Abacus Global Management, Inc.

It's first on flows. Since you say in the release that the second securitization could slip into 3Q, if that did fall in 2Q, would that be incremental to the $500 million first half inflow expectation?

Hi, Patrick. Yes, that would be in addition to that $500 million.

Okay, great. And could you update us on where we are in the SEC process for the interval fund?

Sure. Thanks for asking. We've been working diligently with the SEC. And while we can't, you know, specifically state where and how their specific process timing is, we feel good about potentially being able to make an announcement in Q2.

Great. Thanks a lot. I'll get back in the queue.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Andrew Kilgerman with TD Cowen. Your line is open.

Hey, good afternoon, everyone. Looking at your slide 11, I thought that was pretty interesting. So it implies that wealth advisors would move from zero to about 25% of revenue over the next few years. Could you walk us through kind of like a little roadmap as to how you get to 25% of revenue? Is it Manning and Napier? Is it existing advisors? Do you expect a fair amount in deals? Just curious as to the roadmap there on that.

Thanks for asking that, Andrew, and great to hear from you. Yeah, our roadmap to the financial advisory slash really private wealth division is is really consistent with the premise that it's the build it or buy it. And we have a number of opportunities that we think will come to fruition and help us meet those targets. The Manning and Napier initial investment here, I think made a ton of sense for us to demonstrate and show the synergies that we've talked about between sourcing contracts, sending them and processing potentially lead gen for them and then kind of operating those synergies with additional cash flow from both entities. And we're already seeing some success there and very close to kind of finalizing our strategic alliance agreement and then go forward agreement. And we have a number of additional opportunities in place of registered investment advisors that I think are seeking that same type of partnership, whether that's in a minority position or a full position. full acquisition, and so we're really excited about the pipeline for that. I think we'll see more of that through year-end and certainly more heavily into 27.

Got it. Makes a lot of sense. And then just looking at slide 27, you know, I thought it was a nice trend to see the days held on the sold policies increased, you know, really significantly to 290. which maybe you could share with us the kinds of gains that you have by holding that for quite a bit of time. And then on the flip side, the days held on the own policies kind of decreased meaningfully to 209. So what are you thinking about both of those metrics as we move forward? Are they right in the band where they should be or not? Right. Do you see one of them moving up or down? What are your thoughts going forward?

Thank you. And, you know, I think you nailed it on the last part of the question was that we believe we're in kind of the band where we target. If you look at kind of historically where that's been at, you know, whether it's days held and or days held via transactions, we're finding a little bit of a sweet spot there. And You know, there was, you know, in the prior quarter, we saw a little bit of shift where we had taken advantage of some contracts that, you know, that were very opportunistic and moved a larger percentage of those. But I think historically where we're trading at right now is kind of where you should see those numbers start to kind of think about modeling going forward. Right, I think in the quarter, we were somewhere around 1.9 to two times on an annual basis related to our book turnover. And I think that's reflective of the opportunities we see in the market. One of the things I'll highlight, though, is that we are seeing significant increased demand for the underlying asset, driven by its certainly uncorrelated nature. But if you consider some of the volatility that we've seen in other kind of adjacent asset classes, if you will, this opportunity, I think, in this asset class has certainly been more appealing to institutional investors who are looking for maybe a little bit less yield, but they want that uncorrelated stability nature that these policies represent.

Great. Thank you, Jay. Awesome. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Mike Grondahl with Northland Securities. Your line is open.

Hey, thank you. I just wanted to ask about the 9,000 policies. you reviewed in 1Q26 versus the 11,000 in 2025. Would you say that's all organic growth, all inbound? Any extra marketing or anything to drive that?

Sure. Thanks, Katie.

It's a very astute pickup. Yes, it is organic. It's also, I would argue, a bit opportunistic from our perspective. and that we're seeing opportunities out there as we continue to have demand and increased capital related to our own funds and certainly other funds, that's driving up supply. And I think what I'm really trying to highlight there is that as we continue to raise capital on our funds, securitizations, and some of these other products, sometimes that leads to the question of, do we have the policies to support that demand? And I think Clear evidence shows in Q1 we do. And some of that's carrying over into Q2, and we're excited about that. So that is organic. We're not necessarily turning up the advertising budget. I think the budget year over year was fairly stable in Q1. But instead, I also believe that the work of 25, where we did increase our budget, right, particularly Q3, Q4, you start to see that paying off in Q1 and Q2 and Q3.

Got it. And then you talked about rising asset value and the demand for those policies resulting in that lower purchase discount rate. Can you quantify that for us a little bit, Jay? Is that worth a point or two? How do we measure that or get a sense?

Sure. I think the best way to think about it, right, is when you look at the slide related to our gross trade spread margin, right, when you see that number, I think we're plus or minus around 26 for the quarter, you know, that's the best way to quantify. So even though you might see demand increase, which in most markets, you know, when you have demand increase driving prices up, you would historically see those discount rates or the forecasted purchase rates compressing. In our case, what we're stating is that can actually be a good event for us, right? Because prices go up, we sell at a higher price, and that demand then drives additional revenue. And my point is I believe we're going to see more of that, right? When you just look at the cash flows into our own funds, but then demand from investors who are seeking – capital sources that, again, are less volatile and correlated, those kinds of attributes, it becomes a positive outcome for us. So to be specific, if you were to kind of quantify this to kind of a percentage point, I think that's a bit of a challenge because we'll see that happen in any given quarter. But my point is that whether it's 100 basis points or 200 basis points, it's ultimately a positive outcome for us.

Got it. Well, thanks a lot. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Crispin Love with Piper Sandler. Your line is open.

Hi, good afternoon. This is Ben Graham for Crispin Love. Thanks for taking the question. I'm just wondering if you could share a little bit more about your current thoughts on M&A, just specifically what types of assets you're most interested in currently and Basically, would it be more on the RIA side, technology, or some other areas? Thank you.

Yeah, sure. Great question. The pipeline is fairly robust right now. And the areas that we're most interested in, you nailed it on the RIA side. We think that there are some very interesting opportunities there. And for us, we're also super selective. We want to make sure that this is the type of platform that meets our expectations culturally, that is profitable. And most importantly, and I think this is the biggest takeaway for any of our M&A, it's got to be accretive, right? It's super important that these opportunities are accretive to us, both from a EPS basis, but in addition to that, accretive in relationship to our synergies. We want to show that this is the type of acquisition that's going to help grow the business into 27, 28, because I think that's what our shareholders want us to do. So we're very disciplined in that. We want to create businesses. When we look at our technology platforms, we're still developing, I think, some very exciting things in-house that in the next probably 60 days, we're going to start announcing. Certainly at our investor day, we're going to roll some of those out that are going to fundamentally have a significant transformative shift in private wealth management. And Those types of programs where we're incorporating lifespan into financial planning is starting to happen in real time. Adopting different AI platforms to assist with that, to accelerate that process, is all happening in real time. If we're looking at technology-type platforms, it's the type of platforms that can provide data and information to our clients that is incredibly useful for a customized solution. of whether it's insurance or financial planning, but all related to their longevity data. I just spoke with the Milken Institute on this, and this was a huge, huge talking point because there's a trillion dollars of wealth transferring. Our point is, wouldn't the world like to know when that's going to transfer? And you can know that better if you better understand the longevity and lifespan data behind it. So those companies are super interesting to us.

Awesome. Thank you so much for all the color there. And then just briefly on the carrier buyback program, I'm just wondering if there's anything new to call out here, new announcements, expectations for the year, and just if anything's baked into the guide there.

There still continues to be a very high level of interest and structure that we're working directly with carriers on. I think in addition to the buyback, we're also working and speaking with carriers about new product issuance related to our underwriting. So, you know, it's amazing how this is really coming full circle in our partnerships and strategic partnerships with carriers as well as reinsurance companies. And, you know, when I talk about structure in relationship to a buyback, there's some structural advantages that we're working through with some of our carrier partners that can actually make that buyback more affordable as well as easier to execute on. So we're continuing that program through 2026, and we're also, in addition to that, adding to some of our carrier relationships, even potentially do product sales.

Awesome. That's it for me. Thanks so much for taking the questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Timothy D'Augustino with B. Reilly Securities. Your line is open.

Yeah. Hi. Thank you. Thanks for taking the questions. Joining a bit late here, so apologies if anything is repeated. Looking at capital deployed for policy originations on slide 26, that number for 1Q continues or was ahead again of what we were forecasting. I guess trying to understand, you know, in 2025 in the beginning part, you know, it was about $120 million. At these current levels of $230 million in the fourth quarter and $163 in the first quarter, are you comfortable with this kind of being the run rate, or are you taking advantage of opportunities? Thank you.

Great question. And, you know, yes, certainly opportunistic, but I would also add that we had capital demand to meet that capital deployment. Now, if we're modeling to what we think a closer range will be, We have a couple of analysts who have tracked this at a really high number, which isn't necessarily the right way to think about it either. I think where we're tracking is in that 130 to 150 range and certainly had a really nice quarter in Q1. The one kind of KPI we take into consideration is that you could see that number increase over 150 like we did in Q1. if you see our gross capital inflows higher, right? So, you know, the way that I would think about it is that that number can be correlated to the amount of demand and capital that we have to put to work. And so, you know, I'm hesitant to come out and say, oh, you know, model this at 200, because in any given quarter, as I've highlighted, that could change a little bit. And so we're much more comfortable in this kind of guiding to that 130 to 150 number. And then if we surpass that by a little bit like we did in Q1, that's great. That's always our target is to exceed expectations. It's also why we raised our guidance, right? We kind of tried to put an indicator out there that said, look, we feel pretty good about what's going to happen in the remainder of 26, including capital deployed. we're comfortable in maybe the higher range of the 130 to 150, and therefore, we'll increase our guidance to reflect that.

Okay, great. And then if I can ask a second question on AUM, relatively flat quarter over quarter, and I understand it's a short period, just the first quarter, but As we look at the 2028 guide of $30 billion of AUM, I guess, could you walk us through again, you know, how much of that is coming from like organically and how much is inorganic? Thank you.

Yeah, you know, the purpose there is to get pretty close to like a 50-50 number as we get out to 2028 on organic versus inorganic. and the inorganic would be acquisition, and whether that's through some very exciting opportunities on the asset management side, in addition to the private wealth side, as I've spoken about before. So that's the way that we're mapping that. We see more of that taking place as we come into 27, but based upon some of the opportunities we have in our pipeline, I will tell you that we believe we're tracking at that number.

Okay, great. Thank you so much for taking the questions today.

Thank you. Our next question will come from Patrick Davitt with Autonomous Research. Your line is open.

Hey, thanks for the follow-up. I don't think I saw the materials, but how much is left on the repurchase authorization? And through the lens of this M&A conversation, could you update us on how you're thinking about the stock here and repurchases from here? Thank you.

Sure. Thank you, Patrick. We've deployed plus or minus around 50% of the last 20 million board approved buyback. So we still have, I think, a decent amount of powder left to execute on. And we look closely at that. I mean, what you've touched on is really important because we look at where we sit on a multiple basis based upon where our earnings are, you know, our kind of consistent performance here, certainly in relationship to our recent, you know, we just announced we're raising, again, our EPS targets for 26 and then forecasted into 27, 28. So when we look at would we consider more stock repurchase, the answer is yes. I think that, you know, we still very much see the pricing of our stock is a very discounted price. And when we measure that against where we may deploy other assets, right, we're looking at, you know, ROICs and ROEs and the high teens, low 20s. And, you know, we think that even based upon price targets from our analysts, that we're currently trading at a pretty significant discount to that. So, you know, buybacks are still very much what we believe is an important piece of our, you know, kind of things that we might deploy. when that is related to M&A, you're right, right? You know, stock price is important to that. And I think that, you know, in most M&A transactions, a percentage of that is related to the stock. And I think what's interesting to me is that the deals that we're looking at now in our pipeline are accretive even at this pricing. And so imagine if we pick up, you know, another 10, 15, 20, 30% in stock valuation, these deals even become more accretive. And so when we're looking at a deal now, we're assuming in that M&A that, hey, this is at a very favorable stock price. Is this deal still accretive? As the stock price continues to carry some upward momentum, these deals will look even better.

So we think we're in a great spot on the M&A side. Thank you. Thank you, Patrick.

Thank you. This concludes our question and answer session. I would now like to turn the meeting back over to Jay Jackson for any additional or closing remarks.

Thank you. Again, we just want to express our gratitude to our partners, our analysts, our shareholders, and certainly each and every one of our employees, where nearly all of them are shareholders. I think it speaks volumes into the production of our company and our ability to continue to meet these consistent goals that we have set out. We raised our targets in 2026. Our expectations are we're going to continue to push through those through 27 and through 28, and we're tracking to our $250 million EBITDA of 28. And so we are grateful and thankful for all of you to be on our journey together and look forward to our next call.

Thank you. That brings us to the end of today's meeting. We appreciate your time and participation. You may now disconnect.