Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by. My name is Abby and I'll be your conference operator today. At this time I would like to welcome everyone to the Veeva Systems Fiscal 2026 Second Quarter Results Conference call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker's remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question during that time, simply press star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. If you would like to withdraw your question, press star one a second time. Thank you. I would now like to turn the conference over to Gunnar Hansen of Veeva IR. You may begin. Good afternoon and welcome to Veeva Systems' fiscal 2026 second quarter earnings conference call for the quarter ended July 31, 2025. As a reminder, we posted prepared remarks on Veeva's investor relations website after 1:00 P.M. Pacific today. We hope you have had a chance to read them before the call. Today's call will be used primarily for Q&A. With me today for Q&A are Peter Gassner, our Chief Executive Officer, Paul Shawah, EVP Strategy, and Brian Van Wagener, our Chief Financial Officer. During this call we may make forward-looking statements regarding trends, our strategies, and the anticipated performance of the business, including guidance regarding future financial results. These forward-looking statements will be based on our current views and expectations and are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially. Please refer to the risks listed in our earnings release and the risk factors included in our most recent filing on Form 10-Q. Forward-looking statements made during the call are being made as of today, August 27, 2025, based on the facts available to us today. If this call is replayed or reviewed after today, the information presented during the call may not contain current or accurate information. Veeva disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. We may discuss our guidance on today's call, but we will not provide any further guidance or updates on our performance during the quarter unless we do so in a public forum on the call. We may also discuss certain non-GAAP metrics that we believe aid in the understanding of our financial results. A reconciliation to comparable GAAP measures can be found in today's earnings release and in the supplemental investor presentation, both of which are available on our website. With that, thank you for joining us and I'll turn the call over to Peter. Thank you, Gunnar, and welcome everyone to the call. We had another strong quarter delivering Q2 results ahead of our guidance. Total revenue in the quarter was $789 million with non-GAAP operating income of $353 million. Thanks to the team and our customers, our industry cloud vision is starting to come together. That means great industry-specific software, data, and business consulting all working together to help the industry become more efficient and effective. I'm especially excited about the clear vision and rapid progress on Veeva AI that will be transformative for Veeva and the industry over time. We'll now open up the call to your questions. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. If you have dialed in and would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad to raise your hand and join the queue. If you would like to withdraw your question, simply press star one a second time. If you are called upon to ask your question and are listening via speakerphone on your device, please pick up your handset and ensure that your phone is not on mute when asking your question. To be able to take as many questions as possible, we ask that you please limit yourself to one question and one follow up. Again, it is Star one if you would like to join the queue. Our first question comes from the line of Ken Wong with Oppenheimer. Your line is open. Fantastic. Peter, I wanted to touch on the resolution in terms of lawsuit with IQVIA. Can you help us walk through kind of what led to that resolution and what potential opportunities this could potentially unlock? And then for Brian, just on the Billings guide, a nice increase there, although with an inline 2Q, just help us understand the confidence in increasing the back half with what was a, you know, a more inline-ish second quarter. Thank you. Hey Ken, this is Peter. What led to the resolution? We've had this dispute for about 10 years with IQVIA and things are a lot different. Ten years ago, you know, IQVIA was still IMS, by the way, and just joining with IQVIA and Veeva wasn't that strong in clinical and IQVIA had a CRM product and now they don't. So many things have changed and we just got together sort of at the start of the year from the IQVIA leadership and myself and realized there's no reason for this conflict anymore. We can begin to learn about each other and partner for the benefit of customers and even IQVIA. It's just the passage of time, things changed and we woke up and said what are we fighting about? There's no reason to be doing this anymore. I'm super happy and I believe I can represent that IQVIA is very happy as well to have it resolved. Now in terms of what does it unlock for us? Historically in the commercial area there were two barriers, two sort of artificial barriers. One was with Salesforce that was because of our OEM agreement, we couldn't develop the applications we wanted, we weren't allowed and we couldn't develop it in the way we wanted them either. Now that's gone with Salesforce since we've moved to Vault and we have 100 live customers in CRM that's really an anchor tenant in commercial. Then we had these important products, Veeva Network, Veeva Nitro, our commercial analytics offerings. We couldn't put IQVIA data in there. This was sort of a hole in our boat. These products were impractical because they couldn't put the industry leading data in there. That's resolved now. You got the Salesforce thing resolved, the IQVIA restrictions resolved. I'm really looking forward to making Commercial Cloud, sort of like Development Cloud, really. No limits. Very excited about that. The biggest news in commercial for a long time. Ken, this is Brian I'll pick up the second question on billings. On billings, really, annual is the better indicator. We're pleased with the $35 million raise there to full year guidance, which is roughly in line with the revenue increase. Quarterly billings, as we've spoken a bit about in the past, are lumpy because there are a lot of timing factors, there's customer specific items, operational things, mix on pre and post paid, and it's just not a metric we use internally or a great indicator of the business. Annual is a better way to look at it. We're really happy with the guide there. Thank you guys. Our next question comes from the line of Joe Vruwink with Baird. Your line is open. Great. Thank you for taking my questions. Nice to see R&D subscriptions and services with larger upside just relative to how we've been modeling it. I've been interested in the evolution of Quality Cloud. It seems like that's receiving an elevated stature inside Veeva. I was hoping you can maybe just speak to what you're seeing. You know, is there a larger role for Veeva to play and maybe extending that both into the lab and also manufacturing? Looking ahead, is that maybe, you know, more of an outsized driver? Obviously I appreciate it's broad based, but is quality maybe factoring more into the five-year plan than you thought perhaps a year ago? I'll take that. This is Peter for the last one. I think we're very happy with our five-year plan. We have a lot of confidence in our $6 billion revenue plan and the changes in quality, you know, from what we see are not material. It's on track for where we roughly thought it would be. It is a big area and it has gotten elevated focus inside of Veeva in the last couple years. The start of that was to go after the LIMS area, the Laboratory Information Management. That's a super important area. We have batch release, we have a validation management product. We really elevated up to the level of the full cloud because that can be a very big business for us. Quality. Okay, that's great. Just on the excitement around AI, you know, the first products focus more in the commercial suite and then broadening out there into next year. I guess h ow do you see the opportunity? You know, I think it's interesting that Commercial Cloud takes on basically the look of Development Cloud in terms of Veeva controlling its full destiny now. Do you think that starts to be a meaningful incremental driver just monetizing agents into next year, or do you actually think that the bigger consequences may be more strategic in that Vault has developed such a robust architecture and partner ecosystem that Veeva is going to be a central role for the industry as they adopt AI? Maybe regardless of whether it's a Veeva agent or not, Vault's going to be a part of that mix one way or the other. Let's see how I would think of it. You asked a few questions there. Let me reframe a little the basic way I would think about it. Veeva Vault platform. We started that in 2010, actually late 2010, it was around this. It had content and it had data and it could do both. That was very unique. Users worked with content and data, and we were able to make integrated suites in clinical, quality, regulatory, and safety. That is what we've been doing for the last 15 years, working very hard at it and making these deep industry applications. The business rules are around all the data and the content. This is the next phase where we're going to have agents. We still have our data, we have our content, we have our agents, and the users are going to interact with all three, and the agents also interact with the content and the data. It is a fundamental new thing. We have led really and are leading in this industry cloud area, industry-specific cloud applications. I think we're going to lead in industry-specific agents, certainly inside life sciences. That is the way to think about it. The monetization will come from selling Veeva AI, which is two things: the platform so customers can create their own custom agents, but mainly our industry-specific agents that they'll get when they buy Veeva AI. With the model MCP, model context protocol, agent-to-agent interoperability is really easy, and also vault-to-vault interoperability. In terms of monetizing that, we will create billions of dollars of value for the industry. No doubt about that. Sometimes making humans much more efficient, sometimes reducing the need for certain people doing certain types of tasks. There is a tremendous amount of value being captured by the industry, and we'll get our fair share of that for sure. We're going to take that flow, work with our early adopters, end of this year and 2026 or so. I don't expect any material revenue contribution for 2026 or 2027, for example, but I expect it is a significant increase in our market size, and that'll play out over many years. This is going to be a tremendous benefit for Veeva, our employees who are building all these agents, and our customers who are getting that value. We're very excited about it. We've done that hard work over the last seven months or so of plumbing it deeply into the Vault platform. That is the really hard work, and now the application agent work is really starting in earnest. Thanks very much. Our next question comes from the line of Brent Bracelin with Piper Sandler. Your line is open. Good afternoon. I guess first one for Peter here. I'd like to go back to the long standing dispute with IMS and IQVIA that you settled. Specifically, we'd love to get your thoughts on, one, what's been the initial customer reaction feedback to the news just last week here? Do you have any? And then, two, how should we think about IQVIA that historically has been a CRM competitor? As we're going back to the Segedigm days, you know, sold some of the CRM business to Salesforce. How has that CRM specific relationship with IQVIA changed? Okay, so customer reaction to Veeva and IQVIA has just been overwhelmingly positive because it's such good news for customers. If you're a life sciences company, especially a medium to large one, there's a few things you have to have. You have to have SAP for sure in the supply chain, you have to have Microsoft on your desktop for sure. You have to have that. You're going to have Veeva inside your organization in one part, two parts, five parts, many parts. You're going to have IQVIA as well, specifically the IQVIA data. That's what you're going to have. What they had before was a problem and they needed a lot of band-aids because in a lot of situations IQVIA and Veeva didn't fit well together. It's just a sense of relief from customers and exploring, hey, what's possible, can I do this, can I do that? Very, very, very positive. In terms of IQVIA, they were a historical competitor in CRM. They're not anymore. When Salesforce got into that market directly, Pharmaceutical CRM, and said they were going to build a product, IQVIA went out of that market. I don't know what was the timing of what decisions there. I just know that IQVIA is not selling that CRM product anymore. There's no issues there. We still compete with IQVIA in areas of things like reference data, our OpenData product, our Compass product, things like that. That's normal, healthy competition. We partner in many, many areas and we compete in some and customers benefit and they don't need so many band-aids anymore to stitch things together between Veeva and IQVIA. Helpful color there. Brian, just a quick follow up on that R&D subscription growth. Sequentially it looks like it rose the most in two years. What drove the momentum in my side and R&D this quarter? Thanks. Hey, Brent. Yeah. It continues to again be broad based. We're really pleased with the execution of this team across all areas and they're working in a pretty stable environment. I think you saw a really strong Q2 and things firming up as we go into the second half of the year and Q3 and Q4, broad based, strong execution. Thank you. Our next question comes from Dylan Becker with William Blair. Your line is open. Appreciate it here. Nice job, Eddie. Peter, going back to the idea around the opportunity with AI, how you're kind of thinking about Veeva's platform approach, the network you've built, the scale you've built, giving you kind of that right to win as you embed more AI functionality across the platform. AI and maybe how more of these top 20 enterprises are going all in, maybe how that can serve as kind of gravity supporting some of that AI momentum with embedded intelligence and things of the like in the future. Yeah, right. We refer to that as structural advantage. When you have an application that's a system of record, be it the email system or the supply chain system, or all the 50 sort of applications that Veeva has that are deep in life sciences, from the CRM system to the drug safety system to the clinical trial management system, when you have that system of record with the users in there, you have the right to win the deep industry specific agents because it's in the user's workflow. Think about it, if you use Google for your email and your calendar, you would love an agent from Google that works seamlessly with that if you could get it. We have a right to win there. You call the right to win, I call it a structural advantage. We can knit that technology together so that it's a seamless platform that handles the agents, the content, the data. Another thing that Veeva has is we have a platform that's broad. We make about 50 applications with our platform, so we can touch a lot of things with our Vault platform. We put it in the Vault platform once and it can extend everywhere. We have a structural advantage. I think it's early for customers to be going all in on AI with Veeva because we haven't even released any agents yet. We have to work with our first early adopters and work that out. We have to execute. Everybody has a grand plan, but do you execute on it? That's what really makes a difference. We have to execute, prove our value. Over time, I'm quite confident when customers see the value, they will come and they will want to go all in with Veeva for AI around the things that we do, and with Microsoft around other things that they do and with SAP around other things that they do. The nice thing about identity AI that's framing up is these agents will be able to talk to each other in a much easier way than what's possible before AI. That's very helpful, thank you. That does make sense. Maybe Paul, for you with the two top 20 customers live on CRM and I know there's been a handful of more momentum of others coming online over the past few months, wondering how kind of the evidence of that live and successful implementation is resonating with customers. Maybe how that stacks up on a like-for-like cost basis versus some of the conviction and maybe again the customer conviction in the fact that that's only going to get more efficient over time, kind of compounding the obvious nature of maybe needing to migrate. Thank you. Yeah, thanks. Let me step back a little bit and just give you a little bit of a broader context. We called out seven top 20s committed to Vault CRM. In the prepared remarks, I can give you a little more context beyond that. Including verbal commitments, we added two additional top 20s for a total of nine top 20s committed to Vault CRM. We're doing really well in the market and part of it is the go lives and the continued execution there. To be fair, we're also aware that Salesforce had one additional top 20 verbal commit for a total of three. Just to give you the full picture, the latest is Veeva has nine top 20 wins. Salesforce is at three. All of the wins that I talk about are not equal. This gets to your question here. There's a very big difference between a Veeva win and a Salesforce win. You asked about the two top 20s go live less than two years after they made an announcement. They're now live in major markets and that just happened this quarter. With Veeva, a win almost becomes a certainty. We have to work at it. I don't want to make it sound too easy, but these are two significant live and happy customers now in some of their major markets and they're going to continue to go live globally through the end of the year and beyond. That's where we are with wins. That's a huge milestone. That has a big impact. With Salesforce, that's obviously very different. The earliest that they'll have a go live with a top 20 in a single region is the end of 2026, possibly finishing in, let's say, the 2029 time frame. That's obviously a very long time. A lot of things can happen between now and then, especially as our customers get the benefit of all the things that Peter just talked about around Veeva. AI being able to get started with AI this year, our partnership with IQVIA that they can take advantage of today, but that will get better over time. The chance that all three Salesforce customers go live in all regions is actually low. It's just not proven. It's going to require a lot of custom work. It's going to take years to mature, if it even gets there. All of those three wins that they have are not equal to a Veeva win and they all have a contingency plan which is Veeva. That's where things play out. The two wins that we had that are now live customers are obviously critically important and these are multi factor decisions, but this is a pretty significant play and kind of how customers are thinking about where they place their chips. Beyond the top 20, that story even gets stronger. As smaller companies, they just can't afford to take a risk on a risky project. We're feeling good about the competitive position and this is a huge milestone that Veeva had and I have confidence we'll be able to continue to win and continue to convert to live happy customers. Very helpful. Thank you guys. Our next question comes from Brian Peterson with Raymond James. Your line is open. Hey gentlemen, congrats on the quarter. I just wanted to take a step back and think about the agentic opportunity. If you think about how we could maybe size that or where you could see some of the early opportunities, I think in commercial we see that. If we're looking at the R&D portfolio and what bulk could be with the agentic opportunities, what are some of the early use cases you'd see there? How would you kind of look at that opportunity thinking about it? Maybe convert commercial versus R&D. Okay, I'll take that one. That's certainly different. We have a lot of variety in Veeva, right? We do clinical trial operations, we do commercial and medical things, and quality and manufacturing. Each one is different. In the commercial area, I don't think it's about reducing the number of people too much inside of life sciences, if at all, but it's enabling them to be more productive and hold more relationships and get more work done. That's very valuable in itself. If you look at areas within safety and clinical, there are some areas where there's a lot of outsourced, hundreds of millions of dollars of outsourced labor used to do processing type things. I think agentic AI can maybe remove the need for half of that. If you look at a clinical trial master file, agentic AI is going to be pretty good at putting a document where it should go and telling you if you have all the documentation you need for that trial based on the protocol. Is any document blurry, is any document illegible, etc.? It's going to be really darn good at that stuff. It'll be different by each area, but agentic AI is going to do some of the things that humans can do. Agentic AI is going to be able to do that. That either frees up more human time for humans to be more productive on what they need to do or reduces the need for humans. It's going to apply to every area, just like people apply to every area, but it's going to apply in different ways. Thanks, Peter. Maybe a follow up. I'd love to get an update on some of your horizontal software ambitions. I know that was a big theme at the analyst day last year. Any progress today that you can share? Thanks guys. Yeah, no specific progress. I think just to reiterate, we're working on a platform-first approach here. We're making great progress. We have a good team, stable team, making excellent progress, really excited about it. We have said in the CRM area will be our first use case, our first application. We're starting to talk to early customers and getting that feedback, et cetera. I think we'll have a project or two starting this year and then we'll give more of an update on our analyst day, more of a fulsome update. If you think about Veeva, what do we do? We make excellent products. We really buckle down and make excellent products. We sort of avoid the hype and all that stuff and we improve those products with our customers and we're very authentic. Maybe everybody thinks that, yeah, you can't do that in horizontal software. I don't know. I think we'll buck the trend and I think we'll do that. In the horizontal software, I think you'll see the flavor and the culture of Veeva come through and you'll see the product excellence come through. You got to remember a lot of these cloud applications, they were made before, they were certainly made before AI, but a lot of them were made before the iPhone too. There are some structural things when we're starting from scratch here that we can really take advantage of and the whole new markets team is super excited about that. More to come, but the activity is definitely going full steam. Good to hear. Thanks, Peter. Our next question comes from the line of Stan Berenshteyn with Wells Fargo Securities. Your line is open. Hi, thanks for taking my questions. First one, Peter, for you, going back to that IQVIA news just with Nitro and Network getting a second life here, can you just size the dollar opportunity for these products and what kind of uptake should we anticipate from clients? In terms of the dollar opportunity I would say similar to some of our other add-on products, maybe a bit bigger but similar. The way to think about it is what it enables for our full commercial suite. This helps our CRM products and all the different products we have, our events management, our patient CRM, our campaign management, our data products, because it's a more full solution. It really helps our business consulting too, which drives stickiness. I would say it lets customers over time take a bigger bite at the Veeva Apple in commercial, and you saw that in clinical when our product suite got very mature and got wholesome and got practical for people. You started customers, hey, maybe I'll just get all that Veeva stuff at once. I think that's going to happen a bit more in commercial. It's transformative. I would say if you had to think about the benefit for Veeva, maybe 25% of that benefit is related to actually revenue there, you know, business consulting and Network and Nitro, and 75% of it is related to the network and the network effect that will have on the broader commercial. Got it, thank you. A follow-up for Brian on the commercial class subscriptions. There were, I believe, kind of flattish quarter on quarter here, and in the prepared remarks Crossix was called out as seeing continued strength and momentum here in the quarter. First, wondering if there's anything offsetting that momentum here in the fiscal 2Q, and then what is factored into the raised guidance for commercial subscriptions, Thanks. Hey Stan. Great quarter for Crossix in Q2 on the back of a few great quarters in a row now. We're really pleased with the execution of that team. We expect that to continue to be a meaningful driver of growth in commercial going forward and in the balance of the year. I think more broadly you see the growth, as we touched on earlier in the call, in R&D subscriptions, which are picking up in the second half and seeing firming up of the pipeline in the second half. Good quarter of execution in Q2 and a solid view going into the second half of the year here. I guess if you could just comment why was the quarter flatter sequentially, if there's any offsets there, and what drove the raised guidance for the back half of the year for Commercial Cloud? Thank you. On commercial, I think similar factors to what we've spoken about previously, Stan, so that we still see Crossix being the main driver there. We saw that in the past quarter, continues to be a driver in Q2. Got it. Thanks so much. Our next question comes from David Windley with Jefferies. Your line is open. Hi, thanks for taking my question. Management has talked about, I think, CRM evolving to a breadth of products that would rival what R&D looks like today with the kind of release or the transition over to Vault and away from Salesforce reliance and now your IQVIA resolution that you talked about today, Peter, that seems to kind of open the path to do that more aggressively. You've already launched a couple. The question here is what is the path to a, you know, doubling or maybe even two and a half times number of products in CRM look like and are AI agents part of the count along that path? Or do you think of those, you know, as companions to that path? Thanks. Excellent question. I think there may be some new applications, but that's probably not the main way I look at it. I look at it for Veeva. AI will expand our opportunity also. We have now opportunity to pull through some of the newer applications. We already have Campaign Manager, Service Center, Patient CRM, Network, Nitro, some of our data products in our commercial analytics. If you look at our revenue on the commercial side now, Crossix is doing quite well, commercial content doing quite well, and the core CRM doing quite well. These other applications were somewhat stalled for two reasons. First, things like Campaign Manager, Service Center, Patient CRM, we couldn't develop them until we decided to move off the Salesforce platform. That was about three years ago. We had to develop those. For the ones that dealt with data and analytics, those were stymied due to the IQVIA restrictions. Long story short, we have the product footprint we need to really increase our revenue in commercial and now we just have to mature those products and do that hard work of customer adoption and customer success. You know, we're free in commercial, the runway is clear. We just have to do that hard work to go down that path. Excellent, thank you for that. The follow up for me would be just to confirm and clarify that in your data products and development path that you're thinking about there, your agreement with IQVIA does not restrict you in any way from pursuing the development, the applications that you want to, the data that you want to. Right. There's no restriction on Veeva, there's no restriction on IQVIA where, you know, the market is open and free. We will compete in some areas, partner in some areas. We both have an interest in customer success, but no restrictions on Veeva. Got it, thank you. Our next question comes from Tyler Radke with Citi. Your line is open. Thank you, Peter. On the IQVIA partnership, I know a lot of questions been asked on that, but is there sort of immediate imminent kind of revenue unlocks that is perhaps driving the higher forecast for this year around some of the data products? If you could just hit on like what this year this unlocks if anything. Yeah, nothing material for this year. Nothing that, you know, our confidence in the year is just that Q3 and Q4 are closer now than they were 90 days ago and things are firming up. No, it's any additional revenue was unlocked as it relates to IQVIA. Not material for this year, but it'll contribute in the coming years. Okay, great. More of a product and technology question. You talked a lot about your optimism, maybe a bit more medium to long term around AI and agents. Could you just sort of articulate what you view as the unique differentiator from an architecture perspective of Vault versus Agentf orce or even, you know, the back end of IQVIA? Like what do you think is, you know, puts you at an advantage, you know, whether certain design or technology decision that you made. Thanks. Yeah. Our main advantage is we have the deep application. If we just take a clinical example again, we have the clinical trial management application so that house all the people that deal with clinical and all the data about clinical and all the business rules and all the content and all the security about clinical trials. With Veeva AI, when we build an application agent that's built inside of the Vault platform, it inherently knows all the security rules and how to deal with that. It's running in the Vault application server. It also has transaction control so it can update the data and the content. It can act on behalf of the user inside of a workflow in a transactionally sound way. That's a structural advantage if you have the application. For example, what I said is if you're using Google for mail and if you need an agent to help you write emails, boy, Google has an inside advantage on that one because they know what you're doing in email. That's the main thing. From the technology perspective, we have some good technologists here making good decisions. One of the nice things is we waited a little bit, tell the large language models, tell the base AI technology settled down a little bit so we could be really accurate on how to do things. When we put it into the Vault platform, we took a platform-first approach. It's going to have very wide adoption across our different applications. You asked about something like Agentf orce. Agentf orce really grew out of the use case of a call center agent. You know, you're 1-800 number and you need, you used to outsource those people, now you, the Agentf orce, that's a little bit different. What we're doing is more of a deep application and there are other toolkit-based approaches that say, hey, you can build a bunch of AI with our toolkit. We're not like that. We are deeply embedded in the application, which I think is a structural advantage and makes you very picky. Our next question comes from the line of Rishi Jaluria with RBC. Your line is open. Oh, wonderful. Thanks so much for taking my questions. Nice to see continued progress here. Maybe I want to ask two questions on the AI front, which I know has been dominating this call. Number one, you know, Peter, you talked about the ability to leverage MCP and agent to agent transaction. I just want to kind of understand, you know, are you going to be architecting your agents out in a way like Slack? Have you already started to see this where, you know, it's not only living within the Vault ecosystem or the Veeva ecosystem, but you have the ability to do agent to agent transactions outside of Veeva, whether that's with, you know, completely different vendors like a Workday or ServiceNow or, you know, even something that might be a little bit coopetition, like an Agent force from Salesforce or something from IQVIA. Then I've got a quick follow up. Yeah, certainly we're architecting it that way that if you have an agent inside of Veeva, it can talk to an agent that might be inside of SAP or Workday or a different Salesforce one and vice versa. I think that's going to be one of the unheralded, you know, people don't realize how much of a benefit that is when you have agents that can talk to agents across systems because they're all following a common protocol. Much less brittle than if you're wiring things up with a MuleSoft and transferring data back and forth. I'm really excited about that potential. It can expose from system to system communication, but also for a user. I might be in my Microsoft Office and I might say, file this document in TMF. The Microsoft Office Copilot may have that agent, the TMF filing agent from Veeva registered with it. It says, hey, any of the agents know how to do this? The TMF agent would say, I sure do. Okay, I'll hand the document over to you. Away it goes. That might have been just from within a person's email and they just said, hey, file this document in the TMF. The agent would know by reading that document. What clinical site are you talking about? What type of a form is this? What investigator is this related to? I have to fill out three or four fields. Okay, I got it from the definition of this particular trial. I'll fish that out of the PDF. Okay, I got that. I'm done there. That can't happen without agentic behavior. All right, got it, that's really helpful. Maybe just sticking with AI agents in our text, one of the kind of things that have led to some customers dragging their feet on migrations to Vault CRM have been rebuilding some of the customizations that they've done on the previous Veeva CRM. Is there an opportunity that you can leverage, you know, agents to make that transition and movement of applications easier? Thank you. I would say now it wouldn't help the migration easier. What's really helped there is we've really got our tooling really well refined. That's not AI-based tooling. That's very specific migration tooling. We have our services team, our partners teams trained up because we have a lot of projects underway now. I think we've migrated over 20 customers, but we have about 300 more to go. This is going to become a machine. I think what it will do, and you're right, some customers are hesitant to migrate to Vault CRM. The main reason is they're happy with Veeva CRM. It's working for them and they have other things to focus on now. I think the pull of AI in CRM will cause a little bit of a pull as it really starts to roll out. That'll cause a bit of pull and then time marches on. Right. When, you know, we get into 2026, certainly the end of 2027, most customers are going to think, I'm not going to ride Veeva CRM, wait till the end. I got to get going, I got to get this done. We always thought the bulk of our migrations would happen in 2026 and 2027. I still think that's true. We have to see how it plays out. I got to believe more than two thirds are going to be done in 2026 and 2027. All right, very helpful. Thank you so much. Thanks. Our next question comes from Ryan MacDonald with Needham. Your line is open. Thanks for taking my question. Congrats on a great quarter, Peter. I was fascinated about the comments on the use of Veeva business consulting to sort of help push forward your AI initiatives, particularly because, you know, we obviously hear plenty about sort of agent fatigue amongst buyers and organizations just broadly these days. Can you just talk about sort of what level of, sort of demand that you're seeing from customers for some of these consulting services to help with change management and moving forward, should we sort of look at, you know, projects from business consulting as sort of a leading indicator for agentic AI adoption of your, of your Veeva AI tools? Thanks. Agentic fatigue, I love that term. Did you make it yourself or is that an industry term I don't know about? I don't think I'm that clever, so I'll say it's the industry. Okay, I don't know, maybe I got it or maybe I don't. Agentic fatigue, but that's a good term. You're right to pick up on this. In fact, sometimes when we have strategic meetings with the customer. I was thinking about a meeting we had a few weeks ago with the CEO and his management team of a medium sized pharma company. I think the biggest eye opener was actually what our business consulting can do for their company. Because for the first time in the industry you have a business consulting group that can do business process transformation that is aligned with the technology partner as well. These are reinforcing things. Now when AI comes in here, every AI project is a business consulting project because you're changing the boundaries of what the humans do and what the agents do. That's not going to happen just by sending an email. It's not going to work like that. You're right, it's a major structural advantage. I guess if we would disclose, you know, how many specific business consulting AI projects we're starting in any one quarter, that would be a leading indicator. We don't break it down that way, but it's certainly something I watch because that's the start of an AI project. We have one going on right now, early adopter that wanted to get going even far before the software was ready. It started with a business consulting project in the commercial content area, which is a very intricate workflow of handoffs of people between medical, regulatory and legal and different brands in different countries. Very intricate. When an agent is going to do some of that, you have to figure out, what is my workflow and what is my expectation for that? If those people were doing that step and they're not going to be doing that step anymore, what work do I want them to do? That's all business consulting. Like I said, that's not just send an email, use the agent. That's not going to work. Yep, makes full sense. I appreciate all the color there. Maybe as a follow up, it's great to see some of the continued progress with the Compass product suite. You did call out Compass prescribers seeing a bit of resistance in the marketplace or resistance to change. Can you just talk about maybe what's driving that resistance? Whether it's sort of macro driven? Is there sort of incremental product investments you need to make there, just any color you can provide on that. Thanks. I would say there's always incremental product investments we need to do. Sometimes you run the race and you run 100 miles an hour and that's faster than you expected. Sometimes you run 50 miles an hour and that's a little slower than you expected. This one's probably a little slower than expected. We ran into a few more bumps than we expected. I think in prescriber particularly we probably underestimated just the resistance to change in that area. We're turning the corner a bit. Really, customers are pretty happy with it. We project the first product to project procedure, products and procedures for 4,000+ brands that was just not available before. People don't know really what to make of it too much. They're very used to the way things are. It's just been a hard market. When it goes, it'll go, I think. Great. Thanks, Peter. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, to be able to take our remaining questions in the time that we have left, we ask that you please now limit yourself to one question. Our next question comes from Craig Hettenbach with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Great, thanks. Just a question on the macro backdrop which hasn't changed for prepared remarks kind of in the last 90 days. You know, Crossix is highlighted as an area of relative strength. Any other kind of segments that you would call out in terms of despite some of the macro uncertainty that are, you know, still performing really well. Hi Craig. Yeah, this is Brian. I'll take this one. On the macro environment, I think what we're seeing overall is while there's still elevated uncertainty that there's really change. It's fairly stable in that level of uncertainty. We continue to see customers work effectively within that environment. We continue to see pipeline build and deals progress. That's the main contributor to what you heard is talked about as a firming up of the view for Q3 and Q4. No one area that I would call out in particular. We're seeing good execution across the business and customers stay focused on the task at hand. Got it. Thank you. Our next question comes from Kirk Materne with Evercore ISI. Your line is open. Hi, this is Dawn for Kirk, and thanks for taking my question. Brian, you already have great margins, but are you seeing any in-house benefits yet from AI in R&D or sales and marketing functions? Hey Bill, I think on AI internally, we don't expect a meaningful contribution from that in the short term. We think these have the potential to be a transformational tool over the long term. For us, it's really a new tool about driving productivity and quality. We've got access so that everybody internally has some models that are integrated with our email system. Our engineers have specific tools that are in their flow of work, a lot like what Peter talked about with customers and building AI embedded in customers' flow of work. I wouldn't expect a big sudden headcount change. It's a tool that we're using to continue to drive quality and productivity in our team. Great, thanks. Our next question comes from DJ Hynes with Canaccord Genuity. Your line is open. Hey guys. Going back to the two top 20s that have gone live on Vault CRM in major markets, can you just speak to the economics of those very early large Vault CRM customers? Both spend levels and margin contribution maybe compared to what that may have looked like on legacy Veeva CRM? I guess I can take that one. Prices similar. I guess the best way you say it's not exactly the same because the packaging is somewhat different. It's a bit simplified in Vault CRM vs Veeva CRM, but revenue wise to Veeva about similar. Over the long term, our cost of goods sold will be smaller. In the short term, actually a little bit bigger because we have some transition costs. During that transition time, the customers, you know, we're getting them going on Vault CRM and the customers are still using the Veeva CRM and they can continue that for a while to do a cutover and archive. In the short term a little more cost of goods sold and then in the longer term better cost of goods sold. From a revenue perspective should be roughly neutral. Okay, got it. Thank you. Our next question comes from Jailendra Singh with Truist Securities. Your line is open. Thank you. Thanks for taking my questions. I want to follow up on the Crossix comments. Can you be a little bit more specific there? It seems Crossix still remains strong, but how were trends there compared to Q1? Broadly, what would you attribute from the key drivers behind Crossix's performance? Is it strengthened industry trends or are you gaining market share? Just trying to better understand if all the noise around other marketing channels for pharma companies is creating more opportunity for you guys and your confidence in sustainability of those trends going forward. Hey Jill, Andrea, this is Brian. I'll take this one. On the Crossix trends, I think we saw continued strong performance coming into Q2. You recall that in Q1 where we had some outperformance there, we said it was largely driven by audiences and we're waiting to see some of those trends play out. We saw continued growth across the Crossix business. We're not going to break it out specifically, but it continues to be a meaningful driver of growth in Commercial and we see that continuing as we go into the balance of the year. There's some seasonality in Crossix. It tends to be a little bit heavier in Q1 than over the course of the year, but that's really more about the nature of the market than any change in the macro trends. We think we're positioned well there and continuing to pursue market leadership in that space. I would add on, I would say we are increasing market share is one thing we're doing and then we're increasing our product footprint. So audience is relatively new for us. That's growing quite well. Traditionally, Crossix made, you know, it's very strong in the consumer measurement and optimization of the patients and potential patients. Now we're getting quite a bit better and pharma is actually spending more incremental money in the marketing to healthcare providers and so we're doing more measurement in what's called the HCP marketing. That's what you're seeing. It's growth on two axes, both market share and product footprint. That's really, if you get down to it, that's driven by producing solid ROI and customer success. It's kind of a word of mouth business and that's what's going on. Great, thanks a lot. Our next question comes from Saket Kalia with Barclays. Your line is open. Okay, great. Hey guys, thanks for taking my question here. Peter, maybe for you it's great to get to see the IQVIA stuff sort of behind us. You know, Nitro in my view was really one of Veeva's early AI products. We didn't hear much about that product earlier on because of the data challenges with IQVIA. Now that that's out of the way, how quickly can we get Nitro back in front of customers and how much of a multiplier could that be to your CRM deals or however you think about the revenue opportunity? Yeah, it is, you know, if you're happy to see it, I'm probably triply happy to see it, you know, and the whole Veeva team, imagine if you're working on the Nitro product or the Network product, you're going in there and you have one hand tied behind your back. Now all of a sudden you don't have that restriction. Part of it is we have to relearn that motion in Veeva, right? We have to invest in the people and invest in the product and the selling. We have to relearn that motion so that it's not going to happen overnight. We need to do that. In terms of the revenue, again I won't break it out but it'll be significant. Mainly it's significant as we'll show up with a more wholesome, a more fulsome solution to the customer. It will enable us to do all types of things, make new data products, make new analytical products and just show up with a better, more full suite. I couldn't be more excited about it and I think the main reason I'm excited is customers are excited about our joint customers. We had got I guess just the week after it was announced, the following week I believe, or maybe one week afterwards we had a call, a joint call with Veeva and IQVIA with I believe that was certainly a top 20 pharma if not a top 10 at their request. There were high level people from the customer and that never happened before as far as I know in the history of Veeva here. It was very productive information sharing. The Veeva team came away energized, the IQVIA team came away energized and the customer team came away energized. There were actually specific follow ups to explore this or to explore that. That never happened before. I'm just optimistic that a lot of value can be created and ideas can come out of this that are super positive for the industry. We do different things, IQVIA and Veeva, and then we compete in certain areas. The one thing we do share deeply, both of us have a proven deep commitment and understanding of the industry. IQVIA is a much bigger company than us and they do different things than us, but we share that in space. We're both deeply committed to the industry. We're probably the two largest companies that are deeply, deeply committed to, in terms of revenue anyway or impact, deeply committed to life sciences. Now we're working together in the customer's interest. I'm pretty excited about it. Sounds like a great outcome for everybody. Thanks. Yeah, it is. Thank you. Our next question comes from Jeff Garro with Stephens. Your line is open. Yeah, thanks for taking the question. One more AI question out there specifically around the R&D product set. The market seems to have a strong appetite for AI in clinical development and you've outlined, you know, a measured approach to releasing AI agents into the market. I am wondering if you could comment on how you plan to work with partners in the interim as you get to a fuller set of agents released. Any early thoughts on where Veeva can automate in a differentiated way versus partnerships, effectively driving value for your life science sponsor clients? The partner work certainly continues and we have customers using partners and there's no issues there. You mentioned a measured approach about AI. I guess that's true, but the goals are pretty big. When we talk about in the TMF area, where we have 20 out of the top 20 using our TMF, we have a goal internally to see if we can reduce the processing and the outsourced labor needed in and around the TMF by 50% in the industry. That's not measured. That's a very, very aggressive goal. To do that, you have to start out with these big goals in mind and then you have to incrementally make progress. Partners will play a part in that because with Veeva AI and the ability to develop these agents and for agents to interoperate, I think there's going to be good room for partners to develop agents that interoperate with our agents and then customers to develop their own custom agents pretty quickly to do the small things that we're not going to get around to that might be very specific to that customer. Measured progress and very deliberate platform first, but the goals are very large. Our next question comes from the line of Stephen Valiquette with Mizuho Securities. Your line is open. Yeah, thanks. Good afternoon. Really just a quick follow up, another one here on Crossix, which I think you kind of half answered, but I'm just going to ask it anyway. Last quarter in fiscal 1Q, you mentioned the usage based component of Crossix drove more of the upside. You mentioned back then that could be lumpy and that was reflected in the full year guide. I guess just one quarter later, just want to confirm how you're still thinking about that lumpiness for the back half of fiscal 2026 and then also for fiscal 1Q you mentioned Crossix was growing at over 30%. I'm just wondering, are you able to comment on whether Crossix is still or was still comping at 30% growth or more in the fiscal second quarter as well? We continue to see good growth in both areas of Crossix. The measurement business, which is a little more consistent subscription-like business, as well as the audiences business, which is usage based, both were drivers of growth in Q2. Audiences was in Q1 and remains in Q2 the higher growth segment of the business, the smaller but higher growth segment of the business. We're not going to break down a specific growth rate quarter by quarter and speak to the 30% each quarter, but it still remains that audiences is the primary growth driver of that business. Our next question comes from the line of Andrew DeGasperi with BNP Paribas. Your line is open. Thanks for taking my question and fitting me in. Just on a follow up, I appreciate the color on the verbal commitments on the CRM side, I was just wondering, are you seeing any, can you comment on any potential verbal commitments on EDC? If you can't answer that question, I was just going to add in terms of the headcount growth you had. I know it's the recent graduate class. I'm just wondering, is this like a once a year event? I didn't see that kind of level of additions in the past 12 months at least. Thank you. I'll take the verbal commitment one. We're always talking with customers on EDC and other areas, but you know, we don't, we really don't get into that level of verbal commitment. I think the Salesforce one is a little bit of a sort of a weird territory. We're in here with the Vault CRM for the next nine months. We wanted to give you updates there because we know people are interested in that one. Brian, in terms of the seasonality, do you want to take that one? Absolutely. On the hiring side, the headline there is in line with our expectations and driven by the core business generation. Veeva, which is our hiring program for recent graduates, was, as you mentioned, the largest driver of that. That's a really important program for us. It feeds our consulting, our professional services, and our engineering. It had a larger class in Q2 relative to its usual mix, but was in line with our expectation. A little bit of a shift in the mix versus prior years, but as we expected. Thank you. Our next question comes from David Larsen with BTIG. Your line is open. Hi. How many total Vault CRM wins were there in the quarter? I think there were 28 last quarter, and just any color on the trend sequentially, and where those wins are coming from, please. Thank you. Yeah, David, this is Paul. We had 13 total, which was a mix of new customers that were mostly buying a first CRM, but also some of the migrations from Veeva CRM. I would think about each quarter having a mix of both of those categories, but also it being relatively lumpy because the number of companies that are coming online each quarter buying a new CRM, that will vary. That will change. It's not a linear thing. Also, the number of migrations in 2025, I expect that to be some of the lower years. I expect that number to ramp up as we get into 2026 and through 2027 and even 2028. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our question and answer session. I will now turn the conference back over to Mr. Peter Gassner for closing remarks. Thank you, everyone, for joining the call today, and thank you to our customers for your continued partnership and to the Veeva team for your outstanding work in the quarter. I'm looking forward to talking with you again at our upcoming investor day, October 16th. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's call. We thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.