Good afternoon, and welcome to Veeva's fiscal 2027 second quarter earnings conference call for the quarter ended July 31st, 2026. As a reminder, we posted prepared remarks on Veeva's Investor Relations website just after 1:00 p.m.

Pacific today. We hope you've had a chance to read them before the call.

Today's call will be used primarily for Q&A. With me today for Q&A are Peter Gassner, our Chief Executive Officer; Paul Shawah, EVP, Strategy; and Brian Van Wagener, our Chief Financial Officer.

During this call, we may make forward-looking statements regarding trends, our strategies, and the anticipated performance of the business, including guidance regarding future financial results. These forward-looking statements will be used based on our current views and expectations and are subject to various risks and uncertainties.

Our actual results may differ materially. Please refer to the risks listed in our earnings release and the risk factors included in our most recent filing on Form 10-Q.

Forward-looking statements made during the call are being made as of today, August 26th, 2026, based on the facts available to us today. If this call is replayed or viewed after today, the information presented during the call may not contain current or accurate information.

Veeva disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements. We may discuss guidance on today's call, but we will not provide any further guidance or updates on our performance during the quarter unless we do so in a public forum.

On the call, we may also discuss certain non-GAAP metrics that we believe aid in the understanding of our financial results. A reconciliation to comparable GAAP metrics can be found in today's earnings release and in the supplemental investor presentation, both of which are available on our website.

With that, thank you for joining us, and I'll turn the call over to Peter.

Thank you, Gunnar, and welcome, everyone, to the call. Q2 was another strong quarter, delivering results ahead of our guidance.

Total revenue in the quarter was $928 million, with non-GAAP operating income of $416 million. Execution was exceptional this quarter as we made strong progress in many key areas.

It was our best CRM quarter ever. We also are accelerating rapidly in AI overall, and especially with Veeva Falcon.

Our focused acquisition strategy is working, bringing great people and capabilities to Veeva. It's an exciting time.

AI is enabling the next big chapter for Veeva and the industry. We'll now open up the call to your questions.

Great. Thank you for the time today.

I think it's evident over the past few months that biopharma R&D spending is headed in a positive direction and that also showing up at Veeva. As pipelines move forward, what are you finding the mentality to be at customers around assessing and adopting something that's brand new and thinking about the Vault Application Agents or even Veeva Falcon?

I'm interested in levels of early interest taking place amidst what seems like a busier environment and whether that's a reflection of the value customers are seeing pretty quickly when they start looking at the new Veeva offerings.

I'll take that one. There are a lot of things going on, right?

The funding environment is relatively good. There's a lot of changes with AI.

Science is moving ahead. There's a lot of priorities for the customers.

When that happens, they can't do all things at once, and they generally try to pick some things that they can do and that are high priority. Your question was related to Falcon.

I think Falcon has a lot of interest right now because it's very clear that that's high priority: quick, cost savings, and compliance and efficiency. That's high on everybody's priority.

I think there's a lot of interest in Falcon. We are the rate limiter right now.

We have to get that product ready, start working with the early adopters. Interest in Falcon is very high.

That's great. Then maybe as you think about how customers can now engage with Veeva in an AI framework, you have the application agents, you have Falcon, you have a custom development framework that you've introduced, are any of those modes of engagement maybe becoming larger or bigger piece of the conversation, and do any of those modes matter more or less as you think about how your financial model evolves and what the impact might end up being to Veeva?

Yes, it is a major change for Veeva. Falcon is agentic labor.

That's something different than we've done before, right? We've done cloud software, data, consulting.

Now we have this fourth thing, agentic labor, it is transforming the discussion. There's two different things you could do with Veeva: you can do some agentic labor, you can do core applications.

That was never the case before. The important point is Veeva fits very well.

It's a structural advantage for Veeva to both have the agentic labor and across multiple areas in life sciences, and have the core applications across multiple of those areas in life sciences. That's why I feel like we're very well positioned.

The conversations are very rich. Gosh, I just hope we got to get that product going as soon as we can.

If we had our early adopters live and successful right now, I don't want it be hyperbole, but Falcon would be flying off the shelf if that was the case. Because one thing to know is there's not an extensive Falcon implementation.

There's not a data mapping from one system to the other. There's not a cutover process.

There's not ETL to do. This implementation to full value is faster with Falcon.

The tech underneath it is newer, and we have to get our motion down there. If you can tell, I hope you can tell, I'm pretty excited about Falcon.

I really think we're onto something.

That's great. Thank you.

Hey, gentlemen. Thanks for taking the questions, and congrats on a strong quarter.

The commercial segment was really strong this quarter. I know you called out a record results.

Could you maybe unpack what drove that acceleration in the subscription line item? Would love to get some more color there.

Hey, Brian. This is Brian, I'll take that one.

Commercial subs, yeah, very strong quarter. I think the culmination of many quarters of execution, but you see them showing up in the results here.

Up about 13% year-over-year. Even when we back out Crossix, it's double digits in the rest of commercial.

It was quite a broad-based strength in the commercial offering across CRM, content, data, Crossix, Austral most recently. Feel very good about the execution.

Crossix continues to be a strong performer with a lot of headroom for growth. We're continuing to see growth in CRM, which I think a lot of the conversation has been, "Is that going to go down?"

It's actually going up. We're continuing to see a lot of room to continue growing in a healthy market in Crossix as well as the other areas.

Great. Appreciate the color.

I just want to follow up on Aspen. I know you guys are excited about that as well.

How should we be thinking about that market opportunity and some of the investments that you're taking to kind of enable that revenue stream? Thanks, guys.

Aspen, I think, it's very early, right? That's the thing to know.

This is a startup inside of Veeva. It's moving very rapidly.

It's on 90-day plans. We have a core market that we're going after, the horizontal CRM, in a new way that really enables AI and is built on modern technology.

The thing to know that is very agile now. What we're focused on is getting the product right, working with our early adopter customers.

I'm 100% convinced that there's a market for what we're making in Aspen. Can we execute well enough?

That's always the hard thing in a startup. Can you do it?

Can you do it better than your competition? What kind of luck do you have along the way?

That plays into it. I've done the startup thing before starting Veeva.

I've done the startup thing when we started Vault inside of Veeva. We're doing it again, and I have lots of friends that have done it, and it's just like that.

Can you execute well, really, really well, and what kind of luck do you have on the way? Sometimes you're wondering whether the market is there or not.

You could say maybe we were wondering that when we were getting new markets going, 18 months ago, etc. Right now, we have enough product and we're working with some early customers.

We are 100% clear that the market is there, 100% clear. It's just whether we can execute, and we'll see.

Your question was about how to size the investment as well. Aspen is very small in the Veeva scale.

It's not something that Brian, our CFO, notices really on the Veeva scale, because you have to keep that very small when you're working with early customers and you're iterating an early product. Actually these days you keep it smaller than normal because the pace of development is faster with AI.

You actually need a smaller amount of developers, very, very, very skilled as well. It's not a financial drain on the company, it's not a focus drain, and it's certainly not any kind of revenue that's figured into our plans at this time.

Hey, good evening, everybody. This is Ryan Pandolfi on for Saket tonight.

Thanks for taking the question. Peter, maybe my first for you.

From the customers that are planning to transition to Salesforce away from Veeva CRM, what do you hear from those customers? What are they saying right now about the decision?

Do you think longer term it could be possible for Veeva to win some of those back?

Ryan, I do. There's a handful of customers, large customers, that did select Salesforce, many of them even two years ago.

Those projects they're having troubles, right? They're not going smooth, and we have some project delays because it turns out the product is very deep and you need that.

I think we can win back some of those customers, maybe some of them completely, others of them in some certain regions and not others. I think the bulk of that win-back would probably be in 2027 and 2028, because Veeva CRM, they have that backstop until the end of 2029.

This is the time when it starts really to get real, right? Because during 2029, there's no more backstop of, "Oh, we can keep using Veeva CRM," because they know they have to go to Vault CRM.

We're very optimistic about that. The best thing we can do there to help that is really focus on our existing customers that did decide to go with us for CRM and make them very successful, improve the product.

For the customers that didn't choose Veeva, we have a good relationship with them, and they've told us that, "Hey, we said, 'Hey, we want to be your Plan B,' and they really embraced that and that's the way they view that." Because these customers, they have business systems to run, right?

They got to get their medicines to patients. It's great.

They love having a backup option if their Plan A doesn't work out.

Really interesting, appreciate that. Brian, maybe my follow-up for you.

Could you just talk a little bit about what you're seeing on the R&D subscription line, and maybe specifically where you see Veeva in the journey between some of the, let's call them old guard products versus some of the newer growth areas that you're investing in, just as we think about that revenue mix shift and how it's unfolding?

It's a great question, Ryan, because we're right in the middle of that transition that you pointed to. I think very pleased with the progress and the execution that we're making.

The old guard that you're referring to would be things like, I guess, eTMF, and CTMS, and QualityDocs, and QMS, and our regulatory suite that have fueled a lot of the growth in R&D to date. A lot of the growth as you look out over the next few years to 2030 and beyond is being driven by a different set of products: EDC, eCOA, RTSM, Safety, LIMS.

These are big, very strategic products with a ton of headroom, but they're very early. We're excited about that.

We're executing really well against that. There's a little bit of a changing of the guards that's happening there, and the S-curves don't stack up exactly, you see some of that factored into the guidance for the balance of the year.

We're very confident and excited about the long-term trajectory of the R&D business and obviously pleased to be raising the guide again here in Q2.

Very helpful. Thanks, guys.

Hello, everyone. I wanted to go back to the Falcon discussion.

With five Falcon early adopters and first go-lives expected this year, what are the key readiness gates you must clear, and how do you expect the human-in-the-loop requirement to evolve by workflow type?

I'm sorry, Alexei, there was a breakup and it said, "What are the key you have to clear?" and I didn't hear the word in the middle.

Peter, I was talking about the key readiness gates you must clear and how do you expect the human-in-the-loop requirement to evolve by workflow type?

The key sort of regulatory hurdles, if I heard correctly? Yeah.

Agentic labor is like human labor in a way. It's non-deterministic.

You have to prove that you have the right training and guardrails around humans, and that's the same thing we have to do around our agents. We provide for that human-in-the-loop with Falcon as well, because you can see the outcome of what the agent did and does inside of the Vault applications.

From what we can see, it's working very well. This approach is completely similar to what customers are doing today on certain internal projects.

The difference is they would like to be able to do it at scale in a very repeatable motion. I would guess three years ago, we would probably have to be teaching the customers a lot about what is AI, what is agentic labor, how do you do this, how do you do that.

We really don't have to do that so much anymore. The customers know how to deal with it, they just want a partner that can scale it across multiple areas.

Thank you, Peter. Also on the data cloud topic, you added 14 Data Cloud customers.

Where is Data Cloud proving most differentiated, and how are you positioning connected data as a prerequisite for AI outcomes in commercial workflows?

We don't position Data Cloud as a prerequisite for AI. It's more of an accelerator.

The cleaner your data is, the better your AI processes are going to work, especially in certain areas. What's working well for us in Data Cloud is open data, clean reference data.

Now that's a hard project to do because it involves changing a lot of things in downstream systems. We have some momentum there, and I think that's going to continue.

We have strong momentum in Compass for certain therapeutic areas of complex therapies, where our Compass products can see different things in the flow of complex products in the US that other offerings can't see. Then we have real market leadership with our Link product and Link key people, and we're expanding there with the add-on products of Link.

Link Medical Insights, Link Key Accounts for the US, Link Workflow for congresses. Overall, it is not a thing that can accelerate very, very fast.

It's not like selling fast fashion on Instagram, right? That can accelerate fast and then disappear.

Data is not like that. It's a long, slow grind.

We're certainly happy with our progress and it's very synergistic with Veeva. If you look at why is Veeva being successful?

We have a very synergistic product plan. We have software applications that work with our data and consulting that knows about our software and data, and we have agents that work with our applications that are known by our consulting and that leverage our data.

It's not a random set of products. We're building the industry cloud, and the more our customers realize it, the more benefits they get because things fit together.

Thank you, Peter.

Hi. Good afternoon.

Thanks for taking my question. I wanted to ask Peter on Falcon quickly.

Are your early adopters exclusively sponsors or OEMs, or are you also seeing some service providers approach you to adopt Falcon capabilities?

Our early adopters are with sponsors. Now we have had some interest with service providers.

I say that carefully, interest. They're interested, but we really haven't engaged heavily there yet, because you have to be focused when you start working with your first customers.

Service providers will have similar needs to sponsors, but not the same. We're focusing on the sponsors first.

I fully expect over time that this will be useful for outsourced service providers, but we have to work on the sponsors first.

Great. Pivoting for my follow-up, a lot of moving parts in China over the course of this year, maybe over the course of the last several years, regulatorily, drug-development-wise, etc.

How do you see the China market as an opportunity for Veeva right now?

China is certainly moving fast. When we look at my tech career standing, well, it's over 30 years here, it's just astounding the transformation in China and what it means for the global economy and what can be accomplished, and the whole notion of a parallel tech stack in China.

Yes, it's moved so fast and it continues, and it's great to see that from my perspective. It brings variety.

Our opportunities there, we have quite a few products that are made by our Veeva China team in China for China. We have our China CRM suite and that's gaining market share.

That's written on the China tech stack, etc. We have our data products made in China specific for the China market.

There's other things that we can do in China there in China for China. One of the big benefits is those products fit with our global products.

For example, China CRM fits with our global PromoMats product. There's a synergy there.

China's good business for us, and we're proud to do that in China, and it's profitable for us there, and it's growing. It's also synergistic with our global business because our global customers, when they have their headquarters in the US, or Japan, or Europe, they want a team, a global Veeva team that can help them with China also.

It's very synergistic. We really love our China business.

Thank you.

wonderful. Thanks so much for taking my questions.

Nice to see continued strength in the business. I want to start with a question on Aspen and the pricing model.

I think the publicly posted pricing model is really interesting and compelling as application software companies try to kind of figure out kind of the pivot to more consumption, etc., and you're talking about charging per human or per agent. Can you maybe walk us through how you see that pricing model starting, how the puts and takes of that, and what lessons or learnings can kind of be picked up from that as you see more Falcon adoption, more AI adoption within the broader Veeva suite, and trying to kind of price accordingly for this new AI world?

Then I've got a quick follow-up.

Cloud software, we got to remember it hasn't been around for 50 years, right? I was working on it in the early days of Salesforce.com and that was not even 25 years ago, right?

For me it was 23 years ago. Very early, and the pricing models sort of arrived and a technology model arrived, and the way we do things arrived, and you see that all in the first generation big cloud companies, big cloud application companies.

There's a way you do things. Right.

Aspen is taking a different approach that may or may not prove effective. It's to say, "Well, it's a different approach, a different technical stack, a different approach there, and a different pricing approach."

It's just much more simple. You get your productivity, $50, $50 a user a month, it's not this crazy price and you don't know what it is and you have to haggle with your sales rep for discounts and if you're a big company it's this and that, and 14 different editions.

No, it's more like modeled off of Amazon Web Services. There's a price.

Okay. It's a good product.

You can buy it. You don't have to buy it.

It's a good product. We will lean into that.

Then there's of course usage overage. Okay.

Let's say you buy five users, it's $50 a month, and you put a terabyte of data in there for some reason. Okay.

That's not anything that anybody thought about, there'll be overage charges that you will pay monthly on the overage. It's a mix.

I would say we're shooting for mostly predictable, because at the end of the day large businesses would really want mostly predictable. You have to have this escape hatch to say, "Yeah, you can't use unlimited compute because that doesn't make sense."

Now we're also going to listen to our early customers, and we're very customer-friendly company. If there's a better way to do it, we'll certainly do that.

We're after authentically customer success. You got to remember, we're a public benefit corporation.

We're after success for our customers, the industry we serve, and Veeva, and our investors. The thing is, make it simple, get rid of all this noise that have built up in the systems over time.

All right, now that's really helpful. Then maybe just thinking through, as Falcon and kind of your AI products grow, can you talk a little bit about under the hood, what sort of the AI stack looks like, and maybe more importantly, as these become a bigger portion of the business, drive greater usage and obviously, as you pointed out, Peter, greater customer success, how should we be thinking about the impacts on margins, both gross margins as well as free cash flow margins?

Is there opportunity over time to leverage more multimodality and even some of the open-weight models as they improve to control some of that potential gross margin headwind? Thank you.

Yeah. Again, I don't really want to make predictions on Falcon because it's early.

In general, I don't think we're going to have a gross margin problem. I think the gross margins will be roughly similar to our software.

Here is why: when we really go deep into Falcon and we have what we call Falcon Copies where we have the real customer data that we're testing the agents with and developing the agents with, we know what's going on, more and more and more of that work goes into the deterministic software, and we use the non-deterministic models, the Anthropic models, etc., when we need to. A lot of this value is going into the agent.

Then I believe everybody knows that the cost of these models are going to go down, versus whether they're with better hardware or open-weight models or etc., etc. The current cost of the models is not sustainable.

Not based on what we're doing, but based on this notion of what software development is doing, eating up 50% of the tokens in the world and hundreds of billions of dollars. Somebody's going to build a better mousetrap for that over time, and that'll compress the prices.

That's our belief. Even if that wouldn't happen, I think Falcon would be a great business because we're pushing a lot of things into the deterministic layer.

Very helpful. Thank you so much, Peter.

Thank you for taking the question. Brian, just going back to your comments on the R&D side of the business and talking about kind of the stacking of the S-curves.

I was wondering if you could just be a bit more precise in terms of the timing and when you see the kind of the growth inflection happening from those S-curves, and if you were to just sort of stack rank those products you mentioned, what sort of have the biggest opportunity to be the next $500 million or $1 billion product within R&D?

Thanks for the question, Tyler. I think we are excited really about all of those products, all the five that I mentioned: EDC, eCOA, RTSM, Safety, LIMS.

Every one of those is very large and very strategic in their area. A few of them are around clinical, Safety is its own big space, LIMS is in quality.

Each of these is very significant opportunities. At slightly different stages as you look across them, but all of them pretty early.

I think that's what gives us the confidence as we look out to 2030, for example, that we're on track for those goals, as we're making great progress in the product, great progress in the execution, great progress getting customers live and happy and successful and reference selling. We don't put exact timing on that, right?

We don't generally talk year by year, I'm not going to give guidance out beyond this year. I think we feel very confident in the trajectory that we're on with those products in R&D.

Got it. Then in terms of Aspen and sort of your broader ambitions across industries outside of your traditional segment, just can you just remind us sort of the ICP there?

Is it smaller organizations, or clearly such a broad opportunity, how do you start and prioritize that and staff it?

I think Peter can touch on...

Go ahead, Peter.

For clarity, ICP, what is ICP?

Oh, the

ideal customer profile.

Ideal customer, I assume. Yeah.

Oh, okay. I'll take that one.

The ideal customer profile when you're just starting out is really a nimble-type company that really wants to work with you. I think in this area, we're probably get a lot of young tech startups, right?

Because they're doing something really innovative in what they're doing, and they don't really want to do the same old thing in CRM for core account, contact, opportunity management. I think we have early indications that they'll be great companies to work with, but we'll see.

Again, I'll let you know a lot more in a year.

All right. Thanks, and sorry to throw in an...

Thank you, and thanks for taking my questions. I want to go back to Falcon discussion and the five early adopters there.

It seems one of them is a top 20 pharma company. Based on your conversations with these top pharma companies around Falcon, do you believe that the work will be shifting to Falcon is something they were outsourcing to other partners such as CROs, or should we think about something they were doing in-house and now they are leveraging Falcon for that?

Related to that, any incremental color on the pricing of the Falcon product?

In terms of where the labor's done or where it will be displaced, I think there'll be a combination of internal and outsourced, although generally not the CROs. That's not what I see.

It's a different type of outsourcing. Some of it from the CROs, but not most of it.

Then in terms of the pricing, it's very early for that. I know we've been in discussions with customers, and their desire is for predictability.

That's for sure, right? They want predictability for that, because for one thing, they get that predictability when they either hire or outsource labor.

It's quite predictable and it's better for them. It's actually better for us too.

What gets in the way of that a little bit is, well, Falcon is quite early now. It can do certain things, but it can't do the things that it will do three years from now.

How do you have a fixed price when your capabilities are rapidly improving? I think with some of our customers, we'll end up having enterprise license agreements, enterprise subscription agreement for the labor, based on the size of their company or their function.

It will probably escalate over time. It will be lower in the beginning when Falcon is less mature.

If you want a teenage Falcon, it costs you X, and if you want a Falcon that's 25 years old, it's going to cost you a little bit more. I think it's going to be like that, but again, this is the type of thing you work out with the early adopters.

The nice thing here and the structural advantage that we have is this is the same buyer facing the same business problems as our applications. These are people we know deeply.

The trust is there. You will hear people say, "Business moves at the speed of trust," and there's a lot to that.

We have the trust with these customers. We'll get to the right story pretty quickly.

All this hinges on having a product that works well, and that's really where our focus is. I would say our early signs are good.

When I talk to the engineering and the product management people on Falcon, there's an optimism. You'll see even the pessimistic ones saying like, "Oh, my goodness, this could really work."

In some early test runs, it's like, "Wow, we tested this against the humans, what the humans did, and Falcon's already better than what the humans did." There's this sense of optimism, but it's too early to declare success.

We have to be very paranoid and pessimistic because we're going into something we haven't done before. Veeva has never done agentic labor and the whole motion is new.

That's why the leader of Falcon reports right to me. This is a complete new market and a new motion for Veeva.

We don't have all the answers yet.

Makes sense. My quick follow-up on other point you raised in your prepared remarks.

Somebody asked it earlier about your focus on CRM win-backs among top 20 companies that did not select Vault CRM. I understand your point that you want to share success stories with them.

Just curious, have there been any developments or conversations with customers who have picked Salesforce that is driving that confidence that these opportunities are more actionable, or is it more around delays in rollout by Salesforce that giving you confidence or opening a window? Just curious, seems like you are a lot more explicit this time around than the past.

It's based on our execution and what we're seeing with Salesforce as well. I think Peter alluded to earlier how Salesforce has been struggling with some of the larger projects that they have, and they don't really have any customers live.

When you look at what Veeva is doing, it contrasts pretty significantly. We have over 180 customers live.

We have customers that are turning AI on. We had a big milestone in CRM this quarter where one of our top 20s turned AI on in CRM for their entire field force.

Really significant milestone. The contrast between how Veeva is executing and what we're seeing on the other side is very significant.

As Peter mentioned, we're very close with these customers. They buy a lot of products from Veeva.

We have deep relationships. We stay very close with them.

That's what gives us the confidence: our execution, our innovation, getting customers live, that trust. That's why you hear that the bullishness and the confidence in those win-backs.

Just more broadly in the overall market, we're executing very, very well in CRM. It's really clear that we are the market leader, we're going to maintain the market leadership position.

Just to kind of paint the kind of what we view as the end state, we see Veeva maintaining over 70% share in the CRM space, which means we'll continue to execute, we'll continue to drive innovation for our customers. We feel really good about how CRM is playing out.

Now, you asked about our customer interactions there. Yes, we have customer interactions.

Lots of people at Veeva do with these customers, and I personally do at times too. Common thing you might hear from a customer is, "We're not ready to make that decision yet."

Right? They're open to it, they're looking into it, they're not ready yet.

Those types of things give us confidence.

Great. Thanks a lot.

Thanks. Great discussion around all the AI developments.

Peter, from a macro perspective, after a couple volatile years, whether it was IRA, MFN pricing, tariffs, the backdrop has steadied. I'm curious outside of agentic, in your customer discussions, what are they most focused on, what areas are they leaning into investments that you're seeing in the business?

Craig, it is interesting. We think things have steadied.

It is an interesting comment on the world, right? We've had two, kind of major wars going on.

We've got a complete tech disruption in AI that's going on. I think what happened is the life sciences industry has gotten used to, "Hey, the world is going to have a lot of moving parts and they're just moving forward."

I think you're good to point this out. They're not being disrupted by this disruptions.

If we would have something really catastrophic in the future, that can always disrupt things. For example, if we had a major, major shift in interest rates, well, life sciences is a capital-intensive industry, that can do things.

If major escalations in war, that can do things. Far, industry seems to be executing pretty well and focusing on the jobs to get done.

Got it. Then just on my follow-up for the EDC segment, compared to one or two years ago, as that was ramping, that got a lot of attention.

Can you just maybe give us an update on just how those ramping deals are progressing and then just the opportunity to capture additional top 20 over time?

EDC is one of our larger areas and it's certainly a long implementation cycle, some of our wins are still ramping. We're working with the other ones.

We have I believe it's nine out of the top 20. Most of the other ones are with Medidata, not all.

We're working on those over time. It's not the right time for all customers to change out all systems at one time, getting back to they have many other things to do.

I would go back to this structural advantage we have in the Development Cloud: applications all on a common platform, and then with Falcon as well, the structural advantage with Falcon's more things to bring to the same buyer. Especially in clinical, having the clinical operations, clinical data management, and our site solutions.

That site solutions is very strategic to us, and we're introducing eSource there. I think confident on EDC over time.

It just takes a while, and that's something that I think you'll see progress in the coming year in the next couple of years there.

Helpful. Thank you.

Thanks for fitting me in. I just wanted to ask one, first, I think you're coming up to the one-year anniversary of your partnership with IQVIA and the settlement with them.

I just wanted to understand how's that going. Have you seen any momentum?

Because we haven't heard much from that deal, and wanted to know is it going ahead of expectations, or in line, or below?

We're really happy with that IQVIA partnership. Gosh, and I discuss with the management team of IQVIA and I can represent that they represent to me that they're very happy with the partnership as well.

Yes, and customers are especially appreciative of it, right? Much less hassle working with Veeva and IQVIA.

I think great things are going to come out of that partnership. They're already starting to come, and I think there's more to come.

When you look at it, IQVIA and Veeva, we are both major players to the life sciences industry. We are the two major players, I think it's fair to say, by far.

AI is transforming the industry, and for AI, you need services, you need data, you need software. The more Veeva and IQVIA can collaborate, the better it is for the industry, helps the industry grow, helps Veeva grow, helps IQVIA grow.

I couldn't be more happy with that. If you ask me, I feel 500% better about our IQVIA relationship now than I did two years ago.

It's probably the best thing that happened to our company 12 months ago, and that was just outstanding. Super happy with that.

Thanks. Then I'm curious about the double-digit growth you mentioned in the Commercial Cloud business even excluding Crossix.

I just wanted to unpack that. Did it come from PromoMats or some of the other marketing tools, or was there something unique about the CRM side that was giving you that acceleration?

Not really any one factor that I'd point to, Andrew, and I think that's part of what actually makes us feel much excitement and pleased with the results is that it was CRM. It was add-ons and new customers in content.

It was new customers and brands in Data Cloud. It was continued growth in Crossix on both the measurement and the audience's side.

It really was broad-based growth around commercial. I think, I guess, what I'd point to is some of what Peter and Paul have mentioned is that full commercial story and full capability of all those products on one platform from one provider really resonating in the market and driving growth.

Very strong quarter from commercial.

Thank you.

Hey, guys. Appreciate it.

Maybe, Peter, if we touch on the strength in consulting and services, I know that there's kind of several components to that, but how would you classify kind of the value of efficiency or kind of being able to do more with the same kind of amount of your existing resources versus the efficiency gains you're seeing there enabling your customers to go faster and capitalize on kind of more of the AI opportunities? Maybe meet their kind of increasing willingness, if that makes sense.

Because it does seem like that's another area, I know it's not perfectly correlated to the subscription side, but continues to see healthy momentum in driving that change management for a lot of these enterprises.

I think that the big benefit for Veeva that we will hopefully see over time here is that, by more tech-enabling our consulting and especially our services, our software will become more valuable. For example, if somebody wanted to buy our EDC and if it took $1 billion to implement, nobody would buy it.

If it took $10 and a week, everybody would buy it. The faster you can have your implementations go and the more accurate, the less cost, the more valuable your applications become.

That's the big driver. Yes, it probably means growth for us in services because people will buy more services.

It's about customer success and the industry's success and driving our applications business. I overall think it'll be a renaissance for services and consulting companies as we go forward, because I think this notion of tech-enabled services, specialized tech-enabled services, is really going to drive growth, rather than going to generalists that say, "Hey, I have people that can do a lot of things."

No, you have a job to get done, you'll probably go to the specialist that has a tech-enabled service that can get that done. I think that will actually lead many companies to do more with partners rather than doing it internally, because they can get the outcome quicker and better with a tech-enabled service.

Thanks for taking my questions. I guess, Peter, I wanted to ask you a question on a recent management change.

It was announced that Tom Schwenger will be leaving the company to go to a long-standing partner of yours. We understand that he played a pivotal role in many of the company's top 20 biopharma wins.

How should we be thinking about the current transition of his responsibilities and maybe the impact of his exit on the relationship he has helped curate over the years, if any?

We're of course sad to see Tom go. Tom was at Accenture before he came to Veeva many years ago and was a great Veeva partner at Accenture.

Tom's going to go on to be a CEO of a services-type partner, and we think that he will be a great partner for us there now. All good there.

Those relationships don't go away that Tom has, he will keep those. In terms of Veeva, when a customer, especially when you mention CRM, gosh, that's a business-critical decision that lasts for 10 years.

There's many, many people involved in that and there's a product involved with that. Tom's departure won't have effect on our CRM business, because it's an enduring, long-standing thing.

It's different than maybe consulting type work or something like that. This is a product attachment.

That's not going to affect our business.

Perfect. Thanks so much for taking the question here.

Congrats on the two big top 20 biopharma wins for Vault CRM in the quarter. Could you give a little more color on how those deals played out, what ultimately drove them to Veeva over Salesforce?

For the top 20 vendors that have not decided yet, has your level of confidence changed in potentially winning those versus, say, 90 days ago? Thank you.

First, we're excited about the exceptional quarter that we had, and that was one of the headlines. You heard us talk about three large companies, two in the top 20, Lilly selecting Vault CRM, Biogen selecting Vault CRM, and then, of course, we had Regeneron as well.

The why is pretty simple, and I think we've touched on it on this call, right? It goes back to trust, they trust Veeva to be able to deliver.

Then product excellence. The product is working.

We are delivering on the promise of all the innovation that we've told the market we would execute on, and that's playing out in the marketplace. It's trust and it's great product.

It simply comes down to those two things. In terms of the remaining top 20 commitments that are out there, there's only two left, we have 12 of top 20 and there are two remaining, and they'll play out by the end of this year.

We feel good about both of them. They still need to be finalized, but we like our chances in both and we'll update you as things play out.

All right. Thanks for taking my questions, and congrats on a nice quarter.

Peter, an emerging trend that we've been seeing across large healthcare and life sciences organizations within the industry this year is one in which customers want to embrace AI, but they don't want to take the risk on a new and unproven entrant that offers AI for only a specific point solution or a niche use case as they don't have the time to evaluate hundreds of new vendors. It sounds like they'd rather consume AI from the incumbent platform vendors that they're already deeply embedded with.

One, are you getting this sort of same feedback from your customers? Two, does this dynamic create an opportunity for you to perhaps ramp up M&A activity, acquire similar types of AI point solutions like CoPilot and sell it into your existing base faster than what one of these smaller AI solutions could do on their own?

Thanks.

Sorry, I was giving a great answer on mute. The customers want to be out of the experimentation phase.

They definitely want to be out of that. Some months ago, when we first introduced Falcon, I had customers come up to me personally.

We were at an event and they said, "Oh, thank goodness you're announcing that, because I didn't want to evaluate all these small vendors. Now that you have an offering, that helps me not have to go in and look at all these small vendors."

Yes, it's absolutely what customers want. In terms of acquisitions, we may find others that are a cultural fit, but we'll be very discerning.

CoPilot was an excellent acquisition for us, and by the way, the Falcon which is now Falcon MLR, that is maybe our sales cycles there are probably more advanced than in any other part. That market is very, very ripe for things.

In these other areas, we're getting started and we're making a lot of progress with Falcon. If we're going to do an acquisition there, it would be more for talent acquisition and not for product, because we've build real good base in the Falcon product and Falcon platform.

I don't think we'll need acquisitions for product anymore. We did look at some when we were just starting Falcon.

We looked at a number, I would say at least 20 companies to look at. We found one that was the right fit of culture, product, and of willingness to be acquired.

We found that in CoPilot. It's sometimes like that.

For Falcon, I don't actually expect us to find another acquisition that fits, and we're not dependent on any acquisition. We'll see what happens.

Hi, everyone. This is Grayson on for Gabriela.

Thank you for taking our question. Just one on Aspen.

What are the specific customer problems that Aspen is aiming to solve that maybe the existing horizontal CRM platforms struggle with, and what are the milestones that you would point investors to watch for over the next year? Thank you.

In terms of milestones, I think it's probably just the things that we say on our earnings calls and things like that. That would be, because there's not going to really be visible milestones, I would say.

We'll probably give you updates when the time is there. Your other question was basically how will things be better?

If you could rephrase that again.

Just what are the specific customer problems that you're aiming to solve with Aspen versus what some of the existing horizontal CRM platforms struggle with today?

Yeah. There's a couple.

One is price, price being unpredictable, getting out of control. That would be one.

The other one would be just sort of dependability of the vendors, right, that you can really count on the vendor to be on your side. Scalability of the vendor, right?

Sometimes they want something that really works for a small company, but can scale up to a very large. Now in the market, you have to pick, "Do I want something that works for a small company or do I get something that's too big for me now, but I think scale up?"

Other things are just data entry. The existing CRM systems really, if you get into them, require a heck of a lot of data entry.

Most of that with AI doesn't need to be done anymore. Then I just think there's this other fundamental thing of a better CRM system.

That's just the details of a fundamentally better data model, better business logic, better just details, like how do you handle multicurrency, how do you handle forecasting, how do you handle implementations so that you can get the CRM you want for your company in three months rather than getting half of what you want in three years? I was on the board of Zoom for many, many years, and Zoom was a very small company when I joined, and very few investors wanted to invest in Zoom, because they thought, "Well, there's already Webex, there's all these other things."

Eric had an idea, "But mine will be fundamentally better, better, better." That's the same idea here.

Now that's unusual, that could be disruptive, but I think in this case it will be: better, nicer, less expensive, more predictable, faster. I think all those things add up.

Thanks, guys, for squeezing me in. I wanted to drill more into Crossix.

From 90 days ago, from your purview from Crossix, are you seeing pharma marketing advertising budgets become better than they were 90 days ago? Do you think that AI is helping to act as a catalyst for pharma budgets not only across Crossix, but the overall pharma digital advertising space?

Thank you.

We continue to see strength in the pharma marketing budgets and spend on digital, and that's playing out in Crossix. We had another strong quarter of performance in Crossix.

AI, what role is that playing? I think that's a nice long-term benefit and driver of what we're doing in Crossix.

You've probably heard us talk a little bit about helping companies become an agentic commercial, engage with doctors via AI. They're turning more and more to AI.

As that becomes a more important channel, Crossix becomes more important in terms of measuring and understanding and optimizing against that spend. Absolutely.

AI will be a nice tailwind for the foreseeable future for Crossix.

Thank you, everyone, for joining the call today, and thank you to our customers for your continued partnership and to the Veeva team for your outstanding work in the quarter. I'm looking forward to speaking with you again on our upcoming Investor Day on November 5th.

Thank you.