further strengthen Rexford's portfolio, enhance the quality and sustainability of our cash flows, and position the company to deliver outsized total shareholder returns. Over the first half of the year, we conducted a comprehensive asset-by-asset review of the portfolio, evaluating every property through the lens of future growth potential, cash flow durability, and the opportunity to create value. That review identified approximately $2 billion of non-core assets, representing approximately 8 million square feet, that do not align with our long-term strategy. These assets are generally characterized by more limited value creation opportunity, elevated competitive supply, shorter remaining lease durations, and substantially above market in-place rents. Just as importantly, this process reinforced our conviction in the quality, durability and embedded growth potential of the approximately 43 million square feet of core assets that will comprise our go-forward portfolio. These are assets we believe will drive outsized FFO and NAV per share growth and form the foundation of Rexford's next chapter. We have made significant progress executing this planned portfolio realignment. During the quarter, we launched a robust disposition process, and we are now in advanced discussions on a substantial portion of the planned sales. Based on the depth of interest and progress to date, we are confident in our ability to execute this realignment, and we expect the vast majority to be completed this year. The current valuation gap between private and public markets creates a compelling window to act now. Our disciplined capital recycling strategy gives us the ability to capitalize on this opportunity in a way that is accretive over the long term. As we redeploy capital, our priorities remain clear and unchanged. We will continue to allocate capital to the highest risk-adjusted return opportunities available. This includes strengthening our balance sheet and liquidity profile, opportunistically repurchasing shares at a meaningful discount to intrinsic value, and selectively investing in high-yielding repositioning and development opportunities across our portfolio. Taken together, this portfolio realignment enhances our financial flexibility, improves the quality and consistency of our cash flows, and positions Rexford for long-term growth and value creation. To be clear, these actions together reflect conviction around our long-term view of infill Southern California industrial real estate. This market is powered by a robust local economy larger than most countries. New supply remains limited and barriers to future development are increasing. In fact, supply under construction today is at multi-decade lows and recent regulatory changes have introduced additional development constraints that will make it increasingly difficult to bring new industrial supply to the market. These dynamics reinforce the scarcity and long-term value of the assets we are choosing to own and strengthen the competitive advantages of the Rexford business model. Operational rigor also remains a core priority and is reflected in our execution to date. Through an in-depth and ongoing review of our cost structure, we identified an additional $3 million of G&A savings this quarter, bringing our total G&A savings since 2025 to $22 million. Our focus remains on driving greater operational effectiveness and efficiency across the business. In summary, our transformative strategic actions, combined with the strength of our team, value creation framework, dynamic market fundamentals, and commitment to operational rigor, provide a powerful foundation for Rexford to deliver meaningful value for our shareholders in the years ahead. Before I turn it over, I want to thank the entire Rexford team for their extraordinary effort this quarter across the platform. I am energized by the focus, dedication, and execution our team continues to bring every day. John?

Thank you, Laura, and good morning, everyone. The infill Southern California market experienced positive net absorption in the second quarter, with overall vacancy declining by 30 basis points. Performance continues to vary by submarket, size range, and product type, reflecting diverse demand drivers and varying levels of competitive supply but we are optimistic about the signals we're seeing net absorption turned positive in the ie west and san diego markets this quarter and greater los angeles posted its second consecutive positive quarter orange county continued to experience negative net absorption though we are encouraged by a recent pickup and tour activity there as the market works through elevated supply and landlords compete for deals market rents remain under pressure, declining just over 1% sequentially in the quarter. We are pleased by the overall trajectory and are closely monitoring the market for successive quarters of positive net absorption, which we believe is a precursor to market inflection. Leasing activity in our portfolio gained momentum throughout the second quarter. We executed 2.1 million square feet, which brings our year-to-date total to 6.2 million square feet, a 2 million square foot improvement compared to the first half of last year. Cash-releasing spreads for the quarter were negative 11.3%, driven primarily by rent roll-downs from leases signed at the peak of the market. Rexford's leasing activity continues to be driven by a diverse mix of industries, including advanced manufacturing and consumption-related uses, such as logistics, food and beverage, automotive, and construction. We are seeing healthy demand across our portfolio for spaces under 50,000 square feet, and activity is picking up in spaces over 100,000 square feet, partially driven by incremental corporate demand for Class A product. project. Tenants continue to evaluate the efficiency of their operations, and Rexford has directly benefited from the resulting flight to more functional space, which supports our leasing pipeline and builds our confidence in our leasing expectations for the remainder of 2026. As we have done throughout the year, we will continue to aggressively prioritize occupancy to capture demand. Shifting to capital allocation, our planned portfolio realignment will further concentrate ownership in the assets best aligned with our long-term strategy, focusing on the opportunities where we see the greatest long-term value creation potential. Through this process, we are targeting non-core disposition candidates, generally having lease durations shorter than our portfolio average and in-place rents that are more than 20% above market, while having characteristics that do not align with our value creation strategy, the operational focus on uniquely competitive assets. We believe that executing upon this $2 billion rebalancing will enhance the portfolio's long-term growth profile and value. Our decision to execute this strategy now is supported by the increasing depth and activity of institutional capital focused on Infill Southern California as investors continue to be drawn to these markets because of their unique supply constraint characteristics and long-term fundamentals. This investor activity, in part, is why we are confident in our ability to execute this planned realignment at scale. With respect to repositioning and development, we continue to focus on creating value by executing on opportunities within our portfolio that are best suited to deliver appropriate risk-adjusted returns. We started one new development project, 16-425 Gale, which exceeds our return thresholds and will deliver a highly differentiated property to the City of Industry sub-market, featuring best-in-class specifications and a demisable cross-dock layout that is unique to the market. The project is expected to be complete in late 2027. I'll now pass the call over to Fitz.

Thanks, Lauren, John, and good morning, everyone. Through this phase of the cycle, we've remained focused on what we can control. Today, we're taking the next step in executing our strategic priorities, acting on our comprehensive asset review to realign the portfolio and meaningfully strengthen our balance sheet to unlock significant capital allocation flexibility. Our updated full-year disposition guidance of $1.5 to $2 billion gives us optimal flexibility to allocate capital where it creates the most value. We view balance sheet flexibility as an important strength, supporting both financial resilience and capital allocation optionality. We will use approximately $1 billion of the projected proceeds to repay debt maturing in 2027, rather than refinance into a higher rate environment, which will meaningfully strengthen our balance sheet. We estimate this will bring us a three-and-a-half times on a net debt-to-adjusted EBITDA basis, down from four-and-a-half times today, reflecting the deliberate, disciplined sequencing of our capital allocation. This improved leverage profile puts us in a position of strength. Combined with remaining disposition proceeds, it provides us significant flexibility and liquidity to allocate capital toward the highest risk-adjusted return opportunities, including share buybacks. As a result, making this planned portfolio realignment accretive over the long term. The ultimate magnitude of that accretion will depend on how we deploy the remaining proceeds, which will be guided by market conditions and the most attractive opportunities available to us at that time. We're not delevering to sit idle. We're delevering to redeploy. And we are committed to being prudent and disciplined in deploying shareholders' capital. Turning to results, second quarter core FFO per share came in at $0.63, $0.02 above the first quarter, driven by credo-share buybacks, settlement income, and lower G&A. Same property NOI growth was 1.5% on a cash basis and a negative 0.5% on a net effective basis, both ahead of expectations. Same property ending occupancy was 95.1%, up 30 basis points year over year. We ended the quarter with net debt to adjusted EBITDA of four and a half times and total liquidity of approximately $1.3 billion. During the quarter, we redeployed year-to-date disposition proceeds into $100 million of share buybacks, repurchasing approximately 3 million shares at a weighted average price of $36. Over the last year, that brings our buyback activity to approximately 15 million shares for $550 million, or approximately 6% of shares outstanding. Given the additional capacity created by our planned portfolio relignment, our board has authorized a new $1 billion share repurchase program. As for guidance, we're raising our full-year core FFO per share midpoint by one cent, driven by better-than-expected same property NOI growth, lower G&A, and second-quarter settlement proceeds. This is partially offset by modestly diluted projected capital recycling activity due to the timing of deployment, but it meaningfully lowers leverage while also avoiding future rent roll-down risk and eliminating the need to refinance our 2027 maturities at higher rates. To execute this, we plan to pay off all but $575 million of our 2027 maturities in 2026, with the remainder repaid and maturity in March of 2027. As a result, we are reducing our 2026 interest expense guidance to $105 million. These prepayments carry little to no penalty, making this an efficient use of projected proceeds. We've also raised our same property NOI growth outlook by 75 basis points at the midpoint on both a net effective and cash basis, primarily reflecting the removal of lower growth assets tied to our 2026 expected dispositions, along with continued leasing momentum. Consistent with that, we raised our average same property occupancy guidance to a range of 95.3% to 95.7% for the year, up 15 basis points at the midpoint. Cash releasing spreads are now expected to be a negative 15% to a negative 10%. This incremental change from last quarter reflects a change in the mix of leases we expect to execute in 2026. Further, our total portfolio cash mark-to-market stands at approximately negative 4%, down from negative 3% last quarter. Lastly, G&A guidance now stands at $57 million, down from our original $60 million target, a tangible result of our continued cost discipline. I also want to provide context in the $625 million impairment charge we recognized this quarter, which has no impact on cash flow and is excluded from core FFO. As part of our increased disposition guidance, we shortened the holding period on non-core assets, which triggered the charge, a deliberate portfolio decision to drive long-term value. Before we turn to questions, here's the one thing I want you to walk away with. Everything we're doing, including scaling our portfolio alignment, executing our plan to lower leverage, and authorizing a new $1 billion buyback plan, enhanced our flexibility to act on the opportunities ahead. That's what will drive sustainable FFO and NAV per share growth over the long term. Finally, I want to thank the entire Rexra team. I see the work everyone puts in every day, and I don't take it for granted. I'll now turn the call back to the operator to open the line for questions.

At this time, I would like to remind everyone in order to ask a question, press star, then number one on your telephone keypad. I will now hand the call back to Doug Bettisworth to begin the question and answer session.

Thanks. Our first question comes from Blaine Heck from Wells Fargo. Blaine, please go ahead.

And thanks, everyone. So the disclosure on dilution in 2026 was very helpful, and, you know, obviously I'm not looking for guidance on 27 yet, but I think it would be helpful to contextualize, you know, how much dilution from these specific transactions we should expect to impact 27 earnings. You know, I guess the question is, how should we think about cap rates on the dispositions and how are you thinking about keeping cash on the balance sheet for eventual debt pay down at maturity in March of 27 versus, you know, maybe putting the cash to work immediately or at least earlier through the share repurchases?

Hey, Blaine. I'll start, and Fitz will jump in with some more detail around 27 and expectations. But what I'll say around cap rates and valuation is that, as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we are well underway in an advanced negotiations on a substantial portion of the dispositions. But given that negotiations are ongoing, disclosing valuation at this point and cap rates could impact optimal execution. So as transactions close, we will provide cap rates and valuation at that time. But what I can tell you is this, we have confidence in our ability to execute the plan dispositions by the end of the year. We expect that pricing will be achieved at levels that allow us to redeploy proceeds on a neutral to accretive basis through our 2027 FFO per share. And this is not a dilutive exercise.

And look, we're going to redeploy the proceeds pretty quickly. We estimate that the one and a half, two billion will close in probably the mid-fourth quarter. We have an opportunity, like I said, in my prepared remarks, to bring forward some of the billion of debt maturities that are maturing next year. About 500 million or so we can pay off pretty quickly. And then the remaining 575 million, which is tied to our converts, doesn't mature until um march 27 so i can't get it that early and then in between all that we're going to be very opportunistic with uh sherry purchase depending on where our share price is we've been very active very committed over the last 12 months as i mentioned in my prepared remarks we bought over 550 million we're very grateful for the board to authorize a new program and we're going to put it to work and we do believe that this will be at the minimum neutral next year and potentially creative depending on marketing conditions thanks blaine our next question comes from Samir Connell of B of A. Samir?

Yeah. Good morning, everybody. I guess, John, you talked about positive signs in the overall market there in Southern California. Maybe just expand on those comments. I mean, where are you seeing those sort of improvements, maybe some strength, and on the other side, I mean, where are things still under sort of pressure or weakness in terms of these sub-markets? Thanks.

Yeah. Hi, Samir. So overall, you know, consistent with last quarter, sub 50,000 square feet continues to be a good vein of strength. We're seeing pricing stability and some growth in some sub markets below that threshold. And that's fairly consistent across all the sub markets. We obviously like to talk about the under 50 and then everything above that. When you get to the larger size space, which for us, you know, 100,000 square foot or larger, it starts to vary a little bit. What we saw overall in the market is a good step, right? We saw a positive net absorption and that's been growing. But as you look into where that's occurring within each sub-market, that's some important nuance. So for example, in the IE, most of the positive net absorption was coming in much larger spaces, those over 500,000 square feet. We don't have a lot of exposure to that size range in that sub market. Our average unit size there is around 30,000 square feet, but that falls into the sub 50 where we've seen some continued strength. And converse to the IE, if you look at greater LA, which had an additional quarter of positive that absorption. Most of the gains there are sub 200, which fits right in the wheelhouse of the Rexford portfolio and has been a good trend for us. Where there's pockets of weakness continue to be around class A in certain sub markets. As I mentioned in the prepared remarks, Orange County is one of those. That's a market that received a lot of additional supply in the peak periods, and it's going to take some time to work through that. And so we saw negative net absorption there again this quarter. And I would say rents probably moved the most in that specific size range within that sub-market. So it continues to be varied. This is expected. As we kind of progress towards recovery here, we do not expect it to be linear. We're going to see certain pockets of certain sub markets improve before others and pricing stability will occur kind of in tune so we're we continue to be very focused on the net absorption numbers by market and by size range and are optimistic that things will continue to improve thanks samir our next question comes from craig mailman from city craig hey good morning everybody um mike or laura i just want I want to go back to the commentary that, you know, you think that at the end of this, the transaction could be potentially a push or a creative to 27.

Maybe just help me walk through the math on that. I know you guys don't want to talk about cap rates today, but if you're selling a good amount of assets with 20% above market rents, I can't imagine you're getting super low cap rates on those because those would roll down even more, right? So if you assume that, I don't want to put a number out there, but if you assume 6% or higher on that and you're paying off a billion dollars of your 27 roll, which is on an average 4.1%, I'm just trying to figure out how that can ultimately be accretive, even if you then swap out and re-lever back up to 4.5. and buy back stock. Could you just try to help me bridge that math? And also just, I know you guys said this, your math could be accretive. Does that just mean that the dividend is safe here? Is there any risk to that going forward?

Sure, Craig, thanks for the question. Look, directionally, the full year interest savings from the $1 billion debt repayment, The in-place rents or in-place interest is about 4.1%. That's a highly certain quantifiable benefit. You combine that with the redeployment of the remaining proceeds, plus the option to lever up into buybacks. It's all designed to be accretive on a run rate basis. If you look at the last 12 months on what we bought in terms of share buybacks, that yielded anywhere between 6% and 7%. So that's a toggle in terms of, or the range of possibility as we look at share buybacks going into next year. You know, if you combine those two factors with, you know, how we're selling these assets and where we're selling them at in terms of pricing, we do believe it's going to be neutral to accretive next year. I'd remind you that in a disclosure last night and in the repair remarks, I think you're in general lower sections, that the roll down risk is real here, right? That's what we're eliminating with the sale of these assets. It's plus 20%. So that that roll down risk is real. It's going to happen expected to happen in 27 and 28. so that also allows us to this transaction to be creative as well. And as far as the dividend, it's, it's, it's safe like this, this portfolio realignment plan 1, it strengthens the balance sheet and 2, it strengthens the durability of our cash flow. So we're very confident that we can keep that we can continue to grow the dividend.

Thanks, Craig. Our next question comes from John Kim from John.

Thank you. On the impairment, I just wanted to clarify, was that on the full $2 billion that you've identified for sale? And can we assume that you have a good sense of where the market value is for these assets? And finally, can you confirm that these assets will be sold at a taxable loss and there's no need for 1031?

Yeah, good morning, John. Great question. The impairments, let's take a step back on that. So the plan dispositions, the $1.5 billion, $2 billion that we expect to sell this year were largely bought at the height of the market. To Laura's point, we're in advanced negotiations on a substantial amount of those plan dispositions where the intent to sell is very clear, which triggered the impairment charge. Look, further charges are possible if additional assets are added to the pool and there's an intent to sell, but this impairment charge is not indicative of any impairment risk within our broader portfolio. As far as any need to, I think this is what you're alluding to, to issue a special dividend, the answer is no. Similar to the impairment, there are tax losses which will offset any tax gains as part of these planning dispositions.

Thanks, John. Our next question comes from Vikram Maholcha from Mizuho. Vikram?

Good morning. Thanks for the questions, you know, and congrats. There's a lot of work, I guess, done to get the steps done or at least started, I should say. I just want to go back again. I know you've been asked on this sort of how to keep this accretive. And I'm wondering, in effect, are you saying that there are certain buyers willing to pay, you know, a five cap, even though there's a big roll down because they're assuming a lot of rent growth going forward? And then do you mind just sort of clarifying on your presentation, you talked about 20% rolldown for these assets and then the portfolio at four. I just want to clarify, is the 4% or rolldown for including these assets as it is today, or is it like X these assets, the rolldown is 4%?

Thanks. Yeah, as far as the roll down that we put in our disclosure last night, the 4% includes the entire portfolio that exists today. We do believe that that 4% will get better after we get through the portfolio realignment. But that's just like one part of our growth profile going forward. So I want to spend a little time there to discuss that as we move through this portfolio alignment plan throughout the remaining part of this year. Look, this puts us in a much better place, just given the roll down and the vacancy risk associated with this portfolio and the firepower that it gives us, the $1.7 billion to reshape the business position of strength, paying down debt ahead of a maturity wall, buying back stock at a discount, intrinsic value, and preserving the optionality to invest where we see the best risk adjust returns as conditions change. We absolutely believe a stronger balance sheet plus real capital to deploy here is what creates the most value for shareholders. You can't forget the embedded opportunity that we have already underway within our repositioning and development pipeline that represents approximately 50 million of annualized NOI once it's fully leased. And the backdrop is getting better, as John noted. Fundamentals are improving, real signs of improvement, net absorption turned positive, vacancies going down, construction starts continue to remain at multi-decade lows. Now, the releasing spreads that you're alluding to, Vikram, let's be clear-eyed on this. Releasing spreads on our retained portfolio will stay under pressure for a bit. We do have leases signed that were signed at the P that are rolling over the next couple of years. That's real, and that's something a portfolio this size fixes overnight, but it's a known. It's a shrinking headwind. I can tell you that. It's not an open-ended one. And it's why we prioritize selling the assets that face the steep reset. So overall, one thing that we want you to continue to walk away with here, this is a cleaner, lower risk portfolio, stronger balance sheet, and higher liquidity with a strong embedded growth in place from our pipeline.

And Vikram, I'll offer some general commentary on the cap rate component of your question. And what we're seeing in the market broadly across Southern in California is transactions that are focused on good product quality, good locations with good credit and a decent amount of vault. That's hitting about a five and a half on average is where I would put market cap rates. Cap rates, as we've discussed, fluctuate significantly up and down from there, largely depending on the mark to market and how much duration there is, in fact, on the lease and the quality of the real estate, which is which is permanently important. We've seen some transactions in the market where there was a big positive mark-to-market opportunity. We've seen cap rates dip well below 5% for that type. Conversely, it's well above 5.5 and can be into the sixes if you have lower quality assets or significant negative mark-to-market. Generally, the buyers in the market are going to underwrite to a restabilized yield that is congruent with today's market cap rates, adjusting for all those factors that I went through.

Thanks, Vikram. Our next question comes from Greg McManus from Scotiabank. Greg.

Hey, good morning. I appreciate the commentary on the market and the backdrop that's improving, but the market also saw vacancy go down while Rexford's vacancy increased. This related to timing, and so we should assume some accuracy growth in the back half of the year were there specific assets that were drivers? Any explanation on this disconnect would be appreciated.

Sure. Hi, Greg. So yeah, we saw quarter over quarter average occupancy decline about 60 basis points. This was largely driven by a few larger move outs. The two most significant ones were located in the IE West market, a couple of spaces that were just north of 200,000 square a few to piece. One of those move outs was unplanned. It was related to a bankruptcy. The other one was expected and budgeted. Just a quick note on the one that was a result of bankruptcy. We actually just released that unit this week with occupancy recommencing in September. So a good result on that. So part of it is just some of these move outs that are getting offset by move-ins that you'll see in the next quarter's data.

And Greg, in terms of the shape of the occupancy as we move through the second half of the year, we do expect it to decelerate some in the third quarter between, you know, 50 and 100 basis points due to planned move-outs and then re-accelerate in the fourth quarter of this year.

Thanks, Greg. Our next question comes from Rich Anderson from Cantor Finchgerald.

Rich? Thanks. Good morning. So on the positive net absorption figure for the second quarter, that sort of came out of nowhere relative to the historical patterns that we've seen. It's not in disagreement, though, with some of what your peers have said about the market. So, you know, good sign. But I'm curious if you can make any comment about subsequent to second quarter, you know, what you're feeling about the net absorption being somewhat repeatable, positive net absorption being somewhat repeatable as we go forward. Obviously, you call it a prerequisite for a continuation of a market inflection. Any signs post-second quarter that you can talk about in terms of the cadence of fundamentals?

Yeah, thanks, Rich. Thanks so much for your question. And in regards to third quarter, and it's early, but what we can tell you is that when we look at what happened in the second quarter, our leasing pipeline built through the back half of the second quarter, and that has continued early into the third quarter. Executions and our pipeline, we're less than a month in, but I would say that it has been strong as we've entered the third quarter. So those are all positive indications. As you noted, it was a strong quarter, positive absorption, lowering vacancy, and availability in the overall market. I think it's important to also consider, obviously, tenant demand is increasing, and that's a positive indication, but also to look at supply. Supply today under construction and what is going to be delivered to the market is at multi-decade lows. And those are two good things to put together. While we still have elevated vacancy and availability in the market, we are not increasing the supply. And so as tenant demand is increasing in the market, that incremental demand will continue to absorb the space. And that sets up the market for continued improvement and inflection in the future.

Thanks, Rich. Our next question comes from Dave Rogers from Raymond James.

Dave? Oh, yeah. Good morning, everybody. Fitz, all your comments were really helpful earlier. I wanted to take one other shot at the portfolio realignment. Everything you've sold, I think year to date is like a zero cap rate, zero occupancy. If you look at the occupancy or where these assets of the portfolio realignment are coming from, can you give us a sense of kind of what the occupancy might be or whether they're coming out of the same store versus the redevelopment? Because you had made the comment about 50 million of real upside and redevelopment. So trying to reconcile to see if we're selling some of that upside off going forward. And then maybe just a follow-up to But, Laura, your last comment about leasing during the second quarter sounds like it ended stronger than it started. Was there anything in particular at the beginning of the quarter that kind of kept the second quarter leasing pace a little lower than where you saw in the first quarter?

Hey, Dave. Good morning. This is Fitz. Yeah, the vast, vast majority of the assets that we plan to sell this year are operating properties and are coming out of the same property portfolio.

Yeah, going back to the leasing, I can offer a little bit more color there. So yeah, this quarter, the number was a little bit lower, 2.1 million square feet. Keep in mind, in the first quarter, we did have a renewal of our largest unit in the portfolio that increased the volumes there. So when you adjust for that and you also look at more than one quarter together, I think it is more indicative of the overall trend that we're seeing form, which is incrementally positive. I wish everything lined up perfectly with quarter end, but subsequent to quarter end, we have seen continued touring activity and we've actually made some good progress in certain areas of the market. I can give you a few examples. We've touched on previously how the South Bay continues to be particularly strong. A lot of that's being driven by advanced manufacturing, which is focused on the most coastal areas of the South Bay market. We have a project that's under construction currently in that market that's delivering two buildings, and we've just completed leases on both of those buildings ahead of the completion of construction. So we're happy with that. In the San Fernando Valley, we've been making some progress on some of our repositioning buildings, most recently signing leases at Plummer, which completed before as a new development, and more recently our Avenue Kearney project. Both of those were leased to tenants that are in the consumer products business. So overall, you know, we're pleased with the levels of activity that we're seeing. I think it is a steady improvement, but it is moderated in pace, and we are carefully watching each sub-market and our properties and what they're competing with in each case.

And Dave, to answer a question about whether or not we're selling any of the $50 million of upside in our reposition and development pipeline, the answer is no. Thanks, Dave.

Our next question comes from Michael Griffin from Ebercore ISI. Michael?

Great, thanks. Not to belabor the point on the valuation for the portfolio realignment, but could we get a sense maybe, you know, Laura, you started off the prepared remarks talking about $2 billion of asset sales on 8 million square feet. That would equate to about $250 a square foot versus what you've sold this year at about $300 a square foot. I guess is $250 a good sort of floor valuation that we could look at? And then maybe just one more just buyer pool and interest types. Do you expect to sell these properties in one-off portfolio deals? And then what kinds of capital is interested in buying them? Thank you.

Okay, Griff. Thanks for your question. As I mentioned in answer earlier, we'll certainly provide cap rates and valuations as these transactions close. Providing that today could impact execution. So, that's important that we continue to be able to execute these at the highest level of pricing. In terms of the process that we ran, to give you a little bit more visibility around that, We ran a competitive process on a substantial portion of the plan dispositions. We had multiple institutional buyers involved. We received offers that we believe represented competitive pricing. And so today we're in advanced negotiations around a portfolio transaction. So while a substantial portion of the pool will be sold via a portfolio sale, we're also in various stages of our process to transact on the remaining assets, which will likely be sold via one-off or maybe smaller portfolio transactions. So that's what, you know, given our current visibility and the progress that we've made to date, that's what gives us the confidence and our ability to transact on the majority of these planned dispositions at attractive pricing by the end of the year.

Thanks, Michael. Our next question comes from Brandon Lynch from Barclays. Brandon?

Great. Thanks for taking my questions. It looks like you've lowered your development yield assumptions by 50 basis points quarter over quarter. Can you discuss the puts and takes there and also maybe discuss the rent assumptions relative to where the market is in your currently expected yields?

Yeah. Hi, Brandon. So the yield is aggregated based on what goes in and out of the pipeline. So there's some impact there. We do also adjust our returns based on what we're seeing in the market. And overall, we saw, as we mentioned, a slight decline. And particularly for new buildings that are getting developed, those are going to fall into the class A segment. And in certain sub markets, we're seeing more movement around pricing based on competitive supply than others. We'll say for what we have in the pipeline, we're pretty excited about those properties. They all represent assets that are going to be delivered with unique and differentiated functionality that we think are going to be completed at the appropriate returns and will be great long-term additions to our portfolio.

Yeah, look, we continue to be very disciplined around capital allocation relating to our repositioning and developments, solving for 100 to 200 basis points above a stabilized cap rate, and the ones we've started to date have and followed that framework you know and in fact you know the gale project uh that we added to the pipeline this quarter is is over 200 basis points excess of the stabilized cap rate um and then another asset that we uh started under construction is you know five to six hundred basis points above a stabilized cap rate so we continue to be very very disciplined around that front thanks thanks brandon brandon mike mueller from our next question comes from mike mueller from jp morgan mike

Yeah, hi. Can you give us a sense as to how much 2027 rent spread should improve with the sales relative to which are previously messaged? And I think you said that 27 spreads are going to be worse than 26 before.

Like I mentioned in the earlier answer, Mike, there's going to be continued pressure on rent spreads, but that's just one part of the P&L. We only have 15% of our rent roll expiring in any given year. which is a great natural hedge against market rate fluctuations with market rent. But what I can tell you, it's shrinking. Like I said, it's a known commodity. We're just going to have to get through it over the next couple of years. We've got plenty of offsets with accretive capital recycling and occupancy upside across the portfolio. But again, it's going to be continued pressure next year on releasing spreads.

Thanks, Mike. Our last question comes from Vince DeBone from Green Street. Vince.

Hi, good morning. Could you discuss how you think about intrinsic value for Rexford and kind of at what share price levels you'd consider taking a pause from buybacks? I mean, John, you mentioned market cap rates are, you know, five and a half on average. And on our numbers, you know, after today's, you know, pop in the share price, the implied cap rates also in the mid five. So just trying to get a sense of how you think about, you know, the gap between public and private valuations in your portfolio in stock?

You know, by no means, we're going to share what our NAV is on today's call, but I appreciate the question, Vince. But that's, you know, the share price is the number one thing we look at when, you know, assessing whether or not we're going to buy back shares. Obviously, that's combined with where our balance sheet leverages that and then other competing uses of capital. And I think what we've proven over the last year is that this has been very creative to FFO per share and NAV per share. As I mentioned earlier, the FFO yield that we're achieving that's compounding very quietly in the background to our earnings growth profile going forward has been between six and seven percent. So very, very good use of capital for us and we're committed to that and we look forward to taking advantage of that going forward. Thanks, Mike.

Jamie Feldman from Wells Fargo will be our last call. Jamie.

Great. Thanks for taking the follow-up from our team. So, I mean, your commentary certainly sounds like transaction markets are getting healthier quicker. I'm just curious. I mean, we've now seen several big announcements across multiple sectors of large portfolio buys. Can you just talk about how fast things are changing both on the buyer pool and also on the, you know, cost of capital for buyers? It seems like there's a lot happening quickly.

Yeah, Jamie, we have seen a change in an incremental improvement in terms of the institutional demand for product in the market. And so, you know, I think that is what we are doing today is taking advantage of that change, certainly improving market conditions. There's a lot of conviction around the Southern California market, not just in the near term, but long term. And I think that's all driving capital and more capital into the market. Certainly, you know, would say that there's been an incremental increase in institutional capital and demand for product in this market over the last six months. But for us today, I mean, this is we really view this as an incredibly unique opportunity in a moment in time where we can capitalize upon upon this. And and so we are not reacting. this is incredibly proactive, you know, we're going to be able to achieve competitive pricing. At the same time, we can redeploy proceeds in a creative manner. So it's not a dilutive exercise, as we've talked about. And we can do this all at the same time while we're increasing the portfolio quality or future cash flow durability and value creation opportunities that align with our strategy. So these factors rarely emerge together. And we are taking advantage of this unique opportunity that sets Rexford up for the future.

That concludes the Q&A portion of our earnings call. I'd now like to turn the call over to Laura Clark for closing remarks.

Thank you all for joining us today, and we look forward to spending time with you over the next few months.

This concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect.