Good day. And welcome to the Bruker Corporation Second Quarter 2024 Earnings Call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. [Operator Instructions] After today’s presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. [Operator Instructions] Please note this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Joe Kostka. Please go ahead, sir.

Good morning. I would like to welcome everyone to Bruker Corporation’s second quarter 2024 earnings conference call. My name is Joe Kostka, Associate Director of Bruker Investor Relations. Joining me on today’s call are Frank Laukien, our President and CEO; and Gerald Herman, our EVP and CFO. In addition to the earnings release we issued earlier today, during today’s conference call, we will be referencing a slide presentation that can be downloaded from the Events and Presentation section of Bruker’s Investor Relations website. During today’s call, we will be highlighting non-GAAP financial information. Reconciliations of our non-GAAP to GAAP financial measures are included in our earnings release and are posted on our website at ir.bruker.com. Before we begin, I would like to reference Bruker’s Safe Harbor statement, which is shown on Slide 2 of the presentation. During this conference call, we will or may make forward-looking statements regarding future events and the financial and operational performance of the company that involve risks and uncertainties, including those related to our recent and pending acquisitions, geopolitical risks, market demand or supply chain. The company’s actual results may differ materially from such statements. Factors that might cause such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in today’s earnings release and in our Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2023, as updated by our other SEC filings, which are available on our website and on the SEC’s website. Also, please note that the following information is based on current business conditions and to our outlook as of today, August 6, 2024. We do not intend to update our forward-looking statements based on new information, future events, or for other reasons, except as may be required by law, prior to the release of our third quarter 2024 financial results expected in early November 2024. You should not rely on these forward-looking statements as necessarily representing our views or outlook as of any date after today. We will begin today’s call with Frank providing an overview of our business progress. Gerald will then cover the financials for the second quarter and first half 2024 in more detail and share our updated full year 2024 financial outlook. Now, I’d like to turn the call over to Bruker’s CEO, Frank Laukien.

Thank you, Joe. Good morning, everyone. And thank you for joining us on today’s second quarter 2024 earnings call. Our teams have delivered excellent revenue growth in the second quarter and a solid first half of 2024 despite soft market conditions. We continue to execute on our dual strategy of Project Accelerate 2.0 portfolio transformation and operational excellence, posting well above market organic revenue growth and even stronger constant exchange rate or CER revenue growth. We see mostly good demand for our differentiated Scientific Instruments and Life Science Solutions, but we acknowledge that biopharma demand has remained weak, and in China, customers appear to delay some purchase decisions into the second half of the year while they apply for more funding from the announced stimulus package. We now expect mid-single-digit organic revenue growth in the third quarter of 2024 and we maintain our guidance of full year organic revenue growth in the range of 5% to 7%. Our well-above organic growth is driven by Bruker’s differentiated innovation engine, as well as our multiyear transformation towards fundamentally favorable secular trends for our unique enabling tools for the post-genomic era. We are also benefiting from strong orders in semiconductor metrology in support of high performance computing for the AI megatrend, with strength in orders in Pacific RIM countries and North America. On May 17th, we hosted an Investor Webinar in which we provided in-depth looks into the three well-timed strategic acquisitions that we completed in the first half of 2024. These major acquisitions further accelerate our portfolio transformation and addressable market expansion into spatial biology, molecular diagnostics, as well as into laboratory automation and digitization. So far, Chemspeed is over performing our expectations and the performance of ELITech and NanoString is reassuringly very much in line with our initial expectations. Chemspeed is…

Thank you, Frank, and thank you everyone for joining us today. I am pleased to provide more detail on Bruker’s second quarter and first half 2024 financial performance starting on Slide 11. In the second quarter of 2024, Bruker’s reported revenue increased 17.4% to approximately $801 million, which reflects an organic revenue increase of 7.4% and BSI organic growth of 8.6% all year-over-year. We reported GAAP EPS of about $0.05 per share, compared to $0.39 in the second quarter of 2023. On a non-GAAP basis, Q2 2024 EPS was $0.52 per share, an increase of 4% from the $0.50 we posted in the second quarter of 2023. Our Q2 2024 non-GAAP operating income increased 6.3% and non-GAAP operating margin decreased 150 basis points year-over-year to 13.8% as higher gross margins and strong organic operating margin expansion was more than offset by operating margin headwinds from our recent acquisitions. We finished the second quarter with cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments of approximately $170 million. Our second quarter treasury program was very active as we completed $1.3 billion in funding of the ELITech and NanoString acquisitions with about $0.9 billion of financing through fixed low interest rates, Swiss franc debt, and the balance through a $400 million follow-on equity offering. We also funded selected Project Accelerate 2.0 investments, as well as capital expenditures in the quarter. We generated $0.9 million of operating cash in the second quarter of 2024, compared to $13 million in the second quarter of 2023. Capital expenditure investments were $26 million resulting in free cash outflow of $25.1 million in the second quarter of 2024, compared to $10.5 million in the second quarter of 2023. In the second quarter of 2024 as a result of our volume of M&A in the quarter, we incurred and paid additional…

[Operator Instructions] And the first question will come from Puneet Souda with Leerink Partners. Please go ahead.

Hi, Frank, Gerald. Thanks for taking my question. So maybe just a financial one first and then a broader question. So I appreciate the organic growth guide remain the same for the year, but op margin was slightly lower, and Gerald, I think, you were expecting a lower op margin in the third quarter. Just maybe talk to us about what’s your expectation there and what can drive that higher or lower. What’s in your assumptions for NanoString and any weakness as you pointed out in the market, just broadly speaking, given sort of the hard landing concerns and what are you things that could materialize in the market?

Well, it’s all in, right? There’s many moving pieces. You have cited many of them, right, and so that’s why that, I mean, we don’t do this by quarter, but for the full year, you see our four -- if you go to our Slide 18 with the assumptions that go into our revenue and non-GAAP EPS guidance. For instance, on the operating profit margin that implies that it’s around 16% for the year up organically more than 50 bps. So we continue to make progress in our core business. That’s good. And this year as expected, with a headwind of about 300 bps from M&A, a little bit of FX, mostly M&A, all while maintaining our R&D OpEx at about 10% of revenue. So that’s how it all comes together. NanoString China, biopharma and all, right, including the very good thing. I mean, we do have continued aca/gov demand growth at least outside of China, that’s up. We had good diagnostics growth, very solid business is a highlight right now, probably on a -- from a macro grows faster than the Life Science tools market right now and yes, we did have very nice semiconductor metrology and a little bit of lithography growth in orders. So that’s the beauty of our portfolio, right? There are many things and this year it’s more mixed. But still overall, looking at that 5% to 7% organic revenue growth, and of course, 15% to 17% CER growth for the full year, that’s how it all comes together, all the pieces.

Okay. That’s helpful, Frank. And that’s a good segue into my broader question. I mean, if you can take a step back and help us understand where Bruker can continue to outperform the market, both in the topline and in earnings once the acquisitions are baked-in. I think there are some sort of near-term questions, but once you emerge from that. I mean, I think you pointed out that on the Slide 8, some, but just wanted to see if you could elaborate a bit more on the strength and the differentiation at Bruker. I mean, you are a heavy -- instrumentation heavy company, but you continue to deliver significantly outsized growth versus your peers and instrumentation is the concern in the market. So just help us educate a bit on how you are positioned in the market and the overall continued growth and how to think about that for Bruker in context of the backlog as well? Thank you.

Yeah. Right. Yes. Of that 70% cumulative growth, well over 55% was organic and indeed, while this year, it’s no longer double-digit organic revenue growth at Bruker, it’s still very good. And if the LS tools market this year organically is flat or perhaps down a couple of percent, obviously, the differential is still much higher than the 200 bps to 300 bps differential that we have in our -- that we aim for on average or hopefully every year in terms of outgrowing the market. Well, that’s because we fundamentally repositioned. We are not a -- we are not your traditional Life Science tools or analytical instruments company anymore. Our positioning for the post-genomic era with spatial biology, with single cell, with proteomics, with multiomics, with protein, protein interactions, binding structure, that’s where the funding gets allocated. So even in a weaker environment, we are still doing quite well. We are also really in terms of cleantech and industrial research, it’s really not bad for us. Diagnostics is very defensible. Our clinical microbiology, our new or much increased molecular diagnostics business with ELITech being the larger piece and we had a bit within Bruker already that gets now integrated. Those are all good demand drivers that support our organic growth guidance this year and our medium-term, well, not just aspiration, but really plan to outgrow the market -- continue to outgrow the market over the next few years. We expect that on average, we will outgrow that 20 bps to 300 bps. We have this more and more meaningful semiconductor metrology, a little bit of lithography. I mean, it was 8% of revenue, but it’s going to clearly approach 10% and maybe, it will go to 15% in the next few years. And I mean, AI is real. There…

That’s great. Super helpful. Thanks for the perspective, Frank.

Thank you, Puneet. All right.

The next question will come from Patrick Donnelly with Citi. Please go ahead.

Hey, guys. Thank you for taking the questions. Frank, maybe on the BSI side, I think you said the first half book-to-bill was somewhere above 0.9, a little bit below 1. Can I pin you down a little bit on the 2Q trends on the order front, book-to-bill will be great, and then certainly if orders, if you could give any sort of growth range for the 2Q orders, that would be helpful. Just trying to feel out the back -- the backdrop here and the implications for backlog as we move forward. So, again, if you could frame up the 2Q order dynamic, that would be helpful?

All right. Tighten it up a little bit, Patrick. Fair enough. Yeah. It’s in the mid-0.9 range. So sort of half -- pretty much halfway between 1 and 0.9. So mid-0.9 book-to-bill for BSI, up organically, which was because we still had good China orders last year in the second quarter. So, BSI organic order growth was still up mid-single digits. So, nothing to write home about, but really not so bad. And that along with our backlog, which is now at about 7 times, 0.7 months -- sorry, seven months, down from 7.5. So it’s coming down a little bit. It will probably also end up. Now that we have ELITech is 80% consumable, spatial biology single cell is as these instruments get out there is more than 50% consumables and aftermarket. So in the future, we probably still have two years of roughly of backlog normalization buffering these choppier general markets and then just fundamentally, our orders are decent given and we have enough of our portfolio with the post-genomic era with some of this cleantech and semiconductor metrology, we still have strength in the portfolio. And fundamentally, if you take out China, aca/gov is up for us as well, obviously, an important driver for us and there is some weakness in U.S. funding here, here and there but overall, it’s up. Europe, for instance, did really quite well in the second quarter with a weak comp last year, but many, many moving pieces, but overall, very, very resilient.

Yeah. No. That would be positive from our side too. Yeah. No, no, Frank. And then, Gerald, maybe one for you. We get a lot of questions just about the 2025 setup. I know you guys kind of implied the 310 earnings number for next year at the Analyst Day. Can you just talk about, I guess, the moving pieces, the confidence level there? I think a lot of focus on the NanoString dilution, the margins, which again, touched on there. And then just if you could remind us the yen impact, that’s been a question we have been getting obviously this week with some of the moves there. I know you guys in the guidance, I think, uses a little bit of a stale number certainly given how quickly that’s moving. So just refresh us on that would be helpful. Thank you, guys.

Yeah. Patrick, nice to hear from you. I mean -- on the 2025, sorry, we can’t offer too much. We will talk more about that in February. We haven’t moved off of our medium-term outlook numbers that we presented two months ago. So I think, generally speaking, we will talk more about that. On the yen, as I think most people know, the yen has strengthened relative to the U.S. dollar recently, actually even just this week. So our -- unfortunately, our Japanese business is not the same size that it was many years back. So fundamentally, it’s not going to have much impact on Bruker. There was a time several years back where it was critically important for us. It’s still an important market, but unfortunately, the overall volume activity for Japan has declined. So I would say, hope to see a bounce back in the Japanese business over time.

Yeah. Maybe a little bit of anecdotal color? I mean, a lot of our growth, including semiconductor metrology, fantastic bookings growth in the second quarter and also in the first half year-over-year comes from other Pacific RIM. I mean, notably, South Korea and Taiwan are just amazing. And then, of course, the U.S. finally is investing in semiconductor metrology. So that’s all strong. Japan is indeed less important for us right now. It’s also not very strong in terms of growth and orders. So plus it has some currency issues. Yeah, that’s a headwind, but we have enough other tailwinds to put it all together. I think the Chem -- I am actually, I think all three acquisitions that I mentioned, Chemspeed, they have probably enough backlog even for 2025, a lot of backlog, a lot of execution. So that business and investing in automation and lab automation with CapEx, industry seems to be willing to do that. If they think they can do with less OpEx, less headcount, well-placed with this molecular diagnostics business, I was delighted. We were at our placement rate for the first three months, I know it’s only three months that we have owned them. This is now including July, which I know technically is in Q3, but the placements for these InGenius, BeGenius for those three months that we have owned it were something like 20% ahead of what we hope to do. That’s not a lot of revenue this year, but that pull-through of consumables revenue next year. So that -- that’s on top of a solid molecular diagnostics business to begin with and I am actually quite optimistic about NanoString having a nice, you know, snapback or whatever, not macro-driven, but driven by obviously it’s taking a damper this year-after the Chapter 11 and the various by now all removed injunctions and so on and rebuilding that team. That team is coming together quickly and really even after three months, we have a -- we have our arms around that. We were running with very good management processes and a very fired-up leadership team with a lot of not just aspiration and rah-rah-rah, but a lot of concrete pipeline and opportunity building and things in the pipeline that they are doing and rebuilding the team. NanoString will be a good grower next year, I am convinced.

Very helpful. Thank you guys.

The next question will come from Rachel Vatnsdal with JPMorgan. Please go ahead.

Perfect. Good morning to you guys. Thanks so much for taking the question. First, I just wanted to push on the 3Q guide. You mentioned that you expect 3Q to grow mid-single-digit organic, which is a little below consensus, but you also mentioned that you started to see an air pocket related to China stimulus where customers are starting to hold back on orders as they just wait for funding. So could you unpack that mid-single-digit 3Q guide for us a bit? How much of it was really due to this China dynamic? Could you breakout for us what you expect to grow organically in China and excluding China in 3Q as well?

Yeah. Fair question, Rachel. So, yeah, you saw that our Q1 was below average growth. Q2 was above this year’s average growth. Q3 will be more in line, right, with roughly the organic growth that we are expecting. Mid-single digits indeed, yeah, a little muted China orders in Q2 for sure. I wouldn’t call it an air pocket that’s too strong but muted and, of course, absence of a clear evidence of any biopharma recovery, seeing a little bit of a step-up in the U.S., but that might just be fluctuations. So, yes, so that seems prudent then for Q3 to think that it’s mid-single-digit somewhat not far from the full year trend whereas Q2 was better than the full year trend and Q1 was weaker than the full year trend in terms of organic growth, right? That’s what I am referring to.

Helpful. And then maybe just closing that out on the 4Q implied. Could you walk us through what you are assuming from a budget dynamic into 4Q? It looks like guidance really implies like a high single-digit organic growth number in 4Q off of 16% comp from last year. So how are those conversations around your end budget flush dynamics been trending with customers and what are you assuming in that?

Yeah. Another fair question. We are not a budget flush type of company. We don’t get -- we don’t use that. It doesn’t really do that much because of our backlogs. I think budget flush maybe more if you have more turns when you have a lot of consumables business. Nonetheless, fundamentally, you are right, we are looking for a strong Q4. So, yeah, Q4 is going to be, as far as we can tell, very going to be a very strong quarter for us and it’s just not necessarily the budget flush dynamics. It’s simply the buildup of orders and backlog and new orders this year and we expect continued good orders in Q4 as well. So Q4 looks to be strong in Q3, not bad. But I think with a mid-single-digit growth in Q3, we are comfortable with that. And of course, because of the acquisitions, as Gerald explained already, Q3 EPS will be down year-over-year, but up sequentially from Q2 this year. That’s kind of normally we don’t talk about sequential much, but now that we have all these acquisitions, actually keeping track of Q3 sequential improvements and then Q4 sequential improvements will be a somewhat of a good dynamic to watch this year. Okay.

Thanks, Rachel.

All right.

The next question will come from Tycho Peterson with Jefferies. Please go ahead.

Hey. Thanks. Frank, can you help us bridge the gap on the M&A step-up here, the incremental $90 million, I think you said NanoString previously $80 million, Chemspeed about $10 million a quarter and ELITech over $150 million for the year. So is that incremental step-up all NanoString or maybe just give us a little bit more color?

Good question, Tycho. It’s a lot of small pieces, quite honestly. There isn’t the $10 million chunk out there that it’s a lot of small pieces. There isn’t a single answer. It’s -- yeah, that’s the answer. The answer is it’s nothing remarkable. It just comes together this way.

I guess it’s your view on…

It’s only 10 million higher for the year, right, and there isn’t drivers what I am saying. I don’t mean to be evasive here. There isn’t any no there, so to speak, there isn’t the one thing that made up that $10 million, many small pieces just trending a little better.

And then I guess as your view on the kind of IP situation evolved post the injunction in Germany and how are you thinking about kind of next steps in the U.S.

Yeah. No. There’s nothing new there that you don’t know. So the -- nothing new, no new developments. Yeah, you saw the last press release a few weeks ago that we had now put out some bond. Even though we had invalidated that patent in Germany, we still needed to put up a bond in order to lift the injunction. We have done that. And of course, the injunction had been lifted in the rest of Europe some time ago. So presently, there is no injunction anywhere. And the -- I think it’s going to be September or later in the year that there might be additional rulings in Europe or in the U.S. and then any of the bigger trials and things like that, if we get that far would be in 2025, possibly into 2026. So it’s been quiet on that front, all.

That may be good.

Yeah. So not…

And then for…

Sorry.

But just one last one…

Yeah.

… for the back half of the year, just any more kind of color by sub-segment if we think about kind of BSI, Nano BioSpin and CALID for the back half of the year guidance?

It’s -- I feel bad, Tycho and I don’t have any crisp answers for you today, but it’s not one standout group or product line or so. I mean semiconductor metrology was really quite a bit -- surprised us in the first half with the strength of orders that was stronger than what we had predicted. And yeah, on the other hand, biopharma, we would have liked to see more of a recovery, but maybe that’s more of a 2025 thing now, also looking at what other companies are reporting. So it’s just it’s -- yes, it’s some of the acquisitions, of course, they are only about 10%. It’s strength in MALDI Biotyper or diagnostics, it’s strength in industrial research, proteomics, NMR, all solid. A solid execution of the strength of the portfolio is really the message here rather than one particular product line with, yes, I mean, we expect China to be down in revenue for the full year. We expect biopharma to be weak or down. So those are the bad guys for this year and the rest is all pretty good and semiconductor perhaps very good with a very nice order recovery. Although there the lead times are so long that a lot of the strong semiconductor recovery may not then turn into revenue till 2025 but that’s good too. People want us to deliver growth in 2025.

Understood. Thanks.

And we do too, of course. Yeah. So I gave you three non-answers, Tycho. I apologize. It’s really the message is strength of the -- strength and resilience of the portfolio more than one group or one product line or one market.

Thanks, Frank. I appreciate it.

Yeah.

Thanks, Tycho.

The next question will come from Doug Schenkel with Wolfe Research. Please go ahead.

Hey. Good morning, guys, and thank you for taking the questions. Just a couple of cleanup questions. I want to confirm as we sit here today that one, you aren’t accelerating anything relative to your original plans in terms of working through backlog to get the guidance for the year based on how orders are tracking. It sounds like things are just kind of on track with some different puts and takes, but I just want to make sure that’s the case. And then secondly, I want to make sure you remain comfortable with EPS targets for 2025 through 2027, the ones that you outlined on May 17. Gerald, I think you said, obviously, you are not going to update guidance or set guidance for next year as we sit here at the beginning of August, but I just want to make sure there’s no change in thinking at this point.

Yeah. Doug, thanks for the questions. It’s Gerald. So, on the cleanup question around the overall performance. I don’t see any significant change. Our existing backlog, as Frank has mentioned, came down to about seven months versus 7.5. It’s not really affecting dramatically. We have good strong organic revenue growth in the business already. We are pulling -- we would be -- I would actually be happy to see some backlog come down. As some of you know, I am really interested in moving that down to a more normalized level. So we are not expecting to see anything different from a guidance perspective for 2024 on the backlog. It’s coming down, as well as we would have hoped. And then on the other point related to medium-term outlook, as I said earlier, we won’t comment specifically in guidance for 2025, but we don’t see any obstacles or roadblocks in the way with respect to our medium-term outlook that we laid out on May 17 in the Investor Webinar.

Yeah. Medium-term outlook remains as described, no changes there implied here at all and yeah, maybe at the -- maybe within two years from now or thereabouts will be more at a five months of backlog and a more normalized level within the BSI segment. So you -- so that’s also as expected. So yeah, we are on track in a choppier year, but with a strong portfolio, and of course, very nice. I mean the pull-through, the reallocations under the hood from more traditional instruments and towards to that post-genomic era and that where we have positioned ourselves is just really, really working with a little bit on that semiconductor chairing on top.

Okay. And one quick follow-up. You acknowledged some stalling of the market in China due to stimulus. I happen to catch up with you guys. You were good enough to sit down with me for a little bit at the beginning of June. You weren’t -- it didn’t seem like you were seeing this at that point. So my guess is, and I just want to confirm this that dynamic picked up towards the end of the quarter and maybe carried into Q3, is that right? And if so, it seems like you have probably just widened the error bars in China to account for some risk that lingers into the back half of the year. Is that the right way to think about things? Thank you.

A completely -- I mean, sales cycle lengthening in China, especially in aca/gov, is something that became apparent, orders that we may expect or opportunities that look good, but they just moved to later in the year. People are now looking for bigger budgets and then making a bigger splash rather than spending their original budget right away, it makes sense, and I think you are thinking about it exactly the right way. We still think that the stimulus, particularly perhaps for BioSpin with NMR and high-end systems, but other high-end systems, perhaps as well could be really quite good, but it takes -- it’s just not moving fast like it was in Q1 of 2023. This is going through the provinces and many more decision layers, perhaps more scrutiny as well. It’s taking longer or actually, I mean, this is not a big surprise to us. We already a few months ago that this will probably be a 2025 beneficial effect and tailwind, and yes, that has confirmed -- that has been confirmed now. So, yes, there was muted demand and muted orders in China in Q2 and a lot of that seems to suggest, especially in academia that these orders may come or perhaps larger orders may come in the second half or some also in 2025. So that’s correct. I think you are thinking about it exactly the right way to Doug from what I heard.

Doug, what I have heard also is there is activity, but there are no orders. So, I think this is the -- this is important to clarify that it’s very clear that there’s a lot of movement, but no orders have been placed related to that at this stage.

Great. Thank you, again.

You are welcome.

Time for one more question.

And our last question for today will come from Josh Waldman with Cleveland Research. Please go ahead.

Hey. Good morning, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. A couple for you. First, a follow-up on Tycho’s question, I believe. Any changes to growth assumptions by segment for the year versus the prior guide framework. And then within the reiterated 5% to 7% organic outlook for total company, it seems like there’s a wider-than-normal range for the second half. I guess, is that wider range a reflection of market uncertainties in pharma in China? And I guess, like any context you can provide on what gets you to the low-end, what gets you to the high-end, like do you need to see improvement from those end markets to get to the high-end?

Yeah. So on segments, as we said, biopharma, obviously, less expectations than we may have had at the beginning of the year. Semiconductor, it goes up, although this although total turns into revenue. It takes a little bit longer. China sort of as expected, but we didn’t know exactly in Q1 2023, wow, this -- we were surprised how quickly those stimulus orders came through. We were -- wow; we almost didn’t see that coming. So that just doesn’t repeat itself. It seems to be a longer, bigger wave, not this one-quarter bolus. So China and biopharma, not a surprise, I guess, from what we are hearing from others, we would lower our expectations for this year and we are upping them in just about everything else in or at least keeping them the same, upping them in semiconductor metrology for sure, upping them in automation -- lab automation, although that’s still a relatively new business and it’s not organic yet, upping them in scientific software, smaller drivers, and yeah, and really quite pleased with what more like infectious disease diagnostics is doing for us acquired and the existing MALDI Biotyper franchise. So some incremental changes, nothing dramatic, I would say, but biopharma, China, the culprits and other good guys. To the second half of 2024, I mean, I would say, given the uncertainty and that we all read the Wall Street Journal and yesterday wasn’t a good day, who knows what happens today. I think it’s fair to think about maybe the -- within our guidance of 5% to 7% organic that maybe this is not prudent to maybe model it that we would be in the lower half of that guidance, but we are still in that guidance range and we are pretty optimistic also about our bookings in Q3 and Q4 in addition to our revenue forecast. So yeah, this is the -- this is the environment, the macro environment and our concern about the correction or recession perhaps are not helping and China being delayed and biopharma recovery being delayed are not helping. But, yeah, I mean, we are damn resilient and I think we are still pretty exceptional in terms of our growth for the year. So that’s -- incrementally, the macro environment has probably gotten a little weaker than when we spoke three months ago, right? If I see what’s going on around us, but we are not just a macro company as you have seen by now many times. Does that help at all?

Yeah. Frank. Yeah. That helps, Frank. I appreciate that. And then I guess for my follow-up, I thought I’d ask one on timsTOF. I was curious if you could comment on how the Ultra 2 rollout is going. And then more broadly for the timsTOF franchise, I wondered if there’s any change in kind of near- or medium-term outlook. I mean I don’t think you called it out as the driver in CALID. I wonder how you are thinking about growth in that franchise kind of burst the broader…

Yes. Its growth was slowed -- its growth in orders was slowed a little bit when the Astral showed up being very competitive a year ago. We have since improved our competitive position significantly then with our launch of the timsTOF Ultra 2 and some other important workflows, for instance, for plasma proteomics is not an instrument, but very amazing plasma proteomics performance with our timsTOF -- other models of our timsTOF platform. So, in terms of revenue, it’s not a big growth driver in year-over-year. But in terms of bookings and competitive position, I think, the trend is now -- it’s still competitive. But I think we are in a -- in much better competitive position, quite honestly again. And so, that’s a -- timsTOF order and customers and opportunities are all really doing quite well again.

Got it. Thanks for the detail.

All right.

Thank you, Josh.

This concludes our question-and-answer session. I would like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Joe Kostka for any closing remarks. Please go ahead.

Thank you for joining us today. Bruker’s leadership team looks forward to meeting with you at an event or speaking with you directly during the third quarter. Feel free to reach out to me to arrange any follow-up and have a good day.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today’s presentation. You may now disconnect.