Good morning. Thank you for joining us today for Post's fourth quarter fiscal 2025 earnings call.

I'm joined this morning by Rob Vitale, our President and CEO; Jeff Zadoks, our COO; and Matt Mainer, our CFO and Treasurer. Rob, Jeff, and Matt will make prepared remarks, and afterwards, we'll answer your questions.

The press release that supports these remarks is posted on both the Investors and the SEC Filings portions of our website and is also available on the SEC's website. As a reminder, this call is being recorded and an audio replay will be available on our website at postholdings.com.

Before we continue, I would like to remind you that this call will contain certain forward-looking statements, which are subject to risks and uncertainties that should be carefully considered by investors, as actual results could differ materially from these statements. These forward-looking statements are current as of the date of this call, and management undertakes no obligation to update these statements.

This call will discuss certain non-GAAP measures. For reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures to the nearest GAAP measure, see our press release issued yesterday and posted on our website.

With that, I will turn the call over to Rob.

Thanks, Daniel, and good morning, everyone. We had a good FY 2025, and we ended with a strong quarter.

It was an interesting year as we navigated regulatory changes, tariffs, avian flu, and uncertain consumer sentiment. Despite this challenging environment, our portfolio of businesses displayed resilience and delivered strong results.

We expect that the benefits of our diversification will allow us to navigate an environment of continued uncertainty. We expect continued volume growth in our food service business, especially in our highest value products.

In retail, we remain disciplined in the face of a very challenging volume landscape, keeping our focus on cost reduction and profitable brand investments. Jeff and Matt will provide detail on our FY 2026 outlook.

We will focus on what we can control, and from that perspective, I like our positioning. I expect food service to provide volume growth and our retail businesses to generate considerable cash flow to fund both organic and inorganic opportunities.

In that vein, a highlight of FY 2025 was our strong operating cash flow, which allowed us to maintain flat net leverage while making key capital investments, completing two tactical acquisitions, and buying back over 11% of the company. With a step down in capital spending and the benefits from the new tax law, we expect a meaningful increase in FY 2026 free cash flow.

Coupled with our long-dated debt maturity ladder, we can be opportunistic with our capital allocation decisions. We continue to review M&A opportunities and we benchmark them against buying back our own shares.

I would like to thank all of our employees for another successful year. The strength and diversification of our operating model, combined with dedicated employees, give me a great deal of confidence in continuing our track record of value creation.

Before I turn the call over to Jeff, I want to make a personal comment. Bill has been a mentor, business partner, and friend for nearly 30 years, and I expect that to continue, regardless of titles.

Jeff?

Thanks, Rob, and good morning, everyone. We delivered strong consolidated results in Q4.

Our cold chain businesses did a fantastic job in navigating HPAI. In addition, across the entire portfolio, cost reductions and manufacturing execution combined to more than offset the impact of lower retail volumes.

At Post Consumer Brands, our branded and private label cereal businesses experienced consumption declines resulting from challenging category dynamics. In pet, our volume consumption was down versus a flat category, driven primarily by Nutrish.

As a reminder, we are adjusting the value proposition and messaging for this brand, with changes to be in market by the end of fiscal Q2. A bright spot in pet was Kibbles 'n Bits, which had strong consumption volume versus the prior year.

In spite of the volume challenges, we were successful in growing our Consumer Brands EBITDA margin, excluding 8th Avenue, by 100 basis points, driven by improved mix in cereal and strong cost management across the segment. Our upcoming cereal plant closures will further help to alleviate the impact of cereal category declines.

Setting aside HPAI, food service had strong underlying performance driven by growth in both egg and potato volumes. While a portion of Q4 egg volume growth was related to timing from improved egg availability and customer inventory replenishment, we continue to see strong demand, in particular for our higher value-added products.

Volumes for these higher margin egg products grew nearly 9% in the quarter and approximately 6% for the full year. Our HPAI-impacted egg supply came back online as expected in Q4, allowing us to continue gradually winding down pricing adders.

As we enter fiscal 2026, we are well positioned to continue the normalized growth trend in this business. In refrigerated retail, dinner sides grew volumes in the quarter driven by targeted promotions and new private label offerings that began shipping toward the end of the quarter.

Private label offerings are expected to contribute low single-digit volume growth in FY 2026. Segment profitability had some continued tailwinds from HPAI pricing adders again this quarter.

At Weetabix, our flagship yellow box product consumption performed in line with the improving cereal category, which was down less than 1%. The noticeable improvement in the UK cereal category over recent quarters is an encouraging trend.

Meanwhile, we continue to execute against our identified cost-out opportunities as we consolidate our private label production, resulting in a plant closure in mid-fiscal year. Turning to FY 2026, we have planned for a more normalized environment in our cold chain businesses as we begin the year with egg supply back in balance, allowing us to focus on driving volume growth in both food service and refrigerated retail.

For the balance of our portfolio, we're projecting some improvement in the cereal category as we lap certain FY 2025 pressures. However, we do not expect a full return to historical trends.

To support volumes across the entire company, we will make targeted investments, including innovation, where we see profitable opportunities. However, as Rob mentioned, we remain focused on protecting margins and our strong cash flow.

With that, I'll turn the call over to Matt.

Thanks, Jeff, and good morning, everyone. Fourth quarter consolidated net sales were $2.2 billion and adjusted EBITDA was $425 million.

Sales increased 12%, driven by our acquisition of 8th Avenue. Excluding the acquisition, net sales declined, driven by lower pet food and cereal volumes, partially offset by avian influenza-driven pricing and egg volume growth.

Turning to our segments, Post Consumer Brands net sales, excluding the contribution from 8th Avenue, decreased 13%, driven by lower volumes in both grocery and pet. Cereal volumes decreased 8% due to category and competitive dynamics.

In pet, our volumes declined 13%, driven by lost private label business we mentioned last quarter, and we are continuing to experience consumption declines as we reset our Nutrish brand. Segment adjusted EBITDA increased 2%, which includes a $20 million contribution from 8th Avenue.

Excluding 8th Avenue, adjusted EBITDA decreased 8% versus prior year, as the impact of lower volumes were partially offset by improved cost management, especially in SG&A. Moving to food service, net sales increased 20% on both pricing and an 11% volume increase.

Excluding the impact of our PPI acquisitions, volumes increased 9% on higher egg, potato, and shake volumes. The increased volumes and avian influenza-driven pricing drove the revenue increase.

Adjusted EBITDA increased 50%, driven by avian influenza-driven pricing and the previously mentioned volume growth in our value-added egg and potato products. Refrigerated retail net sales were flat and volumes, excluding the impact of PPI, fell 4%.

The volume decline was driven by sausages and eggs, which experienced elasticities due to pricing to offset input costs. Segment adjusted EBITDA increased 44%, benefiting from avian influenza pricing adders and lapping some elevated SG&A costs in the prior year.

Weetabix net sales increased 4% versus the prior year. Foreign currency represented a tailwind of 360 basis points.

Overall, volumes decreased 3% as our core yellow box product volumes declined by 6%, offset by volume growth in UFIT, which was up 41% versus the prior year. Segment adjusted EBITDA increased 1% versus prior year due to currency tailwinds, partially offset by lower volumes and increased inflation-driven costs.

Turning to cash flow, in the quarter, we generated $301 million from operations. Our free cash flow for the quarter was approximately $150 million, as we invested in key projects in both PCB and food service businesses.

Free cash flow for the full year was nearly $500 million, driven by strong operating cash flow net of elevated CapEx. In the quarter, we repurchased 2.6 million shares, bringing our fiscal 2025 total repurchases to 6.4 million shares.

We were active in share repurchases following the end of the quarter, buying back approximately 1 million shares. Net leverage, in accordance with our credit agreement, ended the fiscal year at 4.4 times, relatively flat to how we began the year.

Before we get to Q&A, I have a few comments on our fiscal 2026 guidance. As stated in our earnings release last night, including 2 months of pasta contribution, we expect our FY 2026 adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of $1.50 billion to $1.54 billion.

This range reflects approximately a 1% to 4% growth rate to a normalized FY 2025. Relative to FY 2025 Q4, we expect Q1 adjusted EBITDA to decrease meaningfully, driven by HPAI normalization and seasonality declines in US and UK cereal, partially offset by seasonality benefits in refrigerated retail.

For the full year, we expect second half favorability to the first half. Finally, our CapEx guidance of $350 million to $390 million is down notably from FY 2025 as we completed key investments within PCB and food service.

FY 2026 will continue to see elevated spending in food service as we invest behind growth for both precooked and cage-free. Thank you for joining us today, and I will now turn the call over to the operator.

Morning, thanks so much. Maybe, Rob, to start off, we've certainly seen industry volume remain sort of challenged.

We can see some of that reflected in your PCB segment in cereal and pet. You've been aggressively buying back your own shares in lieu of, I guess, more interesting portfolio opportunities.

The last time valuations in the group were really under this much pressure was sort of the late '90s, and the group got out of it through larger-scale M&A. Perhaps this time is different.

Some investors maybe see the current weakness is maybe more structural rather than cyclical. I guess I'm curious how this dynamic sort of informs your capital allocation decisions.

Is M&A still the right approach given how cheap assets are, or is buying back stock at these levels more sensible if one believes the terminal growth rate of potential acquisition candidates is simply lower going forward? I guess what I'm asking is whether this represents another buying opportunity in the space like the late '90s or is it somewhat different?

If the ultimate question is it structural or cyclical, I think you have to tell us how long the cycle will last. I think it's different in the following manner.

I think the big difference is the cost of capital has changed dramatically. We've been in a long-term decline, and now we're in what could be an inflection point where we see more increased pressure than decrease.

I think that starts to develop the strategy. I think in lieu of a reflexive position of we're just going to use M&A to get bigger, it needs to be a little more thoughtful, and perhaps a little bit more focused around focus, so that we can look at opportunities to be better rather than just bigger.

That sounds a little bit cliché, but I think it's true. Where we have opportunities to be more focused in some area, I think we should take them.

Where there are opportunities to be more efficient in other areas, we should take them. From our perspective, we don't necessarily differentiate between M&A and buybacks.

What we try to do is compare them from a potential return perspective and a risk perspective and then compare them. We really don't look at it and say, if we buy back shares, we're going to shrink or look at our multiple different.

We look at that and say, what is the best risk return adjusted way to use our capital?

Great. Thank you for that.

I know on the last earnings call, I think you talked about all the asset optimization efforts, right, that you're undertaking in ready-to-eat cereal, and that those could kind of get plant utilization maybe back up to around the mid-80s. That, if the cereal category continued to be weak or below its historic rate of decline, maybe further actions on the cost side sort of would need to be considered.

I guess I'm curious what sort of actions could we be talking about, and maybe are you considering any additional ones given, I think, your comments in the prepared remarks that don't see the category in fiscal 2026 necessarily getting back to what's been its longer or historical rate of decline? Thanks so much.

Certainly there are additional opportunities we can take on cost reduction. I think the magnitudes start to get smaller as the bigger things like plant closure have occurred.

We are looking at things like line optimization rather than plant optimization. They continue to be good opportunities, but we've obviously taking the larger ones first.

Yeah. Thank you.

Good morning, and thanks for the question. You have normalized growth outlooks you've given for your segments and I guess maybe thinking through those segments for fiscal 2026, which ones do you kind of see as being more consistent with that normalized outlook after we adjust for M&A and avian flu and maybe which ones are light?

I know there was the PCB commentary, but kind of curious, I guess in the other areas. Thank you.

Sure. I think when we look at the PCB legacy business, we see that as more flat, not growing the 2% we have in our algorithm this year given what we've got going on in cereal, but also the Nutrish reset that won't take place until mid-year.

Then the balance of the portfolio, honestly, we see in line with those algos.

Okay. Thank you for that.

I guess to follow up on the algos, a quarter ago, you talked about in food service around a $115 million EBITDA being a normalized run rate. We have seen real volume strength in that segment, and I appreciate the past year had some avian flu, but why is 115 still the right number, or should we be thinking about something maybe a bit higher to start out the year?

No, we think 115 is the right number, and that was really a benchmark we put last quarter, and that's how we think about fiscal 2025. I think fair to assume that grows in line with algo for fiscal 2026, by the end of the year would be, obviously something more like 120.

Again, I think we talked about it last quarter as well, we would like to have a quarter or two of some normalcy so we can get a better read on that. As you pointed out, there's a lot of noise with avian influenza.

We definitely had some catch-up this past quarter with customer inventory levels given some of the challenges with AI, but really do see the base business continue to perform quite well. I think we'll revisit in another quarter, but how we benchmarked normal and normalized run rate was against that 115 and then growing 5% in fiscal 2026.

All right, thank you.

Hi, good morning. I wanted to ask about the performance in refrigerated retail.

You had a nice 20% EBITDA margin in the quarter, but you called out some AI pricing benefits there. As we look forward, is this [cough] a business that's on solid footing to maintain kind of a high teens EBITDA margin in a normal environment?

Sure. We definitely similar to food service, but on a much smaller scale, we had some pricing benefits that fell away at the end of the quarter.

That was a little bit inflated because of that, but we are seeing better performance and better volume performance around private label, which is improving capacity utilization. I think with that said, in the holiday season for them, we've always had significant seasonality.

I think high teens is reasonable when you talk about those periods. In our slower part of the year, you're going to return to more, call it 16% or so margins.

It's not going to be a high teens.

Thanks, Matt. Rob, as a follow-up to some of the commentary about the industry, we are seeing private label trends vary across Post categories, gaining some share in pet categories while having a softer performance in the cereal category currently.

Is there anything to read through in terms of category by category how consumers are trading down into private label, in any observation you have, whether it's price gap dependent or really category dependent? Thank you.

You took the words right out of my mouth. It's really price-gap dependent.

We're starting to see consumers be a little bit more drawn to promotional activity, and it moves inversely to that.

Hey, good morning. Thanks so much for taking our questions.

First thing I wanted to ask about in the prepared comments, you mentioned making targeted investments in 2026 with some innovation potential. Just wondering if you can kind of share some details about how you're thinking about some of those investments, maybe what categories you would like to invest in, and anything else you can comment on that.

Thanks.

It's the typical type of investment for brand innovation that you have seen historically. We took a pause on some of those during the pandemic and it's been something that we haven't been quick to renew in the last couple of years.

It's going to be line extensions in really every retail category. In cereal, as an example, we're going to be bringing some protein products, we're going to be bringing some granola products, which are areas of the category that are growing better than the rest of the category.

You're going to see that sort of thing in our refrigerated retail business as well. In pet, a lot of that is directed towards the Nutrish relaunch, although we'll see some smaller innovations in some of the other brands as well.

Got it. Thanks for that.

Next question for me, just as we look at the food service business and some of the demand for some of those value-add products, it sounds like you're expecting some of that momentum to sustain as we get into next fiscal year. Maybe what gives you confidence that some of your operator partners will continue to demand these products at these high levels and just any comments you can share about the overall backdrop for your operators right now?

There's a couple of things we would point to. One is really a long history of that business moving customers up the value chain.

Starting from lower value-added products, moving them up to higher value-added products, and the value proposition that they see when doing so. It's a function of the labor dynamic in their operations when they move up the value chain.

That's been a multi-year, almost decade-long, maybe multi-decade-long trajectory of the category, which we don't see any slow down in that happening. The one more perhaps unique situation with avian influenza and the pricing dynamic that has been caused by that in shell eggs has caused some customers to convert to liquid eggs, the ones that were able to convert, because over this period of time, liquid eggs had been less expensive than shell eggs.

What we have seen in the past, probably on a smaller scale than what we've seen this last cycle, is that there's some stickiness to people who have converted to liquid eggs, initially just for the pure price play, because they find that the efficiency in their operations is such that even if the prices are more competitive with one another between liquid and shell eggs, that they find efficiencies in remaining with liquid eggs. We have some belief that, given what we've seen over the last 12 to 18 months, that the stickiness of those customers that have converted will continue.

Thanks so much, we'll pass them on.

Thank you, good morning.

Hey, Mike.

Just on pet, can you maybe unpack some of the key moving parts there, and maybe just remind us the cadence of some of the private label cuts and distribution losses or the co-man cuts and when you lap those and just how to think about the puts and takes through the year?

Sure. A year ago, we were working our way through fiscal 2025 through some profit-enhancing decisions we had made, and we've fully lapped those as we exited 2025.

In 2026, what we've yet to lap then as we developed during 2025 is we lost some private label business. We continue to pursue opportunities there, but we won't lap that until we get to the midpoint of the fiscal year.

I think as we think about the business and the volume trajectory, first half of the year, see really more down mid to high single digits, and then as we get to the midpoint of the year and Nutrish is on shelf and we lap that private label loss, we'd be back to more flat to maybe some slight growth year-over-year.

Great. That's helpful.

Then, you touched on some of the price gaps, maybe just specifically for cereal, can you help us understand what you're seeing there, how rational does pricing seem, and maybe any sense of why you're not seeing a little bit more benefit from trading down?

We've had some competitive pressure and promotional activities over the last several months. They seem to be changing.

I think it's no more complicated than that, as some of our competitors have been more promotional. The private label offering has been less competitive.

Thanks so much.

Hey, good morning, and thank you for the questions. I guess first on the EBITDA bridge into '26, any changes to your underlying assumptions for the go-forward 8th Avenue business?

I think you previously called out $45 to $50 million EBITDA annualized plus the $15 million synergies exiting the year. Then any color on contribution baked in for the pasta business for the first quarter top line and EBITDA?

Sure. No change to the outlook.

45 to 50 is how we think about the contribution in fiscal 2026, and then do have confidence in getting to a run rate and synergies by the end of the year. It's going to take some time given all that's going on there.

Then in terms of the pasta business in Q4, we called out about $20 million contribution from 8th Avenue, a little under the run rate, obviously. About half of that was pasta.

Again, we're expecting just 2 months of pasta contribution this fiscal year, 2/3 of $10 million before we close on the transaction in December.

Thank you. Then, just a little more on the volume trends in core grocery.

Any color on progress through the quarter and how things have trended into the first quarter? Have you seen any incremental pressure perhaps from SNAP, and then just what's factored into your outlook for this year?

I I think what we what we factored in is fairly conservative. Again, I think we we believe there's we'll see some category improvement as we lap some challenges in the back half of of next year given some of the our fiscal 2026, I should say, given that some of the challenges we saw with Mahat, some other things, that happened, in the spring.

We're we're not calling for a category getting back to normal in the back half of the year. Some marginal improvement year-over-year is is really what we have.

I think Q1 and Q2 looking a lot like what we saw in Q3 and Q4, and then seeing some improvement in Q3 and Q4 is what's baked in our guidance.

Thank you. Once again,

Good morning, thanks for the question.

Hi, John.

I wanted to go back, Rob, to some of your comments around strategy and cyclical versus structural. Over the years, Post has built this portfolio that's tilted more to value, whether it's cereal, pet food, the 8th Avenue business here again.

Value's held up well against the macro over time, it's been prudent. I'm curious, given the headwinds now for lower-middle-income consumers, higher debt, SNAP reductions, and you're seeing the consistency from the premium eggs, does it maybe warrant more initiatives in terms of addressing premium products, higher-income households?

Just how do you think about that in terms of future M&A or organic innovation and the capacity to tilt the portfolio differently going forward?

I think I would disagree that the portfolio is built around value. I think the portfolio is built around choice, because if you look at each line we are in, we have a array of price points, and that is true of eggs, cereal, potatoes, so that what we really like to do is appeal to an array of consumers.

I think that the trends that you're raising, rather than dictating the construct of the portfolio in total, really dictate the direction of innovation. I think, in that context, it does suggest, if we have the opportunity to do so, to innovate more towards higher- or middle-income consumers.

Okay. Then maybe just building on that in the refrigerated retail business, thinking about some of the side dishes.

I think that's been an area where private label's been a little bit of a challenge the last year or two. As you move forward now, supply chain issues have been cleared away, how do you think about investing in that business in terms of vehicle for innovation, taking the convenience angle for consumers, expanding distribution growth?

Where is your plan sort of sit for that side dishes business going forward now?

John, you've got a long history with us, we went through a period of time when we first acquired the business that it was in private label and the branded, to Rob's comment, we were participating up and down the value of that segment at different price points. Then we went through a period of time when we did not have enough capacity to meet our branded demand, we exited private label so that we could focus on the brand.

In the meantime, some competitive private brand products got some traction. We have now gotten to the point where we have our capacity better aligned to the point where we have capacity that can meet both private label and branded demand.

Because of that, we're choosing to pick and choose where we go, but to go after attractive private label opportunities in that category while also maintaining the brand and continuing to invest in the brand. The longer-term or medium-term goal in that category would be to do exactly what Rob said, play at the multiple price points, not to be the omnipresent party in private label, but to be the party that wins where private label's most relevant at those retailers.

Gotcha. Thanks, Jeff.

Thanks, Rob.

Thank you.

Hi, you talked a lot about the M&A as part of the strategy over the past. I'm just wondering how that environment looks today and if there are a lot of opportunities.

Then also if you're focused more on opportunities within any of your key segments or would you add another leg to the stool?

We tend to be entirely opportunistic on the last, part of your question. I think in order to have a successful transaction, we obviously need a counterparty.

I think with the, multiples where they are today, we've seen some, reluct- reluctance to transact. Again, we don't necessarily look at M&A as as an objective in and of itself.

We look at it as something, an allocation of capital choice that we can use compared to, buying our share, shares back or paying down debt.

Okay. Given the 8th Avenue's behind you, any thoughts on coming to market to refinance some of the draw on the revolver that you used for 8th Avenue?

We'll continue to monitor, Carla. Obviously we keep a close eye on that and the bond market, but we'll continue to look for the right pocket to do that.

Great. Thank you.

Thank you.