PJT Partners Inc. (PJT) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good day, everyone. Welcome to the PJT Partners first quarter 2026 earnings conference call. Today's conference is being recorded.

各位好。歡迎參加PJT Partners 2026年第一季財報電話會議。今天的會議將進行錄音。

At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Ms. Sharon Pearson, Head of Investor Relations. Ms. Pearson, please go ahead, ma'am.

此時，我想將會議交給投資人關係主管Sharon Pearson女士。Pearson女士，請開始。

Thanks very much, Bo, and good morning, and welcome to the PJT Partners first quarter 2026 earnings conference call. I'm Sharon Pearson, Head of Investor Relations at PJT Partners. And joining me today is Paul Taubman, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Helen Meates, our Chief Financial Officer.

非常感謝你，Bo，大家早安，也歡迎參加PJT Partners 2026年第一季財報電話會議。我是Sharon Pearson，PJT Partners投資人關係主管。今天與我一同出席的有：我們的董事長兼執行長Paul Taubman，以及我們的財務長Helen Meates。

Before I turn the call over to Paul, I want to point out that during the course of this conference call, we may make a number of forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties, and there are important factors that could cause actual outcomes to differ materially from those indicated in these statements.

在我把電話交給Paul之前，我想提醒各位，在本次電話會議過程中，我們可能會作出若干前瞻性陳述。這些前瞻性陳述受到各種風險與不確定性影響，且有一些重要因素可能導致實際結果與這些陳述所示存在重大差異。

We believe that these factors are described in the Risk Factors section contained in PJT Partners' 2025 Form 10-K, which is available on our website at pjtpartners.com. I want to remind you that the company assumes no duty to update any forward-looking statements and that the presentation we make today contains non-GAAP financial measures, which we believe are meaningful in evaluating the company's performance. For detailed disclosures on non-GAAP metrics and their GAAP reconciliations, you should refer to the financial data contained within the press release we issued this morning, also available on our website.

我們相信，這些因素已在PJT Partners的2025年Form 10-K中的「風險因素」章節加以說明，該文件可於我們網站pjtpartners.com查閱。我也要提醒各位，公司不承擔更新任何前瞻性陳述的義務；此外，我們今天的簡報包含非GAAP財務衡量指標，我們認為這些指標有助於評估公司的經營表現。關於非GAAP指標及其與GAAP的調節之詳細揭露，請參閱我們今早發布的新聞稿中的財務資料，亦可於我們網站取得。

And with that, I'll turn the call over to Paul.

接下來，我把電話交給Paul。

Thank you. Thank you, Sharon. Good morning, everybody, and thank you all for joining our earnings call. Earlier today, we reported revenues, adjusted pretax income and adjusted EPS that were all Q1 records. Our revenues increased 29%. Our adjusted pretax income increased 49%, and our adjusted EPS increased 47% from year ago levels. The substantial progress we have made is even more apparent when viewed through a longer lens.

謝謝。謝謝你，Sharon。各位早安，感謝大家參加我們的財報電話會議。今天稍早，我們公布的營收、調整後稅前淨利以及調整後每股盈餘（EPS）皆創下第一季新高。我們的營收成長29%。調整後稅前淨利較去年同期成長49%，調整後EPS成長47%。若以更長期的角度來看，我們所取得的重大進展更為明顯。

In just three years, our quarterly revenues have doubled, while our adjusted pretax income and adjusted EPS have nearly tripled. In this dislocated market environment, we delivered strong performance in all of our businesses with Strategic Advisory leading the way. Our consistent efforts to attract talent drove our increased partner count as we added eight new partners in the first quarter.

僅在三年內，我們的單季營收已翻倍，而調整後稅前淨利與調整後EPS幾乎成長至三倍。在這樣的市場失衡環境中，我們各項業務均交出強勁表現，其中以策略諮詢（Strategic Advisory）領先。我們持續吸引人才的努力，帶動合夥人數增加，第一季新增了八位合夥人。

Our hiring pipeline continues to be robust, and we expect to remain very active in recruiting senior professionals to our firm. While geopolitical uncertainties and other risks pressured many companies' prospects and valuations during the quarter, our outlook for our business remained unchanged.

我們的招募管道仍然強勁，我們預期將持續積極延攬資深專業人士加入本公司。儘管本季地緣政治不確定性及其他風險對許多公司的前景與估值造成壓力，我們對自身業務的展望仍維持不變。

During the first quarter, we repurchased 1.6 million share equivalents, more than offsetting our year-end 2025 equity issuances. Even after this record $244 million of repurchases, we still ended the first quarter with record first quarter cash balances of nearly $400 million. All told, we have allocated almost $1 billion to repurchase shares and partnership units in just over two years.

第一季期間，我們回購了160萬股等值股份，足以抵銷我們在2025年年底的股權發行。即使在創紀錄的2.44億美元回購之後，我們第一季末的現金餘額仍接近4億美元，同樣創下第一季新高。總計而言，在略超過兩年的時間內，我們已投入近10億美元回購股份與合夥單位。

Our Board of Directors has authorized a new $800 million open market share repurchase program, reflecting our continuing confidence in our prospects as well as the strength of our balance sheet. After Helen takes you through our financial results, I will review our business performance and outlook in greater detail. Helen?

我們董事會已核准一項新的8億美元公開市場股票回購計畫，反映我們對前景的持續信心以及資產負債表的強勁實力。在Helen帶各位回顧財務結果之後，我將更詳細說明我們的業務表現與展望。Helen？

Thank you, Paul. Good morning. Beginning with revenues. Total revenues for the first quarter were $418 million, up 29% year over year, and as Paul mentioned, a record first quarter for our firm. Our businesses all delivered strong results in the quarter with record first quarter performance in both Strategic Advisory and Restructuring.

謝謝你，Paul。各位早安。先從營收開始。第一季總營收為4.18億美元，年增29%；如Paul所提，這也是本公司創下的第一季新高。本季我們各項業務均表現強勁，其中策略諮詢與重整（Restructuring）皆創下第一季紀錄。

Turning to expenses. Consistent with prior quarters, we presented the expenses with certain non-GAAP adjustments, which are more fully described in our 8-K. First, adjusted compensation expense. We accrued compensation expense at 66.5% of revenues for the first quarter compared to 67.5% for the first quarter in 2025 and 67.1% for the full year 2025. The 66.5% ratio represents our current best estimate for the full year 2026.

接著談費用。與前幾季一致，我們以若干非GAAP調整後的方式呈列費用，相關內容在我們的8-K中有更完整的說明。首先是調整後薪酬費用。第一季我們提列的薪酬費用為營收的66.5%，相較之下，2025年第一季為67.5%，2025年全年為67.1%。66.5%的比率代表我們目前對2026年全年的最佳估計。

Turning to adjusted non-compensation expense. Total adjusted non-compensation expense was $56 million in the first quarter, up 14% year over year. The main drivers of the increase were higher travel and business-related expenses, higher occupancy costs driven by the expansion of our global office footprint and higher professional fees. As a percentage of revenues, our adjusted non-compensation expense was 13.4% for the first quarter, which compares to 15.2% for the same period last year. We continue to expect our total non-compensation expense in 2026 to grow at approximately 12%, a similar rate to 2025.

再來看調整後非薪酬費用。第一季調整後非薪酬費用總額為5,600萬美元，年增14%。增加的主要原因包括：差旅與業務相關費用上升、因擴大全球辦公據點而帶動的租用成本上升，以及專業服務費用增加。以營收百分比計，第一季調整後非薪酬費用為13.4%，相較去年同期為15.2%。我們仍預期2026年非薪酬費用總額約成長12%，與2025年的增速相近。

So growth rates in travel expenses as well as AI-related investments are more uncertain this year, and we will provide an updated view on our non-comp expense outlook when we release our first half results.

因此，今年差旅費用的成長率以及AI相關投資的增幅不確定性較高；我們將在發布上半年業績時，更新對非薪酬費用展望的看法。

Turning to adjusted pretax income. We reported record first quarter adjusted pretax income of $84 million compared with $56 million for the same period last year, and our adjusted pretax margin was 20.1% for the first quarter compared with 17.3% for the same period last year. The provision for taxes, as with prior quarters, we presented our results as if all partnership units had been converted to shares and all of our income was taxed at a corporate tax rate. Our effective tax rate for the first quarter was 20.5% compared with 14.1% for the full year 2025.

接著談調整後稅前淨利。我們第一季調整後稅前淨利創紀錄達8,400萬美元，去年同期為5,600萬美元；第一季調整後稅前利潤率為20.1%，去年同期為17.3%。關於所得稅費用，與前幾季相同，我們以假設所有合夥單位均已轉換為股份、且所有所得均按公司稅率課稅的方式呈列結果。第一季有效稅率為20.5%，相較2025年全年為14.1%。

The increase in the effective tax rate compared to both last year and our prior guidance was principally a result of a lower tax benefit from the delivery of vested shares in the first quarter. As a reminder, we take a full year view of that benefit, and we currently expect our full year effective tax rate to be around 20.5%.

有效稅率較去年及我們先前指引上升，主要是因第一季交付已歸屬股份所帶來的稅務利益較低。提醒各位，我們會以全年角度看待該項利益，目前預期全年有效稅率約為20.5%。

Our adjusted competed earnings was a record for the first quarter at $1.54 per share compared with $1.05 per share for the same period last year. On the share count for the quarter, our weighted average share count was 43.3 million shares, down 3% versus a year ago. During the first quarter, we repurchased approximately 1.6 million shares and share equivalents, and we committed a record $244 million to share repurchases in the first quarter.

我們的調整後競爭收益在第一季創下新高，為每股1.54美元，去年同期為每股1.05美元。就本季股數而言，加權平均流通股數為4,330萬股，較一年前下降3%。第一季期間，我們回購約160萬股及等值股份，並在第一季投入創紀錄的2.44億美元進行股票回購。

We are in receipt of exchange notices for 149,000 partnership units and subject to Board approval, we intend to exchange these units for cash. Additionally, our Board has authorized a new $800 million open market share repurchase program. On the balance sheet, we ended the quarter with $388 million in cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments and $535 million in net working capital, and we have no funded debt outstanding.

我們已收到針對149,000個合夥單位的兌換通知，並在董事會核准後，我們擬以現金兌換這些單位。此外，我們的董事會已核准一項新的8億美元公開市場股票回購計畫。就資產負債表而言，本季末我們持有3.88億美元的現金、約當現金及短期投資，淨營運資金為5.35億美元，且目前沒有任何未償付的有息負債。

And finally, the Board has approved a quarterly dividend of $0.25 per share. Back, Paul?

最後，董事會已核准每股0.25美元的季度股利。回到你這邊，Paul？

Thank you, Helen. Beginning with Restructuring. We continue to operate in a period of sustained demand for liability management and restructuring advice, with Restructuring revenues for the first quarter comfortably above year ago levels. We expect this level of activity to continue as companies around the globe across a wide array of industries contend with overleveraged balance sheets, challenged business models, pressures resulting from technological disruption and an increasingly complex geopolitical environment.

謝謝你，Helen。先從重組業務談起。我們持續處於對負債管理與重組諮詢需求長期維持的環境中，第一季重組收入明顯高於去年同期水準。我們預期此一活動水準將持續，因為全球各地、各行各業的企業正面臨高槓桿的資產負債表、受挑戰的商業模式、科技顛覆帶來的壓力，以及日益複雜的地緣政治環境。

As our coverage footprint grows, so too does our ability to connect our leading liability management team to additional opportunities.

隨著我們的覆蓋版圖擴大，我們也更有能力將我們領先的負債管理團隊連結到更多機會。

Turning to PJT Park Hill. PJT Park Hill revenues were comfortably above year ago levels as significant growth in private capital solutions more than offset a decline in primary fundraising revenues. While this is shaping up to be another challenging year for the overall primary fundraising market, we expect our primary fundraising revenues to broadly match our high water levels as we benefit from a high-quality fundraising pipeline that is receiving strong investor interest.

接著談PJT Park Hill。PJT Park Hill收入同樣明顯高於去年同期，私募資本解決方案的顯著成長，足以抵銷主要募資收入的下滑。雖然整體主要募資市場今年看來仍將充滿挑戰，但受惠於高品質的募資案源管線並獲得投資人強勁興趣，我們預期主要募資收入整體將大致維持在我們的高水位水準。

In contrast to pressures in the primary market, the secondaries market is positioned for another year of robust growth as rising demand from GPs and LPs for liquidity solutions is being matched by growing secondary investor appetite. Clients are increasingly recognizing the power of our integrated platform given the close collaboration with Strategic Advisory and the ability to access an extensive network of global LPs through PJT Park Hill's strong distribution relationships.

相較於主要市場的壓力，次級市場有望再迎來一年強勁成長，因為GP與LP對流動性解決方案的需求上升，同時也有更多次級投資人意願承接。客戶愈來愈認可我們整合式平台的價值，這得益於與策略諮詢業務的緊密協作，以及透過PJT Park Hill強大的分銷關係，得以觸及廣泛的全球LP網絡。

Turning to Strategic Advisory. For the quarter, our Strategic Advisory business delivered record performance with revenues increasing significantly compared to year ago levels. On our last earnings call, we noted the many positive dynamics supporting a highly constructive deal environment, including strength in the debt and equity capital markets, greater confidence regarding regulatory outcomes and increased CEO confidence.

接著談策略諮詢。本季我們的策略諮詢業務創下紀錄表現，收入較去年同期大幅成長。在上次財報電話會議中，我們提到多項正向動能支撐相當建設性的交易環境，包括債券與股票資本市場的強勁表現、對監管結果更有信心，以及CEO信心提升。

We also sounded a cautionary note that market sentiment could turn on a dime and that geopolitical risks as well as debate surrounding AI would continue to loom large in shaping the year ahead. The first quarter did, in fact, see large swings in market sentiment as investors grappled with significant geopolitical events and profound AI debates.

我們也提醒，市場情緒可能瞬息萬變，而地緣政治風險以及圍繞AI的討論，仍將在塑造未來一年走向上占據重要地位。第一季確實出現市場情緒的大幅波動，投資人一方面面對重大的地緣政治事件，另一方面也在消化深刻的AI辯論。

These dislocations were a reminder of the many risks and uncertainties facing CEOs and Boards of Directors as they evaluate strategic alternatives. Adding to the list of potential worries are the implications of higher oil prices and potential supply disruptions emanating from the conflict with Iran. This heightened volatility is fueling a greater sense of urgency to play both offense and defense as companies continuously reimagine and reposition their business models to fortify their competitive standing.

這些錯位情況提醒我們，CEO與董事會在評估策略選項時面臨諸多風險與不確定性。潛在憂慮清單上還包括油價上升的影響，以及與伊朗衝突可能引發的供應中斷。這種更高的波動性，正促使企業更有急迫感同時採取進攻與防守策略，持續重新構想並調整其商業模式，以鞏固競爭地位。

In this uncertain environment, our mandate count continues to increase and is now at record levels, up about 15% from a year ago. Our preannounced revenue pipeline has increased even more and also stands at record levels.

在這樣不確定的環境下，我們的委任案數量持續增加，目前已達歷史新高，較一年前約成長15%。我們已預先公告的收入管線增幅更大，同樣處於歷史新高水準。

And while our announced pending close backlog is below year ago levels, we have seen the pace of our announcements begin to pick up appreciably. As we look ahead, our firm remains well positioned to thrive across a broad range of market environments, given the growth opportunities before us in each of our businesses. As before, we remain confident in our near, intermediate and long-term growth prospects.

此外，雖然我們已公告、待完成交割的在手案量低於去年同期，但我們已看到公告節奏開始明顯加快。展望未來，鑑於我們各項業務面前的成長機會，本公司仍具備在廣泛市場環境中茁壯成長的良好定位。一如既往，我們對短期、中期與長期的成長前景仍然充滿信心。

And with that, we will now take your questions.

接下來，我們將開始回答各位的提問。

(Operator Instructions) Brennan Hawken, BMO Capital Markets.

(接線員指示) Brennan Hawken，BMO資本市場。

Paul, I was hoping -- thanks for your comments on the Restructuring outlook and all the uncertainty. Would appreciate maybe getting a bit more color there. It seems like we're likely to get at least a slowing of capital in the private credit markets, even though the retail vehicles are roughly a fifth of the AUM.

Paul，我想——謝謝你對重組展望以及各種不確定性的評論。希望你能再多補充一些細節。看起來私募信貸市場的資金至少可能會放緩，儘管零售載體約占AUM的五分之一。

Certainly, there've been a lot of the capital flowing in, and that looks to be slowing at best and maybe even more dramatic than that. So what impact do you expect that could have on the outlook for Restructuring? And what are your updated expectations there?

確實，之前有大量資金流入，而現在看起來充其量是放緩，甚至可能更為劇烈。那麼你預期這會對重組業務的展望造成什麼影響？你們最新的預期為何？

I appreciate the call. Look, we've maintained for a long time that we're in a long cycle of elevated Restructuring liability management activity. And it's driven by a whole host of things. One is there's no doubt that lending standards, if you go back to the 2019, 2022 period were not as rigorous as they are today. Rates were very low.

感謝這通電話。你看，我們長期以來一直認為，我們正處於一個重組與負債管理活動維持高檔的長週期。其背後由多項因素驅動。其中之一是，毫無疑問地，如果回顧2019到2022年期間，放貸標準並不像今天這麼嚴謹。當時利率非常低。

People were chasing yield and perhaps the loans and the credit that was extended or the standards were laxer than they are today. So some of that is just dealing with that. Some of it is clearly the fact that we have a very dynamic world and the outlook for some of these businesses is fundamentally different than it was before. I think private credit has a larger exposure to some of these issues because of how much growth they saw during those benign credit years and also because they have a greater-than-average allocation to the broader software marketplace. We don't see systemic issues.

人們追逐收益，或許當時發放的貸款與延伸的信用、或其標準，比今天更為寬鬆。因此其中一部分只是對那段時期遺留問題的處理。另一部分則明顯在於，我們身處一個高度動態的世界，某些企業的前景在根本上已不同於以往。我認為私募信貸對這些問題的曝險更大，因為它們在那些信用環境溫和的年份成長幅度很大，同時其對更廣泛軟體市場的配置也高於平均。我們沒有看到系統性問題。

We do think that this will undoubtedly slow the pace and potentially cause a retreat in retail flows. I think there's a period of time when all of this was characterized as gates and limited liquidity was the best of both worlds. I think in this environment, it may be the worst of both worlds.

我們確實認為，這無疑會放慢資金流入的速度，並可能導致零售資金流出現退潮。曾有一段時間，大家把所謂的設閘門（gates）與有限流動性描述為兩全其美。但在目前這種環境下，它可能變成兩頭落空。

And I do think that expectations for liquidity are being magnified by some of the new stories and the like. But inevitably, this probably has more of an implication for what's the long-term appetite for retail interest in this product than it is for anything more systemic.

而且我確實認為，隨著一些新聞報導等因素，市場對流動性的期待正在被放大。但歸根結底，這對於零售資金長期對此類產品的偏好，影響可能大於任何更具系統性的層面。

But we see the overall trends as being quite consistent with an increase in overall liability management exercises. And if you just look at all of the industries that rely on energy, cost of energy, how sensitive that is, and if you see a pinching of supply, you could see another leg up. But we're in a period of significant volatility and uncertainty, and that typically is not constructive for credit that was underwritten in a different environment.

不過，我們看到的整體趨勢仍相當一致：整體負債管理操作正在增加。如果你看看所有依賴能源的產業、能源成本及其敏感度，一旦供給受到擠壓，你可能會看到活動再上一個台階。但我們正處於高度波動與不確定的時期，而這通常不利於在不同環境下承作（underwritten）的信用。

I'd love to hear your thoughts on Strategic Advisory. Strategics are clearly driving the market with M&A right now. That's an area where you've been leaning into as you've been building out the Strategic Advisory business. So you were pretty optimistic on growth in those revenues coming into the year. We started out the year yet again on a bit of a roller coaster.

我也很想聽聽你對策略諮詢的看法。目前策略型買家（Strategics）顯然正在以併購驅動市場。這也是你們在打造策略諮詢業務時持續加碼投入的領域。因此你們在年初對這些收入的成長相當樂觀。而今年一開始，我們又像坐雲霄飛車一樣起伏不定。

Has that impacted your view? And I believe you touched on the fact that mandate count is up 15%. Is that in the Strategic Advisory business? And can you help us maybe frame what that statistic would mean in the long-term outlook for the company?

這是否影響了你的看法？而且我相信你提到委任案數量增加了15%。那是在策略顧問業務嗎？你能否幫我們梳理一下，從公司長期展望來看，這個統計數字意味著什麼？

Sure. So look, the basic message to me -- from me is strategic activity. I think corporate Boards of Directors are bigger and bolder than ever before. We've talked about this for a long period of time. I think there is a secular shift to constantly reimagining companies.

當然。所以你看，對我而言——我的核心訊息是策略性活動。我們談這件事已經談了很長一段時間。我認為存在一個長期結構性轉變：企業會不斷重新想像自身。

The cost of standing still in a dynamic environment is far greater companies that don't move are putting themselves in increasing peril. And that's a secular shift, and that's why we believe that the level of M&A activity, which has been by most macro metrics sort of meaningfully below trend, is quickly getting back closer to trend and may well operate above trend line.

在動態環境中停滯不前的代價要大得多；不採取行動的公司正把自己置於日益增加的風險之中。這是一個長期結構性轉變，因此我們相信，併購活動水準（以多數宏觀指標來看一直顯著低於趨勢）正迅速回到更接近趨勢的水準，甚至很可能運行在趨勢線之上。

Having said that, the reality is that strategic activity is highly linked to the market environment at that moment in time. And when we, three months ago, sounded a cautionary tale, we just made the point that these market windows are going to open and close and they're not going to stay open all the time, and there are going to be shocks to the system and that there's perhaps an underappreciation for some of the tail risks out there.

話雖如此，現實是策略性活動與當下的市場環境高度連動。而當我們在三個月前提出審慎提醒時，我們只是指出：這些市場窗口會開啟也會關閉，不會一直開著；系統會遭遇衝擊；而且外部可能存在一些尾端風險，市場或許低估了它們。

So we see a world where the secular trends are pushing activity up and to the right, but we do see more oscillation and volatility around that where there will be moments in time where you've got launch conditions that are perfect or near perfect.

因此我們看到的世界是：長期結構性趨勢推動活動向上、向右，但其間也會出現更多的擺盪與波動；在某些時點，你會遇到幾乎完美或接近完美的啟動條件。

You'll have other periods of time when people will be digesting and retrenching as they wait to assimilate the implications of additional news flow. That's kind of our view. And we also made the point that 2025 was a really strong year in Strategic Advisory for the overall market.

也會有其他時期，人們在消化並收縮，等待吸收更多新聞流所帶來的影響。這大致就是我們的看法。我們也提到，對整體市場而言，2025年是策略顧問業務非常強勁的一年。

And while we expected a steady increase from there, we didn't think that there were going to be step function increases from there and that we were probably going to have a stronger year this year, but not by crazy amounts. Now as far as our business, we're in the CEO engagement and mandate accumulation game.

而雖然我們預期之後會穩步上升，但我們不認為會出現階梯式的大幅跳升；我們大概會在今年迎來更強的一年，但不會強到離譜。至於我們自身的業務，我們做的是CEO互動與委任案累積的生意。

That's what we do. Our footprint and our dialogues are all designed to have a long-term view to identify companies where we can add significant value. We have a compelling value proposition to go from not being on their radar screen on their radar screen to being the adviser of choice and being the strategic adviser who's helping them prosecute all of their many strategic activities. The leading indicator for that is new client mandates, new companies that we've broken into as a trusted adviser. The mandate count is up about 15%.

這就是我們在做的事。我們的佈局與對話，都是以長期視角來設計，用以辨識我們能夠創造顯著價值的公司。我們有一個很有說服力的價值主張：從不在他們的雷達上，到進入他們的雷達，再到成為首選顧問，並成為協助他們推進各項策略活動的策略顧問。其領先指標是新的客戶委任案——也就是我們以受信任顧問身分成功切入的新公司。委任案數量約增加了15%。

Our preannounced pipeline, which is a better measure of revenue potential is up meaningfully more than that. But at the end of the day, quarter-to-quarter, it's just simply a function of the quickly -- how quickly the pace of preannouncements become announcements and then what's the time to close.

我們預先公告的案源管線（這是衡量營收潛力更好的指標）增幅明顯高於此。但歸根結底，按季度來看，這只是取決於：預先公告轉為正式公告的速度有多快，以及完成交割所需的時間。

And we'll have much more clarity as the year progresses on that specifically. But right now, I think when we look at kind of the most important KPIs, we're seeing a meaningful step function increase in the level of activity.

而隨著年度推進，我們會對此有更清晰的判斷。但就目前而言，當我們看最重要的KPI時，我們看到活動水準出現了顯著的階梯式提升。

Devin Ryan, Citizens Bank.

Devin Ryan，Citizens Bank。

I want to dig in a little bit on the software sector specifically, just given some of the comments that you made. Obviously, an important part of the M&A market, a lot of uncertainty directly there and then kind of emanating off of that. And there's been a lot of valuation disruption as well.

我想更深入談談軟體產業，尤其是考量到你剛才的一些評論。顯然，這是併購市場的重要組成部分，那裡直接存在很多不確定性，並且也有一些不確定性由此向外擴散。同時估值也出現了很大的擾動。

So would love to just get some thoughts around whether you're expecting this part of the market is just going to remain particularly challenged with those dynamics? Or do you see buyers maybe starting to get ready to step in more value or these companies need to consolidate? I love to get some thoughts around how that specific part of the market playing out over the next year or so here.

所以很想聽聽你的看法：你是否預期在這些動態之下，這一塊市場會持續特別艱難？或者你是否看到買方可能開始準備以更有吸引力的估值進場，或是這些公司需要整併？也想聽聽你對未來一年左右這一特定市場板塊將如何演變的看法。

Sure. So look, I don't think you can sort of paint the entire industry with one broad brush. And the reality is that within the software ecosystem at large, there are clearly winners, but they're not all winners. That would be the first point. I think the second point is the debates are much less about near-term cash generation profitability and more about what's the long-term value, what's the terminal value of these businesses.

當然。你看，我不認為可以用一把大刷子把整個產業一概而論。現實是，在廣義的軟體生態系中，確實有贏家，但並非人人都是贏家。這是第一點。第二點是：當下的爭論焦點已不太在於短期現金創造或獲利能力，而更多在於長期價值是什麼、這些業務的終端價值是什麼。

The debates that are underway are not likely to be resolved across the board in the near term. And you can end up with operating performance that's quite positive while questions linger about long-term value.

正在進行的這些爭論，不太可能在短期內全面得到解決。因此你可能會看到營運表現相當正面，但對長期價值的疑問仍然存在。

And in a world where many of these companies were financed in the credit markets with a loan-to-value mindset, if there's real questions about the value, the ability to refinance that entire capital stack without further equitizations or some other catalyst may, in some instances, be a challenge, which is why you're starting to see the earliest signs of this bleeding into the credit markets as it relates to liability management.

而在一個許多公司以「貸款對價值（LTV）」思維在信貸市場融資的世界裡，如果對價值存在實質疑問，那麼在不進一步股權化（equitizations）或沒有其他催化因素的情況下，能否為整個資本結構完成再融資，在某些情況下可能會是一項挑戰；這也是為什麼你開始看到最早的跡象：這些問題正開始滲透到與負債管理相關的信貸市場。

And that's less about near-term fundamentals and just more about quantum of debt, loan to value and whether or not that entire cap stack is the right cap stack when there are questions about long-term value. I think there's that.

而這與其說是短期基本面問題，不如說更多是關於債務規模、貸款對價值，以及當長期價值存在疑問時，整個資本結構是否仍是合適的資本結構。我認為有這一層。

I think it also makes monetizations by private equity firms more challenging. And I suspect that there were probably monetization goals overall for individual asset managers that may be a bit more challenging if some of those assets need to be held back waiting for greater clarity. I think that, that trend plays very nicely into our private capital solutions business as alternative asset managers are going to look increasingly to alternative liquidity options to maintain the pace of capital return and that you'll see more, and it may be on assets that are away from these where there are still question marks.

我也認為，這會讓私募股權公司的變現更具挑戰。我猜測，對於個別資產管理人而言，原本整體上可能有一些變現目標；但如果其中部分資產需要暫緩持有、等待更清晰的訊號，那些目標可能會更難達成。我認為這個趨勢非常有利於我們的私募資本解決方案業務，因為另類資產管理人將愈來愈多地尋求替代性流動性選項，以維持資本回收的節奏；你會看到更多這類需求，而且可能發生在那些仍有疑點的資產以外的其他資產上。

But clearly, monetization -- if you're finding it challenging with parts of your portfolio, you may rethink monetization opportunities in other parts of your portfolio. And probably for some of these companies, there will be a sense that creating more scale is important.

但很明顯，變現——如果你在投資組合的某些部分發現變現具挑戰性，你可能會重新思考在投資組合其他部分的變現機會。而且對其中一些公司而言，可能會認為擴大規模更為重要。

So I think at the right time, you'll see more strategic activity as it relates to some of these companies. But it's challenging when there's that much headline risk and people are still trying to calibrate what the new equilibrium is. So I sort of see this as sort of the waiting and watching and absorbing before there's full assimilation, repricing. And then inevitably, you're going to see an increase in activity.

所以我認為在適當的時點，你會看到與其中一些公司相關的策略性活動增加。但當頭條風險如此之高、而人們仍在校準新的均衡點是什麼時，確實會很具挑戰。因此我把這段時間視為：在完全吸收、重新定價之前，先等待、觀察並消化。然後不可避免地，你會看到活動增加。

That's great color, Paul. And just a follow-up here on recruiting. You obviously had a record year of partner additions last year, and I know some of that was promotions as well. It sounds like the pipeline right now is still quite strong. So can you talk a little bit about the pipeline, kind of what your expectations are in the year?

這個觀點很有幫助，Paul。接著就招募再追問一下。你們去年合夥人新增人數創下紀錄，我知道其中也包含一些內部晉升。聽起來目前的人才管道仍然相當強勁。所以你能否談談這個管道，以及你對今年的預期大概是什麼？

And then just interrelated, the ramp time of productivity, I'm assuming that as the firm scales and kind of get some of those network effects in certain industries that potentially the production would scale faster. So I would love to hear a little bit about that. Like are the partners from last year increasing production faster? Just any thoughts around the second component to that question as well?

另外相關的一點是生產力爬坡時間。我假設隨著公司規模擴大，並且在某些產業形成一些網路效應，產出可能會更快擴張。所以我也很想聽你談談這部分。例如去年加入的合夥人，產出是否在更快提升？也請分享你對這個問題第二部分的任何想法。

Let's start with the second component first. It all depends on whether it's the tip of the spear into a new area or whether it's going from strength to strength. So if you think about it, if you built out an industry vertical and you have real traction, real coverage footprint, real impact in boardrooms and you're adding another partner, the expectation is the ramp should be quickest. If you're going into a new geography or this is really ground zero for a hire in a space that you haven't previously been in, it will be longer. And I've always talked about this.

我們先從第二部分開始。這完全取決於這是否是進入新領域的第一線先鋒，或是從既有優勢再往上加強。所以如果你想像一下，你已經建立了一個產業垂直領域，並且有實質動能、實質覆蓋版圖、在董事會層級的會議室裡有實質影響力，而你再新增一位合夥人，那麼預期爬坡會最快。如果你是進入新的地理區域，或這真的是在你們過去未涉足的領域裡從零開始的一次招募，那就會需要更長時間。我一直以來都在談這件事。

We're out there building lots of networks. And every time you come closer to completing a network, it lights up. But it's those early investments in a new geography or a new industry where we haven't previously had presence, where by definition, it's not the productivity of the first couple of hires, it's the productivity of the third, fourth, fifth individual that completes the circle and lights up that network.

我們在外面建立很多網絡。而每一次你更接近完成一個網絡，它就會被點亮。但在新的地理區域或新的產業、也就是我們先前沒有布局的地方，按定義來說，決定性的不是前一兩位招募的生產力，而是第三、第四、第五位把圈子補齊、並點亮那個網絡的人的生產力。

And the reality is, no matter how much we've grown, our investment at any point in time is a little bit of everything, where we're taking really greenfield initiatives and recruiting. At the same time, we're fortifying real strengths.

而現實是，不管我們成長了多少，我們在任何一個時間點的投資都會是「什麼都有一點」：一方面我們在做真正的綠地（從零開始）計畫並進行招募；同時，我們也在鞏固既有的真正強項。

And then we have other initiatives that are somewhere in between. And that's the challenge in sort of talking about that. Having said that, whatever the time would be in any of those scenarios, that time to ramp is less today than it was five years ago because the firm has a much stronger field position is much better known.

然後我們還有一些介於兩者之間的計畫。這也是為什麼要談這件事會有點挑戰。話雖如此，不論在上述任何情境下，現在的爬坡時間都比五年前更短，因為公司在市場上的戰略位置更強、知名度也更高。

There's greater likelihood that there are others in this firm that have connectivity at the Board level and the C-suite with their other trusted advisers, be they law firms or other trusted advisers where we have clear credibility or where the Board members have seen us in action in other boardrooms. So you've got lots of cross currents here.

更有可能的是，公司裡其他人已經在董事會層級與 C-suite，透過他們的其他可信賴顧問建立了連結，不論是律所或其他可信賴顧問；在這些關係中，我們具備明確的公信力，或是董事會成員已在其他董事會會議室看過我們的實戰表現。所以這裡有很多交錯的力量在作用。

All else equal, it should be quicker than it was, but it really depends on where the investment is. And if you look at our footprint, we've entered new markets. We've made a commitment to Italy. We've made a commitment to the Nordic region. Those are, to some extent, greenfield operations.

在其他條件相同下，應該會比過去更快，但仍然非常取決於投資落在哪裡。如果你看我們的版圖，我們已進入新市場。我們對義大利做出了承諾。我們對北歐地區做出了承諾。在某種程度上，這些都是綠地式的營運。

But I think they'll scale faster than other markets would have because we've built a strong reputation for ourselves. And as far as the recruiting environment overall, look, it's challenging. It's competitive, but we have a unique value proposition.

但我認為它們會比其他市場更快擴張，因為我們已為自己建立了很強的聲譽。至於整體招募環境，坦白說，確實具有挑戰性。競爭激烈，但我們有獨特的價值主張。

And I do think that when things slowed a little bit after all the hype of December, early January, I think there were some people who were saying, I couldn't possibly think of leaving at the apex of the gold rush. When it turned out in the first quarter, this wasn't necessarily the apex of the gold rush.

而我確實認為，在 12 月、1 月初那波炒作之後，當事情稍微放緩時，有些人會說：我不可能在淘金熱的巔峰離開。但第一季的結果顯示，這未必就是淘金熱的巔峰。

We probably at the margin had more engagement with high-quality individuals than we were expecting just because the market, while still quite robust, maybe wasn't as frenetic as initially advertised. So at the margin, that's been helpful. But we're in a lot of active discussions. We have a lot of white space, and we have a lot of enthusiasm to continue to grow the business. And how much we do, we'll be able to report back with greater clarity in the second and third quarter, what the full year report is going to look like.

因此在邊際上，我們與高品質人才的互動可能比原先預期更多，因為市場雖然仍相當強勁，但也許沒有一開始宣傳得那麼狂熱。所以在邊際上，這對我們是有幫助的。不過我們正在進行許多積極的討論。我們還有很多空白區域（white space），也有很高的熱情持續擴大業務。至於今年能做到多少，我們會在第二、第三季更清楚地回報全年會呈現什麼樣的結果。

James Yaro, Goldman Sachs.

James Yaro，高盛。

Paul, I just want to touch on financing conditions today. Is it fair to say that the mix of M&A financing shifts at least for some period to more bank-led financing and private credit financing costs have already increased? I'd love to get your perspective there. To what extent are these impacting the health of financing markets and in turn, M&A? And finally, to what degree could the mix of M&A financing change more permanently as a result of the issues in private credit?

Paul，我想談談目前的融資條件。是否可以說，至少在一段時間內，併購融資的組合會轉向更多由銀行主導的融資，而私募信貸的融資成本已經上升？我很想聽聽你的看法。這些因素在多大程度上影響融資市場的健康狀況，進而影響併購？最後，私募信貸出現問題後，併購融資的組合在多大程度上可能會更永久性地改變？

Look, I think it's going to coexist, but maybe the view that everything is going to private credit, which was a narrative at one point in all of this, is not the way this all plays out. And we've seen a lot of deals that were originally done in the private credit market were then refinanced in the syndicated market. I suspect you're going to see a little bit of both. and probably a lot of both. And therefore, it still has significant advantages to it, but it is a competitive world.

我認為它會共存，但先前那種「所有融資都會轉向私募信貸」的敘事——在某個階段確實有人這麼說——並不是最後的走向。我們已看到很多原本在私募信貸市場完成的交易，之後又在銀團市場再融資。我猜你會看到兩者都有，而且可能兩者都會很多。因此私募信貸仍有顯著優勢，但這是一個競爭激烈的世界。

And the banks are not looking to give up their field position and what's still a very lucrative origination business. And I suspect that we're going to get to a new equilibrium. And one of the beauties of our firm is we're agnostic about where our clients finance. We don't have any reason to favor one versus the other. And we can give the best independent advice.

而銀行也不打算放棄他們的市場陣地，以及這個仍然非常賺錢的承銷／起始（origination）業務。我猜我們會走向一個新的均衡。我們公司的一個優勢在於：對客戶在哪裡融資，我們保持中立。我們沒有理由偏好其中一方勝過另一方。我們可以提供最佳、獨立的建議。

And I think increasingly, clients value our perspectives as what is the best way to finance a specific transaction and to do it clear-eyed and only thinking about what's in the best interest of our clients. And increasingly, we're seeing that clients will come to us to ask for those clear-eyed judgments as to how best to tap the markets and whether this should be done through private credit or whether they should be done in the syndicated market.

而我認為，客戶愈來愈重視我們的觀點：對於某一筆特定交易，最佳的融資方式是什麼；並且以清醒的判斷，只從客戶最大利益出發來思考。而且我們愈來愈常看到，客戶會來找我們，請我們做出這種清醒的判斷：要如何最好地進入市場，以及應該透過私募信貸，還是應該在銀團市場完成。

And we believe it's very situation specific, and we can add real value in that regard. So I suspect that, that business is going to continue to increase in importance for our firm as we increasingly find ourselves able to originate and to advise clients on the best place to raise capital. I don't believe that there's a systemic risk to all of this from what we've seen.

我們相信這非常取決於具體情境，而我們在這方面能提供真正的價值。所以我猜，隨著我們愈來愈能夠進行起始（originate），並就最佳募資場所向客戶提供建議，這項業務對我們公司的重要性將持續提升。就我們所見，我不認為這裡存在系統性風險。

Obviously, no one sees everything and you don't know everything. But from what we see today, this is probably more of a PR challenge and an asset gathering challenge for the private credit world at large than it is a systemic issue. And we're watching it very carefully, but that continues to be our view.

顯然，沒有人能看見一切，你也不可能知道所有事情。但就我們今天所看到的情況而言，這可能更像是整個私募信貸領域面臨的公關挑戰與資產募集挑戰，而非系統性問題。我們正非常密切地觀察，但這仍然是我們的看法。

That's extremely helpful. I hope you might be able to shed some additional detail on the secondaries business, specifically around perhaps the mix of LP versus GP secondaries, which you alluded to previously. Do the issues in software impact the growth of continuation vehicles volume specifically in which they were a meaningful component of activity? And then discretely, I'd love to just get your perspective on the LP market -- LP secondary market specifically as well.

這非常有幫助。我希望您能就次級市場業務提供更多細節，特別是您先前提到的 LP 次級與 GP 次級之間的組合占比。軟體領域的問題是否會影響延續型載體（continuation vehicles）交易量的成長，尤其是在軟體曾是重要活動組成的情況下？另外，我也想單獨請教您對 LP 市場——特別是 LP 次級市場——的看法。

Look, we've always maintained that you need to open up a third way for liquidity. If you just look at -- this is a math problem as much as anything else. If you just look at all of the capital that's been invested, all of the capital that needs to be returned and every dollar that was invested, isn't worth $1 today. On average, it's worth significantly more than $1 this sheer volume. And there are real challenges in trying to use the IPO markets as your sole avenue or to rely on another sponsor to sponsor passing of the parcel, there needs to be that third way.

你看，我們一直主張需要開闢第三種流動性途徑。如果你只是看——這在很大程度上是一道數學題。如果你只看所有已投入的資本、所有需要返還的資本，而且每一美元當初投入的資本，今天並不都只值 1 美元。平均而言，因為這龐大的規模，它的價值顯著高於 1 美元。而若試圖把 IPO 市場當作唯一出口，或仰賴另一個贊助方接手、像傳遞包裹一樣轉手，確實會面臨真正的挑戰；因此需要那第三條路。

And if you look at it on any dimension, we think it's an underinvested marketplace. The biggest governor to date has not been the desire on the part of asset managers to consider secondary transactions is can they be done at scale, big assets, big size, big liquidity desires. And can it be done where there is the appropriate competitive tension where you don't need all these big anchor orders to be able to get to the number.

而且不論從哪個維度來看，我們都認為這是一個投資不足的市場。迄今為止最大的限制因素，並不是資產管理人不願意考慮次級交易，而是：能否以規模化方式完成——大資產、大金額、強烈的流動性需求。以及能否在具備適當競爭張力的情況下完成，而不需要依賴一堆大型基石訂單才能把價格做出來。

And the way that happens is more allocations to secondaries funds as an asset class. And we've always maintained that if you step back and look at this as an asset class, it's a compelling asset class for reasons we've talked about previously, the ability to better match commitment and investment, the lack of J curve, clear identification with an operating history track record of the asset you're investing in, continuing sponsorship from the manager, and it's proven out that the returns have been strong.

而要達成這點，就需要把更多配置投入到次級基金這個資產類別。我們一直認為，如果退一步把它當作一個資產類別來看，它非常具吸引力——原因我們之前談過：能更好地匹配承諾額與投資進度、沒有 J 曲線、你投資的資產有清楚可辨識的營運歷史與績效紀錄、管理人持續贊助（continuing sponsorship），而且事實證明其報酬表現強勁。

And as there's a better appreciation for that, we think that this asset class continues to grow in assets under management, assets deployed and then the better execution you can get, the more secondary activity will be coped out. And that's why we've spent so much of our time in building out this practice as really focusing on the ability to attract new sources of capital so that we can deliver better executions.

隨著市場對此有更好的理解，我們認為這個資產類別的管理資產規模、資金投放都會持續成長；而執行品質越好，就會帶動更多次級活動被釋放出來。這也是為什麼我們投入這麼多時間來打造這項業務，核心在於吸引新的資金來源，讓我們能提供更好的交易執行。

And all that we've seen is that in a volatile world where I'm sure the January 1 internal plans as to which assets were likely going to be harvested in 2026, my guess is that for most managers, names have come off that list and in an effort to be able to return their targeted amounts of capital to their LPs, they're going to have to create more alternative liquidity vehicles. And that's why we're seeing such strong interest and strong take-up, but it needs to be matched with continued allocation of capital to the space. And we're seeing that.

而我們所看到的是，在一個波動的世界裡，我相信 1 月 1 日內部原先規劃哪些資產可能在 2026 年收割（退出），我猜對多數管理人而言，名單上已經有一些標的被劃掉；為了能把目標金額的資本返還給 LP，他們將不得不創造更多替代性的流動性工具。這就是為什麼我們看到如此強烈的興趣與高採用率，但它仍需要持續的資本配置來匹配。而我們也正在看到這點。

And I think we're in this virtuous circle, and we're going to continue to see that as well. And in other instances, you're starting to see more needs on the part of LPs to be more forward thinking about how they themselves reallocate their own commitments, and we're seeing more interest also in LP sales. But our real growth driver in this environment is on the GP side.

我認為我們正處於一個良性循環之中，而且我們也會持續看到這種情況。另外，在其他情境下，你也開始看到 LP 端更需要更前瞻地思考，如何重新配置他們自己的承諾額，我們也看到對 LP 出售（LP sales）的興趣增加。但在這樣的環境下，我們真正的成長驅動力是在 GP 端。

Jim Mitchell, Seaport Global Securities.

Jim Mitchell，Seaport Global Securities。

Paul, so it sounds like you're not -- the thought process around sponsor activity on the M&A side is still kind of depressed and really being driven by secondaries and not really going the M&A route. So just curious, maybe taking a step back, how do you kind of view the environment this year will be very similar to last year, driven by strategics and still depressed financial sponsor activity? Or are you starting to see any of that change where middle market versus large cap starts to pick up on the M&A side?

Paul，聽起來你對於贊助方在併購（M&A）端的活動思路仍然相當低迷，而且更多是由次級交易所驅動，而不是走 M&A 路線。所以我想退一步問一下，你怎麼看今年的環境：會不會跟去年非常類似，由策略買家主導，而財務型贊助方的活動仍然低迷？或者你是否開始看到一些變化，例如中型市場相較於大型股（large cap）在 M&A 端開始回溫？

Sure. Well, again, I want to be really clear. We're talking about trends. We're not talking about individual situations. So on any high-quality asset that we're in market with, there's very robust interest from a broad group of sponsors.

當然。不過我想非常清楚地說明。我們談的是趨勢。我們不是在談個別案例。因此，對於任何我們正在推向市場的高品質資產，都有來自廣泛贊助方群體的非常強勁的興趣。

It's not as if people aren't active, aren't deploying capital, and it's not as if they're not looking to bring some of their own assets to market. I want to be really clear. The market is open, it's operating, it's healthy. The question is, compared to last year, how much have we seen an improvement? And the fact is, I think where software matters is software as an industry has created some overhang or plans for liquidity in 2026.

並不是說大家不活躍、不在投放資本，也不是說他們不打算把自己的一些資產推向市場。我想把這點講得非常清楚。市場是開放的、在運作的、是健康的。問題在於，與去年相比，我們看到改善了多少？而事實是，我認為軟體之所以重要，是因為軟體作為一個產業，對 2026 年的流動性計畫造成了一些壓力（overhang）。

And if some of the comps that you were looking at for an IPO are down considerably, that's obviously going to have a dampening effect on your own IPO plans and it's going to make your confidence in being able to monetize these assets relative to where they're marked, it's just going to reduce that activity. So if your own monetization machine is behind plan, probably at the margin, your own deployment schedule is going to be dialed down a little bit relative to what might have been the case at the beginning of the year.

如果你原本用來參考 IPO 的一些可比公司估值（comps）大幅下跌，這顯然會抑制你自己的 IPO 計畫，並且會降低你對於能否以相對於帳面估值（marked）的水準變現這些資產的信心，進而減少相關活動。因此，如果你自己的變現機器落後於計畫，那麼在邊際上，你自己的投放節奏很可能會比年初預期稍微下調一些。

And therefore, we're not seeing the rebound that everyone was hoping for. We've always thought that this was going to be far more strategic led for a variety of reasons. One is when you think about changes in regulatory posture, that tends to affect decision-making on strategic assets than assets that were originally sold to sponsors.

因此，我們並沒有看到大家所期待的那種反彈。我們一直認為，出於多種原因，這一輪會更偏向由策略買家主導。其中一個原因是，當你想到監管立場的變化時，它往往更會影響策略性資產的決策，而不是那些原本賣給贊助方的資產。

So as a result, when you see more degrees of freedom in thinking about consolidation four into three, five into four type transactions, that's going to coat out more strategic firepower. You also have incredibly robust corporate balance sheets. So when rates are higher, they may make it harder to pencil out for a sponsor in a way that you don't feel the same pressures strategically.

因此，當你看到在思考整併（例如四併三、五併四這類交易）時有更大的操作空間，這將釋放出更多策略買家的火力。此外，企業資產負債表也非常強勁。所以當利率較高時，可能會讓贊助方更難把交易算得過去（pencil out），但策略買家不會感受到同樣的壓力。

And then also the ability to use equity as a currency. And when you have market indices, while it may not be across the board, you have many companies trading at all-time highs, their willingness more comfort in using their own currency.

再者，還有把股權作為交易貨幣的能力。而當市場指數——即便不是全面——有許多公司股價在歷史高點交易時，他們使用自家股票作為貨幣的意願與舒適度也會更高。

So all of that is going to continue to make this in the near to intermediate term, we believe, more sponsor led -- I'm sorry, more strategic led. And if you ask me what are the three takeaways, if you look at this environment right now, it's strategics versus sponsors, it's larger deals versus smaller deals and it's rest of world deals versus the United States as sort of trends.

因此，我們認為所有這些因素在短期到中期內都將持續使市場更偏向由策略型買家主導——抱歉，是更偏向策略型買家主導。如果你問我三個重點，在目前這個環境下，趨勢是：策略型買家對上財務型買家（贊助方）、大型交易對上小型交易，以及世界其他地區交易相對於美國的交易。

Okay. That's really helpful. And maybe just on the buyback, a nice increase from the $500 million previously authorization. Does that imply a faster pace going forward? I know you tend to do more in the first quarter, but how do we think about, I guess, the cadence of buybacks in the context of record cash and the bigger authorization?

好的。這真的很有幫助。另外可能想問一下回購，授權額度相較先前的5億美元有不錯的提升。這是否意味著未來回購速度會更快？我知道你們通常在第一季做得比較多，但在現金創新高以及授權額度更大的背景下，我們應該如何看待回購的節奏？

Well, I'll let Helen speak to it. But before she does, I'll just make the point that we always want to neutralize the dilution as quickly as possible, but we're also looking at the value in our share price. And to the extent we find that to be compelling or the balance sheet backs it up, then we're going to back it up by putting our own money to work.

嗯，我先讓Helen來回答。但在她回答之前，我想先強調，我們一向希望盡快中和稀釋效應，但我們也會看股價的價值。如果我們認為估值具吸引力，或資產負債表也支持，那我們就會用自有資金來支持、投入。

So Jim, I would say no real change to our strategy. As Paul said, we tend to be more front-end weighted year in our buybacks. Goal number one is to offset dilution, but we're also opportunistic. So I think the strategy would continue. And I think the $800 million reflects a higher share price. The last buyback program we used in just over two years. So maybe it's a little longer, but no significant change.

所以Jim，我會說我們的策略沒有真正改變。如Paul所說，我們的回購通常在年度上偏向前段較多。第一目標是抵銷稀釋，但我們也會把握機會、伺機而動。所以我認為策略會延續。而8億美元反映的是較高的股價。上一個回購計畫我們在兩年多一點的時間內用完。所以可能會稍微拉長一些，但沒有重大改變。

Mike Brown, UBS.

UBS的Mike Brown。

So I wanted to ask about Restructuring. So LME has really been driving a lot of the Restructuring activity over the past few years. How should we think about how the mix could shift going forward? Do you think we'll see more Chapter 11s here? And then, Paul, you touched on the global opportunities.

我想問一下重整（Restructuring）。過去幾年LME確實推動了很多重整活動。我們應該如何看待未來組合可能的變化？你們認為會看到更多第11章破產案嗎？另外，Paul，你也提到了全球機會。

Maybe can you talk a little bit about your capabilities outside of the US? How does it compare maybe which regions, countries do you have a larger presence? And then how does that mandate mix debt or credit or differ from your domestic business?

能否談談你們在美國以外的能力？例如在哪些區域、國家你們的據點更大？另外，那邊的委任案組合（債務或信貸等）與你們的本土業務有何不同？

Well, first thing I would say is, we have an addressable market that we still haven't come close to fully tapping. So if you think about just all the industry verticals, that are partially unbuilt where having that coverage footprint would enhance our liability management practice. There's no doubt there's a high correlation there. So as we build out industry groups.

首先我要說的是，我們仍有一個可觸及的市場，但我們距離完全開發還差得很遠。如果你想想所有產業垂直領域，其中有些覆蓋仍未完整建立；若能擴大覆蓋版圖，將能強化我們的負債管理業務。毫無疑問，兩者之間高度相關。因此，當我們擴建產業團隊時。

The second is while we've done a terrific job in expanding our breadth of sponsors who work with us on liability management exercises, there's an extraordinary amount of white space. And as we continue to expand our coverage footprint with sponsors, we have real growth opportunities. And then the third is as we continue to build out our footprint rest of world in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, we have tremendous opportunities.

第二，雖然我們在擴大與我們合作、進行負債管理交易的贊助方（私募等）廣度方面做得非常出色，但仍有大量的空白市場。隨著我們持續擴大對贊助方的覆蓋版圖，我們有實質的成長機會。第三，隨著我們在歐洲、亞洲與中東等世界其他地區持續建立據點，我們也有巨大的機會。

And we've seen success in France, Germany, Sweden, elsewhere, UK as we continue to build out presence. So the way we think about it, the coverage footprint continues to grow, becomes more powerful, and that can only be a real positive for the rest of our businesses.

而且我們已在法國、德國、瑞典以及其他地方、英國等看到成果，並持續擴大在當地的布局。所以我們的看法是，覆蓋版圖會持續成長、變得更有力，而這只會對我們其他業務帶來非常正面的影響。

I would say there's probably more of an effort to focus on creditor assignments outside the US, particularly in Asia. So we've done a lot in Asia, but a lot of that has been represented in creditor groups as opposed to onshore creditors -- sorry, onshore debtors. And I think that, that's probably a difference in mix between US and rest of world.

我會說在美國以外，特別是在亞洲，可能會更著重於債權人委任案（creditor assignments）。我們在亞洲做了很多，但其中不少是代表債權人團體，而不是在岸債權人——抱歉，是在岸債務人。我認為這大概就是美國與世界其他地區在組合上的差異。

Great. I wanted to ask you about the non-comps. So you mentioned that some of the uncertainty due to the AI-related investments you're making makes a little tough to give some guidance there. Can you maybe just talk about how much investment came through in 1Q? Talk a little bit about where you were investing?

很好。我想問一下非薪酬（non-comps）。你們提到，由於正在進行與AI相關的投資而帶來一些不確定性，使得提供指引有點困難。能否談談第一季投入了多少投資？也談談你們主要投資在哪些方面？

And then when we think about AI, can you talk a little bit about what that can mean for the margin, maybe near term, longer term? Is there an opportunity on the comp side? And then maybe just one final one on 2Q, is there kind of a guide there at least as we think about our models?

另外，談到AI，能否說明這對利潤率可能意味著什麼——短期與長期？在薪酬（comp）方面是否有機會？最後再問一個關於第二季，至少就我們建模而言，是否能提供某種指引？

I'll start with the last question first. I don't think we have a clearer guideline for Q2 than what we've said, which is 12% for the full year. So I think that would be still where we are. In terms of the AI spend, we have been buying licenses. But the reality is that you need to invest, we intend to invest.

我先從最後一個問題回答。我不認為我們對第二季有比先前所說更清楚的指引；我們的說法仍是全年12%。所以我想我們仍維持在那個水準。至於AI支出，我們一直在購買授權。但現實是你必須投資，而我們也打算投資。

And in the short term, that probably means that it's got an impact on margins as a cost as opposed to a benefit. And there are lots of investments, making sure that we have our data structure organized, investments in security, infrastructure to support whatever we're putting in place. There's probably going to be some technical consulting expense that we need to incur.

而在短期內，這可能對利潤率的影響會以成本呈現，而不是帶來效益。而且還有很多投資，包括確保我們的資料架構整理到位、在資安方面的投資、支撐我們所建置內容的基礎設施。我們可能也需要承擔一些技術顧問費用。

So we're looking broadly with a mindset of investment and then figuring out how we can best use it. So I think it's too early to say what the impact will be. But certainly in the short term, we think there'll be a cost from that.

所以我們是以投資的心態廣泛評估，並再去找出如何能最好地運用它。因此我認為現在要說影響會是什麼還太早。但可以確定的是，短期內我們認為會有成本。

Brendan O'Brien, Wolfe Research.

Wolfe Research的Brendan O'Brien。

I guess to start, you guys gave a lot of color on the pipelines. And if I heard you correctly, preannounced pipeline at record levels, while your announced backlog is down but improving. Obviously, got off to a strong start to the year, which helps, but I was just hoping you could give some color on what you're assuming in terms of deal conversion in the 66.5% comp accrual. And just given the trends in the announced backlog, is it fair to assume that revenues this year could be a bit more back half weighted?

我想先從你們對管線提供了很多細節開始。如果我理解正確，預先宣布（preannounced）的管線處於歷史高位，而已宣布的在手量（announced backlog）雖然下降但正在改善。顯然今年開局很強，這也有幫助，但我希望你們能談談，在66.5%的薪酬應計（comp accrual）中，你們對交易轉換（deal conversion）的假設是什麼。另外，考量已宣布在手量的趨勢，是否可以合理假設今年營收可能會更偏向下半年？

Well, I think our comp accrual reflects our best estimate of a variety of factors where trying to give our best assessment about what our overall year financial results will be. We have some views on what our recruiting gets will be throughout the year. We also are making some judgments about the competitive environment, and it's our best estimate at this time.

我認為我們的薪酬應計反映了我們對多項因素的最佳估計，我們試圖就全年整體財務結果給出最好的判斷。我們對全年招募進展會帶來的增量也有一些看法。我們也在競爭環境方面做出一些判斷，而這是我們目前時間點的最佳估計。

But as we said, I think, in our prepared remarks, our view for the year is pretty much unchanged from where it was three months ago because we had predicted some of this volatility in the marketplace. So I think it's sort of been part of what we've expected. And as it's played out, it hasn't caused us to adjust in any material manner our views for the year.

但正如我們在事先準備的發言中所說，我認為我們對今年的看法，基本上與三個月前相比沒有太大改變，因為我們已經預期市場會出現部分這樣的波動。所以我認為這某種程度上一直在我們的預期之內。而隨著情況發展，它並未促使我們以任何實質性的方式調整我們對今年的看法。

Great. And for my follow-up, Paul, your comments on rest of world versus US in response to one of the previous questions caught my attention. I just was hoping you could maybe drill down a bit more in terms of what you're seeing in terms of activity by geography, what's driving some of those divergences and how you see that playing out throughout the balance of this year?

很好。那我追問一下，Paul，你在回應先前其中一個問題時，對世界其他地區相對於美國的評論引起了我的注意。我希望你能再深入一點談談你按地理區域所看到的活動情況、是什麼在驅動這些分歧，以及你如何看待這在今年剩餘時間的發展？

Well, we always got to be careful whether you're looking at percentage change or absolute market size. So there's no confusion. The market that's the biggest, deepest, most vibrant is the US market. If you're just asking me though, where is there probably an uptick in growth year on year, I think Europe would be that place.

嗯，我們總是得小心，你看的是百分比變化還是絕對市場規模。所以避免混淆。最大、最深、最具活力的市場是美國市場。但如果你只是問我，哪裡可能會出現同比增長的上升，我認為歐洲會是那個地方。

And you can see it in the numbers, you can see it in the data. I think some of that is there's an increasing appreciation. And we've talked about this previously that you need to create more scaled European competitors in defense, in financials, in communications, in all sorts of critical areas.

你可以從數字中看到，也可以從數據中看到。我認為其中一部分原因是，大家越來越認同——我們之前也談過——你需要在國防、金融、通訊以及各種關鍵領域打造更具規模的歐洲競爭者。

And I think the regulatory posture in Europe is going to continue to relax to allow more of this to occur. At the same time, there's been a valuation disconnect for many companies that operate on the global stage, but happen to be listed in Europe.

而且我認為歐洲的監管立場將會持續放寬，以允許更多這類事情發生。同時，對於許多在全球舞台上運營、但恰好在歐洲上市的公司而言，一直存在估值脫節。

So you're seeing more opportunities to capitalize on these valuation equilibriums with more take privates and the like in Europe. And I think that's probably two of the most important factors as to why European activity is up relative to rest of world this past year.

因此，你會看到在歐洲有更多機會透過更多私有化收購（take-privates）等方式，來把握這些估值均衡（equilibriums）。我認為，這大概是為什麼過去一年歐洲的活動相對於世界其他地區上升的兩個最重要因素。

Alex Bond, KBW.

Alex Bond，KBW。

I have a follow-up on the Restructuring commentary from earlier. Paul, you noted that revenues were comfortably above the year ago levels in the quarter. But wondering how that maybe compares to other quarters last year, just given the seemingly strong results in 1Q?

我想就先前的重組（Restructuring）評論追問一下。Paul，你提到本季營收明顯高於去年同期水準。但我想知道，考量到第一季看起來結果相當強勁，這與去年其他季度相比大概如何？

And then also it would be great to get a little bit more color around the outlook for the rest of the year here. I know you said you expect activity levels to remain elevated, but do you think restructuring results over the remainder of the year can or will also come in comfortably above the year ago levels?

另外，也希望你能就今年剩餘時間的展望提供更多細節。我知道你說你預期活動水準將維持在高位，但你認為今年剩餘時間的重組業務表現是否也能、或將會，明顯高於去年同期水準？

Well, look, there's a lot to play out. I think I would say we feel very comfortable about our competitive position. We think that this dislocated environment is going to continue for a considerable period of time. It's certainly quite possible that we'll be up a bit. We could be up comfortably.

嗯，你看，還有很多事情有待發展。我想我會說，我們對自身的競爭地位感到非常有信心。我們認為這種失衡的環境將會持續相當長一段時間。我們確實很有可能會略有增長。我們也可能會相當明顯地增長。

But I suspect that it's going to be a very positive year. But it's just too early in the year to really put too fine a point on any of our businesses as to the actual quantification because there are a lot of transactions that could slip into next year. They could accelerate into this year. And when you have a lot of chunky assignments, whether they're in Strategic Advisory, the PCS business or Restructuring, it's just too early in the year to know exactly where the revenue recognition falls. But if you're asking about levels of activity, I think all of our businesses are going to be quite active in 2026.

但我猜這將會是非常正面的一年。只是今年還太早，無法對我們任何業務的實際量化做出過於精確的判斷，因為有很多交易可能會延後到明年。它們也可能加速在今年完成。而當你有很多大額（chunky）的委任案時，不論是在策略諮詢（Strategic Advisory）、PCS 業務或重組業務，今年還太早，無法確切知道營收認列會落在哪裡。但如果你問的是活動水準，我認為我們所有業務在 2026 年都會相當活躍。

Got it. Okay. Fair enough. That's helpful. And then a question on the increase in the restructuring MD headcount. This is the first time we've seen a step-up there in a couple of years. So curious if this was a concerted effort to add talent in this area or if there's just any other color you could add in that step-up in the quarter?

了解。好。合理。這很有幫助。另外想問一下重組業務 MD 人數的增加。這是我們幾年來第一次看到那裡出現明顯上升。所以想了解這是否是有意在這個領域增聘人才，或你能否就本季這個增幅提供任何其他補充說明？

And you're talking about partner headcount?

你指的是合夥人（partner）人數嗎？

Correct, yes.

是的，沒錯。

Yes. Yes. Look, I think it just demonstrates the investment that we make. We hire MDs that get promoted to partner. That's one of the increases.

是。是。你看，我認為這只是展現我們所做的投資。我們聘用的 MD 會被晉升為合夥人。這是其中一項增加來源。

And then we've got homegrown talent that we promote. So it is an investment in the overall franchise, and you're starting to see it come through as the headcount in that group increases. So I think it went from 18 up to 21.

另外，我們也有自家培養的人才會被晉升。所以這是對整體平台（franchise）的投資，而隨著該團隊人數增加，你開始看到這些投資反映出來。所以我想是從 18 人增加到 21 人。

And ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our question-and-answer period. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Mr. Taubman for any closing remarks.

各位女士、先生，問答環節到此結束。我現在想把電話會議交回給 Taubman 先生，請他做任何結語。

Just want to once again thank everybody for their interest, for spending the last hour with all of us, and we look forward to reporting on our second quarter earnings and doing this again in the summertime. Thank you all very much.

我想再次感謝大家的關注，感謝各位在過去一小時與我們一起參與，我們也期待在夏季再次向各位報告我們第二季的盈餘並再度進行這樣的交流。非常感謝各位。