Privia Health Group Inc (PRVA) 2024 Q4 法說會逐字稿

Thank you for standing by.

感謝您的支持。

My name is Luella, and I will be your conference operator today.

我的名字是 Luella，今天我將擔任您的會議主持人。

At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Privia Health fourth quarter conference call.

現在，我歡迎大家參加 Privia Health 第四季電話會議。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作員指令）

Thank you.

謝謝。

Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded.

請注意，今天的會議正在錄音。

I would now like to turn the conference over to Robert Borchard, SVP of Investor and Corporate communication.

現在，我想將會議交給投資者和企業溝通高級副總裁羅伯特·博查德 (Robert Borchard)。

Please go ahead, sir.

先生，請繼續。

Thank you, Luella, and good morning, everyone.

謝謝你，盧埃拉，大家早安。

Joining me are Parth Mehrotra, our Chief Executive Officer, and David Mountcastle, our Chief Financial Officer.

與我一起的還有我們的執行長 Parth Mehrotra 和財務長 David Mountcastle。

This call is being webcast and can be accessed the investor relations section of Prviahealth.com along with today's financial press release and slide presentation.

本次電話會議正在進行網路直播，您可以透過 Prviahealth.com 的投資者關係部分訪問，同時還可以查看今天的財務新聞稿和幻燈片演示。

Following our prepared comments, we will open the line for questions and we ask that you please limit yourself to one question only and return to the queue if you have a follow up so we can get to as many questions as possible.

在我們準備好評論之後，我們將開通提問熱線，並請您將問題限制在一個範圍內，如果有後續問題，請返回隊列，以便我們盡可能回答問題。

The financial results reported today are preliminary and are not final until our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

今天報告的財務結果是初步的，直到我們向美國證券交易委員會提交截至 2024 年 12 月 31 日的年度 10-K 表後才最終確定。

Some of the statements we will make today are forward-looking in nature based on our current expectations and view of our business as of February 27, 2025.

我們今天所做的一些聲明本質上是前瞻性的，基於我們目前的預期和對截至 2025 年 2 月 27 日的業務的看法。

Such statements, including those related to our future financial and operating performance and future business plans and objectives, are subject to risk and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially.

這些聲明，包括與我們未來財務和經營業績以及未來業務計劃和目標相關的聲明，都存在風險和不確定性，可能導致實際結果大不相同。

As a result, these statements should be considered along with the cautionary statements in today's press release and the risk factors described in our company's most recent SEC filings.

因此，這些聲明應與今天的新聞稿中的警告聲明以及我們公司最近的美國證券交易委員會文件中所述的風險因素一起考慮。

Finally, we may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures on the call.

最後，我們可能會在電話會議上參考某些非 GAAP 財務指標。

Reconciliation of these measures to comparable GAAP measures are included in our press release and the accompanying slide presentation posted on our website.

這些指標與可比較 GAAP 指標的對帳包含在我們的新聞稿和網站上發布的隨附幻燈片簡報中。

Now I'd like to hand the call over to our CEO Parth.

現在我想把電話交給我們的執行長 Parth。

Thank you, Robert, and good morning everyone.

謝謝你，羅伯特，大家早安。

Privia Health had a very strong 2024 on many fronts as we continue to execute well and drive growth across all our markets.

Privia Health 在 2024 年的許多方面都表現得非常強勁，因為我們繼續執行良好並推動所有市場的成長。

This morning I'll cover our 2024 performance and business highlights.

今天上午，我將介紹我們 2024 年的業績和業務亮點。

Then David will discuss our recent financial results, capital position, and our 2025 guidance outlook before we take your questions.

然後，在我們回答您的問題之前，David 將討論我們最近的財務表現、資本狀況以及 2025 年的指導前景。

Previous momentum extended across all aspects of our business as we exceeded the high end of all guidance metrics for 2024.

由於我們超過了 2024 年所有指導指標的高端，先前的勢頭擴展到我們業務的各個方面。

Our growth team once again delivered an exceptional year of new provider signings in existing markets which underpins our strong visibility through 2025.

我們的成長團隊再次在現有市場中取得了出色的新供應商簽約業績，這鞏固了我們在 2025 年的強勁發展勢頭。

Implemented providers increased 11.2% year over year, which drove FIA service collections growth of 13.6%.

實施供應商年增11.2%，推動FIA服務收款成長13.6%。

Healthy growth and attribution and a continued focus on clinical performance improvement led to better than expected value-based care results despite the challenging Medicare Advantage environment.

儘管面臨充滿挑戰的醫療保險優勢環境，健康的增長和歸因以及對臨床表現改進的持續關注帶來了好於預期的基於價值的護理結果。

But adjusted EBITDA was up 25.2% with operating leverage driving marginal expansion of 230 basis points year over year despite continued investments in our US markets.

但儘管我們繼續在美國市場進行投資，調整後的 EBITDA 仍上漲了 25.2%，在經營槓桿的推動下，其同比小幅擴張了 230 個基點。

Privia also generated a record $109.3 million in free cash flow in 2024, converting 121% of adjusted EBITDA.

Privia 也在 2024 年創造了創紀錄的 1.093 億美元自由現金流，轉換率為調整後 EBITDA 的 121%。

We ended the year with $491 million in cash and no debt.

到年底，我們的現金餘額為 4.91 億美元，並且沒有債務。

Our balance sheet positions us with significant financial flexibility to deploy capital and take advantage of opportunities in the current market environment.

我們的資產負債表使我們擁有極大的財務靈活性，可以部署資本並利用當前市場環境中的機會。

Our business development pipeline is robust, and we are committed to pursuing disciplined growth that complements our organic sales engine in existing markets.

我們的業務發展管道強勁，我們致力於追求有紀律的成長，以補充我們在現有市場的有機銷售引擎。

Privia's outstanding performance in the current healthcare and regulatory environment is a testament to the strength of our unique business model, strong execution by our operating teams, and most importantly, exceptional performance by our physician partners in our high performing medical groups and risk entities.

Privia 在當前醫療保健和監管環境中的出色表現證明了我們獨特的商業模式的實力、我們營運團隊的強大執行力，以及最重要的是，我們高績效醫療集團和風險實體中的醫生合作夥伴的卓越表現。

We are well on our path to building one of the largest primary care centric delivery networks in the nation.

我們正在順利建立全國最大的以初級保健為中心的服務網絡之一。

Our large-scale high-quality community-based medical groups and risk entities have demonstrated proven success across 14 states and the District of Columbia.

我們的大型高品質社區醫療團體和風險實體已在 14 個州和哥倫比亞特區取得了成功。

In these geographies, our footprint now comprises 4,789 implemented providers caring for over $5.2 million patients in more than 1,200 care centre locations.

在這些地區，我們的足跡現已包括 4,789 名已實施服務提供商，在 1,200 多個護理中心為價值超過 520 萬美元的患者提供護理。

Gross provider retention of 98%, highlights the stickiness of our model and our providers satisfaction with the Privia platform.

98% 的總供應商保留率突顯了我們模型的黏著度和我們的供應商對 Privia 平台的滿意度。

Likewise, our patients net promoter score of 87 underscores the excellent patient experience being delivered by our medical groups.

同樣，我們的患者淨推薦值為 87，凸顯了我們的醫療團隊為患者提供的卓越體驗。

Privia now serves over $1.26 million attributed lives across commercial and government value-based care programs.

Privia 目前為商業和政府基於價值的護理計劃中的超過 126 萬美元的患者提供服務。

The breadth of our contracts and geographic reach positions us as one of the most balanced and diversified value-based care organizations.

我們的合約範圍和地理覆蓋範圍使我們成為最均衡、最多樣化的基於價值的護理組織之一。

Total attributed lives estimated as of January 1st, increased more than 11% from a year ago, driven by new provider growth, as well as new value-based care contracts in certain programs.

截至 1 月 1 日的估計總歸因生命比一年前增加了 11% 以上，這得益於新提供者的成長以及某些項目中新的基於價值的護理合約。

Commercial attributed lives increased 15.2% from last year to reach 782,000.

商業歸因生命比去年增長了 15.2%，達到 782,000 人。

Medicare Advantage and Medicaid Attribution both increased almost 8% from a year ago.

醫療保險優勢計劃 (Medicare Advantage) 和醫療補助歸因計劃 (Medicaid Attribution) 均比一年前增加了近 8%。

We continue to expect headwinds in Medicare advantage over the next few years given pressures from elevated utilization trends, phase in of [V28] through 2026, and changes in star scores among other factors.

考慮到利用率上升趨勢、2026 年 [V28] 的逐步實施以及星級評分的變化等因素帶來的壓力，我們預計未來幾年醫療保險優勢仍將面臨阻力。

However, the diversification of previous value-based care contracts gives us confidence in our ability to build scale and profitability across the business despite challenges in any one particular program.

然而，先前基於價值的護理合約的多樣化使我們有信心，儘管任何特定項目都面臨挑戰，但我們仍有能力在整個業務範圍內建立規模和盈利能力。

We remain highly focused on generating positive contribution margin in our value-based contracts as we pursue attribution growth, manage risk, and implement clinical and operational enhancements in our partner practices.

在我們追求歸因成長、管理風險並在合作夥伴實踐中實施臨床和營運改善的同時，我們仍然高度專注於在基於價值的合約中創造積極的貢獻利潤率。

Ultimately our goal is consistent and sustainable earnings growth.

我們的最終目標是實現持續、可持續的獲利成長。

For our medical groups and shareholders year after year.

年復一年，為我們的醫療集團和股東。

Privia has delivered consistent growth and profitability and free cash flow across economic, health care, regulatory, and political cycles over the past seven years.

過去七年來，Privia 在經濟、醫療保健、監管和政治週期中實現了持續的成長、利潤和自由現金流。

The power of our business model and consistent execution is evident in how we have compounded all key metrics, including free cash flow over time.

我們的商業模式和持續執行的強大力量體現在我們如何整合所有關鍵指標，包括隨著時間的推移自由現金流。

Since 2018, we have consistently expanded EBITDA margins and converted 105% of EBITDA to free cash flow on average.

自2018年以來，我們持續擴大EBITDA利潤率，平均將105%的EBITDA轉化為自由現金流。

The midpoint of our 2025 guidance metrics demonstrates our expectations for another year of strong EBITDA growth despite significant headwinds in the current healthcare environment for value-based care.

我們 2025 年指導指標的中點表明，儘管當前醫療環境對價值型醫療而言面臨巨大阻力，但我們預計 EBITDA 仍將再實現強勁增長一年。

Now I'll ask David to review our recent financial results and discuss our capital position and 2025 guidance outlook in more detail.

現在，我將請大衛回顧我們最近的財務業績，並更詳細地討論我們的資本狀況和 2025 年指導前景。

Thank you, Parth.

謝謝你，Parth。

Privia executed very well through the fourth quarter of 2024.

到 2024 年第四季度，Privia 的表現非常出色。

Our implemented providers grew 147 sequentially from Q3 to reach 4,789 on December 31st, an increase of 11.2% year over year.

我們實施的供應商數量較第三季環比增加 147 家，截至 12 月 31 日達到 4,789 家，年增 11.2%。

The growth in implemented providers, along with continuation of solid ambulatory utilization trends and value-based performance led to practice collections increasing 4.7% from Q4 a year ago to reach $792.5 million.

實施提供者的成長，加上持續穩固的門診利用率趨勢和基於價值的績效，導致實踐收入較去年同期第四季度增長 4.7%，達到 7.925 億美元。

Excluding revenue from the renegotiated Medicare Advantage capitated agreements, practice collections increased approximately 12.4% year over year in the fourth quarter of 2024.

不包括重新談判的醫療保險優勢計劃按人頭計費協議的收入，2024 年第四季的醫療服務收入年增約 12.4%。

Adjusted EBITDA, which is reconciled the GAAP net income in the appendix, increased 44% over Q4 last year to reach $24.9 million, representing 23.1% of care margin.

調整後的 EBITDA（與附錄的 GAAP 淨收入一致）較去年第四季成長 44%，達到 2,490 萬美元，佔照護利潤率的 23.1%。

This is a 420-basis point improvement from a year ago as we generated operating leverage across both cost of platform and GNA while investing across all markets.

這比一年前提高了 420 個基點，因為我們在所有市場進行投資的同時，在平台成本和 GNA 方面產生了營運槓桿。

As Parth noted, we exceeded the high end of guidance for all key operating and financial metrics for full year 2024.

正如 Parth 所指出的，我們在 2024 年全年所有關鍵營運和財務指標方面均超出了預期上限。

Practice collections increased 4.5% to $2.97 billion.

業務收入成長 4.5%，達到 29.7 億美元。

Care margin was up 12.4%, and adjusted EBITDA grew 25.2% to reach $90.5 million.

護理利潤率成長 12.4%，調整後 EBITDA 成長 25.2%，達到 9,050 萬美元。

The free cash flow generation of our business model further strengthens our healthy balance sheet as we ended 2024 with approximately $491 million in cash and no debt.

我們商業模式產生的自由現金流進一步增強了我們健康的資產負債表，截至 2024 年底，我們的現金約為 4.91 億美元，沒有債務。

With the minimum capital expenditures in 2024, free cash flow for the year was $109.3 million or 121% of adjusted EBITDA, higher than previous guidance due to the timing of certain outgoing cash payments, as well as prudent working capital management.

由於 2024 年的資本支出最低，當年的自由現金流為 1.093 億美元，佔調整後 EBITDA 的 121%，由於某些現金支付的時間安排以及審慎的營運資本管理，該數字高於先前的指引。

Our initial guidance for 2025 is built upon strong 2024 provider signings and the diversity and resiliency of our operating model in the current healthcare environment.

我們對 2025 年的初步指導建立在強勁的 2024 年供應商簽約以及當前醫療保健環境下我們營運模式的多樣性和彈性之上。

In 2025 we expect to focus on the same core priorities that have driven our business to date.

到 2025 年，我們預計將重點放在迄今為止推動我們業務發展的相同核心重點。

First, provide our growth to increase density and scale in existing and new markets.

首先，實現我們的成長，增加現有市場和新市場的密度和規模。

Second, attribution growth and performance and value-based arrangements.

第二，歸因成長以及基於績效和價值的安排。

And third, operational improvements and efficiencies that impact the bottom line.

第三，影響底線的營運改善和效率。

Using the midpoint of our 2025 guidance, implemented providers are expected to increase 9.6% year over year to reach 5,250 by year end.

按照我們 2025 年指引的中點，預計實施的提供者數量將年增 9.6%，到年底達到 5,250 家。

An attribute to live growth is expected to be approximately 7.5%.

預計直播成長幅度約 7.5%。

We expect practice collections growth of approximately 7.8% at the midpoint.

我們預期實務收款中期成長率約為 7.8%。

This guidance assumes minimal increase in shared savings accruals year over year given the ongoing challenges in the Medicare Advantage environment.

鑑於醫療保險優勢計劃環境中持續存在的挑戰，本指南假設共享儲蓄累計金額逐年微小增長。

We expect care margin growth of 8.9% at the midpoint given minimal increase in shared savings accruals.

鑑於共享儲蓄應計費用的微小增幅，我們預期護理利潤率中位數成長率為 8.9%。

We are also guided to adjusted EBITDA growth of approximately 19% at the midpoint.

我們也預期調整後的 EBITDA 中位數成長率約為 19%。

Even a margin as a percentage of care margin is expected to expand approximately 200 basis points year over year as our operating leverage in more mature markets more than offsets new market entry costs.

由於我們在較成熟市場的營運槓桿足以抵銷進入新市場的成本，預計護理利潤率的百分比也將較上年同期擴大約 200 個基點。

While we are maintaining a robust pipeline of existing market expansion and potential new market opportunities, our initial 2025 guidance assumes no new business development activity or capital deployment.

雖然我們保持著強勁的現有市場擴張和潛在新市場機會管道，但我們最初的 2025 年指引並不假設有任何新的業務開發活動或資本部署。

Finally, we expect capital expenditures to be de minimis again this year as part of our capital li operating model and are assuming an effective tax rate of 26% to 28%.

最後，作為資本營運模式的一部分，我們預計今年的資本支出將再次降至最低，並假設有效稅率為 26% 至 28%。

We are nearing the end of our net operating loss carry forward, so we expect to pay more for cash taxes in 2025.

我們的淨營業虧損結轉即將結束，因此我們預計 2025 年將支付更多的現金稅。

This should still lead to at least 80% of our full year adjusted EBITDA converting to free cash flow.

這仍將導致我們全年調整後 EBITDA 的至少 80% 轉化為自由現金流。

Privia Health remains focused on building one of the largest primary care centric delivery networks in the nation.

Privia Health 始終致力於打造全國最大的以初級保健為中心的配送網路之一。

We look forward to continuing to serve our physicians, providers, and health system partners and their patients while creating value for our shareholders for many years to come.

我們期待在未來許多年繼續為我們的醫生、服務提供者和醫療系統合作夥伴及其患者提供服務，同時為我們的股東創造價值。

Operator, we are now ready to take questions.

接線員，我們現在可以回答問題了。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作員指令）

Your first question comes from the line of Elizabeth Anderson with Evercore ISI.

您的第一個問題來自 Evercore ISI 的 Elizabeth Anderson。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hi guys, this is Samir Patel on for Elizabeth Anderson.

大家好，我是薩米爾·帕特爾 (Samir Patel)，為伊麗莎白·安德森 (Elizabeth Anderson) 播報。

Congrats on the strong quarter and the solid guidance here.

恭喜本季取得的強勁業績和穩健的指引。

I just wanted to ask about the [CapEx] line.

我只是想問有關[CapEx]線的問題。

It looks like you're increasing OpEx based on your guide by only about 300k, year over year.

看起來，根據您的指導，您的營運支出比去年同期僅增加了約 30 萬。

Can you just help us understand and break out the leverage between sales and marketing and GNA?

您能否幫助我們理解並突破銷售和行銷與 GNA 之間的槓桿作用？

Is sales and marketing expected to be maybe down year over year just given the fact that there's no, new market entry cost, or how should we think about this?

由於沒有新市場進入成本，銷售和行銷是否預計會同比下降，或者我們應該如何看待這個問題？

Yeah, thanks Samir.

是的，謝謝薩米爾。

Yeah, I think you know you're seeing the scale, scaling of the cost structure.

是的，我想你知道你看到了成本結構的規模和擴展。

We added one new market last year and the sales infrastructure spend happens right at the at the outset, so.

我們去年增加了一個新市場，銷售基礎設施支出在一開始就進行了。

I think, our guidance does not assume any new markets, any business development activity.

我認為，我們的指導不承擔任何新市場、任何業務發展活動。

If that happens, we'll update the guidance, but other than that, our job is to continue to scale the cost structure between GNA and sales and marketing.

如果發生這種情況，我們將更新指導，但除此之外，我們的工作是繼續擴大 GNA 和銷售與行銷之間的成本結構。

We are fifth year as a public company, and you should expect that.

我們作為一家上市公司已經五年了，這是你應該預料到的。

And so, you're seeing the operating leverage play out really nicely.

因此，您會看到經營槓桿發揮得非常好。

So that's one of the key levers to drive EBITDA growth.

這是推動 EBITDA 成長的關鍵槓桿之一。

Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Mock with Barclays.

您的下一個問題來自巴克萊銀行的安德魯莫克 (Andrew Mock)。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hi, good morning.

嗨，早安。

The cash on the balance sheet is now approaching $500 million, hoping you could provide a bit more colour on the M&A pipeline, and are you diligent in a lot of opportunities and passing on them or just haven't seen any opportunities that are, thus far?

資產負債表上的現金現在已接近 5 億美元，希望您能為併購管道提供更多細節，您是否正在積極把握許多機會並將其傳遞下去，還是迄今為止還沒有看到任何機會？

And then relatedly, are there any use of building cash if not M&A thing.

那麼相關的是，如果沒有併購的話，累積現金還有什麼用嗎？

Yeah, I appreciate the question, Andrew.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題，安德魯。

So yeah, you can expect us to look at everything in the space, we have 23 analysts covering us.

是的，你可以期待我們關注該領域的一切，我們有 23 位分析師負責報告我們。

You can expect we have 23 plus bankers covering us as well.

您可以預期我們還有超過 23 位銀行家為我們提供服務。

And so given our strong financial position in this environment in our space, we're looking at all transactions that come across the table.

因此，鑑於我們在這個領域的環境中擁有強大的財務狀況，我們正在關注所有遇到的交易。

As we noted, the pipeline is really robust.

正如我們注意到的，該管道確實非常堅固。

However, we're going to be disciplined.

然而，我們會嚴守紀律。

It's been a pretty tough environment out there for value-based entities and a lot of revisions in estimates and performance, both, publicly as you've seen, but also in the private market.

對於基於價值的實體來說，這是一個相當艱難的環境，無論是公開的還是在私人市場，估計和業績都經過了大量的修改。

So, I think it's just finding the right opportunities.

所以，我認為這只是尋找正確的機會。

We can, we'll continue to be very aggressive but very disciplined in how we pursue those and take advantage of the situation, but you should expect us to deploy the capital, enter new states, increase density in existing states.

我們可以，我們將繼續非常積極但非常自律地追求這些目標並利用形勢，但你應該期待我們部署資本，進入新的州，增加現有州的密度。

We've said previously we're looking at medical groups, risk entities, MSO entities, given our model, I think we can be very flexible, so we'll continue to look for opportunities to deploy capital to create shareholder value, and that remains the primary focus.

我們之前說過，我們正在關注醫療集團、風險實體、MSO實體，鑑於我們的模型，我認為我們可以非常靈活，因此我們將繼續尋找機會部署資本來創造股東價值，這仍然是主要關注點。

Obviously, the strong balance sheet also helps us have sufficient capital to prepare for any.

顯然，強勁的資產負債表也幫助我們擁有充足的資本來應對任何情況。

Unseen risks that might come, regulatory changes and so on and so forth to support our medical group and risk entities.

可能出現的未知風險、監管變化等等，以支持我們的醫療集團和風險實體。

So that's a big part of the capital that we that we have.

所以這是我們所擁有的很大一部分資本。

So I think it puts us in overall in very strong financial position and then ultimately if the stock price deviates fundamentally from what we think is intrinsic value, we have the option to return capital to shareholders as well.

因此，我認為這使我們的整體財務狀況非常強勁，並且最終如果股價從我們認為的內在價值中發生根本性偏差，我們也可以選擇向股東返還資本。

Your next question comes from the line of Josh Raskin with Nephron Research.

您的下一個問題來自 Nephron Research 的 Josh Raskin。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Yeah, thanks.

是的，謝謝。

Good morning.

早安.

So it seems as though, other companies in the sectors, I think are looking maybe to sort of evolve their business models and take less risk, especially in their initial contracts with providers and plans.

因此，我認為，該行業的其他公司似乎正在尋求改進其商業模式並降低風險，特別是在與供應商和計劃簽訂的初始合約中。

I heard one competitor speak to a glide path to risk.

我聽到一位參賽者談論通往風險的滑行路徑。

Now it sounded very familiar, so.

現在聽起來非常熟悉，所以。

I guess my question, does that help Privia as plans and providers are getting more used to that sort of as you guys talk about this path to risk methodology, or do you think that puts competitors on sort of better footing now and then I just wanted to make sure I heard just a follow up.

我的問題是，這對 Privia 是否有幫助，因為計劃和提供者已經越來越習慣於你們所談論的這種風險方法，或者您是否認為這會讓競爭對手處於更有利的地位，我只是想確保我聽到的是後續消息。

Did you say you were generating positive contribution margin from your MA risk contract still?

您是否說過您仍從 MA 風險合約中產生正的貢獻毛利？

And if so, how's that?

如果是的話，情況怎麼樣？

Yeah, I appreciate the question, Josh.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題，喬希。

So take them in order.

所以請依序服用。

So, on the first one, look, I think we've been very consistent for five years that we've been public that, you have to distinguish between the willingness to take risk and the ability to take risk.

因此，關於第一個問題，我認為我們五年來一直堅持公開表明的觀點是，必須區分承擔風險的意願和承擔風險的能力。

We've always had the ability to take risk.

我們一直都有承擔風險的能力。

We do so at the highest level in MSSP, as we do capitation in MA with a small book.

我們在 MSSP 中以最高級別進行此類操作，就像我們用一本小冊子在 MA 中進行人頭稅一樣。

I don't think providers wake up every day saying we want to do full risk.

我不認為提供者每天醒來都會說我們想要承擔全部風險。

I think there's a lot of noise in the space by entities that jumped into full risk, and I think it's a misconception that to perform well in value-based care, to perform well in MA.

我認為，那些陷入完全風險的實體在該領域發出了很多噪音，我認為在基於價值的護理中表現良好，在 MA 中表現良好，是一種誤解。

You necessarily need to take full risk.

你必然需要承擔全部風險。

We've always said we prefer models where the payer has skin in the game, an entity like Privia that's enabling has skin in the game, and the doctors have skin in the game, or the medical groups and the risk entities have skin in the game, and we share it upside and down, and I think that keeps everybody honestly.

我們一直說，我們更喜歡這樣的模式：付款人參與其中，像 Privia 這樣的實體參與其中，醫生參與其中，或者醫療團體和風險實體參與其中，我們上下共享利益，我認為這可以讓每個人都保持誠實。

So, I just think it doesn't change our position in the marketplace.

所以，我認為這不會改變我們在市場上的地位。

I can't speak for competitors.

我不能代表競爭對手發言。

I think they've learned a hard lesson.

我認為他們已經得到了慘痛的教訓。

Ultimately our job is to take as much risk that pays us and pays our medical groups and risk entities by the payers to assume that risk.

最終，我們的工作是承擔盡可能多的風險，由付款人承擔我們和支付給我們的醫療團體和風險實體的風險。

I don't think.

我不這麼認為。

We're not trying to do venture capital in public markets.

我們並沒有試圖在公開市場進行創投。

You don't need to lose money to do all this good work, and if we don't come across a fair contract from a Privia that compensates our medical groups for the work that they're doing, we're not going to take downside risk.

你沒必要賠錢去做這些好的工作，如果我們沒有從 Privia 獲得一份公平的合約來補償我們的醫療團隊所做的工作，我們就不會承擔下行風險。

It's pretty much simple and I think the providers appreciate that and actually respect that that glide path.

這非常簡單，我認為提供者很欣賞這一點，並且實際上尊重這條滑行路徑。

So I don't think it changes our position.

所以我不認為這改變我們的立場。

In fact, I think it validates our approach and makes our position much stronger.

事實上，我認為這證實了我們的方法並使我們的地位更加強大。

And then secondly, on the MA book, yes, as you can see from the disclosure on our press release, we made a small, about 2% gross margin from on the capitated book, and, we said last year we had renegotiated a couple of contracts at the beginning of last year, much ahead of the curve, and the one that we remained, we were hoping that we'll make money and we're glad that we performed really well.

其次，關於 MA 賬簿，是的，正如您從我們的新聞稿中披露的那樣，我們從人頭賬簿中獲得了大約 2% 的毛利率，並且，我們去年說過，我們在去年年初重新談判了幾個合同，遠遠領先於預期，而我們保留的那個合同，我們希望能夠賺錢，我們很高興我們的表現非常好。

It was better than expected and that led to some of the outperformance and the results that you see.

它比預期的要好，並帶來了一些優異的表現和你所看到的成果。

And that's our hope that if you're doing taking downside risks, the objective is you do it to make money.

我們希望，如果您願意承擔下行風險，目的就是為了賺錢。

It's pretty binary at the end of the day.

最終，它都是二進制的。

Your next question comes from the line of with Mayo with Leerink Partners.

您的下一個問題來自 Leerink Partners 的 Mayo。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thanks.

嘿，謝謝。

I just wanted to hear more about the factors influencing the flatness this year and shared savings.

我只是想多聽聽影響今年平坦度和共享節省的因素。

I don't know if this is all just V28, the respectfulness that you have around utilization cost trend, but there are there any other changes with, the benchmark methodology that's concerning you?

我不知道這是否只是 V28，您對利用成本趨勢的尊重，但基準方法還有其他變化嗎？

And then I'm wondering.

然後我就很疑惑。

In the event that ACO reach doesn't get extended in sunsets, is this a thing that could be potentially good for you with new groups that may be looking to affiliate with your platform?

如果 ACO 的覆蓋範圍最終沒有擴大，那麼對於那些可能希望加入您平台的新團體來說，這是否是一件潛在的好事？

Yeah, thanks for the questions with.

是的，感謝您的提問。

So, look, I think we've taken a pretty prudent approach last couple of years just given all the factors we outlined.

所以，看，我認為考慮到我們列出的所有因素，我們在過去幾年採取了相當謹慎的做法。

Whether it's utilization trends, V28 star scores, benefit design changes, so on and so forth, and it's across the book, I think our guidance assumes prudence that we won't grow shared savings meaningfully year over year.

無論是利用率趨勢、V28 星級評分、福利設計變化等等，而且是在整本書中，我認為我們的指導假設我們不會逐年顯著增加共享儲蓄。

We were able to do do so.

我們能夠做到這一點。

We had the same assumption last year and then we outperformed and that led to better-than-expected results.

去年我們也有同樣的假設，然後我們的表現超乎預期，並帶來了好於預期的結果。

So, I think we're adopting the same approach.

所以，我認為我們採取的是相同的方法。

This guidance does not assume any meaningful step up in shared savings, and if we are wrong, we're hoping that there's an upside and downside, as we've consistently seen with our results over the past five years.

本指南不假設共享儲蓄會有任何有意義的提升，如果我們錯了，我們希望它有好處也有壞處，正如我們在過去五年的結果中所看到的那樣。

So, I just think it's that it's across all the programs, utilization hurts us if you're taking risks.

所以，我只是認為，在所有專案中，如果你承擔風險，利用率就會對我們造成傷害。

We've said you've got to manage that risk.

我們說過你必須管理這種風險。

So, I think it's more prudence across the board versus any one particular program from that perspective.

因此，我認為從這個角度來看，這比任何特定的計劃都更為謹慎。

And then to your second question, yeah, as CMS obviously allows a risk entity or a or a tax ID medical group to choose between MSSB or ACOE today.

然後回答你的第二個問題，是的，因為 CMS 顯然允許風險實體或稅號醫療組在 MSSB 或 ACOE 之間進行選擇。

So, we think there'll be convergence over time in some of these programs.

因此，我們認為隨著時間的推移，其中一些項目將逐漸趨於融合。

MSSB has done really well.

MSSB 的表現確實很好。

Reaches in the in this initial stage, and if that sunset, I just think providers ultimately are managing patients and their spend and would like to get paid for doing that good work irrespective of the program.

在這個初始階段，如果到了那個時候，我只是認為提供者最終要管理患者及其支出，並且希望因做好工作而獲得報酬，而不管計劃如何。

So ultimately, I think if this.

所以最終，我認為如果這樣。

We'll hopefully tend to benefit or capture some of that volume.

我們希望能夠受益，或捕獲其中的一部分。

We don't do reach today because we think we perform really well in MSSP, and if in all our ACOs or states, we've chosen to continue to add attribution in MSSP because we think that's the better outcome to save dollars for the government, taxpayers, perform well for our medical groups and risk entities, and if this convergence, I think it'll just validate our position even more.

我們今天不進行覆蓋，因為我們認為我們在 MSSP 中的表現非常好，並且如果在我們所有的 ACO 或州中，我們都選擇繼續在 MSSP 中添加歸因，因為我們認為這是更好的結果，可以為政府、納稅人節省資金，為我們的醫療團體和風險實體提供良好的表現，並且如果這種融合，我認為它將更加驗證我們的地位。

Your next your next question comes from the line of Jailendra Singh with Truist Securities.

您的下一個問題來自 Truist Securities 的 Jailendra Singh。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Yeah, thank you and good morning and thanks for taking my questions and congrats on a good quarter.

是的，謝謝你，早安，謝謝你回答我的問題，並祝賀你本季取得了良好的業績。

I wanted to follow up on higher-than-expected EBITDA to cash flow conversion in 2024.

我想追蹤 2024 年高於預期的 EBITDA 向現金流的轉換情況。

You guys called out certain outgoing cash payments, maybe provide a little bit more colon there.

你們呼籲進行某些現金支出，也許會在那裡提供更多的科朗。

And is this the reason why you are expecting the conversion at 80% this year compared to like 90% you expected heading into 2024?

這就是您預計今年的轉換率將達到 80% 而不是 2024 年的 90% 的原因嗎？

Yeah, thanks for the question.

是的，謝謝你的提問。

Yeah, it's really just sort of the timing of payments and where the liabilities and the cash ended up at the end of the year.

是的，這實際上只是付款的時間以及負債和現金在年底的最終去向。

I would say next year is really driven more based on the fact that we run out of some of our [NOLs] and we're going to have to start paying.

我想說，明年的推動力實際上更多的是基於這樣的事實：我們的一些[NOL]用完了，我們將不得不開始支付。

Taxes next year and that's really going to decrease the percentage.

明年徵稅，確實會降低該比例。

So, might it next year have been a little bit higher than 80% without that, without the great year this year, perhaps, but we feel very confident in our 80% guidance.

因此，如果沒有這種情況，沒有今年的出色表現，明年的成長率可能會略高於 80%，但我們對 80% 的預期非常有信心。

Your next question comes from the line of AJ Rice with UBS.

您的下一個問題來自瑞銀的 AJ Rice。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hi everybody.

大家好。

When I look at your guidance, even down you're expecting within the range of sort of 16% to 22% growth.

當我看到您的指引時，您甚至預計成長率會在 16% 到 22% 之間。

I know every year there's puts and takes.

我知道每年都有得有失。

I wondered if you would comment on, what do you see as some of the key variables that will move you around within that range and is there anything that's different because you're heading into 25 from what you normally see and if I could squeeze in a variance on that, anything in Washington with all the uncertainty.

我想知道您是否會發表評論，您認為哪些關鍵變量會使您在此範圍內變動，由於您即將進入 25 強，與通常看到的相比，有什麼不同嗎？

I don't perceive you've got a lot of things at risk there, but anything you're looking at that they're discussing that could be an opportunity or a challenge for you.

我不認為你們面臨太多風險，但是他們正在討論的任何事情都可能成為你們的機會或挑戰。

Yeah, I appreciate the questions, AJ.

是的，我很感謝你的提問，AJ。

So, on the first one, look for context, our guidance is very narrow.

因此，首先，尋找背景，我們的指導非常狹窄。

It's a $5 million range, that underscores the predictability and the consistency of our model, and, so it's not a big range from a dollar perspective.

這個範圍是 500 萬美元，這強調了我們模型的可預測性和一致性，因此從美元角度來看這不是一個很大的範圍。

And then, there's nothing new this year, then, it's pretty much rinse and repeat.

然後，今年就沒有什麼新鮮事了，然後，基本上就是重複。

The variables are the same.

變數相同。

We have a very predictable FIA service book.

我們有一本非常可預測的 FIA 服務手冊。

We've sold a lot of the providers that'll get implemented already, as there's a 56-month lag, and so the FIA service book is extremely predictable.

我們已經賣出了許多即將實施的供應商，因為存在 56 個月的滯後，所以 FIA 服務手冊非常可預測。

The only source of variability is the value-based book, and that's actual performance versus our accruals, and you've seen from a track record, you can see slide seven.

唯一的變異來源是基於價值的帳簿，這是實際表現與我們的應計費用，您可以從記錄中看到，如第七張幻燈片所示。

A seven-year track record that we've been pretty consistent with our accruals, and we follow the same methodology as I alluded to in the answer to the previous questions.

七年的記錄表明，我們的應計項目一直非常一致，並且我們遵循我在回答前面的問題時提到的相同方法。

So I think that's going to be the only source and then that's why you have the range if if the value-based book performs better than expected, then like last year, hopefully, we'll be at the at or above the high end of the range and if not, then we have the range.

所以我認為這將是唯一的來源，這就是為什麼你會有這個範圍，如果基於價值的賬簿表現好於預期，那麼就像去年一樣，希望我們能夠處於或超過這個範圍的高端，如果不是，那麼我們就有這個範圍。

So, that's pretty much, underscores that that narrow guidance.

所以，這很大程度強調了狹義的指導。

On your second question, look, I don't think there's anything specific with our model supporting community-based physicians.

關於你的第二個問題，我不認為我們的支持社區醫生的模式有什麼特別之處。

It's the lowest cost of setting in healthcare.

這是醫療保健領域成本最低的設定。

The administration in its first term was really supportive of all the programs we are in.

第一任期內的政府確實支持我們所進行的所有計畫。

We don't expect them to change that.

我們不指望他們改變這一點。

And so, there's nothing currently that we've heard that impacts our results.

因此，目前我們沒有聽到任何會影響我們結果的消息。

If something changes, obviously we'll let but, I think we'll continue to get good support from CMS here for all the programs that we participate in.

如果發生變化，顯然我們會讓其發生，但我認為我們將繼續獲得 CMS 對我們參與的所有專案的良好支持。

Your next question comes from the line of Jack Slevin with Jefferies.

您的下一個問題來自 Jefferies 的 Jack Slevin。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thanks for taking the question and congrats on the really strong print pretty simple one for me here, I guess just want to zero in on the care margin guidance and running quick numbers.

嘿，感謝您提出這個問題，並祝賀您獲得了非常強勁的印刷效果，這對我來說很簡單，我猜只是想把注意力集中在護理利潤率指導和快速運行數字上。

It looks to me like.

在我看來是的。

It's taking in a 6% drop in a sort of simplified view if you just look at care margin per average implementer provider and I know that doesn't take all the moving pieces into account but maybe just considering.

如果只看每個平均實施提供者的護理利潤率，那麼從某種簡化的角度來看，它下降了 6%，我知道這並沒有考慮到所有的變動因素，但可能只是考慮一下。

What are the scenarios you guys think you'd have to look at to upside the care margin and the even with that guidance for the full year?

你們認為，為了提高照護利潤率，甚至達到全年指導水平，必須考慮哪些情境？

Thanks.

謝謝。

Yeah, good question, Jack.

是的，傑克，你問得好。

So, it's predominantly the flat assumption in value-based care shared savings.

因此，這主要是基於價值的護理共享節省的固定假設。

So that's one factor and the other is, the mix between physicians and ABBs and nurse practitioners, so that impacts it a little bit given our scale, but not too much, and then obviously the mix between, primary care, feeds, [BOBs], and then specialists.

這是一個因素，另一個因素是醫生、ABB 和執業護理師之間的混合，考慮到我們的規模，這會產生一點影響，但不會太大，然後顯然還有初級保健、餵食、[BOB] 和專家之間的混合。

And then how that flows down into care margin from practice collections.

然後它如何從實踐集合流入護理範圍。

So, I think overall we're looking to increase operating leverage down to even done free cash, and you can see that increasing pretty well, but I think that's flat, that is mainly driven by the first factor which is if shared savings assumptions are flat.

因此，我認為總體而言，我們希望將營業槓桿率提高到甚至更低的自由現金水平，而且您可以看到這一增長相當不錯，但我認為這是持平的，這主要是由第一個因素驅動的，即共享儲蓄假設是否持平。

And as our take rate is 40% on every dollar of shared savings, that is leading to that to that outcome.

由於我們的共享儲蓄每美元的提取率為 40%，所以就導致了這樣的結果。

Hopefully we'll get leverage in future years as that improves.

希望隨著未來幾年情況的改善，我們能夠獲得槓桿作用。

Your next question comes from the line of Jeff Garrow with Stephens Inc. Please go ahead.

您的下一個問題來自 Stephens Inc. 的 Jeff Garrow。

Yeah, good morning.

是的，早安。

Thanks for taking the questions.

感謝您回答這些問題。

I thought maybe we'd check in on the Care Partners program and just curious how provider interest has trended in that model and similarly where previous level of interest is in not requiring providers to switch electronic health record systems to join the Privia platform.

我想我們也許應該檢查一下護理合作夥伴計劃，只是好奇提供者對該模型的興趣趨勢如何，以及之前的興趣水平如何，即不要求提供者切換電子健康記錄系統來加入 Privia 平台。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Yeah, I appreciate the question.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題。

So, I think that's progressing well, as we bought Community Medical Group in Connecticut, which was one of the largest IPAs, and that's a state where we're starting to implement providers on the on the same technology stack, but a large portion of that, those are not on the platform yet.

所以，我認為進展順利，因為我們收購了康乃狄克州的社區醫療集團，它是最大的 IPA 之一，在這個州，我們開始在相同的技術堆疊上實施提供商，但其中很大一部分尚未在平台上。

I think over time our hope is we'll migrate as many of our providers onto the same tech stack into our medical groups, but you know that's a good lever for us to continue to expand, get attribution, perform in value-based care, and over time get providers on the integrated stack.

我認為隨著時間的推移，我們希望將盡可能多的提供者遷移到我們的醫療組中的同一技術堆疊上，但您知道，這對我們繼續擴展、獲得歸因、在基於價值的護理中發揮作用以及隨著時間的推移讓提供者進入整合堆疊是一個很好的槓桿。

So I think it's performing pretty well as we had expected.

所以我認為它的表現正如我們預期的那樣好。

It's all embedded in the results.

一切都已包含在結果中。

We don't break it out.

我們不會打破它。

It's part of the core business, and so I think it's gone pretty well as planned.

這是核心業務的一部分，因此我認為一切進展順利，正如計劃的那樣。

Your next question comes from the line of Matthew Gilmore with Keybank.

您的下一個問題來自 Keybank 的 Matthew Gilmore。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, good morning.

嘿，早安。

Thanks for the question.

謝謝你的提問。

I wanted to ask about the physician fee schedule.

我想詢問醫生的收費標準。

I don't think Congress addressed the cut that started this year at this point.

我認為國會目前還沒有解決今年開始的削減問題。

There's obviously a lot of bipartisan support to get that addressed hopefully in the next couple of weeks.

顯然，兩黨都大力支持，希望在未來幾週內解決這個問題。

I was curious how you were thinking about that from a guidance perspective.

我很好奇你從指導的角度是如何考慮這個問題的。

Is that even something that's material enough to move anything either way?

那是否是足夠實質的東西，能夠以任何方式移動任何東西？

And if it doesn't get addressed, is that something that actually helps drive additional providers on the platform?

如果這個問題無法解決，這是否真的有助於推動平台上出現更多的提供者？

Yeah, I appreciate the question, Matt.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題，馬特。

So, I mean we've embedded, our best estimate into the guidance with whatever puts and takes.

所以，我的意思是我們已經將我們的最佳估計嵌入了指導中，無論付出什麼。

I think we have a lot of offsetting factors in there too.

我認為其中也有很多抵消因素。

So, it's nothing material that we like to call out, and if it's better, it's better, I think.

所以，我們不想大聲喊出什麼實質的東西，如果更好，那就更好了，我想。

Look, our fundamental value proposition just does not change, with that particular variable.

你看，我們的基本價值主張不會因為那個特定變數而改變。

If anything, all of these pressures, further validate the need for providers to join a very large integrated medical group, risk entity, and the value has to offer.

無論如何，所有這些壓力都進一步證實了供應商加入一個非常大的綜合醫療集團、風險實體以及其所提供的價值的必要性。

So, I think nothing fundamentally changes, either way.

所以，我認為無論如何，都沒有發生根本性的改變。

Your next question comes from the line of Richard Close with Canaccord Genuity.

您的下一個問題來自 Canaccord Genuity 的 Richard Close。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Yeah, congratulations.

是的，恭喜你。

Thanks for the question.

謝謝你的提問。

Maybe digging into Washington a little bit more specifically, how do you think about, maybe the level of uninsured increasing if subsidies go away and then the potential, changes in Medicaid, how does that impact your business?

或許更具體地深入了解華盛頓，您如何看待，如果補貼取消，無保險人數可能會增加，然後是醫療補助的潛在變化，這會對您的業務產生什麼影響？

Obviously, it would be more 2026, but just thoughts there.

顯然，這個時間更可能是 2026 年，但這只是想法而已。

Yeah, I appreciate the question, Richard.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題，理查德。

So, as we don't have a big Medicaid book.

所以，我們沒有大量的醫療補助帳本。

We have about 97,000 lives in some value-based programs.

大約有 97,000 人參與了一些基於價值的專案。

Our mix represents the demographics in each state across our 14 states and DC, so it's pretty diversified, same with the uninsured, so I think we'll just see.

我們的組合代表了我們 14 個州和華盛頓特區的每個州的人口統計數據，因此它非常多樣化，無保險人群也是如此，所以我想我們拭目以待。

We went through the whole Medicaid re determination, and you saw, like, we can capture some of those patients and lives into other parts of the book, whether it's commercial, MA, duals, whatever it is, on the individual exchange.

我們經歷了整個醫療補助的重新確定，你會看到，我們可以將其中一些病人和生命記錄到書的其他部分，無論是商業、MA、雙重，還是其他什麼，在個人交換中。

So I just think it depends on how it all plays out, what the impact is.

所以我認為這取決於事情如何發展，其影響是什麼。

Do patients actually move in a particular direction, and that'll be again state by state.

病人是否真的朝著特定的方向移動，這將再次由各州進行。

So it's just tough to predict, but we don't have big exposure to Medicaid or to the uninsured yet.

所以這很難預測，但我們目前還沒有大規模涉足醫療補助或無保險族群。

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Daniels with William Blair.

您的下一個問題來自 William Blair 的 Ryan Daniels。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Yeah, hey guys, this is Jack.

是的，嘿夥計們，我是傑克。

I'm down for Ryan.

我支持瑞安。

Congrats on the strong year.

祝賀這豐收的一年。

I know you called out the cash balance where you can use, some of that to help enter new markets and build density, but, well, and your guide does not include the new market entries, but is there any one area that you're targeting more or that you should see more growth from like whether it is entering new markets versus new market growth?

我知道您提到了可以使用的現金餘額，其中一些可用於幫助進入新市場和建立密度，但是，您的指南並不包括新市場進入，但是是否有一個領域是您更關注的，或者您應該看到更多的增長，例如進入新市場還是新市場增長？

Just kind of curious what your mindset is, kind of parsing out the difference there.

只是有點好奇你的心態是什麼，想分析一下其中的差異。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Yeah, thanks, Jack.

是的，謝謝，傑克。

So, look, I think all the sales and marketing expense for existing markets is fully expense in the P&L.

所以，我認為現有市場的所有銷售和行銷費用都已完全計入損益表中。

So, I think you're seeing the power of the platform in that we can continue to grow organically in existing states pretty well without deploying capital.

所以，我認為你看到了該平台的強大力量，因為我們可以在不部署資本的情況下繼續在現有狀態下實現有機成長。

I think in existing states where we could use capital is to just double down or increase density, if there are opportunities that arise, and that's very value creative because we already have an infrastructure.

我認為，在現有的州，如果有機會，我們可以使用資本來加倍或增加密度，這是非常有價值的，因為我們已經有了基礎設施。

And then a lot of capital, obviously predominantly the business development is getting into new states which we've consistently done over the past, as you can again see on slide seven, we've consistently added new states every year and then, we've absorbed any incremental costs within our guide.

然後大量的資本，顯然主要是業務發展進入新的州，這是我們過去一直在做的事情，正如你在第七張幻燈片上再次看到的那樣，我們每年都在不斷增加新的州，然後，我們已經吸收了指南中的任何增量成本。

I think that's pretty important.

我認為這非常重要。

To also underscore, so I think if you look at some of the years like '2022, '23, we continue to absorb a lot of those costs within the guide that we gave.

還要強調的是，我認為，如果你看看 2022 年、2023 年等某些年份，我們會繼續在我們提供的指南中吸收大量成本。

So, I think, our guidance is pretty prudent, assuming no impact of

因此，我認為，我們的指導是相當謹慎的，假設沒有影響

[BD].

[屋宇署]。

Obviously if you deploy significant capital that'll come with the incremental collections, scare margin, even the, some will flow this year, some will flow next year.

顯然，如果你部署大量資本，這些資本將伴隨著增量收款、恐慌利潤，甚至一些資本將在今年流入，一些資本將在明年流入。

So, we'll just see when we can get those deals done and if and when that happens, we'll update guidance, but I think this guidance does not include any impact.

因此，我們只會看到何時可以完成這些交易，如果完成，我們將更新指引，但我認為該指引不包含任何影響。

Your next question comes from the line of Matt Shea with Needham.

您的下一個問題來自 Needham 的 Matt Shea。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thanks for taking the questions and congrats on a strong close to the year.

嘿，感謝您回答這些問題，並祝賀您在今年取得了圓滿的成績。

I guess kind of as a follow up to the last question, it was great to hear earlier this year that 70% of the new provider pipeline is coming from referrals pushing down tax and payback period.

我想這有點像是上一個問題的後續，今年早些時候我們很高興地聽說 70% 的新供應商管道來自推薦，從而降低了稅收和回報期。

So now that referrals have reached this level, is this changing your philosophy at all?

那麼，現在推薦已經達到了這個水平，這會改變你的理念嗎？

New market expansion versus stepping on the gas to grow more in existing markets and maybe as a follow up as we think about.

新市場擴張與增加現有市場的成長力度，或許是我們考慮的後續行動。

New markets like Indiana, how long does it take for the referral flywheel to get going.

像印第安納州這樣的新市場，推薦飛輪需要多長時間才能啟動。

Yeah, I appreciate the question, Matt.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題，馬特。

So, on the first one, look, we're going to be aggressive everywhere existing states, new states, just given the business model is very proven, the unit economics are really proven.

因此，首先，我們將積極進取，進軍所有現有州和新州，因為商業模式已經得到充分驗證，單位經濟學也確實得到了驗證。

We know what to do, how to do it.

我們知道該做什麼、怎樣做。

We have the capital, so I think you'll see us pursue both.

我們有資本，所以我想你會看到我們追求這兩者。

So, we're going to step on the gas in every which way to just continue the flywheel, and then.

所以，我們要全力踩油門，讓飛輪繼續轉動，然後。

Each market evolves, so those conversion rates are in the most mature markets, as you would expect.

每個市場都在不斷發展，因此正如您所期望的那樣，這些轉換率處於最成熟的市場。

Some of the new markets, I think that takes time to develop.

我認為一些新市場需要時間來開發。

So, I just think each market evolves over time, but I think we can have referrals across markets too.

所以，我只是認為每個市場都會隨著時間而發展，但我認為我們也可以跨市場推薦。

We can have bigger groups.

我們可以有更大的團體。

Join us as they hear about the success story of of their colleagues in other states.

加入我們，聆聽他們講述其他州的同事的成功故事。

So I think we're pursuing all all aspects, all levers to continue to grow and scale the business.

因此我認為我們正在利用所有方面、所有槓桿來繼續發展和擴大業務。

You're seeing that in the results, despite challenging value-based environment, we're continuing to grow even that, grow free cash all the way down to the down the P&L.

您可以從結果中看到，儘管面臨著基於價值的挑戰，我們仍在繼續成長，自由現金一直成長到損益表。

So I think that's just reflective of how this is playing out, and we're pretty proud of the accomplishment.

所以我認為這只是反映了事情的進展情況，我們對這項成就感到非常自豪。

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Langston with TD Cowan.

您的下一個問題來自 TD Cowan 的 Ryan Langston。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Good morning.

早安.

In the 2025 guidance, providers, it looks like expected to grow around 10%, but lives around 7.5% year to year, I guess, despite kind of the strong 2024 provider pick up, for 2024, actually the lives growth was over the provider growth.

在 2025 年的指導中，提供者似乎預計會成長 10% 左右，但年均成長率約為 7.5%，我猜，儘管 2024 年提供者的成長很強勁，但就 2024 年而言，實際上年均成長率超過了提供者的成長。

So just wondering if that's an expectation of a slower ramp up of lives once you get those providers on boarded or anything else going on there.

所以只是想知道，一旦這些提供者加入或發生其他任何事情，這是否意味著生命成長會緩慢成長。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Yeah, I appreciate the question.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題。

I mean, it's a wider range this year from 1.3million to 1.4 million lives.

我的意思是，今年死亡人數的範圍更廣，從 130 萬人到 140 萬人。

So, at the high end it's 11.5% growth.

因此，最高成長率是11.5%。

We'll just see how it plays out, it's a lot of large numbers are playing out, so I think the numbers you reflected were at the midpoint, but we'll just see how it plays out.

我們只是看看它如何發揮作用，它有很多大數字正在發揮作用，所以我認為你反映的數字處於中間點，但我們只是看看它如何發揮作用。

It's also influenced by; we're building multi-specialty groups.

它也受到以下因素的影響；我們正在建立多專業團體。

And so, primary care, the specialty mixes influences that a little bit as the attribution predominantly happens with the with PCPs, as and then to some extent with OBs and beats, but I think it's a broader range, so we'll just see how it plays out, but usually it's kind of is pretty consistent with provided growth.

因此，初級保健和專科護理會在一定程度上影響因素，因為歸因主要發生在 PCP 上，然後在某種程度上與 OB 和節拍有關，但我認為範圍更廣，所以我們只需看看它如何發揮作用，但通常它與提供的增長相當一致。

Your next question comes from the line of David Larson with BDIG.

您的下一個問題來自 BDIG 的 David Larson。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, congrats on the good quarter and the great year.

嘿，祝賀這個季度和這一年取得的良好業績。

Did I hear you say there's no new market entry costs in the guide for 25 and why not?

我是否聽您說過 25 年指南中沒有新市場進入成本，為什麼呢？

You usually enter a couple of markets, you get a bunch of cash on the balance sheet.

你通常會進入幾個市場，然後在資產負債表上獲得一大筆現金。

And then also did I also hear you say that the gross margin for cap revenue is 2%.

然後我還聽您說過上限收入的毛利率是 2%。

It's great that it's positive, but that still sounds kind of low, right?

這是積極的一面，這很好，但聽起來還是有點低落，對吧？

I would assume a negative EBITDA margin if the gross margin were 2%.

如果毛利率為 2%，我會假設 EBITDA 利潤率為負值。

Why not just sort of exit those contracts?

為什麼不直接退出這些合約呢？

Thanks very much.

非常感謝。

Yeah, thanks, David.

是的，謝謝，大衛。

So on the first one, yeah, just to correct, the guidance assumes no incremental new markets.

因此，對於第一個問題，是的，只是為了修正一下，該指南假設沒有增量新市場。

We obviously entered a few new markets over the last couple of years, so those are still, we are investing in those as we noted in our prepared remarks, and all of those costs are fully embedded.

顯然，我們在過去幾年中進入了一些新市場，因此，正如我們在準備好的評論中所指出的那樣，我們仍在對這些市場進行投資，所有這些成本都已完全嵌入。

In the guidance, and then I think if you refer to, page 10 of the press release, you can see we break out, the capitated revenue and then then the total claims incurred.

在指南中，我想如果您參考新聞稿第 10 頁，您會看到我們列出了人頭收入和發生的總索賠。

So you can see that we actually generated positive contribution margin in that book.

所以你可以看到，我們實際上在那本書中產生了正的貢獻毛利。

So that's what we were alluding to.

這就是我們所暗示的。

Your next question comes from the line of Adam Ron with Bank of America.

您的下一個問題來自美國銀行的亞當·羅恩。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thanks for the question.

嘿，謝謝你的提問。

I'd like to unpack more of the shared savings commentary you gave, particularly on MSSP.

我想進一步解釋您給出的共享儲蓄評論，特別是關於 MSSP 的評論。

And so, you mentioned in '24 you had initially expected minimal accrual increases for shared savings, but then it ended up coming in better.

所以，您提到，在 24 年，您最初預計共享儲蓄的累積成長會很小，但最終情況卻有所好轉。

So, first, was that more so on the 2023 sure up or was that based on what you're accruing for 2024?

那麼，首先，這是否更取決於 2023 年的確定性，還是基於您對 2024 年的累積？

And then second, it'd be helpful if you could share, somewhat directionally what you're seeing on trend for MSSP in 2024 and how that compares to what people are saying in ACH is like a high single digit trend and if that, what your kind of assuming in 2025 if you're assuming, similar trends continue in 2025 versus '24 accruals thanks.

其次，如果您可以分享您對 2024 年 MSSP 趨勢的看法，以及與人們在 ACH 中所說的高個位數趨勢相比的情況，那將會很有幫助，如果您假設 2025 年會出現類似的趨勢，那麼與 24 年應計相比，您對 2025 年的假設是什麼？

Yeah, I appreciate the question.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題。

So, look, I mean, we don't obviously give guidance by year and by accrual versus actual, but in general it's a combination of both.

所以，你看，我的意思是，我們顯然不會按年份、應計金額或實際金額提供指導，但一般來說，這是兩者的結合。

So, in every year we are throwing up.

所以，每年我們都會嘔吐。

Accruals versus actual performance for the previous year as the results come in and then adjust our accruals in the current year based on the data we see, so that's fundamental to the question you asked.

隨著結果出來，我們將應計項目與上一年的實際業績進行比較，然後根據我們看到的數據調整當年的應計項目，所以這是您提出的問題的基礎。

Our methodology is the same, our assumptions are the same that we want to be very prudent with the trends we witness.

我們的方法是一樣的，我們的假設也是一樣的，我們希望對我們見證的趨勢非常謹慎。

If we are wrong, we hope that this positive upside versus negative downside, that's how we look at when we guide.

如果我們錯了，我們希望是正面的上漲而非負面的下跌，這就是我們指導時的看法。

And so, I think the outperformance was again a combination, '23 versus '24, there was some prior period stuff.

因此，我認為優異的表現再次是 23 年與 24 年的結合，有一些前期的東西。

There was some in year stuff, it balances across different lines of business.

有一些年度事務，它可以平衡不同業務線。

We got commercial, we got MSSP, we got MA, so they put and takes across all, that balances itself out, and we're adopting the same approach this year.

我們有商業，有 MSSP，有 MA，所以他們把所有這些都納入其中，使其達到平衡，今年我們也採用了同樣的方法。

Yeah, I can't specifically comment on trend and reach versus MSSP.

是的，我無法具體評論與 MSSP 相比的趨勢和影響力。

It's really by geography, by book of business.

這實際上是根據地理位置和業務簿來劃分的。

By state, based on regional benchmarks, how they change, so on and so forth, ACC trends in those states, and so, we're just looking at the data that we get from CMS each quarter, each rolling quarter, and that influences, true ups on versus how we accrued foreign prior periods and then, how that informs us for adjusting accruals.

按州劃分，基於區域基準，它們如何變化，等等，這些州的 ACC 趨勢，因此，我們只是查看每個季度、每個滾動季度從 CMS 獲得的數據，這些數據會影響我們對外國前期累計情況的真實變化，然後，這些數據如何為我們提供調整應計費用的信息。

In the current year, so it's a pretty dynamic exercise.

在當前年份，這是一項相當有活力的練習。

I mean, our healthcare economic teams, data analytics teams just does a fantastic job, with a pretty large book.

我的意思是，我們的醫療經濟團隊和數據分析團隊做得非常出色，而且書本內容非常豐富。

I think you've seen that very consistently with our results over the last seven years.

我想你已經從我們過去七年的業績中看到了這一點。

I mean, slide seven just speaks for itself.

我的意思是，第七張幻燈片本身就說明了一切。

So, I just think we're going to keep following the same approach and just see how it plays out and the diversification of the book really helps us, mitigate, any puts and takes in any particular state or any particular program.

所以，我只是認為我們將繼續遵循相同的方法，看看它如何發揮作用，而帳簿的多樣化確實可以幫助我們減輕任何特定州或任何特定計劃的投入和產出。

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Ha with Baird.

您的下一個問題來自貝爾德的邁克爾·哈 (Michael Ha)。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Just wanted to follow up on that last question.

只是想跟進最後一個問題。

So, on an MSSP, I guess specifically CMS published their Hannibal pair perspective trend for '23 to '24, and I know everyone's saying it's significantly below emerging trend, right?

因此，在 MSSP 上，我猜 CMS 具體發布了 23 年至 24 年的漢尼拔對視角趨勢，我知道每個人都說它明顯低於新興趨勢，對嗎？

AC reach like you just mentioned, but you sound very confident based on, what you're seeing internally.

就像您剛才提到的 AC 範圍，但根據您所看到的內部情況，您聽起來非常有信心。

Does that mean what they published for the ACPT?

這是否意味著他們為 ACPT 發布了什麼？

Is in line with what you're actually seeing for your own ACOs, and I guess how it impacts your 24 performance accruals and is there any potential go forward risk if rates do remain understated versus trend or I'm guessing maybe it's more in line than what people are assuming.

是否與您對自己的 ACO 的實際看到的情況一致，我猜想這會對您的 24 項績效累積產生什麼影響，如果利率相對於趨勢仍然被低估，是否存在任何潛在的未來風險，或者我猜想也許它比人們假設的更一致。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Yeah, so I think it's important to recognize the ACPT impact is on newer ACOs, not older ACOs.

是的，所以我認為重要的是認識到 ACPT 的影響是針對較新的 ACO，而不是較舊的 ACO。

So I think there's some of that you have to factor in.

所以我認為你必須考慮其中的一些因素。

We have, I think 11 new ACO that's impacted a little bit, just given the gestation of these ACOs over time.

我認為，我們有 11 個新的 ACO，它們的影響有點大，因為這些 ACO 是隨著時間的推移而醞釀的。

So again, our book is very diversified, all those trends are factored into the guidance.

所以，我們的資產負債表非常多樣化，所有這些趨勢都被考慮到了指導之中。

Then it's our relative performance versus the benchmark, the ACO's rebates every five years.

那麼這是我們相對於基準的相對錶現，即每五年 ACO 的回扣。

So that happens over time with different ACOs.

隨著時間的推移，不同的 ACO 也會發生這種情況。

I mean, we've been in the program 10 years, so, I think we just have a methodology that we follow.

我的意思是，我們已經參與該計劃 10 年了，所以，我認為我們只是有一個要遵循的方法。

We look at the balance book and we embed all that in the guidance.

我們查看資產負債表，並將所有內容嵌入到指導中。

And then we hope that we're right and there's a track record.

然後我們希望我們是正確的並且有記錄。

So, I don't think it fundamentally changes what we've done.

所以，我認為它不會從根本上改變我們已經在做的事情。

If they are puts and takes, we absorb it and then try to outperform based on good clinical performance in our practices and all the levers that we can pull and so I think we're not doing anything different than we've done in past years.

如果它們是相互影響的，我們會吸收它，然後嘗試在實踐中基於良好的臨床表現和我們可以利用的所有槓桿來超越，所以我認為我們所做的與過去幾年沒有什麼不同。

Your next question comes from the line of Constantine Davides with Citizens JMP.

您的下一個問題來自 Citizens JMP 的 Constantine Davides。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Thanks.

謝謝。

Parth, there's a number of competing medical group strategies out there in the marketplace that just haven't been as successful as yours.

Parth，市場上有許多競爭醫療集團策略，但它們的策略都沒有你們的策略成功。

How much is technology a differentiator or enabler for you and supporting your growth in terms of just Leveraging the Athena backbone and I'm assuming now being one of their largest partners, in terms of driving your ability to scale quickly but efficiently, at this pace across as you mentioned, a pretty diverse set of providers, states payers, etc.

就利用 Athena 主幹網而言，技術對您而言有多大的差異化或推動力，支持您的增長？ 我認為現在我們是他們最大的合作夥伴之一，在推動您以這種速度快速高效地擴展規模方面，正如您提到的那樣，在相當多樣化的供應商、國家付款人等方面。

Yeah, thanks, Constantine for the question.

是的，謝謝康斯坦丁提出這個問題。

I think, it's a great question, but it's much broader than just the tech stack.

我認為這是一個很好的問題，但它涉及的範圍遠比技術堆疊要廣泛得多。

I think how we've differentiated ourselves; we've been saying this for five years since we were public, there are not too many entities that are creating integrated medical groups, risk entities, and a full tech and services platform all together in one shop.

我認為我們如何才能脫穎而出；自上市以來，我們五年來一直在說這一點，沒有太多實體能夠在一家公司內創建綜合醫療集團、風險實體以及完整的技術和服務平台。

Having providers join an integrated medical group on the same platform with the same governance structure where we are deeply embedded in the workflows, deeply embedded from a technology standpoint, not only just an EMR and RCM, but everything you build on top of that, and then having a risk entity that is fully embedded and is supporting that medical group to take risk, and we are seeing the data, day in and day out across all lines of business.

讓供應商加入到同一平台、具有相同治理結構的綜合醫療集團中，我們深深嵌入到工作流程中，從技術角度深深嵌入，不僅僅是 EMR 和 RCM，還包括在此基礎上構建的一切，然後擁有一個完全嵌入的風險實體，支持該醫療集團承擔風險，我們日復一日地查看所有業務線上的數據。

That's a very unique model.

這是一個非常獨特的模型。

I don't think other models are this deeply embedded in the workflow.

我不認為其他模型能夠如此深入地嵌入工作流程中。

I think you've seen how that impacts performance.

我想您已經看到了這對性能的影響。

They're relying on pairs, they're relying on, a very light layer on top.

他們依賴於成對的，他們依賴最上面的非常輕的層。

They don't have the governance, the deep governance that we do, so I think it's the combination of those elements of our business model and then obviously the embedded technology stack.

他們沒有我們所擁有的治理、深度治理，所以我認為這是我們商業模式的這些元素與嵌入式技術堆疊的結合。

That allows us to really work very closely with our practices, organize them in small pods and influence results.

這使我們能夠真正與我們的實踐緊密合作，將它們組織成小塊並影響結果。

So I think it's all those factors that we have fundamentally built this business in a very thoughtful manner from day one, and you're seeing the fruits of that in empirical results over 78 years, a lot of companies went public, there are a lot of private companies out there that got funded.

所以我認為正是這些因素促使我們從第一天起就以非常周到的方式從根本上構建了這項業務，你可以在 78 年來的實證結果中看到這一策略的成果，許多公司上市，也有許多私營公司獲得了融資。

And it's very easy to just go take risks and on a few lives and support practices in a very light manner.

而且，很容易就冒險並以非常輕鬆的方式犧牲一些人的生命並支持實踐。

I think that just plays itself out as you're seeing as this industry evolves.

我認為，正如你所看到的，這個行業正在不斷發展。

So I think it's probably, very thoughtful question if you just, look at the results that we've produced consistently over 78 years that you can see publicly now that demonstrate the validity of this business model.

所以我認為，如果您看看我們 78 年來持續創造的成果，並公開看到這些成果，就能明白這種商業模式的有效性，那麼這可能是一個非常值得深思的問題。

And I think it's a combination of all of those factors, and that's why providers choose us given that strong value proposition.

我認為這是所有這些因素的結合，這也是為什麼供應商會因為強大的價值主張而選擇我們。

Your next question comes from the line of Daniel Grosslight with Citi.

您的下一個問題來自花旗銀行的丹尼爾·格羅斯萊特。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hi, thanks for taking the question.

你好，謝謝你回答這個問題。

On your capitated book for 25, are you still assuming around a 2% contribution margin, or should we expect some improvement there?

對於您按人頭計算的 25 本書，您是否仍假設貢獻利潤率約為 2%，或者我們是否應該預期會有所改善？

And then as we think about capitation full Cap in in 2026 and beyond it does seem like rates, the advance rate was, no, it was good and maybe some room for improving.

然後，當我們考慮 2026 年及以後的人頭稅全額上限時，看起來利率、預付利率確實是不錯的，也許還有一些提升的空間。

That as it goes to final, it seems like bids have been a bit more rational this year, so curious how you're thinking about capitation also in in 2026 and beyond.

隨著最終結果的公佈，今年的出價似乎更加理性一些，所以很好奇您是如何看待 2026 年及以後的人頭稅的。

Yeah, I appreciate the question.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題。

So obviously we don't break out guidance in any particular program, as we've consistently said, we are in a particular program, and we are doing some capitation with the hope that we'll have positive contribution margin.

因此，顯然我們不會在任何特定項目中公佈指導，正如我們一直說的那樣，我們處於一個特定的項目中，我們正在進行一些人頭稅，希望我們能有正的貢獻利潤。

I think it's tough to predict whether it'll be the same repeat from last year.

我認為很難預測今年的情況是否會重複去年的情況。

I think we're going to be prudent in that book.

我認為我們在寫這本書時會保持謹慎。

The environment continues to be challenging as we alluded to with all the factors.

正如我們所提到的，環境仍然充滿挑戰。

So, we'll see how it plays out in this year.

因此，我們將看看它今年的表現如何。

If we are in it, we are hoping we'll make money.

如果我們參與其中，我們希望能夠賺錢。

We'll just see how it plays out during the course of the year.

我們只需觀察它在今年內如何發展。

And then on the broader question, look, I think this goes back to the first or second question that was asked.

然後關於更廣泛的問題，看，我認為這又回到了所問的第一個或第二個問題。

I, we continue to, distinguish, in our minds this need to take full risk and capitation to do well in MA.

我，我們繼續在心中區分，這需要承擔全部風險和人頭稅才能在 MA 中取得好成績。

I think fundamentally we think a shared risk methodology with the payers where everybody's interests aligned is the right model A.

我認為從根本上來說，我們認為與付款人共擔風險、讓每個人的利益保持一致的方法是正確的 A 模型。

we are, we have the ability to take as much risk.

我們有能力承擔同樣多的風險。

I just don't think the pairs, given the pressures they are facing, will hand over contracts that are slam dunk for provider groups just to assume full risk and make money in this environment with all those factors.

我只是認為，考慮到所面臨的壓力，這些組合不會將對供應商集團來說輕而易舉的合約交給他們，而只是為了承擔全部風險並在這種環境下賺錢。

I mean, you've seen every payer go through the results and all the pressures, so it's pretty well documented by all of you on the call.

我的意思是，您已經看到每個付款人經歷了結果和所有的壓力，所以你們所有人都在通話中很好地記錄了這些。

So, I don't think you should expect us to ramp up our capitation book.

因此，我認為你不應該期望我們提高人頭稅。

I think if there are opportunities where we can do so, where we see a good risk reward ratio and there's a fair payment for us to assume that risk, we will.

我認為，如果我們有機會這樣做，並且我們看到良好的風險回報率，而且承擔該風險可以獲得公平的回報，我們就會這麼做。

Otherwise our preference is to share the risk with the payer across all aspects of the book, whether it's a it's Part B, it's Part C, it's PCP spend, specialist spend inpatient spend.

否則，我們傾向於與付款人分擔保險各個方面的風險，無論是 B 部分、C 部分、PCP 支出、專科支出或住院支出。

I think we take as much risk as we can in the things we control, and if we don't control certain things, then we're not going to take risk or share it with the payer.

我認為，我們會在我們能控制的事情上承擔盡可能多的風險，如果我們無法控制某些事情，那麼我們就不會承擔風險或與付款人分享風險。

But our hope is if we are taking risks, we're going to make money, otherwise there's no need to take risk.

但我們的希望是，如果我們承擔風險，我們就能賺錢，否則就沒有必要承擔風險。

We're making money for the pair, we're making money for our medical groups, we're making money for our shareholders, so it's a pretty simple concept.

我們為夫妻二人賺錢，為我們的醫療集團賺錢，為我們的股東賺錢，所以這是一個非常簡單的概念。

At the end of the day again it's a very binary outcome.

最終，這又是一個非常二元的結果。

Your next question comes from the line of Jessica Tassson with Piper Sandler.

您的下一個問題來自派珀·桑德勒 (Piper Sandler) 的傑西卡·塔森 (Jessica Tassson)。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hi guys, thanks for taking the question.

大家好，感謝你們回答這個問題。

So this one's maybe for David.

所以這可能是給大衛的。

Can you just help us understand why the 4Q upside to the high end of the implied platform contribution guide didn't see more of a kind of complete flow through to adjust to Eva dot upside in 4Q.

您能否幫助我們理解為什麼第四季隱含平台貢獻指南高端的上升趨勢沒有看到更多完整的流程來適應第四季度的 Eva 點上升趨勢？

Were there any one-time items in OpEx?

營運支出 (OpEx) 中是否存在任何一次性項目？

And I guess just why the platform contribution upside wouldn't be really high incremental margin and drop kind of straight through toe out.

我想，為什麼平台貢獻的上升不會是真正高的增量利潤率，而是直接下降呢？

Thanks.

謝謝。

Thanks, Jess relatively complicated question, I think. what you're asking is why is the EBITDA increasing greater than contribution margin platform contribution.

謝謝，傑西，我認為這是一個相對複雜的問題。你要問的是為什麼 EBITDA 的增幅大於貢獻利潤率平台的貢獻。

If that's the case, it's due to, how our sales cost and our GNA cost run through for the year.

如果確實如此，那是因為我們的銷售成本和 GNA 成本是如何貫穿全年的。

And again, both of them were, I would say, positively or negatively impacting on how you want to look at it from how we did for the year.

而且我想說的是，這兩種情況都會對你如何看待我們今年的表現產生正面或負面的影響。

So, I don't know if 100% answer your question you ask a lot in there.

所以，我不知道是否能 100% 回答你在這裡問的很多問題。

So, if not we can follow up after.

如果沒有的話，我們可以後續跟進。

Yeah, I think, we had a great sale here, so obviously the sales costs in four, were higher as we threw up commissions and then the company did pretty well.

是的，我認為，我們這裡的銷售業績很好，所以顯然由於我們增加了佣金，所以四年的銷售成本更高，而且公司業績也相當不錯。

So, some of the bonus accruals are higher than, originally anticipated, so all that kind of just gets factored into even versus platform contribution.

因此，一些獎金應計金額高於最初的預期，所以所有這些都被計入平台貢獻中。

Your next question comes from the line of [taou] with Macquarie.

您的下一個問題來自麥格理的[taou]。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thank you.

嘿，謝謝你。

Just to continue on the point about your willingness to take risks, looking back in 2024, you renegotiated some MA contracts, and your BBC share of total collection came down 7% versus the previous year.

繼續說你願意承擔風險這一點，回顧 2024 年，你重新談判了一些 MA 合同，而你的 BBC 總收款份額比上一年下降了 7%。

Parth, I think you mentioned that the BBC environment remains.

Parth，我想您提到 BBC 環境仍然存在。

Challenging out there and MSSP is expected to be flat.

挑戰在那裡，預計 MSSP 將會持平。

Any changes contemplated to any of the risk contract you have today, should we expect the makeshift to further decline towards FSS?

您今天簽訂的任何風險合約是否考慮過進行任何變更，我們是否應該預期臨時風險會進一步下降至 FSS？

And if so, it will be helpful to decide that any potential decline in the mix active or passive.

如果是這樣，這將有助於確定混合中任何潛在的下降是主動的還是被動的。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Yeah, I appreciate the question.

是的，我很感謝你提出這個問題。

So yeah, we don't anticipate any changes, we renegotiated whatever we had to beginning of last year.

是的，我們預計不會有任何變化，我們已經重新協商了去年年初必須達成的所有協議。

We're continuing with the capitated book we have.

我們將繼續出版現有的按人頭計算的書。

It's a pretty small piece of the business.

這只是業務中很小的一部分。

Like we said, we're solving for positive contribution margin, and you have to recognize, I mean, just going from full risk to partial risk, it's all revenue recognition.

就像我們說的那樣，我們正在解決正貢獻利潤率的問題，你必須認識到，我的意思是，從完全風險到部分風險，這都是收入確認。

The doctors don't go anywhere, the lives don't go anywhere.

醫生哪裡也不去，生命哪裡也不去。

Our ability to manage those lives does not change.

我們管理這些生活的能力不會改變。

So, you know that that decline was fundamentally the way top line gets recognized if you take full risk versus you don't take full risk.

因此，您知道，這種下降從根本上來說是承擔全部風險與不承擔全部風險時營業收入獲得認可的方式。

So, we're solving for positive care margin, positive contribution margin, positive even positive free cash flow, so, but there's no change contemplated from the book we have today.

因此，我們正在解決正的照護利潤率、正的貢獻利潤率、正的甚至正的自由現金流的問題，但是，從我們今天的帳簿來看，沒有任何變化。

Your last question comes from the line of Craig Jones with Stifel.

您的最後一個問題來自 Stifel 的 Craig Jones。

Please go ahead.

請繼續。

Hey, thank you, thanks for thanks for Glen, let me ask you a question here, so.

嘿，謝謝你，感謝格倫，讓我在這裡問你一個問題，所以。

I wanted to hit on free cash flow conversion, you've been over 100% for the last, handful of years here, gotten to 80%, I think, through from a combination of, working capital maybe and then starting to pay cash taxes.

我想談談自由現金流轉換，在過去幾年裡，你們的自由現金流轉換率一直超過 100%，我想，已經達到了 80%，可能是透過結合營運資本，然後開始支付現金稅。

So if you look at maybe more in a normalized year where your full cash tax and let's just say no working capital, where does that conversion kind of shake out?

因此，如果您看一下正常年份的更多內容，其中您的全部現金稅以及假設沒有營運資本，那麼這種轉換會產生什麼影響？

Thanks.

謝謝。

Yeah, I mean it's going to kind of shake out, I would say close to the 80% as we get rid of all of our NOLs, it's probably going to shake out a little bit lower than that if we don't take into account any working capital adjustments.

是的，我的意思是，當我們擺脫所有的營運資本調整時，我會說接近 80%，如果我們不考慮任何營運資本調整，它可能會比這更低一點。

So I would probably say in the 70% to 80% range is sort of a final resting place assuming they're working capital adjustments.

因此，我可能會說，70% 到 80% 的範圍是最終的歸宿，假設他們進行營運資本調整。

We do not have any more questions at this time.

我們現在沒有其他問題了。

Gentlemen, you may continue.

先生們，你們可以繼續。

Thank you all for listening to our call today.

感謝大家今天收聽我們的電話會議。

We appreciate your continued interest and support of Privia and look forward to speaking with you again in the near future.

我們感謝您對 Privia 的持續關注和支持，並期待在不久的將來再次與您交談。

Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes today's call.

女士們、先生們，今天的電話會議到此結束。

Thank you all for joining.

感謝大家的加入。

You may now disconnect.

您現在可以斷開連線。