Aurubis Aktie

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the analyst call. The conference will be recorded. At this time, all participants have been placed on a listen-only mode. The floor will be open for questions following the presentation.

Let me now turn the floor over to Elke Brinkmann, Head of Investor Relations.

Good afternoon, and welcome to our Q3 2025-'26 conference call. We will walk you through the results for the first 9 months of our fiscal year.

With us on the call are our CEO, Toralf Haag; and CFO, Steffen Hoffmann. After the presentation, we will be happy to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions] Before we start, let me draw your attention to our disclaimer. We will make forward-looking statements today. These are based on current plans and expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially.

That being said, let me now turn the floor over to Toralf Haag.

Thank you, Elke, and good morning and good afternoon from sunny Hamburg. Before we dive into the details later in the presentation, let me provide you with a high-level overview of the performance in the first 9 months.

Operating EBT increased significantly by 31% to EUR 374 million compared to the previous year, in line with expectations. Operating EBITDA came in at EUR 570 million. The improved performance in the first 9 months was supported by markedly higher earnings in Q3 of fiscal year '25-'26, where operating EBT came in at EUR 149 million, a 23% increase versus Q2 of the current fiscal year. Net cash flow was minus EUR 28 million, considerably below last year's EUR 357 million. This is mainly due to the temporary buildup of the intermediate product inventories to supply the phased commissioning of the expanded tankhouse in Pirdop.

As just highlighted, the increase in inventories is a temporary effect, which by the fiscal year-end, we expect the net cash flow to be above the prior year level of EUR 677 million. As alluded to in our Q2 analyst call, free cash flow before dividend came in as expected, significantly negative at minus EUR 365 million compared to minus EUR 211 million last year. Based on our latest planning, we continue to expect the free cash flow before dividend to break-even at a minimum for the full fiscal year '25-'26.

Operating return on capital employed increased to 9.4%, up from 9.1%, reflecting improved earnings performance and partly offset by the temporary inventory buildup. In light of the improved results after 9 months and our current planning, from today's perspective, we anticipate operating EBT to come in around the upper end of the forecast range for the '25-'26 fiscal year.

Let us now have a look at how the market environment developed over the last quarter. Against the backdrop of an exceptionally tight market environment, sulfuric acid was one of the most supportive earnings drivers during the third quarter as the ongoing Middle East shipping restrictions and the Chinese export ban for sulfuric acid are lifting prices to new highs.

European spot copper premiums remained at high levels, supported by healthy demand for refined copper. In recycling markets, spot refining charges for scrap #2 stayed above prior year levels despite a moderate easing during the quarter. By contrast, concentrate markets remain very challenging. Spot TC/RCs for copper concentrates declined further and remained under pressure as smelter demand continues to outpace mine supply.

With regard to the price environment of our key metals, copper continued its upward trend during the third quarter. This was supported by robust demand expectations and a constructive market backdrop. Gold and silver remained at historically elevated levels as well, although both metals saw some consolidation compared to the exceptionally strong levels reached earlier this year.

The euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate fluctuated during the quarter, but remained within a relatively narrow trading range. As always, bear in mind that there is no direct one-to-one relationship between spot price movements and our reported earnings. As part of our exposure are hedged and some effects materialize with a time lag.

Now I would like to hand over to Steffen. He will walk you through our performance in the third quarter and the financial results for the first 9 months of the fiscal year.

Thank you, Toralf. Good afternoon, and a warm welcome from my side as well. Let me start with the key figures for the third quarter. Overall, Q3 marked another step-up in profitability. Operating EBT increased to EUR 149 million, up 23% compared to the previous quarter. Apart from achieving a higher metal result, we leveraged the opportunities of the tight sulfuric acid market earlier than we had hinted at in the last conference call. Along with improved recycling RCs, these positive earnings contributions compensated for the drop in concentrate TC/RCs.

Net cash flow amounted to minus EUR 189 million compared to plus EUR 169 million in Q2. Cash generation remains a key priority for us. However, in the last quarter, we built inventories to ensure a smooth ramp-up of our strategic projects. In addition, we had some seasonally higher levels of finished goods. Thus, the weaker cash flow should be seen as a temporary effect that should be reversed by the end of the fiscal year '25-'26.

Looking at Page 7. Let's switch to the 9-month overview. Group revenues increased by 29% to EUR 17.8 billion, mainly reflecting higher metal prices and solid operating performance across the business. Operating EBT increased by 31% to EUR 374 million. The earnings drivers in the first 9 months were largely consistent with those seen in Q3. Higher contributions from the metal result, recycling activities, sulfuric acid, and copper products more than compensated for the continued pressure on concentrate TC/RCs.

As mentioned for Q3, net cash flow was impacted by temporary inventory effects in the third quarter and therefore, amounting to minus EUR 28 million compared to plus EUR 357 million in the prior year. Operating ROCE improved to 9.4% from 9.1% and increased for the third consecutive quarter, supported by the strong earnings momentum despite an increase in capital employed.

Coming to our sources of income, you will see that gross margin increased to around EUR 1.7 billion, up by roughly EUR 140 million versus the prior year. The increase was driven not only by higher copper and precious metal prices, but also by a strong operational performance in the first 9 months of fiscal year '25-'26, as higher production volumes across the group provided an additional uplift. Please bear in mind that the same period last year was impacted by the planned maintenance shutdown in Pirdop.

The metal result increased its contribution from 37% to 43% of gross margin, benefiting from higher metal prices and the stronger production performance. In contrast, the share of TC/RCs and recycling RCs declined from 27% to 21%. As expected, the tight concentrate market weighed on earnings, although recycling charges developed more favorably and partly cushioned the impact.

Products and premiums remained broadly stable at 36% of gross margin. Healthy demand for copper products and a stronger sulfuric acid contribution helped offset the headwinds from raw mat markets. Overall, this development illustrates the strength of our multimetal business model. Pressure in one earnings component can be compensated by opportunities in others.

On Page 9, let's now dive into the multimetal Recycling segment. The segment generated a gross margin of EUR 589 million, an increase of EUR 87 million compared to the prior year. Within the gross margin mix, the metal result increased its contribution from 46% to 51%, benefiting primarily from higher prices for gold, silver and copper. The share of refining charges decreased from 44% to 39%, which is mainly due to the shift in distribution of the gross margin drivers. On a higher gross margin basis, refining charges still contributed a higher absolute earnings amount than in the prior year. Products and premiums remained stable at 10% and continue to provide an additional earnings contribution.

The stronger earnings profile translated into operating EBITDA of EUR 162 million, up from EUR 97 million, while operating EBT increased to EUR 87 million from EUR 36 million. Importantly, operating ROCE improved to 3.8% from a low 0.6%, reflecting the improved earnings performance despite continued growth investments and an elevated capital employed.

Turning now to the performance of the CSP segment. The segment generated a gross margin of more than EUR 1.1 billion, an increase of around EUR 50 million compared to the prior year. Products and premiums remained the largest earnings contributor with a share of 50%. This is broadly in line with last year, highlighting the continued strength of our copper products and sulfuric acid businesses.

The metal result increased its contribution from 32% to 38%, benefiting from higher copper and precious metal prices. As expected, contribution from treatment and refining charges declined from 19% to 12%. Despite higher production volumes, we were faced with softer TC/RC levels that gradually roll over into our contracts, although not to the same extent as the development we showed earlier for the spot market.

Concentrate throughput increased to 1.9 million tonnes, while sulfuric acid sales rose to 1.8 million tonnes. The increase in sulfuric acid earnings reflects both higher volumes and higher prices. The volume increase benefited from the absence of the Pirdop shutdown, which was carried out in the prior year, while higher sulfuric acid prices started to contribute more meaningfully to earnings in Q3. As a result, for CSP, operating EBITDA increased to EUR 461 million from EUR 436 million, while operating EBT rose to EUR 355 million from EUR 342 million. Operating ROCE came in at 15.5%, below last year's 17.6%, which was mainly driven by an increase in capital employed of around EUR 200 million.

Turning to Page 11. Let's now take a look at cost development in the group. Total costs edged up by about EUR 60 million, 4% increase to EUR 1.48 billion, largely on account of footprint expansion. The main driver was higher scheduled depreciation and amortization of EUR 37 million, reflecting our investment activities and the ramp-up of strategic projects. The uptick in personnel cost is also in part attributable to our increased footprint and the associated higher average headcount, as well as to general wage inflation. Other operating expenses decreased slightly to 20% of total costs with logistics and administrative costs being the largest components. With a share of 9%, energy costs were broadly on par with the prior year level, thanks to an effective energy management and hedging.

On to the cash flow bridge on Page 12. Starting with operating EBITDA, which was at EUR 570 million, offset by a EUR 525 million increase in net working capital, which reflects the impact of higher metal prices, seasonal effects and the ramp-up of our strategic projects.

Aurubis has a track record of generating reliable cash flows. However, as we regularly highlight, cash flow at any reporting date can be influenced by temporary balance sheet effects. Including tax payments of EUR 73 million, net cash flow amounted to minus EUR 28 million compared to plus EUR 357 million in the prior year.

Cash outflow for investing activities totaled EUR 322 million and was primarily related to Aurubis Richmond and the new precious metals refinery in Hamburg. As I have mentioned during the Q2 conference call, we expected a significantly negative free cash flow for Q3 of this fiscal year '25-'26, mainly due to temporary inventory buildup in connection with the phased commissioning of the tankhouse expansion in Pirdop as well as normal seasonality. So in light of this, the free cash flow of minus EUR 365 million came in as expected.

Cash generation remains a key management priority, and we continue to expect net cash flow for the full year to exceed the prior year level. We also remain on-track to achieve a free cash flow before dividends at least at breakeven level for the full fiscal year.

After P&L and cash flow, let me briefly touch on our balance sheet and key financial ratios. The equity ratio stood at close to 49% compared to around 56% in the prior year. While the equity increased by more than EUR 250 million, the mentioned increase in balance sheet in total more than compensated for this effect.

For the full year, we expect the KPI to be closer to the level of the previous year. In consequence of the change in the net financial position, our debt coverage increased to 1.0 from 0.6 in the prior year, which is still well below our target of not more than 3. Considering that we are executing one of the largest investment programs in the company's history, a ratio of 1.0 remains very moderate and underlines the continued strength of our balance sheet.

Capital expenditure decreased significantly versus last year, reflecting that the strategic CapEx program is almost behind us. Capital employed increased by around EUR 630 million to EUR 4.8 billion, reflecting both our strategic growth investments and the temporary working capital buildup, which we highlighted earlier.

Let's now turn to the outlook for the key drivers of our business for the remainder of the current fiscal year '25-'26. Overall, the raw material markets remain competitive but manageable. Our diversified sourcing setup and long-term supply relationships continue to support stable operations despite challenging market conditions. Concentrate markets are still the most demanding area. We continue to expect concentrate availability to stay tight and TC/RCs to remain under pressure as global smelting demand continues to exceed mine supply.

In recycling, markets conditions remain broadly stable. While a modest seasonal decline in availability is typical towards summer, we currently see no material change in the overall supply situation and continue to view recycling markets as supportive.

Regarding the euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate, we maintain our previous view despite some fluctuations in the last quarter. And the outlook for sulfuric acid remains highly favorable. Given the Chinese export restrictions and ongoing logistical disruptions, we anticipate the current market environment to prevail.

Metal prices continue to provide support, particularly for copper and precious metals and demand for our copper products remains healthy. Thus, the outlook remains intact overall, as we are actively navigating challenges.

Based on our performance of the first 9 months of the fiscal year, we confirm our full year guidance of EUR 700 million to EUR 800 million operating EBITDA and EUR 425 million to EUR 525 million operating EBT, and expect the EBT to come in at the upper end of the guidance range.

For the operating ROCE on group level, we maintain the communicated level between 10% and 12%. For net cash flow, we expect to be above last year's level as the previously discussed temporarily higher inventory levels should be reversed until fiscal year-end. Following our net cash flow guidance and the projected reversal of inventory buildups, we also continue to anticipate a free cash flow before dividend at least at the break-even level for which we see ourselves being on-track. Still, please bear in mind that the usual working capital fluctuations in high metal price environments may affect our free cash flow at the balance sheet date.

Having outlined all of this, let me remind you that all of these guidance figures are built on our current market assumptions, as usual, and do not account for major unforeseen disruptions.

With this, I'd like to hand back over to Toralf.

Thank you very much, Steffen. I would like now to turn to our strategic projects and start with Complex Recycling Hamburg, where we have reached an important milestone during this quarter. After first production in May, we officially commissioned the plant and celebrated its inauguration in July. The project was delivered as planned, demonstrating our disciplined approach to project execution.

Since startup, the ramp-up has progressed well, and we exceeded our internal targets for the first 9 months of operation. This success reflects the excellent preparation and collaboration of the teams on site. We have already reached the targeted feed mix of internal and external raw materials. This is encouraging from both a technical and a commercial perspective. Looking ahead, we will steadily increase throughput, and we expect the plant to contribute to the group's earnings through TC/RCs and metal results incurred from complex raw materials. Overall, CRH is proving to be a success as it strengthens our smelter network by unlocking the unique opportunities it offers.

Let me now walk you through the recent developments in the U.S. We consider Aurubis Richmond a key pillar of our growth strategy and step by step, we are moving ahead technically and commercially. That being said, during the last quarters, we already indicated that ramping up the greenfield smelter is taking longer than originally anticipated as we experienced technical challenges during ramp-up. Accordingly, we corrected the expected EBITDA contribution from Richmond for the fiscal year '25- '26 to a level below breakeven.

The longer ramp-up of key equipment is causing commissioning of both phases to overlap, leading to an overall longer ramp-up period. From today's perspective, ramp-up for Phase 1 will be completed in fiscal year '26-'27, and ramp-up for Phase 2 in fiscal year '27-'28, respectively. Furthermore, given the overall heterogeneous and dynamic nature of the recycling market, raw material qualities and quantities have naturally shifted from the original plan as well, which impacts the technical side to some extent, too.

Against the background of the technical and commercial issues, Aurubis Richmond's mid-term earning profile shifts out by 1 year. We are actively addressing both angles, the technical as well as the commercial ramp-up. In light of the longer time needed, we expect that in the current fiscal year, Aurubis Richmond will contribute to the group's earnings to a similar degree as last year. This is based on today's reiterated guidance for fiscal year '25-'26, where we see ourselves at the upper end of the EUR 425 million to EUR 525 million corridor for the group.

For the outer years, positive effects resulting from higher metal prices and improved commercial terms support the earnings outlook, while the forecast also reflects the updated assumptions on ramp-up timing, the feed mix, and metal contents.

After full technical and commercial ramp-up, as of today, we expect the medium-term annual EBITDA contribution from Richmond to the Aurubis Group to be in a healthy territory, not exactly at the previous year target -- at the previous target level, still in the triple-digit million-euro region. As I stated in the beginning, we are convinced that Aurubis Richmond creates a foundation for us to further grow in the U.S., and we are managing the technical and commercial complexities of the business.

Finally, I would also like to briefly update you on the tankhouse expansion in Pirdop, another important cornerstone within our strategic investment program. This project is designed to remove a bottleneck in our production network and increase annual cathode production by 120,000 tonnes. Construction work and installation of the main equipment have been completed. The gradual commissioning process is now underway, and we expect operations to commence in autumn 2026. Once fully ramped up, the expansion will increase cathode production and contribute to our gross margin through higher products and premiums while also optimizing logistics costs. With this project, we add another building block to our smelter network, increasing resilience and seizing opportunities.

Coming to a close. Let me summarize the key takeaways from today's presentation. For the first 9 months, Aurubis delivered an operating EBT of EUR 374 million, which is 31% above the prior year level. Operating EBT in the third quarter is at EUR 149 million and is supported by an improved metal result, increased revenues from processing recycling materials, as well as from sulfuric acid and copper products.

Our cash flow in the third quarter was temporarily impacted by an inventory buildup, largely in connection with the strategic projects, which we expect to reverse until fiscal year-end. Thus, we maintain our target to achieve a free cash flow before dividend breakeven at the minimum for the fiscal year '25-'26. On the back of our improved performance, the group operating return on capital employed increased while still being dampened by the temporary inventory spike.

With respect to our strategic project pipeline, we continue to make progress. CRH was officially inaugurated. The tankhouse expansion in Pirdop is close to commissioning. And in Richmond, we are addressing the extended ramp-up and shifted earnings profile.

For the remainder of the fiscal year, we expect that higher metal prices, earnings from recycling raw materials, as well as higher contributions from the copper products and sulfuric acid business will mitigate the effects from the challenging concentrate markets. Therefore, we confirm our guidance for the fiscal year '25-'26 and expect operating EBT to come in around the upper end of the forecast range of EUR 425 million to EUR 525 million.

With this, I would like to hand back over to Elke Brinkmann.

Thanks, Toralf and Steffen. Before we open the line for your questions, I would like to provide you with an overview of the next events. Our annual report for fiscal year '25-'26 will be released on December 2nd, and followed by the Q1 publication on February 4th, and the AGM on February 11th.

That being said, I'll now hand over to the operator for the first question.

[Operator Instructions] We already have a few questions submitted. The first question goes to Deutsche Bank from Bastian Synagowitz.

I've got a couple, and I will take them one by one, if that's okay. And maybe starting off on guidance here. So I guess if we take the upper end of your guidance, it implies a flat pretax of around EUR 150 million in the fourth quarter. And I guess you've got the Lunen standstill, which is now completed, which reverses roughly EUR 10 million in earnings. You've got the sulfuric contributions, which will be higher, which you mentioned already as well as the metal result. Just looking at the prices of gold, silver and copper, I guess, there should be still definitely some room to go considering your hedge duration. I guess all of these are pretty positive drivers and potentially powerful. And you mentioned TC/RCs, but I guess those are mostly contracted. So what is going against you here to basically still basically just guide for flat EBT in the last quarter? And what are the points to keep in mind? That's my first question.

Thank you, Bastian. So I think it's important to reiterate here that during the course of the year, we have increased the guidance 2x. With this call, we stayed within the guidance range, but we added the language that we see ourselves at the upper end of the range. We did not say the upper half. We said the upper end of the range. So what we are trying to say here is that we look into a good fourth quarter. We look into a quarter 4, that should be in the similar ballpark as Q3, but still for the full year within the range at the upper end.

So if we look at the drivers here, obviously, sulfuric acid helping a lot, helped quite nicely in Q3. But yes, there is an upside in Q4 versus Q3. On the metal for the time being, I would assume it can be similar, Q4 as Q3 on a good level, similar. Same for products on a similar level, but a good level. RCs similar on a good level. And then I think there's two things. One is TC/RCs, where we have seen a gradual more difficult situation during the quarter. So we make our assumptions here on the fact that the Q4 TC/RC impact should be visible versus Q3.

And then finally, what you always see, at least at our end in the seasonality of cost in the last quarter of a fiscal year, we would expect that costs are a bit more pronounced, a bit more expelled. But once again, we are trying to send a constructive message here on Q4, and we are quite happy with how the year is evolving.

Okay. Great. Very clear. Then maybe moving on to the situation in Richmond and I guess you basically cut your expectations for the project as most people just turned a bit more positive given the policy backdrop, I guess, the metal prices, and it's also pretty decent scrap RC levels over in the year. So some of the factors which you highlighted as to why you're cutting the target here sound a bit more temporary in nature, which are really the drivers for you to impair the outlook structurally? And is there also any early indication on where you expect the EBITDA number for the project contribution to go next year? Maybe also just adding to that, has your D&A schedule changed with the delay?

Yes, Bastian, let me start on the structure, we -- firstly, like we said in the presentation, we firmly believe that this is the right investment and that this will significantly contribute to Aurubis earnings in the future. The main reason is the technical ramp-up, where we experienced some difficulties, which you can say is, on the one hand, normal when you have a greenfield expansion. On the other hand, we had to adapt our technical capabilities to also to the feed mix, which is a little bit different in the U.S. than it is in Europe. So we are in a, I would say, in a learning phase there, but we are producing metal, so -- but it's below our expectations. But we are confident that this will improve over the course of the next month.

So the main reason for the delay is some technical issues we have in Phase 1. We don't expect that we have the same amount of technical issues in Phase 2, when we ramp that up because we will learn from Phase 1. The commercial terms, like we said, we are establishing ourselves in the market. We don't see this as a major issue going forward. We have established relationships with the raw material, with the recycling suppliers in the West, because we have this relationship before. So there's long-term trusted relationships.

We are currently well supplied in the plant, and we continue to play a role in that market. And we are positive on the overall outlook of the recycling market for the future, also in the U.S. because copper demand is rising. And as you know, they cannot fulfill all their copper demand by internal sources, not by concentrates and recycling materials. And we also think there will be some benefits in the next months by the further tightening of the U.S. Government of the export of recycling materials to other parts of the world.

So in summary, again, the main cause for the -- what we mentioned for the delay is technical issues in the ramp-up of Phase 1. Maybe Steffen, to the outlook.

Yes. Bastian, you asked about, let's say, an indication for an EBITDA for next year. I mean, we all know that today is probably not the point in time where we want to guide for next year. But still to get into the topic you alluded to, Toralf said in his speech that the earnings profile for Richmond shifts out by 1 year. We did start this fiscal year with an ambition to achieve EBITDA breakeven for this fiscal year. We stated today that this is not the case anymore. But if you apply this rule of thumb of shifting out by 1 year, we roughly can say that, obviously, we definitely want to achieve an EBITDA breakeven next year.

Okay. Okay. Great. That's helpful. And the D&A schedule, I guess, has not changed versus the original guidance?

Right. It has not -- sorry, we were muted here. It has not changed. That's correct.

Got you. Okay. And sorry to come back just on the structural shift. So from what I understood, you basically maybe walked back a little bit the EUR 170 million EBITDA contribution target, which you had given earlier. And I guess you wouldn't have done that if you would still expect EUR 160 million or maybe EUR 150 million or whatever. So it seems like we may come in below that number. Did I understand that correctly? And again, from everything you talked about earlier, the sound all like very temporary basically headwinds, which I guess you say yourself, you will be fixing over time. So if you walk back the EUR 170 million, what are the lasting headwinds relative to what you were aiming for before?

You're correct that today, we are saying that we see the EBITDA contribution from Richmond to the Aurubis Group in healthy territory, but not exactly at the previous target level. You just alluded to the figure but it's still in a triple-digit million euro region. With that, we are not saying that it's exactly where this triple-digit million-euro region starts. So it's somewhere between where it starts and where we initially guided. We would now -- as we talk here about, let's say, a mid-term period, and so let's say we talk about the next 3 years ahead.

I'm sure in this dynamic, but also a very promising U.S. market, there will always be some premise changes. So that's why, as of today, we will not shoot exactly for a new figure. But what we are trying to say, it's below this lower end of what is a triple-digit figure and what has been before. So let's say, a double-digit million-euro gap between what we had initially said. What we mentioned here is based on a view of, let's say, the next 2- , 3-4 years that we are basing ourselves on. It would not make sense to look out further into the future. And let's say, this technical ramp-up situation that Toralf has described is probably more a thing of the next 2 years.

The commercial ramp-up is obviously, also a decisive endeavor now for the next 2 years, and this is where we base ourselves. And perhaps to frame it a bit, because obviously, it's absolutely right that we focus here on Richmond. But to frame it a bit, we also want to make the point that with all the strategic initiatives that the company has launched in the last years, we are confident to stay within the envelope of an EBITDA improvement in the mid-term for Aurubis Group of EUR 260 million. So even though we talk today about a certain piece of setback on Richmond, I think it's important to make the point that we are very comfortable as of today with the mid-term EUR 260 million EBITDA for the group.

Okay. Great. Very clear. Then just maybe coming back again to the bigger picture here and the implications for the project. So maybe taking the mid-point of what may be the new target contribution for EBITDA and then also considering, I guess, the latest or the last disclosed budget and cost inflation, and maybe also the higher start-up cost, it becomes technically quite difficult for the project to still hit the 15% ROCE target, which you have on group level. And I guess the project has been footing on the view that there is abundant availability of scrap, and now that has been part of the reason for cutting the EBITDA target.

So I guess, unless something materially changes, the logical conclusion would be that building another recycling smelter in the U.S. may no longer make sense. I guess what are your thoughts here? And how does this impact your ambition to do another growth project in the U.S. at all, would be great to have your thoughts on that side.

Outlook on the U.S. market and the evaluation of different strategic alternatives has not changed. The demand for copper in the U.S. will grow strongly over the next years and decades, driven by data centers, energy infrastructure and defense. And recycling will -- is and will stay an important pillar to satisfy that demand. So operating a metallurgical plant, we have to, like we said, adapt and fine-tune. But our view on the U.S. market, it remains unchanged.

We continue to explore opportunities to grow further in the U.S. while we are building the Richmond business. And we see U.S. as an attractive growth region. And these strategic alternatives, as we said before, consider different alternatives, which also could potentially include another recycling smelting capacity.

Okay. Just again, like from taking the parameters on the existing projects where you have visibility, again, you're not hitting your 15% return target. And I guess, is then the logic that, again, also the recycling smelter you would only do if you would get government support, like the budget and CapEx...

We take a more long-term view, and there could be also synergies between different facilities and other strategic aspects. So we see not only the mid-term view of our return on capital, but also the long-term and strategic view. And under this consideration, it could definitely make sense.

And if I may add, Bastian, I think you were also referring to subsidies, right? We have made the point that for Richmond, we basically did not enjoy scale subsidy programs that in the meantime has evolved. So if we were going on with something, let's say, one of our key considerations would obviously be to become eligible to attractive U.S. Government support and that could perhaps bridge a certain gap.

The next question goes to Bank of America, Jason Fairclough.

I'm afraid I'm going to jump on the Richmond train as well, if that's okay. But I'll try and keep my questions kind of short. Just in terms of the capital employed -- and maybe this is one for Steffen. What is the capital employed today for Richmond? And what will it be by the time the facility is fully ramped up?

Jason, we understood very clearly your question, and I just look at a colleague to give me the figure. So if you have further questions, then go ahead with your further ones, and we'll get to you, obviously, in a very few minutes.

Okay. So second question then. So your new guided earnings -- triple-digit millions. I think previously, you and I talked about EUR 2,400 per tonne of blister didn't feel like it was a credible one. If I pick a number, let's call it, EUR 120 million, still EUR 1,700 per tonne of blister feels to me quite aggressive versus other recycling operations. So I'm interested to understand why you still think this facility can be so much more profitable than other recycling operations.

Yes, Jason, I remember very well the exchange we had on that, accompanied by a very nice chart in the office, I remember that well. Yes, I mean, if you look at the U.S. recycling market and RC, the U.S. market versus other regions of the world, you definitely see a gap or, let's say, an uptick on the margin on RCs in the U.S. And this is still the case. Actually, when we updated our business case, we were quite happy with the commercial terms we're seeing. What has changed as a part of the update, and Toralf has alluded to that is rather the mix of the core feed, but it's not the commercial terms. So in a nutshell, commercial terms that we are seeing are quite favorable and different than in other regions of the world.

Second piece to your question is that with the setup of Richmond, we are basically targeting especially those pieces of the value chain that are quite interesting. And that's why as of today, Richmond is not going all the way to the anode and the cathode because that part of the value chain that Richmond is addressing is a more profitable one. And obviously, metal result and metal price development is really supporting the case here.

Okay. So if we think about the derisking...

Sorry, Jason, your question on capital employed for Richmond is around EUR 800 million to EUR 850 million.

Okay. In terms of the derating of the profitability, is it higher operating costs? Or are we actually just going to end up with lower blister production?

Both.

Both -- okay. And I guess, lastly, to come back to this tariff question, where are you...?

Sorry, Jason, I need to be more precise. It's both pieces. So let's say it's higher cost. And it's on the revenue side, it's lower revenues, but it's not lower quantities, but it's lower revenues because of unfavorable mix.

And so should I read into that, that there's less pressures than you thought there might be?

No, that relates to -- we need to show a certain piece of flexibility on the input mix. So we need to deviate a bit from the core feed we initially had in mind. And with, let's say, alternative feed, there is, from a margin perspective, a less favorable mix than in the initial business case.

Okay. So last one, I don't know where you guys are with thinking about tariffs. If we get tariffs in the U.S., do you need to think about building a copper refinery? Can you build a 60,000 or 70,000 tonne copper refinery? Is that too small?

Yes, of course, we can build that. No, we haven't specified the tonnage, but it would be at least that range what you said.

Okay. And in terms of -- as it stands today, you're shipping blister copper out of the U.S. And of course, the blister copper is full of good stuff. Is there any, let's say, concerns around that from the U.S. administration that they're losing critical minerals to Europe?

Jason, the blister we are producing, they have all the valuable metals in it, as you know, like gold, silver, and other precious metals. And in order to unlock the value from the blister and to capture the synergy potential, that we also -- we ship this to Europe and use the capabilities there, but we also have then the possibility to ship back to the U.S., the finished product. So this is how the value chain we envision to work in the future.

[Operator Instructions] The next question goes to Adahna Ekoku from Morgan Stanley.

I think we've touched a lot on Richmond. I just have one follow-up on that mix point. Can you just give a bit more detail on what exactly has changed on the mix from your initial assumptions? And is there anything, especially maybe with regards to policy that could change or increase your flexibility on the mix that you thought you might have had?

The effects cannot be isolated as all the aspects are interconnected and the market remains dynamic. So we deal what we have today. We -- as we have entered the market now on a broader scale, we have built a clearer view on the raw material qualities and which of them fit best in the current operational phase of our plant. The other raw material streams are mostly alloy scraps, where different metals need to be separated in our process. So we are still in this process. We are convinced that we have an attractive offering to many of our suppliers. However, we need to bear in mind that existing buyers are adapting their commercial terms as well in order to keep the material flowing. So it's a complex subject.

The raw material is complex. We have -- like Steffen said, we have some minor deviations in our assumptions or compared to our assumptions in the mix. It is, for us, the most profitable, of course, if we have more complex materials, which have higher metal -- higher precious metal content. And here, we are seeing some deviations, which is a little bit unfavorable, but nothing to be concerned about.

Okay. And then maybe just on sulfuric acid. So you've touched on the kind of quarter-over-quarter improvement. Is there any way you can help us to quantify this? And just especially on the contracts, should we still assume that this is 85% contracted? Or have you perhaps shifted slightly more to spot pricing? And then also on this, thinking about the step-up into Q1 as well, is it fair to assume that's similar to the quarter-over-quarter step-up we're seeing this quarter? Or how can we compare these?

Well, as we have said for this fiscal year, the majority, around 85% of our contracts for sulfuric acid, the sale of sulfuric acid have already been contracted. So we only enjoy a minor part of our exposure to spot pricing, even though we benefit from it, but it's a minor part in the next fiscal year. There's also a certain part contracted already. But there, we will enjoy a larger portion of our contracts where we are negotiating right now in the coming months to be not at spot rate, but at, of course, higher prices than we have contracted for this year.

Okay. And anything -- any color on the quarter-over-quarter development?

Yes, I can give you a bit of color here. I would think that the sulfuric acid piece in Q4 will contribute. If we look Q4 versus Q3, I would see an upside of a small double-digit figure out of sulfuric acids, Q4 over Q3. That's, I think, what we can say. And perhaps to give one more data point for the full year, for this fiscal year, the full fiscal year, it could be in the ballpark of EUR 180 million out of sulfuric acid.

Next question goes to Maxime Kogge from ODDO.

So my first question is a follow-up on the growth project envelope. So we are you reaffirmed the target to reach EUR 260 million, and that's despite the lowering of the target for Richmond. But that implies that other projects are running ahead of expectation. Can you perhaps shed some light there on which projects are outperforming versus your expectations? I guess CRH is a big building block, but is there any other project that is performing better?

You're right. We talk about 11 strategic projects. The mid-term, the total contribution for the sum of them is the EUR 260 million, which we confirm as well today. And Richmond is one of them, obviously, the most prominent one, but one of them. So what are projects that -- what are other projects and where are they on the contribution? I would refrain from now giving figures on all the 11, but I would love to do it a bit more qualitatively. The ones that I would like to highlight in terms of upside contribution potential is the CRH, so complex recycling Hamburg, that is a very successful project, just has started.

Another one I would like to highlight is also what Toralf mentioned in his speech is the tankhouse expansion in Pirdop, where obviously, the upside is on getting out a significant amount of cathodes. And this, coupled with a nice copper price helps us also on the EBITDA line. And then I would mention 2 more recent projects that are already ramped up and a few months more already in operations on the Belgium side -- ASPA and BOB, that are also now delivering up to their plans and also delivering pieces of contribution that help delivering the EUR 260 million figure.

Okay. That's helpful. And second question is on the concentrate sources. So you've hinted that some structural changes going on there. So we've seen actually Antofagasta agreeing on an index-based system for its Phase 2 contracts with the smelters. Let's see what the negotiations around the new yearly benchmark is.

The result is expected somewhere in October. But do you see a risk that the whole market price switches to an index price, an index-based pricing system for the services, and that would make obviously more difficult for you to impose yearly or multi-yearly contracts, which has been your way of operating up to now?

Maxime, as we always said, our long-term portfolio and capability to treat more complex materials when it comes to concentrates enables us to get better terms than the spot prices that are indicated on the market. However, we cannot escape the fact that the availability, like you said, on concentrate is tight and that puts pressure on our terms. From today's perspective, we need to assume that the negative TC/RCs environment will play a role in our negotiations for concentrate supplies in the calendar year '27.

At the same time, however, the miners are also looking to secure sulfuric acid supply where, as we said, where the market is scarce. Both markets are somewhat intertwined, and those might be the subject of our talks with the mine suppliers. Mine supply and refined copper production are connected as well. And so this all plays into role.

So while we expect that the negative TC/RC trend on spot prices will continue for a while, so we don't expect the short-term recovery. Like we always said, we are not linked to the spot prices when we do long-term contracts. And with the additional negotiation subject of sulfuric acid, we think we have a good basis here to come to, let's say, good agreements for Aurubis, in the -- in relation to the current market environment.

Okay. That's helpful. And just following on that, you mentioned that the 2 subjects in the -- sulfuric acid and TC/RCs are important point, but I would have thought that sulfuric acid was only needed for operations by the miners. So it's not necessarily the same miners that need sulfuric acid and those that have to use the concentrate. So could you share with us the share of sulfuric acid within your mix that is sold to the miners? Or is that somehow a secret?

Maxime, we don't give these concrete numbers, but you're right, it's a smaller part of our business of our total sales of sulfuric acid. The share of sulfuric acid we sell to mines is a smaller share. And as you know, the mines, they do both. They do the leaching process and they also produce concentrates.

[Operator Instructions] The question goes to Kepler Chevreux, Boris Bourdet.

Just a very quick follow-up on Richmond. To check that, I understand quickly. So your first assumption was on a certain quality of mix. So now my understanding would be that you are missing in this mix, maybe some precious metal content that would explain the double-digit structural decrease in your EBITDA mid-term contribution. Yes, that's the first question. Just to check.

You're right, Boris. It's on the one hand, it's the content of certain metals, but also it's the TCs, it's the RCs and other terms and the conditions. So it's not only that, but that's also part of that.

Okay. And do you think you might find a solution if the United States government further increases the -- refrain the capacity to export recycling materials that you would keep better kind of materials for the domestic market, that would improve your metrics going forward? Or is it unlikely?

Yes, this would be conceptually positive for us because it increases consequently, of course, the availability of all sorts of recycling materials and also of more complex materials. So this would be positive for us, yes.

And maybe a word on free cash flow. So you're guiding for free cash flow before dividend payments being at least breakeven this year despite the minus EUR 365 million year-to-date figure. So that means a strong reversal in Q4 for net working capital, I guess. But I was wondering, looking at your CapEx number, it's EUR 373 million year-to-date. It seems to be behind the intended number of EUR 670 million. Do you stick to that guidance? Or what could be the right number to look at in CapEx? And yes, that would be my question.

Well spotted, Boris. So on the CapEx side or let's say, the cash CapEx, it's not likely that we will, let's say, spend that much in Q4, that would remain to, let's say, the old target. So let's say, there -- as of today, we think that cash CapEx could be probably below EUR 600 million. So this will also obviously then support the free cash flow generation.

And then generally on, let's say, the general improvement on working ourselves down from the seasonally high stock levels. So we have a clear plan how to reduce working capital and deliver on the full year target. So it's about destocking of inventory. It's about selling our copper products into the market. For example, on copper products in the summer period, there's less of a production here due to German summer and Belgian summer vacation schedules. So we had more on stock. That's kind of a usual thing. So it's about now selling those highly attractive copper products to the markets, being it on the rod and shape side, being it on the cathode side.

Second point is a clear targeted decrease of intermediates. So let's say, we have a clear plan as we speak, working capital is going in the right direction. And this, coupled with what you spotted well on, let's say, the cash CapEx, all that together makes us confident that we will achieve free cash flow target of at least breakeven before this year.

Very clear. And the last question is on TC. How much does it represent today of the group's gross margin? And do you confirm it cannot go below 0?

Yes. I mean, on the first piece of your question, you saw that on Page 8, from a gross margin perspective, TC/RCs for both businesses was, let's say, 21%. And as we talk about TC/RCs, so then we focus on the CSP segment. And there on Page 10, we saw that the TC/RCs for the primary side, this is where the pressure is, were, let's say, only 12%. And I cannot confirm that it will never be 0.

Yes, but it should never go below 0. I mean, we see negative spot rates on the market. Is there a possibility that one day, your contracts might include negative commercial terms? Or do you have a sort of a floor?

If the spot level is super negative, and I mean, we will always differentiate ourselves, emancipate ourselves visibly from, let's say, a more spot market level. But if the spot market level is very depressed, we can also not rule out that it would be 0 or a bit below 0. But it will always be significantly better than the spot market.

So that was the last submitted question. We do still have some time. So I will repeat the key combination in case anyone has some follow-up question. [Operator Instructions] We have Bastian from Deutsche Bank back on the line.

Just a very quick one on CapEx. Steffen, you mentioned CapEx will now be around EUR 600 million or actually below. So does that mean that the EUR 70 million will be moved to next year's budget. So next year will be more like EUR 620 million or so? Or is this a cut elsewhere which is sustainable?

Bastian, you can rely on our ambition that we want to build the curve of bringing CapEx down. So we are not guiding today, but our ambition is that next year should not be above this year.

Last question from Maxime, ODDO. You are on the line.

Yes, if I can stay on the subject of sulfuric acid, because I think you said that you will finish the year with about EUR 200 million, EUR 180 million of sulfuric acid contribution. But if we look at the spot prices in Europe, multiply that by your sulfuric acid production, yes, we had close to $800 million of revenues there. And my understanding is that there are very limited associated costs. So is that a credible figure somehow if prices stay where they are now? Or is there anything we should be aware of to not -- I mean, to apply some kind of discount to the prices?

As we said before, the vast majority of our exposure this year has been already fixed or covered by long-term contracts, which were fixed before the sharp increase of the prices for sulfuric acid. And secondly, also when we go into negotiations for the remainder of the part and also for next year, we are, I want to say, almost also interested in long-term relationship with our customers. So we're trying to take not too much advantage of the current spot price situation.

So thank you, everyone, for your questions and participation. And with that, I hand over to your host.

So the IR team will, of course, be happy to answer any further questions you may have. I would now like to close today's conference call, and thank you for your attention. Enjoy the rest of the day. Thank you, and goodbye.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Analyst Call.

[Operator Instructions]

Let me now turn the floor over to Elke Brinkmann, Head of Investor Relations.

Good afternoon, and welcome to our Q2 2025-'26 Conference Call. We will walk you through the results for the 6 months of our fiscal year.

With me on the call are our CEO, Toralf Haag; and CFO, Steffen Hoffmann. After the presentation, we will be happy to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions]

Before we start, let me draw your attention to our disclaimer. We will make forward-looking statements today. These are based on current plans and expectations and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially.

That being said, let me now turn the floor over to Toralf Haag.

Thank you, Elke, and good afternoon from beautiful Hamburg. Before we dive into the details later in the presentation, let me provide you with a high-level overview of the performance in the first 6 months. Compared to the previous quarter, Aurubis achieved a significant increase in earnings in quarter 2 of fiscal year '25, '26. Operating EBT came in at EUR 121 million, a 15% increase versus Q1.

In the first half of '25, '26, we delivered robust results, broadly on par with last year and in line with market expectations. Operating EBT came in at EUR 226 million and operating EBITDA increased by 3% to EUR 351 million. Net cash flow was EUR 161 million and below last year's EUR 190 million. This is mainly due to higher net working capital in connection with increased metal prices. Free cash flow before dividend improved to minus EUR 63 million compared to minus EUR 151 million last year, supported by over EUR 100 million less CapEx spend.

Operating return on capital employed was 8.1%, down from 10.2%, reflecting higher capital employed for strategic projects and lower earnings in previous quarters. In the recent quarters, key drivers of our business have developed in our favor, such as persistently high metal prices, improved recycling markets as well as healthy copper product and sulfuric acid markets. Against this background, we have raised our guidance of the operating EBT in the current fiscal year to EUR 425 million to EUR 525 million.

Let me now take you through the market environment. Sulfuric acid has certainly been an area of attention in the last quarter as Middle East shipping restrictions tightened the global sulfur market. As a result, sulfuric acid spot prices moved up sharply and even stayed above the already high levels. Supported by overall good physical demand, European spot copper premiums increased compared to the end of 2025. Still, premium levels remain volatile. European spot refining charges for scrap #2, increased further, driven by high metal prices and hence, better scrap availability. In contrast, spot TC/RCs for copper concentrates stayed in negative territory, reflecting the still tight concentrate market.

With regard to the price environment for key metals, gold and silver prices outperformed copper in Q2. In doing so, both precious metals once again reached new all-time highs before easing somewhat due to the conflict in the Middle East. The copper price was overall stable at historical high levels. The strong performance of these key metals supported our metal result as we will see later on. The euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate was broadly stable versus Q1 and therefore, had limited effect on our Q2 results.

On a general note, please bear in mind that there is no direct one-to-one relation between the price development shown here and our P&L. As we hedge parts of our earnings, some of the effects will only become visible with a time lag. I would now like to provide some color on the Middle East situation and the effect on Aurubis, since this is a frequently discussed topic in many calls and meetings. As we do not receive concentrate from the region and purchase only limited scrap volumes there, our exposure from a sourcing point of view is very limited.

On the sales side, we also have no major exposure to the Middle East for metal products or sulfuric acid. Direct risks are, therefore, low in the short term. Indirectly, higher oil and gas prices do impact energy and freight costs, but this is manageable. At the same time, sulfur supply disruptions and potential export restrictions support sulfuric acid markets as production of sulfuric acid from burning of elemental sulfur remains the largest source of sulfuric acid. The disruption of cathode exports from Iran and potential disruptions of SXEW production in consequence of the lack of sulfur supply could support global premium levels.

Overall, from today's perspective, we anticipate more medium-term opportunities than risks for Aurubis. In light of the current geopolitical situation, I would now like to provide a deep dive on sulfuric acid. Until 2030, global sulfuric acid demand is expected to grow further by about 3% annually, mainly driven by fertilizers and metals. At Aurubis, we produce more than 2 million tonnes annually and sell it to a diversified customer base. This base spans fertilizers, metals and chemicals with a focus on Europe, Turkey and North Africa.

Around 85% of our sulfuric acid is sold under large annual contracts with quarterly or semiannual pricing. About 15% is sold on the spot market, mainly to overseas customers, giving us exposure to spot prices. In '24, '25, sulfuric acid contributed roughly EUR 125 million to the gross margin with a high conversion to EBT. Before I hand over to Steffen, let me give you a brief update on the U.S. tariffs, where an updated ruling was published on April 2. The updated U.S. tariff regime continues to bolster domestic copper recycling and therefore, Aurubis Richmond.

A key change is that duties on copper semis and selective derivatives now apply to the full customer value, not just the copper content. More importantly, however, U.S. origin copper that is smelted and cast in the U.S. but refined elsewhere and reimported to the U.S. can now qualify for a reduced 10% rate. While strict traceability requirements need to be fulfilled, this ruling creates access for U.S. origin copper to Aurubis' European smelter network. In this respect, our smelter network adds flexibility and enhanced supply security to our U.S. customers as well.

And now let me hand over to Steffen Hoffmann, who will take you through the details of our financials.

Thank you, Toralf, and welcome from my side, too. Let's move to the financial details of the first 6 months, and I would like to start with the key KPIs of the second quarter. Quarter-on-quarter, our profitability clearly improved. Operating EBT significantly rose by 15% from EUR 105 million in Q1 to EUR 121 million in Q2. The main drivers were considerably higher earnings from processing recycling materials and from copper product sales.

Net cash flow turned from minus EUR 8 million in Q1 to plus EUR 169 million in Q2, benefiting from, among others, an improved operating EBITDA. Let's switch over to the aggregated 6-month overview. Group revenues increased by 23% to approximately EUR 11.3 billion, mainly due to higher metal prices, especially for precious metals. Operating EBT was stable at the prior year level. A higher metal result as well as slightly higher earnings from processing of recycling raw mats as well as copper products and sulfuric acid sales offset lower concentrate TC/RCs.

Net cash flow was EUR 161 million, below last year's EUR 190 million, reflecting higher inventories in connection with high metal prices. Operating ROCE decreased to 8.1%, which is attributable to lower earnings in previous quarters as well as our growth projects that are still in the implementation phase. These projects are reflected in the EBIT in form of ramp-up costs as well as in the capital employed and will unfold their full earnings impact in the medium term once ramp-up is complete.

Moving on to the split of our gross margin, which is a good reflection of our multimetal strategy and the diversification of our earnings drivers. The total gross margin for H1 was about EUR 1.1 billion, up from approximately EUR 1.08 billion last year. Overall, the contribution of the metal result to our gross margin increased year-over-year, which can be attributed, in particular, to the strong development of metal prices. Compared to last year, products and premiums remained broadly stable, reflecting the ongoing healthy demand for copper products.

Year-on-year, the contribution from sulfuric acid was slightly higher, which is, however, masked on the slide due to rounding effects. In contrast, the total of TC/RCs and RCs was down versus previous year, mainly due to the tightness in the concentrate market and the subsequent pressure on TC/RCs. The contribution of RCs for recycling raw materials was actually slightly up versus the prior year. Here again, rounding effects distort the picture. Long-term supply relationships and our focus on complex raw materials contribute to mitigating headwinds, in particular from challenging concentrate markets. This shift in the contribution of different earnings drivers resembles the resilience of our business model, which we continue to enhance with strategic projects, such as Richmond and CRH as well as the tank house expansion in Vietnam.

Now let's move on to the segments, starting with Multi-Metal Recycling. The gross margin increased by 11% to EUR 387 million. Main driver for the development was a stronger metal result, which has been supported by higher prices for gold, silver and copper. Refining charges for complex recycling materials also improved and largely offset slightly lower throughput. Altogether, this translates into a disproportionately large operating EBITDA increase. Absolute EBITDA rose from EUR 84 million last year to EUR 103 million. Despite an around EUR 13 million higher level of depreciation, the operating EBT improved to EUR 56 million from EUR 51 million. Considering the EBIT of the last 4 quarters, operating ROCE declined to 1.2%. This was attributable to weaker financial performance due to one-off effects and project-related ramp-up costs incurred in the previous fiscal year.

At the same time, capital employed increased by 30%, primarily as a result of significant growth investments, especially in Richmond. In Custom Smelting & Products, the gross margin of about EUR 710 million is composed of 51% products and premiums, 36% metal result and 13% TC/RCs for concentrates and RCs for recycling input. The slight gross margin reduction to prior year's level was caused by sharply lower concentrate TC/RCs, trends we have seen over past quarters and anticipated in our guidance.

On the positive side, higher metal prices and product sales had a positive impact on the segment's performance. Likewise, concentrate throughput increased to 1.25 million tonnes, reflecting good operating performance in Hamburg and Pirdop. This enabled higher sulfuric acid sales amid strong market conditions. In line with a slightly lower gross margin, operating EBITDA was at EUR 279 million. Operating EBT was at EUR 211 million, reflecting year-on-year EUR 10 million higher D&A in the segment. Operating ROCE remained strong at 16.5% and only slightly below last year's 16.8%.

Capital expenditure in the first half was below EUR 150 million and used mainly for the construction of the precious metals refinery, complex recycling Hamburg and the Pirdop tank house expansion. Let's now take a look at the cost development in the Group. Total costs rose by EUR 30 million, a 3% increase to EUR 949 million. The main driver, however, was higher scheduled depreciation and amortization of about EUR 23 million, reflecting our investment activities and the ramp-up of strategic projects. Personnel costs rose to general wage inflation and higher average headcount in line with our footprint expansion.

Other operating expenses decreased slightly to 20% of total costs with logistics and administrative costs being the largest components. Energy costs declined to 8% of total cost, thanks to effective energy management and hedging. Let me now deep dive into our cash flow bridge. Operating EBITDA was EUR 351 million, offset in the order of EUR 152 million due to increased net working capital in connection with higher metal prices. Within the net working capital position, increased inventories accounted for close to EUR 0.5 billion and higher receivables for nearly EUR 240 million of cash outflow. Elevated metal price effects were, however, not limited to the asset side, liabilities increased as well by more than EUR 0.5 billion.

Including the outflow in taxes, net cash flow came in at EUR 161 million, down from EUR 190 million in the prior year, but clearly improved from the minus EUR 8 million at the end of Q1 of this fiscal year. Cash outflow for investing activities was EUR 250 million, driven mainly by spending on Richmond, the new precious metals refinery in Hamburg, CRH in Hamburg and the Pirdop tank house expansion. Interest paid was limited to just EUR 10 million. So free cash flow before dividend was, therefore, minus EUR 63 million. This is an improvement of nearly EUR 100 million compared to the prior year and predominantly achieved by lower CapEx spending.

Looking ahead, for Q3 of this fiscal year, we expect a significantly negative free cash flow, which is due to normal seasonality and is in line with our internal planning. And then for Q4, we expect a significantly positive free cash flow. And for our full year, we remain on track to achieve our free cash flow target above breakeven before dividend for the full year. Before we move to our outlook and guidance, I would now like to take you through some of our balance sheet KPIs. The equity ratio on an operating basis was 48.6%. The decrease compared to previous year was caused by the expansion of the balance sheet, driven, in particular, by higher working capital that negatively offset the addition of EUR 175 million in earnings to the equity.

But let us put the equity ratio into perspective, though. The close to 50% level is still very solid and clearly above our larger than 40% target. And in the next quarters, we expect to return to the 50% levels again. Debt coverage defined as net financial liabilities over rolling EBITDA increased to 0.6, also a result of higher working capital, yet is still well below our ceiling of 3.0. Capital expenditure for the first 6 months was EUR 232 million, down from EUR 340 million, reflecting progress in completion of strategic projects as well as disciplined execution.

Capital employed increased from EUR 4.07 billion to EUR 4.35 billion, reflecting growth investments and higher working capital. Let's now turn to the outlook for the key drivers of our business. Since our last update in February 26, our view on some macro drivers has improved. Overall, raw mat supply remains tight, but manageable, due to our long-term contracts and diversified sourcing. Still, let it be mentioned that given headwinds and volatilities in our sourcing markets, it is also a stretch for our commercial teams to secure the right quantity and quality at the right time and place.

Concentrate TC/RCs remain under pressure reflected in the red-ish signal on the chart. For recycling, material availability in the recent quarter has improved somewhat, among others, due to higher metal prices, and therefore, we've been seeing better market conditions. Such improvements in market terms tend to trail the actual development and therefore, take effect in our P&L with a time lag. Accordingly, we are taking a slightly more positive view than we did in February and have added a touch of green to the yellow traffic light.

The euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate environment remains largely unchanged versus our previous assessment. Given the tight supply situation in the consequence of the Middle East crisis, sulfuric acid markets are very supportive. Correspondingly, we've colored the asset outlook completely in green. Metal prices, especially for precious metals and copper remain persistently on a high level, and demand for our products remains strong, in particular, for wire rod.

Overall, this improved backdrop underpins our higher confidence regarding the outlook for the second half of the fiscal year. Based on the performance of the first half year as well as the improved outlook for key drivers of our business, we have lifted the full year forecast for fiscal year '25, '26 last Friday. We now expect operating EBITDA between EUR 700 million and EUR 800 million. Operating EBT is now expected between EUR 425 million and EUR 525 million for the Group.

Within this overall range, we expect EBT of EUR 370 million to EUR 430 million for CSP and EUR 115 million to EUR 175 million for MMR. For MMR, this takes into account that although ramp-up enrichment is making progress, a breakeven on EBITDA level will still be a stretch this year. We have factored this caution into the segment's EBT range. We are now targeting an operating ROCE between 10% and 12% at Group level with CSP at 15% to 17% and MMR at 8% to 10%. For net cash flow, we expect to be above last year's level despite higher working capital, which is in part due to higher metal prices.

We continue to aim for free cash flow before dividend at least at the breakeven level and are on track to achieve this target. This being said, please bear in mind that usual working capital fluctuations in high metal environment may affect our free cash flow at the balance sheet date. All these guidance figures are based on our current market assumptions and exclude any major unforeseen disruptions.

And with this, I would like to hand over back to you, Toralf.

Thank you, Steffen. Before we wrap up today's presentation, I would like to update you on our strategic projects. With its first melt on March 23, Complex Recycling Hamburg in short CRH was successfully hot commissioned. Since then, the plant has been ramping up gradually with the first blister copper having already been supplied to the Hamburg primary smelter. CRH is a brownfield expansion that optimizes material flows and improves metal recovery at the Hamburg site. It allows us to process internal intermediates and around 32,000 tonnes of external complex raw materials per year.

CRH will contribute to the Group's gross margin via TC/RCs and RCs as well as via the additional metal result and thereby supports our Multi-Metal strategy. Turning to the other 2 projects that are in or near commissioning. At Aurubis Richmond, Phase 1 is making progress. The central equipment has been commissioned, including key furnaces and supporting systems. We are gradually increasing the share of complex feed materials in Phase 1 as the ramp-up advances. Construction work for Phase 2 is largely finalized and commissioning is the next step. In parallel to the technical activities, we are also scaling up our sourcing efforts and developing our North American supplier base in order to secure feedstock to operate the 2 Richmond phases. Building up the technical and commercial ramp-up curve takes time. In Pirdop, the tank house expansion is in its final stage. Technical installations and construction work are essentially complete. Current activities are focusing on testing and ensuring equipment operability. The gradual start of production is scheduled for summer 2026, which will increase refined copper capacity to about 340,000 tonnes from around 220,000 tonnes today.

Coming to the final slide of our presentation, I would like to summarize the first half year. Quarter-to-quarter, we improved our EBT by 15% and achieved EUR 121 million in operating EBT. In half year 1, EBITDA of EUR 351 million exceeded last year, while EBT of EUR 226 million was in line with both the prior year and market expectations. The main positive drivers were higher metal result and slightly higher earnings from recycling materials, copper products and sulfuric acid. Free cash flow improved on a like-for-like basis as this year's dividend was paid in Q2 instead of Q3, while net cash flow was lower due to higher working capital.

Operating ROCE is temporarily subdued because of our high investment activity and ramp-up costs, but these projects will support returns in the medium term. We achieved important milestones in our strategic CapEx program, first melt and first blister at CRH, continued progress in Pirdop and Richmond Phases 1 and 2. For the full year, we see metal prices at a high level and expect earnings from processing of recycling materials to be better than anticipated. We also expect our copper product business to perform well and now also expect earnings from sulfuric acid to improve in the second half year.

Therefore, we raised our fiscal year '25, '26 guidance to operating EBT of now EUR 425 million to EUR 525 million, and remain on track to achieve at least a free cash flow breakeven before dividend payments.

And with this, I would like to hand back over to Elke Brinkmann.

Thank you, Toralf and Steffen. Before we open the line for your questions, I would like to provide you with an outlook on the next event. On August 6, we will publish our results for the first 9 months of '25, '26. And our annual report for fiscal year '25, '26 is due on December 2.

That being said, I will now hand over to the operator for the first question.

[Operator Instructions]

The first one is from Adahna Ekoku, Morgan Stanley.

Maybe just starting with Richmond and to clarify on the EBITDA contribution. So last quarter, you guided us to be breakeven. I think just now you mentioned that breakeven will be a stretch for this year. Is that correct? And if so, what has driven this change?

Yes. Adahna, thank you for the question. Like we said, we had the first melt in September '25. And since then, we've successfully gone into commissioning and ramp-up. Since then, we are gradually ramping up the plant. We have our first blister shipped to Europe, and we have stepwise increased the intake of complex recycling material, which is important. because with this, we allow more valuable -- the recovery of more valuable metals from scrap.

And like we said, Phase 2 is approaching the finalization of construction and will be coming to the commissioning. The ramp-up curve of the project implies that the buildup steadily moves forward. The slope of the curve may be steeper in certain periods and flatter in times of larger technical efforts. Due to some technical challenges in Q2 that are meanwhile solved, we were facing some delays in the recent ramp-up. So from today's perspective, we expect Richmond to end the fiscal year a bit below EBITDA breakeven. This assumption is part of the new and increased group guidance.

That's really clear. And maybe just following up on the U.S. Do you have any updates on your thinking regarding the next steps for the U.S. footprint, just especially given the changes to the tariff regime last month that you outlined in the presentation?

Well, as we said before, we are in close contact with the U.S. administration on evaluating potential further steps. However, there is nothing imminent at this point. Our priority lies on the ramp-up of the Richmond plant.

The next question is from Daniel Major, UBS.

Congratulations on a good set of results. The first one on sulfur. You also provided quite a lot of detail, so it's very useful. Can you just try and give us a little bit more flavor on the earnings sensitivity and how it relates to those kind of pricing contracts. So you did about $65 million of gross margin from sulfur -- sulfuric acid, sorry, in the first half of this fiscal year. If prices were to stay at this sort of level, what kind of uplift will we see in the second half? Is it as simple as if the price doubles, we should just add an annualized EUR 120 million to EBITDA? Is that the way we sort of should be thinking about the sensitivity?

Daniel, this is Steffen. So as we've shown on the charts, you know that also in the sulfuric acid business, we are not very much exposed to the spot market. So 85% of the portfolio is based primarily on annual contracts with quarterly or semiannual pricing mechanisms and only 15% exposure on the spot market. So what I can say is in the guidance increase where we increased both ends of the range by EUR 50 million, and we were kind of labeling the EUR 50 million due to better metal prices environment, better RCs and better sulfuric acid, roughly 1/3 of that. So call it EUR 15 million, 1-5 to EUR 20 million would be attributed to an additional H2 effect on sulfuric acid.

Okay. So yes, so if we were to think about that EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million on the second half, yes, it would be fair to assume if prices stays here, that would continue and actually be higher into fiscal year '26, '27. Is that fair?

That's correct.

Yes. And then my second question, you mentioned around improved scrap contribution, improved scrap availability in Europe in response to the higher pricing environment. How do you see the broader scrap market? Is that sustainable? Are there any updates on legislation with respect to potential restrictions on scrap exports from Europe?

Well, Daniel, overall, like we said, the RCs are improving slightly. We see increased availability in general in Europe and U.S. with the higher metal prices. Nevertheless, we have to face also the Asian competition on the European market and also the U.S. market. So this is counterbalancing that. We expect some regulation in Europe to come. I mean, there's already some regulation in the U.S., but we expect some regulation in Europe to come hopefully in the -- in due course. But so far, there is no timing that we can relate to. So these are the 2 counterbalancing effects.

Okay. And then one final one, and I'll go back into queue. The broader dynamics in the smelting industry, you've seen this like continued negative move in the treatment charge with smelting companies, including yourselves, still generating resilient earnings because of free metals, sulfur, precious pricing, et cetera. I guess my question is, are you seeing any pressure or discussions around negotiating the other variables of profitability in a very tight concentrate market, i.e., reduced payability, reduced free metals as China continues to stretch for getting enough concentrate?

Daniel, no, we don't see that pressure, high pressure on these other aspects of our contract negotiations. I think here, it really pays out our -- like you mentioned the word resilience that we have a diversity of our supply base. We work with many mines together, and we have long-term relationships, and we also have a tight link to them. So we have a security of supply, but also apart from the TC/RCs quite stable other conditions.

The next question is from Maxime Kogge, ODDO BHF.

So first question is a follow-up on sulfuric acid. I think you provided some insight on your earnings sensitivity. But I mean, if we take a high-level view, it's difficult to actually make out what capacity has been actually destroyed, what is just temporarily disrupted because of the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. What's your view on that? What's your take on the actual disruption level and how long it could take for them to come back to the market? So that would be my first question.

Yes, Maxime, we don't have detailed numbers on this question, how much capacity has been destroyed. We see restriction -- export restrictions from certain countries, which is helping the spot market. I think more importantly is what we've provided in the slide that we have a mid- and long-term strong demand of sulfuric acid, which is growing steadily and supported by different industries like the chemical and fertilizer industry. So I think this is important. But how much the important development of this market, but how much has been destroyed, we don't have the answer.

Okay. Fair enough. And second question is on new capacity coming online in Europe. So there will be, on the one hand, the tank house at Rönnskär by Boliden, which will restart again by the end of this year. You also have a big recycling facility in Spain at Atlantic Copper coming up in the coming weeks actually. What do you think the impact will be on refining charges for the Atlantic Copper project and on cathode premia for the Rönnskär tank house? Do you expect to suffer as a result from this increased capacity?

No, we don't expect any direct impact on our RCs because like we said before, the demand for our copper products for cathodes, but also other copper products remains intact and is growing over the next years. So we don't expect any direct impact of these new capacities.

All right. And just the last one. So it's on TC/RCs. So far, the Chinese smelters have been able to avert a negative scenario where the benchmark would be below 0. So that was the case in 2026. But since then, the TC/RCs have plunged further into negative territory. You yourself quite immune because, I mean, you have your own contracts, but you still have some earnings sensitivity, some sensitivity to the benchmark level. So do you think a scenario where the benchmark comes below 0 can be again avoided next year given the recent evolution of the market?

Well, we cannot speak for the benchmark. And as we always said, our long-term contracts are not so much linked to the benchmarks. We expect midterm the TC/RCs to recover because of the overall market situation. But in our opinion, also, it takes some time. So we don't expect a short-term strong recovery of the TC/RCs.

[Operator Instructions]

And the next question comes from Bastian Synagowitz, Deutsche Bank.

My first one is just a follow-up on the operational challenges there, which you mentioned with regards to Richmond. Is a low double-digit headwind the right ballpark when we think about what the second quarter earnings impact has been? And then also, has there been any other effects which you had in the second quarter, maybe which are a little bit more in the one-off in nature, any disruptions, for example, also from hedge rolls and so on? That's my first question.

And then maybe related to that and the other projects you've got going on, maybe you could give us a quick update on how the other projects are doing at the moment and what the latest overall expectations are with regards to EBITDA contribution this and next year? I'll stop there.

Yes. Maybe first on Richmond on the assumption of the headwind we had, your assumption is right. It was low double-digit million in the Q2. Maybe Steffen, on the hedging question.

Yes, Bastian, I think you're referring to a remark that was in our documents on CSP kind of about offsetting effects from realization of hedging transactions. It's a bit of technical comment here. I think the most important message is both segments, MMR and CSP benefited from the contribution of a higher metal result, which is linked to overall higher price levels. Further spot-driven upside was capped in CSP due to hedging, which is our normal course of business to avoid risk.

And the effect was recognized in the CSP segment as the derivatives in question were allocated to CSP-related legal entities. So it's really a very technical effect. I would not overemphasize it. Key message is we earn good money on the metal price side. We do not enjoy all record high spot levels due to our hedging strategy, but this is obviously the right approach for us.

Can I maybe just -- sorry, can I maybe briefly follow up? Just on the duration of the hedge book, is it fair to assume that the main impact from the, I guess, the very strong metal prices is mostly coming in, in the second half of the calendar year, assuming maybe like a 12-month duration in the hedge book?

It's basically coming in all the quarters of this year and also for next year. So as we speak, for this fiscal year on the precious metals, we are hedged at around 75%. I think at another occasion, we did say that for next fiscal year, in silver, we are already hedged at 60% in gold already at 50%. And that comes in every quarter. Obviously, it's fair to say that hedging decisions have been taken 9 or 12 months in advance.

So let's say, what you see in this Q2 might be kind of a consequence of hedging decisions that have been taken 9 or 12 months earlier. And so it comes quarter-by-quarter.

And maybe, Bastian, on the other questions of the other strategic projects, as we've reported before, ASPA and Bob in Beerse and Olen, they have come on stream. They are now at the planned capacities and CRH is also coming on stream and also looks like it's going according to plan. And the other 2 big projects, which still need to be fully implemented are the tank house in Pirdop in Hamburg. And both these projects are on track from -- also from a budget standpoint.

And what does that mean for the overall contribution, I guess, the contribution now in '26 as well as what you now expect in '27?

Well, Bastian, you know that for, let's say, the impact of the strategic projects, we were guiding that in the midterm, so meaning in the fiscal year '28, '29, we expect a contribution of EUR 260 million overall. And we would not give, let's say, the more detailed picture now on each fiscal year. And speaking overall and with regard to the projects that Toralf just alluded to, we are in a comfortable position to achieve this midterm target.

Okay. Got you. Fair enough. Then just one last question and just coming back on sulfuric acid. Now I guess, even when taking into account your contract structure, is there any reason why spot pricing shouldn't be coming through pretty much in full in the last fiscal year quarter?

I agree with you that obviously, the impact that we see out of the dynamics Toralf described earlier related to the Middle East, the impact should be rather in Q4 than in Q3. So what I said earlier to, let's say, EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million increase in the fiscal year, most of it should be coming in Q4. And once again, visibility is also low, and we do not know to what degree this favorable pricing level will continue. But you're right, major impact should be in Q4.

But then, of course, looking at the EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million and your exposure to sulfuric acid volume-wise, I guess, makes the EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million look very low. So I don't think you've been at the upper end of guidance factoring in -- you've been factoring in anything near the current spot price. Is that correct?

I mean you know that when we give a new guidance, then our focus point is the midpoint of the guidance. So when I quote the EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million, this is in focus to the midpoint. If you would want to argue more towards the upper part of the guidance range, then the impact of sulfuric acid would be more meaningful than the EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million.

And at current spot, is there any guidance you could give us on like how maybe the fourth quarter exit run rate will look like, obviously, when the metal results will probably strengthen further and particularly sulfuric and maybe the scrap side will obviously start to support as well. Would it be wrong to say that yield should be above the EUR 200 million pre-tax run rate possibly?

I mean, I know where you want to get with me, and I would love to stay where we were. We said EUR 125 million last year, targeting a midpoint of the guidance with a larger impact of Q4. I would add, let's say, the EUR 15 million to EUR 20 million. Now talking about exit run rate out of Q4 into the next year, I would love to have that discussion with you later in the year. We still have a few months to prepare for that discussion.

At the moment, there are no more questions in the queue.

[Operator Instructions]

Everything seems quite clear. So with that, thank you very much. We are closing the Q&A session, and I'm handing the floor back over to the host.

Thank you. The IR team will, of course, be happy to answer any further questions you may have. We would now like to close today's conference call, and thank you for your attention. Enjoy the rest of your day. Thank you, and bye-bye.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and a warm welcome to the analyst call. [Operator Instructions] Let me now turn the floor over to your host, Elke Brinkmann, Investor Relations.

Good afternoon, and welcome to our call on the results of the first 3 months of fiscal year 2025-'26. We are here with our CEO, Toralf Haag; and our CFO, Steffen Hoffmann, who will walk you through the figures for the first 3 months of 2025 and '26 and current developments at Aurubis. We will first take you through the presentation and then open the line for your questions. [Operator Instructions]

But before we dive, a short reminder of our disclaimer on forward-looking statements. Today's capital markets presentation contains forward-looking statements about Aurubis plans and expectations. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.

Let me now turn the floor over to Toralf Haag.

Thank you, Elke, and good morning, good day, good afternoon from Hamburg. Aurubis started the new fiscal year with a sound result that was in line with market expectations. Operating EBT was satisfactory at EUR 105 million, driven mainly by higher metal prices and consequently, a higher metals result. Declining TC/RCs, however, partly offset the positive metal result effect. EBITDA was EUR 164 million compared to EUR 184 million last year, which reflects anticipated higher costs in the overall group.

Net cash flow was slightly negative at minus EUR 8 million compared to EUR 178 million in Q1 of last year. Free cash flow before dividend was minus EUR 103 million compared to EUR 39 million the year before. Higher working capital at higher metal prices was the main factor in lowering cash flows, and both figures should be viewed as snapshots, as Steffen will explain further later in the presentation.

Operating ROCE on a rolling 4-quarter basis decreased to 7.8%, down from 11.7% the year before. This reflects lower earnings in prior year quarters and higher capital employed from our growth investments. Looking ahead to the remaining quarters of the fiscal year, we expect positive effects on earnings, in particular from higher metal prices and strong demand for copper products. In light of these factors, we raised our full year guidance for operating EBT to between EUR 375 million and EUR 475 million. The previous range was EUR 300 million to EUR 400.

Once again, our production figures show the broad scape of our multi-metal competence. I would like to briefly highlight the key drivers. Starting with our input, concentrate throughput went up 5% year-over-year to 630,000 tonnes, carried by a good operational performance. Copper scrap/blister copper output, on the other hand, went down by 5% to 115,000 tonnes. This was caused by our input mix in the quarter. Other recycling materials totaled 125,000 tonnes, slightly above last year. On the output end, the stable performance of our Tankhouse resulted in 285,000 tonnes of cathodes produced. Sulfuric acid output increased by 5% to 583,000 tonnes, right in line with concentrate throughput. Wire rod output remained stable at 201,000 tonnes, while copper shapes output dipped by 15% to 34,000 tonnes.

Lagging demand, trade barriers and imports were the main factors here. In contrast, flat rolled products and specialty wire increased slightly to 22,000 tonnes. Our output of other metals is another indication of the complexity of our feed materials and varies based on the content of those materials. Let me now take you through the market environment. This chart shows the development of our 4 key indicators since September 2023 based on market intelligence.

On the downstream side, European spot copper premiums remained widely stable at a high level in fiscal year Q1. Please bear in mind that premiums for annual contracts differ from spot premiums and will become effective only from fiscal year Q2 onwards. Sulfuric acid prices showed another increase, a move supported by strong demand, especially from overseas markets. On the upstream side, RCs for recycling materials improved in Q1 of the fiscal year because higher metal prices increased the availability of scrap. We expect that this trend will take effect in our results with a time lag.

Spot TC/RCs for copper concentrates stayed at low levels in fiscal year Q1, reflecting the tightness in the concentrate market. Our long-term supply contracts and diversified sourcing, however, help us manage this challenging environment.

Let me now turn to the price environment for key metals and the U.S. dollar. As all of you have taken notice of in fiscal year Q1, gold and silver prices continue to rise and reached all new-time highs. Copper prices also moved up notably as well with an increase to close to $1,000 per tonne in December alone, with an increase of $1,000 per tonne in December alone. The favorable development of these 3 metal prices positively contributed to our metal result as we see later.

Compared to Q1 of the last fiscal year, the U.S. dollar depreciated against the euro. Aurubis' long dollar position remains unchanged at approximately USD 530 million for the fiscal year. 54% of our U.S. dollar exposure is hedged at 1.125. For fiscal year '26, '27, around 40% of the exposure is hedged at a rate of 1.188. As a reminder, please note that there is no direct one-to-one correlation between our P&L and the price development shown here. We hedge part of our earnings and some of the effects are only visible with a time lag.

Before we move on the details of our financials, I would like to share an update on our contracting season. Despite the challenges in the concentrate market, we have already secured a very high share of our supply for calendar year 2026. Through long-term contracts that target complex raw materials, we ensure reliable supply to our primary smelters. This also allowed us to close additional long-term contracts, including agreements with new mining projects.

At the same time, we also ensure we have the flexibility to obtain additional volumes and steer our market presence as needed. For recycling, the market is still short term in nature and visibility is limited. Copper scrap availability still improved compared to the summer, a development supported by higher metal prices. This, in turn, allowed us to secure a supply of scrap that is enough to cover our needs until the end of the second quarter of '25, '26 at the very least. In the U.S., we are focused on securing the supply for Aurubis Richmond in line with the planned ramp-up.

Finally, we are expanding our sourcing presence beyond Europe to broaden our supplier base at the same time as well. In the downstream business, we have mostly wrapped up a very successful sales campaign. Demand for our copper product remains high. This is especially true for wire rod, which we largely supply to the energy, infrastructure and communications sector. We remain on track, moving in the right direction with sustainability, our Tomorrow Metals commitment, foster customer relationships and helps generate new business.

Demand for copper shape and flat-rolled products lagged somewhat behind the high demand for wire rod. This was mostly due to the reasons I already mentioned in detail. Looking at sulfuric acid, we are still seeing stable demand from the European chemical and fertilizer industries. Demand from overseas has also stayed high and is supporting the current market terms. Our asset sales book gives us good visibility in the summer despite the higher volatility on the spot market. This reinforces our confidence that we will be able to maintain this high level during this fiscal year.

And now let me hand over to Steffen Hoffmann, who will take you through the details of our financials.

Thank you, Toralf, and a warm welcome from my side, too. Let me take you through the financial details of the first 3 months of 2025-'26 and touch on the KPIs in this chart. Revenues increased by 25% to EUR 5.3 billion, primarily due to higher precious metal revenues driven by the marked rise in metal prices. Gross profit was slightly lower at EUR 426 million versus EUR 433 million in the prior year quarter. Higher cost of materials more than offset the gross margin increase. Operating EBIT came in at EUR 101 million and operating EBT at EUR 105 million, which is 19% below the prior year level of EUR 130 million.

Compared to the EBITDA, the decrease of the EBT was more pronounced than in the previous year. Personnel expenses increased by EUR 12 million and depreciation rose by EUR 10 million as planned due to strategic projects. The main positive impact on the result was a significantly higher metal result due to increased metal prices, especially for precious metals. Sulfuric acid revenues on par with the high prior year level and sustained higher copper product revenues provided additional support to the result.

Markedly, lower treatment and refining charges with higher year-over-year concentrate throughput, along with a mild input mix-related decline in earnings from the processing of recycling material had a counteracting effect. In addition, anticipated higher expenditures for strategic projects had an adverse effect on the result. With an EBITDA slightly below the previous year, the net cash flow was at minus EUR 8 million, significantly below the prior year level of plus EUR 178 million due to reporting date related higher inventories, coupled with higher metal prices.

Here, I would like to emphasize that this cash flow is a snapshot as of December 31, 2025, and inventory buildups will turn into cash flows in future quarters. In contrast, previous year's Q1 net cash flow was exceptionally high, considering the usual seasonal pattern. Operating ROCE, taking the operating EBIT of the last 4 quarters into consideration, decreased from 11.7% to 7.8%. This reflects lower earnings in previous quarters and higher capital employed due to continued investments.

Looking at quarterly performance. Profitability improved significantly in Q1 of '25, '26 compared to Q4 of '24/'25. Revenues increased from EUR 4.4 billion to EUR 5.3 billion. Gross profit climbed from EUR 380 million to EUR 426 million, driven by a stronger metal result and good smelter performance in CSP. Operating EBT rose from EUR 68 million to EUR 105 million. The previous quarter was still affected by the scheduled major shutdown in Pirdop. One-off effects in the MMR segment also weighed on Q4 '24/'25. Net cash flow declined from EUR 319 million in Q4 to minus EUR 8 million in Q1, mainly due to the buildup of working capital at higher price levels, which will translate into future cash flows, as mentioned before.

Coming to the gross margin. This slide shows the breakup on a group level. Total gross margin was around EUR 546 million, slightly above the prior year level of about EUR 534 million. Metal result was the main contributor to the gross margin and accounted for 45%. This is a step up from last year's 36% and reflects higher prices, especially for precious metals. Products and premiums were the second largest contributor and accounted for 33% of the gross margin. This share is broadly in line with the previous year, which underlines the stability of our downstream business. Higher earnings from products to come as of Q2 fiscal year.

And finally, treatment and refining charges for concentrate and recycling input decreased to 22% of the gross margin, down from 31%. This was mainly driven by the marked decline of concentrate TC/RCs as well as slightly subdued RCs for the recycling material purchased in the months before. As Toralf mentioned earlier, improved availability and higher RC levels will support earnings with some operational time lag, most probably starting in Q2 of the fiscal year. Overall, strong metal prices and solid product demand more than offset headwinds from lower TC/RCs at the gross margin level.

Coming to MMR. In the Multimetal Recycling segment, gross margin increased slightly from EUR 171 million to EUR 177 million. The main driver here was again a higher metal result that benefited from overall higher metal price levels. The strong increase of the metal result was, however, weakened by lower refining charges for recycling materials sourced in the previous months, coupled with a slight input mix-related drop in throughput. In contrast, operating EBIT declined from EUR 28 million to EUR 20 million and operating EBT fell from EUR 28 million to EUR 18 million. Higher expected costs and increased depreciation, among others, at Aurubis Richmond outweighed the gross margin uplift.

Operating ROCE decreased to 0.4%, down from 5.5%. The central factors here were lower earnings and over 20% higher capital employed, mainly for Richmond. Please keep in mind that the rolling EBIT of the last 4 quarters includes quarterly EBITs that were impacted by one-off items. Operationally, the segment's performance was mixed. Input mix-related effects resulting from scrap availability during summer impacted the throughput of copper scrap and blister copper, which moved down from 92,000 tonnes to 83,000 tonnes. Throughput of other recycling materials, however, was stable at 112,000 tonnes, while cathode output in the segment increased slightly to 134,000 tonnes.

In the next quarters, we continue to focus on stabilizing higher throughput levels, while enrichment revenues will gradually start to compensate the operating cost of the plant. And generally in MMR, RCs should pick up. In the Custom Smelting & Products segment, gross margin improved slightly from EUR 362 million to EUR 369 million. The powerful increase in the metal result was largely offset by the decline in concentrate TC/RC. The stable contribution of products and premiums to the segment's gross margin reflects just how robust our downstream business is.

Scheduled comprehensive maintenance in Hamburg with an EBIT impact of minus EUR 6 million, general cost inflation and anticipated cost increases for strategic projects weighed on operating EBIT. It declined from EUR 125 million to EUR 122 million, while operating EBT decreased from EUR 131 million to EUR 113 million. Operating ROCE was 17.8% compared to 19.4% in the prior year quarter. This decline was essentially due to lower earnings.

As in the MMR segment, the rolling 4-quarter EBIT level also took effect here. Concentrate throughput rose from 602,000 tonnes to 630,000 tonnes based on stable operations in Hamburg and Pirdop. In line with higher concentrate throughput, copper scrap and blister copper input increased to 32,000 tonnes and sulfuric acid output went up 5% to 583,000 tonnes. Cathode output reached 151,000 tonnes, which was due to temporarily lower current efficiency in Pirdop is only slightly below the previous year's level. Overall, we are satisfied with the segment's operational performance at the Hamburg and Pirdop plant. We are targeting ongoing high utilization levels to maximize copper supply to the markets.

Let's now take a look at cost development in the group. Total costs amounted to about EUR 464 million compared to roughly EUR 441 million in the prior year quarter. This EUR 23 million increase was significantly driven by higher scheduled depreciation in the amount of EUR 10 million for the strategic projects, which are being executed right now. At about 35% of total costs, personnel costs increased slightly. The main factors here were collective wage increases and expanded staffing levels for our strategic projects. Other operating expenses declined slightly to 21% of total cost with logistics and administration as the main items. Active energy management and hedging helped keep energy cost inflation under control and stable at around 7% of total cost. Excluding depreciation, cash costs totaled EUR 401 million compared to EUR 388 million in the prior year.

Turning to the cash flow bridge. In line with the operational performance of the business, operating EBITDA amounted to EUR 164 million. Compared to the previous year, the main deviation here is from the buildup of working capital, which was strongly influenced by higher metal prices. Inventories were EUR 495 million higher and receivables increased by EUR 176 million. Factoring was EUR 100 million lower than in last year's Q1. On the other hand, liabilities rose by EUR 404 million, partly offsetting the increase. The position other covers valuation changes for financial instruments that we are using for forward sales.

In Q1 '25/'26, the noncash effect amounted to EUR 110 million. Taken together, this resulted in a net cash flow of minus EUR 8 million. Here, I would like to highlight once more that our cash flow is subject to intra-year volatility and that the working capital tends to normalize over the course of the fiscal year. Net cash flow at December 31 should be regarded as a snapshot, in particular, because factoring capacities have not been exhausted in Q1.

Finally, we spent EUR 91 million in cash on investment activities. These were mainly linked to Richmond and the new Precious Metals Refinery in Hamburg. Total free cash flow for the first quarter came in at minus EUR 103 million. Before we move to our outlook and guidance, I would now like to take you through some of our balance sheet KPIs. The equity ratio on an operating basis was 49.9%. The slight decrease was caused by the balance sheet expansion driven by working capital that negatively offset the addition of EUR 81 million in earnings to the equity. Let us put the equity ratio into perspective, though. The close to 50% level is still very solid and clearly above our larger than 40% target. And in the next quarters, we expect to exceed the 50% mark again.

The debt coverage defined as net financial liabilities over rolling EBITDA was around 0.6 in Q1. Again, the increase of this KPI was primarily the result of higher working capital. Our debt coverage is still well below the 3.0 ceiling. Capital expenditure was EUR 108 million compared to EUR 141 million in the prior year quarter. This quarterly decline reflects the progress on completed projects as well as our disciplined approach. When we take the investments made in our strategic projects in recent quarters in account, the operating capital employed was about EUR 4.3 billion. This represents an increase from the EUR 3.8 billion recorded at the end of Q1 '24/'25. Nevertheless, as a bottom line, it's fair to say that Aurubis remains solidly and conservatively financed.

Let us now turn to our outlook for the key drivers of our business. Compared to last year's view on the markets, the outlook for our key macro drivers has improved overall. We all have followed the development of the metal prices. And since we last presented this chart, metal prices have reached even higher levels, which will positively impact our metal result. Regarding earnings from copper products, we anticipated strong earnings levels already last year. Still demand presented itself healthier than previously projected, which supports earnings from product sales even further. So both earnings drivers remain a green traffic light, however, even more positive than anticipated before.

Furthermore, as I've mentioned earlier, we are seeing a stable, if not slightly increasing sulfuric acid demand. Our sales book now provides us with visibility into the summer of '26. So we are taking a slightly more positive view than we did at the end of '25 and correspondingly added a touch of green to the yellow traffic light. For recycling, material availability has improved somewhat due to higher prices, and we are seeing better market conditions than last summer paired with improved market visibility.

At this stage, we maintain a cautious view as expressed by the yellow traffic light, but see the potential for an improvement in the coming months. The U.S. dollar-euro exchange rate remains an important factor as well, and we anticipate headwinds from the depreciation of the U.S. dollar versus the euro. Since we are somewhat mitigating the impact through our hedging strategy, we keep the yellow light here. While we are confident that we will be able to supply all our assets with raw materials, we are still seeing tight concentrate markets.

Consequently, the red traffic light for concentrate TC/RCs remains, in particular, since we have seen a visible TC/RC decline versus the previous year and the corresponding effect in our gross margin. In summary, these developments provide us with higher confidence regarding the outlook for the business in the remainder of the fiscal year. Based on the improved market outlook that I've just shared with you, we have raised our full year guidance for fiscal year '25, '26 last week. As we have highlighted before, the continuous rise in metal prices will have a strong positive effect on the group's metal result. Moreover, we anticipate that higher earnings from copper products and lower concentrate TC/RCs will still be a net positive effect on the EBT.

For Richmond, we expect to achieve breakeven on EBITDA level, meaning on EBT level, the contribution will still be a negative item. Finally, due to the recent depreciation of the U.S. dollar versus the euro, we factor in an additional headwind from foreign exchange. Therefore, we now expect operating EBT to be between EUR 375 million and EUR 475 million, up from EUR 300 million to EUR 400 million. And we now expect an operating EBITDA where the range has equally been lifted by EUR 75 million to be between EUR 655 million and EUR 755 million. By segment, we project an operating EBT of EUR 320 million to EUR 380 million for CSP, which is plus EUR 40 million and for MMR, an operating EBT of EUR 115 million to EUR 175 million, which is plus EUR 35 million versus prior guidance.

As a result, we upgraded the operating ROCE forecast as well to between 9% to 11% at the group level, which is up by 2 percentage points versus the prior guidance. Breaking it down to the segment level, we anticipate ROCE between 13% to 15% for CSP and between 8% to 10% for MMR, also here up each by 2 percentage points as well.

Furthermore, we have refined our net cash flow forecast and expect it to be above last year. This means net cash flow should exceed EUR 677 million for full year '25, '26. And finally, we expect free cash flow before dividend to be at least at breakeven for the full fiscal year. So in other words, we do expect that higher earnings levels will also result in higher cash flows. So the free cash flow guidance is slightly raised to at least free cash flow breakeven.

Having said this, please bear in mind that in context of raw material shipments at record high metal prices, a certain degree of imprecision around the balance sheet date may be unavoidable. And with this, I'd like to hand back over to Toralf.

Thank you, Steffen. Before we come to the final slide of our presentation, I would like to update you on the progress of our strategic projects. To sum up, our strategic projects continue moving forward and every day brings us closer to commissioning. By December 31, around EUR 1.4 billion, which is about 80% of the approved investment volume for strategic projects has been invested.

In Hamburg, we successfully installed the converter for complex recycling Hamburg. This is a key project milestone and commissioning is planned for the first half of this fiscal year '25, '26. That puts it in the current quarter. In Pirdop, the Tankhouse Expansion will allow us to process all anodes produced on site. This will increase refined copper capacity by about 50% to around 340,000 tonnes. Commissioning is also scheduled for fiscal year '25, '26.

In Richmond, we achieved a number of milestones that highlight the progress made on Phase 1. The first blister was shipped to Europe, generating the first revenues for the plant. Depreciation started in Q1 '25, '26, a signal of the site's technical readiness. The first complex melt was carried out on January 28, another important step in the ramp-up. Looking to the Phase 2, commissioning is still planned for this fiscal year.

Reaching the end of our presentation on the first quarter of fiscal year '25, '26, I would like to summarize the key takeaways. We had a sound start to the fiscal year. A higher metal result and strong metal prices drove gross margin expansion despite lower TC/RCs. EBITDA of EUR 164 million and operating EBT of EUR 105 million were in line with market expectations and were carried by good operational performance. Net cash flow and free cash flow came in below last year, in particular on account of working capital buildup at higher metal prices.

Operating return on capital employed was lowered by high investment in trailing earnings. However, as the projects ramp up, they will support returns over the medium term. The execution of our strategic CapEx program is on track. Complex Recycling Hamburg, the Tankhouse Expansion in Pirdop and Richmond Phase 2 are all scheduled for commissioning in '25, '26. For the full year '25, '26, we expect higher metal prices and stronger product business to offset the challenging raw material markets. Therefore, we now expect an operating EBT between EUR 375 million and EUR 475 million and a free cash flow before dividends to be at least at breakeven for the full fiscal year.

And with this, I would like to hand back over to Elke Brinkmann.

Thank you, Toralf and Steffen. Before we open the line for your questions, I would like to provide you with an outlook on the next event. Next week on Thursday, February 12, we look forward to welcoming many of our shareholders at our Annual General Meeting. And on May 11, we will publish our half year results for '25, '26.

With that said, I hand over to the operator for the first question.

[Operator Instructions] The first one is from Adahna Ekoku of Morgan Stanley.

I've got a question on your free metal hedging. So at the Capital Markets Day, you outlined that given the elevated metal prices, you would keep your remaining open position that you had for the rest of this year unhedged. Is there any more color you could give us now on where this hedged versus unhedged exposure is for the rest of the year?

Yes. Thanks, Adahna, for the question. I mean, as we now have 3 months, let's say, advanced in the fiscal year, we've also advanced a bit on our hedging position. I think what I can share here is that for copper, we are hedged for this fiscal year at around 60%. And for gold, silver, talking about the main pieces on precious metals, we are hedged at around 70% for this fiscal year.

The next question is from Bastian Synagowitz of Deutsche Bank.

Maybe starting with -- also with the metal prices, I guess we've seen obviously an amazing volatility there. Given the higher value in metals, do you see that your metal terms are changing for the procurement of raw materials? Or do you still see a pretty stable content in free metals in tonnage terms? That's my first question.

Yes. Bastian, no, we don't see any major change in our contract terms because of higher metal prices.

Okay. Great. And then just moving on to Richmond. I actually touched on that in the presentation. But just on the current weather situation in -- I guess, in the region, has this become effective for the supply of the business? I guess you said that you are relatively well supplied for scrap overall for the upcoming quarter. But I just wanted to understand how far maybe the weather is causing any effects here upstream or downstream? And then also, have you advanced on the next possible steps for U.S. footprint? If you could give us an update there, that would be great.

Yes, Bastian, on Richmond, the weather conditions U.S. don't have any major effect on our supply situation. We are currently well supplied with materials for our ramp-up for, I would say, until summer of this year. We also have the different materials available. So no impact of the weather on our tonnage or mix situation when it comes to recycling materials for Richmond.

Next steps, we are still in the evaluation phase. We are also in contact with the U.S. government for potential funding. But we stick to our milestone. First, we want to get Phase 2 up and running in the course of this fiscal year, and then we will make a decision on further expansion in the next fiscal year.

Got you. Okay. Great. And then lastly, on, I guess, the European market. What are you making out of the European plans for securing access to critical raw materials? I guess we have had a bit of noise on that front in the last couple of days. So what does this mean for you? And are there any implications to you on the project pipeline as well?

Of course, we welcome this, this attention to critical materials in Europe. We hope that also new mining projects will be started in Europe in order to increase the independence of Europe in the magnitude or in the direction of raw materials. Short term, we don't expect any major effect because it takes a while until these mining projects get started or help us supply more concentrates out of mines. But mid to long term, this we see a positive effect for us. We also hope that with this Critical Raw Materials Act that also there will be more focus on the support for the competitiveness of European raw material companies who use raw materials and who produce metals. So we expect more support from the government here. So we see this positive.

[Operator Instructions] The next question is from Maxime Kogge of ODDO BHF.

So first question is on the consolidation wave that we are seeing on the mining side. So now there are talks between Glencore and Rio. There has been already talks concluding into a merger between Anglo and Teck. What's your take on that? Because I guess that from the smelting point of view, it's not necessarily great to have this consolidation. You prefer to speak to Rio and to Glencore separately than to a global player? And would you see the need as well to consolidate on the smelting side to somehow mirror this consolidation on the mining side?

Yes. Thank you for that strategic question. Of course, we monitor these mergers quite intensively. We don't see a big negative effect. We rather see a neutral effect on us because our contracts are, in most cases, directly with the mines, and we have long-term relationships, as you know, with many different mines. So we continue to -- we expect that these long-term relationships and long-term contract agreements will continue.

Consolidation talks on the smelting side, we don't see right now. We have a good market position in Europe. We are building up a good market position in the U.S. with our focus on Europe and the U.S. and our -- as is market position in Europe and our to-be-built market position in the U.S., we feel strong enough to stay independent and not have any further consolidation. So no consolidation plans from our side on the smelting side.

Okay. And just a second and last question is on the wire rod. So this is really the product that is in hot demand right now. So I guess that you're basically at full capacity there in Europe. So would you see a case for expanding your capacity there? The current program doesn't plan any big capacity increase in Europe. Is this a segment where you would perhaps be more inclined to envisage that thing?

As you rightfully said, there is strong demand for wire rod. We see that across industries. We are almost at our capacity, where we still have a capacity limit where we still have some capacity left. First, we want to use or expand -- materialize this excess capacity that we have. And then in the second step, we would think about further expansion. But right now, there are no concrete plans.

Next question is from Daniel Major of UBS.

Just first and a couple of follow-ups on the existing questions. You mentioned 60% of copper and 70% of precious were hedged for this year. What sort of levels are those hedges at?

Yes, Daniel, I think that's the $1 billion question, right? So I think what I can share is that the guidance increase of the EUR 75 million, which is basically linked to more positive view on metals, a very positive view as well on our copper products, a bit more cautious view on Richmond, and obviously, also an update on the foreign exchange. Those comments that we were making were based on, let's say, on data points and on market information from the beginning of this calendar year. So that gives you a rough impression where the metal prices were there. And obviously, we do not know where the next months will go to. But as I said, in the midpoint of the guidance grounds on premises of early calendar year '26.

So if prices persist at this level, you'd be in the range. Is that a fair assessment?

Can you repeat if prices...

If spot prices were the same for the rest of the year, you would be within the range. There's no upside risk of spot pricing. Is that the right way of thinking about it?

That's correct. If prices would stay on those levels of early beginning of January, then we would see ourselves at the midpoint of the range. And if prices would be significantly higher than that or significantly lower than that, then it could be the one or the other.

Okay. Second question follows on from Bastian's question a little bit, but specifically on scrap export restrictions from Europe. Is there any update on time line or kind of parameters around that?

No, Daniel, there's unfortunately no update on the time line. We are in close contact with the political authorities here. They are willing to do something, but we have no concrete time line.

Yes. Next question, just going back to your slide with the variables. So Slide #5, you've seen a pickup in spot refining charges and sulfuric. In terms of the scrap market, you're mentioning improving availability because of the higher price environment. Do you think that's sustainable? Or is this just a destocking of available inventory of low-quality scrap because of the high pricing environment and that will normalize? Or is this a sustainable improvement in scrap availability?

I mean, Daniel, on -- let's say, we all know that on the scrap side, the visibility is limited. So kind of it's the next 3 months. But we do think that for now, it's -- let's say, for the next few months, it is sustainable. For the next few months, we count on higher RCs starting now with our next Q2. We see it coming. Let's say, new material that's going in is coming in with better RCs than the material we were putting in the smelters in Q1, having been sourced earlier or in the mid of '25 or in the fall of '25. So for the foreseeable few months, we think it's sustainable. And obviously, it will be a function of copper price developments going forward.

And then kind of similar question on the sulfuric market. It's not a market I know very well at all. What are the dynamics that have driven the recovery? And again, what's the outlook as you see it in the near term?

I mean also here, Daniel, let's say, visibility is a bit limited. But as I can say it that way, we see it at the time of the CMD or when we did the full year disclosure end of last year, we were giving the sulfuric acid market a yellow traffic light, yellow meaning same level as the very good level last year. And now we added some shade of green to it, meaning it's a bit better than that. And we think this is market driven in some of the subsegments, basically in the overseas -- from our perspective, in the overseas subsegments of the sulfuric acid prices. So here, it's a slight further improvement on real good levels that we see.

And then final one, you also highlight the positive contribution from the strength of products, which is predominantly wire rod. Is there any improvement in other end markets you're seeing coming through? I noticed you had a sequential year-on-year decline in flat products, but is there any signs of life in the other segments outside of wire rod?

Well, as you know, automotive is still at a low level. We see no major improvement there, but we see slight increases on the construction and infrastructure industry. So we see a slight pickup here, but no major pickups yet.

At the moment, there are no more questions in the queue. [Operator Instructions] All right. There is a follow-up from Bastian Synagowitz from Deutsche Bank.

Just on Richmond, I think your overall commentary there on the ramp-up sounded quite positive, but you said in the guidance mix, you basically marked it down a little. I guess Richmond is one area where at least on pretax level, I guess, the FX should actually work in your favor. So what's been driving the markdown?

Yes, Bastian. At the CMD, I think we had a chart that indicated that EBITDA would be a positive level. I think from the scale one could derive that it was, let's say, a plus EUR 20 million EBITDA figure. And as Toralf has said, we feel well with what we have on stock. We feel well also with the commercial terms. I mean what we talked about RCs improving now in Europe. We see similar things in the U.S. So the reason why we scaled it down a bit by the EUR 20 million roughly that I said is basically a few weeks slower ramp-up than we thought last fall.

But I mean, here, you see we are very granular. It's just a few weeks. We are happy that we had the first revenues in Q1. We are happy that we have the depreciation, which is a sign that the system is up and running. But it's really granular, perhaps at the end of the year, we are missing very few weeks of revenues, and that would be it.

So at the moment, there are no questions in the queue. So with that, I would like to close the Q&A session, and I'm handing the floor back over to the host.

Yes. Thank you. The IR team will, of course, be happy to answer any further questions you may have. We would now like to close today's conference call, and thank you for your attention. We wish you a pleasant rest of the day. Thank you, and goodbye.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Aurubis Analyst Call. [Operator Instructions]

Let me now turn the floor over to Elke Brinkmann.

Good afternoon also from my side and a warm welcome to the conference call on the full year results of the fiscal year 2024-'25 of Aurubis AG. We, from Investor Relations are here with our CEO, Toralf Haag; and our CFO, Steffen Hoffmann, who will present the figures for the 12 months of 2024-'25 and current developments at Aurubis.

After the presentation, the floor will be open for questions. [Operator Instructions]

Before we begin, a brief reminder of the disclaimer on forward-looking statements. Today's capital markets presentation contains forward-looking statements about Aurubis plans and expectations. These statements involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.

Let me now turn the floor over to Toralf Haag.

Thank you, Elke, and welcome, everybody, to our conference call for the full year results for the fiscal year 2024-'25. Aurubis looks back on a successful year in which our competitor strengths have once again been the foundation of our resilience. The past fiscal year was characterized by a highly dynamic market environment with unprecedented shifts in the market.

The concentrate market swung into a deficit, motivating Asian smelters, in particular, to substitute copper scrap for concentrate. Developments that send TC/RCs and scrap RCs on a downward trajectory. Thanks to our multimetal excellence, our sustainability leadership but also our closing the loop activities with our customers, we were able to fully supply our primary and secondary recycling smelters.

At the same time, demand for metals searched where trade measures redirected material flows and created local deficits. As an integrated copper producer, we were able to reliably supply our customers and ensure the flow of critical metals to strategic relevant industry sectors. Overall, we managed market challenges well, while also achieving key milestones in our strategic growth agenda. One was first melt Phase 1 of Aurubis Richmond. We are well on track and our robust business model was a cornerstone of our resilient performance in the past fiscal year.

On the next page, I would like to give you an overview of the key financial highlights for fiscal year 2024-'25. In line with our sharpened guidance range, operating EBT came in at EUR 355 million. As highlighted before, this result was achieved in a challenging economic environment and includes the successfully completed major shutdown in Pirdop. EBITDA was at EUR 589 million versus EUR 622 million in the prior year, reflecting our solid operational performance.

Operating ROCE decreased to 8.8% compared to 11.5% a year ago. This is primarily due to our ongoing strategic investment program, which is increasing capital employed until the full earnings contributions come through. Net cash flow was a strong EUR 677 million, significantly above the prior year's EUR 537 million level driven by the robust earnings situation and a clear improvement in working capital. Q4 was outstanding with EUR 319 million net cash generation alone.

On the back of a healthy cash generation in Q4, free cash flow, pre-dividend improved by more than EUR 100 million from minus EUR 219 million in the previous year to a minus EUR 95 million. On this basis, we are proposing increasing the dividend to EUR 1.60 per share, up from EUR 1.50, which underlines our confidence in the business and its cash generation. Looking ahead to the next fiscal year, we are confirming our forecast of an operating EBT between EUR 300 million and EUR 400 million, which is expectedly roughly on par with the 2024 and '25 level, as well as free cash flow in a positive territory.

Turning on the next page to our production figures. I would like to highlight once again that Aurubis is much more than just copper. We have a wide array of strategically relevant metals. On the input side, we processed around 2.2 million tonnes of concentrate a slight decline of 4% year-over-year, reflecting the planned maintenance shutdown in Pirdop and operational issues in Hamburg at the beginning of the year.

At the same time, we increased copper scrap and blister input by about 3%, totaling 510,000 tonnes, demonstrating our ability to source and process secondary raw materials. Other recycling material throughput was down by 6% to 510,000 tonnes. On the output side, copper cathode production was stable at 1.1 million tonnes. In line with concentrate throughput development, we reduced roughly 2 million tonnes of sulfuric acid. The picture for other industrial metals, along with precious and minor metals is mixed. While some quantities exhibited fairly stable development or even increased, other metal quantities such as gold dropped versus the prior previous year, which is, to a large extent, a collection of the feed mix in connection with lower throughput levels.

Our output of wire rod and copper shapes was on par with the prior year level. Flat rolled products and specialty wire volumes, however, were down 31%, mainly because of the previous year figures included volumes from the Buffalo plant, which we sold. Overall, our smelter network showed a solid operational performance. Our unique smelter network allows us to supply high-quality products from both primary and secondary sources with a high share of recycled content.

As you can see, the share of recycled content in Aurubis copper cathodes has increased by 1 percentage point to 45%. And all of our copper products contain a sizable share of recycled content as well. We recovered 20 different metals and elements that are contained in our raw materials, such as tin. And here, we achieved even 100% recycled content, which highlights our strong position in circular economy solutions. This is the key strength of our network of plants in Europe and North America and is also a clear competitive advantage in securing supply and delivering sustainable products.

Let me now run through the market environment of our main products and raw materials. Starting with the downstream side. European copper premiums increased significantly after the U.S. tariff decision. And although they came down from the elevated levels in Q4, they stayed clearly above last year's level. Sulfuric acid prices declined from prior year peaks but stayed stable at a relatively high level, supporting our earnings in the CSP segment.

On the raw material side, according to industry reports, treatment and refining charges for copper concentrates on the stock market had fallen into negative territory in the recent quarters. They have now stabilized but remain at very low levels, reflecting the tightness in the concentrate market. This has been strained further by major main disruptions -- mine disruptions towards the end of Q4.

Furthermore, tightening scrap markets led to declining refining charges for recycling materials, particularly in Q4. Overall, we saw favorable development on the product side but faced headwinds from raw material markets, especially for concentrates and scrap. However, please bear in mind that there are no direct one-to-one correlation with our P&L. We are actively managing to remain independent for short-term fluctuations.

Let me now turn to the price development of -- for key metals in the U.S. dollar. As you are all aware, gold and silver prices increased sharply in Q4 of '24-'25 up 44% year-over-year and at new all-time highs, driven by macro and geopolitical factors. In comparison, copper prices remained relatively stable with a moderate increase towards the end of the quarter.

This favorable development of key metal prices positively contributed to our metal result as we will see later. The U.S. dollar euro exchange rate moved into a tight range over the period with the U.S. dollar depreciating from the levels at the beginning of the year. Aurubis long U.S. dollar position remains unchanged at approximately USD 530 million for the fiscal year with 54% of the U.S. exposure hedged at a rate of 1.125 for the fiscal year '26-'27, around 40% of the exposure is hedged at a rate of 1.188.

And now I hand over to Steffen Hoffmann for more details on the financials.

Thank you, Toralf, and a warm welcome from my side too. Let me take you through the financial details of fiscal year '24, '25 and touch on the KPIs in this chart. Our revenues increased by 6% to EUR 18.2 billion, mainly reflecting higher metal prices. Gross profit decreased slightly by 4% to EUR 1.6 billion as did EBITDA, which came in at EUR 589 million, which is minus 5%. Operating EBIT came in at EUR 358 million and operating EBT at EUR 355 million, 14% below the prior year. Compared to the EBITDA, the decrease of the EBT was more pronounced as in '24-'25. Depreciation increased by EUR 20 million as planned due to our strategic projects.

A higher metal result significantly increased earnings from sulfuric acid a robust contribution from product sales, as well as lower legal and consulting costs positively impacted the result. However, lower concentrate throughput and reduced TC/RCs lower earnings from processing of recycling materials and the anticipated higher ramp-up costs and depreciation for strategic projects weighed on the results.

Net cash flow improved significantly to EUR 677 million from EUR 537 million, underscoring the strong cash generation of our business. Our operating ROCE for fiscal year '24-'25 was 8.8% against 11.5% the year before, reflecting the investment phase we are currently in. Looking on the next chart at quarterly performance. Q4 showed clear improvement over Q3. Our operating EBT increased by 19% to EUR 68 million. Higher concentrate throughput following the successful completion of the Pirdop shutdown in Q3 supported earnings despite lower TC/RCs.

Please keep in mind that the shutdown was completed in Q4, so a minor portion of the shutdown still affects Q4. In Lunen, we recognized a EUR 10 million environmental provision in Q4, while Q3 was impacted by EUR 12 million additional depreciation on the at equity investment. Net cash flow almost doubled quarter-over-quarter to EUR 319 million, mainly due to the significant improvement in net working capital.

Moving on to the split of our gross margin, which is a nice representation of our multimetal strategy and the diversification of our earnings drivers. You saw this breakdown at our Capital Market Day, and we decided to provide you with the same breakdown for the 12-month period as well.

In total, gross margin was at around EUR 2.077 billion, broadly in line with the prior year level of about EUR 2.1 billion. Please bear in mind that our former FRP site in Buffalo was still included in the overview for fiscal year '23-'24. Compared to the previous year, the metal result share increased mainly on account of strong precious metal prices but the higher copper price contributed as well.

Here, we see again that Aurubis is more than just copper. We are multimetal and we will continue to strengthen this profile through targeted investments. However, declining concentrate TC/RCs weighed on the overall gross margin, while the scrap RC share remained stable. Still, our strategy of building on long-term partnerships and more complex materials shielded us to some extent from the extreme developments visible on the spot market.

In products and premiums, higher asset prices supported the group's gross margin, partially counteracting the TC/RC decline. And with respect to product premiums, I'd like to reiterate that Buffalo was still included in the previous year. Overall, the balanced mix of these earnings drivers helped us to mitigate volatility in individual markets and once more underpins the resilience of our business.

Let me now go into segment performance, starting with Multimetal Recycling. MMR generated an operating EBT of EUR 13 million compared to EUR 79 million in the previous year. Operationally, the throughput of recycling materials was slightly above the prior year level. However, in an environment of declining refining charges for recycling materials. The second half of the fiscal year was characterized by a challenging market environment with an impact on RCs, volume and mix.

Additionally, compared to fiscal year '23-'24, the segment's performance was impacted, in particular, by higher ramp-up costs for strategic projects, especially at Aurubis Richmond, and furthermore, as we've alluded to, an impairment on an equity investment in the amount of EUR 12 million and a provision for a planned environmental measure in the amount of EUR 10 million weighed on the segment's performance and can be treated as a one-off. The ROCE declined from 5.6% to 0.9%, reflecting both the lower earnings level and the increase in capital employed, mainly due to Richmond. Overall, we are not happy with this level at MMR and we'll focus on improving the financial performance going forward.

Turning to the segment's gross margin. Overall, the gross margin increased slightly to around EUR 640 million versus EUR 623 million in the prior year despite the tightening scrap markets. This increase is attributable mainly to the segment's metal result which benefited from higher metal prices. refining charges for recycling input were stable and contributed roughly 45%, very close to last year's 46%. Contribution of products and premiums in MMR remained flat compared to the previous year.

Let's now take a look at the Custom Smelting & Products segment. CSP delivered an operating EBT of EUR 446 million versus EUR 458 million, so almost at the prior year level despite the deterioration of concentrate TC/RCs. The ROCE for the segment was 18.2% compared to 19.6% last year, influenced again by a higher capital base due to investments. Concentrate throughput was at 2.18 million tonnes and sulfuric acid production at roughly 2 million tonnes, both slightly below the prior year due to the major plant shutdown in Pirdop.

Cathode output rose slightly to 582,000 tonnes, and rod and shapes volumes remained broadly stable. FRP products and specialty wire volumes declined to 90,000 tonnes mainly due to the sale of the Buffalo plant in the prior year.

Overall, CSP showed good operational performance in a challenging market environment and delivered earnings broadly in line with last year, despite the Pirdop shutdown. Looking at the gross margin. This, in CSP highlights the different moving parts. Total gross margin was approximately EUR 1.44 billion, slightly below last year's level, reflecting lower global treatment and refining charges, as well as lower concentrate throughput.

Accordingly, treatment charges for concentrate and recycling input contributed around 18% of gross margin, down from 24% in the prior year, mirroring lower TC/RCs and subdued scrap RCs. The metal result increased to 34% from 27% in the prior year, driven in particular by higher precious metal prices and higher copper prices. Products and premiums contributed 48%, roughly in line with last year's figure. This reflects significantly higher earnings from sulfuric acid and robust demand for copper products and here again, the reminder is that last year's figures included Buffalo for 11 months. So while TC/RCs were under pressure and throughput volumes were lower due to the shutdown in Pirdop, we successfully compensated with a stronger metal result and product contributions.

Let us now take a look at cost development in the group. Total group costs were around EUR 1.9 billion, slightly below the EUR 1.98 billion in the prior year. Distribution among the cost categories was quite similar to last year. The decrease in total cost is largely due to the sale of the Buffalo plant and thus a lower asset and cost base. Personnel costs represented about 33% of total cost slightly increasing due to higher headcount, mainly for strategic projects, as well as wage increases.

Our energy costs declined mainly on account of the sale of the Buffalo plant. For the remainder of the group, energy costs were stable due to energy management. Consumables and external services, both around 12% and at 22%, other operating expenses like logistics or maintenance were stable versus previous year. Depreciation and amortization increased as expected due to our strategic investments, bringing total D&A to about 12% of the cost base. Excluding D&A, our total cash costs decreased to EUR 1.665 billion from EUR 1.764 billion in the prior year, reflecting our cost discipline and portfolio adjustments.

Turning to cash flow. We saw a very strong development in '24-'25. Starting from left to right, operating EBITDA of EUR 589 million is the starting point, reflecting our robust financial performance. Net working capital improved significantly driven by higher liabilities, partly offset by higher inventories. Tax payments, however, increased to EUR 92 million on account of the application of the global minimum tax rate in Bulgaria, as well as deferred taxes.

This led to a net cash flow of EUR 677 million, clearly above the prior year's EUR 537 million. Cash outflows for investment activities remained high at EUR 754 million, mainly for Aurubis Richmond, complex recycling Hamburg and the planned Pirdop shutdown. Free cash flow before dividend was at minus EUR 95 million, which is a marked improvement versus the previous year's minus EUR 219 million figure and reflects that the peak of our investment phase is now behind us. In total, we paid dividends in the amount of EUR 66 million, which results in a free cash flow after dividends of minus EUR 160 million. Overall, we focused on strengthening the cash flow profile while executing large strategic projects.

I would now like to move on to some of our balance sheet KPIs. Our equity ratio is 53.5%, slightly below almost 56% last year but very comfortably above our 40% target and above. Our net leverage is again very low at 0.5% and well below our maximum target of 3x EBITDA. Please take note that the capital expenditure of EUR 771 million on this slide includes capitalized own work.

And for this reason, is slightly higher than the cash figure shown on the previous slide. Capital employed increased to roughly EUR 4.1 billion from around EUR 3.7 billion, reflecting the investment program. The net cash flow, as mentioned before, improved to EUR 677 million. So I think it's fair to say overall that the balance sheet remains very solid despite the high level of investments and the financial leverage remains low, giving us ample flexibility.

The next slide is meant as a quick reminder of our updated capital allocation policy and our clear commitment to maintaining a strong balance sheet while pursuing disciplined growth and shareholder returns. Besides aiming to keep the equity ratio above 40% and maintaining a maximum net leverage of 3x EBITDA at the fiscal year-end, we provided guidance on how to allocate available capital among approved growth projects and baseline CapEx, as well as dividends.

For the latter, we sharpened our dividend policy at the CMD and foresee a payout ratio of up to 30% of the group's operating consolidated net income in the medium term for fiscal year '24-'25, we stated that we would aim for a 25% payout ratio since the last fiscal year was still marked by high investment activity. So what's now our concrete dividend proposal on the next chart.

Our operating EPS was at EUR 5.97 in '24-'25, down from EUR 7.66 in '23-'24. Main reasons for the decline were the lower operating EBT, as well as higher tax payments due in part to the higher corporate tax rate in Bulgaria, which I mentioned before. Despite the lower earnings base, we propose increasing the dividend to EUR 1.60 per share up from EUR 1.50 per share last year, continuing the gradual upward trajectory in absolute terms. This would correspond to a payout ratio of 27% which is above the 25% target for the transition year that I've just mentioned. It once more underscores management's confidence in the business and its outlook.

While this would increase the absolute dividend, the dividend yield is lower than in previous years due to strong share price performance. Still, the absolute dividend amount and our policy reflects a clear commitment to shareholder renumeration. Looking ahead to fiscal year '25-'26, the mix picture for our main macro drivers that we presented at the CMD remains largely unchanged. Raw mat supply is not ideal but manageable thanks to our long-term contracts and market position.

As many of you are aware, concentrate supply remains tight, and we remain cautious despite some hopeful news flow in recent weeks. Hence, we expect TC/RCs to remain at the low level of the recent months. For RCs for recycling raw mats, we expect a stable outlook, although recent months presented more of a mixed picture. Keep in mind that visibility in these markets is generally limited. The euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate remains affected to watch as it has developed less favorably for us in recent months, but we manage our exposure through our hedging and commercial policies.

The sulfuric acid market is of a more short-term nature as well. And prices have normalized from previous peaks but are still at a sound level. We continue to see healthy demand from the chemical and fertilizer sectors, although with more volatility compared to the previous year. Metal prices and demand for our products are expected to remain supportive overall, especially given structural trends such as electrification and infrastructure investments.

In total, we expect a challenging raw mat environment, though with positive contributions from metals and products. Despite the somewhat mixed macro picture, we expect a sound '25- '26 fiscal year. We maintain our outlook for operating EBITDA between EUR 580 million and EUR 680 million and an operating EBT in the range of EUR 300 million to EUR 400 million, roughly at '24-'25 level.

Bear in mind, please, that the EBT level mentioned includes higher depreciation in the order of EUR 50 million. For CSP, we expect an operating EBT of EUR 280 million to EUR 340 million. On the one hand, this range reflects the lower TC/RC level that affected fiscal year '24-'25 only in part and will now affect '25-'26 on a full year basis.

On the other hand, besides headwinds from the euro-U.S. dollar rate we anticipate higher costs for footprint expansion due to strategic projects like CRH or Tankhouse expansion Pirdop. Higher depreciation will weigh on the segment's financial performance as well.

On the other side, increased material prices, high demand for copper products and improvement in operational performance will offset the challenges but only partially. Still, considering that we are only 10 weeks into the new fiscal year, there might also be scenarios in which the segment's EBT comes in at the upper end of the guidance.

For MMR, our expected operating EBITDA range is EUR 80 million to EUR 140 million. From today's perspective, we do not expect negative one-off items like last year and ramp-up cost in Richmond to impact the segment's performance in fiscal year '25-'26. Furthermore, increased metal prices and high demand for copper, as well as an improvement in operational performance should support the segment's earnings level.

Regarding the development of recycling raw mat markets, we maintain a more cautious view and higher depreciation at segment level will partially counteract the positive items. Also here, they are still 40 weeks ahead of us in this fiscal year. We anticipate net cash flow in the range of EUR 640 million to EUR 740 million, driven by a strong operating performance and further working capital management, which would translate to free cash flow before dividend at breakeven, reflecting the combination of reduced investments and cash generation improvements.

Operating ROCE is expected between 7% and 9% with CSP at 11% to 13% and MMR at 6% to 8%, mirroring the increased capital employed from the investment activities mentioned. Overall, we confirm our previous guidance and expect another solid year. To help you frame the guidance, this slide, which we presented in detail at the CMD, schematically shows how our price change of 10% versus our assumptions for fiscal year '25-'26 would impact our EBT, a 10% change in concentrate TC/RCs, recycling RCs or sulfuric acid prices. Each translates into a low double-digit million euro impact on operating EBT for '25-'26. A 10% change in the euro-U.S. dollar rate or the copper premium would lead to a low to medium double-digit million change of the EBT.

The highest sensitivity is visible in the metal result, a 10% price change across the entire metal portfolio would translate into medium to high double-digit million euro impact. Again, this illustrates that the diversified set of drivers influences our results and the drivers that may have been expected to have a higher weight in the earnings composition I refer to TC/RC turn out to be less dominant. At the same time, we actively manage these exposures.

On CapEx, we are now moving beyond the peak of our current strategic investment program. More than 75% of the existing EUR 1.7 billion strategic CapEx program has already been spent. And the remaining strategic CapEx will phase out gradually as shown here, basically almost everything of the remainder in the new fiscal year. You can see that total CapEx peaked in '23-'24, declined in '24-'25 and is expected to decline further in '25-'26 as major projects are completed or enter commissioning.

Therefore, we are planning with the strategic CapEx in the amount of EUR 350 million, EUR 100 million lower than in fiscal year '24-'25. At EUR 320 million, our expected baseline CapEx falls at the lower end of the EUR 300 million to EUR 400 million range, reflecting our CapEx discipline and the change in our primary shutdown cycle. As strategic projects come on stream, depreciation and amortization will gradually increase, reflecting the higher asset base. As mentioned before, DNA is anticipated at EUR 50 million above the prior year level.

And with this, I'd like to hand back over to Toralf.

Thank you very much, Steffen, for taking us in detail through the financials. The next slide we presented to you at our CMD at our Capital Market Day, and I would like to briefly repeat our path forward to frame the next slide.

The decade of metals has begun and megatrends such as electrification, energy infrastructure, artificial intelligence, and global security are supporting long-term demand for our products and capabilities. Our ambition is to forge resilience and to lead in multimetal delivering impact across five strategic pillars: focused growth, innovation, efficiency, commercial excellence and impact from our investments. We are targeting value-creating growth, where we hold a leading competitive position, and we aim to maximize multimetal yields through innovation in metallurgical know-how.

We continuously optimize our operations for peak efficiency and strengthen our commercial excellence to deep market access and competitiveness. This is underpinned by three key enablers. Sustainability leadership, our performance culture and financial strength. In the fiscal year, '24-'25, we successfully advanced projects into the in-commissioning phase. Including Bleed Treatment Olen Beerse, Aurubis Richmond Phase 1 and the third Solar Park in Pirdop.

BOB has already started commissioning in December '24, and the first phase of Aurubis Richmond celebrated first month in September '25 and is now in the early stages of hot commissioning. Looking ahead to the current fiscal year, important projects such as Complex Recycling Hamburg, Aurubis Richmond Phase 2 and the Tankhouse expansion in Pirdop are planned to go into commissioning and expand our multimetal network.

Projects such as Slag Processing in Pirdop and the new Precious Metal Refinery in Hamburg are still further out with commissioning scheduled in the fiscal year, '26-'27. These projects will create impact by enhancing our recycling capacity improving efficiency and supporting our sustainability and growth ambitions. In the next few minutes, I would like to highlight the 3 key projects for '25-'26 in more detail.

First, Complex Recycling Hamburg or CRH, is expected to start commissioning in the first half of the current fiscal year and will further optimize the metallurgical network in Hamburg. The facility will show -- will allow for about 30,000 tonnes of additional external recycling input per year, increasing our ability to process complex secondary materials. From a gross margin perspective, the project will contribute to strengthen the metal result, as well as our earnings from TC/RCs and RCs.

Second, Phase 2 of Aurubis Richmond in the U.S. will double the intake capacity for complex recycling materials to 180,000 tonnes. Commissioning will be followed by a technical ramp-up phase, after which we expect a material contribution to earnings. Once fully ramped up, Aurubis Richmond will contribute to increasing TC/RCs and RCs, as well as the group's metal result.

Third, the Tankhouse expansion in Pirdop will enable us to process Pirdop's entire anode production directly on site, adding around 50% more refined copper production capacity at the site. This additional cathode production will mainly add to the group's earnings from product and premiums, while also supporting the metal result to a lesser extent.

Together, these projects support our multimetal strategy, strengthen our footprint in Europe and North America and further enhance our resilience. Our commercial excellence pillar, specifically target strengthening the relationship with our partners, downstream but also upstream in particular. Secure competitive raw material supply is crucial for Aurubis.

Here are some of the key agreements we concluded. With Troilus Gold in Canada, we signed an offtake agreement for 75,000 tonnes of copper-gold concentrate based on a positive feasibility study supported by a German government financing package. Our metallurgical capabilities and ability to process complex raw materials allow us to unlock resources and create value together with Troilus.

With Viscaria in Sweden, we have agreed on 25,000 tonnes of copper concentrate deliveries from 2028 to 2035, with an option for extension. This mine project has a strong ESG profile and strengthens European supply.

With Teck Resources, we signed a memorandum of understanding, collaborate on responsible mining and sustainability, focusing on traceability, transparency of ESG performance and credible certification frameworks, building on our long-standing partnership.

In our collaboration with both Viscaria and Teck, our authentic sustainability leadership has been key to building and further strengthening the relationships. These agreements support our long-term raw material security, enhance our ESG positioning and contributes to the resilience and competitive of our supply portfolio.

To summarize, 2024-'25 was a successful fiscal year for Aurubis. Despite planned maintenance shutdowns, one-off items and a challenging market environment, we delivered a solid EBITDA of EUR 589 million and an operating EBT of EUR 355 million, which was comfortably within our guided EBT range. Cash generation improved significantly as is reflected by net cash flow of EUR 677 million, and we aim to improve it further going forward.

We reached key milestones in our strategic product including the first melt at Aurubis Richmond. The proposed dividend of EUR 1.60 per share represents a payout ratio of roughly 27% and reflects our confidence in the business and its long-term prospects. For 2025-'26, we expect an increased metal result and higher contributions from our product business. This will compensate for challenging raw material markets.

With declining annual CapEx, we expect free cash flow generation to improve to a breakeven before dividend, while we confirm our guidance for an operating EBT of EUR 300 million to EUR 400 million, broadly at the '24-'25 level. Overall, we are well positioned to benefit from structural megatrends and to continue delivering on our performance 2030 strategy.

Let me close the presentation by reiterating what makes Aurubis stand out. First, we have a strong market outlook. The decade of metals has begun, and megatrends are expected to drive double-digit growth in our end markets by 2035.

Second, Aurubis holds a leading position as a top copper and multimetal producer in Europe and the U.S., with a unique setup of capabilities in primary and secondary metallurgy.

Third, our strategy focused on growth and resilience, leveraging multiple earning drivers to increase our leadership in multimetal and our impact, efficiency and robustness.

Fourth, we deliver strong financials. On the back of a world-class operations and focused investments, we aim for steady EBT growth and a 15% long-term ROCE target.

Fifth, we are clearly committed to a shareholder value, combining value-accretive growth projects with an attractive dividend policy and potential additional returns of excess cash. In short, performance, resilience and multimetal leadership define Aurubis investment case.

And with this, I would like to hand over to Elke Brinkmann.

Thank you, Toralf and Steffen. I would like to provide you with an outlook on the next event following our Q4 publication. We will publish our Q1 2025-'26 results on February 5, followed by the Annual General Meeting on February 12, '26.

And with that, I would like to ask the operator to take over for your questions.

[Operator Instructions] And first up is Boris Bourdet from Kepler Cheuvreux.

My first question would be on the recent developments you alluded to in your presentation regarding the recent discussions on TC/RCs. We've heard that the Chinese CSPT was committed to reduce the production by 10%. I was wondering whether that would change your view on TC/RCs marginally. And can you share with us where you would expect the benchmark to land, if any?

And also from Slide 11 on TCs, I can make a rough calculation that -- it meant -- lower TCs meant EUR 90 million downward contribution this year. Is it the same kind of contribution you expect next year? That's the first question.

I'll start with the first question, and then Steffen can take on the second question. Yes, you're right, Boris. There was also a publication that the Chinese smelters plan to reduce the capacity, the production output by 10%. And we have not felt that in the spot TC/RCs. But we expect a slight recovery of the TC/RC level. But again, it's going to be a slight recovery in no major recovery.. But this is positive news which unfortunately only will have limited impact so far.

And Boris, on your second question relating to TC/RCs, right? We are flagging that also for this year, we see an impact of declining TC/RCs for copper concentrates. So basically low TC/RC levels are rolling into our Aurubis average terms. You do know that, obviously, a big chunk of our contracts is already concluded.

So call it, at this stage, roughly 85% of the contracts are concluded. So our exposure to direct spot rates is limited but some of the contract language has a certain link to recent market levels. And yes, the overall impact this year is around in the vicinity, let's say, from a year-over-year impact in an EBT bridge, it's a similar impact as we've seen last year versus the year before.

And maybe 2 others. One question would be on yesterday's announcement by the European Commission about the RESourceEU program. It doesn't seem like copper is -- copper scrap is part of what is being discussed at the moment, but could be -- can you share your view on what could be expected from this and discussions you might have with the European Commission?

Well, as you said, this recently announced RESource program does not have copper in the focus. We are more relying on the Critical Raw Materials Act, which was published a while ago, and we are in constant discussions with the European Union to secure more raw materials in Europe, number one, by focusing and allowing -- permitting more mine projects in Europe; and secondly, to limit the export of secondary material out of Europe. So those are the two cornerstones of increased raw material availability in Europe but these discussions are taking their time.

Okay. And regarding the one-offs you mentioned during the call, so the EUR 12 million impairment on the JVs plus the EUR 10 million provision at Lunen. Was that already part of the guidance? Or was that a last minute surprise, meaning that without this, you might have ended up quite above consensus expectations for the full year results? And what exactly is that equity impairment for the JVs?

Boris the two one-offs that you have alluded to that we disclosed separately have been baked in the full year guidance. For example, when we were exchanging with you and the capital market around the CMD, we included that. So we were not surprised by that.

On the equity adjustment or the participation. We have said it's in the MMR segment. It's in the recycling segment. it's related to a battery recycling participation. And in the annual report, you can also find the name. So that's why I don't ask you to go -- to find it out yourself, the company is called Librec, it's a Swiss participation that we are engaged in the battery recycling environment. Obviously, we all know that some of the key premises on the battery recycling market in EU are developing -- are moving time-wise a bit more to the right. So we felt that it was right to take a correction here.

Next up is Bastian Synagowitz from Deutsche Bank.

My first one is on Richmond. So I'm basically just wondering whether everything so far is going according to plan. And are there any roadblocks which have come up -- which have come up since you started the smelting process? And are you also generally happy with the metal KPIs and the performance from what you're seeing so far? That is my first question.

Yes, Bastian, yes, Richmond is going according to plan. We are now, as we have said, in Phase 1, we had some charges where we were smelting simple scrap. Now we are in the process of smelting more complex recycle materials. Right now, we don't see any major roadblocks, but it's too early to say if we meet our metal KPIs or not because we are still in the ramp-up phase.

So we still need to have experience on two sides on the one -- the material mix we are getting in the U.S. in our recycled materials and number two, the production efficiency, that's still too early to say. But so far, it's on track.

Okay. Great. And then on your supplier structure and portfolio, is this coming together as well as you were hoping to? And are you still confident that the availability for the materials you're actually looking for is there in the market and as good as you were expecting?

Yes. I mean we had experience in the U.S. market before because we had contact with suppliers for the supply of scrap material and recycling material for Europe. So they have been long-term relationships. The supplier structure is coming into place. We're getting the mix of different recycling materials in. So normal copper strap, also cables, but also more complex recycling materials like circuit board. So the supplier structure is there. The different materials are there. Like I said before, it's too early to make statements about what result we get out of this material and the efficiency.

Okay. Great. Then my next question is on cash flow and probably one for Steffen. I guess when we look at cash flow in the fourth quarter, you performed actually quite well. I'm wondering whether this has raised the bar for the target for breakeven this year as well? Has this become more ambitious? Or is this very much as you expected, and you're still very confident to hit that target as well. I know you kept that target for breakeven, I guess, to some extent that answers it, but I wanted to just understand how far this may have become a bit more of a stretched target now.

Yes. I think I can say that the way we could end the last fiscal year was slightly ahead to what we initially had in mind. So we had small smile on our face, let's put it that way. Now talking about '25-'26 and cash flow, we are expecting a net cash flow of EUR 640 million to EUR 740 million.

And we've also said that the cash relevant CapEx would be expected to go down versus last year by roughly EUR 100 million. So depending on the point in the range that is chosen from a net cash flow guidance perspective, free cash flow breakeven could be rather modest or more significant I mean we still have 40 weeks ahead of us in the fiscal year. So let's not nail ourselves down on whether it will be exactly a breakeven before dividend or whether there is a slight upside, we are at the guidance where we are, and we are confident that we will achieve the targets. And that's what I think we can say at this stage.

Okay. Great. Fair enough. Then my last question is just on, I guess, your maintenance schedule, and I saw that you've been bringing forward the smaller maintenance still set in Hamburg now into November, I think originally, there was scheduled for May. Was there any particular reason behind it? I guess it's a small one, so I wouldn't think so, but just wanted to understand what's been driving this.

No, Bastian. This is normal maintenance planning where we have different influence factors, the availability of materials for the maintenance. So it's a combination of many factors why the maintenance planning was adjusted, but no major incidents.

And we're coming to the next questioner, It is Adahna Ekoku from Morgan Stanley.

Can you help us with some more detail on the mix picture you're seeing for recycling RCs? How are the levels now as compared to the summer where I think European scraps RCs were at around EUR 250 per tonne. So where do these kind of stand now? And have you seen any green shoots at all to consider going into next year? Thank you.

Yes, Adahna, we have seen a slight recovery of the recycling markets when it comes to -- also when it comes to scrap when it comes to the tonnage and also a slight improvement of the RCs, but we have not seen a substantial improvement.

And maybe just to follow up on that, is that improvement from kind of any increase in economic activity or slightly lower exports or just kind of general improvement?

We think it's mainly the function of, again, a higher copper price and therefore, higher availability of copper scrap.

And the next question comes from Felicity Robson from the Bank of America.

Could you provide some color around timing on commissioning for a strategic project for next year, especially around the second phase for Richmond, please?

Well, Felicity, as we said in the presentation, we plan the commissioning of Phase 2 in the year -- in the calendar year 2026, it strongly depends on how we process now with Phase 1. So our current assumption is that we will commission it in the mid -- in the summer of 2026.

[Operator Instructions] And we have a follow-up question coming from Boris Bourdet from Kepler Cheuvreux.

Thank you again. One broad question and one technical. The first is, what would you say has been the main change since the 8th of October where at the time of the CMD you have observed in the market? That's one question.

And the second is on the tax rate, since there is a higher tax rate in Bulgaria. Would you share any guidance for the tax rate into next year?

Well, on the first question, what was changed since October 8? There are no major changes in our assumptions there's maybe slight changes that we have a little bit improved situation like we discussed before on the availability and on the RCs on the recycling market. And we have some positive news on the concentrate market when it comes down to China capacities but we have not seen a big recovery in the TC/RCs for concentrates. So very slight changes, no major changes.

And Boris, on the tax rate, absolutely right, in '24-'25, we had a higher tax rate. I was alluding to that, 2 reasons one-off special item related to Buffalo on the deferred taxes. Secondly, a topic that's not a one-off, which is a topic to stay higher tax rate in Bulgaria, according to Pillar 2 now with a 15% minimum tax rate in Bulgaria. All of that resulted with the mix of results that we have from our footprint resulted to a tax rate of 26% and in last fiscal year. And I would assume that we are in the same ballpark also for this fiscal year.

[Operator Instructions] Thank you. There are no further questions.

Okay. Thank you. The IR team will, of course, be happy to answer any further questions you may have. We would now like to close today's conference call, and thank you for your attention. We wish you a pleasant rest of the day and a beautiful Christmas time. Thank you and goodbye.