Amcor Plc (AMCR) Q2 2026 Earnings Call Transcript

Amcor Plc (NYSE: AMCR) Q2 2026 Earnings Call dated Feb. 03, 2026

Corporate Participants:

Tracey Whitehead, — Global Head of Investor Relations.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

Stephen Scherger — Chief Financial officer and Executive Vice-President

Analysts:

Ghansham Panjabi — Analyst

Jakob Cakarnis — Analyst

Anthony Pettinari — Analyst

Brook Campbell- — Analyst

George Staphos — Analyst

Niraj-Samip Shah — Analyst

Jeffrey Zekauskas — Analyst

Ramoun Lazar — Analyst

Cameron McDonald — Analyst

Michael Roxland — Analyst

Keith Chau — Analyst

Nathan Reilly — Analyst

John Purtell — Analyst

Presentation:

operator

Sa. Sam. Sa. Ram. Thank you for standing by. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to Today’s Amcor Fiscal 2026 second quarter earnings call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the Speaker’s remarks, there will be a question and answer session. If you’d like to ask a question during this time, simply press STAR followed by the number one on your telephone keypad and if you’d like to withdraw your question, simply press Star one again. Thank you and I would now like to turn the call over to Tracy Whitehead, Head of Investor Relations.

Tracey Whitehead, — Global Head of Investor Relations.

Tracy thank you operator and thank you everyone for joining Amcor’s fiscal 2026 second quarter earnings call. Joining the call today is Peter Koneczny, Chief Executive Officer and Steve Scherger, Chief Financial Officer. Before I hand over, let me note a few items on our website amcor.com under the Investor section you’ll find today’s press release and presentation which we will discuss on this call. Please be aware that that we’ll also discuss non GAAP financial measures and related reconciliations can be found in those documents on the website. Remarks will also include forward looking statements that are based on management’s current views and assumptions.

The second slide in today’s presentation lists several factors that could cause future results to be different than current estimates. Reference can be made to Amcor’s SEC filings, including our statements on Form 10K and 10Q for further details. Please note that during the question and answer session we request that you limit yourself to a single question and then rejoin the queue if you have any additional questions or follow ups with that. Over to you pk.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

Thank you Tracy and thank you to everyone joining us. I’m pleased to welcome you today to discuss our fiscal 2026 second quarter results. This is a transformative and exciting time for umcor. Our acquisition of Berry created a global leader in consumer packaging and dispensing solutions while realizing the benefits of this combination and executing well, resulting in strong momentum toward achieving our fiscal 2026 commitments. With a strengthened platform and a clear growth roadmap, Amkor is well positioned to deliver significant long term value for shareholders. Before turning to today’s key messages, as always, we will start with Safety on slide three.

The well being of our colleagues is a core value for Amcor and our commitment to safety remains unwavering. For Q2, our industry leading safety performance continued with Amcor’s total recordable incident rate at 0.52. This is a modest increase compared with last year’s performance which is not unusual when we acquire a business. We have moved quickly to drive safety performance across our combined business and are pleased to see this key metric improve compared to the September quarter. Additionally, 79% of all Amcor sites remained injury free through Q2. Slide 4 highlights the key messages for today aligned with our near term priorities which have not changed continuing to deliver on the core business, accelerating synergy realization and further strengthening the business through portfolio optimization actions.

Each and all these near term priorities are contributing to setting Amkor up to deliver solid and sustained volume driven organic earnings growth over the mid to longer term. First, our financial performance in the second quarter was in line with the expectations we set out in October, maintaining momentum toward our full year objectives. Adjusted EPS was up 7% for the quarter and 14% for the first half as we continue to execute well against our priorities and our market opportunities. Across our core portfolio, comparable adjusted EBIT was up 7% driven by Synergy benefits and in line with the prior year excluding synergies.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

This reflects the successful effort of our teams to fully offset the impact of lower volumes with cost and productivity benefits. Our continued solid execution demonstrates the resilience of our business and the capability of our people in what continues to be a challenging and dynamic market environment. Second, synergies were at the upper end of our guidance range with benefits accelerating to $55 million in Q2 and totaling $93 million for the first half. The expanding Synergy pipeline combined with our proven integration track record reinforces our confidence in delivering at least $260 million of synergies in fiscal 2026.

Third, we have reaffirmed our financial guidance for the fiscal year updating our adjusted eps expectations to $4.00 to $4.15 per share to reflect the recent 1 for 5 reverse stock split. We remain on track to deliver double digit EPS growth in fiscal 2026 and to double free cash flow versus fiscal 2025 primarily driven by delivery of identified synergies and productivity gains. And lastly, our identified portfolio optimization actions are advancing well and at pace in a relatively short period of time. We’ve made meaningful progress evaluating alternatives for our $2.5 billion of non core businesses, including the North American beverage business.

We believe these focused actions will position us for stronger, more sustainable long term growth. Turning now to Slide 5 and financial performance for the second quarter and first, in absolute terms, the business generated strong quarterly revenue of $5.4 billion, EBITDA of $826 million and EBIT of $603 million. This is significantly higher than the prior year as a result of the Berry acquisition, disciplined cost management, improved productivity and accelerating synergies. Adjusted EPS has also been updated to reflect the reverse stock split. We delivered $0.86 per share for the quarter in line with our expectations, including a one time favorable tax benefit offset by weaker performance in our non core business portfolio which we expect will improve in the second half.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

Free cash flow was $289 million for the quarter after funding approximately $70 million of acquisition related cash cost and today the Board declared a quarterly dividend of $0.65 per share which is up over the prior year and continues our long term commitments to annualized dividend growth. Overall, these results are aligned with our expectations eight months after a transformational acquisition and demonstrate our ability to execute against our commitments. Taking advantage of a unique opportunity to optimize the portfolio was one of the key commitments we highlighted when announcing the acquisition. As shown on Slide 6, our $20 billion core portfolio represents the strongest part of the combined business.

The core portfolio includes our six focus categories namely health, beauty and Wellness, protein Liquids, Food service and pet care. This is where we hold leadership positions, where innovation drives differentiation and value and where long term consumer demand is most durable. These categories reflect the markets where Umkor has a distinct competitive advantage when viewed on its own. The core portfolio has a stronger financial profile and outperforms the total company across all key financial metrics including volumes. In the second quarter, our estimated core portfolio volume performance was approximately 100 basis points better than the total. Combined portfolio volumes for the core business were approximately 1.5% lower than the prior year.

Similar to the first quarter with market dynamics remaining largely unchanged. Growth across our focus categories modestly outperformed the broader portfolio in both segments. Adjusted EBIT margins of approximately 12% also reflect a higher concentration of advanced solutions. Improved mix within our core portfolio and synergy benefits. Adjusted EBIT dollars were up approximately 7%, largely reflecting synergy benefits. Excluding synergies, we held earnings flat with a prior year in a market with modestly declining volumes. This is a solid result achieved through a focus on the cost and productivity levers within our control. Likewise, as mentioned earlier, our portfolio optimization actions are advancing with pace.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

We’re making strong progress exploring alternatives for the remaining $2.5 billion of non core businesses, including encouraging discussion related to the North American beverage business. We believe these actions will ultimately ensure resources are allocated to the highest value opportunities within our core portfolio. Slide 7 shows Q2 synergies continue to accelerate as expected, resulting in $55 million of benefits in the quarter at the upper end of our expected range and $93 million in the first half. G& A synergies reflect organizational redesign, system consolidation and simplification efforts across corporate support functions. We remain on track and have reduced headcount by over 600, consistent with our integration roadmap.

As expected, procurement synergies continue to ramp up as we consolidate, spend, harmonize specifications and align pricing across the combined supplier base. Negotiations and agreements with our major vendors are on track, underpinning our confidence in delivering $325 million in procurement synergies by the end of fiscal 2028. Fiscal benefits are also flowing through as expected, reaching approximately $10 million through the first half as we continue to execute and optimize our debt and tax structures. Additionally, we are gaining traction on operational Synergies with approximately 20 site closures or restructures approved or announced. These synergies, as expected, will primarily materialize in years two and three of our Synergy Realization Timeline.

Growth synergies have also been strong. We’re gaining momentum as customers validate the value we bring through our expanded footprint and integrated product offerings to meet complete and complex packaging needs. Annualized sales revenue from business wins directly linked to our combination with berry now exceeds $100 million, a strong start to our original three year target of $280 million. We expect delivery against these wins will commence in the second half of fiscal 2026. Adding another example of those we discussed last quarter, our strengthened supply chain and multi format capabilities have enabled us to support a major global pharmaceutical customer as they launch a solid oral dose GLP1 therapy drug.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

This is an exciting win that will benefit both segments through supply of blister packaging in Europe and rigid containers in the U.S. overall, our teams are executing well against our proven integration playbook. We also remain confident in our ability to deliver at least $260 million of synergies in fiscal 2026 and a total of $650 million of synergies through fiscal 2028. Before turning the call over, I’d like to take a moment to formally welcome Steve Scherger, who joined us as AMCOR CFO nearly three months ago. Steve has spent his early days deeply engaged, meeting with our executive team, immersing himself in our business and getting a clear line of sight into our priorities and opportunities.

He brings deep industry experience and a strong understanding of both the US and global packaging markets, and we are excited to have him on board. We’re fortunate to have an executive of his caliber and reputation join our leadership team and we’re confident that his insights and experience will further strengthen our ability to deliver value for our customers and shareholders in the years ahead. Steve, over to you.

Stephen Scherger — Chief Financial officer and Executive Vice-President

Thank you pk for those kind words. It is an honor to be here with you and our 70,000 colleagues. In my first few months at Amcor, I’ve had the opportunity to meet teams from across the organization and around the world, gaining a deeper understanding of the operational and strategic priorities that will drive and shape significant value creation for years to come. What has stood out most is amcor’s clear market leadership, disciplined approach to creating value, and the exceptional quality and capabilities of the people who drive performance globally every day this quarter. As you can see, we are sharing some additional materials and analytics with you to help provide a clear view of our underlying market trends and the exceptional global consumer packaging platform we are building.

I look forward to continuing to share our strategic priorities with current and potential investors in ways that will simplify and quantify our compelling value creation model. I look forward to partnering with our global leadership team as we build momentum and deliver strong results for our customers and shareholders. Let me start with the Global Flexible Packaging solutions segment on slide 8. Sales for the segment increased 23% on a constant currency basis, driven primarily by the Berry acquisition. On a comparable basis, volumes were down approximately 2% and were similar to what we experienced in Q1 in all regions.

In the developed regions of North America and Europe, volume trends were consistent with the first quarter down low to mid single digits, with Europe remaining modestly more challenged than North America. Volumes across emerging markets were as expected, with low single digit growth in Asia Pacific offset by modestly lower volumes in Latin America. By market category, volumes were higher in pet food and meat proteins. This was offset by lower volumes in other nutrition liquids and unconverted film and foil. Overall, our focus categories performed modestly better than the rest of the portfolio. Adjusted EBIT rose 22% on a constant currency basis to $402 million, driven by approximately $65 million of acquired earnings net of divestments.

Stephen Scherger — Chief Financial officer and Executive Vice-President

On a comparable constant currency basis, adjusted ebit was up approximately 1% and adjusted EBIT margin of 12.6% reflects accelerating synergy benefits in line with our expectations. Excluding synergies, comparable earnings were broadly in line with the prior year. Our teams remained resolute in their focus on disciplined cost performance and driving productivity improvements to offset the unfavorable impact of lower volumes. Turning to slide nine and the Global Rigid Packaging Solutions segment, sales for the segment increased significantly on a constant currency basis, mainly as a result of the Berry acquisition. On a comparable basis, volumes were flat with the prior year excluding non core businesses.

This represents a sequential improvement of approximately 1% or 100 basis points driven by improved growth in emerging markets where volumes were up low single digits, primarily in Latin America. In developed market regions excluding non core businesses, North America volumes were flat compared with the prior year. As expected, volumes in Europe remained somewhat challenged and were down low single digits. Similar to the flexibles segment focus categories performed better than the rest of the broader portfolio with growth in the pet food, protein and beauty and wellness markets. This growth offset softer volumes in the food, service and health care markets.

Adjusted EBIT was $228 million up over last year on a constant currency basis driven by approximately $165 million of acquired earnings net of divestments. On a constant currency comparable basis and excluding non core businesses, adjusted ebit was up 15% as a result of accelerating synergy benefits excluding synergies, adjusted EBIT was in line with the prior year with disciplined cost performance offsetting modestly unfavorable mix. Adjusted EBIT margin excluding non core businesses improved approximately 200 basis points and was 12% similar to the flexible segment, underscoring the strength of the business we are creating with this transformational acquisition.

Stephen Scherger — Chief Financial officer and Executive Vice-President

Moving to Slide 10 free cash flow for the quarter was $289 million, resulting in a first half cash outflow of $53 million in line with expectations. First half capital spending was $459 million up compared with the prior year. As anticipated, we continue to expect fiscal 2026 capital spending to be in a range of 850 to $900 million. Adjusted leverage exiting the quarter was 3.6 times, consistent with the seasonal cash flow patterns. We expect stronger cash flow in Q3 and continue to expect adjusted fiscal year end leverage to be in the 3.1x to 3.2x range. Our commitment to an investment grade credit rating, a strong balance sheet and a modestly growing dividend annually remains unchanged.

Strong annual cash flow generation fully supports our capital allocation priorities. Turning to Slide 11 and our financial guidance, another quarter of results in line with expectations reinforce our confidence in delivering a year of strong adjusted EPS and cash flow growth. As PK noted earlier, we are reaffirming our full year guidance ranges today. Adjusted EPS expectations remain unchanged while noting the range has been updated to a range of $4 to $4.15 per share reflecting our recent 1 for 5 reverse stock split. Our expected year over year adjusted eps growth of 12% to 17% is primarily driven by synergy capture in line with our commitments and continued strong cost control as we execute in a challenging market environment.

These actions, combined with the portfolio optimization steps PK covered earlier will position us well to deliver sustained volume driven organic growth over the mid to longer term. We are also reaffirming free cash flow guidance of 1.8 to $1.9 billion relative to the first half of the year. Our guidance implies a step up in earnings in the second half in line with our expectations driven by three key components. First, synergy benefits will continue to build. Second, seasonality is typically stronger in the second half of the year and third, performance across our non core businesses is expected to improve, supported by recently renegotiated customer contracts and improved operating performance compared to the prior year.

Looking to the third quarter, we expect adjusted EPS to be in the range of $0.90 to $1 per share, including realization of approximately 70 to $80 million of synergy benefits. Please also draw your attention to supplemental third quarter and updated full year guidance metrics and in the Appendix section on slide 14 which should be helpful when updating financial models. In summary, we are executing well and delivering against our commitments as we continue to take steps to further strengthen the business and our performance. With that, I’ll hand the call back to PK to close out pk.

Peter Konieczny — Chief Executive Officer

Thanks Steve. In closing, we’re making tangible progress across all three of our strategic initiatives. These actions support our long term organic growth objectives translating into sustainable volume driven earnings growth over the mid to longer term. As we close out the first half of fiscal 2026 and look ahead, we are pleased with our progress, we’re executing well, our financial performance is in line with expectations and we are delivering against our commitments, demonstrating the resilience of our business in a challenging market environment. We’re on track to deliver at least $260 million of synergies this fiscal year and $650 million over three years.

We have reaffirmed our fiscal 2026 adjusted EPS and free cash flow guidance and portfolio actions are progressing with pace. That concludes our prepared remarks and with that operator please open the line for questions.

Questions and Answers:

operator

Thank you. And at this time I would like to remind everyone in order to ask a question, press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. In the interest of time we like Excuse me. We would like to remind participants to limit their questions to one and to rejoin the queue for any follow ups and we will pause just a moment to compile the Q and A roster and it looks like our first question today comes from the line of Gunsham Punjabi with Baird Gunsham, please go ahead.

Ghansham Panjabi

Thanks, operator. First off, Steve, congrats to you and welcome back. Best wishes in your new role, I guess, you know. Yeah, thanks. You know, I guess PK, in terms of the volumes, or Steve for that matter, in terms of your expectation for volume for the next two quarters, which are your fiscal year 26, are you embedding Just share with us in terms of what you’re embedding in terms of volumes between the two segments, have you seen any improvement in your production backlogs or any other forward indicators that you track? And just asking, because some of the CPGs have reported thus far have said some, you know, generally speaking, very favorable things as it relates to volumes and pivoting towards volume velocity in fiscal year 26.

I’m just curious if you’ve seen any impact of that whatsoever at this point. Thanks.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, thanks Ganch. I’m happy to give you some color and then maybe Steve wants to follow up and provide some context with regards to our financial expectations. Well, generally speaking, I’d say we’re approaching the back half not much different from what we saw in the first half and therefore the commentary is even very much aligned with what we said in November. I’ll start with the positives. I think we’re making good progress on the revenue synergies, as we pointed out in our prepared comments, and we are very much focused on the growth initiatives that we’re driving across the business, so those could potentially provide some upside.

But the reality is we’re operating in a market that is low single digits down. And while everybody is hoping that the environment will turn in the short term in the second half, we’re approaching it very much consistent with what we’ve seen in the first half. What that means is we will continue to apply the same recipe in terms of focusing on cost flexing the organization according with the volume demand that we’re seeing. So we do see some opportunity for improvement in the back half, but we’re hoping for the best and planning for something that’s very much consistent with the first half.

Steve.

Stephen Scherger

Yeah, and thanks bk. And just to add a little bit to that, Ganchum, our guidance assumes really at the bottom half of the guidance, if you will, assumes a market environment similar to what we’ve been experiencing. So similar to the one and a half percent that we were down in the quarter. So really the bottom half assumes consistent volume environment and as PK said, well, the upper half would be more aligned with the possibility possibility of more positive activity with our customers as well as the capture of revenue synergies and the work we’re doing to gain to gain position.

operator

Great, thanks, Goncham. And our next question comes from the line of Jacob Kakarnis with Jarden Australia. Jacob, please go ahead.

Jakob Cakarnis

Thanks operator. Evening, PK and Steve. I just want to focus now that we’ve got the guidance for the third quarter, more on the fourth quarter and exit rates if we could. Seasonally, it looks like your EPS historically has been about 30% of the full year. In that fourth quarter, it looks like the guidance is largely congruent with that sort of shape for the result. Could you just give us, outside of volumes and market performance, some of the initiatives you’re enacting through the fourth quarter that give you confidence around that guidance, please?

Stephen Scherger

Jacob, this is Steve. Maybe just try to take you through the first half, second half and then a little bit third quarter, fourth quarter, as we look first half, second half, I’ll focus on EBIT improvement. Really there’s three things that will drive first half, second half, EBIT improvement. One is just seasonality, a little bit of what you were just talking about. We should see about $100 million of EBIT improvement first half to second half, just seasonally, which would be consistent with historical expectations. Synergy growth is very important. First half, second half. The at least $260 million of of synergy for the year is another hundred million dollars of improvement first half, second half.

And then I’m sure we’ll talk a little bit more about our non core businesses. The 2.5 billion of non core. We’ll see improvement first half, second half there as well. Particularly given a challenging second quarter that we saw with our non core businesses, primarily the North American beverage business. Q3 to Q4 improvement to your question. That too, Synergy capture will continue to accelerate Q3 to Q4, our non core businesses, we should see improvement Q3 to Q4. And then one of the things that we’ll see in Q4 specifically on a year over year basis is a year ago in Q4 we had some challenges with our North American beverage business.

And we have More confidence that Q4 year over year we’ll see improvement on that front. So just a little bit of first half, second half and third quarter, fourth quarter for you. I hope that helps with the context.

operator

Great, thank you, Jacob. And our next question comes from the line of Anthony Pettinari with Citi. Anthony, please go ahead.

Anthony Pettinari

Good evening. Hey, just following up on Goncham’s question. In terms of the volume performance in the first half and maybe the embedded. Assumptions for the second half. I mean, do you think in your major categories are you, is your volume performance basically in line with the broader industry? Do you think that you’re gaining a. Little bit of share or conversely, are you letting go of some business that’s maybe become less profitable?

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, thanks Anthony. I think I’ll have a go at this one. Let me just run you through the numbers again to calibrate and at the same time give you a bit of color. So the overall company in the second quarter was down 2.5% on volumes and that would have been a performance that’s very similar to the first quarter. And when you take a really hard look, you probably see a performance that is marginally better in the first quarter. But I’d be cautious to read too much into that just because I would like to see a bit more of a trend here.

And also the numbers are not that much different. So very much in line I would say volume performance wise with the first quarter. Now let me dive into that a little bit more. And by doing that I’ll focus on the core, on the core portfolio. So now I’m talking about the 20 billion out of the 23 billion of the company and the core portfolio really is 1.5% down. That’s about 100 base points better than the overall business. And the delta obviously is made up by the non core part of the business, but the core is 1.5% down.

I go into the segments between rigids and flexibles. Again, both have been very similar to Q1. Flexibles down, low, single digits, rigid, flat. Happy with that. We’re happy with the flat performance of rigids. I guess what we’re seeing there is that North America is holding up. We’re seeing some growth in Latam and would like to believe that that’s a combination of market improvement maybe, but also the efforts that we’re investing in the business in order to improve the volume performance overall. So happy with the ridgid’s performance. If I go by region. You know.

Anthony Pettinari

North America, encouraging, as I said, low single digits down a little better than Q1. Europe’s a bit weaker than North America across both segments and we’re seeing growth again in the emerging markets. Low single digits after we’ve been flat in Q1. And then I’ll make one more comment which is important because we keep referencing the focus segments of the business which are more than 50% of the core business and collectively those focus segments have outperformed the core business overall and we’re happy with that. Pet care was certainly a standout example. We’ve seen high single digits growth over a couple of periods now and there I would say we probably are gaining some share.

And meat proteins has likewise been a category we’re happy with with low single digits growth. And that would be consistent with the efforts that we’ve put into the category in the past. So I think that gives you some color.

operator

Great. Thank you so much for the question, Anthony. And our next question comes from the line of Brooke Crawford with Baron Joey. Brooke, please go ahead.

Brook Campbell-

Yeah, thanks for taking my question. It was just on the second half, implied earnings improvement, which you know, you’ve already kind of talked through there. But just with respect to the non core portfolio, can you provide some EBIT numbers in terms of what we should expect? Improvement in the non core EBIT contribution in the second half versus the first half would be super helpful, thanks.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah. Brooke, again, this is pk. Let me provide some color and then Steve can help you out on the numbers. The non core business we believe had a tough quarter in Q2 and that was mostly driven by volumes. Sequentially Q2 was a little weaker than Q1, particularly in the North American beverage business. I would say we’ve been looking for explanations and signs. We’ve been looking at destocking activities, but in the core portfolio of our business, I wouldn’t say I could see any, any destocking impact in the non core business. There may have been some targeted destocking, so that may have been one of the reasons that drove the volume performance down.

The other two things that I want to tell you is operationally we operated well in the non core portfolio and that relates back to some challenges that we had in prior periods. But we exited the first quarter already saying that we were okay with that. And I can confirm that in the second quarter making these comments. Also in terms of the outlook into the second half, the thing that’s changing going forward for the non core business is that we’ve also sat down with a number of our customers and we have looked at the commercial terms of our contract and really in a real partnership basis, we have been able to adjust some of those terms on a very fair basis which will improve the business going forward.

So that gives me confidence we’re operating well in the back half. That’s our assumption. Commercial terms have improved, that will give us a lift. Then we’ll have to see what the volume situation is like. But Certainly, you know, Q2 versus Q3 I would expect a bit of a lift if I’m, if I’m correct with my assumption that we did have some destocking.

Stephen Scherger

Yeah, Brooke, this is Steve. Just to kind of add some of the facts there to what PK was describing. As PK mentioned was a difficult quarter for our non core businesses. EBIT margins in the 3% range. And that was really where we saw some of the headwinds, the $30 million of year over year headwind that was in the context of our overall still growing EBIT at the company level. First half EBIT margins for our non core business, roughly the 1.2 billion of top line in the 5% range. So that just kind of speaks to the first half as we look to the second half.

As PK mentioned, new contractual terms, better pricing, good operating environment. We should operate EBIT back in more traditional levels, which is more in the 7, 8% range, which year first half to second half would be about a $50 million improvement in that business, which is really kind of the third component. We were talking earlier of the first half to second half improvement relative to the North American beverage business in the context of the total non core businesses.

operator

All right, thanks, Brooke. And our next question comes from the line of George Staphos with Bank of America. George, please go ahead.

George Staphos

Thanks very much. Hi everyone. Steve, good to hear you. Welcome back. Pk. Thanks for the details as well. I guess my question is the following. Can you talk about, especially in your focus categories and flexible, what the exit rate on volume was from fiscal 2Q into fiscal 3Q? Where are you seeing perhaps some acceleration or decline, the sort of related question behind the question? You know, when I look at the segment results for flexible on slide 8, you know, I know you’re pleased with the synergies and certainly that’s going well, but there was really not a lot of operating leverage, a lot of earnings growth ex the acquisition and I’m assuming it’s the core businesses being down in volume.

So if you could talk about the exit rates on your focus categories. Inflexible, what’s doing well, what’s not and what kind of the mix effect of declining volume was in 2Q for flexibles. Thank you.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, thanks, George. Let me give this a try and then Steve can follow up if he can add some additional value. So exit rates of the focus categories. You know, I’m not a big believer of dissecting a quarter into beginning, middle and end and sort of talking about the volume performance in a very short period of time and read too much into it. But what I can tell you is and I made this comment, the focus categories collectively outperformed the core business in the second quarter and I can and the core business was 1.5% down.

The focus categories were anywhere between 50 and 100 base points better than that. So that gives you a bit of a flavor of how the focus categories performed. Now as to the performance between the six, I made a couple of comments already. I guess on the positive side, pet care really strong and this is went as far as saying in an earlier question that I think we are gaining share in pet care. Meat protein was up low single digits so we liked that. Dairy was a little softer and meat and dairy together make up protein.

Then if I go to health, beauty and wellness, healthcare was down just a tad. You would wonder why that is. But if you look at the quarter again short period of time, the US. Flu season was a little weaker.

George Staphos

That sort of is a bit of a driver. And beauty and wellness was in line with growth in Europe, a little weaker in Asia. The rest of the focus categories are sort of in the range of low single digits down, maybe food service a little more which is a reflection of the value conscious behavior of the consumer. And that sort of speaks to the mix between the different categories. Steve, is there anything you want to add?

Peter Konieczny

No, I think the only thing to add there George, to your segment component of the question, I think if you look at the flexible segment, the page 8 kind of the lower left overall volumes were down 2% as we mentioned in the flexible segment while ebit was up 1%. Synergy capture in the flexibles business this quarter was in about the $10 million range. So only 10 of our 50 million of EBITDA EBIT synergies. So actually the EBIT on a comparable basis up roughly up roughly $5 million synergies plus 10. The core business actually operated pretty close to flat, just down very modestly.

So I think the core we’re actually very pleased with how the core business performed in a modestly down volume environment where we really saw the positive benefits on the rigid segments in the kind of the lower left excluding the non core businesses which we mentioned were down $30 million on a year over year basis was actually up 15%. And so to put that into context it’s about $35 million and 30 million of our 50 of EBIT synergy capture was in the RIDGID segment because given that’s where the Berry business primarily is, we saw a lot of our of our G and A and A Lot of our procurement synergies captured there and there too.

Excluding that the core business performed quite nicely flattish on a, in a flat volume environment. So that’s just to give you a little bit of the details on the segment side.

operator

Great, thank you, George. And our next question comes from the line of Neeraj Shah with Goldman Sachs. Neeraj, please go ahead.

Niraj-Samip Shah

Hi guys, thanks for taking my question. Just double clicking on synergies. Can you give us some color on the split between GNA and procurement in the second quarter? I think it’s skewed to GNA in the first quarter, but also how you expect that to look in the second half and how the conversations with the suppliers are progressing as well, please.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, I can touch on that and PK can add some color there. Of the $50 million of Synergy capture, EBITDA synergy capture for the, for the quarter, it split actually quite evenly between procurement synergies and G and A. So it was those two categories, the 55 that we mentioned, the incremental 5 are the financial synergies. Kind of more on the, on the interest and tax side. So pretty evenly split between procurement and G and A. As we look forward, we’ll continue to be on path relative to procurement and GNA synergies. We’re not expecting much in the form of revenue synergies in the second half of the year.

That will be mostly positive that we’re going to start to see in fiscal out into 2027. So post June of this year we’ll also start to see some of the operational synergies. That’s really where we’ve been investing for facility improvement and consolidation. Those synergies will start to ramp up as we look past this year’s fiscal year end. So hopefully that gives you a little bit of the detail there.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, maybe. In terms of the color on the procurement side, what I can tell you is that generally we feel really good about the synergy ramp up and also the pipeline that supports our expectations for the back half of the year. Steve already said, you know, what hits first is gna. What then comes second is procurements. As you watch through the inventory, anything on the network takes a little more time because it typically has to do with plant restructuring or closures. And the commercial side while awarded takes a moment for it to also come through.

That’s sort of the background to Steve’s commentary which I fully support. On the procurement side, we have a number of conversations with our suppliers. Obviously about half of the total synergies that we’re expecting of the 650 are procurement related and the compensations have gone well and to an extent that again, we feel very confident about our ability to deliver the synergies. If procurement wouldn’t perform, we couldn’t get there just because of the weight in the portfolio. So feel very good about that.

operator

Great. Thank you, Neeraj. And our next question comes from the line of Jeff Zukowskis from JP Morgan. Jeff, please go ahead.

Jeffrey Zekauskas

Thanks very much. Sort of a two part question. Is the conclusion that we should draw from slide six, is it that the non core businesses have very minimal ebit? And secondly, on your raw material synergies, are the raw material synergies independent of the general level of raw material values? So in other words, in a world in which oil falls in value and we’ve seen polypropylene prices fall and polyethylene prices fall, is the amount of synergy capture simply smaller? And in a world in which raw material prices really rise, would it be higher or is it independent of commodity changes in value?

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, Jeff, maybe I’ll start on the non core and I’ll just go back to what we mentioned a little bit earlier. Just on the, the margin profiles you touched on it. Our non core businesses, the two and a half billion, operated through the first half at about 5% EBIT margins. So think EBITDA in the, you know, in the, in the just sub 10% range. And that was below traditional levels mostly because of a very difficult Q2, as we mentioned, down at 3% some of the significant volume decline that we saw there, high single digits during the quarter.

We do expect that EBIT margins will return to more normalized levels for our non core businesses in the second half. Repeating as PK mentioned earlier, better contractual terms, better pricing, more volume commitments and they would be in EBIT margins more in that, you know, 7 to 9% range. As we’ve talked before, they are below the averages for the company and obviously have a different growth trajectory, which is one of the critical reasons why strategically we’re committed to exiting from them.

Peter Konieczny

So that’s just a little bit of. The fact base on that front. And I’ll let PK add on the raw material side, I’d say those savings tend to be more volume driven generally. But pk yeah, I just want to provide some context here for the scale, Jeff, and break that down a bit. We got to remember that our procurement spend is about $13 billion of which 10 billion is raw materials and 3 billion is indirects. Out of that 10 billion of the raw materials, 5 billion, 50% is resin based and the balance is ink, solvents, adhesives and a number of other things. So the first thing I’d say is we tend to believe our synergies are resin based synergies. It’s a lot broader than that. And we need to remind ourselves of this also in terms of the scale of our procurement spend to start now in a world where raw material input pricing comes down, and we had this conversation several times on earlier calls.

The question is, how big of an influence does scale of our operations have? Just the near volume that we’re able to offer to suppliers. And it’s had an impact in a situation where you’re struggling for volumes. Big buyers that can offer volumes do and can make a difference. And we’re seeing that. But if we take that plus everything else that we’re doing on the procurement side, we get to the synergy expectations that we’re confirming today and that we feel very comfortable with.

Ramoun Lazar

All right, thank you very much for the question. And our next question comes from the line of Ramon Lazar. Ramon, please go ahead, by the way, with Jefferies.

Ramoun Lazar

Thank you. Good evening and good morning to all on the call. Just another one just on the volumes. Pk, if you could maybe comment on how you see your customers performing in the context of the overall market. I know previously you’ve called out market share losses by some of your customers. Do you think those customers have stabilized their share in the end markets and just keen to see how you’re seeing that progress through the year? Yeah, Ramon, I mean, it’s not for me to comment on our customer performance. And that’s not your question, I know that. So how can I best answer that? The first thing that I would say is we are.

Peter Konieczny

We have always been. We are, particularly now after we’ve done the acquisition, very broad. And we have a very broad exposure to a number of different customers and customer groups. So, you know, broad participation. Therefore our performance should roughly be what the market actually offers. Right. Unless we can outperform or we’re trying to outperform. And we have good reasons why we believe we can outperform. So that’s one. The second thing, to the extent large customers, CPG type customers have been taking price in the past on the back of a very inflationary environment and prioritize price over volumes. What I can tell you there is that certainly the conversations have moved to finding a better balance between price and volumes, which also relates to promotional activities that have been spoken about by customers. And you see that when they go to market and they talk about how they want to improve their volume performance going forward.

And I think we’re well positioned to support on that end. While we haven’t really made any specific assumptions in terms of improvements in the back half as we’ve laid out beforehand. So again, we’re seeing all that happening, we’re listening very carefully, we’re positioning ourselves to participate as much as we can and to help customers on their journeys. But we’re sort of planning and approaching the back half at least very consistently with the first half.

operator

Great. Thanks, Ramon. And our next question comes from the line of Matt Roberts with Raymond James. Matt, please go ahead.

Michael Roxland

Hey bk, Steve. Hello. And Steve, good to hear you again. Okay, earlier you noted health care inflexibles is a bit weak. I believe you said low cold and flu season, although not my household. But I believe you’re comping a destocking impact in the prior year quarter. So what was behind that weakness? Was it confined to a certain region? Or maybe parse out your expectations for the second half of the year between pharma and healthcare more broadly and any mix impact we should expect from that category?

Peter Konieczny

Well, listen, it’s a good question. I made a couple of comments earlier. I mean, we saw health care volumes being a little weaker in the second quarter. That’s correct. I do not want to read too much into that. The healthcare category itself is a gem, I think in our portfolio. And I continue to say that we need to look at the volume performance over longer periods of time. We did have a bit of a overall weaker flu season. I’m sorry to hear that it didn’t apply to your household. But overall in the market, apparently in the US that is the case.

And there could also be in this quarter a bit of phasing of volumes between quarters. So again, not to read too much into it. And then don’t forget we have a pretty broad exposure also between pharma and medical in the healthcare piece, which we also need to take into account. Look, I could think about other things that are positive for the healthcare business. I mentioned in my prepared comments that we’re pretty well positioned to participate there. GLP1 was an example where we’ve made a great win, which also speaks to the ability of a combined company to win in the space and we will continue to double down on that.

operator

All right, thank you so much, Matt. And our next question comes from the line of Cameron McDonald with AP. Cameron, please go ahead.

Cameron McDonald

Good morning PK. Can I just delve into that comment around the GLP1. And it’s good to see you participating in that, which is got a long term growth profile. How are you guys thinking about the impact on the other side of your business, particularly around ultra high processed foods and snacks, confectionery, et cetera, you know, high calorific food consumption in an era where we have this explosion in GLP1 use? And how much of that is going to be a structural headwind for that 60% of the business that’s exposed to nutrition?

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, it’s an excellent question, Kamara, and I’m actually quite glad that you brought that up because it comes back over and over again. GLP1 and we’re spending a bit of time on that too. Look, let me structure my comments by first of all saying everything that makes people more healthy is a good thing. So we are, we’re supportive of that and we see that trend very clearly. We’re supportive of that and we’re thinking about what it means for our company, how we can best respond to it. But it’s a good thing. Now we do have an exposure to the healthcare industry as we just discussed, and therefore we can participate in it.

Right. So that’s very clearly said and clearly understood. Now your question is a little different. You say, well, turn back to all the other categories that you’re supporting in food and beverage and help me understand what the impact is there. And look, I will go back to some standard conclusions here. Where we have more unhealthy categories, where we supply packaging, those will be impacted. But on the other hand, we also have other categories that are considered to be healthy and they will increase. If you think about snacking generally, I don’t think that the trend of snacking is going to go backwards.

It will shift from unhealthy to more healthy categories. There’s examples in the market where that happens. Now the good news is that Amkor is a very broad based company with a broad participation across many categories. And therefore what you see, what we are expecting to see, is that that’s a shift in volumes between from unhealthy to more healthy categories. And therefore we’re somewhat robust to that trend and we think that we can participate well in it. Now, customers, that’s the last comment that I may want to make. They’re of course thinking about that very carefully and we’ve seen these trends before or similar trends before and it has led to an innovation where customers are leading through these impacts and innovating through those impacts to support their business and to reinvent their businesses.

And this is where, again, Encores is pretty well positioned to help our customers do that through our innovation capabilities and again, the broad exposure that we have to different categories. So overall I think we’re pretty robust. I don’t think that that creates a structural headwind for us, but we’re very much aligning ourselves with the impact at this point in time. It has been very moderate from a GLP1 perspective.

operator

All right, thank you so much for the question. And our next question comes from the line of Michael Roxland with Truist. Michael, please go ahead.

Michael Roxland

Yeah, thanks, P.K. Steve Tracy for taking my questions. And Steve, I look forward to working with you again. I just wanted to follow up on George’s question. Given that synergies seem to be more. Weighted to rigid, should we expect operating leverage to be relatively muted, EBITDA margins to be relatively flat year on year and flexibles barring recovery in volumes?

Stephen Scherger

Hey, Michael, it’s Steve. I think that if you’re just purely looking at maybe the second half of this fiscal year, probably not a lot of natural movement in margins, but if you take a multi year view, which we certainly are, relative to the synergy capture, given the revenue synergy commitments, given the operational improvement commitments, actually margin improvement on a multi year basis could be spread across both segments quite nicely. More of a short term phenomenon, I think, Michael, relative to where the synergy capture is here in fiscal 26.

operator

All right, thank you, Michael. And our next question comes from the line of Keith Chow with MST Marquis. Keith, please go ahead.

Keith Chau

Hi, gents. Thanks for taking my question. Pk, I just want to go back to the comment around recently renegotiated customer contracts. And I think, Steve, you mentioned better contract returns, better pricing and more volume commitments. So it sounds like, you know, clearly all three factors are positive. I’m just wondering what’s happened in the. Past that has meant that you’ve been able to get these improvements? Has it been, you know, a bit of slippage in customer commitments that you’re clawing back? Ultimately, I’m keen to understand how you’ve been able to do this and whether there is any cost associated with these renegotiated customer contracts? Thank you.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, Keith, I’ll be able to take that. I don’t think there’s any cost associated to renegotiating the contract. Just to give you a little more color, there were two angles to it. One was we were operating particularly in the beverage side, in an environment with very low volumes. And the renegotiated outcomes have Given us a bit more line of sight of the volumes going forward and have stabilized and supported the volume outlook going forward. So that’s one. The other element was just simply in some of those contracts going back and covering the basis of inflation recovery, which in some cases we have a reason to do, and that has also been successful.

So between those two things, we get some more inflation support and offset if you want, and then we get a better line of sight and we’re a little more confident about the volume outlooks going forward.

operator

All right, thank you so much, Keith. And our next question comes from the line of Nathan Riley with ubs. Nathan, please go ahead.

Nathan Reilly

Morning, gents. Just a very quick question about your capital or Capex budget. I think you spoke to 850 to 900 million for the year. Can you just give us an update in terms of where you’re focusing that investment, particularly with respect to some of your growth investments. Just keen to understand how that might impact volumes on a medium term basis going forward?

Stephen Scherger

Yeah, Nathan, it’s Steve. I can touch on that. We do see line of sight into the 850, $900 million range for the year and as you would expect, a lot of that beyond just traditional maintenance. Capex will be in our focus market categories and so we’ll invest for growth there, as was mentioning earlier. So into those markets where there’s opportunity for differentiation. So I’d say we weight our capex on our focus market categories just broadly.

operator

All right, thank you so much, Nathan. And our next question comes from the line of John Purtel with Macquarie. John, please go ahead.

John Purtell

G’, day, Peter and Steve. Congrats on the new role, Steve. Steve, you’ve obviously got a lot of experience in the packaging space and also with acquisitions. I know it’s early days, but I’d. Be interested in your perspectives on the. Synergy opportunity with Berry and also how you see plastics versus other substrates and. Some of the dynamics there.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, thanks for that, John. And I will tell you it has been an honor to be here for the last three months and this is an incredibly capable global consumer packaging company. I’ve just been so positive in terms of just raw capabilities, the global acumen and the very distributed nature of the product categories that we participate in, the market categories we participate in. The synergy capture momentum here is quite exceptional and it’s incredibly well done. The teams that are in place, dedicated, the tracking is outstanding. The commitment to putting money to work thoughtfully that drives Synergy capture is very noteworthy and it shows in the results.

It shows in the confidence in the 260 and shows the confidence to the multi year certainly relative to substrates and the like. I spent a lot of time in fiber based packaging as you know, and it’s a fit for purpose business. It has a fit. It has a purpose that suits those markets well where it has specific opportunities to be utilized effectively. As you know, rigid and flexible packaging, particularly on a global scale, has a right to win and a fit for purpose that is very broad and very much aligned with the day to day life of the consumer.

I think we’re just truly uniquely positioned as a company that globally literally is in the day to day life of the consumer. And it’s and it’s great to be here. So thank you for asking that, John.

operator

Great. Thank you, John. And ladies and gentlemen, John is our final caller today as we are well over our one hour meeting duration. So at this point I will now turn the call back over to management for closing remarks.

Peter Konieczny

Yeah, thanks operator. And look, everybody, thank you for joining us and we’re certainly looking forward to the opportunity to sit down with you over.

operator

Great. Thank you so much. And ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude today’s conference call. Again, thanks for joining. And you may now disconnect.