Okay. A very warm welcome to everyone both here in the room and for those of us joining us remotely. I want to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners and First Nations peoples who host our operations around the world and pay my respects to their elders, past and present. We are pleased to be here today with our CEO, Simon; and our CFO, Peter Cunningham, to present to you our 2025 full year results and this will be followed by a Q&A session. There are no planned fire evacuations today. So if you hear the alarm, please follow instructions from the fire wardens here at the London Stock Exchange. With that, I'd like to ask Simon to the stage.

Good morning all to those here in London. And of course, also those joining us online. So I'll start with safety. And this evening, I'll fly to Guinea to spend some time with the team at Simandou. As you'll no doubt be aware, last Saturday, one of our colleagues died at the mine site. We've achieved a great deal at Simandou, but this tragedy underlines that we have more work to do to ensure that everyone goes home safely at the end of every shift. Safety is the foundation of our business and nothing is more important than the people that work around us. And we must be able to safely operate in different jurisdictions around the world like Guinea. The leadership team and I are determined to learn from this tragedy, and we're taking some immediate actions. We've stopped all site works and construction activities. We started an independent investigation with both internal and external experts. And in addition, we will appoint an independent safety advisory panel. This will consist of leading safety practitioners from both industry and academia together with experienced Rio Tinto alumni. It will provide additional guidance and support to our team as we complete construction and then move Simandou into operations. As we put in place these actions, we will reflect further on the lessons from our colleague's death. With these thoughts in mind, I'll turn now to our financial results. We're making clear progress towards our mission of being the world's most valued metals and mining business. The results today are underpinned by a stronger, sharper and simpler way of working, which will lift productivity as well as lower costs, enabling us to cut complexity and focus on the right opportunities. Our operational performance was strong in 2025, and we delivered an industry-leading 8% equivalent increase in copper equivalent production, setting annual records for both copper and bauxite. Our Pilbara mines rebounded strongly from the cyclones at the start of the year and set production records from April. And while volumes increased, our copper equivalent unit costs reduced by 5%. These results also show the value of diversification. Underlying EBITDA increased by 9% to $25.4 billion. The increases from both copper and aluminum were a particular highlight. Self-help was also a feature as we unlocked a $650 million run rate in annualized productivity benefits. And I'll talk more about this shortly. Finally, the dividend. We achieved stable underlying earnings of $10.9 billion, and we will return 60% of this to shareholders equating to $6.5 billion. Now stepping back. We've got the right assets in the right commodities and we're well positioned to deliver growth in the years ahead. Over the next decade, we expect strong growth from aluminum, lithium and copper with steel demand remaining resilient. At the same time, across the board, supply is constrained, with sector CapEx 50% lower than its 2013 peak. Now Rio has got the people, the capability and the projects to meet this demand. And we're achieving this through operational excellence. This is driving our strong production performance, putting us on track to deliver our ambition of 3% CAGR for copper equivalent production through to the end of this decade. As part of our stronger, sharper, simpler way of working, we're also driving operational outcomes and structurally reducing costs. We will achieve the $650 million annual run rate in productivity by the end of this quarter. And with this strong start in 2026, we will deliver cash improvements materially above this Q1 run rate in 2026. Of course, to drive the growth that creates value for our shareholders, we need to deliver on our projects safely, reliably and at scale. And in 2025, with Oyu Tolgoi, Simandou and our in-flight lithium projects, we executed some of the most technically challenging mining projects on the planet. That underground development at OT is now complete, fully invested and the growth is ramping up. And we're on track to deliver, on average, around 500,000 tonnes of copper per year between 2028 and 2036. In December, we also achieved our first shipment of high-quality iron ore from Simandou, and we will deliver 60 million tonnes per annum of iron ore as we fully ramp up. And in lithium, we're progressing our in-flight projects, targeting capacity, 200,000 tonnes per annum by 2028. We're delivering tangible outcomes today. And we have the project pipeline to extend growth well into the 2030s with copper at its core. That includes projects like La Granja in Peru, Resolution in Arizona, Nuevo Cobre in Chile, which I'll visit shortly. And I've asked our exploration team to narrow their scope and put copper front and center. And so we're now directing 85% of our exploration budget towards copper. But we are clear-eyed about the task. No matter how amazing the geology, this effort must translate into value-accretive projects. And finally, capital discipline, the bedrock of strong and consistent shareholder returns. Rigorous capital allocation guides every investment decision we make. All projects must compete for capital and every dollar we invest must create shareholder value. The same standards apply to how we manage our portfolio. As we said at Capital Markets, we will deliver $5 billion to $10 billion in cash proceeds from our asset base. And we're now actively testing the market for RTIT and the Borates businesses. To sum up, we're achieving both returns and growth. Returning cash to shareholders and at the same time delivering the largest number of greenfield projects of any of the diversified miners, whilst retaining the industry's best growth options. That same discipline underlines how we approach any major portfolio decision. So let me touch briefly on the discussions we had with Glencore. We went under the hood with a singular focus on whether we could create value for shareholders. We considered what we could bring to the table and the extent to which we can generate incremental value across a combined portfolio. We had constructive discussions between the two teams. Ultimately, we concluded that we could not reach an agreement that would deliver value for Rio Tinto shareholders. Now as you might recall at Capital Markets Day, I said we would look at M&A opportunities through a disciplined lens, and that's exactly what we've done. And the same focus on value will continue to guide us. With that, I'll hand over to Peter, who will take you through the financials in more detail.

Thanks, Simon. At our Capital Markets Day, we set out a clear pathway to increase volumes, reduce costs and release cash from our asset base, all of which will strengthen our balance sheet and drive future returns. In 2025, the improvement in our financials was largely driven by volume growth, a function of our ongoing drive towards operational excellence and higher copper volumes from OT. Today, we are reporting nearly $3 billion of volume improvement year-on-year. Cost discipline was also good and we started to deliver substantial reductions late in 2025. These will flow into our results in 2026 and will be enhanced as we implement systemic improvements across our business. More on that later. Our net debt increased to $14.4 billion as we absorbed the Arcadium acquisition, and falling slightly in the second half of the year due to our strong operating cash flow. The balance sheet remains in good shape, and gearing is modest at 18% with future capital release initiatives set to further strengthen our position. Once again, we're paying out 60% of our underlying earnings as dividends. Let's now take a closer look at our markets. Now there are two key messages here. Firstly, the resilience of iron ore; and secondly, the positive correlation of our other products with the energy transition. Iron ore remains supported by Chinese steel export growth and a structurally balanced market. As Vivek outlined at our Capital Markets Day, the cost curve remains steep and is supported at the top end by over 100 price-sensitive producers from more than 20 countries. Copper and aluminum prices both rose 9%, but average prices don't tell the whole story. Copper ended the year 44% higher than 12 months earlier; and aluminum, 17% higher. The demand growth picture is not uniformly strong. Traditional areas, such as construction, remain weak. But the backbone of growth is the energy transition, particularly around power systems and electrification. The energy transition, combined with supply constraints and reinforced by investment inflows, is driving the market strength. Lithium also ended the year with strong momentum as markets came back into balance earlier than expected. Battery storage demand is emerging as a fast-growing pillar of the energy transition with growth now outpacing EVs as renewable scale and grid firming becomes critical. It continues to surprise many market commentators to the upside. Turning now to our EBITDA composition over the last 2 years. Iron ore EBITDA was down 11%, but copper and aluminum more than offset this. Our portfolio gives us the ability to allocate capital to shareholder returns and to grow with confidence, recognizing our best returns come from improving our existing assets and reducing our cost base. At the CMD, we announced $650 million of near-term productivity benefits, driven by stronger operational discipline, a streamlined organization and a sharper focus on the portfolio. For the past few months, we've reshaped our organization, rescoped and stopped work. By the end of Q1, we will be into our next phase of the program, which is larger in scale, multiyear and steps us towards full potential. In the Pilbara, we're looking at different ways to operate our system, focusing on contingency stockpiles and optimization of our asset shut sequencing. This will enable increased asset throughput and smarter use of spend across the mines. For copper, we're driving productivity of underground equipment and operations in both development and production areas while improving metal recoveries in the concentrators. In aluminum, we're focused on sharpening day-to-day operational discipline, strengthening smelter stability, improving maintenance quality and raising contractor performance to ensure operational consistency year-after-year. And centrally, we're reorganizing our operating model to clarify accountabilities and streamline workflows. We've already redefined our closure operating model, optimizing R&D spend and driving further improvements in sustaining capital projects. Now we expect the value uplift to be materially more than the first phase with programs advancing in 2026, as we scale up to deliver further in 2027 and 2028. Let's now unpack EBITDA through our standard waterfall. For the first time in many years, we experienced minimal net impact from commodity prices with lower iron ore fully compensated by higher prices for aluminum and in particular, copper. As I said earlier, the big driver of earnings growth was volumes with higher sales delivering a $2.9 billion uplift. This is mostly from copper and gold with the ramp-up of OT and improved output from Escondida. Higher iron ore sales from the Pilbara were also an important contributor. Volumes were also a major driver of the $800 million improvement in unit costs due to fixed cost efficiencies. Now in copper equivalent unit cost terms, this represented a 5% reduction. There were a few offsets. Kennecott is on track to deliver production increases by 40% to 50% over the next few years, as we outlined at CMD. Its operating performance is much improved, but the financials were impacted by the base effect of refining high intermediate product inventories in 2024. Secondly, our Pilbara business recovered impressively from the four cyclones with record production rates since April. However, there was a $700 million EBITDA impact. Looking forward to 2026, volume growth will be more muted at around 3% across our managed operations, which will be offset by closures at Arvida, Diavik and the midyear curtailment at Yarwun, and an expected grade decline at Escondida. Now nothing has changed from the parameters that we set out at the CMD. We are pushing very hard on productivity improvements and cost reductions building on the initial $650 million already identified and secured. I would, therefore, expect the aggregate volume and cost improvements, net of headwinds, to be a material uplift on that number in 2026. On to the product groups. Iron ore delivered $15.2 billion of EBITDA. The product strategy has been successfully introduced to the market, aligning sales to our system, and we've seen strong cost control reflected in unit costs, in line with guidance at $23.50 per tonne. For 2026, we're guiding to $23.50 to $25 per tonne, reflecting in part the impact of a stronger Australian dollar. Copper was the standout, with EBITDA more than doubling to $7.4 billion, driven by higher prices and rising volumes. Shipments were up 60% at OT, where the underground development project is now complete. Unit costs were down 53% and 2026 guidance is comparable to 2025. Aluminum sustained its impressive record of stability, in particular, for smelting and bauxite where we set a new production record. And we took advantage of stronger markets, leading to a step-change in financial performance with EBITDA up 20%. Now our commercial team continues to proactively optimize our vertically integrated position in the changing tariff environment. It was the first year for our new lithium business, which is clearly not yet a significant contributor, but as set out at the December deep-dive, we'll focus on delivering the in-flight projects, which will bring us to a meaningful capacity of around 200,000 tonnes by 2028. CapEx in 2025 was at the high end of our guidance range of around $11 billion, as we hit peak spend on growth with an outlay of $1.6 billion at Simandou and just over $1 billion on lithium growth projects. Now this is a crucial period of CapEx spend, which will underpin future earnings. Our growth commitments will ease over the next few years with Simandou nearly 2/3 complete. We do continue to strengthen our Pilbara system through replacement mine investments and also Weipa, where later this year, we will consider a final decision on the expansion of the Amrun mine. Given this context, we see no change to our guidance of up to $11 billion for the next 2 years before stepping down to $10 billion thereafter. Turning to the balance sheet. Net debt has risen to $14.4 billion following completion of the Arcadium transaction, a level comfortably in a range consistent with our commitment to a single A credit rating. All our credit metrics are in a solid place. This remains a strong balance sheet. We're committed to our capital framework and shareholder returns policy of paying 40% to 60% of underlying earnings. We know that distributions to shareholders are incredibly important. And once again, we're paying out at 60%, and now have a 10-year track record of paying at the top of the range. So to summarize, we have the right assets and the right commodities. 2025 was a solid year of delivery with sustainable volume uplift. And over the next few years, our focus turns to a powerful combination of self-help and growth as we build on the productivity improvements, and we see the first results from the capital release. The balance sheet remains strong, and we're generating very stable operating cash flow from our diversified portfolio. And with that, I'll turn it back to Simon.

Thanks, Peter. We've talked about what we're achieving and stronger, sharper, simpler is how we're doing it. It's the operating discipline that underpins the way we think about value creation across the group. Over 2026, we will focus on structurally improving the cost base and achieving a meaningful step-up in underlying performance. This work cannot succeed without our leadership team's full engagement and I'll be impressed by the way we've come together. Peter has updated you on our program and three words on this slide: Simplify, deliver and release, reflect our priorities for the year ahead. So to sum up, returns and growth. We grew by 8% in copper equivalent terms. Our strong operating performance, combined with our focus on cost and capital discipline translates into the financial results you see today as we returned $6.5 billion to you, our shareholders. And I'm confident that there's even more to come. Thank you for your time. And with that, we'll open up to questions.

Give me a moment. We will now transition to the Q&A session. We have just over 30 minutes for this. Let's begin with questions from those in the room and then move on to those participating remotely. We'll start with the front.

Myles Allsop, UBS. Maybe start with the elephant and the Glencore talks. Maybe could you just say what you've....

I was running a book as you made me happy.

I think we all....

So, do you feel comfortable owning coal? That would be your first question. What do you think you've learned from the discussions? What sort of synergies did you see from that sort of combination? Obviously, the value didn't work, but any other issues that kind of stopped the deal from happening?

So you always learn through these processes. The constructive discussions, you learn, I guess, about your own business, you learn about others as well. And as I said in my presentation, we went deep, we went under the hood. We looked rigorously and clinically and ultimately didn't get there on value. The discussions were for the full perimeter. And the way that we think about that is really through the lens of the underlying asset quality and whether together, in a combined portfolio, we could incrementally add value compared to the case we laid out at Capital Markets, and it's through that lens that we assess the transaction. Really comfortable with the plans that we put out at Capital Markets, and as you can see today, that's the full focus of the team.

And owning coal, was that ever a concern from the management team?

As I said, it was for the full perimeter of the business, including coal and really through that lens of what's the underlying asset quality and can we add value through the combination.

This is Alain Gabriel at Morgan Stanley. A couple of questions. One is on streaming, which appears to be quite invoked now. You have a fairly good chunky gold component at OT. Do you see an opportunity there or are the current discussions with the government around taxation, an impediment around going ahead with any streaming agreement? That's the first one.

Yes. I mean I suppose all of this comes down to the fact that we've got lots of options across our portfolio to release capital, and that's our focus. I mean, we've talked about the strategic reviews of borates and our RTIT, we're testing the market. We've got options around infrastructure. We do have options around streaming. But we're just going to work through these systematically and say what's the best option that we can undertake. So, I mean, those options exist right across the portfolio, but it's all about value and what we can sensibly sort of prioritize to deliver.

And the second question is on cost cutting. You've put out a slide there, looking at the cost-cutting opportunities beyond the $650 million program. The Pilbara seems to be at the heart of it. Can you help us frame a little bit the opportunity there to quantify how much can be taken out of the business in terms of costs?

So on the $650 million, that was a run rate that we announced at Capital Markets that we'd said we'd hit by the end of Q1. So what we're saying today is that our 2026 cash delivery will be materially above the $650 million, which was a run rate. And so that sizes it for 2026. I think the main point here, and Pete talked about it, we've gone systematically asset-by-asset looking at full potential with clear plans then around delivery, and it will be a multiyear program. And so we've sized it for 2026, but clearly, there's more to come in '27 and '28. And I should say it's across all businesses. So yes, iron ore, but it's across each of our businesses in the portfolio.

When should we expect that?

Just on the unit cost, I mean remember guidance is $23.50 to $25, but it is at a higher exchange rate. So the exchange rate would take you up more to the midpoint of that. So the business is making pretty sizable sort of improvements because as Matt went to its CMD, there's a lot of headwinds in the Pilbara still, but we're offsetting that through productivity.

Okay. We'll go to some of the people on the line, if we could. Operator, would you mind to give the first speaker, the microphone?

Our first phone question comes from Paul Young of Goldman Sachs.

Simon, firstly, on Glencore. I mean, well done for sticking to your guidance of being disciplined and being focused on value. Look, I think a simple merger would have changed your strategy from one of simplification to complication. And it does appear that the true operating synergies were pretty limited. So was the main attraction the copper growth? And when Mark and the project team reviewed that pipeline, were there major differences on the CapEx and the timing?

Thank you, Paul. As I mentioned earlier, it was for the full perimeter. They have a diversified business, and we examined all assets, including copper. We conducted a thorough review, and there were constructive discussions with the team. We looked closely at their pipeline and existing assets, just as they examined ours. The key question we considered was whether we could create additional value through this combination, taking into account all aspects of both businesses. If I take a step back and set aside those discussions, the positive takeaway from today’s results is our growth, specifically the 8% copper equivalent growth at OT. We also have a project pipeline that should allow us to extend that growth beyond a 3% compound annual growth rate through the 2030s, with options to push that into the 2030s. Copper is a particular focus, reflected in our projects and exploration efforts. This is a primary focus for the team. However, we need to ensure that we turn what is a strong set of options into value-generating projects.

Okay. And then second question is on the Brazil aluminum deal with CBA and Chinalco. Not much mention of this. I know the deal was only recently announced. But can you just talk to the high-level rationale? Can you expand the refinery in the smelter? What it means for your Atlantic strategy more broadly? And obviously, great for the Chinalco relationship. What does this mean for potential further deals going forward with Chinalco?

Yes. We've learned a tremendous amount through the Simandou project, obviously, working with our partners in the consortium there. And I guess taking that same mindset, we looked at that for the CBA transaction as well, an opportunity to involve ourselves in the Brazilian aluminum sector, an opportunity to add value and growth to our aluminum business and as well as the point you make, which is around securing our supply lines. And so obviously, the potential for bauxite down the track. And so that was the, I guess, the strategic rationale. And as we got into it, we could see a clear value opportunity for our aluminum business and hence, progressing that transaction.

We'll take one more from the line, please.

Next question comes from Glyn Lawcock from Barrenjoey.

It's Glyn. Just on Glencore, you mentioned there was a valuation gap. How did you assess the value? What exactly are you observing? How did you measure the gap, and what metrics do you believe indicated its emergence?

Ultimately, Glyn, our focus is on the underlying value. We have analyzed their entire portfolio to form an understanding of this value. Additionally, we consider the potential synergies that could be added and how any transaction might look. These data points contribute to our perspective on the potential transaction and its impact on Rio Tinto shareholders. There are numerous data points that inform this analysis, but these are the core principles we considered.

So when you mention value, Simon, just to clarify, are you saying that when you perform a discounted cash flow analysis, you evaluate each individual asset and arrive at a sharing of the two entities? You conducted a thorough analysis and essentially found that the equity relationship of 60-40 or 2/3-1/3 showed that the gap was simply too significant.

Yes. So that's the core tenet of the valuation, as you articulate, Glyn. Obviously, we look at all data points as well, those in the market, what others' views are and fold that into our thinking, but that's what underpins the valuation.

Thanks, Glyn. Jason.

Jason Fairclough, Bank of America. So Simon, just to take you back to iron ore. Obviously, still a major product for you. And it's kind of a funny year because you've got the change in the benchmark. We've got BHP having a bit of a dispute with the Chinese and we've got Simandou coming online, which has kind of been this thing that everyone's been talking about for a long time. So how do you see the dynamic emerging from here? Are you changing your approach to selling the iron ore to producing it even?

I think we're changing our approach the way we think about portfolio because Simandou having been something that's coming is something that's arrived. And so, as we did the work last year on product strategy, we obviously had a pretty clear view around what the future mix would look like in terms of our own portfolio. Having IOC, the Pilbara asset and Simandou obviously gives us real options across high grade, mid grade and low grade. And so thinking about how we best present those iron units to the market and also working with our customers around what their forward projection looks like. The iron ore industry continues to mature and so working with our customers around it, about what the best mix for that is as well. As you and I have talked about before, Jason, we obviously got a long-term business, and so we've got to look beyond the sort of next few months or into what the future looks like as well for that business and make sure that we're really well positioned regardless of which way the future steel industry goes.

So just a bit of a long-term follow-up. India, how do you see India's place in the market evolving over the next 5, 10 years?

So, I mean growth rates are really high. The central question in India is what portion of their iron ore demand is met domestically. And so we've been doing, our people work on, on looking at that and understanding it. I think inevitably, as we see those sort of growth rates, there will be periods of time when India is a really strong market for us. They do have relatively more domestic suppliers compared to, say, China through their growth phase. And so it will be a different market for us, but there will be some opportunities as well.

Ephrem Ravi from Citigroup. Two questions. Firstly, on Simandou. It seems to have a high rate of fatalities for the time period. And obviously, you haven't changed your guidance for this year. But looking forward, like do you see a risk to kind of hitting that 60 million tonnes in a reasonable period of time unless the safety culture improves quite dramatically? If not, would you consider like portfolio adjustments, i.e., potential disposals of Simandou to your partners?

So the events of the weekend are obviously incredibly sobering and the impact on colleagues, family and friends and looking forward to being on the ground there with the team tomorrow. As I said in my introduction, we've got to be able to safely operate and construct wherever in the world that is. And I think the team at Simandou have made enormous strides and the events of the weekend show we've got further to go. And so that's our real focus at the moment. And I think the work that they have done, we know we can get there. We've just got to put in place the blocks to make sure that we really can. It is a different jurisdiction in a different environment, and we need to adjust our operating practices to that, but we're confident of the 60 million tonnes that we've announced.

And just a question on lithium. Obviously, prices have gone up 100% since the site visit about 2 months ago. And some of the peers like Pilbara is restarting operations, et cetera. So is there any change in thinking in terms of just doing your in-flight projects? Or is something more than in-flight projects going to be approved within a reasonable time frame?

I'll probably borrow the answer I was giving Jason. We have a long-term business, and we focus on our underlying fundamentals. Given the size of the lithium industry and its growth rate, we expect lithium prices to be volatile, which we have certainly observed recently. However, we must consider long-term pricing since these assets, once in production, will operate for decades. It's not just about the immediate future; it's about the years to come. The positive aspect, which was evident during the site tour, is that this business has options and strong opportunities in the industry, creating a high standard for capital allocation. Our primary focus is on the current projects, but we definitely have other options in our portfolio as we look further down the line.

It was a well-timed side.

Brilliant.

Great. Look, we will go back to the line for two more questions. Over to you, operator, please.

Next question comes from Rahul Anand of Morgan Stanley.

I've got two questions, both on iron ore. The first one is around, I guess, your cost-out targets. Obviously, $650 million outlined at the group level and then you've got a medium-term target in 2023 for the iron ore business around that $20 a tonne mark. My question is around sort of what the targets are for your competitors in the Pilbara? And I kind of think about BHP guiding below $17.50 and they seem to be strongly guiding towards being significantly lower and then Fortescue sub-19. Now I understand, obviously, your mine systems are quite different to theirs. But today, in terms of the next phase examples, you've talked about the Pilbara. So I guess, how can you better that $20 a tonne? And what level of betterment do you think we can expect? And sort of where can you end up in terms of where you sit versus your competitors? I'll come back with the second.

And Pete, I'll get you a comment as well. Probably the first point I'd make is you've got to look at it on apples-to-apples. And people can flip between full unit costs and C1 costs. But the numbers that you're referring to for us anyway is about full unit cost, and so got to compare the same. I think as you've seen today, we finished last year at $23.50; guidance for this year, $23.50 to $25 at a higher exchange rate, probably points to the work that Matt Holcz and the team are doing to really drive efficiencies and effectiveness in the Pilbara. Obviously, different businesses, as you say, in terms of the particular phase of investment they are and the material that we need to move. But I think the numbers today probably point to a fair bit of the work that the team there is doing.

Rahul, I think the important takeaway is that we have all the replacement projects underway, which we consider essential to the system's performance. These projects are now being implemented, and that's crucial for us. What we observed in the nine months from Q2 to Q4 of 2025 demonstrated the potential of the business when it operates at higher volumes, which is vital for our future. Similarly, all our operations are focused on this. Over the past six months, we have established clear actions aimed at enhancing productivity and managing costs across our entire system. This will drive significant productivity improvements in the coming years. Our focus on streamlining operations, eliminating bottlenecks, and enhancing performance will intensify over the next few years, especially as we bring in new replacement mines. This is at the core of our goals to reach $20 in 2023 terms moving forward.

No, absolutely, I mean, I acknowledge the business has already improved significantly in terms of, I guess, reliance and productivity, especially the last quarter. Look, the second question is around the iron ore negotiations. Now, obviously, there's been a lot of press with BHP and the CMRG Group. I just wanted to kind of take the conversation to perhaps a wider industry question. Would I be right to kind of deduce that these types of conversations are perhaps going to happen, not just with BHP, but I guess all iron ore suppliers into China as these contracts come up for renewal? And if you've had any conversations so far, how have those conversations been? And I guess, if you have some sort of timeline or something in terms of which contracts are coming due for renegotiations, I guess, in the next year or 2 years?

So we have had conversations, we're having regular conversations with CMRG and all market participants across our business, whether that's in China or in some of our other markets. And so those conversations are what I would describe as continual and ongoing. Look, if I was to characterize them, they're exactly the sort of conversations you'd expect between us and customers. We're obviously focused on their business, securing supply prices as we are. And so it's coming together and really understanding each other's business and trying to create value together, and that's what we do with customers, that's what we're doing with CMRG. And so in that sense, it's a continuation of where we've been. The market continues to evolve. We've obviously been talking for some time about the maturing iron ore market in China. You'll see more than 1 billion tonnes of steel in China this year again. And so it remains a large and really solid market for us as we think about folding in Simandou into the mix. And so all those things are on continual discussions with CMRG.

We'll take the second question from the line, please.

Next question comes from Rob Stein of Macquarie.

I have a couple of quick questions. Regarding the copper unit cost guidance you provided, could you share the expected magnitude of byproduct credits? It seems the market anticipated a lower figure, and I wonder if you might be offering a conservative estimate of those credits. I'll ask my second question afterward.

I mean, I think the gold volumes are kind of a bit higher in '26 and '25. And Rob, we've used pretty much, I think, just a bit higher than the average price of '25 in those calculations.

Okay. Speaking about copper and long-term growth, one of your competitors recently shared an extensive list of organic growth projects that will significantly enhance their growth profile over the next decade. How are you approaching these longer-term copper growth opportunities in your portfolio, especially considering that Resolution is still not mined? I assume you would prefer to have a project there. Can you also provide an update on the copper joint venture with Codelco and its progress?

Sure, I mentioned the copper pipeline earlier because we have some strong opportunities that we need to turn into valuable projects. I plan to visit Nuevo Cobre in Chile in the next month or two, along with our projects in the U.S. The positive aspect of our results today is that we are experiencing growth now, with a projected 3% copper equivalent growth through 2030. This focus on the present is important because our growth is set for this period, and we have options to extend that growth into the 2030s. We will provide updates as those projects develop. Regarding Chile, I'll be visiting soon, and our relationship with Codelco is very strong. I'm looking forward to seeing them next week. Chile, Argentina, and South America as a whole remain key areas for our copper initiatives. I believe that partnering is a major strength for Rio Tinto, and we are eager to advance our joint ventures with Codelco and other partners in the region.

So Rob, it's really nice progress now, which is what we've got in our numbers today. I mean, in the next few years is really good.

And is there anything through DD with Glencore that identified potentially opportunities for JV at a project level there?

Partnering has consistently provided significant value to our organization across nearly all commodities in our portfolio. This remains a key focus area for us. Exploring partnerships, where we contribute project execution capabilities, operational skills, and technical expertise while our partners also bring their strengths, is one approach we are taking. This applies to our relationships with Glencore and others.

Great. Thank you. Chris?

It's Chris LaFemina from Jefferies. I want to ask about the changing geopolitical risk profile at Rio. Your growth is in Mongolia and Guinea, and you're considering a deal with Glencore, which operates in the DRC and Kazakhstan, as well as many other regions where you aren't active. Over the last five years, Rio has worked on restoring a culture that historically focused on relatively low-risk areas. How do you assess geopolitical risk not only with the Glencore deal but also in the future? Would you consider investing in assets in very high-risk regions where you traditionally haven't ventured? For instance, would you look at a pure play DRC copper miner? What would provide you with confidence to enter regions where you haven't operated before, like Kazakhstan? When valuing Glencore in this context, are you applying a significantly higher discount rate? How do you find comfort in assets located in these types of regions?

Look, it's an excellent question, and it's one that we spend a lot of time grappling with and thinking about it, and I'm not sure there's a perfect answer. You're right in the sense of, ultimately, it's got to come back to value. And so a higher discount rates, the way you think about the opportunity could clearly, in more challenging projects, whether they're more challenging because of the jurisdiction or more challenging because of technical aspects. The size of the prize has to be there to really step in and take on some of those challenges. And so we have a number of different tool sets, discount rates is one, putting a high bar in terms of the returns that we expect, thinking deeply about how you could mitigate and share some of that risk might be another one. But ultimately, it's a bit hard in the hypothetical because it comes back to the opportunity and what we think about that specific opportunity, whether we take some of those risks. But it's certainly one we spend a lot of time thinking about historically and probably for the reasons you articulate more time now given some of the changes in the world. Tell you what, so the other point I would make just to tag on the back of that. I think in the numbers today, you can see the real value of the diversified model, and it goes a little bit to your question as well, whilst iron ore prices were down, EBITDA has gone up because of greater contribution from copper as we ramp up and obviously, a strong contribution from aluminum as well. And so as we think about risk, as we think about some of the geopolitical tensions, clearly, having that diversified model is also helps you mitigate and manage some of that between jurisdictions.

Alan Spence from BNP Paribas. On the dividend, 10 years paying out the top end of the range. Looking forward, costs are coming out of the business, CapEx is starting to come down. There's no big M&A for now. Is it still the appropriate range? Or how do you think about recalibrating it potentially higher?

Alan, I think, very comfortable with the policy we've got. We've always said in our capital allocation framework of the priorities we'll have, investing in the existing business, the sort of ordinary shareholder returns policy and then looking at growth, the balance sheet and returns. If we have excess capital, we will look to sort of return more to shareholders. That framework is still absolutely applicable as to how we think about that right now.

If I can push back a little bit. What's the point of having the low end of the range of 40%, if over the last 10 years, not every year has been an easy year, but you've never paid 40%?

Well, I mean, I think I'd sort of push back as well and say that the business has kind of performed at a level to have the 60% payout range. I mean, that's what we've had. I think that's sort of just reflective of the cash flows, quality of assets. And the reality is now we're growing the business. That pie will grow. And so the absolute number in line with the growth of the earnings would increase as well. I think that's a pretty good place to be. It's growth and its returns.

So a minimum 60%?

All I'd say is our policy.

Okay. We've got one more on the line. Please?

Next question comes from Ian Rossouw of Barclays.

Just a follow-up on the Glencore sort of discussions. Yesterday at the Glencore presentation, Gary talked about sort of meaningful potential synergies on sort of overhead, procurement cost savings, line optimization on the marketing side. And I guess he was referring to the point that not a lot of the synergies would have come from sort of operational synergies with mining next to each other as we've seen with some of the other mergers in the industry. I mean, that all suggests that the synergies potential between Rio and Glencore could have been much bigger than what the market was estimating. Just wanted to hear your views on that.

There were synergies, and I think the discussions with Gary and the team were constructive; the teams worked well together in considering what those synergies could be. However, it's just one data point among many that affect the valuation. It's important to evaluate it rigorously against the base case we outlined at Capital Markets Day, taking into account what can be achieved independently. The methodology needs to be strong enough to truly value what can be gained from the combination, rather than relying on other alternative means.

And then maybe a follow-up in sort of on the back of Myles was asking about sort of learnings from this process. I mean, would you approach the marketing side slightly differently within the Pilbara or other parts of the business?

Again, if I lift it up to a more general industry statement, I think that marketing front end is something that we are spending quite a bit of time thinking about. We, obviously, established commercial a few years ago, a little bit to the question that was made before in terms of geopolitical tensions and volatility in the world. I think, around our physical flows there are ways we can generate greater value around those flows. And certainly, that's top of mind for Bold and the commercial team.

Okay. I think we have time for one more. So, Liam?

Liam Fitzpatrick from Deutsche Bank. I'll just ask one. On Chinalco. There was talk last year from you and your predecessor about discussions over the stake in Rio plc. Has that gone anywhere? Are discussions live? Any color you can give.

Continue to engage with Chinalco. Nothing to announce today, obviously. But the relationship is in a good place. Obviously, the CBA deal is with Chinalco as well, and so we're continuing to engage.

It's Matt Greene at Goldman Sachs. Simon, I want to revisit Glencore. We've discussed valuation today, and you mentioned discount risk profile. Looking ahead, where do you see potential value and, more importantly, how do you think the market will value your company in the future? Regarding a possible re-rate, either through being a combined entity that leads in various commodities or considering a future simplification or demerger, how much weight do you give to your perspective on valuation? How significant is that aspect for you?

So valuation by its very definition is forward-looking. And so it completely flowed into our view of value. But strategic rationales don't pay the grocery bills. It's got to come back to cash accretion for Rio shareholders, and that's the lens we talk.

Okay. Any last question? We're good. Ben?

Ben Davis from RBC asked about mineral sands, mentioning the asset sales the company is considering and noting that they are not forced to sell. He inquired about the minimum valuation the company would seek for these assets, especially given the currently challenging cycle in mineral sands. He also suggested that it might be more advantageous to wait for another three years for conditions to improve.

We're going to do it patiently, yes. As I've said earlier, we are a long-term business. And similarly, I think the people that are interested in that or the borates business is going to look through the market as it stands. But we're going to be patient, as you say, we're not under any pressure. And so if we don't get the sort of value that we see in the business, we won't progress them. But anything to add?

No, I think that's exactly right.

And then just quickly on Yarwun, how much are we looking at care and maintenance costs? And again, what's the longer-term plan for that asset, which is sitting there?

We're currently moving that as we announced low single digits, I would say, in terms of spend.

Okay. Many, many thanks for joining us today. For those online, we will conclude our time now. And for those here in London, I welcome you to join us for a light refreshment before, for the analysts here, we move into an analyst roundtable. So thank you again. And with that, I conclude today's presentation. Thank you.