Teradyne, Inc.

This call will be available via the same page after the call ends. The matter that we discuss today will include forward-looking statements that involve risks that could cause Teradyne's results to differ materially from management's current expectations. We caution listeners not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements included in this presentation. We encourage you to review the safe harbor statement contained in the slides accompanying this presentation, as well as the risk factors described in our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31st, 2024, on file with the SEC. Additionally, these forward-looking statements are made only as of today. During today's call, we will refer to non-GAAP financial measures. We have posted additional information concerning these non-GAAP financial measures, including reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures, where available on the investor page of our website. Looking ahead between now and our next earnings call, Teradan expects to participate in technology or industrial-focused investor conferences hosted by Citi, Susquehanna, Morgan Stanley, and Cantor. Our quiet period will begin at the close of business on March 13, 2026. Following Greg and Michelle's comments this morning, we'll open up the call for questions. This call is scheduled for one hour. Greg?

Thanks, Amy, and thank you all for joining us today. I'll start off by summarizing our fourth quarter and full year 2025 results and provide some context for our initial view of 2026 and our new target earnings model. Teradyne had a strong fourth quarter, with 41% sequential revenue growth and more than 100% non-GAAP earnings growth. Both revenue and EPS were above our high guidance, as trends we noted previously continued through the end of the year. Semiconductor tests, product tests, and robotics all delivered double-digit sequential growth. A striking trend was the increase in AI-driven revenue in the second half of 2025. This is obvious in computing memory. However, the rapid build-out of cloud and edge AI is also driving demand for power management, SLT, HDD, ICT, and optical test. This aligns with the themes of AI, verticalization, and electrification that we have highlighted in prior calls. When you roll it up, AI demand drove 40% to 50% of our revenue in Q3. In Q4, AI drove more than 60% of our revenue. Looking forward to Q1 of 2026, we expect that upwards of 70% of our revenue will be driven by AI applications. Now, Michelle will go into a lot more detail about the quarterly results and trends. I'd like to give you a little full year color for each of Terranine's businesses. Starting first with the product test group. Overall, we grew revenue 8% in 2025, driven by strength in defense and aerospace. We have successfully integrated Quantified Photonics into this group, including training the sales team for Lightpoint and production board tests on the Quantified product line. We expect all of our business lines in this group to grow in 2026. Turning now to robotics. In 2025, we saw three consecutive quarters in growth starting in Q2. As we've discussed previously, we are optimistic about the value-creating opportunity in physical AI and advanced robotics, and our strategy has been to focus the organization on the segments, customers, and technologies with the highest growth potential. For all of 2025, the semiconductor test group delivered 19% year-on-year growth, SOC test revenue grew 23% year-over-year, driven mainly by networking and VIP compute. Memory test revenue was up slightly in a roughly flat memory test market on continued share games in HBM and DRAM final tests. With strong VIP revenue, we believe that we maintained about 50% market share in the VIP compute market in 2025. This entire segment remains very concentrated, with only a few players driving significant ATV purchases. This contributed to revenue lumpiness in 2025 and complicates forecasting VIP share in the future. Our full-year financial results reflect a successful pivot to AI-driven demand and high-performance computing. Back in 2020 and 2021, our business was dominated by mobile. We were highly exposed to mobile in SOC, memory, and wireless tests. Now, in 2025, compute is the largest component of our revenue and grew 90% year over year. This growth can be attributed to the decisions and investments we've made over the past few years that are now yielding. Our historically strong networking business has been growing because of high-density network connections in AI data centers and the increasing complexity of networking components. The work that we have done to align our product roadmap and customer-facing teams to VIP and merchant computing customers has enabled us to capture valuable new design wins. While we are gaming in computing memory, we believe that diverse revenue mix is Paradigm's long-term strength. Using round numbers, in 2023, only about 10% of our SOC product revenue was in compute. 50% was in auto and industrial, and 40% was in mobile. Now, in 2025, nearly 50% was in compute, and auto industrial and mobile were roughly balanced at a quarter each. This balance de-risks our target earnings model. The SOC TAM reached record levels in 2025, nearly 60% larger than 2024. Looking forward, we expect that TAM to grow robustly over the midterm, driven by continued data center build-out and the growth of Edge AI. Predicting this growth rate from year to year is going to be difficult because of the high concentration and less predictable product ramps. one big socket sliding across your boundaries could have a significant positive or negative effect on year-to-year growth although this uncertainty makes it challenging to predict the 2026 soc 10 we are expecting robust year-on-year tam growth at a segment level we expect compute to grow significantly from a very high base driven by ai We expect to see moderate recovery in auto industrial, but we are uncertain about the mobile TAN. Although we are expecting to see a significant jump in device complexity, there are questions about unit volume, product mix, and capital efficiency improvements. All in all, we believe that we are positioned to gain share in the single digits in SOC tests in a significantly larger market. Now, shifting gears to memory. In 2025, the overall memory TAM was down about 4% from 2024, and we were able to gain a little share. A bright spot in the memory test market was AI compute demand for both HBM and DRAM. Again, it is useful to take a longer-term look at the changes in memory test. Back in 2020 and 2021, the memory test market was split more or less evenly between Flash and DRAM. In 2025, DRAM and HBM comprise nearly 90% of the memory TAM, a trend we expect to continue into 2026. Overall, we expect a resurgent memory market in 2026 with low double-digit TAM growth over 2025 driven by continued strength in HBM and DRAM, and we expect to continue our incremental share gains. our IST business delivered over 50% growth from 2024 to 2025. Historically, IST has had very high segment and customer concentration. In 2024 and before, we served the HDD and mobile SLP markets, and our revenue was mostly driven by a large single customer in each segment. In 2025, this began to change. We won a new customer in mobile SLT in 2024, and that ramped strongly in 2025. Also in 2025, we entered compute SLT and won business from two customers in that segment. Finally, in late 2025, we received orders from a new customer in HDD, which will be ramping in 2026. All of this is setting us up for continued strong revenue growth from IST in 2026 and beyond. Michelle will be going over our target earnings model in some detail. I'd like to comment on the underlying drivers of that model. In looking at the future, we have to answer two questions. The first question is whether the markets we are in are poised for growth. In our mind, the answer to that is unequivocally true. Right now, the prime mover of the market is AI data center. Our product lines cover this market from beginning to end, from testing compute devices to complete server trays, all the way to robot-assisted operations in AI data centers. Looking beyond the AI data center, segments of the market where Teradyne has high share are poised for recovery. Auto industrial will have long-term growth tied to the transition to edge AI, EVs, and 800-volt data center power. Mobile is positioned for steep complexity increases as the compute power required to run inference on LLMs is crammed into phones. Physical AI is already expanding the applications of advanced robotics, and we believe that trend will continue to strengthen. The second question is whether we, Teradyne, are positioned to gain share in the markets where we play. Again, I think the evidence from 2025 is clear. We are. We have gained share in HBM and DRAM. We have maintained high share in networking. We have ramped significant new VIP sockets. We have a leadership position in silicon photonics device test, and we are in play for a share of merchant GPU. We have won new segments and customers in our IST group in both storage test and system level test of compute devices. But Teradyne's exposure to the growing AI data center market extends beyond device test. Our production board test business tests the server trays that devices go into. Our quantified photonics instruments test silicon photonics from device to rack. In alignment with our strategy to go from wafer to data center, last Thursday Teradyne announced an agreement with Multilane to form a joint venture. Multilane is a global leader in high-speed I.O. and data center interconnect test solutions. This joint venture will be called Multilane Test Products and is being formed to serve the growing AI data center demand. Upon the close of this transaction, which we expect in the first half of this year, we will be the majority owner of the JV, and Multilane will maintain a minority position. In robotics, we have built a world-class platform for physical AI applications that is being applied in multiple industry verticals, and we have embedded AI capabilities into our AMR products. Most importantly, we have begun to ramp an important worldwide AI-driven application in e-commerce. So, to sum up, Teradyne is positioned to deliver better-than-market growth in markets that are going to be growing robustly over the next few years. We foresee a future where the ATE TAM will be $12 to $14 billion, up from about $9 billion in 2025. In that market, our long-term model illustrates our expectation that Teradyne would deliver nearly two times 2025's revenue and two and a half times the earnings per share. With that, I'll turn the call over to Michelle Turner, our Chief Financial Officer, and welcome her to her very first Teradyne earnings call. Michelle, over to you.

Thank you, Greg, and good morning, everyone. I'm thrilled to have joined the Teradyne team and look forward to the value-creating opportunities ahead. Today, I will cover our fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial results Then I will share our Q1 2026 outlook. And then finally, I will discuss our new target earnings model. Now on to Q4. Fourth quarter sales were $1.83 billion with non-GAAP EPS of $1.80, both above the high end of our guidance range. Fourth quarter sales were the highest revenue quarter of 2025 and our second highest quarter in history. only $3 million below our record during the mobile boom of 2021. Semitest revenue was $883 million, fueled by AI compute and memory demand. Within Semitest, SOC revenue was $647 million, up 47% quarter-on-quarter. and memory revenue was $206 million, up 61% quarter-on-quarter, marking a record sales quarter for our memory business. The product test group at $110 million grew double digits sequentially and year-on-year, driven by strong defense and aerospace demand. Robotics revenue of $89 million grew for the third consecutive quarter and was up 19% from Q3. In Q4, greater than 5% of our robotics revenue was driven by a large e-commerce customer. Moving on to bottom line, non-GAAP gross margins were 57.2% aligned with our guidance range driven by semi-test AI demand strength, offset primarily by lower product test group margins and robotics mix and an inventory write-down on legacy products. Non-GAAP operating expenses were $306 million and the non-GAAP operating profit rate was 29% in the quarter. Non-GAAP operating profit dollars in the quarter roughly doubled to $314 million in comparison to both prior quarter and prior year. We generated $219 million in free cash flow and returned $204 million to our shareholders through share repurchases and dividends. quarter, excluding discrete items, was 10.6% and 10.3% on a non-GAAP and GAAP basis, respectively. Overall, fourth quarter results were strong across the portfolio. Now turning to full-year results. Our revenue was $3.2 billion, up 13% from prior year. At the beginning of the year, our SOC revenue was equally divided across our major end markets of compute, mobility, and auto and industrial. Exiting the year, fueled by strong AI-driven demand, compute is now the largest part of our SOC portfolio, eclipsing our historical stronghold of mobile. From an overall portfolio perspective, SimiTest now represents close to 80% of our enterprise sales, an increase from the low 70s over the last few years. From a customer perspective, I'd like to remind you about a characteristic of our business model. We typically have a specifying customer who chooses platforms and drives demand, and a purchasing customer who actually places the order and receives the equipment. In different cases, the specifying and purchasing customers have more influence in the purchase decision. In 2025, we had two greater than 10% specifying customers and one greater than 10% purchasing customer. Gross margin for the year was 58.3%, OpEx was $1.2 billion, and operating profit was 22%. Non-GAAP EPS was $3.96. We generated $450 million in free cash flow and returned $785 million, or 174% of free cash flow, to our shareholders through share repurchases and dividends. We ended 2025 with $448 million of cash and marketable securities. Our tax rate for the full year, excluding discrete items, was 12.8% and 12.6% on a non-GAAP and GAAP basis, respectively. now to our outlook for q1 since our october call we've continued to see demand across our group strengthen q1 sales are expected to be between 1.15 billion and 1.25 billion which would be a new quarterly record driven by all things ai the midpoint of this revenue range is 11 growth from an already strong q4 and 75 growth from the same period in 2025. Non-GAAP EPS is in the range of $1.89 to $2.25 on 158 million diluted shares. From a margin perspective, we expect first quarter gross margins to be in the range of 58.5 to 59.5, up 180 basis points at the midpoint of the guidance quarter over quarter. OpEx is expected to increase 6% from Q4 and run at approximately 26 to 28% of first quarter sales. The non-GAAP operating profit rate at the midpoint of our first quarter guidance is 32%. With the strong start to the year, I want to take a minute to talk about our historical sales patterns and how this is a classic example of history is not necessarily indicative of the future. Many of you who have been following us for a while know historically we've experienced what we call lumpy Q2 or Q3 revenue trends tied to mobile demand and product life cycles. From 2020 to 2024, we consistently delivered the majority of our sales in second and third quarter. 2025 broke this pattern. Q4 represented our largest quarter of the year. As our compute and memory portfolios continue to grow, our revenue will continue to be lumpy, yet follow a less predictable pattern. While 2025 sales were 40% in the first half and 60% in the second half, based on what we know today, we expect 2026 sales to be at the inverse. Before I walk through our new target earnings model, a few comments on our recently announced multi-lane joint venture. As Greg mentioned, we expect to close the joint venture in 2-2-26. For your modeling purposes, the results of this business will be consolidated into the results of our product test group, and our EPS will reflect our share of the results of this business. We will disclose the net income attributable to the non-controlling interest as a new line item on our income statement. We expect this deal to be accretive in 2026 with a de minimis impact to EPS. Now moving on to our new target earnings model. Rather than anchoring our earnings model to a specific future year, as we've done historically, this year we are framing it around what our P&L looks like at an ATE TAM of $12 to $14 billion, which we believe is achievable within this midterm. This approach better reflects the inherent lumpiness in both compute and memory demand, where program timing and customer buying patterns can shift revenue across supporter and year boundaries. So at an ATE TAM of $12 to $14 billion, our target model assumes roughly $6 billion of revenue. At this scale, we expect gross margins between 59% and 61%, a point higher at the high end versus our prior model. We anticipate OPEX of 27% to 29% of revenue, reflecting operating leverage in the benefits of scale. This results in an operating profit of 30% to 34% and non-GAAP EPS of $9.50 to $11. We expect this growth over the midterm to be proportional across each of our groups. From a semi-test group perspective, we expect to grow our revenue greater than the overall ATE market growth rate, reflecting our expectations of share gains. This growth is driven by continued strength in AI compute and memory, as well as anticipated recovery in auto and industrial and mobile. Our mobile assumptions reflect recovery, but not a return to the 2021 peak. We also expect growth in IST tied to wins in SLT for compute, as well as HDV. From a product test group perspective, we expect growth across the portfolio tied to compute, defense, photonics, high-speed Internet data, and data centers. From a robotics group perspective, we expect growth tied to physical AI, A strategic pivot towards large accounts along with a sharper focus on e-commerce, logistics, semiconductor, and electronics verticals is expected to further support growth. This new target earnings model is reflective of our conviction in the growth potential of the ATE TAM driven by all things AI, even at today's unprecedented levels. Moving from a date-driven earnings model to an evergreen one reflects this conviction while also recognizing a lack of precision in terms of which year this comes to fruition. Now turning to capital allocation. Our strategy remains consistent to maintain cash reserves that enable us to run the business and have dry powder for M&A. For reference, from 2015 to 2025, we returned over $5.4 billion to shareholders and dividends, which is roughly 100% of free cash flow. We will remain opportunistic around value-creating inorganic opportunities as well as share buybacks. So summing up, exiting 2025, we are encouraged by the strength of the business. Our overall company revenues grew 13% year-on-year, and our SOC and memory contributed 17% year-over-year, helping to achieve a 23% increase in our EPS to $3.96. We are making strategic investments to drive competitive advantages and gain market share in the semi-test and product test groups. We remain focused on large accounts and attractive verticals to drive sustainable growth in robotics. We enter 2026 feeling good about the year ahead. With that, I'll turn the call back to the operator for questions.

Operator? Thank you. We will now be taking questions from the Teradyne's research analysts. At this time, if you wish to ask a question, please press star 1 on your telephone keypad. You may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star 2. In the interest of time, we ask that you please limit yourself to one question and one quick follow up. We will take our first question from CJ Muse with Cantor Fitzgerald. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thank you for taking the question. I guess wanted to focus near term and then a longer term question on the near term. Can you kind of help us understand how to better think about calendar 26? You know, I heard you talk about kind of the inverse of that 58, 42 percent we saw in calendar 25. But, you know, curious how to think about. you know, perhaps the overall revenue growth rate or thinking about June so we can size it, you know, will you grow above the high end of kind of the revenue target range of 25% or, you know, any help would be great.

Hi, good morning, CJ, and thanks for the question. This is Michelle. So I'll give some color commentary. I know this is going to be of interest to everyone who's listening in. So a couple of things I would reference in terms of this year versus past years. One, we are entering the year with a healthy backlog. And so we're excited by that. That's a positive when you think about our positioning for 2026. So we have better fidelity than we did at the same period last year. And then the other thing I would highlight is we typically, for those that follow the Charitine story, you know we talk about having like 13 weeks of demand kind of insights from a forecast perspective. I would say we have better insights this year to first half, and so that's a positive from an overall 2026 perspective. I do want to balance this, however, with kind of what I talked about in the opening remarks and really emphasize the lumpiness of this new sales pattern. So I want to caution us against kind of a linearity trend assumptions with the recognition that we could see things move between quarters and between years as we recognize some of these ordering patterns in this kind of new AI infrastructure build-out environment.

Yeah, and CJ, I'll add one thought here. This is Greg. The run rate that we have in Q1 is, you know, like we have a fair amount of strength in Q1. We don't have great visibility into the second half. So we're a little bit cautious that, you know, we don't want people to sort of take that and run with it for the full year. We expect, you know, that we're in kind of a, you know, two, three-quarter surge that may lead to a shorter period of digestion afterwards.

Great. Very helpful. And then, Greg, longer-term question. Implicit in your new target model is a vision for your share of AAT to grow from about 25% to 46%. So we'd love to hear kind of your high-level thoughts on what the key drivers are behind that.

right now uh in the uh you know our model our sort of 12 to 14 billion dollar tim model with us at six billion dollars that actually um is moderated from that 46 level just a little bit um and that reflects uh in that model we expect that the compute tam is going to continue to grow We're going to be gaining share in the compute space, but we're coming from a much lower share position. So I think we are, you know, like thinking about it from a long-term model perspective, we expect to gain share in compute. We expect the mobile market to probably get to maybe one and a half times the size that it is now, and we maintain the share that we have. auto and industrial probably the same kind of proportional gain in terms of the TAM size and we'd maintain. And then in memory, you know, it's going to have incremental growth through this midterm. And right now, We feel like, you know, if you look back a few years, there were multiple parts of the memory market where we were not even present. Now we feel like we are in most of the segments for most of the customers. And so we are in a position to sort of split the share and ride the trends in the markets. Does that help? Very helpful. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Timothy Arturi with UBS. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thanks a lot. Greg, I wanted to come at the last question from a different angle. So if I take your new model, and it seems if I take what you've already said for robotics, how much it'll grow, and I grow systems tests at a pretty good clip, product tests at a good clip, it seems to me like the semi-test share only gets back to the high 30s, which is really only where it was from 2022 to 2025. So it doesn't really seem to imply that much share gain. I mean, it does off of where it was in 2025 because it was sub-30, but it doesn't seem to imply very much share gain. from where it was in 2022 to 2024 so maybe you can provide a little more color like is that calculation wrong is the is the you know semi-test number assumed uh you know having share higher than that because it seems like it's not that much higher than it than it's been the past few years i i think the um in order to get to the numbers that you have

that you probably have slightly more aggressive growth expectations for the robotics and the product test group. So we're kind of thinking across this midterm that the proportion, sort of the 80-10-10 proportions are going to be roughly the same. And, you know, so... And by my math, we are in the low 40s for share in ATE. And remember that the IST stuff is in our revenue, but it's not in the ATE TAM. That's in a separate segment.

yeah okay all right um and then uh can you break either your um michelle can you break down the ssc tan in 2025 the 7.2 can you break it down between compute mobile auto and maybe also you've talked before about how large the you know vip tan is within compute can you give us a sense of uh you know how big that was in 20 you know 2025. so um in in 2025 the uh

The TAM broke down roughly, we think it's, and this is subject to us sort of totaling up the final numbers which will come in over the next couple of months from third party sources. But our expectation was that compute was in the neighborhood of $5 billion for the year. Mobility in about a billion. Auto industrial just under a billion. And service was in the $700 million range. For memory overall, we think that the TAM was just under 1.4 billion, and 1.2 of that was DRAM. The rest was Flash.

And, Greg, of the compute portion, how much is VIP? Sorry. I think it's just over 600. Okay, awesome. Thank you.

Thank you. We will move next with Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi Hosseini with SIG. Mehdi H the concentration is actually going to get broader now and more custom AC coming out. And would that enable you to increase market share by 50%? And I have a follow-up.

Sure. So, yeah, so in 2025, we think share was roughly 50% of VIP compute. When you look into the future, we expect that that share split is going to, the thing about this space is that no share is safe. We are challenging for sockets that we don't have. We're being challenged for sockets that we do have. And that's true for stuff that is in high volume right now and programs that have yet to ramp. the the thing that i i'm a little bit cautious in terms of trying to size the tam for uh asic programs that are not yet in volume because what tends to happen is that the hyperscalers will benchmark the performance of their own asics against what they can get commercially and they will only take their ASICs to full volume if they see an advantage in tokens per watt or what other metric they are trying to focus on. So I think long term, it's likely that we'll be able to maintain 50%. But I am expecting that this is going to be a really noisy number, especially at the quarter by quarter level. But even yearly, depending on when different ramps happen, It's going to swash the share around a fair amount.

That's fair. And then for the entire team, as we look at your $6 billion near-term revenue target, given your revised ATE market, it was only six, nine months ago that we were contemplating if your revenues would increased above a couple of billion, and now there's a new target. And what I wanted to figure out, what the question is, what is the sensitivity to that ATE and the $6 billion revenue target? Is that a baseline assumption? Is that kind of an average of worse than a best-case scenario? And any thoughts around how you came up with the ATE and the $6 billion revenue target will be very helpful. Thank you.

So, I think the, you know, first I'll say that it's a balanced number, that there are potential balloons and anchors around the R6 billion. Probably the most important uncertainty is the speed at which the market grows. Like, how long does it take to get to this kind of a TAM size? And I say that because, you know, like, I've been in this business for a long time and I've been in situations where we look into the future and we see, you know, like up into the right kind of TAM forecasts and then external conditions change things. So I think it's one of the reasons that we wanted to look at an evergreen model is because we can't predict the external factors that are going to drive the TAM. So that's probably the biggest X factor in all of this. The next is our share in the ATE market, and that is really related to the compute space. We believe we're positioned to gain share in the compute space on an incremental basis, that it will take time, but we think that we have a good product and good position with the customers in this space to be able to increase ourselves from a relatively low position. The next part of this and the thing that gives me a fair amount of confidence around our $6 billion number is the other stuff beyond the core ATE, the compute space, if you will. I think the mobile space, we are going to ride whatever the TAM does. And I think that TAM is going to recover on the basis of complexity. We are in a position to gain share in the industrial and automotive space because of the acquisition of the power group that we got from Infineon last year to cover the wide band gap power market. And our IST business has a much broader customer base to help drive healthy revenue growth through this midterm. And then we have this extra large customer in the robotics space on top of the core business that we think is a catalyst for growth there. So, you know, I think we have a balanced plan going on in the future, and I think that helps to de-risk that number.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Krish Sankar with TD Cowen. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi, thanks for taking my question and congrats on the great results and guidance. I know you can't get into specifics. I'm just kind of curious on the GPU test side, which is a growth opportunity for you. What is the realistic market share expectation for this year and how high can that go over the next few years or so? And can that parlay into basic market share too? And then I had a quick follow-up.

Okay, so let me give you sort of a quick update of where we are in this project. So we're making great project progress, and we expect to achieve production qualification. The qual process for these things is very complex. It's very extensive, and the exact date for a release to production is tough to pin down, but we're really confident of our success here. Once we achieve qualification, I believe we'll incrementally gain share for these devices over the course of a couple of years. um i just want to be clear that our guidance for q1 does not include any merchant gpu revenue we see that as more of a factor in the second half of 2026. um we believe it would be uh you know a material amount of revenue for us but it would not be a heck of a lot of share inside of the account where we want so you know single digit kind of share numbers to start And then over time, what we've seen in other situations where we have a competitive dual source situation is that we eventually get to a situation where the vendors are balanced between 30% and 70% share. And that is not saying that, like, our share top is 30%, but we'll take time to get up to that 30%, and then we'll essentially be going head-to-head on a competitive basis, around who gets how much.

Got it. Thanks for that, Greg. Very helpful. And then just a quick follow-up. I understand you don't want to give a full year outlook and first half rated for this year. Is it because of underrated film? I'm just curious because given that mobile is less, I would expect no seasonality anymore. So I'm just curious, why do you think it's still first half rated besides visibility and underrated film?

So, I'll give Michelle a chance to comment. I would say that part of it is because major programs that we're a part of are first half loaded. And so, you know, the demand that we can map for the full year is definitely more concentrated in the first half than the second half. But there's also an element of we don't know about the second half, that there are a lot of irons in the fire that could result in second half growth, but we can't pin that down enough to sort of give a confident forecast for where the full year will be. I don't know, Michelle, do you want to add anything on there?

I think you summed it up well, Greg. I think the only other thing I would add is in comparison to previous years, coming into 26, we have really strong backlog, which is giving us better fidelity and insights into the first half.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Our next question comes from Jim Schneider with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Good morning. Thanks for taking my question. Just a bit of a clarification, if I could. And I may have missed it, so I apologize. But if you, as we think about 2026, can you maybe help give us a sense, given everything you said about the first half and two-quarter visibility and the potential unknowns in the back half, maybe give us any sense about how we should be thinking about the Q2 relative to Q1, rough numbers. I mean, it's flattish, something we should expect as a reasonable jumping-off point. on a sequential basis, and or can you help us on where you think roughly, even if it's a large range, we could land in terms of the ATE PAM in 2026?

Yeah, so from a Q2 perspective, we're not going to give a second quarter guide. I'm just going to go back to we have better visibility within the first half, and I would expect 26 to be the inverse of 2025 with roughly 60% of our sales in the first half. We'll give you an update when we get into Q2. Thank you, Jim.

So on the ATE TAM for 2026, what we talked about in our prepared remarks was robust growth from 2025. And the reason that we're using adjectives versus numbers is that it comes down to a really wide range, essentially based on the uncertainty in the second half. So, you know, like if you wanted to put a big wide range around it, it would be like 20% to 40% growth for the year, but we don't know where in that range it would land.

Understood. That is helpful. Thank you. And then maybe just as a follow-up, it was referred to before, and I think you talked about, I think to paraphrase, many ways to get to the target model, you know, assuming that not everything happens perfectly, even if the endpoint is uncertain. As you think about that model, is that, you know, what you think could be a mid-cycle model, you know, in a couple, three years' time, whereas, you know, that would kind of incorporate a lot of cyclical ups and downs once we get past this kind of period of very explosive growth? Thank you.

Yeah, so, you know, when we were doing a model that was, like, fixed to a particular year, we always had all of these caveats around, you know, sort of we're trying to average out the cycle, looking at long-term growth trends. And all of that was, in the end, not particularly helpful. So, what we decided to do was to give people an idea of sort of what Teradyne would look like at $6 billion. At $6 billion, we think that we need an ATE TAM between $12 and $14 billion to be at that kind of a revenue level. And then the rest of the business model sort of drops down from there in terms of our expectations of the investments we need to make and the kind of margin we'll get. So I do believe that the model is achievable over the next few years, but whether it's at the you know whether you interpret a few as a small number or a few as a larger number really depends on how quickly the atetam grows and that has to do with whether the current case of data center build out continues but kind of at this rate you know so the the numbers that uh you know that are out in terms of how much silicon is going into data centers are kind of mind-boggling. From 24 to 25, it's like 60% more silicon revenue in data centers. Looking out to 2026, it's way more than 100% year-on-year growth. So whether that can persist from 26 to 27, or if it moderates, that's the thing that's going to determine how fast it takes to get to that $6 billion.

Thank you.

Thank you. We will move next with Brian Chin with Stifel. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi there. Good morning. Thanks for letting us ask a few questions. Maybe to start with, Greg, I was wondering if you could outline maybe a few catalysts for GPU share gain. over the next few years in terms of Paradigm's platform differentiation, higher device power and complexity, and maybe the addition of new test insertions.

Yeah, so the addition of new test insertions I think is a catalyst for TAM growth more than a catalyst for share growth. You know, so as these new insertions come in, we will have an opportunity to compete for them. And the same thing is, you know, as the merchant GPU market has more specialized chiplets per device, I think there's more shots on goal, more higher quality requirements for the test at the chiplet level. So there's a bunch of things that I think are accelerating the compute TAM. Now, in terms of compute share, there are a number of things that I think our customers like about our product. The first and most obvious is that they believe that we have a more resilient supply chain that we're able to respond to demand with generally shorter lead times. And that's an important thing when their demands are somewhat unpredictable. The second is that it's actually a better tester. We have very good reliability in production circumstances. We have good uptime. The OSAPs like it a lot, so they are helping to advocate for that as a choice. And we also have a next generation of instruments that is in beta test now which will significantly increase the amount of power available to the devices and, very importantly, the amount of memory for the test programs and the test patterns that these devices are going to need. The last is that I think our tester has better capabilities to allow these devices to be tested in the same way that they're used in the server, in a mission mode. And that requires a pretty sophisticated, almost like building a server into the tester itself. So I think we have some advantages that allow us to achieve higher coverage, essentially moving defect detection as far to the left as possible.

Great. That's really helpful. I think in the prepared remarks, you mentioned a new HDD customer. Is that an example of your test platform outperforming their internal tester? I guess, how much growth do you expect from HDD tests in 26 and also what revenue base in 25? And then kind of last part of that, more broadly, Are there other historical instances of semiconductor logic and DRAM IDMs using captive test platforms? And are we at the point there where complexity and semi-test really compels those companies also to use external platforms?

Yeah, so in HDB, you're right that this is a case of commercial test replacing in-house test. Or I actually think that the right way to think about it is complementing internal test. I don't think that this is like a complete flip as much as a way for a customer to effectively build capacity. But we're really excited about the change because we've been working to try and achieve it for a number of years. From a revenue perspective, we don't break out the HDD versus other revenue inside of the ISP group, but I will tell you that our HDD revenue is going to double between 2025 and 2026. Now, sorry, a part B to your question, which is other captive in the rest of the semiconductor ATE space. So right now, there are really, there's one big player in SOC, and there's one big player in memory that have captive ATE strategies. I think, like, long-term, I think the memory one is probably more persistent. The SOC one, I think, is probably going to change over the next couple of years as there are a broader range of customers for Foundry that want commercial platforms.

Great. Thanks. Thanks, Greg.

Thank you. We will move next with Sameek Chatterjee with J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.

Your line is open. Thanks for taking my questions. Greg, maybe if I can just change gears here and ask you about the mobile SOC TAM. In your prepared remarks, I think you did say you're expecting it to be about one and a half times the current TAM in your target model. Is that sort of all driven by the volume tailwinds as well. And then you did mention new term there being sort of a capital efficiency of customers that may be making you a bit more cautious. If you can explain that as like what you're seeing on that front.

Sure. So yeah, the thing that we want to try and emphasize is that in like a $12 to $14 billion TAM model, we are not expecting the mobile TAM to get back to prior peak. That it's, you know, like a half-decent guess is somewhere like halfway between where it is now and the prior peak. And you're asking in terms of, like, what would drive that? I think that it is primarily around complexity, not units. smartphone units have been sort of hovering in a relatively narrow range. There's a potential that if there's a compelling new form factor or really compelling AI-based features that it would drive a higher refresh rate, but that certainly hasn't been the case for the last four or five years. So, we're modeling kind of relatively consistent unit volume, but increased complexity across the broad product line. Now, the reason that we are cautious about that, I think we're pretty certain that there's going to be a lot of complexity growth, and more complexity means more testers are required. However, there is a really large fleet of testers that are installed for mobile, and there are a lot of different parts across a number of different vendors that can use very similar tester configurations. And so by carefully arranging the use of that fleet, they can optimize the utilization on a year-round basis. And it can help to moderate the amount of additional capacity that they need to add. In the old days, like back in 2020, 2021, there was a smaller installed base and there were fewer SKUs that were being tested. More of them were being introduced and ramped very quickly. That was the kind of thing that really piled up the demand to drive much higher TAMs.

And maybe just on a follow-up, going back to the AI compute side, I mean, you did mention that the VIP ASICs sort of was not launched already in production. The volumes are a bit tough to quantify at this point. But in terms of broadening of the customer base, given it's a very concentrated sort of purchasing from a few customers right now, as you look out to the medium term, particularly in terms of your target earnings model, do you see a broadening out of the customer base? reduce when you get to that target model does that reduce the lumpiness and that in the business just given higher visibility from a broader set of customers thank you

Yeah, so in a $12 billion to $14 billion TAM, our expectation is that we would add additional logos in terms of VIP compute wins. But it's not like it's going to go from a very small number to dozens. It's more like four or five different programs. And what I expect to see, the steady state in this market, is that Teradyne and Adventest are going to be competing on a generational basis for new design wins. And those decisions are going to be made on the basis of the features of the tester, the reliability of the tester, more than sort of incumbency as the thing that drives the selection. Got it. Thank you.

Thank you. Our next question comes from David Dooley with Steelhead. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Thank you for taking my questions. I guess the first one is I think you mentioned three 10% customers. Could you talk about which segment they might be in or how large they might be? I know you probably don't want to give us the names, but if you could give us the names, that would be great as well.

So in the three 10% customers, as Michelle said, two of them were specifiers. One was a purchasing customer. The specifying customers, one was in the mobile space, one was in the compute space. And the purchasing customer does it all.

Okay. And relative size of, you know, how much above 10%? I guess I'm just trying to figure out customer concentrations.

Roughly 10. It's not substantially higher than that.

So each one around 10%. Is that what you just said? I'm sorry. Yes. Yes. Okay. All right. Final question, I guess, is, Greg, I think you kind of mentioned, you know, when you look at all the pieces for 2026, the overall TAM growth, I guess, is going to be around 30%. I'm guessing that the the SOC TAM goes faster than that, and the memory TAM goes slower than that in 2026. If you could just comment on, you know, roughly the growth in each piece. And then if you said you're going to gain share in 2026, and that means obviously you're going to grow faster than 30%, is that a fair assumption?

Oh, no. Yes, in a range between 20 and 40, you may arithmetically put that at the mean of 30. We are not trying to communicate that at all. We are trying to communicate that we don't have sufficient visibility into the second half to give a good TAM estimate for 2026. Your assumption around SOC growing faster and memory going slower I think is fair. I think that we are expecting that kind of a market where the compute TAM is already big and it's going to grow a lot. The memory TAM is going to grow more incrementally. that we believe that we are positioned for share gain. And that really depends to a certain extent around whether like which segments of the TAM grow the most. So even if we gain share in compute, Since our share position in compute is relatively lower, if the compute TAM grows a ton, then that could be dilutive to our overall share position, even though we're getting better in every segment that we serve. So that's the reason that I want to be cautious about that.

Thank you.

Thank you. And we have time for one more question. We will move next with Vidvati Shrotri with Evercore. Please go ahead. Your line is open.

Hi. Thanks for squeezing me in. The one clarification I had is, so the GPU merchant win, does that in any way dictate your second half versus first half dynamics? And then even in the new target model, are you assuming contributions from the GPU wins?

So, yes, a significant ramp associated with merchant GPU would have an impact in the second half. I'm not sure I caught the second part of your question.

Is that a part of your new target model as well?

Oh, yeah, yeah. So, and it's, but the thing I want to emphasize is, You know, as I said, the merchant, like share in merchant GPU is going to be an incremental gain over years. And so it is a part of that $6 billion model, but we don't assume a radically high share in the merchant GPU space.

Understood. And then the second question I had was, on the robotics, you have the large e-commerce program starting to ramp. So does that mean that, you know, is there a possibility that your revenues grow, like the robotics piece grows to higher than the break-even revenues that you have for that business?

We're aiming a break-even for robotics this year. In terms of the large e-commerce customer, we think that that revenue is going to triple-ish. between 2025 and 2026, and then grow substantially post-26 as the deployments go to a larger number of facilities. So that's a pretty good tailwind. And, you know, so I think we're looking to have that business at breakeven in 26 and then contributing positively beyond. Understood.

Thank you, Rainbush.

Thank you. And this concludes our Q&A session, as well as the Teradyne fourth quarter and full year 2025 earnings call and webcast. You may disconnect your line at this time. Have a wonderful day.