Montana Aerospace Aktie

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Montana Aerospace H1 2026 Conference. I'm Moritz, your Chorus Call operator. [Operator Instructions] The conference is being recorded. [Operator Instructions]

At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Patrick Maurer. Please go ahead, sir.

Welcome, everyone, to the Half Year 1 2026 Earnings Call of Montana Aerospace. Quarter 2 and therefore, the first half of the year 2026 represents another chapter in Montana Aerospace strong track record of revenue and results growth. As said, my name is Patrick Maurer, CFO of Montana Aerospace. And today, I'm joined by Vicky Welvaert, our CHRO; and as always, Marc Vesely, Investor Relations.

In today's call, we will take you through the key developments of the first 6 months, our financial performance, the balance sheet and cash flow development as well as going a bit deeper into selected strategic growth areas, giving some further insight into capital allocation priorities and finally, have an outlook for the remainder of '26 and 2027.

But before we go into the numbers, I want to bring us all back on the same page why we in Montana Aerospace achieved industry-leading performance in the Aerospace industry. Over the past years, we have sharpened our portfolio significantly. This started with the divestment of the E-Mobility segment in '24 and Energy in '25. And we now have a clear profile that allows for better comparability and through the proceeds of these divestments, also strengthened financial resilience.

Our ambition from the beginning was to build an aerospace platform that is different from the traditional fragmented model that we typically see in the industry because we want to be a game changer in the aerospace supply chain. And that's not a slogan. It's based on concrete industrial capabilities that we see here on this page again.

One and foremost, our vertical integration that starts with partial chips recycling, metal chips recycling, casting, extrusion and then going into the machining and assembly, so the full supply chain. And what it brings for our customers is reduced complexity, improved lead times, sometimes substantially improved lead times and of course, reduced transport and qualification cost and complexity.

And that on the second side, allows us as Montana Aerospace to capture more value than other players in the industry. Second, our setup is based on a largely best-cost-country manufacturing footprint across all key regions in the aerostructure industry. And that's critically to be close to the customers, but also to ensure we are cost-wise competitive in the long run and also in the short run. And yes, this is an outcome of our heavy investments over the last decade.

Third, we have a high material competence in Montana Aerospace in aluminum, steel, but also titanium with a portfolio that ranges from structural components for fuselages, wings and landing gears to very complex engine components. If we continue our processes and our long-term know-how and industrial experience, that gives us the required know-how and IP in order to really excel in this industry.

And finally, and important to mention, through our integrated setup and being, let's say, where the customer is, ESG is deeply embedded in our business model and allows us to solve ambitious sustainability goals, but also brings added benefits for the customers that we have just discussed.

And with that, Montana Aerospace not only participates in the aerospace industry and in the ramp-up, but we, with our model, address structural issues that our customers face today. And if we look on the next page, what it means is that we have a strong commercial aerospace order book above EUR 7 billion by now and are best-positioned to benefit from the growth and the very positive momentum that we currently see in the industry.

And the EUR 7 billion come from just EUR 3.9 billion in 2021 and underline the progress we have made in expanding our position across all the different aerospace platforms and winning additional market share. And what is important to mention here is that our order book is also qualitatively very strong across all narrow-body, wide-body and business jet platforms as well as military transportation aircraft such as the A400M.

The way it's calculated is rather conservative. So we basically take our contracted ships at value per plane, multiply that by the duration of the contracts we have with our customers. So typically somewhere between 5 to 7, sometimes even more years. And then multiply that with our Montana build rate assumptions, which are, for sure, more conservative than the OEM build rates and therefore, give us, let's say, an upside potential.

So we are basing our plan on a prudent view of what we believe can be achieved and still benefit from the strong long-term industry demand and momentum that we see. If we now switch to the financial performance of half year 1, we can see that we have a nice sales growth of 12%. And this despite the fact that FX rate in half year 1 '25 was around 1.17 for the U.S. dollar-euro exchange rate.

And now in this year was around 1.09. So that took a bit away of the dynamic. But nonetheless, the performance is very positive. And important to mention is that this growth was purely organic, so without any acquisition or other dilutions, driven by increased volumes and additional market share wins in the Aerostructure segment and other interesting industries or related industries.

EBITDA was EUR 87.1 million in 2026 half year 1, which also corresponds to a growth of 12.2% and the EBITDA margin was at 16.8%. And here, I would like to highlight that there were no adjustments made in the EBITDA 2026. So it's, let's say, a pure EBITDA without anything to consider or without anything to adjust for. And what I'd also like to highlight is that the Aerostructures segment again performed very strongly.

So the growth there, again, without taking FX into account was over 13% and EBITDA growth in the Aerostructures segment was over 16%, bringing us to a strong 18.3% EBITDA margin. So overall, sales are growing organically, EBITDA is increasing and most importantly, margins are resilient and improving where it matters the most in our Aerostructure segment.

When we switch then now to the next page, it's a pleasure to present to you that the operating leverage that we have allows us -- allows the results basically to flow through to EBIT, where we see a 22% increase and to the final result of the period, which is at around or almost EUR 30 million, heavily increased compared to the last year because in addition to the strong operating performance, we have also not seen a negative impact from the noncash FX impact that we saw last year because the U.S. dollar didn't fall or didn't weaken further compared to December 2025.

And as a consequence, the earnings per share have heavily increased to EUR 0.47 from just EUR 0.1 in half year 1 2025. The key takeaway is that our business is converting operational progress into bottom line improvement. And we're not only growing sales, we are seeing the benefit through EBITDA, EBIT, net result and earnings per share. And that is an important proof point for the scalability of our platform.

If we deep dive a bit more into the Aerostructures segment, I'd like to highlight the path where we came from. So only 3 years ago, we were standing at around 10%, a bit above 10% EBITDA margin despite a pretty strong U.S. dollar in that timeframe to now just 3 years later, where we are very well on track towards our 20% EBITDA margin in the Aerostructures segment.

So that means over a timeframe of 3 years, we were able to almost double the margin profile in our Aerostructures segment. So we invested heavily in this last decade in capacity, process capabilities, our best country footprint and program readiness. And that naturally came with, let's say, fixed costs and industrialization expenses and a certain underutilization at the start.

But now as the volume continue to grow and we more and more utilize our assets and our asset base, our platform sees better margin and strong operating leverage, and that we expect to certainly continue going forward. Let us now switch and address our cash flow, working capital and balance sheet progress.

In half year 1, Montana Aerospace generated a free cash flow of EUR 67 million including, as we know, the first proceeds from the Energy divestment. And if we go through step-by-step the different contributors, we see a cash flow from operating activities of EUR 26 million, which is behind half year 1 for 2 main reasons.

One is an inventory increase from the prebuying and the higher pricing of metal pass-throughs, as you know, driven by the Middle East situation and crisis where we started early on to secure our supply chain to not see any impacts and any production limitations for the rest of the full year. So that's clearly an impact on the inventory that we see in this first half year, in addition, of course, to the higher business activity.

And the second equally important factor is that we do not factor anymore a customer who was last year still in certain financial difficulties. And therefore, we had to mitigate and reduce the risk by having nonrecourse factoring in place. But this we stopped entirely for that customer and has, of course, a certain impact in this first half year of 2026. Cash flow from investing activities of EUR 41 million roughly is positive because of the proceeds from the Energy segment.

And of course, we will come to a bit more details on the further investing activities and capital allocation relating to it in the upcoming slides. From the finance perspective, we just paid back part of the term loan, as you know, and yes, have some movements there back and forth. But overall, in a continuous and very strong financial position, also having quite large credit lines open that are currently largely unused.

If we switch to net debt, we see further progress and improvements compared to December 2025, so substantial ones, as you see from 0.8 to 0.4 leverage. But also compared to Q1, we see a certain slightly better numbers than in Q1 2026. And with that, we are fully on track to a cash positive position at year-end, as we have communicated before, driven by our positive operating free cash flow and on top then the proceeds from the Energy segment that we already saw and that we still expect in the second half year of 2026.

Working capital, as addressed before, saw a certain increase to above what we consider best practice. However, with clear reason behind, as I said, the inventory buildup to have a resilient supply chain for the rest of the year and starting 2027 and a certain impact from factoring that we need to progressively improve through better terms and conditions with customers and suppliers.

Okay. Let me then turn to say a bit more on 2 further strategic growth platforms where Montana Aerospace is present and very well-positioned in, Defense and Space. And starting with defense, we are proud, as we have announced to expand our strategic partnership with Lockheed Martin and have further program content included in our books with as typical for the Aerostructure industry, long-term production visibility, long-term contracts and clearly a planability and partnership that we are proud of.

But in addition to that, we are proud and very positive that there's further growth potential with other -- with 2 other or many others, but in more concrete discussions with 2 other leading European defense players. And there, we expect to have more clarity on the outcome and what that means in terms of sales and potential margin benefits for the years to come in the second half of the year.

If we then turn to the second growth pillar, space, which has become a very meaningful growth platform to Montana Aerospace and where we see revenues developing towards 10% Group revenue in 2026.

Here, I'd like to highlight that our vertical integration, again, was the basis that customers are coming to us because of fast lead times, because of reliability, a competitive cost setup and fast engineering capabilities that allows them and us to dynamically provide innovations and provide products also for this sector of the Aerospace industry.

And the result is that what was an opportunity just 3 years ago, it's now one of our key growth drivers, as said, going towards EUR 100 million in sales per annum and with very strong momentum and perspective in the years to come, as you all know from different IPOs in that field, and all the things that are happening there.

What I'd also like to mention and highlight here is that we are not only focused on one single platform or one single product, but we are part of different generations, different platforms and more and more working towards also a broader customer field in that segment or in that industry.

Yes. Let us now address the capital allocation and knowing that we move towards a net cash position in the course of the year. We have, of course, discussed together with the Board how to create value for our shareholders and have agreed basically on a certain framework of the capital allocation.

So one step of that is seeing through our business wins, seeing the capacity requirements in the aerospace commercial industry, but also these 2 additional growth platforms and the impact and importance of being in different regions. We have decided in addition to the maintenance CapEx or standard CapEx of around EUR 50 million that we have discussed with you in the past, to add an additional EUR 30 million to EUR 40 million per annum in the next 2 years, at least for accretive margin projects and growth CapEx.

So that is -- and that's not related to only a specific area or one site. It's related to all geographies and markets. And it's both, as said, market wins where we [indiscernible] just additional machinery or strategic projects where we continue our integration and further strengthen our independence from the rest of the supply chain.

And obviously, that in the long term will increase to also bring our platform to the even next level to where we are now. Okay, I think we can then with that continue. Here, we see the consolidated supply chain in Aerostructure on the left side, which still gives room and attractive opportunity in the end to decomplexify the Aerostructure supply chain as many specialist suppliers are small, have very limited integration, sometimes financial troubles and can become a source or are a source of uncertainty in the ramp-up environment for the OEMs and Tier 1 customers.

And there, our approach is something that the customers really appreciate and where we gain a lot of traction. And of course, in terms of M&A, we remain disciplined and selective to what adds really value to our supply chain. And in most cases, it has to be in alignment with the OEMs. And there are alternatives, often alternatives on the inside to have brownfield or additional investments to just win packages and market share instead of purchasing one of the current suppliers.

But nonetheless, the conclusion is that the supply chain consolidation overall remains a meaningful value creation opportunity for us, clearly, both on the organic side, but also potentially on the inorganic side, should interesting opportunities come up. When we switch to our guidance, I believe the strong half year 1 2026 is the best example and the best concrete support for our 2026 and 2027 guidance.

So we remain very confident in these figures and believe in clearly a sales number above the EUR 1 billion and adjusted EBITDA, which will be probably the same as the reported EBITDA as in half year 1 of above EUR 185 million and then Aerostructures or Aerostructures segment margin moving to the 19% range, depending a bit on the cost side and what we pass on there and what is just the flow-through basically. Cash conversion, excluding or before growth CapEx that I just mentioned and before M&A remains a target to move towards 50% this year and above 50% in the years to come.

And with that, I believe we are well set up to achieve or overachieve our guidance and are open and happy for our discussions with you all now in the next minutes to come. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] And the first question comes from George Mcwhirter from Berenberg.

Firstly, on the cash proceeds from the energy divestment. Can you just run through your assumptions on the timing of that? So how much do you expect to receive in the second half of this year and next year? And what level of net debt do you expect to reach at the end of the year?

And the second question is on the decision to raise the growth CapEx guidance for the next 2 years. Can you just explain a little bit in more detail the areas that you are planning to invest in? And what -- and when we should actually begin to see the revenue being generated from this additional investment?

Thank you, George, for the questions. So yes, starting with your first point on cash proceeds. We expect for the second half year, at least another roughly EUR 50 million to come through. That is well in line with recent discussions with the Board and CFO of ASTA Energy. And with that proceeds and a bit depending on how much finally come through, we will be clearly cash positive at the end of the year.

But it's -- at this point, it's difficult to mention or to say how exactly that position will look like, first of all, for the proceeds of the Energy segment, but also from a perspective of our strategic investments. Yes, the question is how much we can bring into the, let's say, into the spend already in the second half of the year.

On the growth CapEx guidance to continue with that. So it's, I would say, a combination of programs that enhance our integration and margin profile, which are not always generating extra sales, but improve the margin profile and strategically our independence from the rest of the supply chain.

And that's in different regions and sites. But yes, that's, I would say, the guidance that I would give for that at the moment and has been approved by the Board already. And then there are indeed some additional growth CapEx for market share wins that we have brought on board in the recent months, I would say.

And there, the revenue will largely come in '27 on board or start to come on board and be industrialized in 2027. Some of the machines obviously have lead times of close to a year. So yes, that's a bit the time line of expectations of when additional sales from these investments will hit our P&L.

And the next question comes from Sullivan Josh from JonesTrading.

Can you hear me now? Just as far as the CEO search, at this point, are you leaning internal versus external candidates? And any color you can provide on time lines as well?

Yes, I will maybe leave that to our Group CHRO, who joins me today.

Yes. Well, I would like to reiterate what we said last time, that is that after the resignation of the CEO -- of our CEO of Montana Aerospace, the company's operating activities are continuing as planned, supported by a strong and highly experienced leadership structure.

The responsibilities are currently distributed across the Group Management Board, the divisional management teams and a strong extended leadership team, [ comparting ] well-respected executives with many years of execution, experience in our industry. The Board of Directors continues to work diligently on the future composition of the management team and expect to provide a further update in the third quarter of this year.

And I guess just switching over to more of a fundamental demand pull question from the aerospace OEMs. Just how are you looking at it relative to the guidance assumptions you had earlier in the year at this point?

Yes. I mean from a guidance perspective, as said, I mean, we remain conservative, but are very confident that we at least achieve the guidance. I think half year 1 comparatively looks quite positive and strong on the track to get there, as you can see from pure numbers on a run rate basis. Typically, Q3 and Q4 are stronger.

And I would say from the current perspective, I still expect it, but there are -- especially still with the macroeconomic environment and situation, there are some things that, let's say, are not clear enough yet for a clear guidance raise, but we stay very confident with the '26 figures.

And '27, of course, we will review once we know more about how the defense possibilities develop and also the space platform. And of course, the additional wins that we saw or that we discussed with the extra CapEx. So we will find and come to consensus in the quarter 3, beginning quarter 4 as a Group and then at some point, can give there some update as well.

And then I guess just a clarification question on the increased growth CapEx plans. Are those -- is the upside related to that contemplated in the guidance at this point?

No, they are not -- largely not encompassed. So of course, we have certain new business wins inside our guidance, which are typically quite conservative. So those market share wins that we had or have go above that. But as said, from a sales and EBITDA perspective or result perspective, they will largely come on board only in '27. Part of the current guidance.

And the next question comes from Aymeric Poulain from Kepler Cheuvreux.

I've got 2, please. The first one is again on the conservative, I think that you were guidance reiteration, especially for '27, 10% growth when most of your customers are targeting a much higher ramp-up rate. You also highlighted the positive contribution of space, which is much bigger than what you anticipated originally.

You have higher pricing of aluminum, you have better dollar. So why aren't you in a position to raise this guidance? Is it because of your own capacity restriction, which would explain the CapEx increase or is it because you are taking a very conservative assumption on the production rate of the 2 main customers of yours? That would be the first question.

And second question is on factoring. You said you reduced the factoring in the first half. What is the current level of balance sheet factoring debt at the moment? And when you look at the free cash flow guidance for the year, do you anticipate factoring to grow and contribute to that free cash flow or should we assume it's flat from here on?

Yes. Thank you, Aymeric, for the questions. Let's start with the guidance one. Yes. So first of all, indeed, we are more conservative versus our customers on their growth expectations, simply looking backwards at the last years, yes, where we have, I think, a good reasoning to be on the conservative end there.

Space and defense for sure, provide key opportunities, but they are not -- not all of them are signed yet. So that's for us still open to be seen how much that translates already next year into the sales and result perspective.

And from that reason, let's say, we stay conservative for the moment and do not reiterate the guidance -- do not change it, sorry, but rather reiterate it and give a positive outlook on it and believe that it is probably on the lower end for the moment, but not yet there to raise it.

On the factoring question, yes, clearly lower factoring at the moment compared to last year or also end of the -- last year June or end of the last year 2025. There is still some factoring in our books for the simple reason of flexibility and very strong financial ability of some of the customers, as you may know.

So they provide also cheap and flexible financing, I would say. But yes, lower than in the past, and I believe it will also -- despite the higher activity and higher sales, it will stay on a lower level compared to the past.

Maybe [indiscernible] because we do not have to factor -- yes, one of the customers for financial reasons or financial instability, which was quite expensive. So that is clearly gone and also helps the financial result, as you see, but also it's not necessary from a risk mitigation perspective.

[Operator Instructions] And we do have one question by text coming from Yannick Zullig from AWP. You mentioned a potential share buyback program. What would you need -- what would need to happen for the Board to actually launch one? And what size could such a program have?

Yes. Thank you for the question, Yannick. Indeed, I maybe didn't highlight this enough in the capital allocation slide. So apart from the strategic growth investments and accretive margin investments, together with the Board, we have agreed that the share buyback was delivering share cash and value to our shareholders remains a critical component of Montana Aerospace or is a critical component that we want to see in the future.

So that could take the form of a share buyback or dividend or even both. And what needs to happen, I mean, basically, for the moment and for the past, we are somehow limited by the loan requirements. But I think the strong financial performance will give us much more room also on bringing such return to shareholders. And therefore, yes, I believe we are not far away from getting to this stage of Montana Aerospace.

There are currently no more questions at this time. So I would like to turn the conference back over to Patrick Maurer for any closing remarks.

Yes. Let me close, of course, feel free to still add questions along the way. But otherwise, let me close with the main takeaways from today's presentation. So first and foremost, Montana Aerospace continued the strong operational track record and delivered a very positive and strong first half of 2026. Second, Aerostructure as a segment continues to be the central value driver of the Group.

The segment has increased the sales to EUR 485 million, an EBITDA of almost EUR 89 million and an EBITDA margin that expanded to 18.3%. Third, we significantly strengthened the financial profile of the Group with positive net cash position still expected at the end of 2026 and as communicated and the declining financial leverage, which gives us the opportunity for the capital allocation measures we have discussed.

Fourth, the aerospace strategy is more and more clear and -- yes, more and more clear and understandable. Commercial aerospace remains our core, while the Engine, Defense and Space sectors provide very attractive additional growth opportunities to Montana Aerospace. And it's not, let's say, a fantasy. We are positioned in these segments or in these areas and will further grow there.

And fifth, for that reason, our outlook remains very strong and robust. We reiterate our 2026 and 2027 guidance and see a clear path to stronger utilization, stronger margins and improved cash generation.

So in summary, Montana Aerospace combines long-term visibility, a differentiated industrial and integrated platform that others don't have, a further improving margin profile and cash generation profile and meaningful value creation opportunities for all of you as our shareholders. Thank you very much. And if there are no further questions, I suggest we close the call.

Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Montana Aerospace Q1 2026 Conference Call and Live Webcast. I am Sandra, the Chorus Call operator. [Operator Instructions] The conference is being recorded. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it is my pleasure to hand over to Patrick Maurer, CFO of Montana Aerospace. Please go ahead, sir.

Welcome, everyone, to the Q1 2026 earnings call of Montana Aerospace, a quarter that marks the continuation of our success story and above-market growth. To start and for everyone new in the call, I'd like to reiterate the USP of Montana Aerospace. We are a game changer in the aerospace industry because, one, we have a very integrated value chain, which brings reliability to our customers and mitigates our reliance on the outside world, especially important in these turbulent times.

Two, we have high material competence in aluminum, but also steel, titanium; three, the majority of our workforce and assets is located in best-cost countries, both in Europe, but also Asia. And four, we have unique process know-how, partially backed by our own IP and overall, are situated as a key player from an ESG perspective with our integrated business model.

Here, you see our long-term visibility of the orders, which has grown in the past from roughly EUR 4 billion in '21 to now more than EUR 7 billion. And it also shows that we are selling our products for all different platforms of the main OEMs as well as other companies like Embraer or Gulfstream and are therefore, set up to have a clear path towards our growth ambitions and towards our revenue growth that we have in the guidance and beyond.

In addition, I'd like to highlight that our business model and our setup mitigate negative macroeconomic impacts or any other impact, in fact, that some of you, I know, are concerned about. So if we look at 4 critical areas, or only 4 critical areas for this page, I'd like to show you the protection that we have in these fields and I'd like to highlight that we can, with our business model and our setup, mitigate some of the key questions that come up to many of you in terms of how we are positioned.

So one, material pricing, as an example, the aluminum prime material. That is -- we can pass that on to our customers in most of our contracts, either on a monthly basis or then on a PO basis, which, in the end, limits our raw material and our raw material price exposure from an absolute return perspective. Of course, it does have for the current macroeconomic environment where LME pricing increases does have some impact on the working capital and also because we want to secure our supply.

But as I said, on the absolute returns that there, we do not have an impact. Second, from the sourcing perspective itself, our integrated casting and recycling setup, especially in our biggest site in Romania, leads to the fact that we are less dependent on external prime materials and especially aluminum prime materials and therefore, enhance our resilience in the supply chain.

Three, the energy pricing. So while energy prices and fuel prices are increasing, the majority of our contracts in the meantime, after the COVID experience have an annual inflation protection clause. And on top, the energy we purchased ourselves is protected for the year through -- for the year 2026 and partially '27 through hedging, but also through the fact that we established substantial PV capabilities or capacities over the last couple of years.

So all of that protects us from the current increases in the energy pricing that we see. And finally, from the demand side, so from our customer demand side, we are resilient in terms of, first, because we have our buffers in our expectations and guidance towards what we can expect from the OEMs, and we have seen that we are doing the right assumptions in that regard in the meantime, very accurate.

And on top, also for the moment, from a customer side, we have not seen cancellations out of the Middle East conflict. So also from the demand perspective, we do not see any headwinds towards our guidance or towards our current setup and results.

Let's now move to the financial results of the first quarter 2026. So sales have grown by 4%, driven by the Aerostructure segment to roughly or close to EUR 250 million, EUR 248 million to be exact. And what seems like a slowdown in our growth trajectory is actually a pretty strong performance if you consider that our majority of the sales are in U.S. dollars and the FX rate from Q1 '25 changed from 1.05 roughly to 1.17 in Q1 2026.

So around 10% or close to 10% because not all sales are in U.S. dollars are impacted just from a FX perspective. On top, as you will see in a later slide, the Q1 of 2025 was quite strong on our end, but also on the OEM side. And there, in the OEM perspective, we see actually a decrease in this year's deliveries. And that shows that we are actually continuing to gain market share growth.

We continue to gain market share and thereby grow our sales. From an EBITDA perspective, we have again increased versus the Q1 2025 and also, again, over proportional, what resulted in a 16.4% group EBITDA margin and more than 18% in Aerostructure, which is already close to, let's say, benchmark performance.

Yes, no adjustments were made to the Q1 '26 EBITDA results. On the next page, we see that once we move further down the P&L, the over proportional improvement continues. So you see a plus 11% in the operating results and plus 131% in the final results from continuous operations to have a comparable. That is also driven by a strong improvement in the financial result with 2 main effects.

So one is that we deleveraged our balance sheet and therefore, had lower interest costs. And second, also the FX losses, the noncash FX losses that we experienced last year and actually experienced again in Q1 2026 have, however, reduced by roughly half. That also leads then to a strong increase in the earnings per share from EUR 0.17, up from just EUR 0.07 in quarter 1 2025.

Here, we get a good overview of Q1 sales and Q1 EBITDA inside of the OEM deliveries. So you can see that we grew in our Q1 2026 deliveries versus 2025 despite the fact that the OEM deliveries actually were reduced by 3.4%. And that is even without considering the FX impact because we are, of course, talking on our side from euro values, while the OEM deliveries are quantitative output basically.

Versus the past, we see an impressive growth rate, both in the sales of 40% on average as well as over proportional in the EBITDA of 180% and while there is a certain slowdown, we further -- we see, let's say, our trajectory continue further until we fully utilize our asset base. So there's not -- for sure not the end where we are at the moment. But of course, compared to very low levels in 2023, it's a bit of a slowdown in that regard.

We continue to the next page. We see a cash perspective. And from a cash perspective, we have deleveraged our balance sheet further and are now at a very healthy 0.4 net debt-to-EBITDA ratio on a group perspective. That was backed by the cash flow from investing activities, where we received EUR 62 million from the Energy segment carve-out, but also by cash flow from operations, which was positive with EUR 1.4 million, which is, let's say, a plus of roughly EUR 7 million compared to the quarter 1 2024 -- 2025.

And despite the fact that our working capital increased because of higher metal prices, as discussed and also because we are starting to protect our supply chain with metal purchases for the rest of 2026. The working capital impact, however, should be just temporarily until the Middle East situation resolves itself and hopefully, pricing comes back to more normal and reasonable levels.

Now I will hand over to Vicky Welvaert.

Thank you, Patrick. And good morning or afternoon, everyone. Let me take a moment to address the recent leadership change following the resignation of the CEO of Montana Aerospace. As I know, this is an important topic for many of you. First and foremost, I want to underline that the CEO transition is fully decoupled from the performance of the business, and it is not driven by any change in our strategy, any operational issues, nor does it affect our financial outlook in any way.

Put simply, our strategic and operational continuity remains fully intact. Our strategy is unchanged. Our guidance remains unchanged and most importantly, our execution continues fully on track. Operationally, the business is performing as planned and delivering as expected. To ensure continuity during this phase, Patrick and I have taken on interim responsibilities, working closely together and supported by a highly experienced extended leadership team across the group.

This is not a situation where we are starting from scratch, quite the opposite. We are building on a strong and well-established organization. It is also important to note that we continue to benefit from Kai Arndt's involvement as an adviser, particularly on key strategic topics, which provide an additional layer of continuity.

So if I can summarize the key message in one sentence: this is a transition in leadership and not a change in direction. Let me now move to Slide 11. What gives us confidence in managing this transition is the strength of our organization and leadership team. We have a proven and well-functioning management structure with clear accountability across all functions, regions and divisions.

This structure has been built over many years and is designed to deliver consistency in execution. Importantly, there are no changes to our operational setup. Our sites worldwide continue to be managed by the same experienced teams, reporting lines remain unchanged and day-to-day operations continue exactly as before.

I would also like to highlight the seniority and experience of our extended leadership team. Many of our senior leaders have been in the aerospace industry for more than 20 and in many cases, even over 30 years. This brings deep operational expertise and long-standing relationships across the industry.

Supported by these seasoned leaders with extensive aerospace experience and strong functional expertise, we are also very well positioned in terms of customer access, contract management and strategic alignment with our key OEM partners. At the same time, our divisional leadership teams continue to operate with the same focus and discipline that has characterized their performance in recent years.

So overall, we are not relying on individuals. We are relying on a strong and experienced leadership structure. That continuity is critical, and it is a real strength in times like this. It allows us to stay fully focused on what matters most, delivering on our operational targets and executing our strategy.

And I would emphasize that our teams on the ground remain highly engaged, focused and committed to delivering results. This transition is being managed from a position of strength, stability and continuity.

With that, let me hand back to Patrick.

Yes. Before we come to our guidance, I'd like to reiterate the key pillars to continue our growth story in Montana Aerospace. So obviously, one, it's the structural growth that is in -- is the basis of our industry. We capitalize on strong end market drivers that are different to other industries, such as strong global air travel coming more and more also from the Asian, Middle East and South American and African side.

Growing aircraft order backlog. So year after year, we have experienced and seen that despite, let's say, the growth in deliveries, which could be better, but which we see constantly. There is also a growing order backlog, which the OEMs have to manage to fulfill earlier or later. And of course, the ramp-up of OEMs, Boeing doing a good job as well as others.

Second, there's our internal strength and growth pillars, vertical integration, the machine capabilities and low-cost asset setup that allows us to be competitive towards our customers and compared to their competition.

Our industrialization strength, we are industrializing more than 3,000 parts per year and have built up inventive capacity and strength in that field to be able to respond very quickly to OEMs, but also other interested companies, material competence and others. And finally, as you know, the aerostructure industry is still very and highly fragmented because of the setup of qualifications and basically past history.

So also there, there's a huge and tremendous potential to further integrate, let's say, the whole supply chain by both M&A consolidation, but also by taking over packages where we can offer to a customer, let's say, a one-stop shop versus competition who -- where the customer often has to deal with 3, 4, 5 parties and also their supply chain challenges, we can provide reliability as a one roof and one-stop shop company.

Especially in the North American market, we see more and more possibilities in that regard with our past acquisitions and our current setup. So yes, overall, these pillars will allow Montana Aerospace to use the growth in the industry and in the market, but also to use our own strength to grow and continue to grow above the market.

When we come back to guidance, I'd like to reiterate the figures we gave in the annual earnings call a month ago. So nothing has changed neither with the management decision nor with the continuing discussions in the Middle East, which one day are better than the other and fortunately positive today.

We still see, let's say, 2026 sales of more than EUR 1 billion. We also see an EBITDA of more than EUR 185 million, which results in a strong 18% EBITDA group margin and even more so in Aerostructure segment. And on the cash conversion, we have seen some unclarity and confusion what is included and what is not. So we have clarified that in this guidance.

So our cash conversion, which we see around 50% for the year and more in the years to follow, comes from a basis of using basically an operating cash flow, including the working capital adjustments, of course, minus our maintenance CapEx that we see in the range of roughly EUR 50 million. And if you look at our CapEx spend in quarter 1 of around EUR 11 million, that's very much in line with where we stand.

But then, of course, on top, there could come expansion CapEx, which we diligently consider at the moment, certain projects as well as, of course, M&A transaction, and those are excluded in the cash conversion guidance, just to be clear. And also on the 2027 numbers, we keep a very positive view and momentum. And we don't see any change in the positive outlook that we have for that year and for the year '27 and the years to come.

If we, therefore, close the presentation and before we come to our Q&A, I'd like to one more time reiterate our strong growth potential in Montana Aerospace and our results guidance as well as the way we can create value for our shareholders. The main points that stand behind this is our high visibility of sales and orders and our big order backlog for the next years ahead.

A very strong margin profile achieved through operational excellence, fixed cost leverage and our low-cost asset base, a strong cash flow profile following a period of growth investments, but now, let's say, more and more paying off and significant internal and external opportunities to create more shareholder value in the future.

With that, I thank you for listening, and we can come to the M&A -- the Q&A part.

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from George Mcwhirter from Berenberg.

I've got 2, please. Firstly, on the guidance on cash flow. In terms of what you expect for net cash at the end of this year, if I take the 50% cash conversion and also assume the majority of the asset proceeds this year, is it fair to assume that you end up with a net cash position in the higher double-digit euro million range?

Yes. So let me answer that. Yes, we see -- we clearly see a net cash position in the higher double-digit range. Of course, it depends on any strategic CapEx or M&A decisions that we make. But without those, clearly, yes.

That's great. The second one was on the reason for the raise of the cash conversion target for next year. Is it mainly due to improved profitability? Or is there anything else to think about in terms of working capital or CapEx?

No, I think -- I mean, we are confident with the figures. And since we have experienced a lot of discussions with investors and analysts over the last couple of weeks, we were just -- we wanted to give more clarity and more guidance in that regard. And it's basically just to make public the discussions we had with -- yes, all of you.

The next question comes from Josh Sullivan from JonesTrading.

Just wanted to zero in on the market share gains you highlighted in the prepared remarks. Where are you being most successful taking share or what product line specifically?

Yes. I mean, for sure, in the areas where we have vertical integration as well as with the Vietnam low-cost setup. So in Vietnam, we have qualified, let's say, the second OEM in the meantime. So a lot of possibilities are coming from that side, but also from many other fields. So definitely there, we see a good momentum from just being extremely competitive in that regard, but as well as the integration model.

So in our Romanian side, but also in the U.S. setup, especially with the acquisition of ASCO in the past where we have machining and surface treatment capabilities and also the extrusion side, -- we see more and more that the OEMs value this setup and that more and more packages are coming to us for discussion.

And yes, basically, with our setup and the fast speed of industrialization possibilities that OEMs often need when they see some problems arising, we have this momentum of market share gain and getting additional packages without losing others.

And if I take that, and I appreciate your '27 guidance takes a discount to the OEM's airframe production forecast, which is prudent. However, if we think of the market share gains you're making here as well as the eventual restocking needs across the industry, how can we frame Montana's growth rate just relative to what the actual airframes that do come out of the OEMs over the next 2 years?

Well, I mean, that -- we have, of course, a certain market share growth also expected in those figures, but with very conservative build rates, as I said. But to compare and to say what is coming from exactly which direction for that is a bit too early at this point in time. I mean, if we gain, let's say, more packages than is currently on the horizon or that are already signed and can industrialize them faster, then, of course, the guidance could -- or we could outperform the guidance clearly.

And of course, also then if the OEMs perform better than they do, then that would change the respective numbers and the relative, let's say, growth on both of these pillars.

And then just one last one on M&A. Given the leadership transition here, and I understand that you're trying to keep some continuity across the company, but what is your perspective on the current M&A environment, looking at either large assets or small assets? Just want to hear your thoughts.

Yes. I mean I would say we have a reasonable size as a target from a company perspective. So somewhere in the range of companies with EUR 100 million to EUR 300 million in sales in that range. So that's the target range that we look at. And to go out of that doesn't make much sense from, let's say, not overtaking ourselves and on the other side, not purchasing very small assets unless they are extremely strategic.

So that's the target range. And I think the change in management has not a major impact on the M&A pipeline nor whether we, let's say, pursue one of them. It's mostly based on whether they make strategic sense for us, whether we see a benefit to further strengthen the partnership with the OEMs and therefore, provide value for both sides with such an acquisition. And on top, let's say, we are evaluating for every M&A path, also internal investments that could fulfill a similar purpose.

[Operator Instructions] The next question comes from Olfa Taamallah from ODDO BHF.

I may have 2 questions. First, I would like to follow up on the market share question. Wondering if you could specify how the scale within the revenues, I mean, in terms of organic revenues and maybe on which programs you have been successful so far and whether it is temporary or not?

Maybe if also you can give us an idea about potential market gains in coming years. And the second question is related to the potential launch of share buyback. What may trigger such a decision? And when should we expect the move?

Yes. So on the first question of market share, we see momentum across all platforms basically. Of course, there are in tendency quite a lot of possibilities on the short-haul planes because the delivery targets for Airbus and Boeing on A220, A320, 737, yes, they are very ambitious. So they need reliable partners, and therefore, there are a lot of good possibilities for us with our integrated setup to, let's say, to win packages there.

But the same is true for the wide-body planes. So basically across all platforms. From the share buyback perspective, yes, I mean, we see with the recent changes, macroeconomic environment, but also, let's say, some miss or some confusion, I would say, in the spin-off of the Energy segment, the management changes that compared to the underlying basics of Montana Aerospace, the stock market price is on the lower end.

And therefore, that could prove attractive also for our Board of Directors to initiate such program. And from a time perspective, I mean, I would see that not too long out in the next weeks.

The next question comes from Christian Bader from Zürcher Kantonalbank.

A couple of questions from me. So the first one being in terms of the revenues in the first quarter, can you please comment whether you gained or whether your business grew with all customers, at least in constant currency terms or have you delivered a bit less to one of the big OEMs or one of the other smaller customers?

Yes. I mean, in general, let's say, there is, of course, more growth from the one OEM side than the other for the moment. As you have also seen, I think, by their delivery rates, but that doesn't translate one-to-one to our deliveries. So that's not related.

Last year, however, there was a strong momentum in Q1, especially on one of the short-haul platforms. So there, we have experienced last year very strong sales, which are then more constant rather than strong growth compared to the other platforms. But I would say across a variety of platforms, also wins on additional smaller companies or smaller OEMs, different fields, yes.

Okay. And did you grow the satellite business?

In Q1 -- we did, yes.

Okay. All right. And my next question is relating to FX hedging. From my memory, you have been hedging your U.S. dollar exposure in the past. So I was wondering, did you do that also in the first quarter and which impact did it have on your results?

Yes. So we also did that in the first quarter of 2026. Sales are, of course, unhedged. So the hedge benefit comes in between EBITDA and financial results. So let's say, the full impact you see in the net result. But basically, sales are unhedged and therefore, on the sales side, you see the impact of a change in the FX.

Okay. But did you benefit from hedging in terms of -- for your first quarter results?

Yes. I mean so as we have discussed in our guidance and in, let's say, in the detailed ad hoc, we have an FX rate of 1.18, 1.19 assumed for our guidance. We have hedged below that. But of course, it's not -- so in terms of -- compared to the guidance, we have benefited in Q1, yes. Compared to the spot rate, there were a lot of ups and downs. So it was -- the average FX rate was 1.17. So in that regard, it was quite neutral for Q1.

Okay. All right. And then my last question relates to the tax rate, which has been extremely low in the first quarter. Can you maybe provide some guidance what to expect for the full year, please?

I mean for the full year, we continue our guidance in that regard. But yes, for Q1, to be honest, yes, that's, of course, also some reflections that refer to the prior year, some -- especially on the North American side, you typically have final tax results. Yes, but there's -- I think there's something especially in the tax rate for Q1.

All right. So you can't give us any guidance for what we should model for the full year in terms of tax rate?

I mean for the full year, we again see a low double-digit euro rate for taxes. Yes. So I think that's the guidance we can give there.

Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Patrick Maurer for any closing remarks.

Yes. So thank you, everyone, for listening into the Q1 earnings call. One more time to reiterate, we believe the company is structurally and organizationally very well set up to deliver on our guidance and potentially above that. And we look forward to talking to you on a personal note or then again in the half year earnings call. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.

Welcome to the Annual Results Call of 2025. It's another year with strong financial performance and a year in which we successfully divested the Energy segment, and thus became a focused aerospace company.

It's my first earnings call as CFO of Montana Aerospace after taking over in January from Michael Pistauer. Because Kai cannot make it today, I'm joined by our CHRO, Vicky Welvaert; and as always, by Marc Vesely.

Before we dive into the presentation, let me briefly remind you why Montana Aerospace is so well positioned as a pure-play aerostructure company following the divestment of the E-mobility segment in 2024 and the Energy segment in 2025. From the beginning of our journey, our ambition has been to become a game changer in the global aerospace industry, with deep vertical integration, multi-material competence and a global best cost country footprint.

This combination gives us a competitive advantage in lead times and cost efficiency, flexibility, but also in ESG performance versus our peers. And on top, reduce complexity for our customers and give us a sustainable competitive advantage with attractive margin levels.

Over the past years, we invested more than EUR 800 million anti-cyclically into our state-of-the-art best cost footprint facilities to support the industry ramp-up and the long-term perspectives of the aerospace industry. These investments have become fully operational now and underpin our scalable growth model.

At the same time, our disciplined acquisitions have been complementary, where we still needed an integration in the supply chain and further strengthened our one-shop approach. With this background in mind, let us jump into the presentation that clearly demonstrates the strength of our focused strategy.

Yes. As discussed, the successful divestiture of the Energy segment after a long process that actually started in 2023 has made us a pure aerospace player now with a very strong balance sheet going forward. IPO after the Energy segment this year will, on top, result in an earn-out of more than EUR 40 million and allow to close the ties between the two companies earlier than expected. It makes our equity story clean going forward, and with the divestiture, we also had the chance to convert another EUR 65 million of Belgian state financing into equity at ASCO without impacting Montana Aerospace shares.

Our balance sheet is thereby now stronger than ever. We have achieved at the end of 2025 already a 0.8 net debt-to-EBITDA ratio, which will actually turn positive in 2026, and an equity level of 62.5%. This setup and the enhanced financial strength will allow us to capture M&A or also internal strategic opportunities in the aerospace market going forward. Let's now look a bit more in-depth into the results. 2025 was another year with double-digit sales growth despite the negative FX impact as most of our Aerostructures sales are in U.S. dollars. And with that growth, which was primarily in the Aerostructures segment driven by the build rate increase and further gains in the market share. With this growth, we were able to grow our EBITDA over proportionally using our fixed costs and asset base.

We have achieved a 16.5% EBITDA margin and are on track, especially in the Aerostructures segment, to come to the 20% that we always communicated and work towards. And how do we do that? As discussed before, there are a few pillars, which are, let's say, the strength behind such sustainable figures. First, it's the integration that eliminates transport costs. It eliminates complexity, qualifications and quality checks and positions us as an attractive partner to the OEMs.

On top, we have a local-to-local approach, primarily with investments and asset base in low-cost countries. And all of that gives us basically a competitive sustainable advantage versus many peers. The operating results, so the EBIT has improved by more than 72% versus last year. And the only caveat to the results that I would like to highlight right away are -- that is the financial result and thereby also net income, which was heavily impacted by the strong U.S. dollar rate.

And the outcome of that is that in IFRS, we are required to evaluate our U.S. dollar intercompany loans despite the fact that they have not been paid back at the end of 2025 with then in place euro-U.S. dollar exchange rate, and that has led to losses of EUR 28 million, which are inside the financial results in 2025 versus EUR 18 million gains in '24, despite the fact that those -- neither the gains nor the losses this year have -- in 2025 had any cash impact on the company.

On the cash flow side, this is a bit more complex with our path towards a pure aerostructure player, especially the investment cash flow was impacted by those transactions where we will dive into in a minute, but what I would first like to highlight, as you can see, the operating cash flow, which includes working capital changes has had a very solid growth of 42% to EUR 168 million compared to -- in 2025. So very strong operational performance that we have seen throughout the group.

On the investing side, next to our, let's say, standard CapEx program, we have seen two special effects in 2025, adding up to EUR 81 million that you can see here in the, let's say, third bar of the upper graph. Those are the energy divestment, where we will see the cash inflow primarily in the year of 2026. And the second one was the final payment for the ASCO acquisition in the amount of EUR 30 million. On top, in '25, we have deleveraged by more than EUR 100 million over the year by, one, refinancing our loan and partially paying back the old loan for the next 5 plus 2 years, which gives financial stability for the company. And on top, as mentioned, by converting the profit certificates of EUR 65 million at ASCO into equity.

If we come to the working capital, I'd like to highlight that this is a focused topic in Montana Aerospace for the last couple of years already, but we have become better and better at it. And thereby, at the end of '25, we have achieved the ratio of 30%, which is quite strong and where we were driving forward to, which doesn't mean we will not further work on it, but it's already a good, and for sure, sustainable level.

Looking a bit into 2026, and we will go into more details of that on the next slide. We will potentially add a bit of metal into our inventories in order to secure our supply chain with the turmoil in the Middle East at the moment, but I want to highlight once more that with our integration in Montana, where we partially do chips recycling and casting in several sites, especially in Europe, we are much more independent than our peers, and thus less reliant on the external market.

On the next page, we want to give you more confidence of how Montana Aerospace is positioned in regards to the Middle East crisis or any other macroeconomic challenge that may come up in the future. And we divided that into 4 pillars that may be a concern or that you may see as a concern. So first one is the material pricing. Raw material prices in Montana Aerospace are largely protected with our customers, and we can pass them forward in almost all of our contracts. So that means that the increase in metal costs that we see at the moment should not impact, or for sure, not materially impact our supply -- our results for the year 2026 or going forward.

On the sourcing side, as just mentioned, we have chips recycling and own casting, and with the target of M&A or internal CapEx, we are further trying to integrate the supply chain backwards to be less dependent on the external market.

On top, as I said, we have started to put a bit more inventory on the balance sheet in the recent weeks in order to respond to the Middle East crisis. From energy pricing resilience, there are 2 sides to this. So one is the energy that we purchase ourselves. One, we have largely hedged those in 2026 and partially '27 among our sites, and on top, we have learned from the '22 crisis here and have installed, especially in the Romanian side, substantial PV facilities in order to become less dependent on the external market.

Second point is that we have in most of our -- in several of our contracts, CPI escalation clauses and therefore, can also pass price increases in that area onwards to our customers. And the last pillar is the demand side. For the moment, OEMs and the communication from the OEMs that they are still confident with their rates for 2026, but as you know, we have a safety buffer of around 10%, 15% versus the OEM rates in our planning and in our guidance. And that means that we feel still very secured with the current picture at this point in time.

On this page, we see that the OEMs are growing, but much more in line with our own expectations and assumptions, and also guidance rather than the ambitions that are communicated from their end towards the market. So if you look at Airbus, for example, the last 2 years from '23 to '25 showing around 4% annual growth in the rates. On the Boeing side, '23 to '25, it's around 6% growth per year. And that is pretty much in line with our conservative approach of putting rates into our guidance.

On top, I would like to highlight that you can see that Airbus is very strong and leads the semi-aisle market, while Boeing is strong on the wide-body market. So the Boeing sold 88 planes on the 787 versus Airbus 59 on the A350. But good or important to mention here is that Montana Aerospace is part of all platforms, and therefore, less agnostic to any change in a single platform that we could see.

Before we come to the guidance, I'd like to highlight one more time that there are great opportunities that lie ahead of us in Montana Aerospace for the year '26 and going forward because as you can see on the left side, the supply chain towards the OEMs is still far too fragmented and the main reason basically why they cannot deliver according to their plans year after year.

Montana Aerospace, we position ourselves as an integrated and reliable partner to the OEMs with our integration and approach that you can see on the right side. And thus, the logic conclusion is that we further integrate our supply chain where we see gaps or where things make sense from a geographical or supply chain perspective, either via M&A or strategic CapEx investments is supported by the OEMs. And as I said in the start, we clearly have a strong balance sheet for the moment that allows us to follow such attractive opportunities in the market or in our -- inside of our company.

With that, I would like to jump to the guidance, which is particularly interesting for you, I believe. And I'm glad to say that we are very confident with the 2026 numbers, and I want to reconfirm that we see sales above EUR 1 billion for '26 as well as an EBITDA -- adjusted EBITDA of more than EUR 185 million and towards the end of the year, a net cash position.

In terms of 2026, 2027, we also want to give a first outlook. So despite our conservative build rate assumptions and the conservative FX rate assumption that is above the current picture, but that obviously changes on a daily basis. We see further growth in our sales and in our market share to above EUR 1.1 billion in 2027 and to an EBITDA of more than EUR 210 million, which already comes very close with our -- to our 20% EBITDA margin target.

And with that, I would like to open the M&A question round.

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from the line of Josh Sullivan from Jones Trading.

So just, I know Montana has the 15% buffering guidance to OEM build rates. But have you seen any change in demand signals at this point from OEMs as it relates to Middle Eastern turmoil at this point?

Thanks, Josh, for the question. So as I said, for the moment, the OEMs are still reiterating their guidance for their build rates. And as I said, we still have the buffer. So we are less agnostic to that. The fact is that they, of course, sell to the Middle East companies. But if you look at the almost 10-year order book that they have, I think any company, including the big players in the Middle East will have to critically think if they delay their deliveries into future years or cancel them even because that will put them towards the end of the supply chain of the order book. And yes, then they are out of the, how to say, of the reordering of planes for a couple of years. And I don't think that's in anyone's interest.

And then with the balance sheet now at just 0.8x, you've got the Spirit reintegration, disruption in the Middle East and growing build rates at the OEMs here over the next couple of years. What does the M&A target market look like for you guys? And I guess, where are you comfortable taking that EBITDA leverage multiple to for acquisitions?

Yes. No. I mean, I think as we always read the rates, the M&A market, we are very active on that, and we have been very close in 2025 2x, but we have, first of all, a conservative approach on the pricing. So it clearly has to be accretive, and we have to see a value above the company that we purchase, I mean, an integration value above the company numbers that we purchased. And in addition, it has to fit into our supply chain and into our strategy. So those are the, I would say, two cornerstones of any M&A investment or also internal strategic investment before we go ahead. But if we see something in the market and we are ideally not in, let's say, in a bidding process, then for sure, we will pursue M&A that fits to our company.

The next question comes from the line of George Mcwhirter from Berenberg.

On the net debt, can you just walk through the bridge in 2026, touching on contributions from the loans from affiliated companies linked to the energy sale, the IPO earn-out, and also the level of underlying cash flow that you expect this year, please?

Yes. George, thanks for the question. Yes. So basically, we started out with the EUR 128 million end of 2025. We have seen, and I believe, published that we have already received EUR 61 million from the affiliated company transaction and expect a further double-digit number towards the end of the year. So that brings us already basically close to the net -- to a positive net debt or a net cash position actually. And from the free cash flow, I mean, that depends a bit on whether we will see any strategic investments, any M&A transaction, but clearly, we will not make a transaction that basically heavily harms our free cash flow. So it will be always in line with a still positive free cash flow that we project for the year.

And the double-digit amount, I think you mentioned that you expect towards the end of the year, is that a further contribution from the loans from affiliated companies? Or is that the...

No, it's a combination of loans and the earn-out, yes. Exactly.

Okay. Okay. That's helpful. And in terms of the phasing of the cash receipts from the loans from affiliated companies after 2026, what's the profile that you're expecting there?

I'm not -- can you repeat it? I'm not sure if I understood it correctly.

Sure. So I thought you're expecting more cash receipts from the loans from affiliated companies after 2026. Is that right?

Yes. So no, the vast majority we expect for '26. And yes, there could be still some final payments in 2027, although all the rates are -- or all the loans are secured with the stock and as well on market interest rates. So we are a bit agnostic to the payback because we receive well and good interest income from them, but yes, to reiterate, clearly, maturity in '26 and potentially something in '27.

Okay. That's helpful. And is there any guidance you can give on the absolute level of net debt that you expect to reach this year beyond the guidance that you put at net cash?

Not at this time, to be honest. Maybe we can give some more clarity on that in the upcoming quarterly calls, but at this time, yes, we reiterate the net cash positive position.

We now have a question from the line of Christian Bader from Zürcher Kantonalbank.

Thanks for the interesting presentation, and I have a couple of questions. The first one being, you mentioned that you are about to purchase additional raw materials or metals. I was just wondering which kind of magnitude of, let's say, inventory building we are talking about and by when are you going to do that?

Thank you, Christian, for the question. So I mean, that's just a bit, let's say, to pull forward some of the purchases that we anyhow would do in the year. So the magnitude is not substantial. We are talking about like a low double-digit million amount. So nothing that will completely change our balance sheet because, as I said, we have chips integration, so we don't need to purchase everything externally. So yes, so I would say a low double-digit amount, I would foresee at that point in time, quite low double digit.

Okay. And another question related to that. So can you confirm that you're not facing any delays or incremental cost for your metal procurement at this point or currently?

Well, not any -- that's the wrong -- probably the wrong wording is that we are protected on the customer side. So for example, the metal is -- for us is mostly a pass-through, but that's trading on different levels every day and the metal premium changes, for example, also with tariffs in the U.S. for the North American market. So we are -- the right conclusion is that we are not impacted on the result perspective and that we can pass those impacts through to the customers.

Okay. Then my next question relates to the disposal proceeds of the Energy segment. Originally, I thought that you receive everything by 2026. So -- and it seems that there is still something left in 2027. So how much is left then for 2027 in terms of these overall proceeds?

Yes. It's just some of the loans because also the Energy segment now in an independent state cannot pay back everything immediately. So they also have to look into their financing. And basically, that's why there could be a portion that's coming in '27. But that's the vast majority in '26, and potentially the full loans are repaid, but this, we will see in the course of the year.

All right. I see. And the last one for me, and then I go back into the queue, is you mentioned that you are on track to achieve this 20% EBITDA margin. So it would be helpful to tell us by when you are targeting this 20% EBITDA margin. Also, is this only for the Aerostructures segment? Or is this for the entire group?

Yes. It's short to midterm, especially for the Aerostructures segment. And short to midterm, I would see, yes, towards '27, very latest in '28, we will achieve that. Also, of course, keeping in mind that we have a conservative perspective on the build rates as well as the FX rates. So should that be more positive than our internal perspectives, it could be earlier.

Okay. And then last one for me on CapEx. Is there a CapEx guidance for this year, please?

I would say the, let's say, the standard CapEx that allow us to grow with the build rates and that cover our maintenance CapEx is in the range of the always communicated EUR 40 million to EUR 50 million. And then on top with the strong balance sheet position at the moment, we see, let's say, opportunities both internally to integrate further in the supply chain, which could be another EUR 10 million to EUR 20 million in strategic CapEx or on the M&A market, but that, that will be obviously an acquisition and not CapEx.

Okay. So the overall figure for CapEx is comparable to 2025?

Yes, comparable to 2025, although in '25, there's a small portion still of the Energy segment inside in the cash flow numbers. So yes, that portion obviously would go out anyhow. And that was another positive effect from the divestiture because we are not investing in the Energy segment, but purely in the Aerostructures now.

[Operator Instructions] We now have a follow-up question from the line of George Mcwhirter from Berenberg.

Just a question on your 2027 guidance in terms of the bridge between EBITDA and free cash flow. Do you mind just walking through that bridge? That would be helpful.

Thank you, George, for the question. Yes. So as always, with the strategic CapEx and potentially M&A, that's a bit difficult to give a final number for that. But basically, as we discussed, we are working towards our target of a 50% conversion from -- 50% conversion from EBITDA to free cash flow, and that without strategic projects should be achieved in '27 already.

And secondly, are you seeing any disruption on the supply chain so far from the Middle East complex?

As I said, not really. I mean we see, I don't know, like everyone else, increases in fuel prices and some of the energy costs, but no issue on the supply side there yet. And the same for metal, but metal with certain risks in the future, that's why we are working on securing the metal supply, the limited metal supply that we have for our company already now.

We have a follow-up question from the line of Josh Sullivan from Jones Trading.

Yes, I just wanted to touch on the defense market within the European theater. I mean what are you seeing as far as demand inbound as far as European aerostructure defense demand at this point?

Yes. So we are already engaged in the defense market, but it's also like the aerospace or aerostructure market, I would say, not super fast-moving market. So you need, in many cases, especially if you go to the airplanes, you also need the long qualifications. The process is not as fast as it may seem to the outset that the money is immediately invested. But for sure, we are in many discussions with different companies and big companies in that regard in also different countries in order to benefit from that upside. But as said, I mean, it will take some time, but we clearly see potential in that market.

[Operator Instructions] We have a follow-up question from the line of Christian Bader from Zürcher Kantonalbank.

First of all, Alpine Metal Tech, a new segment, I mean, I believe not all of us know much about it. So I mean, what's the kind of growth trajectory that we should model for this business?

Yes. So basically, it was always part or most of the time part of Montana Aerospace, just the sales figure was below 10% in the past. So it was not shown as a separate segment. And now it just achieved basically this 10% with a bit different profile than the Aerostructures segment from EBITDA margins and CapEx investments, so there are rarely any. And we also don't see there the growth that we see in the Energy -- in the aerospace Aerostructures segment. So basically, that's a segment that we see quite flat and the growth and the margin expansion comes from the Aerostructures segment. And just to amend, so basically, AMT is our -- provides internal automation and robotics to the company and to the Aerostructures segment. And that's, let's say, the strategic value behind having them in our group.

Okay. And a follow-up on your intercompany loan, which is in U.S. dollar-denominated, is the, let's say, the overall scope of this intercompany loan, does it remain flat? Or is it decreasing? Or what -- how should we think about it, please?

Yes. I mean, we are quite flexible on when to make a repayment within the group, but it's not planned to be enhanced substantially. So the leverage should stay the same, but obviously, if you compare 2024, where the exchange rate was 1.8, I think, and then 2025, where I think it was 1.15, 1.16 range, that big movement from the U.S. dollar at the end dates resulted in this, let's say, EUR 28 million noncash related losses in the finance result.

Okay. So this FX effect in the financial results will prevail if some currencies move, right?

But if the currency stays as it is, which is a bit lower than end of last year, then we would get a gain again like we have seen in 2024, but if it's flat, there wouldn't be any impact from those loans basically. And to reiterate, that's really a noncash impact, and you have the same with the assets that we have in, I don't know, U.S. dollar companies, but those are going directly through the balance sheet, while the IC loans, they have to go through P&L. So that's the only reason there from a technically IFRS standpoint, why we see that loss.

The next question comes from the line of Aymeric Pula from Kepler Cheuvreux.

I apologize if the question has already been asked, but I was cut while I was trying to lock the first question. So the first question is actually on the cash proceeds from the sale of Energy. I'm still very confused by the absolute amount that you expect to receive in total when taking into account what you received in 2025 and what you expect to receive in 2026, especially when I look at the cash flow, it seems that there are -- you discontinued some cash flow from the Energy. So the net proceeds seems very low.

So I just wanted to check exactly how much you got both gross proceeds and net of some extra cash out and same for 2026, what's left to be received, just to be clear on the exact number of this disposal? And secondly, on the 2027 sales and EBITDA guidance, it looks to me that it was a bit of a cautionary cut compared to what you had previously assumed, and I just wanted to be clear also about what assumption change, what actually triggered that cautionary cut to the '27 guidance for sales and EBITDA on the aerospace business?

Thank you, Aymeric, for the question. So let's start with the '27 guidance question. Yes. So the main assumptions, I would say, that have changed is obviously the speed of the growth in the OEM build rates. They both have reiterated their numbers and delayed them to the years later, basically. And the second biggest aspect that I'd like to highlight here is that the FX rate has changed substantially compared to 1.5, 2 years ago.

And since the Aerostructures sales are largely in U.S. dollars, and we have -- we are U.S. dollar long, we have a U.S. dollar long exposure, that is the second aspect that has led us to reiterate the guidance slightly. Yes, sorry, the first question with the cash proceeds. So overall, we expect a 3-digit million amount. And that, as said already, largely in 2026, potentially a small amount in '27, which is basically to reiterate what has been said there before.

But again, sorry to insist on that, but my impression that you said that you were selling the business at something around 5x EBITDA, which my calculation was around EUR 200 million proceeds, but when I look again at the cash flow from 2025, I'm struggling again, there's been some discontinuation effect and you paid an extra cash to the ASCO shareholders. So I'm just trying to reconcile some of the number and understand exactly how much you received in '25 and if the gross amount actually equals to EUR 200 million at the end, or if it's lower than was previously assumed.

Yes. So the above EUR 200 million is an enterprise value, of course. So that there's always a bridge towards the equity portion of that. But as said, I mean, what I would like to point out again, there is that with this transaction, which was very value accretive, because we could, also on top, avoid CapEx going forward in the amount of EUR 15 million -- EUR 20 million to EUR 30 million per year. And on top, we were able to transfer the EUR 65 million of profit certificates into equity. So in a total consideration from an enterprise perspective, we have seen -- or we see well above EUR 300 million from that divestiture.

Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Patrick Maurer for any closing remarks.

Yes. So thank you again for joining today's call. And we very much look forward to presenting the Q1 results in the beginning of May and talking to all of you again in the meantime. Have a good day. Bye-bye.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Montana Aerospace 9 Months 2025 Earnings Call. I am Valentina, the Chorus Call operator. [Operator Instructions] The conference is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast.

At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Michael Pistauer. Please go ahead.

Welcome everybody to 9 months 2025 earnings call of Montana Aerospace. This is the first earnings call is a pure-play Aerostructures company goal, which many of you know, we followed consequent since 2023, and we are extremely happy to announce that this time, we have achieved this goal to be pure-play aerostructures company.

Yes, balance sheet is still heavily impacted by the carve-out of the Energy segment. We will go into detail of those aspects. But still, we think aerospace is doing great. And we are more than positive but and confident that we will also, in the future, outperform our peers in aerospace.

Let's -- to date, the aerospace earnings call, as always, Kai Arndt and me, Michael Pistauer, will guide through and we are happy to answer your questions after the presentation. of Montana Aerospace earnings in 2025. Where are we right now? We announced our strategic transition into a pure-play Aerostructures company already in 2023. And the reason for this statement and strategy was pretty clear. We think that aerospace as an industry has a extremely long-term perspective, not many other industries can share this long-term perspective was we connected with long-term contracts, which we will then also discuss a bit later on. And we think we can outperform the market, consequently, something we treated in the past few years. And we can outperform for the future, we think because of a special setup. Why? We do have a very special approach to the market.

We are situated in the meantime, transition we had in the last 2 years as a global player, still local to local, something which is under the light of tariffs and other developments, more important than ever and also adds additional market share to our portfolio. We are one of the few ones in our special area we are in, with fully -- as a fully integrated value chain, something which is also for the future, we think the market still and the supply chain stays shaky is more and more important to pass that up at the end with our customers, which are the Tier 1s and OEMs in aerospace industry. And last not least, we have not only best-in-class entities, but most of our assets are situated in so-called based cost manufacturing footprint countries. Price pressure is something which is constantly on in certain price pressure for us with situations or set up like we have is a positive momentum, which also brings us some tailwind into our development. And we have a very clear core, which helps us to perform better and better together with our customers.

Let me elaborate on the carve-out, which is definitely one of the crucial topics within our balance sheet in the 9 months results. And we think that the carve-out is highly accretive for the company on an Aerospace. Why? We have achieved enterprise video in the cavort of EUR 204 million. And before we go into the details of additional impacts, let me shortly elaborate the transition history. In 2023, when we announced with Montana Aerospace is elaborating into a pure-play Aerostructures company. We tried a so-called carve-out IPO in the Energy segment. We fade -- we phased out of the reason that the carve-out IPO within the stock-listed Montana Aerospace was not accepted in the market and by the investors. We can have consequently M&A possibilities work out and more than 30 interested parties went through a very deep diligence. Many of them strategist like Siemens, GE and other companies were not able to participate in the carve-out due to the market share of energy segment and therefore, the fear of consequences of trade commissions in merger control issues.

After 2 years' time, we choose the highest -- by far the highest offer they have received. Yes, with some impact, but on the other hand, by far the highest offer. And also because we had some time pressure, time pressure, which was given by the [indiscernible] we were able with this condition precedent or are able, with this condition precedent, to shift some debt into equity with no diluting impact for the Montana Aerospace, which I would like to explain. So all in all, we achieved with the carve-out of energy, EUR 23.7 million into [indiscernible]. We avoided as a Montana Aerospace equity injection, which was planned and also guided of EUR 30 million. This is done by the new shareholder. We have an opportunity for unscaled untapped earn-out component, which is also to be paid either by good performance of the Energy segment for M&A transaction or an IPO of the Energy segment by the shareholder to Montana Aerospace. And here, we calculate with an amount of EUR 40 million plus already to happen, hopefully, in the next year to come.

And further, we have been achieved our -- as a goal, as a pure-play aerostructures company, which gives us provide us, I would say, the fact of the condition precedent to fulfill the debt equity swap with the pension state fund in the amount of more than EUR 66 million, which otherwise would have been cash effective to pay back. So all in all, we think with an amount totaling up of clearly over EUR 320 million, a very accretive topic for Montana Aerospace, and therefore, we are quite happy also to announce.

Cash impact is a bit delayed as the closing of the transaction was late in September, 2025. The net debt impact will be around 25% of the total amount in Q4 2025.and around 75% is expected to happen within the first half of the year 2026, most likely even in the first quarter 2020, which also lead us later in the guidance or I would say, very optimistic and positive guidance on net debt or net cash with onetime net debt EBITDA this year and even a net cash position together with the operational business and the Aerostructures cash flow in 2026.

Let's go into the details of the first 9 months of 2025. And here, we see again a P&L, and please note this P&L is showing only anymore the Aerospace business. Montana Aerospace also as it will look forward looking without the energy segment with the pure-play aerostructures company, which is [indiscernible]. And what we see is in sales, stronger than the market growth with 15.5%, the net sales of EUR 712 million. And as announced, the overproportional development of the EBITDA. Yes, the quarters are not any more completely the same. There is a kind of a seasonality with a strong second quarter and a very strong fourth quarter to be awaited expected, mostly even EBITDA, which also then bring us related to a very strong EBITDA guidance for 2025 and also for 2026.

The result, which shows the result of the continued operations from negative to positive within 1 year. And please note that the results still includes heavy impact of a noncash impact we have to suffer with [indiscernible] is the FX impact, which is in the financial result. I did repeat my specific within the financial result, you find a position of almost EUR 30 million of negative impact, which results out of IC loans or intercompany loans from Montana Aerospace to its entities in U.S. dollar. And as the dollar changed dramatically within this year, from around FX 105 by the beginning of the year to at the end of December date of 117, more than 10% of this almost EUR 300 million loans are evaluated differently, even so they will never have a negative cash impact for the Montana Aerospace as shown in the result. And still then with this EUR 30 million impact, we show a continuous operations result of 3. Otherwise, it would have been 33 or even more.

CapEx, and here, I would like to stress the CapEx without the industry segment for comparative reasons, slightly lower than last year, and I would say, exactly in the area of our guidance where we say always even with small additional capacity increases are at the level of EUR 40 million to EUR 60 million on a yearly basis, which is far below our depreciation, therefore, shows the strong cash flow, operational cash flow, possibility and potential. Net debt, including the total company as it is on the years and or in this case, the 9 months end thing shows a quite significant decline in comparison to the last year 2024. Please note that within this year, we had decide also the carve-out of ASTA, our Energy segment, an impact, which was net debt related. There was an earn-out component of the -- out of the ASCO transaction, ASCO was bought by Montana Aerospace within the year 2022, 2023. There was always an earn-out component within our balance sheet, sheet in the amount of EUR 30 million. And this earn-out happened to be paid out by July 2025 in the amount of EUR 28 million. It's a bit less than what we expected.

But nevertheless, of course, this impact was also something which impacts the net debt. Without that impact on a like-to-like basis, the net debt decrease would have been even over EUR 100 million to be more specific, EUR 30 million -- almost EUR 30 million, lower than what we see right now. Free cash flow shows the total impact of the transactions I just told. On the one hand, the earn-out component, but also the impact of the carve-out of the Energy segment. Nevertheless, without the impact of the Energy segment. The free cash flow shows at the level of EUR 2.8 million without the impact of the additional earn-out component for the ASCO segment, the free cash flow would show an amount of over EUR 30 million. So on an operational basis, we are -- on an operating basis, we are extremely happy with the development and, I guess, if you look at the details, it shows the strong position as the Montana Aerospace has. And additionally, with the pretty strong contracted sales of over EUR 7 billion, where Kai is giving also some more color on it in just a moment, we think we have prepared more than positive for the future.

Details on the results, I would -- is it is aerostructures. I would like to hand over to Kai Arndt to give you more details on the development of the industry and of Aerostructures, Aerospace, Montana Aerospace in the last few months.

Good afternoon, and everyone, before I start with the details, and let me also give you some remarks -- personal remarks from my side. Of course, everybody is under the impression of the today's share price development. I'd just like to mention that I'm not focused on a day or a week or a month or a quarterly development I'm definitely focused on the sustainable development of the company. And I guess, we have all the right to say that for the last half year, and there's absolutely no reason to questioning or getting negative on our business model. So we stay positive and there's a good right to do so because we see what is happening in the market. And there's no changes in the last months. So the OEMs still publishing the same rates.

Our market position is getting stronger and stronger. We are winning more work packages because the customers like our business model, and it's extremely difficult to be a copycat and do the same business model wherever in the world. I guess this is still very underlined by the recent development and the recent packages we are winning. And as said, there is absolutely no reason for getting pessimistic for the future are getting negative on our business model. I don't see that. We are winning the packages we want to win, and this is definitely also reflected in the margins we are able to create. And I guess this is giving us the right to stay positive on the business model, and we will continue the way we have chosen just a couple of years ago.

Why are we a bit more pessimistic for the future? I will come to it on the next pages. Let me start first with the current development of the quarter 3 compared to 2024. You've seen that we are close to a 20% increase quarter-by-quarter comparison and also a 17% increase in our EBITDA. As Michey already said, traditionally, the strongest quarter of the year is the fourth quarter, and I'm staying positive that we will at least achieve the guidance for 2025. There is no reason we shouldn't not achieve it. We see what's coming in. And therefore, I'm quite positive that we said, at least achieve the guidance for '25. And let's move ahead and then we can see about our rate assumptions and the guidance for '26. I don't see the next page now. Okay. No.

Yes. So here, as already discussed and mentioned, there is always the influence of the energy business. And as you can see, if you compare quarter-by-quarter, operationally, I guess, we are doing pretty well in line with what we expected for the different quarters. The trajectory is absolutely healthy and definitely, it will continue like this. And for the fourth quarter, as already mentioned now a couple of times, it should even be stronger than this one. Okay, what does this mean now for the outlook in terms of really the rate assumptions and the guidance for 2026, I guess this was one of the biggest questions and maybe a reason for some questions also later on. If I come to the guidance, as I said a couple of minutes ago, from the environment we are in, you don't see any changes from the big OEMs. You don't see that they adjust their delivery announcements for '25 but also for '26.

But if I see one, if I look a little bit deeper into the market, I also see that Airbus announced around more than 50 gliders in to [ lose], I saw photos of one of our biggest customers, Spirit AeroSystems and [indiscernible] where I see more than 200 [indiscernible] largest on stock. I see that the supply chain is still influenced by fast enough shortages and so on. And also, we see some discussions we have on the extrusion side in terms of the volume demand for 2026. So if I combine everything of the information we get from our customers, but also from our supply chain. I think this is the reason why we probably we are a bit more conservative than the complete market. But I'd also like to say in the last 4 years, there was not a single time in one of our earnings calls that we had to come with the winning warning. It was only one time and this was a positive one. And I guess in terms of professionalism and also in terms of the conservative approach we might take in here, I guess this is simply what we see from the supply chain, but also from the OEM. And this has been embedded in our planning for 2026.

We are not that much focused on the revenues. And just to be also very clear on this one, we are focused on our margins. We are focused on the generation of cash flow, and we are focused on a lot of projects which are in the pipeline and where we are in very, very good discussions with our customers. And I'm quite positive that in the near future, you will see a lot of announcements coming from our side in terms of maybe new projects where we're engaging ourselves and also in terms of new contracts, we will be able to sign with the big OEMs. This is definitely giving us the baseline and the fundament for the way forward. And I'm ready to take every challenge or every question on '26 and onwards. But again, I guess, we are in a very, very healthy position and I'm quite positive that we at least achieve the guidance also for '26.

Shortly a bit more details before we come to the guidance also on some numbers. You see here the cash flow of Montana Aerospace development, which was already discussed by Kai. The quarter 3 was still impacted in the free cash flow, not only by the Energy segment, but also as we said, by the so-called earn-out component concerning ASCO and taking this one into account. Also, the free cash flow would have been above the year 2024.

As you see on the next page is a constant development of the trade working capital and also of the net debt. So trade working capital since our high peak 2 years ago, we constantly worked down EUR 365 million in quarter 3 2024 versus EUR 328 million. by Q3 2025. In absolute terms, the reduction of almost [ EUR 40 million ], sorry, concerning percentage, of course, considering the change of our -- now from a 2 segment to 1 segment business, there is a percentage change which is in line also with what we guided and what we expected to be prepared also to overcome certain difficulties in the supply chain of others with our stock we have and therefore, been able to supply another scale. Net debt constant reduction. The outlook already for this year is to be -- which will come into the guidance in a second, is to be at the level of onetime net debt-to-EBITDA and consequently, together also with the proceeds of the carve-out, which we said already are expected to happen on the net debt level in 2025 by around 25% and around 75% of the remaining amount by beginning of '26, we think that we will end up with the net debt level of positive cash level of higher double-digit amount by end of 2026. So no net debt in future, but net cash, which provides us additional firepower for not only dividends but mostly for additional activity, either in CapEx or in M&A's.

The build rates, which were discussed by Kai. So market development. I said it's a bit still not in line what were the announcements of the OEMs, and that's also something we keep on going for the future. Concerning our expectations, we think there's a steady development upwards, so more bitrate of the OEMs, but not as fast and not as steep is sometimes announced or hoped. And this is on a -- so therefore, there is market growth, yes, not as deep as sold. But on the other hand, still also concerning the shakiness of the industry, additional tailwind for our businesses, which gives us a situation where we can choose between the possibilities on the market and the packages, which we think is quite favorable and positive to [indiscernible] up with the OEMs.

Finally, we come to the guidance. The guidance now as a Montana Aerospace aerostructures, pure-play company. So we slightly increase even our, I would say, single segment industry company, the sales to above EUR 900 million or around EUR 900 million. In 2025, heavy growth also in comparison to last year. Aerostructures segment, we think and guide for adjusted EBITDA of around EUR 160 million. Therefore, exactly once again mirrored what Kai already announced to be expected a very strong quarter for 2024 '25, mainly in the EBITDA and on the other hand, also concerning net income and free cash flow, and therefore, also be guide with a positive net income by year's end on the operation and the business as it is on the continued business. And as already said, net debt of around net debt onetime EBITDA by the year's end 2025.

2026, again, impacted by growth but the focus is on cash flow strong and also EBITDA, strong growth pays to over EUR 1 billion on aerostructures, aerospace, Montana Aerospace and the adjusted EBITDA growth of EUR 185 million. Please let me explain that our assumption for this EBITDA also is based on a certain FX and certain tariff situation. We calculate with a U.S. dollar of 1 19, which is in comparison to the last guidance we gave at the beginning of 2025 at 1 05, much weaker comparison to the euro or, let's say, 13% difference. What does it mean in the business or industry, which is in general a U.S. dollar-based industry. 95% of the sales in this industry, not only for us, but for everybody, is U.S. dollar-based. Even companies like Airbus, invoiced and calculate fully in U.S. dollar.

So out of a sales volume of around EUR 1 billion, we do have a long position in U.S. dollar of around 30% or, let's say, equaling more than EUR 300 million. In this EUR 300 million, now having an FX impact, which we at least expect with 119 versus 105 amounts for more than EUR 30 million, almost EUR 40 million.

On the other hand, we still think that even though the tariffs with -- after first shock, I would say, in the first months of 2025, had shown that general aerospace is in most parts, excluded. Nevertheless, certain supplies and other topics in the full value chain are still impacted. So over here in comparison to the guidance of end of 2024, beginning of 2025 for the year 2026, we see or calculate with an impact which is versus almost double-digit million euro amount on EBITDA. So on a like-to-like basis, same FX or lower FX in case of this development, and then maybe eased or stable development of the tariffs, the EBITDA would be up by more than almost EUR 40 million. And therefore, I think this EUR 185 million adjusted EBITDA with this conditions precedent or assumptions is mirroring a very strong EBITDA and growth for the year 2026.

Last but not the least, and already mentioned today, strong cash flow. Operationally, with decent CapEx and a more stable trade working capital, therefore, strong cash conversion on the EBITDA. And on the other hand, the impact of the carve-out, therefore, we calculate with higher double-digit million euro amount on a net cash position by the year 2026.

Saying that, we would end the presentation, and happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much.

[Operator Instructions] The first question comes from Josh Sullivan from JonesTrading.

Yes. So just to be clear, we strip out the FX and tariff noise on the '26 guide you said you're conservative on guidance. But is that the same position you were sequentially on the conservatism? And just to be clear, you're incrementally positive on build rates in the Aerostructures segment generally?

For the bill rates, I would like to hand over on to Kai. But before we start, we go over to the build rates on the FX, yes, we calculate with an FX of 1 19 to the euro, which means a very weak U.S. dollar. This was by end of September, beginning of October, I would say the forward-looking exchange rate. So saying that if the development is like right now, not as weak concerning the U.S. dollar, we would have, of course, the positive impact out of it, so sustain it like right now, 3 points less than the 1 19 already impacts many million euro amount additional EBITDA.

Of course, we hedge to a certain extent. So for instance, this year, we hedged most of our sales at 1 07 for the total year's average. But of course, hedging is only possible for a certain period of time. And therefore, right now, the guidance is based on a full FX impact of 119. For the build rates, please, Kai.

Yes. Thank you, Michey. Yes, as mentioned in my little speech just a couple of minutes ago, there is some variance in terms of how we see the build rates because we have so many different work packages ending up in a different set of the aircraft, if you just compare the wings for the 737 [indiscernible] the 737 then there is a big variance, a big difference in terms of the volume demand for 2026.

I like to be very clear because I guess this is the name of the game today and all clarity, I guess we -- overall, we have roughly a discounted build rate of, I would say, 10% in most of the packages and some other areas like extrusion, we see even a stagnation in terms of the demand from the supply chain. And this was one of the reasons why we has a more conservative approach for 2026. We are flexible enough if the volumes are increasing more than expected. Then, of course, we are flexible enough to deliver even more. But for the budget assumptions, we were very details in all of the different work packages, we more or less have different assumptions in terms of the build rates, especially when it comes from exclusion to machining to detail parts and assembly, there's always a different set of rate assumptions because we see what's demanded by the customers, but also we see what is happening in the supply chain.

Overall, I mean, there is a steady increase from '25 to '26, which is still -- and given the industry we are in, I guess, a very good place to be, but it's maybe a little less than anticipated by some of you.

And then maybe in the remarks, you mentioned you're winning more work packages. What is Montana's ability to take share here as you see it build rates generally accelerating over the next couple of years, Spirit being absorbed, fractured supply chain? Can you just talk a bit about those work packages you're winning and how we can think of the work package opportunity for Montana over the next couple of years?

Yes, with [indiscernible] because this is explaining the business model we are we are in and what we can deliver to the customer. And I guess it's always the customer who's giving us then the bigger packages and, of course, is willing to pay for it. that's the main topic. So a couple of years ago, we are winning packages which were maybe in the machining, maybe in the extrusion, maybe we won also some packages in assembly for Vietnam, but none of them were really vertically integrated.

Today, we are winning work packages from the raw material until the final delivery which, of course, is giving us then the chance to also create higher margins because it's a demand situation for customers, but also for us. This will continuously go like this. We are approached by the customers for these kind of work packages. And we are definitely refusing single work packages out of one technology. That's not longer what we are after. We want to have the full packages, everything under our control, and that includes also the supply chain. So whatever we can build on our own. We want to be independent from any supply chain terminal. You see that today, and I guess it will continuously happen in the next 3 years that there will be suppliers which underrated their inventory situation, and there will be some impact from the supply chain in the next 2 years, at least that's my hands.

And we can go after packages where we are more or less independent from those impacts and this is recognized also by the customers. You mentioned the Spirit takeover by Boeing. Yes, of course, this will open up a complete new field of business because I -- my guess is, after the takeover Boeing has to clean their portfolio, and they are searching for reliable partners. We are in discussion with Boeing on some of the packages and I'm very, very positive that we will find solutions also in the near future on them. What does it mean? I guess we will see the impact of these work packages maybe in 18 or 24 months. It will not influence the '26 numbers. But for '26, I guess, with the current worst-stage we are quite happy.

And then I guess just one last one, I'll get into the queue. Can you just make any comments what you're seeing in the space market. And as that economy grows where your exposure is and what your expectations are there?

Yes. I guess you heard me saying in the first quarter earnings call and also in the second quarter earnings call, we are absolutely happy that we are winning more and more market share in the space industry and the space market. On the other side, we always said that this is not the core business we are in because yes, the changes in the space market for work packages are so fast. And I would say it's a 10x multiple compared to the aerospace business in terms of design changes, and it's by far faster. So they are looking for flexible partners. This is why we are winning the packages. We are faster than anybody else in the industry.

And for the moment, we are quite happy of winning even more were packaged even more market share with the space business. But as I said, I don't think on the long run, I'm not quite sure if this will be a sustainable inflow of revenue than EBITDA. So this is why also on the space. we have not this steep increase in '27, '28, '29, which is maybe and some other guidances visible. But I guess, we are in our field in the industry for the space. I think we are also market leader on this one. Well, that's clear enough?

Next question comes from [indiscernible] Wider from Berenberg.

Maybe on Q3 free cash flow, can you just run through the competition of the EUR 39 million cash costs relating to the asset divestment firstly?

Yes, this is no problem. It's just explained. Of course, we looked at the impact in the cash flow statements directly in the statement we published today. There's, of course, the disposal impact of the so-called discontinued operation as the net cash impact, but it's also the acquisition of intangible assets and property and plant, which shows a position in there.

And together with the changes in assets, which you dispose, you come up then with the total impact of this EUR 39 million. So it's minus the cash which you -- which we sold. So the impact is mostly that there was some cash impact also given to the -- when you dispose the asset, IFRS looks at it in the case of what went out in this moment. And at the moment of the transaction, there was a cash payment or net cash, which was at ASCO of around EUR 50 million. So this is part of the cash flow statement.

On the other hand, there was also a lot of debt, which was acquired by the new, let's say, shareholder or part of the Energy segment, which also flew out, but it's not in the cash flow statement. So therefore, it's really hard to read. -- sorry about it, but hopefully, it explains. So you look at the balance sheet as it is. The cash flow statement, of course, shows already the cash impact directly, but are not the disposal of net debt. The disposal of net debt is in the cash flow from financing activities. And there you also have the impact of the reduction of the net debt out of the Aster transaction.

That's helpful. The second one is on free cash flow. So you helpfully guided to higher double-digit million net cash position at the end of FY '26. Can you just run through what you expect in terms of free cash flow for this year and next year, please?

On an operational basis for 2026, we guided for EUR 185 million adjusted EBITDA or you say EBITDA. IFRS, there is a CapEx in the amount of higher double-digit amount included in the cash flow. There is a low taxation still, there's also -- it's not part of the cash flow, but also a lower interest rate expected. We have -- we can collate with something around minus EUR 50 million financial result of the -- it was all in '26 and [indiscernible] collate with a high -- the EBITDA -- sorry, with more or less stable trade working capital in absolute terms. Even though the sales are increased, therefore, a better percentage. And if you sum it up, you come to operational cash flow, which is in the amount of triple-digit amount million euro and even if you deduct on a, let's say, comprehensive cash flow discussion also deduct taxes and interest, you're at a high double-digit amount million euro cash flow our cash in 2026. So high cash conversion on the EBITDA.

We always said that we intend to have a cash conversion of the EBITDA of 50% plus is that's I think something we can achieve in 2026.

Then the last one is just on the build rate assumptions. You mentioned no big changes in discussions with variance. Can you just comment about what you're seeing on the A320 with Airbus build rates in 2026 and 2027?

Yes, with pleasure. Let me just add one comment to your question to the cash flow generation because I have your market study in front of me, which you published on the 17th of October. And I definitely like to say there's no reason that I doubt what is in your own paper, and we are, by far, generating the best cash profile in the next 5 years. So the compound average growth rate in comparison to all our peers is by far higher and this will remain.

So there's no reason why we should put this in question -- and even if you then compare the PE ratio, this is by around 9% in 2030 compared to the median, which is around '25. So this is why I'm always coming back to the environment. I'd like to speak with data and respects. And this is your own market study. This is why I just wanted to come back to it and give you some add on this one. In terms of the rate assumptions, I mean there is clearly the path forward for the rate 70, 75 on the A320 was published. They want to achieve the 75 million by the -- I think it's by the end of '27. Currently, they are evolving in this direction. As said, we have some different work packages, which we are delivering to Airbus. As I start with the ASCO work packages, which is being movable. So the flat,the flat tracks, we are delivering for the A220 and A320 out of ASCO Belgium. And there is a huge difference in terms of what we see as the announcement and what we see as the demand coming from broad in the U.K., where they are assembling the other things.

This is exactly what I was talking about when I was talking about the differences in terms of what you see as an announcement from the OEM and what we put into the budget. And I guess our budget assumptions are still very realistic, very serious and professional. So I definitely stick to them. We are in talks with Airbus if there is a higher demand coming up because the inventory levels are going down, then, of course, we are ready to deliver more. But I guess we if you talk and raise, I guess, we are always a little bit behind the announced rate of Airbus because the inventory levels are so high, especially in the assembly areas of Airbus themselves. If you take the 737, for example, I mean I'd like to remind everybody the difficult times we have been through in the last 3 years with all the turmoil [indiscernible] was in the door blowout last year. And this created so much friction in the system. And my hunch is that in every of the single suppliers, and I'm talking about more than 10,000 suppliers still, there are so many different levels of inventory, and this is seen also in the demand coming through our extrusion facility that we need to be very careful with how we plan the volume and how we distribute it to the supply chain.

This is why we definitely also see in terms of the 737 announced rates, we are roughly always 5 shipsets month behind what Boeing is seeing in their announcement. This is simply based on the fact that we deliver a lot of part into the fuel large. And as said, there are still around 200 through the largest in digital. And I guess it will take at least 2 years until they have burned down the inventory to a normal level. And then of course, we will participate also in the rate announcement which are given to the market. So this is the logic we have been implemented in the budget. And I definitely guess there is some room for opportunity, no doubt. But after 4 years or 5 years in a row where I guess not of the OEMs delivered to their announcements, I guess that our conservative approach was always the right way to go.

The next question comes from Aymeric Poulain from Kepler Cheuvreux.

I've got 3, please. I've got to say understand your guidance for 2026. So could you help us just with very simple numbers, what volume do you expect in terms of shipset in 2026 growth -- in terms of growth for volume? What the pricing you would see, what the FX assumption that you have for 2026? And then on the I'd like to better understand your hedging policy because, again, I didn't understand your explanation. So I think you said 100% of your sales is in U.S. dollars. 70% or so is naturally hedged. So you have an exposure of 30%. And last year or this year, it said at 107. So you have no exposure on the EBITDA of that dollar effect. But next year, you expect 119. So a big drop in the sales coming from the dollar effect, but you didn't explain what the hedging policy was and how much was your exposure in terms of hedging to the dollar. So that would be helpful to have this number, please?

And then the last question is as volume should nonetheless increase over the next 2 years, when do you expect full capacity utilization to be reached, please?

Maybe I'll start again at the rates and the utilization. I like to start with a very complete example, which I mentioned already the shipset we are delivering into the new movable or the wins of [indiscernible]. This year, we will end up with around 640 shipsets on the A320. Next year, the current demand from Airbus is around 720 plus. This is what we have budgeted for. This is what I was talking about in terms of the rate assumptions and maybe the rates which are published these rates might be a bit higher, but this is not what we see in terms of the demand coming from the OEM directly.

So the second question, was it again on the rates? I'm not...

It was to make -- because you give figures, but in terms of the translation in the model, it's impossible to actually see what volume growth you actually assume because you say, okay, there may be some effect, but we have also hedging -- sorry, FX that have to impact your '26 sales. So would you be able to just give us simple numbers like volume growth, pricing, FX that will help understand the '26 guidance perhaps a bit better, please?

Okay. I mean in terms of pricing, that's not easy in the call to give you a pricing assumption, but you see the revenue growth, you see the EBITDA growth. You see the margin evolution year-by-year, and this should give you some boundaries about how we manage the different volumes. And when it comes to the FX and the impact from the -- of the FX, I'd like to hand over to Michey here.

Yes. Simply said, as it considering the pool rates, so let's say, for us necessary bitrates and we calculate around. It depends really on the work packages or the certain parts because certain areas, a lot of inventory still in the supply chain, sometimes more, sometimes less. And I said, we are a bit more conservative concerning our expectations of the build rates of the OEMs. But we can calculate with around 10% growth on the pull rates 2026 versus 2025.

So with A320, depending again from 2. We calculate with less than 800 ship set on a yearly basis in 2026. Again, a bit depending up more down from which part we are discussing calculating always in a certain amount of inventory in -- with the OEMs or Tier 1s. For the 737, better growth, but still definitely not the 42, which is announced there. So also here, we calculate with less than -- around 40 or less than 40, depending again on the parts. All in all, plus/minus around 10% growth from the pull rates, which is expected if it comes stronger, we are happy -- and also from the outlook, we don't think, for instance, a calculate with more than below 70 build rate for the A320 for the next years to come.

So also here, we are a bit more conservative. Nevertheless, we think that we can always grow faster than the market in this area. Concerning FX, yes, sorry about it. It is complicated, but it's the way we are -- it's the world in the meantime we are living in. You're right. almost all of the sales is calculated by invoiced in U.S. dollars aerospace industry is, in general, a U.S. dollar-based industry. Even if we invoice to term and whatever here, it's based in the U.S. dollar. If we invoice to Airbus, it's based on U.S. dollars. So it's a U.S. dollar business and all those contracts everything is done in the meantime in U.S. dollar. It changed also in the last years more in mind to test the direction. So around 95% of our total sales are completely U.S. dollar related.

By saying that, you're right, most of it is naturally hedged. So around 70% of the total sales is naturally hedged because we also try to supply or calculate our structure -- base structure concerning all the entities on U.S. dollar phase. So the remaining amount is around 30% of our total sales. And therefore, as we invoice and have less with dollar on our cost side. It's a U.S. dollar long position. The U.S. dollar loan position, you're right, this year, as we have hedged most of the amount for this year is around 107, calculated to the euro. And next year, we took the forward FX rates, which is usual also for this basis for the year. '25 and we calculate and give our guidance on a 119 FX rate. So 105, which was the beginning of the year [ 2019 ] is 13% up or, let's say, less sales yes, for the total amount. And of course, also an impact on the open position of 13% difference.

Taking to simplify the calculation, the EUR 1 billion on total sales, 30% loan position. So it's EUR 300 million, EUR 300 million multiplied with 13%. It's almost EUR 40 million. So let's say, it all impacts up and down more than EUR 30 million, which directly, of course, impact the EBITDA, yes. You receive less, that's a simple topic. And this is also part of the guidance. So we calculate that on a like-to-like basis, if you want to compare it to the old guidance of 250, let's try a bridge and the bridge was like 250 for 2026 based on an FX rate of 105 and more or less no tariffs. So if we compare this one, take the Energy segment out because this is not part of the guidance anymore. I reduced the remaining amount by the impact of the FX, which is around EUR 30 million. I reduced the remaining amount by around double-digit amount of tariffs, which we at least -- which we calculate all the security reasons in 2026, even so Aerospace is mostly excluded, but some supplier. So we end up on a like-to-like basis, 2024 guidance for 2026 and 160.

Now we show 185 which means we are EUR 25 million better than what we expected at the beginning of the year. And this, I guess, signals the strong position we are in. Well, saying differently in case the FX would be 15 to 107 again. And the tariffs on the supplies are coming not as strong as we expect for the guidance 2026 then we would end up with an EBITDA of 225.

Now coming to your last question, which is our hedging or hedging structure. We can't hedge for the next 10 years, times. What we can do is always to try best to mitigate the impact on the next year, which we do. And therefore, until the bigger loan position is creating we try to hedge naturally as good as possible. We try to increase this share, which is more or less in line with our local-to-local strategy. Therefore, I think that also for the future, with less impact on the loan position, which has to be hedged by financial instruments will remain, but not for the year 2026 yet. And the amount then is financially hedged as good as possible. So any time we see a good development below 119, which is the amount we calculate with for 2026. We try to hedge as good as possible our sales and therefore, the impact on the EBITDA. Hopefully, this explains.

We had already some positions hedged at the favorable development we had in the past few weeks at 115, 116 , but not all of the volume. And therefore, there's still some other positions. But there's already now a point part of the positive hedging impact affected and will not happen to influence our -- will happen to influence our EBITDA. Therefore, also with the guidance with those hedged amounts should be more than secure and even over to be overachieved in 2026.

Sorry, that's a complicated world in the meantime, concerning the changes of the FX. It was not as heavily audit on these topics in the past, but the industry changed. The industry changed concerning tariffs. Concerning more local to local, the industry changed concerning everything in the meantime, even Airbus, the European company everything to dollar. And therefore, also, we have to guide on that point.

The next question comes from Christian Bader from Zürcher Kantonalbank.

I've got 3 questions, and I'd like to do one after the other. So first of all, if I look at your guidance for this year, you talked about more than EUR 900 million after achieving EUR 712 million, which implies at least a turnoff of EUR 190 million. So while in the conference call, Kai said, that he was confident that in the fourth quarter, the turnover might be even higher than the third quarter. So this gets me to group revenue number of EUR 960 million. So why are you so guiding so conservatively or it seems so conservative?

Sorry, it was mostly impacted by the EBITDA we concentrated on the EBITDA concerning our statement. Hopefully, it doesn't have not misleading. So we expect a very strong EBITDA growth in the absolute and relative in the fourth quarter.

On the sales, we are a bit more conservative, but you're right, there's upside potential. Nevertheless, considering EBITDA, we think that we can more or less overachieve on a quarterly basis, most of our last quarter by far.

Okay. My next question has to do with, again, with the guidance for next year. Can you maybe comment whether you adapted guidance for 2026 is purely based on the existing backlog?

Of course, there are some POs, which are coming in, but I would say, 95% as everything else is not possible otherwise, it's based on the existing backlog. We do have -- you're right, the contracted sales basis, which is worth more than EUR 7 billion. What does it mean? We have contracts. We are more or less on exclusive terms for those parts, by fact, single source by those topics. So of course, we are dependent on the build rates or pull rates of those OEMs and Tier 1s, if they pull less to a certain extent. We have to digest it. Therefore, we are always a bit more conservative concerning certain assumptions also when we give our numbers. But everything else, yes, you're right. It's based on the present order backlog.

Just to confirm, is that 95% is based on the existing backlog?

Here, yes, there's some ups and downs, I would say, even up to 100%. Everything is based on contracts, but there are some points where there would like a bit more or some parts are missing from some other suppliers, and then we try to jump in.

Okay. I see. And my next question relates to the sale of the Energy segment. I mean you gave the percentages in terms of proceeds that you expect? What are the actual amounts of cash inflow that you expect or the total impact on the net debt would be for over EUR 200 million?

Of the total of the transaction we have shown on this 1 page of total [indiscernible] EUR 200 million.

Is that including the earn-out or excluding that earn-out?

It's including the earn-out. Here we have to be fair. It's including a certain amount of earn-out. As we said, taconites more than EUR 40 million, but this is in this case with EUR 40 million and this is including [indiscernible].

Okay. But you reported a cash outflow of EUR 51 million from the disposal in the third quarter now?

Yes. I said the net debt reduction is not shown. IFRS in this aspect is so it's not our invention, not as easy to read. But the cash flow shows only if the cash is going out cash, but it's not showing the cash flow, the net debt, which is reduced by also the transaction is the assets for disposal will also include some net debt position.

The next question comes from Beltran Palazuelo from DLTV.

I have a couple. First of all, regarding the aerospace capacity with, let's say, with a EUR 119, could you repeat what is the current capacity? And if I'm not wrong in October, you put a press release that you're increasing capacity of the sorter machinery. So just if we could know what is the maximum capacity? And when do you expect to reach it? That would be my first question.

I can take this. I can take this. I guess it's a quite easy one. we always said we are good for EUR 1.2 billion in terms of the installed capacity right now. It's an easy one to install further machines to increase even this capacity we have overall utilization right now, depending on the technology. I would say, in some areas around 85% and another area still at 70%. So still -- there's still room for further load for further volume. But this is where we are still in -- yes, this is still the volume we can produce.

So with your euro dollar change, maybe instead of 1.2, 1.1 -- so has this changed with the change in FX?

Yes, of course, there's a change in FX. Whenever the dollar is weaker, then of course, the revenue will also be influenced by it. But overall, I'd like to do the like-to-like comparison. And we said in all of the last earnings calls, we always mentioned it's around 1.2, maybe with additional machines, it's a little bit higher. And if you compare the like-to-like, it's still there.

Understood. And then my second question would be, you were talking about your integrated value chain. So my question would be how sustainable is your current competitive advantages? And then the second question would be, if you are long in dollar and maybe I suppose that some of your competitors maybe are not as long as in dollar terms? Let's say, the euro appreciation and your cost appreciation, does it erode your competitive advantages or not?

So the value chain is something we constantly optimize there's still room to move forward. So therefore, we think our competitive advantage is still quite huge. Please note, if you would start on a greenfield basis, right now, aerostructures investments you would not see any sales before in 7 years. It takes such a long time to install it, to get the certifications to apply for contracts than to industrialize. So it is a very long period of time.

Of course, the other companies don't sleep. They also try to mitigate this way that we optimize not maybe in the value chain, but mostly consulting base cost manufacturing footprint countries. But I guess our situation is extremely favorable, and there is a concentration of the suppliers to the OEMs anyway. So there's enough -- more than enough to share and here we're a very strong partnership position with more select different partnership discussions with the OEMs than competition. Concerning the FX, which you also mentioned that you're right in case you would be as a company completely in U.S. dollar naturally hedged completely. We would be, from the first claims, not having impact out of the FX, but you would have other issues.

So at the end, [indiscernible] out. So for instance, there were other issues concerning also maybe then tariffs or other areas where you don't have any more heavily impacted. So we don't think that we are -- in contrary, I think that in comparison to our European and worldwide acting competitors, we have a much higher local to local basis than many of them, therefore, also are higher chains and also percentage of natural hedging. And therefore, we think that we are quite good situated, but fill it impacts.

Great. Only 2 more. Sorry, about the questions. Regarding maybe M&A, it's great to see that you conservatively are guiding for a high single digit -- high double digit, let's say, net cash position for the end of '26, of course, if you buy a [indiscernible] a good point. So if you -- if I'm not wrong now, say that maybe your max capacity, you do not want to go maybe over time. And of course, if you buy something, which if you buy it, it's a U.S. dollar industry, you can buy it at a better multiple. So your firepower will be around EUR 500 million. What are your plans? What are you analyzing? It's good to see you in the next 12 months with a lot of firepower, but what are your plans? And if there's no plans, dividends, buyback if the stock were to...

Yes, we will proceed to -- we will proceed to propose as a management to the general assembly dividend for the year 2025 and therefore, to be paid out in 2026. We think it's feasible to at least propose it. And hopefully, it will be also decided. That's one aspect, but still it would leave us with a good cash position in the high firepower. What is it supposed to be used for. Yes, we are looking at M&A constantly. Also this year, we had, for instance, 2 larger targets where we quite put some effort into it.

But at the end, we didn't pull back -- we pulled back in terms of not letting us into a discussion to buy too expensive because we look at it, it must be always super highly accretive. Otherwise, we concentrate more on the second area, which is just to take over the workload and do CapEx, strategic CapEx. And right now, to give you a bit more guidance on that point. There are 2 topics, which we look very carefully right now for more strategic CapEx to integrate in certain areas in comparison to an M&A transaction. And I guess we will see this way or that way, something where we can show something to the market in the second half of 2026.

This is just the one point. For the EUR 500 million [indiscernible], I just received a letter from [indiscernible] from a bank which is signed by also the management of this large commercial bank, and they just said as they gave us the line of 500 million firepower for an EBITDA. So not the only one we see this firepower Montana Aerospace, and this was also printed in black-and-white also by a commercial bank to us. So we see the same that we have some firepower and we will do something with it.

Great. So maybe the last question. Now that you have a great balance sheet and it will look even better going forward. What will be, let's say, the cash interest in 2026 because it's quite puzzling to see year-by-year now that they're going to be in net cash, but let's say, the cash interest are high. Yes.

Yes, you're absolutely right. We count with around impact of EUR 10 million to EUR 15 million on this, yes. Still, you have to see, even if you're cash positive, then by the year's end. On a monthly basis quarter, you have to work with it. There's still some line which you need at the entities on a daily basis, cash pulling back and forth. So the count with a total interest rate of around EUR 10 million to EUR 15 million for the next year, also cash impacting the company. [indiscernible].

Ladies and gentlemen, due to time restrictions, that was the last question for today. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Michael Pistauer for any closing remarks.

I think there's a lot of questions and therefore, a lot of interest in Montana Aerospace. We're extremely proud and happy about it. We try our best also to outperform in the future. Now as an aerostructures only company, I guess to the evaluation of our development within our peers and our constant outperformance should be seen a bit easier, and we're looking forward to that one and hope to see and hear you in the next earnings call for the full year 2025.

Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing Chorus Call, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.