Infosys Limited (INFY) 2026 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, greetings and welcome to Infosys Limited Q4 FY26 earnings conference call. (Operator Instructions) Please note that this conference is being recorded.

各位女士、先生，大家好，歡迎參加印孚瑟斯有限公司（Infosys Limited）2026 財年第四季（Q4 FY26）財報電話會議。（接線員指示）請注意，本次會議將被錄音。

I now hand the conference over to Mr. Sandeep Mahindroo. Thank you, and over to Mr. Mahindroo.

現在我把會議交給 Sandeep Mahindroo 先生。謝謝，接下來交給 Mahindroo 先生。

Thanks, everyone. Welcome to this earnings call to discuss Infosys Q4 FY26 financial results. Joining us on this call is the CEO and MD, Mr. Salil Parekh; CFO, Mr. Jayesh Sanghrajka; along with other members of the leadership team.

謝謝各位。歡迎參加本次財報電話會議，討論印孚瑟斯 2026 財年第四季（Q4 FY26）財務業績。與會者包括執行長兼董事總經理 Salil Parekh 先生、財務長 Jayesh Sanghrajka 先生，以及其他領導團隊成員。

We'll start the call with some remarks on the performance of the company, subsequent to which we'll open up the call for questions. Please note that anything we say that refers to our future outlook is a forward-looking statement that must be read in conjunction with the risks that the company faces. A complete statement and explanation of these risks is available in our filing with the SEC, which can be found on www.sec.gov.

我們將先就公司表現發表一些評論，之後開放提問。請注意，我們所提及任何關於未來展望的內容均屬前瞻性陳述，必須結合公司所面臨的風險一併閱讀。關於這些風險的完整陳述與說明，已載於我們向美國證券交易委員會（SEC）提交的文件中，可於 www.sec.gov 查閱。

I'd now like to pass on the call to Salil.

現在我想把電話會議交給 Salil。

Thanks, Sandeep. Good afternoon, good evening, good morning to everyone. Thank you for joining in. We delivered a strong performance in the financial year 2026. We had a growth of 3.1% for the full year in constant currency terms. Our Q4 revenue growth was 4.1% year on year in constant currency terms. We had strong growth in financial services, in the communications industry, manufacturing industry, and for the Europe geography for the full year.

謝謝，Sandeep。各位下午好、晚上好、早安。感謝大家參與。我們在 2026 財年交出強勁表現。以固定匯率計算，全年成長 3.1%。第四季營收以固定匯率計算年增 4.1%。全年在金融服務、通訊產業、製造業，以及歐洲地區均有強勁成長。

Large deals were strong. For the full year, we had $14.9 billion of large deals. This is a growth of 24% over the prior year. And for Q4, we were at $3.2 billion, a strong showing for the quarter. We shared our AI strategy during our AI Investor Day a few weeks ago. We see a large addressable market for AI services across six areas, AI strategy and engineering, data, process, legacy modernization, physical AI, and trust. With our Topaz Fabric platform for AI, our COBOL platform for cloud, we have differentiated capabilities to serve our clients across the six areas of AI.

大型交易表現強勁。全年大型交易金額達 149 億美元，較前一年成長 24%。第四季為 32 億美元，單季表現亮眼。幾週前我們在 AI 投資人日分享了 AI 策略。我們看到 AI 服務在六大領域具備龐大的可服務市場：AI 策略與工程、資料、流程、舊系統現代化、實體 AI，以及信任。憑藉我們的 AI 平台 Topaz Fabric，以及用於雲端的 COBOL 平台，我們具備差異化能力，可在上述六大 AI 領域為客戶提供服務。

Some examples of the work we are doing for a consumer products retail company, Ralph Lauren, we helped build a conversational and personalized AI tool that led to converting customer interest into a shopping experience. This resulted in an increase in the revenue by 12% and customer engagement by 50%.

以我們為一家消費品零售公司 Ralph Lauren 所做的工作為例，我們協助打造一個具對話式與個人化的 AI 工具，將客戶興趣轉化為購物體驗。其結果是營收提升 12%，客戶互動提升 50%。

For a large transport company, Hertz, we helped with a legacy migration to bring 3 million lines of COBOL code to a modern microservices environment using AI foundation models. The cost was 60% lower, the timeline was 60% quicker than how they would have done it without AI.

對於大型運輸公司 Hertz，我們協助其進行舊系統遷移，運用 AI 基礎模型將 300 萬行 COBOL 程式碼帶入現代化的微服務環境。成本降低 60%，時程也比未使用 AI 的方式快 60%。

For a large energy company, BP, we deployed 50 AI agent initiatives across trading, supply chain, sustainability, and core operations to transform the software development, knowledge automation, legacy modernization, and digital decision support. This resulted in 95% payment accuracy, 50% faster contract validation, and 18% improvement in IT operations efficiency.

對於大型能源公司 BP，我們在交易、供應鏈、永續與核心營運等領域部署了 50 項 AI 代理（AI agent）計畫，以改造軟體開發、知識自動化、舊系統現代化與數位決策支援。成果包括：付款準確率達 95%、合約驗證速度提升 50%，以及 IT 營運效率提升 18%。

We have strategic collaborations with emerging foundation model companies, such as Anthropic and OpenAI, which help us support our clients' transformation for software development, legacy modernization, and agent building. We also have established strategic AI collaborations with Google Gemini, NVIDIA, Microsoft, AWS, Google Cloud, and Intel, among others. We've deployed over 30,000 deployer developers on GitHub Copilot.

我們與新興的基礎模型公司建立策略合作，例如 Anthropic 與 OpenAI，協助我們支援客戶在軟體開發、舊系統現代化與代理建置方面的轉型。我們也與 Google Gemini、NVIDIA、Microsoft、AWS、Google Cloud、Intel 等建立既有的策略性 AI 合作。我們已在 GitHub Copilot 上部署超過 30,000 名開發者。

As we look ahead to financial year 2027, we see large opportunities in AI services, continued competitive intensity, and AI productivity impact. With a clear AI strategic roadmap and real-world toolkit of Topaz Fabric, we are well-positioned to support our clients' transformation, technology and operations objectives.

展望 2027 財年，我們看到 AI 服務的龐大機會、競爭強度持續，以及 AI 生產力帶來的影響。憑藉清晰的 AI 策略路線圖與 Topaz Fabric 的實戰工具組合，我們已具備良好定位，可支援客戶的轉型、技術與營運目標。

Our revenue growth guidance for financial year '27 is 1.5% to 3.5% year on year in constant currency terms. We expect acceleration in growth in financial services, and the energy, utilities, resources, services vertical from financial year '26 to '27. We expect H1 to be stronger than H2, consistent with our normal seasonality. Our operating margin guidance for financial year '27 is 20% to 22%.

我們對 2027 財年的營收成長指引為：以固定匯率計算年增 1.5% 至 3.5%。我們預期金融服務，以及能源、公用事業、資源與服務（EURS）垂直領域，將在 2026 財年至 2027 財年出現成長加速。我們預期上半年（H1）將強於下半年（H2），符合我們一貫的季節性。2027 財年的營業利益率指引為 20% 至 22%。

With that, let me hand it over to Jayesh for his update.

接下來，我把時間交給 Jayesh 進行更新。

Thank you, Salil. Good morning, good evening, everyone, and thank you for joining the call today. Financial year '26 performance demonstrates our ability to maintain financial discipline and operational excellence in its challenging and evolving business environment. Planned spending is guarded with greater focus on cost optimization engagement as against growth-led transformation programs. We are seeing increasing momentum in AI-driven initiatives, particularly around productivity, automation, and platform-led modernization initiatives.

謝謝你，Salil。各位早安、晚安，感謝今天加入本次會議。2026 財年的表現展現了我們在充滿挑戰且持續演變的商業環境中，仍能維持財務紀律與營運卓越的能力。相較於以成長為導向的轉型計畫，規劃性支出更為審慎，並更聚焦於成本優化專案。我們看到 AI 驅動計畫的動能持續提升，特別是在生產力、自動化與平台導向的現代化計畫方面。

Let me start with the key highlights for the year and the quarter. FY26 revenues crossed $20 billion and grew 3.1% in conscious currency terms within the upgraded guidance band given in January. This was after lower third-party costs, which was down by 1% as percentage of revenue and 0.7% reduction in onsite mix. Acquisitions contributed about 70 bps on full-year growth.

我先從全年與單季的重點摘要開始。2026 財年營收突破 200 億美元，以固定匯率計算成長 3.1%，落在我們於 1 月上調後的指引區間內。這是在第三方成本下降後達成的：第三方成本占營收比重下降 1%，以及駐點（onsite）比重下降 0.7%。併購對全年成長貢獻約 70 個基點（bps）。

For FY26, communication, manufacturing, vertical, and Europe geography grew more than double the company average, led by ramp up of the large deal wins. Additionally, FS and EURS grew above the company average in currency terms. Volumes for the year were flattish. Growth was led by increase in realization, thanks to Project Maximus.

2026 財年，通訊與製造等垂直領域，以及歐洲地區的成長均超過公司平均的兩倍，主要由大型交易得標後的擴量（ramp up）帶動。此外，以固定匯率計算，金融服務（FS）與能源、公用事業、資源與服務（EURS）也高於公司平均。全年量（volumes）大致持平。成長主要來自實現率（realization）提升，這得益於 Project Maximus。

Adjusted operating margin was stable at 21%. Gains from currency and Maximus were reinvested in talent, AI investment, and sales and marketing. Q4 revenues grew by 4.1% year on year. Sequentially, revenues declined 1.3% in constant currency due to seasonality and slower decision making in the month of March. Growth in Q4 was broad based across major geographies. Communication, EURS, and LS verticals grew well above the company average on a year-on-year basis in constant currency terms.

調整後營業利益率穩定維持在 21%。匯率與 Maximus 帶來的收益被再投資於人才、AI 投資，以及銷售與行銷。第四季營收年增 4.1%。以固定匯率計算，季比營收下降 1.3%，原因在於季節性以及 3 月決策速度放緩。第四季成長在主要地區均呈現廣泛分布。以固定匯率計算，通訊、EURS 與生命科學（LS）垂直領域的年增表現均明顯高於公司平均。

Q4 operating margins stood at 20.9%, down 0.3% sequentially, adjusted for the labor code impact in Q3. On-site mix further reduced to 22.8% from 23.1% in Q3. Utilization excluding training was 83% in Q4 and 84.4% in FY26. Utilization including training was at 81.1% for FY26, reflecting the investment made towards creating future capacity.

第四季營業利益率為 20.9%，若就第三季的勞動法規（labor code）影響進行調整後，季比下降 0.3%。駐點（on-site）比重進一步由第三季的 23.1% 降至 22.8%。第四季（不含訓練）的稼動率為 83%，2026 財年為 84.4%。包含訓練的稼動率在 2026 財年為 81.1%，反映我們為建立未來產能所做的投資。

Strong focus on collections aided by technology interventions helped us reduce DSO, including an unbuilt net of unearned to [78], which is the slowest in seven years -- which is the lowest in seven years. Reported EPS in INR terms grew 23.8%, Y-o-Y in Q4, and 11% in FY26. EPS adjusted for income tax orders and the labor code grew double digits for the year at 13.9% in Q4 and 12.1% for the full year in INR terms.

在科技介入的支持下，我們強力聚焦收款，協助降低 DSO（應收帳款週轉天數），包括將未開立（unbilled）與遞延收入（unearned）淨額降至 [78]，為七年來最慢——也就是七年來最低。以印度盧比（INR）計，第四季揭露的 EPS 年增 23.8%，2026 財年成長 11%。若就所得稅裁定與勞動法規影響調整後，EPS 全年維持雙位數成長：第四季為 13.9%，全年為 12.1%（以 INR 計）。

Free cash flow adjusted for the labor code and income tax refunds stood at $3.5 billion for FY and $882 million for Q4. Existing free cash as a percentage of net profit continue to be well above 100% and 106% for FY26 and 111% for Q4. We had a strong large yield win in financial year with a TCV of $15 billion with 55% net new. Large yield pipeline continues to remain strong. Our $50 million-plus clients increased by three and $100 million plus clients also increased by three, $400 million by two in financial year last year.

扣除勞動法規與所得稅退稅影響後的自由現金流，全年為 35 億美元，第四季為 8.82 億美元。自由現金流占淨利比重持續高於 100%，2026 財年為 106%，第四季為 111%。本財年我們取得強勁的大型交易勝利，TCV（合約總價值）達 150 億美元，其中 55% 為淨新增（net new）。大型交易管線仍維持強勁。我們 5,000 萬美元以上客戶增加 3 家，1 億美元以上客戶也增加 3 家，4 億美元以上客戶增加 2 家（相較上一財年）。

At the end of the year was over 328,000. Voluntary attrition reduced by 1.5% to 12.6% for the year, reflecting continuous and interventions toward talent retention. We onboarded more than 20,000 freshers in FY26 and expect to hire a similar number in FY27. We will continue to calibrate the overall requirement depending on growth expectations and attrition trends.

年末員工總數超過 328,000 人。全年自願離職率下降 1.5% 至 12.6%，反映我們持續推動的人才留任措施與介入。我們在 2026 財年招募超過 20,000 名應屆畢業生，並預期在 2027 財年招募相近人數。我們將依成長預期與離職趨勢，持續校準整體人力需求。

Operating margins for Q4 declined by 0.3% to 20.9% sequentially. Major components of the changes are as below: headwinds of 50 basis points impact from past acquisition on account of additional amortization of intangibles, 30 basis points for normalization of last quarter's one-off gain, 20 basis points from compensation-related costs offset by lower variable pay.

第四季營業利益率季比下降 0.3% 至 20.9%。變動的主要構成如下：不利因素包括，因無形資產攤銷增加，過往併購帶來 50 個基點的影響；上季一次性收益回歸常態帶來 30 個基點；以及薪酬相關成本帶來 20 個基點的影響，但部分被較低的變動薪酬所抵銷。

This is partially offset by tailwinds of 40 basis points for currency and 30 basis points for maximum comprising of value-based selling, lien, and automation in critical portfolios. Q4 yield on cash and investments balance was at 6.2% and 6.7% for the year. ROE stood at 31.6%. Consolidated cash and investments were at $4.5 billion after returning over $4 billion to shareholders in FY26, reflecting a strong cash generation.

這部分被順風因素部分抵銷：匯率帶來40個基點，以及最高30個基點（由價值導向銷售、留置權（lien）與關鍵投資組合中的自動化所構成）。第四季現金與投資餘額的收益率為6.2%，全年為6.7%。股東權益報酬率（ROE）為31.6%。在FY26向股東返還超過40億美元後，合併現金與投資為45億美元，反映出強勁的現金創造能力。

We signed 19 large deals during the quarter with TCV of 3.2 billion. This includes five each in financial services and manufacturing, four in retail, two each in life science and communication, and one in EURS. Region wise, we signed 11 deals in Europe, five in America, and three in the rest of the world.

本季我們簽署了19筆大型交易，TCV為32億。其包括：金融服務5筆、製造業5筆、零售4筆、生命科學2筆、通訊2筆，以及EURS 1筆。按區域劃分，我們在歐洲簽署11筆、美洲5筆、世界其他地區3筆。

In FY26, we signed 96 large deals with a TCV of $15 billion, 55% net new. This includes three mega deals for the year. Tax rate for the quarter is lower due to reversal of prior tax provisions as a result of favorable tax orders. We expect effective tax rates for the financial year '27 to be in the range of 29% to 30%.

FY26我們簽署了96筆大型交易，TCV為150億美元，其中55%為淨新增。全年包含3筆超大型交易。本季稅率較低，係因先前稅務準備在有利稅務裁定下回轉所致。我們預期FY27的有效稅率將落在29%至30%之間。

In line with our capital allocation policy, Board has proposed a final dividend of INR25 per share, which will result in a total dividend of INR48 per share, an increase of 11.6% over last year, once the final dividend is approved by the shareholders. Coming to verticals, financial services for FY26 grew above company average at 4.4%, led by ramp ups of large deal wins and continued momentum in AI-led transformation, legacy modernization, and vendor consolidation. Overall market sentiment remains positive, resulting in continued consumer spending across US banking, capital markets, and Europe.

依據我們的資本配置政策，董事會已提議每股INR25的期末股利；待股東核准期末股利後，全年股利合計將達每股INR48，較去年增加11.6%。就垂直產業而言，FY26金融服務成長4.4%，高於公司平均，主要受大型交易得標後的放量，以及AI驅動轉型、舊系統現代化與供應商整併的持續動能帶動。整體市場情緒仍偏正向，使美國銀行、資本市場與歐洲的消費支出得以延續。

CY26 budgets are expected to grow in US. We signed a large GCC deal for a regional bank in the US, an industry-first and a large AI-first GCC deal. We are a strategic AI partner for 18 out of the top 20 clients in this vertical, significant large deal closures, and a new account opening in FY26, along with a strong large deal pipeline will drive growth acceleration in FY27.

預期CY26美國預算將成長。我們為美國一家區域性銀行簽署了一筆大型GCC交易，屬於業界首創且為大型「AI優先」GCC交易。在此垂直領域的前20大客戶中，我們有18家是其策略性AI合作夥伴；再加上FY26多筆重大大型交易結案與新增客戶開戶，以及強勁的大型交易管線，將推動FY27成長加速。

Clients in manufacturing remain cautious amid softer demand, particularly in automotive and parts of Europe. There is continued uncertainty on account of tariffs and ongoing Middle East conflict, which is resulting into delayed decision making in pockets. Discretionary spending remains constrained, while clients prioritize yield cost optimization and operational resilience. Large yield pipeline comprises of infra-outsourcing, AMS, S/4HANA rollouts, et cetera. Near-term and FY27 growth will be impacted due to low revenue from one large client.

在需求轉弱下，製造業客戶仍保持審慎，尤其是汽車產業與歐洲部分地區。關稅與中東衝突持續帶來不確定性，導致部分領域決策延後。非必要支出仍受限，客戶優先聚焦於收益/成本最佳化與營運韌性。大型收益管線包含基礎設施外包、AMS、S/4HANA上線等。由於某一大型客戶的營收偏低，短期及FY27成長將受到影響。

Across EURS segment, demand environment remains constructive, supported by a strong large yield pipeline. Clients continue to prioritize cost reduction and operational efficiency, which is a driving vendor consolidation. In energy, we see increased outsourcing leading to healthy yield momentum. Utilities demand is structurally higher driven by grid constraints, renewable integrations, and acceleration electricity needs for data centers. 80% of the large TCV of FY26 was net new, which will help growth in acceleration in FY27.

在EURS分部，需求環境仍具建設性，並由強勁的大型收益管線支撐。客戶持續優先推動降本與營運效率，進而帶動供應商整併。在能源領域，我們看到外包增加，帶來健康的收益動能。公用事業需求在結構上更高，主因包括電網限制、再生能源併網，以及資料中心帶動的用電需求加速。FY26大型TCV中有80%為淨新增，將有助於FY27成長加速。

In retail segments, clients are operating in continued uncertainty from supply chain disruptions, geopolitical conflict, and shifting trade policy. consumer demand remains muted across the sector, and budgets are tightly controlled with discretionary spend under pressure. Clients expect saving from AI-led productivity to do more with a similar budget. We will see higher demand for AI-assisted legacy modernization. Topaz Fabric and AI Next platforms are helping clients in ideation from concept to deployable state with the right coverage for privacy, ethics, and control.

在零售領域，客戶仍面臨供應鏈中斷、地緣政治衝突與貿易政策變動所帶來的持續不確定性。全產業消費需求仍偏疲弱，預算嚴格控管，非必要支出承壓。客戶期望透過AI驅動的生產力節省，在相近預算下完成更多工作。我們將看到AI輔助的舊系統現代化需求提升。Topaz Fabric與AI Next平台正協助客戶從概念發想走到可部署狀態，並提供適當的隱私、倫理與控管覆蓋。

In communication sectors, growth for FY26 was led by large deal ramp ups. Overall environment remains cautious amid macro uncertainty and margin pressures for clients. Budgets are flat to negative, which is impacting discretionary spend. Non-discretionary spends are selective and increasingly AI led. There is a shift from generative to agentic AI with clients consolidating IT and BPM cuts We see a strong uptick in AI deals in areas like IT operations, software replacement, and mainframe migration.

在通訊產業，FY26的成長主要由大型交易放量帶動。整體環境在宏觀不確定性與客戶利潤率壓力下仍偏審慎。預算持平至下滑，影響非必要支出。必要性支出則更具選擇性，且日益由AI驅動。客戶正從生成式AI轉向代理式（agentic）AI，同時整併IT與BPM削減。我們看到AI交易在IT營運、軟體替換與大型主機遷移等領域明顯升溫。

As we enter FY27, we continue to see a measured and selective approach to enterprise budgets amid macro and geopolitical uncertainties, higher interest rates, rapid technology shifts, and high competitive intensity. We expect FY27 growth to be 1.5% to 3.5% in constant currency terms. The FY27 guidance includes contributions from Stratus, which we closed earlier this week but excludes Versent JV and Optimum Healthcare acquisitions that are yet to be closed.

進入FY27之際，在宏觀與地緣政治不確定性、較高利率、技術快速變化以及高度競爭強度下，我們仍看到企業預算採取審慎且選擇性的方式。我們預期FY27以固定匯率計的成長為1.5%至3.5%。FY27指引包含Stratus的貢獻（我們於本週稍早完成交割），但不包含尚未完成交割的Versent合資（JV）與Optimum Healthcare收購案。

Reduction of 0.75% to 1% due to a lower revenue from one of our large European manufacturing clients. This was due to reduced client spend on account of challenging macro environment, along with our conscious decision to not pursue a certain deal that was not aligned to our return expectation. Further reduction in onset mixed by 0.75% to 1%. We expect third-party costs for FY27 to remain at similar levels as FY26.

由於我們某家歐洲大型製造業客戶的營收較低，將造成0.75%至1%的下修。原因在於宏觀環境具挑戰，客戶支出縮減；同時我們也有意識地決定不追求某筆不符合我們報酬預期的交易。此外，組合（mix）變動將再帶來0.75%至1%的下修。我們預期FY27的第三方成本將維持在與FY26相近的水準。

Our operating margins guidance for the year is 20% to 22%. This assumes headwinds from wage hikes, productivity pass-throughs, and AI investments offset by initiative under Project Maximus. The impact of Optimum Healthcare strategy and Versent on operating margin will be approximately 0.7% on a full-year annualized basis post closure.

我們對全年營業利益率的指引為20%至22%。此假設薪資調升、生產力讓利（pass-through）與AI投資帶來的逆風，將由Project Maximus下的各項措施所抵銷。Optimum Healthcare策略與Versent對營業利益率的影響，在交割後以全年年化基礎計，約為0.7%。

With that, we can open up for the questions.

接下來我們開放提問。

(Operator Instructions) Yogesh Aggarwal, HSBC Securities.

（接線員指示）HSBC Securities的Yogesh Aggarwal。

Yes, hi, just a couple of questions. Firstly, Salil, can you talk about the push-pulls for the guidance, like at the lower end, at the upper end, what are you assuming? And secondly, you guys had a very successful project, Maximus. The quality of business, the revenues has also improved. But the entire INR depreciation, which is very significant, has not impacted the margin outlook. So I was just curious which are the areas where all the INR depreciation has been invested and if you can talk a little bit about that. Thank you.

是的，你好，我有兩個問題。第一，Salil，你能談談指引的拉鋸因素嗎？例如在下緣、上緣各自假設了什麼？第二，你們的Maximus專案非常成功，業務品質與營收也有所改善。但整體INR貶值幅度很大，卻沒有影響到利潤率展望。我想了解INR貶值帶來的效益主要投資到哪些領域，能否稍微說明一下？謝謝。

Hello, Yogesh. This is Jayesh here. At the lower end of the guidance, we have assumed higher deterioration in the environment. And at the upper end, we have assumed improved environment, similar to what we've done in the last year as well.

你好，Yogesh。我是Jayesh。在指引下緣，我們假設外部環境惡化幅度更大；在指引上緣，我們假設環境改善，與我們去年採用的方式類似。

In terms of margin walk, I did give you a broad margin walk. But largely, we have invested all the benefits that we got from rupee as well as from Maximus back into the business, whether it is station marketing costs, which has gone up by 40 basis points on a full-year basis, the AI talent, and the AI partnerships, et cetera, that we have. So I think all of that has been absorbed in the margin in the financial year.

就利潤率橋接（margin walk）而言，我先前已給過你一個大致的拆解。但整體來說，我們把從盧比以及Maximus所獲得的效益幾乎都再投資回業務中，不論是品牌/行銷成本（全年基礎上升40個基點）、AI人才、AI合作夥伴等。因此我認為這些都已在本財年的利潤率中被吸收。

And just a quick follow up. You mentioned productivity pass-through impacted margins. I was just wondering why should that be the case if there was productivity improvement.

再追問一下。你提到生產力讓利（pass-through）影響了利潤率。我在想，如果生產力提升了，為什麼會出現這種情況？

So Yogesh, market is competitive, right? As I said, the competitive intensity in the market has gone up and the productivity will get passed back to the client last week.

Yogesh，市場競爭激烈，對吧？如我所說，市場競爭強度上升，而生產力提升的成果會回饋（pass back）給客戶。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Ankur Rudra, JPMorgan.

JPMorgan的Ankur Rudra。

Thank you. I notice you've chosen to guide in a 200-basis-point band versus a slightly wider band in the last couple of years. Is your visibility better this year versus the last few years? And furthermore, if you can dig a bit more into the guidance as a follow up to the previous question, the guiding for a 2.25% organic at the midpoint approximately, which appears to be a bit of a slowdown versus the 2.5% or 2.4% organic in fiscal 26. Can you maybe talk about what are the puts and takes of the outlook and if you can especially elaborate on if the slowdown is because of A, demand environment; B, structural AI deflation; or C, the impact from that one large account which is ramping down this year. Thank you.

謝謝。我注意到你們這次選擇提供200個基點的指引區間，而過去幾年區間稍微更寬。今年相較過去幾年，你們的能見度是否更好？另外，作為對前一題的延伸，如果能再深入說明指引：以中位數來看，你們大約指引2.25%的有機成長，似乎較FY26的2.5%或2.4%有機成長略為放緩。能否談談展望中的拉鋸因素？並特別說明放緩是否主要來自A：需求環境；B：AI結構性通縮；或C：今年某一大型客戶縮量（ramping down）的影響。謝謝。

Yes, so, Yogesh, if you -- sorry, Ankur. If you look at the guidance last year, we gave a 3-point guidance because the whole environment changed pretty much very close to the time when we were giving guidance, right? And we had no -- we had very little clarity in terms of how that environment change because of on the back of tariffs, tariff changes is going to impact the client behavior, et cetera.

是的，所以，Yogesh——抱歉，Ankur。你如果看去年的指引，我們給的是3個百分點的區間，因為整體環境在我們給出指引的時間點附近發生了很大變化，對吧？而且我們對於那次環境變化——主要是關稅、關稅變動——將如何影響客戶行為等方面，當時幾乎沒有、或只有非常有限的清晰度。

Where we stand today, I think there's a better clarity in terms of what happened. The environment has been like this for last few quarters. And we know how clients are behaving at this point, at least at this point in time. Of course, if things change, the client behavior will change, that's given always. But at this point in time, from a comparative perspective, we have a better clarity and better handle versus the last year.

就我們今天所處的位置而言，我認為對於發生了什麼事情，已經有更清晰的認識。過去幾個季度的環境一直如此。而且我們也知道客戶在此刻的行為方式，至少在目前這個時間點是這樣。當然，如果情況改變，客戶行為也會改變，這一點一向如此。但就目前而言，從比較的角度來看，相較於去年，我們有更清楚的掌握與更好的掌控。

So with the construction of the guidance, what we are seeing positive, where the changes are, Jayesh mentioned many of those points. I'll elaborate. We are seeing the growth on AI services. We are seeing very good traction on that. We've started a program where we are working with large companies with a smaller footprint that Infosys has. We're expanding that quite nicely. Then we saw the last deal with the net new was 55%, so that will contribute for this financial year in a significant way.

因此，在指引的建構上，我們看到的正面因素、以及變化發生在哪裡，Jayesh 已提到其中許多點。我再補充說明。我們看到 AI 服務的成長，且在這方面有非常好的動能。我們已啟動一個計畫，與大型公司合作，而這些公司在 Infosys 的既有版圖中覆蓋較小；我們正在相當順利地擴展。接著，我們看到上一筆交易中，淨新增（net new）占比為 55%，因此這將在本財年以顯著方式做出貢獻。

And then, on the other hand, there is the productivity benefits that are coming through, which the clients are looking for with AI on the existing portfolios. Then Jayesh shared a couple of situations with manufacturing, Europe with onsite mix, sort of some technical factors. So those, if I sort of add and subtract, is where we came on that guidance. The environment I find is good. Our large deal pipeline is good.

另一方面，還有正在顯現的生產力效益，這是客戶在既有投資組合上透過 AI 所尋求的。接著 Jayesh 也分享了幾個情境，包含製造業、歐洲的 onsite mix，以及一些技術性因素。因此，如果我把這些因素加加減減，這就是我們得出該指引的原因。我認為環境是好的。我們的大型交易管線也很不錯。

The way we had done it on that AI Investor Day, we had sort of said, look, there's a growth side with what will be the AI. We have a couple of other growth drivers, and then there's a compression side, and that's the balance that we are seeing. In the past year, with 3.1%, and if you adjust for the one-timers, the one time from the prior year, we had a growth rate which was more than the compression we were seeing. And this coming year, the guidance that we have started with also sees that. And then we'll see, as Jayesh said, on the environment, how it changes, improving or not improving, and then see how the year goes after that.

在那次 AI 投資人日（AI Investor Day）上，我們的說法大致是：看，AI 會帶來一個成長面；我們還有幾個其他的成長驅動因素；同時也有一個壓縮面（compression side），而我們看到的就是這兩者之間的平衡。過去一年是 3.1%，如果你把一次性因素（one-timers）調整掉、也把前一年的一次性因素調整掉，我們的成長率其實高於我們所看到的壓縮。而接下來這一年，我們起始給出的指引也反映了同樣的情況。然後我們會如 Jayesh 所說，觀察環境如何變化，是改善或未改善，再看這一年後續的走勢。

Thank you for the elaboration, Salil. If I could just -- a quick follow up. What would need to happen for you to see an acceleration at the midpoint on an organic basis? Thank you.

謝謝你的補充說明，Salil。我想再快速追問一下：要發生什麼情況，你們才會在有機（organic）基礎上看到指引中點（midpoint）的加速？謝謝。

These are things which are always more difficult to estimate, as you know well, Ankur, on. However, the view emerging is that the situation in the Middle East may find some sort of a good out resolution. Then the underlying economic strengths are pretty good in the markets where we are large, so that could give sort of rise to a more stable macro environment.

如你所知，Ankur，這些事情一向更難估計。不過，目前浮現的看法是，中東的情勢可能會出現某種良好的解決結果。再者，在我們占比較大的市場中，底層的經濟韌性相當不錯，因此這可能帶來較為穩定的總體環境。

Our AI traction and partnerships are good. So if those things, the first and the second accelerate, then we will see some good outcomes. But it's more of going in. We see the environment today. It's not -- we've not seen some big change to give us a view that we have to do a 3-point range and so on at this stage. And overall, we see growth, which is more than compression.

我們在 AI 的動能與合作夥伴關係方面表現良好。因此，如果第一點與第二點加速，我們就會看到不錯的結果。但這更像是進入年度時的觀察：我們看到今天的環境。現階段我們尚未看到足夠大的變化，讓我們必須在此時就做出 3 個百分點區間之類的判斷。整體而言，我們看到的成長仍高於壓縮。

Appreciate it, thank you.

了解，謝謝。

Bryan Bergin, TD Cowen.

TD Cowen 的 Bryan Bergin。

Hi, thank you. I wanted to ask on the AI productivity that you're seeing here. So with the AI model advances happening as fast as they are, has the amount of productivity during compression that you're seeing changed in the current contracts relative to what you may have been seeing, say, one or two quarters ago? And can you mention maybe the mix of the business that is directly exposed to the productivity pass-throughs versus maybe the mix of the business that is more insulated?

嗨，謝謝。我想問你們目前看到的 AI 生產力。由於 AI 模型的進展速度非常快，相較於例如一到兩個季度前，你們在現有合約中看到的生產力所帶來的壓縮幅度，是否有所改變？另外，你能否談談業務組合中，直接暴露於生產力傳導（pass-through）的部分，與相對較具隔離性（more insulated）的部分，各自大概的占比？

So on the first one, the models and the technology is moving with great innovation. We have not seen in one or two quarters the change that you referenced, though what we are seeing is the competitive intensity is pretty high. So every now and then, we see a competitor doing something which looks outside the range of what we think the models can do today.

先回答第一個問題，模型與技術正以高度創新快速演進。我們在你提到的一到兩個季度內，尚未看到那種變化；不過我們看到的是競爭強度相當高。因此，我們偶爾會看到競爭對手做出一些事情，看起來超出了我們認為目前模型能力所能達到的範圍。

So that sort of thing we do see, but not just the tech in its last two quarters; meaning over the last two years, of course, there have been changes. In the terms of exposed, I think we have not shared that data. But I think we've shared very clearly what our service line data is, and you can make some estimates with that, I think.

這類情況我們確實會看到，但不只是最近兩個季度的技術變化；也就是說，若看過去兩年，當然是有變化的。至於暴露程度，我想我們沒有分享過那個數據。但我認為我們已非常清楚地分享了各服務線（service line）的數據，你應該可以據此做一些估算。

Okay. And then my follow up is on kind of how you're thinking about the overall business and headcount. Hiring extensions for fiscal '27, I think I heard you say roughly targeting the fresher target of around 20,000 again. But do you envision a scenario where I guess the total headcount could ultimately be down in total when the year is over? And also, if you can help talk about the subcontractor intensity that you're anticipating in the year ahead.

好的。那我的追問是關於你們如何看待整體業務與人力。針對 2027 財年（fiscal '27）的招募規劃，我想我聽到你說大致仍以約 20,000 名新鮮人為目標。但你是否設想一種情境：也就是到年度結束時，總人數可能最終會下降？另外，也請你談談你們對未來一年分包商（subcontractor）使用強度的預期。

So on the overall headcount, first, as you pointed out, we will recruit 20,000 college graduates. That's our plan today. We have a model which does some of it at one particular time and the rest of it throughout the year. So we have a variability built in if we see some changes. But what we see today, we think 20,000 looks like a good place to start.

關於整體人力，首先如你所說，我們會招募 20,000 名大學畢業生。這是我們目前的計畫。我們有一個模式：部分會在某個特定時間點完成，其餘則分散在全年進行。因此，如果我們看到一些變化，這裡面是有可變動性的。但以我們今天所看到的情況，我們認為以 20,000 作為起點是個不錯的位置。

We still have, at least now by look out for this quarter and next quarter, very good demand for people which are coming at higher levels, lateral recruitment. So I think that will continue. I don't see that our headcount is going to be -- we don't have a plan that the headcount will be less at the end of the year. Now we'll see how the demand environment plays out, but it's not the going in sort of a view that we have. Of course, we have -- we basically look at Q1, Q2, and the rest we build out on the models we have. Subcons?

此外，至少就目前對本季與下季的展望而言，我們對較高職級的人才需求仍然非常好，也就是橫向招募（lateral recruitment）。我認為這會持續。我不認為我們的人數會——我們並沒有一個計畫是讓年底的人數更少。當然，我們會看需求環境如何發展，但這不是我們進入年度時的基本看法。當然，我們——基本上我們會看 Q1、Q2，其餘部分則依據我們的模型來建構。分包商（Subcons）？

Yes, and then the subcons, Bryan, if you look at the last few years our subcon as a percentage of revenue has come down. Obviously, it's also a factor of degrowth. So typically, we use subcons to meet the demand, which comes in immediately. We don't have the requirement skills, et cetera, and then we backfill that to the employees, and that's a cycle that goes on. So we don't really expect subcons to significantly change from those numbers. Over a medium-term period, we expect to maybe go towards the lower end -- I mean, to slightly go down from the current level. But at this point in time, not significantly change.

是的，至於分包商（subcons），Bryan，如果你看過去幾年，我們的分包商占營收比重已經下降。當然，這也受到負成長（degrowth）的影響。一般而言，我們使用分包商是為了滿足立即到來的需求——當下我們缺乏所需技能等——然後再由員工補上（backfill），這是一個持續循環的過程。因此，我們不預期分包商會相較目前數字出現顯著變化。以中期來看，我們可能會往較低端靠攏——也就是從目前水準略為下降。但就此刻而言，不會有顯著改變。

Okay. That's all. Thank you very much.

好的。就這些。非常感謝。

Gaurav Rateria, Morgan Stanley.

Morgan Stanley 的 Gaurav Rateria。

Hi, thank you for taking my question. My first question is on the construct of growth. When I look at that, there are broadly three factors that come to my mind. The first is the macro. Compared to last year, it appears that the headwinds related to tariff, et cetera, are not there. So there is slight improvement, which is reflected in 40% of your portfolio that you talked about.

嗨，謝謝讓我提問。我第一個問題是關於成長的構成。當我看這件事時，大致有三個因素浮現在我腦中。第一是總體環境。相較於去年，看起來與關稅等相關的逆風已不在，因此有些微改善，這也反映在你提到的占你們投資組合 40% 的部分。

The second factor is AI services, which probably has become larger than the last year and growing faster, which again is a tailwind. And the last factor could be the deflationary impact on existing business on account of productivity savings. So the fundamental question is that the first two tailwinds look better than last year, and the growth rates in organic terms does not look better at the midpoint of guide. Is it that the deflationary impact assumed in your guidance at the midpoint is slightly higher than what you have seen in the last year?

第二個因素是 AI 服務，這部分可能已比去年更大、且成長更快，這同樣是順風。最後一個因素可能是既有業務因生產力節省而帶來的通縮性影響。因此，根本問題是：前兩個順風看起來都比去年更好，但在指引中點的有機成長率看起來並沒有更好。是否代表你們在中點指引中假設的通縮性影響，略高於你們去年所看到的水準？

Hi, Gaurav. This is Salil. I think what you described is the way it starts off, which is we see very strong activity on AI services. On the macro, as the year progressed last year, the situation of the tariff got better and better understood, as you know. Then when the war started, that again had a little bit of a constraining effect on the macro. There's a general view that there's coming to a resolution, but it has not happened. So while some of the economic indicators are forecasted in a better way, it's not yet into the system in that sense. We'll see when it actually comes in.

嗨，Gaurav。我是 Salil。我認為你描述的就是它一開始的樣子：我們看到 AI 服務非常強勁的活動。在總體面上，去年隨著年度推進，關稅的情況如你所知被愈來愈清楚地理解。接著當戰爭開始時，又對總體環境帶來了一些限制性的影響。普遍看法是情勢正走向解決，但尚未發生。因此，雖然部分經濟指標的預測更為正面，但在這個意義上，它還沒有真正進入系統。我們會看它何時實際反映出來。

Then if you look at the couple of things that Jayesh shared on the specific, on the manufacturing Europe, on the specific, on the on-site mix -- when you put all that together, we see actually something which looks stronger in that sense to what we saw last year. Now the compression is definitely there, but it's not -- I don't know if I have a sense that it's more than last year. We are definitely seeing the compression, but we're also seeing the growth, and that's how we are sort of sort of dissecting it, if you will. Jayesh, you might have something to add.

然後，如果你看一下 Jayesh 在幾個具體面向分享的內容——在歐洲製造業、在具體的、在現場（on-site）組合（mix）——把這些全部放在一起看，我們其實看到的是某種在這個意義上看起來比去年更強的情況。現在，壓縮（compression）確實存在，但它並不是——我不知道我是否覺得它比去年更嚴重。我們確實看到壓縮，但我們也看到成長，而這就是我們某種程度上在拆解它的方式（如果你願意這麼說）。Jayesh，你可能還有補充。

So Gaurav, maybe a couple of points in addition to what Salil said. If you look at last year, we started with zero to 3%. And as the visibility improved, every quarter we either tightened the band or improved the guide from where we are. The idea of guidance is to reduce our symmetry and provide a view as to what we see today, and this is what we see today.

所以 Gaurav，除了 Salil 說的之外，我再補充幾點。如果你看去年，我們一開始的指引是 0% 到 3%。隨著能見度改善，每一季我們不是收窄區間，就是在原本的基礎上上調指引。指引的目的，是降低我們的對稱性（symmetry）並提供我們對當下所見的觀點，而這就是我們今天所看到的。

We do have a client in manufacturing in Europe where we have stayed away from a deal where it did not meet our return estimation. There's some ramp downs on that client happening because the client is going through a challenging macro environment.

我們在歐洲製造業有一個客戶，我們選擇避開了一筆交易，因為它不符合我們對報酬的估算。該客戶因為正面臨具挑戰性的總體環境，今年也正在發生一些縮減（ramp downs）。

So that is baked in. We have also baked in the on-site mix that will impact in the guidance. The exit trajectory of on-site mix is already pretty much 40 to 50 basis points from the future-year perspective. So that is baked in in the guidance already. And the resultant is 1.5% to 3.5% guidance that we have announced. Of course, if the visibility improves as we go through the year, we will re-route out the guidance.

所以這些都已經納入考量。我們也把會影響指引的現場（on-site）組合納入了。從未來年度的角度看，現場組合的期末（exit）走勢已經大致反映了 40 到 50 個基點。因此，這也已經包含在指引之中。最終我們公布的指引是 1.5% 到 3.5%。當然，如果我們在今年進行過程中能見度提升，我們會重新調整指引。

Thank you for the detailed answer. The second question is on the new AI services. Would it be fair to say they come at relatively higher revenue productivity than the core business and also better gross margins or not? Lastly, Jayesh, any color on when would the wage hike cycle kick in during the current financial year? Thank you.

謝謝你詳細的回答。第二個問題是關於新的 AI 服務。是否可以說，與核心業務相比，它們的營收生產力相對更高，且毛利率也更好，還是不是？最後，Jayesh，能否談談本財年加薪週期大概何時會啟動？謝謝。

So Gaurav, generally, the AI projects come at a better pricing; and therefore, it reflects in a better margin. Of course, it also has a higher cost compared to the regular projects because the talent is a premium talent at this point in time, right? So it's always a factor of how much ahead of the curve you are in terms of benchmark.

所以 Gaurav，一般來說，AI 專案的定價會更好；因此會反映在更好的利潤率上。當然，與一般專案相比，它的成本也更高，因為目前這類人才屬於高端稀缺人才（premium talent），對吧？所以這總是取決於你在基準（benchmark）上領先多少。

That's what will define the premium that you will get in the market. If you are at the benchmark level, you wouldn't get a premium. If you are ahead of the curve, you do get a premium. And at this point in time, if you look at the numbers in terms of deals that we are winning, we have won $15 billion deals. That kind of talks about our positioning in the market.

這將決定你在市場上能拿到多少溢價。如果你只是處在基準水準，你就拿不到溢價；如果你領先於曲線（ahead of the curve），你就能拿到溢價。而在目前這個時間點，如果你看我們贏得的交易數字，我們已經贏得了 150 億美元的交易。這某種程度上說明了我們在市場上的定位。

You did see on the AI Day everything that we presented in terms of our capabilities and what clients are saying in terms of our AI capabilities. So I think that kind of gives us the comfort and confidence that we are in the right direction, and it's also reflected in the pricing and the margins on the AI Day.

你在 AI Day 上也看到了我們所展示的所有能力，以及客戶對我們 AI 能力的評價。所以我認為，這讓我們更安心、更有信心我們走在正確方向上，而這也反映在 AI Day 所呈現的定價與利潤率上。

In terms of wage increases, we haven't really decided the timing at this point in time. We do take multiple factors when we decide that in terms of the level of attrition that we have when did we do the last wage increases, what the market scenario was, the inflation, et cetera. We will take all of those decisions into consideration and decide.

至於加薪，我們目前還沒有決定時間點。我們在做決定時會考量多個因素，例如我們的離職率水準、上一次加薪是在何時、市場情況、通膨等等。我們會把所有這些因素納入考量後再做決定。

Thank you and all the very best.

謝謝，祝一切順利。

Sumeet Jain, CLSA India.

Sumeet Jain，CLSA India。

Yes, thanks for the opportunity. So Salil, firstly, wanted to check in the last two months with the latest launch of Anthropic models, have you seen increased productivity demand from the clients? I mean, you mentioned in the press conference that nothing material has changed in the last three months. Can you just specify what kind of client conversations are you happening around productivity?

是的，謝謝給我提問的機會。Salil，首先想確認一下，過去兩個月隨著 Anthropic 模型的最新發布，你是否看到客戶對提升生產力的需求增加？我的意思是，你在記者會上提到過去三個月沒有任何重大變化。你能否具體說明一下，你們與客戶圍繞生產力正在進行哪些對話？

So there, the sense I have is the need for productivity is similar. There is some level of competitive intensity, which is higher, which then leads to more sort of demand. There are some cases where it's way outside the bound, where there is not a lot of engagement, meaning that is something which we don't see a way of getting to, so we are not going down those paths.

在這方面，我的感覺是，對生產力的需求是相似的。競爭強度在某種程度上更高，進而帶來更多這類需求。有些情況會遠遠超出合理範圍，幾乎沒有太多互動，意思是我們看不到能達成的方式，所以我們不會走那條路。

But those are very in frequency. But look at the vast majority we see, not just like something is complete. Big changes has come literally in the last two months or so at this stage. Now things are moving fast, productivity over time, which is over multiple quarters, year -- that has changed. But it's not that something suddenly is like a step change in the last two months that we've seen.

但那種情況發生頻率很低。就我們看到的絕大多數而言，並不是說在過去兩個月左右突然出現了巨大的變化。當然，隨著時間推移——跨越多個季度、甚至一年——生產力確實在變化。但我們並沒有看到在過去兩個月突然出現某種階躍式（step change）的變化。

And can you also help throw some light in the new deals, what you have signed? I mean, are the productivity levels with usage of AI tools similar to what you are in a way passing on in the existing business? Can you give some -- because order book looks pretty strong on a Y-o-Y basis for the full year.

另外，你也能否幫我們說明一下你們簽下的新交易？我的意思是，在新交易中，使用 AI 工具所帶來的生產力水準，是否與你們在現有業務中某種程度上正在轉嫁（passing on）的水準相近？你能否提供一些——因為從全年來看，訂單簿（order book）在年對年基礎上看起來相當強勁。

But that is not translating into your improved organic growth in FY27. So is it like the base business is seeing a much higher deflation than what each one of us were expecting? And with the improvement in AI models, can it actually further accelerate in the coming quarters? So can you throw some light as to how you are seeing the market?

但這並沒有轉化為你們 FY27 有機成長的改善。所以是否是基礎業務正在出現比我們每個人預期更高的通縮（deflation）？而隨著 AI 模型的改善，是否可能在未來幾季進一步加速？所以你能否說明一下你們如何看待市場？

So there, I mean, we are not, let's say, sharing the specifics on what we are seeing in the portfolio in the growth compression side as opposed to what we've shared, which is our overall guidance, with some of the points that Jayesh mentioned, the onsite mix, the manufacturing, et cetera.

在這方面，我們不會分享例如我們在投資組合中看到的、成長壓縮（growth compression）那一側的具體細節，超出我們已經分享的內容——也就是我們的整體指引，以及 Jayesh 提到的一些要點，例如現場組合、製造業等等。

So I think we see with that a solid growth outlook where we're keeping pace, making sure that what we're seeing in the AI services growth, some of the other areas of growth that we see is growth, which then manages the compression that we see on some of the other parts of our business. So we don't have a way of sharing that this is the compression, this is the gross growth, and then this is the net sort of a growth, if you will.

所以我認為，基於這些，我們看到的是穩健的成長展望；我們會保持步調，確保我們在 AI 服務成長以及其他一些我們看到的成長領域所帶來的成長，能夠去管理我們在業務其他部分看到的壓縮。因此，我們沒有辦法以「這是壓縮、這是總成長、然後這是淨成長」這樣的方式來分享。

No, got it. Got it. I think that's always a difficult thing to quantify, but also if you can just flag in terms of any quantification you can give the impact of the European manufacturing client, sort of ramped down or maybe some competition kicking in there. And I guess, Jayesh, you also mentioned that the shift to more offshore will have a 40% to 50% impact in FY27. And I guess there were some articles around Vanguard in sourcing. So if you can quantify these three things, how much is the impact on your guidance in this year?

了解，了解。我想這確實一直很難量化。不過如果可以的話，能否就歐洲製造業客戶的影響做一些量化，例如該客戶的縮減（ramp down）或那裡可能出現的競爭加劇。另外，Jayesh，你也提到轉向更多離岸（offshore）將在 FY27 產生 40% 到 50% 的影響。我也看到一些關於 Vanguard 採購（sourcing）的文章。如果你能把這三件事量化一下：它們對你們今年指引的影響各有多大？

If you look at what I said earlier, one-person impact, 75 bps to 1% impact will come from the European client, which is a combination of a deal which does not meet our returns expectation and the ramp-downs in the client through the year as the macro environment is challenging in the sector. So 70 basis points is a reduction in on-site mix we are expecting. 40 to 50 basis points is already visible in the exit trajectory. And we do -- as we see forward, we still believe there'll be even further improvement on the on-site mix. So that will also impact the revenue growth from that perspective.

如果你看我先前說的，歐洲那個客戶會帶來 75 個基點到 1% 的影響，這是由兩部分組成：一是有一筆交易不符合我們的報酬預期；二是隨著該產業總體環境具挑戰性，該客戶在今年內會逐步縮減（ramp-down）。另外，我們預期現場（on-site）組合的降低會帶來 70 個基點的影響。40 到 50 個基點在期末（exit）走勢上已經可見。往前看，我們仍然相信現場組合還會進一步改善，因此從那個角度也會影響營收成長。

Got it. That's very helpful, and all the best. Thank you.

了解。這非常有幫助，祝一切順利。謝謝。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Jonathan Lee, Guggenheim Partners.

Jonathan Lee，Guggenheim Partners。

Great. Thanks for taking my question. Percentage of net new deals came in at the lowest level we've seen in recent years. Can you help unpack whether that's a function or capability set, AI pressure potentially impacting demand environment, or any other factor there? And can you walk us through your expectations for net new deals for the year, given what you're seeing today in the pipeline?

很好，謝謝讓我提問。淨新增交易（net new deals）的占比降到了我們近年來看到的最低水準。你能否協助拆解一下，這是能力組合（capability set）的因素、AI 壓力可能正在影響需求環境，或是其他因素所致？另外，基於你們目前在管線（pipeline）中看到的情況，你能否帶我們了解一下你們對今年淨新增交易的預期？

Jonathan, sorry, can you repeat the question?

Jonathan，抱歉，你可以重複一下問題嗎？

We're seeing percentage of net new deals come in at the lowest level we've seen in recent years. So can you help us unpack whether that's a function of capability set or AI pressure impacting the demand environment or any other factor there? And can you walk us through what you expect for net new deals for the year, given what you're seeing in your pipeline today?

我們看到淨新增交易（net new deals）的占比降到了近年來最低水準。所以你能否協助我們拆解一下，這是否是能力組合的因素，或 AI 壓力正在影響需求環境，或是其他因素？另外，考量你們目前在管線中看到的情況，你能否說明你們對今年淨新增交易的預期？

So Jonathan, if you look at the combination of net new and the renewal, is what percentage of deals are coming in for renewal and what percentage of deals are in the pipeline from net perspective. For the full year, if you look at -- we did sign $15 billion of deals, 96 of them, pretty much 55% net new in that. I think, by any stretch of imagination, that's a strong performance. It's almost 25% growth on a year-on-year basis.

所以 Jonathan，如果你看淨新增與續約的組合，續約進來的案子占比是多少、以及從淨新增角度來看在管線中的案子占比是多少。以全年來看，如果你看——我們確實簽了 150 億美元的合約、共 96 筆，其中大約 55% 是淨新增。我認為，無論怎麼看，這都是很強的表現。年對年幾乎成長 25%。

Got it. And as a follow up, can you help us understand what transpired over the course of the quarter and how that may have tracked relative to your internal expectations? I'm hoping to get a better understanding of when you may have started to see some of the outside of deflationary impact or some of the downtick in revenue realization or any other dynamics at play there.

了解。作為追問，你能否幫我們理解本季期間發生了什麼，以及這相對於你們內部預期的追蹤情況？我希望更清楚地了解，你們何時開始看到一些通縮影響以外的因素，或是營收實現的下滑，或其他在其中發揮作用的動態。

I mean, we don't really give a visibility in terms of what were we setting as goals or looking at plants in terms of net large deals and performance against that. I think, in our view, $3.2 billion is a strong performance. Yes, we do see in some pockets some slower decision making in March. but I don't know if it has got a significant impact on in the large-bill sign-ups. I wouldn't call that at this point.

我的意思是，我們其實不會提供可見度，說我們在淨大型交易的目標設定是什麼，或是相對於該目標的表現。我認為，以我們的觀點，32 億美元是很強的表現。是的，我們確實在某些區塊看到 3 月決策變慢，但我不知道這是否對大型合約簽約有顯著影響。此刻我不會這麼說。

Appreciate the color. Thank you.

感謝補充說明。謝謝。

Vibhor Singhal, Nuvama.

Vibhor Singhal，Nuvama。

Yes, hi. Thanks for taking my question. Two questions from my side. The first question, Salil, is basically on the AI deflation or the compression part that we've been discussing a lot. So just wanted to get some color as to where do you think we are in that revenue deflation cycle?

是的，你好。謝謝讓我提問。我這邊有兩個問題。第一個問題，Salil，主要是關於我們討論很多的 AI 通縮或壓縮。想請你多分享一下，你認為我們目前處於這個營收通縮循環的哪個階段？

So let's say if I were to compare it to the last digital cycle, we had revenue compression, which kept kind of increasing, and then we reached a trough. And from there, basically, that just started coming down; and along with, we had incremental revenue coming from the distilled business. I would assume the cycle should pretty much follow the same order.

如果我把它和上一個數位化循環相比，當時我們有營收壓縮，而且壓縮幅度持續擴大，然後到達谷底。從那裡開始，壓縮基本上就開始下降；同時，我們也從成熟業務帶來增量營收。我會假設這個循環大致會遵循相同的順序。

So while our gen AI revenue -- and which is for the other companies also is reporting very strong growth, the revenue completion continues to be quite substantial at this point of time. So do you think we are already at the trough of that revenue deflation cycle? If not, I mean, I know it's difficult to quantify the timeline.

所以，雖然我們的生成式 AI 營收——其他公司也都在報告非常強勁的成長——但營收壓縮在目前仍然相當顯著。你認為我們已經在這個營收通縮循環的谷底了嗎？如果不是，我知道很難量化時間表。

So basically, are we still awake? Are there more deflation that you think that might come in? Or do you think we are basically done with -- the worst is behind, and the deflation will still continue, but it might be not as much as, let's say, going forward as it was before? And then I have a follow up for Jayesh.

所以基本上，我們還在進行中嗎？你覺得還會有更多通縮出現嗎？或者你認為我們基本上已經度過——最糟的已經過去，通縮仍會持續，但未來可能不會像之前那麼大？然後我還有一個要追問 Jayesh 的問題。

Hi, this is Salil. On that, what we are seeing is there are different sort of dimensions to the compression, meaning we are now working with clients where some of the productivity discussions were baked into the deals over the past year or so. And then you have a multiple-year outlook. So all of that has not happened on the first year. It goes through it.

你好，我是 Salil。關於這點，我們看到壓縮有不同的面向，也就是說，我們現在與客戶合作時，有些生產力的討論在過去一年左右就已經被納入合約中。然後你會有一個多年的展望。所以這些不會在第一年就全部發生，而是會逐步體現。

So the actual compression will be dependent on the mix, first year, second year, and so on. We've not got a sense of where we are on that path, but we have a sense of what the foundation models and other tools are able to sort of support and use that as a basis for what we are doing with forward deals, like three-year, five-year deals and so on.

因此，實際的壓縮會取決於組合，例如第一年、第二年等等。我們對於自己在那條路徑上的位置沒有明確判斷，但我們對於基礎模型與其他工具能夠支援什麼是有感覺的，並以此作為我們推進未來合約（例如三年、五年合約等）的基礎。

But on that sort of a scenario, we don't have a view we can share on where that path is. But we are definitely very clear on where -- when you're working with a foundation model and tools, what is possible, where is it effective. Different models or different tools are more relevant for different parts of the AI work that we are doing with clients. That we are very, I would say, close to.

但在那樣的情境下，我們沒有一個可以分享的觀點來說那條路徑目前在哪裡。不過我們非常清楚的是——當你在使用基礎模型與工具時，什麼是可能的、在哪裡有效。不同模型或不同工具，對我們與客戶進行的 AI 工作的不同部分有不同的相關性。這一點我們可以說掌握得很貼近。

Got it, got it. If I may just extend a bit on that, so let's say the deals that we are signing at this point of time, you mentioned many of them have that productivity benefit already baked in, or let's say built into the original deal.

了解、了解。如果我可以再延伸一下，假設我們現在簽的合約，你提到很多已經把生產力效益烘焙進去，或說已經內建在原始合約裡。

But as the cycle evolves, are we also seeing, let's say, deals which we have signed maybe six months ago or 12 months ago? And there, the client has come back and asked for incremental productivity benefits to be passed. I'm talking about the recent deals, not the early deals. I'm sure the early deals are seeing that kind of a response sometimes. But in these recent deals also, are we seeing that kind of a movement in our conversations?

但隨著循環演進，我們是否也看到，例如我們可能在 6 個月前或 12 個月前簽的合約，客戶回來要求把額外的生產力效益讓利出來？我指的是近期簽的合約，不是早期的合約。我確定早期合約有時會看到那種反應。但在這些近期合約中，我們的對話裡也有看到那樣的變化嗎？

Vibhor, I don't think we have seen scenarios where what we signed a few months back where client has come back and asked us different productivity to be baked in again, what Salil was talking about when a deal comes up for bid or when you're bidding for a new deal.

Vibhor，我不認為我們看到那種情境：我們幾個月前簽的合約，客戶又回來要求我們再把不同的生產力重新納入。Salil 談的是當一個案子重新招標，或你在競標一個新案子時的情況。

Right. Got it, got it. Sure. Just one last question for you, Jayesh. In terms of the margins, I think this quarter had a very good tailwind from depreciation. Now we know that for as long the industry has matured to a state where the rupee depreciation doesn't lead to much of margin expansion over the medium to long term.

好，了解、了解。當然。最後一個問題給你，Jayesh。就毛利率而言，我認為本季因為匯率貶值有很好的順風。現在我們知道，隨著產業成熟到某個程度，盧比貶值在中長期不太會帶來太多毛利率擴張。

But we have generally seen quarterly bump up in margins because of INR depreciation. Has that benefit also kind of stopped trickling in? Because not just for us, but for most of the players in the industry, we're not seeing any kind of a margin expansion. Is it that -- in this quarter specifically, is it that those benefits are being invested somewhere else, or is it that those benefits have stopped accruing at all and those are being passed to the client immediately?

但我們一般確實看到因為印度盧比貶值，毛利率在季度上會有一個小幅上揚。這個好處是否也已經不再逐步反映？因為不只是我們，對產業多數公司來說，我們都沒有看到任何毛利率擴張。是不是——就本季而言，這些好處被投資到其他地方了？還是這些好處根本不再累積，而是立刻就讓利給客戶？

So two points there, because generally, I mean, you do have rupee benefits that sometimes gets offset, or most of the times gets offset by cross-currency headwinds, right? Because when US dollar appreciates, it appreciates against most currencies, and that kind of offsets each other. And your portfolio of non-US, as it grows, that offset becomes larger and larger across us and across the industry; also, you have seen that.

這裡有兩點。一般來說，你確實會有盧比帶來的好處，但有時會被抵消，或多數時候會被交叉貨幣的逆風抵消，對吧？因為當美元升值時，它會對多數貨幣升值，這就會彼此抵消。隨著你非美業務組合成長，這種抵消在我們以及整個產業都會變得越來越大；你也看到過。

I mean, there were times when the US dollar used to be 70-plus percentage, or US used to be 70-, 75-plus percentage. That obviously has gone down significantly; and therefore, the headwinds from the other currencies come in.

我的意思是，曾經有一段時間美元占比是 70% 以上，或美國占比是 70%、75% 以上。那顯然已經大幅下降；因此，其他貨幣帶來的逆風就會出現。

If you look at this quarter, specifically for us, as I called out in the margin walk, there was close to 50 basis points of headwind that we got because of amortization of one of the acquisition-related intangibles. Last quarter, we had a 30-basis-point gain. In a way, these two went into two different directions for us in terms of margin impact -- both became a headwind -- and then 20 basis points on account of employee-related costs. So all of those were headwinds that were offset by 40 basis points from currency and 30 basis points from Maximus.

如果你看本季，特別是對我們而言，正如我在毛利率橋接中提到的，因為攤銷某項併購相關無形資產，我們承受了接近 50 個基點的逆風。上一季我們有 30 個基點的正面貢獻。某種程度上，這兩項對我們的毛利率影響是往兩個不同方向走——但這次兩者都變成逆風——另外還有 20 個基點來自員工相關成本。所以這些都是逆風，然後由匯率帶來的 40 個基點以及 Maximus 帶來的 30 個基點所抵消。

Noted. Thank you so much for taking my questions, and I wish you all the best.

記下了。非常感謝回答我的問題，也祝你們一切順利。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Abhishek Pathak, Motilal Oswal.

Abhishek Pathak，Motilal Oswal。

Yes, yes, hi. Hi, Salil. So I had a question around the deals that we left on the table. We saw similar comment from one of your sort of peers as well. So just curious, what is happening over here? Are we being disrupted by, let's say, sort of more AI-native sort of companies who are pricing their deals very low by the delivery model changing? Or is this a race to the bottom from traditional vendors who are just essentially sort of creating a pricing -- creating irrational pricing? So very curious as to what's happening here.

是、是的，你好。你好，Salil。我有一個問題是關於我們放在桌上沒有拿下的交易。我們也看到你們某位同業有類似的評論。所以想請教，這裡到底發生了什麼？我們是否被例如更 AI 原生的公司所顛覆——他們透過交付模式改變，把價格壓得很低？還是傳統供應商之間在進行一場向下競爭，本質上是在做定價——做出不理性的定價？所以我很好奇這裡發生了什麼。

And over the next two- to three-year period, do you think the industry needs to find newer, leaner models to sort of price their deals? And how much is sort of possible to kind of change over here in the short term. Thank you.

以及在未來兩到三年，你認為產業是否需要找到更新、更精實的模式來為合約定價？短期內在這裡能改變多少？謝謝。

So there, it's not that this is something widely prevalent. We do see sometimes a particular sort of competitor doing pricing, which seems sort of unusual. This is something that's happened over the course of years for different reasons. Just now, it may be linked with the client's mind to AI productivity. In other times, it's got other things. I don't see that it's something which is sort of across everything.

這方面，並不是說這種情況非常普遍。我們確實有時會看到某個特定競爭對手做出看起來有些不尋常的定價。這些年來因為不同原因，這種事都曾發生。只是現在，它可能與客戶對 AI 生產力的想法連結在一起。其他時候，則是因為別的因素。我不認為這是一種全面性的現象。

At the end, we had 96 deals with close to $15 billion in large deals for last year. It's very sort of broad-based, robust outcome. Plus, the pipeline is pretty good. But there are anecdotal things where some of the productivity thing looks out of the range that we see with what's possible with what we have understood with all the foundation models. So it's more that sort of a comment, not -- at least we don't see that as being a sort of trend of some sort.

最後，我們去年共有 96 筆交易，其中大型交易接近 150 億美元。這是一個非常廣泛且穩健的成果。此外，案源管線也相當不錯。不過，也有一些零星的情況顯示，某些生產力相關的表現看起來超出了我們基於各種基礎模型所理解的可行範圍。所以這更像是一個觀察性的評論，而不是——至少我們不認為那會形成某種趨勢。

Understood. Thank you so much. All the best.

了解。非常感謝。祝一切順利。

Keith Bachman, BMO Capital.

Keith Bachman，BMO Capital。

Hi. Thank you very much. I have two questions. The first question is related to pricing. And I wanted to understand the context of how pricing competitiveness has changed. And you started the answer on the last question and really, A, is it more competitive today than it has been over the last couple of years?

嗨，謝謝你。我有兩個問題。第一個問題與定價有關。我想了解定價競爭力變化的背景。你在上一題的回答已經開始提到，A，現在是否比過去幾年更具競爭性？

But B, the spirit of the question is my understanding when some of your competitors are getting more aggressive on pricing, they're introducing cost curves associated with the deployment of AI that may have more uncertainty surrounding those cost curves because this is new technology. And we're -- I think everybody's trying to figure out what it can and can't do at the current level. So does that introduce incremental risk in how you're philosophically thinking about pricing? If you could just talk a little bit about pricing dynamics with the introduction of AI, and I do have a follow up.

但 B，這個問題的核心是：我的理解是，當你們的一些競爭對手在定價上更積極時，他們正在引入與 AI 部署相關的成本曲線，而由於這是新技術，這些成本曲線可能存在更大的不確定性。而我們——我想大家都在嘗試弄清楚在目前水準下它能做什麼、不能做什麼。那麼，這是否會在你們從理念上思考定價時引入額外風險？如果可以的話，請談談在導入 AI 後的定價動態；我也有一個追問。

I'll start on that pricing sort of point. The way we're seeing it is the point you made about competitive intensity, we do see there is increased intensity. If you look at last financial year, we had a growth. Some other players had negative revenue, so one can sort of imagine some of that sort of a scenario.

我先回應定價這點。就我們看到的情況而言，正如你提到的競爭強度，我們確實看到競爭加劇。若看上一個財年，我們有成長；而其他一些業者營收為負，因此可以想像會出現那樣的情境。

In pricing, it's -- actually, Jayesh will talk a little bit about it. I think, overall, a realization is better in the year than we have seen before. So maybe the execution is better. And the portfolio, at least we feel, is less risky in that sense. So I don't think we have what, if I understood well, what you were describing.

在定價方面——其實 Jayesh 會再多談一些。我認為整體而言，今年的實現率（realization）比我們過去看到的更好。所以也許執行得更好。而且至少我們覺得，投資組合在這個意義上風險更低。因此我不認為我們有你所描述的那種情況——如果我理解無誤的話。

If I can just add to what Salil was saying, if you look at an elevated level, despite the softer volume through the year, most of our growth came from the realization that reflects in what we have been able to get on the back of AI, that reflects in the value that we are creating for our clients, and to some extent, that also reflects the contribution from Project Maximus through the lean automation, value-based failings, and all of those tracks. So that is given.

我補充 Salil 的說法：如果從更高層次來看，儘管全年量能較疲弱，我們的大部分成長來自實現率的提升；這反映了我們藉由 AI 所能取得的成果，也反映了我們為客戶創造的價值；在某種程度上，也反映了 Project Maximus 透過精實自動化、以價值為導向的措施，以及所有這些軌道所帶來的貢獻。這點是既定的。

If you look at -- despite the competitiveness in the market, despite all of that, we've been able to maintain our margins for the year. We've invested back in the business 50 basis points or 40-odd basis points in sales and marketing, the AI talent that we are building, the AI capabilities that we are building, all other AI-related investments. All of that has been absorbed in the margin while keeping margin constant.

再看——儘管市場競爭激烈，儘管有這些因素，我們仍能在全年維持利潤率。我們把 50 個基點或約 40 多個基點再投資回業務，包括銷售與行銷、我們正在打造的 AI 人才、我們正在建置的 AI 能力，以及其他所有與 AI 相關的投資。所有這些都在維持利潤率不變的情況下被吸收。

Okay, okay. Let me ask my second follow-up question, and it also speaks to -- or questions the growth algorithm. And I'm trying to understand how the growth algorithm may change from a volume perspective, given the AI efficiency gains on the supply side. And the way I think about it, and we've had this conversation with one of your competitors, if you're trying to grow at 3%, in the past years, you might have to grow volumes by 5% or 6% to get to 3% growth.

好的，好的。讓我問第二個追問，這也涉及——或說是在檢視成長演算法。我想了解，從量的角度來看，鑑於供給端因 AI 帶來的效率提升，成長演算法可能如何改變。我是這樣想的，我們也和你們的一位競爭對手討論過：如果你想成長 3%，過去可能需要量成長 5% 或 6% 才能達到 3% 的成長。

And one of your competitors suggested that that volume variance may need to double because of the efficiency gains to get to the same revenue growth trajectory. And I just wanted to see if you could think about, how is the growth algorithm on a volume basis different today because of those efficiency gains as you look out over the next 12 months, what it's been over the last couple of years?

而你們的一位競爭對手表示，為了達到相同的營收成長軌跡，因效率提升的關係，這個量的差異可能需要加倍。我想請你們談談：由於這些效率提升，現在以量為基礎的成長演算法與過去幾年相比有何不同？展望未來 12 個月，你們怎麼看？

The reality is, we do see -- as was Salil saying earlier, we do see some deflation from our existing services, right? And largely, part of that is getting offset by the new services, the new AI-driven services. Overall, at this point in time, the volumes for the last year have remained flattish; and as we go forward, we continue to see volumes to remain flatter or marginally positive as we -- what we baked in in the guidance at this point in time, which is reflected in the lower end. In the upper end, as I said earlier, we have expected better macro environment, which would reflect in better volumes.

現實是，我們確實看到——如同 Salil 先前所說——既有服務出現一些通縮（deflation），對吧？而其中很大一部分會被新服務、由 AI 驅動的新服務所抵消。整體而言，截至目前，去年的量大致持平；往前看，我們仍預期量會維持較平或小幅正成長——這是我們目前在指引中所納入的假設，並反映在區間下緣。至於區間上緣，如我先前所說，我們假設宏觀環境更好，這將反映為更好的量。

Okay, thank you. All right, many thanks. Good luck.

好的，謝謝。非常感謝。祝好運。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Apurva Prasad, Franklin Templeton.

Apurva Prasad，Franklin Templeton。

Hey, hi. Any comments on the direction of the onsite mix? I'm trying to understand if the AI compression or just AI embedded in services and contract structures, is that impacting the delivery mix?

嘿，嗨。對於駐場（onsite）占比的走向有任何評論嗎？我想了解 AI 壓縮效應，或只是 AI 內嵌於服務與合約結構中，是否正在影響交付組合（delivery mix）？

No, Apurva, I think it's multiple factors, little bit of the environment, little bit of the visa situations in some of the countries, little bit of our own initiative to deliver more from offshore. So I think it's a combination of all of that. (multiple speakers) So just to add that, the decrease in spend will also come down, which generally needs higher onsite.

沒有，Apurva，我認為是多重因素：一部分是環境因素，一部分是某些國家的簽證情況，一部分是我們自身推動更多離岸交付的措施。所以我認為是這些因素的組合。（多位講者）再補充一點，支出下降也會帶動下降，而那通常需要更高的駐場比例。

Okay, and for FY27, the onsite exit should be similar? And third-party cost, I think you said, will be similar next year versus this?

好的，那 FY27 的駐場退出水準（onsite exit）應該會類似嗎？以及第三方成本，我想你說明年會與今年相近？

Third-party costs, I did say that earlier, we expect it to be in a similar range. FY27 exit is difficult to predict. At this point in time, as I said, the FY26 exit itself gives us approximately 40, 50 basis points of lower on-site mix. And we think this trend will continue to some extent, but it's very difficult to predict what will be a FY27 exit.

第三方成本方面，我先前確實說過，我們預期會落在相近的區間。FY27 的退出水準很難預測。就目前而言，如我所說，FY26 的退出水準本身就帶來約 40 到 50 個基點較低的駐場占比。我們認為這個趨勢在某種程度上會延續，但很難預測 FY27 的退出水準會是什麼。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, we'll take that as the last question. I'll now hand the conference over to the management for closing comments.

非常感謝。各位女士先生，我們就把這題作為最後一題。接下來我將把會議交回管理層作結語。

Thank you. First, thanks everyone for joining. I just want to share a quick summary. We had a strong FY26, 3.1% growth, 21% margin, very good large deals, close to $15 billion. We have a growth guidance for the coming year. We have a mix of growth drivers and compression, overall growth guidance, and adjusting for some of the one-off technical factors, larger growths, like-for-like basis.

謝謝。首先，感謝各位參與。我想快速做個摘要。我們 FY26 表現強勁，成長 3.1%，利潤率 21%，大型交易表現非常好，接近 150 億美元。我們也提供了來年的成長指引。我們的成長指引包含成長驅動因素與壓縮因素；整體成長指引在調整部分一次性技術因素後，以同口徑（like-for-like）基礎來看，成長更高。

The AI services approach and strategy I think we've laid out is resonating with our clients very well. We see all of the six areas in our pipeline, very good partnerships with the AI foundation model companies and other tool companies. With all of that, we look ahead to a strong, successful year in this coming year and look forward to seeing all of you -- catching up with all of you in the next quarterly call. Thank you. Take care.

我認為我們已闡述的 AI 服務方法與策略，正非常有效地引起客戶共鳴。我們在管線中的六個領域都看見良好進展，並與 AI 基礎模型公司及其他工具公司建立了非常好的合作夥伴關係。基於這些，我們展望來年將是強勁且成功的一年，也期待在下一次季度電話會議上與各位再會——與各位交流近況。謝謝。保重。

Thank you very much, members of management. Ladies and gentlemen, on behalf of Infosys Limited, that concludes this conference call. Thank you for joining us and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.

非常感謝各位管理層成員。各位女士先生，我謹代表 Infosys Limited 宣布本次電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與，現在可以掛線。謝謝。