Good morning. Good morning to you all in the room, and good morning to you all on the screen.

Good morning from Brussels, and thank you all for joining our 2025 results presentation. As policymakers and business leaders met in Antwerp yesterday to discuss the future of European industry, we're here with a positive signal from the frontline: our strong figures and positive outlook for this year.

Today, we will give you a presentation. I will start with the highlights: the exceptional leasing momentum, we've been able to let and re-let 250,000 square meters in our existing portfolio, and sign another 35,000 square meters of new developments at average rents that are 9% higher than previously.

We are in the second year of Track '27, and it was executed as a success: more than €300 million has been invested at yields averaging 6.5%, and 2025 earnings guidance has been delivered, €4.90 as promised, a year-on-year growth of 8%. The agenda of today is Els, who will bring you the full results for 2025; I will give you an update on our growth; Inna will continue with an update on the portfolio and the market; and Els will bring an outlook for this year and Track '27; and I will wrap up with the ESG.

As every year and every quarter, there is, of course, the Q&A afterwards, where you have the time to ask all your questions. I will now hand the floor to Els for the full-year results.

Thank you very much, Jo, for this nice introduction. Let's indeed move on with the 2025 results.

The recurring EPRA EPS went up by 8% year-on-year to €4.90 per share, despite an increase by 10% in the weighted average number of shares. The net result stands at €163 million for 2025, and includes, besides the EPRA result of €113 million, a positive portfolio revaluation result of €53 million.

Per share, the net result stands at €7.09. Looking at the top line, the net rental income, that went up by 21% compared to 2024 to €140 million, driven by, of course, our portfolio expansion and a strong like-for-like rental growth of 3.2%, of which 2.9% is linked to rent indexation and 0.3% linked to rent reversion.

Total property result, including net rental income and income from solar panels, increased also by 21% compared to last year to €149 million. Of course, with the growth of the portfolio, the property and overhead expenses increased to €17 million for fiscal year 2025.

Operating margin improved compared to last year to 88.9%, which is the equivalent of the EPRA cost ratio of 11.3% for 2025. Financial result, excluding fair value changes, increased by 38% to €18 million, and reflects the expected increased interest charges due to new debt that was taken out to finance our growth plan, Track '27.

Taxes include €2 million of corporate income taxes for 2025, reflect the expected rise in tax expenses in '25 following the abolishment of the Dutch REIT regime. All of this leads to a EPRA result of €113 million, an 18% increase year-on-year, or €4.90 per share.

Balance sheet is prudent, with KPIs that will enable our growth: a loan-to-value of 38.1%, an adjusted net debt to EBITDA of 7.3 times, and an interest cover ratio of 4.5 times. You all know, we have a Fitch investment-grade credit rating of BBB+ with a stable outcome.

Financing costs are well under control, with a cost of debt on average of 2.1%. Funding is long-term, with an average remaining debt maturity of around 6 years, and there is no debt maturing before 2027.

In 2027, we need to refinance only €75 million. Hedge ratio is 99.7% at the end of 2025, and the average remaining maturity of the hedges is around 5 years.

Give back floor to you, Jo, for the growth update.

Thank you, Els. We have some good news on the updates, growth update of course.

Montea is on track to meet its Track '27 growth targets, and when we look at how we are delivering this growth, we see a clear trend: strong acceleration in standing investment opportunities over the past year. Our strong local footprint in our different markets gives us opportunity to complete more standing investments, which fit our ambition to create long-term value.

The market is currently offering very interesting opportunities, including sale-and-rent-back transactions, and there is more to come in 2026, I can promise you that. We reconfirm our EPRA EPS target of €5.60 by 2027, underpinned by €400 million of the remaining investment volume.

This volume is fully covered by the available balance sheet while remaining within the adjusted net debt on EBITDA target of 8 times, taking into account, of course, our annual optional dividend, an 80% payout ratio, and the occasional contribution in kind. This brings us to 80% of the €1.15 billion under Track '27 investments already being identified, and well on track to reach a portfolio growth beyond the €3.5 billion we promised by the end of 2027.

In short, this rebalanced growth will continue to reinforce our clear focus on earnings-enhancing opportunities. Today, more than 80% of our investment program is already earmarked: this is €750 million that is already invested, €66 million currently under execution, and €120 million in exclusive negotiations.

This means just over €200 million still needs to be identified over the next 2 years in order to fully deliver on our plan. In line with our outlook, we realized over €300 million of investments in 2025 at an average yield of 6.5%.

As in previous years, our growth is driven with a balanced mix across our four growth pillars: in-house developments, standing investments, partnerships, and green investments. We expect this trend to continue with a stronger focus on yielding acquisitions in the coming months.

Here you have an overview of the 130,000 square meters we delivered pre-let projects in 2025: an extension for Vos in Oss; the largest development we've ever done in the history of Montea for Intergamma in Tiel; in Amsterdam, we did a new development; and we delivered an extension in Aalst for our client, Movianto. On average, these projects yield at 7%, we realize roughly 30% development margin on these projects, and they have an average lease duration on first break of 14 years.

Let these figures sink in. It's, in my opinion, very strong: 7% yield on cost, 30% development margin, 14 years lease duration, quite strong in these challenging markets.

Next to that, also accretive growth through strategic acquisitions. End of December, we bought a building in Beringen, the former Euro Shoe site.

We are currently completing the necessary refurbishment works on this building, while discussions with potential tenants are at an advanced stage. We have in Zeewolde and Zaltbommel, where we bought a building, two buildings and an extension for new development.

We extended our developments in Blue Gate with a new building we bought at the quay near the river Scheldt. These projects currently under development are being realized at yield on cost of 6.5%, as I said.

We already have another €62 million under development right now, both in Halle and in the Netherlands. We have €4 million in execution on our green investments at an IRR of roughly 8%.

As I said, Halle is under development, and we have our JV in Weerts that continues to go on, where we have a maximum exposure of €140 million. I repeat, it's at an pre-let of 100%.

Here, the average duration on first break on both projects is 20 years, very significant lease duration. That will continue.

We are currently under negotiation for three growth pillars: yielding investments, solar panels, and non-yielding land bank, and we keep the target KPI of more than 6.5% expected net initial yield. This is, in my opinion, a very important slide, it's a new one, where we show the compounding growth momentum we have realized.

When we look at what we have realized under Track '27 until now, over the past 2 years, we see that there is €150 million of value creation. That's more than €80 million coming from value creation on our new developments, more than €10 million comes from value creation on the acquisitions we did in '24 and '25, and more than €60 million comes from a revaluation of our existing portfolio.

These strong results, in our opinion, support both our external and internal growth, and they translate into a total annual return of 9% per year under Track '27. This is a result we are absolutely proud of, and we want to continue that.

Over the next 2 years, we expect to launch more than 200,000 square meters of new projects, all on our existing land bank. These are projects where we already have a customer, but we are still waiting for permits, or we already have the permit in place, but we are waiting for a signature with a client.

For these projects, we expect, as already mentioned, yield on costs of 6.5%, and beyond that, our land bank also offers longer-term development potential: up to 1.2 million square meters of GLA, gross lettable area, within which we expect to receive permits for a further 350,000 square meters of GLA over the course of '26 and '27. Here, too, we expect a yield on cost of at least 6.5%.

This includes yielding land bank and land that is not yet available for immediate development. As the key strength of this strategic land bank is its scale and its development potential across all of our countries.

Through this growth pillar alone, we can expand our portfolio by up to 70%. The land bank has current market value of just €190 per square meter, and more than half of it is already yielding at 5.8%.

This land bank is the foundation of our future growth story, and the full potential is, of course, substantial: it offers over 70% of rental growth in the years to come, and around €330 million of value creation potential. With that, I would like to give the floor to Inna for a portfolio update.

Thank you, Jo. Looking at our lease maturities for 2026, 64% of the roughly 12% of leases that are coming to break or maturity this year have already been renegotiated or extended, with the remaining size of lease breaks well-spread across the year.

If we look back at 2025, 95% of last year's maturities and breaks have been extended and re-let, the trend that's fully in line with previous years, and that confirms the appeal of our portfolio, as well as is further evidenced by the consistently high occupancy, which today outperforms the market by 500 basis points on average. The leasing momentum witnessed in 2025, where we let and renegotiated over 250,000 square meters of leases and signed another 35,000 in pre-lets, confirms solid market activity and our ability to capture it within the portfolio.

This covers roughly €18 million of headline rents, whereby an average rental uplift to date has been secured at 9%, and that of course translates into a positive outlook for our like-for-like rental growth, to which we will come back in a few slides. Looking also at the activity in Q4, this has predominantly been somewhat slower because of the remaining tail of maturities we had to cover for 2025 and the maturity of leases and breaks that are now predominantly being skewed towards the second half of 2026.

Overall, we signed our leases above latest ERVs, confirming the attractive rental growth performance of our assets, and adding close to 1 year to our weighted average lease till break at the time of signing. This slide demonstrates pretty well the demand we see across our portfolio, but also what we witness in the leasing market overall, with core demand coming from 3PLs, food and pharma companies, as well as e-commerce.

Our portfolio, as Jo has already alluded to that fact, has increased about €360 million year-on-year, it's a growth of 13%, and adding it to €3.2 billion today. The key drivers of the value uplift have been predominantly like-for-like revaluation of the standing portfolio, 12% value uplift realized on our acquisitions, which confirms our value creation in that elements, as well as the in-house development gains.

Today, our EPRA net initial yield stands at 4.8%, and it's been further supported by the ERV uplifts we have witnessed in Q4. If we look at the reversionary potential of our portfolio, today it stands at around 8%, and it demonstrates, again, our ability to capture this and drive our like-for-like rental growth beyond indexation.

The net reversionary yield today has a 5.6% level, and the strongest double-digit under-rent remains in our Dutch and German portfolios, which represents close to 50% of our total portfolio. Looking, of course, at the market, and this is where most of the questions come from, what we see today within our portfolio and the market is that the prime yields continue to show stabilization, and Belgium has even seen a light yields compression towards the end of 2025.

This is clearly underpinned by the ongoing gradual rental growth of prime rents, predominantly driven by inflation, and this provides further cushioning and support for asset valuations. Some core microlocations, it's important to note that there, the rental growth posted is actually beyond indexation, but overall, this aligns with our assumption to keep the core driver of rental growth to be indexation with a top-up of reversion towards the ERVs.

The take-up figures for 2025, we see a measured recovery in tenant demand. The activity has accelerated across most markets in Q4 and has now reverted to a 5-year average that has been observed prior to COVID.

Important to mention is that the supply side of things remains very constrained. Today's construction of logistics remains 40% below the peak we have witnessed in 2022, and speculative developments represents just a fraction of that.

If we look at the vacancy across the market, we continue to see that there is a very polarizing trend between the A and B-grade location. That is something that we also observe in our portfolio and the strength of leasing we have been seeing over the course of 2025 and going into 2026, and the vacancy has now roughly stabilized at around 5% across the markets.

E-commerce does remain one of the core drivers of growth in our markets, and we see, first and foremost, that the market penetration and the outlook is improving. We observe an increased amount of tenders in the market for larger spaces looking into e-commerce again, and for us, this represents a 4 million square meter growth opportunity across four markets where we are operating today.

Now, Els, over to you for the outlook.

Thank you very much, Ina. We have some new guidance for 2026, with a minimum 2.5% like-for-like rental growth and an investment volume target of €250 million.

Montea aims to grow EPS by 7% year-on-year to €5.23 per share, including the potential 8 cents coming from the FBI recognition for fiscal year 2024, which we expect by the end of this year. From a dividend perspective, we also expect an increase by 7% year-on-year to €4.19, also there, including the potential FBI recognition, which will be paid out for 80%.

2027 guidance has not been changed. We reconfirm our EPRA EPS target of €5.60 per share, an increase by 7% compared to 2026, and this based on an investment volume target of €150 million for 2027.

Track '27 is made based on the strong financial and operational framework, which reflects our disciplined financial allocation and our focus on operational excellence. First, we have an adjusted net debt on EBITDA target of around 8 times; an operating margin that will evolve towards a level of 90% by the end of 2027, currently roughly around 89%, or EPRA cost ratio of 11.3%, and so the target for the EPRA cost ratio will be below 11% for the end of 2027; an average cost of debt that won't exceed 2.5% throughout the period; and a consistently high occupancy rate above 98%.

The remaining €400 million of investment volume that we target under Track '27 is fully covered by the available investment capacity within the adjusted net debt on EBITDA limit of 8 times. The €400 million that we target to invest will be done through our four growth pillars with an agile, earnings-focused capital allocation.

The first growth pillar are the acquisitions: we are able to acquire high-yielding acquisitions, core product on prime locations, and this thanks to our local presence in the different countries. Second growth pillar are the in-house developments, where it's important, we do not start the developments before we have a tenant, there needs to be a pre-let.

Then the third growth pillar are the partnerships with the landowners and the developers, such as Weerts and Cordeel, the current ongoing partnerships. Next to that, the fourth growth pillar is, of course, the green investments that are the investments that we do in the solar panels and in the battery energy storage systems, which have an IRR of around 8%.

With permits for 500,000 square meter of GLA that is expected to be received in the upcoming years in France, we lay the groundwork for our growth beyond Track '27. Track '27 framework translates in very solid balance sheet, with a net debt on EBITDA that has never exceeded the 8 times looking back at the last 6 years, an interest cover ratio that has never been below 4.5 times, and a loan-to-value that has never been below 40% throughout that same period.

Funding is long-term and diversified, with 50% of credit lines, 50% of bonds. Maturity of the financing is around 6 years, hedging around 5 years, and the maturities are well-spread over time.

Montea has a proven return track record, with a total accounting return over the last 10 years of on average 16%. Back to you, Jo, for the ESG update.

Thank you, Els. We will be very short on the ESG updates, there is not much to tell.

We are continuing our plan to develop photovoltaic capacity, solar panels, we are now at 88 megawatts; battery storage, where we are at 45 megawatts; heat pumps, close to 50% target for 2030, we are now at 45%; and more than 90% of our buildings are now equipped with LED lighting. We continue to roll out our green investment, but due to the slowdown of new developments, we also reduce our ambition under Track '27 from €75 million to €60 million.

That's quite obvious: if we don't build it, we cannot put solar panels on it. There's a slight decrease of the ambition under Track '27, given the fact that some of the projects are delayed.

With that, I think we brought you a story, Montea as an unmatched story: we are the JV partner in the largest development in Belgium ever built for a single tenant; we have an occupancy rate of 99.8%, which, in our opinion, and based on the facts, is today unmatched in the gateway to Europe; and last but not least, the projects under development, we keep the discipline of only working on 100% pre-let developments. With that, I would like to give the floor to Inna for the Q&A.

Thank you, Jo. We'll now open the floor to your questions.

We'll first take the questions in the room before moving on to our webcast attendees. Frédéric, please go ahead.

Thank you for the presentation. Frédéric from Kepler Cheuvreux.

Maybe just want to come back on the Q4 leasing activities, and mostly on that, I want to understand a bit the change between the positive tone at the Q3 earnings with regard to potential leasing, and the fact that, actually, in Q4, the leasing activity was quite sluggish. Maybe that's the first question.

Of course, on the new developments, we already said that there is a delay, and I want to maybe elaborate a bit on that. If there is a delay, it's a strategic it's also linked to a strategic choice Montea has made to continue to focus on the big-box developments.

Going to take Born as an example, we can do a 60,000 square meter development there. We have three leads ongoing for that plot for 60,000 square meters.

Some of them are already looking at this site for more than a year, but we know that strategic decision-making for big box is very difficult today, because they're not only leasing the building, they're also having to do the investments on automatization, get the people in place, so that's taking much longer. Now, this being said, there is the option to say, let's forget about the big box, let's just cut it up in 10,000 square meter plots, and if we would do that, we would have been able to lease out at least three units over the last 6 months.

That's the campus model? We could have made a strategic choice to say, if there's no real demand for big box today, let's forget it, we go for the campus.

What I can say is that until today, we've had that discussion several times on our board: shouldn't we go for that campus model on some of the sites? We think that once you split it up, it's impossible to bring it back together in the future.

If you look at the duration of our developments, 14 years, 20 years duration on first break, the value creation of those buildings is so unique that until today, we still focus 100% on those single-tenant developments. That's the reason where there is delay on the developments.

This being said, when we look at the standing portfolio, if you look at our occupancy rate, obviously, if you don't have vacancy, you cannot lead lease out? Today, we have 99.8% occupancy.

Already, I think 60%, Inna, of what has a break date in '26 is already covered, there we just don't have the square meters available to to lease out more than what we have done in Q4.

The remaining 40% that will come to end or break in 2026 will only come to end or break in the second half of the year.

Okay. That's understood.

Maybe a second one, still on the development. You changed a bit the reporting or the way you were reporting project-by-project, which I totally get that, otherwise, it's probably too much detail.

I still want to reconcile or be able to reconcile a bit the near-term pipeline that you mentioned, which is around 200,000 square meters or a bit more than that, versus the 300,000 square meters that you had also as a reporting in the previous, in Q3, which are actually not pre-let, but for which you have the permit. Does it mean, as there is a discrepancy, that some project which you think you could let in the near term were pushed forward?

Exactly. Under Track '27, the 300 was to be delivered under Track '27, and that's where we see indeed the delay.

Some of them, we still hope and think that they will be started under Track '27, but they will not be delivered under Track '27. Indeed, that's the reason why you see the difference, and your absolutely your analysis is 100% right.

We think that 2 years ago, when we launched Track '27, we wanted to bring you a message: standing investment is too expensive for us today, and we see yields below 5%, and with our current share price, we are not able to buy that, we will have to rely 100% on in-house development. We gave you a very detailed list of the projects.

At a certain moment in time, that list started to haunt us, because you're always asking for a lot of details. Also, in our discussions with clients, it became a bit of an issue, because if you give the detail, then their competitors also have the details.

Indeed, we took the decision to be a bit more vague on that, still give you the figures, but on a less detailed manner. Basically, what we absolutely want to emphasize again is that the focus remains on the single tenants.

I also want to give a bit of detail on the LOI, because I think that would definitely be one of your questions. In the previous two quarters, we talked about an LOI we had signed.

Unfortunately, that LOI has dropped. It was for the site in Lummen, I can give you that detail now.

We hoped to start a development in Q4 in Lummen, but unfortunately, the client there decided not to go on with the project. We were close to signature, but there's a delay, and that's why we thought it was the right moment to give you this message.

This being said, the other part of the story is, of course, that we see the acceleration in the standing investments, where we see opportunities, and it's absolutely based on the off-market potential we have with our teams. We also have there the average 6.5% yield.

We see that prime yield is still at 5%, and we are able to do off-market deals at very interesting yields, mainly because it's partnerships and it's mainly because we see upside potential in redevelopment. I think it's a combined story.

Then maybe to just add to that point, if you look at our value creation, which is the core of earnings growth, even with a delay of developments, we are still going to be able to get there. For us, it comes back to the point of we have been doing over the past 7 years, on average, we've been spending around 30% to 35% of our yearly CapEx on developments.

We are absolutely a committed strategy for us, and we keep expanding our land bank, but the growth has never solely come from developments. Going forward, today the market is we acknowledge the fact that the additional incremental demand is more challenging, and it's taking time to sign those pre-lets, but today there are other avenues to grow.

We're still not talking about investing at yields of 5%; it will still remain what we have always done: the elements either with a future reversionary potential, the element of where we can add value, or we buy off-market, and those are the assets that are priced more attractively.

All right. Just a last one for me before giving the mic.

Just on the EPRA net initial yield, I understand the change of methodology. Just sequentially, if I look, you mentioned that from H2 to H1, there was also the integration of new deliveries and rent incentive.

Just to understand that, is it because the delivery was of very low yield, or because of incentive, which were bigger than usually? Can you shed lights on that?

Thank you.

In terms of the breakdown of net initial yields, we have indeed completed several developments where we now booked the incentives in place. Having said this, what you will actually see is that in the second half of 2026, most of these incentives will be wearing off.

The net initial yield of 4.83% you see today, it will go off in the next, in the second half of the year.

There the topped-up net initial yield is more representative, excluding the lease incentives, going to 4.95%.

Thanks for the presentation. Wim Lewi, KBC Securities.

I want to drill down a little bit further on Frédéric's questioning, and I fully understand the commercial aspects of not giving the full details, but you mentioned Born and Lummen. The one I'm really interested is Tiel.

I think also on the last call, you mentioned that would be an easy leasing project because of the availability of energy. Can we assume that that is still in the 236?

Absolutely. Yes.

I can confirm that Tiel is definitely top ranking the ambition we have for the next 2 years. Now I already feel it in the back that I already get an angry look because I'm already giving details again, and we promised not to give details anymore.

Tiel is definitely one of our ambitions, yeah.

Okay. I'll stop that line of questioning.

Then just two more follow-ups on that. I think if we look at Euro

Shoe,

the way I look at it is that you have something that's available, you can now you don't have to build it. Do you see that because, yeah, maybe leasing activity is not that hot as it was, that you might do more of those kind of ready-to-lease investments?

You mean buying empty standing investments?

Yes.

It's not our first priority. We prefer, of course, things to be leased out when we buy them, but this was such a unique opportunity with the quay it has on the Albert Canal.

We really thought that this was a unique opportunity for us at very attractive yield. Yes, you're the fact that you're buying something empty is reflected in the yields you are able to buy it, that's for sure.

Leased out, this building would have had a totally different pricing. We are now doing the refurbishment works, and we are very confident that by the delivery of those works, it will be leased out.

This is absolutely something we would I think when we prioritize between location, quality of the tenant, and lease duration, although we sign very long leases, our first priority is always the location, and this is such a unique location that we absolutely wanted to have it. Yes, this is a bit more risky than what you're used to see from Montea, but we also think that when you have close to 100% occupancy, you can take a bit more risk on these kind of deals.

Okay. Then last follow-up is again on the haunted table, because there it mentioned in the last presentation an expected yield on cost of 6.8%.

Now, my question is, can you because now you split it up in a time-wise, projects that will be finished in 2 years, and there you mentioned 6.5%, which is slightly below the 6.8%, is that due to mix effects, that some higher-yielding projects are shifted out in a beyond 2 years, or maybe another case is that you expect to have just a lower yield on cost?

Wim, it's at least 6.5%. A very important detail.

All right. I'll leave the mic for the other side of the room.

Ladies first.

Can you hear me? It works?

Yeah.

It's Francesca from ING. I noticed that 2027 investment targets were revised a little bit downward.

Is this because of the answer you gave to Frédéric? If this is the case, can you elaborate a little bit about investment market and investment opportunity that you have, because to me, this decision, it looks a little bit suboptimal, considering the light financial structure that you have.

Second question is on Germany. I don't see anything in the press release, in the annual reports, in anything change on this market, how you look at opportunities here.

Third question is a bit obvious, but I still do that: when do you plan to present the next plan?

Okay. Thank you, Francesca, for your question.

On the investment volume, we have been focusing, and we see that you guys and the market has been focusing a lot on EPS over the last years, that's what truly driving us, the €5.60 is for us crucial. What we wanted to bring as a message today is that based on €400 million investments at 6.5%, we are able to reach the 5.6 target, we are able to reach the €3.5 billion portfolio, and we are able to do this under our current financing.

That is the main message. Obviously, our ambitions are always higher, but this is the core message of the €400 million: yes, we are able to reach the €5.60 per share with €400 million and totally financed under the current balance sheet.

That is the core message. Your second question, Germany, I just read an article this morning with our dear friend, Joost Uwents from WDP, always also confirmed Friday that Germany is a struggle.

It is difficult to start there. We see opportunities, but let not forget that this is the strongest market of Europe.

Let's not forget that they come from yields close to 3% in 2022. In our target of 6.5% that we repeated several times, based on our current financing structure, doing business at 6.5% in Germany is very, very tough.

We see some opportunities in standing investments. We also see, as I said in the past, that in Germany, they don't like land leases, we see some opportunities on ports and airports where, indeed, land leases are mandatory, where we see that there is much less competition compared to other sites that are fully owned.

Yes, we still see potential, but it is a difficult market to enter. We keep on working there, but yes, it's absolutely a struggle to get foot on the ground in Germany.

On the last question, the most tricky one, I would like to give the floor to my beautiful next to me. The next growth plan.

I think your comparison probably comes from the WDP's announcement of extending the growth plan. I think the key message there is we are actually have one extra year to go versus their previous extends or blend plan, '27, because our investment volume runs until the end of 2027.

Today, we are 80% secured in terms of what we're looking to do, but we still have a way to go. For that, we have another 2 years to execute.

I think to give maybe a bit of clues of where we stand, that is obviously our strategy on securing the permitted land in France, where we started and we actually bought in 150,000 square meters of permitted land in France, which is permit is actually the biggest challenge in France, and we plan to add another 350,000 to that over the course of this year and next. To be very clear, it's not a plan to put that to work, it's really preparation for what is yet to come.

I totally understand your answer. Still, coming back on Germany, other peers are opening to other markets outside the current region.

What is preventing yourself to look elsewhere? Still on the plan, but let's put it differently: is there anything that is preventing you to giving visibility beyond 2027?

Thank you.

On the first part of your question, I heard from a very seasoned investor lately who said, "It's first about the people, then about the market, and then about the means." You first need to have the people in place, then you look at the market, and then you put your money there.

I said it in the past, I strongly believe in the Italian market. It's not because the question comes from you, Francesca, but I absolutely believe in that market, I think there's huge potential there.

For us to start there today will also have an impact on our operational margin, you have to put people there before you can start working. We have a lot on our plate in France, as already mentioned by Inna, we are expecting to have 500,000 square meters of GLA permitted in the near future.

We have our hands full with developing our current markets. For me, it's not the primary target to go into a fifth, sixth, or seventh market today.

The second part of your question again refers to a future growth plan, again, I will give the floor to Inna and Els on that.

Today we I think we have provided quite a bit of visibility until 2027, and there are a lot of moving parts in the market. We have some way to go still under this plan, I would say, stay tuned.

Hi, this is Steven from ABN AMRO. Thank you for taking my questions.

To start, some questions on France. The 150,000 square meters that you acquired and has been permitted, can you give some details when can we start developments there, is that '27 or later, maybe even earlier, maybe where is the location and what we can expect there?

Second, a bit broader, the remaining 350,000 square meter that you intend to find a permit for, any color there, what are the bottlenecks, can we expect the permit in the next 6 months or in '26, any color is very helpful.

On the first part of your question, maybe first on the 350, it's where we expect to receive the permits. The permit has been applied for some time ago, we expect to receive the permit this year.

It's not, huh? Under Track '27, the growth plan, the total development pipeline from previous presentations, you remember that it was 100% Benelux or Belgium-Netherlands focused, these were not in the original growth plan, under the original Track '27 growth plan.

This being said, this means that, indeed, might be that some of the projects in Belgium and Holland are delayed, and that some projects in France are a bit more advanced or can be delivered earlier than expected under Track '27. I will not give you detail on the specific projects today, again for the same reason as mentioned before: we don't want to go into detail on specific projects, but indeed, we can expect that France will be a bit earlier in the process than it was under Track '27, that I agree.

For permitting, what are the main bottlenecks there, because it was also a bit delayed before, right?

You mean the permits in France?

Yes.

It's just a very long throughput time. We have been working on these permits, I think the land bank dates back from pre-corona, 2019-20, we started already buying land in France.

It took a long time, but the momentum is there now. We are getting there in the next months.

It's really delays in It's a very long throughput time. That also gives an idea on the value of those project, of those permits, of course?

When the hurdle rate is high, it also creates value once you have them. Vivien.

Hi. Vivien from Degroof Petercam.

A couple of questions left for me. Maybe to jump in first is on the guidance.

A few questions there. First, do you assume any contribution in kind, optional dividend in it?

I assume that in the project you have or the I would say the investment on the negotiations, there is some acquisition and maybe there a contribution in kind. Any guidance you can give there, what do you assume?

Optional dividend, yes, for both years. Contribution in kind, as you state indeed correctly, it is included, but only if there are projects under exclusive negotiations, very limited amount.

Thanks. Then maybe on the like-for-like revaluation, I think this was 0.7% on standing portfolio, just trying to understand, because your letting activity was very strong, you commented that again you are letting above ERVs, still the ERVs lagging, I would say, inflation to that extent.

Just trying to understand, is it the gap between ERVs and your ability to let growing, or is it just maintaining?

I think if you see the average uplift being at 9% over the course of 2025 and our under-rent being at 8% today, we're able to get to ERVs or even above. In Q4, we've seen an uptick in ERV assumptions by the valuers, it was at 1.1% in Q4.

Yields remain flat on the assumptions of the valuers, it's more, let's say, a mechanical calculation. For us, again, it's the key ability of showing that we're able to get to ERV levels is the most important elements.

We have said also last year already that we believe our portfolio is fairly valued today, and today it also keeps on driving our like-for-like rental growth into the future. All the activity you've seen last year, that's also the reason why we're able to put an like-for-like guidance forward for this year at minimum 2.5% this year.

Then a bit more tricky question on capitalized interests. It's declining a bit, the pipeline is limited, I would assume a further reduction is potentially this year.

For the project that have not been started or further delayed, assume that your expectation of rent has also increased, and therefore, the value creation still to be capture, I would say, unchanged compared to the delay that you had to take for some of the projects. Meaning that capitalized interest booking some of the value creation, but the value creation keep on growing, maintaining the potential that you will still have when you start the projects.

I don't think I got the question. Can you...

My question is to know if the value creation potential of the project in the pipeline is remained unchanged over the last 2 years, despite the delay, considering that you have some capitalized interest.

Okay. It remains at €330 million, that has not been changed.

It is compensated by some ERV growth that we see for those development projects, but indeed, no big changes there.

Okay. Then one last question, maybe technical.

How much of the in the financial income come from the Weerts Group contribution? Let's

yeah, around 90%, quite a bit.

Okay.

Yeah. That will shift after 2027 to yielding product, of course.

Thank you.

Thanks, Vivian. All right, we will now move on to the questions in a webcast.

If you're joining us there, please raise your hand to ask a question. If you are joining us through the dial-in option, please press pound key 5 to enter the queue and pound key 6 if you would like to withdraw your question.

Our first question comes from Jamie Richmond at Colletix. Jamie...

Good morning.

Hi, guys. Thank you for the update and presentation.

I just have one question. Can you remind us of how you think about your cost of equity, and under what conditions would you shift from mainly self-funded growth to a larger amount of equity capital?

Thank you.

The question was on cost of equity, yeah? Yep,

indeed.

Yes.

Basically, when we look at the market today and we look at the implied yield of Montea, that would be 5.20%. If we look at our internal analysis, as already mentioned, we look at 6.5%.

The difference is, of course, because we want to continue the earnings per share growth of 6% to 7%, 8% per year, that's our ambition. We have to be more stringent, we have to put the bar higher for ourselves compared to our current share price.

For us, it's really about the momentum, and for us, the cost of debt, the cost of our share price, but also the LTV, but also the targeted earnings per share are crucial in that. For us, this is crucial: we want to focus on EPS, and for us, the bar and the decision whether we go for additional capital increases or not is absolutely linked to the EPS target we want to achieve.

I already mentioned that in the past, if the share price would not allow us to do additional capital increases at levels that are acceptable for us, we would even prefer to go for asset rotation instead of going for capital increases at price levels that are not creating value for the existing shareholder. Value creation, that's why we always bring the total return also, not only the EPS growth, but also the total return is absolutely crucial: we want to create value for the existing shareholder much more than just building a bigger portfolio for the sake of liquidity and size.

Thank you very much. That was very clear.

Thank you, Jamie.

Thank you, Jamie.

Our next question comes from Pierre-Emmanuel Clouard at Jefferies. The floor is yours, Pierre-Emmanuel.

Yes, thank you. Good morning for taking my question.

Sorry, I was a bit late for listening your presentation, sorry if the answer has been already given. You are basically targeting a 2.5% like-for-like growth.

Can you give us a quick breakdown of this 2.5% like-for-like growth, and especially the indexation component of it?

It's a minimum guidance for 2.5%. Roughly, 2% of that is represented by indexation.

This is in line also with our assumptions for 2027 for the budget, where we take into account around 2%.

Okay. France basically will be 0.5%, meaning that we should expect indexation bigger than 2% in Belgium and the Netherlands?

Correct. The indexation figures, if you look especially at last year in terms of indexation, in the Netherlands, we always have a 4-month lag on the index that we use.

We index our leases on the 1st of January with the index from September, and there it's comfortably above 3%, and Belgium is also standing above 2%.

Okay. That's clear.

Can you remind me how much leases do you need to renegotiate this year?

This year, we have 11.6% of our rent roll, and we are 64% done today, we have roughly 4% to go.

All right. Understood.

Then the question the second question is on the follow-up of the previous one on your capital allocation and your equity. I understand your point on equity raise, for sure, but can I ask a question about the share buyback, because I understand your implied yield is close to 5.5% today, but obviously the risk attached to buying back shares is lower than develop new projects.

Would you consider any doing any share buyback, even though I understand your view, it's not the sake of having a big portfolio for having a big portfolio, obviously the share price of today is telling you something, is there something that you are not doing right compared to your competitors, and is the share buyback an answer of it?

The only share buyback that we've done in the past was linked to incentive programs to our management. We think that you don't build those strong teams in the different countries to tell them then, well, we will use our capital to buy back shares instead of investing in new projects.

We absolutely need our money to grow the portfolio, to grow the quality of the portfolio. Repeat myself, I would rather prefer to sell some existing assets and improve the quality by using that money for new developments and new acquisitions instead of raising capital or buying back shares just for the sake of optimizing or using the momentum of the current share price.

Els, maybe you want to add something on that?

I fully agree. We don't expect any share buyback, although I understand the question, and it is, on the short term, value creation for the existing shareholder, of course.

On the other hand, we have a growth plan, €250 million that we are going to do. We see the opportunities.

We have 81% of our Track '27 investment growth program that is identified, is secured today. Buying back shares would have a negative impact on the LTV, the loan-to-value would increase, giving less opportunities to do the growth, the creative growth that we see in the market currently.

I see. In one hand, you're saying that you are not looking for the size for the sake of the size, but then you are not using all the tools that are at your disposal, it's a bit counter-intuitive for me as an analyst.

I understand your point. Maybe one final question is, obviously, looking at the current valuation versus your peers and the current price reaction, is there something that you should be do, that you should improve in terms of, I don't know, perception, financial communication, or whatever in your view in order to fill the gap with the competitors?

I don't feel that gap. I see an implied yield that is 100% comparable, we don't see that as a gap.

Obviously, I saw this morning that all the real estate shares had the lowest performance on the BEL 20, the four that were down were the four real estate shares. We don't really see that underperformance, but if you would have a suggestion that's something we can change on our plan, we're absolutely open to listen to it, but we don't see the need today to make any strategic changes to this strong plan.

No, and to your first comment, buying back shares for a bigger amount than what we need for the long-term incentive plans, and then going back to the market to raise equity, yeah, that would not add value. We prefer to leave our loan-to-value that has now an investment capacity of €400 million under Track '27, we prefer to keep that capacity for growth.

Understood. Thank you.

Thank you, Pierre-Emmanuel. Our next question comes from Kanad Mitra at Barclays.

Kanad, good morning. Please go ahead.

Hello.

Hello, Kanad.

Morning. Hi.

Thanks for taking my question. Just one small one.

I was just wondering about your guidance for FY '26. We're starting at a passing rent of €146 million.

Isn't starting from there and adding up indexation and like-for-like rental growth, isn't the guidance a little bit light if what may I be missing is how I would frame my question.

You're referring to the table of the annual passing rent at the end of December, the €146 million, right?

Yes, that's simply €6 million just starting up front higher net rental income, and obviously there will be some indexation over that as contracts expire for the year, yeah?

The elements for growth, indeed, as we mentioned, it's like-for-like growth for rents at 2.5%, and then the remaining contribution of acquisitions and developments we completed over the course of last year. Of course, what you see on the top line and net, there are a lot of moving parts in between that, in terms of the top-line guidance today, we have provided the bridge into until 2027 of indexation and reversion that we take into account, as well as the remaining contributions for rents, but this does cover 2 years as well.

Otherwise, the underlying EPS growth of 7% is what we are comfortable with today.

7% for FY '26, that's €4.92? Yeah.

Yeah.

That includes the one-off FBI effect, right? Just thinking of the recurring one, that's only 5%.

The underlying recurring is 5%.

[unclear]

We're losing you, Kanad.

Kanad, would you mind repeating your question?

Hello? [unclear]

We are losing you, Kanad. Unfortunately, we cannot take your question because we cannot hear it.

Yeah. We will come back to you offline after the webcast.

We have no further questions on the line. Francesca, one more in the room.

The stock is strongly down today and underperforming the sector. Besides what we discussed, is there anything else that you would like to tell the market to reassure investors?

I think, Francesca, what you're asking is basically the core message we wanted to bring today is that we are halfway down our Track '27 growth plan, that we are delivering on that program: 7% EPS growth this year, 7% EPS growth next year. We're laying the foundations for our future growth plan with 500,000 square meters GLA permits this year in France.

As a reassuring message, we think this is a very strong message. There's not really much we can add today that could give you more reassurance than what we have already given.

We see a very active M&A market, focus more on high-yielding standing investments. That doesn't mean that we will give in to quality: we will focus and continue to focus on prime location, next generation, and core product.

We see that there is a market, thanks to our local presence in the different countries. I think the focus on developments, and of course, we need to do those developments.

We have a land bank of 3.5 million square meter, we are well aware of that. Big part is under option, we are not paying for that land bank, it's not weighing on the EPRA results, on the EPRA result per share.

Of course, the whole part that has been acquired, we know that it's weighing on the EPRA result per share. That's why we have always been focusing on yielding land bank, the fact that it is generating income during this permitting or this pre-letting phase.

Then, of course, we will continue to go for new tenants for those permitted already land bank positions that we have, but it's really a mixture between the four growth pillars that we have. I think that's what the market should keep in mind, that we have four growth pillars that are, yeah, income-generating and not just one.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Over to you for the wrap-up.

Thank you all. Thanks for joining us today in the room, thanks for joining us on the call.

As I already mentioned, and Els said it right to wrap it up, after 2 years, we are well on track to deliver on Track '27, strong results, and strong foundations for future growth. Thank you all for joining, and hope to talk to you soon.

Thanks.