Good morning. I'm Jason Weate, Fund Manager of Dexus Industrial REIT, and I'm pleased to present DXI's first-half '26 results.

I would like to begin by acknowledging the traditional custodians of the many lands on which we operate and pay our respects to elders past and present. Today I will discuss DXI's investment proposition, key highlights for the period, and our first-half '26 financial results.

I will also share insight into our portfolio's performance, recent acquisitions, and development pipeline before opening for Q&A. DXI provides investors with high-quality, strategically located industrial assets featuring significant diversity of over 88 assets valued at $1.4 billion, access to 80% of the population within 60 minutes of our asset base, and strong exposure to the infill market.

In addition, our portfolio has a significant development pipeline at Ascend at Jandakot. DXI's investment proposition is to generate strong risk-adjusted returns from Australian industrial real estate.

We achieve this by focusing on three key objectives: firstly, through owning a strategic portfolio that is attractive to a diverse range of tenants and capable of delivering secure and growing income; second, we take an active approach to portfolio management to maximize value-adding opportunities; and finally, we practice prudent balance sheet management, providing us with flexibility to invest opportunistically through the cycle. Turning to the highlights for the period.

We are pleased to provide slightly upgraded FFO guidance of 17.4 cents and distributions of 16.6 cents per security, driven by a high-performing portfolio and secured pre-leasing at Glendenning. For the half, funds from operations were 8.9 cents per security, with distributions at 8.3 cents per security.

Portfolio like-for-like income growth was 7.4%, supported by embedded rental escalations and significant leasing and high occupancy. We continue to deliver positive momentum across our development book, with over 24,000 square meters of completions at Jandakot, with further projects progressing as planned.

We've now fully redeployed proceeds from the divestment of BTP in Queensland into acquisitions across three high-quality urban infill locations. Our balance sheet remains strong, with look-through gearing of 26.2% at 31 December, remaining below our target range and providing us with capital deployment flexibility.

Our portfolio continues to deliver positive valuation momentum, with $15 million of gains contributing to a 1.5% increase in our NTA. The DXI portfolio delivers an attractive and differentiated mix of income security with embedded rental growth drivers and a development pipeline of scale that provides an additional layer of growth for investors.

Our income security is supported by high occupancy of 99.7%, and we are well-placed to manage near-term expiries, with potential to unlock under-renting opportunities over the medium term. We are exposed to a diverse tenant base, with approximately 87% of income subject to contracted rental increases above 3%, and our scaled development pipeline provides the vehicle with opportunity to drive outsized returns for investors and enhance FFO growth over the medium term.

DXI remains committed to delivering sustainability outcomes that generate both environmental and financial benefits. Our sustainability initiatives include solar installations, recycling or reusing materials, and EV charging capability for trucks, which not only reduce environmental impact, but also enhance asset appeal and long-term value.

Turning to our financial results. For the period, DXI delivered funds from operations of $28.2 million, or 8.9 cents per security.

Distributions were 8.3 cents. At the property line, strong like-for-like income growth and leasing outcomes more than offset reduced income from the sale of BTP.

Net finance costs increased over the period, driven primarily by higher cost of debt from increasing hedge rates and floating rates. Together, these factors resulted in a marginal decline in FFO per security compared to the prior period.

Look-through gearing remained low at 26.2% and is expected to increase by approximately 2.3% following the Moorebank acquisition. Even if we fully debt fund our current development pipeline, gearing would remain within our target range, underscoring the strength and capacity of our balance sheet.

During the period, we refinanced and extended $150 million of debt on more attractive margins, while eliminating short-term refinancing risk with no maturities until FY '28. DXI reported a positive valuation uplift of $14.8 million over the half, or a 1% increase on prior book values, driven by strong leasing outcomes and development progress at Jandakot.

Cap rate expansion slowed to 3 basis points across the industrial portfolio compared to 11 basis points in FY '25, which reflects stabilizing market conditions and continued investor demand for industrial assets. Our portfolio continues to deliver strong operating performance.

In the stabilized portfolio, we secured 13,500 square meters of leasing, with renewal incentives below market and occupancy remaining high at 99.7%. Like-for-like income growth of 7.4% was up from 5.9% in FY '25 and was supported by positive lease spreads on renewals of 7.6% and average rent reviews of 3.3% across the portfolio.

We've acquired four high-quality assets located at Glendenning, two in Dandenong South, and as released to the market yesterday, the acquisition of our remaining 50% interest in Moorebank. We've now redeployed the entirety of BTP sale proceeds into acquisitions with a distinct investment thesis.

Glendenning is a repositioning opportunity. We've acquired an older asset in a land-constrained Northwest Sydney precinct with strong occupier demand.

As such, we've taken the opportunity to bring forward the lease-up of that asset, requiring only minor refurbishments. We will preserve the option for a full repositioning into a modern multi-unit facility with a secured DA that we will keep in place.

Dandenong South is a reversion play where acquiring at a 6% cap rate with approximately 20% under-renting, a portion of which we have the opportunity to unlock in 2 years' time from now. At Moorebank, the opportunity allows us to lift our Sydney weighting from 6% to 10%, a segment we think will be additive to the portfolio's rent growth profile over time.

The recently completed development has material valuation upside potential upon full lease-up of the asset. These acquisitions collectively enhance portfolio quality by deploying capital into supply-constrained markets with embedded rental growth.

Turning to our development pipeline at Jandakot, which represents a $225 million investment opportunity and is an important driver of future earnings growth. Since we acquired Jandakot, South Perth rents have grown at over 14% per annum and well ahead of construction costs, and this spread is what underpins our development returns.

The chart on the right shows the result, and importantly, it shows momentum. Yields on cost have improved from circa 5% when we started to approximately 6.6% that we expect to deliver on our committed pipeline.

Overall, the development pipeline is well-positioned to provide the fund with an ongoing source of earnings accretion into the future. More specifically, on first-half '26 completions at 19 and 21 Marriott Street, we delivered a fully leased yield on cost of 7.4% and 7.1% respectively.

Our committed pipeline spans across seven projects at Jandakot, with 77% of income already pre-leased. Moving on to market fundamentals.

Notwithstanding a period of normalization in net absorption, which has been influenced by material supply, the outlook is set to rebound. The development economics in Sydney and Melbourne are significantly challenged, with rents needing to rise within a range of 10% to 36% in key submarkets before new development becomes viable.

Market forecasts assume that all development-approved projects proceed, but feasibility constraints suggest that many won't. The third chart on the right projects how this may play out in relation to speculative completions, which are expected to decline by some 44% over 2026 and '27.

These market dynamics position us well for rental growth over the medium term. In summary, we are well-placed to continue delivering long-term value for investors, supported by a resilient earnings profile and strong, flexible balance sheet.

DXI's momentum in activating high-quality developments continues to enhance portfolio quality and drive long-term growth. DXI is currently trading at a significant discount to our NTA, and as such, presents a compelling investment opportunity to access embedded value and future growth.

Looking to FY '26, barring unforeseen circumstances, DXI has upgraded its guidance to deliver FFO of 17.4 cents per security and distributions of 16.6 cents for FY '26. Thank you for joining the call, and I will now hand back to the moderator for questions.

Good morning, Jason and team. First question for me, if I may.

Can you talk about the moving parts that might sit in guidance for FY '26 that's now been upgraded?

Thanks, Andy. I think we've called out that the primary driver for the slight upgrade relates to the secured pre-leasing that we've done at Glendenning.

I guess there's always a few additional drivers, in addition to that, we've done a little bit of extra leasing at Moorebank. The second tranche of the sale of BTP was delayed a little bit, so that'll be another positive driver.

I guess the combination of those things will more than offset roughly a 60 basis point increase in second-half floating rates since we set guidance.

Makes sense. Just in terms of Glendenning, can you just talk maybe a little bit about what's changed in terms of the approach there with the asset?

What's happened at Glendenning is we've had an opportunity to secure a 3PL tenant that specializes in last mile. They're attracted to the site given its proximity to the M7.

They'll relocate from Smithfield, and I guess given the certainty that that offer provides us, we've taken the opportunity to bring forward that income whilst retaining optionality to undertake extensive works for a multi-unit facility for which we have a DA secured and that we will keep on foot and look to utilize potentially the next rental cycle. That's what's happened with the asset, and that security of income has influenced the yield on cost that we are now buying on, but obviously we have future development profits as a source of upside.

Makes sense. Final one from me, if I may.

Just on Moorebank, are you able just to talk through the rationale, I guess, for you increasing your stake that you didn't already own, and how are you thinking about leasing from here on that asset?

Firstly on the the acquisition side of things, I mean obviously we the key one is we we get to consolidate ownership in a brand-new asset that we we know really well. There's there's value attached to that.

We we have a rent guarantee that'll that'll protect us in in F or protect our FY '26 earnings piece as we further look to to lease up, and we're confident that there's valuation upside once that asset is fully leased, which, we we hope will translate to an attractive IRR profile for the acquisition. It's also just just really difficult to replicate that kind of prime product in inner Sydney.

As that relates to leasing, we we think the we think the platform's making some some progress steadily. We've got four of the six units in total that are now leased.

We've got a strong amount of inquiry on the remaining couple of units. Importantly, we're not seeing us lose out to competing product.

We also do acknowledge that as part of that lease-up process, that leasing decisions on the part of, incoming tenants is taking longer. Landlords are offering, more incentives than they previously have, and that's to to sorry, to to help keep their sitting tenants in place, and that's making it at the margin harder to attract relocations than some 12 months ago.

I guess on top of that, you've got some macroeconomic uncertainty that, in relation to things like interest rates, elections, and and tariffs, and the like, that is has weighed on and frankly slowed tenant decision-making. All in all, we're really happy with the levels of inquiry that we continue to get for that asset, and we're really confident about our leasing prospects going forward.

Clear. Thanks, Jason.

Thanks, Andy. Thank you.

Good morning, Jason and team. Thanks for taking my questions.

Just a follow-up on Glendenning, is all that site pre-leased now? How much have you had to spend on the modest kind of refurb that you've done or that you're doing now?

Thanks, David. It currently is a one-unit facility, so that incoming tenant will see that the asset fully occupied.

We do have a smallish scale of capex to make some minor refurbishments to the site. There'll be some forecourt works, for example, and that will cost us around about $4 million compared to the $10 million scheme that we were previously contemplating for the multi-unit facility.

Thank you. Just one question on guidance.

I think it implies a bit of a skew to the first half, 51-49. Is that normal or is there anything kind of one-off that needs to be called out in the first half?

Or is that a reflection of the 60 basis point increase in floating rates for the second half?

Thanks, David. I think it's a couple of factors there.

Floating rates ticking up is undoubtedly one of them. I think you can expect our all-in cost of debt to track or edge up slightly higher than what it was in the first half.

Also, we had the benefit of BTP high-yielding income in the first half that we won't have in the second half, so that's driving that skew.

Thank you. Just the last one from me on the refinancing that you did, the $150 million, mentioned that you did it on more attractive margins.

Are you able to specify kind of what margin? You also mentioned no maturities until FY '28, is there a possibility of refinancing to lock in lower debt margins that might be on offer at the moment?

That particular refinancing attracted a saving of about 7 to 8 basis points. In addition to that, and I guess it's to your point around other opportunities, with the acquisition of Moorebank, we've taken on a new debt facility.

That's coming at, again, a really attractive margin that's some sort of 15 basis points inside of what we feel like market is. With the more refinancing we do, we are continuing to access cheaper margins.

Thanks, Jason. Appreciate it.

Thanks, David.

Morning, Jason. First question was just on that 7.4% like-for-like growth number.

I was wondering whether you could just unpack that for us a little bit. Obviously, quite a bit higher than what the embedded fixed bumps would be, and probably in line with what you've been reporting in terms of leasing spreads in the past year or so.

What drove that 7.4%?

Thanks, Murray. I guess that headline number has benefited from what was prior period downtime at 2 Maker Place.

First half '25 had about 3 months' vacancy in it for that asset. Obviously, that didn't repeat for first half '26.

In addition to that lack of downtime, we also benefited from a 40% rent reversion on that particular lease. I think that's probably the key driver that's adding to some of the other leases that we've struck over the period.

Got it. Then just having a look at some of the yields on cost that are coming through on these various sheds that are getting put up at Jandakot, and comparing that to delivering in the sort of high 6s, early 7s, versus the 6.25 for the sort of more longer-term portfolio.

I was wondering whether your thinking around return hurdles has shifted much in the past 6 months or so, given yeah, first of all, it looks as if deliveries of yields on cost have been pretty strong on the more recent completions, but also we've got slightly higher funding costs that have come through in the last 3 months as well.

Murray. We haven't had a fundamental reset in terms of how we think about hurdles for Jandakot.

You'll note in the pack that we still quote to a 6.25% plus target for a yield on cost. That is to reflect something of a baseline expectation that we have through the cycle.

Obviously, as you can see, where yield on costs have trended up towards, we're currently cycling through yields that are better than that. Bearing in mind, it will vary depend on the size of box that we're ultimately putting down on the ground, but at the moment, you can expect sort of more around at the high 6s mark into the near term on our committed segment of the pipeline.

Murray, no real fundamental change in how we think about thresholds, unless, of course, you're referring to some of the other new acquisitions as well.

No, it was more just on the Jandakot development pipeline. Thought the acquisitions were clear.

Just lastly, on the balance sheet broadly speaking, the look-through gearing still looks pretty conservative at sub-30 even when factoring in the acquisition that was announced yesterday. You've obviously mentioned the pretty deep discount at which the shares are trading.

I was wondering whether you might consider deploying a little bit of that balance sheet into a buyback, given the accretion that seems to be a play there.

Sure. Just starting with the gearing piece.

We are currently at 26.2%. Following Moorebank, that'll tick up to about 28.5%, still some significant optionality on the table.

We are comfortable taking up gearing towards the midpoint of the target range as we fund the development pipeline and continue to pursue opportunities. That'll take us on a pro forma basis to the mid-30s.

Where we take it from there will be dependent on the nature and attractiveness of deployment opportunities that are available to us, of which obviously the buyback is one of those. It's not off the table.

We continue to assess that as part of our capital allocation planning. Fundamentally, it does come down to the marginal dollar of spend and where value creation is greatest.

We do have a portfolio of scale with diversification, but we are conscious of some of the negatives associated with shrinking the vehicle from where it is now. Still very much an option on the table, but there are obviously broader considerations that go into that decision-making.

Understood. Thank you, Jason.

Thanks,

Murray.

Hi all. Thank you for taking my question.

It seems like the broader sector conditions seem to be stabilizing, despite some upwards pressure. Could you just talk through how leasing conditions differ across your key markets, and which submarkets you would describe as stabilizing versus under pressure?

I guess how does the forward supply outlook differ across those markets?

Yeah. I guess in terms of how we're thinking about probably the rents side of things, I think as a more general comment, we do expect face rents to continue to grow across most submarkets, albeit the pace has normalized.

Growth is becoming more varied by submarket. I think infill locations do continue to outperform non-infill, and we think that aligns well with our portfolio, given close to 80% are in the infill locations.

Obviously, the development feasibility constraint piece in Sydney and Melbourne is supportive to promote ongoing rental growth. In terms of how we think about some of the other markets that perhaps are attractive, we think sort of middle-ring industrial precincts in supply-constrained submarkets, and close to population and transport infrastructure is sort of on our radar, and will remain sort of East Coast focused for Sydney and Melbourne, which are sort of our priority markets given existing Jandakot land holdings in Perth.

In terms of leasing across our portfolio, and how that sort of contrasts with the broader market comments I've made, we've achieved 7.6% leasing spreads on our stabilized portfolio over the period, and that's across seven deals. We are continuing to strike incentives that we think are below market, let's call it at the 15% mark, and I think those leasing results sort of demonstrate a balanced market more generally.

Thank you for that. Just secondly, I know you alluded to all-in cost of debt, jumping 60 bips.

I just guess in terms of the second-half cost of debt guidance, could you clarify what base rate assumption you're using?

Sorry. The quote I made before was a specific reference to the increase in floating rates.

We've assumed a second-half floating rate of 4.1%, so that's what's jumped up 60 basis points since we first set guidance. The way to think about the movement of our all-in cost of debt is we're currently cycling through 4.9% in the first half, and I think you can expect that to trickle up to just a touch over 5% for the full year.

No, thank you for the clarification. Just one more if I may.

Occupancy jumped 110 basis points of the half. Are you able just provide a bit more color in terms of the income contribution from that, whether or not it'll be captured across that second half, or pushed further back?

Most of the shift in that occupancy, I think is mostly flowing through the portfolio. We don't expect that to be an incremental driver over the second half, but for the fact that BTP has come out of those occupancy numbers, and that's also influencing the headline number.

Thank you.

I'd to thank you all again for taking the time to join the call and hear the DXI update, and I really look forward to catching up with you all in the coming days. Thank you.