Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Veeva Systems Fiscal 2022 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Earnings Call. Just a quick reminder that today's call is being recorded. Now at this time, I would like to turn the call over to Ato Garrett, Senior Director of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon, and welcome to Veeva's Fiscal 2022 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Earnings Conference Call for the quarter and year ended January 31, 2022. As a reminder, we posted prepared remarks on Veeva's Investor Relations website just after 1:00 p.m. Pacific today. We hope you've had a chance to read them before the call. Today's call will be used primarily for Q&A. With me today for Q&A are Peter Gassner, our Chief Executive Officer; Paul Shawah, EVP of Commercial Strategy; and Brent Bowman, our Chief Financial Officer. During this call, we may make forward-looking statements regarding trends, our strategies and the anticipated performance of the business, including guidance regarding future financial results. These forward-looking statements will be based on our current views and expectations and are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially. Please refer to the risks listed in our earnings release and the risk factors included in our most recent filing on Form 10-Q. Forward-looking statements made during the call are being made as of today, March 2, 2022 based on the facts available to us today. If this call is replayed or viewed after today, the information presented during the call may not contain current or active information. Veeva disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. We may discuss our guidance on today's call, but we will not provide any further guidance or updates on our performance during the quarter unless we do so in a public forum. On the call, we may also discuss certain non-GAAP metrics that we believe aid in the understanding of our financial results. A reconciliation to comparable GAAP metrics can be found in today's earnings release and in the supplemental investor presentation, both of which are available on our website. With that, thank you for joining us. And now, I'll turn the call over to Peter.

Thank you, Ato, and welcome, everyone, to the call. It was a great quarter and a year of execution for Veeva, with strength across the business and results above our guidance. Total revenue and subscription revenue for the quarter were each up 23%, and we posted a 38% operating margin. Total revenue for the year was up 26% to $1.85 billion, and our operating margin was 41%. We also continued to track ahead of our 2025 targets. Things are going well. We have a great team and are attracting new people who believe in our values and want to be part of our mission. Our partnership with the industry continues to become more strategic. Our innovation engine is strong, and we're executing well in established areas and newer areas. This sets Veeva up for a long runway of organic growth and profitability as we deliver more value to the industry. Now we will open up the call to your questions.

We'll go first this afternoon to Brent Bracelin at Piper Sandler.

Peter, maybe I'll start with you in the script here in the prepared remarks. You do mention something about seeing some challenges around larger deals and closing deals and some projects taking a little longer to close. Can you just maybe talk about is that a shortage on talent on your side, being able to service the client? Or is it really around things that you're seeing and feeling in the customer side of the equation here?

Yes, Brent, this is Peter. What we're noticing is that there is a general talent shortage in the industry that impacts both us and our customers. The industry is indeed growing, but the labor pool in the U.S. is somewhat diminishing, leading to this talent shortage. We need more personnel and must invest in training them. However, I believe it's a manageable situation. We had a strong hiring quarter and are training many new employees in the industry. I am confident this will resolve itself. Regarding the larger deals you mentioned, that's a different issue. We are encountering bigger deals than ever before, particularly from companies in the top 40 to the top 15, which are considering making significant commitments to Veeva, particularly in R&D and Development Cloud. Some top 10 companies are also looking to fully engage with us in Clinical. These major developments take time to materialize. So, those are two distinct factors you've asked about.

Helpful color. And just one quick follow-up on Clinical. That seems to be an area where you continue to have very good success, particularly around kind of the digital trials, broader CDMS adoption, broader CTMS adoption here. What's resonating there? And would you say Clinical adoption is happening as you expected in the last year? Or are things happening a little quicker than you anticipated in the last year?

We are on track to become the leader in Clinical. Our journey began years ago with a broad vision to lead in this space, starting with our strong foundation in eTMF, where we are already established as the leader and continue to grow. Our efforts in CTMS have also yielded positive results, and we are progressing towards leadership there as well. In CDMS, we've successfully onboarded our initial customers, who are quite satisfied. We are now introducing new elements like ePRO, Site Connect, and eConsent within digital trials. Our Clinical Suite is expanding significantly, and we are unique as the only technology company addressing it comprehensively while also driving innovation. The momentum is promising, and we view this as a long-term endeavor. We're very pleased with our progress in Clinical. I recently saw a demo of our new ePRO application, designed for direct patient use, and I believe it has the potential to be a groundbreaking tool that will transform the industry, though it will require time for widespread adoption.

We'll take our next question now from Saket Kalia at Barclays.

Peter, maybe just to start with you. I would love to dig into Data Cloud a little bit. Really interesting remark in the prepared comments about sort of comparing that to Vault in the early days. Can you just talk about that comparison a little bit? A lot of us on the call remember that. And maybe just the extension to that question is what's been the feedback that you've gotten from those early adopters on Data Cloud about how the product stacks up against competitors out there? Does that make sense?

Yes, absolutely. When I compare our Data business to Vault, which includes various components like Link, Data Cloud, and OpenData, we are creating multiple data products and finding ways to integrate them into a cohesive data architecture that customers can utilize across different areas. This approach is very similar to Vault, showcasing a well-structured architecture. Customers might begin with regulatory, clinical, or quality applications, but all components work together and become more valuable as additional parts are integrated. This embodies the essence of Veeva: we offer outstanding solutions that can operate independently with multiple entry points, and then we progress from there. Regarding specific use cases, it’s worth noting how Data Cloud differs. Paul, would you like to elaborate on that and discuss what some of our early adopters are doing with Data Cloud?

Yes, we are very much focused on the early adopter phase of the market, enhancing our product and ensuring product excellence. I can share a couple of customer examples that are both real and quite interesting. One is a major pharmaceutical company that approached us about a specific use case involving a specialty product. These specialty products are distributed through specialty pharmacies, which sometimes restrict access to sales data. This creates a blind spot for the brand team, preventing them from seeing how much is being sold through these pharmacies. They came to us seeking help to fill this gap and gain visibility. Thanks to our modern approach to sourcing and consolidating data, we were able to provide insights that their previous provider could not. This is just one example from a top pharmaceutical company that markets around 25 to 30 products. As we build confidence in our data, this success tends to spread throughout the organization. Another intriguing example comes from a leading vaccine manufacturer. They inquired about our vaccine visibility, and we used our Data Cloud to analyze vaccine trends. During our analysis, we identified a specific dip in the marketplace that they initially questioned. However, after collaborating with them and diving deeper, they discovered insights that surprised them and confirmed the accuracy of our data. We're not only teaching our customers new things, but we are also establishing trust in our product’s excellence. This process will take time as these are complex organizations, but our progress in the early part of the market has been promising.

Got it. That's really helpful. Brent, maybe for you as a follow-up. Very helpful commentary in the prepared remarks again, just around Commercial subscription revenue, roughly that 60-40 split, right, around kind of pricing based on a per rep and not per rep basis. And maybe talking about CRM versus non-CRM is the better way to put it. I was wondering if you could discuss the relative growth profiles across those two parts of the Commercial business as you look at fiscal '23, even in broad terms.

Yes, I'm happy to. If you look at the fiscal year '23 guidance, the main drivers of growth will come from the non-rep-based segment. Consider the potential of our advanced marketing analytics product, along with Link and our Vault content product suite, which will be the key contributors. The more traditional CRM and add-on business will grow at a steadier, slower pace. That's how I would frame it.

We go next now to Ken Wong with Guggenheim Securities.

Maybe it's for Peter or perhaps Brent. As we examine the Clinical growth in subscriptions, it has indeed slowed from 39% to 34%. I'm curious if the key reason for this is that these are usually the larger deals and if that's where you're experiencing some potential short-term pressure. I would appreciate any insights you can provide regarding the impact.

Yes. Ken, this is Peter. I'm really happy with that 34% growth on what is becoming a larger number these days. So it's just the way that the deals are falling out and the product suite is getting larger. CDMS is very early in its revenue curve, CDMS, and then Digital Trials hasn't even really started. So I think that's what you're seeing, numbers getting larger. CDMS is really getting a lot of traction, but not contributing very much from a revenue point of view because these are large deals oftentimes that ramp. Now if you want leading indicators on Clinical, if you look in that script, one of the most meaningful lines in there was that one of the top 6 CROs switched to Veeva as their preferred CDMS. When a sponsor asks them to run a trial, that's a big deal. That will start a trend. So that's really good validation. So yes, really happy with our Clinical business.

Got it. Really appreciate the color there. And then, Brent, I see that billings is kind of no longer part of the disclosures. I guess as we think about our model, I know, in the past, you typically steered us towards it to kind of track with subscription growth. Is that still the right framework as we look ahead? And any kind of seasonal elements that we should be thinking about on that number?

So Ken, I want to ensure we are aligned. We provided a guide on billings for the year, starting with a forecast for fiscal year '23 of $2.32 billion, which reflects approximately 19% growth. We are enthusiastic about the momentum in the business that is reflected in our billings guidance for the year.

We go next now to Rishi Jaluria at RBC Capital Markets.

This is Richard calling for Rishi. I have a quick question about the follow-up on the reduction in pharma representatives. Last quarter, you mentioned that the impact was minimal, and you noted that the non-core CRM segments now make up 40%. As we look into fiscal '23 and '24, are you still observing the same 10% reduction in representatives and how it affects the core CRM business? Additionally, is there any update on that aspect over the past 90 days?

Yes, Richard, this is Paul. I can give you an update. In terms of rep reductions, what we observed in Q4 was pretty much what we expected. We did see some planned reductions, so there were no surprises. Additionally, we did not find anything that would lead us to rethink our overall estimate of a 10% reduction, which has been in effect since last year and will continue mostly through this year and partly into next year. So there are no changes to our outlook; everything is unfolding as we anticipated.

We go next now to Dylan Becker with William Blair.

I want to start with Peter. This has been a record year for adding customers. As your R&D solutions continue to develop on the platform, how are you assessing the pace of adoption for some of your initial offerings? It seems that tools like CDMS, CTMS, and Safety are experiencing a quicker adoption rate. Is this primarily due to the value of the integration across the platform? Additionally, how are you planning to approach this uptick from an innovation perspective in the future? When you introduce new solutions, should we expect them to have accelerated adoption, considering they provide incremental value to your customers?

Yes, Dylan. When considering adoption, the key factors are product excellence and strong relationships. Having the leading product in the market requires continuous effort and the right talent, along with a clear vision. We're performing well in that area. Additionally, building relationships is crucial, especially when introducing products to large enterprises; our multiproduct approach is beneficial here. We have several early-stage products, such as Safety and Data Cloud, which are still in the beginning stages of their revenue growth. Progress often occurs well before revenue starts to materialize, and I'm pleased with the advancements we're making, which should result in strong revenue growth over time.

That's great. I appreciate the insights. I have another question, particularly for Brent. As we consider the ramp-up in the latter half of the year, how should we view the effects of hiring and project starts? How do these factors contribute to the recovery as we experience acceleration? Additionally, as we notice an increase in professional services, how does that impact the subscription dynamics?

Yes. So yes, thanks, Dylan. So when we look at the deal progressions, we saw that the bookings linearity was slightly more weighted towards the back half of the year. And so we are seeing good momentum of deals progressing, and that's having about a $15 million impact overall to revenue that we called out. That has lent itself to the fact that we think we will be accelerating on the back half of the year from a revenue subscription perspective. So we are informed through the conversations we're having with customers. And as Peter mentioned, we're really progressing some large deals nicely. Professional services plays in that nicely. That's a really nice growing business. We're excited about it. And we're continuing to build and add talent to that team.

We go next now to Ryan MacDonald at Needham & Company.

Peter, maybe for you first. I'm curious on Veeva Engage. Obviously, as we are broadly, I think, hopefully approaching the return to normal here and travel opening up again, I'm curious what the renewals have looked like for Veeva Engage and if you're seeing any similar trends that we're seeing more broadly with sort of video meeting platform vendors in terms of sort of less usage here and if that could have sort of a double impact on Commercial over time with sort of not only fewer pharma reps, but then also maybe a shift away from more video-based meetings, to return in-person.

Yes, Ryan, this is Paul. I can address that. I closely monitor those figures with Engage. First, renewals have been very solid this year, and last year's utilization was quite high. Utilization tends to fluctuate with the opening and closing of offices and varying preferences. We are focused, together with the industry, on facilitating a hybrid model that allows operations from both doctors' offices and home offices seamlessly. I am very proud of our team. We have developed a robust product in core CRM and Engage to support this hybrid working approach, which is now becoming a standard. Almost every company and customer I speak with is considering hybrid working models, which may involve both digital and in-office interactions. While utilization may vary, this hybrid method is established and will be integral to how business is conducted moving forward. I anticipate renewals will keep progressing in Engage, especially as we continue to innovate within the product, introducing features that enhance its value even in office settings, such as sharing content at a short distance. Our customers highly value this kind of innovation, and we are eager to assist in the industry's transition to hybrid working while advancing our innovation roadmap.

And perhaps, just a quick follow-up on that. In terms of the pace of the migration of the industry there, do you feel that the current environment is such that the pharma companies are sort of obviously cutting headcount here and then just sort of evaluating the productivity levels of what they have remaining before making sort of those incremental, more hybrid or virtual investments? Or are you starting to see a faster sort of adoption of those additional areas? Just trying to understand how quickly we could see perhaps that 40% non-rep-based component evolve over time.

Yes. The productivity gains have been driven by the adoption of more technology and the use of digital tools, with Veeva playing a significant role in that strategy aimed at enhancing industry productivity. As a result, companies are benefiting from increased efficiency, allowing them to reduce costs or reinvest those savings into more digital initiatives or other areas. For instance, as companies progress with digital strategies over the long term, they will need better data, which could boost solutions like Link for targeting their digital outreach and improve precision in digital engagement through Data Cloud. This transition to digital will unfold over many years; it is not a quick process. However, the number of sales representatives will reach a new stable level, and the industry will continue to evolve by embracing new digital capabilities along with advanced data and analytics from Veeva and beyond.

We go next now to Stan Zlotsky at Morgan Stanley.

You have Ryan Bressner on for Stan. I guess just maybe first, maybe talk about Vault outside of life sciences. How are you thinking about that business going into FY '23 now that maybe some of the COVID headwinds are starting to subside?

Yes, the business there has largely returned to normal as COVID-related challenges have eased, especially outside of life sciences. Our focus is on large customers in sectors such as consumer products and chemicals, which include basic consumer goods like food, consumer healthcare, cosmetics, and specialty chemicals. We are primarily targeting large companies with revenues of $5 billion and above. In areas like Regulatory and Quality and Safety, our aim is to support these companies. It's important to note that in this context, safety refers to employee well-being and environmental safety, rather than drug safety. We are concentrating our efforts here, and it appears we have good momentum, which should lead to steady growth in this segment for us.

Helpful. Maybe just one more then. You talked last quarter a bit about MedTech CRM. Just kind of curious if you have any updates on the opportunity there and how that could maybe work into your existing relationship with Salesforce?

Yes. MedTech CRM, we announced that last quarter. So overall, the MedTech business for us is going well, and it's largely on the Vault side, on the R&D side. It's the Quality, Regulatory, Clinical area, Commercial content. But we did announce MedTech CRM, and that was done very openly with Salesforce, who's been a great partner of ours for 15 years. 15-year partnerships in technology, that doesn't happen very often. So yes, we partner there in pharma with Salesforce. It's just early in MedTech CRM that we're doing on Vault, and we're just talking to some customers who may become early adopters. We're building the product. So we don't really have any progress to report. We're having a lot of good customer conversations.

We go next to Kirk Materne at Evercore.

This is Adi Ahire asking on behalf of Kirk. I wanted to inquire about your recent acquisition of Veracity, which is now offered as Veeva RTSM. Could you share some insights on how that is progressing, the future growth potential of this product, and your outlook on mergers and acquisitions moving forward? Additionally, do you think pursuing more M&A makes sense given the organic developments you are currently undertaking? Any thoughts on that would be appreciated.

We're very pleased with the RTSM acquisition. I want to take a moment to discuss that. It's going well, and I must say I'm more involved in this project than in some others. The team is small, but they have developed a strong product over more than a decade. However, they lacked a proper channel to market that product. Now that team feels reinvigorated as part of Veeva. We've expanded the team and brought in a new general manager from the Veeva side who is excited about his new role. Additionally, we've secured a few new deals and clients, which is very encouraging. Regarding our acquisition strategy, whenever we explore entering a new market, we evaluate whether to acquire, build, or partner. Often, the right acquisition may not be available, but in this case, we found it. Our overall strategy remains unchanged, and we are very satisfied with the RTSM acquisition.

We take our next question now from Joe Vruwink at Baird.

Veeva obviously had a very strong year in the Quality category. And Quality seems to be receiving a bit of an elevated focus, just in general, based on some of the recent news and based on some big transactions in the space. Do you think the role of that product set in your customers is changing or evolving so that, ultimately, it can command a bigger footprint? I think about Veeva rank-ordering its Vault products in the past. Has the overall opportunity for Quality actually grown so that it might be more consequential going forward than it might have been several years prior?

Yes, Quality is a significant focus for us and is still in the early stages of development, but it's growing in two ways. Our reach is expanding, and we've recently added training, which is gaining traction. We also acquired GXP content, which is in its early stages but starting to develop. We introduced a major new product, a laboratory information management system, which is crucial for how pharmaceutical companies assess the quality of their products. This represents a strategic and substantial area for us, with growth in applications and expanding locations for our offerings. We aim to have a significant number of Quality customers over time, potentially reaching 1,000, up from around 450 currently. Quality is set to become a major business for us as we move forward. You were right to highlight this potential.

Okay. Great. And then maybe a question for Brent. Just on the back end-weighted nature of billings growth in this year, it seems like maybe starting the year with mid-teens growth and then exiting closer to 20% growth. Can that 20%-type number start to inform kind of how we should view growth, and I know it's early, but growth in fiscal 2024 if you're exiting at that type of level?

Yes. So regarding our guide for the year, so I think looking at the full year number is the best way to kind of look at the overall strength of the business from a billings perspective at 19%, not to provide any sort of guidance for '24 at this point in time, but we are excited about the momentum we're seeing in the business, the scale of the deals, the breadth of the deals. And as we look out to 2025 and beyond, we're clearly tracking ahead of our 2025 goals. So we're very optimistic.

We go next now to Stephanie Davis at SVB Leerink.

You made some comments on the hybrid environment earlier as we go between in-person and Engage. So I was hoping we could draw some parallels to some of the virtual care players. Are there any pockets of providers or departments that will generally require more in-person rep meetings, especially as you go into more of a MedTech-y kind of environment? And are there any pockets that you think will be able to more fully lean in to Engage communications, similar to how the behavioral health, for example, has gone more fully onto virtual care?

Yes, that's certainly a valuable observation. You're absolutely correct that we notice various nuances and differences across therapeutic areas, which we can analyze in considerable detail. For instance, we can compare oncology, neurology, and cardiovascular sectors, observing distinct disparities among them. These variations often correlate with factors you've mentioned, such as the providers' comfort level with telemedicine. Those who incorporate telemedicine more into their traditional practices tend to be more at ease with virtual meetings with pharmaceutical companies. Additionally, other elements influence this, including the regional distribution of customers. Some clients, who were previously only reached through in-person interactions, are now accessible digitally. As a result, certain companies are broadening their customer outreach capabilities. We recognize these nuances and assist our clients in gaining insight for greater effectiveness. This helps them initiate benchmarking, which is where our Business Consulting services are valuable. We act as a strategic partner, providing our customers with precise guidance. Therefore, this trend is significant for us, and we continuously support our customers in navigating it.

That's helpful. Can I shift gears real quick just over to the Development Cloud side? I was hoping you could help us frame the trend of greater end-to-end outsourcing on pharma biotech companies and kind of what the puts and takes are across trial complexity and cost and success rate that's impacting this, especially in the terms of a reopen, knock on wood, and how that impacts your win rates versus some of your potentially more incumbent competitors as the shift happens.

Yes, I believe the trend of outsourcing versus in-sourcing is largely neutral for us at Veeva. I don't anticipate any significant changes from a macro perspective. When we consider small biotech companies, their primary needs include a Quality product and maintaining their own Quality records, which is essential. I don't foresee any changes in that regard. The next area they will likely require assistance in is Clinical, where Veeva has been making strides in the Contract Research Organization channel, becoming the preferred choice for Clinical Data Management. This progress is what will benefit us moving forward.

We go next now to Brian Peterson at Raymond James.

So I wanted to start, and maybe this is for Paul, but just on PromoMats and maybe on MedComms. It sounded like that was a driver of growth year-over-year. You know what, I believe in the past, when it used to be just the Vault business, there was some discussion on maybe that had hit a saturation point. But it sounds like that's not the case. So I would be curious, as some of your customers kind of rethink their commercial strategies, are we seeing incremental adoption for MedComms and PromoMats. I would be curious to get your thoughts there.

Yes, that's a good question, Brian. The answer is yes, we are seeing growth. A couple of factors are contributing to this. We're experiencing expansion with some existing customers who are increasing their usage to additional users and, in some instances, entering new markets as they strive for greater efficiency in content management. Additionally, there is a rising demand for digital content driven by the shift to digital, which requires faster content delivery. We are assisting our customers in achieving new levels of speed through innovative solutions like modular content. Our customers are innovating alongside us, allowing them to operate more efficiently. Overall, the expansion among existing customers and the push for efficiency through innovations like modular content, fueled by digital advancements, is contributing to the growth you are seeing.

And Brent, maybe one for you. I mean you guys had given a lot of detail about the rep decline and the 10% and the timing. I think the question that we get a lot is we're only seeing that in the financials. So if we think about just given how much of your renewal base is tied to the fourth quarter, is this last quarter that was just reported, is that going to be the biggest headwind to billings given the revenue and the renewal impact? Or how do we think about this?

Yes. Hey, Brian. So what we've said is we expect most of the sales rep reductions of the 10% to happen by the end of fiscal year '23. So we're on that path. We didn't see anything that was unusual or surprising to us in this last Q4. And as you should expect, that the revenue impact to slightly trail the reduction in the pharma reps in the billings. So there's a little bit of a lag there on how it flows through the financials. But nothing's changed from what we've seen previously, and it's all incorporated into our guidance.

And our last question this afternoon will come from Brad Sills of Bank of America.

I just wanted to ask, and apologies if you answered the question already, but the hiring impact, was that more on the customer side, they're lagging hiring plans, getting projects started? Or is it more on your side, hiring sales personnel and whatnot to help close the deals, to get the deals started?

Yes, Brad. This is Peter. I'll take that. I would say it's a bit of both, right, the industry overall. I think you're talking about a pharmaceutical company, whether it's Pfizer or Novartis or Veeva, and so the industry is growing. And so we need more talent and kind of specialized talent, and so we're having trouble getting enough people and manufacturing those people. So it's a slowdown, is both, from both of those things. Now in the grand scheme of things, you have to remember, a pretty minor slowdown and no change to the competitive environment. On our side, yes, those types of people that you would expect, sales and services people. But the good news is we had a strong hiring quarter, and we're training a lot of new people about the industry. So we think we'll come out of this very strong.

That's great to hear, Peter. And one more, if I may. Just anything on CTMS, CDMS deals in that top 50 segment this quarter, and just pipelines, how does that segment look?

I am very optimistic about that segment. We previously mentioned the CRO that chose Veeva as their primary CDMS, which was a significant win, along with a CTMS victory in the top 20. The pipeline for Clinical is really advancing, including in CDMS, CTMS, and some combined deals between CTMS and CDMS. I am very excited about this momentum, which is palpable even if it doesn't immediately reflect in the financials. We can definitely sense the Clinical momentum right now.

And that is all the questions we have for today. Mr. Gassner, back to you, sir, for any closing comments.

All right. Thank you, everyone, for joining the call today. And thank you to our customers for your continued partnership and to the Veeva team for your outstanding work in the quarter and the year. Thank you.

Thank you. And again, ladies and gentlemen, that will conclude today's Veeva Systems Fiscal 2022 Fourth Quarter and Full Year Earnings Call. I would like to thank you all so much for joining us and wish you all a great day. Goodbye.