Good afternoon. I'm Anna Marie Wagner, SVP of Corporate Development at Ginkgo Bioworks. I'm joined by Jason Kelly, our Co-Founder and CEO; and Mark Dmytruk, our CFO. Thanks as always for joining us. We're looking forward to updating you on our progress. As a reminder, during the presentation today, we'll be making forward-looking statements, which involve risks and uncertainties. Please refer to our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission to learn more about these risks and uncertainties. So, we just hosted our annual conference Ferment and all that's geared towards our customers understanding why customers are choosing Ginkgo is important to our investors. And so we're going to spend some time today recapping some of the themes from that event. As usual we'll end with a Q&A session and I'll take questions from analysts, investors, and the public. You can submit those questions to us in advance via Twitter #Gingkoresults or e-mail at investors@gingkobioworks.com. All right. Over to you Jason.

Thanks Anna Marie. I'm super excited to be chatting with all of you today. We just hosted Ginkgo Ferment, our big meeting. We had about 1,000 people there in person, plus folks on the live stream as well. In my keynote, I reminded the audience that at Ginkgo we're not spending our cash just on clinical trials or field trials or cosmetic launches, these are sort of end product activities that our customers are doing. At Ginkgo, we're spending our capital on improving our platform for our customers. So, a big goal today was learning from our customers about what they want us to build and I firmly believe that if we deliver on those requests then we ultimately deliver for all of our investors. We do right by our customers we do right by all of you. So, you're going to hear a lot more from me today about why customers are choosing to sign up for Ginkgo's platform and what I heard at Ferment. When we launched Ginkgo one of the big criticisms of our whole model was that a general purpose platform would not work in biotech, right? It might work in the tech industry, but in biology the lab work you do to engineer a mammalian cell is just too different from the lab work you do to engineer bacterial cells to get that working on a common robotics platform and automated for example or the data and machine learning models that would be relevant in the biopharma industry would never port over to work in agriculture. So, I'm happy to say we are proving these people wrong. This is a sampling of our customers at Ginkgo. We have some of the largest biopharma companies in the world now, Novo Nordisk, Merck, we just announced a…

Thanks, Jason. I'll start by discussing our Cell Engineering business. As a reminder we now refer to Cell Engineering revenue rather than foundry revenue as it is more reflective of the business. You'll see that updated throughout our 10-Q. We added 13 new cell programs and supported a total of 97 active programs across 60 customers on the Cell Engineering platform in the first quarter of 2023. This represents substantial growth and diversification and programs relative to the 64 active programs in the first quarter of 2022 with strong growth coming from the pharma and biotech and the food and agriculture segments. We added several large new customers to the platform including Boehringer Ingelheim, Syngenta, Solvay and a new program with Sumitomo in addition to a good mix of programs with earlier-stage customers across industries. As Jason mentioned, we think both of these customer segments are important. It's an important validation of our capabilities when we add large multinational customers like BI and Syngenta who have strong internal R&D capabilities but we're also very proud of our ability to enable the next generation of leaders. Cell Engineering revenue was $34 million in the quarter, up 59% compared to the first quarter of 2022. As you can see in the charts at the bottom of the page, this growth was driven entirely by our services revenue with third-party customers and is reflective of diversification in the customer base. Now turning to Biosecurity. Our Biosecurity business generated $47 million of revenue in the first quarter of 2022 a solid result as this business transitions away from K-12 COVID testing services. Importantly over 20% of this revenue came from what we believe will become more recurring sources such as federal and international contracts while that proportion was well under 10% in Q4 of…

Thanks, Mark. It's always exciting to me to see new customers signing up for the platform. And I want to highlight that we actually spend a lot of time talking to our current customers, including running an annual customer survey to learn how they're using the platform and importantly, how can – you can make the platform better. So I want to share a little bit about what we've learned on why our customers are choosing to outsource to our platform in the first section. Now our customers are specialized in their vertical markets right? They're a pharma company, an industrial biotech or an ag company. We are not right? I think as a general platform. So I want to talk about these service offerings that Ginkgo is launching so that we can better speak in the language of our customers when we're offering our general platform. And then finally, I'm also really excited about the progress our Biosecurity business is making around the world. And so I'm going to end there with a few comments. Okay. Let's dive in. All right. So I showed this slide before, but I do want to I want to pause on it just again for a minute to highlight how unique it is to have this range and breadth of customers on the platform both in terms of size and range of industries. And so one of the things we wanted to ask is why are these folks getting on the platform, okay? And we did this by again surveying and talking with folks and things like that. I think this is a really nice quote from one of our larger customers he's Brian VanDahl at Novo Nordisk and he said, Science is currently undergoing a revolution. Large-scale data sets coupled with AI…

Great. Thanks, Jason. We'll switch to Q&A in a few moments. Before we do, I wanted to get through a couple of housekeeping items. In my role, I respond to a lot of investor e-mails, and I'd like to make it easier for all our investors to benefit from the questions that are being asked. And there's been a couple of recurring themes. So I've added two new slides into the appendix materials that I'm hoping will be helpful. The first which Mark alluded to provides more clarity around stock-based comp. And in summary the vast majority of the stock-based comp, we've recorded since going public is related to shares granted prior to going public. That's been a common source of confusion. So, hopefully, that will help clarify that as well as provide some modeling tools around what's left. The second slide provides some additional details on stock sales by our founders. This data is all publicly available, but some of the market data providers don't accurately pull our share counts, because they sometimes exclude different classes of shares. As you'll see on the appendix slide our founders still own over 400 million shares. That represents over 20% of the company. They did have some mandatory sell-to-cover transactions when their RSUs were settled and have put in place small 10b5-1 plans. But both of those are dwarfed by their core holdings most of which sit in illiquid Class B shares. So I'm hopeful that those slides are helpful.

Now we'll move on to Q&A. As usual, I'll start with a question from the public and remind analysts on the line that if they'd like to ask a question to please raise their hands on Zoom, and I'll call on you and open up your line. Thanks all. All right. It looks like everyone has managed to reconnect. So we'll go ahead and get started. The first question as I mentioned always comes from retail. This comes from Mark De [ph] on Twitter. Since the number of projects is the best leading indicator for future platform revenues, how do you feel about your original forecast of adding 100 projects for 2023 when looking at the pipeline of projects are you on track?

Yes. I can take that. I can also talk about the scene change, since I am now in Qatar just getting back from a dinner. So I mentioned this at the end of the recorded talk there. We -- we've been expanding our biosecurity business pretty dramatically on the international side. And one of our best sites is actually Hamad International Airport here in Doha, which is just a great regional airport for the area. We have this program with the CDC where we're collecting wastewater and testing for new variants. I'll just say that the flights into Doha are not overlapping very much of the flights into Atlanta. So it really is a really nice way to get a wider set of data for our biosecurity programs. We're lucky to have the partners here. So to get to the answer to your question on the programs Yes. So I think one of the key things -- I mean, a, our per -- was 13% in the quarter that's down from last quarter. So that's something we're keeping an eye on. I would say, we have one disadvantage we're doing large enterprise sales, which can be a little bit lumpy and unpredictable like there's just an enterprise sales element to it. The advantage of enterprise sales is you have decent pipeline visibility. So we have a good sense deals don't close in a week they close over months. And so we have a good sense of what's in the pipeline. So that's the one reason we have a lot of confidence in that program count for the year. I will say, if I like look across the last year and try to find like actual trends and what's either making it easier or harder to close programs, probably the one thing that's making it harder I would say is for start-up companies in kind of non-biopharma biotech, so things like industrial biotechnology. Those companies are having a harder time accessing capital in the sort of tighter capital market. It's one of the areas that venture capitals are putting less money into. And that is making it tougher. It's at least extending deal close time and things like that with programs in that area. On the other hand, again, we think it operates as a general platform like I mentioned in my remarks there that allows us to be able to move into other areas that are doing better like biopharma for example. So biopharma you are still seeing a ton of activity both with start-ups and large companies. We mentioned how much energy we've been getting out of the StrideBio acquisition, but we also have a healthy pipeline in cell therapy applications mRNA, therapeutics applications things like that. So I think you'll see us shift a little more towards biopharma, but we do have a robust sales pipeline coming up so I feel good about it.

Thanks, Jason. All right. We'll take a question from analysts now. The first question I'll take comes from Rahul Sarugaser at Raymond James. So let me try to open your line here although we're actually having a bit of trouble. I may need to ask for a little IT support to give me permission to open the lines. And while we're doing that I'll go ahead and ask another question. This one actually coming from an employee. So for folks that don't know any time we do an earnings call the first sort of investor call that we take after our earnings call is with all of our employees. Our employees as a group are our largest shareholder. And we thought we might share some of their questions with you all as well. So this one came from an employee that chose to remain anonymous. We're increasingly talking about AI at Ginkgo. And so can you provide an overview of our AI and code-based strategy and how we're staffing those efforts?

Yeah. So I think this is actually a big deal. So I touched on this a little bit at Ferment, but one of the things that's happening is because of the impact of sort of ChatGPT in the sense that like large data, less generative AI models equals change in industries, you now have pretty much like every large corporation looking at what the impact of this is going to be on them. And that's auto companies that's chip companies media companies and it's also biotech biopharma companies ag companies and so on. And in order for a customer to use Ginkgo's platform they have to choose to make a change, right? So today, they have an internal R&D department doing work and they're making products and everything else. And I'm saying change some of that spend some of those R&D dollars on our platform. As sort of like a sales motion they need to have a reason to want to change. And sometimes it's they're greedy to try to add a new product sometimes things aren't going well and they want to try something new. And sometimes something new comes along in the kind of in the atmosphere that makes them think they need to take a look. And that is what's going on with generative AI. So you have people saying hey I think I should be looking at what happens if there's big data and models in my space. And the beauty of Ginkgo is we are a great place to generate huge data assets. And so I think AI is a core strategy. It is a very positive wind in our sales here at Ginkgo. In terms of how we're making use of it, well, we have this advantage that we have been over the last 10 years as we've done all these deals and so on accumulating a huge data asset. We've talked about this publicly many times our code-base. That is beautiful data to train these types of models. So we're super excited about that. We're already seeing good results. You can see some of this in our webinars about how we do our protein engineering, but expect that to expand to a wider set of activities at the company. And I expect customers to come to us to get access to it.

Thanks, Jason. All right. Rahul, I think we're all set. So I've just opened your line. Please go ahead.

All right. Can you guys, hear me?

Yes.

Excellent. This is Michael Premion [ph] on for Rahul today. Thanks very much for taking our questions. And congratulations on such a successful Ferment event. That was a really spectacular display with some growing reviews from your customers. So thanks for throwing that you guys. Pleasure to be there. Okay. First question is on the overall IP strategy. I'm wondering, what can you tell us about how this year versus perhaps last year, Ginkgo has been leveraging its existing code base for new cell programs versus doing de novo engineering and how much – perhaps how much more it's drawing upon that code base now? And the attitude among customers like I trust in early days there are some serious pushback among customers saying, when – with Ginkgo's attitude toward holding on to the IP that you develop. So I wonder if you could shed some light on all that.

Yes. Yes, I can touch on this one. Yes one of the biggest challenges we had with customers over the years was sort of hey, it seems Ginkgo like you're doing a project in an area for the first time with me. I'm going to fund a chunk of it and you're going to keep the rights to reuse it and go off and build a business on the back of my investment, right? And short answer was yes, we were doing that in a number of cases. But what's happened over time is we're accumulating assets in all these areas is we now – and you can see this what those four services I announced at Ferment, each one of those services has specific code base in that area. So when we go and talk to a customer, it isn't saying, hey, I don't have anything in AAVs but I think my robotics could be useful for you. Hey, that would have been true and I did do sales like that 1.5 years two years ago, they're brutal sales. Now I get to say, all my infrastructure and high throughput automation is useful for AAVs. By the way, here's the data to show you. By the way, here's a bunch of great capsids from [indiscernible] you can get access to. And by the way here's some other data capsid work we've done to discover some new stuff and so on. That really, really helps on the sales side. So I would say probably the biggest impact is in selling because a lot of customers, particularly in the biopharma side want to see data that you've done something like what they're interested in. And then the second order is like I mentioned that Lygos project where we're able to just totally draw on some work we did before to speed a project up. I don't know in some cases by years. So I think there's a real there's going to be more and more examples of that. But probably the first place we're seeing it is just having a more complete product to offer on these services.

All right. Thank you very much. I think as a follow-up this one will probably be for Mark. Around at the end of last year, we were waiting out some lumpy milestones. We're curious about the timing on that. I'm looking at the cell engineering revenue, where $1 million of the total $34 million was downstream revenue. Also looking at the appendix of the presentation today, where $13 million is non-cash consideration of the total $34 million. I wonder if you could just help us sort through those as the definitions and shed light on these things and then perhaps talk about those lumpy milestones.

Okay. So I'll take the two points in turn, first on the lumpy milestone. So really it's the same comment I think that we made on our last earnings call, which is yes, there were the two milestones that – at one point we had been expecting to hit in Q4, which spilled into 2023. And yes, we are still going after those two milestones. We believe the technical work on that is substantially complete. But I think as we had mentioned on the last call and this is still true, there are aspects of validating the completion of that work that is out of our control. It's dependent on both customer, and some third-party manufacturing. And so, those are still in play, but timing is just uncertain on that. With respect to the second point that you made on noncash considerations, so yes, first of all, the conclusion that substantially all of the revenue in the first quarter related to services revenue, that's correct. The supplement in the appendix shows like you said, the component of services revenue or total revenue that is noncash. So, we do in some cases, as you know, and we started doing this last year, we do sometimes take equity from a customer as part of the upfront consideration on a project. So, not just for downstream value share, but also for the upfront or the service fee consideration. And so, that's why we're giving you that additional sort of date point. Does that answer the question? Q - Unidentified Analyst It sure does. I appreciate that. I'll jump back in the queue.

All right, Mike. All right Edmond Tu [ph] from Morgan Stanley. I've just got ahead and opened your line.

Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my questions. Just to circle back on that point, Jason. How do you strike the right balance between leveraging the collective learning sort of code base, for the benefit of an individual client versus making sure clients don't feel threatened, that their secret sauce is being farmed out for the benefit of other customers. What safeguards do you have in place, to make customers feel comfortable?

Yes. This is a key question, and something we talk a lot about with customers. I'm happy to share about it. So the number one thing is, new IP developed in a project for a customer for their application is exclusively licensed, to them for that application. So if you're developing gene therapy, and against the disease target whatever it is, you're going to get the rights to the IP developed with the work done for you, for your drug and no one else can use it for that. So they're not going to get to take, what you did and compete with you directly. Now, where we differ a little bit is, we would say well, if that capsid had used for example, in some other disease area, some totally different thing than what you're really working on, or just in pharmaceuticals generally, we'd like to be able to reuse that asset. And that's where we end up arguing with customers and kind of - and figuring out, what's right. I would say, the general rule is, we're most interested in things that have kind of broad reusability across larger projects, right? So capsids are a good example, certain internal sequences on cars are a good example. There's certain things that we think are -- don't make up the whole drug, but boy if they work better, they would make it a lot easier to get a lot of drugs to market, right? And so that tends to be the kind of thing that we fight hard to make sure we do have broad rights to it. If it's something ultra-specific to the customer, then that's kind of less relevant. But that's how we do it. And I think over time, as we accumulate more and more assets, this conversation becomes easier, right, because you're sort of coming in and I'm saying, listen I've got 90% of what's necessary for this project. But you're going to have to agree with this, for the other 10% that you're going to add to it, or else we just can't work together and you're going to want the 90. Does that make sense?

Yes. Got it. That's very helpful. And then Jason, on a separate note it sounds like you still feel like that the funding pressures, are actually driving a push towards greater outsourcing. I mean clearly, we've seen the weakness get worse even with some of the CROs, now acknowledging weaker spend at mid-cap biotechs. So, I just wanted to understand, what insulates you more versus the traditional CROs.

Yes. And just to be clear, like I said, for industrial biotech my experience is I think it is like causing push back on us, right? So, I don't think we're seeing more outsourcing necessarily in industrial biotech, we're just seeing less spending in industrial biotech. So, there I think we see more sensitivity. When it comes to like these other areas, I mean the honest truth is we're not that penetrated into these areas, right? So, if I was off already serving every biopharma company and they cut their R&D spending 30%, I'd be back 30%. But the reality is I've been an integer number of biopharma companies out of thousand, right? And so we just have so much room to run through adding new customers. And so we're just not -- I think we're just not as sensitive to it yet. It doesn't matter if that sector just stop spending on R&D, which is a little bit of what we're seeing in some of the industrial biotech spaces, but in biopharma that's not the case. So, there's plenty of opportunity for us.

Got it. Thank you for the color and the time.

All right. Thanks Edmond. All right, Gaurav I've just opened your line. Feel free to go ahead.

Awesome. Thanks guys for taking my question. I know it's about midnight over there Jason, so I'll keep it quick. On the new 13 programs right this quarter, are you guys able to break out that end market split or even the downstream potential, or is that something that we should expect only on an annual basis?

Mark do you want to take that?

Yes. Generally speaking, we would only be updating the downstream value share sort of metrics that we had talked about on the last call we think once sort of annually. Now we did announce just recently a large program with BI. And so you've got up around $400 million of downstream milestone potential from that particular contract. And I would just say the 13 programs are spread like pretty broadly across the types of downstream value share that we got. I mean there's a good chunk of royalty-bearing programs in there. There's a few that are milestone based a few that are equity based. So, it's -- I think it's just representative for the normal sort of mix.

Yes, that makes sense. Thanks Mark. And then just one quick follow-up for me. On the new four service offerings, so just to make sure I understand it correctly, right? So, are these four new service offering capabilities Ginkgo previously couldn't address on the platform, or are they just a more structured and focused program version of what they worked like?

Yes, that's an awesome question. Okay. So the -- here -- like how Ginkgo run basically is to have a large general platform. It's a mix of software and automation and a variety of genetic and IP and data assets that are all available to a scientist who works at Ginkgo on a customer project to order things from. Like that's what's happening internally. All right. Now, I can walk up to a customer and say like look at this 300,000 square foot facility and all these robotics, could it be useful to you, right? And they don't know how to translate that like they're used to seeing scientists and lab, working by hand like we do R&D in a very different way. And so the point of the services is to speak in the language of the customer. Okay. So, it is a sales object, right? It is a way for us to say let me just be very clear. This is what we can do in this category. Let me name it for you. Ginkgo does AAV for acquiring StrideBio. In part, great assets, people are calling us about the assets. It's also just people like hey Jason, why I know you guys are working on AAVs? We're working on AAV for two years, right? We have an announced deal with Selecta, right? And we did the deal with Biogen, right? Still -- but the acquisition of Stride, it was also in part just a marketing activity in the biopharma space so that people knew, right? And that's kind of the goal of the services. Like as a general platform, it's great because our TAM is huge. The downside is people don't understand what we can do for them. And so expect more services, right? I'll do as many of these as make any tank sense to customers, frankly. And so it's not going to see us experiment there and see where we're landing and having something that help customers better understand how to leverage the Ginkgo platform.

Awesome. That’s clear guys. Thanks, Jason. Thanks everyone. And cheers. Talk soon.

Thanks Mark.

Thanks, Gaurav.

All right. Next question will come from Matt Sykes at Goldman Sachs. And then just a reminder to the other analysts on the call that, if you'd like to ask a question please do raise your hand, so that I know to call on you. Thanks so much. All right. Matt, your line should be open.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yeah.

Yeah. Go ahead.

This is Ivy Kozlowski on for Matt. [indiscernible] early on, but could you provide any color on how the success-only payments has impacted your win rate at this point with customers?

Yeah. So this is a cool idea I think. I mean -- so -- so again, just to restate what we're trying to accomplish here like the larger mission of Ginkgo just to be clear is to make it easier to engineer biology. And by engineering means something, right? Like, when you engineer something there is a predictable set of equations that let you know how to build a bridge or a microchip or whatever, right? When you do research on a cell like engineering net engineering itself people don't think of it really like engineering you're doing science, right? And you're exploring the space and you don't know if it's going to work and all these things. And so we're trying to generally move into engineering. And one of the things we noticed was for certain types of projects doing these certain protein discovery projects and enzymes and optimization projects certain protein production was starting to feel like engineering, right?

Right.

Like, we were just seeing extremely high success rates. We knew which projects were going to be hard operator and which ones were going to be easy. And we would tell customers we didn't show data and they'd still be like, I'm not going to spend that much on a research project. And so what we're saying now is, fine, it's not a research project anymore it's an engineering project. And you'll pay on delivery. And that absolutely is working. We restart -- there's, probably seven or eight projects in the sales pipe right now that were previous in those since we announced it. So -- and that's just stuff we had been talking to people about before. So I think it's a really exciting idea. And we'll see how it plays out over the next couple of quarters, but early looks good. It is good. I mean, like, if we're wrong we're taking risk right like customers are getting real value out of this. It's not like we're not offering them something here. But I like our odds and I like our technical success rate in these categories.

Yeah. That super helpful. Thank you. And then …

One last point sorry.

Yeah.

We also are aiming for the shorter projects right? So not -- expect these projects more like six-to-12-month projects not like two or three-year projects where we would be -- it's a longer project we break it up in a smaller success-based pieces. So I don't want to go too far out on a limb on a project where we're waiting to see if we're technically successful to get paid, if that makes sense.

Right. Yes, that definitely makes sense. And then on Biosecurity revenue came in much higher than our expectations. I know you talked a little bit about it, but can you talk to your updated strategy as it relates to Biosecurity potentially becoming a more durable part of revenue than we might have previously expected. I think you said 20% is recurring but how should we think about the work down of the nonrecurring part and then also a long-term growth rate of the recurring part.

So why don't I start with the -- just to get the numbers kind of straight here. So first of all so in the quarter 20% roughly speaking of the Biosecurity revenue came from those what we believe will be more recurring sources. And so that would not be the state kind of K-12 school COVID testing programs for example. The -- you'll also note that we didn't change the guidance on Biosecurity. And so what you are going to see is really one more sort of partial quarter where we do still have some K-12 school testing revenues coming into the numbers. And then that is expected to drop off pretty dramatically after the second quarter. And so we have sort of little -- very little to nothing in the guide for the second half of the year relating to that legacy K-12 business. So the first quarter was solid like you mentioned, but that is because we were still getting a good chunk of K-12 revenue. We'll get a little bit more in the second quarter and then it's going to fall off. And sort of thereafter the bulk of the Biosecurity business is the sort of the new sources of revenue. And so you can kind of work -- what that sort of will tell you I guess is that a good portion of the $100 million will be realized in the first half of the year. And then thereafter it's almost like a reset on a lower revenue base that we expect to increase over time. That will be largely the new sources of revenue.

Okay. Great.

And just a comment on what those will be that's around things like these airport programs. These what we consider to be like persistent monitoring and I think there's a few different places that could happen, but we're probably most excited about what we're seeing in the airports.

Great. Thank you.

All right. Thanks so much. So a final call if there are any other questions to raise your hand but we are just about at time. And so for once Ginkgo hosted a call that didn't run over new KPI for me. And we'll let Jason go catch this next flight. Appreciate everyone joining us this quarter and we'll see you next time.

Thanks, everyone.