Good morning everyone and welcome to Pegasystems Q2 2026 earnings call. Before we begin, I'd like to read our safe harbor statement.

Certain statements contained in this presentation may be construed as forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words such as expects, anticipates, intends, plans, believes, will, could, should, estimates, may, forecasts, and similar expressions are intended to identify these forward-looking statements.

These statements speak only as of the date the statement was made, and are based on current expectations and assumptions. Because these statements relate to future events, they are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from our current expectations for fiscal year 2026 and beyond.

Factors that could cause such differences are described in the company's press release announcing our Q2 2026 results and in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31st, 2025, as well as other recent SEC filings. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, as there can be no assurances that the results contemplated will be realized.

Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances. In addition, non-GAAP financial measures discussed on this call should be considered in conjunction with, and not as substitute for, our consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP.

Constant currency measures are calculated by applying the June 30th, 2025 foreign exchange rates to all periods presented. Reconciliations of GAAP to non-GAAP measures can be found in our earnings press release.

With that, I'll turn the call over to Alan Trefler, Founder and CEO of Pegasystems.

Thank you, Peter. Thank you, everyone, for joining today's call.

Ken will walk you through the first half financial results shortly. Before he does, I'd like to spend a few minutes discussing some major market shifts that we've seen, and a lot of the tension and confusion in the market, and why we believe it creates significant opportunity for Pega.

The market evolution shows a structural shift in software. We're still in the early stages of the fundamental transformation driven by AI.

Across the industry, organizations are rethinking how software is designed, built, operated, and evolved. For a time, AI providers acted a little bit like drug dealers, offering their products for free or charging $20 a month for what felt like unlimited usage.

To many users, the experience was magical. At the same time, the frontier model providers have been investing literally billions or trillions of dollars building the data centers required to power AI.

Now, they're going to need to seek a return on that investment, making a significant shift in the economics of the market. These companies are under pressure to generate meaningful revenue.

What was once available for free or for all-you-can-eat licensing is priced now by token use, with the attendant anxiety and ambiguity. It's not done.

More of this is coming. The challenge for enterprises is token consumption is opaque until the bill arrives.

Many of the tokens these models consume are reasoning tokens. They don't show up in input or output, but are used by the model itself as it loops through increasingly complex logic.

These reasoning costs can become surprisingly and prohibitively expensive. Now, this cost uncertainty is leading many, many organizations to sort of freeze and try to figure out what's going on and take a more deliberate approach to technology investments as they assess the economic environment.

Decision cycles have lengthened as clients seek greater clarity around technology strategies, AI priorities, and the reality of highly variable token costs. At PegaWorld, we unveiled the solution: offering our clients access to AI agents with no per-token costs.

Our clients' demand for predictable outcomes and predictable costs plays directly and uniquely to Pega's strengths. Our clients see the opportunity to use AI to deploy software faster and more effectively, and to see the power of AI agents to automate work that could not have been automated before.

The value from this technology will not be measured in the lines of code generated or the number of agents deployed. The value comes from better business outcomes with greater speed, control, and efficiency.

For decades, we have delivered software that optimizes and executes the workflows and decisions that run our clients' businesses. AI is making that software much, much easier to design and build, and continuously evolve.

As our tagline puts it: build for change. AI dramatically expands what is possible.

The requirements of enterprise systems remain the same. They need to be predictable, governable, secure, and cost-effective at scale.

Our goal is simple: help our clients avoid AI chaos and the mess that comes from it by delivering predictable outcomes at predictable costs. Our approach is different from the two misguided approaches that others in the market are offering.

The first misguided approach is that enterprises should just use AI agents to code up anything they want, generating millions of lines of code. Now look, Pega has competed against code-it-yourself for decades.

The reality is, it went through an open-source cycle where everything was going to be open-source and people would code it themselves with those technologies and tools. It went through a use inexpensive fingers in India cycle.

The problems with code and our moat against it remains the same. In fact, with AI, the problems with this alternative get worse.

Code is hard to change, it's hard to understand, and AI generates more code with less visibility, making those limitations even more pronounced. Clients report to me that simple things, like changing the label on a field, become really, really hard when that field is buried in millions of lines of code that no human has ever reviewed and wasn't structured for people to really understand.

The code is only readable by coders, and it doesn't fit into a model that business and IT can jointly see. Pega provides that model.

Our system is built on a structured and visual foundation of workflows, business logic, personas, and integrations. These remain transparent, understandable, governable, and adaptable over time.

We represent the logic in business metaphors, like stages and steps and decision rules, that clients can easily understand and change. With the release of Pega Infinity last week, we took a significant step forward with the introduction of Infinity Studio.

Together, Pega GenAI Blueprint and Infinity Studio now create a more complete AI-powered life cycle that helps clients design, build, operate, and then continuously evolve enterprise systems, all in a model that both business and IT can work in. That capability reinforces what has always differentiated Pega: our ability to help enterprises build for change.

In an AI-driven world, that advantage becomes even more valuable. While with Blueprint, we apply powerful AI reasoning at design time, before an application goes into production, enabling our clients to reimagine how they get work done, create better processes, and see them working in an application they can design in minutes.

Blueprint takes in information about a client's business and creates a system built around the scalable structures of workflows, personas, integrations, and decisions. Structure is critical.

In contrast, if clients generate code directly with tools like Claude or Codex, where's the architecture? How is the business logic captured and understood?

Code-first approaches become opaque, complex, difficult to govern, and extremely expensive to change, especially at scale. When we developed and released Blueprint, it really opened up people's eyes to how they could reimagine their businesses.

It brings in our decades of experience, and our Blueprint agents are able to really come up with things better than even the inputs they're given. It's enormously exciting.

I'm constantly having clients tell me this is one of the most novel uses of AI they have seen. There's really nothing else like it out there.

Blueprint enables clients to reimagine their business processes to be better, to see how those processes translate to working systems, and engage with a working system early in the sales cycle. Blueprint is transforming how we engage clients and prospects at the front end of the sales cycle, moving Pega from a conceptual sales process to an experiential and product-led one.

In retrospect, when we started with Blueprint, we really focused on new clients and new applications. We have not yet brought the full power of Blueprint to help existing clients reimagine and rethink their existing Pega applications, for two reasons.

First, we were learning how to use it. Secondly, helping clients reimagine existing systems is, in many ways, a more tricky and complex problem.

Now, with Pega '26, Infinity '26, which we released last week, we've made the power of Blueprint AI available for clients to reimagine and improve their new and existing Pega applications. This release brings Blueprint AI from the design-time use into build and deployment and to evolve using this Infinity Studio capability.

Our completely reimagined builder environment enables our Pega Cloud and client-cloud clients to leverage Blueprint AI to deploy new applications and to improve existing ones. Blueprint AI helps businesses and helps IT leaders reimagine how organizations get work done.

Infinity Studio extends the power of Blueprint AI into the application development and deployment, creating a continuous path from idea to execution. This is especially compelling for our existing clients, who can use Blueprint to modernize and evolve existing Pega applications, helping them reimagine what's possible.

It also is terrific for new clients, who can answer the question: how are they going to continue to evolve after their initial build? Furthermore, we've made the whole Pega development environment available via MCP.

People who are very technically oriented can use Claude Code or OpenAI Codex or any coding agent to be able to initiate their Pega applications. These improvements dramatically lower the barriers to entry, reducing training time and accelerating productivity, and will enable more workflow creation across the enterprise.

Infinity Studio will make it easier for our clients to build and extend their workflows. We launched it last week and will be rolling it out aggressively through the rest of the year.

Infinity Studio is a really big deal for our clients and prospects. I said there were two misguided approaches to AI, and let's talk about the second for a moment.

The second approach says, hey, just use AI agents to reason through every process at run time. Now, people know this approach fraught risk.

Agents built on LLMs don't execute with the consistency that enterprises need for most of their workflows. It also turns out, however, that it can be hugely expensive.

We've got a pack calculator at pega.com that shows you the difference between this and our approach, and it's pretty staggering. Our approach is fundamentally different: use AI extensively at design time through Blueprint AI, and design the workflows and get them right and really make them excellent.

Once you get them right, run them repeatedly at scale, thousands or millions of times, only using the AI selectively in the run-time steps where it makes sense. I like the metaphor of a chef.

A great restaurant doesn't reinvent each dish each and every night, each and every patron. They take the time to design a recipe or set of recipes that work really well at scale.

That's what we do at Blueprint. Then when it comes time to execute the dinner service, the whole kitchen follows the recipe predictably and consistently, tuning it only when needed.

That's our workflow running in production. Clients know how to execute effectively at scale, providing the perfect balance between AI inspiration at design time and AI used consistently at run time.

This also means we're not using up massive amounts of costly reasoning tokens at run time. It's how we are able to offer agentic AI as an uplift to our case-based price with no variable per-token costs.

We use AI selectively for specific and well-defined tasks where it adds value at run time, like summarization or reading documents. Core workflows remain deterministic, predictable in the outcomes they deliver, and efficient in the costs it takes to run them.

This is a key and structural differentiator for us. It's hugely important to help our clients both ensure they deliver the outcomes they want predictably, and to ensure their AI costs are tied to value.

We've taken this power even further. With Infinity '26, every single workflow in Pega, both new and existing, is automatically available through MCP.

That means any agent built on any agent platform can find and invoke a Pega workflow. The workflow instructs the agent to operate predictably and consistently.

Because the workflow does the reasoning for the agent, Pega helps our clients make even agents built outside of Pega more cost-effective. In conclusion, our clients tell us they want to see increased efficiency and better results from AI.

They also, however, want better outcomes, insulation from runaway token costs, and measurable results in increased efficiency and better processes. For much of the work they do, they don't want to re-reason a business process every time it runs.

Instead, our approach really resonates: reimagine with AI, execute predictably, continuously evolve and improve it. This is what Pega delivers, giving clients the ability to design an effective recipe for executing work at design time.

Then, when users request a business outcome, the menu at the restaurant contains the proven recipes that organizations know how to do extremely well at scale, and that are consistent with regulators' needs and the efficiency the organization wants. Clients, I believe, are increasingly recognizing the value of our approach, and we have a strong and differentiated story today.

The clients who saw it at PegaWorld, who I met with extensively, were extremely excited. You can see Infinity '26 yourself in Kerim's keynote, which is available on pega.com.

It's also becoming increasingly clear that while the market is still early in its AI journey, many of the key trends, I think, are moving in our direction. Increasingly, clients are coming to us to ask how they can manage business costs while achieving business value.

As organizations move beyond AI experimentation and try to bring ROI to production deployments, they will avoid approaches that generate massive amounts of brittle code or highly, highly unpredictable economics. We think that these companies will succeed with AI by becoming those that combine innovation with structure, control, and economic discipline.

Some of the things we hear just seem like madness: people talking about trying to control thousands and thousands of independently operating agents. We just don't see how that works.

Candidly, I've talked to a lot of customers who don't see how that would work either. Our approach instead really builds on our tradition of workflows, inspired by AI for way more aggressive design, and the use of AI to do the pieces that it needs to do at run time.

We remain committed to how we help our clients get through the confusion that has been candidly promulgated by so much noise in the market about SaaS-pocalypses and software being dead, etc. I think some software is definitely under threat, unquestionably, but the types of systems we are, to build them in code would be extremely complicated, hard to update, hard to extend.

That built for change is important for our clients. These principles relate to how we are going to work with our customers.

We don't just want to help our customers bring efficiency to their businesses and help our customers run well-managed businesses. We need to also operate our business that way.

We remain committed to getting through the current period of wild confusion, and generating strong free cash flow along the way, regardless of market conditions or how long it takes for the sort of understanding here to stabilize. We will be using and leveraging our AI technology and capabilities to improve our efficiency and create additional operating leverage, and we will temper our spend accordingly vis-à-vis our free cash flow needs.

With that, let me turn it over to Ken to provide more color on our first half. Ken?

Thanks, Alan. The first half of '26 had challenges for three primary reasons.

First, as we explained in February, our renewal portfolio is significantly weighted toward the back half of the year, resulting in a more typical seasonal pipeline pattern. Because a meaningful portion of our net new ACV comes from cross-selling and upselling into our existing client base, fewer renewal opportunities naturally result in fewer expansion opportunities.

Given our typical contract length, renewal timing is inherently a long-term dynamic in our business. Second, as Alan explained, unprecedented change in the software market created significant buyer uncertainty.

Organizations wrestled with fundamental questions about how AI would reshape software development and whether they should build more capabilities themselves. The market entered a token-maxing mindset, where organizations encouraged, even celebrated, token consumption, and then whiplashed to the opposite extreme, where companies sought to tightly monitor and control token usage.

The resulting uncertainty made customers more cautious and contributed to a more confused and longer buying cycle. Third, we didn't execute well enough on our go-to-market change to drive deeper and broader engagement with our clients and prospects.

As part of that effort, we're increasing prospecting activity, expanding executive-level engagement, identifying new workflow and legacy transformation opportunities with not only existing clients, but also strengthening our focus on new logo acquisition. We are also using Blueprint to help shorten sales cycles, powered by the combination of Blueprint and the newly released Infinity Studio in Pega '26.

These are the right changes to improve pipeline quality, conversion, and sales productivity over time. Our progress in the first half was slower than we anticipated, but we remain very confident this is the right approach.

With that context in mind, let me turn to our financial results. Annual contract value growth, or ACV growth, is one of the most important metrics and in our view the best indicator of underlying execution.

That's because ACV growth provides a clearer view of the business momentum than revenue growth in a subscription model. Pega Cloud ACV increased by $165 million as reported year-over-year, growing 22% as reported and in constant currency.

This growth reflects the continued expansion of our cloud business and reinforces the success of the subscription transition we began in 2017. As a result, Pega Cloud remains the fastest-growing and most important component of our subscription model, though growth moderated from 27% at the end of last quarter in constant currency.

We're watching that trend closely and remain focused on improving our broader ACV growth trajectory. Our overall ACV growth rate was offset by decreases in maintenance ACV and subscription license ACV.

As a result, total ACV grew 7% as reported and 8% in constant currency year-over-year. We expect Pega Cloud ACV to continue increasing as a percentage of total ACV over time, and still believe it could ultimately reach approximately 75% of the total.

That mix shift toward Pega Cloud will continue to put pressure on maintenance and subscription license ACV growth in future periods. Over the longer term, however, a greater concentration of Pega Cloud ACV will create a more predictable, higher-quality revenue stream, improve cash flow visibility, and strengthen our ability to compound shareholder value.

While our total ACV growth was below expectations, we continue to operate in a period of significant market disruption. Several software companies have recently noted delays in purchasing patterns, where the business is not going away, but the clients are frozen in the confusion.

It remains difficult for us to assess the magnitude or duration of potential IT spending reallocations and their impacts on software growth. More broadly, clients are still focused on legacy transformation and using and refining their AI strategies, but also governing usage, managing token costs.

Although this is a great long-term trend for us and our value proposition, it still may continue some delay in investment decisions. Moving to cash flow, even with slower ACV growth, the durability of our model is evident in our cash generation.

We generated $288 million of free cash flow in the first half 2026, a record that reflects the strength of our subscription model and our disciplined approach to managing the business. Increasing free cash flow over time is one of the most important measures of value creation and business health.

It also provides strategic flexibility for capital allocation, which then brings me to my next topic. As we discussed during our investor session in June, we intend to deploy a substantial amount of our free cash flow to opportunistic share repurchases.

In the first half of 2026, we repurchased 9 million shares for over $360 million in the open market under the prior authorizations. That cash expenditure represented well over 100% of the free cash flow generated during the same period, and total common shares were reduced by 6 million shares the first half of 2026.

Share repurchases remain a very attractive use of capital and represent a meaningful opportunity to create long-term shareholder value, especially in a disrupted market that we see around SaaS. We remain confident the long-term prospects of the company and our strong cash generation provides us considerable flexibility.

While we're pleased with our capital allocation results, one of the most common questions investors have been asking is, what are we seeing in the demand environment? As we exited the second quarter, we began to see a more balanced discussion emerging around AI economics and deployment costs.

Clients and prospects are increasingly focused on measurable business outcomes, governance, and total cost of ownership, rather than just experimentation alone. This shift favors Pega's differentiated approach and creates an opportunity for us to more effectively communicate our unique value proposition and our approach to AI cost containment.

Let me be clear: Pega does not charge per token. Rather than monetizing per token, our AI monetization strategy is based on the business value that clients create on our platform.

Clients should be rewarded for driving outcome, not penalized for AI usage. Our monetization approach features two key elements.

First, Blueprint makes it easier and faster for clients to create and deploy applications on the Pega platform. Given our case-based pricing model, the more workflows clients run on the platform, the more value that they create, and then the more ACV that we generate.

Second, we apply a case price uplift for advanced AI-powered run-time capabilities, including innovations such as agentic process fabric. This approach aligns our economic interests with our clients' value creation and success.

As clients drive more value from Pega and expand adoption across the enterprise, both parties benefit. Before I conclude, I'd like to provide a few forward-looking thoughts on our business.

As a reminder, we provide annual guidance at the beginning of the year, and we do not issue quarterly guidance or typically update our outlook during the year. Given our back-end loaded renewal portfolio and our slower-than-expected start to the first half of 2026, we definitely have our work cut out for us in the second half.

That said, we expect the market disruption and buyer confusion to remain factors in the near term. I'm optimistic, though, that our ACV growth over the long term will be stronger than our Q2 results would indicate.

I also thought it would be helpful to share that when we model our full-year net new ACV add for 2026, we assumed 1/3 of that add would be in the first half of the year, and 2/3 of that add would be in the second half of the year. We will work hard to recover as much of that first-half shortfall as possible, but it will be very difficult.

The second half requires stronger execution than we delivered in the first half, particularly in expansion activity, new logo contribution, and conversion of our healthy, qualified pipeline. From a mix perspective, now that Pega Cloud ACV is 57% of total ACV and continues to be the fastest-growing element of the business, we expect continued pressure on maintenance and subscription license growth rates as clients migrate to Pega Cloud, as I mentioned a moment ago.

In addition, as more and more buyers move from the experimental phase of AI into the ROI stage, that shift plays to our strengths. As AI costs come under greater scrutiny, our outcome-based pricing model provides a clear and more efficient path for clients to generate and measure return on their AI investments.

As we reiterated at our annual investor session last month, we expect to generate $700 million-plus of free cash flow in 2028. Slower ACV growth in the first half of '26 does not change that objective, but it will require us to re-evaluate certain investment priorities.

Our 2028 free cash flow objective is supported by multiple levers, including cloud scale, continued mix shift, sales productivity, gross margin improvement, and disciplined investment prioritization. We will make appropriate adjustments to ensure that we remain on track to achieve or exceed this target.

Strong free cash flow enables long-term shareholder value creation, and our commitment to the Rule of 40 performance reflects our belief that the world's most valuable companies combine durable subscription growth with disciplined cash generation. In conclusion, we remain optimistic.

Our latest technology enables clients to achieve predictable outcomes at predictable costs at a time when organizations are struggling to justify the economics of token-maxing and broad-based AI experimentation that failed to deliver ROI. Our investments in Blueprint, Infinity Studio, agentic process fabric, and the broader Pega platform are designed to help clients deploy AI at scale within a governed framework that accelerates productivity and business transformation.

We made some critical architectural choices that even if it takes a few quarters to recognize, are going to be game-changing. The idea of design time and run time being respected in their own ways is massively different than the approach of our competitors.

Look at it yourself to appreciate the differentiation and how hard it would be for someone to emulate. We continue to see strong engagement from both new logos and existing clients, growing Blueprint adoption, and increasing interest in solutions that help organizations move from AI experimentation to AI-powered business outcomes.

The market is increasingly rewarding companies that can combine AI, workflow automation, and enterprise transformation within a governed, production-ready platform. Pega is uniquely positioned at the intersection of all of those trends.

While execution remains our top priority for the balance of 2026, our long-term conviction has only strengthened. We remain confident in our market opportunity, confident in our ability to deliver substantially growing free cash flow, and confident in our disciplined approach to balancing growth and profitability, and will sustain strong Rule of 40 performance and create significant long-term value for our shareholders.

With that, operator, can you please open the line for questions?

Hey, great. Thanks for taking the questions this morning.

I guess I wanted to dig in a little bit more on just what it is you are seeing on the demand side. It sounded like exiting 2Q that maybe some of these deals were beginning to unblock and things were getting over the finish line, but can you just maybe give a little bit more clarity on have you seen deals get over the finish line now?

Are the deals that pushed from 2Q, are those starting to close? Just, I guess, how does that make you feel about I guess the broader kind of opportunity for these delays to unthaw into the back half of the year?

We are seeing movement. We went through a period, I would say, early to mid second quarter, in which the level of confusion, look, I've been doing this a long time, I've seen other enormous moments of confusion, but this would rival anything that I've seen.

People just weren't sure what they should be doing. I would say even today there is enormous confusion that is percolating in lots of these organizations, and they're trying to figure out what to do.

They're trying to figure out how this all fits into a future. The reality is, though, these companies have serious things they need to get done.

We've had excellent engagement from customers. The things we announced at PegaWorld, which obviously was just in June, have generated a lot of enthusiasm.

The idea that we have a architecture that is understandable, you can actually understand, hey, big difference between agents that do a lot of their thinking at design time and reuse it. That's something people can internalize and understand.

The fact that we translate that into a no-token-cost model has gotten a lot of candidly excitement and provides real reassurance to these clients that we have a thing to do. I'm seeing things starting to move, but, I'll be honest, in the summer, the third quarters are lousy times for turnaround is just in general.

We are working in, and I have a lot of confidence that what we're doing is the right thing. Candidly, what we did a couple of years ago in choosing this architecture, I think has been enormously vindicated, and customers do see the difference.

In terms of unlocking, yeah, they will be unlocking in the second half. How quickly it will happen, that's, candidly, part of this great uncertainty I think a lot of companies are dealing with.

Okay. That's helpful context around that.

Then on I guess just the investments that you feel like maybe are a little bit more kind of discretionary, or at least to make the $700 million in free cash flow work in a few years, just I guess how is this I guess making you change how you feel about the own investments that need to be made in your business? Or I guess, if rubber meets the road, just what does that look like?

Or how does that maybe take shape or change strategically how you think about the business and the investments that need to be made to grow here?

Look, let me just say, after years of candidly not operating that way, we've really enjoyed the benefits of being a Rule of 40, cash flow generating company. We are committed to doing that.

We have enormous opportunities to change the way we operate and become more efficient. We're seeing that happen, and we're doing that.

We will temper our investments to make sure that we don't go back to that spend culture that I think we probably had more of if you go back a decade. I'll turn it over to Ken, who's going to be the enforcer on this.

I I think Steve, I think what really the the simplest way to think about this is that we have we worked very hard to build the muscle and the discipline in the organization to run as a Rule of 40 company. Based on where our growth trajectory is, we need to always be looking at opportunities to right-size the amount of investment spend that we have based on where we are and our future growth trajectory.

That's a that's a that's just, to me that's just running a good business. The specific opportunity we have ties to a lot of the the opportunity around AI in our own operation, which is areas where we can optimize, where we can not only optimize by leveraging technology, but also optimize by looking at places where we might be able to organize more effectively and be able to get better outcomes by thinking about themes of work that we do that could be better coordinated, and also just quite frankly looking at ways that we can drive efficiency in how we deliver value in all the different parts of the business.

I would not put us, I would not say that any part of our financials are best-in-class and cannot be improved, going from gross margin the whole way through to spend in each of our functional areas. That's really what you should hear from us, is that we're going to continue to run a good business, investing in the right areas and make sure that we're delivering value for shareholders.

We believe Rule of 40 and certainly free cash flow is an important lever in that value creation.

All right. Perfect.

No, makes sense, and thanks for taking the questions.

Thanks, Steve.

Perfect. Thank you.

Ken, you kind of mentioned the three areas that kind of impacted the numbers. We knew about the go-to-market changes as well, and I heard your comments there.

How do I have to think about how much of what we're seeing here now is kind of stuff that the go-to-market changes and the cohort, which is kind of in your control, you can control the controllable, versus the token maxing that we see in the market? How much is in your control really to change what's going on here?

I had one follow-up.

That's a great question. There is a connection between those two themes that I think will make sense to you, which is with the whole AI kind of disruption, and that happened kind of right in the middle of us really pushing harder to grow into new logos, grow into new workflows, into new use cases.

There's a tremendous opportunity with Blueprint to be able to unlock in a much faster and more efficient way opportunity with both our existing clients and new logos. That is a motion that is different than the way that we've operated at Pega over the last, quite frankly, 40 years.

That was a change for us. I think maybe we underestimated some of the ways that we needed to really manage that change internally.

That is a big part of what happened in the first half of the year, is we just didn't move as fast as we would have liked to in terms of making that change. We believe that is a tremendous value unlock, even in a confused market, because there is lots of opportunity where people are looking at solving this problem with a deterministic workflow approach and certainly with the best platform to do that in Pega.

I think there is a relation there, but a lot of this is in our control.

Yeah. Perfect.

That's good to hear. Then the other things on the guidance, a common pattern would be, look, you had a tougher first half to kind of de-risk the guidance somewhat.

You talked to that a little bit, Ken, but I'm still slightly confused why not use this opportunity? Thank you.

We've stayed away from the pattern, whether you agree with it or not, or whether others agree with it or not, we've stayed away from the pattern of being in this constant kind of chasing, trying to re-guide and guide and re-guide quarters. Our business is a business cycle that doesn't happen in a 90-day period typically, we kind of try to stay away from that.

I think what we're trying to give some color to is that we had a lot of work to do in the back half of the year in the existing model, right? 2/3 of our business was going to be in the back half of the year.

That's a good working set for us to go after. It's just going to be very challenging to make up the gap that we already experienced in the first half.

I hope that gives some color around how we're thinking about the potential range of outcomes. To be honest with you, I think re-guiding to a number in an uncertain environment, I don't think it's super helpful for anybody, including us.

We want the number to be as big as possible, obviously. I think that helpful guide of we originally said 1/3, 2/3, certainly we have significantly underachieved on the 1/3 in the first half, and if you just assume we can't make that up, but we will still work hard to achieve what we originally thought in the back half, that's hopefully some color to help you get a view of that, Raimo.

Perfect. Thank you.

Good luck.

You're welcome.

Hi, Ken. Hi, Alan.

Thanks for taking my questions here. Would love to just get a little bit more context on some of the deal elongation commentary.

I know you gave kind of that commentary of expecting to add 1/3 and 2/3 of that new ACV for the year in the first half and second half, but would love to just get maybe more context, maybe if you could kind of quantify the magnitude of deals that might have slipped from 2Q into the second half or beyond that, and are these deals that were kind of pushed out, are they concentrated in any specific vertical or geos? Just any context there would be helpful.

Let me start just by saying one thing. The thing that we're not seeing, which I think we view as a positive, is what we're not seeing is clients not wanting to engage.

Second thing we're not seeing is opportunities go away because a client says, 'Oh, we're not doing that. We're only going to use AI.

We're not doing that. We've chosen not to do any transformation,' for example.

We don't think that the market is actually deciding the transformation is not important, but a lot of those pipeline deals in Q2 just didn't close, right? They elongated.

When that will unlock and when that will correct, Devin, I think is a very hard thing to predict, but I think the thing that I would be most worried about that I'm personally not seeing is deals just go away, right? Pipeline deals just go away.

We're not seeing that. We're just start seeing a little bit of a thawing buyer dynamic in the market.

Alan, any...

No, I think that's accurate. People are just confused.

It's really almost a max confusion moment. It's starting to make more sense.

Candidly, it was wonderful that earlier this year, suddenly tokens started costing something. People realized that they had an economic decision to make here, because before that, it was all magic and no expense.

Candidly, I think we have a compelling story, even in a free token competitor environment, because we offer the predictability. You need a level of determinism.

I don't see anyone else out there who's able to use AI aggressively to be able to redesign and reimagine the business, and then use AI selectively to make you deliver outcomes at scale at reasonable cost. We're going to work really hard to push 26.1 out to a lot of new customers and have them get hands-on with that, probably faster than we've done historically.

I think that will actually help us unlock customers as we enter the third and fourth quarter.

Got it. Appreciate the additional context there.

Then maybe just a quick follow-up on the free cash flow side. Just given potential of a kind of more muted ACV outlook for the year, can you just kind of speak to the confidence in delivering the $575 million outlook for the free cash flow side?

Does that kind of guidance hinge on the ACV growth to accelerate for the year? Just any color there?

Thanks.

We certainly would expect ACV growth to accelerate from where it is now through the back half of the year, but certainly any ACV shortfall puts pressure on our ability to hit that 575 for this year. I definitely wouldn't suggest that the ACV landing spot and the free cash flow for the current year are completely unrelated or disconnected.

There's certainly a relation there. There are decisions that we make around spending that are in-year decisions that we certainly will be much more thoughtful about given the first half performance, but we still feel like the cash flow durability is strong, but I would be remiss to suggest that the ACV shortfall wouldn't have some cash flow impact associated with it.

Okay. Got it.

Thank you.

Oh, great. Thank you.

Hey, Alan. As I think back to your June 8th remarks, I think you had a pretty good sense this was coming, right?

Because you made a comment back then that's very similar to what you're saying now. You said there's still an enormous amount of confusion.

It's going to take months and quarters for the confusion to abate. What were you seeing at the beginning of June?

Cuz you still had 3 weeks to go in the quarter. Was there a really big deal that pushed or what made you suspect this was going to be a problem so early?

I'm not sure it was so early. The reality is, when you were talking to customers after the whole SaaS-pocalypse narrative, people were wondering, well, what do we do?

Right? Should we be writing this ourselves?

One of the interesting challenges for us is that, particularly since we sell to a lot of very large organizations, and to, for example, banks. Those have been primary targets of the people trying to get customers to become agentic, right?

Everybody's talking to them about that. They hear it all the time.

You can just tell they're massively confused with what they hear originally from companies like Microsoft and Salesforce, and then of course, recently, just the overwhelming drumbeat of Anthropic and OpenAI and others coming with their coding solutions. What I'm encouraged by is, as recently as last week with the heads of technology for a very large financial institution, going in and them saying, 'We really don't want to be in a position to maintain all this code.'

The amount of code that this stuff generates and the lack of sort of sensible structure around it. Somebody just needs to look at a Pega system and say, 'Hey, I can understand this.

When I go and I want to change something, it makes a difference.' That's what we need to build on.

It's not unreasonable that everybody is trying to re-evaluate things when you think of just all the noise that hit. I think, Patrick, a lot of that hit really in Q2.

All right, great. That's really helpful.

Can I ask, you mentioned OpenAI and Anthropic and Salesforce and Microsoft. Is Sierra starting to pop up?

Is Decagon starting to pop up? Are those types of vendors contributing to the confusion for your customers?

Look, Sierra's been out there for a while, and customers have been experimenting with them. I've yet to see the sort of groundswell that I think was promised in some setting for some of those.

I think it does present some confusion opportunities to the customers, because I think organizations are unsure. Should I do a Sierra?

Should I do a workflow? Should I do a direct OpenAI or Claude sort of interface?

Everybody is in this party shouting at the customers. In that environment, it's just incredibly noisy.

What I'm going to say is that we have a distinctive story, and I've never been happier that we made some of the decisions we made 3 years ago.

All right, great. Thank you very much.

Thanks, Pat.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. Ken, given that this year is more weighted toward the back half of the year, and given that some of the deals in the pipeline didn't close in 2Q, what is giving you confidence that the current delay in purchase decisions is just temporary rather than kind of a more durable shift in spending priorities?

I think that's a very fair question. I don't know that I would say I have complete clarity to refute the suggestion that this may go on longer.

What does give me confidence is our pipeline is growing nicely, and our late-stage pipeline is very strong over last year. We're not seeing clients not want to engage.

The last point I would make is that the pipeline and the discussions that we have are companies that are thinking about AI priorities as well, and they're still kind of engaging with us in very healthy conversations around how we can help their transformation needs. It looks like the activity that we're seeing is, I would say, real, that it's real pipe.

Okay. The question you're asking about how do I know for sure that the confusion won't continue for a prolonged period of time, I would say I don't think anybody in the market can guarantee that.

I would say we feel confident that the activity is rising, the pipeline is strong, clients are real, we know these clients in many cases, and our engagement around Blueprint has been a real big difference maker for us in building that. Right now it's just down to us continuing to execute.

I think somewhat of this is you just as a software company through all this confusion, you just need to grind through it. You just need to work through and just stay focused on your objectives.

I just think we're in that kind of market right now.

We have the benefit of having real structural differentiation. I think it can be hard for people who don't want to spend the time digging in and looking, but if you do, if you actually go look at the alternative approaches that we have and a company who's either writing massive amounts of code or generating dozens or thousands of agents, there's a big difference when you've got workflows at the heart of it.

To be blunt, we are the best workflow company out there by far.

That's fair. Thank you.

Then, Ken, would you say that renewals are holding up better than net new business, or are you seeing pressure on both?

I would say the net new business and the expansion with existing clients is where some of the kind of freezing happened, I think, in the first half of the year.

Great. Thank you.

Yep.

Hi, Alan and Ken. Thanks for taking my questions.

We've heard that Blueprint helps cut your average sales cycle roughly in half, which seemingly supported a material reacceleration in your revenue over the last year or two. Can you talk about the significance of Infinity Studio '26, if you think that has the potential to have a similar effect on your implementation timelines?

Do you feel, as we think about that, that dynamic, alongside some of the frozen, but not lost, deals you've talked about, provide any kind of spring-loading of demand you feel like you have heading into late '26 or into '27?

I think that's a good question. Bringing the Blueprint AI capabilities into Infinity Studio is a really, really big deal.

What we had done originally was focus very much on how do you completely reimagine the design process, and candidly that was a sufficiently hard problem, it deserved our focus. What it meant is that after somebody wanted to begin using the system, the whole concept of building for change required you to return to a more antiquated environment.

Customers told us, 'No, no, we don't want to do that. We want to be able to continue in this sort of accelerated mode of thinking and inspiration.'

I think having Infinity Studio be available with Blueprint AI technology in it is going to be a really, really big deal. Candidly, I think it will do more than halve the build and delivery experience.

I think it's going to completely change it, much in the same way that Blueprint did. We're very excited about that.

Candidly, it's been in the market now for a week. We're going to get some real experience.

I'm sure we'll talk about it at the next call.

Thanks. Wanted to ask if you could quickly provide some thoughts on the proliferation of open source and open-weight models, SaaS evolving space.

What implications if any you believe...

I think it's actually sort of great and inevitable. The reality is that these model makers are going to find that they've become largely commoditized.

It's an interesting thing to see how quickly that is happening.

Okay. Thanks, Alan.

Thank you, and obviously it's a challenging moment. Last week, actually, we opened the NASDAQ to celebrate our 30th anniversary.

This being my 120th earnings call, frightening to say, we've seen a lot. We've seen a lot of technology change.

We've seen a lot of market changes, a lot of market shifts. I just want to reassure people that I think we have a really good understanding of how to react strongly, but smartly, and we are going to do that.

I appreciate your support. Thank you very much.