Voltalia Aktie

Good morning. This is the conference operator. Welcome, and thank you for joining the Voltalia Half Year 2026 Results Presentation. [Operator Instructions]

At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Robert Klein, Group CEO of Voltalia. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today for our 2026 half year results presentation. 12 months after the launch of SPRING, the first operational results of our transformation are becoming visible. In this period, we continue to simplify our organization, improve capital allocation discipline and reduce development costs while maintaining strong operational execution. In H1, most of our disposal processes have been launched. We also benefited from the recognition of historical curtailment compensation in Brazil, representing around EUR 29 million of EBITDA. And we continue also to progress with 438 megawatts commissioned and nearly 1 gigawatt of PPAs signed.

As a result, we confirm our 2026 EBITDA objective. However, we now expect a net loss for the full year 2026, including the second half, reflecting a marked significant than anticipated deterioration of items below EBITDA, particularly financial expenses, certain loss-making assets and transformation costs. Sylvine will provide more details in a few minutes on these factors and their expected impact on our full year results. Despite these challenges, SPRING remains fully relevant and the first benefits of the plan are already visible.

I will now take you through the key achievements in the first half, the initial outcome delivered by the transformation. Let's begin with today's agenda, then we will start with the key highlights from the first half of the year, including our recent operational and commercial progress. We will then review our 2026 financial results and explain the main factors behind our performance. Next, we will provide an update on the execution of SPRING, including progress on cost savings, portfolio refocusing, disposals and operational performance. Finally, we will look at our outlook for 2027 and beyond.

Let's start with the key highlights now. I will start then with one of Voltalia's key strengths, the long-term visibility of our Energy Sales business. We have around EUR 7 billion of secured revenues with an average remaining PPA life of 16.6 years. In addition, 79% of our revenues are indexed to inflation, which provides further protection. You see that secured revenues decreased from EUR 7.7 billion at the end of 2025 to EUR 7 billion. This mainly reflects the revenue recognized during the first half and our revised and more prudent assumptions, including curtailment. We also have a geographically balanced 12 gigawatt development pipeline and 3.6 gigawatts in operation or under construction. Our priority is now to improve the quality maturity in the pipeline rather than increasing its size. Together, these elements provide strong visibility and the solid foundations for disciplined and profitable growth.

Let me now turn to our recent commercial developments. This is our second pipeline, which is a continuing strength -- our strength on our commercial activities alongside the refocusing of our portfolio. Then we continue to convert our development pipeline into long-term contracted growth, as you can see, while applying stricter investment criteria, and this is important.

During the first half, we advanced around 1 gigawatt of PPAs mainly through 860-megawatt of REZA wind project in Egypt and new agreements signed in the U.K. and in Italy. In Brazil, you've been able to read on probably on the press that we made further progress on Pecem, one of our first projects in the data center sector. Indeed, after securing 322 megawatts of grid connection capacity in June, the project reached recently another important milestone with its approval under the Pecem Export Processing Zone framework. What does it mean? It means that this will allow the project to move to another key milestone, which is the tax incentives and which will make the project even more attractive.

Pecem also gives us the opportunity to combine our strong local presence with our energy expertise and explore how Voltalia could support the data center industry as an energy infrastructure partner. Of course, based on this first experience, we may gradually consider similar opportunities in Brazil and potentially in other countries. At the same time, our services businesses continue to grow with new contract for Renvolt and additional opportunities for Helexia. Somehow, this shows that SPRING is not about reducing our growth ambitions but it is about focusing our resources and investments on the opportunities that create the most value. And to capture these opportunities, of course, maintaining access to long-term financing remains a key priority.

Then on the third highlight, it shows our continued ability to attract long-term financing partners. The proposed partnership with IFC getting ready for up to EUR 120 million is a good example of that. Beyond the financing itself, it demonstrates the confidence of a leading international institution in Voltalia's strategy and project offering. This financing would mainly support large-scale projects in Uzbekistan, Egypt and Tunisia. And given the size of these opportunities, we also intend to bring in an equity partner at, of course, the appropriate stage. This will help us share the risk limit our capital exposure and also maintain a balanced portfolio. Together, these 3 highlights that I just commented show that Voltalia combines long-term visibility, strong commercial momentum and disciplined financing to support measured and sustainable growth.

Let me now hand over to Sylvine, who will present to you the 2026 half year results and the first evidence of the transformation. Thank you, Sylvine.

Thank you, Robert. Good morning, everyone. Let me begin with the headline performance for the first month. Turnover reached EUR 331 million, up 30% at constant exchange rate, while EBITDA rose plus 35% at EUR 110 million. At the same time, the quality of earnings required a balanced reading. The period includes Brazilian past curtailment compensation. We will revert to this point soon to give you more detail but first point is we've recorded EUR 29 million, which is more than what we budgeted, initially more than EUR 20 million, while resource availability transformation costs continue to weigh on the performance.

Consolidated net loss remained at EUR 40 million, which is flat compared to last year. Important point I'd like to highlight is the cash delivery improvement. Operating cash flow reached EUR 102 million, which is equivalent to 92% of cash conversion and the closing cash position increased to EUR 343 million, which is a raise from half of June '25 of EUR 108 million. What is the output of this slide is we do have a strong operational progress and we continue to apply a financial discipline to improve cash generation.

Let's now move to our business lines. So we will do a focus and a deep dive for main activity within Voltalia. Let me start with development. Our priority is clearly value through conversion over volume. We have refined the pipeline. Robert mentioned to 12 gigawatts with a tighter project selection, clear conversion threshold and more discipline of capital allocation. Financial effects and consequences are here visible. Point one, cash cost spend decreased by 32%, reaching EUR 30 million. Prospection fell by 23% to EUR 6 million. Headcount reached 293 people, which is more or less 14% less than prior period.

In addition to the project sales made over the first semester, development P&L operating impact is minus EUR 2 million, which is less than EUR 5 -- by EUR 5 million compared to previous period. These savings are not simply short-term reduction. It reflects the structural leaner operating model we are currently leading.

What's next? Let's have a look now on Voltalia Energy Sales. Thanks to new capacity, we've mentioned in South Africa, Uzbekistan, we -- a bit lower ramp-up than expected, but with now a full operation, we increased slightly the production by 1%, though we are still facing some challenges in Brazil and French Guiana.

One of them, curtailment in Brazil slightly decreased. And finally, we recognized the past compensation. As a result, the turnover increased by 29% to EUR 158 million, while EBITDA increased by 32%. It means we did improve EBITDA margin. Against this, wind resources and availability were weaker compared to prior periods, especially in Brazil, French Guiana biomass assets only restarted in May.

In second half of this year, the priorities are clear: restore availability, complete the ramp-up of the plants, which have been commissioned in the last months, maintain an operating cost control. The recovery levers are identified and delivery remains our main objectives.

Let's now have a look and focus on where we stand with the curtailment. Reduction in volume is a positive signal. You can see it on the chart, but it's too early to consider normalization of Brazilian operating environment. Part of the lower curtailment is mechanically linked to weaker production in Brazil, but we must separate curtailment related to grid effect from resources and availability effects.

Now regarding the accounting of the compensation. So we recognize the revenue and receivables in our books this year because we finally managed to get clear evidence of amount and agree with the administration about how much we can get as a recovery. It relates to past curtailments, September '23, November '25. It definitely supports our H1 figure, but we should not consider that this amount will be recurring in our books and we are still continuing negotiating for curtailment further November '25 to get compensation. Indeed, the effects of curtailment is different between EBITDA and net results. Why that? We have, actually, first of all, recognized some taxes related to this composition. And simultaneously, we did book an impairment of some of solar assets in Brazil because we reviewed our midterm assumptions in terms of curtailments and therefore, assume that the prudent approach was to decrease by around EUR 8 million the value of some solar assets in Brazil. Therefore, the effect of the curtailment compensation is by EUR 19 million on the net income.

Let's now move to another business line, Helexia. The growth is driven by dynamic European energy sales activity. Production increased by 12% to 323 gigawatt hours, turnover by 8% increased by EUR 32.5 million. It's broadly stable for the EBITDA, EUR 21 million. The challenge sits below EBITDA across the portfolio. European energy sales remain resilient, but services is not enough profitable. In Brazil, activity remained unprofitable. With an average project debt rising EUR 459 million, the cost of debt increased 56% to EUR 21.5 million. It reflects an environment of local interest rate increase.

Bear in mind that in Brazil, inflation index financing on assets are not yet for Helexia Brazil producing full capacity, so we do not have yet the revenue generation to absorb and repay the financial costs, which creates a discrepancy. We, therefore, accelerate, complete the commissioning plan and support with the restructuring plan to reverse the situation. The objective in Helexia is to continue to grow on the top line to improve the EBITDA to assume a cash discipline to get better returns.

Let's now move to Renvolt. For the first half, Renvolt increased by 45% to EUR 124 million turnover. EBITDA doubled to EUR 12.5 million. EBITDA margin, which is a real success, increased to 10%, which is the target 2030, which is already reached. Growth is supported by both construction and maintenance. We have more than 750 megawatts under construction for third-party clients, mainly in Europe. We operate more than 1.2 gigawatts under maintenance contract. The backlog stands at approximately EUR 300 million, which is equivalent to 2.3x last year 2025 turnover. It provides visibility. At the same time, we are protecting the quality of growth, reducing as much as we can monitor risk and monitoring warranty control. This is essential to convert the backlog in cash and secure our margin. Here, Renvolt is delivering a profitable growth with an increasing recurrence and visibility.

To wrap up, all what we've been through are here consolidated within our 2 segmental reporting, Energy Sales and Renvolt. We do also have the Hub, so you can see here that the group turnover reached EUR 331 million. Energy Sales represent 57% of the total, Renvolt 37%. At EBITDA level, Energy Sales contribute to EUR 116 million. All major businesses improved. Corporate cost stands at EUR 10.3 million and includes some transformation and M&A-related expenses. The group is benefiting from better performance in Energy Sales development and services, while underlying Helexia performance still needs to improve. Overall, EBITDA is up by 35%.

The earnings bridge does not stop at the EBITDA. So let's have a look on the bottom line. Moving below EBITDA, the first half net result reflects both the expansion of our asset base and the cost transformation. From EUR 110.3 million EBITDA, we have, in addition, depreciation and provision, which amounts to EUR 89 million. This includes the full year effect of recently commissioned assets for amortization and approximately EUR 10 million of impairment and regular guarantee provision linked to our regular activity of Renvolt. It also includes other operating items such as SPRING and Helexia restructuring costs.

Financial results stands at minus EUR 48.6 million. Increase is driven by higher average debt -- higher cost of average debt, which rose overall from 6.14% to 6.3%, which is partially explained by our South Africa and Brazil scheme of inflation index related to also revenues index. Taxes and other items represent minus EUR 11.9 million, mainly reflecting the Brazilian tax. This leads to a consolidated net result of minus EUR 39 million and minus EUR 43 million of net loss group share. What we can here conclude is that we do really have operational improvement, but challenges remain within the restructuring, the cash discipline and the financial recovery.

Let me now walk you through the financial balance sheet and structure of Voltalia. Our balance sheet is designed around long-term contracted nature of the asset base. Approximately 79% of the fixed assets are operating projects. Development assets represent the next source of earnings growth. Gross debt is predominantly project related. EUR 1.7 billion of project debt finance is the main part compared to EUR 945 million of corporate debt and EUR 70 million of shareholder loan. On interest rate exposure, 75% of the debt is fixed, hedged or inflation indexed, leaving only 25% as variable.

Most important, the project debt has an average maturity of 12.6 years versus 16.6 years of remaining PPA life. This positive duration gap provides structural protection and visibility. The average all-in cost is 6.3%, while the net leverage stands at 68%. So deleveraging remains a central priority for us. To sum up, long-dated contracted revenues support the financing model, but the capital discipline is now definitely to reduce the leverage.

Let's now have a look to the cash generation. From June '25 to June '26, we improved the cash position by EUR 108 million. Walking you through from December to June, what happened. So we started with a EUR 314 million cash, which has been improved, thanks to operating cash flow by EUR 102 million. While we did spend some CapEx -- total CapEx actually both for development and for our plants of EUR 139 million and get a net amount of additional financing of EUR 49 million. At the end of the period, our cash position improved to reach EUR 343 million of cash. This is another key example of the financial translation of the action plan we are now undertaking.

So let's now have a look looking forward on the remaining part of 2026. We are confirming our EBITDA 2026 objective from EUR 210 million to EUR 230 million. The first half provides a base of approximately EUR 109 million from development and energy sales, EUR 13 million from Renvolt and minus EUR 11 million from other activity together with corporate costs. We do expect from the second half of the year, the following contribution. Development and energy sales are expecting to contribute further EUR 105 million to EUR 120 million, supported by recently commissioned assets and improved availability plan on second half.

Renvolt expect to contribute within EUR 5 million to EUR 15 million through backlog conversion, as I mentioned it to you priorly, additional maintenance contracts as well. Other activity and corporate costs are expected to be in the range of minus EUR 10 million. The principal sensitivity remain resources and curtailment as well as the transaction timing of the M&A SPRING planning we are now working on. Therefore, the EBITDA target is supported by some key operating and intensified levers.

I will now address the items below EBITDA. We indeed revised the net result outlook for 2026. We expect a full year net loss, including in the second half despite maintaining the EBITDA target. Therefore, the change is driven by 3 factors below EBITDA. First, some loss-making activities, particularly Helexia Brazil. We continue to carry on high financial costs, while the commissioning and the full speed performance is not yet delivered and delayed and therefore, weighs on the net result. Second, the corporate debt remains temporarily higher, while the SPRING disposal program is implementing with a final target to reduce the net debt-to-EBITDA ratio. And third, we consider some impairment to reflect an overall prudent approach that we have to have a leaner and more performance company within the next month. This is a realistic reset, not a change in our ambition and not questioning the operational improvements we've already achieved and I shared with you this morning.

Let me close by summarizing the objectives for the full year '26. Our '26 operational and EBITDA objectives remain unchanged. We continue to target approximately 3.6 gigawatts in operation and construction, including around 3 gigawatts in operation. We also confirm a group EBITDA of EUR 210 million to EUR 230 million, including EUR 190 million to EUR 210 million from Energy Sales. At the same time, we are clear that the full year net result is now expected to be negative. Our response, our action plan is execution, discipline to continue to improve in all operational KPIs and complete the ramp-up of recent assets, conversion of backlog, reducing structural costs, delivery the planned disposal. These actions are central to SPRING to our objective to restore a sustainable profitability, stronger cash generation and progressive deleveraging. The overall message is we are confident in the operating fundamentals, combined with financial realism and a firm execution discipline.

I will now leave the floor back to Robert for the SPRING execution plan.

Thank you, Sylvine. Let me now give an update on SPRING. Then 1 year after its launch, Spring is now fully in execution and most actions are on track. We are moving from implementation to visible operational and financial effects as you've been able to see with Sylvine. We are starting to see the first recurring benefits through simplification, workforce optimization and stronger cost discipline. And at the same time, we are reinforcing financial discipline with closer cash monitoring, more selective CapEx, stricter portfolio decisions and clear focus, especially on deleveraging. And these benefits will build progressively as SPRING moves towards completion by the first half of 2027. But our objective goes beyond SPRING. We are building the Voltalia of tomorrow, a more profitable and focused company easier to understand with a clearer business model and positioning.

Now let me take you through concrete progress achievements across each SPRING work stream that you can see in the slide. On portfolio refocusing, we continue to concentrate on our core geographies. Five country exits were identified last year with 2 additional exits targeted by year-end. On workforce optimization, around 160 positions have already been addressed, representing approximately 80% of our targeted reduction program. More specifically in France, this affect around 100 positions, including 80 related to the completion of the social plan, what we call the PSE in French, in Brazil, around 40 positions and for each Portugal and the United Kingdom, around 10 positions.

On cost efficiency, we have already delivered EUR 16 million of recurring savings versus the first half of 2025 including EUR 12 million from development and prospecting activities alone. I will come back to illustrate that we are on track with our plan in the second focus on the next slide. About disposals, very important one. Most of the processes have now been launched and discussions are progressing with multiple counterparties. While we cannot and you will understand that we cannot disclose further details at this stage, we remain fully aligned with our objective of EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million for the first half of 2027. But clearly, at the same time, we are ready to be flexible on timing when needed to maximize value rather than compromise on price.

Finally, on performance improvements. We are moving from identification to delivery with early evidence already visible in the operational performance of some of our assets as well as Renvolt, which doubled its EBITDA in the first half of -- to reach EUR 2 million. Overall, we are making good progress on SPRING with concrete milestones across all areas of the plan. Then one of the first focus, the portfolio refocusing. Our priority is no longer to maximize the size of the pipeline. You know that already. It is to focus on the projects with the highest probability of conversion and strongest value creation potential.

As part of SPRING, we have thoroughly reviewed our development portfolio and introduced also a clearer maturity framework. This approach allows us to allocate capital more selectively and then, as a matter of fact, improve expected returns and as well reduce execution risk. It also helps us better serve a broader range of off-takers from utilities and governments through PPAs to corporate companies through what we call the CPPA, corporate PPA, including data centers.

At the same time, hybrid projects combining renewable generation and storage are taking a growing share of our pipeline, reflecting the increasing demand for flexible energy solution. Going forward, we will, of course, continue to present this development funnel, providing a clear view of our project maturity, conversion potential and future growth opportunities.

Next point regarding the savings. We are ahead of plan. Let's take a moment to explain where we stand. In first half of 2026, we delivered EUR 16 million of recurring savings compared with H1 2025. This is around 60% more than transformation costs of the same period, which was EUR 10 million. It is also important to remember that transformation costs are temporary, while those savings are recurring and will continue to improve our cost base going forward.

Now, to compare our performance with our original target, we need, of course, to use the same baseline 2024. On this basis, we have already achieved then EUR 21 million of savings for 6 months on the base of 6 months, EUR 18 million from development and prospecting and EUR 3 million from structural costs. And I can say that overall, we are generating savings faster than expected. And this gives us, of course, confidence in our ambition of reaching the EUR 45 million of average annual recurring savings between '26 and '30. I remind you, EUR 35 million from development and prospecting and EUR 10 million from structural costs.

And moving now to our last focus, performance. Let me highlight an important point regarding our 2030 Energy Sales EBITDA margin target to go from 70% to 72%. The improvement will come from 2 complementary sources. First, our existing operating portfolio, where we are working on production and availability, revenue recovery, cash generation and cost efficiency. Second, new power plants entering into operation with structurally higher margins. Then on our existing fleet, these actions are already delivering results, and it will be improved month after month.

For example, we have reduced operation and maintenance as well as asset management costs in Greece and in Brazil as well as solar insurance costs of some of our assets. Altogether, and already -- those initiatives already represent around EUR 2.7 million of annual savings. And we are only at the beginning. As we are progressively -- we progressively roll out those initiatives across our geographies, it's obvious that the impact will continue to grow over time.

Moving now to our medium-term outlook. The targets, of course, are supported by 4 key drivers: the contracted visibility, the asset performance, SPRING savings and financial discipline. 2026 is the first step towards, as Sylvine mentioned, stronger performance in 2027 and towards, of course, our 2030 margin and leverage objectives. Our focus remains the same, building a more profitable, cash disciplined, resilient growth model with development and IPP at the core. We are concrete.

Now let's come to our 2027 and 2030 objectives. First, our 2027 operating and EBITDA objectives remain unchanged. We continue to target around 4.2 gigawatts in operation and construction, including 3.7 gigawatts in operation. We also confirm our EBITDA target of EUR 300 million to EUR 325 million, including EUR 270 million to EUR 300 million coming from the Energy Sales.

Looking further ahead, our 2030 objectives also remain unchanged, around 5 gigawatts in operation and construction, 70% to 72%, as I mentioned earlier, of Energy Sales EBITDA margin improvement -- and 9% to 11% improvement for Renvolt margin and net for the deleveraging, a net debt to EBITDA of 7.5 to 8x. These targets, of course, are supported by SPRING with building stronger asset performance and of course, our disposal program, so important for progressive deleveraging. However, as I mentioned earlier, on disposals, we want to maximize value rather than compromise on price, and this may result in some transactions taking more time than initially planned. For this reason and given the uncertainty on the timing on disposals, we are suspending and only suspending our positive net result objective for 2027 as well as a related, of course, dividend objective for 2028.

This is only a prudent decision. It does not change our direction or our operating or our EBITDA ambitions. Let me now conclude with our key priorities for execution. And this is the final slide. Let me conclude with 4 clear messages. First, 1 year into SPRING, the transformation is delivering operational tangible results, a lower cost base, a simpler organization, stronger operational performance, supported by a better governance. Second, we are refocusing our business model. Development is becoming more selective. We are improving the performance of our assets, and we are more disciplined in our capital allocation.

Third, financial discipline remains at the center of our execution. Of course, we continue to secure project financing, strengthen liquidity and develop strategic funding options as you've seen -- you've been able to see with the proposed partnership with IFC. Despite improving -- as you've been able to see today, despite improving operational performance, we now expect a net loss in 2026. This is obviously not satisfactory. It reflects the pressures below EBITDA and shows that our transformation is not yet complete. However, this does not change the direction of Spring. On the contrary, it reinforces the need to continue and accelerate the transformation, particularly on cash generation, disposals and therefore, deleveraging.

And this brings me to my final message, our priorities to turn SPRING progress into sustainable value creation. This means delivering our 2026 priorities, executing our disposal program and of course, progressively deleveraging the company. Of course, we remain prudent on the pace of the transition, but our ambition remains clear to make Voltalia a top performer with profitability discipline and execution as our key priorities.

Thank you very much for having been there for this presentation and listening to us. We are now ready to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions] The first question is from Arthur Sitbon of Morgan Stanley.

I have 2. The first one is, I was wondering, you mentioned a few reasons, but I was wondering what is the main driver really of the cut on net income expectations for 2026 because that cut is, I understand, at least EUR 40 million, and it happened just in a month, basically from end of July when you did the trading statement to now. Is it that some sales processes are going less well than expected and maybe before you assumed some capital gains linked to that and now you assume some impairments because I struggle to see how the higher debt could be so meaningful to lead to more than EUR 40 million of negative impact. That's the first part of the question on the guidance.

The second one is on 2027. What is exactly leading to the suspension of the target because the time line of your disposal plan doesn't seem to have changed. So is it also linked to expectations of impairments versus capital gains on disposals? And the second question on a totally different topic. On the Pecem data center project, I was wondering if you could provide a bit more detail on what will be Voltalia's role exactly? Will you basically just build the power plant and sell the electricity via PPA? Or is there also the monetization of some powered land, some grid connection that could take place and lead to development gain?

Okay. We'll leave Sylvine for the first 2 questions, and I will take the third one. Sylvine.

Yes. Thank you, Arthur, for your questions. So first of all, coming back to the results to be negative in '26 and the main reason why. What I was striving and explaining is that [indiscernible] 1 is structurally in Voltalia net result negative due to the seasonality effect, point one. Point two, indeed, we have a negative impact, which is linked to nonprofitable activity. I mentioned in the presentation, for instance, Helexia Brazil is definitely negatively weighing on our net results. The point and the reason why -- and you will say why it was not anticipated, the fact is that in Brazil, you do have a delay Helexia Brazil in the delivery of the commissioning of the plant, which, therefore, do not generate as much as we planned expected operating cash flow and therefore, it has an impact on our P&L.

So the second question is, in this case, why you did not mention and why you didn't share that point earlier within the year. The reason is the following. At the time of the Q2 publication in July, the information available in the progress of the disposal plan still supported the assumptions of sufficient contribution for 2026. So this is the main reason why in July, we did not mention. So to answer question is the main driver, it's nonprofitable activity due to delay in commissioning, which is part of it. Second of all, it's the reason why we mentioned it now, it's because of the combined impact of all the expectation and the targeted, especially in terms of disposal plan, which make us sure that we have to indicate not positive result for 2026.

Then second point is why do we suspend '27 net result? The fact is, as you mentioned, we do have a disposal program, the SPRING disposal program, which is expected to provide us a total cash in of EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million. We actually did launch a lot of actions projects, which are now underway. They are either in Phase 1 or we even received some NBO and are processing now the opening data room and are expecting by the end of the year, some binding offer. What we want to do is to select and to take the best projects, I would say, of disposal, which creates the more value for the company and which are the better for the company restructuring plan.

Having said that, it means that -- and everyone knows that M&A is quite difficult to predict. We consider that instead of telling you now an amount and then in 6 months to say we have a positive impact because of this transaction and then a negative impact with another transaction, there are 2 big volatilities linked to the M&A program that we preferred to suspend and to inform you once we deliver each of the disposal program. So this is the main reason why instead of giving some indication which may change, we preferred to say, okay, let's freeze, and once we have more visibility, we share with you. So that was for question 1 and 2. And as for the last one, I hand over to Robert.

Yes. Thank you for the question. Indeed, this is what you mentioned this. We've been working for a long time together with other competitors in this location, which is a very good location in Brazil for data center because there is possibility to take advantage of the arrival of fiber optic cables, especially Pecem or close to Pecem. And our role is developing the project, securing the connection, securing the land, the permitting, et cetera, in order to monetize indeed this project. But not only we want to be an energy infrastructure partner, also supply the energy, thanks to the pipeline we have in Brazil, especially with wind projects, which are ready to build.

And basically, it's both monetizing the development activities we've been doing so far in that very specific place and negotiating and signing corporate PPAs with those data centers that will require a lot of energy in order to be able to run. And in Brazil, it's been now reconducting an incentive -- tax incentive program, and we just had the output -- the outcome that we are eligible to this tax incentive program that will allow us to show very competitive projects towards colocators or hyperscalers, et cetera.

So just to follow up, to be entirely clear on that one, you will be linked to the data center project. You will be generating EBITDA linked to the sale of electricity via PPA at some point when the data center comes online, but you will also generate EBITDA coming from the sale of a site or just from a PPA?

From both. This is what I said, monetizing then all the development activities to sell the projects and hopefully profitable with an EBITDA generation and also EBITDA generation through the PPAs once the data center will start operation, and we will start also generating electricity on both is our expectations. This is the aim of the project...

[Operator Instructions] The next question is from Philippe Ourpatian of ODDO BHF.

I have several ones. One is a follow-up concerning Arthur's questions on Pecem. How are you treating this deal because it's a little bit particular. Are you including it in the divestments, means including the EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million you're expecting or is considered as operating means EBITDA for the PPA, I could understand that. But the land disposal would be treated as nonrecurring as a business, which is including the divestment or not? That's my first question.

The second question is concerning the curtailment. You were mentioning at some point a target of EUR 36 million some months ago. Where we are currently? What is your last estimation of the impact on the full year basis? And two other questions are mainly linked to the losses. Could you just help us to figure out what's going to be the landing point? Because you mentioned that financial charges are going to be higher linked to what you mentioned concerning the level of debt in Brazil. Could you just help us to have a rough figure what could be the Q2, I would say, impact of that?

And also concerning the net losses, are we -- do we have to take almost the double of H1 for the full year? And last point is concerning the guidance, [ '26 ] in terms of EBITDA. The EUR 29 million are included. What is today your estimate of this compensation level in a full year basis as you are still working on that? Do we consider that the EUR 29 million is already achieved, I mean and we may have more than that? Just in order to have an idea about where we have to land?

I will take the first one and Sylvine will take the other ones. No, the answer is no to your first one. Actually, we consider Pecem as business as usual as we are developing projects, it could be energy projects and now it could be data center projects as an infrastructure energy partner. Then it's not included in the EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million divestment as you asked me. Then it's, let's say, considered as if we were selling a ready-to-build solar or wind project like we -- it's part of our business model every year. Sylvine?

Yes. So Philippe, as for your questions -- as for the curtailment, as Philippe mentioned, the amount you mentioned is the one which was budgeted curtailment '26 without any kind of compensation. So we do, and this is what we are trying to reflect that we noticed and we can recognize that there is a step-by-step year-on-year, a slight decrease in percentage of the curtailment, for this period compared to the prior period. So we assume that this amount will continue to decrease. And we have no -- as per target in terms of curtailment for 2026 and what we budgeted, we are in line and we have no deviation for 2026.

One point is that it weighs a little bit more compared to our budget because we did the budget with BRL 7 exchange rate, while we are now a bit more than BRL 6 per euro. So it weighs a little bit in our group contribution. Financial cost, cost of financing, we expect not a significant increase for the second half. I would say the percentage, which I presented 6.3% will be maybe slightly increased, but not very significantly. So this is going to be narrowed on H2 compared to H1.

In terms of net loss, so indeed, we have a group loss of minus EUR 40 million at the end of H1. We do have two things to consider here. The first one is our run activity. And the second part is the net result impact of the divestment plan. So as for our running activity, as I was explaining what weighs on our P&L, it's this nonprofitable activity, and we indeed do not expect to go further that the loss of the first -- the one that we had for the first semester. Having said that, I put a caveat. I know it's not comfortable, but I'm sharing you also what is the day-to-day life within Voltalia saying we have a big program of investments.

We have some potential significant profit from this program, some of them which are not profit that can be lost, depending when they will happen, and this creates the volatility I mentioned. So I just put this note, which is important. And then the last question, I think, was the EUR 29 million. So we do not expect any further compensation related to this period or any future period for this year. We are still strongly having discussions, but not anything to be booked within the year.

[Operator Instructions] The next question is from Juan Rodriguez of Kepler Cheuvreux.

I have two follow-ups from my side, if I may. The first one is on the disposal program that you signaled and the ongoing discussions for it. I want to better understand why is the difference in the timing that you've seen what you initially expected a year ago is mainly on the asset review on your side and the impairment charges that you've been having some assets is mainly on investor interest and the expected valuation that you're going to get. I want to better understand this timing change.

And the second one is on the 2027 EBITDA guidance that is confirmed. Are you including any curtailment compensation for this guidance that you are including for 2026? The second is, what are your curtailment assumptions given that 2026 curtailment slightly above what you expected? And the third one is, are any disposals effects included on EBITDA? Or is it going to be mainly below EBITDA in 2027?

Thank you, Juan. I will take the first one, maybe Sylvine can take the second one. Basically, it's regarding our disposal plan, it's roughly what you said, and it's pretty diverse actually the reasons of taking more time. Sometimes it's because the process takes more time because it's a bit more complex than we were expecting. On the other cases, basically, we prefer to take more time in order to be able to maximize the price then this is what I said during the presentation. And that's the reason why we could have an offset of planning in terms of asset disposal program.

Second question, Juan was about the assumption for 2027 EBITDA. So we did not book any potential compensation in our 2027 target in respect of curtailment for -- in our plan. And the third question, which is about disposal, indeed, most of them will impact below EBITDA because it's not a sale of assets, but it's mainly sale of activity, business lines. So it's going to be below EBITDA.

And a follow-up, if I may, what are your curtailment assumptions on your budget?

Yes. Sorry, I forgot that one. I apologize. For the budget 2027, the amount is estimated to be EUR 20 million. Just to give you an overview, this amount is below the one of 2026, but is actually in line with what we anticipated and when we build our P&L because then after we expect 2027 to decrease again a little bit. And when now we reviewed our curtailment assumption, you've heard I explained that we booked an impairment of EUR 8 million on some solar assets in Brazil because we reviewed mid long-term assumption for curtailment. So we assume that in a normalized environment where we will still have some curtailment at least for the discrepancy between offer and demand, we do rely on a 5% to 10% curtailment, just to give a clear indication about short-term, long-term vision.

There are no more questions registered on the conference call at this time. Back to you for any written questions.

Let's move now to the question from the platform. Let me read it now. So there are several questions related to divestments. So I will maybe select several of ones. This one is, could you update us about the divestment plan? Have you confirmed the EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million target and about the planning?

Then this is what we said earlier with the question we had. Basically, we have launched already most of the process for the asset disposal program. Then we are -- we have received some [indiscernible]. We are negotiating with the counterparties, the data rooms are being opened or are going to be opened in some cases. And that's the reason why we expect closing those deals on the first half of 2027. Unfortunately, we cannot at this stage, and you will understand for the best of the price of the processes, we cannot disclose precisely what are the operation in progress. But I mean, a big team is dealing with that, and we're having quite a lot of progress. But there is a matter of timing, as I answered to Juan just earlier, where basically we may take some more time for some of the transactions in order to get the best price as it's usual in an M&A process.

I have a question from CIC, from Emmanuel. One question related to, keep going on divestment plan. The question about Helexia. You highlighted Helexia performance, which is weaker than expected, particularly in Brazil and in services. Could this be a candidate for divestment under the SPRING plan?

Well, as I mentioned before, we cannot at that stage, disclose the transactions that basically, you have to do your own mind about what are the candidates that we are thinking about. But indeed, we are looking at all the options, including, of course, Helexia. But as Sylvine mentioned during the presentation, it's a matter of the performance of Helexia, which is not in line with our expectation on the first half in 2026 is really related about the offset from the financing and the generation of revenues, the high cost of financing and some delays on the commissioning of the plants.

Additional question from CIC, Emmanuel Chevalier. In your target of EUR 120 million EBITDA for Energy sales in the second half year of the year. Have you made any further assumptions regarding compensation related to curtailment in Brazil? And same question applies to 2027 targets.

Yes. Actually, I think we covered it, but better to repeat. So indeed, we do not expect any additional compensation in the second half of this year, and we did not build our 2027 target of -- with any compensation of curtailment. We have included EUR 20 million of curtailment cost, but no curtailment compensation in 2027.

In addition, it's worth saying that it's not because we have not considered any compensation, further compensation in 2026, 2027 and later on is that we are giving up. We are still together with associations fighting in order to be able to recover at least part of the losses due to the curtailment and still actively participating to the negotiation with the government in order to recover it.

And I can see a final question related to leverage. Without significant divestments, what is the projected financial leverage at the end of the year? So the targeted leverage for Voltalia, we said it since we launched the SPRING. We have to deleverage and we will deleverage through the disposal program. So to improve the net debt-to-EBITDA ratio, we are improving operation. And I hope I convinced you by showing how operating cash flow improved for the period, and we continue working on that, point one. But the main driver is definitely the disposal program.

So this really, again, and I know that to plan, and this is also our goal to have the best view what will happen in 2026, what will happen in 2027. But between 2026 and 2027, thanks to this disposal plan, it will also decrease the leverage of the group.

Additional to the question of CIC, related to development and IPP and specifically IPP activity. A question from Nicolas Royot, the EBITDA contribution of IPP related to H2 seems conservative given the higher contribution of recent assets, seasonality and recovery expected of availability. Did you expect higher curtailment? And/or do you expect also restructuring cost and impairment expected in H2?

Actually, you cannot consider that we are going necessarily to double the EBITDA in the first half is considering the EUR 29 million, which will not happen again on the second half. And we have considered the seasonality effect on the second half to reflect, let's say, a higher normalized EBITDA. It means without further curtailment compensation. We are not considering any degradation on the curtailment on the second, and we are not necessarily very prudent regarding -- I mean we are realistic regarding the generation of electricity on the second half and then, and therefore, the generation of EBITDA.

Let's move to a question related to divestment. [ Thomas Fitterer ] asked about the disposal plan under SPRING. Are you planning to sell assets by region? Or will you try to sell everything in a small number of transactions, one or two portfolio of assets to one or two buyers. Also, are your discussion mainly with financial buyer or utilities?

Well, it's a large question actually. And regarding -- considering the large disposal program that we have, I mean, most of what you said is forecasted. Actually, we have -- we prefer, of course, to reduce the number of transactions because it's less work to be done in order to conduct all those processes. But in some cases, for instance, the exit of the country, of course, we prefer to sell the platform rather than selling assets by assets. Obviously, it could create more value at the same time, less work and less cost in order to be able to conclude those transactions. Then really, it depends case by case according to the objects and according to the market, according to the appetite of the market. Then we have several configurations here. And you asked the potential buyers, also, they are diverse. It could be funds, it could be platforms, could be utilities. I mean, and depending, of course, of the disposal we are talking about.

I can see that I didn't ask the final part of the question of Nicolas Royot. Are you accounting for restructuring cost and impairment expected in H2 2026 additionally? So aside from our disposal program, no, we do not expect significant impairment expected in H2 in the way that what we were saying before, if we have to impair some assets within a sale process, we will reflect it in our books depending on the value creation. But apart from that part, there are no major impairment expected. We have also a question related to the market condition related to raising debt.

What is the market currently? Is it difficult? Bearing in mind that in parallel, the upcoming financing with the IFC gives you more flexibility?

So I would say the overall environment for any company in the market is facing increase of interest rates. So as we do in Voltalia, and we are an infrastructure company with a balance sheet structure with an amount of debt, which is, therefore, important and which is drawing the attention. What I'd like to remind, and this is something we try to message to convey to you is that we do have within our debt, I would say, two types of debt because we have, on one hand, the project debt which is the one and it's 62% of our debt, which is the one linked to our PPA, long-term revenues. We negotiate at the beginning before the construction, then we fixed, we hedge or we index the interest and then the life is moving on, I would say, of that debt. So this is really something which is frozen at the moment we contract.

And on the other hand, we have the rest of the debt, which is supporting financing our development and activity. So for sure, we are now controlling and indeed optimizing the cash flow generation of our operations to reduce the net debt-to-EBITDA ratio because the higher net debt-to-EBITDA ratio I have, the less favorable, I would say, condition I can capture. So we do have some debt indeed, we are negotiating. We have some loans which are expiring, extending. We are having always some negotiations. Things are going. But indeed, you're right, the environment makes it at a higher cost than it used to be in two to three years.

And finally, for the IFC. So to make it clear, the IFC it's really one of the milestone of SPRING. So the IFC project is a partnership with a financial and international institution to co-invest in equity in some emerging countries that Robert mentioned to support and to share risk and rewards, I would say, and to do bigger projects in sometimes some country which could weigh too much in our balance sheet. So it diversify actually with a partner, a long-term partner. And this is really what we want to develop and to continue to do in SPRING. So it's a co-partnering in investing in our equity for our energy sales activity, solar activity.

And the last question I can see from Allinvest, Claire Meilland. Regarding the depreciation, you mentioned depreciation following the impact of curtailment in certain assets. Does this mean we should expect structural depreciation going forward?

The answer is no. Now I will explain why. What we've done, we said, okay, now we have finally negotiated, reached the agreement and hopefully collected compensation more than we expected. But we need also on a regular basis to review whether our assumptions in terms of curtailment were too much optimistic compared to how it's moving on or too much prudent. We've run a full review of our Brazilian assets, full. We did some technical impairment discounted cash flow forecast, and we end up with some impact for this solar plant.

Why? Because if you remember, we mentioned it, maybe it was 1 year ago, the curtailment does not affect the same way a wind plant, a solar plant and so on. So solar were more affected. And this is the reason why that by doing -- working on the scenario, we feel it's more prudent to adjust the value of this asset hopefully, I cannot predict the future, but hopefully, with the information we have in mind with the midterm, I would say, 5 years' time, 5% to 10% curtailment, I would say, in a more regular environment, stable environment. So we are not saying there will be no more curtailment. We are saying there will be, but at a lower cost and maybe some misbalance, between offer and demand, we expect the 5% to 10%. And reflecting this in our discounted cash flow end up with one impairment that we booked in Q2.

And just to complete, we say 5% to 10%, is because also there could be some curtailment, which could be different if it's a solar plant or a wind plant according to the moment those assets could generate energy.

Thank you, everybody. I think we can move to the conclusion, Robert?

Well, you can say [ Roby ] as well. People call me [ Roby ] or Robert, it's the same. First of all, I'd like to thank you for attending that presentation. Thank you so much for those questions. As you've seen, I'm not going to repeat my further conclusion, but hopefully, we've been able to show you that the transformation actions are ongoing, and we start to see and to measure some of the effects, even if there are still some way and some actions to be done.

The teams also it's important to talk about the team. They are more and more confident about the path we are going towards. They understand every time more about not only the needs that they have understood already some time ago when we started the transformation project. But now they see -- while they see some of the results, they feel, of course, they're every time more confidence.

Of course, everyone, and we are the first disappointed about the perspective of the expectation of negative net results but it does not affect the fact that we still -- we believe on the effects and on the improvement of the operational performance very soon on the financial performance. There are, yes, some possible offsets regarding asset disposal that we mentioned earlier. But what I would say is that we are on the right track, and I hope we've been able to show that to you. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over, and you may disconnect your telephones and your devices.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Voltalia 2025 Full Year Results. The call will be structured in 2 parts. First, a presentation by the Voltalia Group management team represented by Robert Klein, CEO. Afterwards, there will be a Q&A session. [Operator Instructions].

I will now hand over to the speaker. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. I am Robert Klein, and I am pleased to present Voltalia's 2025 annual results, together with our CFO, Sylvine Bouan. Before we start, let me briefly outline the structure of today's presentation. First, we will look back at 2025 with a short overview of the year and the key operational and financial highlights. Second, we will provide an update on our SPRING transformation plan. We will share the progress achieved during 2025, the first concrete actions implemented across the group and what we expect as we move towards 2026.

Finally, we will conclude with our short and medium-term market environment that continues to evolve rapidly. We will explain how Voltalia is adapting its strategy to this changing context and how the transformation underway will support our future growth and profitability. Sylvine will notably provide more detailed insights on our financial performance and key indicators, while myself, I will focus more specifically on the strategic developments, the transformation of the group and also our perspectives for 2026 and beyond.

With that, let me start with a quick look back at 2025 and the main highlights of the year. The KPIs that you can see illustrate the dual challenge we faced in 2025, maintaining operational delivery in a demanding environment while executing the structural adjustments required to strengthen Voltalia's long-term performance.

First, we achieved our objective in terms of capacity with 3.6 gigawatts and our EBITDA target with EUR 211 million. Production increases by 4%, but remained below the 5.2 terawatt hour target due to higher-than-expected curtailment in Brazil. Our cash from operations reaches EUR 212 million, showing a resilient level of our operations.

Finally, the Group reports a net loss for the year. While this result reflects the challenges faced in 2025 and the ongoing transformation, it also allows us to reset on a healthier basis, address structural issues and move forward with a clearer and stronger foundation for the future. In short, 2025 was a year of transition, a year with operational tensions, yes, but also a year where we took decisive actions to transform the company.

Let me now take a step back and look at the evolving market environment because staying relevant today requires solid positioning and the capacity to perform in an increasingly complex market. Curtailment and negative prices are now more frequent in countries where renewable penetration is high. Permitting is also longer and more difficult, which favors developers with strong local experiences and good execution.

And in many markets, public support is decreasing, meaning more projects now need to rely on real market fundamentals. Projects themselves are also changing, hybrid solutions with storage are becoming more common. They help stabilize the grid and increase the value of our assets. And global trade dynamics are shifting. U.S. tariffs, for instance, on Chinese projects are pushing more equipment towards other markets, which somehow improves access to competitive prices for energy producers like us.

Despite these market challenges, 2026 is expected to be another record year of renewables after 2025 established record level with 685 gigawatt commissioned. So overall, the market is still attractive, but it is still more demanding. We've been talking about renewable market competitiveness. Here is a slide showing the evolution of CapEx, wind, solar and storage. After more than a decade of continuous decline, we can see that solar equipment prices have stabilized and slightly rebounding due to recent policy measures in China.

But even with this adjustment, solar remains at historically low cost levels. At the same time, battery storage costs continue to decrease rapidly, reinforcing the shift towards hybrid and flexible solutions. Wind for its part has now reached a more stable cost plateau after years of efficiency gains with Chinese manufacturers now strengthening their position worldwide and not only in China. Overall, costs remain very competitive, especially for solar and storage. This shows that the fundamentals of the sector are still strong even if projects are now more complex and more connected across technologies, regulation and grid needs.

So in this market environment, what did Voltalia deliver? Moving now to our operational highlights. In 2025, we continued to expand our asset base with 408 megawatt commissioned and 305 megawatts announced in construction, bringing our total capacity in operation and construction to 3.6 gigawatt. Beyond the pure capacity increase, what is particularly important is the progressive rebalancing, on the right side you can see it, of our geographical exposure.

Historically, Latin America has been a major contributor to Voltalia's portfolio, and it now represents around 46% of our installed capacity. Europe 38%, and Africa and International 16%, which will increase in the future. Overall, this evolution shows that our growth is becoming more balanced with gradual diversification by region and by technology.

Now focusing on the new opportunities, the future that we are building for the next phase of growth. Since 2025 and early '26, we have been signing new long-term contracts to fuel future growth. More than 400 megawatts then have been secured with governments and utilities. We are also continuing to sign contracts with corporate clients across Europe through our business unit, Helexia. At the same time, we are building the future with additional MOU for large-scale storage projects, especially in Uzbekistan.

As for our development activity, it has been reshaped through the SPRING plan. In 2025, we started to streamline our development pipeline, focusing on project maturity and capital discipline to raise the overall quality of our portfolio. This approach already led to a better use of our development resources and EUR 13.8 million reduction in development costs compared with 2024, bringing them down to EUR 79 million. And this development cost reduction will accelerate in 2026.

As a result, our development pipeline reached 2 gigawatts at the end of December '25, representing a 30% decrease compared with 2024. This evolution reflects the first concrete actions taken under the SPRING plan with write-off of less attractive projects. At the same time, we continue to create value through selective project sales with a total of 101 megawatts sold or presold in 2025.

Now let me move to our service activities. In '25, services grew by 69%. Most of this growth came from external clients who now represent the majority of the activity for both construction and maintenance. In maintenance, we have already passed our 2027 target, reaching 8.7 gigawatts operated for third-party clients.

I will now hand over to Sylvine to go through the 2025 financial results, and I will come back. Sylvine, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Robert. Let me share with you the key financial highlights for 2025. Starting with turnover, Voltalia recorded a 16% increase at constant exchange rate, reaching EUR 588 million. This growth was driven by services for third-party clients. As Robert mentioned earlier, EBITDA reached EUR 211 million, in line with our target. EBITDA remains stable compared to prior year, reflecting the resilience of our operating activities.

As for the net result, the Group recorded a net loss of EUR 128 million, out of which EUR 103 million reflects exceptional impact. I will walk you through in detail in a few slides. Eventually, our financial structure, our cash flow from operations stands at EUR 212 million, which represents almost 50% of our investment cash flows in '25. Our net debt-to-EBITDA ratio stands at 10.3 compared to 9 last year. Deleveraging is our target for 2026.

I will now zoom in on the main financial drivers of the year. Starting with operational performance. What are the main components driving us from 2024 to 2025 EBITDA? The Energy Sales activity benefited from a EUR 7 million volume effect, while the price effect decreased by EUR 25 million. First, it's explained by the volume impact. So what composed the volume, commissioning of new plants, better resources, especially in Brazil. However, on the other hand, we had availability below expectation due to maintenance works performed during the year and a shutdown of our biomass plant we mentioned during the year in French Guiana besides the perimeter change with the full year effect of the asset disposed in France in 2024.

As for price effect, while we had a negative impact due to the early generation revenues that we gained in '23 and in '24 in Albania and in France, we benefited from our inflation index PPA, especially in Brazil. Development activity, so it increased by EUR 6 million. It combined both, an additional contribution from asset disposal and the lower prospection costs. Renvolt is the new brand name of our construction and maintenance business unit continues to develop third-party activity, thanks to which EBITDA contribution increased by EUR 10 million.

Voltalia Hub, it includes other business units such as Triton activity, Helexia Services. Triton activity commissioned its plant in French Guiana in October while Helexia Services is back to a positive contribution to EBITDA. This explains the increase during the year. Finally, before the variation of curtailment effect, we ended up with an EBITDA of EUR 217 million.

Speaking about curtailment, let's take a short stop to share last news. To remind you, curtailment occurs when the grid operator requires producers to temporarily stop injecting electricity into the grid, though the plant is technically able to generate. In 2025, Voltalia experienced 1 terawatt hour of curtailed production in Brazil, representing around 23% of its production above the initial expectation.

The main reasons of the gap were Brazilian grid operator, ONS has adopted a very conservative approach to ensure system stability. The booming of the distributed generation capacity created a bottleneck of the transmission grid. And last, our expectation to get more visibility in the third quarter and finally later in 2025.

Where do we stand? We continue actively participating in renewable energy working groups to lobby reducing curtailment and obtaining compensations. On the regulatory side, it's worth noting that we reached an important progress with the adoption of a new law released finally in November, allowing compensation for past curtailments related to grid reliability. Current estimates made by the Brazilian operator represent more than EUR 20 million of potential compensation for Voltalia.

In the meantime, Voltalia remains fully committed with stakeholders and authorities finding long-term solutions and mitigating the operational future curtailments.

Let me walk you through our development and Energy Sales activity. Starting with Energy Sales from an operational standpoint, the production increased by 4%, driven by 16% increase in installed capacity. At constant exchange rate, turnover of Energy Sales declined by 8% to EUR 316 million with an estimated average price of EUR 64 per megawatt compared to EUR 76 last year. This mainly relates to the early generation production I mentioned before despite a higher production and higher better resources.

Importantly, our price visibility overall remains very strong, indeed, with 77% of expected future revenues secured through long-term power sales contracts, most of which is indexed to inflation.

Turning to development. First, prospection costs, they decreased by EUR 3 million during the year. In addition to that, I'd like to mention that the total cash spent on development of projects decreased by EUR 14 million down to EUR 79 million in 2025. This decrease reflects our refocusing on maturing the pipeline rather than fueling the pipeline. The pipeline now stands at 12 gigawatts.

Moving to EBITDA from Energy Sales and development activity. As you can see on the slide, it amounts to EUR 203 million, down 8% with an EBITDA margin of 64%, slightly above last year, thanks to a close monitoring of costs, out of which the EBITDA from development reaches EUR 16 million, up 63%, driven by continuous asset disposal, including 3 operating assets, which were -- for which we sold and services were attached related to the sale.

Though we are hit by negative effects, 2025 demonstrates solid operational execution and long-term visibility on revenues. Having a look now to Renvolt, which includes Construction and Maintenance Services activities for both external and internal clients. Renvolt shows outstanding activity in 2025. We have more than 900 megawatts under construction, mainly across Ireland and Spain.

At the same time, Renvolt operates 2 gigawatts in Europe and Africa for maintenance and continues its expansion. On the financial results side, here, we disclosed the external activity contribution. It's an overall turnover reaching EUR 229 million, up 76% year-on-year, driven mainly by construction. As for EBITDA, the performance is strong with an EBITDA increased by 87% to EUR 20 million. Construction represents the main contribution, while maintenance also progressed. EBITDA margin remained stable, 9%, similar to last year and on track to our long-term trajectory towards 10% to 12%.

Let me now walk you through the main elements of our P&L statement below EBITDA. Main changes below EBITDA are depreciation, amortization and provision reaches EUR 142 million, up 41%. Other noncurrent income and expenses reaching EUR 66 million multiplied by 4 over the period. Those 2 items as well as the discontinued activities amounting to EUR 28 million reflects the major decisions implemented with the SPRING plan. I will come back to that in the next slide.

As a consequence, operating income EBIT reached EUR 4 million compared to EUR 98 [indiscernible] million in 2024. Financial results amount to EUR 89 million expense, 24% increase compared with last year. This reflects increase in project debt linked to the growth of our portfolio. As Robert mentioned before, in total, commission and construction capacity represents 700 megawatts in 2025. Despite higher interest rate environment, the average cost of debt remains strictly controlled at 6.14%, similar to last year.

Finally, we report a loss on discontinued operation of EUR 28 million, referring to exits of several nonstrategic countries and activities. After taking minority interest into account, the Group share of net results stands at a loss of EUR 128 million. We will detail this is driven by 2 factors: first, curtailment impact; and second, exceptional items related to the SPRING transformation plan.

So let's deep dive in the SPRING effect. Execution of SPRING started first semester 2025. Concrete actions were implemented in 3 main areas: definitive criteria to increase project and pipeline selectivity, review the asset portfolio and review and refocus of activities. The results in EUR 103 million negative impact is coming from write-off of projects from development pipeline for EUR 47 million. This is following the review of projects, again our new selective criteria. Clearly, we made the cleaning of our pipeline. Projects that no longer met the standards were written down. This impact is mainly reflected in other noncurrent income and expenses.

Second, impairment of assets and minority shares in other businesses represent EUR 20 million. We also conducted a review of our asset portfolio, prioritizing the ones that best meets our profitability targets. The related adjustments are recorded in depreciation and amortization. Then the SPRING transformation costs themselves amount for EUR 8 million and are booked under other noncurrent income and expenses.

Regarding exceptional items below EBIT, the review and refocus in activities lead to exiting 5 countries and disposing noncore business. This amount to EUR 28 million, mainly impacted in discounted operations. The financial impact reflects necessary decisions to reset the group on stronger foundations and prepare the acceleration of the transformation from 2026 onwards. 2025 net results was at the end of the day, mainly impacted by 2 exceptional items.

As I just explained to you, the SPRING exceptional cost amounting to a total of EUR 103 million and on the other hand, EUR 36 million curtailment effect. Excluding these 2 items, as you can see on the right-hand side of the slide, net result would have been positive at EUR 11 million.

Now moving on our balance sheet. Out of our total gross fixed assets of EUR 3.7 billion, the largest share corresponds to plants already in operation, 72%, contributing to our operational cash flow. Regarding the debt structure, 70% is composed of project finance or bridge to project finance. This debt is nonrecourse, directly linked to specific assets. Overall, our debt structure remains well balanced, consistent with the way renewable infrastructure platforms are typically financed.

Let me now comment on the cash flow. During the year, operating activities generate positive operating cash flow driven mainly by the EBITDA generated by our assets for a total of EUR 212 million, fueling almost half of the cash needed for investing. From financing side, the net increase in cash of EUR 232 million includes both project debt reimbursement, while the project debt additional one were raised for [indiscernible]. Our closing cash position is EUR 315 million, keeping in mind that on January 26, we repaid the convertible bond for EUR 250 million.

So overall, this slide illustrates 3 key messages: a solid asset base denominated by operating renewable assets, financing structure largely based on project finance, disciplined management of cash and financing. With that being said, it's also worth mentioning that during 2025 year, we secured a new syndicated loan of EUR 244 million, designed to refinance and extend the corporate debt facilities that were initially maturing in May '26. This new financing has 3-year maturity with the possibility to partly extend to 5 years, providing additional flexibility to the group.

Beyond simply refinancing existing debt, this facility also supports the implementation of the SPRING transformation plan. The facility was arranged with diversified pool of leading French and international financial institution and banks, demonstrating their strong support of Voltalia's long-term plan. To conclude on our debt position, the net debt-to-EBITDA ratio stands at 10.3x at the end of 2025. Despite the well-balanced structure of the debt between corporate and project, it's our target for 2026 to deleverage.

We plan a trajectory to reach 7.5x to 8x in 2030 with a first step in 2026 of a range between 8x to 9x. The monitoring of the debt is also about its structure. We'd like to draw your attention to the lower maturity of the residual project debt 13 years, while the average remaining life of our PPA is longer, 5 more, 18 years. This alignment between contractual revenues, debt maturity provides strong visibility, stability for debt services and additional contribution profitability after the debt repayment.

In addition, our debt is remotely exposed to variation since 53% and 4% is fixed or hedge, pre-hedge, only 18% remains variable. We monitor carefully our financial position in 2025 anticipate corporate refinancing, but SPRING execution plan is also about deleveraging Voltalia to a target range of 7.5 to 8. Now let's have a look at the 2026 SPRING execution plan with Robert.

Thank you, Sylvine, for the comprehensive review of our 2025 financial statements. Now I would like to highlight the SPRING strategy and where we stand today in its execution. What do we mean when we say that 2025 laid the foundations of our transformation. SPRING is not about adjusting a few processes. It is about rethinking how Voltalia operates, where we allocate our resources and how we create value over the long term.

First, we refocused the Group on our core activities, geographies and technologies. In '25, we stopped development activities in 5 countries and exited several noncore businesses. This allows us to concentrate on solar, onshore wind, storage in markets where we can reach meaningful scale. Second, we simplified our operating model with the creation of Renvolt. And third, we launched a strong performance and efficiency program. This includes stricter governance, a more selective portfolio management and a reduction in both development and structure costs.

In '25 alone, cash expenses fell by EUR 16 million on a run rate basis and our workforce decreased by 7.6%. In short, '25 was a year we set the foundation. From '26 onwards, the benefits of this transformation will expand and will accelerate. Shifting to Renvolt, then Renvolt has clearly evolved beyond internal service provider, which was the aim at the beginning a few years ago to become a commercial platform serving third-party developers and investors.

This allows us to clearly separate energy production and development activities from service activities while improving operational efficiency and visibility. We initiated Renvolt carve-out in 2025 and it will be finalized this carve-out in H1 2026. Renvolt is bringing together around 400 employees across 12 locations, mainly in Europe and Africa and as demonstrated by Sylvine that Renvolt had a strong commercial momentum in 2025.

We now move to Helexia, our on-site solar generation such as solar rooftop on large buildings and energy solutions for commercial and industrial clients. Today, Helexia employs around 430 people and has a strong portfolio with 770 megawatts of secured capacity, including then 552 megawatts already in operation. Geographically, the portfolio is well balanced between Europe and Brazil with about -- you can see 2/3 of our activity located in Europe. One of the key strengths of Helexia is its high-margin business model with an EBITDA margin, which is around 70%.

With SPRING, the organization has been strengthened with the appointment of a new CEO of Helexia and the company has launched a transformation program built around several key initiatives aligned with SPRING key levels. After the reset actions in '25, '26 will mark the acceleration phase of the SPRING plan. Of course, we continue to deploy the same transformation levers, but this year, they will have more tangible effects on profitability and deleveraging.

On refocusing, we continue to reshape our portfolio. The country exit process initiated last year will continue with the objective of reaching 12 core geographies, which will remain within Voltalia, allowing us to concentrate capital and execution on our highest priority markets. On cost discipline, '26 is clearly a year of acceleration. We will drive additional cost savings, both on our development and structure costs.

As a reminder, our objective is to reach EUR 45 million of run rate savings on average over '26 to '30 compared with '24 cost base. In '26, structure cost reduction will be supported by workforce optimization projects representing around 10% of the Group, including France, Portugal and Brazil. Of course, these measures will be implemented in full compliance with local regulations in close dialogue with employee representatives.

On the operating model, we completed a key milestone with [indiscernible] carve-out, as I explained earlier. Finally, SPRING fully enters its full financial phase with EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million of asset disposal by 2028, some, of course, already expected in 2026 and the majority by first half of 2027. Like this, we accelerate cash generation and deleveraging to bring in '26 a net positive result and the decrease of our net debt to EBITDA ratio, as mentioned earlier by Sylvine.

I will take now a moment to share our outlook before opening the floor to questions. Let me start by our DNA, our mission, improving the global environment while fostering local development. We have set clear environmental and social objectives for '27, '30, and we are progressing pretty well. Our performance in CO2 avoidance, stakeholder engagement, co-use of soil and carbon intensity already show solid progress and confirms that we are on track. It is worth noting that we already exceeded in 2025 the '27 target for co-use of soil.

Now related to our '26 objectives, which we are presenting today. Starting with operational targets. We aim to reach around 3.7 gigawatts of capacity in operation under construction, including approximately 3 giga in operation. Regarding the financial side, we are targeting EBITDA in the range of EUR 210 million to EUR 230 million, including EUR 190 million to EUR 210 million from Energy Sales. We confirm a positive net result. These objectives somehow show the expected early effects of our transformation and their impact will grow as we move forward.

I'd like to remind our objective, 2027 objectives, which are the following. From an operational standpoint, we are targeting around 4.2 gigawatts of capacity in operation under construction, including approximately 3.7 gigawatts in operation, reflecting then the continued project delivery and a more mature asset base. On the financial side, we are targeting EBITDA in the range of EUR 300 million to EUR 325 million, including EUR 270 million to EUR 300 million from Energy Sales.

The important thing, the progression towards this level from '26 -- level of performance from '26 to '27 is mainly driven by 4 factors. First, the full year contribution of recently commissioned assets and the growth in installed capacity. Second, improved operational availability across the portfolio. Third, a gradual reduction expected curtailment impact in Brazil. And fourth, service activity also continued to grow, providing additional and more resilient EBITDA. It was for '27.

Now let's look ahead to 2030. Our objectives integrate the structural effects of the transformation now underway. Operationally, we target around 5 giga of capacity in operation under construction, including approximately 4.5 gigawatts in operation. On the financial side, our ambition is centered on a gradual improvement in margins driven by a more selective portfolio, improved performance across our asset base and the commissioning of higher margin projects.

As a matter of fact, we target an EBITDA margin of 70% to 72% for Energy Sales by '30 and 9% to 11% for Renvolt. As a conclusion of today, 2025 was a pivotal year with external challenges, but also decisive actions to reset the company through the spring transformation. We started simplifying the model, streamlining the portfolio and strengthening our governance. In '26, we accelerate the transformation with a refocus on core activities and priority geographies with selective divestments and capital allocation.

We improved operational performance through stronger execution, lower cost and simpler organization. We strengthened financial discipline with clear deleveraging actions, project monetization, partnerships and improved cash generation. These priorities rely on solid foundations, long-term PPA, development engine creating value through selective sales, hybrid and storage capabilities which we are going to increase and strong positions in emerging markets. Overall, Voltalia is moving from expansion to selective execution focus driven by value creation. All this with clear financial ambitions for 2026, EUR 210 million to EUR 230 in EBITDA, a positive net result and lower leverage.

Thank you very much for listening. And now I'm sure a lot of you cannot wait to ask your questions. So let's now open the Q&A session.

[Operator Instructions] Okay, for the moment, we don't have any questions from the con call. So I will switch to the written question. Let me see it on the screen. Let's begin by the first one. It was in French. I will switch it in English.

What about the Canudos wind farm in Brazil? Is it operating at 100% capacity? Or is it being swapped?

I will take this one. Thank you for the question. First of all, just to remind you that Canudos entered into operation around 2 years ago. Since that moment, it's been operating with an excellent availability over 97%. Somehow it's been throttled -- I mean away not taking into account the curtailment because it's a wind farm, which is also being curtailed like most of the -- all the wind farms and solar farms in Northeast Brazil. But regarding availability, it has a very appropriate macro [indiscernible] detection system. No accident has been related to approach this commissioning and there's not a very negligible diminution of the availability because of this detection systems. It is working well and very good availability.

Second question related to Brazilian data center. Brazilian data center route seems promising, but Voltalia, you will no longer mention it in this presentation?

Indeed, we are progressing pretty well and especially in Brazil, and it's a trend which somehow is a little bit slowed down because of the curtailment as the energy price is one of the main factor in which investors in data center are going -- having some plan to invest in Brazil. And we will, of course, communicate as far as we have some news regarding our development of data center in Brazil, but still going on. It's true that we have not tackled that subject in the presentation, but you will know it in time when there will be some progress.

Question related to curtailment. For the curtailment in Brazil, are you expecting [indiscernible] to be compensated at 100% of the curtailment period and based on which means [indiscernible] projection of the period based on estimated production during that time?

Well, we are confident that we will be compensated though probably not fully. You've seen that we have excluded any compensation from 2025 as discussions with the ministry and the regulators are still ongoing. For the past -- November of '25, low enabled compensation reliability curtailment, based on earnest curtailment we are not at the level that we would like and that's the reason why we are still negotiating with the regulator and the ministry in order to increase the level of compensation we should have.

Still no question from the call. I will move to see if we have other questions.

When you speak about positive net results for 2026 and onwards, do you mean after curtailment in Brazil?

Yes. Actually, indeed, we built our target for 2026 with confirming a net result -- positive net result and we do confirm that this would be post the impact we assume to get for the curtailment. And besides that, just for you to better understand, we consider curtailment would be similar to the one we faced in this year so that we have a consistent and prudent approach.

Let me check for a question. It's seems -- let's check about [indiscernible] working. Can you talk about the Artemisya project in Uzbekistan please? When would it is to be expected? Are you looking at another development in [indiscernible]?

Then regarding the Artemisya project, we signed together with the government last year, we expect a project of 100 megawatt of wind and 100 megawatt of battery storage. We expect battery storage to enter into operation end of 2027, while the wind project will take some more time for the construction and then with an expectation of COD starting operation in 2028, which are the first phases of the next projects that we are tackling in Uzbekistan. They are more, as I mentioned during the presentation, with even a bigger project for battery storage that -- for which we have signed an MOU, and we expect to confirm that project together with the government.

In your target of 3 gigawatts in operation by the end of 2026, compared with 2025, have you made any assumption about disposals of asset currently in operation?

Yes. Thank you. So indeed, we do confirm that the target we define now for the capacity is already included but we expect to dispose whatever its assets -- future assets to be -- could have been solely operative. So yes, we do confirm that [indiscernible].

Let's move to another one related to EUR 16 million reduction in development costs in 2025 and the continuation of this reduction. Can you give us some indication of your objective for 2026 for the long term?

So indeed, we mentioned about cash cost reduction. So this amount, it's actually the total cash cost that we clearly stated in September with the SPRING plan to better monitor cash cost reduction. At that time, we were mentioning a target of EUR 35 million. And actually, it's on track. So what we show here is that we already started the beginning of the year to work and to reduce. So we did half way, let's say, in 2025, and we continue to increase this target to reach the EUR 35 million, which is recurring, let's say, full year estimates that we target for 2027. So 2026 will be in between the 2.

[Operator Instructions] A question relating to data center. No, we already have done it?

We already answered, yes.

Let me see other question. Okay. In your reporting, you have split Helexia activity between electricity production and services. It seems to me that this activity were fairly integrated. Can you give us more detail on the new operational organization?

First of all, as we mentioned during the presentation, we have a new CEO in Helexia and Helexia basically is conducting the same level of the SPRING transformation project that we are having towards Voltalia. However, it's a pretty autonomous company, which is a kind of different market even if we have sales of energy with different typology of assets and 2 different clients. Then as I mentioned, Helexia have more 400 people working in there. Some of the countries are the same as Voltalia, but let's say, acting as a separate company in terms of operating model.

Okay. Question related to PPAs. Have you seen more interest in signing PPAs in the last couple of weeks following increases in energy prices?

Well, we've seen that there is a reflection from the war in Iran towards the price of energy in short term. It has not sorted already effects on the appetite for signing long-term PPAs. But if the war continues to grow and continue to last in time, we may have some reflects from the buyers in order to protect their demand of energy with longer term -- longer PPA duration and probably higher prices as well.

Then we don't know what's going to happen, but it's true that some Bloomberg for instance, made an article regarding a potential project in increasing the appetite in signing long-term PPA. But for the time being, we have not seen especially demand growing for the last -- during the last 2 weeks.

One question related to any positive earnings, one effects from disposal are included on your EUR 210 million and EUR 230 million guidance for 2026?

So just as a reminder, in our activities, we have energy sales and development activity. And within development, we do mature future project as well as dispose greenfield or sometimes brownfield assets. So somehow we do have this asset rotation within our target of EUR 210 million and EUR 230 million which are part of our business model. So indeed, some are included in our guidance, yes.

[Operator Instructions] One question. Yes, Philippe, we can see your questions, so we will answer it. Is your net profit 2026 target is based on recurring net profit growth?

So indeed, it's a good question. We mentioned that we do a positive result in 2026. This positive net result for us is confirmed with a range of EUR [indiscernible] million EBITDA. So we do confirm that we will reach positive net result with especially high range of the target that we stated for EBITDA in 2026. Just a reminder also, regarding the EBITDA SPRING effect, I'd like to draw your attention to any platform business unit, sorry, disposal we perform through the SPRING transform plan is recorded below EBITDA because it's a platform business unit, so it's not affecting the EBITDA. Just a short reminder about the IFRS.

One question related to the level of curtailment. What is the level of curtailment Voltalia is considering within 2026 and 2027 EBITDA?

As far as we are still in discussion with the government regarding the past curtailment and the compensation. And of course, we are fighting in order to increase it to the level of the full loss that we suffered in the past and we are still negotiating the future compensation. We are pretty prudent in 2026 with an amount of EUR 35 million between EUR 30 million to EUR 35 million of losses due to curtailment in '26.

It means pretty the same level of what we've been impacted in 2025. As far as '27 is concerned, we believe that normally during this year, we should reach an agreement for the past and for the future. That's the reason why we have considered in 2027 an impact of EUR 20 million coming from curtailment.

One other question on the great momentum in the European market, France included for maybe opportunities of assets in operation for sales and extremely interesting price. Any plan to M&A or even in ready to build?

So first of all, there are several momentum. Let's say, we have the current events with geopolitics, which are indeed creating some pressure on the electricity price. Overall, there is a European momentum with some potential assets to be purchased or to be sold. What we would like to remind is that -- and it's something we mentioned while working currently in September, we mentioned it, it's about the platform and the partnership.

So in our view, what we are working on is to create and develop some regional platform, and that's why I mentioned it because Europe could be one where we look for co-development and/or co-investments. So for us, it's typically the kind of structure we want to share risks and opportunities together with other and to deploy within some region. So could be Europe, could be [indiscernible] since Voltalia's DNA is about emerging, also in emerging markets. So the way we see the M&A is more about partnership within Voltalia.

You mentioned staff reduction that could represent 10% of the group workforce in 2026 and this project already been partially provisioned in your 2025 P&L. What is your estimate of the total associated cost in cash and P&L for 2026?

So as for the staff, let's say, monitoring and that reduction that we are planning. So first of all, we've been working a lot of attrition in 2025. And indeed, we target a 10% reduction. Nowadays, we are working on the targeted and structure organization. We have recognized in our books 2025, what we can book in terms of accounting [indiscernible] I would say. Otherwise, as for 2026, we do include the figures in our budget. But I'd like to remind you as well that we disclosed, and I disclosed earlier EUR 9 million of cost of restructuring, cost of SPRING. So all these cost are also to cover the reduction that we are planning and that we mentioned this morning.

We have several questions related to dividend. When are you planning to pay dividend? And do you expect it to pay in the coming years after?

Yes. Indeed, as per our last presentation last September, we are reinforcing the fact that we expect to pay dividends from 2028, thanks to all the efforts and the levers that we are putting in place with the SPRING transformation. Then 2028 will be the first dividend that will be distributed.

[Operator Instructions] Okay. A question from Claire. You mentioned development cost of EUR 79 million. Are these all recognized as OpEx? Or is it capitalized? If so, could you please provide the breakdown if all of them are recognized as OpEx? Could you explain how to reconcile the development EBITDA of EUR 15.9 million with EUR 79 million development, it gets very precise this disposal amounting to EUR 95 million.

Okay. I'll try to answer as clearly as I can. Actually, you're right, Claire, to mention that the EUR 79 million is development cash cost. So this amount represents the total cash I invest, whatever it's -- to get the permission, secure the land, get the grid authorization, ensure that it's financially reliable. So all this cash cost, it's actually out of 100%, 80% to 90% depends on the stage of maturity goes to the balance sheet and's then the remaining part goes to the P&L.

It's what we call the prospection because it doesn't reach the criteria -- 4 criterias to be a future project. So the EUR 79 million refers to the full amount which goes in the balance sheet and the EUR 3 million savings I was mentioning compared to the prior period was only related to the saving on the prospection cost, which is between 10% to 20%, let's take an average of 15% goes to the P&L. Hope it clarifies.

Your capacity under construction is mostly solar. Are you stepping back from wind?

Indeed, you're right, our capacity under construct for '26 and '27 uphold a lot by solar, that we are not stepping back from wind. We have wind recently, and I mentioned earlier the project of Artemisya with 100 megawatts. However, you must know that especially in Europe, it takes more time to develop wind than solar. That's the reason why. And this reflects of representing that.

Then we are still developing wind, I repeat it and reinforcing our development in wind as that is a very good match when we are talking about hybrid projects with wind, solar and battery storage today represents a very good solution in order to go towards flexibility.

How do you explain the cautious EBITDA guidance for Energy Sales between growth between 0% to 10% when operating capacity increased more and the base effect relatively low with a negative price effect?

So I will take this one. Indeed, we have a target for EBITDA 2026 of EUR 210 million and EUR 230 million. And we reached EUR 211 million for 2025. You mentioned the increase in capacity. I just would like also to remind that I mentioned some disposal of assets so in 2025, which have a perimeter effect. Without considering this perimeter effect, we would grow by 15% between 2024 and 2026.

So this is consistent and in line with the capacity. So all in all, we have build our objectives based on prudent approach, reminding also I mentioned that the curtailment is similar to how much we booked in 2025. Therefore, this is a rationale why the target was set at EUR 210 million to EUR 230 million.

Then next question, what is the impact -- the expected impact on D&A for 2026 of 2025 impairment?

So almost nothing. Most of it relates to some development in progress. So almost nothing.

There are no more questions at this time. So I hand the conference back to the speakers for any closing comments.

Thank you very much, everyone, who assisted to that presentation. Then you've seen that we have made quite a lot of progress in 2025 in order to put the foundations for the transformation with a great acceleration that we're expecting in 2026 and beyond with the effects that we have presented today. Thank you so much for your questions as well, and see you soon. Thank you.

Good morning, everyone. Thank you for coming. For the ones who are here presently and the ones who are following us on the webcast, welcome to our half year results presentation. I am Robert Klein; and I'm joined by Yoni Ammar, our Deputy CEO; and Sylvine Bouan, our CFO. Let's go.

I am happy to stand before you today, as it is such an important moment for Voltalia's history. Before we go into details of our results with Sylvine, I would like to start with a broad overview of where I believe we stand right now. Voltalia has achieved very strong growth over the past decade, supported by 4 successive capital increases. We have built a solid international presence. We have diversified technologies and developed recognized expertise.

Today, however, we face continued pressure on our profitability and increasing changes in the renewable market. It is still growing fast, but it's becoming more demanding and more complex. Over the last months, we've looked closely at our assets, our activities, our organization and our challenges also.

The result is a clear road map, SPRING, not to change who we are but to unlock Voltalia's full potential in a fast-changing renewable market. SPRING is our 5-year plan to make Voltalia stronger, financially self-sustained, driving better performance and profitability. Today, we want to share with you the progress we've made and the concrete steps we are taking to move Voltalia forward. But first, I will hand over to Sylvine, who will take you through the half year results.

Over to you, Sylvine.

Good morning, everyone. So let's have a look to the first half year 2025 results. First of all, some key operational and financial indicators to wrap up our results. 3.3 gigawatts of capacity in operation and construction, that means an increase of 7% compared to last year. The total turnover reached EUR 257 million, which is plus 8%, while our EBITDA is almost stable, EUR 78 million, and we finally end up with a loss of EUR 40 million.

Having a look, first of all, to operational KPIs. As I mentioned, on the left-hand side, you may notice the total capacity 3.3 gigawatts, meaning a 7% increase, which has actually doubled with regard with the production, which increased by 14%. So it's reaching 2.4 terawatt-hour. In terms of exposure, on the right-hand side, you can see the shares, Latin America amounts for 51%, almost 40% for Europe and the rest is in Africa while now solar is reaching 71% of the total capacity.

Let's look now at the turnover and how it increased and come from last year, increased by 8%. So what are the major contributions? First of all, from the EUR 239 million, we benefit from a volume effect for a total of EUR 4 million. Within this effect, you do have the full year effect of plants commissioned, the newly commissioned plants while we were affected by this curtailment, but overall net increase.

On the other hand, we had a negative effect from price linked to early generation. You might remember last year, we did explain that we benefited in Albania and France, for instance, from high price based on short-term PPAs. And actually, we switch now to long-term PPAs with different prices. Finally, taking into consideration the contribution -- significant contribution of turnover to the Service, plus EUR 35 million, we end up with EUR 257 million.

Another view on the EBITDA bridge. So I was saying more or less stable. Why? You have 2 main contributions. One is, again, on the volume effect. So we do have the same, as the one I explained for the turnover, volume, though curtailments impacting, and price effect with the fact that we have a different structure in terms of short-term, long-term PPA contracts.

So per activity. Now, deep diving in energy sales on the table. So you may notice the decrease at constant rates by 3%, which is partially mitigated by operating expenses. Therefore, constant rate, we have an EBITDA margin, which increased by 1 point of percentage. While production increased, estimated average price, which is here as the turnover by the total production, decreased as well. So you can see it here, it's EUR 64 per megawatt while it was EUR 81 in the prior period.

EBITDA actually in terms of regional contribution decreased in Brazil, though we improved the resources, the 14% curtailment affected the overall contribution. France also had a decrease for another reason. It's because last year, we did sell some brownfield plants. So we have a variation of perimeter. And the solar resources was not as good as it was last year. For other countries, we benefit from an increase, thanks to better resources and new commissioning.

Most of our results being still driven by Brazil. Let's have a look on where we stand with the curtailment. As you may know, curtailment occur when the grid operator imposes to stop injecting in the grid. We did face curtailment last year from the summer till the end of the year for a total average in last year of 20% of the production curtailed. We did forecast for this year an average curtailment of 10% of the production. However, year-to-date, curtailment reached 14%.

What causes this gap? We have still a highly conservative approach from the grid operator. We have additional capacity, which were commissioned in the Northeast, while the grid is still facing some network bottlenecks. So what do we do? Voltalia continues to be active within working group to limit curtailment and to strengthen the transmission lines on long-term perspective from a technical perspective.

Voltalia continues to discuss long-term solution to get compensation mechanism for the future. And Voltalia continues to pursue legal proceedings to get a favorable decision on historical financial impact. As a consequence, we remain confident in reaching a favorable outcome in the midterm. No compensation were accrued in our financials.

What about services activity? As a reminder, services include construction and maintenance, which contribute to the turnover, and EBITDA, of course, as well as prospection cost and sale of projects, which are recognized and visible straight in the EBITDA. As you may read on the table, the turnover significantly increased by 50%, reaching EUR 105 million. Total EBITDA of service activity, however, is negative, minus EUR 6.6 million.

Why that? Actually, I just mentioned the growth in activity in construction, which benefit from new contracts in Europe, for instance, Ireland. I do mention increase in activity in O&M with also new contracts won in Portugal and in Brazil. However, from the development activity, we did not book any sale of projects in the first semester. Sales and M&A projects are still ongoing, so no recognition. However, we do have recurring prospection costs, which are an expense in the total EBITDA of services activity. Overall, construction and O&M are -- sorry, showing a margin of, respectively, 9% and 12%. So a good contribution.

So let's have a look now below EBITDA. As I mentioned before, the group EBITDA of EUR 78 million compared to EUR 81 million last year. Depreciation and amortization grew by 20%, which is mainly due to the commissioning of new plants. Noncurrent expenses doubled in euro, including here, cost of SPRING transformation, the first part of the cost. Financial results decreased by 7%. They are carefully monitored, as we are doing for the debt. Average financing cost is stable. It's around 5.9% compared to 6% last year. Tax expenses refers mainly to the Brazilian Lucro Presumido taxation. Keeping in mind, in 2024, we did benefit from a tax income related to some deferred tax in Jordan.

Finally, we ended up with a total loss for the group of EUR 40 million, which also includes some discontinuing activity that you can see here on the table for EUR 8 million, which refers to our equipment activities that we decided to stop, and therefore, to recognize all the costs within the first semester.

I'd like to draw your attention to one point, so I mentioned the effect of SPRING, the beginning of the effect on the first half of 2025. Robert will detail in few slides that we run, and he already mentioned it, we run the diagnosis. As a consequence, we identified some risks or some impact that have to be reflected in our full year financials.

What kind of impact I'm talking about? Pipeline rationalization, transformational restructuring costs linked to the SPRING program, exiting some noncore activity or countries. Therefore, we anticipate that, but are still working to define exactly the impact, a net loss for the second half of '25, which will be more significant than the loss for the first half of 2025.

Let's have a look to our balance sheet, and more precisely, cash flow on the bottom of the slide. You have here the cash flow statement. And as you can see, we still -- and we rely on a solid cash position. The cash generation from the operations amount for EUR 47 million, used to finance part of the new CapEx. So investment cash flows amount to EUR 171 million, while the financing inflows are stable between the disbursement and debt repayment. Overall, the cash position remained at EUR 235 million at the end of June '25.

So now moving forward to what's going to happen at the end -- till the end of the year, so 2025 objectives outlook. First of all, we do confirm our operational objectives in terms of capacity around 3.6 gigawatts and a production around 5.2 terawatt-hour. As of the year-end, we do target an EBITDA in the range of EUR 200 million to EUR 220 million compared to the EUR 215 million we had in 2024.

Robert will now drive you to the SPRING journey.

Now, let's move to the core SPRING, our vision of 2030, and how do we plan to achieve it. With SPRING, Voltalia is entering a new stage, delivering 300 to 400 of self-financed growth per year until 2030, while strengthening profitability and efficiency and building solid foundation for our long-term ambition. But to understand why this transformation is needed, let's have a quick look back at our trajectory and at the turning point we reached in 2024.

Over the last decades, as you can see, Voltalia has delivered strong growth, installed capacity, turnover, EBITDA, net result over 30% growth annually. This was made possible thanks to 4 successive capital increases and also a strong growth engine. But in 2024, as you can see on the right side, profitability came under pressure with EBITDA declining and net result negative. And 2025, as Sylvine mentioned, will remain under pressure. This was a clear signal. Growth is not enough. It has to be sustainable and profitable. And in the context where the renewable market itself is evolving fast, becoming larger and more demanding, let's zoom on that.

Globally, renewable market is growing, continues to grow pretty fast. Solar and wind -- to give you some examples, solar and wind are gaining share, now providing 15% of global electricity worldwide, overtaking hydroelectricity for the first time in history. Solar also was the largest source of new energy installed globally, more than coal, gas and hydro combined. Storage capacity has nearly doubled in 2024, reaching 155 gigawatts, and the perspective are great, as it attacks somehow intermittency, allowing flexibility.

At the same time, global electricity demand grew by 4% in 2024. Just to give you an example, it's basically the consumption of a country like Japan. This growth was driven mainly by emerging countries and also new type of consumers such as data center or artificial intelligence. Importantly, 2024, renewable provided over 90% of all new generation capacity in the world, reflecting their rising competitiveness. But also complexity is rising. With curtailment and negative prices that are increasingly frequent, especially in major countries, where penetration of renewable is pretty high, like Spain, like Germany, like Brazil, permitting processes are getting longer and more complex. But somehow, it's good for experimented developers, and Voltalia is an experimented developer.

Policy supports are getting lower with less subsidies, then the project has to be more market-driven, and that's good because renewables are competitive. And that's because of that we have reached 90% of the new installed capacity. And hybridization with storage projects are the future as it manages -- it can manage flexibility.

Then, projects are becoming more complex and more capital intensive, but also creates opportunity. That's why we launched SPRING, a plan that takes us from diagnosis, design and then to delivery, positioning Voltalia for success in this changing market. In the first half then of 2025, I arrived as -- in this new position, and end of January, we launched SPRING to look -- to take the time to look at ourselves with an independent review. We analyzed our strengths, our challenges and benchmarked Voltalia against peers, Neoen, of course, Scatec, Boralex and other ones. And this gave us a clear picture of where we stand now.

In the second half of 2025, we moved to the design phase. We defined clear strategic priorities. We started implementing first measures. And as you will hear more about it from Yoni in a moment, we prepared a portfolio refocus. And from 2026 onwards comes the delivery phase. That means executing the transformation levers delivering 300 to 400-megawatt of self-financing growth annually and achieving sustainable improvements toward profitability and efficiency.

Diagnosis, this transformation builds on Voltalia's trends, but also directly addresses the challenges we face, and let's have a look at it. Voltalia starts this transformation with strong foundations. We know how to develop projects successfully. We have a strong pipeline, which can fuel our growth and create value, as we have shown in the past. We have long-term PPAs that reduce volatility on our portfolio, global expertise across the full value chain and proven ability to develop complex projects.

But the good news when we are saying that we are developing hybrid projects with storage are going to be more frequent in the future. But at the same time, we must recognize the challenges we face. Yes, we are too dispersed across 2 new geographies and activities, which can dilute our focus. This explains in part the reason why our organization has become more complex. In some cases, we do not deliver our projects according to the plan, and our financial results, as a matter of fact, are not yet where they should be. And SPRING is about leveraging our strengths and fixing those weaknesses to build a stronger and more resilient company.

How to do it? To do it, we defined 2 sets of priorities. First, refocus on what matters; and second, strengthening performance and profitability. I can show that now. The first priority then is to refocus concretely. We will concentrate our resources, our efforts on priority geographies and technologies, where Voltalia can reach critical mass and deliver competitive advantage. We will also refocus on our core activities, development and energy sales, which are the heart of the value creation -- of our value creation.

And importantly, we will leverage co-investment platforms to support selected activities. This allows us to accelerate growth while preserving capital and mitigating risk exposure. These factors will generate EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million of cash inflow between 2026 to 2030, and EUR 35 million recurring savings on average during the same period. Strategically, it allows us to self-finance our growth, accelerate pipeline maturation and reach scale in countries we choose to stay and to target.

The second priority is about how we do operate, improving performance and profitability throughout the organization. We will act on different key levers. First, very important, of course, streamline the organization to reduce complexity and cost with expected savings of EUR 10 million per year on average during the period of 2026 to 2030.

Second, maximize the performance of our assets -- operating assets. By 2030, we aim at reaching EBITDA of 70% to 72% in IPP in Energy Sales and 9% to 11% for Services.

And third, reinforce project management discipline to ensure our projects are delivered on time and on budget. But this is not only about financials, it's also about mitigating risks in a market which is becoming more volatile, securing returns and leveraging digital and artificial intelligence tools to better and to strengthen asset management. In short, it's about being a more agile, more efficient and more profitable.

So far, I have outlined the context and the priority behind our transformation. To go deeper into the different drivers and actions, let me now pass the floor to Yoni, who will get you through this roadmap.

Thank you, Robert. Thank you very much. Good morning, everyone. I'm very happy to be here today with you. And Voltalia is at a pivotal moment, and I will take you through SPRING, our strategic transformation plan. I'm Yoni Ammar. I'm Voltalia's Deputy CEO. And after 10 years in the company in several positions, I have been leading the development and sales of energy activities for a few months now. I will, thus, be accountable for the last part of the SPRING project.

First of all, let me give you a quick overview of SPRING and how we designed this plan. It's about 4 levers, 4 drivers, and it's not just an adjustment, it is a roadmap for the next phase of Voltalia's journey. Those 4 phases are focusing on what we do best, clarifying our operating model, raising operational performance and ensuring profitability. All those actions are about one thing, making Voltalia stronger, simpler and more valuable.

The first driver, so our first step is to refocus. How? First, we will capitalize on Voltalia's core development expertise while exiting noncore activities. As a matter of fact, few sales processes have already started, and it's confidential for obvious reasons. As you know, Sylvine said it, we began our refocusing by closing the Equipment business, which was a loss-making activity, and we are evaluating as well to divest some minority stakes.

Then we are doubling down on technologies where we have scale and proven expertise, solar and onshore wind that you know is very competitive and has the lowest cost of electricity and storage to anchor us into the future. As you may know, it is expected that price of battery will be -- will decrease of 40% within the next 5 years, making storage very competitive and part of the solution of grid robustness and intermittency.

Finally, we are also reshaping our geographical footprint, prioritizing the countries where we have long-term visibility, market depth, a robust offtake scheme and attractive returns and exiting those where this strategic fit is weaker. Concretely, we aim to remain within 12 maximum -- maximum of 12 geographies within the next 18 to 24 months, and first announcements are expected by year-end. Some transaction to lower Brazil exposure are already and also initiated. This discipline will ensure that every euro we invest goes to project with the strongest risk and reward profile, and emerging markets remain of interest to favor higher profitability.

Now that we have refocused on core activities, next step is to make our operating model clearer and more efficient. Look at the figures. Our construction and maintenance services platform is now a business on its own right. What's remarkable is the scale we have already achieved, 7.7 gigawatts under O&M management for external parties, so practically hitting the 2027 target of 8-gigawatt well in advance.

Same thing with construction with more than 800 megawatts in execution for third party as of today. That's impressive and shows both the demand for our expertise and our ability to deliver. We are, therefore, setting up a dedicated service subsidiary, sorry, which brings together construction and maintenance businesses. This new configuration creates a clearer accountability, a better collaboration with the Energy Sales business and a stronger platform to capture third-party clients. A significant EBITDA margin improvement will result in those adjustments from 7% to around 9% to 11% by 2030.

SPRING also means more comprehensiveness. From the 2025 annual results presentation, the financial communication will be clearer with 3 main pillars: development, which was before mixed with construction, energy sales and services. So with the clarified model, we can move to the next driver. This priority is raising our performance, making Voltalia more efficient, agile and selective in its growth. We are targeting leaner operations to -- thanks to a streamlined organization. And like Robert said, it will generate EUR 10 million cash savings per year from '26.

SPRING means as well more selectivity in the pipeline, focusing on projects that deliver value rather than volume. This discipline and stricter criteria will lower the cash demand for development by around EUR 20 million starting '26, improve capital allocation and sharpen our execution. Besides, this approach will also lead to abandoning, postponing or selling projects with lower profitability than our target. Those EUR 20 million are part of the EUR 35 million announced a few minutes later by Robert.

In parallel, we are strengthening construction oversight to short-term lead times and reduce deviation risks on CapEx. To do so, we are reinforcing a specific role in Voltalia called the Asset Owner. The Asset Owner is responsible for the equity invested in the project by Voltalia and to optimize every day, and on the long run, its profitability. Every megawatt we operate must deliver its full potential. And data-driven optimization is the way to get there. We can summarize our asset management approach in 3 words: anticipate, simplify, standardize.

On the next slide, I show you how our new approach translates in practice, both in terms of governance and the way we use data to optimize performance. So here, 2 illustrations. The first one is the reinforced role of the Asset Owner and the change in project governance. Beyond the number, performance means a cultural shift in the way we are managing assets.

Until now, we were doing development, financing, construction, operations. But in between, there were always, I would say, some fights or so misalignments between teams. The global view of the project was maybe not at the highest standards we could. Now, we are moving towards to an end-to-end accountability model. The asset owner is responsible from the end of development through to operations. This avoid silo, smoothen and secure interface between development, construction and operation and mostly ensures strategic continuity.

Second, illustration. We did create recently a new data and AI department, and it's about digital tools. We are working on predictive maintenance, advanced analytics, short-term forecasting to extract more value from the projects. For instance, if you see here, this in-house tool describe hour per hour, plant per plant the losses we can suffer, allowing us to be alerted in real time of operating problem, and thus, to put in place remedial action very quickly.

Ultimately, this leads into a stronger profitability and cash generation. From '26 onwards, we will be able to finance 300 to 400 megawatts of new capacity each year entirely on our own resources without capital increase. Our energy sales activity will improve to deliver 70% to 72% EBITDA margin comparing to 61% in '24, while Services are scaling up to a double-digit profitability from 7% in '24.

Finally, through co-development platform and specific co-investments, we can accelerate our growth while keeping control on our portfolio and our assets. Those partnerships will allow to share development risk in the most complicated market, and co-investments in specific situation will allow to shorten our payback while derisking our position and increase equity profitability.

Sylvine will now detail our financial discipline and the objectives.

Voltalia is about SPRING, the transformation plan we initiated. But Voltalia is also about fundamentals. We have said it before, we have strengths. And we plan, of course, to rely on these strengths to build up SPRING and to reach a new Voltalia.

What are these fundamentals? First of all, we rely on our main activity businesses with some rules, dedicated and specific models, and indeed, financial discipline. I'll come back to this topic right after, but it's not only development, power producer, but also Services and our Helexia activity. Second, we do go for more financial agility. How do we plan to do that? We mentioned the cash from proceeds, sorry, which will both serve the future growth and allows us to come back to a targeted ratio of net debt to EBITDA by 2030 of 7.5x to 8x.

And finally, is also a clear point of how do we plan to share the value creation. We have 2 milestones we presented, and we are here highlighting. The first one is a positive net result targeted from 2026 onwards. The second one is the first dividend expected in 2028. But let me come back to the first point. I'll pinpoint some of them. This is the backbone of Voltalia.

Development, how do we do? We explain you why we are doing development because developing big projects, it allows us then to resell part of it and to share the cost and to capture the value, which is definitely significant at the beginning.

Financially speaking, what does it allow? It allows actually to finance from a cash perspective the prospection, which goes to my P&L, together with the development cash costs, which are on my balance sheet. So the purpose is to say, on a long-term perspective, the cash allocated to prospection and dev is neutral versus the cash collected from the M&A of greenfield or brownfield projects.

About Energy Sales, this work for Voltalia and also our subsidiary, Helexia. Secured and predictable revenues, thanks to long-term PPAs. You probably remember about our 4 KPIs on the top, but we do have 16.4 years of remaining PPA, and we have EUR 8.1 billion future revenue contracted under portfolio. This is really a strength for Voltalia. Of course, there are risks. How do we mitigate these risks? Here, 2 points, natural hedging; revenues and debt are denominated in the same currency; and contract -- revenue contract indexed or on inflation.

Second point, the way we build the project finance, and we finance our projects, then we swap our fixed interest expenses. And this secures us future revenue on PPA, which are now working plants operating. For construction and maintenance, the strategy is really to benefit from scale effect. We have been releasing, sharing some winning of new contracts in Ireland for construction, for instance. This is exactly what we are looking for.

Scale effects with almost no CapEx, light working cap. So actually, therefore, we can have a look to the improvement and the double-digit EBITDA margin. These are really, together with the SPRING transformation plan, what will make the new Voltalia. So practically speaking, what does it mean? First of all, first step in 2027, objectives. Total capacity in operation and construction is 4.2 gigawatts. It means a 14% CAGR versus 2025 versus today, out of which around 3.7 gigawatts in operation.

Second, we defined a new target for EBITDA of EUR 300 million to EUR 320 million, out of which, 90% refers to energy sales, namely EUR 270 million to EUR 300 million. But these are intermediate KPIs and milestones because SPRING will bring us to 2030. So what will be the objective? What are the targets for 2030? A capacity in operation and construction of 5 gigawatts, out of which 4.5 will be in operation. As for EBITDA, we target a set of EBITDA margin of 70% to 72%. For Energy Sales, remember, I mentioned today, 62%. And 9.11% for Services we are on track.

Eventually, we are, and we continue, and we'll continue to be a mission-driven company. What does it mean? ESG target as well. So these remain the same as the one we had before, except the first one we changed, avoided emission, 2.4 million tons of CO2 avoided compared to 4 million previously, mainly linked to the capacity evolution I just mentioned before. Other ESG targets for '27 are unchanged as well as the carbon intensity, minus 35%, but with a target for 2030.

Now let me hand over to Robert for the conclusion.

So we have shared with you our trajectory for the next 5 years. We have planned the actions we're taking and the numbers behind them. This is not only a plan on paper, it is a roadmap we are going to deliver and ready to deliver.

Now let me quickly sum up what's ahead. From 2026, we target 300 to 400 megawatts of self-financed growth every year, supported by a return to positive net results in 2026. By 2027, EBITDA will be in the range of EUR 300 million to EUR 325 million. From 2028, we expect to start distributing dividends. And by 2030, Voltalia will be stronger with durable growth and greater financial discipline.

So to wrap up, SPRING is not only about adapting to the current market, it's about positioning Voltalia for the next decade as a resilient, profitable and a focused leader in the renewable energy.

And I would like to have a final word for our teams. None of this would be possible without the patient, the talent and the commitment of the Voltalians around the world. And SPRING, there are a few of them here. SPRING is our collective journey, and together, we will make it a success.

Thank you very much. And let's go for the Q&A now. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Robert. Thank you, Sylvine and Yoni. We are now opening to Q&A right now. So we will begin by the people in the room, then if any question in the con call. And we'll finalize also with -- as there is a webcast, we have also maybe questions online, so we invite you to raise your questions now in the room.

I would have a first question on the deleveraging trajectory that you flagged in your presentation, I think, if I remember well, to 7.5x and 8x net debt to EBITDA. My understanding is that you will get to that point mainly through disposals and just rising EBITDA, but I just wanted to make sure I understood that correctly, so there is no equity included to get to that point. And I was curious, more generally speaking, what is to you the maximum acceptable leverage level basically? And what leads you to have this plan to lower the leverage ratio? So that's the first question.

The second one is just on the 2027 EBITDA target. So I think the previous one was EUR 475 million. So there is -- I think it's a EUR 160 million cut at midpoint on that target. I was wondering if you could give some details on the moving parts of the '27 EBITDA, and basically, quantify the different building blocks to get from the previous to the new target. So I assume there is some on capacity, some on FX. I was wondering if there is any assumption on curtailment in 2027 in Brazil. So any thought on that would be quite helpful.

Thank you, [ Arthur ]. So for the first part of the question, actually, the -- how we will get to a 7.5x to 8x net debt ratio to EBITDA, it's actually coming from both, increased cash from operations, which will allow us to finance part of our investments, this is for sure. And second, indeed, you're right, also from sales, from some noncore activity businesses, so resulting from the refocusing. So these are the 2 elements, which end up with a 7.5x to 8x.

As for what is an acceptable level, actually, we believe this is the one, and this is the one we are targeting. We have been always targeting actually. And we remain keeping on this target believing it's the right for our business model.

With regard with '27 EBITDA target, you're right, we did target before EUR 475 million normalized EBITDA. Just to refresh, normalized means what? Normalized production based on the long-term production, and normalized in respect with the exchange rates, especially Brazilian exchange rate, which was built on a 5.5 assumption rate.

So how to go from EUR 475 million to EUR 300 million, EUR 325 million? Indeed, FX. We did review the exchange rates going for a 7 exchange rate instead of 5.5. This is the first point. Second point is in terms of production, we now say, it's too complicated for you, for the market to monitor, so we commit for an EBITDA, which is not normalized anymore. So there is no topic about normalized production neither.

So we did take, of course, therefore, this adjustment in the way we decreased, but we also have some unrealized projects that we didn't do and will not do. Why? Because either the IRR were not the one we were targeting. And also because actually, from the curtailment from the past, for sure, we missed some cash to reinvest. So this is the second part of the explanation around about EUR 60 million.

Then you have the last part, which is another effect, it's about the M&A. You know that historically, we do sell a lot of greenfield projects in Brazil because we have a pipeline with a strong project and valuable. We put on hold what's happening in Brazil. And obviously, we need to have a better view and understanding of what's going to happen in the coming months and years. So this affected also the bridge.

And last but not least, indeed, to be cautious, we include an assumption of curtailment in 2027 figures.

So these are the main pillars, which brings us from EUR 475 million normalized to EUR 300 million to EUR 325 million not normalized.

Philippe Ourpatian, ODDO. Just one additional point concerning the curtailment you mentioned from 2027. Do we have your hypothesis, it's still 10 or it's a little bit higher than that due to the 14 we have already? Just to follow up of the [ Arthur ] questions.

From my side, I have some several ones. Concerning the storage, you start to discuss storage. It's not something new in the industry, but you are accelerating on this specific field. What kind of business are you considering in terms of storage? Are you discussing to fuel some end consumer during a certain period of time? Or are you more thinking about ancillary services, grid help? Well, that's important because it's not exactly the same business model. Or are you going to do some market merchant battery businesses? That's going to be also interesting.

And I was wondering what part of Helexia is waiting? Or how is the weight of Helexia in this new plan? Because it was fueling in the previous one quite strongly, the solar business, and you reached 70%, which means that it has been the case. In the last strategic plan, it was described as one of the main driver. Where we are with Helexia today? And the refocusing in terms of country is also in the perimeter of Helexia? That's -- because it has been lot -- significantly developed almost everywhere in Europe and with sometimes very low capacities. That's the point.

And the last is concerning the cash inflow. Just to be sure that in this cash inflows, EUR 300 million, EUR 350 million, are you putting in the disposal you are waiting on that? And what's going to be the magnitude of that, if it's the case?

Thank you, Philippe, for the questions. I will answer a few ones, and then, maybe I will let Sylvine to answering the other ones. First of all, it's true, maybe we should have commented better about that during the presentation, but SPRING is about Voltalia Group. It means it concerns Voltalia and also Helexia and also the other subsidiary and also businesses of Voltalia.

Then yes, the focus of geographical print also concerns Helexia. And by the way, we have already exited South Africa in Helexia. We have already exited Senegal. And then this refocusing concerns in terms of geography, also Helexia, to answer your first question.

Second question regarding curtailment for 2027, I think you asked that, indeed, as Sylvine mentioned, we have considered curtailment for the full period of we are talking right now, between '25 and '30. While we are considering -- well, we do not expect, but we have considered a high curtailment up to 2027 and reducing gradually from 2028 and on. Then basically, to give you some numbers, we have considered around between 12% to 15% in 2027, while we still believe that we will be able to benefit from compensation. But again, we have not considered it in our business plan.

Why we are believing that we will benefit from compensation? And honestly, maybe I'm a bit -- I'm too much optimistic with regard to that. Maybe because I'm also Brazilian. But we were expecting indeed to reach an agreement with the government and also ANEL end of this half year, which did not happen. Negotiations have been really strong, really intense. However, we don't want to leave money on the table. Then -- and I'm not saying Voltalia, the renewable market, the ones which are affected.

And also together with the help of the association, we are negotiating firmly with the government, with the grid operator, with ANEL in order to benefit from the best compensation as possible. Then, I think it will happen. However, again, I do want to come back to you saying that we're too optimistic, then we have considered curtailments at a pretty high level during -- over the period. And again, we expect that at least part of the losses will be compensated.

Checking the other ones. Regarding storage, well, I think you have already the answer, but it's true, we are talking about transforming Voltalia, but we are not going to transform Voltalia into a volatile company -- I mean, a more volatile company. We are not expecting to enter to the merchant market with storage. It's to be able to have more flexibility within our assets. It's something that we already do. Basically, you know because it's been announced that in Uzbekistan, for instance, those emerging countries are somehow benefiting from the return on experience of more mature country, which are experimenting curtailments.

What do they do from start? They say, let's -- rather than putting a lot of solar and a lot of wind, let's put hybrid projects together with battery storage. And this is what we are doing in Uzbekistan. This is what we are negotiating with the government in Egypt as well. And in a lot of countries -- in South Africa, yes, it's true, South Africa, Italy.

Then the next developments are taking into account battery storage, but in order to make a bundle for less intermittency, whether for auctions, whether to supply an off-taker with a more firm energy because it's more difficult today to sign PPAs, pays as demand -- as produced, sorry, pays as produced, as we used to sign historically.

So maybe to complete Helexia, the weight remains around 12% to 15% of the total turnover. So all in all, so this is similar to basically what we have, especially also mentioning keeping in mind the refocusing and the SPRING transformation plan that Helexia is as well doing.

As for the cash inflow, indeed, the majority is coming from disposals, but not only.

Yes. There is a question on the other side. You have the mic, perfect.

Juan Rodriguez, Kepler. I have 2 questions, if I may. The first one is on the dividend payment that you're signaling for 2028. Is this dividend expected to continue going forward? Are you targeting a payout ratio? Or it's more of a symbolic figure and a distribution of the EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million of cash inflows that you're expected for that year?

The second one is on the exit of noncore assets that you're signaling. You signaled that probably you're going to remain around 12 countries, if I'm not mistaken. Brazil is still a key region for you because you signaled that you're reducing your stake, but by how much? And what about the hydromass -- hydro and biomass assets that you have on projects that you have on those?

I will start with the last question. Actually, when we are saying about refocusing in terms of geographies -- I do think that, by the way, could you -- about the geographies, in order to be able to answer both, about geographies and also biomass and hydro, what you have just mentioned, what's your question again about geographies?

What countries are within the 12 that you're signaling, which is -- which are the countries...

Which are the countries?

Which countries are you focusing? And if Brazil is considered a key region for you still or it's part of the disposal of noncore assets?

Yes. Thank you. Thank you for the question. Basically, we consider it a key country, a country where we want to stay with several criteria. One of the criteria is the size, if we manage to reach a critical size within that country. Why? Because we believe that performance is also linked to the -- our capability to understand perfectly the country and to be able to leverage our competitive advantages.

And I believe that when we have 20 to 50 mega in a country, it cannot pay, let's say, a team which is experienced, which knows about tax optimization, et cetera, compared to a team -- to a country where we have basically 300 megawatts, and you can size the country with a team -- experienced team in order to grab opportunities and to do the best, be the best-in-class in operating the assets. Then it's a matter of scale and experience that we can get from being -- having a kind of critical size within the country.

Then, this is one of the criteria in staying or not in a country, the perspective to be able to reach such a critical size. Of course, the size depends on the type of the countries. I would say in Brazil, it will be a higher size than in other European countries, 300 megawatts could be a reasonable size in order to be able to profit from that, to benefit from that.

The other thing is volatility of the country and the risk assessment of the country as well. I mean, if it's a merchant country or pure merchant country, it's very difficult to have long-term PPAs. It may be a country. Even if we could do potentially 300 to 400 megawatts, maybe we will not stay or we will not go in such a country.

I'm not going to be able to give you the name of the countries because there are some, of course, some processes going on. And we are finalizing also some of the assessments. Since the beginning of the year, we have done a strategic review about each country, strengths, weaknesses, the team, the pipeline, et cetera. But in time -- in due time, we will inform you about the countries.

About the dividend, maybe I'll leave you -- yes.

Maybe hydro and biomass assets. What we said is that we are focusing on the future for the development on solar, onshore wind and storage. Does not mean automatically that we would sell the assets, even though, of course, everything is under assessment, but there is no direct link between it.

And finally, so for the dividend, indeed, the way we build our plan is to be able to pay a dividend from 2028 and onwards, future -- following years.

[indiscernible] I would be quite direct. As you said, 8 countries have been under assessment. Are there any African countries under assessment? As we know the complexity and sometimes the low profitability of some projects over there, can you try to be as direct as I have been about the answer?

We are looking, of course, to African countries. Nonetheless, you may see that we are not in a lot of African countries. Definitely, we are struggling with some African countries, and we are having questions. But definitely, the backbone of our African view is on, I would say, strong countries, South Africa, Egypt. We have a lot of success in Tunisia, so we are more into those countries. Then country per country, we could decide to move on, okay?

Nonetheless, you have remarked that we said that emerging countries remain an access important for us in order to have a risk-reward profile, which is important for us, and we consider sometimes that in that kind of countries, we can have a better balance than in some others. And you saw -- but you saw that Helexia already stepped out of South Africa and Senegal, but that was on the Helexia side. So yes, we did some choices on Africa.

Is Morocco at risk?

Morocco is moving. We are -- Morocco is a complicated country. Nonetheless, we are, I would say, between the 2, 3 credible actors in Morocco. Team is here. Projects are ready to build. So we are assessing like others, but not a specific risk.

Maybe to add. We're not saying here that they are good and bad countries while they are. The point is here is we cannot do everything. We don't have the financial resources to do everything. Then we need to choose our battle. Of course, it's tough. We need to arbitrate. And we need to put our efforts and resources where we believe we could have the quickest wins, a long-term view and a best risk-return profile. Saying that, I'm sure that you will be able to do yourself the job in order to guess which country we are going to stay and the other ones we are going to leave.

But really for Morocco, actually, we are aiming to start construction in the coming months on our first big project, 120 megawatts of wind, so we are here.

Just a follow-up concerning the dividend. In the question of my colleagues, it was the kind of profile of your dividend policy. Are we discussing about a fixed payout? Or are you thinking about a kind of floor dividend like some other companies are doing with potential upside? What's going to be your view on that? Just to help us to define what's going to be, even if it's not the most significant part of your cash out, but just to know your philosophy in terms of dividend regarding your future policy and starting '28, which is not tomorrow, but not a so long period of time also.

I would say that policy on dividends should not prevent us from investing. This is the first thing. The second thing is that it's a very important signal to you within the framework of the roadmap that the company will be strong enough, the balance sheet will be strong enough, profitability will be strong enough to start distributing dividends without preventing us from investing.

I think we -- let's move to the webcast platform. I do have one question related to co-developments and co-investments. What are the type and specific activity that we can work on co-development and co-investment?

That's a very good question, and you've seen that we emphasized that part. Basically, we have built a large pipeline. We have invested a lot in the pipeline, which has, let's say, a duration in order to be able to maturate. What we want is to accelerate maturation with, of course, choosing the best ones, the ones that we believe could reach ready-to-build stage quickly. But also, we want to monetize part of that pipeline. And that's the reason why we are discussing with potential partners in order to be able to share part of the pipeline, specific -- in specific geographies in order to be able to monetize part of it right now.

Second, to also reduce the risk. And third, having a partner helps very often in order to be able to speed up or to add value in speeding up the processes. If it's a local one, for instance, it could be a help in some countries where we are struggling, for instance, for getting connections.

Then the first part of the co-investment is related to the development platform. I remember you that we have 17 gigawatts in our pipeline, while we intend here to build around 2 giga for the next 5 years. Then, there is a big difference. Of course, we are intending to sell part of it, of course. But why not partnering with someone who can help us in order to concretize this monetization that we are thinking about.

The second part of platform is something that we have been doing so far, actually, especially in Brazil, where we had a big volume. I remind you that in Brazil, we have chosen to develop a big cluster, what we call Serra Branca. I remind you, it's around 2.3 gigawatt of solar or hybrid projects, maybe soon with batteries, who knows.

And in order to be able to be competitive, what we did, something that you mentioned earlier, is that we have decided to share and value, of course, all the developments done there. It's good for us. It's good for the partner because in big projects like this, you have a scale effect, which makes you competitive because you are talking about 100, 200, 300 megawatt project.

But also one of the trigger to be competitive is to be able to -- the substations, transformers, transmission line. Here, we are talking about a transformer of 300 MVA. We are talking about 50 kilometers transmission line of 500 kV and 230 kV. It's huge. With one project of 200 megawatts, 300 megawatts, you cannot support it. And then if you partner with someone who is also doing the 300 megawatts, you can build a big substation, and you deal with the cost and you get competitive.

Then, we are in Egypt, and you know that we are targeting a project. We have already a local partner there of more than 2 giga. We are negotiating contracts in Uzbekistan of hundreds of mega, et cetera, et cetera. Then sharing together with a co-investor will increase our value, will accelerate our payback. In the same time, it will allow us to be more competitive in order to be able to have the best engineering for the project. And, of course, there is a question of risk that we will share also with some partners. Then, basically, those are the both type of platforms we are working on, one on the development side and one on the IPP side.

[indiscernible].

Yes. I mean, we will keep the -- I will not say necessarily the majority, but at least, we will keep the control.

We have 2 remaining questions on the platform. One from our analyst from Santander, Oscar. In how many countries we are now compared with a target of 12? And then related to the cash flow, EUR 300 million to EUR 350 million from 2026 to 2028, you said cash from disposal included, but I understood the majority of the cash flow income is from disposal, yes? So Yoni.

Yes, maybe just -- so on the countries, as of today, we are having teams and full structure for Development and Energy Sales activities in 18 countries. And once we have added the countries of operations of the Services and Helexia, we raised to 22 countries. The 12 countries we were discussing are more on the Energy Sale and Development activities. Of course, it is much more mobile when you are doing construction. You can have a specific construction with teams, which are centralized in a country. For instance, Portugal, as you know, is a strong base for our Services business, and they could go for specific contracts, okay? But the 12 are for the full country of operation where you have Services and Development and Energy Sales.

Then just to be very clear, in Paris and Porto, we have a dedicated bidding team, very -- I would say, very lean, able to answer and to bid to big international call for tenders, for IPP, for Energy Sales. And this would remain as it is very low in terms of expenses. So we could go, and this is how we did enter Uzbekistan. This is how we did enter Egypt. This is how we did enter Tunisia from a centralized team, which is bidding in a new country.

So as for the question on the cash flow, indeed, we mentioned it, most of the cash inflows, let's call it like this, is coming from the disposals. As for the cash burn, a good way to understand what the -- how we want to improve, looking at '24, basically, the cash flow from operation, we're financing 30% of our investment cash flows, maximum, yes, 30%. So we want to reach 50%. After, it's a matter of growth, and Voltalia wants to continue to grow. We are not saying we're going to just fully be autonomous. So we have a target to go further. But the reach and the target we are fixing is 50%.

I think we have a last question in the room, and then, we will let Robert conclude.

Yes. [indiscernible] with Bloomberg. I'd like to know how the political uncertainty in France and the lack of energy roadmap is forcing you to potentially adapt your growth plan and capital allocation. And what sort of impact it may have for the company?

Thank you. Indeed, there is a volatile atmosphere that we can see in France. But I'll remind you that, I mean, it's not new. It's been lasting for a few years. Though the growth of solar and wind has not been nothing in France -- I mean, 5 gigawatt of solar installed capacity in France and 1 giga, 0.5 or 1.1, I don't remember, which is pretty important. Then market in France, while we are hearing a lot of things about renewables, it's still growing, still growing fast.

What's going to happen in the future? I don't know. But what I see is that in many countries where there are even the government against -- and I will name U.S., for instance, not necessarily in favor of renewables, renewables reached such a competitive stage that even if the governments are not supporting so much renewable, it continues to grow. We saw that on a Trump version 1, and we can see that Trump version 2, except maybe some issues that some developers and investors are experimenting in offshore wind.

Then we have a large pipeline in France. But I will say, the beauty of the model and the one that we are refocusing is balancing the risk between several geographies. And I would say, as we are experimenting here in Brazil, and we have a big weight in Brazil, that's why -- that's the reason why because of curtailment, we are kind of suffering. But having 10% on one country of the total capacity and 10% on the other one, we can leave with this volatility.

Then, basically, we're not going to put all of our eggs in France. We are going to continue to reduce the work we've been doing so far in Brazil in order to rebalance Brazil and having less weight of business in Brazil. And this is basically the strategy we are going to do geographical wise in order to be able to support volatility fluctuation. And we know sometimes it stops, and it creates also a lot of opportunities because some players are not strong enough to stay in such environment, and it favors companies who finally are resilient, and SPRING is about being resilient, even more than we are today. Then I would like...

Yes, maybe a last question.

[indiscernible] What is missing in this presentation, in my opinion, is the relationship between the objectives you are expecting and the means you need in order to obtain them. In order to better understand, what is the engine of this transformation, how efficient it is and how -- and what sort of fuel you need to put in such engine in order to have such a result.

And I'm sure you have done some simulation to obtain such results. Obviously, you are not ready to share that with us. But it will be interesting to have a sort of prospective outlook in order to understand that. For example, you mentioned curtailment. And as you know, bigger is a curtailment, bigger is a divergence between the investment and the result. And this is not linear. Same thing for compensation depending of yes or not, what is the impact of compensation into the result.

Same thing for the choice of country. It's not a question of geography. It's a question of how is the attention into the energy system in such country. For example, for solar, it's very different between Spain, Texas versus France, where some are ready to cancel solar, for example.

And any other, how to say, hypothesis, which can have a huge impact on the result. So the question is to better understand what is in your view, in your transformation, what is the brand lever you want to develop in order to such -- to reach such transformation result?

Thank you. Thank you for the question. I think we have, in a larger part, answered to your question, giving, by the way, some examples about what it is about in order to be able to create value, but that's a fantastic way to conclude, by the way, your question. It's about to generate strong cash flows, improving profitability while being self-financed.

Thanks to recurring cost savings, improving EBITDA margins, thanks to that, reduced leverage between 7.5% and 8%, and then enable dividends from 2028 on. And I would be pleased that if you want some details, if we can disclose them to help you to understand better the plan.

Anyhow, I really thank you for your questions, for being present here, for the ones who are present on the webcast. And hopefully, we will meet again with some good news regarding the roadmap and the actions we are implementing. Thank you so much.