Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Genuine Parts Company First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. Today's call is being recorded. [Operator Instructions] At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Tim Walsh, Vice President of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Welcome to Genuine Parts Company's First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. Joining us on the call today are Will Stengel, Chair-Elect and Chief Executive Officer; and Bert Nappier, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. In addition to this morning's press release, a supplemental slide presentation can be found on the Investors page of the Genuine Parts Company website. Today's call is being webcast, and a replay will also be made available on the company's website after the call. Following our prepared remarks, the call will be open for questions. The responses to which will reflect management's views as of today, April 21, 2026. If we're unable to get to your questions, please contact our Investor Relations department. Please be advised this call may include certain non-GAAP financial measures, which may be referred to during today's discussion of our results as reported under generally accepted accounting principles. A reconciliation of these measures is provided in the earnings press release. Today's call may also involve forward-looking statements regarding the company and its businesses as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The company's actual results could differ materially from any forward-looking statements due to several important factors described in the company's latest SEC filings, including this morning's press release. The company assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made during this call. With that, I'll turn it over to Will.

Thank you, Tim. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining our first quarter 2026 earnings call. I want to start this morning by recognizing and thanking our 65,000 teammates around the world for their continued dedication and hard work. Their commitment, expertise and focus are the foundation of our success as they work every day to deliver parts and solutions to our customers. This morning, I'll review our first quarter financial results by business segment, followed by an update on our announced plan to separate our Global Automotive and Global Industrial businesses into 2 publicly traded companies. In short, the separation work is on track and progressing well. As we execute our separation plan, our top priorities remain the same: stay focused on key strategic initiatives, operate the business with discipline and deliver excellent service to our customers. During the first quarter, our teams did this well and delivered financial results ahead of our expectations. The war in the Middle East will require us to remain agile and disciplined in a dynamic global environment. The war is impacting the flow of certain goods across the global supply chain, adding inflationary pressure to certain product and logistics costs and adding incremental uncertainty for customers. Despite the environment, we did not experience a material impact to our financial results during the first quarter. Our teams have demonstrated the ability to manage through temporary economic and geopolitical disruptions in the past. We have global scale, playbooks and capabilities to deploy as needed. Moments of disruption create opportunities to gain market share and strengthen customer loyalty, especially when we respond with speed, discipline and focus. Bert will share more about how we're thinking about the conflict and the implications for our outlook. Turning to our financial results. A few highlights for the quarter…

Thanks, Will, and good morning, everyone. Our teams delivered in the first quarter with sales in line and profit ahead of expectations. Our results reflect disciplined execution across the organization against evolving market conditions, particularly with the added uncertainties surrounding the conflict in Iran. During the first quarter, adjusted EBITDA was up 5% and adjusted EPS of $1.77 was slightly above prior year. Our results were driven by higher sales and the benefits from our global restructuring initiatives, partially offset by cost inflation and operating expenses. Our previously communicated headwinds from depreciation and interest expense negatively impacted our earnings by $0.09. This morning, I will review the details of our first quarter results and then share a few comments around our 2026 outlook, which we reaffirm this morning. Then I'll close with additional details on our estimated range of dis-synergies and stand-alone costs of our separation. Before I take you through the details of the quarter, my comments this morning will focus on adjusted results which include nonrecurring costs related to our global restructuring program and costs related to the planned separation of our automotive and industrial businesses. Collectively, these items totaled $75 million of pretax costs or $56 million after tax. Now let's turn to the details of the first quarter. Total GPC sales increased 6.8%, which included a 240 basis point improvement in comparable sales, a 130 basis point benefit from acquisitions and a 320 basis point benefit from foreign currency. Of note, each of our 3 segments delivered comparable sales growth that sequentially improved from the prior quarter. Price inflation was up low single digits in each segment, with North American Auto at approximately 3%, international auto at approximately 2%, and industrial at approximately 3%. Our gross margin was 37.3%, an increase of 20 basis points from…

[Operator Instructions] First, we will hear from Greg Melich at Evercore ISI.

Thanks for all the additional detail. I want to follow up on, I think, Bert, some of your comments about the conflict in Iran and some of the spillover and how it inflects the outlook. I think you mentioned pricing was up low single digits. I think it was [ 3% ] in North American auto and then similar in Industrial and International. How do you think the increased cost, as you mentioned on freight, you said it would pass through? So do you expect pricing to now for the year be running at that 3%? Or do you think it decelerates equally across the businesses?

Greg, thanks for the question. Look, I think I'll start -- I'll pull it up just a little bit and then come back to the pricing point and maybe give everybody a little bit more color on Q2 when we think about the next 100 days or so. And again, start with pointing back to my prepared remarks on those various elements of the P&L that I outlined where we think the impact comes from, when we think about the conflict, whether it's revenue, cost of goods sold or operating expenses. When we look across the balance of the year, I think we've been pretty prudent and pragmatic. That balancing, we finished ahead of expectations for Q1 against all these new dynamics we're dealing with the conflict. And so when you think about the forecasting, obviously, we're thinking about your pricing question within that. But I think the biggest variable, which gets to the question you've asked about the duration of pricing for the year is the duration of the disruption itself and the conflict. And obviously, there's a wide range of outcomes and scenarios when we think about this and we've really tried to refine our perspective to the next 100 days because I think that's what we have the best insight to, which is obviously a bit arguable when you think about the strait opening and closing from morning to afternoon or just the point around oil prices, I think in the last 45 days, we've had 6 days of double-digit moves in oil prices with some of those swings at nearly 20%. So with that backdrop, I think I'll give you just a little bit more precise color on Q2. We expect the impact to the forecast for us to be most pronounced in Q2. And when…

That's great. And for a follow-up, I would love to ask Will, as you're going through this big separation process and -- how do you think it could impact the culture and how do you think about working that through the thinking just bolt-on M&A along the way or even thinking of selling some of the businesses, if that's what makes sense along the way?

Yes, Greg, I think this is a moment where our culture really shines. It's based in team. It's based in hard work. It's based in collaboration. I referred to the way in which we've set up the project team, it's cross-functional, it's cross-business unit, it's global. We meet every week. So I think the operating rhythm and the way in which we're all working is a perfect reflection of how this company works as a team and has built its culture over 100 years. As I've talked about before, we have a very consistent culture, both geographically and across business units. So that's part of our special sauce, and I wouldn't expect anything about the work that we're doing in 2026 or our strategy going forward. to change that. And in fact, I would argue that it amplifies the depth and the way in which we work together. So we feel really good about where we are.

Next question will be from Bret Jordan at Jefferies.

Could you give us a little more color on the European backdrop, I guess, or regional performance, competitive landscape, are there stronger and weaker markets over there that should be [indiscernible]?

Yes, happy to, Bret. As I said in the prepared remarks, we were really encouraged -- we saw sequential meaningful sequential improvement versus the fourth quarter in all of our geographies. So we're seeing continued good execution and arguably improving market fundamentals across each of the geographies. We had some nice progress in our Germany business this past quarter. They're doing a nice job relative to competition, and we continue to show really nice progress in our Iberia platform that has done a lot of work to build its national supply chain, work closely with its vendors. It's accelerating its NAPA brand offering in the market that's new and different in the marketplace. So those are 2 highlights. And as I said, the other markets improved, and we're cautiously optimistic that as we go through 2026, we'll continue to build that momentum.

Great. And then I guess sort of early thoughts on the dividend policy for the [ spincos ]. Obviously, it will be a sort of a different business profile, but how do you think about that capital allocation?

Yes, Bret, look, I think we've got more work to do on capital allocation. We're obviously mindful of the dividend and the importance of that to the various customer base -- or the various shareholder bases. One thing that I would say is that we have -- we've increased the dividend again for 2026. It's an important part of the current GPC capital allocation structure, and it will be going forward as well. I think as we shared a few weeks ago at the conference with Michael, this is a moment in which we'll ensure that the capital allocation strategy of the 2 businesses follows its growth strategy. And those will be different. And that's a backdrop for why the separation of the businesses make sense. Each business has a different trajectory going forward, both super positive, and we're both -- and we're excited about both. But when we think about it, I think you'll see an automotive business that has a focus on shareholder returns, first and -- first and foremost, and secondarily, probably an indexing towards capital CapEx investments and a little bit of bolt-on M&A. And when you think about industrial, I think you'll be thinking about a profile of more M&A. It's a little less capital-intensive business, so CapEx as well, but also shareholder returns. So early innings, we're doing that work right now, and we'll continue to progress that work and share thoughts later. But the most important thing will be to continue to focus on shareholder returns and make sure the capital allocation strategies follow the business strategies and in the end, make sure that we stay faithful to our intention to have both companies investment-grade ratings.

Next question will be from Christopher Horvers at JPMorgan.

So I had a couple pricing follow-ups. So first on Section 232, the new steel tariffs, to what extent do you expect that to be inflationary? And I guess, to what degree and is that baked into your guidance as you look to the balance of the year? And then you mentioned potentially pricing through some of the freight costs. Just wanted to understand is like freight costs that get capitalized into inventory. You passed -- it sounds like you're willing to pass those through, but the periodic costs of domestic freight, is that something that you would anticipate passing through over time? Or is that something more of a TBD, we're going to have to eat that now, figure out the need to pass that into price later?

Yes, Chris, maybe I'll start with -- that's a long question. I'll start with the second part on the current environment with respect to the conflict and how we're thinking about that, and then I'll come back to the Section 232 tariffs. Look, I think this is going to be a steady as it goes kind of environment. We're dealing with something that's incredibly dynamic. As I mentioned a few minutes ago, just oil prices alone and the volatility changing from day to day. On the freight end, which does get capitalized into inventory, that would be part of our pricing strategy. We'll be thinking about how do we pass that through balanced against our regular playbook on pricing and where we're considering the moves of pricing across markets, geographies, SKUs and what elasticity is out there. I think the consumer has a lot to consider right now. Customers and consumers have a lot to consider on the pricing front. And we'll have to be thoughtful about this environment on top of overall inflation and then tariffs. When we think about the freight out and so that's the cost that we're incurring to move product inside the U.S. or inside a certain geography from DC to the branch or store. Again, we're having to absorb increases in cost, and that's why I shared the thoughts I shared on the second quarter about those additional downside risks to the business in the near term. That also will factor in how do we think about pricing on that front as well. I mean all of these things factor into our operating costs and the cost to serve our customers, and we put them first. And so we're being super thoughtful about how do we balance the additional costs we have in the…

And then staying on the pricing topic, you talked about 3% inflation roughly. You also talked about a gross margin headwind with respect to tariffs. So is it that you're not passing -- and that number lags -- that 3% lags what Zone and O'Reilly have talked about, albeit in line with Advance. So is that gross margin headwind essentially indicative that you're holding back on some of the tariff costs and as a mean to maybe narrow price gaps? Or are you trying to adjust for prices that are perhaps too high in certain markets and just trying to get back down to normal?

No, I don't think there's anything to see there other than we had a really strong Q1 a year ago, a 120 basis point expansion in gross margin. So we had a tough comp to begin with. The second element would just be that don't forget that the first quarter of last year had no tariff impact. And so for Q1 this year, we're actually carrying all the increases in cost of goods sold with the top line benefit and all of those things are hunting in the low single-digit range. So when we think about how we've expanded gross margin over the past several quarters, we've had the benefit at moments in time of lags and where we sit in terms of the delta between price and cost. And in this particular quarter, I think they're pretty lined up. And so that created a little bit of attention on expansion to gross margin for the quarter. But nothing concerning from our perspective, in line with our expectations. And as I -- as we mentioned in my prepared remarks, we've reaffirmed our outlook for the full year, 40 to 60 basis points of gross margin expansion. And that's going to come on this great work we're doing across the business, which is going to build benefits across the course of the year.

Next question will be from Scot Ciccarelli at Truist.

Scot Ciccarelli, two auto-related questions. First, I don't know if you guys are willing to provide anything at this stage, but any more detail around the profitability of your North American company-owned stores versus the independent biz? And then secondly, kind of on a related basis, where do you think company-owned profit -- company-owned store profitability can go over time, just given what we can see from some of your biggest competitors?

Yes, Scot, on the first one, I hope you can appreciate, I'm not sure we prefer to disclose that level of detail on the profitability. On the second question, maybe we won't talk with specific numbers, but I can tell you with a lot of empirical data behind it as you think about our 2025 strategic review, obviously, we spent a lot of time looking at what we call our entitlement in all of our businesses, but in particular, in our automotive business, and it's really compelling. And it's a material improvement in the business. The exciting part about it is, we've got best-in-class examples that are already at the level of entitlement. And so it's not pie in the sky in the sense that we've got to go out and do something unnatural. We have to get all of our opportunities up to best-in-class. And I think we'll bring that to life in the Investor Day to put some numbers around it. But we're excited about the work we're doing and the sequential improvement in company-owned stores is the early days work of executing that road map and that playbook to get the best of breed to teach the others and work with the others to get to that level. So more to come on it. It's a good question. It's a fair question. I would note, we are a B2B business. So we are different than your traditional retailers. So we'll have our own benchmark for what we view as entitlement and best of breed that might potentially look different than a traditional retailer.

Can I just ask a follow-up, given the lack of information on the first question there. What are you hearing just in terms of your conversations with your independents, given their appetite for inventory and given some of the cost pressures that they've been under with the interest expense related to inventory?

We had a -- I should mention, we had 20 of our largest owners here in the U.S. in the Atlanta headquarters 2, 3 weeks ago and the tone and the discussions are very positive and optimistic, honestly, sequentially improved, as you saw in our results, which I think reflects the cautious optimism as we go through 2026. Alain Masse and the NAPA team here in the States, part of his expertise and his experience working with independent owners is playing out as we thought. There's really good alignment in terms of the priorities of the business and the investments we're making in the business on behalf of the independent owners. And we're also spending time thinking creatively about different ways to support their inventory investments, and there's more to come on that topic as well. So we're working as well as we've ever worked with our independent owners over the recent years. Obviously, it's been a tough market backdrop for them in all small businesses and part of our strategy today and going forward is to make sure that they're in a position to win in the local markets. And their sales outperformance is encouraging. And as long as we're all selling out in the markets there, I think the independent owners have a real opportunity to be successful and we're here to support them to be successful in the same. So more to come on it, but a fair question and a good question.

Next question will be from Michael Lasser at UBS.

It's essentially a follow-up on that last topic, which is, is there a trade-off for GPC corporate in the Auto segment where you have to balance the free cash flow generation of the North American auto business versus the top line growth for your independents, meaning you have an opportunity potentially to sacrifice some of the free cash flow generation. If you were to extend more capital or longer terms to your independents? And if that's the case, how is that going to impact the free cash flow generation of a stand-alone auto business?

Michael, it's Bert. I think the short answer to that is it doesn't impact the medium or long-term outlook for cash flow generation for the business. The bottom line is that we've been using our very strong balance sheet for many, many years to support our independent owners whether that's capital programs that we guarantee, that we disclose to support their growth and loans that they need to grow, which gives them access to capital at a more favorable -- at a little bit more favorable rate than they could on their own to payment terms, to deeper investments in inventory to make sure they have the availability. We've been using the GPC balance sheet long before I got here to support the independent owners, and that's in our run rate. And so I think when we think about how we look ahead to the global automotive business on a stand-alone basis, we'll continue to do that. And as Will just mentioned, we're reimagining even as we speak, how we support independent owners. The independent owner has a -- it's the backbone of this business. It's how the aftermarket grew up and it will always have a place. We just have to find a way to optimize it in a maximized way and continue to grow together and do the right thing for our customers. And so we're going to continue to do that. I don't think even with some of the new things we're considering, it changes the long-term view on cash generation or how we've used the balance sheet. We're just going to use it in a different way, and we'll have more to come on that. Look, I think all of these questions build into what will be a very exciting Investor Day for Global Automotive. We'll be talking about the strength of the 2 channels, the company-owned stores, the independent owners and what we can do as we look ahead. And so that's why we're excited. And that's why I think everyone should be excited about the separation of these 2 businesses and will be 2 great public companies.

Got you. Very helpful. And you also provided some really helpful commentary on sizing the incremental EBITDA impact from all the geopolitical issues, $10 million to $20 million of EBITDA. Putting a couple of points together, you mentioned that April has been steady for the business. So should we be modeling pretty consistent top line performance in the second quarter with what you experienced in the first quarter and yet take into account this $10 million to $20 million EBITDA hit? And how does that play into your expectations in the back half of the year and how we should be modeling that?

Look, maybe I'll answer that on a core basis, Michael. So don't forget the first quarter had a nice tailwind from currency. I think that's the one element that we've assumed about 1 point of FX growth for the rest of the year. We had 320 basis points of FX tailwind in Q1. So let's not -- let's not everybody run out and remodel on that kind of FX tailwind as we look to the balance of the year. When I look at core revenue growth for Q2, I think it will be pretty steady. April has started out steady, March was pretty resilient, April a steady start. And April helped inform the downside risk that I shared earlier. But within that, I think the top line will continue to perform. The things we watch on the top line are the European market conditions, which, as Will mentioned, we're cautiously optimistic have improved from the fourth quarter. They're still muted, but they are improved from the fourth quarter, so we'll continue to watch that. Independent owners had a sequentially improved quarter. We'll continue to stay focused there. And as I shared earlier, I think when we think about revenue in Q2, we'll have what we think is maybe a little bit more pricing benefit from some of the things that are happening with the costs we're passing on to perhaps more muted demand, and that leaves us neutral in our assumptions. So I'd say, keep the core kind of in line and don't model in a bunch of additional FX tailwind, if that's helpful.

And at this time, we have no other questions registered. I will turn the call over to Mr. Tengel -- Stengel. Please go ahead.

Thank you, everybody, for joining us today. We look forward to updating you on the transaction and our progress as we move through the quarter on the July earnings call. Thanks again for being with us, and thanks for your support. Have a great day.

Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, this does indeed conclude your conference call for today. Once again, thank you for attending. And at this time, we do ask that you please disconnect your lines.