Regis Resources Limited

Thanks, Renju. And good morning, everyone. And thanks for joining us for the Regis Resources Financial Year 2025 Full Year Financial Results. I'm joined this morning by our, or with our CFO, Anthony Rakiki, our COO, Michael Holmes, and our Head of Investor Relations, Jeff Sansom. On this call, we will be referring to various slides in the pack that we released earlier this morning. This, of course, can be downloaded from our website or the ASX. might be helpful if you've got that in front of you. So with that in mind, referring to slide three, first off, I have a look at safety for the year, and Regis continues to deliver safe and profitable answers. Our lost time injury frequency rate for FY25 was 0.4, well below the gold industry average, which I think the latest is around 1.6, reflecting our ongoing commitment to safe production across all our operations. This year, we also reported our first integrated annual and sustainability report, which highlights not only our ESG achievements, but also our progress on climate-related reporting. Just a couple of key ESG highlights to include now. We saw a 7.6 reduction in group one scope, sorry, group scope one and scope two emissions year on year. We delivered more than 200 hectares of progressive rehabilitation across the Duketon site, and our female representation increased to 23% across the workforce. We're also well advanced in aligning with mandatory climate-related disclosures, which will become part of our statutory reporting framework in FY26. Now, turning to the financial results, Many of those numbers were foreshadowed, of course, in the quarterly release a month or so ago, but it's worth repeating because FY25 has been a record year for Regis. Now, look, I'll try not to steal all of Anthony's thunder, but there are some high-level metrics that I would like to mention. Firstly, we delivered a record net profit after tax, and I would point out that's not underlying. That is the actual net profit after tax of $254 million. That's a $440 million turnaround from last year's loss. Anthony will put a little bit more context around that shortly. Also, our record statutory cash flows from operating activities was $821 million. That's up 73% from the prior year. Importantly, after repaying our $300 million of corporate debt in January, we closed the year with $517 million of cash and bullion, strengthening our balance sheet and providing flexibility. Now, just to contextualise this, I think it's sometimes easy to talk about these things in terms of a net debt, net cash position. So if we look at where we were 12 months ago, Regis was in a net debt position of $5 million. So we were in debt to the June net of $5 million. And now, 12 months later, we sit at a net cash and bullion position of $517 million. Reflecting this strong profitability and cash generating capacity, the board has declared a fully franked final dividend of $0.05 per share. That's the equivalent of a distribution of about $38 million. With this dividend, Regus has now declared nearly $585 million in fully franked dividends since 2013. And with that, I'll hand over to Anthony to step through the financial results in a little more detail.

Thanks, Jim, and good morning, everyone. I'll turn you now to slide five of the presentation. This is a really impressive chart that demonstrates the cash generation capacity that reaches this business. We started the year with $295 million of cash and bullion, which grew by $222 million to $517 million by 30 June 2025, as Jim was saying. Now, importantly, that includes the $300 million of debt we repaid in January. So before the debt repayment, cash and bullion effectively grew by $522 million. Looking to the income statement, so now I'll get you to look at slide six. Gold sales were $1.65 billion, up 30% on FY24, driven by a 47% increase in realised gold prices. Costs of sales excluding depreciation and amortisation were similar year on year. Depreciation on amortisation itself increased by 14%, largely due to the accelerated amortisation of pre-strip at Ben Hur and the Tropicana open pits. We expect depreciation on amortisation to be a little lower on a per ounce basis in FY26 versus FY25. You'll also note an exploration and evaluation expense of $11 million, which relates to McPhillamy's. I would note that since last year's Section 10 declaration, for all of FY25 and until further notice, McPhillamy's costs are being expensed directly through the profit and loss account. Another key item is tax. We recorded a tax expense of $109 million in FY25 and an estimated tax payable of just under $100 million. After several years of tax benefit positions, Regis will now move into a payable position again, a product of our high profitability. And just on that, as a result of the upcoming tax payable in the FY26 financial year, our five cents a share dividend will be 100% fully franked. So all up, The results translated into a record net profit after tax of $254 million, a $440 million turnaround from last year's net loss, which was impacted by the McPhillamy's write-off and the costs of closing out our hedging contracts. Now onto the statutory cash flows and balance sheet on slide seven. Statutory cash flows from operating activities was a record at $821 million, up 73% on last year. A stunning result for a business to be approaching a billion dollars in cash flows from operating activities. On cash flows from financing activities, the only major item was the repayment of our $300 million debt back in January, as we've discussed. At year end, we had $517 million in cash and bullion, and our $300 million revolving credit facility remains undrawn. Our balance sheet is in an excellent position and continues to strengthen. Overall, FY25 was a step change in the company's financial strength, positioning us well to pursue growth opportunities while continuing to generate meaningful shareholder returns. Thank you and back to you, Jim.

Yeah, thanks, Anthony. So to summarise what you've heard, FY25 has been a year of records for Regis. The team delivered consistent operating performance, which has translated into record financial outcomes, strengthened the balance sheet and, pardon me, with that, we are returning $38 million in dividends to shareholders along with their participation in the high capital growth that they've seen over the last 12 months at least. As we've demonstrated over the years, our capital allocation remains disciplined. With our unhedged position, strong gold prices and an ongoing delivery against plan, we're confident in sustaining this momentum into the current FY26 year and beyond. And with debt repaid, we are well positioned to fund growth internally, maintain financial flexibility and to continue to build and return value to our shareholders. Well, thanks for your time this morning. I'll now open it for questions.

Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star 2. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up your handset to ask your question. The first question comes from the line of Andrew Bowler with Macquarie. Please go ahead.

G'day, Jim and Anthony. First one from me just around dividends. I couldn't find a formal policy in the documents you provided today. I was just wondering if there is a want of the board to provide a formal policy in time or is it going to be ad hoc over the next little while?

Look, we don't have... We don't currently have a formal policy. Obviously, these things are always discussed, and, you know, internally, we consider a number of metrics, but at this point in time, the board doesn't have a stated or unstated policy that we apply. We just look at what the cash and profitability has been of the business and look at what we see our requirements might be going into the future. and make a decision on that. But you'd have to say in the current environment, it's a very strong one for gold producers, and that's why the board elected to make the decision to award or pay a dividend.

No worries. And maybe one for you, Anthony. Thanks for that additional colour about that $100 billion lumpy debt payment in the third quarter of this year. Beyond that, is it meant to be... Is it likely to be a more normal PAYG instalment process from then on? Or is, you know, the $100 billion that we're expecting this year in terms of cash tax?

No, you're right, Andrew. Once we true up... the bill of around 100 mil for the tax payable. Going forward, we will start to make monthly tax payments again.

No worries. That's all from me. Thanks, Jim and Anthony. Thank you. Thanks, Andrew.

Thank you. Next question comes from the line of Al Harvey with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Yeah, morning team. Just on inorganic growth, I know you obviously hosed down speculation of those talks on acquiring the other 70% of Tropicana. I appreciate it's challenging to answer questions on the topic, but perhaps you could just help us frame your views on acquisitions in the context of your comments in the release earlier this week, as far as as to exactly what a deal would be that would align with your strategic goals and and what accretive to shareholders means to you, in your view, I suppose, long-term NPV, earnings accretion, steady production, just help us put some numbers around it.

I think you probably just answered your own question there, Nell. But, you know, I mean, our view on anything that we look at or consider in terms of inorganic growth has to be accretive for our shareholders. If it's not accretive for our shareholders, the fundamental question is, why would you do it? And the elements that we look at in that are, as you just described them, on an earnings per share basis, on a NPV or NAV basis, we would look at all of those as we have done in the past and will probably continue to do in the future.

Any of those, Jim, rank higher in yours or the board's view?

Oh, look, I think you'd have to say that the fundamental analysis would have to be overall does the asset give you is it accretive from an NAB point of view? Because you might do something that looks great for one year on an earnings per share basis, but then it's value destructive in the medium to longer term, and I'm not sure why you would consider something like that. And there might alternatively be something that's got great long-term value but might look a little bit value... not accretive in the short term. So every single scenario has to be considered on a case-by-case rather than putting in a single measure that it must do this and it must do that. Yeah, I mean, it's like everything, Al. You've just got to look at the range of ways that you assess the project and look at it on a case-by-case. Yep.

It makes sense, Jim. I suppose just to follow up there, I mean, how does the upcoming judicial review on McPhilemys and the growth that that could introduce into the portfolio impact the way you're looking at inorganic opportunities?

Well, it's definitely part of the equation. But, you know, the judicial review is currently scheduled for December. Regardless of the outcome there, as I think I've said in the past, you know, the McPhillamy's project is a fantastic project. It is really good to have in our portfolio. Probably the most frustrating part about it is the timing that we could bring it in. I mean, if that project was running now, you know, on its average oil and sustaining costs, And the spot price of today, you know, if you look at the maths, I think it's an average production of 180,000 ounces a year. Average oil and sustaining costs last year were $1,600 an ounce. Add a bit of inflation onto that. You know, you could do the maths. This thing would be generating at least $1.5 million in cash a day if it was operating at the moment pre-tax, right, on average production. So do we think it's a valuable project? Absolutely, we do. Unfortunately, this review, as we said at the time, has created a delay for us and we'll pursue the judicial review. But at the same time, we'll look to try and see if there's an alternative way to be able to store the tails. But as we said last year, that work could take us at least four or five years. You know, it's just not that easy. But it's worth enough to us that it sits in our portfolio. But from a timing perspective, it's at least a couple of years out, even if the judicial review is successful by the time that all plays out. We're talking a timeframe here that's sort of well out in front of us. So for that point of view, we like to look and consider what we might be able to do for other organic or inorganic growth options.

Thank you. Thank you. Next question comes from the line of David Coates, Bell Potter Securities. Please go ahead.

Good morning, Jim, Anthony, and the rest of the team. Congratulations on a great looking set of numbers this morning. No surprises. A question on the dividend. I don't know how much Collier can give us, but in terms of capital allocation priorities, the debt's gone, dividend buybacks, can you maybe give us a bit more colour on how the decision to pay a dividend was arrived at and how it got above other uses of capital?

Yeah, sure. And you just reminded me at the start of this, I meant to go back and recount the old Paul Keating statement that these are a beautiful set of numbers. So thanks for reminding me that I should be giving it a surlative because they are pretty good. So, you know, your question on dividends is a good one. Probably, maybe they'll give a little bit of context around it. And as I said earlier... We don't have a specific policy, so you need to take that into account when I make these comments. But when we looked at FY25, we saw it as a bit of a year of two halves, right? The first half of the year, we really built up our cash. We had no hedging. We did a great, great job of delivering into our plans. And effectively what we did there, which was as we described through the year, the first objective was to pay down our debt which we did early in the new year which then says all right well the second half of the year we were debt free building cash and we got to the the half end of half two and we were very comfortable and liked the way that the business was running of course who wouldn't and and elected to pay a dividend so you know without sort of specifically saying that we have a policy one way or the other It was certainly a case of the first half of the year we spent putting our money into paying down the debt, and the second half of the year we looked at building up our cash and returning some dividends based on second-half performance. So, you know, that'll be the view that we take as we look forward as to how might we be thinking about dividends.

Yeah. And...

It does a little bit, yes. And the quantum amount, $38 million, just sort of seen as a manageable and affordable amount to pay out given other, I guess, potential uses of capital in the next 12 months. Is that sort of reasonable to say that?

Yeah, that's right. We just think it was a sensible... We just think that it was a sensible... point to restart our dividend repayments you know I wouldn't like to describe it as well I won't describe it as dipping our toe in but clearly we're in a strong we're in a good financial position um but we also yeah we wanted to uh basically keep some of our powder dry for our um for our capital growth options uh and and finally Jim um you know the you know

I'm just getting pretty bored of asking questions on M&A, but I'll ask another one. The gold sector is obviously pretty densely combed over at the moment, but would you consider any other commodities? Sorry, would we consider any other commodities? Consider adding exposure to any other commodities, yeah.

Look, I think, yes, our response to that has been we'd certainly look to... At the moment, we would look to and consider other commodities if it was something that was in combination with gold. We're definitely not looking to sort of create a, you know, an iron ore arm or a diamond's arm or something like that. But if... If we discovered in the Lachlan Fold Belt or if we found the right M&A opportunity that had copper and gold combination, that certainly wouldn't scare us at all. That would be something that probably would be welcomed in. But would we go off and look for some non-gold-related commodity on a standalone basis? That's certainly not something we're contemplating at the moment. Fair enough. OK, thanks, Jim. Thanks very much. Thanks, Dave.

Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Byer for closing remarks.

All right. Well, look, we'll leave it at that. Thanks, everybody, for joining us. We realize it's a pretty busy time of the year. Thank you for your questions. uh as well and as always if anybody's got any follow-up please give us a call jeff's standing by and we'll we'll do our best to answer thanks very much and have a good day thank you that does conclude our conference for today thank you for participating you may now disconnect