Lazard LTD.

Please stand by. We're about to begin. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Lizard's first quarter 2025 earnings conference call. This call is being recorded. Currently, all participants are in a listen-only mode. Following the remarks, we will conduct a -and-answer session. Instructions will be provided at that time. If anyone should require assistance during the call today, please press star key followed by zero on your telephone keypad. At this time, I will now turn the conference over to Alexander Degnan, Lizard's head of investor relations and treasury. Please go ahead, ma'am.

Thank you, Bill. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Lizard's earnings call for the first quarter of 2025. I'm Alexandra Degnan, head of investor relations and treasury. In addition to today's audio comments, we have posted our earnings release on our website. A replay of this call will also be available on our website later today. Before we begin, let me remind you that we may make forward-looking statements about our business and performance. There are important factors that could cause our actual results, the level of activity, performance, achievements, or other events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements, including but not limited to those factors discussed in the company's SEC filings, which you can access on our website. Lizard assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of these forward-looking statements and assumes no duty to update them. Today's discussion also includes certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe are meaningful when evaluating the company's performance. For reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures, to be comparable GAAP measures is provided in our earnings release and investor presentation. Joining our call today are Peter Orszag, Lizard's chief executive officer and chairman, and Mary Ann Zetsch, Lizard's chief financial officer. After our prepared remarks, Peter and Mary Ann will be joined by Evan Russo, chief executive officer of asset management, as they open up the call for questions. I'll now turn the call over to Peter. Thank

you, Allie, and thank you to everyone for joining our call. First quarter performance was solid, with results supported by a high degree of client engagement across the firm, along with our diversified business model. In financial advisory, our global market share of announced transactions increased year over year, as the momentum behind our long-term strategy continues to grow. Over the past 12 months, revenue associated with private capital was over 40% of total financial advisory revenue, just above our prior peak in 2021. This reflects strong market activity and our successful expansion of coverage in this area. In asset management, we saw substantial improvements in our flows for the first quarter compared to last year. Inflows were driven by large wins in our strategic focus areas, including our quantitative platform, Japanese equities, global equities, and international quality. Even with increased growth inflows during the quarter, our one but not yet funded mandates are even higher than at the beginning of the year, as sales and distribution efforts have successfully generated new business. During the quarter, we continued to execute our Lizard 2030 long-term strategy. We announced a strategic alliance with Arimi Capital Management, expanding Lizard's connectivity to private capital across Europe. This partnership creates opportunities across both of our businesses by providing clients access to flexible financing solutions and unique investment strategies. We also announced our expansion in the Middle East, opening a financial advisory office in Abu Dhabi. This office builds on our successful business in Saudi Arabia and complements our presence in Dubai. Finally, last month, we launched our first active ETF product set in the U.S. The introduction of our Japanese equity, equity megatrend, and next-gen technologies ETFs further expands our capability to meet investor preferences and demands. Looking ahead, while there is substantial unpredictability due to shifting trade policies, corporate balance sheets remain strong and the preconditions for ongoing economic growth and MAA activity are present. This includes underlying tailwinds for financial advisory activity with client opportunity driven by technology and generative AI, the biotech revolution, ongoing expansion in energy demand, and efforts to de-risk and reposition supply chains. Over the past month, and even with the overhang of heightened uncertainty, our backlog in financial advisory has continued to grow, driven by activity in Europe and in restructuring, along with continued growth in M&A and financing and capital solutions. Whether this pattern continues and how this backlog evolves in the future will depend in part on greater certainty regarding tariffs. Overall, client engagement across both of our businesses remains robust. Let me now turn the call over to Maryann to discuss our financial results.

Thank you, Peter. Firmwide adjusted net revenue was $643 million for the first quarter. Financial advisory adjusted net revenue was $370 million for the first quarter of 2025, which is 17% lower than the prior year's record first quarter revenue. Our global M&A expertise and our expanded connectivity to private capital are reflected in first quarter results. Recently announced transactions include Malancrot Pharmaceutical's $6.7 billion combination with Endo Pharmaceuticals, Sun Community's $5.7 billion sale of Safe Harbor marinas to Blackstone infrastructure, Just Eat Takeaway.com's 4.1 billion euro recommended public offer by process, and Assura's $2.1 billion recommended cash offer from KKR and Stonepeak. Completed transactions include CD&R's 16 billion euro acquisition of a controlling 50% stake in Sanofi's consumer health unit, Bopella, Tactive Evergreen's $6.7 billion acquisition by Novolex, a portfolio company of Apollo, Siete Foods' $1.2 billion acquisition by PepsiCo, and Sock Gen's 1.1 billion euro sale of its professional equipment financing business to BPCE. In addition, large corporate restructuring assignments include company roles with Altis France and GFEE, while creditor and related party roles include EmployBridge and Oregon Tool. We also advised on several private capital markets assignments, including advising Grosvenor on its sale of 25% of a portfolio of properties valued at $1.2 billion to Norges Bank, and Vannecar Partners and Crestview Partners on continuation funds led by investments from Oxfel, KKR, and Apollo's S3, respectively. Turning to asset management, adjusted net revenue was $264 million for the first quarter of 2025, a decrease of 4% from the prior year quarter. Our revenues reflected management fees of $256 million for the first quarter, down 1% from the prior quarter. Incentive fees totaled $9 million and were driven by strong performance in our credit fixed income and Japanese equities strategies. As of March 31st, we reported AUM of $227 billion, up slightly compared to year end and demonstrating improvements in inflows and outflows. During the quarter, we had market appreciation of $800 million, foreign exchange appreciation of $3.9 billion, and net outflows of $3.7 billion. Average AUM for the first quarter was $231 billion, 1% lower than the prior quarter. Recently, one new business for asset management includes an Asian sovereign wealth fund investing $400 million into global equity advantage, a Swiss client funding $390 million into emerging markets equity advantage and China equity advantage, a U.S. public pension funding $300 million into international quality growth, and a Japanese financial intermediary investing $175 million into global equity advantage. Now turning to firm-wide expenses, our adjusted compensation expense was $421 million for the first quarter of 2025, resulting in a compensation ratio of .5% compared to 66% one year ago. Our adjusted non-compensation expense was $148 million for the first quarter of 2025, resulting in a non-compensation ratio of 23%. Shifting to taxes, our adjusted effective tax rate for the first quarter was negative 13.9%, due to a discrete benefit related to stock compensation awards that vested during the quarter. We currently expect our effective tax rate for the full year 2025 to be in the high 20% range. Turning to capital allocation, in the first quarter of 2025, we returned $175 million to shareholders, including a quarterly dividend of $45 million, $36 million in repurchases of common stock, and $94 million in satisfaction of employee tax obligations. In addition, yesterday we declared a quarterly dividend of $0.50 per share. Now I'll turn the call back to Peter. Thank

you, Mary Ann. The current environment is highly uncertain, but Lazard has a long history of combining business insights with geopolitical context, which is increasingly valuable to our clients. Our geopolitical advisory group is in high demand across both of our businesses. We also recently announced the addition of Patrick McHenry as senior advisor. Patrick's policy expertise as a congressman, including as chair of the House Financial Services Committee, further enhances our advisory capabilities. In financial advisory, we provide innovative ways to address a wide array of client needs, supported by investments we've made to expand and integrate our restructuring and liability management, private capital advisory, and capital solutions groups. With nearly two centuries of operating in Europe, our strong presence, deep relationships, and respected expertise provide us with a competitive advantage in serving those markets. We continue to actively recruit to increase our client coverage. Bakers are attracted to our global reputation and brand, and we achieved our objective to expand our financial advisory MD ranks with 11 net additions over the past 12 months. We also have several senior MDs joining our health care, financial sponsors, restructuring, and debt advisory groups in the upcoming months. In asset management, during times of market volatility, investors historically look to active asset management for solutions. Demand for investment products outside of the United States may also expand as investors reevaluate overweight allocations to the U.S. for more balanced global exposure. With our core capabilities in global, international, and emerging market strategies, this shift could benefit our platform. In addition, we plan to continue expanding our ETF offerings, creating future opportunities for growth over time. Our first quarter performance demonstrates continued progress against our long-term strategy and our focus on delivering excellence as a trusted advisor for our clients at all times. I'd also like to take a moment to welcome Peter Harrison to our board of directors, which we announced last month. And I'd like to thank Jane Mandela for her service. Jane served three terms as a board director and has been instrumental in guiding and strengthening LASARD for close to a decade. Now we'll open the call to questions.

Thank you very much, Mr. Orszag. Ladies and gentlemen, at this time, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star two. So others can hear your questions clearly. We ask that you pick up your handset for best sound quality. We'll go first this morning to Mike Brown of Wells Fargo Securities. Morning. Great. Good morning. And thanks for taking my questions. So, Peter, positive commentary on the backlog. That's great to hear. It sounds like it's growing in broad days. Maybe just within the backlog, are you seeing a higher level than normal of M&A deals dropping out? So despite seeing the growth underneath the surface, is there some M&A deals that are actually dropping? And then do you see risk of that picking up at all? Thank you.

Sure. So look, in any normal environment, you see some deals get pushed out, some deals get accelerated, deals go sideways. I wouldn't say that we've seen an elevated level of that, but it, you know, there is often it bounces around from quarter to quarter. And I note, as I pointed out, that even within M&A, our backlog continues to expand. I also want to immediately emphasize that the degree to which that will continue is very path dependent and depends on what happens during this 90-day window to hopefully resolve the uncertainty over the tariff regime in particular. So that's point one. Point two is that we have a very diversified business model at this point across M&A, -M&A, across public companies, private companies, across the U.S. and Europe. And that ability to, or that odd set of capabilities and geographic diversification means that we have the ability to skate to where opportunities are with our clients in a rapidly evolving environment. So point one is the M&A market is continuing, but will be subject to challenges if the tariff regime is not clarified over during this 90-day window. And point B is we have a lot of products and strategies and services that we offer to our advisory clients beyond M&A.

Yeah, great, great. Well said. Maybe if I just, as a follow-up, just kind of narrowing in on QQ here, it's off to a good start based on what we can see in the public data. And the deals that are set to close in the quarter would actually point to a pretty good second quarter here. Based on the visibility you have, how do you think the second quarter can compare to this first quarter? Can it be up sequentially and could it also even be up year over year? Thank you.

I would say that it is extremely challenging at this point in the quarter to be giving a definitive view about where a specific quarter is landing. But I'd go back to despite the uncertainty, we continue to see a lot of engagement of clients and a lot of activity. I'm just not going to give you a definitive answer to that question because even in normal times at this point in the quarter, there's still a lot of uncertainty around it. And we're not in normal times.

Understood. Thank you for taking my questions. Thank you. We'll go next now to James Yarrow with Goldman Sachs.

Good morning and thanks for taking my questions. Just firstly on the sponsor M&A dynamic, I think 2025 was supposed to be a much healthier sponsor capital return backdrop across both M&A and IPOs. To what extent are you seeing sponsor M&A slowdown as a result of the macro backdrop and tariffs? And then what does this mean for the growth of secondaries for this year?

So look, within sponsors, I think there are multiple countervailing forces. On the one hand, private equity is built to trade. So there is an incentive. There is a kind of underlying driver deal activity. And in addition, as you know, many portfolio companies have now been held for longer than their private equity owners would normally hold portfolio companies. That also pushes towards more deal activity. On the other hand, there are three factors currently that are going in the other direction. The first is that the heightened uncertainty around tariffs can affect how one views a portfolio company, especially if it's affected by having to reconfigure its supply chain or pay significantly higher costs for its inputs or face lower consumer demand for its products if the tariffs are passed along to the consumer. So that's factor one. Factor two is that even though these are private companies, the comparables are often public companies in terms of how they're valued. And whenever there's a very sharp movement in market valuation, you can temporarily have a bid-ask spread between buyer and seller. And so the market gyrations that we've been experiencing would play to that second factor. And then the third one is that many private equity transactions are backed by either the leveraged loan market or the high-yield market, and those are both disrupted right now. So those are the sort of countervailing forces. That push and pull will vary across sponsors. It will vary across the type of portfolio company. And so what I would say is all three of those kind of countervailing forces will dissipate if there is clarity or more clarity provided over the tariff regime during this 90-day window. So there's a good example of how the policy world is interacting in a quite direct way with that type of activity. And then your second point, look, we see underlying growth in the secondaries market period because the penetration rate of secondaries in the marketplace still has room to grow in any market environment. But layered on top of that, you do have a cyclical force that if more portfolio companies are held for longer and LPs want liquidity, you'll get an additional accelerate to secondaries activity from that tendency also. But the important point on secondaries is while that may cause some acceleration this year, we see continued growth in the secondaries market regardless.

Okay, that's very clear. Thank you. Maybe just could you speak a little bit to the dynamics within restructuring? Could you talk about how trends have evolved in terms of separately liability management versus Chapter 11 and bankruptcy and then the outlook for both these components? And then finally, maybe just how quickly could Chapter 11 potentially pick up if we were to see a weaker macro backdrop?

Sure. So I do think this is an important change in the marketplace. We have retooled our group to handle both restructuring through Chapter 11 and liability management mandates and also serve both debtors and creditors more evenly. And when you look at the mix of our revenue mix within that group, it is a much more diversified debtor-creditor mix. And then specifically on your question, as private capital has become more dominant, both private equity and private credit, the tendency to do liability management as opposed to a formal Chapter 11 process has increased. And so we would anticipate that that will continue because the role of private capital is more dominant today than it was a decade or two ago. That is not to say there won't be formal Chapter 11 processes for some firms, but we do think the mix of business will continue to be disproportionately in the liability management camp.

That's very clear. Thanks a lot.

Thank you. The next now to Ben Rubin with UBS. Hi. Good morning.

Thank you for taking my questions. I first wanted to start on the comp ratio. So 65.5 percent, slightly below the last year's accrual. And I know your goal is to get to 60 percent or below, and maybe the hope was to maybe get there this year. So I'm just curious, what would you need to see in terms of the M&A environment, the deal backdrop, such that you'd be more comfortable bringing down the accrual rate? And then also, if you can give us any type of indication on whether or not the 65.5 assumes improvement in the fee revenues throughout the year, and if so, what type of magnitude? Thank you.

I'll start and then Mary Ann will come in. Look, we were always really clear that the 60 percent target was dependent on market conditions. I think maybe to the annoyance of some of you on the phone, we kept putting in those caveats. That was done on purpose because we recognize that the outlook had some uncertainty surrounding it, and that operating leverage that is achievable depends on not only what we do, but also on the external environment. So I would just say we, again, put those caveats in, you know, if you look back at the previous transcripts, on purpose. And I'd say that events have underscored the wisdom of having done that. With regard to this year, we are going to have to see how this plays out. We are going to make every effort we have to continue to achieve some operating leverage and have the comp ratio come down, but it is very dependent on events beyond our control. And in particular, whether there is resolution during this pause period or not, because with the heightened uncertainty that currently exists, you're in one scenario, and if that uncertainty were resolved pretty quickly, you're in a different scenario. And so there's just no way to give more assurance when the world is bifurcated to that degree. Yeah,

I guess the way I might think about it is, you know, we're, as Peter said, our backlog is growing, but it's at a much more modest pace than what we expected when we came into the year and when we were talking about the 60 percent ratio. So, you know, I would think about it that if our revenue is relatively stable, then 65.5 is kind of our best guess for the year at this point. It could, you know, it could change as the year goes on, as it always does. But that's how I would think about it.

Great. Thank you. I wanted to shift gears maybe to asset management. Peter, you mentioned previously that, you know, you were entering the year with, you know, 2025 could be an inflection for your asset management business, much like 2024 was for financial advisory, with maybe the potential goal of hitting your net zero flows. And you've been active, obviously, as you mentioned in your prepared remarks about launching active ETFs in the U.S. and also the general shift of investor interest going beyond the U.S. should benefit your global strategies. So just curious, how do you feel about that net flow target today? And then also maybe if you could provide us a mark to market on how the flow picture is looking for April, that would be great. Thank you.

So what I would say is two things. First, if you look at the first quarter, net outflows were significantly lower than last year. And that occurred despite the fact that our one but not funded mandates increased. So I think there had been some speculation or commentary that we might have been eating into that one but not yet funded mandate quantum. And that's it's been the opposite. It's gone. It's it's risen. And I know coming back to the geographic diversification that the majority of that one but not funded mandate comes from investors in Europe in particular. And so that shows the benefits of the diversification. And I'll let Evan give an update on or any additional color, including anything you want to say about April.

Sure. Yeah. So clearly, we've been trending better than last year, as we had expected coming into this year. And we talked about the more balanced flow picture coming into the year based on several factors. One was the strong foundation, as you mentioned, the one but not funded sort of that pipeline that we started with this year. And as Peter mentioned, the elevated pipeline that we started this year with is not only not declined, but it's actually been growing steadily a little bit over the course of the first quarter, which continues to give us confidence. Also, the investments that we've made across our business, both on the investment side, of course, on distribution changes we've made and organizational changes that we've made across the platform over the past year. And then importantly, it really was based on the performance that we've had in many of the products that we expected to be interesting focused products for the market this year. The strong performance that we had was going to give us a lot of confidence. And then finally, it was the new vectors of growth, as you mentioned, ETFs and others, which will play out and help us out over time. So all of that was the reason we expected there to be a more balanced picture of flows this year. And we're seeing all that play out. I think it's a little bit of a continuation of that trend into Q2. You know, it's going to be lumpy month to month as it always is. But we're continuing to see a more balanced picture. And given the fact that we remain at the higher elevated one, but not funded, and continuing to have new wins come in this quarter in both quant and Japanese equities, international global, all those strategies that are, you know, make sense for the market today and are doing really, really well. We'd expect that to continue. So I think it's generally the continuation of the positive trend and the expectations we came in at the beginning of the year.

Great. Thank you for taking my questions. Thank you. We go next now to Ryan Kinney with Morgan Stanley.

Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. So follow up on the comp ratio. Understand there's a lot of uncertainty on the revenue side, but is there any framework we should think about in terms of comp dollar range? Is there a floor on comp dollars that we should think about in the scenario where maybe more deals start getting pushed out?

Yeah, so I'll take that one, Ryan. The largest two components of our fixed compensation are salaries and amortization. And I would expect both of those to be up kind of in the mid single digits range year over year. And I think you have that data from our prior disclosure. So if you want to, you know, kind of model the floor, I would think about those components. And salaries, you know, we have every year there's, you know, people are promoted and we have, you know, cuts of living adjustments, et cetera. And then on the amortization side, even though we brought our deferral rate down last year, we still had a higher deferral rate than we did in 2021, which is the year that rolls off this year. And so we do see that slight uptick in amortization as well. So that's how I would think about the fixed pieces, which sort of form your floor on the comp ratio.

All right, thanks. That's helpful. And then on the restructuring backlog growing, any sense on how quickly conversations can turn into mandates and then how quickly that can hit the P&L? Is that more of a 2025 pickup story or more of a 2026 story?

I would say that one feature restructuring mandates, especially in the liability management category, is that they can translate into revenue faster than many M&A deals. But we also have a mix of other -M&A businesses, Lizard Capital Solutions, PCA, et cetera, that can translate from, you know, mandate award to actual revenue faster than many M&A deals also. So it's not just restructuring that has a different time profile.

Thank you. Thank you. We're going to move on to Devin Ryan of Citizens. Hey, this is Alex Jenkins, still on there for Devin. Appreciate you guys taking my question. I guess just to follow up on the asset management side, that $10 billion asset management mandate that you highlighted last quarter, can you speak to whether any of that's been funded to date and just the timeline for full deployment? And specifically, are there any challenges or opportunities in executing this mandate that you would like to highlight today? Thank you.

Well, again, and I'll let Evan elaborate, that that figure was the one but not yet funded mandates overall. And as we have noted before, quantum in that category has actually gone up, not down. So there's always things that come, you know, they go ahead and get funded, but then there are new mandates that come in. And on net, it's increased, not declined, which is what I think there has been perhaps some confusion about. But it's risen. And I don't know, Evan, if you wanted to add anything. Yeah, I would say, Alex, it's not one mandate. It's

a series. It's sort of the backlog of things that we were told we want to mandate, but it just hasn't funded yet. So it's just a question of timing until that they decide to actually deploy the capital. But they've chosen us to be their provider for the asset management services. And so it's a whole series of things across lots and lots of different products. And, you know, we're constantly rolling some of those things in. They're constantly funding. But as Peter and I mentioned, it's actually grown over the first quarter slightly. So it's starting at a very high elevated level relative to where we are historically at the beginning of the year. We were at a higher and elevated level and that's only continued to grow. But it's a mix of lots of different strategies with several lots of different clients. We expect, you know, a lot of that to start to hit both in the second quarter, probably into the third quarter of this year. But it's constantly being replenished. And so it's a question of how fast that gets. You know, we continue to win new mandates in this environment. Those things, you know, sometimes can move around quarter to quarter because if there's volatility and institutions may decide, let's not invest, let's not put the capital to work for a new mandate in a period of high volatility. They may wait for a more stable environment so that can move things out for a few weeks or a month based on their original timing. But those things are, you know, very, very highly likely and almost certainly going to fund over the next 12 to 15 months or so.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you for that clarification. I appreciate it. I guess just a quick follow up on capital and growth. You know, you've continued to bolster the platform, your announced expansion plans in Europe. I guess just how are you prioritizing capital allocation between organic growth, strategic partnerships and just shareholder returns? And maybe can you speak to anything in terms of investments or acquisitions in the pipeline to support the 2030 strategic plan? Thank you.

Sure. So look, we I think we've been clear about our capital allocation priorities, which is, you know, after interest and dividends to buy back shares to offset part or all of our deferred compensation. And then with regard to that free cash flow over and above those priorities, we are considering a variety of inorganic options, but we're going to be very judicious with regard to making sure that the match is right, that shareholder value is enhanced and that it fits our strategic priorities. So we are we remain in active dialogue on lots of inorganic options disproportionately on the asset management side of the business. But we are going to be very disciplined about preserving capital for its highest and best use and to protect our, you know, to make sure that whatever we do is enhancing shareholder value.

OK, thank you very much. Thank you. We go next now to Brendan O'Brien of Wolf Research. Good morning and thanks for taking my questions. I guess to start, I just wanted to touch on Europe. You know, I've been those we've been hearing a lot more positivity on the backdrop in the region relative to the U.S. of late. So I just want to get a sense as to how conversations in Europe compare to those in the U.S. And also, Peter, you were quite you were constructive on cross-border activity, potentially improving if we were to see more protectionist regime in the U.S. But we've also seen some governments be fairly aggressive in discouraging U.S. investment in response to more significant tariffs that were implemented. So I just wanted to get a sense as to how your outlook there has changed at all as well.

Sure. So, I mean, as I mentioned, our backlog in Europe continues to expand disproportionately to the United States. I think it's one of the benefits of this diversification and our long, you know, our long history in Europe and the local roots that we have there. With regard to the cross-border activity, I mean, first, I think there is there are two things that I would note. One is that cross-border activity doesn't necessarily mean going directly into the United States. It can also mean taking a new look at entities that are in lower tariff regimes. And there was an announcement this morning involving a major technology firm announcing some relocation of where its production will occur as an example. And that is one of the phenomenon that we could see where it's not just interest in locating inside the tariff wall of the United States, but rather relocating to another country that has a lower tariff with the United States. We'll have to see. But just to point that out, I would note there is the second thing I note is there's also increased interest in Europe-Europe transactions. So things that, you know, don't touch the United States. So our deep local roots, maybe the way I would put it is our deep local roots in Europe are a benefit, not just because if European firms want to locate inside the U.S. tariff wall, that's an advantage, but rather because by being close to the European clients that we are, whatever they want to do, whether it's Europe-Europe or -U.S. transactions, we can be there for them in a way that reflects our long history with many of these clients.

That's a hopeful color. And I guess for my follow-up, you alluded to this a bit in answer to a prior question, but I was just hoping you can give a bit more color on what you're seeing in terms of credit availability at the moment and specifically whether you believe that growth in private credit will result in financing being more readily available in a down cycle relative to what we've seen in the past.

Yeah, it's a great question. One of the reasons why we have built out a wide array of different ways of serving our clients is precisely because the world is evolving. And the growth of private credit in particular is something that is different today than it was a decade ago. So our Lazard Capital Solutions Group is extremely active in helping corporates figure out innovative financing solutions. And that demand for that goes up as the leveraged loan market and the high-yield market become more challenging, just naturally. I mean, it's always present as a competitive force, but it becomes yet more attractive when the other sources of financing are more challenging. So this is one area in which we are very, very active and have deployed our banking teams across the globe to help clients explore innovative financing solutions. And we're very pleased to have expanded in this area and be able to help our clients with this new vector. So how much of an offset it is, we'll have to see. I think the more important point is, as I said before, I would expect that the challenges in the high-yield market and the leveraged loan market will dissipate if there is more certainty provided to the tariff regime and now that there's a little bit more certainty regarding the administration's approach to the Federal Reserve. So I wouldn't just take it as given that the high-yield market and the leveraged loan market remain in their current state for the foreseeable future. It's very dependent on what governments across the globe do.

Great. Thank you for taking my questions. Thank you. And we'll take a follow-up question now from Mike Brown at Wells Fargo. Great. Thanks for taking my follow-up. I just wanted to ask on the fee rate. It kicked up nicely here in the first quarter. And just in light of that, how should we think about

the

full-year fee rate guide? Is the 1Q the right level to consider for the next couple of quarters? Is that the right jumping-off point? Or does the mixed shift from the mandates that are set to fund actually start to bring the fee rate down as those flow in? Thank you.

Hey, Mike. It's Evan. I'll take this one. I mean, yeah, the average fee rate for the quarter was up, obviously increased from Q1 and versus last year as well. As you mentioned, it's due to the business mix, as we've discussed in past quarters. The last couple of quarters, we had a couple of larger outflows that were in lower fee mandates, that were larger mandates, which helped the mix this quarter. Also, some of the new flows we had this quarter into some of the global, yeah, Japan and others came in at higher fees. And I'd say, look, the pipeline that we keep talking about, the one but not funded, is a mix of products and some of the larger mandates. So depending on the timing of when those things come in, you could have some movement in the next couple of quarters, could have a smaller impact. But overall, you know, fee rate stability, which what we've seen over the last several quarters, has been a positive story for us across the platform. And the newer products and newer vehicles that, you know, from a strategic planning perspective that we've been putting in there, should continue to support this over time. As to the jumping off point, because of some of that movement and some of the, you know, the idiosyncratic timing of some of the flows, I would say, you know, probably better to assume the average of 2024 is probably where we average for 2025 as a jumping off point. But it's going to move around a little bit quarter to quarter as it has. And, you know, so far, it's been a positive story in Q1.

Okay, great. Thanks, Evan. Thank you. And ladies and gentlemen, that is our last question for this morning. So that will bring us to the conclusion of today's conference call. Ms. Dorsak, I'd like to turn things back to you for any closing comments.

Yes, thank you very much. I would just close by saying it is clear that we are in a period of massively heightened uncertainty. But it's two things about Wizzard make it a moment in which our clients seek out our advice disproportionately. The first is that we have always had in our DNA this ability to combine business and financial decision making with insight into what governments are doing. That skill set is more important than ever because it is, I think, increasingly obvious to everyone that you can't make a decision just within the four corners of the Excel spreadsheet. You need to take into account the policy and government backdrop to that. And that is a core competency of Wizzard. And the second is that our diversified business model, both geographically and with regard to what products and services and other ways of helping clients we're able to offer, tends to shine in moments like this because it allows us to skate to where the client needs are very quickly. And so we all hope that uncertainty is resolved sooner rather than later. But Wizzard's business model is resilient to all the various scenarios that we may be playing through in the coming months and quarters. Thank you very much for joining us.

Thank you, Mr. Orszag. Again, ladies and gentlemen, that will conclude today's Wizzard's first quarter 2025 earnings conference call. Again, thanks so much for joining us, everyone, and we wish you all a great day. Goodbye.