Welcome to today's event where we have the pleasure to present Wirtek. Half-year result is what is in focus on today's event where we will take a walkthrough the results for the first half-year and, of course, look a little bit ahead through the guidance.

As always, we are joined by CEO and founder, Michael Aaen, and CFO, Mads Greiffenberg, who will help us through the presentation and, of course, answer questions in the end. In that connection, there's a box down below where you can feel free to ask questions during the event, but we will take the main part or all the questions in the end in a Q&A session.

Do feel free to ask it in Danish. I'll try and translate to the best of my ability.

For now, I will hand the call over to you, Michael.

Thank you, Michael. My name is Michael Aaen, and I'm the CEO of Wirtek, and with me today is our CFO, Mads Greiffenberg.

We'll take you through our results for the second quarter of 2026 and our first half-year results. It's a quarter where the bottom-line profitability was restored.

I'll also cover the acquisition of D-Techs Change, which we completed on Wednesday this week. Same day, we also published our Q2 report, and actually, the reason why we had to postpone this webcast a couple of days.

Now our CFO will present the financial highlights. Over to you, Mads.

Thank you, Michael, and Michael. Even though the acquisition of D-Techs Change is probably the most important and exciting thing to talk about right now, I would still like to take you through the numbers for Q2 first.

Revenue came in at 15.1 million for Q2 and 30.6 million for the first half of the year, and that's broadly in line with last year. The headline this quarter is again profitability.

EBITDA improved to 1.3 million from .3 in Q2 last year, and the EBITDA margin reached 8.3% against 1.7% last year. The pretax result turned positive at .5 million in the quarter against -0.8 million in Q2 last year.

For the first half of the year, positive .3 million against -2.7 million last year. That's a swing of 3 million year-over-year.

On funding, the 5 million long-term facility we established in the first quarter extended the maturity profile of our debt. Cash increased to 3.2 million from 2.2, and net cash holding, which is cash net of total bank debt, stand at -11.2 million against -8.3 million at the start of the year.

This movement is a -1.2 million in operating cash and investment of 1.6 million. The equity ratio is 40%, down from 44% a year ago, and the liquidity ratio is 125%, up from 102%.

Both ratios remains at a solid operating level for Wirtek. Next slide, please.

The left chart shows the five-quarter trajectory on revenue and EBITDA for Wirtek. Revenue has been stable in the 15 to 17 million range, and Q2 at 15.1 million is broadly level with Q1.

Two observations on that pattern: First, the half-year comparison, EBITDA for the first half-year was positive 1.9 million against a -0.8 million a year ago. That's an improvement of 2.7 million.

The margin moved from -2.7% to positive 6.1% year-over-year. This is due to our structural changes made in '25.

Staff costs came down, and capacity utilization improved. The second observation is the sequential step.

Q2 at 1.3 million is more than doubled the .6 million we delivered in Q1. The third quarter is typically stronger, as we also saw in '25, and we expect the improvement to be sustained.

Then finally, a word on our revenue line: Our strategy involves a gradual shift from time and material towards outcome-based engagement. This means that we capture more value from the same volume of work at a higher margin.

This is why the top line is flat while earnings are not. First-half EBITDA alone exceeds the whole of '25.

On the right side, we have the geographic split for the first half of the year. The US remains our largest market at 37%, followed by Denmark, the Netherlands, and Portugal.

International markets continue to support a diversified and resilient revenue base for Wirtek. Next slide, please.

On guidance, we maintain the full-year '26 outlook published at the annual report of '25. That's revenue in the range of 65 to 70 million and EBITDA of 3 to 6 million.

Let me set out what that implies: First-half revenue was 30.6 million, second half needs to be at 34.4 to reach the bottom and 39.4 to reach the top, against the 33.3 delivered in the second half of last year. On EBITDA, the first half delivered 1.9 million.

That leaves 1.1 million for the bottom and 4.1 million for the top, against 2.5 million delivered second half of last year. Confirmed project extensions, including the engagement we announced in July, and stable utilization entering the second half are the factors that underpin our confidence in that range.

The D-Techs Change acquisition takes economic effect from August, and it will contribute to both revenue and EBITDA in the second half. Given the effective date, the contribution to '26 is limited, and we, therefore, do not change our guidance.

Thank you, and with that, back to you, Michael.

Thank you, Mads. First, on profitability: A year ago, we reported a negative first half of the year.

Today, the pretax results is positive for the quarter as well as for the first half of this year. This is the second full quarter of effect from our new strategy, and it confirms the structural changes we made in 2025 are working.

Staff costs are down almost 9% for the first half, capacity utilization has improved, and delivery discipline is holding. The margin recovery shows that our new strategy starts to take effect.

Second highlight: Shortly after the end of Q2, Wirtek obtained ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 certifications. In short, ISO 9001 is the international standard for quality management.

An independent auditor has verified that we work in a documented, consistent manner with processes so that our clients get the same quality every time. ISO 27001 is the same for information security: independent verification of how we protect our clients' data and systems.

Why does this matter? In the regulated industries, where we increasingly win business, clients do not take a supplier's word for these things.

They ask for proof, and many will not shortlist a supplier without these certifications. Our strategy singles out security and compliance as a competitive advantage, and these certifications put substance behind that claim.

Third is an important strategic milestone for Wirtek. On August 12th, this Wednesday, we completed the acquisition of D-Techs Change, a Danish Software as a Service company.

This is the most significant strategic step this year, at least until now, of course, and one that adds a significant subscription-based recurring revenue to our Solutions Division. I'll dive deeper into this acquisition on the following slides.

Next slide, please. Back in June, we announced a letter of intent, and two months later, on August 12th, we completed the acquisition.

D-Techs Change is a Danish SaaS company with a subsidiary in the USA. Its DX5 platform delivers Component Content Management for structured documentation, that is, documentation built from reusable, controlled components rather than static files.

It's built on Microsoft 365, on Microsoft SharePoint, and on Microsoft Word, customers can introduce structured, audit-ready documentation without new infrastructure and without retraining their employees. This brings rollout with clients down to weeks instead of many months or even years.

The customer base tells you the potential of this product. These are blue chip organizations across North America and Europe, all of them in regulated industries.

The important part of this is that both sides of the regulatory chain use the platform. On one side, our customers include rule makers like EASA or European Union Aviation Safety Agency.

It also includes European Defence Agency as well as Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. On the other side, we have regulated companies like Lockheed Martin, GKN Fokker, Danish Grundfos, and the London Stock Exchange as customers.

When the regulator and the regulated work in the same format, the platform really becomes very hard to replace. In 2025, not a single customer left.

The annual recurring revenue for D-Techs Change grew by 22% in 2025 to approximately 2.9 million. The price, or the target price, for the acquisition is 9.1 million Danish krones, settled entirely in cash, there is no dilution of existing shareholders.

The price has three parts: We paid 6 million fixed at closing, another 1.5 million is guaranteed as part of the seller's earn-out, and the remaining 1.6 million in the target price is tied to an average annual growth in annual recurring revenue of 30% during the seller's earn-out that runs from 2026 to 2028. This tells you that both the sellers and Wirtek actually believes this product can deliver significant growth.

As Mads already mentioned, it'll take economic effect from August 1st, it does not change our guidance for this year. Next slide, please.

I want to make it a little more concrete with an example. EASA, or the European Union Aviation Safety Agency, publishes its Easy Access Rules on the D-Techs Change platform.

The content reaches more than 20,000 stakeholder companies across European aviation: every operator, airline, training organization, manufacturer, and so on has to comply, all of it maintained in one component library. This also matters for AI.

AI is only as good as the content you actually pointed at. Unstructured documentation like scattered files, copies, and old versions gives you answers from AI that really you cannot trust.

Structured content is the opposite: Every component is approved, versioned, and current. We have one source of truth readable by AI.

AI can find the right answer and show exactly where it came from. In regulated industries, that kind of traceability is not a nice-to-have, it is the requirement.

Customers on this platform already have the foundation that AI-assisted documentation needs. We'll bring this model to more regulated industries as part of the rollout plan.

Next slide, please. Why D-Techs Change?

Because it actually delivers directly on three of the five strategic tracks on our new strategy we launched in November last year. We will scale the Solutions portfolio by adding a subscription-based product with recurring revenue alongside the Wirtek IoT suite we already have.

We see security and compliance as a competitive advantage, and structured, audit-ready documentation is exactly that proposition. Lastly, this is a strategic acquisition that extends our customer base in the markets we focus on.

The cross-selling logic runs in both directions here: We can bring Wirtek's development, testing, and compliance services to D-Techs Change's installed base, and we'll also target the DX5 subscription model at Wirtek's clients, some of them carrying heavy documentation and compliance requirements. Our ISO 9001 and ISO 27001 certifications, they support that direction.

Then there is the opportunity that attracted us the most here: D-Techs Change has not had a dedicated sales and marketing effort. Every one of those blue chip customers found the product themselves, not the other way around.

A product that grows 22% with zero churn on inbound demand alone tells you the product works. What it has lacked is a commercial engine, and that's exactly what Wirtek will bring.

The addressable market is the large population of regulated organizations that already are running on Microsoft platform. For them, adopting DX5 requires no new infrastructure.

As I said a moment ago, the ambition is anchored in the deal itself: The seller earn-out is aligned to an average annual recurring revenue growth of 30%. The sellers share an ambition with our shareholders.

This concludes my presentation for today, thank you for your attention, and we are ready to answer any questions you may have.

Perfect. There's a question regarding that what you just ended with.

Maybe it's important there's a question here, how many international investors do you have? Why do we keep these web calls on English or send out in English?

Maybe you can explain a little bit about the other stakeholders or any considerations why we do this in English, and you publish in English.

Yeah. It is something we've been discussing internally several times, because on one side, the majority of our shareholders are Danish share shareholders.

We also have quite a significant number of our colleagues that also have Wirtek shares, and most of them actually do not speak Danish. Of course, we also have a lot of stakeholders in general that are We're a very international company, so so other stakeholders would also probably be interested in what we're presenting here, and they would not then be able to to really understand what I'm saying here.

It is something we are really discussing, because it would could make a lot of sense. We'll still be presenting our results in English, but a webcast like this, it could could make sense to do it in Danish, and then maybe subtitle the presentation afterwards as a way to to address both needs, right?

We'll continue that internal discussion. Let's see if we can get everybody happy on this point.

Perfect, perfect. Then there's a question here whether you consider some smaller share buy programs if that will end up maybe in the high ends of your guidance.

Could you consider share buybacks as a part of your asset allocation strategy?

Share buyback is part of our capital structure policy, so that is one of those instruments that we have, or the tools in the toolbox that we have available here. Again, this is something that if we were considering this or wanted to do this, I would have to inform it into the market so everybody has the information at the same time.

I couldn't really comment on this in this webcast.

Of course, of course. Of course, the questioner is also pointing out, too, that if you have them and you don't make them disappear, you can actually use them for M&A, it is actually like a piggy bank, also.

Some other companies has used that. I think your answer is all we can get without breaking any regulations.

Then there's some very specific questions. I don't know whether you want to go into that specific: What are the development of hourly billing trends in your different geographical segments?

A little bit about those hourly billing rates. I don't know whether you want to go so deep into it in geographical segments.

We are not really publishing our rates towards clients or towards specific markets. Hourly rates are actually one of those things that we are getting more and more away from.

That is, we want to move away from having these hourly rates, or to more having a componentized way of delivering to our clients, where the hourly rate is not as important anymore. What we can say is that that is the direction we're already working towards.

As you can see from the numbers here, while our revenue is flat as right now, our margins are increasing significantly. Indirectly, you can argue that the hourly rate or the equivalent of an hourly rate might be improving, or maybe the effort having to deliver on the services we are doing are getting lower, right?

We are improving profitability. That's, I guess, how close I can get to that.

Yeah. It's not what the revenue, it is the margin in between, I guess, that is, at the end, the most important.

Then actually touching upon what you ended with, would you consider expanding into owning products in software and acquiring vertical market software companies like Wirtek and Visma has big success with, leveraging this ARR model, but with the use of FTEs? I think it was a little bit what you pointed to: This company haven't had any sales effort.

Why can't we use our FTEs for that sales efforts? A little bit consideration, maybe it will not be Visma tomorrow, but is this a part of your considerations, and should we see D-Techs Change as, yeah, actually a yes to this question?

It does show that we are true to our strategy, and we're actually making smaller strategic acquisitions here. Again, it's for us, it's important that it fits the road we're on here.

Since we are very focused on the regulated industries, we are very focused on recurring revenue streams as part of our future growth plan here, we are not just going to do acquisitions just for the sake of the acquisitions, they need somehow to fit strategically into the direction we are on here. It's still part of the strategy, even though we just completed an acquisition, I'm sure that in the future, we are going to do further acquisitions because that is part of the strategy.

Perfect. Then there's, how realistic is it that you end in the high end of the guidance?

Who would demand you? You showed it yourself, Mads, on the picture how much you would need to grow also compared to last year.

I don't know whether you want to comment on the realism about the high end of the guidance being reached. Is there something we should see?

Has there been some prioritization? Have you postponed some projects?

Any comments on maybe where we could land in the guidance if you will do that, or if you want to do that?

I don't know, do you want to take that one, Mads, or do you want me to?

You can do it.

Okay. We're maintaining our guidance.

We cannot say exactly where we are inside of that, right, because that would be information that has to be reaching every investor out there. I'm not allowed to tell.

Check. Then, I think there is one here for you, Mads.

Then, other operating income, what does that cover, and will the high amount you had here in the first half continue through '26?

Thank you for that. It's primarily income from publicly funded projects.

According to the Danish accounting rules, we cannot classify that as regular revenue. That's why we showed there.

We saw enough potential in these projects to enter these, and it is multi-year agreements, there will be a contribution also in the coming periods. It's not an area of the business we're trying to grow, but if it makes sense for us, we will do it.

Of course, we don't guide on separate lines, but the multi-year

It is multi-year projects as you say.

It is multi-year, and, of course, it's within our current guidance of EBITDA. I think that's what I can disclose on that.

Perfect, perfect. Then there's the payback time on D-Techs Change.

You've all talked about much that your M&A practice in the old days had a very short payback time. We now have the price, we now have the ARR, and so on, maybe we can calculate it ourselves.

What periods are you working with on payback time on the purchases?

Mads could probably answer that even more precise than I can, but we can't really say precisely. Of course, we expect that it will be a reasonable period for the payback time here.

The potential is really, really large here. You're talking about an organization where I've sometimes asked myself, how did a company like Lockheed Martin find D-Techs Change?

Because they're not very visible out there, right? They are covering a need.

If you are as a regulated industry company working in the Microsoft platform, a company like D-Techs Change really fits well, because there really is no competition that does exactly the same. They Just

maybe cover a part of IT. If I should understand your answer right, this is not a short-term payback, this is a growth engine that you are more looking at?

I know it needs to maybe be profitable and so on, but should I hear your answer that you see the opportunity for this to be a growth engine more than a fast payback time, small investment?

Let's say it like this, that the current market share of D-Techs Change in that segment of companies that actually use the Microsoft platform and have to adhere to a regulated industry information, it's very, very small market share. There is growth opportunities, definitely.

Then about the fixed price projects, you mentioned you want to move. You have seen some movement, but also, if I understood you a little bit, that it was maybe not as fast as you had hoped for.

Is that some projects that has been postponed, or is it projects that hasn't really materialized, meaning it will not come? Just a little bit about those fixed price projects you want to move over to.

What I can say that, we just bit of a month ago, we published the fact that we're going to deliver cybersecurity solutions for photovoltaic solar cell parks in Ireland and Northern Ireland, three of those, right, so that is fixed price projects with quite healthy margins, I'll say.

Has it been postponement or is some project not been to something that's behind, maybe it was a little bit under what you expected to receive here in the first half-year?

If we're talking about our Wirtek IoT suite, that it's a new area that we're building up from ground up, right? It will always take some time to get the traction in the market there, right?

It takes time to build up

that

market, right?

It's Hofstadter's Law: It takes longer time even if you consider the law. Yes, I understand.

Then a final question. I don't know whether you want to comment on this, but no mention of the chairman of the board role.

Can you please explain the reason behind it, the change of the chairman? I don't know whether you want to get into details or about this.

Sure, it actually says it in the announcement of the D-Techs Change acquisition. Our chairman also had a shareholding of less than 15% in D-Techs Change, which means that he cannot participate in any discussions concerning this acquisition because he's on the both sides in this here.

He has not been represented at all in these discussions inside of Wirtek from our side. Then again, since he has been working with D-Techs Change for many, he has a big knowledge that is very valuable for us also in integrating D-Techs Change into Wirtek until we get a business director in place, because one of the main owners of D-Techs Change is in a situation where he's on a path to retirements, we need to get a new business director in to the business.

In that transition period, until we have that in place, our chairman is going to go in on a consulting basis to help with this transition here. Then that makes a lot of sense then to make that change, so that's the reasoning behind this.

You're already running ahead answering the next question, because D-Techs Change potential clients are quite different than current clients. Will there be a dedicated person to manage this different process of the projected strong growth?

I think maybe already you touched a little bit upon it.

Yes. We're going to definitely focus a lot on expanding the market on this product here.

You will have a dedicated person, it sounded like?

There's dedicated personnel there, and also, of course, there's going to be a lot of shared services also from marketing, helping to push this out over the ramp.

Yeah. Perfect.

That was the last question. Thank you to you, Michael, and Mads, for taking us through your half-year results.

As Mads maybe mentioned, it was more interesting the latest M&A development. I don't know, I also like numbers, maybe I'm a little bit split there.

Thank you to both for taking us through the news flow and the financial results and answering question here. May everybody have a nice weekend.

Yeah. Thank you, Michael.

Have a nice weekend.