Thank you. Good afternoon, good morning, and thank you for joining us to review the Q1 2026 bioMérieux sales performance.

I'm online with Pierre Boulud, CEO, together with Guillaume Bouhours, CFO. Please note that this conference call will include forward-looking statements that may change or be modified due to uncertainties and risk related to the company's environment.

Accordingly, we cannot give any assurance as to whether we will achieve this objective. I also remind you that today's call is being recorded and that a replay will be available on our website, www.biomerieux-finance.com.

I will now hand the call over to Pierre and Guillaume, and then we will open the call to discussion and questions. Pierre?

Thank you, Aymeric. Good day to everyone.

Let me start with a few general messages before I say a few words about the guidance. We have dealt with a pretty complicated environment in Q1 with a very weak Q1 respiratory epidemiology versus what we already knew was a strong Q1 '25, and a challenging geopolitical environment that has driven softer customer demand, especially for investment decisions.

It has translated into a 3.9% overall sales decline in the quarter, that in line with the environment I was describing, was driven by weak respiratory sales, minus 23% in respiratory panel, and a general softness in demand, especially for instrument sales that are posting minus 18% in Q1. Despite these challenging market conditions, we have actually continued to deliver in Q1 2026.

If we look at our GO28 growth driver reagent sales, we've grown 6.5%. I would like to highlight SPOTFIRE reagent sales growth, plus 31% in Q1, in spite of the very low respiratory season, and high single-digit, plus 8% for industrial application reagents.

We've also continued to deliver from an innovation perspective, with the CE marking of SPOTFIRE, the Mini assay in March, which will allow us to launch in Europe in the low-plex molecular respiratory market, Mycoplasma on SPOTFIRE for the pharma quality control, we filed hs-cTnI for SpinChip as forecasted in January, and we've also acquired Axelis that will further support and strengthen the portfolio of solutions that we offer to our pharma clients. Finally, we are progressing well with the vaginitis panel and still expect to submit to the FDA by Q2 2026.

In light of this Q1 performance and this very uncertain geopolitical environment, and since the last time we talked we had the Middle East events that started 28th of February, we have decided to review downwards our 2026 guidance, which is now, as you could read, 3% to 5% growth of our sales at constant exchange rate and a profitability improvement from 0% to 10% at constant exchange rate again. Maybe three qualitative elements that I would like that you consider moving forward: We have a much lower base effect starting in Q2, and for instance we had a growth last year of the respiratory panel that was 21% in Q1 and then it declined by 6% from Q2 to Q4, we have a much easier basis for growth.

The second element is we're seeing very consistent commercial dynamics. Complicated to read the market share, but we're looking at win rates across franchises.

We have very strong and consistent win rates. Finally, we are obviously in this challenging sales environment context, we're looking at strengthening our cost control initiatives, and we will continue to deploy, and if possible accelerate, the ongoing implementation of the GO SIMPLE initiatives.

With this, I turn to Guillaume that will give you more color on the Q1 performance.

Thank you, Pierre. Hello, everyone.

Let's look at the bit more details on the Q1 sales. Overall, Q1 sales at €984 million, organic evolution of minus 4% and a total decline of minus 10%, including a negative FX of €73 million, notably driven on the top line by the weaker US dollar or stronger euro.

Just remind you that last year Q1 dollar was at $1.04 against euro against $1.18 in Q1 this year, quite a change. As said by Pierre, Q1 performance was mainly impacted by the weak respiratory and weak instrument sales.

On respiratory, down 23% in Q1 '26 due to epidemiology, which was significantly lower compared to Q1 '25, but Q1 '25 was exceptionally high. When we say lower, there are two effects: there is the effect of lower in number of cases, which I think everyone can see in the public stats, if you look at the CDC stats or others, but beyond the number, there is also a lower epidemiology in terms of intensity.

What we mean is that we saw from a medical point of view more flu B circulating notably, which also means less acute cases and less hospitalization overall. Weak instrument sales, minus 18% overall on all our ranges together, again that we believe is also linked to the geopolitical turmoil driving this, let's say, softness in demand, as Pierre mentioned.

Overall, our GO28 four growth drivers on reagents were up 6.5% on an organic basis. If we look at them one by one, BIOFIRE non-RP is up 4%.

If we drill down in some of them, not to go through everything, but it's interesting to note that we are on pneumonia negative evolution, minus 2%, despite the fact that there is absolutely no competition. We have the only high-plex player with this panel, the evolution is of course driven by the epidemiology.

On the other hand, for example, blood culture, which is also an important panel in our menu, had a strong dynamic, double-digit, despite the fact that we have competition on this panel on the high-plex segment. Also to note on the BIOFIRE that we continued to expand, we don't give quarterly figure, but we can give a trend, continued to expand the installed base on a net basis over the quarter.

Finally, just to note on non-respiratory panels prices, that we had a slight erosion very similar to last year, about 1.5% in Q1. Now turning to SPOTFIRE, so as Pierre mentioned, I think the key figure is a 31% organic growth on the reagents, despite a super high comp base, of course, of epidemiology last year.

Just to remind you, last year Q1 SPOTFIRE was 166% growth. We had overall a, we believe solid, instruments installation in the quarter, plus 450.

We say solid because actually when we take one-offs away, it's pretty much in line with the high comp base of Q1 adjusted. I say adjusted for the one-off in Japan.

You remember that last year there was a government subsidy, especially at the early start of the year in Japan, for acquisition of point-of-care SPOTFIRE. Also, we had one very significant strategic deal in the US in Q1 last year.

Taking out those two, we are pretty much aligned with a Q1. Overall, the installed base is now close to 7,000 instruments, and looking at a 12-months rolling basis, the installed base is up 55%.

Overall, SPOTFIRE performance remains driven by the continued expansion, notably in the US and in Japan. Turning to microbiology, which is the third of the GO28, overall 2% growth, which for us is in line with our expectations internal for Q1 for reagents.

The range overall was still impacted by China. China microbiology was down 7%, but you remember from our previous discussions on China that it's approximately in line with our mid-single-digit decline expectations for China micro in '26.

Also, instruments on microbiology, instrument sales were down 12%. When we exclude instruments in China, microbiology is up 4% on reagents, with notably a strong dynamic on blood culture bottles.

Industrial applications, the fourth growth driver of GO28 at plus 5% organic for the quarter, also impacted by again the softness and decline on instruments, but we believe a good performance on reagents, up 8%, as Pierre mentioned, on our pharma and food customers. Finally, not in the GO28 drivers, but to mention immunoassays, as you could read, a negative performance, but I would say in line with the guidance.

Some elements on the new sales guidance that Pierre mentioned, if we think about it by range, it's interesting to, let's say, highlight for you that we see actually no change on microbiology, 3% to 5%; no change on our prospect for the year on industrial applications, 7% to 8%—9%; no change on immunoassays, still in the range that we have given of minus 5% to 0%. Of course, we have a major adjustments, and it's most on what is coming from respiratory that impacts BIOFIRE, which now we see more around minus 8% to minus 3%.

Second, of course, respiratory impact is on SPOTFIRE, that now we see more around plus 40%, around plus 40%. We have a slight change on the overall non-RP growth, which we would see around 8% instead of the previously mentioned around 10%.

Before moving to the Q&A, just an update on two topics: Middle East events, of course, their impact on bioMérieux, and foreign exchange impacts. On Middle East, bioMérieux has mainly two exposures: of course, one on transportation costs and the impact of the oil prices, be it our own transportation or of course the supplier transportation, and the way they factor that in their prices.

The impact on transportation we estimate is close to €1 million per month at the current level and if it were to be sustained. We have a second impact which, let's say, could be significant is on plastics.

Plastics it is impacted by oil prices, of course, it's derivatives, but most of our instruments and reagents contain, let's say, plastic raw materials in one way or another. Resin prices are already up, but at this stage their impact, if any, would be deferred thanks to the level of inventory that we hold.

On FX, as you've seen, we have confirmed the guidance of about minus 50 to minus €60 million negative impact. Unfortunately, the euro was, let's say, strong up to February, decreased in March, which was probably better for us, but actually rebounded with a strong position, exactly the same as early in the year, in the last few weeks.

With this, I propose we move to the Q&A session.

Hi. Thanks for taking my questions.

Firstly, on reiterating the microbiology guidance at 3% to 5% for the full year, could you help us understand what will help you accelerate growth so materially from Q1? I understand Waters launched a competitive instrument for what's quite a material part of your franchise here.

Could you also explain whether you have any concern on the back of that launch? My second question on the FX.

The others, as in the other currency portion in terms of the headwinds, seems higher than previous years, and you've had a few favorable moves on the dollar, for example, since the start of the year as you noted. Could you explain to us what key currencies these others contain that have been particularly a headwind for you this year?

Thank you, Odysseas. I can start with the microbiology question, and Guillaume will follow up on the FX.

Microbiology, we are actually very confident with the guidance, and as Guillaume highlighted, we haven't changed it. To be transparent with you, actually reagent sales performance in microbiology is very aligned with what we planned to do in Q1.

There was a little bit of impact in China last year, there is a little bit of phasing, base effect, we are very confident we can achieve it, and that's the reason why we didn't change. With regards to the launch of a new system by Waters, as it was announced actually a long time ago.

It was well embedded into our plan, and no reason for us to change anything. We believe we still with VITEK have very competitive solutions in terms of time to result, auto- loading and automation for getting the bottles in.

It's not changed with regards to microbiology for us for the rest of the year.

Coming to FX, definitely worth looking at it together in more details. First on the US dollar, it's important to remember, because it was very volatile last year, that Q1 last year had a strong US dollar before US dollar weakened very significantly from I think end of March.

There's first effect when we compare year-on-year in Q1 and therefore for the year. Then, the major impacts on our CEBIT year-on-year are on currencies like the yen.

The yen continued to be super weak compared to euro. The Indian rupee, which is a significant country for us, also pretty significant change, about 10% from last year.

Then we have the high inflation countries as usual, Turkey and Argentina, who are the next ones in terms of impacts.

Thank you.

Thank you, Odysseas.

Good afternoon, Pierre and Guillaume. Thank you for taking my questions.

I have two, please, both on sort of guidance approach. Just to start with, not to state the obvious, but so you gave us guidance at the end of February and you've been speaking to the market through March, but just a few weeks later the new guidance is obviously very, very different and actually much lower than Q1 performance alone would have implied.

My first question is, and you've already sort of done this, but would you be able to describe, please, in more detail as to the key things that have changed in such a short amount of time that have made you revisit your full-year assumptions beyond just Q1 performance? Then my second question is, if there has been such an extreme change, it might suggest that visibility isn't great right now.

How risk-adjusted is this new guidance in your view? Why is this now the right level?

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Kavya. Let me start with this.

When we share the guidance for the year, we have now two more months. We had one month and a half of sales, now we have two more months of visibility.

There are two elements that led us to review the guidance downward. The first one is we were expecting a weak respiratory season.

It's been very weak, and unfortunately you only know it at the end of the respiratory season, right? We kind of witnessed that March was not getting any better versus the beginning of the year.

The second element is we've seen a very slow market in demand for instruments at the beginning of the year, and the recent Middle East events that started on the 28th of Feb have actually further slowed down investment decisions that were made by our clients. Taking that into account and out of a sake of transparency, right, for the market, we felt that the top end of the guidance is now at the low end of the previous guidance, and we feel it's a better recognition of what's happening.

Very recently in the US, the president announced that he wanted to increase the military spend by 50% and reduce healthcare costs. This kind of things have an impact, of course, on our sales, and we wanted to acknowledge that in a context, as you mentioned, of high volatility, right?

We believe that with this new guidance, we actually better integrate the uncertainty that is happening in the market as we speak. Then

on risk-adjusted and the visibility, definitely the environment is not simple. That's why we highlighted the external factors.

We believe that we have the right, let's say, range or risk adjustments on the upside or downside, be it on the top line, 3% to 5%, or be it on the CEBIT, knowing that of course on the operating margin it's also up to us to trigger the different initiatives that Pierre mentioned, the ones that were existing on GO28 as well as the additional one that we will launch.

Thank you very much. Really appreciate that.

If I could squeeze one more in actually, just on the factoring in of the respiratory season being worse than you expected. The new BIOFIRE RP guidance, the bottom end is gone to minus 8% if I heard right, from minus 3% previously.

Obviously, Q1 alone wouldn't have justified that and the CDC data hasn't halved dramatically since you did the old guide. Is the right way to understand this is just that you're deciding to have more contingency when you think about the Q4 flu season?

Obviously, it's very hard to model and we don't have any data, but is this basically a more prudent approach than what you'd taken a few weeks ago? Then related to that, in terms of how you're looking at China, your China guidance for declining mid-single digits, that was a buffer guidance as you'd said earlier, it was a sort of contingency guidance.

Are you still happy with the prudence with which you've guided on that business? Thank you.

Just on RP to rephrase, maybe I was not clear. Inside our new guidance, it's a range of minus 8% to minus 3%, it's around minus 5%.

Of course, if you take the downside. Of course, as usual, it's an uncertainty on especially Q4 as usual.

That's important to restate on RP. Just you mentioned, I just want to re-explain because you just referred to the stats.

Of course, the stats are very key. The stats are on influenza-like illness, the different types of respiratory topics.

What we see specifically this year, on top of less cases, is less acute cases, and you know that our products are really for hospital acute cases mainly, and again medically we understand that it's less flu A, more flu B, that kind of effects, but definitely less cases and less acute cases in those cases.

Maybe to answer the China question, we actually haven't changed either our forecast for China. What we're seeing is actually consistent with what we expect, mid-single-digit decline.

Everything that happened in Q1 is very consistent with that. There is an element of volatility in China, but as we speak, what we're seeing is very consistent with our initial guidance for China.

No specific buffer, no specific downside.

Understood. Thank you very much.

Hi Pierre, Guillaume, and Aymeric. Thanks for the questions.

My first one is on the instrument weakness where you called out 18% decline for the quarter. By my math, your instrument sales is only about 10% of group sales, which means that that €20 million or so shortfall should have been entirely driven by the SPOTFIRE instrument decline.

Can you confirm if my math is right, and actually ex-SPOTFIRE the instrument growth is more like flattish, or are there other segments where you also saw a decline in instruments? The second question is on the GI panel, which I noticed you didn't comment on in the press release for non-respiratory.

Can you confirm that GI panels were also growing double-digit, or is it the case you might have seen a slow down post Cepheid's GI panel launch this quarter? Thank you.

On instrument weakness, just to recap, no, it's not just SPOTFIRE, especially SPOTFIRE on our main market, of course US, it's about placement. You're right, of course, there's the base effect of the government funding in Japan last year, which were sales of SPOTFIRE in Japan last year, but even when we exclude that, it's still a very significant double-digit decline on instrument sales, and this is what I mentioned on microbiology instrument sales as well as industrial applications instrument sales that are both significantly down.

With regards to GI panels, the competition with Cepheid is a little bit different because it's a mid-plex panel, it's more competing with lower kind of plex panels. It's still the perfect example in terms of competition for us, that's the reason why we didn't take it.

That's the Cepheid impact at this stage is not visible to us.

Okay. I wanted to push a little bit on the guidance approach, and this is more specifically on the midterm guidance approach.

I think it's fair to say the market's been very volatile and we've seen some challenges that are quite unprecedented for you and you've had to lower your guidance three times now in the last 12 months. Appreciate it's only the first quarter of the year, but I guess what triggers or deterioration would you need to see for you to think the GO28 targets might need to be revisited given that the lower end of your new guidance could make it a bit harder to achieve?

Thank you.

Thank you, Aysha, for the question. What we're seeing, which is very unchanged, is a good market share dynamics.

We're seeing be it in microbiology, be it with BIOFIRE, be it with SPOTFIRE, win rates, capacity to take share or to protect share in the case of BIOFIRE is still very strong. I think it was confirmed in 2025 and it didn't change overnight between the 31st of December and the 1st of January, it's still there.

We're seeing that very positively. What we're seeing deteriorating is market evolution, be it respiratory season, be it a slowdown of the IVD market.

It was very striking in 2025 and again in 2026, it's very striking. The challenge for us is in a context where we're seeing a commercial performance that is very strong, to adjust to a market evolution where cost of IVD, and we're seeing it for other players, are actually being challenged by the customers and they are really looking hard at controlling better their costs.

The third element is we're seeing to your point, the high range of the guidance, 5% sales growth, 10% EBIT profitability improvement, very much in line with long-term GO28 target. We confirm the guidance for 2028, and this is where we are, even though we acknowledge that 2026 is a tougher year and we've seen a bit of a slowdown of the market evolution starting in 2025 to be honest, but continued in 2026.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions.

Firstly, I would like to better understand the impact of the Middle East conflict on your instrument business, especially for microbiology and industrial applications. How did instrument sales evolve throughout Q1?

Specifically, were January and February significantly better than March? Have you observed any changes or trends in instrument sales in April?

Then secondly, on SPOTFIRE, one of your competitors has partnered with the same distributor. Does this have any implications for your future placement expectations?

Let me start with the second question, SPOTFIRE/McKesson. The short answer to your question is no.

McKesson, who is our main distributor, only distributor actually for SPOTFIRE in the US, is also distributing every other diagnostic solutions from main competitors. We don't see any change in terms of market conditions, and to be honest with SPOTFIRE, unlike microbiology or BIOFIRE, we have still a relatively low market share.

There are already significant competitors in the market with different players, we're not seeing a significant change in the competitive dynamics, and we've not seen that either in Q1 2026. With regards to instrument Middle East impact, maybe you can In terms of sales, enfin

Yeah. Again, enfin

2%, no, of the total sales, Guillaume?

It's our view that, again, just to recap in our minus 18% of instrument sales in Q1, there is a share that was expected, actually, which is linked to the one-off of very high SPOTFIRE sales in Japan last year, etc. Excluding that, it's still double-digit instrument sales, so that's what we are talking about, that we see notably on microbiology and industrial applications.

Again, it's across the board. We see and we get, yeah, direct feedback, really a wait-and-see mode from customers on this new environment.

Is it the right time to launch reorganization of the lab, rethinking of their installed base, which sometimes by the way can be positive for us, because it means they actually continue with what they have, which of course with our high market shares is always nice, but also the renewal are opportunities for equipment sales and sometimes of course competitive wins. That's what we saw, and no, yeah, we have not seen any change throughout April at this stage.

One follow-up, if I may. Did the instrument business also decline in double digits in January and February prior to the war starting?

Not sure I get We don't give these details, but again we see that linked to the war and overall the geopolitical environment, which because there is a war, but there's also, and I think Pierre alluded to it, the overall and that was before it started between Iran and there is also the global shift on government's focus on defense spend versus healthcare, and in different ways, in different countries, and said differently, let's say, pressure on healthcare spend, which means for the hospitals, our key and the customers, additional pressure.

Okay. Understood.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Hi there. Thanks for taking my questions.

I have a couple, please. Firstly, just to follow up on the instrument weakness across the various segments.

Is this something you're assuming will continue for the remainder of the year within your guidance, and are you then assuming this will improve from 2027 to hit your GO28 guidance? Appreciate the geopolitical situation and the one-offs with SPOTFIRE, but would appreciate your comments on that.

Secondly, on BIOFIRE respiratory, you commented on the non-RP erosion. Is your pricing erosion on the RP side still fairly limited here?

Then thirdly, on the CEBIT guidance range of 0% to 10%, this is fairly wide and appreciate the different levels in revenues, but are you able to comment on the key levers of reaching the lower to high end of this range and where the main cost flexibility sits? Thank you.

Maybe I'll start with comment on the instrument phasing. Guillaume can take BIOFIRE pricing, and I'll take over for CEBIT evolution.

No, we're seeing the slowdown that we're seeing for instruments, we have in our guidance, we expect that it will not slow down forever, right, and which would not work. We have a few elements that make us think that it will get better as we move forward.

In the guidance, we are seeing an opportunity for still coming back to a better level of sales for instruments, which has an impact on total sales, but also an impact for future reagent sales, right? We're comfortable with the guidance that we gave with regards to instruments.

We've kind of included the hit that we saw for the first few months of the year. On

respiratory pricing, Q1 we are around minus 3%, slightly less than that. 3% price erosion, which is a small acceleration compared to last year.

We definitely adjust on, yeah, we feel we need to in clear direction of customer retention, nothing dramatic, but the same kind of low single-digit level, yeah.

Your final question was on CEBIT new guidance that we gave between 0% and 10%. Of course, it's impacted by the level of sales, right, because we have volume of fixed costs.

When you lose sales, when you get to 3%, it's we have significantly less gross margin than when you get to 5%, so that's explains a significant share of the EBIT. Having said that, as with the GO28 plan and GO SIMPLE, we have actually been able to deliver above targets both in 2024 and in 2025.

In this more challenging context from a sales perspective, of course working diligently on executing the GO20 initiatives for 2026, and even accelerating them in that complicated context. Moreover, given the market softness that we are experiencing, we are launching new initiatives, additional initiatives, be it on spend, be it on head count, to be able to control the cost evolution and make sure that we are capable to generate profitable growth, even if the sales growth is a little bit slower than what we expected.

Thank you. Just a quick follow-up on the BIOFIRE RP erosion.

Are you assuming this to accelerate into '27 and 2028 within your GO28 guidance, given further competitive pressures?

No, it's a kind of level that we feel is more, let's say, normal, recurring level of, let's say, of pressure, or said otherwise, of adjustments that we are ready to take. It's been in the same range for the last 2 years, actually.

It's around 2%, well, that's the kind of expectations that we have moving forward.

Okay. Thank you.

Hi, guys. Thanks very much for taking my questions.

A couple from me, please, on your kind of regional impact. Just coming back to this conversation around Middle East sensitivity, thank you very much for kind of clarifying the exposure to transportation and oil costs, but just when we're trying to understand a bit of the sensitivity for plastic price movements, wondering if you can give us an idea of kind of how many months of inventory you hold, at what point could this start to become a problem to underlying costs, and are you able to give us any indication of the level of COGS that plastics kind of represents so that we can try and run that sensitivity?

Then the other kind of regional question I've got is on China. Just noting some of your peers highlighting the potential expansion of VBP programs, I'm wondering if you could just comment on your exposure there, apologies for my ignorance.

Then just lastly, if you could just speak a little bit around your outlook for instruments this year. I'm just wondering if you are able to guide at all on whether or not you expect SPOTFIRE new installations to decline year-on-year as a result of this new hesitancy of customers.

Thank you.

On Middle East sensitivities, thank you. You got it right.

Definitely we have resin, plastic price impacts. Again, we hold several months, actually several quarters, of inventory, us and even sometimes our suppliers hold raw material of inventory of resin price, the impact would be delayed.

Again, I would say when we say in the guidance excluding prorogated Middle East impacts, it's the fact that, first, the level of the impact, where will be the oil price in 2 weeks or in 2 months? We don't know, up or down.

Also the duration, as we all know, nobody has a clue if it's going to last for 6 months or another 3 weeks, the war. We kind of said let's, yeah, exclude kind of the second half.

Just to still give you an idea of what it means, if we were to have exactly the same level of oil price and plastic for up to the end of the year impact of transportation and resin, it would be €5-€10 million on top, which again doesn't mean much because it would go up or down, it would stop at some point, but if you just draw the line it would be €5-€10 million impact additional in H2, just to give an idea. China, so, yeah.

Maybe I can share on China. There is indeed a new regulation that is organizing the billing of the hospitals to the healthcare system for diagnostics, which could translate into a potential revision of prices, at least for some provinces.

I think it's still a draft at this stage. What we've seen on our side, as you know in China 90% of our sales are in microbiology.

This new draft pricing organization or billing organization for the hospitals is actually not unfavorable for microbiology testing. As microbiology is still relatively not as developed in China as it is in other countries.

The billing mechanism actually differentiates in microbiology culture, identification, and AST, antibiogram. We see it as a pretty sophisticated and even favorable way for the hospitals to bill microbiology tests.

It's definitely not a headwind for us. We obviously are watching the evolution.

Again, it's still draft, but for China, we don't see it as a negative for us. SPOTFIRE installation, installation in general, we usually don't give guidance on installations.

On top of that, you have seasonality effect. As usually Q2 is lower and gets bigger in Q3 and Q4.

We have also the impact that Guillaume was describing. Sometimes even for SPOTFIRE point of care, we sign big deals like IDNs who want to harmonize their point-of-care testing, and that's what we did in Q1 last year.

This kind of deal can happen, it really makes phasing of new instruments installations very complicated to give to the market.

Understood. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Charles.

Hi. Thank you for taking the question.

I wanted to ask a follow-up on what Aysha was kind of getting at on the GO28 targets, but more specifically on the SPOTFIRE €450 million target. I guess what is underpinning your confidence there that that's sufficiently risk-adjusted, and if instrument placements remain a bit slower at this pace, how much of that is a risk to the target?

Then on the 2026 0% to 10% CEBIT growth guidance, can you just walk us through a little bit more details on what gets us to the high end versus the low end for this year? Thanks again for taking the questions.

I can give it a start. GO28 targets, especially for SPOTFIRE, €450 million, we're very comfortable with where we are, be it as Guillaume was saying, we're already at 7,000 units installed now for SPOTFIRE.

We are growing our reagent sales by 30% in a context where with the weaker respiratory season has declined sales for respiratory by 20%. There is a huge impact of the respiratory season that makes extrapolation of Q1 really impossible for 450.

As I said, we are working diligently and doing a lot of good progress on preparing the launch for new panels on SPOTFIRE. All of this together really makes us as confident as we were with the €450 million target for 2028.

No change in that regard. With regards to 0% to 10% EBIT, I tried to give a little bit of perspective before.

It's driven by sales and the gross margin, and obviously that's the biggest impact. What we're working on is to make sure that we are launching as we speak additional productivity measures to be able to compensate the sales decline and still be able to generate profitable sales growth in a market that has proven to be very slow in Q1.

It goes across the board, there is not too early, but not the right forum to discuss the details of the productivity measures we're taking, but we're definitely active to adjust our cost base to this new sales top line.

Okay. We have some online questions.

The first one from Christophe Ganet from ODDO. Three questions.

The first one is on BIOFIRE non-RP look a bit low compared to your guidance. Is there an issue of commercial execution or any loss of sales reps, any issue about competition, an issue about real commercial potential assessment, price postponement in order?

Where is the miss? Second question is on SPOTFIRE, which looks below expectations, I think in terms of, yeah.

Can we have the level of consumption per machine SPOTFIRE or any reason explaining those 450 systems? The third question is immuno, what is the proportion of commodities and non-commodities test now?

Your view on the evolution, plus any update on TB test?

I start with non-RP or as for the first question? The short answer is we honestly we don't see, especially in this market, right, which is not shifting that much, we had very strong commercial execution in Q4 2025, growing above 10% actually in Q4.

As Guillaume highlighted, pneumonia panel where we have no competition, zero competition, we declined by 2%. It was one of the high growth drivers that we have.

Of course we're very vigilant and we're looking carefully by country on our cross-selling, win rates, and so on and so forth. Honestly, we're not seeing any disruption with regards to the competition.

We're disappointed with the number, of course, and we see it as mostly explained by epidemiology and the very slow market conditions. The second question that relates to SPOTFIRE, we don't give the level of consumption per instruments for a variety of reasons.

It depends very much on the setting, if they're in point-of-care setting, if they're in hospital, triage setting, it also depends the consumption of course with respiratory season.

Just to re-explain that we are not disappointed. I understand the consensus was above the 450, but actually there might be kind of, I don't know, special perception effect because our Q1 '25 was very strong.

Q1 '25 included, again, Japan, again, very strong additional SPOTFIRE based on government funding. It also included a one-off pretty significant US deal, and there's not that kind of large-size deals every quarter.

When we look ourselves at Q1 '24, Q1 '25 adjusted, and actually Q1 '26 is very much aligned. Q1 is not a very strong quarter by itself.

It could be if epidemiology is strong, some customer actually add capacity during the quarter, which of course did not happen this year, obviously. I think that's our analysis, our view of the dynamic.

For us, and I understand the read of the market, but for us not a disappointment. We know Q4 is actually the highest months in terms of installations.

It goes down in Q1, it goes down in Q2, and what we're seeing is dynamics beyond those one-offs that are very similar. For immunoassays, what I can share is we're still seeing a continued decline of PCT, and the other element on TB test is we are finalizing actually the clinical trial for the US on latent TB, and we're expecting a filing very soon now, to be able to launch somewhere in 2027.

Okay. One question from Philip Omnès, JP Morgan: 'You pulled out instrument sales down 18% in Q1.

Can you remind us of how instrument sales were trending prior to the start of the Middle East conflict?'

I think we answered about it, but no, just coming back to the 2025 performance in instruments, the full year was plus 9% excluding SPOTFIRE instruments. We had a pretty strong dynamic in 2025 that we've not seen in Q1 '26, and especially since the start of the Middle East conflict.

What else do we have? That's pretty much it.

Question, why the 5% decline in immunoassay, I think you answered it, Pierre.

Yes.

No, we are done.

I think we have covered most of the questions.

Any other live question? No.

Thanks a lot, and the next communication on our side will be on July 28 for the H1 2026 performance. It's a bit new.

We used to report after the summer break, now it's going to be before the summer break.

Thank you, everyone. Bye-bye.

Have a good day.