And welcome to the NNNREIT Incorporated 4th Quarter 2025 Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are on a listen-only mode, and a question and answer session will follow the formal presentation. If anyone should require operator assistance during the conference, please press star zero on your telephone keypad. And please note, this conference is being recorded. I will now turn the conference over to your host, Mr. Steve Horn, CEO of NNN REITs. Sir, the floor is yours.

Hey, thanks, Alec. Hey, good morning. Welcome to NNN REITs fourth quarter 2025 earnings call. Joining me on the call is our Chief Financial Officer, Vincent Chow. As outlined in this morning's press release, NNN delivered a solid operating financial performance in 2025, generating 2.7% growth in AFFO per share and completing over 900 million of acquisitions, the highest annual volume in NNN's history. The momentum exiting 2025, driven by elevated acquisition activity and the portfolio management of the vacancies positions NNN well entering more uncertain macroeconomic environment in 2026. I am certain in the team's ability to execute across the full investment cycle, from sourcing the right opportunities, to thoughtful underwriting, to proactive management of the highly diversified portfolio by geography, tenant, and industry. Before turning to the results and the outlook, I want to highlight several accomplishments in 2025. We maintained a highly flexible balance sheet, including a 10.8-year weighted average debt maturity, which is best in class. No incumbent assets and $1.2 billion of total available liquidity. We completed the executive team positioning, and also we continued performance on the acquisition platform alongside proactive portfolio management. The long-term value proposition remains unchanged. At its core, our strategy still continues to focus on executing a disciplined, bottom-up investment approach, growing the dividend annually while maintaining the top-tier payout ratio, delivering mid-single-digit AFFO per share of growth over the long term, aligning acquisitions, dispositions, and balance sheet management to support these objectives. Turning to our outlook as we move through early of 2026, NNN enters the year on solid financial footing. At year-end, we had $1.2 billion of total available liquidity, followed by a record acquisition year. Looking ahead, we expect to fund our 2026 strategy through a combination of approximately $210 million of retained free cash flow, roughly $130 million of planned dispositions, which together should result in manageable equity needs throughout the year while maintaining leverage neutral. This business model can consistently deliver growth in good and challenging economic conditions. Our longstanding approach to capital deployment, remaining selective and opportunistic will not change. Current cap rates have stabilized for the most part, with the fourth quarter initial cap rate in line with the third quarter, and we're seeing that trend continue early in the first quarter of 2026, but anticipating slight compression as we move further into the year. During the quarter, we invested just over $180 million across 55 properties at an initial cash cap rate of 7.4 and with a weighted average lease term of over 18 years. NNN historically sources most of this acquisition through long-standing relationship and does not typically target investment-grade portfolios which tend to have tenant-friendly lease provisions and lower organic growth, if any. Turning to the fourth quarter operating performance, a portfolio of 3,692 freestanding single-tenant properties is performing at a high level. As we sit here today, we're not having any conversations with portfolio tenants that raise concerns regarding operating performance or the ability to meet rent obligations. Our occupancy is up 80 basis points from last quarter to 98.3, which is in line with our long-term average of give or take 98%. The increase in occupancy was a direct result of our asset management team and leasing department executing at a high level addressing the elevated faking assets from the end of the third quarter. I would classify the quarter as, quote, in line on renewals and leasing. Fifty-five of our 64 renewed, ahead with a renewal rate of 85%, but the rental rates were 104% above prior. We leased four properties to new tenants at 109% of the prior rent, demonstrating strong demand for the assets. A quick update on the assets of the furniture and restaurants, which were trending ahead of schedule. First, the furniture assets, as of today, we have the last five properties under contract for sale. We expect the majority of those to close during the current quarter, but however, one or two could slip to the second quarter. With respect to the restaurant assets, the team continues to make solid progress identifying the optimal outcome for each property. Solutions include asset sales, re-leasing, or redevelopment with strong brands across multiple industries. Currently, 32 properties remain, 15 are for sale, and four are in advanced discussions about leasing. The remaining 13 were actively marketed. We expect to reach resolution on these assets progressively throughout the year. On dispositions side, fourth quarter, we sold 18 income-producing along with 42 vacant, generating 82 million of proceeds during the quarter. For the full year, dispositions totaled $190 million, including $49 vacant at a 6.4 CAF rate and $67 vacant. This remains our priority. We continue to be selective, disposing of non-performing assets where there's no clear path for near-term income generation. With that, let me turn the call over to Finn to provide additional detail with our quarterly results and updating guidance.

Thank you, Steve. Let's start with our customary cautionary statements. During this call, we will make certain statements that may be considered forward-looking statements under federal securities law. The company's actual future results may differ significantly from matters discussed in these forward-looking statements, and we may not release revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect the results that differ from expectations are disclosed in greater detail in the company's filings with the SEC and in this morning's press release. Now on to results. This morning, we reported core FFO and AFO of $0.87 per share, each up 6.1% year-over-year. For the full year, Core FFO per share was $3.41, and AFFO per share was $3.44, each up 2.7% versus 2024. These solid results come despite several headwinds to start the year and reflect the resilience of our cycle-tested business model. AFFO per share for the quarter came in slightly ahead of our expectations. The upside was driven by a number of smaller positive variances, including lower net real estate expenses, lower G&A, and higher interest income. there were no notable run rate items to call out this total revenue was 4.9% for the quarter 5.1% for the full year as a percentage of NOI which we think is a better way to think about it GNA was 5.1% for the quarter and 5.3% for the year free cash flow after dividend was about 51 million in the fourth quarter year at 98.3% occupancy up 80 basis points over last quarter which again speaks the resiliency of our business model and the portfolio and the strength of our leasing and asset management teams. Annualized base rent was $928 million at the end of the quarter, an increase of close to 8% year-over-year compared to a 7% increase last quarter, driven by our strong acquisition activity throughout the year. With regard to our watch list, there have been no material changes since last quarter, and we believe our bad debt assumptions are sufficient to absorb any future tenant issues. Although headline risk can create noise, it's important to keep in mind that N&M's proven strategy of focusing on real estate quality, property and corporate level credit, and low cost and rent basis using a long-term sale-ease-backed structure. We navigate various economic cycles with limited long-term cash flow impacts. Capital market activity. In November, we paid off our $400 million 4% coupon note at maturity. In December, we closed on a $300 million delayed draw term loan and entered into forward starting swaps totaling $200 million that fixed SOFR at 3.22%. In conjunction with the execution of the term loan, we amended our revolving credit facility to eliminate the SOFR credit spread adjustment, reducing the effective interest rate on our revolver by 10 basis points. We drew down $200 million against the term loan, leaving us with $100 million of remaining availability. Moving to the balance sheet, our BBB plus rated balance sheet remains in great shape. At the end of the quarter, we had no encumbered assets and $1.2 billion of available liquidity. Performer for the full drawdown of our term loan, floating rate debt represented just 1% of total debt. Our leverage was consistent in the last quarter at 5.6 times, and our duration remained the highest in net lease space at 10.8 years, ending at 3.4% year-over-year increase and equating to an attractive 5.5% annualized dividend yield. In 2016, outlook, we are establishing an AFO per share guidance range of $3.52 to $3.00 in 2026, accelerating from 2.7% growth in 2025. In the past years, our initial outlook embeds a self-funded level of acquisitions with further upside dictated by market conditions and our cost of capital as we remain focused on outlook embeds 600 million of acquisitions which is funded primarily with 130 million of disposition about 210 million effective we have included 75 basis points of bad debt in our full year outlook which we think is prudently conservative to start the year additional details regarding the underlying

assumptions embedded in our guidance can be found in our earns release with that i'll turn the call back over to the operators for questions thank you ladies and gentlemen at this time we will be conducting our question and answer session if you would like to ask a question please press star 1 on your telephone keypad a confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue and you may press star 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue for participants using speaker equipment it may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the staircase. One moment, please, while we poll for questions. Thank you. Our first question is coming from Michael Goldsmith with UBS. Your line is live.

Good morning. Thanks a lot for taking my questions. In the press release, Steve, you mentioned proactive portfolio management. So can you kind of provide the latest and greatest on what you're doing there, where you see it? And And then I guess you can also tie that into, you know, your occupancy took a step up during the quarter to above 98%, but is that the long-term number you want to be, or you've been higher than that in the past, just trying to get a sense of where you're at with that?

Yeah, I mean, I think ideally, you know, you want to be slightly above that, but, you know, we do deal with retailers, so with lease terms that come up, so we do get assets back. but what I mean on the proactive portfolio management yeah you have a portfolio and there's a bell curve everybody has kind of the bottom ten percent and with our relationships we're always constantly in discussions so we have a good idea of who's going to renew at the end of lease terms and if we can get a sense of that you know if there's five years left and we can dispose of the asset with the goal of getting our renewal rates higher over the course of time we're just trying to get ahead of future problems and it's more on the real estate side because credit can turn on a dime and but we always are you know monitoring credit talking to the tenants we're just really just trying to keep the portfolio in good stead over time which I think we have as far as our renewal rates being around that 85% and having over 100% recapture it done it thanks Matt and then just on the bad debt assumption looks like you're starting with 75 basis points last year.

I know it wasn't you, Vin, who set up, but it started lower. And then prior to that, I think the number was a bit higher. So can you just talk about, you know, why is 75 basis points the right way to start the year? And, you know, I think earlier you mentioned that there was not any material changes on your watch list, so just trying to get a sense of some context around that number.

Yeah, thanks for the question. Yeah, so one, I'll just start off by saying no matter what number we put out there, were either too conservative or too aggressive. So typically it's been about 100 basis points at the long-term sort of starting point. Last year we went to 60 basis points because we had already taken out two of our larger problem tenants, the most immediate concerns with the two tenants, the furniture and restaurant operator. So they were already taken out of the numbers and so we went with a lower number to start to reflect any other future speculative. For this year, I think as we looked at it, we don't really have any changes to the watch list. We haven't really had any known issues that are of any materiality, but we felt like, hey, start the year. We haven't been impacted too much by some of the retailer headlines that have been out there. Historically, we've gone 75.

Dan, thank you very much. Good luck in 2026.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Spencer Glimtjer with Green Street. Your line is live.

Thank you. So maybe just piggybacking off the credit loss questions, can you guys share some color on kind of rent coverage levels, and where is the portfolio coverage today, and how does that compare to historic levels?

You know, looking at some of the car wash assets, I was surprised they ticked up a little But when you focus on rent coverage, you've got to really keep in mind it's a stale number, you know, because not all tenants report, you know, quarterly, some are on an annual basis and the the economy is moving so fast the consumer you know we don't get it hung up on one number in particular we kind of look at the trends and that comes back to our active portfolio management but overall depending on the industry you know we have the car wash a lot of them are over three four times all the way down to auto service might be closer to two but overall we're comfortable with the rent coverage and don't have any concerns with it yeah And Spencer, we've talked about this before.

I mean, when you think about rent coverage, depending on what line of trade you're talking about, you know, one number may be very good for one line of trade and not so great for another line of trade. So looking at the overall portfolio average, you know, can help maybe somewhat with directional changes, but it's not necessarily a meaningful number.

Yeah, understood. That's why I was just asking maybe compared to historic levels, yeah, to your point, that the trends are important. But, yeah, second question, can we talk about which segments of your existing clients are looking to grow more aggressively in the near term?

Yeah, you know, we do the bottom-up approach. We don't target a specific, you know, sector because we can only buy stuff that's for sale. But that being said, you know, we do focus on the relationships and we focus on the smaller parcels on, you know, high visibility, highly trafficked roads. And I would say for $25 and the pipeline, it seems like auto services and convenience stores are our biggest opportunities currently.

Okay.

Thank you, guys.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Smeed's Rules with Citi. Your line is live.

Hi. I just wanted to ask a little bit about the pace of kind of lease termination fees. I know they had been elevated back in the third quarter and then seemed a little more normal in the fourth quarter, but maybe a little higher than normal. I'm just wondering what you're expecting as you through 2026 on that front.

Hi, Smits. Yeah, as you kind of discussed in the past, I mean, we did, you know, for the full year, it was about $11 million, just over $11 million of lease termination fees in 2025. The fourth quarter, it was around $230,000. So, you know, again, I would characterize that as a much more normalized level. But historically, we've probably done around 3 million-ish a year, you know, prior to the last two years, which were elevated, you know, so that's call it, you know, just a little bit less than a million a quarter would be sort of a normal level. But it is chunky. So it's not like you just have a number. That's why we don't focus on it too much.

But as far as how we're thinking about 2026, I would say we're assuming a more normalized And then I just want to ask you, just sort of in general, from yourselves and from others, it seems like 2026 acquisition activity remains relatively elevated to maybe what we've seen in the past. I'm just curious as to you, are you not seeing kind of incremental competition for your assets? I know a lot of yours come through long-term relationships already, but just in general maybe some thoughts on kind of the broader landscape of what you're seeing in terms of acquisition competition.

Yeah, we've always operated in a highly competitive environment. You know, there's always been competition, just the names have changed over the course of 20 years of my career. So, I've not really seen an incremental competition entering the market. You know, all the deals we do for the most part are with sophisticated tenants, so they have a fiduciary responsibility to market the asset, but we just kind of get the first call and the last call, and that's where we rely on our relationships. But that's why I do expect, you know, cap rates to compress a little bit, possibly in the second, third quarter, just because there's peers out there that feel the need to elevate the acquisition activity, so they've got to win a lot more deals.

Thank you. Thank you. Our next question is coming from John Kilchewski with Wells Fargo. Your line is live.

Hi, good morning. My first one is just on the acquisition guide and thinking about funding mix. Could you just walk us through the building blocks here? I think it's about $200 million of free cash flow. You've got high-end dispositions, $150. I'm just curious, how much are you willing to take leverage up to, you know, maybe go above and beyond that high-end, or what's that capacity there?

So, one, we really don't have any appetite to take up leverage. You know, we're sitting at 5.6 times. You know, I think ideally, you know, we generally have been around five-and-a-half times. So not looking to lever up to drive that acquisition volume. So as I said, we're projecting 600 million at the midpoint of our guidance. That is pretty much entirely self-funded with free cash flow of 210 million as expected, 130 million of dispositions, and then some incremental debt financing to stay leverage neutral. And then again, beyond that, if there are additional opportunities, it really will depend on what the market conditions are, where the cap rates were. You know, the other thing that we could, you know, look to do is, you know, rather than lever up, is the source of equity.

Got it. And then an extension of that would be sort of the cost of those dispositions. I know there's a handful of vacancies. What's, like, a good blended cap, I guess, we should be thinking about in terms of the cost that you're getting on those sales?

You know, at the high end of the range, $150 million. This year, there will be a little bit more pruning. So I would guess, you know, on income producing assets, I would expect a little bit of an elevated cap rate selling the assets. But when you blend it out, it will be, you know, I would guess significantly below, you know, the 150 basis points of where we're gonna deploy capital.

Yeah, and John- Very helpful, thank you. We do have some, vacancies are still higher than they were prior to the two tenants having some issues there in late 2024. And so, you know, there will still be a healthy number of vacant sales.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Ronald Camden with Morgan Stanley. Your line is live.

Hey, just two quick ones. Just on the occupancy, just where do you expect that to trend through the year, number one?

And then the bad debt question, just if you think about sort of the experience that you had last year coming into this year, the 75 sort of basis points 75 sort of basis points guidance can you just talk us through where you sort of got the confidence that you're not going to see another major one thanks yeah I'll take the in the accuracy and you know they can talk more about the bad debt I think you know end of the first quarter early second quarter I expect the accuracy to trend up a little exactly what Ben said you know we'll sell a few more vacancies that are in progress right now to be significantly higher but trending a little bit higher and our historical

average is 98% plus or minus so I think we'll plateau that yeah and Ron on the bad debt I mean what gives us confidence on the 75 I mean I think one you've got history right this is a portfolio that's been through every cycle you can imagine and and you know historically the companies you know realized call it 30 to 50 basis points of bad debt so that's that's part of it the other part is you know as even I both mentioned in our prepared March we're really not seeing anything that we feel is an imminent issue from a watch list perspective nothing you know at least of a material nature there's always going to be you know some some small tenants that fall out here and there but from material perspective nothing really that that album so that's giving us the confidence that you know and get 75 basis points is higher than our historical but again to start the year thank you our next question is coming from Jana Galan with Bank of America.

Your line is live.

Thank you. Good morning. Again, following up on the 2026 guidance, the expectation for the real estate expenses is down versus 2025, and it sounds like you're thinking that term fees will be lower. So would this just be better occupancy or were there any kind of one-time things that could be driving the expenses?

Yeah, so last year we did 17.3 on net real estate expenses, and that's because we did have an elevated number of vacancies tied to the restaurant and the furniture operator. So we were sort of at the peak, call it 90-ish vacancies, we're down to about 64 at the end of the year. And I think, you know, we do have some line of sight on some of the additional resolutions that Steve outlined in his prepared remarks. And so that's driving further vacancy declines, and that would result in lower real estate expenses.

Thank you. And then maybe just, you know, on the watch list, you mentioned, you know, no imminent issues, no major changes. But just curious, the current watch list, are there any kind of common themes with industries or regions, or is this more like idiosyncratic one-off issues?

Yeah, I think I would characterize it more as idiosyncratic. Definitely no regional trends to call out, but the tenants that are on the watch list, I mean, AMC is on there. They've been on there just from a movie industry perspective. There's nothing imminent that we're sort of expecting from them, but that's a pretty specific situation.

Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Brad Heffern with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is live.

Steve, can you give your thoughts on car wash? It looks like maybe you invested more in the quarter, and you got four car wash tenants in the top 20. It has been a source of investor concern at times, although not necessarily a source of concern from REITs. But do you think the sector has sort of gotten through its tough patch, and what's the outlook?

So they want to redevelop it, and we found there is a lot of cities, so many. So it's kind of a lot of our car washes, and they're performing well. But, yeah, no concerns, you know, and we were fortunate, you know, we didn't do the Zips We're pretty good at underwriting.

And then, Vin, on G&A, it's a pretty big jump year over year. Is there anything unusual in there, like investing in the platform or something like that?

So, it is up a little bit more from a percentage basis, more than an inflationary amount. I think just to keep things in perspective, though, I mean, if you look at it as a percentage of total revenues, you know, we expect to be in that five and a half percentage range. So still very manageable. So in that context, not a significant jump. But there are a couple of things that are driving that increase. One of which is we were in a free rent period on our headquarters in Orlando here in 2025. And so that's about a million dollar headwind in 2026. And then we did have a number of promotions. You know, our team is executing well, and you know they're developing well and so we have a number of promotions as well as a few new net new hires and then lastly you know we did add one new executive to the team those are so those are sort of the okay thank you our next question is coming from Rich Hightower with Barclays your line is live hey good morning guys thanks for taking the question then I want to go back to I think one of your parts, the prepared commentary, where you talk about sort of, you know, debt

structure being sort of matched up with the average lease term in the portfolio. And I thought that was a helpful comment. So maybe if you don't mind, talk about as you sort of increase the balance of term loans relative to other sources of debt within the debt stack, how do you sort of think about that trade-off between, you know, headline coupon and duration risk if we split it up Yeah, look, it all goes into the mixer as far as how we think about it, right?

I mean, we do have to think about the overall cost of debt, but at the same time, you know, we were tracking around 11 years of duration, and our lease duration actually has picked up in the last two quarters, which is not typical. You know, as we think about that, we had a little bit of room to close that gap, and so that allowed us to do a little bit of shorter-term debt on the term loan side. Again, it's not a strategy in and of itself to use short-term debt. It's just looking at our assets and liability matching and making sure that we're, you know, relatively close on that front. And then...

Okay, that's helpful. And secondly, I guess on one of your peer calls earlier today, you know, we sort of I heard the comment that as far as the competition within the marketplace for acquisitions, you know, you do have some buyers maybe a little more motivated by some of the accelerated depreciation features of the OBBBA bill that passed. And so, you know, what are you seeing in that regard? Do you see sort of irrational pricing and would this cause you potentially maybe to lean into the disposition side of guidance a little more and, you know, obviously being cognizant of sort of earnings, you know, dilution that might come with that, just how do you balance that out?

I think case in point, we had because we've leaned into it, you know, on the vacant and the income producing. But as far as, you know, competition, you know, a peer that may have on a call earlier plays in a different market, you know, buys open, you know, portfolios or existing portfolios and you know larger ones you know fifty hundred million dollars the competition that is in the market currently on the private side is has to deploy a vast amount of capital they're not going to go do a ten fifteen million dollar sale lease back so the competition really isn't affecting us if I had to do one and a half two billion dollars I'd probably have a different tune the competition's affecting us but you know going for the midpoint at six hundred million we can find our fair share fairly easily and do the sale leaseback structure. Kind of what Ben just mentioned, it's an oddity that a net lease company lease duration, if you have any size, actually ticks up quarter over quarter. That's a combination of doing a sale leaseback and our acquisitions average over 18 years, but more importantly it comes back to, and I think it was Michael asked about the proactive portfolio management question, that the proactive portfolio management is that we're selling short-term leases. The lease duration of our income-producing assets we sold were 6.1. The DARPA paying rent were 5. So when you do that combination and we sold them at a 6.4 cap rate, that's pretty stellar execution.

All right, great.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Amateo Okusanya with Deutsche Bank. Your line is live.

Yes. Good morning, everyone. So I just wanted to understand, again, the occupancy, the quarter-over-quarter occupancy gain. Was most of that mainly because you just sold vacant assets? Or should we be kind of thinking about really strong leasing activity as well in the fourth quarter and the implications for 2025?

Yeah, hey, Dale. Yeah, I would say most of that upside was driven by vacant asset sales. We did have some releasing as well during the quarter, and so we're seeing good demand there, which is reflected in our recapture rates. But between, I think about vacancies that were resolved because of vacant sales versus releasing, it's pretty heavily skewed to the vacant sales. But as far as implications for 2026, again, I think we have a number of line of sight on a number of additional vacancy resolutions from an asset sale or release perspective. And so, you know, I think we are expecting vacancies to 26.

That's helpful. And then in regards to the 26 guidance, again, with the midpoint 3.2% earnings growth, that's good to see acceleration from 2.7 in 2025. And I think, again, there's some headwinds as it relates to termination fees, which is elevated in 2025. So the question is, again, as you kind of think about what is normalized, and again, not necessarily after for 2017 guidance or anything like that, but how do you guys kind of think about just normalized AFFO for sure growth and kind of ultimately where you're trying to get to in terms of steady state earnings growth?

Yeah, I think our bottom-up approach is we try to do that mid-single digits over the course of the long-run, multi-year approach, and any given year, for example, this year, 25 was 2.7, our midpoint is 3.2, and could the following year be elevated off of that? It's all predicated on the macroeconomic and the composition of the portfolio, but mid-single digit, consistent FFO growth is, you know, you follow this for a while, that's our mantra.

Excellent. All the best since anything.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Alex Fagan with Beard. Your line is live.

Hey, thank you for taking my question. So you mentioned in your prepared remarks that you expect cap rates to compress later down in the year. Is that due to deal mix or can you just speak about why that's your assumption the assumption is driven by the pressure of peers deployed all right thanks for that that's it for me thank you as a reminder ladies and gentlemen if you have any questions please press star one on your telephone keypad

our next question is coming from linda sai with jeffries your line is live hi good morning um Does the $355 midpoint of your AFFO per share guidance include a refinancing headwind from the $350 million in debt coming due in December?

Yes, we do have that debt coming due. It's not until the end of the year, so we do have some refinancing assumptions embedded. But the actual refinancing part doesn't really impact us too much, just given how late in the year that maturity is. But yes, we do have some assumptions embedded there.

Any sense of what rate you could refinance that at?

Yeah. So, I mean, we're looking at a range of options. You know, as we talked about in an earlier question, we do look at our duration and we look at our cost of debt and the different options that we have. We did execute on the term loan and a little bit shorter term bond offering last year. So those are all still potential options. But I think, you know, if you're just talking about where could we price a 10-year today, it'd probably be in five and a quarter-ish, maybe 520 rate.

Got it. And then just to follow up on the cap rate compression comment in 2Q and 3Q, any sense of the magnitude?

Right now, we're starting to price Q2 deals. Yeah, we call it five to ten basis points currently for Q2.

Thank you and good luck.

Thanks, Linda.

Thank you. Our next question is coming from Jim Camert with Evercore ISI. Your line is live.

Hi, good morning. Could you remind me, after all this major acquisition activity in 2005, what is the representative average lease escalator now in the portfolio?

Yeah, I mean, we're a battleship, Jim. Yeah, we could lay back and change the portfolio escalator. It's still 1.5% for modeling purposes.

Fair enough. And then just to layer on, Steve, your earlier comment that you did a bit of defensive sales of occupied assets is what I read or interpreted, including in the fourth quarter. Realizing hindsight, what kind of drove that a little bit higher than maybe anticipated 7-6 cap rate of those 18 occupied assets disposed? Was that, you know, one particular tenant concentration or just curious what was going on there?

No, for the most part, it's we kind of get the wink, wink, nod, nod to the market. Who knows better than the actual tenants, and there was pretty much four or five years left on that they said they're not going to renew at the end of the year, so we sell them. It wasn't one in particular tenant, it wasn't one in particular industry, it was just kind of overall portfolio pruning, and a few of them were dark but paying rent, so the tenant wasn't occupying them, so you know those are problems that you're going to get back, but And then there is another handful of income producing where the tenant, you know, in this particular case, what I'm thinking of is kind of casual dining, said, hey, we're going to exit the market or redevelop another site. So we decided, you know.

And nothing endemic. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Our final question today is coming from John Moussaka with B. Reilly. Your line is live.

Good morning. So, I know we've talked a lot about kind of cap rate trends over the course of the call, but maybe are you seeing some of that compression already in the, let's call it, 1Q pipeline, given that's kind of where you have the most visibility? Or is that relatively flat on a cap rate basis versus what you saw in 4Q?

Yeah, Q3, Q4, and Q1, kind of what I mentioned in the opening remarks are all kind of flat. You know, because we're through the second quarter. In the second quarter, I've seen a slight compression.

And then in terms of dispositions in 4Q, of those vacant assets, kind of roughly how much of that was former Frisch's and Bad Talk locations? And then in terms of, as I think about the disposition assumption in 2026 guidance, I mean, how much of that is either just general vacant assets or even stuff tied to specifically frishes and former backdrop assets?

It would be probably more of the restaurant-type assets that were tied to frishes, just because that's the majority of our vacant assets. You know, we treat all vacant as do we release it, present value cash flow, do we dispose of it, reinvest the proceeds? It's whatever is best.

Let me guess the visibility you have today. I mean, how much of the kind of overall expected disposition volume roughly would you expect to be vacant assets? Because you have these frishes and bad cocks that are still kind of...

As a percentage, 26 would be less of a percentage than 25. You know, I think the vacant assets in 25, 26 would be less.

That's it for me. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We have reached the end of our question and answer session, so I'd like to turn the call back over to Mr. Horn for any closing remarks.

I appreciate you guys taking the time, listening in and in. Good questions. Look forward to seeing you kind of through the conference season, and in good shape, you know, turn the page on 25 and get back to growth in 26.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this does conclude today's conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time, and we thank you for your participation.