on the surfactants segment. Surfactant net sales were $402 million, up from $379 million in the prior year. Organic volume declined 3% year-over-year, primarily due to weaker demand across commodity consumer and construction and industrial solution end markets. Price and mix benefited from pass-through of higher raw material costs, improved product and customer mix, and pricing actions. Foreign currency translation positively impacted net sales by 3%. Surfactants adjusted EBITDA declined slightly, reflecting lower organic volume and elevated oleochemical input costs. Moving now to slide nine. Polymers net sales were $132 million, versus $113 million in the same quarter of last year. Volume increased 11%, driven by North America and Asia rigid polyols and commodity phthalic anhydride growth. Price was negatively impacted by the pass-through of lower raw material costs and competitive pressure. Foreign currency translation positively impacted net sales by 2%. Polymers adjusted EBITDA increased 9% versus the prior year, driven primarily by strong volume growth, partially offset by lower unit margins and unfavorable product and customer mix. Specialty Products net sales and EBITDA were modestly lower year-over-year due to order timing fluctuations within the pharmaceutical business, though medium-chain triglycerides continued to deliver double-digit volume growth. Let's move now to slide 12 to review balance sheet and cash flow. Free cash flow generation remains a key focus. Cash from operations was $60 million in the Q4. Free cash flow totaled $25.4 million, driven by working capital reductions. We ended the Q4 with net debt of $494 million, a $32 million reduction versus the prior year, and a net leverage ratio of approximately 2.5x trailing twelve-month adjusted EBITDA. This improvement reflects our continued focus on cash generation, debt reduction, and maintaining financial flexibility. Turning to full-year results, reported net income was $46.9 million, down 7% year-over-year, while adjusted net income was $41.7 million. The decrease in 2025 adjusted net income was primarily driven by lower surfactants operating income, lower capitalized interest expense, and a higher effective tax rate. Global organic sales volume increased 2% for the full year, driven by strong growth in crop productivity, oil field, Tier 2 and Tier 3 customers, global polymer, and Specialty Products. This was partially offset by softer demand in global commodity consumer end markets. Full-year EBITDA increased 11% to $208 million, and adjusted EBITDA increased 6% to $199 million. Cash from operations in 2025 was $148 million, and free cash flow was $25.4 million. Disciplined working capital management and capital spending allowed us to generate positive free cash flow while funding strategic investments in 2025. With that, I will turn the call back to Luis to discuss our strategic outlook and Project Catalyst. Thanks, Ruben. I will begin with a brief update on our strategic priorities before turning to Project Catalyst, which represents a significant step forward in strengthening Stepan's foundation for long-term superior value creation. Our strategy remains centered on four key pillars. First, our continued focus on customer-centric innovation to create the new applications and better solutions for our customers' products and in strengthening our strategic technical partnerships. Second, our diversification strategy is to deliver growth in higher value-end markets and expand our reach in the Tier 2 and Tier 3 customer segments. Third, operational excellence in our supply chain remains a key priority for the future, improving the reliability and resiliency of our manufacturing network and operating metric results at our Millsdale site. Fourth, we continue improving our financial position by a relentless focus on improving free cash flow generation, deleveraging the balance sheet, and a disciplined and efficient capital allocation. Throughout 2025, we saw significant growth in crop productivity, oil field, and Specialty Products, while Polymers also delivered a strong volume growth across North America and Asia. We also grew mid single -digit in our Tier 2, Tier 3 business. We also made meaningful progress improving our reliability in Millsdale, and we fully commissioned our Pasadena facility, with production ramping up. This effort resulted in EBITDA growth, positive free cash flow generation, and a reduction of our leverage ratio during 2025. Let's move now to slide 14. Today, we announce Project Catalyst, which is a comprehensive plan designed to further optimize our asset base and create a more productive, agile, and accountable organization to enable growth. Project Catalyst is expected to deliver around $100 million in pre-tax savings over the next two years, with approximately 60% of the savings expected in 2026. Project Catalyst is not a short-term cost reduction program alone. It is a strategic transformation designed to enhance the competitiveness of our cost base while preserving customer service and growth flexibility. Project Catalyst is built around three core value levers. First, footprint optimization by consolidating volume and improving utilization rates in our more modern and cost-competitive sites. Another component of this effort is the ramp-up of our Pasadena facility, which we expect to reach around 70%-80% utilization in 2026 and full utilization in 2027. Second, operational efficiency and cost optimization. These include procurement savings, productivity improvements across our manufacturing and logistics network, and the deployment of an enterprise-wide management operating system that drives discipline, data-driven execution, and continuous improvement. Third, organizational effectiveness. We are clarifying accountabilities, streamlining decision-making, and aligning resources more tightly to our growth priorities to accelerate the value captured across the organization and improve productivity. Importantly, Project Catalyst is designed to partially offset inflationary pressures and other headwinds, while creating the capacity to reinvest in growth initiatives, innovation, and supply chain resiliency. Today, we announced the closure of our Fieldsboro, New Jersey, site. This is in response to continued lower demand in commodity surfactants used in the production of laundry detergents. In addition, we are decommissioning select assets at our Millsdale and Stalybridge sites. We're planning to execute these actions in the next few months. I want to acknowledge that the decisions we're making are difficult, especially as they impact people and communities that have been part of the Stepan story for many years. We deeply appreciate the dedication and hard work of our teams at these locations. We will continue to evaluate additional opportunities to further optimize our footprint and strengthen our competitive position while unlocking the potential of our existing sites. This is a dynamic environment, and we will adjust and make changes if necessary. As we look forward to 2026, we remain focused on delivering superior shareholder returns with a balanced approach between top-line growth and productivity cost out efforts. We believe we are well positioned to deliver adjusted EBITDA growth and positive free cash flow in 2026, despite the ongoing market challenges. This concludes our prepared remarks. At this time, we would like to turn the call over for questions. Didi, please review the instructions for the questions portions of today's call. Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, please press star one one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes from Mike Harrison of Seaport Research Partners. Your line is open. Hi, good morning. Good morning, Mike. Wanted to start out with a couple questions on Project Catalyst. I understand a lot of this consolidation has been a long time coming. Can you give us a sense of what capacity utilization looks like within the surfactants business today? Following the optimization actions that you've, you've enumerated here in Fieldsboro and the other two facilities, what would that do for capacity utilization going forward in surfactants? I guess was looking to understand, are the facilities that you're closing or the assets that you're closing, are they losing money on an operating income or EBITDA basis in 2025, or were they still providing some kind of a positive earnings contribution? Great questions, Mike. Look, of course, surfactants have different platforms and different chemistries. What I will say is, with the consolidation that we're doing, we're trying to optimize our cost structure. We're moving volume to, you know, less cost-effective sites, to more modern and cost-efficient sites. We still have certain capacity for growth. Of course, if you think about alkylation, we have still capacity for growth, AOS, and even in, and even in ether sulfates and low 1,4-dioxane, we have capacity to grow, to grow in the future. We know, we know where the market is going, and that's why we took the decisions that we're making. It's not like we're losing money in those sites. The point is that we're moving the volume to other sites to improve the utilization rate in those sites and continue serving our customer at a more efficient cost structure. Then in, in terms of the $100 million worth of savings and just the timing, you mentioned $60 million is expected in 2026. I wanted to understand also that you, you've noted that these savings are intended to help cover inflation that you might be seeing. I was just hoping you could help us understand how we might think about the net savings, you know, that $60 million minus whatever inflation you're anticipating during this year. No, good, good point, Mike, because, yes, we, we believe we're gonna deliver at least the $60 million pre-tax in, in 2026. As you know, it's public information that we have around $750 million in fixed costs, when you think about, you know, salaries and maintenance and all of that, and, and, and of course, inflation is still there, right? I mean, you could argue that the inflation of 3% is still there. In some cases, the inflation is even higher when you think about healthcare, when you think about insurance, when you think about incentive-based compensation. so call it, you, you have, 3%+ inflation rate in, in our cost structure, and that, of course, is gonna, is gonna eat up some of the, some of the savings that, that we will deliver for sure in, in 2026. All right. You had talked a little bit about oleochemicals, creating some raw material pressure. I, I was wondering, did the, did the impact of oleochemicals get worse in Q4 than it was in Q3? Should it get better, as we get into Q1, given that it, it looks like the market prices of some of those oleochemicals have come lower? Maybe just help us understand a little bit more, what's going on with, with the timing of those costs and, and also the timing of, of your, pricing actions or any kind of index to pass through, re- response that might be happening. No, yeah, this, this is, of course, very relevant to our, you know, to our EBITDA margins in the surfactants business. If you look at the surfactant business in Q1 2025, we still had a double-digit, you know, EBITDA margin. That's when we saw the start of the escalation of oleochemicals. There is a lag, right? I mean, we typically carry a lot of inventory because it's from Asia, and all that supply chain is pretty long. So you saw, you know, coconut oil prices going from the $2,000 to $3,000 per metric ton, and really, I mean, you felt all that impact in the PNL in the H2 of 2025. coconut oil prices are coming down significantly now, and actually, PKO is going up, which at the end is narrowing the gap, which at the end, the important piece is the gap between CNO and PKO. the reality is that if you look at where we are now, January, February, that, that spread between CNO and PKO is almost at a, at a normal level, right? $200, $200 difference. You have CNO at $2,200, you have PKO at $2,000, and, and that $200 delta is, is, you know, historically has been in the $130-$150. we're getting to a point where, where we feel very, very good. However, again, last year, we saw the impact in the H2, you know, the hurt of higher oleochemicals in the H2. You are gonna see the help in 2026, in the H2 of 2026. We carry a lot of inventory. This is a very long supply chain. I mean, we keep increasing prices, and you have seen this in our price mix numbers, but at the end, we will, we will recover those margins at the end, you know, at the end of 2026, more in the H2 than in the H1. In the H1, you are gonna still see the impact of lower margins in surfactants. All right. My last question, for now is just a little bit about the timing of earnings. I understand you've given a 2026 outlook that calls for EBITDA growth. Would love it if you could help us understand, you know, maybe some ranges or ideas of how much growth we could anticipate. It sounds like between the oleochemical impact and maybe the savings starting to accelerate as the year goes on, it sounds like the H2 should be quite a bit better than the H1. I know this is adding an extra question, but I also assume there's maybe some weather impact that could drag on your Q1. Maybe just a little bit of color on, on how we should think about the cadence of earnings, and how much growth is anticipated next year, in 2026. Thank you. Good questions, Mike. Let me, let me think about this. We are, we are committed, and we feel good, and that's why we had it in our prepared remarks that we, we expect EBITDA growth in 2026 versus 2025. You are 100% correct that when you think about. Think about these four, five big factors that are helping the H2 and not, you know, not helping the H1. We already talked about the oleochemical raw material situation, right? It's gonna be significantly better in the H2 versus the H1. Catalyst savings, we're committing to the $60 million pre-tax, and of course, those are gonna be heavily skewed to the H2. I mean, procurement savings and some of those things are throughout the year, but when you think about footprint and the other stuff, is mostly H2. We are also expecting, we are also expecting demand recovery in the H2 versus the H1 when you think about, you know, 2 interest rate cuts, right? That's very important. I mean, all the banks are and everybody's projecting at least 2 interest rate cuts throughout the year, especially, especially in the H2. We expect demand to improve in the H2 versus the H1. This is important for our construction business, both in Polymers and a little bit also in surfactants. When you think about all of those effect and the fact that we started Q1 with a historic weather impact, right? Nobody was expecting this winter. I'm telling you that we are pleased, we are extremely pleased with the supply chain that we have, and we did extremely well compared to many other winters. It is true that some demand was lost. When you think about the Polymers business and construction activities and reroofing, when you think about how this impacts some of our surfactant business, there was some demand loss, and there is also absorption, right? Because we didn't produce everything that we intended to produce in Q1. There is an impact of around $6 million in Q1 2026, on an EBITDA basis due to the weather. The good news is that we're expecting to recover at least half, hopefully more than half, but at least half of that between Q2 and Q4. When you think about the absorption piece, and some of the demand loss, we expect to recover at least half of more in the following quarter. Yes, Q1 is a tough quarter to start. I think many, many chemical companies saw that impact, and it was a historic weather in the U.S. The good news is that we did extremely well, and we are well positioned to recapture some of that EBITDA that we lost in Q1. All right, very helpful. Thanks very much. Thank you, Mike. Thank you. Our next question comes from Dave Storms of Stonegate. Your line is open. Morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I just want to maybe circle back. Good day. Morning. wanted to circle back to Project Catalyst. just curious as to what your anticipated impacts on that project are to Tier 2 and 3 customers. Is this going to make it easier for them to engage everyone there? Or is this going to be maybe a little more challenging for them since there's going to be less areas for them to go to interact with you guys? No, look, thanks, Dave, for the question. Look, the Project Catalyst have three levers, right? The first two levers are heavily focused on, on supply chain and, and footprint, but the third lever is very, very important, which is we're working on a more agile, accountable, and productive organization that is gonna accelerate the growth of the company in the future, right? We are working those details right now. We are going to announce more things in the future. But what we are planning to do with the new organizational structure and with all the investments that we're doing on automation and system, is to actually facilitate the growth with Tier 2, Tier 3. We are very happy with the growth that we're having in this segment. We did mid single- digit in 2025, and I'm expecting this to grow even higher in 2026 as we facilitate to them doing business with us. There are plenty of investments that we're making on automation systems and tools to make sure that we capture an even bigger share of the pie of the Tier 2, Tier 3 segment. I think Project Catalyst is just great news for our Tier 2, Tier 3 customer segment. Understood. If I could ask a clarification question. It sounded like the answer around demand loss in the Q1 due to the weather, it sounded like that was mostly based on Polymers demand lost in the Polymers segment. Are you seeing any demand loss in ag? I know Q1 tends to be a big ag quarter for you. Just curious as to what you're seeing given the weather that we've had in the U.S. this year. No, great point. Great point, let me clarify. Out of the $6 million that I mentioned, the majority of that is surfactants. That's where we saw the biggest impact. Polymers, even though it's a low season, you know, Q1 is a low season on reroofing, still we saw a lot of delays from our customers because of the weather. At the end, the $6 billion is more surfactants than Polymers, but it's not in ag. I mean, ag continues growing very nicely. We're very happy with our ag business. We're very happy with our oil field business. We're very happy with our Tier 2, Tier 3 business. We keep growing in all our strategic areas, and we will continue managing our commodity, surfactant business to make sure that it's more productive and cost effective. Understood. That's very helpful. Well, one more, if I could, just around your inventories. I know you mentioned that there tends to be a little bit of a lag there. I also know in the past, as the raw materials prices, tend to increase, your, your inventory levels have increased as well. I noticed your inventory levels are actually down quarter-over-quarter. Is this you kind of learned your lessons from past, you know, inventory run-ups, or is this just the lag that we should expect? Look, I would say this is the, the normal lag of, of Q4, but the reality is that, of course, we are extremely focused on free cash flow. We will continue managing our working capital to ensure that we have, you know, what we need and no more. Free cash flow continues to be a key priority. We deleverage, the balance sheet and, and our leverage ratio went down to 2.5, because that's a key focus, in the company. Having the right, inventory levels is a priority for all of us. Again, but in some of those cases, as I mentioned, when you have a supply chain from Asia, including all the way to coconut oil, all the way to produce methyl esters, all the way to bring those to the U.S., it's a very long supply chain. Of course, those have an impact when you think about the raw material situation that we have. At the end, we feel good with our inventory levels, and we will keep optimizing our inventory levels as we streamline our footprint asset base. Understood. Thank you for taking my questions. Thank you. Our next question comes from David Silver of Freedom Capital Markets. Your line is open. Yeah. Hi, good morning. Thank you. Good morning, David. David? Morning. I just, I have a bit of a scatter of questions, so I'm sorry, be a little disjointed. You know, regarding Project Catalyst, you did go to some detail as to, you know, what production would be reduced from the actions at Fieldsboro. I was wondering if you might be able to do the same for Millsdale and for your U.K. facility. In other words, are all of the facilities affected, are they all in the commodity surfactant area, or might there be some other areas affected? Should we assume that, you know, all of the activities will mainly affect, you know, surfactants segment as opposed to Polymers or Specialty Products? Great point, David. Welcome you back. Look, all these in surfactants, we work, you will see in the press release a little bit more details. It's about the ethoxylation assets in Millsdale, and of course, we have great capacity and modern, and a state-of-the-art, facility in Pasadena, so we want to make sure that we produce those products at the most cost-effective way, and that brings Pasadena. In the case, in the case, of a Stalybridge, it's also surfactants, of course, this is a surfactant site, but it's more a, a commodity, low margin, high CapEx, organics business that we're exiting. This is a business that doesn't produce a return, that we deserve, and we are exiting, that business. It's, it's all surfactants and, and it's, it's to make sure that we improve the profitability and the return and the, you know, ROIC of the company. Okay, great. Thank you. I wanted to ask a question about your CapEx guidance for 2026. At a range of $105 million-$115 million, that is, would be, you know, your lowest spend in several years. Although, if you go back a ways, you know, it was a little bit lower. Should we think of the 2026 CapEx as your new base level for sustaining CapEx, or might there be, you know, a certain amount of discretionary or growth-oriented CapEx? If there is, could you just highlight the areas where, you know, you still feel discretionary CapEx is warranted in the current environment? No, good point, David. You saw before COVID and all of that, we were running in the, call it a $100 million range, for our normal, for our normal CapEx. Now, of course, we have, we have a few new sites, right? We, we acquired two sites with INVISTA, and we have Pasadena. Look, the $110, let's take the midpoint, the $110 reflects a very, I mean, some small but good growth capital projects, and then our normal base CapEx for infrastructure, EH&S, IT, R&D, and all of those buckets. What I will say is, you can call it a, you know, less than $100 for the normal, for the normal base CapEx, and then some growth CapEx on top. It's not significant, but it's still giving us the opportunity to move forward with the projects and the innovation plan that we have, for the next, for the next few years. Okay, great. I had a question on the, on the demand side, maybe this relates more to North America and Europe, but maybe not. You know, amongst some other personal care ingredients, producers that I track, you know, there's been a lot of commentary about the stretched, you know, consumer middle income or thereabout, you know, in the customer demographic. There's been a lot of talk for a while, but even recently about consumers trading down, right, in their choice of personal care, let's say, personal care products. Would you say, you know, would you maybe say that that's been part of your view here and now? you know, how, how are you kind of adapting to that somewhat, you know, evolving demand profile, maybe, you know, to reflect a stretched, you know, kind of middle-income consumer for personal care? No. Yeah. No, very good points, David, and I think you are asking about personal care. I mean, if you think about it, I mean, you have two things: personal care, and then you have all the cleaning piece. On the personal care, what I will say is that's why our huge focus on Tier 2, Tier 3, right? And our huge focus on sulfate-free. When you think about personal care, you, you are rightly so that those are the dynamics, right? I mean, you have, you have consumers trading down, not only on personal care, but on overall, cleaning and disinfection and laundry and, and all of that. Our focus of Tier 2, Tier 3 on sulfate-free for personal care is the right focus to continue, growing where the consumer is going, right? That's where the consumer is growing, and that's where we are investing, and that's where we're putting our focus. Okay, great. Then maybe just the last question. This would have to do with, you know, kind of the global evolving kind of tariff situation. You know, I, I, you know, I, I guess it's, it's difficult to ask the question in the current environment because there's just been another announcement over the past couple of days. I'm thinking more of your global footprint and in particular, you know, Mexico. I'm just wondering if, you know, the current status of, you know, how the U.S. is deploying their tariffs, I mean, has that had a negative impact on, you know, the ability of your assets to competitive, to compete, you know, let's say, for business in the U.S.? You know, how, how would you assess Stepan's overall positioning, you know, in the current tariff environment? Look, tariff will continue to change, and you know better than me that this is a, an evolving, thing. We are focusing on what we control. We, we have a great supply chain with a lot of options, and we will continue optimizing, those options, right. The reality is that we had a, we had a nice, I mean, we had a big impact on. Not a big compared to our, to our overall raw material, prices, but we had an impact in, in 2025, and that's why I put it in my remarks, right. I mean, inflationary pressures in raw material and tariff, we were not expecting that when we started 2025. The reality is that, all those millions of dollars add up. We'll see where the new policy goes. I mean, we have, we have production in the majority of the regions where we source and where we serve our customers, so that gives us an advantage, that we are very close to our customers, and that's the strategy. Of course, we need to, we need to continue evaluating, every supply chain based on where these dynamics go. Again, we expect, we expect 2026 to be as volatile as 2025 in regards to tariff, and we will look for every opportunity, for every opportunity that we have in that front, including refunds of the previous tariffs that we paid. Okay, great. I appreciate all the help. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, David. This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn it back to Luis Rojo for closing remarks. Thank you so much for joining us today. Have a nice and safe day. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.