Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Synopsys Earnings Conference Call for the Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2024. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, we will conduct a question-and-answer session. Today's call will last one hour. As a reminder, today's call is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Trey Campbell, Senior Vice President, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, everyone. With us today are Sassine Ghazi, President and CEO of Synopsys, and Shelagh Glaser, CFO. Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that during the course of this conference call, Synopsys will discuss forecasts, targets, and other forward-looking statements regarding the company and its financial results. While these statements represent our best current judgment about future results and performance as of today, our actual results are subject to many risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from what we expect. In addition to any risks that we highlight during the call, important factors that may affect our future results are described in our most recent SEC reports and today's earnings press release. In addition, we will refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures during the discussion. Reconciliations to their most directly comparable GAAP financial measures and supplemental financial information can be found in the earnings press release, financial supplement, and 8-K that we released earlier today. All of these items, plus the most recent investor presentation, are available on our website at www.synopsys.com. In addition, the prepared remarks will be posted on our website at the conclusion of the call. With that, I'll turn the call over to Sassine.

Good afternoon. We delivered a strong finish to the year, exceeding the midpoint of our Q4 guidance targets, which caps another record revenue year for Synopsys. A big thank you to our customers, partners, and the entire Synopsys team. In FY ‘24, we grew revenue 15% year-over-year and crossed the $6 billion mark, only three years after crossing the $4 billion mark. This is a big achievement considering it took us 35 years to achieve $4 billion. We've also expanded the bottom line with EPS growing at a 24% CAGR over the last five years. FY ‘24 was also a transformational year for the company. We sharpened our focus on growth segments with the successful sale of our software integrity business, and we doubled down on our silicon to systems strategy with the pending acquisition of Ansys. Let me take a few minutes to share some business highlights, and then Shelagh will discuss the financials in more detail. Technology is at a strategic inflection point that presents unprecedented opportunity for Synopsys, from silicon to systems. We are operating in an era of pervasive intelligence, which fuels our momentum and is underpinned by multiple secular growth drivers: the megatrend of AI, silicon proliferation, and software-defined systems. Unlike the broader semiconductor market, which can be cyclical in nature, Synopsys's success is tied to technology innovation cycles. The AI-driven reinvention of compute is accelerating the pace, scale, and systemic complexity of technology R&D, which in turn expands our opportunity. AI and HPC chip design starts continue at a relentless pace, while end demand in industries like industrial, auto, and consumer electronics are recovering more slowly. However, all industries are investing for their AI future, and Synopsys will be a strategic partner in helping them realize their ambitions. Our planned acquisition of Ansys will further our growth into new adjacent areas. Together, we can deliver on the engineering need for the new AI-powered design solutions that fuse electronics and physics, giving R&D teams unprecedented insights into products under development. The regulatory review process is proceeding as expected. I'm pleased to announce that this week, the HSR waiting period has expired, and we are working cooperatively with the FTC staff to conclude the investigation and their review of our proposed remedies. This marks an important milestone towards closure, which we continue to expect in the first half of 2025. We're also making strong progress with other regulatory agencies, and customers remain overwhelmingly supportive of this pro-competitive deal. Looking ahead to 2025 at a high level, we expect to deliver double-digit revenue growth and a 40% operating margin. We will remain focused on execution excellence and operating discipline while balancing our guidance with pragmatism, given we are readying our company for the largest acquisition in our history and continue to manage macro uncertainties in some geographies. Shelagh will discuss the guidance in more detail. Let's move to segment business highlights, starting with Design Automation. In Q4, Design Automation revenue was up 17% year-over-year and full-year revenue was up 12% versus 2023. Our unparalleled Design Automation portfolio provides holistic insight across the flow and includes our industry-leading fusion compiler. Fusion compiler leadership was evident in Q4 as a leading US HPC customer leveraged fusion compiler to deliver their first TSMC N2 production tape-out, and a leading hyperscaler taped out a novel new SOC on TSMC N4. Since 2020, we've been the pioneers in adding AI optimization engines to our products. We now have Synopsys.ai solutions across the design flow that are delivering extraordinary customer results. Customers have now used DSO.ai to optimize over 700 cumulative tape-outs and have deployed VSO.ai in up to 90% of SOC blocks on some chips. VSO.ai deployments are also accelerating with one customer seeing up to a four times improvement in hardware utilization and another achieving two times faster turnaround time. We're also augmenting the capability of Synopsys.ai by bringing the power of generative AI to our platform. We've now expanded coverage of copilot knowledge assistance to 11 EDA products, with our customers seeing 30% to 60% faster time to results versus traditional approaches on our flagship products, with both hosted commercial LLMs and on-prem deployments with open-source LLMs. We and our customers are reskilling and redefining workflow using AI. But this is only the beginning. AI is evolving from a discrete capability to becoming an essential and ubiquitous part of everything we do. We are also on the cusp of a massive architectural revolution in semiconductors, Multi-Die. Acceleration in Multi-Die designs opens a new frontier in chip architecture but also ushers the daunting complexities that require the integration of design and multi-physics to solve. Today, Multi-Die is the domain of a small group of customers, but third parties estimate that by 2027, 90% of HPC AI designs and 70% of PC designs will be Multi-Die. Multi-Die adoption is also increasing the use of advanced manufacturing nodes, a positive trend for Synopsys. We're partnering with ecosystem leaders like TSMC to improve predictability and yield for Multi-Die designs. In Q4, TSMC completed a Multi-Die test chip tape-out demonstrating the industry's only end-to-end unified solution comprising of 3DIC Compiler, silicon lifecycle management, Synopsys test solutions, UCIe, and Synopsys.ai. In this case, AI-driven analysis using 3DSO.ai was deployed to address thermal and power integrity challenges for CoWoS interposer packaging. The real game changer for Multi-Die will be a design environment that fuses Design Automation and multi-physics simulation in a unified platform. That's a key part of the value proposition for Ansys and why our customers are so supportive of that transaction. Closing out on Design Automation, we had another record year in our hardware business with exceptional momentum on both HAPS and ZeBu product lines. During Q4, we had over 50 repeat HAPS customers and more than 10 new customers. Notable among those wins, a US hyperscaler deployed a large HAPS implementation for PCIe 6 software bring-up for AI workloads. ZeBu EP momentum also continued with customers seeing value in the reconfigurability of our system to enable all emulation and prototyping use cases. In the quarter, we saw seven repeat customers and eight new customers for ZeBu EP, with a key IP customer deploying ZeBu because of the unique reconfigurability of that platform. On to Design IP, which was roughly flat in Q4 against a very strong prior year compare. For the full year, Design IP delivered 24% revenue growth with 5 points of adjusted operating margin accretion. Design activity continued to be robust for high-performance computing customers with seven PCIe 6 design wins, spanning hyperscalers and semiconductor accounts. Protecting data over high-speed interfaces continues to be a critical need, and in Q4, we saw another seven wins for security integrity and data encryption over PCIe 6 and CXL 3. We also continued to push technology differentiation in our Ethernet products. In Q4, we achieved the industry's first multi-vendor 800-gig Ethernet demonstration at ECOC 2024, proving the robustness and interoperability of our IP. With the rapid acceleration of Multi-Die designs, there is a significant demand for increased throughput. And this quarter, we announced the industry's only complete 40-gig UCIe solution that includes controller, PHY, and our verification IP. This IP offers 25% higher bandwidth than the UCIe spec with no impact on energy efficiency or area. We secured two 40-gig UCIe design wins in the quarter and ended the year with more than 20 die-to-die design wins. We also saw strength in automotive in the fourth quarter as electrification, infotainment, and ADAS features continue to drive strong demand for our comprehensive automotive IP portfolio with wins at multiple leading automotive SOC vendors. In an industry first, we achieved the third-party certification of 40-gigabit per second USB4 IP, an IP title, which is vital for automotive and mobile markets. Switching to manufacturing, where we take great pride in our role as the IP technology on-ramp to the world's foundries. We were proud to receive TSMC's 2024 Partner of the Year award for interface IP, acknowledging our collaborative success for Synopsys interface IP on TSMC's most advanced processes. Before closing out, I want to highlight the power of our technology portfolio with a key companywide design win. This quarter, we strengthened our decades-long partnership with Arm, aligning our roadmaps to the needs of our mutual customers. As a key partner in Arm total design, we are integrating Arm compute subsystems with our industry-leading IP, AI-driven EDA solutions, and industry-leading hardware accelerated verification solutions. Together, Arm and Synopsys delivered differentiated solutions delivering the next generation of chiplets, SoCs, and systems across AI, HPC, automotive, mobile, PC, and IoT. A few closing comments before we transition to Shelagh's remarks. We have strong momentum across the business supported by multiple secular growth drivers. We have a very resilient business model and are mission critical to our customers' innovation. We are aligning our portfolio investment with the greatest return potential and aligning our operations to accelerate our growth. Thank you to our employees and partners for a transformative 2024. We look forward to igniting our customers' ingenuity in 2025 and beyond. With that, I'll turn it over to Shelagh.

Thank you, Sassine. 2024 was an excellent year, highlighted by record revenue, record non-GAAP operating margin, and record earnings. We continue our strong execution with financial discipline and are confident in our business heading into 2025, driven by our strong momentum across the business, leading technology that is mission critical to our customers, and a resilient and stable business model with non-cancelable backlog of $8.1 billion. As we look into 2025, I want to highlight a few changes compared to 2024. In 2024, we had the benefit of an extra week or approximately $70.5 million in revenue. Also, as mentioned in the 8-K filed last week, we are changing our fiscal year from a 52-53 week period ending on the Saturday nearest to October 31st to end on October 31st of each year. While design activity remains robust, we are taking a balanced view in 2025 given the impact of fiscal periods, macro uncertainty, and a pragmatic view of China. For 2025, we expect to grow revenue 10.1% to 11.1% or 11.5% to 12.5%, excluding the impact of the extra week and calendar year change. Expand non-GAAP operating margin by approximately 150 basis points and drive non-GAAP EPS growth of approximately 13%. Let me provide some highlights of our full-year 2024 results, which are presented on a continuing operations basis. We generated total revenue of $6.13 billion, up 15% year-over-year with double-digit growth across all products and geographies. Total GAAP costs and expenses were $4.77 billion, and total non-GAAP costs and expenses were $3.77 billion, resulting in non-GAAP operating margin of 38.5%. GAAP earnings per share were $9.25, and non-GAAP earnings per share were $13.20, up 25% year-over-year. Now on to our segments. Design Automation segment revenue was $4.22 billion, up 12%, driven by strength in EDA software and hardware. Design Automation adjusted operating margin was 38.7%. Design IP segment revenue was $1.91 billion, up 24%, driven by broad-based strength. Design IP adjusted operating margin was 38.3%. Turning to cash. Operating cash flow for the year was $1.4 billion and free cash flow was $1.28 billion. We ended the year with cash and short-term investments of $4.05 billion and total debt of $15.6 million. Now to our targets. We expect the first-half, second-half split of roughly 45%, 55% for revenue, which is more second-half weighted versus 2024's 48-52 mix based on two drivers. The first driver is 10 fewer days in the first-half of 2025 versus 2024 due to the extra week and the fiscal calendar change, an impact of approximately $100 million. And the second driver is our current assessment of the timing of IP and hardware deliveries. Similarly, we expect first-half, second-half split of non-GAAP EPS to be 40%, 60% based on our current assumption for expenses. In 2025, the full-year targets are revenue of $6.745 billion to $6.805 billion, total GAAP costs and expenses between $4.93 billion and $4.98 billion, total non-GAAP costs and expenses between $4.05 billion and $4.09 billion, resulting in non-GAAP operating margin of 40% at the midpoint. Non-GAAP tax rate of 16%, one point higher than the rate in 2024. GAAP earnings of $10.42 to $10.63 per share, non-GAAP earnings of $14.88 to $14.96 per share, cash flow from operations of approximately $1.8 billion and free cash flow of approximately $1.6 billion. Our guidance for cash flow includes the impact of approximately $100 million for deal-related costs and approximately $130 million of cash taxes from the sale of our Software Integrity business. Now to targets for the first quarter. Revenue between $1.435 billion and $1.465 billion, total GAAP costs and expenses between $1.14 billion and $1.16 billion, total non-GAAP costs and expenses between $945 million and $955 million. GAAP earnings of $1.81 to $1.95 per share and non-GAAP earnings of $2.77 to $2.82 per share. Our press release and financial supplement include additional targets and GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliations. Building on a record 2024, we are well positioned entering 2025, driven by our relentless execution and leadership position across our segments, mission-critical products to enable our customers' innovation, and a stable and resilient business model. With that, I'll turn it over to the operator for questions.

Thank you. We'll take our first question today from Joe Vruwink at Baird.

Great. Hi, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. I wanted to start just the underlying growth of 11.5% to 12.5%. I think that's maybe a point below the starting ranges you've been using over recent history. Is it maybe possible to reconcile just the change that went into your planning assumptions for FY ‘25? And then, I know you mentioned that the Ansys deal may potentially close. How much is maybe your updated budgeting approach related to specifically the transaction and just wanting to be prudent around any disruption that creates?

Hi, Joe, thank you for the question. Really, the way we looked at it is a balanced view for FY ‘25, taking into account a few factors. The first one is the market we're in and serving. I like to think of it as we are in a tale of two markets. The one that our customers are serving, the AI infrastructure build-out, they're doing incredibly well, and we're benefiting beautifully out of it. These are the companies that are delivering memory chips, advanced logic, be it the CPU, accelerator, GPU, et cetera. And that's helping across the board the Synopsys portfolio, the EDA, hardware, IP, et cetera. But let's not forget there's another cohort which is the rest of the semiconductor market, the one that they're serving mobile, PC, automotive, industrial. They're still in many ways trying to have a refresh cycle for their products and leverage AI on devices. For us, for that cohort, given we're tied to their R&D, we're still doing fine, but it's not delivering to similar levels of growth as the first cohort. So that's from a market point of view. The second factor we took into account is the macro uncertainties, and in here, if you double-click on China in particular, the economy continues to decelerate, and you layer on top of it the expansion of restrictions that we needed to take into account. Lastly, we're absolutely taking into account and are so excited about closing Ansys in the first half of '25 that we need to prepare our company for this massive acquisition, not only the largest for Synopsys but the largest for the engineering software industry. So you take all these factors into account, we decided to guide FY ‘25 with pragmatism and we're still guiding, as you mentioned, 11.5% to 12.5% growth on the tail of a 15% growth that we just delivered last year.

Okay. That's great detail. Thank you. Second question just on the outlook for next year, based on the $8.1 billion in backlog, another really strong quarter of bookings. It would seem like there is very high visibility on what the next 12 months may bring. I guess, any changes in your views given all the current events that have been swirling around? You touched on some of them, but in terms of various foundry investments, you mentioned briefly geopolitics. It doesn't seem to have come up just based on your 4Q bookings performance, but what might you anticipate in quarters ahead and how backlog may progress?

Thank you, Joe, for highlighting the backlog, as it reflects the health of the business. We entered fiscal year 2023-2024 with a backlog of approximately $8.1 billion, which indicates our capacity to achieve a 15% growth without heavily relying on the backlog. This also demonstrates the successful execution in fiscal year 2024. Regarding foundries, I prefer not to speculate on the various developments we are undertaking. Most of our IP business originates from TSMC, where our customers design their products. However, we also serve all foundries, including Intel, Samsung, GlobalFoundries, and Rapidus. There is uncertainty about their pace in attracting customers in 2025 and beyond, so it's too early to predict. Nevertheless, we are committed to investing and expanding our IP across all these foundries.

The next question will come from Jason Celino, KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Hey, thanks for taking my question. Maybe just a clarification on the Q1 guide. So I understand the year-over-year dynamics with like the one less week and then maybe an extra one less or two less couple of days based on the fiscal year change. But still, it's coming in sequentially down from Q4. It sounds like you had a pretty strong hardware quarter for Q4, but maybe can you just explain kind of the seasonality that you're seeing for that first quarter?

Sure. Jason, you are correct. The change in the fiscal year and its impact in the first quarter is eight days, which amounts to around $80 million. With our ratable business, we obviously have eight fewer days to account for in the first quarter of 2024. Additionally, looking at the first quarter of 2024, it's a challenging comparison because IP was up 53%. We often mention that this business tends to be unpredictable, leading to quarters where customers pull down a significant amount of IP and other quarters where we're building IP but experiencing lower pull down. The first quarter will be a period of building IP with lower pull down, making it a softer quarter for us, while we expect a much stronger second half for IP. So, these two factors are affecting the first quarter.

Okay. Great. Thank you. And then maybe just a quick follow-up for Shelagh. The divestiture of that optical solutions group, was there any divested revenue impact there? Just trying to think about the guide here and what could have been taken out? Thanks.

So that doesn't have any effect on this as we announced that it will be part of our continuing business until we close the Ansys transaction. So that's still included in our forecast.

Got you. Okay. Thank you.

Thanks, Jason.

And next up is Harlan Sur from J.P. Morgan.

Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my question. Two days ago, the Department of Commerce, BIS Bureau put out an update on U.S. semiconductor and value chain rules and restrictions. There were some updates on the rules on EDA software. Is there any impact of these new rules on your fiscal '25 outlook?

Hey, Harlan. The quick answer is yes. There are some customers who got added to the entity list in that latest ruling and some technology restrictions as well.

But I would say, Harlan, that's all incorporated in our guidance. So all of those most recent restrictions are fully incorporated in the guidance.

Correct.

Yes, I appreciate that. And then for my follow-up, it's good to see the strong double-digit growth in your IP businesses and your Design Automation business in fiscal '24. Sassine, as you mentioned, design activity as measured by chip design starts, IP adoption appears to all be increasing quite a bit. We continue to see new entrants in the chip design sector, OpenAI being one of the more recent. So within your full-year guide, how would you qualitatively describe the growth profile of your Design Automation and IP businesses sort of relative to the full-year growth outlook?

Yes. So, Harlan, the excitement that we have across our customer base that are serving that AI infrastructure is actually the roadmap they're delivering, the investments they're making is at a pace that continues to accelerate and that's part of our confidence when we look at what helped us achieve over the last five years a 15% revenue growth CAGR. And as we look at FY ‘25 and where we're guiding that growth, a lot of it is coming from that increased investment and those customers needing the most advanced IP to do those Multi-Die designs because almost every one of them is designing either at a 2.5 or with a roadmap to 3D. The increased need that they have for hardware-assisted verification to deal with that complexity, and anything we offer today with our Design Automation EDA software, be it with AI, with Fusion Compiler, et cetera, they are the customers that are first to adopt in order to tame that complexity they're dealing with. So it's across the board, Harlan, we're seeing the adoption with that cohort of customers.

Perfect. Thank you.

Thank you.

Vivek Arya from Bank of America has the next question.

Thanks for taking my question. Sassine, you mentioned you've seen very strong overall design starts, especially in AI. I'm curious what was the growth in design starts that you saw last year? And what is your assumption? I imagine this is one of the more important metrics that you look at when forecasting the business.

Yes. Looking back not just at the last year but also over the past three to five years, particularly focusing on hyperscalers and the semiconductor companies serving them, there were initially many questions regarding how much these hyperscalers could continue to invest in building chips to differentiate and optimize their workloads with their own silicon. However, it is evident that nearly all hyperscalers are now quite proud of their increased investments in silicon. As these investments grow, we find ourselves at the center of this expansion among hyperscalers. If we consider semiconductor companies aiming to serve this market, whether through custom ASIC delivery or direct AI accelerators, we see a growing roadmap from our customers that has been steadily increasing year-over-year over the past three to five years, significantly contributing to our revenue growth. I don't anticipate this trend will slow down as we approach FY '25 with this group of customers.

Got it. And I appreciate that you don't want to be specific to a customer, but when we look at your largest customer, how big were they in fiscal '24 and they are going through some level of restructuring and turmoil. How are you trying to deal with that and how much are you assuming that becomes a headwind for Synopsys next year? I assume you have kind of contemplated that in your outlook, but how much of a headwind is that restructuring activity at your largest customer?

The purchasing behavior of our large customers at Synopsys is quite uniform, indicating that they engage in a wide range of purchases. They typically enter into multi-year EDA contracts, which are recognized over a period of three years or more based on the specific agreements. Additionally, for each of these customers, there are two additional layers of contracts and commitments related to IP and hardware. While this is a generalized statement, it reflects the situation with our largest customers. The timing and demand for IP and hardware depend on their development timelines. If they encounter delays or shifts in their projects, it results in a corresponding delay in their demand for IP and hardware, which consequently affects Synopsys's revenue on a customer-by-customer basis. As you examine our FY ‘25 guidance and the expected distribution of 45% to 55% throughout the year, this takes into account these dynamics and the timing of demand fluctuations.

Thank you, Sassine.

You're welcome.

The next question is from Gary Mobley, Loop Capital.

Hey guys, thanks for taking my question. Based on the fiscal year '25 operating margin guide of 40%, it looks like you're bringing a lot more down to the operating income line than you did last year for each incremental revenue dollar despite the slowdown in projected revenue. And so, Shelagh, my question is, is that largely a function of a slower pace design activity or annualizing some of the deals that were done last year in anticipation of the Ansys acquisition? Is that the proper read-through?

Well, I think it's a multi-year focus on driving leverage in the company. So you saw us improve by 2 points last year. We're giving 150 basis points improvement, and it's really across the board thinking about how we do things more efficiently inside our four walls, just like we are servicing our customers to allow them to do their R&D development more efficiently. So we see it across R&D. We've invested heavily in making sure that we are getting benefits from things like AI. We're getting benefits from modernizing how we're building our software and then also things that we're driving in terms of digital transformation. So modernizing how we run the core of the business. So this is a multi-year journey that we've been on in terms of driving leverage across the business, and so I think it's a strong commitment that we have. And then as you mentioned, as we bring Ansys in, that will be some of the work that we'll jointly then do as we work towards the synergy.

Got it. Just a quick clarification. Sassine, you mentioned the fiscal year '23 ending backlog of $8.1 billion. Is that adjusted for software integrity, or was it lower excluding software integrity?

Yes, that's adjusted.

Yes.

Got it. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Thanks, Gary.

We'll go next to Jay Vleeschhouwer, Griffin Securities.

Thank you. Good evening. Sassine, you mentioned that you were aligning operations to prepare for growth for '25 and beyond. Could you be more specific about some of the steps that you've taken, and how much of that are things you would have done anyway irrespective of Ansys? You just grew your headcount for the year by 10%, you also have the largest number of R&D openings you've had in two years. So maybe just talk about some of your internal initiatives that you're putting in place to prepare for more growth and AI follow up?

Yes. Thank you, Jay, for the question. When the company crosses $6 billion, which we just did in FY ‘24, huge milestone. The way we drive our product development and driving solutions to our customers' needs to scale and evolve as well. We've been talking about scaling for a while as it comes to our IP business, as it comes to EDA and how to deliver solutions to our customers, and that's part of the effort that we have put in place around the structure of the company in order to scale and continue our pace to deliver market-leading solutions and innovation, et cetera. So we put some effort around structure. And the second part that we have been investing for about two years is how do we evolve our engineering workflow inside the company. There are some amazing technologies out there that we're seeing some early benefits of efficiency productivity for our R&D, and we continue on putting that emphasis and focus on how do we leverage technology and modernize the way we build both IP as well as the EDA software.

Okay. Thank you. As a follow-up on the third-quarter call, you made some interesting comments about customer-specific AI use cases that with EDA models and the like that you might see more and more specificity on a customer-by-customer basis for AI. On the other hand, you and cadence and the other EDA vendors have for the last number of years also talked about more and more domain-specific design. So maybe you could talk about how those two play together, the long trend towards domain specificity and now apparently this newer phenomenon of customer specificity, how do those come together or might it have any effect in terms of your product packaging, your development, the services you need to provide to customers, and so forth?

Yes. With AI, it's not only unique to Synopsys. I want to say for every software company that is delivering AI as part of their product is rapidly learning how to engage customers in adopting that technology and the monetization of that technology. As the first step that Synopsys took was looking at our complete portfolio and asking ourselves, where can we insert AI inside the products and deliver new products to the customers where they can leverage AI to achieve better time to results, better quality of results, et cetera. And I believe we've done a great job there. This is where the XSO.ai family comes in, and the adoption by customers, the acceptance by customers is going very well. The AI use cases you mentioned, once you start moving to knowledge assistant type of AI application, the customers have their own workflow, they have their own data. They are not expecting that you come in and say, use the following models for AI or something that is pre-trained, they want to train based on their data, and therefore, what is our flexibility in delivering a customer-specific AI capability that sits inside their workflow. So that's not the XSO.ai. XSO.ai is going to come in with all the products. So that's the next level of a workflow optimization that our customers are investing in and of course, investing with and around our technology. The third one, which we're starting to talk about in some of our conferences, et cetera, when you look at the generative Agentic AI, which is absolutely going to drive a completely different approach to what is it that we sell to our customers in that context, and that's going to drive, in our view, an opportunity to what is it we deliver and the business model we deliver to in that disruptive wave of AI. But think back about two years ago, I don't think we were talking in that time window about Agentic AI and EDA or any software company for that matter. So that's the rapid evolution from optimization.ai or XSO.ai, the AI-specific use cases with knowledge assistant based on customer use cases and workflow, and the third one is the Agentic generative AI.

Thank you, Sassine.

Thank you, Jay.

We'll go next to Ruben Roy, Stifel.

Thank you for taking my questions. Sassine, I had a couple of longer-term questions. I wanted to talk a little bit about the tail of the two markets and the haves I guess versus the have-nots. One of the recurring themes that's been coming up more in recent times is the concept of acceleration of AI silicon designs. And was wondering how you're thinking about that over the next couple of years? In the context of, one of the leading providers of IP for ASICs talked about leveraging cloud-based EDA tools just this week. And I'm wondering, I know you've been working on cloud-based tools for quite some time now, but is that something that changes your business model in any direction or inflection in some sort of way? Just would love to hear your thoughts on that.

Yes, two things. One, when it comes to accelerated compute to deliver a more effective efficient EDA, that's something we've been talking about and delivering to not only talking about for a while. If you remember at GTC, one of Jensen's slides was the various areas of Synopsys delivering accelerated EDA for, in that case, GPU from Nvidia, and it applies to many other accelerated compute that our customers may prefer or have their own flavor. There, it's a two-step. You port your software so you can use it for their preferred compute, and then you go into the next phase, which is optimization, and that's where you can deliver factors of performance. We're not talking percentages; it can be 3 times, 5 times, 10 times performance benefit. Now some of our customers want that capability to be available on cloud, not everything available on-prem to be able to burst for that capability. That customer you're referring to does use our EDA for cloud. So the way we sell to that customer, they have a contractual flexibility to use our software on-prem, and when they decide to burst on their preferred CSP, they have that flexibility to burst, which gives us a good burn rate on our software because if they are bursting, they use more software, and we monetize it.

Very good. That's very helpful. Thank you, Sassine. And then a quick follow-up on some of the comments you made on IP. The design activity remaining robust and you're specific around some of the interfaces that you're working or interface technologies, I should say that you're working on and with. I read an interview recently where you talked about potentially looking at royalty models for your IP deliverables. Is that something that you think can play out sooner rather than later and would it be specific to some of these areas like DCI Express 6 or CXL and what not?

Yeah, we always look at inflection points in order to really change the way we monetize. On the traditional interface IP, I don't see a change where we show up at the customer and say, right now, we're going to change the business model and introduce royalty. It's been since its existence to use base monetization, and that will continue. We have other parts of our IP that do have royalty, and that will continue. But the next inflection point that can introduce a new business model is the moment you start thinking about delivery beyond the interface IP, meaning as you start going to a subsystem or a chiplet and beyond the standard delivery, our customers are very receptive to it. But I want to bring it back to scaling. For us today, we have a significant investment in our interface IP, as I just described, and as we look toward the future trends, that's something we're absolutely looking at, investing in, and testing with our customers the opportunities and the business model.

Got it. Thank you, Sassine.

Thank you, Ruben.

And next up is Charles Shi, Needham & Company.

Thank you, Sassine and Shelagh, for the opportunity to ask a couple of questions. I'd like to revisit the topic regarding China. Sassine, you mentioned that the export control has an impact, but I'm curious about how you would characterize that impact. Is it significant, or do you think it’s not quite material for the fiscal year '25 outlook? Additionally, you indicated that you want to adopt a more cautious approach to China, but it seems like China still grew in line with the corporate average in fiscal '24, despite similar comments made at the beginning of that fiscal year. What’s the current expectation for next year? Will China grow below the corporate average, in line with it, or do you anticipate it will still be higher in dollar terms year-over-year in fiscal '25? Thank you.

Thank you, Charles. Our revenue growth in China has indeed slowed when you look at the last several years. The decline can be attributed to a shrinking customer base due to restrictions. This cannot be overlooked, as the number of potential customers and opportunities is decreasing. Additionally, the overall economy in China is also slowing down. The environment where many start-ups would emerge each quarter has changed and is no longer present. Last year, our performance in China was about average compared to the corporate results. I cannot project where we will be in 2025, as we typically do not provide forward-looking guidance. However, we are considering these factors as we plan for the year ahead, which is why we are taking a pragmatic approach regarding China.

Got it. Maybe a question for Shelagh. Regarding the 45 to 55 split, I thought it was closer to 47 to 53. It appears that the first half is slightly weaker, while the second half seems stronger. Synopsys has experienced second-half loading before, but it seems particularly pronounced this year, unlike recent years. This situation often raises skepticism among investors, especially since your peers in 2024 have a similar profile, leading to doubts about their ability to deliver in the second half. What would you say to investors with these concerns? How can we assure them about the anticipated second half improvement? I believe you all are reliable, but I’d like to hear your perspective for those who might be a bit skeptical. Thanks.

Hi, Charles. Thank you for the questions. There are really two main factors at play here. First, we have a mechanical issue due to having 10 fewer days in the first half of 2025 compared to the first half of 2024, which translates to an immediate $100 million challenge for our routable business. Second, as Sassine mentioned, our upfront businesses are more weighted towards the second half based on customer demand timing. Specifically, our IP business, which tends to be unpredictable, can show double-digit growth in one quarter followed by a decline in the next, but we manage that well. We're continually developing titles, but customers will only use them when they're ready. As we look at 2025, many customer demands are skewed to the second half. The same goes for our hardware business, which is also more heavily weighted towards the second half. We had a record year for hardware in 2024 and expect another record in 2025. However, customers are facing challenges securing space and power for their hardware, similar to those experienced with data centers. We need to coordinate with our customers to ensure that hardware is not only available, but that they also have the necessary facilities to operate it, which contributes to the second-half focus. In the meantime, we are expanding our ZeBu cloud so customers can utilize our ZeBu servers for their designs, though this option has limitations and won’t provide the same scale or real-time feedback as an on-premises setup. Those are the two main factors I wanted to highlight: the $100 million mechanical impact and the timing challenges with hardware and IP. Thank you for the question, Charles.

Charles, I would like to add that while you mentioned we are dependable, there may be some skepticism from a few. We are a company that has demonstrated our commitment and ability to deliver on our promises. When you examine our successes in our IP and hardware, you can see a shift in the balance of upfront versus ratable revenue. In fiscal year 2023, 26% of our revenue was upfront; in fiscal year 2024, it was 29%. This trend is expected to continue in fiscal year 2025. We need to understand that there will be some fluctuations from quarter to quarter, but that’s a result of the successes we’re experiencing throughout our portfolio.

Thanks so much for the additional colors, Shelagh, Sassine. I really appreciate it.

Thank you, Charles.

Thank you, Charles.

Operator, let's do one more question.

Hey guys, can you hear me?

Yes, Josh.

Thank you for sneaking me in at the end. I really appreciate it. My first question, I'm going to preface with, I apologize for beating a dead horse, but it feels as if the message is that the guidance is a little bit more conservative than usual, especially around your assumptions for China. Can you maybe just take that one step further and just tell us how it's more conservative because for China is it lower revenue contribution, lower growth? Just walk us through how you embedded some conservatism around the China business for next year?

We are approaching this in a balanced manner. The deceleration in China that I mentioned earlier is significant, and it's evident in our local engagements. Additionally, there are ongoing expansions of restrictions on China. We expect China to perform in line with corporate average performance rather than exceeding it. However, there are other factors, aside from China, that we are considering as we evaluate our fiscal year 2025 outlook.

Okay, very helpful. And maybe just a follow-up for Shelagh really quick. I thought it was interesting unless I misheard it. But at the end of your prepared remarks you talked about some of the confidence you have heading into next year is around the mission-critical nature of the software. And I guess my question is how next year are you translating how mission-critical your software is into better pricing for Synopsys and its customers?

Well, I mean, as Sassine talked about, we've got long-term contracts in EDA and when we go to renewals with customers, we always sit down with all the improvements that we've made and align with them on what the benefits are to them, and so that's, I would call it a regular kind of renewal conversation that we have with customers. We haven't talked too much about AI, but obviously a big part of that engagement is on the AI and the benefits we're having on AI. And then obviously, with IP, that's an ongoing conversation as people pull titles, and I would say hardware we've talked about too. The overall commitment that you see us driving is the improved operating margin. So that's where you really see that coming through, and we've been driving operating margin improvement year after year after year, and you see us doing again 150 basis points in 2025.

Super helpful. Thank you guys. I appreciate it.

Thanks, Josh.

Thank you, Josh.

Thanks, everyone. Operator, you can close the call.

Thank you. So, ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude our conference for today. We would like to thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect.