Arkema S.A.

Thank you very much. Good morning, everybody.

Welcome to Arkema's Q1 '26 Results Conference Call. Joining me today are Marie-Jose Donsion, our CFO; and the Investor Relations team.

As always, to support this conference call, we have posted a set of slides which are available on our website. I will comment the highlights of the quarter before letting Marie-Jose go through the financials.

And at the end of the presentation will be available, as usual, to answer your questions. In the continuity of 2025, market conditions remained soft into January and February 2026 before improving in March.

Regional trends were contrasted with demand continuing to be subdued in Europe and in the U.S., while Asia showed again solid momentum across several of our end markets. In addition, the quarter was once more affected by the depreciation of the U.S.

dollar compared to last year, while this impact is expected to be more limited from the second quarter onwards. End of February saw the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East, which started to impact global supply chains and quickly led to a sharp rise in certain raw materials as well as in energy and logistics costs beginning in Asia.

So in this complex environment, Arkema delivered stable volumes year-on-year, a solid performance in the context. This was particularly driven by Specialty Materials whose volume increased by 1.5%, supported by a strong pickup in March.

All Specialty Materials segments were up. Coating Solutions benefited notably from better dynamics in UV curing resins.

Advanced Materials posted solid growth in key attractive markets for high-performance polymers. These were supported by durable goods and some limited improvement in construction.

This volume performance also reflects Arkema's continued momentum in high-growth pockets with volumes up 15% in attractive end markets such as batteries, sport, 3D printing and healthcare. Batteries once again delivered strong growth, supported by the rapid expansion of energy storage systems, a key additional driver for the group, particularly within High Performance Polymers.

As a result, Q1 EBITDA came in slightly above expectation, reaching EUR 283 million, up 14% versus the fourth quarter of 2025, supported by an improvement in March. EBITDA was nevertheless down year-on-year, primarily impacted by a significant negative currency effect of around EUR 20 million and the absence of rebound in the U.S.

and euro so far. Besides, Advanced Materials experienced a slow start to the year, in line with the trend observed in Q4.

However, momentum improved in March and Q2 should be up sequentially supported by HPP. I would also like to underline the good performance of Coating Solutions, which improved its EBITDA margin by 100 basis points, supported by a more favorable product mix.

Adhesive Solutions delivered a significant sequential improvement despite being down year-on-year. On the other hand, Primary Materials increase earnings slightly year-on-year, mainly driven by legacy refrigerant in the U.S., and actually, the improving spreads in Asia came late in the quarter and so had only a limited impact while the business in Europe and the U.S.

continued to be challenging, particularly in January and February. However, from today's perspective, it is fair to assume that the acrylic spread should improve in Q2 with the magnitude still to be confirmed.

As you can expect, all teams are fully mobilized to effectively and swiftly manage the current economic and geopolitical challenges. In the first quarter, we have set fixed cost inflation of at constant currencies, and we are well on track to achieve this objective for the full year, supported by a number of cost-cutting initiatives.

Turning to the Middle East crisis. The group is reacting swiftly to mitigate supply chain disruptions, both in terms of raw material availability and more important input cost inflation.

Pricing adjustments have been initiated to our sales increase in raw materials, energy and logistics costs, while actions deployed selectively by product, market and geography. This has required close and continuous coordination with both suppliers and customers, cost increases will become visible in Q2.

Arkema's well balanced geographical footprint to serve customers predominantly from the region is worth mentioning, as a good advantage in the current environment. So far, we have been able to navigate this crisis without any supply disruption.

Moreover, Arkema remains focused on executing its major growth projects. So group is currently finalizing the completion of its new PVDF capacity in the U.S.

scheduled to start mid-year. This will add 15% additional capacity in the region to meet growing demand for locally manufactured PVDF, particularly for energy storage systems, semiconductors or cable applications.

In parallel, the group also announced a further 20% capacity expansion at its PVDF in China, set up to start in 2028. Also, the new unit of Rilsan Clear, downstream of PA11 in Singapore started up successfully at the beginning of the year and is expected to support HPP earnings momentum from Q2 onwards, driven by capacity ramp-up.

I would also like to underline the strong first quarter performance of PIAM. EBITDA was up more than 30% year-on-year in local currency with a 35% EBITDA margin.

As highlighted during our last call, PIAM continues to benefit from good momentum driven in particular by solutions for foldable and ultra-thin smartphones as well as its expansion into higher-end application. We expect this positive trend to continue into the second quarter with robust year-on-year sales growth.

In addition, Arkema stays disciplined in its capital allocation, we delivered a solid performance with regard to working capital management. This contributed to recurring cash flow coming in better than last year.

This performance also reflects lower CapEx, fully in line with our EUR 600 million full year CapEx target. I will now hand it over to Marie-Jose for a more in-depth look at the financials by segment before we discuss the outlook at the end of the presentation.

Thank you, Thierry, and good morning, everyone. Arkema's Q1 revenues at EUR 2.2 billion were down 8.4% year-on-year.

They were impacted by a negative 5.1% currency effect, reflecting mainly the weakening of the U.S. dollar against the euro compared to Q1 last year.

Volumes came out broadly stable year-on-year, supported by a strong month of March after a relatively soft start of the year. The price effect was a negative 3%, reflecting essentially the lower selling price environment compared to Q1 2025, in line with the progressive decrease in raw material costs observed in 2025.

Q1 EBITDA came in at EUR 283 million. The currency effect represented a negative of around EUR 20 million.

Looking at the performance by segment. Adhesive Solutions achieved an EBITDA of EUR 89 million.

It reflected on top of the currency impact, the still weak demand in North America and Europe, volumes grew significantly overall or slightly less overall, supported mainly by Asia. This performance was driven mainly by adhesives for durable goods with an improvement in aerospace and heavy truck markets in North America.

On the other hand, packaging remains soft and construction was better oriented, especially in Europe. In Advanced Materials, the EBITDA stood at EUR 139 million.

Apart from the currency effect, the EBITDA was essentially affected by the unfavorable product and geographical mix. Market conditions in much of the quarter were similar to what we observed in Q4 last year, which means a continuing weak demand in the U.S.

and in Europe while Asia continued to show a positive dynamic. Coating Solutions delivered a good performance in the context with an EBITDA stable compared to last year at EUR 51 million.

Volumes were up 3% driven mainly by strong growth in Asia, in particular, in new recurring resins. The EBITDA margin improved by 100 bps at 13%, benefiting from our development in higher value-added applications.

Lastly, Primary Materials. EBITDA was slightly up at EUR 33 million, especially supported by a good performance in legacy refrigerants in the U.S., while acrylic monomers stayed in the low cycle conditions in most of the quarter.

Depreciation and amortization stood at EUR 165 million, leading to a recurring EBIT of EUR 118 million and a REBIT margin of 5.4%. Nonrecurring items amounted to EUR 45 million.

That includes EUR 34 million of PPA depreciation and EUR 11 million of one-off charges, notably some restructuring and reorganization costs. Financial expenses stood at minus EUR 29 million.

The increase versus last year reflecting mainly the cost of carry of our prefinanced green bonds issued end of 2024. Consequently, the Q1 adjusted net income amounted to EUR 65 million, which corresponds to EUR 0.86 per share.

Moving on to cash flow and net debt. Q1 recurring cash flow amounted to minus EUR 95 million, which included the first quarter classical working capital seasonality.

The working capital ratio on annualized sales stands at 16.3%, which is better than a year ago. Total capital expenditure amounted to EUR 75 million in the quarter, which is in line again with our guidance of annual CapEx spend of EUR 600 million for the full year 2026.

Net debt and hybrid bonds at the end of March '26 amounted to EUR 3.3 billion. The net debt to last 12 months EBITDA ratio stands at 2.8x.

Thank you for your attention, and I hand it over to Thierry for the outlook.

Thank you, Marie-Jose. So as you could see, despite the geopolitical headwinds, we could deliver positive volume growth across our Specialty Materials segment in the first quarter with a double-digit increase in our key attractive markets.

As we move into the second quarter, the conflict in Middle East, which began 2 months ago, remains ongoing, as you know, with continued uncertainty regarding the direction and the duration, sorry, and the magnitude of its consequences on the global economy. At this stage, obviously, the key priority of the group is to remain agile in navigating this volatile environment and to adapt this pricing policy swiftly to offset input cost inflation.

This is what we are clearly doing. We remain attentive to other potential impact of this context, notably on global demand as everyone.

At the same time, this crisis could also create some upside as it could also lead temporary to tighter supply-demand balance in certain value chain. In parallel, the group continued to focus on self-help measures, maintaining tight cost and operational contrast -- control, as you could see in the first quarter, alongside the disciplined execution and the ramp-up of these growth projects.

So in this context, the group confirms its target of a slight EBITDA growth at constant exchange rate for 2026. Before opening the Q&A session, maybe a quick word on Arkema journey during the past 20 years, and we have a few slides in the deck on this anniversary.

As you know, we became listed on May 18, 2006, and we'll be celebrating the Group's 20th anniversary in a few days. Over this period, the company has undergone an in-depth and unique transformation from a big bag of commodity businesses, most of them were unprofitable at that time.

They were European-centric for most of them, and we transformed the company into a global and profitable leader in Specialty Materials. Today, Arkema benefits also from a strong financial structure, solid performance, also high nonfinancial standard and offer its customer superior set of cutting-edge technology.

While the chemical industry is currently in low cycle, which is reflected in the share price, leaving space for significant upside, going forward, Arkema has delivered strong long-term value creation over 20 years. EUR 1 invested in Arkema in May 2006 has become EUR 3.6 today, including dividends.

Besides Arkema's share price increased over these 20 years is well above the evolution of the CAC count and its chemical peers, particularly in Europe. So thank you very much for your attention.

And together with Marie-Jose, we are now ready to answer the questions you may have.

Two questions, if I may. So the first quarter has been characterized by better volumes in the more Specialty business in the -- and less so in the more upstream business, and yet your comment around tightening supply and demand chains would suggest that the reverse will now happen.

So is that what we should expect that now the upstream businesses? And could you comment to how you see that playing out, both for 2Q and the rest of the year, maybe regionally as well, given we're expecting quite diverse performances between, say, Asia and the U.S.?

Be very keen to hear your views on that. And the second question, related, but a follow-up is, what do you think the medium-term kind of structural or kind of more sustainable impacts will be or that you're seeing in customer behaviors from the conflict that's risen in the Middle East?

Thank you, Tom, for your question. Obviously, we are in an interesting world where none of us know exactly what is going to happen, the visibility remains limited.

So the good thing, and this is certainly what you could read from the Q1 performance and from our comments on the full year is that we remain solid, and we have -- because we have both balanced portfolio from a geographical standpoint and also from a product line standpoint, sometimes diversity brings stability. And this is the case for Arkema.

So back to your question, I think that the dynamics, I would say, from a geographical standpoint, I mean, we stay with the same contract also Q2 and maybe the remaining part of the world where the engine will be clearly more Asia than Europe and U.S., but we'll see. From a product line standpoint, it can depend from months to months.

What is clear is that, as we mentioned, acrylics, which is what we mentioned by your stream, acrylics will benefit in the Q2 at least from a better supply-demand balance. And I think -- so last year, we suffered clearly in acrylics.

Q2, we see light in the tunnel, which is good, which shows that our strategy is producing a benefit and that the diversity of the portfolio is playing its part. Now as -- I mentioned a couple of months ago, I said this, and it was at the early stage of the Middle East crisis, I said that I believe that this crisis will have a positive and negative impacts.

But all in all, for Arkema, it should be around neutral. We are still in this kind of philosophy, and this is why we confirmed the guidance for the full year.

So you -- we mentioned the upstream. But in Coatings, for example, we see some good momentum in -- so reverse of last year in the quarter Q1, and we should be confirmed in Q2.

With regard to Adhesives, the sort of overall resilience solidity, not wonderful, but overall resilience. In Advanced Materials, more contrast, I would say, because we believe that in HPP after a soft start, as I mentioned, we should start to see a sort of sequential momentum benefiting from all these key projects that we have mentioned and the investments.

While on the opposite, Performance Additives should be maybe the loser of the Middle East crisis because this is a business, the product line, which is -- which has the most customers in the Middle East and is certainly more impacted by some raw material increase like sulfur, where you have time lag to pass it to customers. So I would say -- so I would say the portfolio will play is part everywhere.

And -- but at the end, the good thing with what we deliver is that there is no surprise in a world of plenty of unknowns with some positive and negatives. But overall, we sort of neutral stability, but plenty of work for the team clearly.

Now the impact of the medium term on -- from Middle East crisis, which is -- I imagine your question is on the global demand. I would say nobody knows exactly.

If it lasts a long time, certainly, there should be impact because of the inflation and the disruptions. But so far, we don't see too much unless the volumes are correct.

I would say, not worse than they were last year, so not an extraordinary level. But I would say not too much impact so far.

So wait and see. But we confirm, I think taking everything into account, we believe that for Arkema, we -- this event in Middle East should be neutral with some positive element and some downside.

Just a follow-up on that. Do you think we can expect 2Q '26 EBITDA to be above that of 2Q 2025?

I'm just trying to get some kind of reference point to understand the kind of how things might progress.

My feeling and it is factored in the full year guidance. Last year, we were more, if you remember, H2, Q4, we were more around minus 25% compared to last year, then we are minus 14% in Q1, so you see that step by step, we catch up and with last year, year-on-year.

And I would say we ought to be comparable, I would say, Q2 '26 compared to last year, which would be a significant step up and which is really our road map to deliver the full year guidance. So we would be really aligned with the full year guidance by achieving that.

I wanted to ask about the Advanced Materials division. And from the starting point of the margin you currently have, and the trajectory to get towards the mid-term guide, and in particular, the point on mix, so I'm not sure I fully understand why mix is a headwind at the moment.

Maybe there's some specific products, but you alluded to geographic mix, and I'm struggling to reconcile that with the idea that your CapEx has been disproportionately in Asia to satisfy where the demand is coming from, yet somehow mix is negative. I wouldn't have intuitively assumed that the Asian demand was going to be margin dilutive or else that wouldn't be consistent with the mid-term targets.

So can you just explain to me what's been going on with mix and how you see that evolving? And then somewhat related, you've announced an incremental investment in PVDF in China.

There's been a lot of debate in recent years about the degree of competition and commoditization. I see one of your peers in Japan recently took a large write-down on some investments they're making.

Why do you still believe that you can make a reasonably attractive return in that PVDF segment and it warrants putting more capital into it?

Thank you, Matthew. A very interesting question, I think, completely of different nature.

In fact, on -- overall, on the mid-term, we are comfortable on the fact that the mix, both geographical and product will improve. So this is not the topic of the short-term.

The topic of the short-term is nearly mechanical, I would say. So as you know, the unit margin in Europe and U.S.

are by nature on many of our businesses, higher in Europe and U.S., than they are in Asia. And it's true for many companies.

The reason being that the cost structure itself is heavier in Europe and U.S., than it is in Asia. But in the end in terms of profitability, okay, we have quite good profitability in Asia as we have in the U.S., we are lower in Europe.

Which means that for the same volume, when these volumes are more weighted, which is the case since 2 years in Asia because this is where we have the growth. In fact, for the same fixed cost, okay, in each of the region, you have less margin for a given volume in Asia than you have in Europe and U.S., okay?

So this means that in terms of EBITDA, the EBITDA is, let's say, is comparable everywhere, but the unit margin is lower in Asia than they are and the EBITDA margin is comparable, which means that when you have more volume and more development in Asia, it weighs on the average mix in -- for the same fixed cost, it weighs on the EBITDA margin, it is nearly mechanical, in fact, okay? But now if you think longer term, Europe and U.S., we are confident on that.

We recoup volumes, okay? And step by step, it will come back.

And we confirmed. In fact, we are very happy to confirm the mid-term target for Advanced Materials, which will be well above the 20%, but it's purely -- this is what we explained with the mix.

With regard to the product mix, I would say no, because beyond -- if I put aside this geographical discrepancy in terms of products, we develop the product with the highest margin. But again, even with themselves, they make more margin -- unit margin in Europe and U.S., than they are doing in Asia.

Now on the PVDF investment in China, which is for Asia, it's not just for China, it's for Asia, as it's really very consistent with our strategy since several years. We have had many questions on this PVDF.

We must say that PVDF since many years and still today, is an engine of growth and profitability for the company, and we want to develop it globally. So we have this investment in the U.S.

We have this investment in China, and we are quite comfortable that this investment will have quite a good payback now. Korea, it's -- I don't know, we -- this is -- I would say, they are to pick their profile.

But with regard to us, we are very comfortable on what we are doing, which shows that the quality of our innovation in PVDF, the positioning, the fact that we really focus on the high end of the range, is bringing in fruit. It can be in semiconductor.

It could be in batteries. It can be in cables.

I think we have a good and differentiated strategy in PVDF.

And Thierry, if you allow me just to follow up. In terms of the Q2 commentary around this business, is it that there are some specific projects ramping.

I think you mentioned foldable phones in the intro, for example, that are very high margin or is it just simply an overall improvement in volumes helps to have better fixed cost absorption?

Yes. We got a few messages because we made the comments.

I agree on the HPP, and in this matter. In fact, our message was -- Q1 was -- we joined -- to a certain extent, is linked to your first comment or your first question.

I would say in the mix of Arkema, Advanced Materials in the Q1 from our standpoint was maybe the disappointing part. And the message was to say, okay, it's a soft start, but it will ramp up in the second quarter, at least sequentially.

We have a good business prospect from the major project and this major project are for HPP. And also, it was to spot the mix in HPP between -- the mix in Advanced Materials in the Q2 between HPP and Performance Additives with HPP with, let's say, a positive growth momentum, including PIAM, which is doing pretty well, as you mentioned, but beyond PIAM, PVDF, et cetera and polyimide and specialty fluorogas.

And on the other side, Performance Additives being impacted by the Middle East because they sell -- this is our business line, which is selling the most to Middle East and they have this sulfur topic. So this is more to give you some granularity inside Advanced Materials, which will be with, let's say, two contrasted business lines for the quarter after that, it can change.

The good thing is that maybe to complete on that is that our major projects step-by-step are ramping up, and this will impact in the short- and long-term, HPP, as you know, and as we often mentioned.

First question, about the -- obviously, you referenced, Thierry, in your answers, the geographic mix, where it's more Asia led. Do you -- and less strong in Europe and North America.

Do you expect that to change, given the kind of U.S. PMI trajectory or what we're seeing since the conflict started on the Gold Coast and in other places?

And then secondly, can I also ask about March and obviously stronger than expected. Do you think any of this was customer pre-buying?

Perhaps, obviously, Asia was very strong, and that tends to be the spot market and where you see perhaps the current -- most current capacity outages?

So thank you for the question. I would say with regard to the geographic mix, yes, as you know, we believe in U.S.

because we invested a lot there. It's 35% of our sales.

And we believe that from a competitive standpoint, even reinforced by what is happening in Middle East, their competitiveness, especially in terms of energy superior. So we believe that there are in the U.S., many ingredients for this economy to rebound at a certain point.

This is not what we see today. So it depends if your question is short-term or long-term?

If it is short-term, we have to be cautious, and we still see these dynamics coming from Asia. Now it will -- I don't know, reverse is not really the [ weapon, ] because it would mean that Asia would get down, which would not be the case, but would rebalance with U.S.

getting stronger. We are at a low point in many of our businesses in the U.S., we start to see a little bit of green shoots.

There are minimal here and there, which maybe could get us feel that in the course of the year, we should see some improvement. But now there are so many elements in the geopolitics that we have to be careful.

With regard to March, maybe there is a little bit of prebuying, maybe in the more stream of our businesses. Maybe now when you look at the volume in March, we are just for the company at par compared to -- not so much, but for the quarter, compared to last year.

So if you take Jan, Feb, to March, and we have a tendency to look at the whole quarter with different dynamics, a slow start and some offset or catch up in March. Certainly a little bit of prebuying.

But for example, if you look at April, I think we mentioned it in the press release or I think the April is starting -- is in the continuity of March, which is an element of answer also. This means that we see the good solid March is continuing in April.

But we need that to have a Q2 in EBITDA comparable to last year.

My question is on the downstream businesses. And I'm I guess, focused on net pricing.

I was wondering if you could talk about sort of big buckets of Adhesives, Coatings and the rest. What are you seeing in terms of raw material inflation right now?

Are we talking mid-single digits, low double digits, maybe high teens inflation? And are you using surcharges?

Or are you expecting to see, I guess, pricing commensurate with this type of inflation? When you talk about short-term squeezes on downstream, is it a few quarters or just a few weeks and months?

Okay. With regard to the raw material, all along the place, I would say, that is not only just for downstream businesses.

It's for the whole company. You have increased on raw materials, which can run from a few percent to 100%.

So it's really quite quick and quite steep. This is why our teams, unfortunately, were already trained with what has happened during COVID, are really moving very fast to pass price increase.

Now it's clear, and you know that very well because your experience is quicker in a upstream that it is in downstream to pass to the customers. Our feeling is that the more downstream we go, the more we will have to use the full quarter to pass everything.

So our idea is to fully offset instantly, I would say, for the end of the quarter. But since we have some businesses, as you know, more upstream that will have some upside effect in the case of acrylics in the quarter, it will fully offset the time lag we can have more downstream businesses.

This is where the strength of the portfolio is diversity is playing. So overall, we should be good.

Now it's clear that you have some different color starting from upstream to downstream in the quarter. But the idea is to have done the job, full job for the end of the quarter.

The reason why it takes -- you have some time lag. I would say the profile of the customer can be very, very different, even their own constraints.

So this is why, as you know, in the real life, it takes always a little bit of time. And also the raw material increase -- the waiver of the raw material increase are coming one-by-one.

So this means that you need to come back and to say, okay, it's more, so we have to pass more, et cetera. So real life.

But overall, with our -- and this is why we sort of comment on this comparable to EBITDA comparable to last year in Q2 because we believe that with our portfolio, there will be some plus and minuses. But all-in-all, we can manage.

But it's a job which takes a lot of energy from our teams, like I imagine for everybody.

And back in 2022, I mean you had very, very strong pricing even in downstream areas, at the expense of volumes. And I think at the time, you mentioned that there were certain volumes that you were happy to lose because they were lower quality, lower margins.

Is there any of this right now? Or are you literally now fighting for every molecule as you see them as high quality and you want to retain those volumes?

I would say our -- it's clear that when you put a lot of emphasis on price increase, especially in a world where you have a war. We should not forget in Middle East, is not what is going to push volume up very strongly.

So let's say that we target more or less flattish volume, okay? And in this flattish volume guideline or context, we push the price, okay?

So it's not exactly like in -- after COVID, where we are still to rationalize our portfolio, especially in the Adhesives, we are not -- this job has been done, okay? So it's more stable.

But let's say, flattish volume and then we work on pricing.

I have 3 questions. First one is on acrylic acid.

Maybe -- when you look at this product in Europe and the U.S., for a long time, there hasn't been any capacity added, but margins have continuously sort of drifted downwards. Now in the backdrop of the war and the tightness in naphtha and propylene in Asia, how do you see the sort of mid-term outlook for acrylic acid?

And do you think there is a need for capacity rationalization in either Europe or the U.S. given some of the markets like India, for instance, have become more and more self-sufficient.

That's my first question. The second is around the sulfur topic.

How do you see the upstream sort of methionine market from your point of view, the markup tons value chain given the shortage of sulfur. Have you been able to grab market share?

Or is this an issue right now from your point of view? And the last question is around PA11.

Obviously, you made a very big investment in Singapore. I mean when you look at the plant in Singapore today versus your French plant, in terms of operational performance as well as profitability, where do we stand today?

Is this now more or less at par in terms of product output, but profitability is yet to join? Or how do we stand there?

Okay. So with regard to acrylic acid, first of all, we're happy to see after, as you mentioned, a couple of years of challenges to see some improvement, and we appreciate that for the team is very important.

And it's not in detriment of the downstream, which is good because you saw the Coating Solutions performance in Q1, which is at par with the previous year. So even in the previous year were not great.

I think so this is a chain, which is which is solid right now. Now as we mentioned, the tightness, we have no crystal ball.

I think we are cautious because we are just out of 2 years where acrylics are really under pressure, but we think that clearly with the conflicts and maybe hopefully beyond the conflict, I think we'll stabilize around more normalized spread, but let's do it step-by-step. The first step is to do our job in a market which has changed nobody with Middle East crisis, and we'll see how long will this crisis last.

It's a big parameter and nobody knows about it. And after that, we'll see where we stand and we will certainly update to.

I think the good news is that we benefit from this diversity of the portfolio with some more upstream business and some re-downstream businesses. On the sulfur, I think we -- on the methionine, we are not in the methionine, we -- I would say we supplied our customers.

So this market share is more [indiscernible]. What we do ourselves is to supply them the best way possible.

On the availability of the sulfur, we manage -- so this is the good news. Now the sulfur has increased very much.

So our topic is to increase. And this is where we are sometime lag by contract.

Not every market is the same. But I would say we find the sulfur.

On Singapore, I would say, first of all, the good news is that the Singapore plant is running very well. It took years, as you know.

We started at a low point, and we learned a lot. And now it's really a very, very nice plant, very optimized.

So compared to Marseille, it's more modern, so it should be more profitable. But on the other side, the capacity is smaller than Marseille.

So I would say, all-in-all, they are comparable to answer your question.

Okay. So if there are no more questions, I thank you very much for your attention.

And as usual, don't hesitate to contact the IR team to complete my answers. And have a nice day to everybody.