Welcome, everybody. My name is Claudia Introvigne.

I'm responsible for Investor Relations and Market Analysis here in Leonardo. Today, we are here to present our first quarter results for 2026.

I'm really pleased to have here with me our CEO, Roberto Cingolani, and our CFO, Giuseppe Aurilio. I will now hand over to Roberto.

Thank you.

Thank you, Claudia. Hello, everybody.

This is our last meeting and will be the last day of my mandate. So I will leave Leonardo tomorrow.

At that occasion, which we will present the Q1 data, I would like to take a few minutes of your time to wrap up the last 3 years in view of the change of top management and to say goodbye to all of you. In the first 3 months of 2026, a few months after having launched the Michelangelo Dome in October 2025 and the updated plan, we've got very good and encouraging results.

The order backlog has risen to EUR 57 billion, plus 23% versus 2025. The book-to-bill ratio is 2 and the new orders amount to EUR 9 billion, plus 31% year-over-year.

Revenues increased to EUR 4.5 billion, plus 6.9% year-over-year. EBITA growing by 33.2%, up to EUR 281 million.

The adjusted net result is EUR 184 million, plus 60% year-over-year. Free operating cash flow has been improved by 29% — it is still in the negative ground at minus EUR 411 million.

The workforce has been increased by 5,600 units, and we have reached more than 65,000 people in Leonardo Global. These data do not include the upside given by the acquisition of Iveco Defence, which has been estimated as remarkable.

Giuseppe will tell you more later. Frankly, the numbers are very good and the upside of IDV is very promising.

We could have even proposed an upgrading in guidance. But because tomorrow we will have the new CEO, I think for fairness, we'll leave this choice to the next top management.

The numbers are very promising and I'm sure they will do a fantastic job. Q1 2026 confirms that the plan is solid, credible and feasible.

This is in line with the expected further growth foreseen by the new plan. By the year 2030, the challenge is EUR 32 billion orders, EUR 30 billion revenues, EUR 3.6 billion EBITA, 12% return on sales, more than EUR 2 billion free operating cash flow.

This follows the already positive 3-year trend we registered during the mandate. I want to remind you that in the last 3 years, we grew by almost 20,000 people, reaching 60,000 units.

Importantly, 1/4 were women, 64% of the new people own a technical background and more than 1/2 were below 30 years old. The productivity per capita has been increasing — from EUR 290k per headcount pre-COVID to EUR 320k per headcount last year.

The share value was growing from 10 to 64 maximum about 1 month ago, market cap from 4.6 billion to 34 billion. Debt was under control.

The free operating cash flow exceeded 1 billion for the first time in 2025. And the margins are moving towards double digit throughout the company, which was our main commitment since the very beginning.

The first guideline was what we define bullets and bytes — the intriguing and unexpected merge of hardware and software, digital technologies and defense platforms that we learned abruptly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The second guideline was that no one can make it on its own, so the need for alliances, especially at the European level to contrast the fragmentation of European Defence and Space, and also mergers and acquisitions and big collaborations among industries.

The third guideline was moving quickly from conventional defense to global security — not only military deterrence, but also cybersecurity, space security, space observation, infrastructure security, energy security, something we have to work on in the future. The enabling factors that brought us to get good results were: cleaning the portfolio and withdrawing noncore business activities that were heavy stones in the balance sheet; launching a very strategic and systematic saving plan transversal to all the company; a strong effort in digitalization — today, we have 1 terabyte per headcount memory and 0.5 teraflop computational power per headcount, world-class numbers meaning AI-driven products and processes, improved manufacturing, digital services towards servitization, use of digital twins in all hardware platforms; improving efficiency in production; and then most importantly, a focus on specific technological priorities — digital twin, AI, cloud, data analytics, high-performance computing, hybrid warfare technologies, multi-domain interoperability, unmanned systems in all domains.

Today, all our platforms — land, sea, air — have the unmanned counterpart of any manned platform. Last but not least, building a brand and a digital identity of the company.

The tool for all of this was the industrial plan, an innovative rolling industrial plan starting in '23, with disciplined capital allocation, dividends, debt, clear R&D strategy, organic and inorganic growth. Completion of the product portfolio covering all domains through investments in new products — satellite constellation, high-performance computing, cybersecurity — or through M&A — land vehicles, drones, new parts of cybersecurity.

The international alliances and M&A made the difference with the past. Land defense are the new impulse through the collaboration with the joint venture with Rheinmetall, collaboration with KNDS, Iveco Defence acquisition, Baykar and the drone technology.

In a few weeks, we will launch our first drones in Ronchi dei Legionari, the new models. The new aeronautic division is now doing very well with new orders on the fighters, GCAP and the Eurofighter, the 346 and the Eurofighter.

It has also incorporated Aerostructure, and we've been working a lot to create an international JV on Aerostructures, which is finally at reach. And finally, the cyber acceleration to enhance our AI capability and the new high-performance computing line of business created in 2025.

In less than 3 years, all of this has generated the Michelangelo Dome project — a blend of electronic sensors and command and control at the center of the multi-domain, together with AI and cybersecurity, satellite constellations for earth observation and early warning, manned and unmanned air, land and sea platforms in the digital continuum of the combat cloud. We became the only industrial company in the world that has all the hardware platforms and the AI digital capabilities to create the first open shield architecture for air defense that can accommodate any asset compatible with NATO and our defense doctrines.

The strategy is built, capitalized and contracted. The plan is communicated.

The job now is execution. About 1 billion per year self-funded R&D in addition to the customer-funded 2 billion per year R&D is key to keep the pace of growth and to make Leonardo a world-class player.

Any short-term margin optimization through R&D cut would cause failure. The last 3 years were fantastic.

I believe there is plenty of room for further growth, and the acceleration ramp of Q1 2026 is very encouraging. I want to thank all of you, dear investors and analysts, for your support, your constructive attitude and for sharing the dream of a world-class Leonardo.

Now it's my time to go, but maybe we will meet again. Thank you heartfully for your support.

Bye-bye.

Thank you, Roberto. And I know that today, I can talk for everyone in Leonardo in thanking you for your outstanding leadership and for the contribution to the group over the last years.

So thank you, Roberto. Back to Q1 — it was a very strong start of the year, as Roberto said.

Outstanding performance in all of our KPIs, around plus 30% in EBITA, free operating cash flow and order intake. Revenues up by 10% net of the exchange difference and improved profitability up to 6.3% from 5.1% in Q1 2025.

In the quarter, we completed the acquisition of Iveco Defence for a total consideration of EUR 1.6 billion. IDV is not in the numbers we were discussing earlier — it was consolidated for the balance sheet and for the backlog, but for all other flows — income statement and cash flow — it will be consolidated starting April 1, 2026.

Very importantly, we have improved our rating with Moody's from Baa3 to Baa2, maintaining a positive outlook. At the same time, Standard & Poor's confirmed the current rating but improved the outlook to positive from stable.

This is a very important acknowledgment of the financial progress we have made. Orders were up to EUR 9 billion in Q1 2026, more than 30% above last year.

Revenues were up by 7%, or 10% excluding the negative impacts of the translation, mainly of the U.S. dollar and DRS components.

EBITA increased by more than 30% compared to Q1 2025. Free operating cash flow is negative as usual in our business, but much less compared to the past — plus 30%.

On orders — very important result, strong commercial momentum. Orders were up by 31% compared to Q1 2025 with a total backlog at EUR 57 billion, about 2.5 years of production, including also the backlog coming from IDV of close to EUR 6 billion.

The progress is spread over all the business. Two big orders deserve mention — the NMH order in helicopters for AW149 for the U.K.

Armed Forces, which was a very important milestone, and in Aeronautics, the big order from the Austrian Air Force for M-346. Defence Electronics improved significantly, 20% for Electronics Europe.

Leonardo DRS was negative compared to Q1 2025, but because of the negative exchange difference and because Q1 2025 had a very important order on IBAS activities. The trend of DRS is very positive.

Helicopters — outstanding performance driven by the NMH order. Aeronautics — the Austrian order for M-346, plus EFA orders from Germany and Italy and a C-27J contract for logistics support for the Italian Air Force.

Cyber and Space — plus 30% for Cyber, 18% for Space. This has led us to a book-to-bill of 2x, with a total backlog of EUR 57 billion.

On revenues — up by 10% excluding negative translation of dollars, with improvements across all business and divisions. Defence Electronics — Electronics Europe growing by 15%.

Leonardo DRS is negative only because of the negative exchange difference, otherwise it would be a growth of 6%, driven by RADA and Colombia Marine Plus programs. Helicopters — growing at around 3.8%, in line with our full year estimate and reflective of having grown by more than 10% in each of the last 2 years.

Aeronautics — very solid performance based on our core programs: GCAP, EFA, M-346 and C-27J. Aerostructure — big increase mainly due to the increased rate of production on B787, going from around 4 deliveries per month in Q1 2025 to 7 at the start of 2026 and now 8.

Cyber Security and Space — Cyber by around 20%, Space by 14%. On EBITA — outstanding results, up 33% compared to Q1 2025.

The improvement is spread across all divisions. Defence Electronics — plus 20% year-on-year.

Electronics Europe — plus 25%, already in double digit return on sales in Q1, a result that usually we get later in the year. Leonardo DRS — plus 15% despite around EUR 10 million of negative exchange differences, running at around 10% return on sales.

Aircraft — plus 12%, return on sales close to double digit already in Q1. Aerostructure — minus 45%, but a partial recovery compared to last year's minus 56%, mainly driven by the increase in B787 production rate.

Cyber — plus 36%, mainly from additional scale. Space — plus 100%, driven by strong performance in the service component and partial recovery of the loss of Thales Alenia Space.

Key message — return on sales is improving across all the business. We are already double digit in Electronics, close to double digit in Aeronautics.

Free operating cash flow — up 30%, thanks to our operating performance, actions on working capital and efforts to make this trend more linear. Cash flow used in operating activities was EUR 0.2 billion in 2026 compared to EUR 0.4 billion, but this EUR 0.2 billion includes the settlement of the NH90 litigation with a cash out of EUR 100 million in Q1.

So otherwise, it would have been at around EUR 0.1 billion negative. Net debt — increasing up to EUR 3 billion as expected, perfectly in line with our expectations.

Starting from EUR 1 billion, we had EUR 0.4 billion of negative free operating cash flow plus EUR 1.6 billion related to the closing of the Iveco acquisition. Group net debt excluding lease liabilities and loans from joint ventures is around EUR 0.7 billion.

Very strong balance sheet. We can confirm our guidance.

Q1 gives us strong confidence — new orders at EUR 25 billion, revenues at EUR 21 billion, EBITA at EUR 2.03 billion with free operating cash flow of EUR 1.1 billion despite the NH90 settlement. We are also now in a position to communicate preliminary add-ons from the consolidation of Iveco Defence for the 9 months from April 1 — new orders at around EUR 1.2 billion, revenue EUR 1.1 billion, EBITA at EUR 0.12 billion and free operating cash flow at EUR 0.22 billion.

To conclude, very strong results, very good start of the year, very well on track to deliver our full year guidance.

Thank you, Roberto and Giuseppe. Let's open the Q&A session.

The first question is coming from Sam Burgess from Goldman Sachs.

Firstly, Roberto, I know I'll speak for many when I say you've done an excellent job at Leonardo, and I'm sure many will be sad to see you move on, but wishing you all the very best for whatever is next. My first question — the Italian government has said Gulf countries have made urgent requests for air defense and anti-drone systems.

Can you help us understand if Leonardo and MBDA are seeing this translating into orders at this stage, and what might the prioritization look like relative to other customers? And secondly, on BMD Plus — should we think about this as the first major funded step in the broader Italian missile defense architecture?

And in terms of the margin as this comes through, should we expect it to be broadly in line with the Electronics margin even in the early phases of delivery?

In order to give you a rather quantitative answer, I think we should wait and see what happens in the next weeks or just a few months. On one hand, with respect to what Europe is doing and the relationship between the 3.1% versus 3% deficit ratio — as far as we know, the 3% threshold has been missed by just a few decimal points, so it's unclear what happens there.

To be very correct towards Leonardo, we should never forget that we export 80% of our products. So in principle, we are a world company and most of the market comes from export.

We could certainly say that we are most independent of domestic fluctuation. However, it's very important when you sell defense platforms abroad that you show that your defense system has already been tested in-house.

That's the only interplay I see in case there will be a small reduction of investment in defense by the government. Having said this, for the Michelangelo Dome and what we call the air defense shield, most of the R&D is already included in our capital allocation.

There's not so much new to develop. And this is part of the organic growth of the company.

I'm still very positive towards the success of this initiative. After we announced Michelangelo Dome, many other countries and companies announced a kind of rebranding of their existing products.

Our Michelangelo design team that goes around different countries to customize the specific architecture is supposed to be very busy. They should not miss even one day starting from tomorrow because we are in a rush.

The geopolitical situation imposes a pace and rhythm that is not the usual one. But I'm very optimistic.

The second question is coming from Alessandro Pozzi from Mediobanca.

First one for Roberto — in your opening remarks, you mentioned continuity with the next management. I was wondering if you can share what advice you've given to the next management, if any, and what you think are the key challenges for Leonardo in its next phase of transformation?

We are in a rather fortunate situation that the new President has been a 3-year member of the Board. So he participated very actively in the entire decision process.

He knows step by step how we came to this point — that makes a big difference compared to a President who is parachuted from outside. The CEO, as you know, was in the company for many years.

We were working together for almost 2 years. So he knows people and structure very well.

I believe continuity should not be a problem. The problem eventually is the competition abroad and the time to market — the usual daily challenges in such a complex geopolitical situation.

There will be some rearrangement as the team that was working with me is moving, and they have to recreate the team very soon to not lose one day of operational capability. Fortunately, there are relatively young people who were operating with us in these 3 years, ready to jump in and work on all the different programs.

One thing that maybe should be addressed — because of my background, I was operating like a Chief Technology Officer, not only as CEO. So if a profile like mine goes out, maybe they have to reinforce the CTO position, which is at the moment vacant because I was playing that role.

But it's solvable. We have to go to market and see whether there are good candidates who can coordinate the multi-mission idea underlying the industrial plan.

My second question is on guidance. I believe you mentioned that you can even raise guidance given the progress you've made.

Is there any KPI in particular where things are going way better compared to initial expectations?

I'll leave the answer to Giuseppe because this will be his responsibility. But let me say one thing with the zero responsibility I have because I'm leaving.

Last time we were discussing whether to be prudent or challenging, and we decided not to increase guidance when the improvement is below a few percent. I would say this time it's really very good in almost all KPIs.

With the braveness I can have because I'm leaving, I would have increased transversely the guidance. But of course, they need to be more prudent.

This is a responsibility the new CEO has to share, and he has to make his analysis together with the CFO. But the numbers are all quite above expectations.

So in the end, I think we could be optimistic. And I stop saying anything now.

The numbers are very, very good. Of course, it was a strong quarter.

Of course, we need to factor a couple of things. The first one is that the first quarter is the weakest contributor to the full year.

So although it is very good, most of the activity has to be done over the last 3 quarters. We have also a number of pluses and minuses we need to assess mainly due to the geopolitical context.

So for a prudent view, I think overall starting from where we are now, it is still a balanced situation versus the guidance. Of course, if you look at orders, we are already at EUR 9 billion, which is a particularly good performance.

But keep in mind that orders are not linear. We will look at the guidance in an optimistic way, but that will be a task for the new Board of Directors.

Just a follow-up — the margin effect is fairly large at about EUR 59 million, much larger than the volume effect. Can you say what is the main driver of that?

Increasing scale without increasing fixed cost is helping us a lot. We're improving marginality because we're increasing the scale.

We are also continuing on our saving plan. And we are not increasing fixed cost in a way which is comparable to the increase of revenue.

So increasing from scales, benefiting from the saving plan we set a couple of years ago, and solid program performance — which at the end is the main driver. Very good program performance is a clear outcome of the actions we have been doing over the last years.

The next question comes from Ross Law from Morgan Stanley.

I'll start by reiterating Sam's earlier thoughts, wishing you all the best for the future, Roberto. The first question is on Iveco.

Thanks for the 2026 contribution guidance. I know you don't want to give new group medium-term guidance, but maybe you can provide more color on what you think Iveco could contribute medium term.

Should we use Iveco's 2024 CMD outlook as a guide, or is it better given developments since 2024? And then secondly, just on order intake — specifically with the Turkey Typhoon contract, it doesn't look like this was included in Q1 while some of your peers have recorded it.

Can I just get an update on when you expect to record this?

On IDV, we are still working on the entire plan. It will be a task to be done together with the new Board of Directors to understand how to implement the full plan and fully leverage on the synergies we can produce by putting Leonardo and IDV together.

So it is something we will update during the year based on the progress of this analysis. But you can see already that we expect good profitability overall — 11% return on sales on the 9 months 2026, and this is something we expect also over the plan.

We think the acquisition of IDV will be accretive stand-alone, but also including the synergies we can generate over the plan. Regarding Turkey, it is not on Q1 orders.

You know that there is a time to flow down the orders from the prime to the subcos. We are working on that, but I confirm it is not on Q1 orders.

The next one is coming from Sash Tusa of Agency Partners.

I've got 2 questions. One — can you confirm that the IDV backlog has gone into Defence Electronics & Security?

And if that's the case, is that where you expect IDV to remain? Or will you eventually report it as a stand-alone business given it's broadly similar in size to 2 of your smaller divisions?

And the second question — on your broader ambitions in air defense and particularly Michelangelo Dome, what are the terms under which you can get access to the SAMP/T missile system, given that is a joint venture comprised of MBDA and your rival Thales in the Eurosam teaming? Can you get access to SAMP/T on the same conditions that Thales does, or do they have a structural advantage?

On IDV — yes, I confirm it is inside the backlog of Electronic Defence. For the future, that will be one of the items to be analyzed by the new Board of Directors.

It has to do with organizational issues. At the moment, it is included in Electronic Defence and clearly the portion which has more synergy with IDV is currently inside Electronic Defence.

You have to consider historically that OTO Melara, the remaining part of land defense developed by Leonardo, is inside the Electronic division. Now we might argue that Iveco Defence plus OTO Melara is getting so big that possibly it could be in itself a sort of land division.

But we have to see the industrial synergy and a number of industrial parameters. However, the critical mass of land defense now is much bigger than 1 year ago when OTO Melara alone was just a line of business.

About SAMP/T and the effectors — we obviously expect to have some preferential access to SAMP/T because we participate in MBDA. However, the important point is that Michelangelo is effector-agnostic — it has been conceived not to be specifically dedicated to one effector.

Of course, we like to have homemade or at least participated effectors, but we have already started discussions with other producers outside Europe to see whether other missiles can be used in their defense field. Michelangelo is the only effector-agnostic system that you can think of.

Next question is coming from Benjamin Heelan from Bank of America.

I think you made some comments on the Aerostructures discussions. Could you give more color on where you are on that?

Is there any timeline or probability you can give around that deal coming to fruition? Then secondly, could you give us an update on where we are in the joint venture with Rheinmetall on the land side and when we can see orders on that?

And finally, an update on the Global Combat Air Programme — there were some articles about the U.K. struggling in the short term with some funding.

Has that impacted the development timeline at all?

Aerostructure — as we said in March, there is an important outstanding issue with a potential partner we cannot name. It was related to the funding of local activities needed to fully implement the business plan and the JV.

They are still working internally on that — an essential part of this plan is the funding agreement they need to get from their country. It's work being done from their side.

We are not part of this discussion. As we said, we set a summer window for a go-no-go decision.

They are saying their analysis will be consistent with the summer deadline, but we will see when they have the results.

On GCAP — we heard about the momentary difficulty in the U.K. for funding.

But this is a 10-year program, and we should not make fast decisions based on a momentary difficulty. All the partners are working.

Last but not least, this is the only sixth-generation fighter program left in the world. Stopping it would be a big mistake because one of the partners has a momentary difficulty.

This can happen to any partner at any time. But the rationale for continuing and insisting on GCAP is by far more important than the momentary difficulty.

It's more likely to have a slight delay in the program rather than a stop.

Very important to add — we got the first order at Edgewing, the first international contract at the end of March. It's GBP 0.8 billion, funded by all 3 countries.

So it was a very important milestone to progress on the activities being made by Edgewing.

The Leonardo Rheinmetall joint venture is operating on time. The infantry vehicles have been delivered on time.

There is a second slot coming. And most of the work on the big tanks is still dealing with integration — basically, the payload produced by Leonardo for the turret should be integrated in the chassis of the Panther, and the teams are working on that.

We don't see specific issues at the moment, but of course, we are continuously monitoring.

The next question comes from Martino De Ambroggi from Equita.

First of all, it was a pleasure to work with you, Roberto, and all the best. On IDV — the free cash flow you're providing for the 9 months is quite sizable compared to the size of the company.

Is it something exceptional this year or is it a recurring business dynamic? And still on IDV, could you quantify what portion of the business you are proposing in the figures today, which is part of the potential acquisition from Rheinmetall?

Of course, when we say that cash flow is seasonal in defense, it's true for everyone. Excluding the first quarter from the numbers leads you to a very good 9-months result, but just because you are excluding the heavily negative first quarter in Iveco, like in every company in aerospace and defense.

So this is not fully an indicator of the full year free operating cash flow of IDV. You see only the more positive part of the year.

For the pro forma full year — we don't give guidance on each component of the free operating cash flow, but the first quarter was heavily negative. If you look at the 2025 results under Iveco control, it was in the range of EUR 150 million to EUR 160 million.

On the portion of the business for potential acquisition by Rheinmetall — in the 9 months, the balance between trucks and armored and multi-role vehicles is not stable because the reversal of backlog in trucks is much faster than in armored vehicles. So looking at those 9 months, the ratio is around 60/40.

If you look at the margins, we get back probably to the split we gave in the past of 70/30.

On Aerostructure — what is the cash burn embedded in your full year guidance compared to the EUR 200 million absorbed last year?

We assume it will be negative again. The EBIT was around minus EUR 80 million in the year, plus some investments.

So it's more than EUR 100 million of cash drag in the year.

On GCAP — might a new entry be a possible way to go ahead more quickly?

From an industry perspective, new countries could open new markets in the future. Of course, it is more a political discussion rather than a discussion between industries.

Governmental decision. From our side, since the very beginning, we were open to any expansion of the consortium as long as there was a clear technical contribution, not only financial.

But this is ultimately a political decision. We've expressed on more than one occasion that we would agree to widening the team, but it's just a technical position.

The next question comes from Sebastian Growe from BNP Paribas.

The question is around the DRS segment. It started the year much stronger than expected especially from a margin perspective.

What drove this material margin improvement — both in the European business up about 100 bps and also DRS at almost up 200 basis points? Can you provide any color around how we should think about the mix component in the quarter?

And how would you assess the quality of the order book and how it might differ from what we saw in Q1?

It's a mix of positive items. The main driver is very good program performance, together with the benefit from increasing scales — we are increasing revenues, but not increasing fixed cost in a way comparable to the increase of revenue.

The commercial momentum is key because we see that there are good prospects and opportunities, which is a very good sign for the future development of Electronic Defence. In the comparison, you may also remember when looking at DRS that last year it was affected by some issues relating to specific programs and cost impact on rare materials.

But overall, DRS is performing very well. They are slightly revising their guidance for the full year — a very small number, between $5 million and $10 million of additional EBITDA.

But it's a clear sign of how positive they see the rest of the year.

Next question is coming from David Perry from JPMorgan.

Roberto, I don't want to embarrass you further, but congrats on a good job. You're the ninth Leonardo CEO in the time I've covered the stock — you were definitely the best.

I've got 2 questions. Giuseppe, I think you may have answered this but I couldn't follow the earlier answer.

Have you said or given a rough guide on which part of Iveco you are going to sell? Because we're adding some numbers to this year, but are we going to take a chunk of that back out next year?

And Roberto, if I can ask you an unfair question — as you leave, what do you think is the biggest opportunity for Leonardo to improve its performance? Because you've made a lot of progress, but I still think the company is some way behind some of its peers in some financial metrics.

Relating to IDV consolidation — the numbers we presented for the full year include also the truck portion, which is the one potentially under discussion for a future disposal, but it's just one of the options. There is a discussion with Rheinmetall in place, but the outcome we will evaluate — the best option from a value perspective.

For the time being, we are consolidating 100% of the IDV perimeter including the truck business, and we will see the outcome of this discussion and potential negotiation, also together with the assessment of synergies.

David, thank you. First of all, for your words.

I believe that number one, Leonardo must learn to believe in itself. It's a mindset problem.

To change the culture of the company, of course, we need a bit more time. But at the moment, we do have one of the most complete portfolios in the world — for sure, the most complete in terms of nature, services, digital software, hardware and platforms.

If we understand that this is a competitive advantage, we have to make our best effort to take advantage of this unique capability. So changing the mindset, believing in ourselves.

Second, Leonardo should start behaving like a truly multinational company, not a domestic company. We should have the courage to say we produce the best products, we invest in R&D, we take the company risk — we invest in R&D and we don't stop making innovation.

If the products are better than the others, we prevail in the market. I would have a third longer-term vision.

Whenever there is a war, a conflict, a problem, we end up on energy. This is crazy.

Look at the Hormuz Gulf — the price of gas and petrol goes up. Look at Ukraine — gas price was up and then electricity.

So the national security of the entire world is at risk. If Leonardo will be a real global security company, I think it should have the duty to develop advanced technology for modular nuclear reactors for generation.

You might say this is too long, too much investment — yes, you're right, but somebody has to do it. Otherwise, we will never be really independent.

I think this is going to be the biggest threat to global security, especially in the Western countries. Leonardo would have all the capability, all the technology, the industrial capability to launch maybe a NewCo participated by Leonardo with other investors to do something serious in this field.

So — mindset, R&D, taking advantage of the unique software and hardware capability and servitization of the products. And then for the mid to long term, maybe energy security becoming the most important platform for the future.

We have a last question from Afonso Osorio from Barclays.

Roberto, I just wanted to reiterate what all my peers have said, wishing you all the best for what comes next. I have a few questions.

First — on the cash payment for the NH90 settlement, I see this is included in the cash flow this quarter. Just wanted to confirm if that's the full payment or if there's more to come later on this year.

And the second question — on Aerostructures, I appreciate you just mentioned that the summer deadline is broadly unchanged, but just wondering if you can comment on the size of this new venture. I believe you had said before that this would be a much bigger and larger venture.

On NH90 — it was not a full payment, but most of the outcome of the litigation has been paid. We missed something like EUR 10 million or EUR 15 million still to pay in Q2, but most of it was paid in Q1.

On Aerostructures — the latest information we have is that our partner is now negotiating internally ministerial incentives for the creation of the new international joint venture. We don't touch the ball there.

We were told that the window of the law for the ministerial incentives will close end of June, beginning of July. So inherently, they have to make a decision giving us a response.

The stand-alone plan of Leonardo has been done, approved by the parties, and it's very good, very convenient. We in turn approved their stand-alone part of the plan.

So industrially, everything has been agreed. Even financially, everything has been agreed — we could start tomorrow.

The point is that the counterpart said they need an incentive from the minister because otherwise there will be no ministerial presence in their team. I believe this is more of an internal political organization.

The deadline they confirmed a few days ago still stands at the end of June, beginning of July.

And if I can quickly follow up — on the timeline for the deal with Rheinmetall with Iveco Defence, is there still a message to send by June? Or can that slip into the second half?

We stay on the deadline, and I believe we are focused on the end of this first semester. We have not received any counter signal about that, so we have no reason to expect a shift.

That would be really negative also for us. I don't think anybody wants to delay.

So thank you all. We are now closing our Q&A session.

Thank you to Roberto, and thank you to Giuseppe. The IR team is anyway open to any follow-up.

Thank you. Have a nice evening.

Bye.