Privia Health Group Inc (PRVA) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Hello, and thank you for standing by. My name is Pat, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Privia Health first-quarter conference call. (Operator Instructions)

您好，感謝您耐心等候。我叫 Pat，今天將擔任本次電話會議的接線員。此刻，我謹代表主辦方歡迎各位參加 Privia Health 第一季財報電話會議。(接線員指示)

I would now like to turn the call over to Robert Borchert, SVP Investor Relations of Incorporated Communications. Robert, go ahead.

現在我想把電話轉交給 Incorporated Communications 投資人關係資深副總裁 Robert Borchert。Robert，請開始。

Well, thank you, Pat, and good morning, everyone. Joining me are Parth Mehrotra, our Chief Executive Officer, and David Mountcastle, our Chief Financial Officer. This call is being webcast and can be accessed in the Investor Relations section of priviahealth.com, along with today's financial press release and slide presentation.

好的，謝謝你，Pat，各位早安。與我一同出席的有我們的執行長 Parth Mehrotra，以及財務長 David Mountcastle。本次電話會議將以網路直播方式進行，可於 priviahealth.com 的投資人關係專區收看，並可同時取得今日的財務新聞稿與簡報投影片。

Following our prepared comments, we will open the line for questions. Please limit yourself to one question only and return to the queue if you have a follow-up to get as many questions as possible. The financial results reported today are preliminary and are not final until our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2026, is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

在我們的準備發言結束後，我們將開放提問。請每位來電者僅限提一個問題；若有追問，請回到隊列，以便盡可能回答更多問題。今日公布的財務結果為初步數據，須待截至 2026 年 3 月 31 日季度的 Form 10-Q 向美國證券交易委員會提交後方為最終結果。

Some of the statements we'll make today are forward-looking in nature, based on our current expectations and view of our business as of today, May 7, 2026. Such statements, including those related to our future financial and operating performance and future business plans and objectives, are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially.

我們今天將發表部分前瞻性陳述，係基於我們截至今日（2026 年 5 月 7 日）對業務的現行預期與看法。此類陳述（包括與未來財務與營運表現，以及未來業務計畫與目標相關者）均受風險與不確定性影響，可能導致實際結果出現重大差異。

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，這些陳述應與今日新聞稿中的警示性聲明，以及本公司近期向 SEC 提交文件中所述的風險因素一併閱讀。

Finally, we may refer to certain non-GAAP financial measures on the call. Reconciliation of these measures to comparable GAAP measures is included in our press release and the accompanying slide presentation posted on our website.

最後，我們在本次電話會議中可能會提及若干非 GAAP 財務衡量指標。這些指標與可比 GAAP 指標之間的調節表，已載於我們的新聞稿及張貼於網站的隨附簡報投影片中。

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

現在我想把電話交給我們的執行長 Parth Mehrotra。

Thank you, Robert, and good morning, everyone. Privia Health delivered a strong first quarter as we continue to execute extremely well and drive growth across our markets. This morning, I'll summarize our first quarter performance and business highlights, and David will discuss our first quarter financial results and our updated 2026 guidance before we take your questions.

謝謝你，Robert，各位早安。Privia Health 第一季表現強勁，我們持續展現卓越的執行力，並在各個市場推動成長。今天早上我將總結第一季的表現與業務重點；接著 David 將說明第一季財務結果與更新後的 2026 年指引，之後我們將回答各位的提問。

Privia Health's outstanding operational execution and the strength of our diversified business model clearly demonstrate our ability to perform in all types of market and health care regulatory environments. We are proud to deliver on our mission to achieve the quadruple aim, better outcomes, lower costs, improved patient experience, and happier and more engaged providers.

Privia Health 出色的營運執行力，以及我們多元化商業模式的強勁韌性，清楚展現我們在各類市場與醫療監管環境下的表現能力。我們很自豪能實現「四重目標」的使命：更佳的醫療結果、更低的成本、更好的病患體驗，以及更快樂且更投入的醫療提供者。

New provider signings and implementations remain strong. This provides great visibility through the remainder of 2026. We ended the first quarter with 5,535 providers, a 13.6% increase year-over-year, and with 1.6 million value-based attributed lives, up 26.5% from a year ago. The combination of implemented provider growth, attribution growth, and value-based care performance helped increase practice collections 14.6% from the first quarter last year.

新醫療提供者的簽約與導入仍然強勁。這使我們對 2026 年剩餘期間的展望具有高度能見度。第一季末我們共有 5,535 位已導入的醫療提供者，年增 13.6%；以價值為基礎（value-based）歸因的生命數（attributed lives）達 160 萬，較去年同期成長 26.5%。已導入醫療提供者成長、歸因成長，以及價值為基礎照護表現的綜合作用，帶動診所收款（practice collections）較去年第一季增加 14.6%。

We continue to show strong operating leverage across the platform and G&A expenses. Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter increased 36.3% to $36.7 million, with EBITDA margin as a percentage of care margin expanding 290 basis points to reach 28.5%. Given our strong Q1 performance, we feel confident about our annual guidance across all metrics. Since it's still early in the year, we are maintaining our 2026 guidance, except for increasing our range for attributed lives given the strong first-quarter attribution growth.

我們持續在平台與一般及行政（G&A）費用方面展現強勁的營運槓桿。本季調整後 EBITDA 年增 36.3% 至 3,670 萬美元；EBITDA 利潤率占照護毛利（care margin）的比重擴張 290 個基點，達到 28.5%。鑑於第一季的強勁表現，我們對全年各項指引指標充滿信心。由於目前仍在年初，我們維持 2026 年指引不變，僅因第一季歸因成長強勁而上調年末歸因生命數的區間。

Our ongoing business momentum is expected to drive EBITDA growth of approximately 20% at the midpoint of the guidance, while converting approximately 80% of EBITDA to free cash flow. Privia's national footprint now includes a presence in 24 states and the District of Columbia. Our 5,535 implemented providers care for over 5.9 million patients.

我們持續的業務動能預期將在指引中位數帶動 EBITDA 約 20% 的成長，同時將約 80% 的 EBITDA 轉化為自由現金流。Privia 的全國版圖目前涵蓋 24 個州及哥倫比亞特區。我們已導入的 5,535 位醫療提供者為超過 590 萬名病患提供照護。

We continue to demonstrate very high gross provider retention and patient Net Promoter Score across our footprint. Our growth and momentum have positioned us as one of the leading primary care-centric medical groups and value-based care organizations in the country. We expect to expand our presence in existing and new states, both organically and inorganically, given our balance sheet strength.

在我們的服務版圖中，我們持續展現極高的醫療提供者留任率，以及病患淨推薦值（Net Promoter Score）。我們的成長與動能使我們成為全美領先、以基層醫療為核心的醫療集團與價值為基礎照護組織之一。憑藉資產負債表的強勁實力，我們預期將以有機與無機方式，擴大在既有州與新州的布局。

Privia's diversified value-based platform serves over 1.6 million patients through more than 130 commercial and government contracts. Our total attributed lives increased over 26% from a year ago. This was driven by new provider growth and the addition of the Evolent ACO business. Commercial attributed lives increased more than 17% from last year to reach 913,000. Lives attributed to CMS Medicare programs were up 62%.

Privia 多元化的價值為基礎平台，透過 130 多項商業與政府合約，為超過 160 萬名病患提供服務。我們的歸因生命數總量較去年同期增加逾 26%。此成長主要來自新增醫療提供者，以及併入 Evolent 的 ACO 業務。商業保險歸因生命數較去年增加逾 17%，達到 913,000。歸因於 CMS Medicare 計畫的生命數成長 62%。

Medicare Advantage and Medicaid attribution increased 20% and 36%, respectively, from a year ago. We remain highly focused on increasing attribution and generating positive contribution margin across our value-based book. Ultimately, our goal is to achieve consistent and sustainable earnings growth for our physician partners and shareholders. David will now review our first quarter financial results and updated 2026 guidance.

Medicare Advantage 與 Medicaid 的歸因生命數分別較去年同期增加 20% 與 36%。我們仍高度聚焦於提升歸因規模，並在價值為基礎業務組合中創造正向貢獻毛利（contribution margin）。最終，我們的目標是為醫師合作夥伴與股東帶來一致且可持續的獲利成長。接下來 David 將回顧第一季財務結果與更新後的 2026 年指引。

Thank you, Parth. Privia Health's strong operational performance continued through the first quarter. Implemented providers grew 155 sequentially from year-end 2025 and increased 13.6% year-over-year. Implemented provider growth, along with solid value-based performance and ambulatory utilization trends, led to practice collections increasing 14.6% from the first quarter a year ago to reach $914.8 million.

謝謝你，Parth。Privia Health 的強勁營運表現延續至第一季。已導入的醫療提供者較 2025 年底按季增加 155 位，年增 13.6%。已導入醫療提供者成長，加上穩健的價值為基礎表現與門診利用率趨勢，帶動診所收款較去年第一季增加 14.6%，達到 9.148 億美元。

Adjusted EBITDA, which is reconciled to GAAP net income in the appendix, increased 36.3% over the first quarter last year to reach $36.7 million, representing 28.5% of care margin. This 290 basis points margin improvement continues to highlight significant operating leverage. We ended the first quarter with $219.5 million in cash and no debt following typical Q1 cash outflows from value-based care payments to providers and employee bonuses.

調整後 EBITDA（其與 GAAP 淨利的調節表載於附錄）較去年第一季增加 36.3%，達到 3,670 萬美元，占照護毛利的 28.5%。利潤率提升 290 個基點，持續凸顯顯著的營運槓桿。第一季末我們持有現金 2.195 億美元且無負債；此係在扣除第一季常見的現金流出後，包括向醫療提供者支付價值為基礎照護款項及員工獎金。

We are reiterating our full-year 2026 guidance metrics following our strong performance in the first quarter and raising our guidance range for attributed lives at the year-end. This guide implies adjusted EBITDA growth of approximately 20% at the $150 million midpoint, and we expect 80% of full-year EBITDA to convert to free cash flow as we become a full cash taxpayer.

在第一季強勁表現之後，我們重申 2026 年全年各項指引指標，並上調年末歸因生命數的指引區間。此指引意味著在 1.5 億美元中位數下，調整後 EBITDA 約成長 20%；且隨著我們成為完整的現金納稅人，我們預期全年 EBITDA 的 80% 將轉化為自由現金流。

While our guidance assumes no new business development, we have a robust pipeline of existing market expansion and new market opportunities. We will remain disciplined and strategic while leveraging our healthy balance sheet to grow the business and compound our EBITDA and free cash flow.

雖然我們的指引假設沒有新增業務開發，但我們在既有市場擴張與新市場機會方面擁有強勁的案源管線。我們將在保持紀律與策略性的同時，運用健康的資產負債表來推動業務成長，並持續累積 EBITDA 與自由現金流。

Over the last two years, our EBITDA growth rate has averaged 32%. Achieving the midpoint of our 2026 guidance will result in EBITDA more than doubling over the last three years. Our consistent growth and ability to compound EBITDA and free cash flow across economic, health care, and regulatory cycles over the past nine years validate the strength of the Privia business model.

在過去兩年中，我們的 EBITDA 成長率平均為 32%。達成我們 2026 年指引的中位數，將使 EBITDA 在過去三年內增加至兩倍以上。我們在過去九年中，能夠跨越經濟、醫療保健與監管週期，持續成長並複利累積 EBITDA 與自由現金流，這驗證了 Privia 商業模式的強韌性。

Privia's business momentum is powered by the consistent execution of our provider partners and our employees. This has positioned us well to continue to drive growth and profitability as we build and scale our national footprint. I would like to take this opportunity to thank each one of them for their hard work.

Privia 的業務動能來自我們醫療服務提供者合作夥伴與員工一貫且持續的執行力。這使我們在建立並擴大全國版圖的同時，具備持續推動成長與獲利能力的良好定位。我想藉此機會感謝每一位同仁的辛勤付出。

Operator, we are now ready to take questions.

接線員，我們現在準備開始回答提問。

Pat, we're ready for questions.

Pat，我們準備好接受提問了。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Jailendra Singh, Truist Securities.

Jailendra Singh，Truist Securities。

This is Jailendra Singh from Truist Securities. Congrats on a strong start to the year. So you guys reported strong Q1, but now you are deciding to maintain the outlook on most metrics, except attributed lives. Is this you guys just doing the Privia approach of being conservative?

我是 Truist Securities 的 Jailendra Singh。恭喜今年開局表現強勁。你們第一季表現很強，但現在決定在大多數指標上維持展望，只有歸屬人數（attributed lives）例外。這是否只是你們一貫採取的 Privia 式保守作法？

Or are there any items we should be aware of in terms of puts and takes for the rest of the year compared to Q1? And related to that, are you guys still expecting shared savings to be flat year-over-year? Q1 figures are pretty strong. So just give us any color about the guidance here.

或者，相較於第一季，對於今年剩餘期間的正負因素（puts and takes）是否有任何我們需要留意的事項？另外相關地，你們是否仍預期共享節省（shared savings）將年對年持平？第一季數字相當強勁。所以請就這次指引提供一些補充說明。

Yes, I appreciate the question, Jailendra. Yes. So look, I mean, it's still early in the year. You've seen how we've done this for the last five years since we went public. Our approach is just to keep executing every quarter. There will be some puts and takes. But as we get more data, we get comfortable in then adjusting guidance.

好的，Jailendra，謝謝你的提問。是的。你看，現在畢竟還在年初。你也看到，自從我們五年前上市以來，我們一直都是這樣做的。我們的作法就是每一季持續把執行做好。期間會有一些正負因素。但隨著我們取得更多數據、更加有把握之後，才會調整指引。

We just gave guidance about 50 business days ago. So if this continues, then obviously, hopefully, we'll just do what we've been doing in previous years. But I don't think shared savings should be flat if this trend continues, but we'll just see what data we get for any prior period stuff in the current year across our value-based book. But if the trend continues, then it should grow year-over-year.

我們大約在 50 個營業日前才剛給出指引。所以如果這樣的趨勢持續，當然，希望我們就能延續過去幾年的作法。但如果這個趨勢持續，我不認為共享節省會持平；不過我們還要看看在我們的價值型（value-based）業務組合中，當年度是否會有任何前期期間（prior period）的數據進來。但若趨勢延續，年對年應該會成長。

Next question, please.

下一題，謝謝。

Jessica Tassan, Piper Sandler.

Jessica Tassan，Piper Sandler。

Hi, guys. Thank you. I appreciate the question. So I know you emphasized just the focus on attributed lives. So I'm interested if you guys can discuss your perspective on Medicare Advantage, just given the final year V28. Is the space emerging as more attractive as you guys hear payers describe kind of prioritization of margin over growth for '27?

嗨，各位。謝謝。謝謝讓我提問。我知道你們強調重點在歸屬人數（attributed lives）。因此我想請你們談談對 Medicare Advantage 的看法，尤其考量到 V28 的最後一年。在你們聽到保險支付方（payers）描述 2027 年將「優先考量利潤率而非成長」的情況下，這個領域是否變得更具吸引力？

And then just interested to hear what your appetite for that business is, whether you're seeing a sustained effort from the payers to subcap lives, or any change in payer appetite? And just any directional commentary on how we might think about the capitated business from here?

另外也想了解你們對這項業務的意願（appetite）如何：你們是否看到支付方持續推動次級按人頭付費（subcap）人數，或支付方意願有任何變化？以及，對於我們接下來如何看待按人頭付費（capitated）業務，有沒有任何方向性的評論？

Yes. Thanks for the question, Jess. So our answer is not that different from what I think came up on the last earnings call as well. MA has overall good tailwinds with the demographic changes that we'll see over the next 5, 10, and 15 years. So I think it's a pretty important program, whether you do it with CMS directly or through payers. We are really focused on the MA book.

好的。謝謝你的提問，Jess。我們的回答和我想在上一通財報電話會議中提到的內容差不多。隨著未來 5、10、15 年的人口結構變化，MA 整體有不錯的順風。因此我認為這是一個相當重要的計畫，不論是直接與 CMS 合作，或透過支付方來做。我們確實非常專注在 MA 業務組合。

I mean, you can see now we have over 550,000 MA attributed lives between MSSP and then Medicare Advantage. And so I think we're highly focused on growing that book, both attribution and then performing in that. I think as it relates to capitation or subcapitation, I mean, you've seen our view that doing full capitation is not the only way to perform well in MA. We believe in sharing the risk. That view remains consistent.

你可以看到，目前我們在 MSSP 以及 Medicare Advantage 之間，MA 歸屬人數已超過 55 萬。因此我認為我們非常專注於擴大這個業務組合，包括歸屬（attribution）以及在其中的績效表現。至於按人頭付費（capitation）或次級按人頭付費（subcapitation），你也看到我們的觀點：在 MA 中要有良好表現，不一定非得採用完全按人頭付費。我們相信風險共擔。這個觀點仍然一致。

It avoids any potential conflict of interest as payers adjust in each state, in each local geography, with baseline trends, utilization, or their program designs or attribution changes. So I think as V28 flushes through, I think there are some other adjustments that CMS has announced that they will do with the program across the board.

這也能避免當支付方在各州、各地方市場，因基準趨勢、使用率，或其方案設計或歸屬規則變動而調整時，可能產生的利益衝突。因此我認為隨著 V28 逐步反映到體系中，CMS 也宣布將在整體層面對該計畫進行一些其他調整。

I think just generally having good hygiene around the program. So I think we'll just continue to work with the payers. The value we really bring is very low-cost, dense networks in all of our geographies. I think that's Privia's value proposition to any payer. That, I think, will speak for itself because we have the doctors, we have the patients. The patients don't leave the doctors, no matter what happens to V28 or the MA program or what some particular payer might do or not do.

我認為整體而言，這是在讓該計畫維持良好的「衛生管理」（hygiene）。所以我們會持續與支付方合作。我們真正帶來的價值，是在所有我們所處的地理市場中，提供成本非常低、密度很高的醫療網絡。我認為這就是 Privia 對任何支付方的價值主張。而這點會不言自明，因為我們有醫師、也有病患。不論 V28、MA 計畫發生什麼事，或某個特定支付方做或不做什麼，病患都不會離開醫師。

That relationship is what we bring to the table, and our ability to influence the total cost of care with that patient, starting with the lowest cost setting, I think it's very, very positive for our business and the tailwinds we have. So I think we'll continue to work with the payers. As long as our doctors get rewarded for taking risks, we will take more risks. We prefer the shared risk model. Some of our books will be capitated going forward as it is today.

這種關係就是我們帶到談判桌上的籌碼；而我們也能從最低成本的照護場域開始，影響該病患的整體照護成本（total cost of care）。我認為這對我們的業務以及我們所擁有的順風而言，都是非常、非常正面的。所以我們會持續與支付方合作。只要我們的醫師因承擔風險而能獲得回報，我們就會承擔更多風險。我們偏好風險共擔模式。我們部分業務組合未來會採按人頭付費，就像今天一樣。

Some would be shared risk with a lot more upside. So we'll just see how this plays out in every geography because you're contracting at the ZIP code level, in different risk pools. And so even though the macro environment may get better and the payers come out of the last couple of years, how we contract with them just varies by geography.

有些則會是風險共擔，但上行空間更大。因此我們會觀察在各個地理市場的發展，因為你們是在郵遞區號（ZIP code）層級、不同風險池中進行簽約。所以即便宏觀環境可能改善、支付方走出過去幾年的狀況，我們與他們的簽約方式仍會因地理市場而異。

Next question, please. Operator?

下一題，謝謝。接線員？

Matthew Gillmor, KeyBanc.

Matthew Gillmor，KeyBanc。

Hey, good morning. Thanks for the question. I had a bigger picture question just on growth. Our thought is that there's going to be some washout with the industry, and perhaps you're seeing that already, and that stronger organizations with good balance sheets will benefit from that. Is that something you're seeing either from the business development pipeline or with M&A? Are there more opportunities than you've seen in the past? Or would you describe it as steadier?

嗨，早安。謝謝讓我提問。我有一個較宏觀、關於成長的問題。我們的看法是，產業可能會出現一波洗牌（washout），也許你們已經看到一些跡象，而資產負債表健全的強勢機構將因此受益。你們是否在業務開發管線或併購（M&A）方面看到這種情況？機會是否比過去更多？或者你們會形容為更為穩定？

Yes, I appreciate the question, Matt. I think you're right. There were a lot of investments done, VCs entering the space, and private equity being very aggressive. I think with all of that dissipating, I think it bodes well for a business like Privia with a very strong balance sheet and free cash flow profile.

是的，Matt，我很感謝這個問題。我認為你說得對。當時有大量投資進行，創投進入這個領域，而私募股權也非常積極進取。我認為隨著這些因素逐漸消退，這對像 Privia 這種擁有非常強健資產負債表與自由現金流特徵的企業而言，是個利多。

I think also medical groups with ownership structures, which were pretty unique across the landscape, with physicians owning certain assets, small businesses owning certain assets, and smaller private equity firms owning certain assets. I think as they look for exit or they look for a much more permanent capital structure, I think they've seen what they have to see in the last four, five years.

我也認為，醫療集團的所有權結構在整個產業版圖中相當獨特，例如由醫師持有某些資產、小型企業持有某些資產，以及較小型的私募股權公司持有某些資產。我認為當他們尋求退出，或尋求更為長期、穩定的資本結構時，過去四、五年他們該看到的也都看到了。

And I think they realize what a company like Privia is from that kind of ownership, permanent capital perspective. So I think our business development pipeline is really strong. We're looking at deals across the spectrum. And as you know, our platform is really broad in terms of acquiring service entities, tech platforms, ACO entities, medical groups, and tax IDs. So, it's really broad in terms of what we can do and how we can uniquely structure these deals.

我認為他們也意識到，從那種所有權與永久資本（permanent capital）的角度來看，像 Privia 這樣的公司代表什麼。因此我認為我們的業務開發管線非常強勁。我們正在評估各種不同類型的交易。而如你所知，我們的平台在收購服務實體、科技平台、ACO 實體、醫療集團以及稅務 ID（tax IDs）等方面，覆蓋面非常廣。所以就我們能做什麼、以及如何以獨特方式設計這些交易結構而言，彈性非常大。

Ultimately, with the objective of creating these dense medical groups, ACOs, and full tech and services platforms in every state in a very integrated fashion. I think that's a very unique value proposition that we bring to the table for any physician group, any patient, any specialty, any type of value-based arrangement.

最終目標是在每個州以高度整合的方式，打造這些高密度的醫療集團、ACO，以及完整的科技與服務平台。我認為這是我們能為任何醫師團體、任何病患、任何專科、任何類型的價值導向（value-based）安排所提供的一個非常獨特的價值主張。

So, I think we're keeping busy, and we'll continue to deploy capital to keep compounding the business. You've seen us do that last year. I think we'll continue to just do it, just be disciplined around it, just be patient with valuation expectations. But I think as there are less and less exit opportunities for some of these assets, I think we've become a pretty attractive option.

所以我認為我們會持續保持忙碌，並將繼續部署資本，讓業務持續複利成長。你們去年已經看到我們這麼做了。我認為我們會繼續做下去——在執行上保持紀律、對估值預期保持耐心。但我認為，隨著這些資產的退出機會越來越少，我們已成為一個相當具吸引力的選項。

Pat, please.

Pat，請。

Elizabeth Anderson, Evercore ISI.

Elizabeth Anderson，Evercore ISI。

Hi, everyone. Thanks very much for the question and congrats on the quarter. Maybe just to piggyback off of what Matt was saying. I mean, you've obviously built Privia around primary care and the entry point, expanding that.

大家好。非常感謝讓我提問，也恭喜本季表現。或許延續 Matt 剛才的觀點。我的意思是，你們顯然是以基層醫療（primary care）與入口端為核心來打造 Privia，並在此基礎上擴張。

But it's like the network maturity grows, how do you think about adding more specialty or perhaps changing the mix? Is that sort of something that you just think will happen sort of naturally? Is there any change in how you're thinking about that as an attractiveness in terms of the mix?

但隨著網路成熟度提升，你們如何看待增加更多專科，或可能調整組合？這是否會比較自然地發生？在你們對組合吸引力的看法上，是否有任何改變？

Yes. Thanks for the question, Elizabeth. So, I think that's already happening very naturally. It varies by geography because the physician mix is different in every geography we are in, and who we partner with initially is different.

是的。謝謝你的問題，Elizabeth。我認為這其實已經非常自然地在發生。它會因地理區域而異，因為我們所在的每個地區醫師組合都不同，而我們一開始合作的對象也不同。

So today, even today, it's a 60-40 mix trending towards a 50-50 mix. And we define primary care pretty broadly. So, who's the first point of contact for somebody in the family to include pediatricians for the children, OB/GYNs, family medicine, internal medicine, and so on, and so forth?

所以以今天來看，即使是現在，大約是 60/40 的組合，並正朝 50/50 的組合趨勢發展。而我們對基層醫療的定義相當廣。也就是說，家庭中某個人第一個接觸的醫師，包括兒科醫師（照顧孩子）、婦產科（OB/GYN）、家庭醫學、內科等等。

So, I think it's already happening. And even on the specialty side, we're not really focused on the surgical specialties. But over time, as volumes move outside of the health system, and we can focus on the total cost of care for certain procedures, surgeries move to the ASC setting. I think that becomes pretty attractive for a multi-specialty medical group like ours.

所以我認為這已經在發生。而即便在專科端，我們也不是特別聚焦在外科專科。但隨著醫療量逐步移出醫療體系（health system），且我們能針對某些處置的整體照護成本（total cost of care）進行管理，手術也會轉移到門診手術中心（ASC）場域。我認為這對像我們這樣的多專科醫療集團而言會相當有吸引力。

And so, I think you'll continue to see us expand on that strategy. And we are set up really well to do that. 80% of the total cost is downstream from the PCP, with a lot of reimbursement still in fee-for-service.

因此我認為你們會持續看到我們擴大這項策略。而我們在這方面的布局也非常到位。基層照護醫師（PCP）之後的下游支出占總成本的 80%，而許多給付仍然是按服務計酬（fee-for-service）。

And so, I think the engine that we have today to add value to those practices, I think, is also very differentiated. And then over time, as value-based arrangements and programs evolve that include those specialists, I think we are very well positioned to capitalize on that opportunity.

因此，我認為我們目前用來為這些診所創造價值的引擎，也非常具差異化。而隨著時間推進，當價值導向的安排與計畫演進並納入那些專科醫師時，我認為我們非常有利於把握這個機會。

Makes sense. Thank you.

了解。謝謝。

A.J. Rice, UBS.

A.J. Rice，UBS。

Hi, everybody. I thought I might ask you about this new lead program and your thoughts on that. We're hearing that some providers that maybe historically haven't been particularly well-positioned for some of the value-based care that this program is offering them some opportunities. And so, I wondered how you see it? And do you see this as something incremental that you have an interest in?

嗨，各位好。我想問一下這個新的 LEAD 計畫，以及你們對它的看法。我們聽到一些提供者（providers）過去可能在價值導向照護方面並不是特別有利，但這個計畫似乎為他們提供了一些機會。所以我想知道你們怎麼看？你們是否把它視為一個增量機會，並且有興趣參與？

Yes, I appreciate the question, A.J. So, really similar to REACH when that came about three years ago or so, I mean, we evaluate all the programs from CMS. I think given what we see today, it's unlikely we'll move our MSSP ACO into lead, just given how well we perform, the nature of the program, you can do one versus -- you can't do both with the same tin. So, you've got to pick one, really. And I think MSSP is designed really well.

是的，A.J.，感謝你的提問。就像大約三年前 REACH 推出時一樣，我們會評估 CMS 的所有計畫。以我們目前看到的情況來看，我們不太可能把 MSSP ACO 轉到 LEAD，主要是因為我們的表現很好，以及該計畫的性質——你只能選一個，不能用同一個 TIN 同時參與兩個。所以你必須做出選擇。而我認為 MSSP 的設計非常完善。

Our hope is that some of the elements of lead as CMS experiments with these and changes some of these programs to make them more long-term sustainable. I think you could see more convergence between MSSP and Lead as an example, because a lot of the baseline program structure is pretty much the same, with some added benefits in Lead.

我們希望的是，當 CMS 以這些計畫進行試驗並調整，使其在長期更具可持續性時，LEAD 的某些要素能被吸收。我認為你可能會看到 MSSP 與 LEAD 之間出現更多趨同（convergence），因為其基礎的計畫架構幾乎相同，只是 LEAD 多了一些額外的好處。

So again, it's a new program. It comes into effect next year. We'll evaluate it. I don't think you should expect us to move our existing MSSP book, but we have the flexibility to add new providers and lives into lead in new geographies, or if we acquire a business that has reach, it makes sense to move them into lead. I think we'll look at that.

所以再說一次，這是一個新計畫。它將在明年生效。我們會評估它。我不認為你們應該預期我們會移轉既有的 MSSP 組合（book），但我們有彈性在新的地理區域把新的提供者與受保人數（lives）納入 LEAD；或者如果我們收購了一個有 REACH 的業務，將其轉入 LEAD 也可能是合理的。我認為我們會評估這些可能性。

So, like any other program, we just evaluate it, but we think it's a step in the right direction, and CMS continues to evolve its thinking and take out some of the program structures that make it more attractive for a certain set of providers, like health systems, and so on and so forth. So, we'll just see how it comes about.

因此，和其他任何計畫一樣，我們會加以評估；但我們認為這是朝正確方向邁進的一步，而 CMS 也持續演進其思維，移除一些使其對特定提供者（例如醫療體系等）更具吸引力的計畫結構，等等。所以我們就看看它最終會如何落地。

Sean Dodge, BMO Capital Markets.

Sean Dodge，BMO Capital Markets。

Hey, good morning. This is Thomas Kelliher on for Sean. On the attributed lives on the commercial side of the business, the number of lives where you're taking downside risk is up about 60% over the last two years.

嗨，早安。我是代替 Sean 的 Thomas Kelliher。關於業務中商業保險端（commercial side）的歸因受保人數（attributed lives），你們承擔下行風險（downside risk）的受保人數在過去兩年增加了大約 60%。

Can you walk us through how risk works in commercial? And then how does the shared savings potential per individual and the volatility of that shared savings compare to some of the government programs?

您能帶我們了解一下商業保險中的風險機制是如何運作的嗎？另外，單一個體的共享節省（shared savings）潛力以及該共享節省的波動性，與一些政府計畫相比如何？

That's a great question. I appreciate it, Tom. So look, I think it speaks to the value prop that Privia brings to payers, where, just backing off of what I said earlier, once you bring a very large, dense, low-cost medical group structure in any geography, we are one of the very few entities that can do commercial value-based at this scale.

這是個很好的問題。謝謝你，Tom。所以你看，我認為這其實凸顯了Privia為付款方帶來的價值主張；延續我先前提到的，一旦你在任何地理區域導入一個規模非常大、密度高、成本低的醫療團體架構，我們是少數能在這樣的規模下推動商業價值型照護的機構之一。

OptumHealth does it really well in certain geographies. And I think the value prop is really converting the traditional fee-for-service payment stream into helping the payer take care of these lives, manage the total cost of care, having some quality metrics around different subsets of populations, whether it's children, whether it's working adults, whether it's pre -- the Medicare population is between 50 and 65.

OptumHealth在某些地區做得非常好。我認為其價值主張在於，將傳統按服務計費（fee-for-service）的支付流，轉化為協助付款方照護這些受保人、管理整體照護成本，並針對不同族群子集合設定一些品質指標，不論是兒童、在職成人，或是介於50到65歲之間、屬於Medicare前期的族群。

So, we are converting some of the work we do into our ability to take some risk on those lives, helping the payer manage their MLR really better. And honestly, the payers are willing to compensate us in addition to the fee-for-service reimbursement on a care management PMPM basis, as well as certain quality-based bonus payments, and then ultimately, shared savings if we bend the MLR cost curve for them.

因此，我們把部分工作轉化為承擔這些受保人風險的能力，協助付款方更好地管理其醫療損失率（MLR）。坦白說，付款方願意在按服務計費的給付之外，以照護管理的每人每月（PMPM）方式額外補償我們，並提供某些以品質為基礎的獎金支付；最終，如果我們能為他們壓低MLR成本曲線，還能獲得共享節省。

So over time, we're not going to take a lot of risk at this point because it's an open-access product. The commercial patient has the ability to go wherever it likes, pretty much for different needs, especially if there's a specialty event. But again, we have corridors at risk. But as you're seeing, we are working with more and more payers across our geographies to implement some of these contracts and try to perform well.

所以隨著時間推進，我們目前不會承擔太多風險，因為這是一個開放式就醫（open-access）的產品。商業保險病患基本上可以依不同需求到任何地方就醫，尤其是遇到專科事件時。但再說一次，我們有風險走廊（corridors at risk）。不過如你所見，我們正與各地區越來越多的付款方合作，導入這些合約並努力把績效做好。

Our objective remains the same. We give value to the payers. It reduces their MLR. Our doctors and medical groups need to get compensated for it. And it's really an effort to move some of the traditional fee-for-service payments into a more value orientation. It's still, give or take, 50% of the population is commercially insured, give or take the geography. And so this is really trying to do value-based care at a very, very broad scale for the working-class population.

我們的目標始終不變。我們為付款方創造價值。這能降低他們的MLR。我們的醫師與醫療團體也需要因此獲得補償。而這確實是在努力把部分傳統按服務計費的支付，轉向更以價值為導向的模式。整體而言（視地區而定），大約有50%的人口是商業保險。因此，這是在非常、非常廣泛的規模下，為勞動人口推動價值型照護。

Great. Thank you very much.

很好。非常感謝。

All right. That concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call back over to Robert --

好的。我們的問答環節到此結束。我現在把電話交回給Robert--

I'm sorry. Pat, we're still taking questions.

抱歉。Pat，我們還在接受提問。

Matthew Shea, Needham.

Needham的Matthew Shea。

Hey, good morning. Thanks for extending the Q&A there, Robert. I wanted to touch on technology. We picked up, I think, in April that you guys brought on a new Chief Technology Officer. Seems to bring a good background to an interesting moment, particularly as you're expanding the implementation base.

嗨，早安。謝謝你延長問答時間，Robert。我想談談科技。我們在4月得知，你們聘請了一位新的技術長（CTO）。看起來在一個很有意思的時點帶來了很好的背景，特別是你們正在擴大導入基礎之際。

So would love to hear what gets you excited about this appointment. And I know you touched on some of the tech investments you were making last quarter, but it seems like AI is becoming a louder theme in health care. So curious if the new hire changes any of your thinking or maybe accelerates some of your initiatives.

所以很想聽聽這項任命讓你們感到興奮的地方。我知道你上季提到一些正在進行的科技投資，但AI似乎正在成為醫療保健領域更受關注的主題。因此也想了解，這位新加入的人選是否改變了你們的一些想法，或是可能加速某些計畫。

Yes, absolutely. Appreciate the question. So we had Konda join us from Optum Insights, really good background. It's on the website. And then Chris Foy, our long-standing CTO, finally retired after a very long career. He's been working tirelessly with us since the inception of Privia, pretty much. So we're just lucky that we don't lose our great people to any competitors.

是的，絕對是。謝謝你的提問。所以我們從Optum Insights延攬Konda加入，背景非常好。網站上也有介紹。而我們長期任職的CTO Chris Foy，在非常長的職涯後終於退休了。幾乎從Privia創立之初起，他就一直不懈地與我們並肩工作。所以我們很幸運，沒有把我們的優秀人才流失給任何競爭對手。

So look, I mean, we are really excited. Konda brings a great background and renewed enthusiasm to the team. We talked a lot about our tech stack and what we are doing with AI across all aspects of our business. And we have to link that with the margin profile of the business ultimately.

所以你看，我們真的非常興奮。Konda帶來了很好的背景，也為團隊注入新的熱情。我們談了很多關於我們的技術堆疊（tech stack），以及我們如何在業務各個面向運用AI。而最終我們必須把這些與公司的利潤率結構連結起來。

So I think I'll just reiterate that we are looking to implement different AI applications across our whole tech stack in three broad buckets. Whether it's the Privia Enterprise, which is our core corporate functions, care center operations, and those are broken into fee-for-service, value-based care, and then again, patient interaction.

所以我想我再重申一次：我們正尋求在整個技術堆疊中導入不同的AI應用，概括分為三大類。不論是Privia Enterprise（我們的核心公司職能）、照護中心營運，而這些又可拆分為按服務計費、價值型照護，以及病患互動。

And then the third ultimately is care delivery. And then in each of those buckets, we are working with a lot of existing players, like we're on Google Suite and Gemini for all our corporate functions. We have Salesforce and Workday. We are also focused on every single function where we could use generative AI to increase productivity, ultimately reduce costs, or, as we grow, do not add costs, existing partnerships with Snowflakes on their Coreex AI as an example.

第三個最終是照護交付（care delivery）。在每一個類別中，我們都與許多既有業者合作；例如我們在所有公司職能上使用Google Suite與Gemini。我們也有Salesforce與Workday。我們同時聚焦於每一項可運用生成式AI來提升生產力、最終降低成本，或在成長過程中不增加成本的職能；並與Snowflake等既有夥伴合作，例如他們的Coreex AI。

So I think this will evolve as applications are just getting better every three to six months. And then on the care center side, we're looking at literally every single workflow in the doctor's office. On the fee-for-service side, some examples we have iterated last time were prior auth, autonomous coding, and referral management.

所以我認為，隨著各種應用每三到六個月就變得更好，這會持續演進。而在照護中心端，我們正在檢視醫師診所裡幾乎每一個工作流程。在按服務計費端，我們上次提到的一些例子包括事前授權（prior auth）、自動化編碼（autonomous coding）以及轉診管理。

On the value-based side, we are focused on care gap closures, chart prep, patient scheduling, and patient interaction, which is a big focus with Agentic AI. We're looking at automated outreach, Agentic AI engagement with the patients, self-service tools, virtual health, obviously, I think we'll get much more efficient.

在價值型端，我們聚焦於照護缺口補齊（care gap closures）、病歷準備（chart prep）、病患排程，以及病患互動；而病患互動是代理式AI（Agentic AI）的重點方向。我們在看自動化外展、以代理式AI與病患互動、自助式工具、虛擬健康；顯然我認為我們會變得更有效率。

And then ultimately, with care delivery, you're looking at completely accurate coding, clinical decision support, suspect medical conditions, things like that. So I think there are a whole host of companies that are coming about. I think you'll see us just evolve this strategy, again, using our build-to-partner approach.

而最終在照護交付方面，你會看到的是完全準確的編碼、臨床決策支援、疑似醫療狀況（suspect medical conditions）之類的事情。所以我認為有一大批公司正在湧現。我想你會看到我們持續演進這個策略，同樣採用我們「自建到合作」（build-to-partner）的方式。

But I think a company like ours, with 6 million patients, with 1.6 million in value-based lives, complex workflows around physician practices with our scale, I think we're just set up really well to benefit. Then I think we talked about the margin profile. I mean, we are already approaching the low end of our long-term margin target, EBITDA to care margin of 30% to 35%.

但我認為像我們這樣的公司，擁有600萬名病患、其中160萬名屬於價值型受保人（value-based lives），再加上以我們規模運作的醫師診所複雜工作流程，我們的確非常具備受益的條件。接著我想我們也談到利潤率結構。我的意思是，我們已經接近長期利潤率目標的低端，也就是EBITDA對照護毛利率（EBITDA to care margin）30%到35%。

Our guidance this year gets us close to 29%. I think if we look at the next 5 years with everything we see that we can do with AI, I think we'll easily be close to the high end, if not exceed the high end of that margin target. So we're really excited on what we could do with all the innovation and really excited about what our new CTO can bring to the table here.

我們今年的指引讓我們接近29%。我認為如果看未來5年，考量我們看到AI能做的所有事情，我想我們很容易接近高端，甚至可能超過該利潤率目標的高端。所以我們對所有創新能帶來的成果非常興奮，也非常期待我們的新CTO能在這裡帶來的貢獻。

Great. Appreciate the color.

很好。感謝提供這些補充說明。

(Operator Instructions)

(接線員指示)

Andrew Mok, Barclays.

Andrew Mok，巴克萊。

Hi, good morning. Just wanted to follow up on the shared savings revenue. Could you elaborate a little bit more on the drivers of strength in the quarter, including how much corresponds to prior year performance versus current year performance? And related to this, it would be helpful to hear an update on how the Evolent assets are performing.

嗨，早安。我想追問一下共享節省（shared savings）收入。能否再多談一點本季表現強勁的驅動因素，包括其中有多少對應於前一年度的表現、以及有多少對應於本年度的表現？另外，也希望聽到關於 Evolent 資產目前表現如何的最新進度。

I appreciate it, Andrew. So look, like last past quarters, I mean, we don't usually break down. I mean, there's always some dry period at this point in the year as 2025 closes out, and it's across the book, commercial, MSP, and MA. And then there's obviously, we get good data, and then we see what our actuaries believe about how we can perform in the current year.

謝謝你，Andrew。所以你看，跟過去幾季一樣，我們通常不會把它拆得那麼細。我的意思是，每年到這個時間點，隨著 2025 年接近結束，通常都會有一段相對「乾」的期間，而且是整體組合都會發生，包含商業、MSP 與 MA。然後很明顯地，我們會拿到更好的數據，再看我們的精算團隊對於我們在本年度能達到的表現有何判斷。

So there's always a mix between the two. It varies quarter-by-quarter. So for me to give you something, it's going to change next quarter. So I think if you just look at a rolling 12-month basis, you'll see the increase over time. But it's pretty much across the book. There was not one particular area that stood out, which just bodes well for us.

所以兩者之間一直都會有一個混合。而且每一季都不一樣。所以如果我現在給你一個數字，下季又會變。因此我認為如果你用過去 12 個月的滾動基礎來看，你會看到隨時間推移的增長。但基本上是整體組合普遍發生。沒有哪一個特定領域特別突出，這對我們來說其實是好事。

Sorry, could you repeat the second question? I thought I was. Just an update on the Evolent assets.

抱歉，你可以重複一下第二個問題嗎？我以為我有回答到。是想要更新一下 Evolent 資產的情況。

Yes. So I think it's going really well. I think we're ahead on the integration. We feel really good about the asset. It's a core MSSP and some commercial lives. So I think we're really excited that the team is pretty integrated in the first three months. The tech stack is pretty much integrated.

好的。我認為進展非常順利。我覺得我們在整合進度上是超前的。我們對這項資產感覺非常好。它的核心是 MSSP，並且包含一些商業保險人數（commercial lives）。所以我們很興奮，團隊在前三個月就已經相當整合。技術堆疊也幾乎完成整合。

We're ahead on schedule a little bit there. So kudos to the team for doing a very hard job out of the gate here. And we look forward to working with those provider partners and continuing to increase their performance. So I think hopefully, if all that works out well, that will be good for shared savings as well as we close out this year.

在那方面我們也稍微超前進度。所以要稱讚團隊一開始就把這個非常艱鉅的工作做得很好。我們也期待與那些醫療提供者夥伴合作，持續提升他們的表現。所以我希望，如果這些都如預期順利推進，隨著今年結束，這也會對共享節省帶來正面幫助。

(Operator Instructions)

(接線員指示)

Daniel Grosslight, Citi.

Daniel Grosslight，花旗。

Hi, thanks for taking the question. I actually had a similar question to the last part of the previous question, but I was hoping to get a little bit more granular detail, specifically on the sell-through of the full Privia platform into the physician base.

嗨，謝謝讓我提問。我其實有一個跟上一題後半段類似的問題，但我希望能更細一點，特別是完整 Privia 平台在醫師基礎中的滲透／導入（sell-through）情況。

What's been the early reception there? Are there any metrics you can give us on what that sell-through has been and the progress you're really making in the six new states? Any stats or quantification you can give us where Evolent gave you that beachhead in those newer states?

目前早期的反應如何？你們能否提供一些指標，說明這個 sell-through 的程度，以及你們在六個新州真正取得的進展？Evolent 在那些較新的州為你們建立據點（beachhead），有沒有任何數據或量化資訊可以分享？

Yes, I appreciate the question. I mean, it's still early days. The cross-sell takes time. We're just less than five months into the acquisition, which closed in December. So job number one was making sure the team is integrated, making sure the tech stack is integrated, making sure we reach out to the practices and implement how we work on these programs, on MSSP in particular.

好的，謝謝你的問題。我的意思是，現在還算早期。交叉銷售需要時間。我們完成這筆收購還不到五個月，是在 12 月完成交割。所以第一要務是確保團隊完成整合、確保技術堆疊完成整合，並且確保我們與診所端接觸，落實我們在這些計畫上的運作方式，尤其是 MSSP。

So I think that's been our focus. Our sales team obviously reaches out to these practices to deliver the full Privia stack, but that happens usually over time. Our sales cycles are three to six months. When you're cross-selling, it's a new relationship, and you just don't want to disrupt what's there initially.

所以我認為這一直是我們的重點。我們的銷售團隊當然也會接觸這些診所，提供完整的 Privia 技術堆疊，但這通常是隨時間推進的。我們的銷售週期是三到六個月。當你在做交叉銷售時，這是一段新的關係，你一開始也不希望去干擾既有的運作。

So I think that will come over time. We just don't break out externally what portion of those practices move over. I think that's just part of our existing book. So you'll see that in the implemented provider numbers, which only reflect the providers that are on the full stack and part of the single-TIN from a fee-for-service perspective. So that will just happen over time.

所以我認為這會隨時間逐步發生。我們對外不會拆分揭露有多少比例的診所轉到完整堆疊。我認為那就是我們既有業務組合的一部分。因此你會在「已導入的醫療提供者」數量中看到反映；那個數字只包含已上線完整堆疊、並且從按服務計費（fee-for-service）的角度屬於單一 TIN 的提供者。所以這會隨時間自然發生。

Thank you.

謝謝。

Brian Tanquilut, TD Cowen.

Brian Tanquilut，TD Cowen。

Hey, this is [Will Spak] on for Brian. Most of my questions have been asked, but I guess, is there any color you can provide around the $11 million repurchase of NCI in the quarter? And then just a quick one on, it didn't seem like there was a major impact, but anything from weather and weaker respiratory on ambulatory utilization in the quarter?

嗨，我是代替 Brian 的 [Will Spak]。我的大部分問題都已經被問過了，但我想問，你們能否就本季 1,100 萬美元回購 NCI（非控股權益）提供一些補充說明？另外快速問一下：看起來影響不大，但本季天氣因素以及呼吸道疾病較弱，對門診利用率（ambulatory utilization）有沒有任何影響？

So, on the repurchase of the noncontrolling interest, we just acquired the minority interest in some of our markets. We expect it's going to lead to better cash flow and net income. We're constantly looking in our current markets where we have minority interests for these opportunities, and we just executed on a couple of those in the quarter.

關於回購非控股權益，我們只是收購了我們在部分市場中的少數股權。我們預期這將帶來更好的現金流與淨利。我們一直在我們現有市場中、針對我們持有少數股權的部分尋找這類機會，而本季我們就執行了其中幾筆。

On the second part, look, I think it's important to distinguish, as we've said before, ambulatory and community doctor utilization for flu or other respiratory diseases versus the inpatient setting. We didn't see any major swings relative to previous years. The flu season comes and goes. Some years it is better, some years it's worse. Our book is very diverse. So we didn't experience the kind of change that I guess you all wrote about for some of the hospital companies reporting results in the past quarter.

至於第二部分，我認為重要的是要區分：如同我們之前說過的，門診與社區醫師端因流感或其他呼吸道疾病所帶來的利用率，與住院端（inpatient setting）是不同的。相較於往年，我們沒有看到任何明顯的大幅波動。流感季就是來來去去。有些年份比較好，有些年份比較差。我們的業務組合非常多元。所以我們沒有經歷你們可能在上一季一些醫院公司公布業績時所提到的那種變化。

I think inpatient care can vary a lot more than ambulatory. Preventative care continues to be pretty good around flu, people getting their vaccinations, going in if they have symptoms, and so on and so forth. Even with snow days, telehealth is fully embedded in. It's really efficient. People know how to use it. So that's reflected in our results. You didn't see practice collections dip because of that. I think it just speaks to the diversification of our business.

我認為住院照護的波動可能比門診大得多。在流感方面，預防性照護仍然相當不錯，人們接種疫苗、有症狀就去就醫，等等。即使遇到下雪停課／停班日，遠距醫療也已經完全融入。它非常有效率。大家也知道怎麼使用。所以這些都反映在我們的結果中。你沒有看到因為這些因素而導致診所收款下滑。我認為這也說明了我們業務的多元化。

Whit Mayo, Leerink.

Whit Mayo，Leerink。

Hey, thanks. Good morning. The press release didn't mention $600 million of cash at year-end, probably nothing really to read into that, but just maybe update on expectations for cash this year. And Parth, just wanted to maybe take your temperature on how you guys are thinking about buybacks at some point.

嗨，謝謝。早安。新聞稿沒有提到年末 6 億美元的現金，可能也沒什麼特別含意，但還是想請你們更新一下今年對現金水位的預期。另外 Parth，也想了解一下你們對於未來某個時間點進行庫藏股回購（buybacks）的想法與態度。

Yes, I appreciate the question, Whit. The guidance is the same. We reiterated 80% of EBITDA would convert to free cash flow if you exclude any BD line items, including things like purchasing minority interests. So really, if you look at what cash was at the end of the year and just add free cash flow to it, which is cash flow from operations less CapEx, I think you should get close to that number. I don't think our guidance is changing there.

是的，Whit，感謝你的提問。指引維持不變。我們重申，若排除任何 BD（業務發展）項目（包括例如收購少數股權等），EBITDA 的 80% 會轉換為自由現金流。所以實際上，如果你看年末的現金餘額，然後把自由現金流加上去（也就是營運現金流減去資本支出 CapEx），我認為你應該會接近那個數字。我不認為我們在這方面的指引會有變化。

But that does not include, obviously, the business development line or any spending on acquisitions, which is not included in our guidance. So that $600 million round number, excluding that, remains if things go well. And then look, our preference is, given the TAM out there and the opportunity to continue to consolidate different assets in this industry around community-based physician groups, ACO entities, IPAs, MSO entities, and so on and so forth.

但那顯然不包含業務發展（BD）項目或任何併購支出，這些不在我們的指引之內。因此，若一切順利，那個約 6 億美元的整數（排除上述項目）仍然成立。然後你看，考量到外部的 TAM（總可服務市場）以及持續整合本產業不同資產的機會——圍繞社區型醫師團體、ACO 組織、IPA、MSO 等等——我們的偏好是如此。

I think the best value creation opportunity for shareholders here is for us to keep compounding the business. Using our balance sheet cash to acquire these assets, integrate them, synergize them, and then just keep running that playbook, that's focus number one for deploying our cash.

我認為，對股東而言，這裡最好的價值創造機會，是讓我們持續複利式地成長這門生意。運用資產負債表上的現金去收購這些資產、整合它們、發揮協同效益，然後持續複製這套打法——這是我們部署現金的第一優先。

You've heard us say we like to keep some sleep-well-at-night money for a rainy day, pandemics happen, hurricanes happen, and so on. And then look, we always have the flexibility to return capital. That's an easy trigger if the value in the stock price is well below what we think is the intrinsic value for the company.

你們也聽過我們說，我們喜歡保留一些「睡得著覺」的資金以備不時之需——可能會有疫情、颶風等等。另外，我們也一直保有回饋資本的彈性。如果股價的價值遠低於我們認為公司的內在價值，那就很容易觸發回饋資本。

But our preference is to compound earnings and free cash flow and continue acquiring businesses with our balance sheet cash. It just depends on when BD deals happen. So you can have cash accumulate, and then we could do larger transactions that are more meaningful and value-creating. We'll just see how that plays out over the next 24 months.

但我們的偏好是讓獲利與自由現金流持續複利成長，並用資產負債表上的現金持續收購企業。這主要取決於 BD 交易何時發生。因此你可能會看到現金累積，然後我們可以做更大、也更具意義且能創造價值的交易。接下來 24 個月會如何發展，我們再觀察。

I get it. Thanks a lot.

了解。非常感謝。

Jeff Garro, Stephens.

Jeff Garro，Stephens。

Yeah, good morning. Thanks for taking the question. I wanted to ask about the strong implementation of provider growth. One question, but I'll throw three parts at you.

是的，早安。謝謝讓我提問。我想問一下供應商（provider）成長強勁的落地執行情況。我只有一個問題，但我會分三個部分問。

First, any callouts by market or specialty? Second, any update to contributions from provider-to-provider referrals? And third, how is the current visibility into the signed-but-not-yet-implemented providers and the current pipeline of provider prospects?

第一，是否有按市場或專科的重點亮點？第二，來自醫師對醫師轉介（provider-to-provider referrals）的貢獻是否有更新？第三，對於已簽約但尚未導入的供應商，以及目前潛在供應商管線（pipeline）的可視性如何？

Yes, I appreciate the question, Jeff. I'll take them in order. Look, I think given now that we are in 15 states with the single-TIN model and then another nine with the ACO-only model, the market or specialty mix just varies by quarter and by geography. As a sales team builds its pipeline, they convert, and then some markets get hot one year or one quarter, and then the others catch up.

是的，Jeff，感謝你的提問。我按順序回答。你看，鑑於我們現在在 15 個州採用 single-TIN 模式，另外在 9 個州採用僅 ACO 模式，市場或專科的組合會因季度與地理區域而有所不同。當銷售團隊建立其管線後，他們會轉換成交；某些市場可能在某一年或某一季特別熱，之後其他市場再追上。

So, given the diversification of the book, it really varies each year. I think the strength of the overall business just speaks for itself. As we get bigger, we've talked about this earlier, the snowballing effect happens in this business. In our most mature markets, 50%, sometimes even 60% or 70%, of the referrals are from existing Privia practices to their colleagues.

因此，考量到業務組合的多元化，每年確實都會有所不同。我認為整體業務的強勁表現不言自明。隨著我們規模變大，我們之前也談過，這個業務會出現滾雪球效應。在我們最成熟的市場中，50%，有時甚至 60% 或 70% 的轉介，來自既有的 Privia 診所轉介給他們的同業。

They are the best salespeople, our doctors. They've worked with us. They know what this model is. We perform for them. So, for them to refer another physician who has very high conversion rates. The LTV to CAC is off the charts in this business, some of the best that I've seen. We've talked about our payback period being less than a year. LTV to CAC is well over 10 years if somebody even decides to leave, and then our attrition rates are very, very low.

他們——我們的醫師——是最好的業務員。他們與我們合作過。他們了解這個模式是什麼。我們為他們帶來成效。因此，他們去轉介另一位醫師時，轉換率非常高。這個業務的 LTV 對 CAC（客戶終身價值/獲客成本）高得驚人，是我見過最好的之一。我們也談過，我們的回收期不到一年。即便有人最後決定離開，LTV 對 CAC 也遠超過 10 年，而且我們的流失率非常、非常低。

So, provider-to-provider referral is very strong. And then the visibility is exceptional in this business. I mean, this is our sixth year reporting as a public company. You've seen the track record. It's a three- to six-month sales cycle, a four to five to six-month implementation cycle, given just the length of the size of the group. And so by this time of the year, pretty much every provider that has to be implemented is pretty much sold.

所以，醫師對醫師的轉介非常強勁。另外，這個業務的可視性非常出色。我的意思是，這是我們作為上市公司揭露財報的第六年。你們也看到了我們的歷史紀錄。銷售週期是 3 到 6 個月；導入週期是 4 到 5 到 6 個月，取決於團體規模的長短。因此到了每年這個時間點，幾乎所有必須導入的供應商，基本上都已經完成銷售。

So the visibility is over 90 percent at this point in the year. And that's why we're really confident about the guidance. And that hasn't changed much. If anything, it improves as the book of the business gets bigger. So again, the metrics around the business, the conversion rates, all are trending really, really well. We're really pleased with how we're performing.

所以在一年中的這個時間點，可視性超過 90%。這也是為什麼我們對指引非常有信心。而且這點並沒有太大改變。如果有的話，隨著業務規模變大，反而會改善。所以再說一次，與業務相關的各項指標、轉換率等，都呈現非常、非常好的趨勢。我們對目前的表現非常滿意。

Ryan Daniels, William Blair.

Ryan Daniels，William Blair。

Yeah, good morning, guys. Thanks for taking the question. Parth, maybe a strategic one for you, and you alluded to this earlier, but it seems like there's a lot going on in real time with acute care hospitals and health systems and movement of volume to lower-cost settings.

是的，各位早安。謝謝讓我提問。Parth，可能想問你一個策略面的問題；你先前也提到過，但看起來急性照護醫院與醫療體系正即時發生很多變化，且醫療量正移往成本較低的照護場域。

So you've got teams rolling out with entire episodes of care. You've got things like the inpatient-only list being dissolved. And I'm curious what that is doing strategically with your conversations with health systems as a potential partner to help them deal with all these pretty big changes they're facing.

所以你看到團隊以整個照護事件（episodes of care）為單位在推動。也有像是住院限定清單（inpatient-only list）被取消這類事情。我很好奇，這在策略上如何影響你們與醫療體系的對話——把他們視為潛在合作夥伴，協助他們因應這些相當重大的變化。

Yes, I appreciate the question, Ryan. That's a good one. Look, I do think the pressure on the traditional health system model and how they were kind of monetized is going to be higher for all the reasons you outlined. You could add the 340B program if something changes there, inpatient-only list, the willingness for them to employ primary care doctors, or certain nonsurgical specialties, and subsidize them.

是的，Ryan，感謝你的提問。這是個好問題。你看，我確實認為，傳統醫療體系模式以及其過去的變現方式，會因你提到的各種原因而面臨更大壓力。你還可以加上 340B 計畫（如果那裡有任何變動）、住院限定清單、他們是否願意雇用基層照護醫師或某些非手術專科，並對其提供補貼等因素。

I mean, a lot of you have written about that over the years. I think it's going to be tough. The changes to the Medicaid or the ACA exchange population and how that filters through different health systems are also going to add pressure. So look, I think it bodes well for a business like ours as physicians look to come out of these settings into more outpatient settings and as different health systems figure out their strategy.

我的意思是，你們很多人多年來都寫過這些。我認為這會很艱難。Medicaid 或 ACA 交易所（exchange）人口的變化，以及這些變化如何傳導到不同醫療體系，也會增加壓力。所以你看，我認為這對像我們這樣的業務是利多：當醫師希望從這些場域轉出、走向更多門診（outpatient）場域，以及不同醫療體系在制定其策略時。

I think it's going to vary by health system, different strategies in different communities. They have a different mandate. A lot of them are not-for-profit and are delivering care to really low-income populations. So I think it will vary by geography. But generally speaking, I think as these pressures mount up, we should expect this consolidation that's happened with physician practices at the health system setting to start to unwind a little bit, and physicians looking at businesses like ours to be a natural landing spot or even as they complete their residency as a very viable option to start or join an existing independent practice.

我認為不同醫療體系會有所差異——不同社區會有不同策略。他們有不同的使命。其中很多是非營利機構，為非常低收入的人群提供照護。所以我認為會因地理區域而異。但總體而言，隨著這些壓力累積，我們應該預期：過去在醫療體系場域中發生的醫師診所整併，會開始有些許逆轉；而醫師會把像我們這樣的企業視為自然的落腳處——甚至在他們完成住院醫師訓練（residency）後，也會把加入或創立既有的獨立診所視為非常可行的選項。

And then it also adds to the question that was asked before around certain specialties and ASC opportunity, and our willingness to have a very strong referral base with primary care doctors having the pen in directing where the patient goes.

接著，這也回到先前被問到的問題：關於某些專科與 ASC（門診手術中心）的機會，以及我們是否願意建立非常強的轉診基礎，讓握有「決定病人要去哪裡」主導權的基層照護醫師來引導病人的去向。

So I think we're going to look at all of those strategies to keep expanding our network. And just given our platform that focuses on creating large multi-specialty groups in every single geography that we are in and then offering that to payers of health care in unique ways, mainly on the commercial population as well, it's a big differentiation.

所以我認為，我們會檢視所有這些策略，持續擴大我們的網路。此外，考量到我們的平台聚焦於在我們所進入的每一個地理市場打造大型多專科醫師集團，並以獨特的方式把這樣的能力提供給醫療保險支付方，主要也涵蓋商業保險族群，這是一個很大的差異化。

And I mean, you're seeing that in the results somewhat. They're very stable across cycles. And I think it's part of all of these strategies is playing out. So I think we're just going to keep looking for opportunities that we can keep compounding with that. But great question.

而且我的意思是，你在結果上也多少看得到。它們在各個週期之間非常穩定。我認為這是所有這些策略逐步發揮作用的一部分。所以我想我們會持續尋找機會，讓這些成果能夠持續複利累積。不過問得很好。

Great. Thanks so much.

很好。非常感謝。

(Operator Instructions)

（接線員指示）

Constantine Davides, Citizens.

Constantine Davides，Citizens。

Yes. Just two really quick ones for me. David, it looks like capitated profitability really stepped up in the first quarter. Just wondering if there's anything to call out there?

是的。我這邊只有兩個很快的問題。David，看起來按人頭付費（capitated）的獲利能力在第一季明顯提升。想請問這裡有沒有什麼需要特別說明的？

And then second, Parth, you just talked about Medicaid and low-income populations. And you guys had a really nice or pronounced step-up in your Medicaid attributed lives. So, just wondering if you can talk about your Medicaid arrangements and what's prompting that growth.

第二個，Parth，你剛剛談到 Medicaid 與低收入族群。而你們的 Medicaid 歸屬人數（attributed lives）有一個相當漂亮、或說相當明顯的躍升。所以想請你談談你們的 Medicaid 合作安排，以及是什麼在推動這個成長。

Yes. Thanks for the question. Yes. So again, this is just the first quarter of the year. The timing of data can vary quarter-to-quarter. As we always like to say in the capitated, both look at the full 12 months and a rolling 12 months. This quarter, we did get some prior year adjustments that benefited both revenue and margin.

是的。謝謝你的問題。是的。所以再次強調，這只是年度的第一季。資料入帳的時間點可能會因季度而異。就像我們一直說的，在按人頭付費這塊，我們會同時看完整 12 個月以及滾動 12 個月的表現。本季我們確實收到一些前一年度的調整，對營收與毛利率都有所助益。

So I would say our prudent approach to the book is, at some level, paying off as we continue to see more data. We continue to get some good news there. And again, we just continue to follow our same consistent and prudent, I'll say, accrual methodology. It's a long period of time we need to review this information. But again, as good news comes in, we're able to see a little bit of additional good news.

所以我會說，我們對這個組合採取的審慎做法，在某種程度上正持續得到回報，因為我們看到更多資料後，也持續收到一些好消息。而且再次強調，我們仍然沿用一貫且審慎的（我會說）應計提列方法。我們需要在很長的一段時間內去檢視這些資訊。但同樣地，當好消息進來時，我們就能再多看到一些額外的正面進展。

And then on the second part, Constantine, look, I think we service the entire panel in every physician's office. So organically, as we grow in existing states or new states, some part of the panel is Medicaid patients. So I think the strength of our implemented provider growth and what our sales team is able to do in certain geographies, I mean, this organic Medicaid attribution growth.

至於第二部分，Constantine，你看，我們在每一家診所都服務該診所的整個病人面板（panel）。因此，從自然成長的角度，當我們在既有州或新州擴張時，面板中有一部分病人本來就是 Medicaid 病人。所以我認為，我們已落地的醫療提供者成長力道，以及我們銷售團隊在某些地理市場能做到的事情，帶來的就是這種有機的 Medicaid 歸屬成長。

We continue, again, to work with payers to figure out the right value-based strategy in that book. The gap between what any provider business would like to do and what it could get paid for is still very big, especially for the population. I mean, they have special needs, transportation needs, nutrition needs, just getting people to see the doctors, single mothers, very low-income families, so on and so forth.

我們也持續（再次強調）與支付方合作，找出在這個組合中合適的價值型策略。任何醫療提供者業務「想做的事情」與「能獲得支付的事情」之間的落差仍然非常大，尤其是在這個族群上。我的意思是，他們有特殊需求、交通需求、營養需求，還有讓人們願意去看醫師的問題；單親媽媽、非常低收入的家庭，等等。

So I think while we can do a lot more, the willingness of the payers to reimburse us for some of those strategies is there, but there's still a gap. So while we'd like to continue to grow that book, as you can see in our slide 6, it's all 100% upside-only deals, where again, we are taking the network to the payers, asking them much like our commercial book where we can do certain things with the population, impact the annual well visit rates with the children, with women, with working adults, making sure that they're at least seeing the doctors, getting the vaccinations, getting their screenings done.

所以我認為，雖然我們可以做得更多，支付方也願意就其中一些策略給予我們補償，但中間仍然存在落差。因此，雖然我們希望持續擴大這個組合，如你在我們第 6 張投影片看到的，這些全部都是 100% 僅上行（upside-only）的合約；也就是說，我們把網路帶給支付方，像我們的商業保險組合一樣，向他們說明我們能對這個族群做哪些事情：提升兒童、女性與在職成人的年度健康檢查率，確保他們至少有去看醫師、接種疫苗、完成篩檢。

And for that, the payers are willing to pay a certain PMPM, a certain quality bonus. And then if we impact the MLR, there's shared savings to be had. But to take a risk in that book is tough. Unless the payer is really willing to get behind us and solve for some of these things. So I think we'll continue to grow it. I don't think you should expect us to take downside risk in Medicaid unless there's a unique opportunity.

為此，支付方願意支付一定的 PMPM（每人每月費用）、一定的品質獎金。然後如果我們能改善 MLR（醫療損失率），就會有可分享的節省（shared savings）。但要在這個組合承擔風險是很困難的。除非支付方真的願意支持我們，並一起解決其中一些問題。所以我認為我們會持續成長。除非有特殊機會，否則你不應該預期我們會在 Medicaid 承擔下行風險（downside risk）。

Jack Slevin, Jefferies.

Jack Slevin，Jefferies。

Nice job on the quarter. I guess maybe not to backtrack over this too much, but just on the Medicare Advantage discussion, because there's pretty palpable excitement across payers and the value-based care space around that environment improving.

本季表現不錯。我想也許不要在這點上過度回頭重複，但就 Medicare Advantage（MA，聯邦醫療優勢計畫）的討論而言，因為在支付方與價值型照護領域，大家對於環境正在改善這件事有相當明顯的興奮感。

My understanding or my read is really that many investors think that some of the moves you took to pare down risk meant that you don't necessarily participate in upside in the same way on some of the tailwinds that are now behind the industry.

我的理解或解讀是，很多投資人認為你們為了降低風險而採取的一些動作，意味著你們不一定能以同樣的方式參與到如今產業順風（tailwinds）所帶來的上行空間。

Maybe just breaking down that book across the 71% in upside only, the 19% upside, the downside, and the 9% cat book. Can you just talk a little bit about how better rates or more margin favorable payer bids flow through to you in each sleeve of the book there?

也許把這個組合拆開來看：71% 是僅上行（upside only）、19% 是上行/下行（upside/downside）、以及 9% 的 cat 組合。你能否談談，在這些不同「分層」（sleeve）的組合中，更好的費率或更有利於毛利的支付方投標（payer bids）會如何傳導到你們這邊？

Yes, it's a great question. I think the biggest dichotomy lies in the fact that broad industry sentiment does not necessarily translate into the ground-to-ground payer contracting discussion with any particular payer in one geography with a certain book of business in MA.

是的，這是個很好的問題。我認為最大的落差在於：整體產業的情緒，未必會直接轉化為在某個地理市場、針對某個特定支付方、就其 MA 某一特定業務組合所進行的第一線合約談判內容。

So I think overall, I don't think reimbursement is going to increase massively over time. I think what CMS is trying to do is make sure that everybody is getting reimbursed appropriately, whether that comes through star scores or risk adjustment or whatever other mechanism they can look at.

所以整體而言，我不認為補償（reimbursement）會隨時間大幅增加。我認為 CMS 想做的是確保每個人都能獲得適當的補償，不論是透過星等評分（star scores）、風險調整（risk adjustment），或他們能採用的其他機制。

I think they had a one-time adjustment. The system got a shock. Some of the payers, I mean, these cycles have happened with MA payers over the last 20 years. You can see every four, five years, payers grow their book, they overshoot, they make a correction, and then the lives move from one to the other, and then somebody is left holding the bag until the cycle repeats itself.

我認為他們做了一次性的調整。整個系統受到衝擊。有些支付方——我的意思是，過去 20 年 MA 支付方一直有這樣的循環。你可以看到大概每四、五年，支付方擴張其業務、擴張過頭、做出修正，然後人數（lives）從一家轉到另一家，接著就會有人在下一次循環到來前「背著包袱」承擔後果。

So I think while you're coming off the trough from a payer perspective and you're seeing those results after the last two, three years, how a provider business contracts at the ground level kind of remains the same. We're going to look at each geography, each book of business. And then we continue to believe, I think, this broad-based view that capitation is the only way to capture the upside.

所以我認為，雖然從支付方角度你正從谷底回升，並在過去兩三年後看到那些結果，但醫療提供者在第一線的簽約方式大致仍是相同的。我們會檢視每一個地理市場、每一個業務組合。而且我們仍然相信——我想這也是一個廣泛的觀點——按人頭付費（capitation）是捕捉上行空間的唯一方式。

I think it's certainly myopic. I mean that you've seen the last five years play out. I mean, it's not like any other provider group was making a lot of money in capitation five years ago in '21 when they were really talking about it, and we'll see how the next few years play out. And then there's an economic profit that is there to be shared between the payers, the doctors, and the providers.

我認為那肯定是短視的。我的意思是，你已經看到過去五年的發展。我的意思是，並不是說在五年前、也就是他們在 2021 年真正開始談論這件事時，任何其他醫療提供者集團在按人頭付費（capitation）上都賺了很多錢；而接下來幾年會如何發展，我們再看。此外，還存在一個經濟利潤，可以在付款方、醫師與醫療提供者之間共享。

Our view is that economic profit should be shared and not just captured, or the risk should not be borne by one while the economic profit is shared. So I think it's a shared risk arrangement is much more sustainable. I think you prevent some of the anomalies, some of the potential conflicts that can happen. So I think we'll just continue to work with our payers and continue to capture the upside based on the value that we provide. It does not necessarily have to happen in a capitation.

我們的觀點是，經濟利潤應該被共享，而不是只被一方攫取；或者不應該由一方承擔風險，卻由各方共享經濟利潤。所以我認為，共擔風險的安排更具可持續性。我認為這能避免一些異常情況，以及可能發生的一些潛在衝突。因此，我們會持續與付款方合作，並根據我們所提供的價值持續取得上行收益。這不一定非得透過按人頭付費來實現。

Some businesses might like that volatility and play for that extra risk for the additional downside potential. But our view is to have, as we've said, sustainable earnings is sustainable earnings. And you've seen us do that over the last six years as a public company and then even before that. So our strategy is going to be the same. And if there are opportunities for us to take more risk, we'll take more risk.

有些企業可能喜歡那種波動性，並為了額外風險去追求更高的收益，同時也承擔額外的下行可能。但我們的看法是，如同我們所說的，可持續的獲利就是可持續的獲利。你也看到我們在成為上市公司後的過去六年，以及在那之前，都是這麼做的。所以我們的策略會保持不變。如果有機會讓我們承擔更多風險，我們也會承擔更多風險。

Ryan Halsted, RBC Capital Markets.

Ryan Halsted，RBC Capital Markets。

Good morning. Thanks for taking the question. Most of my questions have been answered. But maybe just a question, any views or thoughts about payers reform on prior authorization policies, I would think certainly potential implications for your fee-for-service business, perhaps opposite implications on value-based care, but just any thoughts on that would be helpful.

早安。謝謝讓我提問。我大多數的問題都已經被回答了。不過我想再問一下，對於付款方改革事前授權（prior authorization）政策，你們有什麼看法或想法嗎？我想這對你們的按服務計費（fee-for-service）業務可能會有影響，而對價值導向照護（value-based care）可能是相反的影響；任何想法都會很有幫助。

Yes. I mean, look, there's a lot of noise in the media around it these days. I think the focus there is for higher value claims, probably in the acute setting, more so than the ambulatory settings with community-based doctors. 95% to 99% of claims are resolved on the first pass. It's mainly at the specialist level where you need prior authorizations. I mean, for a primary care-centric group, it's pretty low-value claims in the first place.

是的。我的意思是，你看，最近媒體上對這件事有很多雜音。我認為那裡的重點是在較高價值的理賠，可能更多發生在急性照護場景，而不是以社區型醫師為主的門診場景。95% 到 99% 的理賠在第一次送審就能解決。主要是在專科層級才需要事前授權。我的意思是，對於以基層醫療為核心的團體而言，這些本來就是相對低價值的理賠。

Ultimately, I think, look, with AI, there will be an equilibrium where the payers and the larger providers in the acute setting will just settle out on prior auth. I think it's in everybody's interest not to have extended timelines for those. It doesn't bode well for the ultimate patient who gets stuck in the middle of these, either as a surprise bill after care has been delivered or is just waiting for prior auth.

最終我認為，你看，隨著 AI 的發展，付款方與急性照護場景中的大型醫療提供者，會在事前授權上達到一種均衡並逐步穩定下來。我認為大家都不希望事前授權的時程被拉長，這符合所有人的利益。這對最終被夾在中間的病患也不是好事——不是在照護已提供後收到意外帳單，就是在等待事前授權。

So I think everybody's interest is aligned with that patient ultimately, but I think we just go through a period where some of this stuff will just get settled out. But I don't think it really impacts our business in that big of a way relative to the acute setting. I think we obviously continue to work with payers in making sure that if there are certain areas of specialties where we feel there's some friction, we smooth that out. And I think a lot of the payers have the right intent to continue to not have this as a source of friction, especially when it impacts patient care.

所以我認為，大家的利益最終都與病患一致，但我想我們會經歷一段期間，讓其中一些事情逐步被理順並穩定下來。但相較於急性照護場景，我不認為這會對我們的業務造成那麼大的影響。我認為我們當然會持續與付款方合作，確保若在某些專科領域我們覺得存在摩擦，就把它順暢化。而且我認為許多付款方的出發點是正確的，會持續努力不讓這成為摩擦來源，尤其是在影響病患照護時。

David Larsen, BTIG.

David Larsen，BTIG。

Hi, this is Jenny Shen on for Dave. I was wondering if you could comment on medical cost trends, how that compares to a quarter ago, and maybe a year ago? And then also, any updated thoughts on your general appetite for risk? It sounds like it's pretty consistent, but whether that has changed at all.

嗨，我是 Jenny Shen，代 Dave 提問。我想請問你們能否評論一下醫療成本趨勢，與一季前、以及一年前相比如何？另外，對於你們整體承擔風險的意願，有沒有更新的看法？聽起來相當一致，但想確認是否有任何改變。

Yes, I appreciate the question, Jenny. So the medical cost trend is pretty consistent. I mean, you've seen that result in our value-based book and how we perform. Again, we like to look at it over a 12-month rolling basis, as David was saying, and that's broadly across our book. So nothing jumped out quarter-over-quarter here for us.

是的，謝謝你的問題，Jenny。所以醫療成本趨勢相當一致。我的意思是，你已經在我們的價值導向業務組合以及我們的表現中看到這一點。同樣地，我們喜歡以 12 個月滾動基礎來觀察，正如 David 所說，而且這是廣泛涵蓋我們整體業務組合的。所以就我們而言，本季相較上季沒有什麼特別突出的變化。

There are some impacts of the flu season, but that happens every year. So we'll just continue to look at data and then see. But from our perspective, what's in our accruals, what's in our guidance is pretty consistent.

流感季節確實會帶來一些影響，但每年都會發生。所以我們會持續觀察數據，然後再看看。但從我們的角度來看，我們的應計項目中所反映的、以及我們指引中所納入的內容，都相當一致。

If anything, we like to be pretty prudent. And if we are wrong, there should be upside, like we've always said. So I think that's how we look at it. And I think we answered the other question previously already in terms of our ability to take risks.

如果要說的話，我們傾向保持相當審慎。而如果我們判斷錯了，應該會有上行空間，就像我們一直說的。所以我想我們就是這樣看待的。至於我們承擔風險的能力，我想我們先前已經回答過另一個問題了。

All right. That concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the call back over to Robert Borchert, SVP, Investor of Corporate Communications, for closing remarks. Thanks.

好的。以上結束我們的問答環節。我現在把電話交回給公司投資人與企業傳播資深副總裁 Robert Borchert，請他做結語。謝謝。

I'll hand it over to Parth.

我把時間交給 Parth。

Thank you for listening to our call today. We appreciate your continued interest and look forward to speaking to you again in the near future.

感謝各位今天收聽我們的電話會議。我們感謝各位持續的關注，並期待在不久的將來再次與各位交流。

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect.

各位女士、先生，今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位參與。您現在可以掛線。