Hello, everyone, and a warm welcome to the Accelleron Half-Year Results 2026 Investor, Analyst and Media Webcast. Thank you very much for joining us today.

Daniel Bischofberger and Adrian Grossenbacher will walk you through Accelleron's performance in the first 6 months of 2026, provide a detailed financial review, and share the updated outlook for the full year. Before we begin, please take a note of the important notices and safe harbor statement.

This presentation contains forward-looking statements based on current expectations and assumptions. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties.

All figures presented today are in U.S. dollars and prepared in accordance with U.S.

GAAP. Definitions of non-U.S.

GAAP financial measures are available on Accelleron's Investor Relations website. [Operator Instructions] I will now hand over to our CEO, Daniel Bischofberger.

Thank you, Michael, and good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining. As usual, I'm with Adrian, our CFO, and here is our agenda.

I will start with the key highlights from the first half of '26. Adrian will then take over for the financial review.

I will return with an update on the marine and energy markets, also talking about our investment priorities and the outlook for the remainder of '26. And finally, we will conclude with the Q&A session.

So I would say, let's begin with the highlights. So Accelleron delivered another strong set of half-year results, building on the momentum of '25.

Revenues reached USD 737 million, an increase of more than 21% year-over-year and slightly above 17% organically. Marine new builds and data centers continue to underpin growth.

Marine developed well, and we have not experienced any negative impact from the conflict in the Middle East to date. High ship utilization continued to support service demand.

Growth in energy exceeded our expectations, driven by strong service demand in U.S. gas compression applications and also high turbocharger deliveries for gas prime power applications, mainly for the U.S.

data centers. Operational EBITA increased more than 22% to USD 190 million.

The operational EBITA margin rose by 20 basis points to 25.7%, and net income increased by close to 32% to USD 151 million. Free cash flow conversion stood at 58% compared with 70% in the first half of '25.

This mainly reflects the high investments we are making to support future growth in marine and energy. Let us look at the main growth drivers in more detail.

The product business grew by around 30% year-on-year, while the service business grew by around 15%. In the product business, the strongest growth contribution came from gas prime power demand related to the U.S.

data centers and from merchant marine new build activity in Asia. Data center-related revenues increased from around 5% of Group revenues in the first half of '25 to slightly below 9% in the first half of '26.

This is a meaningful increase, but the absolute contribution remains limited in relation to total Group revenues. Service business growth benefited from remanufacturing work in U.S.

gas compression as well as service agreements, regular maintenance, and upgrade activities in the merchant marine segment. This slide highlights 4 developments from the first half.

First, prime power gained further momentum. Turbocharger deliveries for data center prime power more than doubled to around 5 gigawatts, up from less than 2 gigawatts in the first half of '25.

Backup power applications remained stable at around 3 gigawatts. This is a consequence of our OEM engine customers allocating more of their constrained capacity through the production of prime power gas engines.

Prioritizing prime power applications benefits us. Unlike diesel-fired backup generators, which typically run only a few hours per year, gas engines used for prime power operate a few thousand hours a year.

As a result, they will generate substantial service demand for our turbochargers in the future. Let me clarify a few technical misconceptions I've seen in reports about Accelleron's power solutions for U.S.

data centers. When we talk about prime power, we are referring to internal combustion engines running predominantly on natural gas.

Internal combustion engines are also known as piston engines or reciprocating engines. So we are not referring to gas turbines.

Gas turbines do not need turbochargers and are a competing technology to gas engines. But it's important to know that gas turbine production is largely sold out until 2030 or even 2031.

And when we talk about backup power or emergency gensets, we mean internal combustion engines fueled by diesel. You might ask why data centers need 2 complete sets of engines on the same site, one powered by gas and the other one by diesel.

The reason is that environmental regulations typically limit diesel engines to only a few hundred operating hours per year. As a result, diesel engines without emission control systems are not suitable for prime power applications running thousands of hours a year.

Conversely, using gas engines for backup power is also difficult. The challenge with gas backup power is not the engine, it is on-site fuel storage.

For the same amount of energy, compressed natural gas requires several times the storage volume of diesel, while diesel can be stored and replenished much more easily in case of extended power grid blackouts. After this small excursion into prime and backup power, let's move on to the next highlight.

We signed a long-term service agreement with the City of Denton in Texas. The agreement supports fast-start power generation with a service model tailored to the requirements of peaking operations.

The third, A100-L/A200-L low-speed turbocharger series launched in 2009 and '13, respectively, surpassed 10,000 orders. The series is used across major merchant vessel segments.

It covers an installed power base of around 110 gigawatts, equivalent to the installed power of around 100 nuclear power plants of the size of Leibstadt, the largest nuclear power plant in Switzerland. The superior performance and reliability of our A100/200-L series are one of the reasons for our strong market share of more than 50% in the low-speed business.

Finally, our next-generation ACCX300-L low-speed turbocharger platform entered the market. The new platform improves serviceability and operational flexibility.

Its cartridge concept allows major service events to be decoupled from dry dock schedules, giving operators more control over uptime and maintenance planning. First orders have been secured for more than 50 vessels corresponding to more than 60 turbochargers and over 600 megawatts of installed power.

With those remarks, I conclude the first section and hand over to Adrian for the financial review. Adrian, it's yours.

Thank you, Daniel. Let us now take a closer look at our half-year financials, starting as always with the Group performance.

Group revenues increased by USD 129 million or 21.3% to USD 737 million. Organic growth reached 17.2%, primarily driven by volume, which contributed close to 14 percentage points.

The remaining growth was attributable to direct pricing actions and indirect pricing effects from CHF, Swiss franc-denominated pricing and invoicing. Marine new builds and data center-related applications continue to support our growth trajectory.

As Daniel mentioned, data center-related revenues increased to slightly below 9% of total revenues. Operational EBITA increased by USD 35 million or 22.5% to USD 190 million.

The operational EBITA margin rose by 20 basis points to 25.7%. The faster growth of low-margin new business and additional costs along the value chain were more than offset by strong structural leverage as revenue growth continued to outpace SG&A growth, resulting in a further margin expansion.

In other words, the margin improvement came from SG&A absorption rather than gross margin expansion. Let us now look at the 2 reporting segments, starting with Medium & Low Speed.

Revenues in Medium & Low Speed increased by USD 70 million or 15.2% to USD 529 million. Organic growth was at 11.3%.

Growth was driven by strong merchant marine new build activities, namely in China. Service growth was supported by fuel efficiency upgrades, a growing number of vessels under full-cover service agreements, and continued high utilization in merchant marine and cruise.

Service activity for medium-speed energy applications also increased, supported by regular maintenance and reliability-driven investments at power plants. Fuel injection revenues developed in line with expectations.

In terms of operational EBITA, this increased by USD 19 million or 16.1% to USD 135 million. The operational EBITA margin increased by 20 basis points to 25.5%.

The mix effect from strong growth in the lower-margin product business was more than offset by aforementioned structural leverage. Let us move now to the High Speed segment.

High Speed delivered particularly strong growth in the first half, continuing its growth trajectory. Revenues increased by USD 60 million or 40.0% to USD 209 million.

Organic growth was at 35.5%. Revenues from turbochargers in gas-fired prime power applications for data centers in the U.S.

continued to grow, supported by capacity expansion at engine OEMs. As Daniel explained, revenue growth in diesel-fired backup power was constrained by OEMs' capacity allocation to prime power.

In gas compression, demand in North America remains strong. Investments in pipelines were supported by increasing domestic and export demand for natural gas.

Service revenue grew strongly, driven by sustained U.S. natural gas demand.

This supported continued momentum in turbocharger remanufacturing activities for gas compression applications. Service revenues from stationary power applications remained stable, while the installed base continued to grow.

Operational EBITA increased by USD 16 million or 41.6% to USD 55 million. The operational EBITA margin increased by 30 basis points to 26.2%.

Additional costs along the value chain were more than offset by strong structural leverage in High Speed. Let us now move through the bridge from operational EBITA to net income.

Starting on the left, operational EBITA amounted to USD 190 million. Moving to the right, one-off and non-operational items included the temporary unrealized foreign exchange gain of USD 1.7 million.

This resulted from the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against the Swiss franc and timing differences between payables and receivables.

Other non-operational items, pension costs, and M&A activities totaled up to USD 3 million. Acquisition-related amortization amounted to USD 1.7 million and was linked to OMT, OMC2, and True North Marine, the 3 acquisitions completed since the stock listing.

The effective income tax rate was 19.1% compared with 19.6% in the first half of 2025. The decrease mainly reflects the geographic profit mix and the higher share of earnings in lower tax jurisdictions.

Net income reached USD 151 million, an increase of 31.5% year-over-year. Let us go now to the free cash flow section.

Free cash flow reached USD 88 million, up from USD 81 million in the first half of 2025. Cash conversion stood at 58% compared with 70% in the prior year period.

Net working capital and other increased by USD 52 million. The change in net working capital and other was mainly due to an increase in volume-driven receivables, slightly higher DSO, and the normalization of the income tax accruals.

Trade payables and inventories grew broadly in line with volumes. Consequently, net cash provided by operating activities increased to USD 119 million.

Let's now move to the capital expenditure. This position increased by more than 40% to USD 31 million.

The increase reflects continued investments in manufacturing and R&D infrastructure upgrades, equipment renewal, and additional production capacity across the globe. These investments are intended to strengthen operational resilience and prepare the business to meet future customer demand.

With that, I'm handing back to Daniel for the market update and outlook.

Thank you, Adrian, for the detailed review of our strong half-year financial performance, I will now address the marine and energy markets, our capacity investments, and the outlook for the full year. Merchant marine new build markets remain favorable.

Ordering activity remains strong across the major vessel segments. Tankers are leading, supported by gas carriers, containerships, and bulk carriers.

'27 and '28 deliveries in tonnage terms are expected to reach record levels, supported by ongoing capacity expansion in China. So it's clear the majority of expansion will happen in China.

We don't really see a lot from Japan and Korea. Despite these capacity expansions, ship orders continue to outpace deliveries.

This is reflected in the steadily growing orderbook measured in millions of compensated gross tons, in short, CGT, as shown by the light purple area in the top right chart for 2026. Orderbook forward cover has risen to more than 4 years, as illustrated by the blue line in the top right chart or put differently, a ship ordered today would in average be delivered in 2030 compared with a typical lead time of 2 to 3 years under normal market conditions.

This reflects a substantial backlog relative to current shipyard output and supports long-term utilization of yards. At the same time, annual deliveries of 4% to 5% of world active fleet remain reasonable.

Please refer to the right bottom chart. The current delivery capacity implies a fleet renewal period of around 20 to 25 years despite the recent acceleration in shipbuilding activity.

Energy momentum also remains strong with sustained demand for prime power, backup power, and gas compression applications in the U.S. Power grid constraints and gas availability are driving demand for gas-fired prime power applications at U.S.

data centers. Given the long lead times for grid connections and the political pressure to avoid passing the cost of new power generation capacity and grid expansion on to utilities and ultimately, residential customers in the U.S., BYOP or Be Your Own Power is increasingly becoming the norm for U.S.

data center operators. As mentioned before, our backup power remained broadly flat year-over-year because OEM capacity was allocated to prime power applications.

Increasing manufacturing capacity and order backlogs at engine OEMs support future growth for prime power, backup power, and gas compression applications. The growing prime power installed base should also create service opportunities over time.

We expect the main service effect to materialize with a lag of approximately 3 to 5 years after the power plants become operational, and that's depending on their operating regimes. In gas compression, growing domestic and export demand for U.S.

natural gas supports investments in gas infrastructure. Pipeline expansion and rising throughput requirements continue to drive growth in gas compression.

More pipelines translate into more compressor stations driven by gas engines, especially on lower flow pipelines. Typical applications include gathering pipelines that connect shale oil and gas wells to major transmission pipelines.

For transmission pipelines that have a higher flow rate by default, gas turbines are generally preferred because of the higher power requirements. Let us now compare our current market assessments with the outlook we presented in March this year.

This slide shows the position as of March 12, following the full-year results. All segments with the exception of specialized vessels show positive momentum with particularly strong growth in medium and high-speed power applications.

The updated view confirms positive market conditions overall with some shifts within the portfolio. In merchant marine, we see higher demand for new turbochargers, especially for tankers and bulkers supported by growing Chinese shipyard capacity.

The service business, both transactional and through service agreements, continues to offer attractive growth opportunities, supported by an installed base that has expanded significantly in recent years. Growth in upgrades and retrofits is expected to level off.

The corresponding order backlog accumulated in recent years is being worked down, while the postponement of the IMO Net Zero Framework has reduced near-term demand. In energy, the outlook has improved for high-speed gas power and gas compression, reflecting data center-related prime power demand and strong natural gas infrastructure activity.

The high domestic demand for natural gas is as well, among other things, driven by the growing electricity demand from U.S. data centers.

The outlook for backup power has weakened compared with March because OEM capacity allocation limits our growth despite continued end market demand. So overall, robust demand in marine and energy supports the raised full-year guidance.

The strong growth in recent years requires increased investments, but we are maintaining flexibility in how we expand capacity. Overall capital expenditure is expected to reach around 5% to 6% of revenues in '26.

Since the stock listing in '22, Accelleron's business volume has almost doubled, mainly driven by the marine business, bringing Swiss manufacturing operations close to capacity limits. Higher CapEx reflects investments to strengthen operational resilience, expand capacity, and support future growth in marine and energy.

For the '26 to '28 period, around 20% of planned investment is allocated to manufacturing and R&D infrastructure upgrades in Switzerland, around 50% to equipment replacement, and around 30% to additional production capacity. Almost 2/3 of the investments are in Switzerland.

The remainder is mainly in China, Italy, and the global service network. Our balanced keep, invest, buy approach provides the flexibility to adapt capacity to evolving long-term demand scenarios while remaining mindful of the risk of overheating demand, especially in U.S.

data centers. By accelerating replacement investments and extending use of existing production equipment, we can temporarily increase capacity for some years to come.

In parallel, we are leveraging our strong partnership with long-term suppliers to outsource a greater share of production. Let us conclude with the updated financial guidance for '26.

Based on the strong half-year performance and the positive dynamics in our core markets, we are raising the full-year '26 organic revenue growth guidance to 14% to 17% from previously 9% to 14%. The raised guidance reflects the structural growth drivers in both markets.

We confirm the operational EBITA margin guidance at 25% to 26%. The guidance assumes that the current market and geopolitical environment do not materially deteriorate.

The guidance excludes any potential refunds of U.S. tariffs.

If such refunds occur, revenues will be reduced by the amount passed on to customers, while the operational EBITA margin would increase mainly for the portion retained by Accelleron. Thank you for your attention.

We are now happy to answer your questions via chat or telephone. Michael Daiber, our Head of Investor Relations, will moderate the Q&A session.

So Michael, please.

Thank you very much, Daniel and Adrian, and welcome to the Q&A session. Please take note that questions that come in by the chat tool might be combined.

[Operator Instructions] I would now kick off with the first questions from the phone.

I have 3 questions, if possible. I can ask them one at a time to make it easier for you.

First, I think you made a quick reference in the presentation to pricing. I was wondering if you could give us some color on how much really it contributed in the first half to the 17% organic?

And what do you have baked in into your guidance?

Yes. Thank you, Daniela, for the question.

I mean, we refer to an organic growth of 17.2%, roughly thereof 14 percentage points volume that leaves 3 percentage points. One is basically that the direct pricing, I think, is fairly marginal in the sense of something of 0.2% to 0.3%.

We have then the tariff piece, which we priced in and passed on. I would say, this direct pricing plus tariff roughly amounts up to half of it.

And then we have 1.5-plus percent is the indirect, and that comes through the fact that we have a Swiss franc price list and we invoice in certain occasions in Swiss franc. So that's a twofold 3 percentage points as discussed.

Yes. That's very clear.

And then can you talk a little bit about how long sort of is your backlog visibility now for marine and for data centers? What share of 2027 revenues are already covered in the backlog, if that's an easier way to comment on that?

I think in general, at group level, we still talk of 4 to 6 months. It isn't much more in terms of really having firm orders at hand.

Yes, we obtain demand signals from our customers, which we obviously need to plan our value chain accordingly. It then boils down in the Medium & Low Speed, we usually have a bit longer order windows, while in the High Speed, it can go down to 6 to 8 weeks.

That's the visibility with firm orders, but obviously, there is more the demand signals which give us a certain comfort, but which are ultimately not committing. Daniel, anything I forgot to mention probably.

I mean, we have some orders, but we see high dynamic in prime power that some customers then are delaying some of the orders because they are not as fast in ramping up their capacity. So it's quite a dynamic and fluid outlook now, but that's a bit what we are struggling with.

And then you've kind of comment on the capacity increases on the OEMs on the prime power side, but you're increasing your own capacity as well. Should we think about sort of the grade of magnitude that your volume ability will increase your planned volume capacity, let's say, in '28 or '29 when the OEMs finish their capacity increases in relation to where you were in '25, what sort of grade of increase should we think?

You've mentioned in the presentation that you doubled -- the volumes doubled from 2022. Should we think about a similar increment or...

No. Thank you, Daniela.

Fair question. So let me break it down.

So an important piece is now the investment in infrastructure. You can consider, more or less our shoe size now has become too tight, and we now need to move to a new shoe size.

That's why we said we're investing in the infrastructure. And that's mainly in Switzerland, where just the shoe size is too tight now, and that's mainly driven by marine.

Also in Italy, where we said we need to also invest. China is so far okay.

Also here, we need to, but more or less the 20% now we're investing or 25% is now really in the infrastructure increasing the shoe size. And with this shoe size, we believe we can increase the revenues by another 1/3 in the long run.

So -- and the rest -- and this is excluding production equipment. So the production equipment, we do incremental based on the feedback we got from the customers.

So with the infrastructure, you can't say what's '27, '28, but we are building an infrastructure, which gives us now some runway for the next 5 to 10 years, depending how fast the feet are growing. So -- and the rest of the equipment we will do based on what we believe makes sense for the next year and the year to come.

I have also 3 questions. I would ask them one by one.

The first one is with regard to the revenue share coming from services for your 2 segments. Can you give us some sort of rough ballpark indication what are the latest numbers there?

Yes. Let me quickly check.

I don't know all the numbers by heart. But if I'm not mistaken, we are about 1/3 product and 2/3 service, plus/minus.

And that is on the group, but how would it look for High Speed and low -- Medium & Low Speed in specific?

Here, I need to check whether we have the details. Okay.

I mean, we have seen there in the High Speed a bit of an accelerated growth because of the gas compression piece. As we mentioned, the pipelines are running and need maintenance, respectively, to turbos.

But we have seen as well a healthy growth level on the Medium & Low Speed, but definitely a faster growth on the High Speed, but we do not guide on that level ultimately clearly said.

Sure. Second question would be on gas compression.

If I'm not mistaken, in the past, you were alluding to that it's around like 9% to 10% of your Group revenues. Can you give us an update there?

What would be roughly the latest share?

On gas compression, that's about 12%.

Great. And then a follow-up question, as a third one with regard to the pricing.

I mean, I'm not sure if I got it correctly there. But the full-year pricing ambition on your side, can you add some color there?

I think it will not significantly change to what we have for the half year. We have not, in general, raise prices.

It was more point-to-point and that 0.3% for the half year, I would expect that not to fundamentally change for the full year.

Two for me, please. The first one is on your operating leverage.

I guess you increased your guide on growth, but the margin guidance stayed the same. I understand that you have a lot of investment going on this year with equipment, et cetera.

How should we think about that operating leverage going into next year? Would you expect to have a potential for any margin upside into...

Yes. I think important to understand this year, with the accelerated growth of our products versus the service, we have a bit of headwind as products in average come in at a lower margin, but still in average, clearly green or positive.

The investments, you're right, we do have by ramping up capacity. We have a bit more people around, meaning efficiency end-to-end is not perfect.

We sometimes have to rely on second source suppliers, meaning the first one is already fully booked. Consequently, costs are a little higher than maybe with the first source.

We sometimes have to air freight instead of sending our goods with the vessel consequently as well, there are some additional costs. Ultimately, if we keep growing that quickly, then yes, we are not, let's say, end-to-end perfectly efficient.

And if the product keeps outgrowing the service, then I believe that 23% to 26% is the bandwidth with a clear ambition to stay in the top, but we remain open as well to invest in future capabilities, is it in respect to growing our R&D on the fuel injection side, really towards the medium speed or then investing into our AI capabilities to improve our productivity and set up end-to-end.

That's super clear. My second question is on the backup power growth.

I guess it seems like -- versus what you initially expected, the growth was a bit lower on the backup side so far this year. I guess that seems to be more related to the OEM capacity constraint rather than the demand side of the equation.

So how should we think about that going forward? Do you expect that growth to come back later this year?

Or that will be more into 2027?

Look, that's difficult to say. I mean, we are in close contact with our OEM customers, and they are struggling now with how do -- how shall they allocate now the share of the capacity?

Is it prime power or backup power? Look, for us, I would say, I'm more in favor of really prime power because definitely, this will create much stronger service business in the long run, while backup power is one sale and most likely we'll never see the turbocharger anymore.

So I'm either way. If I could decide, definitely, I'm in favor of prime power.

Just one remaining, if I may. On the data centers, you mentioned a lot of business in the High Speed system -- in the High Speed segment.

But when I look at what Wärtsilä has been saying and so you should have also some data center-related business in Medium & Low Speed segment. Am I correct?

Or is it too small to be relevant?

Alessandro, you're 100% right. We have medium speed power.

We don't differentiate because it's one big pocket. It's high speed and medium speed.

Now there's definitely growth. But just to be clear, the high-speed gas is much bigger than the medium speed just because of capacity.

There are more players and they have either deeper pockets or they are just investing more in the growth. But all in all, as I said, medium speed and high-speed gas, they're all delivering to prime power data centers.

Before the questions from the telephone line will continue, I will ask some questions or I will read some questions that have been asked through the Q&A tool. First one is from John Kim from Deutsche Bank.

Could you please comment on how your market share looks to evolve given the respective build-out plans from the different OEMs, for example, Caterpillar, Wärtsilä, INNIO. Should we think of your market share as fairly evenly distributed about the OEM designs?

Or is Accelleron over-indexed to certain OEMs?

Thanks, John. I'll take that one I think we should separate between high-speed gas and medium speed.

On the high-speed gas, where we have 80% market share, it's probably fairly to assume that we have quite an evenly distributed among the OEMs. So -- and we are participating and that's why we are very close in contact with all of them.

On the medium speed, there are some engine OEMs that have their own turbocharger where we have 0. So here is definitely a slightly different game.

And here we are between 40% and 50% over the whole. That means where we deliver -- if you do the math, you know the math, the average.

So that means we will have a higher market share on those where we deliver, while on some we have 0. But again, the growth, we don't expect that our market share will change with the corresponding OEMs we have already.

Next question was from [indiscernible] from AWP. You have not seen a significant impact from the conflict in Middle East.

So will high freight rates not lead to some service delays?

Yes. I mean -- thank you.

No, we have not seen anything. I mean, there's still enough idling around and still some enough spare capacity.

And I mean, the Middle East is mainly on the tanker, it's not on the container. So the container, there's enough, I would say that they can absorb everything.

No, we have not seen any delays.

The second question is about our expectations regarding the timing and order impact of the IMO Net Zero Framework.

Yes, that's the famous crystal ball questions. Look, my personal opinion, I don't see any near-term change here in the IMO.

It will be paused, and we'll see whether it goes ahead or not. But as I said, the decarbonization of shipping definitely needs a global regulation.

But we see regional regulation and we see investments, especially in the high-value ships like container, gas carriers and so that they do efficiency improvement, but it's on the cheaper vessels, there's not a lot of investments going on here.

Good. One last question from the chat tool before we go further to the telephone.

It's from Kevin An from Woodline Partners. Given your roughly 80% market share in high-speed gas engine turbochargers and strong ongoing demand, why is direct pricing contributing only 20 to 30 basis points?

Are contractual pricing agreements limiting near-term service price realization?

I can take this, and thank you for the question. Let's take a step back in the High Speed, especially on the product side.

Usually, this is governed by means of contracts which are linked to index-based pricing, meaning this is reflecting a 6 to 12 months delay or in the price realization is carrying over the inflation part. We have not seen inflation lately soaring.

Consequently, we do not see a lot of price realization at this point. But as mentioned, we were able to share the burden in respect to the tariffs and pass there on more than 50% in average, as I said in the full-year presentation as well.

And probably just to add, again, as Adrian already said, a portion of our pricing is in Swiss francs. So there's an indirect price increase.

So where we don't have this long-term contracts -- pricing contracts or frame contracts, we have to be careful. I mean, we should not overdo.

But we always said we are in partnership. So we share pain and gain.

So -- and we don't want to take advantage. So we are fair partners.

I think that's more valuable and this will give us a stronger long-term perspective instead of taking short-term advantages.

Back to the phone line.

I have 3. Let's start with regional first.

Exceptionally strong growth, both in China and in the U.S.A., 43% and 41%, I think, in absolute terms. Would you -- how would you characterize the growth in those regions?

I mean, I think you've called out merchant shipping in China, but was that all of it? And obviously, High Speed and prime power in the U.S.A.

But again, was that all of it? So is there -- are there other factors underlying those 2 points that you've already made?

Thanks for your question. Let me -- I mean, product business is recognized where the customer is sitting more or less.

So -- and here on marine, more or less 100% of merchant marine is still all in Asia and more and more in China. I would say, now the share is about 2/3 China and 1/3 Korea and Japan.

Only a few cruise ships are still built in Europe. So -- and that's why in China, definitely the big growth is coming from the product business.

The service business is more or less allocated to where the shipowner is. So it could be in Greece when the service is done with the Greece shipowner or also with China.

So here, it's a diverse picture. So -- but again, Asia, mainly driven by new build marine.

U.S. is mainly driven by gas compression, especially now in this first half year of service.

We have not seen so much take-up when it comes to product and the other one is the prime power in the U.S. So again, U.S.

is very strongly driven by energy.

That's great. You called out -- the second question relates to somewhat your budgetary planning or your expectations.

You called out product growth in H1 up 30%. As you look at your planning for the year, what level of growth do you think or are you expecting to manage in the second half of the year that fits within your full-year targets?

What we see is more or less we don't expect the second half year to be significantly different from the first half year. So we expect more or less -- if you do the math and so that means in the first half year, product business and service business grew in absolute terms the same, and we expect to be the same also for the second half year.

That's helpful. And then when we think about capital allocation, your balance sheet is relatively strong and certainly, the nature of your business model could support more leverage.

You've undertaken, I think, 3 acquisitions since the spin. How are you thinking about capital allocation beyond the CapEx that you've mentioned today with regard to bolt-on M&A or perhaps extending your current buybacks?

I mean, again, I think first and foremost, you're right. We want to support our business organically, and we keep investing.

That will continue. And Daniel has pointed out 5% to 6% of revenue, plus/minus we expect to land.

Additionally, yes, we have a commitment for a stable to slightly growing dividend, clearly. And then it all boils down to the opportunities, right, on the inorganic side, where we want to stay disciplined and selective.

But we have to say, yes, we are working on our pipeline. And if nothing then materializes, obviously, a share buyback is then the adequate tool to return excess cash.

That has been always our philosophy, and we will stick to this.

I mean, there's not more to say. I mean, we can't give any forecast of any M&A, but it's clear.

As I said, we have seen some interesting possibilities, and we will capture them if and when they arise. So please be patient.

We'll see how the world will develop. But important is a strong balance sheet doesn't lead us to making stupid moves.

So we will be selective and disciplined and capture when it's interesting, that means if it fits for our business and if it comes with a reasonable price.

Actually, I've got also 3, maybe do them one by one. The first one is actually because also you were referring in the presentation to you're planning not to overdo it on capacity on one hand.

On the other hand, some customers appear delaying some bookings on getting things on the ground in prime power. I was just wondering from your perspective, does the funnel see any changes versus, I don't know, 6 months ago or something because also one of your largest -- sorry, largest clients has actually -- signaling that there could be some peak situation in Q2 on order intake on the data center side?

That's my first one.

Yes. That's definitely an interesting question.

We would be happy if we knew the full truth. I mean, the good thing is we are very strong in this business, and we have frequent exchange with our customers.

And I tell you, sometimes they mix firm orders with capacity plans and so on. So we want to be careful.

But as I said, we have the infrastructure set up because that's the, I would say, the longest lead item we need to increase capacity. And the rest we can react very fast.

I mean, also in Switzerland already, we have hired 100 people more just to manage the growth here. And we'll do that going forward.

Again, the outlook is great, but also depending on what you read, some are very skeptical, some are very hype. Some customers are a bit more careful and some go full steam.

We have to make sure that we deliver because we don't want to lose those customers in this time, and we are very confident that we can deliver whatever they need and whatever they order. But request for capacity is still not in order.

So we have to be careful here not to mix up capacity and firm orders. But for the time being, the way forward looks good.

But again, we want to be a bit mindful.

Understood. And then the second question is actually quite a bit related to this, but from another angle because -- I mean, phrasing the question about what happens to your margin a bit differently because I think at the end, what you delivered is really quite strong because you had this strong increase on the new build activity.

So you must have had quite some efficiency measures. And I was wondering if you can talk a little bit about this because it doesn't seem that really pricing is the source of this strong margin.

Anything on that? Did you increase outsourcing?

What did you do on efficiency? And then this is linked to what should we think about the future?

Is there anything that spills over into 2027, which makes us more positive on that you can conserve a higher margin? That's the second one.

I mean, I can take that. First and foremost, thanks for looking through this lens.

Usually, we are asked why isn't it increasing. Indeed, I mean, with the high product business growth, maintaining the margin as such is, I feel as well an achievement.

You need to see our DNA is all around continuous improvements, and we keep improving. And obviously, yes, labor costs keep increasing.

So we need to stay on the productivity. We use all means.

That's not new to us. That's basically somewhat business as usual.

But again, it's year-on-year. You have to deliver on it.

And what we always say, I mean, look, we have a certain amount of fixed costs and then the leverage effect can be felt. And this time, we see it especially on the SG&A side, right?

Our finance, our IT, our HR, our communication and so forth, our management costs are obviously not scaling with revenue and that helps because you see that the gross margin over the years is having a little bit of headwind through that accelerated product business growth, while with the structure, we really can offset this, can maintain and if not even, slightly expand our EBITA. In respect then to next year's margin, I think we have pointed out it remains our ambition and goal to stay in the top third of our margin corridor, 25% to 26% is what I can reconfirm at this point.

That's our ambition. But with a specific guidance, we'll get back as always in March.

All right. Fair answer.

And then the last one is actually a bit on marine. When you are saying actually that tankers and bulkers have been growing more in general, I mean, the growth that has been taken place in China, I assume that it's rather a 2-stroke growth than a 4-stroke growth probably.

And I was just wondering what this does to your mix and that said, revenue and margin profile, 2-stroke versus 4-stroke, that would be helpful.

Probably let me explain that. The large ships have always a 2-stroke and 4-stroke engine.

So the 2-stroke is the main propulsion and the 4-stroke are the auxiliary engines that produce electricity required also on those ships. But there's -- probably also you're referring to, there are ships that have a pure 4-stroke propulsion but then very often, we talk about cruise ships or special vessels.

And that's very often, as I said, cruise ship is mainly in Europe and also a lot of special vessels here. No, but all in all, we don't see a difference.

I mean, we are on large ships and whether they are main propulsion 2-stroke or main propulsion 4-stroke, we have equally strong positions in both segments and margins are similar.

I do have 3. I'll take one at a time.

So out of the close to 9% revenue share that you had from data center end market, could you please provide a split between what -- how much was prime power and how much was backup power?

Yes. Let me quickly check.

So I mean, I would say, if my eyes are correct, then yes, I would say, almost 2/3 came from prime power. So because more or less the backup was stable, while the whole growth in data center was coming from prime power.

That's great. And at your full-year results, you had provided like an outlook for mid-double-digit growth to the prime power revenues for 2026.

Is there any revision that we should consider to that outlook or that remains unchanged?

I think we were highlighting that we would expect to get closer to 10% of Group revenue with basically the data center overall for the full year. And I think, with being now close to 9% and expecting a bit of further growth in H2, I think that still holds strong.

As always said, if we can deliver a bit faster, customers might be quicker able to ramp up, and it's a bit more or it might be a bit less, but around this, I think that's where we are and on track for.

Okay. And for services, with like 15% growth in the first half, are you able to provide growth by end market as to how much was the growth in the marine end market?

And what was the growth in energy?

I mean, look, I would say the strong growth came in 2 fields. One was merchant marine.

So merchant marine overall contributed to the overall growth by 1/3. And I would say, half of the business was new builds and the other one was from service, regular maintenance, high installed base and upgrades.

And the other big share of growth was in oil and gas compression, remanufacturing. So a lot of the engines are now running, transporting or forwarding all the gas and that created the service growth.

Yes. Sorry, 2 follow-ups, if I may.

First one is on gas compression. If I'm not mistaken, you said that there was like 12% revenue share in H1 this year.

I was wondering what was the share last year? And another question would be on the tariff side of things.

So tariff refunds, there was nothing in H1 2026. Is that the right understanding?

I mean, I can take both. I have it.

The gas compression, I think, was last year more like around 9%, and it grew now to roughly 12% of Group revenues in H1 '26 versus '25. That's what I concluded on the table at hand.

And for the tariffs, I would say, clearly, the vast majority of the refunds we expect still to come that there was a very minor one in H1, which was not material to be mentioned. Now it's hopefully to come.

We have filed our application and expect that hopefully to come in within the next 30 to 90 days.

Probably just quickly on gas compression, it's a bit cyclical business because it's not always final customer end demand. There's a lot of inventory in between.

And I think we had in '23 or '24 already this issue that there was over demand in 1 year and then our customers and their dealers realized they had too much in inventory. So here, we would be careful to draw a trend as we see quite a cyclical behavior in the gas compression.

Yes. I wanted to just come back to the question of the market outlook.

And going back to your Slide #8, when you talk about data center power, I guess, first of all, to set the base, from your perspective, as you ship turbochargers for prime power or backup power, when you think of the product rather than the service stream later, are you indifferent? What I mean is, are they similar revenue opportunity and gross margin contribution opportunities across prime and backup applications?

That's the first question just to set it. And then when you talk about H1 '25, around 2 gigawatts of install and H1 '26 around 5 gigawatts of prime power.

When you look at your I don't know, consultants or your reviews. What is your planning assumption from your customer base for gigawatts installed in prime power going into H2?

And how are you thinking about the '27, '28 outlook at this time?

As I said for the second half, we expect a similar trend like in the first half. The outlook is interesting because we get now all the demands from all our customers with 80% market share on high-speed gas and almost 50% market share on medium speed.

We more or less see the full demand from the combustion engine. The funny thing is when we add everything together, then it's bigger than the whole market, ignoring that there are gas turbines also supplying.

So that's a bit the struggle we are in because we have now full transparency and then we go to International Energy Agency and compare that one. And then it would mean that all the combustion engines would take the market and even bigger than the market.

So that's a bit of a challenge, and that's why we are very cautious now for the time being to say any meaningful things for the '27, '28. We are now in close contact.

We are sharing, I mean, not the detailed data from whom we got what data, but we confront them and more or less tell them, look, that's what we got. Somehow it doesn't work together.

And here now, I think we are moving ahead and customers again going through. I mean, lot have confirmed orders, but also a lot is based on forecasts.

And here, we have to be careful. And for the time being, it's premature to give any information on '27, '28.

And maybe to the gross margin question, I mean, we were always clear that prime power means really sizable and fruitful service business opportunity, while on the backup, this is very, very limited. Consequently, we have different service expectations.

And therefore, in that sense, life cycle-wise, prefer the prime power business because that comes with service opportunities while backup is very, very limited.

If I may, just to follow on a little. You've highlighted where your CapEx is going to be directed in Switzerland and Italy and China.

But when you think about capacity constraints across the system now, where do you see internally your most constrained operations? And if you look at the supply chain, do you see any sort of feed-in suppliers that appear capacity constrained to you for your business?

No, we don't see it with suppliers. I think the market is good that we get enough.

Then when we take a look, there's -- I think we have some productions that we still have enough capacity. On some, we are now really getting to the technical limit.

But I mean, more important is that we now build the infrastructure because we get machine equipment fast enough to increase. So I'm not worried about the production.

Now that's why the focus is really on expanding our infrastructure, getting more square meters. And for example, here in Switzerland, now, we are moving things about warehousing or assembly outside of [indiscernible] becomes mainly a production place, and we have now rented some good warehouse and space where we can do assembly.

So for me, really, the main focus is getting the infrastructure ready. The rest is not an issue because our customers need much longer to ramp up the capacity.

We can always be in the shade or shadow of what they are ramping up. So we have enough early information that we can invest in the production equipment also in people that we are ready when the customer is ready.

Thank you for all the interesting questions. I hope you got all the information you need.

And thanks for joining, and hear you soon again. Thank you.

Goodbye.

Thank you. Bye.