Hello everyone, and welcome to TRATON's Q4 and full year 2025 results call. I am Ursula Querette, Head of Investor Relations.

With me on the call is our CEO, Christian Levin, and our CFO and CHRO, Dr. Michael Jackstein.

Since we published our IR presentation and a pre-recorded annual results video on our website early this morning, we will use this one-hour session for Q&A only. We're happy to take questions from analysts, investors, and the media.

Please note that this session will be recorded, and a replay will be made available on our website later today. The disclaimer and forward-looking statements on page two of our IR presentation applies throughout this call.

To ask questions, press the blue Q&A button on the webcast and follow the instructions. You will see confirmation when you have entered the queue.

Press cancel to leave it. Please wait for your name to be announced before asking your question live.

I am sure there are many topics to discuss. Let's start with two questions per participant, and add more if time permits.

The first question comes from Meihan Yang from Goldman Sachs. Meihan, please go ahead.

Good

morning. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Yes, perfect. Thank you very much for taking my question.

I just have two questions. Given the strong orders you have seen in Europe, have you make any adjustment in your production plan in Europe?

I'll take the second question.

All right. Thanks, Meihan.

This is Christian speaking. Yes, indeed, we have a positive order momentum in Europe.

It actually started to build up already at the end of last year. We had really strong order intake in both MAN and Scania in October, November.

December is always a bit weaker because that's the short month with the holidays. The trend continues throughout January and now confirmed also for February.

Yes, we have made, as we have communicated, several adjustments throughout last year, mainly down, but now we start to see order queues, especially in the Scania order book that is a little bit too long. Yes, we have decided to increase our production capacity, and by that we actually re-employ some of the people as from April that had to unfortunately leave the company during the second half of last year.

MAN, we are currently running on the same production capacity, but if the good trend continues, we will have to do adjustment upwards also there.

Thank you. Meihan, did you have a second one?

Yes. Just on the China impact for the Scania margin.

You said the China factory wouldn't be break-even until 2028. Could you give us a bit more color on the pathway to 2028?

How much impact will be expected this year and going forward as well? Thank you.

Absolutely. It's Christian again.

I I can just start with the general outlook, and then Michael will take the financial impact. As we went live in October last year.

We delivered the first Scania trucks to customers in November, and and since then, we are ramping up production for Scania customers. Scania customers both in China, but we are now also reaching the first couple of export markets that will grow throughout the year.

We also launched the next era product, the the value segment product, or D-Plus as it is called in China, with the first deliveries to dealers already happening, and the first deliveries to customers coming in later here in in the month of well, this month, the month of March. Our results from last year was that we managed to get 700.

That's a modest figure, but that was part of our ramp-up plan. We are expecting to reach 10,000 units already this year.

That requires that we can continue to fill the production for both Scania, both for China and export, and next era, which is only destined to to China. Given that the production capacity technically is 45- or even 50,000 units, there is, of course, yet a bit to go to reach a positive result from this factory.

Then I hand over to you, Michael.

Super. Thanks, Christian.

Meihan, hello. Michael.

Let me maybe come back to what we said a couple of times last year. Last year, we said that the investment in China will be roughly $2 billion.

We now know that we spent so far $1.7 billion, a little bit less than we anticipated. We also mentioned that we believed for 2025, we would spend $1 billion.

About half of that amount would be expense. Now it turned out that $400 million were directly expensed, $125 million in Q4.

For the full year, you can say this is also $100 million less than expected. Looking a little bit ahead, and this was also what you were leaning in where Christian gave you a little bit more figures regarding the ramp-up, you should expect also for 2026 continuously ramp-up costs.

We believe that they will be pretty much in the same ballpark when it comes to the expense number like in 2025 to give you an estimate here. Then it goes without saying also, just complementing or underlining what Christian said, taking into account the capacity that we have and that we intend to produce roughly 10,000, there is a way to go until we reach break-even.

It goes without saying that's higher than a volume of 10,000, but it's also well below the capacity that we have installed there. This is why, by the way, fully in line with our capital markets communication that we had 1st of October 2024, we said, yes, there will be some margin dilution until 2029 or, in other words, as you said, we will anticipate to reach the break-even in 2028.

That's to complement from the financial side.

To give you a bit more details then on the order intake situation. We have a healthy order book both for Scania and the Next Era brand, which gives us a lead time around three months, we're exactly where we would like to be.

We're producing between 10 and 20 trucks a day. That will of course have to increase in order to reach the 10,000.

We are now very, very curious to get the feedback from the first customer who received delivery of the brand new product, which we call the Next Era. I think we will get this reaction to tell you already at the next quarterly results call.

Christian, maybe one thing we should add: not all the 10,000 are incremental, because some of the Scania previous export volumes will now be done out of China. That's important for the analysts' model.

That's perfectly right, Ursula. That's also part of the plan.

We need to release production capacity for the next peak in Europe. Now, we're not saying that the next peak is going to be this year, but it's certainly going to be at some time in the future.

We want to increase the ability to deliver with short lead times to Scania customers in the entire Asian region, including actually the Pacific. That is happening as we speak.

We see the increased flexibility that we create in the system. We already had a one big order where we couldn't even deliver out of China because of capacity restriction, and then we were glad to see that we can reallocate that to Brazil.

Already good flexibility with Brazil and Europe, and now we add even more flexibility, which you can imagine in the future with even more customs or tariff discussions. Now we have a war suddenly that can disrupt flows of products.

I think we have here created really good resilience, especially for the Global South.

Thank you. Meihan, anything else, or can we go to the next question?

If I may just squeeze in maybe one more then. Like you mentioned about in your presentation you're planning for several mitigation measures in the US to just mitigate the tariff, Section 232 cost.

Could you give us a little bit more color on what kind of measures you're planning? Thank you very much.

Of course, it's Michael. As you know from last year, of course we have taken measures already last year.

For example, we have taken out the second shift in Escobedo. That was beginning of the second quarter, where we have laid off significant amount of colleagues there.

Then we have typically sort of a playbook in place, as always when we enter into a downcycle. Of course, we have applied all these things, being restrictive on travels, hiring freezes, etc.

This is in place. Taking into account the situation, especially tariff burden, you can say that is not enough.

This is why we have taken another step beginning of this year, where we have looked especially at let's say the higher management structures, where we had another significant layoff of people. We are adapting to the situation.

If I answer it also in a little broader context, then this is also what we said during our presentation here, it's not only up to International to let's say mitigate the tariff burden that we expect for this year, because it's quite obvious. We had to deal with the IEEPA steel and aluminum tariffs for three quarters, but only in the fourth quarter we were hit then by the 232 section tariffs.

This is something what we will have to deal with for the entire year 2026. This is why we have the common understanding in the entire TRATON Group that we compensate here for the tariff burdens.

We work on all kinds of cost initiatives, all our brands. I could mention the redundancy notice you heard about last year at Scania, and MAN 2030+ is another example, but we're also looking into our enabling functions.

We are really doing the cost work. This is on top of our priority list for 2026 to work together here with International to offset the tariff burden in best possible way.

Thank you. Next question then comes from Alexander Jones from Bank of America.

Alex? Alex, can you hear us?

Alex, now you should hear us. We can hear you probably.

Can you hear me now?

Yes, now.

Perfect. If I can ask two on the US.

I guess one on orders. You've seen very strong orders at an industry level in the past couple of months.

Be interested in your views on sort of the key drivers of that, and in particular whether you think there's any pre-buy there ahead of potential tariff-driven price increases. I guess you have visibility on sort of your market share of those orders and whether you have seen a higher market share if people are anticipating potential pricing from you given the Mexican footprint.

Then the second question just on US content. It'd be interesting to know the assumption you made on the US content in the $60 million 232 tariffs that you booked in Q4, and when your expectation is to get clarity on how the administration will calculate that and what the key things you're discussing with them around that are.

Thank you.

Thank you, Alex. One question for Christian and one for Michael.

Christian?

Sure. The positive order intake momentum for the whole industry, as you have noticed, started in December already, and then has continued to improve throughout January and February.

Came in really, really strong. I think it's the highest figure we have seen since back in September '22.

Why is that? There are of course several factors.

One is the replacement need. We have been running below replacement need in the US now for quite some time.

Secondly, we feel that there's a bit more optimism coming back to our customer base thanks to improved transport rates. We are actually in a recession in the US, which has hit the market pretty pretty hard.

We have seen an accelerated consolidation amongst our customers. We have seen bankruptcies.

We've actually seen a decrease of capacity. If you only add these two up, I think that creates pent-up demand that we now start to see.

Now we can actually only speculate whether on top of that there is already a pre-buy effect. I think customers, well, they know that there will be a price increase related to '27 EPA 27 products.

They probably understand that many of the or all of the OEMs have had to adjust their production capacity downwards and that there is a certain reaction time, as there always is in the swings in the US, that are typically the biggest in the world. To position themselves, it is wise to start to place orders, and I guess there is also a portion of that into the really good figures of January and February.

To our market share, yeah, we first of all managed to keep our close to 15% market share in 2025 despite our disadvantageous situation that Michael will talk more about in relation to the tariffs, and you saw the effect on our result. It's important to us to keep a certain volume, and you know our long-term plan is to take a 1% per year as we improve both our products, service, and services offering.

Yes, in these order intake figures, we feel comfortable that we continue on our about 15% share of the market, and we are of course eager to challenge our competitors to continue to grow slowly in the market as we go forward. I stop there and hand over to you, Michael, on the US content and our negotiations with the authorities.

Sure. Thanks, Christian.

Thanks, Alex, for the question. There's obviously a lot to say when it comes to the tariffs.

You asked specifically about, let's say, the offsets here from US content. Let me nevertheless also, because Christian just mentioned also the IEEPA tariffs, let me maybe take the chance to give you a little bit the broader picture here.

Let me start with the IEEPA and steel and aluminum tariffs just also to give you a number here. We have seen a figure of $50 million for the quarter for IEEPA and steel aluminum tariffs here coming from a little bit lower numbers in Q2 and Q3.

Why were the numbers lower? You might recall we had tariff rate of 25% here first, steel aluminum, that went up then to 50%.

We have a higher figure now of $50 million in the fourth quarter. Maybe also something that might be of interest for you when we look into 2026, of course, we believe that with a higher volume, and, as Christian just mentioned, it was a difficult year, especially in the US, if there is higher volume, and you just heard the indications or you were also into the indications, then this goes in line then also with a potential higher amount per quarter for IEEPA and steel and aluminum tariffs, just also to give you that transparency here.

Then let me come to the 232 section tariffs that you were into. They're in place since 1st of November.

You can say we have the effect for two months here in our books. We had an effect of $60 million for the 232 section tariffs in the fourth quarter, meaning for the two months, November and December.

Now coming precisely to your question, in the fourth quarter, we recorded a receivable for roughly half of the content as we expect to recover. That's one important information, I believe, especially when you want to get, let's say, a better feeling about what to expect in our P&L and also regarding the net cash flow in 2026.

There, I would really like to guide you a little bit and say you should expect two different halves to phrase it like this. In the first half of the year, we will, when we talk about the net cash flow, we don't expect that, let me put it like this, we will get the refunds in the first half, but rather in the second half of this year.

We also took here more a prudent view, as I said, recording the receivable for approximately half of the content we in the end expect to recover, which also has an effect then on the P&L in the first half compared to the second half. This then, I think, is a good segue answering also your question, and this is of course not with certainty, when do we expect to reach an agreement here with the US administration?

I can just say that we work on reaching an agreement of course as soon as possible. When I say as soon as possible, I don't believe, and you see my careful wording, I don't believe that we will reach that before the second quarter, potentially more in the third quarter, which is then also the explanation why you should expect regarding the P&L and the net cash flow effects, why you should expect two different halves in 2026.

I hope that holistic view of IEEPA, steel aluminum tariffs, 232 section tariffs, including here the receivable that we recorded gives you a better understanding what to expect in 2026.

Great. Thank you.

Okay.

Just as a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please press the blue Q&A button in the webcast. Next question comes from Rakesh Patel from [Barat?]

. Rakesh, please go ahead.

I fear we have lost Rakesh. Maybe you can queue again for the question.

In the meantime, let's take Harry Martin from Bernstein. Harry, please go ahead.

Hi. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Great. I wanted to start just with a shorter-term question.

You've outlined some of it, but the outlook for the Q1 margin to be below the full-year range, the international margin probably takes another step back as that two months of Section 232 goes to an entire quarter. Does the profitability outside of the North American business also ramp through the year, or is that more stable?

Then, secondly, I wanted to ask if you could give some sort of perspective of the impact of higher oil and energy prices on the demand for trucks generally. Could you help us with some sensitivity?

If oil was, say, above $80 a barrel for an extended period, typically what would happen to truck orders? Then maybe in China, could we even see an even faster shift towards the battery-electric trucks if fuel prices are higher this year, and would that impact your initial expectations of the Scania plant as well?

Thank you.

Michael, do you want to start with margin, profitability?

I can start with that. Harry, thanks for the question.

I think you already tackled here the North American situation, and I could come back to what I mentioned before. Especially when we look at the 232 section tariffs, and that we expect the positive effect, as I was into before without repeating everything, clearly in the second half of this year, this is certainly one of the explanations.

Another explanation is that we have usual seasonal effects, typically, when you also go back in time, you see that the first quarter is not, let's say, as strong as the other quarters. That's another aspect you have seen when you take into account our ad hoc release that we have done really well on the net cash flow because we worked intensively on the working capital management aspect here, and especially when it comes to inventories, we have done a really good job.

These are the couple of seasonal effects that come into play, why we wanted to give you a little bit better understanding, taking into account the broader guidance range that we have laid out, that you have a good estimate for the first quarter where we indicated that we believe that we will see a margin here below the full-year guidance range. These are the predominant effects for that.

With that, looking at Christian if you want

to

complement. Yeah.

Then

it was the good question how does higher oil and gas and energy prices affect our sector? Probably better than me, there are correlations between oil prices and the general economic development where high energy prices are bad, of course.

From that perspective, it's of course not good that gas prices skyrocket and oil prices go up. For us, in our own situation, we're not a very high energy-intensive sector.

It is of course not good, but it's not something that will directly hit our product cost. We have plastics, of course, that will also increase in prices, but, well, however, that's a big part of the truck, but it's not significant, I would say.

The interesting thing, which is new, which we do not have any historical data is, of course, how does this accelerate electrification. Because it changes, of course, the total cost of ownership to the detriment of the combustion engine vehicle, which is exactly what we have been asking for, especially in Europe.

Now you touched China, where the uptake of electric truck has already surpassed 25% in 2025, and we saw a December that was almost unbelievable with a 40% penetration of heavy electric trucks, whereas we in Europe are hovering in and around 2%. Will this be the game changer?

I don't think so, but it is certainly going to change on the margin in certain cases where today the diesel truck is winning towards the electric truck winning the pure TCO cost. Then, of course, customers have to have a certain view on will this continue, for how long, what's the outlook?

You may remember that in our assumptions that we would reach 10% battery-electric vehicle last year and come to 50% in 2030, we assumed much lower electricity prices in Europe. This was before the Ukraine war.

We assumed much higher diesel prices, which for different reasons has not come. Maybe they're coming now.

Sorry for going a bit outside. I do not have a ratio how this would impact the market directly, but a few considerations to put into your calculations.

No, that was very useful. If I can just squeeze in a follow-up on the order momentum in the US.

Have the recent orders placed been for build slots on the normal 6 to 8 week delivery timeline, or is there any sort of unusual extension by larger fleets placing, for example, their entire 2026 renewals all at the start of the year, whereas usually it would be a bit more spread out?

No, the simple answer is no. This is what we would consider more normal retail and some fleet customers, but it's not like someone is hedging our order book.

We have also not decided yet, at least, to increase production capacity, but we are comfortable with the current lead time. Of course, this is something we evaluate every month, so that could very well change so much.

Great. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Harry.

Thank you, Harry. Actually, there are no more questions in the queue.

As a reminder, please press the blue Q&A button. Let's wait 2 or 3 seconds.

Otherwise...

We will see if we have Rakesh back.

Yeah. We have Hampus coming into the queue.

Okay.

Hampus, I'll put you on loudspeaker. Please go ahead, Hampus from Handelsbanken.

Thank you. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. Just my Super.

It would be interested to hear your thoughts on your EPA drivetrain and configuration for the EPA 27 truck in terms of price increases, what are you aiming for? Also, if you would look at your testing on the fuel consumption and maybe also real-time testing from your customers who's testing the product, how does TCO compare to the 20 to the 2026 model?

Hi, Hampus. Christian here.

I'm not sure I want to tell you all of that, to be honest. Let me say that when we started the so-called FPP project, what is now the Common Base Engine 1 for the TRATON GROUP, we had already a supply contract made up with former Navistar, and we knew that we had to be competitive in the North American market.

Already from the pre-study, we knew there would be EPA 27, and we knew there would be Euro 7, and these were where we needed to be extremely competitive. The entire base engine is developed to be the best in the industry for EPA 27.

Being best in the industry means two things. It means predominantly, at least two things, that means being good and really good on fuel consumption, and then being really good on product cost.

Apart from that, you have the service intervals, and you have the reliability, and you have the weight of the driveline, etc., etc., where we deem also that we are competitive. It's too early to proclaim victory.

Of course, we don't know what the others are going to bring to the market. We know their platforms, and we can make our assessments, but my gut feeling so far and the feedback from our both engineers and our ongoing testing in the market is that we are going to come out really, really strong

in '27. We will have a product that consumes very little fuel, and we will have a product that has a very small cost disadvantage.

What we're curious to learn is, of course, where is the market price increase going to end up? Based on that, we're going to take our tactical decisions where to place this product in the market.

Commercially right now, we're of course eager to collect as many orders as possible on the current engine emission generation, where we also have a very, very competitive product with the CBE1 or the S13 in International, and then we're going to come back on the tactics. I'm sorry, I'm not going to share that with you today.

Can I just have one, what you said this in follow-up, because some of your competitors have indicated price increases in the range of $8- to maybe $11,000. When I've been talking to you guys previously, you kind of thought that was on the high side.

Is that still the case? Just trying to grasp how competitive you could be.

Exactly. No, but,

yeah, we still work with a scenario that the market price increase is actually going to be around $10,000 US dollars. I would be very happy to see it there, let's put it like that.

Thank you very much.

Thanks, Hampus.

Thank you, Hampus. Then I would say there's no more question in the queue.

With this, we conclude today's call. Thank you for joining us today.

If there is anything more to discuss, please contact the Investor Relations team. I see Nikolai who joined.

Quickly, of course, let's take Nicolai. Of course we should.

Let me put him on loudspeaker.

Yeah.

It takes... Do

we have Hemal as

well, or? It takes a bit...

The system is slow.

The system is very slow. Now, I think you should hear Nicolai.

Okay.

Hi. Hey.

Hey, good morning. Can you hear me?

Just...

Yes.

Perfect. Sorry, I had some technical issues.

On the very strong orders in US over the last months, can you highlight whether you have raised price for these orders? Because I think there's just a risk that maybe clients have used their pricing power over the last months, because the market has just been weak, to place a lot of orders, and maybe that you have missed out raising prices accordingly.

No, hi, Nicolai. From my point of view, I would not say that's an issue.

If we go back, we have seen in Q4 good order intake in October. We had then foundry effect in November, and then, as you heard before in the call, then we had a good figure again in December, and in a way also in line with the official data.

We have seen, I would say, quite an okay-ish to good order intake so far at the beginning of the year. That's pretty much what we see, but it's very much in line with the overall market situation, where we see also slight positive signs, you can say, which is in addition also in line with our guidance.

When we look at the North American market, what we project regarding the midpoint for the 60,000, this is how I would put it into context.

Understood. One follow-up on the tariff question.

You mentioned $50 million in Q4 for steel and aluminum and $60 million for the Section 232, in total, 110, right, for Q4?

That's correct. The $50 million are for IEEPA, for steel and aluminum, and the $60 million So the $50 million are for the entire Q4, and yes, also the $60 million for the 232 section tariffs are for Q4, but here you should take into account that the 232 section tariffs started in November, 1st of November.

It's in Q4, but that's a number you can say for two months.

Did you already record the receivables of this impact of Section 232 tariffs in Q4, meaning that...

Half of what we believe is going to be the US content. Half of it.

This is why you might not have been in the call before. This is why I mentioned if you take that into account, that explains then that we believe that we see two different halves 2026, because on the P&L side, we expect then once and if we are successful here in negotiating US content on the one hand side and then receiving the other 50% that we believe that we should get in, we see then an effect on the P&L side more in the second half of the year, and also when we talk about the net cash flow effect, we see two different halves of 2026.

Nikolai, are you okay? Did that answer your question?

It did. It did.

Thanks.

Cool. Apparently, there are technical issues.

We have received questions from Hemal Bhundia from UBS. The first one, I would say, we've answered.

Let me quickly read it out, but it's answered. "Could you provide some guidance on the fiscal year '26 tariff impact for International, and if possible, could you split this for both IEEPA and Section 232?"

I think we've done. Next question: "On the net cash flow guidance, you mention you are targeting similar margins for fiscal year '25, and sales guidance implies flattish growth.

Just wondering what you are thinking about on working capital and capex." Michael?

Happy to take that one, Hemal. Situation is here the following.

When you look at our net cash flow guidance, then we have a midpoint here of $1.3 billion. When you look at our ROS guidance to put it into context here, we also have a midpoint of 6.3.

I think it's important to mention that, of course, we are aiming for higher level. That goes without saying.

When we talk about the ROS margin, 6.3 is what we achieved in 2025. Yes, of course, our ambition is higher than what we achieved in the previous year.

The reason why we came up with a broader guidance range, I would say I'm just stating the obvious, is because this world is much more uncertain. We have seen in the past, and we cannot outrule this also for 2026, potential disruptions in the supply chain.

We are coming from a year 2025 where the tariff policies created quite some disturbances, I would say, and then also we said a couple of times, unfortunately, we cannot rule out that there is another war in this world, where we have just seen here the start of the war against Iran a couple of days ago. This is why we believe the broader range is the right thing in this kind of situation, in kind of world we are living in.

To come back to the net cash flow guidance, I think here it's important to say, because I mentioned the midpoint 6.3% for this year, same level as in the previous year, yes, we're aiming for more, very important to state this. When we look at the net cash flow midpoint, then it's below the level of the previous year where we achieved $1.6 billion, which was a little bit better than anticipated.

This is why we also issued the ad hoc release. What was the reason for that?

Extremely strong working capital management. We did very well with regards to the inventories, but also when we look at the payables and receivables in all the constituents of the working capital, we did, let's say, a good job.

We didn't want to copy-paste that one-to-one to 2026. What's the rationale for that?

Because as we were into, we see the signs for a better European market, we see some signs, indications also for potential better North American market in line with our market guidance, and if this takes place, then we also believe that we should see a better book-to-bill ratio in 2026 compared to 2025, which then translates into some pre-financing. Also, we expect that we potentially have then higher inventories at the end of 2026, just to give you a little bit, let's say, the rational and the math behind it, how we came up here with the net cash flow guidance.

Then, and then I stop, you also asked about capex. What I can say here is that we believe when we package R&D and capex, that we should see a similar level in 2026 combined as in 2025.

Hope that gives you a little bit more light into these two aspects.

Maybe now we jump to the third question from Hemal on the truck orders in Europe.

Should I read it out?

Yeah.

The third one is: "On the truck orders, there was an increase in Europe, but Germany orders underperformed. Any color or commentary you can provide on how German truck orders have performed year-to-date?

Are you seeing the stimulus effect come through over January and February, and any key markets you could highlight driving the Q4 European orders, please?"

Yeah. That was the disappointment from 2025.

We expected the stimulus to not just directly positively impact Germany, but we thought it would even have a spreading effect throughout Europe. That did not happen.

Actually, Germany was one of the laggard markets in '25 that did not recover according to plan. You're asking were there other markets?

I think basically all markets, both south, north, east, west, saw a good recovery towards the end of the year with the exception of Germany, Austria, Switzerland. Hence, a little bit less positive order intake situation for MAN versus Scania, as you know MAN is heavily dependent on the DACH region.

What we're seeing at the beginning of the year is or also at the end of last year is that the money starts to trickle through, and we see concrete projects being made, but we do not yet see that translated into truck orders. Undoubtfully that is yet to come, in a way, we have that in the bank.

We just don't know when, but we're absolutely sure that is going to happen. Is there a psychological effect for surrounding markets?

That's very hard to see, but there is definitely a very positive momentum around European markets in general. What we don't know is of course the last days' impact when it comes to the war in Iran.

Will that again create uncertainty and resistance to invest? I would not be surprised if that is the case.

It's a little bit hard to sit here and say Europe is going to develop very, very well. I think as we guided, we guided widely, we guided with a small increase, I think wisely, because, yes, there is an underlying positive momentum, but at the same time, there are lots of risks, and right now we just see one major risk materializing, which is a war in the Middle East.

Super hard to guide going forward, but I remain positive. I think that we are not wrong in our guidance.

I think we could see a European heavy commercial vehicle market move up towards 300,000 again, and with Germany coming along during the year. I stop there.

Yeah. Thank you, Christian.

I think this is a good conclusion to this call. No more questions in the queue.

As I said, if there's anything more to discuss, please reach out to the Investor Relations team. Enjoy the rest of the day, and goodbye.

Goodbye.

Goodbye.