Good morning, everyone. I am here with my colleague and CFO Einar Bonnevie, and we thank you all for joining today.

Let me start clearly. The fourth quarter 2025 was a record quarter, and 2025 was a record year.

We have interesting topics for you to go through today, and these are the main highlights. We're going through the fourth quarter highlights, the full year '25, and of course AI, which is important.

We'll go through that deeply. Then my colleague Einar will go through the financials and our guidance for '26, and then of course also a status when it comes to M&A.

As you see, we will have a presentation for about 25-30 minutes, and we will have a Q&A session at the end of the session. Please, if you have any questions, type them in as we go, and then we will attend to them at the end of the presentation.

Let's start and talk about the fourth quarter 2025. Reported revenue 135 million Norwegian kroner.

That is 17% growth compared to the fourth quarter 2024. We are quite happy with that, and also happy with the fact that the reported EBITDA in that quarter is 31 million Norwegian kroner, and the reported EBITDA margin is 23%.

Even there are some one-offs as usual, this is the reported margin without any adjustments. Then the full year.

It didn't just end on the high note with the fourth quarter. The full year 2025 is also a structural step-up for Omda.

496 million in sales revenue for 2025, which exceed our guiding for '25. That is 16% growth compared to 2024.

That also means that the operational baseline, the operating baseline into 2026 is very, very strong based on what has happened in 2025. The profitability and performance in '25: 117 million Norwegian kroner, which is good, and that also implies 24% reported EBITDA margin for 2025.

Next topic would be AI. Of course, when you look at AI in the market today, there's a lot of discussions, a lot of noise, and predictions, and we have to respect AI as an important topic for all businesses, including our own.

What we have to do is to explain properly what we are doing and how it is affecting us. The good thing for Omda is that we operate, as you see here in the picture, in a regulated, certified, specialized healthcare and emergency environment.

What is going on in there, it is mission-critical. It has to do with life-critical treatments.

Reliability and compliance is, of course, much more important for customers than speed to change things in these environments. Also if you think about the switching cost of a situation like this, it's not only about software and code.

The stability and the mechanisms in this specialized market will stay the same, although AI will have an impact, which I will get back to in a few minutes. If you look at this, a user using a software in a process working in these environments, the value is not necessarily only in the code.

The value is, of course, in regulatory trust, specialized workflows, and expertise that we deliver, and of course in cooperation with the customers and their demands and needs. If you look at it that way, AI for Omda gives us a stable situation seen from the customer side, but it is rather an acceleration tool for us when it comes to be more efficient, a productivity accelerator really.

That is what I'm going to explain to you is more like what are we actually using AI for in Omda. These two pictures will give you an idea.

I think many analysts have already seen what's going on, and I think it's clear that a company like Omda can use development tools with AI agents to completely change the development processes and make them much, much more efficient. We are using, like in this picture, a senior developer, the new day the new era gives the possibility to get added code, testing, documentation, and much more efficient workflow processes using the agents rather than than a lot of other colleagues helping out creating code, for instance.

This was in '24, it was experimental. In '25, we already started projects to make sure that we could do something both in our business units, but also centrally for Omda to create toolboxes for our business units to accelerate this in 2026.

It's no longer experimental; it's our operating model going forward. This is going to accelerate in 2026, and then you will ask yourself, what is the impact on our business?

If you look at this graph, and let me explain it simply, to the left, the percentage will is self-explanatory, but then again, you see the topping here the three dimensions. One thing is what we have delivered, our guidance for this year, which my colleague will go through in a minute, and then the ambition and the long-term targets.

What does this mean really? If you look at the gray curve here, CapEx, which is the same as investments in our own software, we think that investments in our own software will continue with the absolute value level that we have today, but that also means that the CapEx and investment in software compared to our revenue will decline over time, as we show you in this this curve.

If you look at the green curve, obviously when you reduce a CapEx like that, it will give more cash from operations. That means the cash EBITDA margin, or so-called EBITDAC, will, of course, then increase.

This is really the important thing for for Omda. AI in our company is is not a hype.

It's actually a tool set that helps us create a much more profitable business. That means we have delivered a very strong fourth quarter '25 and also a strong year '25.

Now it's time to dive deeper into that. Einar, if you're still awake, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Sverre. Thank you.

Good morning, everyone. Let's have a deep dive into into the financials and start with a with a with a quarterly comparison, the fourth quarter '25 versus the fourth quarter '24.

We see it's a yes, it is a record quarter, and there's one, you could say one-off or anomaly here. It's the sales of hardware, an unusually large hardware order in the fourth quarter made us beat the the expectations.

If you adjust for that, I think we are, very much within the the guidance of, in the in the upper range of what we guided more than a year ago for for for the year. When we look at earnings, a very marked improvement in earnings.

When you look at the EBITDA or cash EBITDA, you see a very strong margin improvement in the fourth quarter. Also if you look at at the whole year, the same thing here.

We see a very strong strong year, ending, very much, ending on a high note. The earnings is was not only, a quarter or two.

We actually, met or beat the expectations each quarter for in 2025. Ending, as Sverre said, on a record high EBITDA and and cash EBITDA.

The thing is also worth noting that even though we had a very large hardware order in the fourth quarter and that for the year actually hardware sales doubled compared to 2024, our gross margin was still improving. COGS is coming down, and gross margin is is still improving, take a note of that.

That also points to where we will be in in in, in 2026 and going forward. The margin improvement should continue.

In a nutshell, 117 million in in in EBITDA. We had CapEx of 47 million, slightly less than than 10%, that was our guidance.

Cash EBITDA, EBITDAC on 70. We have received some questions from, various investors: Why do you focus on EBITDA?

Why don't you only focus on cash EBITDA? Some say, EBITDA is is better, it's more it's more general.

The thing is, we need them both. For, say, bond purposes, incurrence test, etc., measured in on on EBITDA, and it's it's it's more common, you can compare it to other companies.

Cash EBITDA, on the other hand, that is how what we use internally. Let me be very, very clear.

Business unit leaders, they they relate to cash EBITDA and not EBITDA. All right?

That is namely because CapEx, that is a capital allocation decision, and that is one of the few decisions that are still, centrally managed. Capital allocation is centrally managed.

They can't they can't You can You can get a approval for for a capital allocation for a CapEx project or or not. Long goes to the highest bidder, to speak.

That is why why we have them, and we need them both, and hope this this explains it. Okay.

As we focus a lot on recurring revenue, and in the past we have discussed, recurring software revenue. It's it's not only the software that is recurring, and excuse me, a few analysts also have, taken notice of this that, they've said, your professional services, they seem very, very stable.

Yes, indeed, they are. In the past, we referred to professional services as, semi-recurring.

We split those and and started as from the third quarter 2025, we started, splitting professional services in a recurring part and non-recurring part. What we define is that, customers of ours that were also customers 1 year ago, they are defined as, recurring professional services or recurring professional services customers.

We view those as as recurring, and applying that logic, you get a very different perspective on what is recurring of the stability of our business. You see that the recurring software business takes us up to approximately 80%, and then we can add another, 15% or so on on recurring professional services that brings the the real recurring or the true recurring income or recurring revenue in Omda up to almost 95%.

It's an extremely predictable business and extremely, an extreme stability there to the benefit of shareholders, but also, of course, to bondholders. This is this is really this really gives you gives you a stability that that you don't see very many other places, and combines this with very limited churn on the on the software.

We have guided in the past less than 2% per per annum. We can restate that that guidance.

Churn is churn is limited. This speaking of churn and speaking of predictability, with the the earnings in in 2025, and you see the cash earnings, the EBITDA, and the EBITDAC, cash earnings are coming up.

Revenue is growing. Cash is stabilizing.

We are moving into what we call a very low-leverage territory. Here, okay, let me explain.

The bars, three bars, the blue on the left, that is the last four quarters EBITDA. That's how they are measured.

EBITDA is measured in the bondholder agreement for incurrence test purposes. Then we have the orange bar, that is the the run rate, if if the the current quarter is is is a template for for the other quarters, as a run rate.

Then we have the green bars, that is, the forward-looking, the next four quarters, because what is ahead of us, it is not the past. It's the future, and we have a 2026 guidance, the the green bars, they are based on the guidance for for 2026.

Okay. Then the blue line, the upper blue line, is the incurrence test, where that, where we have to be below that in order to do a tap issue on the current bond.

Then we have the purple line that is at 2.5, and that is what, typically is referred to as as low leverage, low gearing. You see that if you look at the first quarter, fourth quarter '25, first quarter '26, where we currently are, you see, and especially if you look at the leverage compared that to and relate that to the next four quarters earnings, you see that we are indeed moving into very low-leverage territory.

Low leverage combined with high predictability on income and earnings, that is where we currently are. This also makes, if you again taking, capital allocation perspective, what shall we how to spend our money most wisely, debt repayment is probably not one of them, but maybe we can improve the debt terms.

That is exactly what we what we are, now considering. Very strong performance on the top line, on the bottom line, and low leverage, that points to possibilities for refinancing of the current debt.

I think as most of you have have observed, and some of them also, commented to us saying that, of the approximately 70 million in in cash EBITDA, a large chunk of that, all those cash earnings from operations, they go to pay pay out interest. That is, and paying interest, that's the largest cash items in our P&L.

Of course, that cost, as all other costs, we'd like to to reduce the cost and increase the earnings. Looking at the current bond that was issued in in December '23, it's callable in December '26 and at 104.3, and until then is a so-called make-whole clause.

The bond has been been trading well, and we see that the spread has been narrowing. The last I saw was actually a spread starting with with a number 3.

We are around 400 basis points, basis points so 400 basis points, 4 percentage points, 4%. The current bond is nominated in NOK, it's 3-month NIBOR plus 4%, translates into approximately 8%, that is where the bond is currently trading.

We we have higher ambitions, and currently the bond is trading in in NOK. We will have to evaluate other jurisdictions also.

When the bond was issued and and Omda went public, we were a very Norwegian company, as you have seen on the distribution of earnings, you can see that in the report, where where are our customers, where are our employees. You see from an operational perspective, we are more Swedish than than Norwegian.

That was, on on finance and what we think there's there's room for improvement there. Let me move on to the the guidance.

Where are we? We know where we are.

Where are we heading? We will repeat our guidance on for 2026.

We will end with revenues of 500 to 525, ending at 494, and even if you knock off the hardware for for 2025, it shouldn't be mission impossible. This is just, the organic part, this is without any new acquisitions.

This is just the organic part. We forecast a margin between 28% and 32% on the EBITDA.

As Sverre just pointed out, we will compress the CapEx, the cash EBITDA, the EBITDAC margin should be somewhat higher than the than the EBITDA. CapEx should be less than 10%.

We forecast we guide on 9% for for 2026, and that should absolutely be be possible. Not guidance, but targets, what you just saw, they were guidance, this is where we think we're going to end up.

These, what you see now, are our targets. They haven't changed much since what we presented in the in the third quarter presentation, but let me be, even more specific and even more clear.

We restate organic growth 5% to 10%, that includes CPI adjustments and the like. We restate that we aim for target inorganic growth or growth through acquisitions 10% to 20% on on top of that.

An EBITDA in excess of 30%. CapEx, going forward over the next 5-year period, we see shrinking from where we where we have been in the past, around 10% of sales or revenue, to 5% of revenue.

We see COGS, as I said, in spite of the unusual large hardware order in the fourth quarter, gross margin was still improving. COGS was still coming down from around 7, 7.5% in '24 to 6.5% in in in 2025, and it it should be and there is more to come.

It's not, an overnight sensation, but we have gradually, if you look 5 years back, 10 years back, you see we have constantly been improving. That improvement will continue, and we see that we can bring it down to at least to to 5%.

Salary and personnel, we have constantly bringing it down. We've been been trimming the number of FTEs compared to to total revenue to 55 at the end of the fourth quarter in percent of total revenue, down from, 70s to 65 to 60 to 55, 54, 55 ending exiting 2025.

We see we should bring it down to below 50%. Other costs, currently at around 13% of sales.

The original target was to bring it down to 15%. We are already there and actually beyond.

We see now that the next target is to bring it down to 10%. Partly, still, trimming trimming your your nails, and also as, part of that they will remain constant and the top line will will grow.

Then last but not least, on the bond loan, is currently 500 million. If you just maintain that that level, I'm not saying that we will, but just take that as a as a starting point, we should be able, with the with improvement that we have displayed already and what is to come, to bring, an interest rate to end up with an interest rate of closer to 5% than 10%.

No, I'm not saying 5.0%. I'm saying closer to 5% than 10%.

See, some analysts, they have said, maybe you should reach 7%. Well, 7% is closer to to 5% than than 10%.

Our target, we are ambitious, and we are ambitious based on this the strong underlying performance. With these with with with those assumptions and targets, we will end up, in revenues something something like this.

You can do your own calculation, do your own math. Here I have, used those those expectations to see where we end up on on revenues on the organic side and on the acquired side.

You can use in your own spreadsheets own calculations, you can apply, the speed and how how much how fast you think we'll reach, the margin improvement, and you will end up with with robust margins, and you can go do your own math on, what you think the valuation of a company like Omda should be. Let me round off by addressing M&A.

We have a huge pipeline. This is We do most of the sourcing ourselves.

We have a lot of, targets on the on the radar screen. We have active dialogue with, someone between 5 and 10 companies.

We are absolutely active in the space. In short, and some will say, 'Well, you haven't you haven't announced anything.'

That is true. As the old statistics professor once told me, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Don't think for a single minute that the fact that we haven't announced anything is not because we haven't been active. Sometimes, the only thing you end up with is a successful DD.

We maintain a goal of 10% to 20% inorganic growth. We will consider, should we do bolt-ons or should we do large and more transformative deals?

Sometimes the bolt-on maybe less money for more more value, so that is always, a consideration. The current market, we've seen there's been turbulence in the market on valuation, everything from, huge stocks or compounders or software companies and the AI turmoil.

That also gives opportunities for for us as as an acquirer. Then, speaking of acquisitions, this again this is a matter of capital allocation, and we need to spend money wisely.

We also need to reconsider, is how is Omda valued and compared to other things we can buy in the market. Share buybacks is also something we we need to to keep considering.

Last but not least, since we are moving into positive, cash cash flow, a good cash territory, smaller deals may be financed, with cash from operations without having to issue any new capital in in any form. That was that was that, a snapshot, and let's move into the Q&A.

The there are a few questions here, and most of them seems to be to to myself. It's one question from John here, and it's related to the last topic, M&A.

The question is: 'With the incurrence test being met, and you have been expecting that for a while given your goals, true, what's the next outlook on getting the M&A engine humming in the next quarters?' Okay.

As I just said, and you can add some some comments to this, Sverre, but as I just said, it has been humming. It hasn't it hasn't been turned off, and again, we haven't announced anything, but that doesn't mean that we haven't done anything on on on the subject.

It it is in indeed humming. Would you like to add anything, Sverre?

I think what is important is actually that the value creation behind M&As also has to do with the sequence of things. When we have dialogues going on for many years with many targets, we are also very good at looking at when to put things together.

There is a very, very high activity, much more than you think, when we look at this. I think what's going on now is that we will stick to the guiding of 10% to 20%, and they will come out, as Einar mentioned, probably of a handful of smaller acquisitions rather than a big one.

All in all, we are very happy to tell you about the M&A processes going on, because these are what will make us reach our goals in the next 5 years as well.

Thank you. Another question here from from John, and that is about the bond agreement.

The question is: 'Remind us of your buyback opening in the bond agreement.' Yes, the the current bond agreement gives us the opportunity to buy back back back shares.

We we haven't done anything for the last, last year or or so. The the bond agreement gives us the option to continue to buy buy back back bonds.

What it doesn't allow currently is to delete the Buy back bonds, buy back shares, sorry. Buy back shares.

We we can buy back and continue to buy back. We still we still have room to buy back more shares, but we cannot delete them under current bond agreement.

That is, that was a trade-off we we made when we when we borrowed money the last time, but that is something we will look into because, we that that is that is that is one way of making, the the implicit dividend more more effective. That is we can continue to buy buy back shares, but we can't delete them.

There's there's one question pending. If you have any more questions, any of you, please type them in as we address the the last question.

There is a little little delay, technical delay, so please don't don't wait to the the very end. If you have anything, if you any comments, any any questions, please type them in as as we address the the last the last question here now.

This is from Balazs, and it's related to net working capital. The question is: 'Can you please elaborate on net working capital dynamics?

It looks like this year net working capital was a drag on cash generation.' I can understand and I can I can understand the question and the the reason behind it.

We we have a very active net working capital view, and we and as you saw, in 2024 fourth quarter, we had -31. Our official target is we should be below -10.

We were ended, 2 years ago in '24 at -31, that was that was a record. In in 2025, we end at -26, which is still very good, but not as good as as the last year.

There are always some some dynamics there. As we like to invoice, annual upfront as much as we possibly can, and then, pay our bills as as late as we can to, to to use the the the capital the the capital effectively.

In in in in 2025, we we issued invoices, and sometimes, they invoices, they are paid just before New Year's Eve, and other times they are paid just after. In in '24 in '25, they were paid, some of them were delayed to be paid, early January.

That is what what you see. There there are a few a few bumps there, but nothing to lose sleep about.

There are now six new questions, let me let me continue. This is one for you, Sverre, and it relates to artificial intelligence.

It goes like this: 'Can you explain in more detail Omda's product moat against AI in the long run? Contract, security, relationships.

How how does AI protect us?'

I think, first of all, what protects us is really what I was into when it comes to what is the priority on the customer side here, which is the regulated business they have. The reliability and compliance is critical, and life-saving activity is critical, and these are run through extremely complex workflows.

The ability to change things is, of course, there, but the business case to change things is one thing. It's really not that relevant.

It's not only the code. It's a very, very complex completeness there.

Then the secondly, of course, the ability to replace things is one thing, but the timeline, it takes years in these areas, not because you change the code, but because you have to refactor a lot of other things and you have to handle procurements, rollout projects, etc., that takes years in the complex environments. It's really not the AI itself that protects that part of us, but we are protected in that sense that the collaboration long-term, as you ask for here as well, the contracts.

What we do now with our customers is to actually have the dialogue, how are we going to deliver add-on components that includes AI functionality? That is not easy, because you also have to certify components like that.

Maybe we would use 1 or 2 years to certify, but still the customer will use maybe some years even to implement because of the criticality. This is why it takes time.

On a good side, although it takes time to implement on the customer side, the speed of the value creation on the inside of Omda is really what is the good thing at the moment, because that is no longer, as I mentioned, experimenting with tools. These are agents that actually already now are actually giving us the ability to increase the cash from operations.

Thank you. Thank you, Sverre.

There's another question about AI, I suggest we continue that. That's also from Matt.

Thank you, Matt, for submitting your questions. 'Which division or business area, business unit is most at risk from AI competition?'

It mentions specifically 'emergency or ProSang, blood management, what will you say?'

That's a good question. It's none of those two, that's for sure.

I would say quite the opposite. Those are quite protected given how these systems are handled.

It's difficult to change the engine when you have a flight over the Atlantic, so that is not the places to see. However, specific questions, my theory would be that the analytics part of our business would probably be more competitive from outside, because the usage of large data and functionality around this is probably the area that will have more competition because they're not so tied into actual clinical and emergency critical processes.

That would be my take. However, I see already that we are using AI and working with AI components inside our analytics software, and the customers would like to acquire more from us.

Please remember, we have contracts there as well and customers that want add-on. It's not only a competition in the market with tenders; we have existing customers that wants more.

Thanks, Sverre. Sverre are six more questions pending.

Thank you for submitting them. There's another one that relates to AI, also from Matt.

Let's take that one before we move on to other topics. 'What is your average contract length, and do you have enough time to integrate AI innovations before the next round of tenders?

How does this work, Sverre?'

That's a good question. It's important to understand that when you choose a strategy like we have done, and when you focus only on these very sticky software types that could be there, since you mentioned in your questions ProSang, which has more than a 50-year history with the same customers being customers, of course, when it stays that long, that is really what's the fact here, that it won't change because of the fact that it's tied to the workflow processes in these areas.

Okay. There are some more questions on the financial side and also from Matt.

The question is: 'Do you see already an impact on private valuations and M&A targets following the current software sell-off?' That is a very good and relevant question.

I think I tried to sum it up on the very last slide, the M&A in short slide, to say bolt-ons versus large transformative deals. We see that bolt-ons are typically what you are referring to here, the smaller private valuations.

Yes, I think is probably now an opportunity to pay less money for more value. Also, as I said, the current market provides more opportunities than challenges from an M&A perspective if you are the buyer.

Because, after the, what should I say, the hype in maybe 2020, 2021, '22, and expectations were going sky-high, I think a lot of the private owners, they have sobered up. Much more realistic expectations now than maybe at least 2 or 3 years ago.

Another one on acquisitions and capital allocation, also from Matt, and that, 'At current share price of 38 NOK, so that's approximately two times sales or seven, eight times EBITDA, isn't share buyback the best capital allocation?' Yes, and that is also something on the very last slide that we try to sum up.

Yes, share buybacks, etc., is to be evaluated. It's all about capital allocation.

Should we increase working capital? No.

Should we invest more in R&D? No.

We will use AI to be more efficient. Shall we buy companies?

Yes, but again, maybe bolt-ons rather than the larger deals. Again, the best return on your investment.

As you point out, yes, if you compare Omda, from an outside-in view, not speaking as a CFO now, but maybe more like a financial analyst, from an outside-in view, Omda is very attractive compared to a lot of companies that we can buy. That has to be a part of the equation.

I think it's probably not an either/or. Maybe you can have the cake and eat it too.

Okay. There are still four four questions.

This is from Mark, and I think it goes to you, Sverre. It's about M&A and startups with AI.

He says: 'In terms of M&A, do you see interesting startups with AI agent tech that you could add to the portfolio? Please expand on venture capital funding dynamics in the Nordics in the space.'

I think the most important answer to that is that our strategy when it comes to M&A is related to customer code competence. That means we acquire companies that has a proven track record within the customer space.

Of course, we look at additional AI companies that has interesting technology, but it's not our strategy, and also because, as I mentioned, it takes many years to implement on the customer side the high type of customers we have. One example of how we approach this would be the last acquisition, one of the last three, was Dermicus, which is an AI-based app that handles wounds or skin cancer, for instance.

This type of components that are in production that we can integrate and add and have synergies for our own business, that will be the preferred acquisition of AI companies from our side. I don't think, even if the new technology comes out, the speed on the customer side will still be the same.

For us, we will still continue to buy customer code competence in that order.

Okay. Let's continue on the on the M&A topic, and this is one from from John.

He writes: 'With your aim for small bolt-ons for M&A, do you foresee an immaterial impact to your expected 2026 margin guidance in that year or future years? How far can bolt-on take you versus your targets over the years?'

I think I can address those. Those are those are two questions combined in one.

Excuse me. First on on the margin side.

I guess the the background for the question may be that in the past, we've done some, large larger deals. When we IPO-ed, we were at 200 million NOK in sales, and a couple years later, we reached 400.

We doubled in size, and a lot of what those we acquired were, turnaround or turn-better candidates. They diluted our margin.

Now, if if you look at the current guidance, and we say on on the current business, we grow, 5% to 10% organically and we will improve the margins. We will take down the COGS.

We will take down salary and personnel. We will take down CapEx.

We will take down other costs. That's on the current business.

Now, if you add to that, bolt-ons or small acquisitions, and we said, our guidance and target is 10% to 20%, that would mean that we would add, 50 to 100 million, in sales roughly for for for this year. That means if so but even if you add, say 15% on average, 75 million, and you have zero margin on that, in the year a turnaround turn-better candidate, and you have zero in in EBITDA, still the dilution would wouldn't be very noticeable.

It would dilute maybe the margin in percentage points with a couple of percentage points, but it wouldn't dilute the absolute number. All right?

We expect that maybe some margin dilution, on the total, but not if you if you look at the the underlying business and that on top. It and it shouldn't be it shouldn't be dramatic.

It's we're not speaking of, from 30% down to 10% or something like that, but knock off a few percentage points. That should be your expectation.

How far can bolt-on takes us? Again, it comes down to, what is the definition of a bolt-on.

Say it's say we're acquiring a business. There are a lot of businesses, between 10 and 20 million NOK in sales.

Three of those would amount to approximately 50 million, 10%. That would, three bolt-ons could take would take us into the the lower part of our guided range.

Absolutely absolutely doable. Okay.

There are still three questions. We still have 15 minutes, if there are any more questions, type keep type them typing in them in.

One one question here from from Draven, and that's goes to to you, Sverre. It goes like this: 'Are there any success stories from this year that you are particularly proud of that demonstrate to you the strength of the business?'

I think the results speak for itself. I think actually the most important thing is the combination of the decentralization that we have and the ability that each business unit leader have had to work much closer to the customers.

The result of that has been a much more predictable business, and there are many smaller and bigger success stories inside those business units. I think, seen from my side, the successful transition to a decentralized organization is definitely what has changed everything and has created a new operating baseline for Omda, which is going to be very strong from '26 and onwards.

What you're saying, Sverre: three things. Capital allocation is important, decentralization is important, and then in a decentralized organization, have the right people on board the bus.

If you control those three, things are going pretty well. Simple as that.

Yes.

Okay. Let's continue to do that then.

Okay. It's another question from John here, and that directly relates to potential bond refinancing.

The question is: 'Have you had talk with investors in the Swedish market or banks to take advantage of the difference in STIBOR versus NIBOR?' The general answer is, yes, we have Norwegian investors, we have Swedish investors, we have American, Anglo-American, French.

We have investors, and we love to have a dialogue with all our investors. Yes, we, of course, also have dialogue with our Swedish investors.

Again, yes, and we have dialogue with several investment banks, and we bounce ideas. To the effect on STIBOR versus NIBOR, the STIBOR is around 2% and the NIBOR is around 4%.

Of course, if we were refinancing, just as an example, I'm not saying this is not a guidance, this is not a target, just as an example, if you were to refinance in Swedish kronor on STIBOR, 2% plus where the bond is currently trading, 4%, that would yield 6%. Just as an example for those of you who are watching this call and are not that into NIBOR, STIBOR, and the whole interest rate universe.

Okay. There's one more question, and this one goes to you, Sverre.

That is also from Draven: 'Across Europe, many healthcare organizations are cutting staff and budgets. How does Omda work with customers to support them to maintain standards with less staff?

Has this been an opportunity for cross-selling, or how is that? How can we support our customers?'

That is a very good question. It's quite interesting thing combined with the previous question about the average length of a contract, because it's really not a contract we're talking about.

Contracts are tools that we have to have, but the stickiness is coming from the fact that customers are using our software. Since the situation is like that, of course we have the dialogue with the customer on how we could help and combined offerings from our own business.

We are doing that inside our business areas with different business units working together and come up with broader offerings to our customers. That will help to be much more efficient.

That is one way. Also between different business areas, since we have strategic dialogue with large customers and key customers, we have the ability to look at a strategic approach years ahead as well and talk about what's going on.

Explicitly, you're quite right in defining the fact that the economy is very, very complex and it's hard times for healthcare. That is a good thing for Omda, because we can help them.

The cost of our recurring software is quite small compared to everything else in these businesses. Yes, we are working with the customers to make sure that they can also get much more benefit of our current software and new software.

Okay. There we are.

There's actually one more question that came in while you were addressing this one, Sverre, and this also goes to you. The question is about pricing models.

The question is: 'Please comment on your pricing model on seat- versus usage-based. This is typically, I take it as I read it from a SaaS perspective of thinking, how does the pricing model actually work in Omda?'

There are differences between different business units. However, in general, if you look at the complex, widely used national, regional highly specialized solutions, which is the backbone of our business, this is coming from contracts many years ago and where the idea is that you pay for the usage of the software normally as a site license or a predefined pricing model.

Might add with extra for an extra department or things like that, but it's much more a conservative model from the beginning here. It's not like a SaaS thing as such where you can, as you do with your Netflix account, that you add it or you cancel it.

This is much more from the beginning a more stable income that is not related to usage directly. However, we have some areas where we have volume-based, but I would say more than 80% of our recurring revenue is based on this stable, long-term, and many times over decades contracts.

Thank you. Thank you, Sverre.

There seems to be no more questions. Happy we have addressed them all.

Thank you all for watching. Thank you all for submitting questions.

We very much treasure the opportunity to have a dialogue with all our investors. We hope you have enjoyed this presentation and the numbers.

Tune in again on the 21st of May. That is when we are going to present the numbers for the first quarter of 2026.

Before that, we will also release the annual report that will be released in April. Until we speak again, or our minds and souls meet, do you some napkin calculations using the numbers we have guided you on.

Enjoy your day. Take care, and stay safe.