[unclear] and CEO, and Andrés Bedregal, CFO. The format for today's webinar will be a Q&A, and we're going to start off with a question submitted in advance.

You are welcome to submit a question in the question box during the webinar, and we may be making some forward-looking statements. If you'd like to know more about those, you can find them on the company's website.

With that out of the way, welcome Arturo and Andrés.

Thank you, Olenka. Thank you for having us here.

It's a pleasure.

Thank you, Olenka. Thank you for having us here.

Thank you. Let's start off with the first question.

Looking at the big picture, Arturo, could you provide a summary of the Q4 and full year 2025 performance?

Absolutely, Olenka. I will describe 2025 as a very strong year for Santacruz and, in many ways, a defining year for the company.

Even with the water inflow event at the Bolívar mine in May, the company really demonstrated the strength of our business platform, the value of its diversified assets, and the importance of the San Lucas ore sourcing business. Just to give you a few highlights, Olenka: we increased revenues by 15%; we grew our profit more than 90%; we increased our EBITDA almost twice, to 99%; and a very important item here is we fully extinguished the Glencore base purchase price obligation, which saves us $40 million in future payments.

We end up with a much stronger balance sheet, including $67 million in cash and marketable securities, with a working capital of $64, $65 million. Financially speaking, 2025 was a strong year for the company.

Operationally speaking, what I would like to highlight is the quality and resilience of our business platform, where you have multiple assets which compliments and add value to each other in a very interesting way. As an example, Bolívar was clearly impacted by this flooding event in March 2025, and and San Lucas was able to come in and and offset some of the lower production that was experienced at Bolívar.

Both, they complement really well, and also San Lucas helped us to absorb some of the fixed costs across the Bolivian operations, no? Importantly, the diversified asset base allowed us to manage and disrupt while remaining this company profitable and generating cash flow.

That's a clear proof for us that Santacruz is not only able to perform in normal conditions, but also capable of navigating real operational challenges, and, at the same time, preserving financial strength. Q4 was especially important because it showed both momentum and a path forward into into this year 2026: revenues of around $100 million, EBITDA approximately $30 million, and one of the strongest quarter quarterly contributions of the of of the year.

Silver equivalent production increased 9%, driven mainly by a 34% increase at Bolívar, and supported, of course, by San Lucas, Caballo Blanco, Zimapán, and Porco operations. Q4 margins increased significantly, driven by the initial recovery at Bolívar, higher consolidated production, and a strong operating leverage across our operations, with San Lucas continuing to support utilization and cost absorption at our Bolivian operations.

That was a brief resume of 2025, Olenka.

Definitely was a milestone year, for sure. Now turning to profitability, Andrés, full year 2025 was profitable overall, but Q4 posted a net loss.

How should investors think about that result in context of operating income, EBITDA, and cash flow?

Thank you, Olenka. I think the clearest way to look at Q4 is to distinguish between the company's operating performance and the below-the-line items that affected net income.

From an operating and financial standpoint, Q4 was a very strong quarter for the company, and materially stronger than Q3 across the key financial metrics. Just let me give you some examples of it.

Just in Q4, Olenka, revenue was $103 million. That's up 28% quarter-over-quarter.

Gross profit was $36 million in Q4. That's up 79% compared to Q3.

Operating income was $29 million. That is up $126 million against the third quarter.

I know net income was negative, but I will explain why in a few moments. At year-end, the company had approximately, as Arturo was mentioning, $44 million in cash and approximately $23 million in highly liquid marketable securities.

That was after paying $40 million to Glencore under the base purchase price agreement. In our view, not only Q4 was a stronger quarter, but 2025 was a strong year for the company overall, even after the flooding event at Bolívar.

Arturo is going to explain a little bit more about the good progress we have made on that front later. Having said that, reported net income in Q4 was affected by a few items that need to be understood in the right context, Olenka.

First, let's look at lines below operating income. Net income was affected by items that were mostly accounting-related rather than cash-related.

The largest one was the revaluation of the CVR liability, which affected finance costs by approximately $11 million. That is not an operating expense.

That is not the same as cash outflow. It is a financial remeasurement.

Let me take a moment to remind the investment community what the CVRs are and how they work. The CVRs are contingent value rights that we have given to Glencore.

Those kick in only when zinc prices go above $3,850. Only when prices go there, we start paying $1.3 million per month.

However, since it's like an option, those options or CVRs get revalued using a Monte Carlo analysis. The liability of those options went up.

That liability goes into our income statements as an expense, although we are not paying anything. However, we have to look into our cash as well.

That's basically what the CVRs are. We have $11 million on that.

In addition, we have a foreign exchange effect of approximately $2.1 million, mainly related to the appreciation of the Bolivian boliviano and the Mexican peso. Not only are they in the cost, these $2 million are only related to the revaluation of certain assets and liabilities.

As Olenka, if you have liabilities in a local currency, the currency appreciates, you have more in terms of dollars. Those items that were below the line of the operating income affected our net income for the quarter.

There is a second reason, though, and it's a revenue timing issue. In Q4, we sold more zinc than silver.

The main reason is that our lead concentrate, which is the highest silver content, is sold FOB, free on board, and depends much more on the availability of the vessels. During the second half of the year, Olenka, vessel availability was tighter due to certain logistics in Bolivia, which have since been addressed.

However, as a result, we were not able to export some of the lead concentrate. Just to give you an example, Olenka, our regular inventory of lead concentrate is about 2,500 tonnes.

We end up the year with more than 5,000 tonnes. That is very significant.

That timing difference had an approximate impact of around, let's say, $16 to $20 million on revenue. Zinc is different because it is sold under DPU terms, deliver at port unloaded.

Once it's delivered at port, the sale can already be recognized. However, importantly, the lead remained in our inventory, Olenka, and the effect now is normalized in Q1 2026.

If we step back and look at the quarter as a whole, the takeaway is very clear. Q4 was a strong quarter, both operationally and financially, Olenka.

Got it. Thank you.

Now, digging into the cost, Andrés, how should investors think about the Q4 all-in sustaining cost, including how it's calculated, sensitivity to silver and zinc prices, specific Q4 cost drivers, and why margin is the better performance lens?

That is a very good question, Olenka. Let me answer that very clearly, because there are really two main things to consider behind the all-in sustaining cost result.

First, there is a methodology effect. Our all-in sustaining cost is reported on a per silver equivalent ounce sold basis.

It depends not only on costs, but also on the number of equivalent ounces in the denominator. When silver prices rise faster than zinc prices—remember, we are a co-product company—each tonne of zinc converts into fewer silver equivalent ounces.

As a result, even if the underlying cost base does not increase at the same pace, all-in sustaining cost per ounce can still move higher, and that's one of the reasons all-in sustaining cost is higher in Q4. That is why we believe, as a company, that the more meaningful ounce-based measure is the margin between average realized silver price and all-in sustaining cost, because it provides a better quarter-to-quarter overview of the economics, and we have doubled that this quarter, Olenka.

Second, there are also real cost drivers in Q4. The main one was San Lucas, which is normal for that business model, because ore is purchased at market prices.

When metal prices increase, ore purchase costs also rise. San Lucas is a margin-based business model, what is important for San Lucas, it is not just the cost.

It is the margin it gets from that ore, and it's still getting a healthy margin from it. As I said before, we have also experienced the appreciation of the boliviano and the Mexican peso, which increases the reported US dollar cost, as well as some additional spending in Zimapán that are related to plant performance, recoveries, and concentrate quality.

Overall, I think our message is straightforward, Olenka. All-in sustaining cost needs to be interpreted carefully.

If you remain, as an investor, focused on an ounce-based framework, the most meaningful measure is the margin over all-in sustaining cost—not just all-in sustaining cost, but the margin from average realized prices and all-in sustaining cost. If you want to assess the overall strength of the business, you also need to look at operating performance, cash generation, and on both fronts, I think we are very strong, Olenka.

Yeah. Just as an example, Olenka, on what Andrés is pointing out.

Imagine silver coming back to $40, right? You'll have more silver equivalent in production, but lower margins and lower revenues, no?

Lower all-in sustaining cost.

Lower all-in sustaining, of course.

That's not what we want. Exactly.

Yeah.

Thank you. The next question is on operations.

Arturo, how did the Bolivia flooding and lower grade ore affect Q4? What is the current status, and why does full recovery take time?

Absolutely, Olenka. Bolívar continued to affect our Q4 production, no?

The important point is that, during Q4, we started seeing the recovery of Pomabamba and Animas veins, improving Bolívar throughput, head grades, and recoveries. That's why we reflect a 34% increase quarter-over-quarter in the silver equivalent production at Bolívar.

As of today, the situation is well under control, and the recovery plan continues to advance as expected. The main reason why fully recovery takes time is that this is not just a matter of adding more pumping capacity.

We also must treat the water and manage it properly. It has a lot of acidity, to do this in a responsible way, we need to treat it properly before sending it out to the different areas, no?

At the same time, we're restoring safety underground access. We are rehabilitating affected areas and bringing the mining equipments back on track.

In an underground operation, all those steps need to have a well-coordinated pattern, and that's what we're doing on that at this moment. Bolívar is definitely coming back.

Pomabamba and Animas veins are increasing production quarter-over-quarter, and we are in line to our dewatering plan.

Got it. That's good to hear.

Now staying on operations, Arturo, how should investors think about San Lucas and Zimapán in the Q4 cost profile and in 2026?

That's a good question, Olenka. Investors should think about San Lucas and Zimapán in a different way.

San Lucas is an ore sourcing business that buys ore at market prices from small miners under a margin-basis model, as Andrés points out. When metal prices increase, purchase costs increase as well, no?

That is normal in San Lucas' business model, and it does not mean the business is under pressure in any kind. The important matter here is whether San Lucas continues to generate good margins while supporting mill utilization and absorbing some of the milling facility fixed costs, no?

This is very important. San Lucas not only brings margin and profitability to the company, it also help us to absorb part of the mill fixed costs that our milling facilities have in Bolivia.

On that basis, it remains strategically important and a great contributor to our Bolivian operations. Let's remember that San Lucas is a margin business, and it's always keeping a healthy and profitable margin, regardless of the metal price environment.

Zimapán is a different story. As we arrived to level 960, and we announced that early in January 2025, we need to prepare that area for the future years to come.

Since that area, Olenka, is so important for the future of Zimapán, as we have a sizable deposit which we believe will run for many years to come, and the mine has definitely merits to become a significant mine for the company for many years to come, it is important to make developments, bring services, and prepare safety areas for our miners, build underground equipment maintenance facilities, and finally build production and exploration developments as well, no? All of this in addition to the improvements that the milling facility required.

We just installed a new flat cell circuit, which is improving the recovery, the silver recoveries in Zimapán in a significant way. All this CapEx that we incurred throughout 2025 and during this first quarter 2026 are going to start paying back on the second quarter of this year.

Definitely this CapEx put some pressure on cost throughout the year, and especially during Q4, but we really think that we're going to start seeing the benefits as we're seeing improved recoveries, we're seeing already better concentrate quality, and a more consistent operation is expected through 2026 and beyond, no? When investors look at these two assets, San Lucas should be viewed as a margin-driven business, no, and as a strategic ore sourcing contributor, with costs that move in line with market prices, no?

Also, reading in the fine line, San Lucas contributes to offset some of the fixed costs in our milling facilities in Bolivia. That's very important to consider, and those are kind of the hidden benefits of San Lucas.

While Zimapán should be viewed as a core asset with strong underlying fundamentals that justify the significant capital investments that we have been allocating throughout the year. We expect this recent investment to translate into meaningful operational improvements in the near term, and we feel that this is the right moment to position that mine ready for what we clearly had identified as a very promising future for this Zimapán mine.

That's, in my opinion, how investors and how I would like to invite them to see San Lucas.

Just let me add something, Arturo, about Zimapán. We always say that Zimapán, it's a high-volume mine, if those investments are able to get better recoveries, we will get a lot of revenue from it.

Those investments should pay their CapEx really soon, and we expect that to do that. Just that.

Correct.

Got it. Now, shifting to pricing dynamics, Andrés, why does realized silver price differ from spot, and do stronger commodity prices support better margins and cash flow?

Sorry, my mic was off. That's a very important question, Olenka, because it helps to explain the difference between spot silver prices and our average realized silver prices.

The first point to understand is that silver producers, such as Santa Cruz, do not typically sell pure refined silver. We sell concentrates, mainly lead, zinc, and copper concentrate with high silver content, with payable silver.

As a result, the spot silver price is only the starting point. The silver we are paid for and the ounces we report as payable silver are based on the silver fine content that they have, but they are subject to the normal—and let me highlight that—normal treatment, smelting, refining, and other commercial deductions that apply in concentrate sales.

The realized price is naturally lower than the spot price for a pure ounce of silver. Like in LME, the price is for a pure ounce of silver.

That is why, when investors compare spot silver prices with our realized silver price, it is important to remember that our revenues are reported net of those standard metallurgical and commercial deduction. That is not unique to Santa Cruz.

It is simply the normal commercial structure for mining companies that sell concentrate. On the second part of your question, the answer is clearly yes: stronger commodity prices support higher revenue, stronger margins, and better cash flow.

We saw that very clearly in our results, where higher prices contribute meaningfully to our gross voting sales and in profitability. Olenka, the right takeaway here is: spot prices matter a great deal, but realized prices will always reflect the commercial structure of concentrate sales in all mining companies.

I want to highlight that.

Got it. Now looking ahead to this year, Arturo, how should investors think about production and cost direction in 2026?

No, absolutely, Olenka. That's a good question.

We view 2026 as a year defined by improved production quality, improved metal recoveries, and more consistent operating performance across our portfolio of assets. In other words, a year driven by efficiencies and stability from a production point of view.

In that sense, one of the biggest drivers will be the full recovery of Pomabamba and Animas veins at our Bolívar mine. This mine should keep ramping up quarter-over-quarter throughout the year.

At Zimapán, the focus is on turning the recent CapEx invested into better recoveries and to a stronger operating performance. In other words, we should see by mid this year the payback of this last year's investments coming into fruition.

With regards of the other producing assets, we remain very focused on cost optimization and on protecting margins through disciplined execution. At the same time, our revenue mix combine precious metals like silver with base metals such as zinc in our case.

This also calls for a more refined breakdown of our metrics, so that both operational and financial performance are properly understood from any reader. Starting Q1, we plan to enhance or to improve our MD&A disclosure to provide a clearer, more representative view of these measures, helping investors to better understand our performance in the current metal environment, where we're seeing a lot of volatility and definitely silver in our case, silver stepping away or opening a gap with related to zinc, no?

We want investors to see the company as a disciplined, high-quality operator, one that delivers consistent performance, maintains margins, and a strong cash flow across the cycles. Our focus is on operational excellence, transparency, and continuous improvement, ensuring that the strength of the business is clearly reflected in our results and in the way we communicate these results to the investment community.

That's how we want the company to be seen.

Thank you, Arturo. Now, touching on liquidity, Andrés, what is your current liquidity position, what's included in your marketable securities, and how are you thinking about capital allocation?

Thank you, Olenka. Liquidity was one of the clearest areas of strength at the end of 2025.

At the year-end, the company had approximately, as Arturo was mentioning at the beginning, $44 million in cash and approximately $23 million in highly liquid marketable securities. Those securities consist primarily of Treasury bills and Treasury notes, which reinforces the conservative nature of our treasury structure and provides an additional layer of liquidity and financial flexibility.

For your second question there, in terms of capital allocation, our approach remains disciplined and return-focused. Our first priority is to protect and optimize the operating base, particularly in areas where capital can improve recoveries, concentrate quality, as in Zimapán, plant performance, or mine access.

The second priority is to maintain sufficient liquidity to fund organic growth opportunities, including Soracaya, that Arturo, I guess, will mention later, while preserving overall balance sheet strength. Beyond that, we will continue to evaluate external growth opportunities, Olenka, selectively and from a position of financial strength.

The message is that we are not just simply accumulating cash or hoarding cash. The message is that, after materially de-risking our balance sheet—it's very clear—we are now have the flexibility to allocate capital more selectively, more efficiently, and with greater discipline.

That is exactly the position we want to be in as we move into the next phase of growth.

Thank you. Now on working capital, Andrés, what caused the increase in trade receivables during the quarter?

Okay. Great question.

The increase in trade receivables during the quarter was basically driven by the value-added tax receivables, and there are two main reasons behind that. First, those value-added taxes are denominated in local currency.

As both the Bolivian boliviano and the Mexican peso have appreciated, the US dollar value of those value-added taxes receivables have increased when you translate it into our balance sheet. Second, this VAT receivables also tend to growth naturally with the business.

They are linked to tax recoveries associated with operating costs and capital investments related to our export activities. As the business continues, Olenka, to operate and invest, those balances can increase as a normal part of working capital.

However, I think it's important to understand that these are tax-related receivables generated by the business, and during 2025, the company was actually collecting VAT at a faster pace than in 2024. If you look our balance sheet in 2024, we have similar amount, but that means that we have collected what we have been created.

We are getting that faster. We are working on that, but that's good news.

Overall, we view this as a normal component of working capital in an export-oriented mining business like we have.

Thank you, that's very helpful. Now, turning to growth and strategy, Arturo, what is the current view on Soracaya and on disciplined M&A?

Absolutely, Olenka. Soracaya is part of our organic growth pipeline, no?

It's a very silver-oriented mine, and we feel this is going to be a very strong addition to our silver production, and we see it as an important internal growth for the company, no? That said, investors should see 2026 on Soracaya a development and ramp-up year, rather than a full production year or commercial production for Soracaya.

The mine will not be in commercial production this year, but we will end up the year with more production that will allow us to prepare the mine for 2027, where, at that moment, within that year, this mine should get actually into commercial production. The focus in 2026 will be, as I was pointing out, the development and the conditioning of the mine, rather than reaching a full scale, no?

On the M&A, yes, we continue to evaluate opportunities. We have demonstrated that we are actually a strong operator, and we have the human capital, not just to run the mines, but to evaluate opportunities and to actually add value to them when we take over these assets, no?

Our approach remains and will always remain very disciplined. We want assets that fit the portfolio strategically, that can create value over the long term, and that we will be comfortable owing them as part of the company for many years to come, just like the portfolio of assets we have today.

We remain open to M&A, but always with a cautious approach, an investment return-focused, and with long-term approach as part of our assets. That's how we see the M&A into the company.

Perfect, thank you. Just a follow-up question on the operations.

On San Lucas, is it a lower-margin business compared to your main mining operations? Should we think of it as hurting margins, or something that adds strategic value?

San Lucas?

Yes.

Oh, yeah. San Lucas definitely, that's a good question.

It's a very important point, and I want to be very clear about it, because San Lucas is absolutely a strategic business for us, no? We do not view it as a business that hurts our margins in any way.

In fact, it does the opposite. San Lucas is a key part of our operating business model, because it helps us keep our milling facilities running at full capacity all year round.

That is extremely important in mining, because higher plant utilization absorb fixed costs in a more efficient way, as you might imagine, no? When you look at San Lucas, you should not think about it as a competitor to our mines, or in somehow a margin-squeezing operation that is compromising our margins.

It does not take production away from our mines, first of all. What it does, it's maximize our plant utilization, it absorbs some of the fixed costs, and generates additional margin to that ore feed that is continually running into our milling facilities.

It is also important, Olenka, to remember that San Lucas works under a margin business model. It always generates profit, its margins.

The ore is purchased at market prices, when metal prices increase, the purchase cost increases as well. As a consequence, the all-in sustaining cash cost for San Lucas increases.

That can create the impression that San Lucas is pushing costs higher, especially when people focus only on all-in sustaining cash costs to measure the performance of the company, no? That is the wrong approach to look at it.

The right way to evaluate San Lucas is through the margins that it generates, no? This is a company that it's profitable all year round, and we run no chances in that regards.

Once we buy the ore, it's the only company where we use hedging. We hedge the metal contents for one month alone, so that we can make sure that, once we sell the product that is produced, it's sold in protecting the margin that, since day one, we wanted to have on those contents, no?

Finally, from an strategic point of view, San Lucas gives us a real competitive advantage. It gives us flexibility, better plant utilization, or milling facilities utilization.

It gives us a stronger fixed cost absorption throughout our Bolivian operations, and more operating stability than many other producers, which they don't have the advantage of a San Lucas. A very good example was the Bolívar, as we experienced this last year.

When Bolívar was affected by the flooding event, San Lucas helped us continuing operating the Bolívar plant or milling facility at full capacity, which reduced the overall impact on that disruption. For us, San Lucas is not compromising our mining-related margins on the business.

It is a strategic business, and it is important part of why our operation model is resilient in challenging times or events, as we just experienced with Bolívar.

If I can add something, Arturo, there. We always say that we have both comparative and competitive advantage.

Comparative because we have very strong mines, very high-grade mines, with very good ore, etc., but we also have a competitive advantage because of of San Lucas. San Lucas is very strategic for us.

It is important to understand that it give us this as a as an operators, we know how to work in Latin America. San Lucas is not only strategically because it help us keep running our milling facility running at 100%, or because it give us margins, but it help us control the environment.

Also, we pay taxes, you know? We we we we are with the communities, all those things that are add value, no?

We definitely know how to work in Latin America, and I think our business model should be should be appreciated in that front.

That's a good point. San Lucas also adds a lot of value to the mining industry in Bolivia.

We have discussed this before, but we even provide safety training to the small miners in some cases, and the KYC process to become a San Lucas supplier is a very thorough. We make sure that they met values of life, no, like no child labor, best safety standards as possible, and, of course, women rights and many other things.

In addition to all those contributions, we bring them to the formal economy, we retain taxes and pay them on their behalf, even the authorities are receiving more moneys in their communities by these taxes that otherwise, in the informality, they would never see, no? It is a very interesting circle, where it complements in a very positive way.

Perfect, thank you. Now on the equity story, Arturo, after a strong share price performance in 2025, how should investors think about expectations for 2026, sustaining that momentum, and the potential path for a TSX uplisting?

Yes. Interesting question.

I guess there's only one way that we can sustain momentum in 2026, and this is by an appropriate execution in our plans. This must come from execution, no, and eventually this will translate into financial performance, and the rest will come along, no?

Let me walk you in more detail through how we're thinking about our priorities, Olenka. First, as I have said before, our focus is to bring Bolívar mine back into full production, no?

We're well ahead on that, and the program, the dewatering program, is very advanced, no? At Zimapán, for example, we are continuing to improve recoveries and improve the quality of our concentrate.

That will make of this mine a very strong producer for many years to come. That's our focus as well, also to capitalize on all the CapEx that we have been investing at Zimapán, no?

The results will come shortly, and will be expressed and in our financials. Across our portfolio of assets, we remain very firmly committed to cost discipline, while at the same time reinforcing our operational performance at each mine.

In parallel to all this, we're advancing Soracaya project towards a full permitting, with the objective of achieving initial small-scale production by the end of this year. At the same time, as you point out, we remain disciplined on a corporate side.

The Nasdaq listing was an important milestone for us, and we will continue working on an uplisting of the company on the TSX in the next coming months. If we execute well in these priorities, our operating and financial results will reflect that progress, and we believe that this is what will ultimately drive the market momentum for the company in this year 2026, no?

Perfect. Thank you so much.

We have a few live questions. The first one is: can investors expect a buyback program?

That's a good question. Definitely, we have a strong treasury today.

We are comfortable with implementing a buyback program. First things first, and we should uplist the company to the big board, into the TSX, and definitely afterwards, a buyback program should be in place.

We believe that the share price today is undervalued by any metrics that we want to see, and with that, I think the share buyback program, it's in the right moment for us to put in place and to start getting shares out of the markets,

no, yeah, but that's something

in a few words. Olenka,

sorry, Arturo.

No, please carry on.

Olenka, as we have said before, our first priority is to protect our operating base, no, particularly doing investments in order to get better recoveries. I think we have proven that we can do that.

In Caballo Blanco, we have done that,

and

we were able to get better recoveries. I think we have the organic growth in Soracaya.

We are also doing some investments to improve our milling facilities. It's definitely on our radar.

However, first things first, as Arturo have said. We are a growth company.

We believe we can grow it more. We may be acquire some other things that we can improve.

We have proven that we are able to do that, that we have proven that we are good operators. Yes, first things first, we are going to protect our company, we're going to have this flexibility going forward.

We need that flexibility. It is important to have it, and I think most of producers will want to have what we have.

We will keep that for the time being.

Got it. How should investors look at CapEx in 2026 compared to 2025?

CapEx, that's a good question, especially for Zimapán, Olenka. Zimapán CapEx is starting to settle.

The last investment, or let's say important investment, was the flash cell circuits for lead. That circuit is proving to be the very right decision.

It's improving the silver recoveries in an important way. Just to give you some metrics, that cell circuit cost us around $2.5 million, and we are increasing revenues at Zimapán for around $700,000 a month by the increased recoveries that we're having with this flash cell circuit.

It's paying back on three months, no, technically. Three, four months.

Those are the kind of investments or CapEx that we're doing, and our driver. Every CapEx needs to be justified.

To answer your question in a short way, CapEx will be normalizing now in 2026. Especially in Zimapán, CapEx by the second quarter should be more of a sustained CapEx alone, no?

Got it. What drove production declines in 2025 at Caballo Blanco and Porco, and what is the outlook for these this year?

I think it is important to see Porco of the kind of mine it is. Porco is a zinc-oriented mine, and I want investors to understand that.

The head grades were a little bit lower this year, but zinc performed well. Caballo Blanco, on the other hand, remember that we have this change in Q3 2024, and that's something they have to look in the MD&A.

Before we have three mines in Caballo Blanco, which were Colquechaquita, Tres Amigos, and Reserva mine, that reported to just one mill facility, which is the Don Diego facility. If you look into the numbers, we basically now have only two mines sending mineral to that plant.

With only two mines, we have been able almost to get the same amount of metal that when we got three mines. The other mine, the Reserva mine, now is send its ore to San Lucas, and we mix it with the small miners, because they have higher grades.

We need to see it that way. We have not decreased the production.

It's just that we have changed it a little bit, but that has given us more revenue and better operating income, Olenka.

Got it. I think we have time for one more question.

How has the new mining-friendly Bolivian government helped Santa Cruz?

I will leave Andrés as Bolivian to respond on that one, but I'm very positive.

No, yes. Yes, of course.

As we were hoping for, this new government has been very supporting, not only to the mining sector, but all exporters in Bolivia. Remember that Bolivia is experiencing a balance-of-payment problem, exports are very important for them.

We, as a miners, bring a lot of dollars into the economy. We bring a lot of labor into the economy.

They are working on changing the law. We know we have spoken with them.

They know that they have to have more security. Investors have to have more security when they invest in Bolivia.

We're very positive on that front. Rodrigo Paz and his government are very supportive of foreign investment.

We are, yeah, I think we are happy with that. They are talking to all the investors community here in Bolivia, the companies, not only to us, but also to the other experts that are more related to energy, etc.

It's positive overall, Olenka.

Good to hear. Thank you so much for your time today, Arturo and Andrés.

Anything else you'd like to cover today?

No, I guess, just stay tuned. We'll keep working, we'll keep very focused on our operations and making sure that we deliver.

We'll be definitely cautious on how we manage both corporate side of the company and our operations, yeah, this should be a very important year for us and a very interesting one in terms of cash flow.

Yeah. I think, Olenka, something that we want to leave investors with is that we are going to improve our reporting going forward in Q1.

I know sometimes our business model can be a little bit difficult to understand, but it's a very good business model. We're going to improve our production news release, our MD&A.

We're going to give our investors community more information. They just need to look our balance sheet, our production, our cash flow statements, etc., and they will see that we are a very strong company.

We're building cash, and we have paid the Glencore base purchase price. We're definitely on a good track.

We're always welcome to answer questions if you have any other questions that we were not able to cover in this webinar. Please just drop us a line, and we will be able to respond that.

Absolutely. Yeah.

Perfect. Thank you again, and thank you to everyone who joined today.

If you have any questions, feel free to email us, and I hope you have a great afternoon.

Thank you, Olenka. Thanks, everyone.

Thank you, everyone.