GFL Environmental Inc. (GFL) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, everyone, and thank you for joining the GFL first quarter 2026 earnings call. My name is Lucy, and I'll be coordinating your call today. (Operator Instructions)

各位好，感謝各位參加 GFL 2026 年第一季財報電話會議。我叫 Lucy，今天將由我協調本次電話會議。（接線員指示）

It is now my pleasure to hand over to Patrick Dovigi, Founder and CEO of GFL to begin. Please go ahead.

現在我很榮幸將電話交給 GFL 創辦人兼執行長 Patrick Dovigi 開始。請開始。

Thank you, and good morning. I would like to welcome everyone to today's call, and thank you for joining us. This morning, we will be reviewing our results for the first quarter.

謝謝，各位早安。歡迎各位參加今天的電話會議，並感謝各位與會。今天早上，我們將回顧第一季的業績表現。

I am joined this morning by Luke Pelosi, our CFO, who will take us through our forward-looking disclaimer before we get into details.

今天早上與我一同出席的還有我們的財務長 Luke Pelosi；在我們進入細節之前，他將先帶大家說明前瞻性聲明的免責聲明。

Thank you, Patrick. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining. We have filed our earnings press release, which includes important information. The press release is available on our website.

謝謝你，Patrick。各位早安，感謝各位參加。我們已提交財報新聞稿，其中包含重要資訊。該新聞稿可於我們的網站上取得。

During this call, we will be making some forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable Canadian and US securities laws, including statements regarding events or developments that we believe or anticipate may occur in the future. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those set out in our filings with the Canadian and US securities regulators. Any forward-looking statement is not a guarantee of future performance and actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of today's date, and we do not assume any obligation to update these statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, and developments or otherwise.

在本次電話會議中，我們將在適用的加拿大及美國證券法規所界定的範圍內，作出若干前瞻性陳述，包括關於我們相信或預期未來可能發生之事件或發展的陳述。這些前瞻性陳述受多項風險與不確定性影響，包括我們向加拿大及美國證券監理機關提交之文件中所載者。任何前瞻性陳述均不保證未來表現，實際結果可能與前瞻性陳述中明示或暗示者有重大差異。這些前瞻性陳述僅截至今日有效；我們不承擔因新資訊、未來事件與發展或其他原因而更新該等陳述之任何義務。

This call will include a certain discussion of certain non-IFRS measures. A reconciliation of these non-IFRS measures can be found in our filings with the Canadian and US securities regulators.

本次電話會議將包含對若干非 IFRS 衡量指標的討論。這些非 IFRS 衡量指標之調節表可於我們向加拿大及美國證券監理機關提交之文件中查閱。

I will now turn the call back over to Patrick.

我現在把電話交回給 Patrick。

Thank you, Luke. Our financial results for the first quarter exceeded our expectations from top to bottom. Adjusted EBITDA margin expanded 180 basis points to 29.1%, the highest first quarter adjusted EBITDA margin in our history. We achieved this record-setting result in the face of notable headwinds that arose after we provided our guidance as well as increased uncertainty of the broader macro environment. The strength of our start to the year once again demonstrates the quality of our asset base, the effectiveness of our growth strategies and the resiliency of our business model.

謝謝你，Luke。我們第一季的財務結果從上到下都超出我們的預期。調整後 EBITDA 利潤率擴張 180 個基點至 29.1%，創下我們歷史上第一季調整後 EBITDA 利潤率的新高。在我們提供指引後出現了顯著逆風，以及更廣泛宏觀環境不確定性升高的情況下，我們仍達成這項破紀錄的成果。今年開局的強勁表現再次證明了我們資產基礎的品質、成長策略的有效性，以及商業模式的韌性。

Most importantly, it highlights the capabilities and commitment of our employees who make all of these achievements possible. Pricing was ahead of plan, driven by strong customer retention and ongoing tailwinds from our recent growth investments, including EPR. We think that this early outperformance should carry forward through the rest of the year and represent upside to our original guide. We expect that our continued focus on realizing incremental pricing opportunities that are available within our portfolio will continue to support pricing at an appropriate spread above our internal cost of inflation. Volumes were better than expected, considering the incremental headwinds from significant winter storms experienced in many of our markets later in the quarter.

最重要的是，這凸顯了我們員工的能力與投入，正是他們讓這些成就成為可能。定價表現優於計畫，主要受強勁的客戶留存率，以及我們近期成長投資（包括 EPR）所帶來的持續順風所驅動。我們認為這項早期的超預期表現應可延續至今年其餘時間，並構成相對於原先指引的上行空間。我們預期，持續聚焦於在我們投資組合中可取得的增量定價機會，將繼續支持定價維持在高於我們內部通膨成本的適當利差水準。考量到本季後段我們多個市場遭遇嚴重冬季風暴所帶來的額外逆風，量的表現仍優於預期。

Excluding the impact of hurricane and onetime transportation volumes realized in the prior year, volumes were up 80 basis points. Our special waste and EPR volumes more than offset the impact of lower C&D related volumes and winter storms. We believe that the ongoing industry-leading volume performance demonstrates the quality of our market selection and the effectiveness of our returns-focused capital deployment strategy. The impact of broader economic uncertainty continues to be a drag on C&D volumes compared to prior period, but we remain well positioned to participate in the upside when these volumes inevitably return. On the cost side, we saw our fifth consecutive quarter of year-over-year reductions in both operational and SG&A cost intensity as a percentage of overall revenue.

若排除前一年颶風影響及一次性運輸量的影響，量增加 80 個基點。我們的特殊廢棄物與 EPR 量，已足以抵銷與 C&D 相關量下降及冬季風暴的影響。我們相信，持續領先同業的量表現，展現了我們市場選擇的品質，以及以報酬為導向的資本配置策略之有效性。相較於前期，更廣泛的經濟不確定性仍持續拖累 C&D 量，但當這些量不可避免地回升時，我們仍具備良好條件參與其上行空間。在成本方面，我們已連續第五個季度，營運成本與 SG&A 成本強度（占總營收百分比）皆較去年同期下降。

greater operational efficiency, improving labor turnover, fleet optimization and procurement benefits are some of the initiatives that we highlighted at last year's Investor Day, which all have contributed to these results. The benefit of these cost efficiencies in our top line outperformance are reflected in the over 200 basis points of underlying solid waste adjusted EBITDA margin expansion that we achieved in the quarter. We believe that our continued sequential exceeding of our already industry-leading margin expansion guidance demonstrates that we are on path to realizing our stated goal of low to mid-30s margins by 2028.

更高的營運效率、員工流動率改善、車隊最佳化以及採購效益，是我們在去年投資人日所強調的部分措施，這些都對本次成果有所貢獻。這些成本效率的效益，加上營收端的超預期表現，反映在本季我們達成的逾 200 個基點的基礎固體廢棄物調整後 EBITDA 利潤率擴張。我們相信，我們持續在季度層面超越既有且已屬同業領先的利潤率擴張指引，顯示我們正朝著在 2028 年達成低至中 30% 利潤率的既定目標邁進。

On M&A activity, we've had an active start to the year as expected. We have completed eight acquisitions year-to-date, including Frontier Waste Solutions, which closed at the beginning of this month. Frontier is a leading vertically integrated solid lease business with operations across the Texas Triangle, one of the fastest-growing regions in the United States. Frontier's assets are highly complementary to GFL's existing assets in the region and will identify our Texas footprint and further strengthen our presence there. The region's favorable demographics when combined with the deep market and operational expertise that the Frontier management team brings to GFL are expected to drive outsized growth for the coming years.

在併購活動方面，如預期般，我們今年開局相當積極。年初至今我們已完成八項收購，包括本月初完成交割的 Frontier Waste Solutions。Frontier 是一家領先的垂直整合固體租賃業務，業務遍及德州三角地帶（Texas Triangle），該地區是美國成長最快的區域之一。Frontier 的資產與 GFL 在該區域既有資產高度互補，將提升我們在德州的版圖，並進一步強化我們在當地的布局。該地區有利的人口結構，加上 Frontier 管理團隊帶給 GFL 的深厚市場與營運專業，預期將在未來數年帶動超常規成長。

The contribution from these eight acquisitions allows us to increase our guidance by nearly 5%, and Luke will walk you through the details shortly. We still have a robust pipeline of actionable opportunities where we think we can deploy an incremental $300 million to $500 million before year-end. The contribution from any additional M&A that we complete this year will be further upside to our guide.

這八項收購的貢獻，使我們得以將指引上調近 5%，Luke 稍後將帶大家了解細節。我們仍有強健的可執行機會管線，預期在年底前可額外部署 3 億至 5 億美元。今年若完成任何額外併購，其貢獻將進一步成為我們指引的上行空間。

Additionally, earlier this month, we announced the proposed acquisition of SECURE Waste Infrastructure. SECURE operates a network of permitted waste processing and disposal assets that will complement and densify GFL's existing geographic footprint in Western Canada, a market that has had very strong structural tailwinds to support the combined businesses growth prospects over the near and long term. Combining SECURE's hard-to-replicate infrastructure network with GFL's broader platform strengthens our ability to capture more waste streams across the value chain and to more fully participate in the significant growth investments that are expected in this region by both public and private sectors.

此外，本月稍早我們宣布擬收購 SECURE Waste Infrastructure。SECURE 經營一個由已取得許可的廢棄物處理與處置資產所構成的網絡，將補強並加密 GFL 在加拿大西部既有的地理版圖；該市場具備非常強勁的結構性順風，可在短期與長期支撐合併後業務的成長前景。將 SECURE 難以複製的基礎設施網絡與 GFL 更廣泛的平台結合，可強化我們在價值鏈各環節攫取更多廢棄物流的能力，並更充分參與預期由公私部門在該地區進行的重大成長投資。

I will now pass the call to Luke, who will walk us through the guidance update in the quarter in more detail, and then I'll share some closing comments before we open it up for Q&A.

我現在把電話交給 Luke，他將更詳細說明本季的指引更新，之後在我們開放問答前，我會再分享一些結語。

Thanks, Patrick. Q1 revenues grew 8.5% before considering the translational headwinds from FX, largely on account of strong pricing and underlying volume, which more than offset greater-than-anticipated headwinds from adverse weather conditions in the quarter. Pricing was 7% for the quarter, which is approximately 25 basis points better than planned and attributable to higher retention rates and ongoing realization of the incremental pricing opportunities we articulated at Investor Day. Pricing was 8.5% in Canada and 6.3% in the US. The strength of the first quarter's pricing results provide a high degree of visibility on the path to meet or exceed the high end of our pricing guidance for the year.

謝謝你，Patrick。在不考慮外匯換算帶來的逆風之前，第一季營收成長 8.5%，主要來自強勁的定價與基礎量表現，足以抵銷本季不利天候條件所帶來、超出預期的逆風。本季定價為 7%，約較原計畫好 25 個基點，主要歸因於更高的留存率，以及我們在投資人日所闡述之增量定價機會的持續落實。加拿大的定價為 8.5%，美國為 6.3%。第一季定價結果的強勁表現，讓我們對於達成或超越全年定價指引上緣的路徑具有高度能見度。

Q1 volumes were 120 basis points behind the prior year, but better than expectations even in the face of the impact of outsized winter storms experienced in several of our markets lapping hurricane and onetime transfer station volume in the prior year period were the primary drivers of the anticipated negative volume trend for the quarter.

第一季量較去年同期落後 120 個基點，但即便面對我們多個市場遭遇的異常嚴重冬季風暴影響，表現仍優於預期；而與前一年同期相比，颶風影響及一次性轉運站量的比較基期，是本季預期量呈負向趨勢的主要驅動因素。

Average commodity prices in the quarter were in line with plan, but we saw sequential increases over the last few months and market pricing is now $15 per ton higher than our initial 2026 outlook. This is the first time in a while where it feels like commodity prices may have bottomed. While there was no meaningful impact to the quarter, if pricing remains at or above current levels, that will result in incremental upside for the year.

本季平均商品價格符合計畫，但過去幾個月我們看到環比上升，目前市場定價已較我們最初的 2026 年展望高出每噸 15 美元。這是好一段時間以來，首次讓人感覺商品價格可能已觸底。雖然對本季沒有實質影響，但若定價維持在目前水準或更高，將為全年帶來額外的上行空間。

Our current commodity price sensitivity is that every $10 change in the gross basket price yields to $6 million change to annual revenue and adjusted EBITDA. Looking at operating costs. Cost of sales before depreciation, amortization, and integration costs as a percentage of revenue decreased 90 basis points to 60.7%. Ongoing efficiency in labor costs in part driven by continued improvement in voluntary turnover as well as reduced repair and maintenance cost intensity more than offset the impact of higher fuel and transportation costs. In terms of fuel, diesel costs in the quarter were up nearly 10% year-over-year and 40% up in March alone.

我們目前對商品價格的敏感度為：總籃子價格每變動 10 美元，將使年度營收與調整後 EBITDA 變動 600 萬美元。再看營運成本。銷貨成本（扣除折舊、攤銷與整合成本前）占營收比重下降 90 個基點至 60.7%。人力成本效率的持續提升（部分受益於自願離職率持續改善）以及維修與保養成本強度下降，已足以抵銷燃料與運輸成本上升的影響。就燃料而言，本季柴油成本年增近 10%，而僅 3 月就上升 40%。

The sudden inflection in diesel pricing created a $10 million cost headwind versus our guidance only $1 million of which was recovered in the quarter due to the timing lag inherent in our fuel surcharges, which are often built in advance based on the prior month's diesel pricing. We expect that by the end of the second quarter, our surcharges should generate sufficient incremental revenue to offset the additional fuel expense tied to diesel prices. Although the cost recovery nature of the surcharge mechanism will be a headwind to margins.

柴油價格的突然轉折，較我們的指引造成 1,000 萬美元的成本逆風，其中本季僅回收 100 萬美元，原因在於我們燃料附加費機制存在時間落差，該附加費往往會依據前一個月的柴油價格預先設定。我們預期至第二季末，我們的附加費應可帶來足夠的增量營收，以抵銷與柴油價格相關的額外燃料費用。儘管附加費機制的成本回收特性將對毛利率造成逆風。

SG&A cost intensity also significantly decreased as compared to the prior year primarily driven by operating leverage of our corporate cost segment in line with expectations. As we have previously indicated, the temporary increase in the percentage of revenue represented by corporate costs resulting from the divestiture of the Environmental Services business is expected to reverse as we continue to grow revenues and leverage this relatively fixed cost segment.

與前一年相比，SG&A 成本強度也顯著下降，主要受企業成本部門的營運槓桿帶動，符合預期。如我們先前所指出，因出售 Environmental Services 業務而導致企業成本占營收比重暫時上升，預期將隨著我們持續成長營收並槓桿運用這一相對固定的成本部門而回落。

Adjusted EBITDA margins were 29.1%, representing a 180-basis-point improvement over the prior year about 30 basis points better than planned and a 300-basis-point improvement over 2024, a definitive illustration of the success of our strategies. Adjusted EBITDA margins were up 340 basis points in our Canadian segment and up over 100 basis points in the US, excluding the impact of hurricane volumes, acquisitions, and the winter storms, as mentioned earlier.

調整後 EBITDA 利潤率為 29.1%，較前一年改善 180 個基點，較計畫好約 30 個基點，並較 2024 年改善 300 個基點，清楚展現我們策略的成功。調整後 EBITDA 利潤率在加拿大部門提升 340 個基點；在美國部門（排除先前提及的颶風量、併購與冬季風暴影響）亦提升逾 100 個基點。

Fuel and commodity prices were a drag on margins in both segments. Excluding the impact of these exogenous factors, underlying consolidated Q1 margins were up over 230 basis points from the prior year. Adjusted free cash flow for the quarter was approximately $20 million ahead of plan on an account of EBITDA outperformance.

燃料與商品價格在兩個部門皆對利潤率造成拖累。若排除這些外生因素影響，合併口徑第一季的基礎利潤率較前一年提升逾 230 個基點。本季調整後自由現金流約較計畫高出 2,000 萬美元，主要因 EBITDA 表現優於預期。

Q1 cash flows were inclusive of the investment in working capital we typically make in the first half of the year. In January, we opportunistically issued $1 billion of new bonds to provide flexibility to execute our growth strategy. The bond issuance was significantly oversubscribed and the interest rate offered represents one of the tightest spreads ever offered for our rating category. Another testament to the conviction institutional lenders have in our corporate credit quality. The cash proceeds from this issuance were on hand at the end of the quarter and were partially used to fund Frontier and the other acquisitions that closed in April.

第一季現金流包含我們通常在上半年進行的營運資金投資。1 月我們把握時機發行 10 億美元新債，以提供執行成長策略的彈性。本次債券發行獲得大幅超額認購，且所提供的利率利差為我們評級類別中歷來最緊之一。這也再次證明機構放款人對我們公司信用品質的信心。本次發行的現金收益於季末仍在帳上，並已部分用於資助 4 月完成交割的 Frontier 與其他收購案。

We exited the quarter with net leverage of 3.6 times, inclusive of the translational impact of the FX rate running up to 1.393 at quarter end. Using the average FX rate for the quarter, net leverage would have been 3.5 times, exactly in line with our expectations. The second quarter acquisitions will temporarily increase leverage about 30 basis points and the business will then naturally delever back down the [mid-3s] by year-end. As is typical for our industry, we will update our full year guidance for our base business when we release our second quarter results. However, with the strong start to this year, we see multiple avenues of upside to our current guide that gives us confidence in our ability to meet and potentially exceed the expectations for the year.

我們在季末的淨槓桿為 3.6 倍，包含匯率換算影響（季末匯率升至 1.393）。若以本季平均匯率計算，淨槓桿將為 3.5 倍，與我們預期完全一致。第二季的收購將使槓桿暫時上升約 30 個基點，之後業務將自然去槓桿，於年底回落至 3 倍中段區間。依我們產業慣例，我們將在發布第二季結果時更新基礎業務的全年指引。不過，鑑於今年開局強勁，我們看到多個上行途徑可優於目前指引，這讓我們有信心達成並可能超越全年市場預期。

Nevertheless, given how successful we have been in our M&A program in the first four months of the year, we are updating our full year guidance to reflect the expected in-year contribution from the eight acquisitions completed year-to-date, Again, this update does not change our previous guidance for our base business.

然而，考量我們在今年前四個月的併購計畫進展相當成功，我們正更新全年指引，以反映截至目前已完成的 8 項收購在本年度內的預期貢獻；再次強調，此次更新不會改變我們先前對基礎業務的指引。

As a result of the new acquisitions, we now expect the following amounts for full year 2026. Revenue of $7.32 billion to $7.34 billion, adjusted EBITDA of $2.23 billion, adjusted free cash flow of $850 million, inclusive of cash interest of $445 million and net CapEx of $825 million. Specifically, as it relates to the second quarter of 2026, we expect consolidated revenue of approximately $1.89 billion to $1.9 billion and an adjusted EBITDA margin of 30.4%. As previewed in Q1, the Q2 adjusted EBITDA margin is modestly behind the prior year on account of the impact of commodities, fuel price, and M&A. Q2 adjusted free cash flow is expected to be approximately $225 million, inclusive of $85 million in cash interest and $265 million in net CapEx.

因此，受新收購案影響，我們目前對 2026 全年的預期如下。營收 73.2 億至 73.4 億美元，調整後 EBITDA 22.3 億美元，調整後自由現金流 8.5 億美元（包含 4.45 億美元現金利息與 8.25 億美元淨資本支出）。具體而言，就 2026 年第二季而言，我們預期合併營收約 18.9 億至 19.0 億美元，調整後 EBITDA 利潤率為 30.4%。如第一季所預告，第二季調整後 EBITDA 利潤率將因商品、燃料價格與併購影響而略低於前一年。第二季調整後自由現金流預期約為 2.25 億美元，包含 8,500 萬美元現金利息與 2.65 億美元淨資本支出。

I will now pass the call back to Patrick, who will provide some closing comments before Q&A.

我現在把電話交回給 Patrick，他將在問答前做一些結語。

Thanks, Luke. I wanted to finish by talking a bit more about our proposed SECURE acquisition. This acquisition represents an opportunity to acquire a best-in-class network of hard to replicate waste disposal assets in a region with highly compelling market characteristics at a fair value. We first started looking at SECURE business in 2023 when they were divesting a small set of assets coming out of a review by the Canadian publication dial related to the [Sevita] merger.

謝謝，Luke。我想在結束前再多談一些我們擬議中的 SECURE 收購案。這項收購提供了一個機會，讓我們以合理價值取得一個同級最佳、難以複製的廢棄物處置資產網絡，且該區域具備極具吸引力的市場特性。我們最早在 2023 年開始研究 SECURE 的業務，當時他們在加拿大出版物 dial 對 [Sevita] 合併案相關審查後，正出售一小部分資產。

While we saw a lot of opportunity in this asset package, we have limited balance sheet capacity at that time of the sale process and we are ultimately unsuccessful with our bid. Since that time, we have observed the resilient financial performance of SECURE through several years of macro-related headwinds including the rapid interest rate hikes of '21 and 2022, the inflationary environment in 2022 and 2023 and then the tariff related to uncertainty of '25 and oil price volatility along the way. The financial performance has been exceptional, illustrating the consistent and durable cash flows that characterize high-quality solid wave assets.

雖然我們在這組資產包中看到了很大的機會，但在當時的出售流程中，我們的資產負債表容量有限，最終投標未能成功。自那之後，我們觀察到 SECURE 在多年的宏觀逆風下仍展現具韌性的財務表現，包括 2021 與 2022 年快速升息、2022 與 2023 年的通膨環境，以及 2025 年關稅相關不確定性與期間的油價波動。其財務表現一直非常出色，展現出高品質固體廢棄物資產所特有的一致且耐久的現金流。

SECURE's business is unlike other E&P disposal businesses that operate in other regions of North America. First off, the permitting process in Canada is such that it is truly difficult to replicate these assets. New disposal assets of this quality simply do not come online.

SECURE 的業務不同於北美其他地區營運的 E&P 處置業者。首先，加拿大的許可核准流程使得這些資產確實難以複製。如此品質的新處置資產根本不會再上線。

Secondly, over 80% of the business is tied to ongoing production rather than new drilling activity, which generates stable recurring highly predictable volumes of waste. The financial performance is largely insensitive to drill rig counts and drilling activities that drive volumes into E&P disposal assets in other regions across North America.

其次，超過 80% 的業務與持續生產相關，而非新鑽井活動，這會產生穩定、經常性且高度可預測的廢棄物量。其財務表現對鑽機數量與鑽井活動（這些因素在北美其他地區會驅動 E&P 處置資產的進料量）大致不敏感。

And thirdly, the ownership of the disposal capacity in the region yield an attractive competitive dynamic. We believe the Western Canada region in which SECURE operates, is on the precipice of the largest investment cycle of the region's history as the Canadian federal government looks to fast-track nation-building critical energy infrastructure projects. Private sector capital is already flowing into the region with new multibillion-dollar investments being publicly announced with increasing regularity.

第三，該區域處置產能的所有權結構帶來了具吸引力的競爭態勢。我們相信 SECURE 所營運的加拿大西部地區，正處於該區史上最大投資循環的前夕，因加拿大聯邦政府正尋求加速推進具國家建設意義的關鍵能源基礎建設專案。民間資本已開始流入該區，新的數十億美元投資正以愈來愈頻繁的速度對外公布。

We expect Western Canada will be the growth engine of Canada for the foreseeable future. The combination of SECURE's post-collection network with GFL's existing asset base strategically positions us to participate in this growth. Operational cost and revenue synergies are expected to be material and could represent an incremental $25 million to $50 million of opportunity above the $25 million of largely SG&A cost savings already identified. SECURE's revenue in 2026 is expected to be $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion. Approximately half of this amount is derived from normal post collection activities with the other relating to tangential energy-related services namely specialty chemicals and energy infrastructure.

我們預期在可預見的未來，加拿大西部將成為加拿大的成長引擎。將 SECURE 的收集後網絡與 GFL 既有資產基礎相結合，能在策略上使我們具備參與此一成長的有利位置。預期營運成本與營收協同效益將相當可觀，且在已辨識之約 2,500 萬美元、主要為 SG&A 成本節省之外，可能額外帶來 2,500 萬至 5,000 萬美元的機會。預期 SECURE 於 2026 年的營收為 15 億至 16 億美元。其中約一半來自一般的收集後活動，另一半則與周邊的能源相關服務有關，主要包括特用化學品與能源基礎設施。

These other energy-related revenue is expected to represent less than 8% of our pro forma 2027 revenues and will decrease further in prime as we continue to grow in solid waste. And grow is exactly what we plan to do. The enhanced scale and free cash flow generation of the pro forma combined business will allow us to materially increase our returns focused growth capital deployment without compromising our net leverage commitment.

這些其他能源相關營收預期將占我們備考 2027 年營收的 8% 以下，且隨著我們持續擴大固體廢棄物業務，將隨時間進一步下降。而成長正是我們的計畫。備考合併後業務規模的提升與自由現金流創造能力，將使我們在不影響淨槓桿承諾的前提下，得以大幅提高以報酬為導向的成長資本投放。

While this breadth and depth of M&A of our M&A pipeline suggests that most of this capital will be invested in the future solid waste acquisitions as well as high return on invested capital organic opportunities. The enhanced scale will accelerate the opportunity for share buybacks to become a more frequent and sustainable component of our capital allocation strategy going forward.

同時，我們併購管線在廣度與深度上的併購機會顯示，這些資本多數將投向未來的固體廢棄物收購，以及具高投資資本報酬率的有機成長機會。規模的提升也將加速股份回購成為我們未來資本配置策略中更頻繁且更可持續的一部分。

I will now turn the call over to the operator to open up the line for Q&A.

我現在把電話交給接線員，開放 Q&A 提問。

(Operator Instructions) Sabahat Khan, RBC Capital Markets.

(接線員指示) Sabahat Khan，RBC 資本市場。

Great. Maybe just a question first to start off on the pending transaction. I think it's about coming up later in May and one investor came out somewhat opposed to the transaction in some form. Maybe from your vantage point, can you just maybe share your thoughts on sort of getting the transaction completion and your confidence in getting the vote.

很好。也許先從這筆待完成交易的問題開始。我想它大概會在 5 月稍晚進行表決，而有一位投資人以某種形式對這筆交易表達了反對。從你們的角度來看，能否分享一下你們對交易完成以及對取得投票通過的信心？

Thanks, [Toby]. Yes. As you said, there was -- there has been one investor that has publicly expressed their desire to not vote for the transaction. I think I don't personally know Abrams, but for everything we've learned and know they're highly respected, great performing sort of money manager. But I think the one thing we agree with Abrams on is the quality of the asset that we're buying and their passion for owning this asset given the amount of work that they've done over a long period of time studying and understanding the asset.

謝謝，[Toby]。是的。如你所說，確實有一位投資人公開表達不打算投票支持這筆交易。我個人不認識 Abrams，但就我們所了解與掌握的資訊而言，他們是備受尊敬、績效優異的資產管理人。不過，我想我們與 Abrams 有一點共識：我們正在收購的資產品質很高，而他們之所以熱衷持有這項資產，是因為他們長期投入大量時間研究並理解該資產。

Obviously, we don't agree on the fact that we believe there's more value to create as 1 versus 2. But that being said, I've never met them, never had a conversation with them, reached out to them recently and plan to have a fruitful discussion with them next week. And we'll see where that goes. That being said, that's one investor out of a multitude of many. When you look at the transaction, you have a very experienced management team that has been on both of these assets being secured GFL over 20 years.

顯然，我們在「合而為一」相較於「各自為政」能創造更多價值這點上看法不同。但話說回來，我從未見過他們，也未與他們對談；我最近已主動聯繫，並計畫下週與他們進行一場具建設性的討論。我們再看看後續進展。不過，那只是眾多投資人中的一位。從交易本身來看，我們擁有非常有經驗的管理團隊，過去 20 多年一直深度參與這兩項資產——SECURE 與 GFL。

And you have a Board here that, again, highly sophisticated, have been alongside both of us building the business for a long period of time. And most importantly, put their money where their mouth is, around the board table, there's about $6 billion of invested capital in the combined entities, right? So they all believe in the strategy, they believe in the combination of these two businesses.

而我們的董事會同樣高度成熟且專業，長期以來與我們並肩打造業務。更重要的是，他們以實際行動支持——在董事會席間，合併後實體的投入資本約達 60 億美元，對吧？因此他們都相信這項策略，也相信這兩家企業結合的價值。

And over the last week, we've had 60 to 70 investor calls with both GFL investors as well as a number of SECURE holders. And it's been very positive. So from our perspective, we believe this transaction is going to go over the line. Obviously, shareholders can vote however they want. But I think once particularly GFL investors got comfortable with the strategy and got comfortable with the assets we underestimated and probably underappreciated the lack of knowledge of some of our investors in terms of what the profile of this asset was where it was, what the opportunities were coming in Western Canada on the backdrop of a lot of the Canadian infrastructure and government investment. So I think we're very well positioned to sort of move this across the line. Again, we're going to continue to speak to both investors over the course of the next few weeks.

在過去一週，我們與投資人進行了 60 到 70 通電話，包含 GFL 的投資人以及多位 SECURE 的持有人。整體回饋非常正面。因此就我們的觀點，我們相信這筆交易將會順利過關。當然，股東可以依其意願投票。但我認為，特別是當 GFL 的投資人對策略與資產更有信心後，我們也意識到並可能低估、也低估了部分投資人對該資產輪廓的認知不足——包括它是什麼、位於何處，以及在加拿大西部、在大量加拿大基礎建設與政府投資背景下所帶來的機會。所以我認為我們非常有條件推動這件事跨過終點線。同樣地，未來幾週我們會持續與雙方投資人溝通。

But I keep reiterating the fact when you look at these businesses on a combined basis, when you look at next year, yes, you're approximately going to have $9.5 billion of combined revenue, call it, $3.2-ish billion of EBITDA, $1.3 billion to $1.4 billion of free cash flow next year. I mean if you look for the business is trading today on a combined basis, we're probably trading at 17 to 18 times 2027 free cash flow probably 10 to 10.5 times EBITDA when historically, we've traded at 25 to 30 times free cash flow and multiple it then somewhere between 13 and 16 times, right? So from our perspective, this will catch up. Yes, a little bump in the road, but there's significant upside to the combined business. So for all those reasons, we believe that this is the right thing to do.

但我想再次強調，當你把這兩項業務合併來看、看明年時，沒錯，合併後營收大約會是 95 億美元，EBITDA 約 32 億美元左右，明年的自由現金流約 13 億到 14 億美元。我的意思是，如果你看這家公司今天以合併口徑的交易水準，我們大概是以 2027 年自由現金流的 17 到 18 倍在交易，EBITDA 約 10 到 10.5 倍；而歷史上我們的自由現金流倍數曾在 25 到 30 倍，EBITDA 倍數則大約在 13 到 16 倍之間，對吧？所以從我們的角度，估值會追上來。是的，路上會有一點小顛簸，但合併後業務有顯著上行空間。因此基於上述原因，我們相信這是正確的決定。

Great. And then just on my follow-up, maybe on the guidance outlook and maybe more for Luke. And I appreciate the color that you shared on the guidance. I guess when you think about the base business, can you help us just maybe think about the puts and takes, at least on the organic business outside of the completed M&A that you've baked in, RINs and commodity prices, at least directionally are stabilizing. Maybe just talk us through the opportunity in the back half? Is there a potential for upside to the numbers you've shared for '26 in the pipeline?

很好。接著我的追問，可能是關於指引展望，或許更想請 Luke 回答。也謝謝你對指引所提供的補充說明。我想問的是，當你們思考基礎業務時，能否協助我們理解一下各項拉動與抵銷因素——至少就你們已納入的已完成併購之外的有機業務而言；RINs 與大宗商品價格至少在方向上似乎正在趨於穩定。能否談談下半年可能的機會？你們對管線中所分享的 2026 年數字，是否存在上行的可能？

Yes. Thanks, Sabahat. Great question. I mean as we said in the prepared remarks, we'll wait till Q2 before we provide. But if you think about directionally, obviously, the strength of our pricing to start the year coming in 25, 30 basis points better than expected, should flow through to the balance. So if you think about the original guide of being a mid-5% or 5.5% price, I think you'd see it at or 25 bps better than that, right? And that should yield if you're looking at dollars, that's $15 million to $30 million incremental dollars coming out of that.

是的。謝謝你，Sabahat。問得很好。如同我們在事先準備的講稿中所說，我們會等到第二季再提供（更新）。但若從方向性來看，顯然我們年初的定價力道較預期好 25 到 30 個基點，應該會延續到後續期間。所以如果你回想原先的指引是約 5% 中段或 5.5% 的價格（成長），我認為你會看到大約比那再好 25 個基點，對吧？若換算成金額，這大概會帶來 1,500 萬到 3,000 萬美元的增量。

Now the offset is volume, and this is really why we need to wait for Q2 to see because as much as we outperformed in Q1, it's difficult to see between winter weather and some special waste tailwinds that we have as to what's actually going to transpire in the underlying core volumes. C&D continues to drag. And the outlook for the year, I don't think has been improved by virtue of the incremental uncertainty that has arisen on a geopolitical basis since we started.

但抵銷項是量，而這也是我們必須等到第二季再看的原因：儘管我們在第一季表現優於預期，但在冬季天候以及我們在特殊廢棄物方面的一些順風因素影響下，很難判斷核心基礎量的實際走勢會如何。C&D（建築與拆除廢棄物）仍在拖累。而就今年的展望而言，我不認為自我們開始以來、在地緣政治層面出現的額外不確定性，會讓情勢有所改善。

And if you think about from an interest rate perspective, from an oil price perspective, the expectations for incremental C&D activity to ramp, I think, still has a high degree of uncertainty. So that's really, I think, the unknown piece on volume. I mean the guide was 25 to 50 bps, right? That's representing $15 million to $30 million of incremental revenue I think that's the part we want to wait and see. Now obviously, some of the exogenous factors in commodities, fuel surcharge, and FX, all have opportunities to be meaningful upside above and beyond the guide.

而且如果你從利率角度、從油價角度來看，以及對於增量 C&D 活動加速爬坡的預期，我認為仍然存在高度不確定性。所以我認為這確實是量的未知部分。我的意思是，指引是 25 到 50 個基點，對吧？那代表約 1,500 萬到 3,000 萬美元的增量營收，我認為這就是我們想先觀察再說的部分。當然，商品、燃油附加費以及外匯等一些外生因素，都有機會帶來超出指引、且相當可觀的上行空間。

Obviously, with the commodity price recovery, there could be a tailwind in there and provided the sort of sensitivity. We'll see where fiber prices go. Certainly, on the fuel surcharge piece, if today's diesel prices persist through the balance of the year, there's another, call it, $50 million to $75 million of incremental revenue that would come online to offset that incremental diesel cost.

顯然，隨著商品價格回升，這裡面可能會有順風，我們也提供了相關敏感度。我們會看看纖維價格會走到哪裡。當然，在燃油附加費這一塊，如果今天的柴油價格在今年剩餘期間持續，那麼還會有大約 5,000 萬到 7,500 萬美元的增量營收上線，用以抵銷那部分新增的柴油成本。

And then FX. Recall, I mean, FX was a 210-basis-point headwind against us. The Canadian dollar has been bouncing around quite significantly. But that $135 million headwind, you could see some improvement to that number, depending on where it result shakes out. So we'll wait to Q2 but certainly very optimistic based on the strength of Q1, and we see multiple avenues to upside.

然後是外匯。回想一下，外匯對我們而言是 210 個基點的逆風。加幣一直大幅波動。但那 1.35 億美元的逆風，視最終結果而定，你可能會看到這個數字有所改善。所以我們會等到第二季，但基於第一季的強勁表現，我們當然非常樂觀，而且我們看到多條上行的途徑。

Patrick T. Brown, Raymond James.

Patrick T. Brown，Raymond James。

It's Tyler. Luke, I appreciate all the color a little bit on the guidance. But I just want to make sure I got it clear. So I know that you guys have put a lot of work into fuel surcharges. That's been a big push over the last couple of years. But I just want to be clear, based on where you are today, you feel that fuel is basically just a margin dilutive issue. It's not really an EBITDA dollar drag over the course of the year. Would that be right?

我是 Tyler。Luke，我很感謝你對指引提供的各種補充說明。但我只是想確認我理解正確。我知道你們在燃油附加費上投入了很多工作。這在過去幾年一直是很大的推動重點。但我想確認的是，以你們目前的狀況來看，你們認為燃油基本上只是造成毛利率稀釋的問題。它在全年其實不會對 EBITDA 金額造成拖累。這樣說對嗎？

And then second, can you just talk about the momentum on price? Was that just -- what was the delta there? Was that better pricing that you went out with on the Street, better retention, a little bit of both? Just a little bit of color there would be helpful.

第二個問題，你能談談價格動能嗎？那裡的變化（delta）是什麼？是你們對外（市場）推出了更好的定價、留存率更好，還是兩者都有？如果能多給一點背景會很有幫助。

Yes. Great question, Tyler. In terms of fuel, absolutely. The surcharge mechanisms and the efficiency we have in place while you can have a temporary delay or lag like what we saw in March. The expectation is by the time you get into Q2, those surcharge mechanisms recover the incremental dollars. So net-net, no impact to EBITDA and just really that's what the margin dilution.

是的。好問題，Tyler。就燃油而言，完全正確。我們已建立的附加費機制與效率措施，雖然可能會出現像我們在三月看到的那種短暫延遲或落後。但預期到第二季時，這些附加費機制就會把增量金額回收回來。所以整體而言，對 EBITDA 沒有影響，真正的影響只是毛利率稀釋。

Now obviously, if diesel runs up another significant leg higher from here, you could have an incremental lag, but assuming that we'll find some sort of stability in that, the surcharge mechanism should recover all of our incremental costs. In terms of the base pricing.

當然，如果柴油價格從這裡再大幅上升一段，你可能會出現額外的時間落差；但假設它能在某個水準上趨於穩定，附加費機制應該可以回收我們所有的增量成本。至於基礎定價。

Look, as we've said, we have incremental opportunities within our portfolio by virtue of just being a little bit behind the industry and where they're at in terms of price optimization, and we continue to pull on that lever, and we have success with that. I think what we've also seen is just a very high level of retention, right? So the base plan assumes you put out pricing of x and you have to give back a component of it.

你看，正如我們所說，憑藉我們在投資組合中的位置——也就是在價格最佳化方面相較同業稍微落後一些——我們有額外的機會，我們也持續拉動這個槓桿，而且取得了成效。我認為我們也看到的是非常高的留存率，對吧？所以基礎計畫假設你推出 x 的漲價，然後你必須回吐其中一部分。

Our retention levels have been higher than anticipated, which has allowed for us to print that higher level of price. So I do think, if you recall the original guide, we started at mid-6s or better was then going to step down ratably through the year. That cadence is expected to remain the same.

我們的留存率高於預期，這讓我們得以實現更高水準的價格。所以我確實認為，如果你還記得最初的指引，我們從 6% 中段或更高開始，然後預計在全年按比例逐步下滑。這個節奏預期會維持不變。

And so if you think about Q2, that should step down now to sort of the high 5s and continue to step down thereafter. But if all other things being equal, we should be able to end the year 20 to 30 basis points higher on overall price than was originally anticipated due to the strength of the Q1 start.

因此如果你看第二季，應該會下滑到大約 5% 高段，之後再繼續下滑。但在其他條件不變的情況下，由於第一季開局強勁，我們全年整體價格水準應該能比原先預期高出 20 到 30 個基點。

Okay. Excellent. And this is a bigger picture question. So I want to kind of come back to this prospect of getting to investment grade. I think one of the things about the SECURE deal is that it will substantially improve the cash-generating profile of the business. So I'm just kind of curious how quickly you think the rating agencies would factor that in.

好的。非常好。這是一個更宏觀的問題。我想回到取得投資級評等這個前景。我認為 SECURE 這筆交易的一個重點是，它將大幅改善公司創造現金的能力輪廓。所以我想了解的是，你認為評等機構會多快把這點納入考量？

And then how quickly do mechanically how it would work, but how quickly would you be able to actually refinance the balance sheet? And you just talked about a really tight spread on your bond issuance, the $1 billion this year. So how much of a coupon differential would there be big picture? Sorry, I know there's a lot there, but just broadly on the investment-grade opportunity to cash flow.

另外，從機制上它會怎麼運作，以及你們實際上能多快為資產負債表再融資？你剛剛也提到你們今年發行的 10 億美元債券利差非常緊。所以從大方向來看，票息差異會有多大？抱歉，我知道問題很多，但我想大致了解投資級機會與現金流之間的關聯。

Yes, it's a great question, Tyler. It's something we focus a lot on, and I think our offering in the bond market demonstrates our borrowing rate today is already closer to investment grade than our actual rating represents. So pro forma for SECURE, you're absolutely right, a bigger business, better free cash flow generation, larger scale is all highly sort of credit positive. The rating agencies, as you know, are a little bit more backward looking than we are. And so it would take some time for the pro forma combined business to perform and the sort of run rate adjustments to roll off before I think you were at a place where you started getting those credit rating upgrades.

是的，這是個很好的問題，Tyler。這是我們非常關注的事情，我認為我們在債券市場的發行也顯示，我們目前的借款利率其實已經更接近投資級，而不是我們現有評等所反映的水準。因此以 SECURE 交易的備考（pro forma）來看，你說得完全正確：更大的業務規模、更好的自由現金流創造能力、更大的體量，這些都非常偏向信用正面。如你所知，評等機構相較我們會更偏向回顧性。因此，我認為需要一些時間讓備考合併後的業務表現出來，並且讓一些備考的 run-rate 調整逐步消退，之後你才會到達開始獲得信用評等上調的階段。

To your point on refinancing of the balance sheet, as we have alluded to, our borrowing rate today on an after-tax basis, is this modestly higher than what we would be borrowing at on an investment-grade level. So we've continued to highlight that we view this less as a cost of debt capital, while there is benefit. That's not really the idea. I think it's more of the cost of equity capital that one can achieve by having the perception of higher quality virtue of the investment-grade rating.

至於你提到的資產負債表再融資，正如我們先前提過，我們目前的借款利率（稅後基礎）只比投資級水準下的借款利率略高一些。所以我們一直強調，我們較少把這視為債務資本成本的議題，雖然確實有好處。但那並不是核心想法。我認為更重要的是，透過投資級評等所帶來的更高品質認知，能夠降低股權資本成本。

So if you look at our spread I mean we are borrowing at 140 basis points over the underlying treasury and an investment-grade peer. We'll be doing it at 70 to 80 basis points, so the 60 to 70 basis point spread on a pretax basis. I think that probably represents what the interest efficiency opportunity is. However, as we've said, we continue to really believe this is more about cost of equity capital than about cost of debt capital.

所以如果你看我們的利差，我的意思是，我們目前的借款成本是較基準美國公債利率高出 140 個基點；而投資級同業大概會在 70 到 80 個基點。所以稅前大約有 60 到 70 個基點的利差。我認為那大概就是利息效率的機會所在。不過，正如我們所說，我們仍然非常相信，這更多是關於股權資本成本，而不是債務資本成本。

Kevin Chiang, CIBC Wood Gundy.

Kevin Chiang，CIBC Wood Gundy。

Maybe just one clarification question. Just on the Frontier deal, you noted it improves your density in Texas and you're tied to these high-growth markets in the Texas Triangle. Did you mention that you saw internalization benefit? Or was that something I might have missed in the prepared remarks?

也許我只問一個釐清問題。關於 Frontier 這筆交易，你提到它提升了你們在德州的密度，並且讓你們連結到德州三角（Texas Triangle）這些高成長市場。你有提到你們看到了內部化（internalization）的效益嗎？還是那是我在事先準備的講稿中漏聽了？

No, we have internalization benefits in the -- obviously, we have landfill capacity in Houston, which we've been to. So there's a bunch of internalization opportunities around that full disposal assets.

不，我們在這方面有內部化的效益——很明顯地，我們在休士頓有掩埋場容量，我們也去看過。所以圍繞著那整套處置資產，有一大堆內部化的機會。

Okay. Okay. Cool. Yes, I thought that would be the case. Maybe just a more conceptual question. And Luke, you alluded to this in the prior -- in your prior answer. I realize you make strategic decisions with the long-term view in mind versus just the near-term gyrations in your share price. But if we kind of look back the last 18 months, you saw your cost of equity improve as you went through this deleveraging process and clearly, the market is penalizing your equity a little bit here, just as you've seen elevated M&A to start this year. I'm just wondering, when you look back, does that be afraid how you think about the pace of future M&A, just given how this one specific is you can kind of swing your cost of equity quite violently in a short period of time?

好的。好的。酷。是的，我想情況應該就是如此。也許再問一個比較概念性的问题。Luke，你在前面——在你先前的回答裡也提到過。我理解你們做策略決策時會以長期視角為主，而不是只看股價短期波動。但如果回頭看過去18個月，你在去槓桿的過程中看到股權資金成本改善，而很明顯地，市場此刻對你們的股權估值有些懲罰；同時你也看到今年一開始併購活動偏多。我只是想知道，回頭看時，這是否會影響你們對未來併購節奏的思考？畢竟單就這一點，就可能在短時間內讓你們的股權資金成本出現相當劇烈的擺動。

I mean I'm looking at Patrick, but I'll respond, Kevin. Look, it's obviously something we think about, and I think truthfully is probably one of the flaws of the public equity markets that it forces you to maybe be a little bit more short termism in your thinking than long-term thoughts that we believe are actually the foundation for equity value creation. So obviously, coming out of '23 and '24, we reevaluated our capital allocation strategy and came to the view that operating in a sort of 3 to 3.5 leverage level is ultimately what's going to yield the best way or path for ideal cost of equity. And that's what we're sticking to and maintaining. I think while we may continue to see hopefully, temporary dislocations in the current share price.

我的意思是我在看Patrick，但我來回應你，Kevin。你看，這顯然是我們會思考的事情；坦白說，這可能也是公開股權市場的一個缺陷：它會迫使你在思考上比我們認為真正能創造股權價值的長期思維更偏向短期。所以很明顯地，從2023年和2024年走出來後，我們重新評估了資本配置策略，並認為把槓桿維持在大約3到3.5倍的水準，最終會帶來最佳、或最理想的股權資金成本路徑。這就是我們會堅持並維持的。我認為即便我們可能仍會看到目前股價出現——希望是暫時性的——錯位。

Over the long term, we are large believers in driving incremental free cash flow per share generation at rates above and beyond the industry by virtue of our return-focused capital deployment strategy, that is when the path to long-term equity value creation and short term sort of share swings, as you said, may come and go and obviously not something that we aspire to, but very much attempt to not allow that to cloud the vision that Patrick started with nearly 20 years ago and has been highly, highly successful at creating material equity value.

從長期來看，我們非常相信，憑藉以報酬為導向的資本部署策略，我們能以高於產業的速度推動每股增量自由現金流的成長；這才是長期股權價值創造的路徑。至於你所說的短期股價擺動，可能來來去去，當然不是我們所追求的，但我們非常努力不讓它遮蔽Patrick近20年前開始的願景，而這個願景在創造實質股權價值方面一直非常、非常成功。

And I think -- I mean the industry for whatever reason, I think, sold off was out of favor for, let's say, Q4 of last year and definitely into Q1 of this year. And stock has sold off before we announced any sort of M&A and then actually recovered a bit with some of the actual M&A. I mean, listen, we don't know when interest stock go up or down. I think over time, the capital allocation decisions we've made have made investors a significant amount of money over a long period of time compound rates above and beyond sort of each and every one of their expectations.

而且我想——我的意思是，這個產業不知為何，我覺得在去年第四季開始被拋售、失寵，並且一路延續到今年第一季。而且在我們宣布任何併購之前，股價就已經先下跌了；之後隨著一些實際的併購，反而又回升了一點。我的意思是，聽著，我們不知道利率或股價什麼時候會上或下。我認為長期來看，我們做過的資本配置決策，已在很長一段時間內以高於各種預期的複利成長率，為投資人賺了相當可觀的錢。

So we're going to keep making smart financial decisions. Like I said, you have a Board on the GFL side that probably today owns around $5-plus billion of equity, and you have a SECURE Board that owns between DPG and Solis another $1 billion of equity, it's over $6 billion of equity. So I think we are making prudent financial decisions, and we have our money where our mouths are. And we're going to keep doing the things that we think will yield the best results for us as shareholders.

所以我們會繼續做出明智的財務決策。就像我說的，GFL這邊的董事會今天大概持有約50億美元以上的股權；而SECURE的董事會，介於DPG和Solis之間，持有另外約10億美元的股權，合計超過60億美元的股權。所以我認為我們是在做審慎的財務決策，而且我們是把真金白銀放在我們說的話上。我們會繼續做我們認為能為股東帶來最佳結果的事情。

I might not be -- so we knew that the share price could maybe suffer 4% or 5% at the time of when we did the SECURE deal, but it will recover. And we keep printing quarters like we printed key printing quarters like SECURE print this quarter, as you saw this morning, I think each and every one of our investors are going to be very thankful that of what we're doing and what we continue to do to drive exceptional results and exceptional performance. So I just think you doing the things that we know what to do, albeit with what we've heard over and over and time and time again, maintain leverage between 3 and 3.5 because that is going to yield the best results for the equity account. And we're going to keep doing that. We're going to live with them that. So you'll continue to see that from us.

我可能不會——所以我們知道，在做SECURE這筆交易時，股價可能會承受4%到5%的影響，但它會恢復。而且只要我們持續交出像SECURE這一季這樣的成績——你今天早上也看到了——我想我們每一位投資人都會非常感謝我們正在做的事，以及我們持續推動卓越成果與卓越表現的作為。所以我只是認為，我們就做我們知道該做的事；儘管我們一再、一次又一次聽到的就是，把槓桿維持在3到3.5倍之間，因為那將為股權端帶來最佳結果。我們會繼續這麼做。我們會接受並承擔這一點。所以你會持續看到我們這樣做。

I appreciate the response there. Congrats on a solid start to the year here.

感謝你的回覆。也恭喜今年有個穩健的開局。

Stephanie Moore, Jefferies.

Jefferies的Stephanie Moore。

Great. Good morning. Thanks, everybody. I wanted to touch on SECURE again. Maybe just talk a little bit about, I think a lot of the questions that we get and may be helpful to get a little bit of color would just be about the commodity exposure under the under the assets? How do you think about how the exposure has changed over time and at the same time, to position that GFL can make us the new owner here and really kind of addressing the quality of the assets and really looking at GFL's legacy services and how they can enhance the business under GFL umbrella?

很好。早安。謝謝各位。我想再談一下SECURE。也許可以多談一點：我想我們收到的很多問題、也可能有助於提供一些背景的，是關於這些資產的商品曝險（commodity exposure）？你們如何看待這種曝險隨時間的變化？同時，作為新所有者，GFL打算如何定位並處理這些問題——也就是資產品質的面向，以及如何結合GFL既有的服務，來在GFL的體系下強化這門業務？

Yes. Stephanie, it's Luke. Great question. On the commodity price exposure, we've highlighted in the call and certainly, I believe in Secure's call today, they're doing the same. It's really limited in the short term on the basis that they derive a very small amount of revenue from the sale of oil and oil-related products. And in the short term, that's what gives rise to the commodity price exposure.

是的。Stephanie，我是Luke。好問題。關於商品價格曝險，我們在這通電話裡已經強調過，當然我相信SECURE今天的電話會議也做了同樣的說明。短期來看，曝險其實非常有限，因為他們從原油及原油相關產品的銷售中取得的營收占比很小。而短期的商品價格曝險主要就是由此而來。

So if you think about SECURE's guidance for the year of $525 million to $550 million of EBITDA in light of WTI running as much as it has, I think they're now suggesting that they're at the high end of their guidance, right? So meaning a relatively de minimis in-year impact where the exposure could be more significant is that an elevated level of WTI over the longer term, does that drive multiyear changes in production volumes in the area in which they operate ultimately generating higher volumes of waste. And conversely, the same is true.

所以如果你看SECURE今年的指引，EBITDA為5.25億到5.5億美元；考量到WTI近期的走勢，我想他們現在也在暗示會落在指引區間的高端，對吧？也就是說，當年度的影響相對微不足道（de minimis）。曝險可能更顯著的地方在於：若WTI在較長期間維持高檔，是否會帶動其營運區域的產量在多年期出現變化，最終產生更高的廢棄物量。反過來也是一樣。

If you entered a period of prolonged suppressed WTI pricing, say, something below $45, that could see a reduction in the production activities that give rise to the steady state volumes that SECURE processes. But again, unlike some of the other basins or areas of energy exploration that is the volumes are very much tied to rig counts and those rig counts can be much more volatilely tied to WTI swings, the production focused nature of SECURE's waste streams that it processes does not yield any of that sort of short-term volatility, thereby creating a much more sort of stable and cash flow characteristics, very much alike to what GFL has today.

如果進入一段WTI價格長期受壓的期間，例如低於45美元，那可能會使生產活動下降，進而影響SECURE所處理的穩態（steady state）處理量。但同樣地，與其他一些盆地或能源勘探區域不同——那些地區的量往往與鑽機數（rig counts）高度相關，而鑽機數又可能更劇烈地隨WTI波動——SECURE所處理的、以生產為主的廢物流，其特性不會產生那種短期波動，因此呈現更穩定、現金流特徵更強的性質，與GFL目前的狀況非常相似。

In terms of the overlap in that region, like, I mean, if you really think about it at the highest level, SECURE operates a best-in-class network of post-collection assets and GFL in the area is very focused on collection. And so if you think about just the market as it exists today, there will be overlap opportunities whereby GFL currently collects wastes and bring them to a disposal site that is not secure that could ultimately be internalized.

至於該區域的重疊部分，從最高層次來看，SECURE經營的是同級最佳（best-in-class）的收運後端（post-collection）資產網路，而GFL在當地則非常專注於收運（collection）。因此，如果你看目前市場的樣貌，會有一些重疊機會：GFL目前收集的廢棄物，現在送往的處置場並非SECURE的；未來這些流向最終可以內部化。

And the opposite is true, whereby SECURE uses or benefits from collectors that bring the waste to their facilities that are not GFL and that can be internalized. So just with the existing footprint today, I think there's those sort of internalization opportunities. Obviously, when we look at the expected capital investment into this region over the near, medium, and short term, which is looking to be in tens and tens of billions of dollars as more energy production comes online and more transmission and pipelines to get that energy to the West Coast and other markets is developed.

相反的情況也成立，也就是說，SECURE 會使用或受益於那些把廢棄物運送到其設施、且並非 GFL 的收運商，而這些量是可以被內部化的。所以僅就目前既有的版圖而言，我認為存在這類內部化的機會。顯然，當我們看向該地區在短期、中期與近期預期的資本投資——看起來將達到數百億、甚至數百億美元——隨著更多能源產能上線，以及為了把能源輸送到西岸與其他市場而建設更多輸電與管線。

We think there'll be a massive opportunity for incremental participation in both the collection activities that GFL does today and the post-collection activities that SECURE does today. So we're feeling very optimistic for just the base business, status quo. But when you layer in the potential growth opportunities in this region, we think there could be meaningful upside and that's where I think to Patrick's point, the combined Boards and shareholders believe the business is much more valuable on a combined basis than it was stand-alone.

我們認為，在 GFL 目前所做的收運活動，以及 SECURE 目前所做的收運後處理活動兩方面，都會有巨大的增量參與機會。因此，對於基礎業務、維持現狀的情境，我們感到非常樂觀。但當你再疊加該地區潛在的成長機會時，我們認為可能有顯著的上行空間；也正如我認為 Patrick 所說，合併後的董事會與股東相信，這門業務以合併基礎的價值遠高於單獨運作時的價值。

And the regulatory environment in Canada for these assets, you just -- they're irreplaceable. So to try and get a landfill permanent get a deep permitted. You just -- you can't do it. They're metal recycling facility permits for rail that goes into those facilities. And again, the network of storage and pipeline facilities that they own, you just -- these are impossible to replicate assets, which yields the margin profile that these assets come with and the returns on invested capital that come with them.

而在加拿大，這些資產的監管環境——你就是——它們是不可取代的。所以想要取得一座掩埋場的永久許可、取得深度許可。你就是——你做不到。還有金屬回收設施的許可，以及進入這些設施的鐵路相關許可。再者，他們所擁有的儲存與管線設施網絡——你就是——這些都是不可能複製的資產，因而帶來這些資產所具備的利潤率輪廓，以及相應的投入資本報酬率。

So I think the transaction worked perfectly because it's highly complementary to both businesses. I think from an M&A perspective, there's limited opportunities on the SECURE side, and they would have to diversify outside of their core today into more sort of lines of business like that we're in, that would come in at significantly lower margins because we've been densifying and rationalizing the businesses around them for almost 16 years.

所以我認為這筆交易非常契合，因為它對兩邊的業務都具有高度互補性。我認為從併購（M&A）的角度來看，SECURE 這一側的機會有限；而且他們必須從目前的核心業務向外多元化，進入更像我們所處的業務線，但那樣的利潤率會顯著更低，因為我們在過去將近 16 年一直在對周邊業務進行加密布局與合理化整合。

So again, strategically, it makes total sense financially makes total sense, in -- as I always say, market where we want to be and market selection we want to be in a market that we're going to be sort of sharing a big part of (inaudible) Waste Connections. And those -- that's a market profile that we like. So we'll continue sort of driving through. And again, like I said, I think we, as a shareholders will all be rewarded handsomely on both sides of the transaction, both SECURE shareholders and GFL shareholders over time.

所以再次強調，從策略面來看完全合理，從財務面來看也完全合理；在——就像我常說的——我們想要進入的市場、以及我們想要的市場選擇上，我們希望身處一個我們將會與 Waste Connections 共同分享很大一部分（聽不清）份額的市場。而那——那是一種我們喜歡的市場輪廓。所以我們會持續推進。而且再次如我所說，我認為我們作為股東，會在交易的兩端都獲得相當可觀的回報——無論是 SECURE 股東還是 GFL 股東——隨著時間推移皆是如此。

I appreciate the color. Just one quick follow-up on M&A in general. And I think you touched on this, but I think it's worth emphasizing. So maybe just talk a little bit about let's just say this deal does close, what is the enhanced flexibility for doing additional M&A on a -- based on a combined basis? I think that's an important aspect that's not being said.

感謝你提供的補充說明。關於整體併購（M&A）我還有一個簡短追問。我想你剛才有提到，但我覺得值得再強調一下。所以也許請你談談，假設這筆交易完成，合併後在進一步進行併購方面的彈性會如何提升——以合併基礎來看？我認為這是一個很重要、但目前還沒被充分說明的面向。

Yes. I mean great question. I mean if you look at it today, we said we could effectively deploy somewhere between $800 million and $1 billion on incremental M&A while still deleveraging sort of 10 to 20 basis points, right? And so that's sort of the sweet spot in which we have been sort of modeling where we're sort of moving.

是的。我的意思是，這是個很好的問題。如果你看我們目前的情況，我們說過，即使同時把槓桿率降低大約 10 到 20 個基點，我們仍然可以有效地投入約 8 億到 10 億美元用於增量併購（M&A），對吧？因此，這就是我們一直在建模、也是我們前進方向上的「甜蜜點」。

Now when you put the two businesses together, you're basically going to be able to deploy somewhere between $1.8 billion and $2 billion a year, so we can materially ramp up the solid waste M&A spend because our pipeline is very deep. I mean, as you've seen this year, we have a significant amount of opportunities that we can continue to deploying capital.

現在當你把兩個業務合在一起，你基本上每年就能投入約 18 億到 20 億美元，因此我們可以實質提高固體廢棄物領域的併購支出，因為我們的案源管線非常深。我的意思是，正如你今年所看到的，我們有大量機會，可以持續投入資本。

And then on the SECURE side, when they were thinking about diversifying into sort of incremental M&A, we don't need to spend those dollars anymore on that incremental M&A. We can just spend the capital on their internal sort of under organic high returns on invested capital projects that you've seen in the spend on the year, which has been a $50 million to $100 million a year spend.

然後在 SECURE 這一側，當他們原本在思考透過增量併購來進行多元化時，我們就不再需要把那些資金花在那類增量併購上了。我們可以把資本直接投入到他們內部、偏向有機成長且投入資本報酬率高的專案上——你今年已經在支出中看到——大約每年 5,000 萬到 1 億美元的投入。

So you put those together, that will then keep the solid waste business growing, continue identifying the markets where we're operating in the US. And we have an incremental, call it, $800 million to $1 billion a year that we can continue spending with the free cash flow generation off of the combined businesses, which is highly compelling.

所以把這些放在一起，就能讓固體廢棄物業務持續成長，並持續在我們於美國營運的市場中辨識機會。而且我們還有額外、可以說每年 8 億到 10 億美元的空間，能夠利用合併後業務所產生的自由現金流持續投入，這非常有吸引力。

If the share price continues to remain this log, you're going to take that and you have ultimate flexibility to buy back a significant amount of stock at these levels and obviously, stock share buybacks when the stock is trading at these kind of levels is highly compelling. So we have also a flexibility with the capital structure to basically do whatever we want. And I think, again, that is a tangential benefit of the transaction.

如果股價持續維持在這麼低的水準，你就可以利用這一點，在這些價位回購相當可觀的股票；而且顯然，當股價在這種水準交易時，股票回購是非常有吸引力的。所以我們在資本結構上也具備彈性，基本上可以做我們想做的事。而我認為，再次強調，這也是這筆交易的一項附帶好處。

Jim Schumm, TD Securities.

Jim Schumm，TD Securities。

Just wanted to get your thoughts on landfills and logistics. Your competitor noted that rail may play an increasing role in disposal, and another competitor believes that available landfill disposal capacity will gravitate towards the central US. So just curious how you see things playing out? And how is GFL positioned for any shifts in the landscape?

我想聽聽你對掩埋場與物流的看法。你的競爭對手提到，鐵路在處置方面可能會扮演愈來愈重要的角色；另一位競爭對手則認為，可用的掩埋處置容量將會往美國中部集中。所以我很好奇你怎麼看後續的發展？以及，面對產業版圖可能的變化，GFL 的布局如何？

Yes. I mean I think that's more of a geographic discussion than anything else. I think if you're thinking about the Northeast, particularly, that's where a lot of waste by rail volumes are happening. I think from our perspective in the regions that we're operating, keep in mind, we're 75% secondary, 25% primary.

是的。我的意思是，我認為這更多是地理分布的討論，而不是其他因素。我認為如果你在想東北部，特別是那裡，很多透過鐵路運輸廢棄物的量正在發生。從我們的角度，在我們營運的區域，請記住，我們 75% 是次級市場、25% 是一級市場。

The big primary markets where we're operating in, again, sort of if you think about Houston, Atlanta, Detroit, those are big primary markets in the US. There's a lot of disposal capacity in those markets. So that's not a major issue for us.

我們所營運的一級市場中，若你想到休士頓、亞特蘭大、底特律，這些都是美國大型的一級市場。這些市場有大量的處置容量。所以這對我們來說不是主要問題。

And in the secondary markets, we're operating, our landfills have significant capacity for the next number of years. We're not going to have to worry about waste by rail. As you know, we don't operate very much in the Northeast. So the waste by rail thesis for us is less relevant because we just don't have operations in those geographic regions.

而在我們營運的次級市場中，我們的掩埋場在未來多年仍有相當可觀的容量。我們不需要擔心透過鐵路運輸廢棄物。如你所知，我們在東北部的營運並不多。所以「廢棄物走鐵路」這個論點對我們的相關性較低，因為我們在那些地理區域並沒有太多營運。

Right. Okay. And then could you just give us an update on the EPR. And just maybe on the sustainability growth CapEx? Is that like $100 million next year sort of ballpark the right way to think about it?

了解。好的。另外你能否更新一下 EPR 的情況？以及，可能也談談永續成長資本支出（growth CapEx）？明年大概是 1 億美元左右，這樣理解是否合理？

Yes. So on EPR, with the exception of some of the stuff in Western Canada, the lion's share of EPR continues to come online throughout 2026. Obviously, the growth CapEx spend associated with those has come down significantly. Yes, to the tune of $100 million to $125 million as we sort of go into next year.

是的。關於 EPR，除了加拿大西部的一些項目之外，EPR 的大部分仍將在 2026 年陸續上線。顯然，與這些相關的成長資本支出已經顯著下降。是的，進入明年時，大約會在 1 億到 1.25 億美元的量級。

There will be some modest CapEx spend around Alberta as those collection contracts and processing contracts continue to come online throughout now and the end of 2027. But that program is materially winding down now and those contracts are live. And the largest collection contracts came on -- are coming on to the sort of first half of 2026. So we're largely through the lion's share of the major CapEx spend around those initiatives.

隨著這些收運合約與處理合約在現在到 2027 年底期間持續上線，阿爾伯塔省周邊會有一些溫和的資本支出（CapEx）。但該計畫目前已在實質上逐步收尾，而且那些合約已經生效。而最大的收運合約是在——將在 2026 年上半年左右開始上線。因此，與這些措施相關的主要資本支出大部分我們已經完成了。

Okay. And then forgive me, but was there -- were there still some opportunities in the Maritimes or that already come fast?

好的。然後請原諒我確認一下，海事省份那邊是否——是否還有一些機會，還是已經很快就到位了？

There's still some collection opportunities in the Maritimes, but the processing ones have been let.

海事省份那邊仍然有一些收運方面的機會，但處理端的合約已經釋出了。

Bryan Burgmeier, Citi.

Bryan Burgmeier，花旗。

I was wondering if you could maybe just call out some of the bigger items for the 2Q margin bridge to kind of get to that 30.4%. I think we've talked about kind of the timing of EPR from last year and then maybe some fuel headwinds then you've got the M&A integration now. So just if you can provide color on some of the big items, that would be helpful.

我想請你們或許點出一下，第二季（2Q）利潤率橋接到 30.4% 的一些較大項目。我想我們談過去年 EPR 的時點因素，然後可能還有燃料的逆風，接著你們現在也有併購整合。所以如果能就幾個主要項目提供一些說明，會很有幫助。

Yes, Bryan, great question. If you look at sequential going from Q1 to Q2, contemplating at that 30.4% level, an 80-basis-point increase. Now I think in order to frame the year-over-year, you got have to look at last year. Last year, Q1 to Q2 increased sequentially 280 basis points, which was sort of outsized and atypical. When you go back to '24, the sequential increase from Q1 to Q2 was 170 bps.

是的，Bryan，問得很好。如果看季比，從第一季到第二季，在 30.4% 這個水準下，是增加了 80 個基點。我認為要框架年比，你得回頭看去年。去年第一季到第二季的季比增加是 280 個基點，算是偏大且不典型。回到 2024 年，第一季到第二季的季比增加是 170 個基點。

And I think that's more sort of a normal course cadence. So really, as we go into this Q2, you have fuel, commodity, and M&A. I mean fuel of today's pricing is going to be a sort of 40, 45 bps headwind and you're going to have commodities if it stays where it is today, it's both sort of 20, 25 bps, and then you got M&A with what we've done so far is 40, 45 bps.

我認為那比較像是正常的節奏。所以實際上，進入這個第二季，你會面臨燃料、商品，以及併購（M&A）。以目前的燃料價格來看，會是約 40 到 45 個基點的逆風；商品若維持在今天的水準，約是 20 到 25 個基點；然後併購方面，就我們目前所做的，約是 40 到 45 個基點。

And so when you add that all together, you got the sort of 110-, 120-basis-point headwind going against you. And so if you were to normalize for that, this 80-basis-point sequential increase from Q1 to Q2 is closer to sort of 200, which is sort of more in line with that normal course cadence.

把這些加總起來，大概就是 110 到 120 個基點的逆風在對你不利。因此如果把這些因素正常化，第一季到第二季這 80 個基點的季比提升，其實更接近約 200 個基點，這就比較符合正常的節奏。

The other thing, I mean, Q2 of last year also had a benefit of 40, 50 bps as it is related to certain accruals and WSI rebates that we generated in Canada. And so again, it was about a 45 bp benefit for the prior year that's not repeating. So it's a combination of all those pieces. We knew about this going into the year with the cadence and notwithstanding the headline number slightly behind on a year-over-year basis. I think when you look at the underlying, we continue to generate the margin expansion by pulling on all the levers we've been talking about.

另外一點是，去年第二季也有約 40 到 50 個基點的利多，與加拿大某些應計項目以及我們取得的 WSI 回饋（rebates）有關。所以，前一年大約有 45 個基點的利多今年不會重複出現。因此是上述各項因素的組合。我們在年初就已經知道會有這樣的節奏，即便從表面數字看年比略為落後。我認為若看基本面，我們仍持續透過我們一直在談的各項槓桿來推動利潤率擴張。

Trevor Romeo, William Blair.

Trevor Romeo，William Blair。

I wanted to follow up a little bit on Frontier and then the Texas market. Maybe I appreciate the comments on internalization opportunities. But just thinking about Texas being a good population growth market. Sort of from a growth perspective, how are you thinking about that from -- or potential for future deals now that you have a bigger footprint across the space?

我想再追問一下 Frontier 以及德州市場。我很感謝你們對內部化（internalization）機會的評論。但考量德州是一個人口成長很好的市場，從成長角度來看，現在你們在該領域的版圖更大了，你們如何看待——或未來交易的潛力？

And then I know Frontier had done several acquisitions of their own over the years. So just what are your thoughts on how they've integrated all those deals and where they are from an efficiency standpoint?

另外我知道 Frontier 這些年也做了幾次自己的收購。所以你們怎麼看他們對這些交易的整合，以及他們在效率面目前的狀況？

Yes. Great question. They're running a very well-oiled machine. If you think about Frontier today, historically, we were generally around the Houston area. This has obviously opened up sort of Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston for us now.

是的。問得很好。他們的營運非常成熟、運轉順暢。如果你看 Frontier 現在的狀況，過去我們主要是在休士頓周邊。這顯然讓我們現在也打開了達拉斯、聖安東尼奧以及休士頓等市場。

I think if you look at our plan, we have a plan to sort of double the revenue of the Texas market sort of over the next five years. So we feel pretty comfortable in that operating model. That's a model shared by ourselves in the Frontier team that has come along with the business. But the plan is, is to double the size of the revenue in Texas over the next five years.

我想如果看我們的計畫，我們的規劃是在未來五年內，讓德州市場的營收大致翻倍。所以我們對那個營運模式相當有信心。這個模式是我們與隨業務加入的 Frontier 團隊共同採用的。但計畫就是在未來五年內把德州的營收規模翻倍。

And I'd say on that, just to add, I mean, while M&A is obviously part of our playbook. The nice things about entrepreneurial and growing business like Frontier is there's meaningful opportunities for organic M&A deployment as well. One of the opportunities that was in flight when we closed the transaction and is adding a new sort of C&D recycling facility at the front end of their C&D landfill and there'll be a benefit to sort of the whole region. So that's in flight have some incremental growth spend, it doesn't manifest as purchase price because the payment for that is happening under our watch. But when that's up and running by the -- towards the end of the year, there will be incremental benefit that we'll see coming through the results. So that goes to the point of this sort of outsized growth expectations. So not only just M&A, but some high-return organic growth opportunities are available to us in that market as well.

我也補充一下：併購（M&A）當然是我們策略手冊的一部分。但像 Frontier 這種具企業家精神且成長中的業務，還有很有意義的有機成長資本投放機會。其中一個在我們完成交易時就已在推進中的機會，是在他們 C&D 掩埋場前端新增一座新的 C&D 回收設施，這將使整個區域受益。所以這項目正在進行中，會有一些額外的成長性支出；它不會反映在收購價格上，因為該項目的付款是在我們接手後才發生。但當它在——大約今年年底前後——開始運轉時，我們會在業績中看到額外的增益。這也呼應了我們對較高成長預期的看法。所以不只是併購，在那個市場我們也有一些高報酬的有機成長機會可供把握。

That's great. And then a quick follow-up on volumes. Did you specifically call out any headwind from weather in the quarter? And then just if you have any thoughts on kind of if you take out the hurricane to comp, what was underlying volume activity kind of across your regional areas if there were any differences?

很好。然後快速追問一下量（volumes）。你們在本季是否特別提到任何來自天氣的逆風？另外，如果把用來比較的颶風因素剔除，你們各區域的基本量能活動大概是什麼樣子？是否有任何區域差異？

Yes. Look, whether we operate in Canada, we operate in Northern climates. We try not to call out weather on it, but I think this first quarter was exceptional and certainly beyond what we had sort of anticipated. So when you look at the volume, we anticipate there's about $11 million headwind as it related to the sort of weather. And again, it wasn't just in Canada, but you had weather in the Carolinas and other sort of markets that aren't typically no.

是的。你看，不論我們在加拿大營運，或是在北方氣候地區營運，我們通常不太會特別把天氣拿出來講，但我認為今年第一季的情況是例外，確實超出我們原先的預期。所以就量來看，我們預期與天氣相關大約有 1,100 萬美元的逆風。而且不只是加拿大，卡羅萊納以及其他一些通常不太會——（受影響）的市場也出現了天氣因素。

So if you look at actual dollars, I mean, volume was negative $18.5 million. So prior year, we had this onetime transfer station volume of $10 million that benefited Q1, and we also had hurricane-related volumes of $21 million last year. So if you just normalize for those two things, you actually had positive $12.5 million of underlying volume.

如果看實際金額，量的影響是負 1,850 萬美元。所以在前一年，我們有一次性的轉運站（transfer station）量約 1,000 萬美元，對第一季有利；另外去年還有與颶風相關的量約 2,100 萬美元。因此如果把這兩項正常化，你其實會得到正 1,250 萬美元的基本量成長。

Now as I said, weather was about $11 million headwind, but you also had EPR, which this growth capital spend was about a $10 million tailwind. So those sort of largely offset. So you're really left with this $125 million on a sort of net-net underlying volume, that's roughly sort of 80 basis point improvement.

如我所說，天氣約有 1,100 萬美元的逆風，但你也有 EPR，這些成長性資本支出約帶來 1,000 萬美元的順風。所以兩者大致互相抵銷。因此你最後剩下的是約 1,250 萬美元的淨額基本量，約相當於 80 個基點的改善。

Now if you look at the pieces in there, I mean, we had a great performance in special waste in the quarter which, as you know, can be sort of lumpy and a little bit challenging to extrapolate trends from. So while special waste has been good for the past four quarters, C&D volumes have been negative for those past three or four quarters. C&D was at the landfill was negative 7.5% in Q1.

現在如果你看一下裡面的各個組成部分，我是說，我們本季在特殊廢棄物方面表現非常出色；如你所知，這部分可能會比較波動，從中外推趨勢也會有點具挑戰性。因此，雖然特殊廢棄物在過去四個季度表現不錯，但在過去三到四個季度，C&D 量一直是負成長。第一季在掩埋場的 C&D 為負 7.5%。

Now typically, the special waste is a precursor to subsequent C&D volume growth. And I think at the beginning of the year, we thought that that was going to be an opportunity back to the prior comments. I mean, with today's macro uncertainty, I think there is a bit of a wait and see.

一般而言，特殊廢棄物通常是後續 C&D 量成長的前兆。而我認為在年初，回到先前的評論，我們原本以為那會是一個機會。我是說，在當前宏觀不確定性之下，我認為市場會有點採取觀望態度。

And so with that, we'll let Q2 play out and see if there is sequential improvements. We're seeing it in the roll-off. I mean our roll-off pulls in Q1 were organically down about 1%. Those have flipped to positive in April, which is an encouraging sign. But again, we'll wait until the balance of Q2 before we recast what we think that means for a full year basis.

因此，我們會讓第二季先走完，看看是否有逐季改善。我們在開放式箱（roll-off）業務上看到了這種跡象。我是說，我們第一季的開放式箱拉運量（pulls）在有機基礎上約下降 1%。4 月已轉為正成長，這是個令人鼓舞的訊號。但同樣地，在我們重新評估這對全年意味著什麼之前，會先等第二季剩餘時間的表現。

Jerry Revich, Wells Fargo.

Jerry Revich，富國銀行。

This is Jake Kooyman on for Jerry. So on the SECURE synergy build, you've laid out roughly $25 million of low-hanging operational cost synergies and a pass to $50 million to $75 million over 18 to 24 months once the broader operational components are factored in. So I was just hoping you could walk us through what gets you from the $25 million to the higher end of that range.

我是代替 Jerry 的 Jake Kooyman。關於 SECURE 的協同效益建構，你們提出大約 2,500 萬美元的低垂果實型營運成本協同效益，並且在把更廣泛的營運要素納入後，於 18 到 24 個月內可達 5,000 萬到 7,500 萬美元。所以我想請你們帶我們走一遍，究竟是什麼讓你們從 2,500 萬美元走到該區間的高端。

Yes. Great question. So as you said, the $25 million really SG&A-related costs, public company, and other type of corporate costs where we think there's efficiency. You move into the next leg, which I'd call operational cost. And we alluded to this in the prior comments, you started thinking about internalization opportunities whereby today, SECURE is subcontracting a collection activity to a third party. They basically to internalize that collection activity.

是的。問得很好。如你所說，2,500 萬美元主要是與 SG&A 相關的成本，包括上市公司成本以及其他類型的公司層級成本，我們認為在這些方面存在效率提升空間。接著進入下一階段，我會稱之為營運成本。我們在先前的評論中也提到，你會開始思考內部化（internalization）的機會：也就是目前 SECURE 將某些收運活動分包給第三方。他們基本上可以把這些收運活動內部化。

And then additionally, if you look at the inverse, where GFL is disposing of waste at a third-party, the ability to internalize that. And so on the sort of cost internalization, I think that would sort of be the next bucket. And then the third bucket being sort of what we call revenue opportunities. If you look today, GFL services many customers in the services that GFL provides. That customer also has a need for a service that SECURE could provide, but isn't today, and that could represent an incremental revenue opportunity that we could capture on the pro forma combined business.

另外，如果從相反方向來看，GFL 目前把廢棄物交由第三方處置，我們也有能力把這部分內部化。因此在成本內部化方面，我認為這會是下一個類別。第三個類別則是我們所稱的營收機會。如果你看現在，GFL 以其提供的服務在服務許多客戶。而這些客戶同時也有 SECURE 能提供、但目前尚未提供的服務需求，這可能代表我們在合併後的備考（pro forma）業務中可捕捉的增量營收機會。

And the same is true in the inverse, where SECURE maybe taking the waste of a customer, but other services that GFL is capable of providing are being provided by a third party. And so again, we think that incremental wallet share capture is a real opportunity that the pro forma combined business could go out and get. So while the first bucket, the $25 million that we underwrote is really that sort of SG&A that other incremental $25 million to $50 million is really equally across those two operational costs and revenue synergy categories. And then obviously, if there's growth above and beyond in this market, as is anticipated by many by virtue of the capital investment plan that's coming out of both public and private sectors, there could be meaningful growth opportunities above and beyond that.

反過來也是一樣：SECURE 可能正在處理某位客戶的廢棄物，但該客戶其他由 GFL 有能力提供的服務，卻是由第三方在提供。因此，我們再次認為，提升客戶錢包份額（wallet share）的增量捕捉，是合併後備考業務可以去爭取的真實機會。所以，第一個類別，也就是我們承諾（underwrote）的 2,500 萬美元，主要是那類 SG&A；而另外的 2,500 萬到 5,000 萬美元，則大致平均分布在「營運成本」與「營收協同效益」這兩大類。當然，如果這個市場的成長超出預期——許多人預期，因為公部門與私部門都將推出資本投資計畫——那麼在此之外還可能有相當可觀的成長機會。

And then my second question would be on the Q4 call, you sized RNG in the roughly $125 million to $150 million range. I was just hoping you could give us an update on where you sit today on RNG run rate contribution? And how much of the 2026 step-up in the bridge is RNG versus EPR?

我的第二個問題是，在第四季電話會議上，你們將 RNG 的規模估在約 1.25 億到 1.5 億美元。我想請你們更新一下，目前 RNG 的年化貢獻（run rate contribution）大概在哪裡？以及 2026 年橋接表（bridge）中的增量，RNG 相對於 EPR 各占多少？

Yes. So that's right. I mean the original plan for RNG was $175 million. We talked that down, say, to about $125 million in light of deeper dives at each of the facilities, what's feasible in terms of actual facility development as well as the opportunity at each of those facilities. So $125 million is the expected target. You're doing roughly $50 million today out of the five facilities that you're generating benefit from. That's roughly flat with last year, to your call this year's guide, there was no meaningful incremental step-up in RNG related contribution as you had an incremental amount of volume from the maturity of facilities, offset by the slightly lower RIN prices, today's 240 versus the higher level that you realize on a blended average in 2025.

是的。沒錯。我是說，RNG 的原始計畫是 1.75 億美元。在對各個設施做更深入的檢視後——包括實際設施開發的可行性以及各設施的機會——我們把它下修到大約 1.25 億美元。所以 1.25 億美元是預期目標。目前你們從五座已產生效益的設施中，約有 5,000 萬美元的貢獻。這與去年大致持平；如你提到的今年指引，RNG 相關貢獻沒有顯著的增量提升，因為設施成熟帶來的增量處理量，被 RIN 價格略低所抵銷——目前約 240，相較於你們在 2025 年以加權平均（blended average）實現的較高水準。

Going forward, 2027 is supposed to see an incremental four facilities come online, which takes you sort of upwards to that sort of close to $85 million to $100 million mark. And then in '28, you have the other remaining sort of four facilities that come online and take you the balance of the way there. So meaningful minimal incremental contribution in '26 to the guide, but we remain clearly focused on that path of sort of getting to that $125 million target as a whole.

往後看，2027 年預計會再有四座設施上線，這會把你推升到大約 8,500 萬到 1 億美元的區間。然後在 2028 年，其餘大約四座設施上線，讓你把剩餘的差距補齊。因此在 2026 年相對於指引，增量貢獻相當有限；但我們仍然明確聚焦在這條路徑上，整體朝 1.25 億美元目標前進。

Adam Bubes, Goldman Sachs.

Adam Bubes，高盛。

Can you just update us on the 2026 EBITDA outlook for GIP and Environmental Services, respectively. And any changes in net leverage on those assets since the last mark-to-market?

能否請你們分別更新一下 GIP 與 Environmental Services 在 2026 年的 EBITDA 展望？以及自上次按市價重估（mark-to-market）以來，這些資產的淨槓桿（net leverage）是否有任何變化？

No, nothing material. I mean, I think, yes, this year, sort of exiting the year run rate of probably $600 million to $625 million. There's been some incremental M&A, no change in sort of net leverage sort of 5.5 to 6. On the GIP business, today, recently just signed another transaction, pro forma EBITDA, probably exiting the year in the neighborhood of 3.50 to 3.75 and net leverage in that business con sitting around 4.5 to 5. So again, going back to the point of -- it doesn't show up on the Bloomberg screen, but there's material equity.

沒有，沒有任何重大變化。我是說，我認為，是的，今年年底退出時（exiting the year）的年化水準大概是 6 億到 6.25 億美元。有一些增量的併購（M&A），淨槓桿大致仍在 5.5 到 6 倍左右，沒有變化。至於 GIP 業務，最近剛又簽了一筆交易；備考 EBITDA 在年底退出時大概在 3.50 到 3.75（單位同前述口徑）附近，而該業務的淨槓桿仍約在 4.5 到 5 倍。所以再回到那個重點——它不會顯示在 Bloomberg 畫面上，但其中有相當可觀的股權價值。

Again, keep in mind, we own just under 40% of ES and roughly 1/4 of GIP and our equity value creation initiatives in those businesses continue to sort of continue to prove out. So they're going well, are doing exactly what they were supposed to do and what earth they set out to do. And at some point over the next few years, we'll definitely monetize our stakes in those two businesses.

另外請記住，我們持有 ES 略低於 40% 的股權，以及約 1/4 的 GIP；而我們在這些業務中的股權價值創造（equity value creation）措施，持續在驗證並展現成效。所以它們進展良好，正如它們原本應該做的、以及當初設定要做的那樣在執行。在未來幾年中的某個時間點，我們一定會將在這兩家業務中的持股變現（monetize）。

And Adam, just as a follow-up in terms of disclosure on that, I know we've talked before about regular cadence of disclosure. As Patrick alluded to, the values vis-a-vis when we just marked the equity in 2025 have not changed sort of materially. So you have that sort of $1.7 billion, $1.8 billion value on the ES investment and then the $1 billion that was just marked on GIP, those are still relatively fresh. As we get towards the end of this year, we will look at incorporating ongoing disclosure, so people have the ability to keep tabs on that incremental store value. As Patrick said, we think sometimes is a sight of which is lost.

Adam，另外補充一下關於揭露（disclosure）的部分，我知道我們之前談過要有固定節奏的揭露。如 Patrick 所提到的，相較於我們在 2025 年剛對股權做重估時的價值，目前並沒有出現重大變化。因此，ES 投資的價值大約 17 億到 18 億美元，以及剛對 GIP 重估的 10 億美元，這些數字仍然相對新近。隨著我們接近今年年底，我們會考慮納入持續性的揭露，讓大家能夠追蹤那部分增量的隱含價值（store value）。如 Patrick 所說，我們認為有時候這一點會被忽略。

Got it. Super helpful. And then can you just talk about how you're thinking about magnitude of transaction and integration costs over the next 12 months as you just a higher level of M&A. Just trying to think through what that bridge between adjusted and free cash flow -- actual free cash flow might look like to consider how much capital in hand you might end the year with?

了解。非常有幫助。接著你能否談談，從較高層次的併購角度來看，你們在未來12個月對交易規模與整合成本幅度的看法。我只是想釐清調整後與自由現金流之間的那座橋樑——也就是實際自由現金流可能長什麼樣子，以便評估你們年底手上可能會有多少資本？

Yes. And what I'd say is that will be somewhat binary depending on whether the SECURE transaction is happening or is it not. So as Patrick said, there's a vote at the end of May, which will have certainty while we're feeling good, we'll have that in hand before we sort of update that for the year.

是的。我想說的是，這會在某種程度上呈現二元結果，取決於SECURE這筆交易是否會發生。因此如Patrick所說，5月底會有一場投票，屆時就會更確定；雖然我們感覺良好，但在我們對全年做更新之前，會先把這件事掌握在手。

So if you think ex SECURE normal course, you'll have the same level of acquisition integration costs that you've had the last couple of years, that number doesn't sort of move around all that much. If SECURE gets layered on, you could have something greater.

所以如果你把SECURE排除、只看正常營運情境，你們會有與過去幾年相同水準的併購整合成本，那個數字不太會大幅波動。如果再把SECURE疊加進來，整合成本可能會更高一些。

Although I would highlight, as we have said many times, it's often much easier to integrate large, organized businesses then there's a bunch of sort of small ones. I mean the team in SECURE is fantastic. And when you think about their capabilities and skill sets across IT, HR, legal and areas where we need integration, being able to leverage the existing folks is really going to minimize the need for incremental sort of third-party costs.

不過我想強調，正如我們多次提到的，整合大型、組織完善的企業，往往比整合一堆小型企業更容易。我的意思是，SECURE的團隊非常出色。當你想到他們在IT、人資、法務以及我們需要整合的各領域的能力與技能組合時，能夠運用既有的人員，確實會把額外的第三方成本需求降到最低。

However, we'll wait until Q2. And by then, we'll have more visibility and provide you a sort of number. But for the guidance that was provided today on the $7.3 million to $7.34 billion of revenue, I'd assume a commensurate level of integration costs as you've seen in the past couple of years.

不過，我們會等到第二季。到那時，我們會有更高的能見度，並提供你一個大致的數字。但就今天提供的73億至73.4億美元營收指引而言，我會假設整合成本水準與你過去幾年看到的相當。

Chris Murray, ATB Capital Markets.

Chris Murray，ATB Capital Markets。

Maybe coming back to SECURE just for a second and thinking about kind of, again, the synergies and where you drive this from. Can you maybe lay out the impact that this may also have on the ES business versus maybe the solid waste business and where you think you could leverage some of these assets? I know historically, you had been involved in some of the transactions even back on the (inaudible). But any other thoughts you have on kind of the mix of business that you see kind of evolving over time would be great.

再回到SECURE一下，從協同效益以及你們要從哪裡驅動這些效益的角度來看。你能否說明一下，這對ES業務相較於固體廢棄物業務可能也會帶來哪些影響，以及你認為可以在哪些地方運用這些資產？我知道過去你們也參與過一些交易，甚至回到那個(聽不清)。但如果你對於你所看到、隨時間演變的業務組合還有其他想法，也會很有幫助。

Yes, not a material impact on the ES business, although there should be some disposal synergies from the US business that would benefit the SECURE CFO combination, right? So I think there's some incremental waste streams that we could probably internalize into those landfills over time and into the depot. So no material changes to sort of either business that sort of come with that.

是的，對ES業務沒有重大影響，不過美國業務應該會有一些處置端的協同效益，能讓SECURE與CFO的組合受益，對吧？所以我認為，隨著時間推移，我們可能會把一些新增的廢棄物流內部化，導入那些掩埋場以及轉運站（depot）。因此，這不會對任何一個業務帶來重大的結構性變化。

Okay. And then last word, just to follow up. Just the pricing comment. You had mentioned that part of the reason for the stronger pricing was our lower churn as well as EPR. So just a question very quickly. Is there something different you're doing on your approach to turn that's actually driving that? Or is it just kind of a factor of kind of the mix of business or how it's coming in? And how is EPR playing into that? Any additional color would be helpful.

好的。最後再追問一下。關於定價的評論。你提到定價更強的部分原因是較低的流失率以及EPR。所以很快問一下：你們在降低流失（churn）的做法上是否有什麼不同，實際上在推動這件事？還是這只是業務組合或新增業務來源的因素？另外EPR在其中扮演什麼角色？任何補充說明都會很有幫助。

I mean, two distinct questions in there. EPR is just a function that we have deployed this growth capital, and we're strategically at getting in front of this wave of change in Canada and have sort of benefited from returns on our capital invested and some of that's materializing in price and some materializing in volume. As we said, if it was a contract that we were doing before or volume that we are processing before and now we're still doing the same but under an EPR contract. That change has been sort of reflected in price whereas if it was net new volume or activity that change was in volume. So the EPR price component is a function of that return on the capital invested.

我想這裡面其實是兩個不同的問題。EPR只是我們已部署這些成長資本的結果；我們在策略上走在加拿大這波變革浪潮之前，並且從投入資本的報酬中受益，其中一部分反映在價格上，一部分反映在量上。如我們所說，如果是我們以前就做的合約或以前就處理的量，而現在仍做同樣的事、只是改在EPR合約之下進行，那個變化就反映在價格上；而如果是全新新增的量或活動，那個變化就反映在量上。因此，EPR的價格組成是投入資本報酬的函數。

In terms of the base business and sort of churn and retention, like return in retention really comes down to customer service, right, provide exceptional service in the market, and that's going to go a long way towards your retention. I think it's also becoming more strategic in our price initiatives. I mean, I'm sure this is a theme throughout the industry as a whole, but I do have better tools, whether that's AI-enabled or not, is better data analytics allows for more appropriate or targeted or rather than sort of pricing. And when it's more appropriate in targeted pricing, you tend to get sort of a better stick rate than not. So I think it's just the continuous improvement.

至於基礎業務以及流失與留存，留存的提升其實歸根結底就是客戶服務，對吧？在市場上提供卓越服務，對留存會有很大幫助。我也認為我們在定價措施上變得更具策略性。我的意思是，我相信這是整個產業的共同主題，但我們確實有更好的工具——不論是否由AI賦能——更好的數據分析能讓定價更恰當、更有針對性，而不是那種較為粗放的定價。當定價更恰當且更有針對性時，通常會帶來更好的「黏著率」（stick rate）。所以我認為這就是持續改善。

The other piece of it is obviously the incremental portfolio optimization that we've spoken about, and we continue to find the opportunities to realize what we had articulated as a $40 million to $80 million benefit at our Investor Day and we keep sort of chipping away at that. But it's all those pieces together. And I think that's what gives us a great deal of comfort that the industry's pricing dynamic the discipline around ensuring the sort of price above our costs to generate sufficient return is very healthy and remains disciplined, and we see that not changing for our long-term outlook.

另外一塊當然是我們談過的增量式投資組合優化，我們持續找到機會去實現我們在投資人日所闡述的4,000萬至8,000萬美元效益，並且持續一點一滴地推進。但就是這些因素加總在一起。我認為這也讓我們非常有信心：產業的定價動態、以及確保價格高於成本以產生足夠報酬的紀律都非常健康且仍然自律，我們也不認為這會改變我們的長期展望。

Tobey Sommer, Truist Securities.

Tobey Sommer，Truist Securities。

It's Henry on for Tobey here. Just to start on your expectations for inflation for the rest of the year and some of the potential upside to the guidance with the global situation. And just kind of the mix of contracts that you have the (inaudible) linked and the lag we could expect the adjustments flow through.

我是Henry，代Tobey提問。先從你們對今年剩餘時間通膨的預期，以及在全球局勢下指引可能的上行空間談起。另外也想問一下你們合約組合中與（聽不清）連動的部分，以及我們可以預期調整傳導進來的滯後期。

Yes, great question. I think it's important to understand the nature of our CPI resets are often such that they're looking back at a reference period sometime before the contract price rule. So if you think about Jan 1 price increases that you received, those are probably based on inflation read somewhere three, six, or nine months before that.

是的，問得很好。我認為重要的是要理解，我們的CPI重設機制通常是回看合約價格生效前某個時間點的參考期間。所以如果你想想你們在1月1日收到的漲價，那些很可能是基於在此之前3、6或9個月某個時點的通膨讀數。

With that, 2026 pricing is largely baked and isn't going to change materially as you think about that largely residential book of business that has CPI linked really represent an opportunity for your 2027 pricing. Now with that, as we and the industry have demonstrated historically, if cost inflation runs significantly higher than expectations in year, we will go to our open market pricing in order to recover those incremental costs.

在此情況下，2026年的定價大致已經鎖定，不太可能出現重大變化；而你提到那本與CPI連動、以住宅為主的業務組合，更多代表的是2027年定價的機會。不過同時，如同我們與產業過去的表現所示，如果年度內成本通膨顯著高於預期，我們會透過公開市場定價來回收那些額外成本。

Now where we're at today, we have yet to sort of see that because I think the cost inflation is really a function of the energy cost, and we're able to recover that separately. But I think if you look back at '22 through '24 and have the industry responded to cost inflation, it's a great data point to show the willingness ability and sort of real-time nature in which incremental unexpected cost inflation can be passed on. The broader is what CPI printing at a higher level, though, would really be a benefit for '27 and beyond.

就我們目前所處的情況而言，我們還沒有真正看到那種狀況，因為我認為成本通膨主要是能源成本所驅動，而我們能夠另外單獨回收這部分。但如果你回頭看2022到2024年產業如何回應成本通膨，這是一個很好的數據點，顯示在面對額外、非預期的成本通膨時，業界具備意願、能力，以及相當即時地把成本轉嫁出去。不過，更廣泛而言，如果CPI以更高水準印出，真正受益的會是2027年及以後。

And then just quick on the kind of potential timeline for secured deals from the regulatory side. Are there any major milestones that you would call it that we should be looking for as that process moves along?

接著快速問一下，從監管端來看，關於有擔保交易的潛在時程。隨著流程推進，有沒有任何你們會稱之為重大里程碑、我們應該留意的？

No. I mean, I think, again, we've put in a significant amount of work, obviously, pre-announcement and post signing. From our perspective, there are no real material issues. And hopefully, the bureau -- again, just because they've gone through this process in depth a couple of years ago, they understand the market really well, and our expectation is that our hope is that we'll get through relatively quickly. But I think you can expect somewhere between three and five months is probably a reasonable time frame to get through that, which would have us hopefully closing the transaction on going into sort of Q4 so down somewhere in September, October, closing the transaction. So we'd have that tuck-in for a quarter of ownership with that asset for this year.

沒有。我的意思是，我想再次強調，我們在公告前以及簽約後都投入了大量工作。從我們的角度來看，沒有任何實質性的重大問題。而且希望主管機關——再次強調，因為他們在幾年前已深入走過這個流程，對市場非常了解，我們的預期與希望是能相對快速地完成。但我認為你可以預期大約三到五個月應該是合理的時間範圍，這樣我們希望能在進入第四季左右完成交易交割，也就是大概在九月、十月完成交割。因此今年我們大概能在擁有該資產的情況下，享有一個季度的併入貢獻。

Shlomo Rosenbaum, Stifel.

Shlomo Rosenbaum，Stifel。

Patrick, maybe you could -- just give us a little color on the differences in the regions in the performance, looks like Canada grew organically 7.2%, US 3.4% you're getting more margin expansion in Canada, even you look at the underlying in the US? And I'm just trying to understand, is there operational something that's very different going on? Is it have to do somewhat with EPR coming on? Maybe you could break that down. And then I just have kind of a housekeeping question for Luke.

Patrick，也許你可以——就各地區表現差異多提供一些說明。看起來加拿大有機成長7.2%，美國3.4%；你們在加拿大的利潤率擴張也更大，即使看美國的基礎表現也是如此？我想了解的是，營運上是否有什麼非常不同的事情在發生？是否與EPR上線有些關係？也許你可以拆解說明一下。然後我還有一個給Luke的例行性問題。

Sure. I mean most of the margin increase in Canada, again, is coming from, again, remember, we -- on January 1, 2026, we took over a significant amount of recycling contracts. A lot of those things were extended. They were priced between 2009 and 2013, at just continue to get extended and we're getting CPI on those.

當然。我的意思是，加拿大的大部分利潤率提升，還是來自——再次提醒，2026年1月1日，我們接手了相當多的回收合約。其中很多都被延長。它們原本是在2009到2013年間定價的，之後就一直延長，而我們在這些合約上只拿到CPI調整。

And then as we took over the recycling as part of EPR, we reset them to the current market rate, right? So that led to some of the margin expansion or the big difference in the margin expansion between Canada and the US over that period. So nothing -- there's no anomalies that have come out of Canada or the US over that period, just -- it's largely just again, the repricing of a bunch of those recycling collection contracts that represented a significant amount of revenue.

然後當我們在EPR架構下接手回收業務時，我們把它們重設到目前的市場價格，對吧？所以這帶來了一些利潤率擴張，也就是加拿大與美國在那段期間利潤率擴張差異較大的原因。因此沒有什麼——加拿大或美國在那段期間都沒有出現異常；主要就是——很大程度上仍是因為一批回收收運合約的重新定價，而那批合約占了相當可觀的營收。

And Shlomo, I would just add, when you think about that margin that you described on the face of it, underlying the US was significantly more impacted by what I call, exogenous factors in Canada was. So if you think about the US quarter year-over-year margin, commodities was a 40-basis-point headwind. Fuel was 40 basis points. The hurricane from last year that you're lapping and the winter impact was 40 basis points, and you had sort of 75, 80 basis points from M&A that was in the US. And so if you factor that in, you actually have nearly a 200-basis-point underlying margin expansion in the US.

Shlomo，我再補充一下：當你看你剛才提到的表面利潤率時，美國的基礎表現其實受到我所稱的外生因素影響，遠大於加拿大。所以如果你看美國本季年對年利潤率，商品價格帶來40個基點的逆風。燃料是40個基點。去年颶風的比較基期效應以及冬季影響是40個基點，另外還有大約75到80個基點來自美國的併購。因此把這些因素納入後，你其實會看到美國的基礎利潤率擴張接近200個基點。

Now Canada is still higher by virtue of the EPR benefits that Patrick sort have alluded to. So you got to remember, our Canadian business is coming from what was a high 20s margin business now approaching the low to mid-30s where our US business has very squarely been sort of low- to mid-30s, some of the pricing opportunities that we've talked about, we're also disproportionately available in Canada in the US. So I think it's all of those things that need to be taken into account that suggest both of our geographic regions from our perspective, are performing exceptionally well, and it's really more those exogenous factors making the headline margin expansion look different in the different geographies.

當然，加拿大仍然更高，因為有Patrick剛才提到的EPR效益。所以你要記得，我們加拿大業務原本是接近高20%利潤率的業務，現在正接近低到中30%；而我們美國業務一直相當穩定地維持在低到中30%。我們談到的一些定價機會，在加拿大相對於美國也更為顯著。所以我認為需要把所有這些因素一起考量，才能看出從我們的角度來看，兩個地理區域的表現都非常出色；只是那些外生因素讓不同地區的表面利潤率擴張看起來有所差異。

Okay. Great. That's great color. And then look, maybe you could just provide color, what exactly is this is, the housekeeping and what is the change in value-add call option? What does that do to?

好的。很好。這些說明很有幫助。然後Luke，也許你可以說明一下，這個例行性項目到底是什麼，以及所謂的增值買權（value-add call option）價值變動是什麼？它會影響到什麼？

So as you know, we have a call option to buy back the ES business in four years' time. As with any option, a significant component of the value is the time. And naturally, all other things being equal, that time is going to erode the value of the options. Now to the comment we were having before with Adam we will update the equity value calculations for that asset on a periodic basis, which would offset the time decay component of the call option, but all the things being equal, you'll just see that natural $10 million a quarter amortization of the value as a function of the reduced amount of duration left in the auction.

如你所知，我們有一個買權，可以在四年後買回ES業務。就像任何選擇權一樣，價值中很重要的一部分是時間。而且在其他條件不變的情況下，時間流逝會侵蝕選擇權的價值。至於我們先前和Adam討論的部分，我們會定期更新該資產的股權價值計算，這會抵銷買權的時間價值耗損；但在其他條件不變下，你會看到每季約1,000萬美元的自然攤銷，這是因為距離到期（或行使）剩餘期間縮短所致。

Okay. That's great color. So on an annual basis, you should expect to see something like that absent a change in the equity value?

好的。這個說明很清楚。所以以年度來看，在股權價值沒有變動的情況下，你們預期會看到類似的情況？

Correct.

正確。

We have no further questions at this time. So I'd like to hand back to Patrick for closing remarks.

目前沒有其他問題。那我想把時間交回給Patrick做結語。

Thank you, everyone, and we look forward to speaking to you about our Q2 results. Thank you. Have a good day.

謝謝各位，我們期待在第二季（Q2）業績時再與各位交流。謝謝。祝各位有美好的一天。

This concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛斷電話。