Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us for DuPont's First Quarter 2021 Earnings Conference Call. We're making this call available to investors and media via webcast. We have prepared slides to supplement our comments during this conference call. These slides are posted on the Investor Relations section of DuPont's website and through the link to our webcast. Joining me on the call today are Ed Breen, Chief Executive Officer; and Lori Koch, our Chief Financial Officer. Please read the forward-looking statement disclaimer contained in the slides. During our call, we will make forward-looking statements regarding our expectations or predictions about the future. Because these statements are based on current assumptions and factors that involve risk and uncertainty, our actual performance and results may differ materially from our forward-looking statements. Our 2020 Form 10-K, as updated by our current and periodic reports, includes detailed discussion of principal risks and uncertainties, which may cause such differences. Unless otherwise specified, all historical financial measures presented today exclude significant items. We will also refer to other non-GAAP measures. A reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure is included in our press release and posted to the Investor page of our website. I'll now turn the call over to Ed.

Thanks, Leland. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. I will provide comments on the strong start that we had to 2021, including the advancement of a number of strategic priorities to make DuPont a premier multi-industrial company, equipped for growth and value creation. But first, let me acknowledge the tremendous dedication and determination of our teams around the world as we continue to manage the extraordinary circumstances of this pandemic. The health and well-being of our people remains our top priority. The principles and protocols we've implemented globally and locally to help to protect our people and ensure business continuity as countries face multiple waves of infection and lockdowns. As an innovation-led company, we believe in science and we're encouraging all employees to get vaccinated. And where possible, we're working with public health authorities to facilitate access and distribution. Starting on Slide 2, I will note that one of our priorities for generating value is consistent operating performance and financial results. This morning, we announced strong top line and earnings results for the first quarter, both above our expectations. Lori will take you through the details in a moment. But I'd like to highlight the 7% organic revenue growth that we reported, reflecting broad and strong demand in key markets such as semiconductors, smartphones, water, residential construction and automotive. This revenue growth, along with continued cost discipline, led to strong operating leverage and EBITDA margin expansion in the quarter. Our first quarter financial results reflect the agility of our teams to navigate through a challenging environment while facing escalating raw material and logistics costs as well as global supply constraints of key raw materials, most notably in our M&M segment. With strong order trend continuing and confidence in our team's ability to navigate the supply chain challenges,…

Thanks, Ed, and good morning, everyone. Let me cover our first quarter financial results on Slide 4. As Ed said earlier, I'd also like to acknowledge the commitment of our employees throughout the pandemic and our team in navigating through supply chain and logistics headwind this quarter to deliver the following results. Net sales of $4 billion were up 8% versus the first quarter of 2020, up 7% on an organic basis. Overall sales growth was driven by strong volume, up 7% versus first quarter of last year, with volume increases in all 3 reporting segments. Currency provided a 3% tailwind in the quarter led by the euro. Portfolio was a 2% headwind, primarily due to the sale of the trichlorosilane business last year. Sales were up in all 3 segments, with E&I, M&M and W&P reflecting organic growth of 14%, 8% and 1%, respectively. On a regional basis, organic sales were up 20% in Asia Pacific, our largest region from a sales perspective, with strong results in all 3 reporting segments. Partially offsetting gains in Asia Pacific were organic sales decline in the U.S. and Canada and EMEA of 4% and 2%, respectively. The declines in U.S. and Canada and EMEA were driven by softness for aramid fibers, specifically continued softness in aerospace and timing delays in defense as well as auto builds, which were down in these regions. I'll provide more color on our segment top line results on the next slide. From an earnings perspective, we delivered operating EBITDA of $1.05 billion and adjusted EPS of $0.91 per share, up 15% and 90%, respectively. Volume gains as well as benefit from prior year cost initiatives and currency drove 160 basis points of operating EBITDA margin expansion and 1.9x operating leverage. Incremental margins for the quarter were 46%.…

Thanks, Lori. Let me close with our financial outlook on Slide 8, which includes our view of the second quarter and full year 2021. We are raising our full year guidance range for net sales, operating EBITDA and adjusted EPS. At the midpoint of the range provided, we now expect net sales for the year to be about $15.8 billion, which reflects year-over-year growth of 10%, up from our previous estimate of 8% growth. We expect to improve leverage and now expect operating EBITDA for the year to be about $4.03 billion, at the midpoint of the range provided, a year-over-year increase of 17%. These revised estimates reflect our solid start to the year and confidence in our team's ability to continue to navigate global supply key challenges. We are also raising our adjusted EPS range for the full year by $0.30 per share and now expect adjusted EPS of $3.67 per share, at the midpoint of the range provided. In addition to the strong operating performance of our businesses, the share repurchases we are completing under our existing programs and the narrowing of our estimated tax range supporting the [indiscernible] while contributing to the revised [indiscernible] estimates. For the second quarter 2021, we expect net sales to be about $3.975 billion, and we expect the operating EBITDA to be about $1 billion, both at the midpoints of the ranges provided and both well above results in the second quarter last year. At the midpoint of the range provided, we expect adjusted EPS for the second quarter of 2021 of $0.94 per share, which now reflects the full reduction in shares resulting from the N&B exchange offer and our weighted average [indiscernible]. With that, let me turn it over to Leland to open up for Q&A.

Thank you, Ed. Before we move to the Q&A portion of our call, I would like to remind you that our forward-looking statements apply to both our prepared remarks and the following Q&A. [Operator Instructions] Operator, please provide the Q&A instructions.

[Operator Instructions] The first response is from Steve Tusa with JPMorgan.

Can you just maybe talk about the sequential kind of dynamics in your business into the second quarter and second half? I mean on the one hand, you guys are having some supply constraints, which I guess is -- has hurt volumes a bit. But then on the other hand, I'm sure that there's some kind of urgency around ordering, and maybe the electronics side seen some pretty big book-to-bills that guys like Tyco Electronics that are -- suggest that customers may be stocking up and kind of double ordering perhaps what they can. Everybody is kind of scrambling to get supply, I guess. It muddles the sequential. Maybe if you could just talk about what you see as kind of the sequential activity in those key stress areas heading into the second half.

Yes. I'll start, and maybe Lori wants to jump in. If I may, I don't think our normal cyclicality plays out this year because of what you just described. Very different dynamics this year. I'd say one of the biggest issues is really the inflation cost on all materials here and then the pricing actions that we can take. So that's a pretty big dynamic for all of us that you see reporting here. But probably, the first quarter, the cost deflation was very little. It was about $20 million. We expect in the second quarter that lists to about $90 million. And we expect the full year impact of raw material inflation to be about $300 million. So it kind of goes up to kind of $90 million to $100 million in the second quarter, holds there for the year, which gets you kind of the $300 million. So we've been -- have been a constructive price market, Steve, and we think we'll catch most of the second quarter inflation, but maybe not all of it as we have some contracts that are 30, 60 days. But we're very confident that we'll be able to cover the walls. When you look at the year in total, that we'll be able to make that up. So we're expecting for total DuPont for our pricing to be up low single digits for the year. But clearly, more so in the M&M division where a lot of the world inflation is -- no price increase in electronics simply because you don't get it there, you get a new product introductions that you get fed and some price increase in Water & Protection, within water and safety business specifically. So I'd say that's a big dynamic there. And then from a kind of…

Your next response is from John Inch of Gordon Haskett.

I would like to just pick up on that theme. So Ed, when you're saying you missed $100 million of sales in the first quarter, roughly $100 million to $120 million expected in the second quarter, does that imply then that the second half is up $200 million to $220 million more than it would have been if you haven't had any supply chain disruptions, like you're going to see that in terms of sequential growth -- or I'm sorry, in terms of the year-over-year growth dynamic? And doesn't that create a bit of a tough compare? Or is that not the way to think about it?

Yes. First of all, I'm not sure this will resolve itself in the year either. You've heard quite a few suppliers talk about this going and potentially into next year, depending on what it is. So inventory levels in new autos chain are very, very low in the supply chain itself. Finished goods are low. You still got the semiconductor ratio that's going to mute things, which I've heard most people think of going into 2022. So I think you got that dynamic going on here. So I wouldn't gauge at all just throwing it into the second half of the year at all.

Yes. I think the guidance that we provided essentially assumes a similar quarter for revenue like we saw in 1Q, so pushing $4 billion between -- around a $3.9 billion and $4 billion range in the second quarter. And then if you look at the full year outlook, you can back into a similar number in the back half of the year. So whatever upside we may see from the M&M portfolio getting back that lost volume in the first half, so still that tends to be a little bit of seasonality in our results that would offset that. Still landed at flat number dollar-wise from a revenue perspective.

Okay. So no, that makes sense. And then just as a follow-up, how big -- can you remind us, how big is DuPont in India? And I mean India is obviously in the news as COVID sweeps that country. I'm just wondering, does Tyvek garments, do they have much of a presence there? And didn't really seem to hurt your Asia Pac numbers this quarter. Does it create for a little bit of a headwind in future quarters?

No. India is not a big impact at all in that one. The biggest upside for us though is India in the water business. That's a real key market for us, but it's not that big in the scheme of things yet. So no, it didn't have any significant impact for us. If we add N&B in the portfolio, it would have been bigger, but that was really where our bigger presence was in our portfolio.

Your next response is from Scott Davis of Melius Research.

Wanted to follow up a little bit on comments that Steve made just about supply chain and John as well. But are you seeing kind of any unusual purchasing patterns by your customers? Are your customers double ordering? Or any kind of unusual inventory build?

We don't think much. I mean we cited a couple of customers we know they are building inventory. It's some in Asia that we think preorder, but it's like $30 million to $40 million business. We're not seeing it. The people just can't get their hands on enough right now. I mean there's so many force majeures out there across the supply chain, again, mostly in the auto business I'm talking about. But I don't see inventory build in the channel. And you know historically, finished goods at autos is very low right now globally. So we don't see a lot of that. Our people trying to double order. I think there's some of that going on, but everyone's getting allocated product at this point in time. So it's not like they're able to build an inventory base. I'll use DuPont as an example. Our inventory well of about $100 million, and it's in mostly in our M&M business, and we couldn't get it up on the other walls to get the product out the door. So we did plan on -- we're not double ordering. We just couldn't get it out the door to have a finished good. So again, in the scheme of our numbers, that's not a big deal. But I'm sure there's a decent amount of that going on, but I wouldn't call it double ordering the stockpile.

Okay. Good. Helpful. And then just a different cleanup here is just what was the average price kind of the asset sales that you -- maybe just any valuation metric that we can think about?

You mean for the noncore businesses that we're divesting?

Yes, for the noncore stuff, in terms if you have.

Yes. We have been somewhere in the range of -- yes, we had mentioned somewhere in the range of 6 to 8x EBITDA multiple on those businesses.

Your next response is from Jeff Sprague of Vertical Research Partners.

Two for me. One, just on the theme, a little bit one more item for me anyhow. On interconnect, Lori, that sounded like maybe it wasn't a pull forward, but demand was -- the demand pattern was different than what you would typically see. Could you just elaborate on kind of what you said and meant there as you went through that segment?

Sure. Yes, I think you said it correctly. So we did see a little bit of acceleration from an order perspective in the first quarter, probably the first half versus what we normally see from some of the smart homes provider. So from a site perspective, probably about a $10 million benefit for the quarter. They're not hugely material to DuPont raw materials. I think they're [indiscernible] segment. If you look at the full year, we've got Interconnect Solutions. We expect to be up kind of in the mid-single digits, so it will normalize as the year goes on. Part of that is due to very strong comps from last year. So if you recall, in the fourth quarter of last year, we [indiscernible] interconnect as some of those producers pulled some volume into 2020 as well.

And then secondly, Ed, just on the M&A front. You're able to acquire Laird here at what looked like a pretty decent price. And I just -- I've noticed there's been a few deals going on kind of in some of the spaces I travel that the valuations actually, all things considered, are not off the chart. So I just wonder if you're seeing that kind of what your confidence level on being able to do bolt-ons here at a reasonable valuation as we progress through the year?

Yes. So Jeff, we're looking at a couple of bolt-ons. One of them is exactly what we've described the last couple of quarters in the water space. I think what we're looking at is very similar to Laird where with synergies, high confidence in, by the way, cost synergies, we can get it up at a multiple that makes sense for DuPont, or by the way, we just won't buy it. We just don't know that final answer yet. So yes, I think there's -- some of those opportunities are out there to do that in some of the spaces we really like there's going to be a great secular growth areas for us in the future. But I'm not talking huge things at this point in time. As I always say, we'll always look at transformative moves if it makes sense for the company -- there's something a couple long, and these are truly a couple bolt-ons in the hundreds of millions, not billions that we're looking at. But similar dynamic I would say to Laird. So maybe to your question, yes, those opportunities are there for us.

Your next response is from David Begleiter with Deutsche Bank.

Can you talk a little more about Tyvek? You mentioned a shift back to the more traditional industrial business going forward, I guess, versus some tough comps versus a year ago in protective?

Yes. I think what we had mentioned about Tyvek in the quarter was garment volume. It adds, it wanes, it picks volume back up in some of the more medical or industrial end markets. And so from a demand perspective, there's not a headwind overall. The headwind that we saw in the quarter was more so around production capabilities. And so we have pushed some of our planned maintenance activity that was planned for 2020 into 2021 just given the COVID response that was needed in last year. And so that tamped down the volume that we were able to produce and then sell in Q1. If I were to size it, I would probably size it around $20 million of a headwind in general for Tyvek. And back on the comment on the garment demand potentially being mainly picked up by other end markets, it's a similar margin profile. So there's no headwind there from that perspective.

And we're sold-out on those assets. So as we move things around, it's not like we're picking up extra volume. Right now, we'll get the same margin impact. And that's why our biggest CapEx program is a new line over in Europe that will come on in 2023. It's our single biggest CapEx program, and we're flat out.

Got it. And just on working capital for the full year, where do you think you'll end up when it is all done?

Yes. I expect to drive improvement from where we were in the first quarter, and that will also translate to improvement in free cash flow conversion. So we'll continue to target greater than 90% of the year, which implies a significant improvement from where we were in Q1. So Q1 was really a function of the higher sales. So we were up about 8% in sales that translated to about a 7% increase in AR. And as I had mentioned, we were opportunistic in buying lots and we could get them. But surely, inventory increased. So I would expect on a full year basis, I might be in right now for working capital to be used, just given the top line growth as we're expecting, probably more so in the $200 million range. So improvement coming out of Q1. But I think more importantly, the measure that we pay attention to is net working capital term. And so we saw significant improvement last year to the June, ending the year at about 5.2 turns. We'll look to target about 5.3 turns as we close the year.

Your next response is from Steve Byrne, Bank of America.

Yes. This Water Solutions business of yours seems to be increasingly a growth engine for you. Can you split that growth between municipalities that are using your technology to purified drinking water versus industrial applications? And on the industrial side, do you see any opportunity down the road, not so much on the purification side, but on the filtrate side, such as trying to extract particular materials like lithium?

Yes. I think the growth, a lot of it is coming from the desalination side. Also, we have a large growing -- it's small today, but it's growing nicely opportunity within the residential space. And so we've now got the leading technology from all 3 applications between reverse osmosis, ion exchange and also filtration in our acquisition. So we feel comfortable, and as Ed had mentioned, continue to look at opportunities for us to expand our presence there. So I think filtration continues to be a large opportunity for us as well. So as Ed had mentioned, whether it's lithium or other types of filtration, we will continue to be a big player in that space.

Yes. I mean with all of us with our ESG goals out there in the industrial world, I mean, the secular growth opportunity here looks like it's going to be pretty awesome for the next couple of decades. So I mean we all have metrics we're trying to hit on clean water, and we all have these facilities around the world. So it should be a really nice opportunity. And by the way, one of the reasons we would like to grow this business organically and inorganically.

And I think about our opportunity in addition to ESG is the potential underneath the infrastructure plan that has targeted investments in the water filtration require a perfect purification space.

And just to follow up on this Laird acquisition, and as you mentioned, some cost synergies, but do you -- how would you compare that opportunity versus your ability to maybe cross-sell since that will be a drop in and it's some different technologies and chemistries that you don't seem to have? So is it a cross-selling opportunity and/or maybe an expansion of some of their technologies into new end markets? Do you see any opportunities to do that as well?

It's definitely -- look, we bought it on the cross-sell, i.e., when you get right down, the way it broadens out the portfolio very significantly in a couple of key technology areas that are needed as there's more advanced technologies coming here, especially thermal management being a key one. So look, the closer we're delivering our -- just going to go at it real quickly just to get it out of the way, but we want it for the growth opportunity, the cross-sell opportunity to be able to bring more solutions to our customers. Remember, in that business, we have a lot of application engineers that are resolving customer issues. And with shrinkage in size of all these components, some of these technologies become more and more important. And so that's the reason we bought it strategically, we think it's a great fit. It's where the industry is headed. And it's more of really the growth reason in that business, but we'll get the cost synergies. So we bought it at a nice number from a multiple standpoint.

Your next response is from John Roberts of UBS.

Ed, my understanding is IFF has recommended against you going on to the IFF Board. Are there any remaining connections between DuPont and IFF that would create a conflict? Or that's just the position they have against previous management being on the Board of a new owner?

Yes. So usually, John, it's an issue of CEO sitting on 2 boards, external boards. But I think in general, and by the way, they have -- also have the issue you just raised. My thoughts, in general, our investors understand why I'm doing it. I don't need to do other things in my life. But I think they understand it, it's very important to me and to DuPont that this goes well, we go opening more than half the company is what we put into IFF. So it's extremely important to our shareholder base. So I think it's morally the right thing to do. But under the definition by an independent director, there's absolutely no doubt about that. And it's very similar driver on the Corteva Board, the help and the transition there. I don't see this is any different than I think it's the right thing to do.

Your next response is from Mike Sison, Wells Fargo.

I just want to get a little better feel for the second half. EBITDA does -- looks like it's going to grow high single digits. And just curious, do you expect demand to improve in the second half as the pandemic sort of subsides, hopefully? And is the lower growth rate more maybe raw materials and other issues? And then longer term, what do you think the EBITDA growth potential for the new DuPont is?

Yes. I think the potential lower growth in the second half is really just a comparison. So obviously, the second half -- second quarter is going to be the largest year-over-year growth driver for us just given that was the lead point of last year, and then we approved as the year went on. So I don't see a material change in the actual EBITDA number kind of similar to the revenue conversation we had earlier, so I think a similar environment. As I've mentioned earlier, from an end market perspective, we're generally that and even above 2019 in those cases, the full year guidance that we had out there has our revenue up 6% versus 2019. And the guide that we put, I think, was the EBITDA kind of low teens. And so we're generally back and then the markets that are weak are really just a handful. And they're more around the aerospace which is up off the bottom, but still off of 2019 and commercial construction, which in the aggregate don't make up a material portion of our portfolio.

Your next response is from Arun Viswanathan, RBC Capital Markets.

Great. I'm just curious now that the portfolio, you've gone through health and nutrition or the separation thereafter you've made some acquisitions here to bulk up E&I, you separated into new segments as well with water. What else are you guys thinking of as far as continued kind of portfolio management? Also the noncore is mostly out. Is the business kind of operating at a level that you're comfortable with? I know you've also undertaken a lot of cost reductions. But maybe strategically, you can just give us your thoughts on maybe some of the next steps as you see moving forward for the new DuPont.

Yes. Look, I would say, short term here, we're very focused operationally running the company. But remember, we just closed the N&B transaction 2 months ago. It seems like forever, and there's a lot of heavy lift there. We still have to finish cars and do the 3 noncore businesses, which we'll get out after mid-year out of the portfolio, and that will bring in $900 million of proceeds. So we still have a heavy lift going on there. And then remember, at the same time, we're going to be starting the integration of the Laird business into the portfolio. So we definitely got a lot of that type of work, in addition to looking at a couple of targeted M&A opportunities as I had mentioned. So -- but I think that has a lot going on portfolio-wise still this year and with all of the issues we talked about managing raw material inputs and pricing through all that in a kind of a crazy but fun year. We've got our hands full. So I'd say portfolio kind of getting to kind of where we want it. Again, we would never take off the table looking some transformative things. But generally, cleaning up the noncore, getting Laird in and operationally, really just knows as a grindstone here.

Your next response is from Alex Yefremov with KeyBanc.

Could you elaborate on the share gains in the CMP slurry? Did you introduce new products there? And do you expect additional share gains in this product or maybe anywhere else in semiconductors in coming quarters?

Yes, I.t really comes from the new products we had mentioned within CMP slurring lithography also within company in the advanced packaging space. So if you look at our revenue performance within semiconductor technology versus where the market does, we were up about 18% in total. We estimate FSI, which is the market indicator that we look at, which is the amount that we first produced was probably up about 9% in the quarter. We think we got about 4% or so just from where we play. So some of the spaces within the semiconductor space grew higher than the market average. And then the remaining 4% would have been from that share gain perspective.

At this time, there are no further questions in the queue. Thank you.

Thank you, everyone, for joining our call. For your reference, a copy of our transcript will be posted on the DuPont website. This concludes our call.

This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.