Thank you, operator. Good morning and welcome to Hudbay's first quarter 2026 results conference call.

Hudbay's financial results were issued this morning and are available on our website at www.hudbay.com. A corresponding PowerPoint presentation is available in the investor events section of our website, and we encourage you to refer to it during this call.

Our presenter today is Peter Kukielski, Hudbay's President and Chief Executive Officer. Accompanying Peter for the Q&A portion of the call will be Eugene Lei, our Chief Financial Officer, and Andre Lauzon, our Chief Operating Officer.

Please note that comments made on today's call may contain forward-looking information and this information, by its nature, is subject to risks and uncertainties, and as such, actual results may differ materially from the views expressed today. For further information on these risks and uncertainties, please consult the company's relevant filings on SEDAR+ and EDGAR.

These documents are also available on our website. As a reminder, all amounts discussed on today's call are in US dollars unless otherwise noted.

Now, I'll pass the call over to Peter Kukielski.

Thank you, Candace. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us on today's call.

We've had a great start to the year, achieving several key operational, financial, and growth milestones. Hudbay delivered another quarter of record revenue, record adjusted EBITDA, and record adjusted earnings in the first quarter.

This was driven by steady operating performance, our focus on cost control, and the continued benefit from margin expansion with our unique mix of copper and gold exposure. Our leading operating cost performance resulted in record low consolidated cash costs in the first quarter, which contributed to continued strong free cash flow generation.

With the strong performance in the quarter, all our operations are on track to achieve 2026 production and cost guidance. Building on our commitment to prudent balance sheet management, we ended the quarter with over $1 billion in cash and cash equivalents, benefiting from $420 million received from Mitsubishi for their initial cash contribution on closing of the Copper World joint venture transaction in January.

Our enhanced financial flexibility has positioned us well to continue advancing the development of Copper World, reinvest in high-return opportunities at each of our operations, and de-risk the Cactus project upon completion of the acquisition of Arizona Sonoran to deliver attractive growth and maximize long-term risk-adjusted returns at each of our operations for stakeholders. Slide 3 provides an overview of our first quarter operational and financial performance.

The first quarter demonstrated strong operating performance with higher mill throughput across the three operations compared to the previous quarter, delivering consolidated copper production of 28,000 tonnes and consolidated gold production of 62,000 ounces. We achieved record quarterly revenues of $757 million and record adjusted EBITDA of $422 million in the first quarter.

Cash generated from operating activities was $211 million, remaining relatively consistent with the fourth quarter as a result of favorable changes in non-cash working capital. First quarter adjusted net earnings was a record of $159 million, or 40 cents per share, reflecting higher realized metal prices and strong cost control across the operations, resulting in higher gross profit margins.

During the first quarter, we continued to demonstrate industry-leading cost performance, delivering record low consolidated cash costs of -$1.80 per pound of copper and sustaining cash costs of $0. This incredible cost performance was partially driven by higher gold byproduct credits, reflecting the benefits of Hudbay's unique commodity diversification.

Turning to slide 4, Hudbay has delivered several quarters of significant free cash flow generation as a result of steady operating performance, expanding margins from strong copper and gold exposure, and our cost control efforts. With our enhanced balance sheet and diversified free cash flow generation, we are well positioned to fund our attractive growth pipeline.

Our cost control efforts are focused on navigating emerging external cost pressures, such as higher fuel prices and short-term labor challenges. We have not experienced any disruption to fuel availability, and have been able to mitigate the cost pressures through initiatives to further improve throughput and enhance operating efficiencies.

We are well insulated from external cost pressures due to our diversified platform with significant byproduct credits from gold production and the polymetallic nature of our ore deposits. While most of our revenues continue to be derived from copper, revenue from gold represents a meaningful portion of total revenues with 39% of gross revenues from gold in the first quarter.

After accounting for our sustaining capital investments, but before growth investments, we generated $102 million in free cash flow during the quarter, bringing our trailing 12-month free cash flow generation to approximately $400 million. As mentioned earlier, we ended the first quarter with over a billion dollars in cash and cash equivalents, and as of March 31st, our total liquidity was $1.4 billion.

Our net debt at the end of the quarter was nearly zero, bringing our net debt to EBITDA ratio to its lowest point in more than a decade. Consistent with our prudent balance sheet management and focus on cost of capital, following the quarter, we repaid our outstanding 2026 senior unsecured notes on maturity on April 1st.

We used a combination of cash on hand and a $272 million draw on our low-cost revolving credit facilities. After giving effect to this repayment, Hudbay's total liquidity decreased by $473 million to $957 million.

This continues to provide us with significant financial flexibility as we advance Copper World towards a sanctioning decision later this year. Turning to slide 5, the Peru operations continued to demonstrate steady operating performance with production and costs in line with expectations.

The operations produced 21,000 tonnes of copper, 9,000 ounces of gold, 530,000 ounces of silver, and 380 tonnes of molybdenum during the first quarter. Production of copper and gold were lower than the fourth quarter due to the depletion of the higher-grade Pampacancha ore in late 2025.

Mill throughput levels averaged approximately 90,700 tonnes per day in the first quarter of 2026, achieving a new quarterly record. The team's efforts to increase mill throughput align with the Peru Ministry of Energy and Mines regulatory change to allow mining companies to operate up to 10% above permitted levels.

On March 6th, Hudbay received a permit approval to increase annual mill throughput capacity to 31.1 million tonnes from 29.9 million tonnes, setting a new base for the 10% permitted allowance. We continue to advance the installation of pebble crushers later this year to further increase mill throughput rates in the second half of 2026, and we are on track to achieve 2026 production guidance for all metals in Peru.

First quarter cash costs in Peru were 70 cents per pound of copper, a 23% increase compared to the fourth quarter due to lower byproduct credits, offset by lower profit sharing, lower power costs, and lower treatment and refining charges. Cash costs in the quarter outperformed the low end of the annual guidance range as a result of strong operating cost performance and temporarily higher gold byproduct sales from Pampacancha, despite emerging external cost pressures.

We are well positioned to achieve the full-year cost guidance range in Peru. During the quarter, Constancia was recognized as the safest open-pit operation in Peru during the National Mining Safety Contest for our performance in 2025.

This reflects our company's unwavering commitment to safety and validates Constancia's compliance with the highest operational safety and regulatory standards. Moving to our Manitoba operations on slide 6, the first quarter demonstrated strong operational agility in mitigating lower equipment utilization and labor availability at the Lalor mine, while continuing to prioritize gold ore feed for the New Britannia mill.

This strategy successfully maintained strong gold production in the first quarter, supported by higher mill recoveries compared to the fourth quarter of 2025. Our Manitoba operations produced 48,000 ounces of gold, 2,500 tonnes of copper, 5,000 tonnes of zinc, and 213,000 ounces of silver in the quarter.

Production of gold was higher than in the fourth quarter due to higher gold recoveries and higher mill throughput, while all other metals were lower, primarily due to lower grades. Production in the second half of 2026 is expected to be higher than the first half of 2026 due to grade sequencing and higher ore output from Lalor.

With solid operating results in the first quarter, we are on track to achieve 2026 production guidance for all metals in Manitoba. The Lalor mine hoisted an average of 3,900 tonnes of ore per day in the first quarter, strategically prioritizing gold zones to secure optimal feed for the New Britannia mill.

Total ore mined was lower than the prior quarter because of lower effective utilization of equipment due to reduced workforce availability. This was offset by successfully onboarding nearly 80 new employees as recruitment and upskilling of employees are underway to increase proficiency of frontline employees.

The New Britannia mill averaged approximately 2,000 tonnes per day in the first quarter and benefited from continuous improvement initiatives to unlock future throughput capacity. Gold recoveries of 90% at the New Britannia mill reflect ongoing optimization efforts.

Similarly, the Stall mill achieved improved gold recoveries of 73% in the first quarter, reflecting process optimization and enhanced gold recovery initiatives. The 1901 deposit delivered 11,000 tonnes of development ore in the first quarter.

The team continues to advance haulage and exploration drifts to further delineate the ore body and support ongoing infrastructure projects. Looking ahead, we plan to prioritize exploration, definition drilling, ore body access, and establish critical infrastructure at 1901 in preparation for full production in 2027.

Manitoba gold cash costs in the first quarter were $408 per ounce, outperforming the low end of the guidance range. We are well positioned to achieve our 2026 cash cost guidance range.

In British Columbia, we continue to focus on advancing our multi-year optimization plans, achieving significant milestones in both mining productivity and project permitting in the first quarter, and remain on track to deliver the benefits of the stripping program and unlock higher-grade ore later this year. As shown on slide 7, Copper Mountain produced 4,800 tonnes of copper, 5,200 ounces of gold, and 43,000 ounces of silver in the first quarter, in line with our guidance and planned mine sequencing.

Production was supported by higher mill throughput, offset by lower grades compared to the fourth quarter. We remain on track to achieve our 2026 production guidance expectations for all metals in British Columbia, with higher production expected in the second half of the year as milling improvements take effect.

Mining activities reached a record total material movement of over 25 million tonnes in the first quarter, driven by an optimized mining sequence in the Main Pit and increased contributions from the North Pit. This ramp-up was supported by the successful commissioning of a new production loader in January.

To further bolster the equipment fleet and add to this momentum, a new shovel has been recently commissioned. Milling throughput benefited from the completion of the second SAG mill and the mill optimization initiatives implemented in late 2025, resulting in increased mill throughput in the first quarter of 2026.

The second SAG mill achieved increased throughput in the quarter and averaged 10,000 tonnes per day in March. The primary SAG mill continued to operate under a reduced load and is being rigorously monitored prior to the head replacement scheduled for late June and into July.

The mill remains on track to achieve its permitted capacity of 50,000 tonnes per day in the second half of 2026. British Columbia cash costs were lower than the prior quarter, delivering cash costs of $2.41 per pound of copper as a result of higher gold byproduct credits and resolving the unplanned maintenance downtime issues experienced in the prior quarter.

First quarter cash costs were within the guidance range, and despite emerging external cost pressures, we remain on track to achieve 2026 cash cost guidance in British Columbia. During the quarter, the New Ingerbelle project reached a major milestone in February with the receipt of the Mines Act and Environmental Management Act amended permits from provincial regulators.

The New Ingerbelle project supports continued copper production, increased gold production, and further mine life extensions. The project is designed to access higher-grade mineralization while improving operational efficiency with a stripping ratio approximately three times lower than current mining areas.

With these permit approvals, we are advancing critical infrastructure required for the expansion. This includes the construction of an access road, a bridge across the Similkameen River, and the development of an east haul road link to New Ingerbelle with existing operations.

A large drill program was initiated during the first quarter at New Ingerbelle to improve resource definition and expansion. We are pleased to receive the news this week that the BC government has added the New Ingerbelle project to the province's list of priority resource projects.

This list highlights the acceleration of major projects that strengthens economic growth, support resource development, and create jobs and long-term value. Turning to slide 8, we announced our annual mineral reserve and resource update along with an improved 3-year production outlook during the quarter.

We extended Snow Lake's mine life by 4 years to 2041, maintained Constancia's mine life to 2040, and extended Copper Mountain's mine life by 2 years to 2045. Consolidated copper production is expected to average 147,000 tonnes per year over the next 3 years, representing a 24% increase from 2025.

This growth is driven by higher expected copper production in British Columbia from the mill throughput ramp-up in the second half of 2026, higher grades in British Columbia in 2027 from the completion of the accelerated stripping program, and higher expected mill throughput in Peru starting in the second half of 2026. Consolidated gold production is expected to average 243,000 ounces per year over the next 3 years, reflecting continued strong production in Manitoba and the expected contribution from New Ingerbelle in British Columbia starting in 2028.

We have already made significant progress in advancing many of our corporate and strategic objectives so far this year, and we anticipate many more key catalysts to come from our portfolio of long-life assets in Tier 1 jurisdictions, as shown on slide 9. Our prudent balance sheet management, strong financial flexibility, significant free cash flow generation from strong exposure to higher copper and gold prices, and continued margin expansion has positioned us to be able to advance generational growth investments across the portfolio.

In Peru, we deliver higher mill throughput in the second half of the year as we complete the installation of two pebble crushers, which will grow copper production in 2027 and 2028. We also continue to progress exploration plans in Peru, including at the María Reyna and Caballito properties, to provide long-term growth potential at Constancia.

In Manitoba, we continue to advance optimization initiatives and exploration efforts to demonstrate an enhanced production profile and expanded mine life. Exploration activities are underway at the 1901 deposit as we advance towards production in 2027, and an expanded exploration program at Talbot is focused on upgrading mineral resources to reserves and expanding the deposit footprint at depth.

In British Columbia, we expect to continue to see operational improvements in the second half of the year as we complete our optimization initiatives and advance this operation towards its free cash flow inflection point later this year. Following the receipt of the New Ingerbelle permits earlier this year, we have commenced construction of critical infrastructure for the development of the deposit to access the higher-grade mineralization and drive further cash flow growth starting in 2028.

We have also launched the largest exploration program at New Ingerbelle to further increase mine life extension potential. On slide 10, during the first quarter, we made significant steps towards enhancing our United States copper growth pipeline.

At Copper World, as I mentioned earlier, we announced the closing of the Mitsubishi joint venture transaction, establishing a long-term strategic relationship with a premier partner. The initial $420 million in cash proceeds will be used to directly fund the remaining presanctioning costs and the initial project development costs following a sanctioning decision later this year.

The feasibility activities at Copper World are well underway, with the DFS progressing above 85% completion at the end of March and remaining on track for completion in mid-2026. In March, we announced the acquisition of Arizona Sonoran, establishing a major copper hub in southern Arizona with the addition of the Cactus project to our existing Arizona business.

This transaction further strengthens our position as a premier Americas-focused copper company, enhances our US growth pipeline, and creates significant operational efficiencies and regional synergies with the staged development of Copper World and Cactus. The transaction has received strong shareholder support, and it is expected to close in the second quarter of 2026.

We have also commenced prefeasibility study activities at our Mason copper project in Nevada. We expect the study to be completed in 2027.

While Mason isn't expected to come into production until after Copper World and Cactus, its larger production base will position it as the third largest copper mine in the US. As we continue to advance all of these attractive growth initiatives across the portfolio, we remain committed to prudently allocating capital to the highest risk-adjusted return opportunities to deliver significant value for stakeholders.

Concluding on slide 11, our focus on demonstrating continued operational excellence while prudently advancing our many organic growth opportunities will deliver significant copper production growth. Over the next 3 years, we expect to increase production by 24% through attractive brownfield investments, while continuing to advance our attractive US pipeline to meaningfully expand annual copper production levels.

By the end of the decade, we expect to increase our annual copper production by more than 70% to approximately 250,000 tonnes with Copper World. With the staged development of Cactus and Mason to follow, we have a pathway to 500,000 tonnes of copper by the middle of the next decade.

The most compelling part of this industry-leading copper growth profile is that our growth assets are low-risk, low-capital-intensity projects located in some of the best mining jurisdictions in the world, and we have the team, the balance sheet, and strong financial plan to deliver this pipeline. This is largely driven by our diversified operating platform with significant exposure to complementary gold and our expanding margins.

I have no doubt that our continued focus on delivery and execution will continue to drive significant value for all our stakeholders. With that, we are pleased to take your questions.

Thanks, operator, and good morning. Thanks for taking my question.

Peter and Eugene, there's been a lot of work being done at Copper World on long-lead items ahead of the definitive feasibility study, and just wondering, do you have set a goal for how much of the revised budget by the time sanctioning does come will, say, be locked in, contracted and committed? I'm just trying to get a sense of how much work can be done ahead of time to manage inflationary pressures.

Thanks, Ralph. Great question.

Look, I, we certainly will lock in a significant amount of the key equipment. For example, we already have pricing on fleet, with the opportunity to lock in fleet pricing right now.

We have pricing from vendors for primary equipment that we are going to procure, and we're ensuring that we have space in the production facilities right now. I would say between the issue of the DFS and FID, we will lock in pricing on all of that equipment.

Andre, any comments you might have in addition?

No, I agree on the long-lead, and there are some also critical path items that we've been moving along. We started construction of our water line.

We've taken some initial blasts, we're pioneering our haul roads as we speak. Those are already in our budget for the year, and but like Peter said, that the big ones are already in place.

Ball mills, SAG mills, all those costing things are coming forth.

Ralph, if I could just add one more. You will recall that when we announced the joint venture transaction last August that we increased the budget in 2025 for long-lead items.

We've, we didn't just react to this today, we've been thinking about this for well over a year. We've been placing orders, we've been thinking about getting ourselves ready for the FID decision well over a year in advance.

Great. Thank you.

That's very helpful. Maybe as a follow-up, a point of clarification, Peter, on the LSIB judicial review, that this is a process that is actually attracted to the regulatory government process itself that sits outside of Hudbay, and are you needing to have a legal strategy around this to preserve the 2028 timeline for New Ingerbelle?

That's a

great question, Ralph again. In March this year, the LSIB submitted an application for judicial review of the regulatory decisions to grant the permit amendment.

We remain very confident in the integrity and the robustness of that regulatory process that led to the issuance of the permit amendment, and we believe that the court will uphold the decision on that award. At the same time, we remain committed to working with the LSIB in a respectful and constructive manner to try to resolve their concerns through the mechanisms that were agreed to by the parties in the participation agreement.

It's their issue's not with us, it's with the government, and we have a constructive relationship with them, and we'll ensure that we continue to drive that relationship.

Great. Yeah.

Thank you for that clarity and for your answers.

Hi, team. Thanks for the call today.

Can I just ask a bit more following up on that question from Ralph just on the CapEx at Copper World? Eugene, how much can you lock up in the next sort of 12 months or so in terms of dollars?

Are we talking 20 to 30% of the CapEx spend you can fix in the next sort of periods? Is that a reasonable estimate?

I guess my question is we've seen a zinc project nearby this week materially lift CapEx, and while part of that is scope change, how can we get meaningful conviction that in 12 months that you guys can avoid that risk, I guess?

A lot of careful planning, and I think we've had a lot of time to think about this project over the years, and the feasibility study for this project was completed a decade ago. We have a certain amount of equipment already in storage and obviously not subject to cost inflation.

In terms of the actual percentage in dollars, I think we're still working on the final estimate in the DFS, and we don't know that number yet. We have been very clear that we expect there to be some cost inflation and escalation related to the final CapEx number from the prefeasibility number that was released 3 years ago.

As there has been inflation, but that 3-years-ago number was post, I'll call it, the biggest wave of inflation post-COVID. We are not expecting a blowout in terms of capital.

We are 85% done with the feasibility study. We'll release that likely in the third quarter just midyear as expected with an FID to follow.

We don't have any further clarity or any guidance on the actual guidance number of the CapEx number at this moment.

I would add, George, it's Peter, that we're following an integrated project delivery system which incorporates a bunch of the contractors and engineers in the overall project management structure. The development of the estimates that we have will, in no small measure, include their estimates of their own contributions.

The constructors and engineers we're using have actually participated in several of the projects that have been developed in the US recently, and so they will have a window or deep insight into the evolution of costs over the last couple of years in any case, and that will be reflected in the definitive feasibility study.

To what the original question around percentages, it's tough, Eugene said, but we do have insights in terms of the fleet, and if you recall from the prefeasibility study, the fleet's 10 to 15% of the overall cost, and those numbers that we're receiving are in line with our estimates. That's a good sign to start.

You'll recall this project's not, it's one of the lowest capital intensity projects in the copper space, and so it's not subject to some of the larger cost blowouts we've seen in this in the sector. It's not at altitude.

It's actually 26 miles from Tucson, and so it's some of the inherent infrastructure challenges that have plagued some of the other builds do not apply to this project as much. We're confident that there'll be a very robust economic case for this project as evidenced by Mitsubishi joining up at the PFS level a few months ago.

Okay. Yeah.

No, that's helpful, guys. Thanks.

Then pivoting slightly, and my line dropped for 2 minutes earlier, I might have missed this, but at Cactus, when will we get an updated PFS with Hudbay's sort of overlaid view and perspectives post transaction closing? Could that be by year-end, or is it still going to be sometime next year?

Also, what's the latest on the permit amendments too, please?

Sure, I'll take that. The vote's still to come in a couple of weeks.

We are quite excited about the project. We've met the teams.

We're very pleased with the quality of the teams that are currently working for Cactus, and excited for them to be part of the team. I think the next step once the vote goes through is to sit with the teams and really regroup around There's lots of synergies with Copper World and our view of what we were thinking when we looked at the acquisition and getting their understanding as well.

That's going to go into next year. It's not a year-end thing.

I think realistically it's into 2027 for sure. In terms of the permitting, the teams are progressing with the permitting as stated and they're having discussions locally with the county.

The permitting and the revisiting of that is on track and moving forward, and we're supportive of them in doing that. The synergies around looking at, what does it look like, obviously they're looking at fleet.

We just come off of negotiating a large fleet for Copper World. They're not privy to that information once we go through that.

I think there's lots of opportunities for Cactus and when we look at it all together. By the end of the year, I think it would be really rushed.

I think it's definitely into next year, for sure.

Okay. Thanks, guys.

All the best. Thanks.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. Maybe just any color on input cost pressures or supply constraints that you're seeing.

I don't think I saw anything in the presentation or in the press release. If you could just comment on that, that would be helpful.

Thanks.

I can take that. I assume Fahad, you're referring to the current fuel and fuel prices and the like.

I think I just want to say that from Hudbay's standpoint, we're fairly well insulated by these emerging cost pressures. As you saw, we held costs very well in the first quarter, and while the prices for oil were not yet elevated, our operations are minimally affected.

In Peru, about $10 increase in the price of oil for barrels, about a 4% or 4 cent cash cost increase per pound of copper. In BC, given the heavy stripping that we're doing, that's a little higher.

It's about 10 cents per pound produced. If you think about oil today, and if, for example, current prices were to hold, oil is about 50% higher than our original budgeted amount for the year, and that would result in about a $45 million sort of hit to cash flow if oil prices were to persist for at this level for the rest of the year for the whole year.

We have a natural hedge of gold in our portfolio that more than insulates that cost. Gold is about 20% higher than what we budgeted for the year, and so the impact, if these gold prices were to hold for the rest of the year, the impact of that would be close to $200 million.

When in terms of a net effect of what we have with the gold that we produce for our portfolio is a natural hedge against, let's call it larger cost inputs like oil. We feel very well positioned.

Fahad, I would also add that, one of our primary cash flowing assets, which is Manitoba, is largely insulated from the effects of oil price, since we use very, very little oil in Manitoba at all. We use, most of our underground equipment is driven by is electrically driven or battery driven in any case.

Great. That really clear.

Then maybe just switching gears to the growth profile. Can you remind us in terms of the sequencing between Cactus and potentially Copper World Phase 2, how you're thinking about that, assuming that those copper permits happen at some point, and you have the you're in the beneficial situation of being able to select between the two?

For sure. I think that what makes absolute sense is that we progress Cactus in sequence with Copper World, because there's a lot of synergies between the two projects.

As Andre mentioned, we would continue with the updating the prefeasibility study of Cactus, move from that into definitive feasibility, get all the permits in place, so that once Copper World is in production, Phase 1, we would be able to move into the construction or phase the construction of Cactus and bring that online subsequent to Copper World. Now Phase 2, we would not want to apply for permits until such time as Phase 1 is in operation, because we don't want to get things mixed up.

If you imagine it's going to take several years in order to get the permit for Phase 2, it makes absolute sense to progress Phase Cactus, and then Phase 2 would come in after Cactus came in.

Yeah. Cactus is a little different than Copper World.

Copper World, the majority, a lot of the CapEx is around building a facility and infrastructure. At Cactus, it's very much the inverse of that.

It's more of a stripping exercise leading in to building an SX-EW plant, and so very very low risk in terms of the execution of moving material. It's just about the purchasing of the fleet and execution of the plan.

There is, like Peter said, there's a timing element, and but I think there it almost naturally fits. It almost naturally fits.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thanks. Hi, good morning, guys.

Staying just on that whole sequencing theme between Copper World Phase 1 and Cactus, just given what's been going on with sulfur and sulfuric acid pricing, demand for US-made cathode, and then just the timing of the sequencing, has anything changed in your thinking as it relates to the feasibility study around the Albion facility?

Great question. I think nothing has really changed, except that we continue the DFS is a continuation of It's exactly the same as the PFS pretty well.

What we could do is during the update of the PFS for Cactus, we could take a look at the sequencing or the timing for the development of the Albion facility. It would be something that we'd look at as part of the Cactus prefeas, rather than the work that we're doing on Copper World right now.

To build on that is the other project in Manitoba where we're looking at getting the gold out of the Flin Flon tailings, we're progressing quite well with the studies on that. There's still more to go, but that one of the byproducts there is also sulfur.

Molten sulfur and sulfur products, and so there's lots of optionality in our portfolio to produce sulfur that would benefit the Cactus project where ultimately what you're trying to get is the acid for the heap leach. Whether it's advancing Albion, it's what you suggest, it could be about producing a lot more gold in Manitoba and doing the other.

We'll evaluate all of those at the right time.

Understood. Then once the feasibility study drops midyear, outside of the financing package, what are some of the other gating items to get you to FID?

Obviously getting our partner on board. The partner would have to, but the partner's already onboarded in many respects, but they have their own internal approval process that we need to respect, and so there'll be some time between the completion of definitive feasibility study and the final investment decision, irrespective of what our partner needs.

They're actively working with us. We're meeting with them.

They absolutely don't want to be a barrier. We're all aligned on rock in the box and hitting that first production.

They've been really great to work with, and yeah, we don't see any delays.

We're already spending the money, right?

We're The

$420 million that they deposited in January in terms of at close, we're using that capital to advance the feasibility study, and that'll be the first capital spent when we FID this project.

We don't see the FID being a barrier to the rock in the box and first production as all of the allowances that we've made and the critical path items that we're focusing on are keeping us on track.

Great, thanks. Maybe just finally, Peter, can you possibly comment on some of the political goings-on in Peru right now, whether that's translating at all into any form of social unrest?

No, I think the social landscape has been complicated since the unrest that we saw last year. I think with federal elections that are underway right now, it may continue to be periods of heightened social unrest.

I think most people are aware of that the general election was held on April the 12th, and that from the initial voting, there is not yet a clear result of who the second candidate is. First candidate, as everybody knows, is Keiko Fujimori.

We think that by mid-month, it probably becomes evident who, or becomes clear who the second candidate is. Frankly, in a way, federal elections don't really impact Hudbay, as we've seen many, many different presidents since we started operations 10 years ago.

What's really been constant in those years has been the stable fiscal regime, which we don't expect to change. We've seen left-wing presidents, right-wing presidents, and everyone in between.

What we've always got to anchor our thinking to is that Peru's a leading copper production nation globally, and I think the new president will recognize the importance of mining to the country, and I think it'll be business as usual for us. We have no concerns with respect to the upcoming election.

We don't think it'll result in heightened unrest. I'm sure there will be spats of it, but we're well positioned to deal with it.

Great, thanks, Peter. That's all for me.

Hi, can you hear me? Yes.

Okay. Just maybe to follow on the Peru theme, in the slides you do mention preparing for María Reyna and Caballito exploration.

I sort of assume that that's more local social considerations. Is there any update on when we might be able to put a drill rig in the ground there?

There have, Stefan, been no changes to the remaining steps in the permitting process, which includes the government's consulta previa process with the local community. With the election underway, that process is delayed.

There are community elections which will be held later on in the year, and we think that once those elections have been held, then we'll move forward towards getting the permits. For sure, permits are delayed, they continue to be delayed, but we think we're sort of coming to the end of that period of delay as we move past the general election and the community elections, and we probably see a little bit of movement towards the end of the year.

Okay. Great.

Thanks very much.

Hi, just wanted to ask one about the labor balance at Lalor. You've mentioned it a few times, some challenges in Q1, and maybe you can elaborate a bit on what you're seeing and how you're addressing it.

Sure. Hi, it's Andre.

Yeah. There has been some challenges.

They're not new. We've gone through this before.

The team's actively working on it, but we've seen a little bit of a peak towards the end of Q1, and we're working through it right now. Some of the things the team's working on is, obviously we're bringing in more people into the organization, and that takes a little bit of time to train them.

That's more of a medium-term sort of fix. In a very, very short-term, the team is looking at With the 1901, which I'm sure you're familiar with, is the 1901 ore body, we've been developing ourselves, and we have a lot of skilled employees there, and so the team's working on contracts with a mining contractor.

In an isolated area, it's a nice fit, and then we'll redeploy our resources into our shortfalls within the mine. There's a variety of things the team's working on.

There's more than that, there's several of them, but those would be the main ones, and they're, we've got this in hand, it's something we've done before, it's just a blip, and we're working through it. It's not something that I'm really worried about, it's in hand.

I think, Matt, what we were pretty straightforward on in the results release is that we remain on track to achieve the annual production guidance in ranges in Manitoba regardless of any labor issues and ups and downs that we might see. The team has it well in hand.

We'll still be within guidance with our cost guidance with those extra costs as well.

Got it. Thank you.

Thank you, operator, and good morning, Peter, Eugene, and Andre. Thank you for today's update.

Could I ask about capital return and just in light of the recently revamped capital return framework and the stronger balance sheet but also considering the growth capital needs and then considering the buyback renewal approval, could we consider the probability that Hudbay might be more active in the buyback in '26 is a higher probability than that in '25 when the buyback wasn't acted upon at all?

Hi, Lawson, I can take that question. I think we look at this holistically, and the capital allocation framework was meant to provide us beyond that 3P plan, the way to advance the company.

We're with the capital allocation framework, we're able to do three things: We're able to fund the development of Copper World, we're able to reduce debt, and we have a goal of less than one times net to EBITDA through the life cycle, through the build, we are able to fund generational investments in brownfield projects each of our operating sites, and given the progress we've made on a balance sheet, we're able to consider for the first time shareholder returns well ahead of what our goal was to be ready to be a meaningful build dividend payer with the development of Copper World. We started thinking about that earlier this year with that capital allocation framework, and the first step to that was increasing our dividend, and it was a nominal increase, but it was the first dividend increase we've had in our history.

We think that that is something that we'd like to ramp into if we have the opportunity and if these prices were to hold, and while we're able to make these generational investments in the company and also provide shareholder returns. The NCIB was put in place as good housekeeping, as a tool for us to ensure to smooth out any volatility there is in the market as there is, and it's something that we want to be able to access at the right time.

There are we don't have we're not committing to doing a share buybacks in terms of a set dollar amount at this time. We don't think that that is the right way to set our capital allocation priorities, particularly during this year of sanctioning at Copper World.

I think if we have the opportunity to have excess capital at the end of the year, we can relook at the dividend and see if we can enhance that in any form as part of the whole capital allocation framework.

I think, Lawson, I would also add to what Eugene says, is that we want to have all options available to us, but right now the most important thing for us is delivery. I'm confident that the culture of consistent operational and financial delivery that we're building will absolutely ensure that we really are the gold standard in the copper space as we refer to in our release.

I noticed that phrase. That was great.

Thank you. The one other follow-up I would like then on capital return is, I'm not entirely clear on the potential spending at Mason.

You're advancing plans to initiate a prefeasibility study. Can you remind us what you think you're going to spend in '26 on Mason, and then could that change?

Is there a range within which we could have a much higher or a much smaller number depending on when you actually start that process in 2026?

We're starting that process, and approximately $20 million is allocated to advancing Mason this year, and that will be expensed as it's not yet in reserve.

That's a fixed number?

Yeah.

Budgeted.

Budgeted.

It's pretty There's not a lot.

There's not much we can increase that by in terms of moving it ahead. We're starting the prefeas, and that'll take the better part of a year to

It's mostly studies, some drilling, some geotech. Hydrology.

Okay. Fantastic.

Thank you all very much.

Thanks. Peter or Andre, just following on the discussion with respect to sequencing in Arizona, do you feel comfortable giving a date in terms of production start for Copper World, for Cactus, for Phase 2, just, to give you just to give us a broad sense of what what this is going to look like going out in into the long term?

Sure, Pierre, it's Look, Copper World, the actual targeted dates will be released with the DFS, but it's pretty well midyear 2029. That would be, as Andre refers to, a rock in the box, and then Cactus would be sometime after that.

I, as Andre said, Cactus really is more an earthmoving effort than anything else. We've got to move rock, we've got to do some stripping, we've got to develop the heap leach piles, and then there's a little bit of a SX-EW plant to build.

There could be concurrent activity on mining between the one and the other, but really it remains to be seen during the PFS update what that will look like and what the actual sequencing would be.

We're not slowing down Cactus studies or anything like that, we're going to move those forward as fast as we can, and depending on where we are with Copper World and metal prices and all that, if it makes sense, then we could, Peter said, we could start the stripping and stuff that we know that is very easy and while we're doing some of the detailed engineering, but we want to keep that optionality open.

That's why I was asking. I was just how much of an overlap.

If you start in mid-'29, do we maybe consider a startup at Cactus within 18 months, 24 months of that startup, or do you need longer lead time? That's

possible.

That's reasonable. There's prefeasibility is a year generally, and feasibility is another year, right, if you add those on, and there's concurrent permitting updates that are going on, and so you layer all those on.

The one thing that we do know is you have to strip rock, and so at the right time, that costs money, is just how is Copper World going, where are we at, how are the metal prices, if all those things are all lining up, and we know we have the permits in hand, then stripping is something that might make sense. We're not slowing down anything with Cactus.

We want to make sure everything's as fast as possible, and then it just it's optionality for us. I think,

Pierre,

the other day, we have a unique portfolio, in the next 5 years, we could triple copper production, and that's a key part of it, and so I think having all that ready to go is something that we're all over.

I guess in terms of Phase 2, that's pretty much open-ended, I guess, hey, for Copper World,

just to,

you know?

Hey,

I wouldn't say it's open-ended. I think that we will apply for permits pretty quickly once Phase 1 is up and running, and then the question is what's the duration of the permitting.

Then, certainly it will take longer to permit Phase 2 than it will take to bring Cactus into production, but Phase 2 is not a massive effort.

There's nice surprises in Phase 1 that when it comes out.

Yes.

Okay. Then finally on the Ingerbelle, what are the implications of bringing Ingerbelle on in '28, again from a production perspective?

More gold. Basically it's more gold and longer mine life.

Double the gold grade than what we're currently producing, and yeah, there is some stripping that goes along with it as well, but it's a great cash flow generator for us, particularly at these metal prices.

It's a third of the stripping, right?

Yeah.

The average gold production with New Ingerbelle essentially doubles from 20,000 ounces gold per annum to about 40,000 ounces per annum. It would be a very nice complement to the consistent copper production, and the mine life of New Ingerbelle is on reserve basis today 10 years, but as Peter highlighted in some of his remarks, we've started drilling New Ingerbelle, and we expect to convert a lot of the inferred, and so we're likely to see a much close to probably double that mine life as we continue to ore and convert that resource.

Thanks.

Thank you, operator, and thank you everyone for participating today. If you have any further questions, please feel free to reach out to our investor relations team.

Thank you, and have a great day.