Q2 2026 Visteon Corporation Earnings Conference Call

on the sell side EBITDA was one hundred and sixteen million dollars or 12.1 percent for the quarter our best EBITDA margin since Q3 of 2025 this was driven primarily by the recoveries we secured in the quarter combined with strong cost discipline on a year-over-year basis EBITDA declined 18 million dollars as a reminder and as we noted in our Q2 2025 earnings call Q2 2025 EBITDA was exceptional and benefited from 10 million of several non-recurring items, mostly commercial in nature. Besides these 10 million dollars, we also had 8 million of negative year-over-year currency impact, mostly driven by the devaluation of the Indian rupee and the Japanese yen, as well as the appreciation of the Mexican peso. These two factors explain in simple terms the year-over-year decline in EBITDA. At a more granular level, year-over-year engineering increased as we continue to invest in the next generation of software-defined vehicle products, mostly for the European, Indian, and Chinese markets. The engineering services acquisitions we've made last year, as well as the acquisition I mentioned earlier, also increased our engineering cost run rate. These additional costs were mostly offset by operational efficiencies. Finally, as cost recovery is a critical component of 2026 results, I would like to provide some more details on this topic. With regards to recovery agreements with our customers, we made meaningful progress in the quarter, consistent with the assumptions embedded in our guidance and highlighted in Q1. We were able to recover most of the memory cost inflation incurred in Q2, with retroactive agreements compensating for the lack of deals with some customers we continue to meet with our customers and expect to close the agreements that remain open in the second half of the year overall our performance in the quarter was strong when adjusting for currency was in line with our expectations and represents the sequential improvements that we were anticipating going into the year driven by recoveries product costing actions vertical integration and engineering productivity. Turning to page 11. Adjusted free cash flow was $20 million in a quarter and negative $3 million for the first half. The first half reflects several key dynamics. First, adjusted EBITDA in the first half was primarily impacted by the timing of semiconductor cost recovery negotiations, which are expected to be fully closed in the second half of the year. On the trade working capital front, this line item has been a use of cash for the first half of the year. This has been a deliberate decision driven primarily by specific actions increasing inventory levels to support higher minimum safety stock levels and to allow us to build a better supply chain resilience. Cash taxes were higher in the second quarter due to a one-time tax settlement in India related to prior years. Consistent with prior years and And as we expected, the first half of the year generally has more cash outflows for items like the annual compensation, which is paid in Q1. While these items limited cash generation for the first half, we believe we will be able to generate cash to the levels we are guiding to for the full year. And finally, capital expenditures were in line with our expectations as we continue to support new program launches, capacity expansion in India, and the modernization of our IT infrastructure. During the second quarter, we completed the refinancing of our $300 million term loan facility and $400 million revolving credit facility, extending the maturity to 2031 and giving us a flexible capital structure to execute our capital allocation plan. We ended the quarter with $650 million of cash and $351 million of net cash after capital allocation. As we highlighted at our Investor Day, our current cash levels position us well to deploy capital in a disciplined and balanced manner. Turning to page 12. Consistent with our Investor Day messaging, we are reaffirming our full-year guidance across all key financial metrics. For sales, we continue to expect between $3.625 billion and $3.825 billion and are trending towards the high end of the range at $3.8 billion. Our sales reflect our year-to-date performance, continued progress on customer recoveries, as well as a strong second-half launch cadence, partially offset by softer customer production. Our launch cadence includes digital cluster and display launches with our top-growing OEMs, as well as large smart-core CDC and high-performance compute program launches in China. With regards to adjusted EBITDA, we continue to expect between $455 million and $495 million and are trending towards the midpoint of the range of approximately $475 million. As mentioned during our investor day in June, cost pressures initially seen in memory are now extending to other purchase components, making it difficult to fully offset inflation in 2026 despite our teams taking further actions to recover and offset these additional costs. In spite of these headwinds, we expect margins to improve throughout the rest of the year, driven by more customer recoveries and the ramp-up of our cost initiatives across product costing, vertical integration, and engineering productivity. Finally, with regards to adjusted free cash flow, we continue to expect between $170 million dollars to 210 million dollars while trending towards the low end of the range of 170 million and having a good line of sight to the second half cash generation EBITDA in h2 will support higher cash flow for the remainder of the year as recoveries and cost actions carry margins toward the full year guide we also expect working capital to improve with some consumption of the first-half inventory build while receiving cash on recovery agreements we secured late in the second quarter. Another significant piece of the second-half performance is related to first-half items that will not reoccur, such as our annual incentive compensation payout, the India tax settlement, and other seasonal cash outflows. Overall, we plan to maintain more elevated inventory levels through the balance of the year, a deliberate choice to protect our customers' launches and production schedules given the current semiconductor and memory environment. Nevertheless, the underlying cash generation capability of the business remains strong, and we have good visibility to a robust cash inflow in the second half. Turning to page 13. I would like to close with our capital allocation announcement this morning. With the support of our Board of Directors, we have entered into a $200 million accelerated share repurchase agreement, which we expect to complete by early Q4 of this year. The program will exhaust the remaining capacity of our 2023 authorization and will utilize a meaningful portion of the new 2026 $800 million authorization we announced at Investor Day. At our Investor Day, we targeted to return approximately $1 billion of cash to shareholders between 2026 and 2029. We also highlighted that we need $150 million of net cash to run the business. Our net cash position at the end of June was approximately $350 million and therefore supports the near-term deployment of $200 million. The ASR is the first step in delivering on our $1 billion target. It allows us to retire a significant number of shares immediately. It demonstrates a clear pace of execution as we repurchase $800 million over the planned period, and it provides what we believe is a compelling use of our capital at current valuation levels. We have intentionally matched the completion window of the ASR with our second half cash generation, giving us flexibility to execute capital returns in excess of the accelerated program in Q4, while maintaining the minimum net cash framework we outline at Invest Today. Importantly, even after funding the announce program, we maintain a healthy balance sheet and flexibility to invest organically in the business going forward, as well as to pursue disciplined bolt-on M&A as we did this quarter with our engineering services acquisition. Maintaining financial strength remains a core pillar of our capital allocation philosophy and a competitive advantage. Turning to page 14. In summary, the second quarter reflects resilient underlying performance in a challenging production environment, continued progress on recoveries and cost improvements, and an important step in delivering on the capital return framework we outline at our Investor Day. We remain confident in our full-year outlook and in the long-term opportunity ahead as we execute on the plan that we outlined in June. Thank you for your time today. I would like now to open the call for your questions.

At this time, if you would like to ask an audio question, please press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. Again, that is star and the number one. We will pause just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from the line of Tom Narian of RBC Capital Markets. Tom, go ahead.

This is Tom Asito on for Tom. Thanks for taking the question. I guess first, at your investor, you guys flagged that Ford and GM were sort of moving to insource their CBCs. given that some of, given that several of your key Chinese OEM wins on CDCs are with these large sort of tech savvy players like Geely and Cherry, how do you think about the insourcing risk from the Chinese OEMs over time? And do you think that risk could be higher or lower in China relative to some of the Western OEMs? And then I have a follow-up.

Yeah. Thank you. Yes. Let me take this question and answer a little more broadly because I suspect that many would have similar questions today. So, first thing I would say is both Ford and GM are very important customers for Viscyon and we continue to engage with them on new business opportunities. If you look at our first half new business wins, about 20% of those wins came from these two OEMs, mostly Ford in this period for displays. As I mentioned on investor day, our portfolio will change from traditional products to more SDV products, starting with displays and eventually, hopefully, CDCs and HPCs. Now, coming to your question about insourcing and what we see and how we think about it. The first thing to note is that the pace of change of technologies in the industry has just been accelerating, and it continues to accelerate. So as OEMs are even dealing with the challenges of launching CDCs, they have to deal with HPC and AI and all these technologies that are coming at the industry at a very rapid pace. And this challenge is even greater for larger OEMs that have multiple vehicle segments and regions to support. So if you think about how the large Chinese OEMs are dealing with this, they're actively collaborating with strategic suppliers for specific types of products and technologies. That's one of the reasons why we've been successful in China with CDC and now with HPC. And so coming back to Ford and GM, with the work that we have been doing on this advanced technologies with HPC and AI and launching and gaining that experience in China ahead of everybody else, we expect to find areas to collaborate with these OEMs for future programs, especially around these technologies. And I should also mention that the sales plan that we presented at Investor Day was based on a very thorough evaluation process, and we didn't include any unsubstantiated sales just based on hope, if you will. But that doesn't mean that we do not have a pipeline of opportunities to pursue and hopefully outperform that sales plan. And we have line of sight to multiple such opportunities with these two customers that we are actively pursuing. So this gives you a sense of how we think about this. It's really not that we have a limited set of opportunities in this environment where technologies are coming at the industry at a very rapid pace.

And we have the opportunity to really lead in what we are really good at, which is this advanced electronics and software, which today is represented by HPCs and AI. gotcha very helpful um i guess as a follow-up you guys you guys demonstrate some pretty resilient growth over market through the first half even given the tough production environment um i guess given that is there a specific like gating factor preventing you from being a little more even more aggressive on buybacks today especially considering where the stock is trading um i guess in addition to leaving some room for mna is there like a minimum cash floor or maybe even a net cash target that we should be thinking about? Thanks.

Yeah, Jérôme, I'll take that question. You're absolutely right. We've indicated during Investor Day that our net cash target was $150 million, and we finished the quarter with $350 million of net cash on the balance sheet. So, therefore, having $200 million that we could deploy essentially right away, and we indicated, again, during Investor Day that we would deploy this pretty quickly. That's really the rationale for the ASR that we've announced today, $200 million, that will allow us to retire shares pretty quickly. And it's the first step, really, deploying a large amount of capital towards shareholders. We've committed to return close to a billion dollars over the period of 26 to 29 in the form of dividend, but mostly share-y purchases. And that's what we are executing towards. So it's really following on our plan, following up on our plan as we laid it out during Investor Day.

Your next question comes from the line of Rajat Gupta of J.P. Morgan. Take it away.

Great. Thanks for getting the question. I wanted to just double click a little bit on the recent Micron agreement. Curious if you're able to provide any more details on what it gets you, you know, any early read on pricing. Is this more of like a price agreement, more of like a supply agreement just to lock that in for the next couple of years?

Any more details you can give us um around that would be helpful i have a quick follow-up yeah yeah thank you so so the first thing i would say is with the recent um memory technology changes that have happened the kind of memories that we use in auto have been in tight supply all this year and it's expected to only get more challenging in terms of supply uh next year um and auto is a long cycle industry And besides price, we need long-term product availability and, more importantly, controlled transitions when older memory technologies are being retired. So what this agreement does, the one that we've signed with Micron, is that it gives us a better assurance on supply with better long-term visibility into availability of memory. It also gives us better price predictability with better commercial terms if we were not to, for example, have this agreement. And then very importantly, this insights that we have on the planning that enables us to then reduce risk of long cycle automotive programs. So these three things right so supply assurance pricing predictability and better planning is essentially what we get from this agreement that we've signed now having said that i want to be very clear that even with the agreement in place we anticipate 2027 to be quite challenging in terms of getting sufficient supply to meet our demand as we see the demand where we sit today so we have been working with multiple alternate suppliers to bring them on board and to close any gap, and we will know more as we progress further in the second half of this year. We're also redesigning some of the products so that we have more flexibility in using memory parts from different suppliers. So the combination of this supply agreement that we have with Micron, additional memory alternate suppliers that we are bringing on board and the redesigns, I think we are doing pretty much everything we can to give us maximum flexibility, first to tide through 2027, which we expect to be the more challenging year. and then hopefully things should start to get slightly better in 28 and beyond as more capacity comes online to provide the industry with memory.

Got it. That's very helpful, Culler. And then I wanted to follow up on the SmartCore wins and just like the overall SmartCore opportunity, you know, starting in China. Can you give us an update on like how the margins are coming through, you know, as you start ramping up, you know, the production here and the shipment? Any early read on that relative to, like, corporate average? Thanks.

Exactly. So in any complex programs like Smart4 or Smart4HPC that attracts a lot of engineering just because of the heavier content, the launch margins are going to be a little lower than the steady-state, higher-volume margins. So 2026, first, is going to be our launch year, the second half, also extending into, I would say, the first half of 2027. And the real volume shipments would begin in 28 and onwards. So we expect margins to gradually track the higher volumes and improve into 28 and beyond. And we expect them to be very similar to our average margins. So I would not want you to think of them as necessarily being a drag for certain on our margins. And we expect to, as the volumes increase, to continue to improve from there.

Your next question comes from the line of Emmanuel Rosner of Wolf Research. Emmanuel, take it away.

Great. Thank you very much. I was hoping to follow up with you, Sachin, on the topic of the insourcing. It feels like for the longest of time, it's always felt like an investor worried that this may happen, but OEMs were never really able to pull it off for various reasons, but there were a lot of execution problems. Now it seems like it's sort of like happening, And I'm just curious to hear from your perspective, what are sort of like the changes that have happened that enable OEMs to do it? What are the challenges they're facing? And any sort of like gating factors, why would it be in like one specific product line and not in another one? Like how do you see this evolve, you know, more holistically?

Yeah. Hi, Mandel. I wouldn't say that that's the right characterization, that it is happening. You know, as you have been tracking this industry long enough, you have seen such intent from various OEMs throughout the last several years, and what has turned out to be the case more often than not is that the OEMs have changed plans after progressing a little bit further in their activities. So what we're seeing here, to be clear, is that we are not seeing anything different than what we've seen in the past. And we fully expect it to play out similarly as it has played out with other OEMs previously. But that's just our expectation, right? You will have to ask these OEMs eventually to get more insights. But the experience that we have and the past examples that we have in front of us just tells us that it's extremely difficult to launch CDCs and HPCs doing all of those things in-house, especially for larger OEMs. And that doesn't change for anything or anybody. And that's been how it has been. So we think that we can be a good collaborative partner and support all OEMs in their transitions through these technologies. We have been doing this successfully for several years, and we expect it to be the case as well with the customers we have here.

Thank you. And then just following up on inflation in DRAM and electronics, when we do our own math around some of the commentary you provided and the implied margin headwinds, it suggests that the cost you will be absorbing, you know, maybe, I don't know, $8 to $10 million in 2026, maybe like $20 million in 2027. And I'm not sure if those numbers are, you know, they're actually in the right ballpark. But just curious if you can expand what's driving this. Because I think in your prepared remark, you were saying it's expanding to other electronics, so it's going to be hard to recover all in 2026. But it looks like you also have a larger unrecovered headwind assumed in 2027.

Yeah. Good morning, Emmanuel. Let me take that one. I think we need to step back a little bit and understand how things have progressed since the beginning of the year. And there are kind of two big buckets that we're dealing with, the memory cost increases, and then which were kind of known at the beginning of the year, which have stayed reasonably stable. We've seen some increases beyond what we had originally guided to. That's the first bucket. And then there's a second bucket, which came in later in the year, which I'm going to talk about. So let's talk about the first bucket first. Memory cost increases. We are progressing exactly on plan. The impact that we are seeing is approximately 2.5% of our sales, similar to what we indicated during Investor Day. We've been slow in Q1, in recovering as we had anticipated, and we did a good job in Q2 catching up with many customers and securing a lot of deals on memory recoveries that allowed us, in fact, to be neutral from a recovery minus cost standpoint in the quarter. We are anticipating that the few customers where we don't have yet an agreement will be closed, will be settled in Q3 and possibly in Q4 as well. But overall, we'll be on target as far as memory is concerned for the food year. Beyond that, as I said, we are seeing, and we've seen that starting at the beginning of the second quarter, we've seen some other inflation costs, and we are tackling this as we speak. We intend to go back to our customers to try to get some recoveries. As you can understand, we've had a first wave. It's now a second wave. It's always difficult to go back, but we'll do that. And at the same time, we are also discussing with our suppliers to try to find some offset. So we're tackling both aspects for these other cost increases that we're seeing since the beginning of the second quarter.

Your next question comes from the line of Joe Spack of UBS. Joe, you have the floor.

Thank you. I actually want to pick up right there because, you know, we've been doing some more math on the memory recovery. And it looks like you're basically assuming, I don't know, something close to 90% recovery. But I guess what I'm confused by is, like, I understand what's going on now where, like, you had to pay the price and now you need to go back to the customers. But I am confused as to sort of why that doesn't change in the future with the SCAs, because then you know the price, right? So why can't that just be the price you charge and get closer to 100 percent? Maybe it has something to do with what percent of the business the Micron deal covers, which I think, Sachin, you sort of alluded to that there's still more work to do. But but but also, you know, then you saw some of the automakers also entered into this agreement. So, like, doesn't that help as well? Like, I'm just – maybe you could sort of just – It does.

Yeah, let me clarify that. So, the agreements certainly help because it takes away, you know, this whole notion about us trying to come to them for price increases. This is now public knowledge. Our customers know this as well. But as you just rightly pointed out, the agreements are just with Micron, and Micron is not the full extent of the memory supply to the industry or to us. There are other memories that we also have to deal with, right? So there's DRAM, there's Flash, there are different types of memories within each category that we have to work with. But in general, though, we fully anticipate to go out to our customers and recover 100% of the cost increases next year. Let's just be very clear about that, right? Now, what Jerome has been talking about are non-memory-related semiconductors. Again, I think there's some confusion there, right? So memory, separate topic. There's other semiconductors that are also seeing some cost and price increases. This discussion was more about those. It's smaller in scope. It's widespread. And we also have alternative options, by the way. This is not the same situation as memory. Hopefully that's clear.

So maybe just to be clear on that, I think like at the analyst day, you said something about like 100 basis point impact. That was not just memory. That was all electronic related inflation.

It was everything, but it's mostly in 20.7. we expect the bulk of it to come from memory cost increases.

But these additional electronics, like that's embedded in that 100 basis point. That is correct. Absolutely, yes.

But as Sachin said, you have what we know, which is coming from Micron, and then you have other more dynamic memory suppliers as well with different prices.

If I put it another way, if Micron is able to supply us everything we need, it's a different discussion. But we are expecting it not to be the case.

Your next question comes from the line of Itai Mahali. Itai of TD Cohen, you have the floor.

Great. Thanks. Good morning. So I'll ask one more on just memory cost recovery. just over time, I know it's uncertain kind of where memory prices will go, but do you expect you will eventually kind of recover all of it, just sort of a lag effect that as inflation continues to intensify, you just kind of have to absorb it temporarily? And related to that, to what extent are just some of the new customer wins you've had, which is great, perhaps also contributing to sort of a bit of a lag on recoveries and maybe, you know, chase those recoveries as aggressively as some of your other customers, perhaps?

Yeah. So I'll answer the second question you'd have first. So the new wins that we have, we're already including the higher costs of memory in those business engagements. So it's really more a question about the existing programs that we have. And in terms of, you know, what happens in the future, so the way we are looking at it is for 2027, it's really a matter of securing supply. So right now, in total, the industry is not going to get as much memory as it needs just from the traditional suppliers. So we have to go out and secure that supply. There will be a cost to that supply, and we fully expect to be able to recover that. Now, there is a cost to also, on our side, to engineer the products that I mentioned earlier, to be able to support all the various different types of memories, qualify them, et cetera. A portion of that cost we may have to absorb. That is part of what Jerome has in his discussion. Now, as we go forward, this increased supply is going to give us more optionality and more competitive pressures to help drive the memory cost down and hopefully also improve our margins in the process.

That's helpful. Thanks, Sachin. And just a quick follow-up, switching gears. Just wanted a bit more color, if you can, on the new Japanese OEM customer win, I think for digital clusters that you talked about.

Kind of curious how this opportunity came about, maybe kind of what the future can hold, and how much of this opportunity is embedded in sort of the out-year financial forecast. great great thanks that you asked because this is actually a very important part of of what we wanted to communicate now unfortunately as you know most customers don't like us to share details and and the name until the product is launched so i'll stay away from that but i will say that this is an oem that um is not part of the global top 12 but the volume is very meaningful and And they can be a very good contributor to our revenues in Japan and North America. And we have never been a supplier to this OEM. And our growing, I would say, reputation in Japan is really what created this opportunity. And we see a significant future opportunity to expand. But on the specific bin itself, it's for a digital cluster. There are, I believe, three vehicles in the initial award with more to follow, and I think this is going to be a very good customer for us for many years that helps us in both regions, North America and in Japan.

Apologies.

Can we take the next question, please?

Next question comes from the line of Dan Levy of Barclays. Dan, you have the floor.

I wanted to double-click on some of the China dynamics you underperformed in the quarter. The revenue was down, but I see on your slide here, you know, you're talking about getting back to growth in the second half in China, you know, some of the premium domestic content. Then you have the HPC launches.

Maybe you can just double-click on the visibility of that, you know, flip to growth and, you know, just what was happening in the second quarter that doesn't happen in the second half. yeah yeah let me address that so um as i'm sure you are aware the domestic market in china is going through what appears to be a structural change and overall demand is down uh driven by the changes recent changes in uh you know government policies as well as incentives And most of the drop is impacting ICE vehicles. And even EVs that are not considered as smart cars are impacted and are not doing as well as EVs that are considered as smart cars. And so the demand for smart car EVs, what we refer to in the industry is now starting to call as the premium tech segment in China, that portion of the market is doing up. And that shift is fundamentally helping domestic OEMs that have this portfolio of vehicles and is hurting most international OEMs. So our sales in Q2 were up with those domestic OEMs that have this portfolio, and it was hurt by the lower volumes with international OEMs. Now, this dynamic changes as we go into the second half with the launches that we have talked about, HPC, where we see a sequential growth from first half to second half, and then this growth should continue into next year. But overall, if you look at our performance, I would say that we performed more or less in line with the domestic market performance.

And maybe to add onto that, by the end of the year, will be close to 60% indexed with domestic OE in China. So as we are launching these high-profile products, it will rebalance our positioning towards more Chinese domestic OEs.

Okay, great. Thank you. Second question, I wanted to double-click. I think this was mentioned earlier as you're ramping on some of the Chinese customers with HPC. And I think what we've seen in the past is that there's not the same visibility or security on programs for some of the Western suppliers with Chinese where there could be more rapid mix shifts or the Chinese can And this place we've seen is with other suppliers. So what's the confidence that as HPC ramps that, you know, you have that visibility of being a supplier? And maybe you can also just address, you know, this as far as the export volumes go, how critical this is from an export perspective.

Yeah, that's a good question. And I think there's really two or three dimensions to how to think about it. I mentioned that the Chinese OEMs are kind of evolving their strategy to work more collaboratively and closely with a set of strategic suppliers for the long term, especially on products that require ongoing software maintenance and regional diversification. So when you think about HPCs with AI, we have to think of the AI technology as being regulated and specific to the regions. So these vehicles that the Chinese OEMs are launching in China with the AI technology that is appropriate for that region is not suitable at all to be sold into Europe without significant amount of change. And in many cases, there's regulation already in place, like in the U.S., or emerging in Europe, which will fundamentally prohibit any AI IP that originates in China. So this requires these OEMs to have a set of capable suppliers that have this ability to support them in different regions with different AI software technologies. I think this point is somehow not easily understood, so I want to make sure that it's very clear to everybody. This changes the dynamic in terms of the relationship very fundamentally. It's not just you give me a box and I will replace it with someone else's box tomorrow. It requires an ongoing engagement between the two parties and therefore we have to think of it as a more longer term relationship. Obviously we need to do our part and execute, they're not going to accept our lack of performance just like in any situation. So it's, in my mind, it's up to us to continue to execute and deliver the value that they expect from us. I do not see this as the same type of business model as before. So the other thing to keep in mind is the set of suppliers that have these capabilities is fundamentally going to be a smaller set because you have to have a strong CDC capability, a proven experience there, and then to be able to build AI on top of it. It's very hard to jump straight into an HPC without having gone through the CDC path. That's going to be also another factor that will maybe have it turn out somewhat differently than in the past.

Your next question comes from the line of Winnie Dong of Deutsche Bank.

Hi, thanks so much for taking my questions. I just wanted to clarify the new HPC when announced in a quarter that that is incremental to what was announced at the investor day. And then I was wondering if you can also talk about the customer pipeline there in terms of interest from either domestic customers or those that have overseas ambitions, and I have a follow-up, thanks.

Yeah, yeah. So the HPC win that we announced is incremental to what we had assumed for HPC sales, right? So in 2027, what we had talked about at Investor Day, this was not part of it. But we will have to talk about our overall 2027 sales later this year as we incorporate all of the other input into it. But as far as HPCs are concerned, that's an incremental. And to the second part of the question that you've talked about. So, we have, as I've mentioned before, three OEMs, and within that, lots of discussions about expanding our footprint within those OEMs, and also actively engaged with others in China, and you can imagine what these companies would be, OEMs that have export markets today that they're serving, or similar technologies. And the discussions are, I would say, very active. There's a lot of energy being spent right now in coming up with your solutions and next sort of generation of AI capabilities with all of the evolution that's happening in AI models, which I'm sure you are aware of as well.

Great. Thank you. And then if we go back to the investor day deck on the revenue rundown from, you know, GM and Ford, just wanted to understand to what extent is it sort of like a base case scenario or more of a worst case scenario? Do you have any conservatism built in it? And then if we were to think about the opportunities for supplying other components such as displays, is there any way to quantify those opportunities and therefore they can serve as, you know, offsets to those declines?

Yeah. So as I have mentioned, and I'll make sure to reiterate, we certainly took a very thorough approach and did not include anything that we thought was not a clear line of sight in terms of the business with these two OEMs. So you can say that in that sense, it is a conservative view of our outlook. And we wanted to make sure that we are very transparent about what we are seeing. And at the same time, it's really important to stress this point that it doesn't mean that we are not seeing opportunities with them. We are continuing to have many active discussions with the Ford and GM. A lot of that right now is centered around, this year in particular, more displays, and we're just starting to engage with them on electronics as they think about the next several years of their vehicle's needs for cockpit electronics, for CDCs, and with HPCs. and we have an extremely, I would say, unique vantage point to bring value to them in terms of helping them understand what the market situation is, what our experience has been in China, and the various options available to the industry and the deeper insights into what goes into really what makes a good or perhaps not as good as advertised solutions for SOCs that they should be picking. So we are having those discussions currently. We expect that on the cockpit electronics front, from a timing viewpoint, these are probably not something that we will be talking about in terms of decisions this year, probably next year. So we have a busy couple of quarters ahead in terms of engagements with them to further this discussions along. And we'll be in a better position to share with you how we think about opportunities in the future. But just to leave you with that, that we certainly look at this as a sort of the baseline from which we hope to build further upon. The timing, obviously, we'll have to come back to you with that as we know more. Unlike in China and India, where we've been able to turn very quickly from award to revenue. In fact, this has been one of the things with this $3 billion of new business wins that we've had in the first half. We've had this set of wins contribute revenue as early as 2027 in a meaningful way. That's not how it typically works with OEMs in Europe and in the U.S. So the timing impact of everything that I've said previously in terms of our discussions with them, we will know more as we go further.

Okay. Thank you, Sachin. Thank you, Jerome. This concludes our earnings call for the second quarter of 2026. Thank you for participating in today's call and your ongoing interest in Vistion.

This concludes Vistion's second quarter 2026 results earnings call. You may now disconnect.