Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the 3 months 25/26 analyst conference of Carl Zeiss Meditec. My name is Sebastian Frericks.

I'm the Head of Investor Relations. Our CEO Andreas Pecher and our CFO Justus Wehmer will present the 3 months results and guide you through the financials and some prepared remarks.

After the presentation, we look forward to the Q&A. Now, I would like to hand over to Andreas.

Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning, analysts and investors.

Welcome to the 3 months 25/26 analyst conference of Carl Zeiss Meditec AG. Maybe some of you know that I've been a Zeiss Executive Board member since January 2022.

Back then, in the very early part of that month, Med was valued above €16 billion. Now it is valued at below €2.5 billion.

This is not acceptable for all of you, and also not for Zeiss. Zeiss has taken the biggest loss of all, above €8 billion since then.

A new low point also is in the level of trust when we had to withdraw a full-year guidance on January 22nd. The minimum I can do is to apologize, which I want to do personally and on behalf of the Management Board.

I assume more important for you and also Zeiss as the main shareholder is that we reverse the trend and build up trust again by working on our business performance and meet what we said before, over and over again. For that, we need to strongly focus on execution now.

We will talk about how business conditions have evolved since our last update in December 2025 and what the key building blocks are for the remainder of the fiscal year. Justus will address these topics in more detail later in the presentation.

Of course, following the presentation, we'll be happy to take your questions. Before that, Justus and I will walk you through the quarterly overview and financial results.

Let me start with an overview of our first quarter performance. To cut it short, this was not a good quarter and we are not happy with the results.

We had a weak start to the year with both revenue and EBIT coming in below the prior year, driven primarily by currency headwinds and an unfavorable product mix with weaker sales of refractive treatment packs, as well as intraocular lenses in China, which weighed on margins. Revenue for the quarter amounted to €467 million, representing a decline of 4.8% year-over-year.

On a constant currency basis, revenue declined by 2.1% year-over-year, driven primarily by movements in the US dollar. When fully reflecting all currency headwinds, FX effects amounted to €20 million.

FX-adjusted revenues was relatively flat at -0.7%. Beyond the US dollar, these currency impacts were mainly related to the Chinese yuan.

In this adjustment, we are also eliminating all currency effects related to the exports into the Zeiss Group global distribution network. The revenue decline was visible across both equipment and consumables.

The quarter was impacted by a soft start into the fiscal year following an exceptionally strong equipment delivery baseline in September last year. In China, we also saw revenue loss from bifocal intraocular lenses following the withdrawal from the current VBP tender, as well as delayed sales of refractive treatment packs due to the later timing of the Chinese New Year holidays.

Looking at the revenue mix, equipment accounted for 52%, consumables for 37%, and services for 11% of total revenue in the quarter. Order intake reached €471 million, down 9.7% year-over-year or down 6.9% on a currency-adjusted basis, which is mainly related to the strong year-end close in September 2025.

Our order backlog decreased to €405 million at a slightly higher level compared to the end of last fiscal year. Now turning to profitability, EBIT came in at €68 at €8 million, a 77% decline versus the prior year, resulting in an EBIT margin of 1.7% compared to 7.2% last year.

The significant decline was mainly driven by negative FX effects, an unfavorable product mix, and negative operating leverage as our cost base remained largely stable while revenues declined. Now I'd like to hand over to Justus, who will provide you with more background and will discuss the SBU figures in more detail.

Thank you, Andreas, and also warm welcome to all of you from my side. As usual, I will briefly walk you through Ophthalmology performance first and afterwards microsurgery.

We had a weak start driven mainly by refractive phasing and a loss of bifocal IOL sales in China. Let's start with the revenue.

Reported revenue came in at €357 million, which is down 5.1% year-on-year, and foreign exchange-adjusted basis revenue declined by 2.4%. The performance was impacted by several factors, of course currency headwinds, as already explained by Andreas; strong equipment sales at prior year end, which created a much slower start in the following month; and later phasing of refractive treatment pack sales due to the later occurrence of the Chinese New Year vacations; and ultimately, the loss of the bifocal IOL sales in China, where we have reported that we lost there the right to participate with one lens category in the tender.

One item to highlight here is the potential bifocal IOL scrap risk associated to what I just explained and estimated at around €8 million in total, which will fall in quarter two. This will be treated as a non-recurring impact and it's worth noting that registration of the successor model is progressing well.

The chance seems good to receive the license before the start of the next tender. Moving to EBIT margin, the EBIT margin declined to -0.4%, representing a 5.2 percentage point decrease year-on-year.

This was mainly driven by a 1.9 percentage points decline in gross margin, largely due to the currency effects and an unfavorable product mix. The opex ratio weighed on margin by additional 2.8 percentage points, although absolute expenses remained stable, as particularly the changes in APAC currencies cannot be locally hedged with most of our opex in Europe.

Finally, looking at the revenue split, Ophthalmology accounts for 76% of total OPT revenue. Within Ophthalmology, consumables represent 46%, equipment accounts for 45%, and service contributes 9%.

Turning then to microsurgery, overall, we saw a margin decline, mainly driven again by currency headwinds and an unfavorable product mix. Revenue reached €110 million, which is down 3.7% year-on-year.

On a currency-adjusted basis, revenue declined by a more moderate 0.9%. The softer revenue performance, despite a relatively modest comparison base, is largely explained by exceptionally strong deliveries towards the prior fiscal year-end, which created a pull-forward effect.

In addition, we saw an unfavorable mix with slower deliveries of neurosurgical microscopes following the strong year-end close in September '25, which not only impacted revenue phasing, but also weighed on profitability. The EBIT margin decreased to 8.7%, representing a 6.5 percentage point decline year-on-year.

This was mainly driven by the 5.5 percentage point decline in gross margin, reflecting currency effects, an unfavorable product mix, and the amortization of capitalized R&D related to Kinevo. In addition, the opex ratio weighed on margin by around 1 percentage point, while absolute expenses remained stable.

Looking at the revenue split, microsurgery accounts for 24% of total revenue. Within microsurgery, equipment represents the largest share at 79%, service contributes 15%, and consumables account for 6%.

Let me walk you through our regional development. Overall, EMEA remained stable while we saw softer performance in the Americas and APAC.

Starting with the Americas, the region accounts for 25% of group revenue. Revenue came in at €117 million, down 13% year-over-year, with currency-adjusted revenue declining by 6%.

This reflects a weaker investment climate, driven largely by heightened geopolitical volatility and a decline in key markets, including the US. Overall, demand momentum in the US remained subdued during the period as a consequence of tariff-related price increases.

Moving to EMEA, EMEA represents roughly 37% of group revenue and showed a largely stable performance. Revenue reached €174 million, moderately below last year, while currency-adjusted revenue actually grew slightly.

This resilience was supported by growth in selected markets, particularly in the Middle East. At the same time, core European markets, including Germany, Spain, and the Nordics, remained broadly sideways.

Finally, Asia-Pacific region, APAC represents 38% of revenue, with China contributing 18% in this quarter. Revenue amounted to €178 million, down 3% year-over-year, with a currency-adjusted decline of 2%.

Performance across the region was mixed: China remained stable, while India and Australia showed positive trends. This, however, was offset by weaker revenue in Japan and South Korea, which weighed on the overall regional result.

Turning to the P&L, margins came under pressure in the quarter, while operating expenses remained broadly stable. Gross profit declined to €227 million, with the gross margin decreasing to 48.6% from 51.4% last year.

This was mainly driven by currency headwinds, a lower contribution from neurosurgical microscopes, IOLs, and refractive treatment packs, as well as higher amortization of capitalized R&D expenses related to Kinevo. Looking at operating expenses, total opex was flat year-over-year at €226 million.

However, as a percentage of sales, opex increased to 48.4%, reflecting a negative operating leverage. As a result, profitability was significantly impacted.

Both EBIT and EBITA declined sharply. Earnings per share decreased to -€0.06, driven by the sharp EBIT decline and negative financial results, primarily due to higher interest expenses.

On an adjusted basis, adjusted earnings per share was €0.03, excluding non-cash valuation effects on contingent purchase price liabilities, while exchange rates and hedging results were not adjusted. The next table provides a brief overview of the bridge from EBIT to EBITA and to adjusted EBITA.

Regular amortizations on purchase price allocations amounted to €7 million in Q1, including DORC effect of €6.5 million and smaller effects from former acquisitions. In terms of special items, the current quarter includes legal expenses in connection with a lawsuit related to former IanTECH in the US.

On the contrary, the prior year benefited from a one-off gain from public grants received in China for our IOL production. Adjusted for special items, EBITA amounted to €10.3 million with a margin of 2.2%, a significant decline compared to previous year.

Next, we have a quick overview on the cash flow statement. We saw a clear improvement in operating cash generation.

This improvement was mainly driven by a strong reduction in receivables, particularly from third parties, as well as income tax refunds, which reflect the weaker operating result in the period. Cash flow from investing activities also improved, primarily due to lower investments in property, plant, and equipment compared with the prior year.

Financing cash flow declined, mainly impacted by the reduction of liabilities to the Zeiss Group Treasury. By end of Q1, net financial debt decreased to €282 million at a lower level compared to a year ago.

Now, I'd like to hand it back to you, Andreas.

Thank you, Justus. Let's move to our key topics and outlook.

I will outline the main triggers behind the current guidance suspension and also share my recent impressions from a visit to China that happened last week. Then Justus will illustrate the key building blocks shaping our outlook for the remainder of the fiscal year.

Let me briefly explain what has changed since December 2025 and why we decided to temporarily suspend guidance in January. Let me start with the bifocal IOL situation in China.

As we communicated at the December 24/25 analyst conference full-year our conference, our bifocal IOL was withdrawn from the existing VBP tender. As a result, it can no longer be sold to public hospitals under that framework.

While the product license itself remained valid, there is still, of course, ambiguity around the VBP withdrawal and we were still address assessing whether limited sales to other markets or the private sector are feasible. At the same time, the treatment of existing inventories remained unclear.

In a worst-case scenario, this could require partial recall and scrapping of stock. We're now seeing only limited resale opportunities for bifocal IOLs more broadly as this product has been removed from the reimbursement scheme following the withdrawal of VBP qualification.

Since January, we have negotiated a partial recall with external distributors and Carl Zeiss China, which will result in an estimated earnings risk of around €8 million for Carl Zeiss Meditec. Second, moving to VBP and competitive dynamics.

Our assumption in December was that the second nationwide VBP tender would put some pressure on IOL pricing, but to a lesser extent than the first tender, as we learned from other peers, which are subject to consumables VBP. Meanwhile, we've identified the competitive landscape has intensified more than expected.

In multi-focal categories, several Chinese competitors have successfully passed registration, increasing price competition. As a result, we now expect pricing pressure in premium IOLs to be tougher than previously assumed.

Beyond IOLs, competition in equipment is also starting to heat up, supported by expanding local procurement policies. Finally, on equipment demand, we're currently seeing weaker demand in the US and broader Americas market.

Particularly in the ophthalmology segment, this seems to extend beyond the impact of the strong September deliveries causing a slower start into new fiscal year. Based on this, internal sales forecasts have been adjusted to reflect a more cautious capex environment for the fiscal year.

Putting all this together, regulatory uncertainty in China IOLs, higher competitive pressure, and softer equipment demand, we concluded that temporarily suspending guidance was the most responsible step until visibility improves. We will update the market as soon as conditions stabilize and assumptions can be reliably quantified.

We're currently working very hard in defining measures and will update you as soon as possible, latest with the half-year reporting, as previously promised. Before I close and hand in back to Justus for the outlook, let me talk briefly about China with a more long-term view.

I just came back from an, I would say, intensive visit in China last week. I was meeting there, of course, government officials, for instance the Shanghai Party Secretary, Chen Jining.

He's one of the Well, he is the highest-ranking official in Shanghai. We also had the the corporate Zeiss Greater China Headquarters campus construction launch launch ceremony, and, of course, we did that alongside many of our customers, the local officials.

Lastly, I met a number of our customers, particularly the Aier Group and its CEO, Mr. Li, and, of course, our team.

Let me be straight in assessing the long-term competitiveness of Zeiss in China. We currently are in a period of, let's call it vulnerability, not having localized our manufacturing fast enough.

The transfer of manufacturing for key consumables and equipment is happening as we speak, and we will be largely completing this over the next 2 years. We have all the support we need from our local team and from the local and regional officials, and I will personally look over this.

We expect to be strongly competitive again across our portfolio with our state-of-the-art production facilities in Guangzhou and Suzhou. Having the strongest brand in ophthalmology in China, keep in mind Zeiss is even more recognized from a brand point of view in China as in Germany, very close relationships with our key customers, and an excellent reputation in the Chinese market.

From consumers, just said that on brand recognition, to doctors, to the government. This can also be demonstrated by the largest ever infrastructure investment corporate Zeiss has made in China today that, of course, also benefits Carl Zeiss Meditec.

Now back to you, Justus.

Thank you, Andreas. Let me now outline how we are thinking about the timing of new guidance and the main factors that will shape our outlook.

At a high level, we continue to see several external headwinds, including trade barriers, regulatory changes, a softer consumer environment, and currencies, which are putting pressure on this fiscal year. Right now, we don't foresee any alleviation of these headwinds in the near term.

There are three groups of internal factors we are monitoring closely. First, swing factors which could move performance either way in the near term.

This includes the timing of the successor bifocal IOL registration and launch. We have already received, as we mentioned before, positive signals, and currently expect to receive the license around March in time for the new volume-based purchasing tender.

We are also awaiting the outcome of the VBP tender expected in April or May, which will have an important impact on our IOL business. Lastly, refractive procedure demand around the Chinese New Year period, which will provide a good indication on overall market sentiment.

In the first quarter, as well as extending into January, our refractive consumption data indicates continued stability, whereas the market was quite weak overall based on our data. We are satisfied about our relative outperformance, but currently cannot count on a growth outcome to offset other pressures in the business.

Second, non-recurring items. In Q2, we expect the scrapping of certain old bifocal IOL inventory.

As just explained, we have agreed with Carl Zeiss China and external distributors to take back a certain quantity of intraocular lenses, which will cause a burden of around €8 million to gross profit in the second quarter. We are developing our strategy and reprioritizing R&D projects, which will likely have an impact on IP and cost allocation.

In addition, we anticipate one-time reorganization-related expenses that will mainly affect the second half and beyond. As we have said in our release on January 22nd, more details on measures will be presented with our half-year report.

Third, key positive drivers. We expect continued momentum from the VISUMAX 800 and the associated SMILE pro rollout in China, further global traction for the KINEVO 900 S.

Overall, while near-term volatility remains elevated, we see both risks and clear operational levers. Once these swing factors crystallize and the one-offs are better quantified, we will be in a much stronger position to provide reliable guidance, timing-wise no later than our half-year results.

With this, I'd like to conclude our presentation for today. Now, we look forward to your questions.

Oh yeah, good morning. Can you hear me?

Yes.

Perfect. Good morning, Oliver Reinberg from Kepler Cheuvreux.

Just three questions, if I may. The first would be on China refractive.

Obviously, the kind of Chinese New Year season is starting soon. Given you have just been in China, can you just provide some kind of feedback, A, what you have seen in terms of stocking ahead of the event, and also what kind of feedback you get in terms of expectation for the season from the clients?

Secondly, just on the counteraction you're going to take. Obviously, you are going to execute the plan that was developed before.

Can you just provide some kind of flavor to what extent you also consider to accelerate this kind of measures given the kind of current earnings pressure? Then thirdly, just on China and the political background.

Buy Local has been a theme for quite a while. Can you be a bit more specific in which equipment parts you specifically see this kind of pressure and whether there's also anything happening in the refractive space?

Obviously, there's so far no local competition to SMILE, but if there's any kind of push towards LASIK, what are you thinking here? Thanks so much.

Thank you, Oliver. I can probably take the first two questions and

Andreas, if you chime in on the second and take the third one.

Exactly. China refractive.

You are absolutely right, Oliver. We are actually, as we are sitting here, entering into this Chinese New Year vacation period.

In a nutshell, I think the stocking into the distribution channel is right now tracking on a level that is, I'd say, within our expectations. It is comparable to last year's level, but the proof is then in the pudding.

The proof is ultimately in the consumption during the vacation period. I think, only once we know that, we will really have a good indication whether our assumptions for this year's overall consumption are actually correct or maybe higher or outperformed or underperformed.

On measures, I can tell you that we are in full steam, to speak, in the assessment and the decision-making process on what needs to be done. I have to ask for your patience.

As there we have to follow a governance protocol, and we also, frankly spoken, don't want to share anything premature here in public and clearly also not to feed our competitors with information that might be interesting to them. On the Chinese political pressure, I think

Maybe I can add to the second one, Oliver. Thanks for those questions.

That was the main reason why I stepped in, right? That we don't want to lose the time here.

We talked about that in December already. First measures have been implemented.

For instance, the commercial organization that's being rolled out now. Of course, the other items we're working together as the team to make sure that we develop those plan as fast as we can.

That's clear. Implement what we can implement, and for other things we, of course, need the governance.

That's clear. Rest assured that this is one of my and the whole team's highest priorities.

Now coming to your third question. Let me first comment with sort of a general statement.

What we observe is typically there's Buy Local policies for areas where you have local competition coming up, of course, because it makes sense, right? Other things have to be imported.

We observed that specifically in the diagnostic areas and there is some risk in ophthalmic areas. The good thing is we have all this in our hand.

We can localize. We have large, really good infrastructure in China.

We have the right people. I just met them again last week that can do that, and we have the willingness to do that.

In addition, we also have the support from the local government and officials. I spoke to them last week.

They really want us to be successful in this market. I would say we have everything in place to counter that and take on competition as it arises.

Do you see any risk that this kind of political pressure is also moving into the private space of refractive?

I wouldn't say political pressure. You can call it political pressure.

In the end, it is the will to localize manufacturing and parts R&D. If you follow that, our impression is we have a very good position in that market.

By the way, that's something that I also see in other businesses of Zeiss. This is not just in medical.

We have that in our vision business as well. What we see is, as long as you follow those rules, we have a very strong position in those markets.

Vision is number one, for example, in China, and there is, of course, strong competition. We have the means to do this and, of course, work with the officials to make sure that we can do that.

Perfect. Thanks so much indeed.

Thank you.

Hi, thanks for taking my questions. I actually just had a quick follow-up on Oliver's question on the equipment and the Buy Local policies.

You mentioned it was mainly diagnostics, but also in other areas of ophthalmology. Is that all other areas of ophthalmology, refractive, cataract, and microscopes, or one more than the other?

Just a quick follow-up there. I'm just interested how order intake has progressed in Q1, Q2 for microsurgery.

Obviously, we saw strong deliveries in the fourth quarter, but have orders progressed well so far year-to-date, and how do you feel about the ability to deliver those in the rest of the year? Thank you.

Maybe I take the first question. Thank you for those questions, Jean.

It depends in terms of the competition. I would say generally it's probably the highest on the cataract side, right, then microscopes.

I would see that more on the lower end coming in, and then the third one is refractive. That's the way I see it.

The good thing is we have a strong position in China. Zeiss overall is more than 7,000 people working for us in China.

We see what's going on in the market. We can react.

Essentially, we have the control over that. We can localize things quickly.

Of course, you all know medical has regulatory restrictions, that's clear, but we can do that and we're willing to do that. One after the other.

This is nothing new to Zeiss in general. You've seen that in Vision as well.

Years ago, we reacted and were number one there.

Fine. Then your question on MCS order intake and outlook.

I think yes, the first quarter has been soft, but I just spoke yesterday with the management of that division and they are totally confident that they will make their numbers and volumes. The funnels, the project funnels are full.

The order entry comes in. I obviously can't disclose here data for the current quarter, but I think what I want to convey to you is that for MCS, as we had said in December, we for this year think that we will clearly benefit from the global roll-in of the KINEVO 900 S and the PENTERO good sales volumes that we have seen last year end of last year also going into this year.

Therefore, I think overall, for MCS, we are currently pretty confident here looking into this year. Thanks.

Thank you.

Good morning. I hope you can hear me well now.

I have three questions. Two on refractive.

The first one is about the rollout of VISUMAX 800. Last year was better than you initially expected in China.

Can you just make a comment how Q1 has continued and where are you right now? Second one is also you said that in China refractive was stable.

Can you comment whether this stable is related to volume or value as SMILE pro implies some positive ASP effect? The last one is you also said in your comments that the planned delivery of neurosurgical instruments was slower than expected.

Is it something that you see it's just temporary or do you see that will spill over more towards the further quarters? Thank you.

Maybe on the first one, just you saw the picture that we've showed, the one with the right background. That's actually me and our team standing together with the management of Aier Group and unveiling one of the SMILE pro systems.

Just as a highlight there, they are dearly waiting for that and they were really, really happy to have us roll that out. That was just sort of highlight, and Justus will go more into the numbers.

Oliver. Happy to share with you that we are going into this year and order entry is currently trending nicely.

We are in a neighborhood of 50 VISUMAX 800 in our books for China, out of which already more than 30 have been shipped and installed. That, I think, is a pretty solid number after the few months that we are in this new fiscal year.

Then your second question, what I was referring to with stable was the procedure numbers, yeah. Just to also comment maybe on your underlying question, we still see a good pick-up in SMILE pro treatments.

From that perspective, I also can confirm that by now, we do not see any further deterioration of margin in the market. Yeah.

Hopefully, that covers your question. You had one on MCS.

Once again, I wouldn't derive out of Q1 any conclusions that would indicate softness or weakness for MCS for this fiscal year. As I said, the funnels are very solid and we also know that this category in the hospitals, neurosurgical procedures, is a moneymaking procedure, and therefore, we clearly expect that there will be a robust market demand for this year.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Hi there. It's Jack Reynolds-Clark from RBC.

Thank you for taking the questions. I hope you can hear me.

I had

three,

please. The first is on European core market weakness.

Could you run through which subsegments specifically are impacted? Was it refractive versus cataract versus DORC?

What do you think is driving the weakness? Do you think it's temporary or longer term?

Pardon me. The next is on the US.

Does the ongoing weakness in the US change how you view the attractiveness of the US market for you? Pardon me.

From a bigger-picture perspective in the longer term. Then my third question was on the CEO search.

Could you update us on where you are with this and share any kind of developments around your thinking about what it is that you're looking for? Thank you.

I'll take the third one.

Hi Jack, it's Justus. On the on the core market segments in Europe, actually, I don't know whether whether that was maybe mispronounced or misunderstood in my statements, because actually we are not so how should I say, unhappy with with Europe.

As I said, we have some regions that still grow nicely and some regions, Germany amongst them, which have a more sideways development in the first quarter. That I would not yet take as indication of a of a softness of of the business.

Therefore, really nothing particular to point out here. I think if I if I look back on, the 8 years with that I'm now here with Meditec, Europe is always a mixed bag, yeah.

You always have due to local politics and so on, you always have different investment behaviors across the board between south and north and east and west. I think, overall, we have always been able to in total then grow year-over-year in Europe.

Therefore, really nothing that I would point out here, especially since you were asking about any particular business sectors of ours. The US, the weakness that you have commented on, of course we are not happy with it, but first of all, we have installed in the US a new head of our sales organization, a very industry-known veteran who has also worked in his history partially for some of the major US competitors of ours.

Yes, it's an environment in which we have probably more hostile competitors than in other markets, but we I don't think that we should give up on it. There is products in the pipeline, as whether it's the hydrophobic trifocal lens, which we would expect by next year, as well as the VISUMAX 800 flap-cutting modality, unfortunately, only also next year.

I think the completion of our portfolio should actually actually in the next year give us some better opportunities or provide better opportunities for us to be in the US in better shape. On the third question, I think

Andreas. Maybe I add that build on you on a second question.

Thanks, Jack, for for those questions. Justus and I spent, what was that, 3 weeks 3 weeks ago we spent a good week in the in the US, of course talking to customers.

It's always we always do that. Also to our team, and the the new person heading our US sales organization is not coming from the outside.

He was at other companies. He came from another one of our markets and has a yes, a proven track record of of bringing a lot of value to those markets.

That is, I would say, one of the one of the first, changes that came out of the new organization, the new commercial organization. As you see, we're in full swing of of of changing things, as I would say, to the better.

On the CEO search, well, Justus says it's in full swing, right? I said before, I personally have a strong interest in keeping that short, as my family, but, jokes aside, we all have an interest, right, to make sure that we have the long-term person in there.

We're currently looking outside and have actually several candidates.

Of course, I hope you understand that we cannot disclose anything more precise today and will announce this as soon as possible. It will be a person that I would say has solid track record in the medical industry.

Great.

Thanks, guys. That's super clear, and I think I over-interpreted the commentary on Europe.

Thank you. Appreciate the time.

Thank you, Jack. Yeah.

Morning, guys. Thanks for the questions.

Three, please. Firstly, just wondered, you indicated you put through some price increases in the US to offset tariffs.

I just wondered how much price you have put through and whether you're thinking about changing your strategy on price there. Secondly, on gross margins, obviously, quite a big impact from both foreign exchange and an increase in R&D amortization.

It would be great to get your thoughts on how gross margins might evolve from here through the rest of the year. Then finally, with the VBP on multifocals coming through, just wondered what you expected the price impacts to be and any thoughts around where volumes might go.

Thank you.

David, I start and Andreas, you just chime in if there's anything that you want to highlight and I didn't cover on it. Price increases, they are in total probably in our high single-digit.

It varies a little bit from category to category, but overall, you can say that cumulatively it is a high single-digit number of price increase. Of course, that you have to compute it on our transfer prices and therefore, in the end to offset for the tariff barrier, basically have to then calculate it backwards from your street price, and that is something like, as I say, high single-digit.

You have to understand, to build on that, David, that this hits in the US the very important category of diagnostic products. The diagnostic products, A, is anyways a very contested market, and secondly, you may say so, it's a market where in an environment like this, no price increases, uncertainties on tariffs, some optometrists and ophthalmologists will simply delay their decisions.

If you have a field analyzer, if you have an OCT or so, typically, it's something where you can also hold back for a while until you have more clarity on your investment decisions, yeah. That, I think, is overall explaining the situation that we are in.

Hopefully, with a little bit more stability in the transatlantic relations and disappearing sentiment that there might be more movements happening than we hope that the investment appetite will return. Gross margin, you were asking on I think what exactly we are anticipating for the remainder of the year.

We clearly would see that the gross margins will recover with higher portions of consumables kicking in over the course of the year with the one caveat that I want to highlight and that leads to your third question on the VBP. Obviously, that also is a function of how aggressive pricing will be reduced in this second-round tender.

Frankly spoken, the only thing you can refer to is analogies from other consumables in the medical sector in the past. Typically, again, the second and third tenders were not as brutal in terms of their price impact, but now we have an unknown factor, as outlined in our presentation.

Also please understand that I will not give you any detail on our expectations what others do because, as you can imagine, this is competitively sensitive information and I don't want to have anybody speculating on how we would respond now.

Nothing to add. Frankly, nothing I want to add on that last point here as well.

Okay. Thank you, David.

Thanks.

Susannah, if you speak, we cannot hear you yet. Yeah.

Can you guys hear me now?

Yes.

Now we can hear you. Thanks.

Great. Thanks so much.

Good morning, and thanks for taking my questions. I have two, please.

First, can you confirm if sort of long term there will be any benefits to COGS from the shift to manufacturing in China and when you would expect to be sort of fully ramped on this shift to manufacturing in China? Then second, I wanted to follow up on what has changed from December to January when you pulled the guidance.

First, on China, I guess why had you originally believed that the price cuts would be softer in the VBP? I know you cite the Chinese companies passing sort of registration, but Eyebright had a trifocal approved since January 2025, had you anticipated that they would be part of the tender or were you thinking there was a chance that they would not be?

Then on the US, were December sales weaker than anticipated, and was that what led to the weaker internal forecast or was there something else?

Susannah, let me start with the last one. In the week that we pulled the guidance, there was a pretty hefty discussion on Greenland.

Within that discussion, there was at least a serious threat by the US administration that there would be, on top of all other tariffs, additional 20% on products out of Germany going in the US. That, of course, would have dramatic impact on our business.

As I said before, the US is our second-biggest market and it's a almost 90% device market. Therefore, that explains why this discussion at that moment in time was playing a significant role also for our ability to assess how the US market may develop or not develop.

On your question on our expectations for the tender, I think in a nutshell, one Chinese competitor in a tender in a category is already changing things, but we also have seen in the past that the Chinese authorities, for good reasons, always try to distribute and don't want to be in a situation in which then suddenly one company is not able to fulfill the entire volumes that have been allocated. With one player in the game, we were still reasonably confident that our strategy could fold out in a way that it would, and therefore was part of the guidance expectations that we published in December.

However, learning then that at least a second Chinese player will be participating with a just recently approved lens, that can, of course, once again change the volume allotments significantly, and that is one of the key reasons. Your first question was on the long-term benefits of Maybe

I can start and chime in. There's two aspects when it comes to localization in China.

The first one, and I think it's the more important one and urgent one, is to make sure that we have access to the market. That's why, once those regulations are anticipated, we can do that and essentially localize and make sure that we have access to that.

The second one, of course, is a question about cost of goods. In general, there is a potential of doing that, and the question is always, are we taking step one means localization together with step two, and that's something that we have to assess essentially also in terms of cost and timing considerations.

Typically, there is a potential, to be very clear. Sometimes we do that right away with step one, sometimes you do that in a step afterwards by localizing also the supply chain.

Great. Thanks.

That was very very helpful. Can I just follow up in terms of the US?

Could you confirm, I guess, just how December performance looked versus October and November?

Oh, Susannah, sorry. I missed on that one.

I think there is within the quarter nothing in particular that I'd see. Probably October and November were weaker than December.

That's the only pattern that I could share here with you, yeah. Don't know whether this answers precisely your question, but that is what I observed.

Great. Thanks so much.

Thank you, Susannah.

Can you hear me?

Yeah.

Yes,

it's a very complex system versus what we're used to, and the UBS tech doesn't always allow me, it's good you can hear me. Right, I've got three questions, please.

Firstly, I think when I was speaking to Sebastian earlier, he was talking about the UV biomaterial being a part of the issue in terms of the registration for the bifocal. I estimate, of your sort of €70-ish million revenue of IOLs in China, how much is not based on the UV biomaterial, just to get that?

Secondly, just on DORC, could you just give us an update on how new instruments placements went in Q1? Then lastly, it's a sort of bigger question, and I know you don't often talk about the pipeline, but I think this would be a pretty good opportunity to do it, which is, you say R&D as a percentage of sales has been well above the rest of the sector.

We obviously have seen some innovation, but it would be good to get a sense as to what really excites you. Rather than talking about the cost cutting, what excites you in the pipeline today that we might see in the next 1, 2, 3 years that can drive future growth for the group, because you've got a great track record in R&D, it'd be good to get a sense as to what's in there.

Thank you.

Graham, it's Justus, your second question, I missed that one because I was taking notes for the first. Sorry.

Oh,

sorry. The second question was just on DORC in terms of new unit placements.

How has that progressed in Q1?

Okay. On the UV biomaterial, we are actually in full swing of transitioning.

I think it's right now probably more still in the neighborhood of 50%, but actually of the total business volume, but actually with the one lens that we are expecting to hold the paperwork of the registration in our hands in a couple of weeks, we then actually would have, going forward, completed the transition, yeah, and then we have the portfolio on UVE. The DORC placements, I think overall, just yesterday had a discussion on it, we are still growing year-over-year nicely and are in full swing of rolling out now also the DORC portfolio into Asian markets.

Last year, as you may remember, we were focusing first on US and some European countries. Now Asia kicks in, and we actually also see in some of our key accounts that are loyal refractive and partially cataract customers, also now high interest in the DORC portfolio.

Overall, I think we are quite happy with the development. I think on R&D, Andreas can talk.

I can say a couple of words on that. Thank you first of all for staying in that we have been having a good track record on innovation.

Of course, that's the core of the company, right? That's the core, actually not just of Carl Zeiss Meditec, that's the core of Zeiss, innovation-driven company.

Let's do the following. How about we talk a bit more about that when we do, latest in May, the half-year results, and show you a couple of the highlights.

There is highlights in both the OPT and the MCS pipelines that I'm excited about. They actually go beyond that.

We're always looking at short-, mid-term innovations, but we're also looking at the long-term innovations where we think we can go into even new markets. The one thing that I'm focusing on right now also is to make sure that we get a higher efficiency and effectiveness of our R&D.

You've seen the R&D expenses going up in the last couple of years, which is good. It can be good if you get the right output, and that's one of the things that I'm focusing in my time also here and, together, of course, then with the SBUs, I'm sure my successor is going to focus on.

What I want is return on R&D investment and I want to increase that even more. That would be my statements.

Sorry for not telling you any of the exciting products yet, but it's maybe better to also do that and see them.

All right. Thanks a lot, guys.

Appreciate it.

Thanks.

Good morning. Can you hear me?

Very well, Falko.

Perfect. Good morning to all of you.

Three questions, please. The first one, do you have an update on when exactly the VBP implementation for IOLs is expected to go live?

My second question is on the downturn in Japan and South Korea, and can you add a bit more flavor on the specific market dynamics you've seen over there and what the expectation is for the rest of the year? Then third and last, can you share your high-level view on what we should keep in mind when modeling sales growth and margin dynamics for the second quarter?

Thank you.

Falko, update or your question on go live of the VBP. Again, there is no official statement at this point in time when the tender is published, and therefore, it's all speculation.

I think last time between the tender publishing and then the actual roll-in, there were several months in between, and it started with single provinces applying it, and then until it was rolled out across China, I think it almost took two quarters. Assuming this year this process is swifter, then maybe it's only one or two months before it becomes effective.

Since we don't know the date, and what's reasonable to assume is clearly Chinese New Year is basically now, it will be then most likely not within the next two weeks. Then we are already almost crossing into March.

As we said, our team expects the tender being published anywhere March, maybe at the latest April. Then counting on that, probably a period until it's becoming fully effective of whatever, 4, 8 weeks, maybe 12, that would be our estimation at this point in time.

Japan, South Korea, my perspective would be that with a focus that we are having on these markets, and I think we shared this in earlier calls, and also some registrations, especially for products in Japan, here for example the VISUMAX 800, just to mention one very important product, my expectation clearly is that over the course of the year for Japan, we should see some growth. Korea, as is already a strong market.

There's always a little bit of fluctuation, but again, overall for Korea, I would also not be too negative on our total outlook for the year.

Maybe on Japan, just keep in mind we still have a fairly low market penetration in Japan, which I would see as an upside.

High-level question on sales growth for the remainder of the year. Quite frankly, now we are back to the rationale on cutting or revoking the guidance.

At this point in time, I don't have the data points to give you a sales indication, yeah. Project funnels look decent, but if we have a big blast from the tender outcome, that can be painful and can take away quite a bit of potential on the top line.

Likewise, if the winter peak or the performance of the winter peak is, as we said before, one key indicator for the remainder of the year, also something where I'd say in 4 weeks we can comment on that more confidently. Therefore, I don't want to start speculation here and now.

Thank you.

Thank you, Justus. My last question was more referring to the second quarter now, the sales and margin dynamics.

In the second quarter, I would pretty much probably refer you to our typical seasonal patterns with the caveat that we, as we said, have potentially the scrapping issue, but that we would consider as a one-off. Typically, the second quarter is, compared to the first quarter, a better one, yeah.

At the moment, I would also assume this will be the case in this fiscal year.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello. Thank you for letting me ask more questions.

I just had two follow-up, but both actually on equipment. The first one is on cataract equipment, like phaco machines and biometers.

Can you maybe just talk a little bit about the sort of regional trends that you're seeing across the US, Europe, and China, because I think there was a comment that the cataract equipment was a bit weak in Q1? Also, are you seeing any increased pressure from new competitor launches specifically in phaco machines that we've seen recently?

That's my first question. Then my second question is on diagnostics.

On my numbers in diagnostics for FY '25, it seemed like this business declined quite significantly, maybe even like low double digits. Is that correct?

Do you see this sort of similar level of decline in FY '26? Maybe you can help us understand how much the pressure there is, general market weakness, a result of your own price increases, and this general delay is in the market?

Have you got any intention to simplify the portfolio in diagnostics just to focus on, say, Humphrey and Cirrus? Thank you.

John, on cataract first, I think US, as we are or have fairly frequently commented, we are certainly not where we are since we do not have this bundle capability. I think outside of US, Europe and China, I would see us trending pretty decently, nothing that we observe in particular changing as impact by new machines being offered by competition.

On diagnostics, yes, it's the most contested market. That's correct.

Obviously, the price increase in the important US market is not helpful, but it's still early in the year and there we also have a bit of a seasonal pattern in this business, therefore, I would still expect recoveries in the course of the year. We also have with the commercial organization clearly more focus on this portfolio and the associated efforts in selling this portfolio.

On the simplification on the portfolio, you probably understand that this is nothing that we going to share, certainly not on speculation here or indicating on any specific products, yeah, that certainly nothing that we want to read about then in the public, yeah. I leave it there.

Andreas,

anything? It's an obvious question, but that's something that obviously we always do.

That's

part of normal business to always look at your portfolio, where do you add and where you take out. That's yeah, no specific comment on that one as well.

Thanks, Graham.

Thank you so much for your questions. Mr.

David Marchesin, do you have any possibility to unmute yourself because I sent you the invitation and I can see that you are unmuted, but we cannot hear you properly. If not, we can give you feedback through the IR team as well, of course.

Okay.

Exactly. Maybe it's better to place your questions to the IR after this meeting, or you can put it into the chat box and I can read it out loud for you if it's too much trouble.

Unfortunately, we cannot hear you. Oh, but I can see in the chat that you just placed your question there.

I'll read it out loud. "The US was significantly down in the first quarter, -12.7% organic.

You are the only one company reporting such weak results from the US, and all the others are reporting strong equipment investment cycle, examples Siemens and Philips. What are the specific issues you're facing there?"

Thank you. I think I almost gave the answer already.

The diagnostic portfolio in the US is one where we typically see the highest sensitivity in terms of prices and price increases, and whereas if you're referring to companies like Siemens Healthineers and their portfolio, they are typically in categories similar to our Kinevos, for example, where reimbursement policies are more favorable and therefore investment decisions are then made less dependent on price swings. Therefore, I think that to me is basically the key difference here that I would highlight.

Maybe, again, if you look carefully on the last quarter of the previous fiscal year, there was an very, very strong August and September in the US for devices, and that goes always somewhat at the expense of Q1.

Thank you. There are three more questions by Mr.

Marchesin. The second one is, "The IOL business is just €80 million annual revenue, or just slightly above 3% of the group revenues, and should be a significant component of your weak performance."

I think there is a misunderstanding. The €80 million refers to the IOL volume in China.

That for clarification, therefore, I'm not sure whether knowing this now whether the question remains the same. Otherwise, frankly spoken, then maybe it's good to follow up with the IR team because it's a little bit difficult to communicate right now.

All right, thank you so much. I'm going to read out the last question.

"Is there the possibility of a buyout of your company by Carl Zeiss AG, just to know if there's a technical possibility? Thank you."

Maybe I comment on that one. Actually, that's something I wouldn't want to even comment on, to not feed any speculations or get into sort of insider information.

Thank you so much. By now, we have not received any further questions.

Ladies and gentlemen, if there are some, please raise your hand and I will happily unmute you. As there are no further questions, I would say we come to the end of today's earnings call, and with this, I would hand over again to Mr.

Frericks for some final remarks. Hey, thanks, everybody, for joining, for asking questions in this call, in the discussion, and please reach out to the IR team for anything that may have not gotten answered completely or may be coming up in the next few days.

We'll be around talking to sell side and buy side over the next few weeks quite a bit, look forward to that and to hear you again on our next call at the very latest on May 12th. Bye-bye.

Thank you. Bye-bye.