Thank you, and also welcome from Mogens' and my side to this Q1 presentation. The picture you saw on the first slide is from our prefab facility in Świnoujście in Poland.

The overall figures: turnover of almost 6.2 billion Danish kroner, a growth of roughly 12% compared to the same period last year; turnover abroad almost 40% as stated on the donuts; and an EBIT result of 254 million Danish kroner, corresponding to an EBIT percent of 4.1%. A first quarter with high activity, high turnover, and earnings as expected.

To the next slide. Construction, the biggest of the five segments: 2.8 billion Danish kroner.

High activity within construction works, civil engineering works, especially infrastructure projects, projects driven by defense, critical infrastructure, green transition. High activity on our projects on Lynetteholm, Vestforbrænding, and Fehmarn especially.

Also within renovating of buildings, transformation of buildings, we see high activity, high market conditions in especially Greater Copenhagen. The more classical building market still on a lower level.

A growth of 10%, and driven by infrastructure projects, and also the investment in Arkil Aarsleff. EBIT result of 106 million, corresponding to 3.8%, in line with our expectations.

Generally, good market conditions, especially within infrastructure projects in Denmark, and also many opportunities, good market conditions in the North Atlantic region. As stated on the second-last bullet, our ongoing building projects, Mindet and Moller [building in?]

Aarhus and Terminal 3 in Copenhagen are progressing as planned. Technical Solutions, including Kirkebjerg: revenue of 1.1 billion in total, a growth of 20%, and an EBIT result of 58 million, in line with our expectations, and an EBIT margin of a little bit more than 5%.

The positive development that we have seen over the last four to five years continues. Again, generally good market conditions, especially within the project division, district heating projects that Technical Solutions had together with the Construction segment is on a high activity level and progressing as expected.

Then also projects driven by green transition is also on a high activity level. Then we just mention that we acquired De-Lor 1st of October last year.

Rail: a little bit more than 500 million Danish kroner in turnover, and a revenue on the same level, almost exactly the same level as the same period last year. An EBIT result a little bit below zero, -2 million.

Again, we have mentioned that on some of the previous calls, previous years that as there can be enormous seasonal fluctuations in Rail. Many of Rail's projects are starting around Easter time and is finishing around mid-October.

The first half year is often pretty quiet. EBIT margin of -0.4%.

Again, high activity, good market conditions, especially in Denmark, with many opportunities. Also good market conditions, both in Norway and in Sweden, but there we are still progressing the turnaround we have been through the last two to three years, not quite through yet, but the market conditions in both Norway and Sweden are also good, but especially in Denmark, very good.

Ground Engineering, the segment that had a difficult year last year and also the year before, has got a good start in the first quarter. Revenue, turnover of roughly 1 billion Danish kroner.

A growth of 12% compared to same period last year, and it's driven by especially high activity level in Sweden and Germany. An EBIT result of 14 million, as expected.

EBIT margin of 1.4%. Again, affected by, as we also mentioned last year, still a relatively low demand for precast concrete piles in most of the markets we are in, price pressure in some of the markets, and that all leads to low capacity utilization, especially on the factories, but also to a certain extent on the driving rigs out in the fields.

We do see a good pipeline of projects in almost all the countries we are in, we have a strong belief that we'll see improvements during the year, and as I said, a good start in the first quarter. Then we, in the last bullet point, mention the acquisition of Styru, that we did last year, which is done 50/50% by Ground Engineering and 50% by Pipe Technologies.

Then to Pipe Technologies: almost 800 million Danish kroner in turnover, a growth of 17%, 18% compared to the same period last year; an EBIT of almost 80 million Danish kroner, in line with our expectations, and an EBIT margin of roughly 10%. Contrary to Ground Engineering, we see strong activity here in Pipe Technologies in all the significant markets we are in.

A good start of the first quarter here in Pipe Technologies as well. As said, good market conditions and thereby also high capacity utilization in Pipe Technologies.

Then we again mention the acquisition of Styru. Order backlog: almost 28 billion Danish kroner, all-times high, and pretty solid in all segments as you can see on the left-hand side of the slide.

An order intake of almost 7.7 billion Danish kroner, and only one major order intake, that's two new contracts on Vestforbrænding corresponding to roughly 1.7 billion. If we took that out, we do still have almost 6 billion in small and medium-sized contracts, so that's also very positive.

Guidance, I will not spend a lot of time on that. That's unchanged compared to what we presented in the last investor presentation.

Then a few words about the two latest acquisitions: the acquisition of LiquiForce in Canada, an acquisition done in Pipe Technologies last week, Thursday afternoon, where we acquired 49.5% of LiquiForce, a Canadian company specialized in trenchless rehabilitation, like Pipe Technologies; a price of roughly 90 million Danish kroner. A next footprint in Pipe Technologies with a footprint in the Canadian market.

Then the plan is, together with the owner of LiquiForce, Puris, to try to enter also the North America market with trenchless rehabilitation. That's the plan.

Then this morning, we announced the acquisition of C.G. Jensen and Asmussen & Knudsen becomes part of our group.

A 100% acquisition of those two companies for a price of almost 800 million kroner, and then we just state very shortly enterprise value includes a number of purchase price adjustments, as we normally have. C.G.

Jensen and Asmussen & Knudsen are, at least on the Danish market, well-known market players, C.G. Jensen having a turnover of roughly 2.1 billion Danish kroner and Asmussen & Knudsen roughly 600 million, same size as Hansson & Knudsen that we already owns.

The signing was this morning, and now we are awaiting the approval by the competition authorities later this year. That was a very quick run-through of the figures and the late two acquisitions, and then we can go over to questions and answers.

Thank you. I have a couple of questions, specifically around your acquisitions.

If we start with the acquisition you announced this morning, as I understand that the management of C.G. Jensen owns a material part of the company today through the holding company.

I would assume that they are getting some money out of this eventually. Just curious to hear your thoughts on sort of their motivation going forward, whether there's any earn-out built into this.

Yeah.

It's correct that a part of C.G. Jensen is owned by the employees.

That's correct, and the other part owned by Jørgen Jensen. We believe from the talks that we have had over a long period that the management that we have talked to is very motivated by continuing and being part of the company going forward for some years.

Okay. There is no— We think that will be— Yeah.

The question was just as much whether there is an earn-out element to the deal as well.

Not in traditional sense. There are some other things included in the agreement, but not a traditional earn-out.

All

right.

There are some motivations, but not a traditional earn-out. That's how I will formulate the question.

Not in a classical sense.

Not in a classical sense. No.

All right. Fair enough.

Then, how do you plan to integrate C.G. Jensen and Asmussen & Knudsen?

Are they just going to continue under their current name as a subsidiary like we are seeing with, for instance, Hansson & Knudsen, or how will you integrate them?

Yeah. That we will do that as we have done in the past, Kristian.

We believe that that's the right way to do it. They will continue under their current names in the group, yeah.

Of course, we look where we can cooperate in one company.

As we normally do, yeah. They will not be operating under a different name, no.

Makes sense. Then looking at their financial performance, you provide some data from 2024, and if you go just a few years back, it's the similar picture.

You can see margin levels somewhat below where you are today. How do you plan to improve the profitability of these businesses?

We believe that being part of the Aarsleff Group, we will get new competences in, we will get more capacity, there will be some synergies. We believe by adding all that together, we will also be able to improve margins together, Christian.

Okay. Would it be fair to assume that these businesses should be able to reach a similar margin level as what you have in your Construction segment, or is there any structural reason why they couldn't reach that level?

No, we believe— Yes. That's also the talks that we've had with the management, and we believe that that should be possible going forward, yeah.

They have also showed that in the past, if you go some years back. They have been hit hard by some fixed-price contracts that was signed wrong compared to all this hyperinflation.

There is some reasons behind the lower EBIT margin the last couple of years.

If you go 5 to 7 years back, Christian, then they actually had quite good EBIT margins compared to— We strongly believe when you get them over at least the same level as the rest of the Construction segment, yeah.

Yeah.

How fast can you do that? Because I assume that there is a backlog you need to roll off and so on.

Is that sort of a three-year horizon, or what's fair to assume?

Hopefully not.

Hopefully faster, I would say. Hopefully faster, yeah.

Okay. That's at least the plan.

Within a few years, we should be over that level,

yeah. Fair enough.

Then,

my last question on the other acquisition, which you also highlighted here in North America. You provide us a bit of financials for the LiquiForce acquisition in Canada, but I'm a bit more curious on the joint venture you are setting up for the US market as I would assume the potential in the US market is substantially higher than the one in Canada.

Can you elaborate a bit on how fast can this new company sort of enter the US market, and how to think about the financial potential here really?

You can say there's a clear plan that we introduce the Aarsleff technology in the Canadian market as fast as possible, and then we will evaluate together with Puris if we will develop to other part of North America. It will be a common decision together with Puris how fast we will move forward with this.

As you said, there's a huge potential in North America. Puris is already among the one of the five big players in that market, for us it's attractive to be part of.

All right. Again, a three-year horizon, is that when we should expect to see some meaningful impact here?

Yeah.

Yeah. Canada should be quite fast within a a year to in 1 to 2 years we should start to see the effect.

The rest of North America, a three-year horizon is more more realistic, yeah. That's a good guess, Christian.

Yes.

All right. Fantastic.

Great. Thank you.

That was all for me.

Thank you.

Hi, Jesper and Mogens, and thank you for taking my questions. Also congrats on a strong quarter.

Also exciting to see that you are incredibly active in the M&A space. As Christian, I will also dig in to these acquisitions, starting with the LiquiForce acquisition, which is not the usual Aarsleff acquisition when you look at acquisition multiples.

Also, as you allude to, I guess the case here is that you're paying to get a foot into new attractive markets with upside from the US. On the US opportunity here, I'm trying my luck here again as Christian did, but could you expand a bit more on sort of the upside potential and what kind of investments you need to put behind this market expansion into the US?

You can say an expansion into the US would mean that we will have to invest in installations equipment. Of course, that would also be a joint effort with our partner.

Yes, there will be investments. It's not as expensive this equipment as the normal type.

If we have a main sewer line, it's much more expensive to invest in installations equipment than in these lateral small installations. Investment-wise would be some, but it's not a major thing in Aarsleff context.

The market potential is by far the biggest market in the world. Of course, if we, with our partner, succeeds also to enter North America, there is a huge potential.

You can say we have taken a decision to join one of the major players. We think that's the best strategy for going into North America.

We could look at that, also enter by ourselves, but it's also a complex market. That was the best solution in our opinion.

Sure. No, it's incredibly exciting.

Looking forward to follow that going forward. May I ask about also the other acquisitions here?

Again, not your I guess usual multiple arbitrage acquisitions, C.G. Jensen and Asmussen.

However, and now I'm looking at '24 figures here and that could be nonsense compared to the current earnings momentum. Is it possible to add some more flavor into the current trajectory in the business earnings-wise, and also maybe if you could add some more flavor to the bigger picture, strategic rationale of these acquisitions?

I think, as presented before is that they have had some projects that they have been working out of the backlog and, what we've seen so far there has been progress as well in '25, these projects that have been diluting the earnings is feeling less and less in the revenue. In '26, that will be more or less gone, and in '25, it was significantly less than in '24.

They are on a good track. Back to higher margins, yeah.

Yeah.

About the strategic rationale, as I said before, we will get more capacity, which is important in a market where there are plenty of opportunities. We will get new competences, steel structures, SAT structures, and basically also within renovating and transformation of buildings where there also is a high demand, high activity.

The mixture of getting more capacity in some areas where we already are, marine construction, for instance, and then getting new competences on board in the group.

We get a better exposure to the renovation market in Copenhagen where they are quite strong. They are also one of the first mover in building in wood, and probably one of the leading ones in Denmark.

We get that competence in where we see a significant potential here in the coming years.

Then there is a strong cultural fit with how we work with you could say own production. They do have the same focus, we see a strong fit with what we already do.

They have a strong exposure to Reese, Copenhagen area and that's also a place where we see a lot of these projects coming. That's also a plus for us.

Sure. Thank you for that answer.

The last question here from me. Sitting in Copenhagen and looking out the window, I can conclude it's been a fairly cold winter.

Also talking to other players in the industry, it seems like activity at least over the past 6 weeks has been fairly subdued in the sector. If I look back in history, it's obvious that you have been fairly sensitive to cold winter conditions historically.

Could you maybe add some color to how we should expect this to impact your Q2 numbers?

Weather is part of being in the business. Sometimes it's cold, sometimes it's raining, sometimes the sun shines.

I think that's the premise of being in the construction business. You will not hear Mogens and I using the weather as an argument for either good or bad results.

Having said that, I think as you just said, we can all look out of the windows, and the winter has been harder than in the recent 10 to 15 years, so that's a fact. You will not hear us using the weather as an excuse or an argument.

It's a part of being in the business.

Got it. Very clear.

Thank you for taking my questions.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, and hello, Mogens and Jesper, and thank you for taking my questions as well. If I may move on to the Q1 results here.

The margin for the Construction segment, you have mentioned in the report and also on prior calls that you are deliberately being conservative on the Fehmarnbelt margin recognition on the contract. Is the Q1 margin in Construction due solely to this, or is there something broader happening here?

That's a part of it, but it's also due to the mix of projects in this first quarter. The conservative intake of earnings on the Fehmarn project is a part of it, but not solely, but it's a part of it.

Okay. That's fair enough.

Can you maybe just go a bit more into detail maybe first of all on the impact on the Q1 results, and then also what you expect going forward? The Fehmarnbelt contract or project in general, it's getting a lot of media attention in the recent months at least.

It would be nice to hear your perspective on this.

I think we have said earlier that there are some issues on the Fehmarn project. We are, as communicated earlier, in a good dialogue with the owner on trying to find solutions to those issues.

If it's more concrete questions to time schedule and other topics on the project, then we need to say that we have agreed with the customer that very specific questions to the project timeline and other things is being answered either by the joint venture or by the client. We are in a good dialogue trying to resolve those different issues that we have on the project.

Okay. That's very fair, of course.

If I may move on to the Pipe Technologies segment, very strong EBIT margin of 9.9%, revenue growth 17.5% year-over-year. Yet, your margin for Q1 last year was 11%.

Can you please describe the dynamics here? Why was it 11% last year and not this year?

I would say last year was exceptionally good, I think we also in the historical perspective. Then, you also have now Styru contributes with a lower margin percentage.

We're not able to get 11% in margin in the type of job that Styru are performing. That's more in line with what we see in Construction segment, that type of activity.

That's diluting that percentage a bit, adding some revenue, but diluting the percentage a bit.

Thank you. That's very helpful.

Yeah.

We're not concerned. As we said, it's a very strong market still in Pipe Technologies, but it will dilute it slightly with Styru.

On the order intake in general, maybe specifically for the Construction segment, you've previously mentioned severe interest in contracts related to the defense industry. How much of the order intake for Q1 is attributable to this, and has anything changed since the last time we spoke?

I don't think we will not be able to provide exact figures, but we can say it's a significant figure in Q1.

Okay.

It's more than one contract. Yeah.

If you look at that market, I guess we are still positive on the critical infrastructure, defense market. There is a lot of opportunities out there.

It's not an easy market to read. Things can change quickly.

So—

It's, as we've said earlier, it's projects that are confidential, we cannot say a lot more than what's already done.

You can say, Anders, with the plans also in the North Atlantic, there's plenty of opportunities in the defense segment, critical infrastructure segment here going forward the coming years. It's more about how the priority change quite quickly, it can be difficult to—

Politically-driven projects, it's based on political decisions.

You can say at the moment, Greenland is hot, so that's where they are looking into projects, but I guess that can be changed quite quickly if there comes something else up. We need to be agile and be where the opportunity comes.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Maybe a final question from my side, going back to the acquisition announced this morning. Just to be clear, say the acquisition gets approved, what margin should we expect for '26, '27?

Would it be a fair assumption to say that for the group, the acquisition next year is margin dilutive? Then, in combination with this, can you put some flavor on the current order book levels of the acquisition for me?

It would be correctly to say that it will dilute it slightly, especially when you look at how it depreciates. We buy an existing order book, as you are saying, and we depreciate and allocate some of the goodwill to that and depreciate it.

If you look at EBIT level, it will dilute, and especially when you take in depreciations and amortizations. Order book is very good in Asmussen & Knudsen and in C.G.

Jensen they can contribute with capacity. They have room to take in more projects.

It's at a high level in Asmussen & Knudsen, especially due to all these renovation projects that are coming out in Copenhagen, where they've been winning some quite large projects here during the last 3 to 6 months. Then with C.G.

Jensen, they have capacity to take in projects, and that's just a part of also what's in it for us, you get some additional capacity.

That was very clear. Final question, I promise.

You've made quite a few transactions in recent months, and now adding something quite significant, I would say, this morning; also burning some cash in the process. What does the pipeline look for you going forward?

Should we expect this trajectory to continue, or are you going to lay on the low side for the next year or so until you get the things in place?

That's a difficult question to answer because we're not always able to control when things come up for sale. We have always decided to have a low debt, we have the possibility to take advantage when things come up for sale.

I would say we, of course, need to digest this, but it's not the same as we don't have capacity for more.

Thank you very much.

It also depends

on

what segment it is in, Anders. Yeah.

Yeah.

Thank you. Thanks for the questions.

Thanks for the interest, for the presentation, and have a nice day. Thank you.

That concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating.

You may now disconnect.