I think we're live here. Well, I want to welcome everyone to the last session of the 2026 Goldman Sachs Global Health Care Conference. Very pleased to have the management team from Amada here with us today. Sean Duffy, founder and CEO. Steve Cook, chief financial officer. I want to keep this as interactive as possible. I say this in every session, offer the opportunity to ask questions. No one asks any, but they're more than happy to come up after and ask you. But this is being webcast. So in the event you do have a question, please just raise your hand and we'll get a mic to you. Maybe, Sean, I'll kind of start high level here. You've been public about a year. Your reflections on sort of what you envisioned for the company as you began the public market journey and how things have gone.
Well, thank you, David. Hi, everybody. Saving the best for last here. Yeah, so we just crossed the year miles from being public and just been expressed. I mean, if you look at all the commitments we had at the time of IPO, I mean, every single one, financial, you know, revenue, margin, profitability profile, you know, strategy, we've delivered. I think we've come ahead of schedule, you know, in many areas, and, you know, I think it's all reflected in the Q1 results. I mean, a $78 million quarter, 43% growth, just a deep bit of positive in the most cost-heavy quarter of the year. So just thrilled with the progress, and it's against the backdrop, excitement, and dynamism in the chronic disease space and the recognition that yesterday's care models of a visit-by-visit approach won't serve. We're feeling that, and it's showing up in the numbers.
And I want to dive into the business model for a second. I want to – but you can be in a space that's been challenging for companies to really figure out a durable growth model. And I think we actually first met in like 2015 on Omada's journey. We were sort of figuring out, I think at that point, you were doing like a risk-sharing model with one of your key customers. And over time, you've sort of evolved the business model. Talk to us about how you landed on the current business model for the company and why you think it's a sustainable growth vehicle.
Yeah, I mean, so the big aha, which has always been on strategy for the business, is to be an actual provider of care delivering the real clinical and economic value. And I think if you looked at yesterday's digital health, those business models did not have that characteristic, and that's where real, like, health care spend is. And so, Ahmad, I mean, we are a between-visit provider. We contract as a covered entity. We file claims. It's on kind of unique codes, but it allows us to hit the exact same medical expenditures as an HCA would, a tenant would, a Stanford Hospital would, although, of course, we don't have the clinics that we have to pay to build out. and it's tailor-made specific for chronic care. And so the revenue model is very simple for Armada. It's when someone signs up, we start to charge, and it's a monthly fee. And that monthly fee is filed through claims, hits the medical expense no different than if that, let's use a self-insured employer, if that employee went across the street to get a procedure at Stanford Hospital. But it's a monthly fee that includes all of what we do. And so that model really works for a number of reasons. Number one, you're very aligned with your customers. They know that when they're paying for the Omada solution, they're paying for people that are engaged. They're paying for value. We love that. Secondly, it has great durability characteristics for the business. I mean, I think you've seen that. If you look at our quarter-by-quarter revenue build and you just see the consistent growth over time, I think the pricing and the revenue model is reflective of that.
And one of the things you referenced there that I think sometimes goes overlooked is just the breadth and depth of clinical data you have, especially when you compare it to other digital health companies. The way sometimes I describe the company to investors when they ask why is this different, a lot of companies started as software companies and tried to become healthcare companies. You've made investments very similar to a healthcare products type company in clinical data that you're now leveraging software to deliver care. Maybe just sort of talk about your clinical development strategy and how much you think that's contributed to the revenue you've generated.
Yeah, so the end market for Amada is a very risk-averse buyer. And the moment you say hi, especially if you're supporting an employer through a channel like a health plan or a PBM, you've got the medical directors of those organizations inspecting your solution, and they want to see data. And I remember in the earliest days, I mean, I left medical school. I was at Harvard to found Amada. And I kind of ask myself, what would convince my critical friends that our solution worked? And there's one answer. It's peer-reviewed studies. And so we've spent many millions of dollars. I mean, these are multi-year investments. We have an arsenal of 30 peer-reviewed publications. They range from observational trials that we optimize for speed to academic medical center-led, multimillion-dollar RCTs. And when we go to buyers, we can show those data, both clinical and economic, as well as things like, you know, industry-leading accreditations. You know, Mata was the first and remains the only NCQA accredited for diabetes and diabetes and hypertension, and that allows you to earn trust with buyers, which becomes a durable mode, you know, at the end of the day.
Maybe we can sort of jump into the business now. I mean, you started as a prevention company, and you evolved into this multi-platform, multi-service line business pretty quickly. So maybe just contextualize for investors where you are in that kind of diversification of offerings and give us a feel for where adoption is in each of those.
So we began Armada's journey as prevention of obesity, the first chapter of Armada. We expanded to diabetes, to hypertension, to cholesterol, to MSK care. And that was not TAM-driven, just to be clear. That was customer-driven. Because what happens is if you earn customers, you know, employers, I mean, we have over 2,000, you know, 25 million covered lives, you know, over a decade of operating history with them. If you earn trust, they ask you to do more for them. And so each one of those condition expansions came from a customer ask where they saw us in action, they saw our capabilities, and they recognized that they have new needs that they'd love us to support. And the way we judge those is, number one, clinical feasibility. Is this a between-visit care need? where longitudinal day-to-day support matters for patient outcomes in not just an incrementally different way, but a transformation in a different way. That's kind of the first judge. The second judge is their business model and is their commercial adoption. And so if a customer asks for it, that helps answer the yes on the other side. And we've seen really just exciting full-platform growth. I mean, right around 50% of new customers start Omada's journey or their journey with Armada in a multi-product fashion. You know, we did announce, looking kind of last year, that both hypertension and diabetes grew over 45%. So it's not just, you know, weight. It's not just GLPs for Armada. It's the attention broadly on metabolic and chronic care
that is supporting the remit of all the clinicals they offer. And maybe just go one level deeper. Can you just visualize just what, for a type 2 diabetic, to an endocrinologist every six months, like, what is it? Just paint a picture of someone that's on maybe a pump and a TGM and they're on drugs, like, what are those things that need?
Yeah, so let's contrast it to the existing, I mean, this brings me back to the really a lot of things, because before we wrote the episode, you know, I sat in the home with the diabetes. And, you know, and it's funny, because I remember we did a tour outside of Atlanta, and I'm sitting at home with this patient, and the healthcare academic would have said, oh, this individual is under care, because they have an attributed PCP, they've been prescribed to meds. But then you ask what they've received, what's on their mind, and they didn't pick up their script. They were taking their meds. Their health trajectory was heading in the wrong direction. They had no idea on their sugar levels. And that became the issue because if you study this space, it's extraordinarily hard to get any outcomes. You really have to drop into paratroopers in this clinical category, and they need day-to-day support that includes a symphony of things, connected devices to monitor progress, education, curriculum, community support, care team engagement. that's not just that doctor telling you what to do. It's the health coach or the diabetes educator that's listening to their goals, supporting them. Because what you need to create is a feel of accountability and progress. And so what our care teams do is, A, make sure that the person's equipped with all the needed connected devices. So we mail a cellular scale, blood pressure, cuff, glucometer. Every patient with diabetes gets right at the beginning to freestyle, liberate, CGM. So those are the hardware. Then they meet their care teams, diabetes educator, health coach. Those care teams get to know them as individuals. And then the software experience combines all of those other pieces. And so that gives the person a feeling of, wow, for the first time in my life, I have someone in my corner, in my pocket, on a daily basis rooting for me. And you ask them to compare and contrast that to standard of care currently, and it's a night and day difference.
And then maybe how does it work on the other end? One of the questions I get from investors, if Amado is offering all these different services, don't they just hire a ton of professionals to support that? Help us understand your side of it and how much infrastructure is required and how technology can be leveraged to make them efficient.
We did, you know, it's interesting. We did have to bite off building it all. Now, thankfully, a lot of those costs are behind the numbers, but we had to build every single piece of what you could deliver the member experience needed, as an example, and use like an office healthy HR. So we built our entire care team platform that our care teams use to support our members ourselves because it's different. Like the care we deliver is like a longitudinal daily engagement model versus, you know, fee-for-service athletic model, which a lot of the HRs are built upon. So, you know, we did have to, you know, take on the burden of that, but equally we're appreciating that. I mean, you know, you look at our margin progress. I mean, our long-term targets that we've communicated are 70% plus. We ended, you know, last year in the upper 60s, 68%. So, you know, nipping at it. Could we have done that without the care team platform, investments in technology? You know, AI, no. I mean, I was our first ever health coach for Amada when I founded the company. Flying totally blind, just look at a weight chart, you know, message a person, total guess. and the way we run the operations right now is the complete opposite.
I think one piece just from an economic standpoint, on the R&D side, when we want to spin up a new care track on our existing tech stack, we approach that with modularity and flexibility in mind. We re-ramped our new GLP-1 product in just a couple of months on our existing tech stack. So we didn't need to go back and deploy tens of millions of dollars to reinvest to stand that up. And so that's going to continue to benefit us from an operating leverage perspective as well.
And that's a good segue to talk about GLP-1s. Yeah, I was just at ADA this past weekend, so certainly all the rage of them. I don't know if GLP-1 adoption has gotten to that part of the country quite yet. But maybe just talk to us about why you launched the GLP-1 care track and talk about the prescribing thing in a second. Maybe we'll start with just the care track. Yeah, why you've – you said it probably sounds like customer-driven. And what were customers telling you about GLP-1s that led to that development? And what have you seen in the utilization so far?
Yeah, I mean, this is an area where I think we're thanking ourselves for, in our view, getting really ahead of the market here. Because three or four years ago, I mean, Armada, I imagine Armada, we've got thousands of customers. You know, at that point in the journey, a lot of them were prevention obesity customers. Some of them started to cover GLP-1s for obesity. And then they started calling us. and the average voice would say, Sean, we're looking at the cost of this and the slope of the curve, and it looks vertical. There is no slope in the curve. Like, does this go to infinity? Like, what do we do? Equally, we're looking at persistence data that our employees who are paying for these meds for are not persistent on the meds. We're seeing regain in real-world evidence. Like, help us think through what to do here. Because clearly, these meds can be effective, but equally, we're worried about waste, and we want to, you know, think through how to maximize their value. And, you know, this is an area that we care a lot about because these are incredible medicines and they're incredible pairing with comprehensive lifestyle, you know, solutions. And so we developed the first version of our care track, which is kind of Gen 1, which paired the Omada that they knew alongside a GLP-1, optimizing for on-therapy outcomes. And then if the patient's goal was to discontinue, doing everything we can to reduce or ideally eliminate regain, after discontinuation. And then every year, we've built upon that knowledge in kind of a rinse and repeat fashion, leading us to the most recent version of the care track, which includes all the bells and whistles, including prescribing and titration of the medicines themselves, because the market is getting more and more complex and more and more difficult for buyers, despite some, obviously, moderation in the price. You take almost any unit price for GLPs and multiply it by the prevalence. And this is an enormous for employers. And so for Moda to come in to almost manage, you know, effectively that spend and be really a value maximizer in like a GLP operating system layer for the accounts has been attracted to the market.
And do you have a sense of how customers are measuring success? That they look at their medical spend and they add GLP-1 to it. Is their intention that we had a medical spend of some number, we add GLP-1, and this number comes down to justify the investment? And what are you seeing in the real world?
You know, it's interesting. You've got, you know, like a 40-60 split, you know, 45 or so. But you've got the minority of employers or the lesser are those who cover gyplanes for obesity. They're not covering it right now because they are hoping for a total cost of care, you know, reduction. They're covering it because they see that these meds are effective and they're responsive to employee voices. And so they bring Armada in really in the hopes of gaining what we're all after, which is that savings, and it's that savings through medical outcomes. So they want to see from AMADA, are the right employees using the meds? And so, you know, that's where our prescribing network can come in, of course, aligned with all the Obesity Society guidelines, you know, best-in-class, you know, clinical practices. So it helps kind of avoid the stories you hear of the dermatologist at, you know, like a fitness center, you know, prescribing a GLP-1. And so there's kind of the clinical integrity piece that they're getting from MAMADA. And then there's the weight loss outcomes well in the med, of which you've seen upwards of about 30% increase in weight loss on our care track than that. And then discontinuation, because to talk to a patient, a very common goal is to try to get off the med. And so what we can say to the individual is, you know, David, that's an amazing goal. It's not going to be an easy one, but it's not your destiny to have to, that's your goal, to regain. Let's work together well on therapy. And the analogy we often use is, you know, would you run a marathon tomorrow without training? And the answer is an obvious no. And so you can use that on-therapy window to support rethinking nutrition habits, exercise habits, kind of ask what a week in their life looks like from an eating standpoint. Ask them if there's anything they've ever wanted to do physically that they can't, and build some success there. and then we've seen that in the discontinuation data. We've followed patients up to a year, and I'm seeing essentially weight maintenance, just minimal, minimal regain at the end of a year, whereas the natural progression should be 6% to 7%.
GLP-1s obviously represent a huge opportunity, but sometimes I think investors do get a little bit over their skis in the sense of GLP-1s have all the growth in members, and we've tried to do some math behind what sort of GLP-1 and ex-GLP member growth is contributing, at least our assessment is in that the non-GOP member growth actually represents the majority of your growth, and GLP-1 is additive to that. Maybe help us think through the is that an accurate interpretation, and how do you want investors to think about GLP-1s and then the aggregate growth profile?
Let me talk about the selling motion and then pass it off to Steve. The selling motion for the GLP-1 CareTrack involves saying hi to self-insured employers, just like we would any other employer. Now, we are proud that we now work with the three largest PDMs in the country to deploy not just our CareTrack, but the broader suite of OMADA services. And so if an employer wants to contact OMADA for GLPs, very quickly the conversation turns into, oh, wait, I probably shouldn't just cover OMADA for those employer employees that are using GLPs to think about OMADA for diabetes or OMADA hypertension. So it turns into a broader platform sale, which is reflected in the numbers. I mean, we did, just to help absolve concerns there, I mean, we do periodically and plan to continue to kind of share a little kind of, you know, view at the aggregate GLPs. And, you know, at the end of last year, we announced that we had crossed 150,000 folks in Armada's care programs. We were supporting them alongside a GLP.
On 886,000 total.
Yeah, that's right. Yeah, and ending Q1 members was just north of a million. So it gives you, you know, because in any given account, you know, there's still going to be the minority on a GLP, we expect that.
Yeah, look, we got our start in prevention and weight health. What we previously disclosed is that 75% of our revenue is in prevention and weight health, where the GLP-1 revenue sits, and then the other 25% is in diabetes and hypertension. And for Sean, I think, you know, given we're using the GLP-1 conversation as this tip of the spear to engage with employers. We've seen growth across all of them fairly equally. One's not really uphitting the other. And it's important because the diabetes and the hypertension economics, they're some of our most profitable members. They're in program the longest. They're priced at the top end of our range. So we really like the profile of those members in our overall P&L build.
And non-member growth, I was talking to you about the OMADA yesterday, and they asked me, well, if they have 50% retention at year one, if you have a million members to grow that, Does that million go to 500,000, then you've got to grow 700,000 to get to 20% growth? It's sort of a confusing dynamic for people. And I was like, no, it doesn't work that way. But maybe just illuminate that for folks more broadly.
Yeah, absolutely. It's simpler than it seems. So you are right that if you look at the shape of a member who joins, at about the end of the first year, north of 55% are still engaging monthly. end of year two north of 50 percent. So you do, you know, clearly, obviously, you lose people along the way. Some of that loss is for people leaving their organization. And so what happens mechanically is every single year, you're getting thousands of new that just come in the door. So you look at some of our legacy customers like a Costco, every single year, we get thousands and thousands of new business as usual Costco new members coming in. And the whole cost structure for Amada, the lion's share of the cost structure is getting that account. It's not the email marketing to get the members in. Those are just automated once we close the accounts. And so that once we explain that, you know, tends to help people get a little bit more comfortable. So it's not like we're refilling that 50%. A lot of that's coming from the existing accounts because of those exact dynamics.
At the account layer. We've gone back and looked at every customer vintage in Amada's history and that net dollar retention has always been above 100 because of that dynamic. If Costco has 100,000 employees, they lose 10,000 every year. They're replacing those 10,000, and they're growing on top of that. And then we're going back in, and then we're adding more products across our existing customer base. And so you just get these really durable, really predictable revenue cohorts based.
That's a very helpful framing. And maybe just to kind of pull on the three PBM contracts where you now have access, how should we think about the conversion of the PBM contract access to member to revenue?
Yeah, so let's look at just the shape of the self-insured employer market. So we've got 8% of that. And then the white space within that, those are employer accounts that ideally we can knock on their doors and convince them to work with Amada. The thing about employers is the vast majority would far prefer not doing a direct contract with Amada or any solution in our space. They don't want to have to bring you through procurement if they can avoid it. per the risk-averse buying standpoint, they're like, well, I'd like my health plan and my PBM's medical leadership to look at this to see if it's worth its salt to evaluate the clinical data. So that's another argument for why they'd love this to go through channel. And so that's all great. It does create a mode if you can get the channel. Right now, if you add up the market share of the three major PBMs, so CIVIS, CAREMAR, OPTIMARX, something like 80% of scripts If you're a sales rep and you happen to be at the conference board talking to heads of benefits or self-insured employers, the first question you're going to ask if you're on the Amada sales team is what PBM do you use? Because the majority answer is going to be one that we work with. And so that turns into a fast follow where you can say, hey, that's fabulous. We have an integrated relationship with CVS Caremark. Oh, we've worked for years, a wonderful relationship with ExpressGrid. Oh, did you hear about our new Optimal Rx relationship? That turns into that meeting where we can talk about the easy button to deploy not just our care track but the broader suite of a lot of services so if you think about
like their own you see the selling cycle to the pvm but then they also have to go you know there's a couple of years there so if you think about optin as an example where you've just announced uh access that you've talked about not being reflected in your your 2026 guidance but maybe just operationally what are the steps that have to take place now to bring optin members on onto Amada.
The average selling cycle for employers is building pipeline in first half and closing in second half. And so in the building pipeline stage, we have our field reps that are out there. We have a channel management team that aligns all the needed relationships in every single market, figures out a way to structure joint pipeline reviews, make sure that the Optum or XSales teams have all the right training, that there's great collaborations between our field So you build pipeline, and then you close in that half for deployment in the first half of the next year. That's the typical. There always is the off-cycle account that's like, hey, I really want this tomorrow. So we may see some of those this year. But in terms of what we underwrite for any new channel, it's pipe build in the first half, closing in the second half for deployment the next year.
And just remind us the size of the member population or the accessible population that getting opt-in brings you.
I mean, OptumRx overall has nearly 70, I think 70, 80 million covered lots that include fully insured plans. The ASS site, I believe, is closer to 30 million. But if you add up the overall ASO market, roughly 75% to 80% will work with a PBM that we work with is the best way to think about it.
The other point, I think, is from a cost perspective, our sales team is roughly 25 total people. Because you're leveraging the health plans and the PBMs to distribute a lot and you're partnering with them, we've been able to keep our sales force relatively flat over time, and that's just created a significant amount of operating leverage in sales and marketing over time. So it's a really nice feature of how we're contracting and then ultimately deploying to employers.
And as you think about member growth, or Steve, as you and your team do your planning for the year and the budgeting, like one of the things I always get asked, how do you know? Like, I remember it would be 30%, it would be 35%, it would be 20%, it would be 50%. I mean, it seems like there's a wide range of outcomes. How do you think about forecasting that number, and what are some tools that you can give investors to gain visibility into the outlook there?
Well, again, it's like, you know, for the prior point, we have a decade-plus of amazing data on all of our existing book of business. So we know at the account level how much, like, on average, which Costco is going to ultimately refresh and add to that population. That's ultimately 75%, 80%. It's just the business you closed in-year is going to cascade forward to the next year. And then we're going to work really closely with our sales team, look at all of our pipeline builds, make some assumption on cover lives conversion, pipeline conversion, and then determine, like, kind of stress test, like a high, mid, low scenario on how much we expect to close in-year. But it's really you have so much great insight at the end of the year because you know how much pipe you've built in H2, and that's going to be your Q1 revenue build. And that's where you see the majority of our new enrollments come in is in that first quarter. And so we have a lot of great data to help, like, ascertain where we're going to land early on in the year, and that's how we run our entire planning process.
And as we translate that to revenue, you don't give ARPU per se. You give us, like, trailing three-year thing. You gave it the time of the IPO, I think. But everyone tries to come up with a sort of PMPM MPM or some reflection of pricing? How should investors think about that translation from member growth to revenue?
Yeah, so pricing and revenue per member are distinctly different in our business. Pricing, we've steadily increased through time. Revenue per member is a combination of channel, product mix, customer vintage. So it's this multifactorial way to ultimately calculate that. Last year in Q1, we're at $279. This year, we're at $276. So roughly flat on a year-over-year basis here if you're looking at it on a trailing 12-month basis. That's how we think it's the most apples-to-apples way to look at revenue per member because definitely our members are someone who's been billed once in the last 12 months, so it's a complete apples-to-apples compare. What's not in the guide and where we view potential upside is on additional product closures in the back half of the year, more cholesterol being added, potentially some early wins in prescribing that we realize in a year, And then we have several internal motions on driving engagement up. So if we can keep folks in program longer by making the product experience more compelling and increase the attach and they stay an extra two, three, six months, that's incremental ARPU that drops directly to the bottom line because it has very little incremental carrying cost. And so we can construe that as being upside to the current kind.
And as you bring on new accounts, I think if you look at this market historically, One of your competitors, they've seen, when they bring on new accounts, they used to give a PMPM. You'd actually see it go down. So when you bring on new books of business, do you have to discount at all to bring them on? What's the pricing on new business?
No, typically we've had success in increasing price through time and then also attaching more of our products from the outset. CVS and Optum are both great examples. Well, CBS, we're working with them across all of our condition areas, and then we're working with Optum across the majority of our condition areas, and then we attach prescribing. Prescribing is priced at roughly two and a half times the price of our legacy, some of our legacy prevention offerings. And so that's been a huge part of our success is just through time attaching the entire product suite, often coming with, like, higher ARPU products, and then folks are staying in program longer, and that's where the durability has been coming from the last couple of years.
So shouldn't that number go up over time?
We expect it to. We certainly would expect it to go up over time. The only counter-dynamic to that is we are finding that, you know, really in Q1 for the first time we saw a lot of diabetics in even their fourth, fifth, and even sixth year with Omada. When you get further out on the curve of engagement, when you're in that fifth year, you don't engage as much. You're probably billing two, three months on average. You're still contributing revenue at very high margins, but you're in that member count. And so it does have a little bit of a dilutive effect on revenue per member, but that's still revenue and margin that we want, and so we're okay with that. But I would say we're more biased to future upside from that perspective given the other areas we cover.
And as you think about setting guidance and targets for the company, you've meaningfully outperformed all of the expectations that were set at the time of the IPO and in your time as a public company and even coming really strong out of the gates here in Q1. And I appreciate, I think everyone appreciates the conservative approach to setting guidance and putting yourselves in a position to deliver consistent results. But maybe just help us, like, operationally think through, like, what has transpired in the business, end markets or customers or market share, that has enabled such significance?
Well, let me just talk about the three growth levers, if you will, in our algorithm. There's the first, which is covered lives. And so that's what you can sell. that's our care areas a matrix against the end market self injured employer, fully injured plan integrated. The second is enrollment initiatives. Just that every single day innovation relative to how you get people in different campaign types, different campaign schedules different messages, leveraging data science leveraging just A-B testing to figure out how do you best get people in. And then the third is engagement. That's the sticker that we can create the program experience for people, the more ARPA we realize. And so those are the three. In the last couple of years, we've had a lot of innovation bets in the second two, especially in back half, that have delivered in an outsized way. Those are typically experiments. We never underwrite them because you want to see them come through. And equally, we don't tend to, per prestige comments, underwrite any off-seasonality deployments from, like, a lot of proclesterol or prescribing, you know, given, you know, typically you close and then deploy in the next year.
Anytime we're ramping into a new channel, we're always taking a very measured approach because you just don't know exactly how quickly you're going to build into that. And so with CVS and Optum, CVS is obviously, as things start to ramp, we can get more specific on how we underwrite that. And I think, to your point, we're a full year ahead of some of the IPO projections. We just logged our highest ever gross margin quarter in Q1 at 64%, with our long-term target being 70%. So we have really near-term visibility into getting to that target with the potential to maybe raise that in the future. So we're really excited about that.
And on the point of profitability, you made a couple of references to the different operating leverage points in the model. How do you think about the balance between scaling profitability but also opportunities to reinvest for growth?
I think this year is a great example of that. We're going to continue to make progress this year towards our 20% adjusted EBITDA margin target, improving upon what we did last year. But we did qualify this as a year where we were going to be investing into AI. And prescribing was the lion's share of our investment this year. And then we backed that up with the OptumRx deal. And so that's what we spent a lot of time last year kind of teeing up. It's like, hey, we're going to go enter prescribing. And then we kind of punctuated that with adding OptumRx. and that will ultimately add some leverage to the business going into next year.
Well, maybe just to close out here, maybe, Sean, I'll turn it back to you. You've obviously been on the road, I think, meeting with investors. You're presenting here today. It was probably one of the last times you'll be in front of investors before second quarter earnings. But what's kind of the take-home message you want to leave people with, both in the room and on the webcast here?
Yeah, I think we hit a lot of it. So just to distill it, you know, I think the founding of OMADA was predicated on the fact that a visit model doesn't work. And if you look at where today's disease burdens are, it's obesity-related disease. And if you look at where the therapeutic landscape and the technology landscape has evolved, you know, we now have more instruments pointed toward those areas than we ever have before. And so, you know, the thesis for Omada is AI alone isn't going to cut it, GLP-1s alone aren't going to cut it, if you will, a care provider that can tie the two together. And we think we're really well positioned, you know, for velocity and us to do more for our customers and better leverage our channels. I mean, we have more love in Omada's history. I mean, GLP-1 FlexCare, Omada for prescribing, Omada for cholesterol, and that's because our product velocity, you know, has increased, you know, within the organization, and we're able to leverage, you know, our channels to do it. So, you know, we really feel, you know, blessed that many of the investments we've put forward over the last, you know, decade that took a lot of cooking, you know, are starting to yield, you know, great, healthy, nutritious meals for Omada.
Well, with that, we're at time. Steve and Sean, thank you so much for participating in the conference, and we'll look forward to getting the next update in August. Super. Thank you.