NRW Holdings Stock

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the NRW Holdings Full Year Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions].

I would now like to hand the conference over to Jules Pemberton, CEO and Managing Director. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much and good morning, everyone. Welcome to NRW's FY '26 full year results presentation. Also joining me today is our CFO, Peter Bryant, who will go through the financial section of the presentation. It's been a very successful year for the group, with all of our divisions performing very well, growing both revenue and profit. In addition, during the year, we acquired Fredon, which is an exceptional business, and also established our newest pillar, EMIT. Fredon has contributed strongly to our results in the 9 months since completion, performing ahead of expectations in both revenue and earnings. Fredon also opens up a huge new market for us and positions the group well to participate in future-facing opportunities, including data centers, health, and defense.

While saying that, it's important to remember that Fredon's been around for over 40 years, and its historical core markets are in health, infrastructure, defense, and commercial. Okay, so on to page 2 of the presentation. We've got a couple of highlights there, which I'll repeat again on page 3. So the only one what's sort of worth mentioning really on that is that workforce numbers currently sit around 14,000 people across the group at the end of July. Onto page 3, and the group delivered an excellent set of results. Revenue of $4.3 billion was up 31.4% on FY '25, and our underlying EBITA was $288.6 million, which was up 38.8% on last year. Underlying NPAT was up 43.6%. Our cash holdings remain strong at $319.7 million, with cash conversion also at strong levels around 94%.

We maintained an order book of $7.5 billion, and the pipeline since our last presentation or our last update has now grown to $29.8 billion, which is the near-term 12 months award or tender activity. We have active tenders still remaining of that pipeline of $11.1 billion to be determined in due course. Our strong financial operating performance translated to the final dividend being declared at $0.145 per share, which is up 53% on FY '25. So on to the next page 4, around sustainability. Lots of things, initiatives being worked across the group, but the main point for me to call out probably is a big improvement in our safety stats, with a significant reduction in our total recordable injury frequency rate. But also the continued rollout of our critical risk packages and strong adoption from the businesses, including our newest business, Fredon.

So now I'll hand over to Pete just to go through the financial slides, and then I'll cover the rest of the operations after Pete's done. Thank you.

Thanks, Jules. Can I also welcome everybody to the call? It is rewarding to be presenting what are a great set of numbers for FY '26. By every financial measure, the group has delivered. Importantly, we are well positioned for FY '27 and beyond. Slide 5 sets out the P&L. Jules has already called out the strong earnings, but as a brief recap, EBITA was up 38.8%. This growth was driven in part by the acquisition of Fredon. That said.....

I am sorry to interrupt, Peter. Your voice is a little muffled. Could you come a little closer to the microphone, please?

Yes, sorry about that. I was just saying, Jules has already called out the strong earnings, but as a brief recap, EBITA was up 38.8%. This growth was driven in part by the acquisition of Fredon. That said, if you back out Fredon's contribution, the balance of the group delivered a very impressive 22% year-on-year increase. We will run through the segment results a bit later in the presentation, but as Jules said, without exception, all the segments delivered earnings growth. Looking at the number on the page, there is a couple I would like to call out. Non-underlying transactions for the year were $26 million. There is a table in the financial statements that breaks down this amount for you.

That said, the largest movement when compared to the $10.3 million expensed in the first half relates to the acquisition of Fredon and includes transaction costs and the amortization of the deferred consideration. You will recall when we presented the half year results, we ran through the accounting standards requirement to treat the $18 million deferred purchase consideration as a retention payment. This amount is then amortized over the 2-year deferral period. P&L interest expense was stable year-on-year, a good outcome given we utilized debt to fund the acquisition of Fredon. This result reflects the group's strong cash generation and effective treasury management. P&L tax has returned to normal levels with an effective tax rate of 29%. You may recall the FY '25 effective tax rate dropped to 14%, which is one of the few positives that came out of OneSteel. Moving to slide 6, which presents the balance sheet.

As you expect, pretty much all the numbers have increased as a consequence of the consolidation of Fredon. The notable exception is property, plant, and equipment. That has decreased due to the disciplined capital management across the group and the low capital intensity of Fredon. In relation to Fredon, the December accounts reflected the preliminary purchase price accounting. Under the relevant accounting standard, companies have 12 months to finalize their purchase price accounting, and we've reflected the final position in the June accounts. I'm pleased to say there were no material variances between the preliminary and final numbers. For those interested, the details are in the financial statements. Moving down the slide, financial debt increased due to the Fredon acquisition, which is funded through our existing debt facilities. Importantly, pre-AASB 16 leverage is sitting at 0.3x, which is a level we are very comfortable with.

Lease debt increased due to a 10-year lease we entered into as we centralized our office facilities in Perth, which ultimately will deliver a material cash saving to the group. Our working capital position remains negative, which is a good thing. In fact, it is $66 million more negative than it was this time last year. This reflects the inclusion of Fredon, which has a large negative working capital balance and reflects an increased focus on the management of the debtor book across the rest of the group. Finally, as reported at the half, customer-related intangibles and goodwill have increased entirely due to the Fredon acquisition. On to slide 7 and some more good numbers. These numbers are cash, which is really what it's all about. Operating cash flow before capital was $327 million, with cash flow conversion at 94%, up from 83% last year.

This strong result was after the payment of $93 million in tax, a notable step up on the last year. But in line with the narrative we gave, which was following a period of low cash tax driven by carry forward tax losses and the benefit of accelerated capital deductions through COVID, FY '27 would return to normal cash tax payment regimes. On the subject of tax, when you work through the financial statements, you'll see we wrote off $90 million of the OneSteel receivable, which had previously been impaired. By writing this amount off, the group will receive a cash tax saving in FY '27. Capital expenditure for FY '26 was marginally below last year at $146 million, which again, is consistent with our focus on disciplined capital allocation and the less capital-intensive nature of the group. Finally, we paid down $91 million of equipment finance leases during the year.

As I said at the start of this slide, the cash numbers for the year are pleasing. Very pleasing. Finally from me, slide 8, which sets out our available liquidity. Subsequent to 30 June, we successfully completed a refinance of our bank debt facilities. The refinance saw an extension of the maturity date and a $300 million increase to the facility limit, which now sits at $700 million. In addition, we established a $100 million uncommitted accordion facility. And pleasingly, the refinance was completed on better terms and at a better rate. This outcome, when coupled with our existing equipment finance facilities and healthy cash holdings, gives NRW a strong funding platform to support the operational needs of the larger group and will enable us to move quickly and confidently on growth opportunities, including acquisitions as they arise.

Lastly, on the refinance, I would like to thank our existing banking partners, CBA, NAB, Westpac, and Bank of China for their continued support. I would like to welcome HSBC to the lender group.

That is it for me. I will now hand you back to Jules.

Okay. Thanks, Pete. On slide 9 is a page we use often to demonstrate our sector exposures and also the scale of our business. As I mentioned earlier, the addition of Fredon during the year has opened up a very large new market for the group to participate and grow in. On to the next slide 10, which shows us the segment contributions during the year. As I mentioned at the outset, all segments performed very well against the prior period, with the MET group a standout and mining also bouncing back strongly from a difficult year in '25 due to adverse weather conditions. We will move on to the civil results now. Revenue was only up modestly from the prior year and the margin percentage remained consistent. However, this was impacted by a one-off challenging contract in Queensland, which was accounted for in the first half.

Second half margins have improved and we expect that to continue into FY '27. We are looking forward to significant pipeline of $8.4 billion and active tenders of $1.6 billion support a strong outlook for this business with a number of tailwinds in our key markets, including the continuing sustaining capital spend in iron ore, public and private infrastructure spend across roads, ports, airports, and defense. The Brisbane Olympics, of course, and potential opportunities in South Australia in either copper, defense, and infrastructure. Moving on to slide 14. In mining, we delivered revenue of $1.54 billion, which is pretty much line ball with last year's revenue. However, due to our strong operational performance and no major adverse weather conditions, we delivered earnings of $139.9 million, which is up 15.6% year on year.

Looking forward, mining will grow this year through the commencement on July 1 of our new project, Meandu, and also the expansion of Castle Hill. Additional growth can come from utilizing spare capacity in our fleet, from the current tenders submitted which total at the moment $4.2 billion and are part of a larger pipeline of near-term opportunities at around $9.8 billion. However, as Pete said previously as well, we continue to maintain a very high degree of discipline around capital allocation within the mining business and generally across the business. That brings us to the MET business. MET has had a fantastic year with revenue up 35.1% to $1.26 billion. Pleasingly, the earnings were up 40.5% to $96 million. An excellent result and thanks to strong contributions from Primero, DIAB, and RCR.

The outlook for MET is positive despite the runoff in Fimiston during the first half of '27. Active tenders of $2.2 billion from a pipeline of $6.8 billion are records for the division, and we expect to gain good traction through the year in terms of awards and projects coming through. We also continue to work on the commercialization strategies for our ALi lithium refining process, and many of you would've seen the recent endorsement by Patriot Battery Metals Inc. in Canada of our technology and that it is their preferred refining pathway based on early studies. Moving on to the last and newest of the divisions, Fredon and EMIT, and certainly one of the most exciting in terms of opportunity and outlook for the group.

Fredon's contributed during the 9 months of '26 and delivered revenue of $684.2 million and earnings of $36.1 million at a margin of 5.3% for that period. However, the second half margins were better than that, which is in keeping with our short-term target of 6% margin for the business. Performance to date, as I said previously, has exceeded our expectations and we've also announced significant wins across health data centers and other Commonwealth of Australia projects. Looking ahead, there's a rapidly growing pipeline of opportunities across many of their core sectors. Active tenders have grown to $3.1 billion, which is part of the larger pipeline of near-term prospects of $4.1 billion. So very exciting prospects ahead there. We'll finish off on group guidance and then go to questions. Obviously, the outlook, as I've said during the presentation, remains very strong for the enlarged group.

Pipeline has grown to $29.1 billion with active tenders across the business of $11.1 billion. $7.5 billion of work in hand, including our repeat business and that sets us up very well for FY '27 and beyond. We have set guidance of $4.6 billion to $4.8 billion of revenue, of which currently more than 80% secured. Underlying EBITA is expected between $320 million and $330 million at this point. Cash conversion consistent with long-term averages.

I think that brings us to the end of our presentation and we can now open to questions. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from John Campbell with Jefferies.

Good solid result, I thought. Just on MET, and you've been asked this a lot, Jules, around the roll-off of Fimiston. Are you pretty confident that MET is going to, and I guess within your overall guidance, that MET is going to grow revenues in '27?

We will certainly grow bottom line and worst case will be flat to growing, worst case in MET. That is our assumptions at this point in time. The opportunities in live tenders and what we are bidding at the moment are enormous and not been seen before by the business. I think that bodes well for the future of that division.

Just on the upscaling and the banking facilities, $300 million upscaling, when you still got quite a reasonable amount of undrawn facilities. Can you give a bit of color on the thinking behind that?

Do you want to cover that, Pete?

Yes. Look, John, we went through a process of just assessing the overall treasury structure of the group. What we wanted to have, given the size of the group, is significant working capital buffer, which we had anyway, but more importantly, to have capacity to be able to act quickly, as I said in my speech, quickly and efficiently in the event that we did want to, I guess, undertake any M&A transactions.

Just on M&A, obviously Fredon is now well bedded down and it is delivering ahead of expectations, which is great. The outlook looks really strong. You have a fairly nicely balanced business really, that I think others would like to emulate. What are you thinking in terms of M&A? Are you back actively looking and in what sort of areas or capabilities would you be thinking about?

Good question, John. Look, there are a lot of things that come to us that are not necessarily part of our strategic thinking. There is also things that we are obviously interested in growing across the MET maintenance business, obviously additional things that we can do in Fredon or under the EMIT banner. So there is a multitude of things that we do look at of different scale. We recently were in a process where we actually withdrew at the end being one of two because of value, and we decided not to play. But that comes back to the kind of discipline in terms of strategic value versus where the market is at the moment or what internationals might be willing to do. So that was not a very large proposition, but again, it could have been something that we would grow within our existing group of services.

I think what we do now is very good. The discipline around capital allocation is very strict, very tight. We continue to maintain that across our mining business and in the procurement sense, we think we are going to have a lot of wins in terms of where we are buying from as well, parts and other things in the future. So I think that is a real drive, an internal cost drive as well as looking for the right opportunity to grow the skill sets of the business long term.

Your next question comes from Matthew Chen with Moelis.

Just wanted to check in on how you guys are thinking about CapEx for the year ahead.

It was $147 million for the year just finished, as you know. I think it should be sitting around $165 million, there or thereabouts.

Yes.

If you think about the Meandu project that we've announced isn't new. It's client CapEx. Again, when you think about those things, we're adding revenue without a CapEx obligation for the company, which has been very good, very successful for us in the Queensland market particularly.

Great. Just in terms of the MET revenue, I think you guys have touched on the fact that there are a few other components of that MET revenue that were growing well. I think you guys had called out DIAB and RCR in the past. Just a bit more color on that side.

Look, obviously the lion's share of revenue is Primero and larger projects, but the other businesses are growing quite strongly. DIAB is more shutdown maintenance, small projects. RCR is also products and then parts service for those products, which is a part of the business which has been growing pretty strongly and also have good margins as well. So, with Fimiston rolling off and the lower margin contribution from that, when we look forward, Yes, whilst revenue might not be growing at the same level, there's a lot we can do at the bottom line in terms of improving that as we look forward, whilst those projects come through.

Great. Congrats on the result.

Your next question comes from Amanda Kelly with Barrenjoey Capital Partners.

I am just wondering if we can delve a bit deeper into the MET pipeline. I am just wondering what kind of pockets of strength you are seeing there and what areas we can maybe talk about.

Well, without specifics, you would know that the gold sector has got an enormous amount of activity, both in terms of upgrades of old plants and building new ones. That is an area. Energy, there is also quite a lot going on the energy side of things, which we have played in historically. It is across those 2 sectors mainly, but also iron ore. It is just the activity levels are very high at the moment, but gold is a decent portion of opportunities in the short to medium term, as well as energy, probably.

Great. Also, it might be a bit too early at this point, but maybe can you walk through what progress has been made with introducing Fredon to some of your other customers?

Well, it has. I think I make the comment somewhere, I am not sure if I have said it today, but it is in maybe in the media release about our ability to be able to support both urban and regional data centers. That should throw a few breadcrumbs out there to who we may or may not have been talking to.

The next question comes from Pia Donovan with Argonaut.

Just on the Fredon business. Obviously expected growth going into the next year. Just wondering what level you are expecting and also how much capacity that business has without any additional acquisitions.

It has quite significant capacity actually, and I think our assumptions previously with where it might have been growing at 20% plus is probably undercooked. That depends on timing of awards and other things. No, I am very excited about the prospects for the Fredon business, and activity levels are very high. We are on projects that are not necessarily caught up in future development or approval issues. I do not think that is a risk for us.

You would not know this, we have, Jules is talking top line growth. We have also seen the margin on that business step up considerably in the second half. I think the challenge to that team now is to continue that margin growth and we have been quite open saying we are targeting 6% by at least run rating by the end of FY '27.

Yes. Great. Just on the margins, as you said, the second half across the business was stronger than first half. Do you expect going forward to sustain those second half margins?

I think so. Yes. Absolutely our plan is to improve margins and the balanced mix of business we have these days. El Nino might help us on the long-term weather issues in Queensland as well. There will be a drought for the next 5 years. So we do not have that to deal with in an abnormal sense. I think it is a very positive outlook at this point in time, certainly for the next few years that we can see right now.

Your next question comes from Nicholas Rawlinson with Morgans.

Congrats on the result. Thanks for taking my questions. Just on civil, obviously a pretty solid result. Presumably, it was heavily dominated by iron ore works. It feels like public infrastructure work is set to ramp up quite heavily in Western Australia around Anketell Road and the Kwinana Port terminal. Are there opportunities around there for you guys?

Yes, we are involved in those bids. Just on that, the last couple of years, we have probably seen the runoff on our freeway project, which we won during COVID, which was contributing revenue but no margin. It was an alliance. That has obviously run through within the last 12 months. We have Toodyay Road and also Tonkin Highway, that we have announced recently that are '27 contributors. Whereas probably 50% of our civil business in WA was public infrastructure, it kind of almost went to zero. Now that is ramping up again whilst the iron ore activity is still pretty strong. I think we got both that balance in there. On the East Coast, urban has been very good.

Urban continues to be strong, irrespective of the housing market and other things, because it is at the very low end of the housing market type subdivisions. That continues to be strong. I think, looking forward, obviously we had that one-off impact in the first half. Margin is better in the second half and expect to at least stay at those levels or improve as we go forward.

Just on mining, you mentioned $4.2 billion of active tenders. Could you maybe just elaborate on what sort of commodities you're tendering on? Are any of those due to be awarded in the next 2 to 3 months?

Could be. It's probably a now to 6 months sort of time, I would have thought that we'd have news flow. We're obviously got a couple of renewals that are coming up that we continue to work through, so there's no concerns about those. The new work, we have a reasonable amount of spare capacity in our fleet, which we haven't redeployed. We're winning jobs that were client equipment supplied, et cetera. Castle Hill's only taken a small amount of additional fleet in there. So, there is capacity without a big CapEx bill to do quite a bit more in our mining business. Also, drill and blast is going pretty well. Drill and blast probably had a soft couple of years. This year, going forward, we expect them to do much better than they have done in the last 2 years.

Nick, for clarity and for everyone, those 2 rollovers are in that active tender.

Your next question comes from Mitchell Sonogan with Macquarie.

Congrats on a good result. Just on Fredon, Jules, you talked to a growth rate above 20%. Can you just clarify, is that still talking off the $840 million pro forma FY '26 number you put out at the time of acquisition? Can you maybe just give us a bit more color on how to take that number? Thank you.

I think that's the last time I said it, yes. I'm trying to think what the annualized number is now.

No. Mitch, we've been saying it should do $1 billion in FY '27. That is on that $840 from the prior year.

Yes.

Perfect. Very clear. Then just in terms of the uplift in the active tenders, like from the first half, it has gone from $1.7 billion to $3.1 billion now. Clearly a lot on the books and working at the moment. Can you maybe just talk to, I guess, some of the biggest opportunities you are seeing across the end markets? Obviously, data centers gets a lot of attention out there, but it is much more diversified than that. So, yes, just keen to understand the biggest end market opportunities you are seeing at the moment.

Obviously, yes, data centers, there is a decent amount of data center stuff in there. There is health. There is also AV actually related to Brisbane. So Yes, there are some big packages, the biggest ones probably in data at the moment, data centers. But as I said earlier, not in areas where there are challenging potential future approvals or anything else. So, good runway for the next few years of those prospects.

Just a quick one on mining. You have obviously talked a little bit about the growth outlook into '27 with Meandu and South Walker Creek step-ups. On Meandu, you mentioned that was client CapEx. So Jules, do you mind just giving us a bit of a sense of what we should expect on the margins into FY '27, noting the 9.1% delivered in FY '26? That is all from me.

Yes. Thanks, Mitch. Our range is usually between 9% and 11%, depending on the capital intensity. We are working on improving that, and the better contribution from drill and blast can help those margin improvements. Generally, when you have client-supplied equipment, the margin's a little lower. So, we've got to see how that mix plays out. But I think the annual run rate for that job's around $150 million, and there might be opportunities to do more where we could supply some equipment as well. So that's obviously only just started a month or so ago, so early days, but we expect the margin range at least to be sort of in the pocket that it is now.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from William Park with UBS.

My apologies, been jumping on a number of calls this morning. My apologies if this has already been covered, but can I get some sense around some of the major mining contract renewals that we should be aware of? I know you've spoken about Curragh and Carrara in the past, and just wondering where that's at, and is there any other renewals that we should be thinking about, and conversely, any other greenfield projects that you think is worthwhile highlighting? Thank you.

Well, the 2 major renewals are Curragh and Carrara, and both of those are in discussions at the moment. There's nothing to suggest that they won't be renewed. We'd expect that to be business as usual. In terms of new prospects, there's things in gold, there's things in iron ore, quite busy bid activity, but it comes back to capital allocation if we have the spare fleet rather than us going out and buying big licks of capital to put into a competitive mining project. I think there's enough work around at the moment that we can play well and make a good return, but that's really the determining factor of how we want to play with already an expansion of Castle Hill and a new Jimblebar coming in to sort of pop the earnings up and the revenue up anyway in FY '27. We've got time to work through that and find the right projects.

Just moving on to civil, I know in the past you guys have talked to getting to sort of the $1 billion revenue number. Is that still an aspiration for you guys? Is that a realistic aspiration in FY '27? If that's the case, what are some of the building blocks that get you from what you reported to sort of $1 billion of revenue and beyond?

Look, some of the tailwinds I've called out will obviously help going forward to sort of grow the overall market. Iron ore has obviously been a big contributor this year. Not so much public infrastructure in W.A., and that's sort of changing this year because the public infrastructure work's coming in. There's ports, marine, all the infrastructure in Anketell, and then after that AUKUS, plus Brisbane Olympics, as well as urban still being strong and the work that happens in Queensland. Look, it's not a desperate focus for us to hit bigger revenue targets. For me, it's more about improving the profitability across the business. That workflow is coming, so the activity levels will be very high. It's just a matter of making sure that we are doing the right projects and delivering a better margin, which is pretty important.

Just on that, where can civil margin get to? I know it really depends on the mix between public infrastructure and resources work that you've called out. Just in terms of the opportunities that's in front of you, where can it potentially get to? Can it have 7% in front of it, or can it go beyond that?

Look, I think, when you've got that sort of scale around and different project timings and all those sort of things, in theory, yes. It's a big business, right? If we get into the 6s, I'll be pretty happy. If we can do better than 6.5% going towards 7%, that will be a great result. We have got scale there. There's no perfect world about projects all starting on time at the same time, and you've got a big overhead in the meantime to sort of carry through. I think activity levels are going to continue to increase off all of the things that are planned, whether it's from airports to ports. As I said, you've still got the iron ore sustaining capital stuff going on.

You've now potentially got BHP doing a lot in copper, plus AUKUS in South Australia, plus all the infrastructure work in South Australia. So there is a huge amount of activity at the moment. If we pick the right projects with the right margins, we'll do better and hit those targets. But I'm not going to call out 7% just yet.

No, understood. One last question I had is just around, I guess, competitive dynamics just across the board and I guess the pricing power balance. I'd imagine a lot of the contractors would have sort of a pricing power as it stands now because of the sheer amount of work that's out there. Just wondering whether if your competitors are continuing to take somewhat of a prudent and conservative approach to pricing as opposed to going quite aggressive, or are you seeing more competitors stepping up their intensity?

Look, we're here to make money. There's a recent example where we were not successful on a project we talked about for a period of time. One of our competitors picked it up. If you look at the market today and what's in that tender pipeline for MET, as an example, there is no capacity left in that market because all of those competitors are absolutely full, which leaves us in a pretty reasonable position to get the right outcomes. I think that's kind of important in that side. In the civil side, there's a lot of work and we're winning our fair share of it, and we're not doing things stupidly to win work. The same in mining. Mining is really about capital.

If a project requires a lot of capital that we don't own and we're not confident we can make the returns out of it, we don't price it, or we price it high, or we find some different capital solution. Because we're getting growth anyway through the existing projects, and we've got spare capital to put into new growth projects. I think, Yes. The whole market is very, very busy, and that's a good thing for the contractors at the moment.

[Operator Instructions] There are no further questions at this point. I will now hand back to Jules Pemberton for closing remarks.

Okay. Look, thanks everyone for listening to the presentation, your questions. Look forward to seeing a lot of you in coming days and great result. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the NRW Holdings Half Year Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I'd now like to hand the conference over to Mr. Jules Pemberton, CEO. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning, everyone. Good morning or good afternoon, depending on where you are. Joining me today is Peter Bryant, our CFO, for our FY '26 half year results. Exceptional set of results for this half year, particularly when compared to last year and some of the challenges we had in pcp. We'll skip through the highlights -- well, I'll skip through the highlights, sustainability, and then I'll hand over to Pete, and then I'll take you through the businesses' operating performances as well.

So just a comment on the second page. We've now got a workforce of more than 12,000 people. So we say circa 12,000 people. That's 12,000 people and growing, obviously, given the activity levels we're supporting across the group. And if I skip over the page to the half year financial results, we delivered revenue up 20% or 9.5% to $2 billion, the underlying EBITDA was $132.3 million, up 36.5% on the half and underlying NPAT of $83.1 million, up 42.3% on the half.

Record cash holdings for the business of $342.4 million and very strong cash conversion, which again, Pete will talk to more but a very strong focus for the business units. Underlying earnings per share of $0.18.

Strong order book grown a bit since the AGM, $7.5 billion, including repeat business. But what's really grown is the outlook and the pipeline, which is for projects to be tendered/awarded within a 12-month period. That's now $25.2 billion, and we have a record of $9.2 billion in active tenders currently submitted and being worked on.

Our fully franked final -- or sorry, interim dividend declared at $0.05 a share is up 20% on the pcp. And importantly, and I'll talk more about this during the presentation as we further upgraded our guidance to $275 million to $285 million of EBITDA from $260 million to $265 million, which we disclosed at the AGM.

So on the next page, I'll talk about sustainability. We obviously always have a very strong focus on the safety and well-being of our people. and also critical risk management. I'm encouraged to see that the TRIFR has improved, albeit slightly from our position of 6 previously that's down to 5.11.

Critical risk management implementation is very close to completion across all of our businesses and obviously having the acquisition of Fredon done recently and will be rolled out across their business as well.

Some of the decreases in female participation and indigenous are really due to the inclusion of the Fredon workforce and the increase in blue-collar workforce, which is predominantly male and that's had a, negative effect on some of those stats. But overall, obviously, we're looking to improve those stats.

So with that, I'll hand over to Pete to talk through the financials, and I'll cover up again on operations shortly.

Thanks, Julian, and I also welcome everyone to the call. As my second results presentation as the CFO of NRW and obviously very happy to present in such a great set of numbers, earnings, margins, cash gearing all reflect very positively for the half.

I'm on Slide 5 now. So Jules has already called out all the key numbers, which leads me with, I guess, the opportunity to present the most engaging commentary I can around amortization, interest, tax and non-underlying. If you just run down the numbers there, amortization of acquisition intangibles was up on the prior corresponding period. That increase all relates to the amortization of the Fredon customer-related intangibles that we'll book. And I'll talk about the Fredon acquisition on the next slide.

Non-underlying transactions at $10 million. There is a table in the director's report that gives you a full breakdown of that number. The largest single item is $6.7 million relates to Fredon and acquisition costs and the treatment of the deferred consideration for Fredon, which is another item I'll touch on in the next slide.

Interest was flat year or half-on-half, which we think we'll use debt to fund the acquisition of Fredon's grade outcome reflects there of the retirement of some equipment financing and the give managed to negotiate a reduction in our interest rates with our banking syndicate.

Finally, on that slide, tax, very stable at just under 30% of NPAT.

Moving to Slide 6, which deals with the impact of the Fredon acquisition. If there's an opening comment, I'm going to say, sometimes accounting standards can at a level of complexity to how we're required to disclose things I think this is one of those times. This is a brief recap. We announced -- or sorry, the announcement of Fredon -- sorry, when we announced Fredon, we pointed out the total consideration would be a maximum of $200 million on a debt-free, cash-free basis. The $200 million comprised a guaranteed payment of $140 million and an earnout of up to $60 million. Of the maximum consideration, a payment of $18 million was going to be deferred for 2 years. Now the good news is Fredon achieve its earn-out. So we will be paying the maximum consideration of $200 million. So this slide now shows how we have to account for that.

If you look at the column on the far right-hand side, I'll just move down the numbers for you. You can see at the top the $200 million acquisition price, we are required under the accounting standards to deduct from that the $18 million deferred payment because that deferred payment is tied to the retention of the minority shareholders. Again, under the accounting standard that deferred payment is treated as an employee expense, not as part of the consideration. We will be providing that payment through our P&L, and that amount will be disclosed as more underlying, and that formed part of that non-underlying balance I referred to on the prior slide.

Continuing to move down, you'll see we add back $45 million. The $45 million was a pre-agreed maximum working capital adjustment that has to be made. I did mention the acquisitions on a debt-free, cash-free basis. We then are required to deduct what we're calling seller deductions. These are payments that were made on behalf of the seller by us out of the seller's consideration. As an example of some of the legal fees were paid by us out of the consideration.

The math then gives you a number of $208.1 million. That is the total consideration under AASB 3, which we will use for calculating goodwill. You'll then see a 55 -- sorry, $53.7 million cash adjustment. That is actually the cash that was in the business when the transaction concluded. So you recall, I just said the working capital adjustment was $45 million. We actually had a gain because in conclusion, there was $53.7 million of cash in the business. That then gives you the final cash outlay of $154 million.

I'll call out the bottom bullet point. on that slide. So on a like-for-like basis, if you think of the announced $200 million purchase price, we effectively paid $191.3 million for the business due to additional cash that came across to us. And you can see the commentary there on what the earnings multiple would be at that level. So as I said, sometimes accounting standards do add some complexity to how we report.

Moving on to the balance sheet, which is Slide 7. Perhaps stating the obvious, but off the back of the Fredon acquisition, pretty much every balance in the balance sheet moved. I'm going to call out the 2 or 3 that I think are most important.

Net debt, you'll see increased to $200.4 million. And importantly, leverage we're seeing at 22.1% before AASB 16. That balance is actually lower than I think I gave guidance to in previous conversations with most folks on the phone.

The gearing was better than expected due to the really strong cash balance that we have on the half. I'm just going to call out, we do still have to pay out the $60 million payment in relation to Fredon. So I do expect gearing will tick up a little bit during the second half of this year, but it should close the full year at or a bit below 30%.

Working capital, you see there, we had an increase of $207.6 million to negative -- sorry, to $207.6 million. That is negative working capital. And just to remind everyone, negative working capital is actually a positive. And I think with the time we give Fredon acquisition, we did call out that Fredon runs that business with negative working capital, very focused on getting paid in advance for the work they do.

My last call out on the balance sheet is in relation to intangibles and goodwill. You'll see that balance has increased. That increase all relates to the Fredon acquisition. We will be booking customer-related intangibles of $95.3 million and goodwill at $141.7 million.

Moving down to the cash flow. And Jules did reference the very, very good cash flow conversion is 114.1%. That cash flow conversion was underpinned by 2 things and by a significant effort of the team to get debtor balances paid, and there are a couple of other balances that we recovered during the period, which was great. We also, through one of our major clients, received some early payments of invoices that were due at the end of the month. So a little bit of a run loss kicker for us. We have called out in the guidance that we expect cash flow conversion to be consistent with long-term averages. So I don't see it at 114% for the full year.

We have a $69.2 million tax payment. I'm calling that out just because it is up on the prior period. Again, we have called this out on previous calls. The business had the benefit of some carryforward tax losses and some accelerated capital deductions during the COVID period. Those are now unwind. We're reversing back to what I call a more normal cash tax basis.

Final one on this page for me is capital expenditure at $56.2 million for the half. Jules mentioned, our focus on capital and cash discipline that remains. We guided at the -- when we release the full year results to about $140 million of capital for the full year. We haven't changed that number, but I do expect we'll come in below given the focus we have on.

Last slide for me is on debt and available liquidity. I won't spend long on this slide, but the data in the table on the left-hand side, I've really referred to already as we've been working through the call. The data on the right-hand table just reflects the headroom we have under our various liquidity facilities. That said, we are going to carry out a bit of a review of liquidity off the back of Fredon and just to see what that structure should look like.

My final comment really for those who have had an opportunity to read the accounts as you will see in the subsequent events that we did increase our debt capacity by about $40 million through the establishment of an overdraft facility just help us manage the ebbs and flows of cashing out of the business.

I'll hand you, thank you, Jules, now for the exciting stuff.

Thanks, Pete. On the next slide, Slide 10, we -- a slide you've seen many times before, which is our divisional split between civil, mining, MET and EMIT. Mining comment on this really is that we're not really a true mining services business anymore. We are a services company, obviously, with activities across mining services, but also public infrastructure building, data, defense, et cetera. So we are a very, very diversified business these days.

On the second slide, we just have a quick overview of the various segments. Obviously, all of them up on the right-hand side, very positively in an earnings sense. Mining was down slightly due to the completion of some projects, which I'll talk about on the slide.

On to Civil, revenue increased 6.3%, strong urban growth and also the WA side of the business. A lot of work for Rio Tinto in terms of their sustaining capital business. So 3 projects there Brockman Syncline, Rio Tinto's coastal water supply and also West Angela's, which is we've worked at for quite a period of time, but we've also awarded deposit age, which is a new project for us there.

The revenue in the core Civil business in Queensland was flat compared to the pcp, was also impacted by an underperforming contract. Productivity and rain was causing some issues on that job. We have fully priced that into this half, the expected outcome, and it's due to complete very soon. Had that not occurred, we would see margins at least where they were at the last half, second half of the FY '25 financial year or better. So as we've said previously, we see those margins continuing to trend up post all of the COVID and hyper escalation for a period to being stronger. So we'd expect that looking forward.

Looking forward, a huge amount of opportunity continuing, obviously, in the Heartland that we've worked in for a long time in the Pilbara. sustaining replacement, minor works, major works, a lot of very large pipeline of opportunities across all of the majors at the moment.

In addition to that, we're seeing quite a bit in the infrastructure space, not as much, obviously, in Queensland yet, but certainly in WA, freeway widening, token grade sets, a whole number of projects that are still coming to market. And this really excludes all of the tailwinds coming in defense, both in WA and South Australia, where I think there's a combined $30 million tag for Henderson and another $35 billion, sorry, another $35 billion in South Australia. So I think activity is going to remain very strong. When you think about the South Australian market, we've worked there previously, at OZ Minerals, Olympic Dam, a lot of that workforce and equipment the capability doesn't exist in South Australian would come from WA or from our East Coast business. So very good opportunities.

And as you can see from our order book, active tenders and pipeline is probably as strong as we've ever seen it, with significant tenders pending award.

On to mining, growth result back to that sort of 9% margin, we've always sort of talked about a 9% to 11% EBIT margin for this business. We're back at 9% after having a pretty difficult time last year due to the excessive rainfall that we had across those operations. So that's a real positive.

Revenue a bit lower on pcp purely because of the cessation of Mt Cattlin Job, Mount Webber and also Isaac Downs were in that period. So run rate was high, but we do expect a much stronger second half with acceleration of Castle Hill and also the weighting of the South Walker Creek project coming in under the new contract model, which sort of started in January this year. So increase in volumes and better performance expected in the second half.

So the only other thing I'd call out is probably the award of the Meandu contract. Excellent contract for us to win. It's 100% client's equipment. So when you think about the mobilization, transition phase is happening this half, but it doesn't really impact us financially until FY '27. So again, we're growing the business, growing the Mining division with 0 capital. So when you kind of compare us to some of the comps, we are a very capital-light mining business compared to what you think a mining business looks like or mining contracting business looks like.

Again, in terms of order book, as I said, outlook very positive. Order book is strong at $4.5 billion. There's a couple of projects Obviously, you can see from the chart there that will be coming up due for extensions. Those conversations are happening now between those 2 large projects that we have in both Curragh and Karara. And then other than that, there's a pretty big pipeline of opportunities of which we do have capital available to support. So there wouldn't be a huge amount of additional capital required in the short term.

On Cement, exceptional performance from those guys on a pcp basis. Revenue, very strong 30% increase on the pcp and also the margin trended up very strongly as well. The combination of good performances from DIAB and RCR and obviously, a very strong performance at -- in the revenue from Primero at Fimiston. That project is completing sort of towards the end of this half.

So again, if you think about pipeline outlook for this business, very strong performances during the half and during the sort of the calendar year. A lot of active tenders in play at the moment, again, pending the award plus a pipeline that's building currently $3.8 billion, but activity levels are very high. So we've got no concerns in terms of replacing the Fimiston revenues as we look forward to '27, which may be a concern from some of the investors' comments in the past.

So we're very comfortable where this business is at the moment in terms of the MET Group run rate. And bear in mind, DIAB has maintenance and shutdown services that it does, so is RCR in terms of its product supply plus maintenance services. So there's a very large annuity business, good margin annuity business that is embedded in our MET Group division. So it's not all about projects. Having said that, obviously, Fimiston has been a standout for us in terms of capability and size and scale and very strong progress on Coastal Waters and Hope Downs 1 NPI as well for Rio Tinto.

And the only other thing probably to call out on that slide is that we're commencing discussions with sort of global investment banks around next steps on generating value commercializing our lithium processing technology, which we've been working on for a number of years now. We've just completed our third pilot plant, had various global majors through understanding our process and its value to the lithium processing industry in general. So that's something that we've kicked off. We haven't talked about it a huge amount in the past, but it's certainly something that can potentially give us a great outcome in the future.

So on to EMIT, very happy with, obviously, the acquisition of the business, the people, some fantastic people in the management team and all the culture of the people fits in hand in glove with the NRW businesses. The integration of the 2,500 employees, the systems and management reports and all of the things that we look at financials has gone very smoothly. And we really got some great outlook for that business as we look forward.

What it delivered during the period, $208 million of revenue at an EBITDA of 4.6%. That was generally expected and communicated to the market through our due diligence phase. We've won a bunch of data center contracts. But importantly, if you look at the sort of last -- the second last bullet point, Fredon has successfully completed delivery of Westmead Children's Hospital, Auckland Convention Center, Sydney Metro. This is a business that is not just about data centers. So if the technology stocks go fluctuating wildly, it's not all about data centers, yes, we're doing a lot of data centers at the moment. But this business has been around for a long time, and its strengths are across infrastructure, hospitals, public venues, sporting stadiums, defense and all of those areas are going to have some huge tailwinds as we look forward at the moment.

So we expect a very strong growth outlook complete, coupled with a focus on achieving our internal target of 6% EBIT margin, which, if you compare it our comps should be absolutely manageable, and we'd look to improve that going forward.

Order book, again, strong. Active tenders and pipeline continues to build. So really, some very good opportunities that you'll get to hear about in the near future.

So that leads me to our outlook and guidance. So continued strong growth will be delivered in FY '27 and beyond, which is underpinned by our pipeline currently sitting at $25.2 billion and those active tenders of $9.2 billion. $7.5 billion of work in hand, obviously, if you heard previously.

So just to reiterate, our '26 guidance. Our full year guidance at the stage is full year revenue increased by $4.1 billion to $4.2 billion from previously $4.1 billion, and our underlying EBITDA has increased to between $275 million to $285 million from $260 million to $265 million.

Cash conversion consistent with long-term averages. Now we don't do 114% all the time, but the high 80s, high 90s is kind of where we're targeting.

So with that, I will open it up to questions. Thanks very much.

[Operator Instructions]

Your first question today comes from William Park from Citi.

I want to just ask about how things have sort of trended in the first 1.5 months of second half, and I appreciate your comments around optics to the outlook, but just in terms of how things have tracked across each segment. And it's clearly mining with their [indiscernible] impact from rain in the first month or so of the second half, please?

Thanks, Will. Look, there has been a little bit of rain in January, but nothing out of the ordinary. I mean you'd know that last year was an exceptional rain event and constant sort of rain that we experienced throughout the year and more than 9 months of the year. It's normal for us to have rain in January. And on that normal period where you'd expected between December and sort of February, but it hasn't been anything excessive that we're concerned about. And it drives [indiscernible] out there at the moment.

And then just for other segments [indiscernible].

No. I mean, look, again, urban always gets a little whack with the rain when it's in Southeast Queensland, but that business continues to perform generally rain or shine because they recover the ops very quickly and generally going to have a lot of disruption. So nothing here. WA, very little impact to the cycle on came across the post when across Karara. I think we lost half a day or something. So certainly nothing that I'm concerned about. And touchwood last year was the anomaly and we're in a more normal pattern at this stage. But doesn't mean that it can't happen between now and sort of Easter time.

Well, the January consolidated result was where we wanted it to be. We're halfway through February. So I don't have numbers, just I'm not hearing anything that you all said, so everything is tracking as expected.

And then can I just clarify your comments around mining. typically, as I understand it, this is first half skew, but are you suggesting that this year because of the timing of project completions and so forth, you're expecting second half revenue for mining to be higher half-on-half?

It shouldn't ever be a first half skew. It kind of depends on what you're commencing. And when you're commencing it, we had South Walker Creek step-up because we're running the clients gear plus our own gear so that was always going to step up under the new contract in terms of size of contract and then also then the commercial model flips back to a production-based model rather than the hourly higher base model, which it was before. So when it rain, we actually did the best on that job at South Walker Creek because compared to the other projects because of the nonproductivity aspect of it.

Now it's converted to our normal production style contract. It's performing very well because we're not having the rain impact. So that's new versus the first half. And obviously, the first half, as I just said before, we've Mt Cattlin dropped out versus pcp, first half 2016 versus first half '25. Mt Webber was completed. It's just run the end of its course. And then also we had a little bit of Isaac Plains in there previously from Queensland.

So second half now, as we say, FY '26 into '27 has growth from Mt Cattlin increasing its second big fleet but also South Walker Creek. And obviously, nothing else coming out. So you've got stuff coming in, things not coming out. And then when you hit '27, you got to add on the Meandu as well, which is 0 capital plus whatever it is $150 million a year of revenue, what are the numbers. That makes sense?

Yes. That's very clear. And then just one last one from me, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is first time that you've ever sort of provided color around, I guess, the next fiscal year. Just want to -- so in comparison to prior years, could you give us some sense around revenue coverage for the next fiscal year at this point? Looking at sort of your pipeline work in hand and [indiscernible] to me looks to be quite poor. But just wondering whether something is effectively change in comparison to project. Clearly, your visibility does look good. But just curious to know [indiscernible] expectations for [indiscernible].

Look, Will, I mean, you got to think about the volatility that's been in the sector over the last few years. COVID and post-COVID and those kind of which weren't really normal. Up until 2018 from even the last kind of real downturn from 2017 to 2019, we probably would have been giving forward-looking statements like that. But the business today is so different. There's so much walking the door, annuity, other things that we don't even announce because of the individual values. If we get a variation on a contract with a large client who might not want to say anything, it could be $30 million to $800 million that comes in the door. So you can't -- order book is one measure. I think submitted tenders is very important. We haven't got preferred tenders in that split out of that -- it's not in the order book, but we don't have that sort of split out of the submitted tenders or active tenders. So there's a whole bunch of numbers in there that some of which you see when we deliver the financial periods, but a lot of it, you don't necessarily. So the confidence that we have going forward is really based on that growing pipeline, which is $25.2 billion of projects, which is here right now and coming up within a 12-month period that we'll be bidding or commencing it.

So the activity levels are very strong. And obviously, you've got to remember that we've got different businesses now, including Fredon and EMIT. You've got parts, maintenance businesses that are kind of churning along and then the project profile that we see across the iron ore majors plus infrastructure is also building. So this -- it's a very different business to worrying about a binary about 1 big project turning up.

Your next question comes from Darcy White from Jarden. First one, just on net performance. Could you break down how much of that improvement is leveraged to higher production versus what's coming from customers? And just given where commodity prices are, how should we expect any incremental benefits as those customers continue to ramp up in the second half, please?

So are talking about MET specifically?

Yes, MET specifically?

Well, look, I mean, the RCR business or the products business, mostly these days. It doesn't do major projects anymore. It used to do a bit of that, but it's mostly in our products and in the service and maintenance of those products. So that's become more of an annuity business. And that's obviously helping improve the overall margin. DIAB is more specialist small projects plus shutdown and maintenance as well. So I was doing a shutdown in maintenance for FMG and for others as well. So again, that becomes sort of not really an annuity business, but more so in annuity business. And then the projects are generally kind of smaller sub 50 million little-sized projects.

And then you've got Primero, which has obviously, a chunk of firm has been in at the moment at a lower margins than most of the projects a bit at. So I don't know if that really explains the question properly. Pete, you want to add?

A bit of color on that. And I think when we talk about net, people automatically going to Primero. But the net business, when you roll in as RCR, [indiscernible] Primero is kind of, call it, ballpark 50% of the EBIT that, that division generates. It's not as heavy as most people think is, and Jules has gone through those 3 businesses. So that's the only additional point I'd add.

That's great deal. Just on margins. Mining performance were pretty strong in the half. Can you just talk to what you're seeing in that second now? How we should think about capacity from here, what you guys are seeing in terms of competitive intensity? And just whether there are any key projects or contracts we should keep in mind for the second half that we should be aware of, please?

Look, two key things I called out on the slide are obviously the extensions that are sort of there at the moment, which is Curragh and Karara, which we've been obviously incumbents for quite a long period of time. Curragh also has Curragh North, which is [indiscernible] and others where it Curragh Main.So there'll be the ongoing conversations at the moment to obviously extend that project. So those 2 are big sort of catalyst is. If you look at the business as usual number, our revenue or annuity number, that's important for us for looking forward. The bid activity is reasonable and building, obviously, through all the gold guys and others and even lithium people that are starting up again in new gear. But winning Meandu was a great opportunity for us. It doesn't use any capital. So we've been very disciplined. And unless we're getting the right returns, we're not interested. We'd rather spend the money on the Fredon, as you can see and diversify the business or grow that business and there is no capital intensity. So we're being very, very disciplined around that.

What we'll see is probably drill and blast is in the mix on a few contracts. They haven't had the best year this year. It's been a bit quieter for them. But I think into '27, that will pick up as well. So drill and blast, which is quite a profitable part of that mining segment will help as we look to sort of '27, '28. But with the focus on capital from even the majors as well, there will be opportunities that come to contractors, assuming they have equipment. For us then, if we have the equipment, great. If we need to go and buy the equipment, it's very, very heavily scrutinized before anyone spending money.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Evan Karatzas from UBS.

I'm getting this asked a lot. I think I know the answer. I was going to ask you. In the MET's results obviously very strong. Was there any proper at least from [indiscernible] or anything else that could be seen as one-off in normal course of business or anything else like that?

No. No. No.

Okay. Yes, very clear. And then when we think about just the MET's earnings number, I mean you're sort of in this 40, mid-40s the last 2 halves, do you want to maybe just speak on how you're thinking about the sustainability of this level of earnings for the rest of '26 then also into '27 as well, please?

Look, I think as Pete said, you've got -- as said as well, the DIAB, the RCR business is sort of and FI are kind of a part of that solution and more projects that we bid with Primero and our usual margins would potentially improve it. So there is a very large revenue chunk related to Fimiston but at a lower average margin across the business. So I think it just depends on the mix of that. But project-wise, there's a lot happening. So Primero is involved in at the moment, that momentum and that project pipeline is building. So there's some really good things that we're involved in. So I have no concern in that business growing looking forward.

Yes. Okay. Good one. And just final one for me. Just coming to Fredon. Can you just remind us of the margin expansion opportunity for Fredon there getting to 6%. Why is it more depressed today? And what drives it to 6% over the short term? Anything you can point to there? And also what's the definition of short term as well?

Short term, well, for us, as the boss to the Fredon guys looking on the call, it's short term is soon. Does that help? Very soon. Look, I think some of the comps do produce different margins. These guys are very conscious of delivery. conservative in terms of their view around their projects, which is a good thing on an aggressive and things like that. They're a conservative delivery model. There are no kind of commercial issues outstanding. They deliver exceptionally well, and they're conservative in the way they do it. So I think that very early days, obviously, for us acquiring this business. And it's really about getting our sort of systems, processes, management reporting, all that sort of stuff that we need to get our hands around. And now we then focus on -- they're very clear in our understanding of the focus on improving those margins. And I have no doubt they'll do so within a short period of time, which could be in a half, it could be next first half '27, but I think we'll start to see things improve pretty quickly.

Yes. Okay. So it's that combination of delivery and best scale, right?

Yes. And I mean just the number of projects that are coming as well. I mean it's if you think about what's out there, it's not just data centers. They do a lot of data centers, but it's the traditional business that they've been working in well with those hospitals, major projects, convention centers or stadiums or airports or whatever else. There is a huge volume of work coming up, and they are a very, very capable organization.

One of the interesting stats on it, and they're probably the lowest turnover rate out of any of our businesses, I think culturally, it's actually improved since the acquisition down to like 11% annualized turnover, which is the lowest you'd ever see anywhere for the kind of business. So it's really an exceptional outcome for us. And obviously, we're very pleased to welcome all those employees to our group.

[indiscernible] group procurement contracts and there, I say, they're not for sale, so they're now focused on growing [indiscernible] due diligence questions here.

Your next question comes from John Campbell from Jefferies.

Great result actually. Just two questions for me, and it's sort of already been asked, but just around MET and Fimiston. Is it would it be right to think along the lines of, say, into FY '27, that there'll be a couple of hundred million of revenues that need to be replaced, but presumably, as you say, the pipeline is pretty good, but the margin impact probably is going to be positive. Just a question of whether you can fully replace those lost revenues?

Yes and yes, John. I think we -- the replaced revenues is not that much of a focus because there is quite a lot of work around. The important thing for us is obviously just improving, making sure that we maximize the overall margin. So whatever opportunities we get to do that, and there are a number of live bids that would certainly deal with that. The pipeline is pretty good and building probably that would be the comment.

Yes. And the margin performance, obviously, for the first half was really good. So it would seem that it would seem reasonable to assume margins will be higher in '27, almost certainly.

Yes. Again, it depends on the mix of the DIAB, RCR and those sort of volumes. But I mean, everything we've been doing with those businesses, they had some challenges with RCR, with overheads reduction when we're trying to grow the parts and maintenance business. So I think we've got a good handle on that now, and that's really the focus. That's a very high margin or higher-margin business. But generally, the NPI projects, the other projects, the FEED studies, the engineering work that Primero does is also at a higher level. So it's just making sure that we balance the right projects in that sort of mix. But what we're seeing at the moment in an activity sense is very positive. So.

Yes. Okay. And just on mining, again, pretty solid margin performance. And your target, I think, around the mining can be sort of in the 10s, early low 10 -- sorry, low double-digit potentially. But as you've sort of progressed and you're becoming less capital intensive within that segment, is it reasonable to assume that margins -- like if you can maintain margins as you're increasing the proportion of noncapital-intensive contracts, that would be a very, very good outcome?

Yes. Look, ultimately, if we get the opportunity to do that because obviously, not every project you can and then it comes back to are we willing to invest that level of CapEx in a project, which lately, we have we haven't won a lot of big mining projects with our own equipment. We just haven't -- we've been focusing on other things. But yes, I mean, Baralaba is a good example of that. Meandu is a good example of that, 100% clients equipment. And if we can keep the mining margin at a blended 9%, happy days. Not about outcome. You can see what we're spending in CapEx. I mean, I don't think I've seen that number that low for 10 years, I don't know. I mean it's been a long time since we've looked at a number that low.

We do have a focus on it, but we've just shut the gates on cap -- you can't walk in the door and say, I want to buy this and buy that to grow a mining business that is still competitive and isn't spinning out the right margins. So unless something changes there, and you're making stupid margins, why would we go and buy the equipment and deploy that capital to that business.

Your next question comes from Nicholas Rawlinson from Morgans.

Congrats on a really strong result. Just on the met segment. When you roll off the target cost estimate contract at Fimiston, I know it depends on mix a; bit, but same mix of Primero, RCR, DIAB, NFI are all pretty much the same. What's sort of a sustainable margin on that? Can you give us sort of a rough indication?

Look, where it is at the moment to when it was small, it was doing 8 to 10, and now it's we've sort of said it should be better than we reported last half, slightly higher, but that was sort of one-off of a bit extra any. I mean in the kind of realm of where we are now is not unreasonable. A couple of things obviously come out of that. It's just that mix of projects. And we've got some very good project teams. We obviously want to keep them busy. We've really built probably the largest project of its kind in Australia very successfully. And we're bringing the Rios, the BHP, everyone else up there to have a look at our capability, which is a real pat on the back for our capability as a group, which is probably not well enough understood. So as a result of that, we're starting to see a lot more interest and not only in construction but also in FEED studies. And obviously, the commodities, in general, are in a very positive environment.

And then just a general one, at the group level, the EBITDA guidance range has actually widened. Usually, it'd be narrowing at this time of year, I guess. Can you just explain what's driven the $10 million delta?

Look, I mean, we're not out of the complete wet season yet. If you want to think about it like that, but it...

It did go up a bit.

Yes, it did go up a bit.

I know. I was just like you had $260 million, $265 million. I was just wondering if there was like maybe a bit of contingency built in there for, I don't know, the outcomes of Fimiston margin recognition there, like in terms of whether maybe you take a little bit of a hit or something like that.

Look, I don't think so, but you can work out what you think. The reason is it's usually been in that kind of $10 million range. It was only -- obviously, we went to a slightly tighter range, but things have continued to be dry. Operations are performing well.

Your next question comes from Cameron Bell from Canaccord Genuity.

Just that pipeline of projects in the next 12 months and your active tenders, those 2 numbers are just on the massive numbers. It's probably a difficult question to answer, and I won't hold you to it, but that $25 billion top line, roughly ballpark, how much of that would you expect to actually convert into eventual active tenders?

Good question. I mean, look, depending on who the customer is in that mix is to some of it can be extensions as an example, we're already there, and they're big numbers. As you can kind of work out from our mining slide, but there is other mining bids live. There's a lot of construction. And as I said just before, we haven't split out the stuff that we're preferred on, so there's another number of that preferred. So look, I mean, I'm not going to give you a number, but it could be sizable.

I thought I was pushing my luck I guess the other part of it being a sort of reverse trickle-down period of work. Given how much work is out there and how your the competitive landscape is consolidated, do you think your win rate of tenders is heading higher?

Look, again, probably, I think if you need a particular capability and you need certainty of delivery, we've been around a long time in our core businesses, and we have a very good reputation for delivery across those segments. So urban is kind of a no-brainer, Civil Pilbara WA, kind of no-brainer. And there's some decent stuff there in terms of framework agreements and other things that are happening.

infrastructure the other interesting thing probably to comment, which I haven't commented on is made in WA or even made in Australia. If you think about our comps in a civil sense, there are very little left. I think we're the only sizable one left in WA. Georgia was taken out by the Austrian Strabag so -- and that's a very important piece to decision-making in the public infrastructure space as well as our local content. Otherwise, the Spanish, the French, one Queensland mod that's private is doing a bit of work. So that becomes than a smaller tender field or potentially as long as you got the capacity. So the key thing for us is making sure we're hiring key people ahead of those opportunities so we can deliver well. And that's what we're sort of focused on, whether it's from Queensland or Rio have got direct flights from Brisbane as an example. So we then bring people through Perth. So Brisbane is a bit quiet or. Gold is a bit quiet, we can funnel people to the west and vice versa.

So -- and then potentially, we've got South Australia to deal with, whether some opportunities that we're working on that are obviously around Olympic Dam, but then Arcus related as well. We're still in Whyalla . So lots of things are going on and ultimately not a huge amount of choice.

Just bit of context too, and I'll give you the names. But the top 5 drives a pipeline to $6 billion in the top 5 jobs. There's some big jobs out there.

Yes. Okay. And then just the last question for me. You gave us that a bit of breadcrumb in the next slide. What is generate value in, I guess, when you're talking about the within process in that?

Well, look, we think we have developed a process and we are patenting it, and we have IP just now called Ali for a much lower capital cost refining process, which doesn't use the same heat or assets or caustic chemicals to produce a lithium carbonate, battery-grade lithium carbonate. So when you think about that versus the Metso, which is a nearly EUR 20 billion company, we may have something that has some value there. However, we need to go through the motions and understand how to best do that, whether it's sell it, operate our own operation, JV, license, all of those things, which ultimately we want to build, but this has a global significance in terms of we think. So hence, it's a breadcrumb in terms of what future value -- well, we don't understand the future value. We know there's a lot going on. And if we can build something at half the price of the current lithium processing plant, which don't really work here, we might be under something.

Albemarle say that doing it in Australia is twice the cost of China, well, maybe we can do it at the same cost as China, but -- and it's a different flow sheet and different process. But anyway, that's the one the breadcrumb.

Your next question comes from Matthew Chen from Moelis.

Just wondering, interested in your latest thoughts on capacity or geographies you want to build on. It sounds like Fredon has gone pretty well. So I'm interested if you kind of want to focus in that more localized space, I think.

In terms of our geo geographical...

No, in capacity in that sense on that side?

Look, I mean, we're growing our workforce numbers. I think when we talked about the acquisition long after. We were 11,500. I think we're now 12,200 or 12,300 or something not long after. So the focus as I said and for Fredon, we've talked about this with investors as well that it should be a material growth uplift in the '27. Yes, material growth uplift. So and that's really to support the projects that we see coming across a lot in the Eastern states, but they're also very busy in WA. So it's been sort of Victoria WA, Queensland in this sort of financial year. But as we look forward, there's probably more in South Australia. Victoria is still very busy, but also coming back into New South Wales as well in Queensland. So we're just positioning to make sure that, a, we're either -- they follow their clients, obviously, a lot of data centers still to build, huge amount of capacity interesting, the whole the mass thing and where we haven't built a huge project before, but he's tied up with furnace. I mean we have that capability. We're doing, I don't know, $300 million worth of data centers so we're right in there in terms of an electrical and a cooling perspective through the HVAC business. So we're focusing on how we can deliver the best outcomes for our business through the opportunities that are out there. right.

Next question comes from Mitchell Sonogan from Macquarie.

Congrats on a great result. Just a couple of quick ones. On the Civil business, you just made that comment, and apologies if you've been through this. Have been jumping between a few today. you've made the comments about opportunities with defense in Western Australia and South Australia. Yes, do you mind just talking to that a little bit more detail at the point where you're looking at tenders over what time frame? Would that potential work start to build?

Yes, good question on the time frame. Not really sure. We're certainly -- the defense business in WA is very closely aligned with the WA government as well. So it's not just purely run by defense. It's being run sort of collectively. We've just extended our lease at the Primero Henderson Yard and everything else to be ready to support all those activities. I think it may go to because of the sensitivities around a couple of major contractors and then we'll look to align our group's capability with one of those 2 major delivery partners, and these are massive construction guys that are well versed and trusted by defense. So that's kind of how that's probably going to work in WA. But then you've got South Australia going at the same time. And we're just looking at those opportunities at the moment in terms of teaming up with some of the majors to look at that. So we don't have a big capability in South Australia at the moment, but we have done quite a bit of work at Olympic Dam and airstrips and infrastructure. We did the road for OZ Minerals, and we're now building their original corporate project out there and things as well. So we do have the experience there other than what we're doing at Whyalla. So that's a consideration subject to kind of how busy we get in WA, I suppose.

Even a bit on defense, we've even had some thoughts around RCR because RCR got a big machine shop here. So in the future, we might be making dry shafts at submarine [indiscernible], and that's trying to vary that field, but there's a lot happening.

Yes. There are only one or 2 businesses in WA. The other one being Hoffman Engineering that can do that type of machining, which actually was news to me until about a year ago. 9 months ago, and they started talking about it. So that's -- yes, future opportunities are very good.

Yes. Just a second sort of one, just on Fredon $1.7 billion of active tenders. Just wondering over what time frame would that work typically be delivered? Is it a 12- to 24-month period? And I guess just yes, whether it's historically or what's the historical win rate that typically achieved or a range there?

No, worries, thanks. Well, look, I think they've got a very high strike rate in terms of their win rate because a lot of it is with long-term customers and a lot of the business, I think, 70% when we announced it -- of their businesses with long-term customers, but that for 20 years or more. So the wind rate is very high. They get involved very early so sometimes, the timing of those awards can take time, depending on when the builder or whoever the head contractor as it starts. But win rate is very high. And again, a lot of that we don't necessarily announce because of the value. So depending on the materiality to the group, we kind of thought about announcing some of those little stuff. But again, it takes time to get the announcement through those their counterparts of their clients and obviously the end client and if it's defense, particularly that's challenging because I don't necessarily want to talk about it. So that's...

The interesting announcements something that's...

We want something. We just don't know. I can't tell you. So I think that's it's a fantastic business. I said, really good addition to the group.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Peter, a shareholder.

Perhaps an excellent result, a very happy shareholder. Could you just clarify where we are with the Whyalla situation, pleased with the golden recovery of the $10 million? I realize there's a note 3 in the accounts. It's quite complicated. Could you just summarize exactly where we're at in sort of plain English, please?

Peter, that's going to be difficult because it is a complicated scenario. Look, we've tried and been scoffed at every opportunity to try and get money out of this process. We tried to take ownership of the port, which we thought we had until the government changed the legislation to take it away from us. So that was obviously a challenge. We successfully wound up LPMA, which was good as a private company, which owns the shares in Tahmoor. Again, he put that into administration, and he since put Tahmoor into administration, but we're not giving up. We're not spending 5 hours of the day thinking about it, but we are still continuing to work on it. And ultimately, where the situation is now Tahmoor lender being sold, by either the administrator of LPMA, which owns the shares in Tahmoor, and that's it's a pretty valuable asset, 2 million tonnes a year reasonable quality coking coal closer to the coast. That sells we get a very significant chunk of anything over a certain value, but we just got to wait and see on it. So look, we don't give up. We've got all our money back on Gascoyne in which turned into Spartan, should have held a little bit longer. But that's just is what it is. We've had to deal with the pain and we're a very different position to where we were 12 months ago when this -- when the government stepped in. And we're still on the mine. We're still working on the mine.

Yes, the reassurance was that we're not getting distracted and it's not taking a huge amount of time trying to recover this money.

No. But as a shareholder, I absolutely value your thoughts on it and all our shareholders, that's our money. We should have been paid for it. We're not a bank and we will do whatever we can to recover until that moment comes, and hopefully, we do get something back.

Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back to Mr. Pemberton for any closing remarks.

Yes. Thanks again, everyone, for listening. A lot of good questions as well today and look forward to seeing a lot of you who were on the road next week. So thanks very much.

Thank you.

That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Thank you for standing by, and welcome to the NRW Holdings Full Year Results Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would like to hand the conference over to Jules Pemberton, Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead.

Good morning, good afternoon, everyone. Also joining me is Peter Bryant, in his first time as NRW CFO, but obviously, many times over the years in his capacity as a CFO of a listed company.

If we go on to Page 2, we'll sort of start with some opening remarks. And despite the many positives in our underlying results, it's been a pretty challenging year. South Australian government placing on steel into administration, of course, had a major impact on the business. And despite the best efforts ensuring we held a strong security position over the port assets. As many of you are probably aware, the South Australian government had amended or written new legislation on 2 separate occasions since the administration to essentially avoid our security or attempt to avoid our security position over those assets in order to simplify the wireless sales process. So that's been obviously very disappointing.

Our efforts to recover the impaired balance, of course, is still underway. We've got a number of initiatives happening at the moment. And we'll continue to seek the best possible outcome for all of our shareholders. And the second impact of the business isn't so much of a similar one to the first one, but more an active god, where we experienced probably double the average rainfall throughout Queensland, which impacted the Golding business, but particularly the mining part of NRW's Golding business. and also during the second half. So it was bad in the first half, but also continued to be far higher average rainfalls than -- sorry, higher than average rainfalls in the second half.

Now having said those, a couple of negative things, we'll move on to the positives for the rest of the presentation. And on Page 3, the group increased revenue by 12.2%, which was driven by strong growth in both the MET and Civil business, which performed exceptionally well. Our underlying EBITDA also increased with margin expansion in MET and Civil. However, as I just mentioned, the mining margin was significantly impacted by the higher average rainfall. We also had a suspension of the Mountain Catlin contract with a lithium project in WA, which finished early and a bit of descoping of fleets at Kura.

Cash holdings remained strong, $265.7 million and also strong cash conversion, 82.9%, which is sort of around our long-term averages between 80% and 90%. Order book, very strong at $6.1 billion and the near-term tender pipeline has actually grown from the half by a couple of billion to $17.3 billion, which is for tenders that can be bid and commenced in the sort of 12-month period. In that, there's active bids of $5.6 billion, again, reinforcing the strong position that the company is in, not only for FY '26, but '27 and beyond.

And if you look at the coverage that we have at the moment on our order book, it translates into about 90% of our FY '26, $3.4 billion revenue guidance. being covered already, which is a very strong position to be in at this time of the year. And finally, the Board declared a fully franked final dividend of $0.095 for the end of the financial year.

On to the sustainability overview. We've seen a slight uptick in the TRIFR, which obviously isn't great, but we're working. It's our highest priority in the business, the safety of our people. and we're working hard to ensure we continue to see those trend down over the coming period. People numbers grew pretty strongly. We're up about 1,000 people from the prior period. reflecting not only the HSE acquisition and the people that came along as part of that transaction, but also growth in the business, and we're going to see -- continue to see those numbers trend up.

We've strengthened commitment to psychosocial, safety. We're partnering Supply Nation to support further engagement with indigenous businesses and obviously continued investment in training and development with a significant number of apprentices, graduates and people in the graduate program as well. On a participation rate, diverse gender diversity, we continue to tick up the female participation rate, which is obviously very encouraging. And in terms of our reduction in emissions, we're also continuing to improve those stats. As you can see, we've had a 51% reduction in emissions intensity within our facilities. So that's sort of the first part of my presentation, and I'll pick up again on the segment results, but I'd now like to hand over to Pete to talk about the financial results.

Yes. Thanks, Jules. Look, it's great to be here during my first NRW results call. I'd also like to take this opportunity to welcome everyone to the call. In my 3 months with the business I've met face-to-face with many of our shareholders and analysts -- for those who I haven't met, I look forward to catching up with you over the coming weeks, hopefully.

From my perspective, it's a new comment to NRW, I'm happy to give you a part of presenting models is a very solid set of numbers. particularly against the backdrop of the wet weather in Queensland and distractions and frustrations caused by OneSteel, which Julian touched on. I think it's a testament to the strength and diversity of the group and the quality of the people that make up NRW that were able to deliver underlying earnings against these headwinds.

Slide 5 reflects the high-level P&L. Jules has called out the key numbers. And as you said, I'll hand back to him shortly to run through the segment performance. That pretty much leaves me with the highly engaging commentary on interest and tax. That said, I'll also provide a bit of color around the nonunderlying items, which are presented on the next slide.

Before I jump into interest and tax, I thought I'd just reiterate the point Jules has made around the EBIT margin. So EBIT margin for the year was 6.3%, which is a tad down on last year's 6.6%. This reduction was due in part to the underperformance of the mining segment as a consequence of the weather. But on a very positive note, I think, was due to the greater earnings contribution from the lower margin and lower capital intensity in the businesses.

So on to interest and tax. Our interest expense did increase year-on-year, driven by 3 key drivers: we saw a net increase in our draw equipment finance lines due largely to the financing of the HSE South Walker Creek fleet that came across as part of the acquisition. We drew down $50 million on our recently upgraded bank debt facility to help fund working capital requirements of HSE and to provide additional working capital buffers across the broader group largely off the back of the 1 nonpayment.

Finally, we incurred circa $600,000 of interest expense related to the amortization of the establishment fees of that new bank facility that I just referred to. Tax expense in the P&L and I stress, this is the P&L not cash tax. It was well down due to the excellent work of NRW's relatively new Head of Tax and his team, who secured a prior period tax refund. The positive outcome of this positive outcome was amplified by the accounting impairment of OneSteel and the other nonrecurring items, we saw the accounting tax expense tenet on a lower statutory earnings base.

Moving to Slide 7, which provides a summary of the non-underlying items. So this balance is bigger than you would have traditionally seen, which won't be a surprise as we previously called out our intention to impair the OneSteel receivable, running down the list, impairment of trade receivables and contract assets. This balance captures OneSteel, strand line which primarily did some work for prior to FY '24 and who went into administration owing us $6 million in February of this year and a further allowance by the company. Importantly, this amount excludes the movement in our expected credit loss or ECL which is reflected in our underlying results.

Next, we have another amount related to strand line, which reflects a payment to secure the release of an insurance bond under the contract. Business acquisition costs relates primarily $5.5 million of stamp duty paid on the acquisition of the HSE South Walker Creek assets. And finally, we have a net gain on investments, which is the mark-to-market impact of a small portfolio of investments held by the group. For completeness, the book value of those investments at 30 June was around $7 million.

Importantly, particularly in the context of the material impact of OneSteel the non-underlying items will deliver a tax benefit to NRW just shy of $43 million.

Moving to Slide 8. cash flow. Jules called out the cash flow conversion. Just that is within our group target range. I don't plan to run through all the numbers in the cash flow. I'll just touch on a couple of the material movements. Cash interest was up year-on-year for the reasons I ran through going through the interest expense in the P&L. Cash tax was up, which is counter to the reduction we saw in new tax expense in the P&L.

Whilst tax always has [indiscernible] of complexity, at a high level, the most significant driver to the variance between cash and P&L tax is the timing of the deduction that will be received for OneSteel if the debt is ultimately not recover. So from an accounting perspective, the FY '25 numbers included the impairment from a tax perspective and no deduction and to formally write off that balance, if that gets what occurs. Aside from the above, the increase really to last year as a result of some benefits received through accelerated capital deductions during the cup period, resulting in a slightly higher nondeductible depreciation this year.

Net capital expenditure, notably down year-on-year reflecting continued focus on capital management. Payment for business companions is the HSE acquisition out and the bank and other finance movements, we have over in the interest commentary.

Moving to Slide 9. Most of the material movements in the balance sheet have been explained. You ran through the P&L and the cash flow. I think the only movement that requires commentary is working capital that went from a debit balance of $25 million in '24 to a credit balance of $44.3 million in '25, again a bit like a scratch, but like a few other things, this movement is primarily related to OneSteel, which effectively saw the receivable, which is a debit balance in working capital being written off by posting new credit balance. There are a couple of other minor movements in working capital related to the acquisition of HSE South Morgan Creek, but the main movement is that receivable impairment.

Finally, from me, Slide 10, which is a new slide to the deck and provides an overview of both our net debt position and our available liquidity. The callout for me is the table on the right-hand side that shows both the drawn and committed amounts of our bank facilities, our equipment finance facilities and our guarantee and insurance bonds facility. With a total committed undrawn value of these sites 3 facilities sitting at just over $8 billion.

In the box at the bottom of the slide, I've excluded new equipment finance and guaranteed insurance bond capacity, given these facilities are quite specific in relation to what the funds can be used for. So at 30 June, looking at our cash on hand and our undrawn bank debt, we have available liquidity at just shy of $600 million, which provides significant capacity to fund working capital and strategic corporate activities if and when the right opportunities present.

That's it for me. I'll now hand back to Jules.

Thanks, Pete. I'm going to go to Slide 12, which just gives us the segment overview. And from there, you can clearly see the heavy lifting that both the Civil and the MET divisions have done, strong growth at top line but also very strong growth at an EBITDA level. And I'll talk about those individual projects in a minute. And mining relatively on par versus the prior year despite the fact we've seen growth in the Mining business, given the addition of the Southwark Creek contract. So you can clearly see the impact at those challenging weather conditions have had on the business during the year.

If we move on to Civil, strong performance. obviously significantly improved margin. And a lot of that is driven by higher activity across the key Pilbara and Bon Basin regions. Bone Basin still experienced a lot of rain during that period, but relatively clear in the Pilbara on higher volumes. We successfully completed a number of projects, including the Bumbryata Ring road, which completed in December '24, a couple of projects for Rio and the 2 alliances, which were essentially not contributing to margin. They were alliance-style projects running at relatively low or mill margins are now out of that. Civil business as well, which, again, will contribute to improving margins as we look forward.

West Australia and Queensland are both experiencing significant surges in infrastructure development lot of projects coming online, be it port, be it defense, and of course, significant demand remains from our Tier 1 iron ore majors as well for sustaining and capital works. So a very good outlook for the civil business at the moment with those backdrops, and active tenders also will reflect that story. So I think if you look at the order book currently versus the active tenders, that active tender pipeline is probably as big as we've seen it in a long time. So I'm fairly very positive about the outlook for our Civil business moving forward.

Again, another good contributor to the margin during the year has been our urban business, urban, the activity across the Pilbara and still robust activity in Queensland has seen a markedly improved performance from our Civil business.

On to Mining, obviously, the revenue increase was due to the addition of the Southwark Creek contract, which I think commenced as of August during the year. That contract, the 5-year extension to that contract actually commences in January '26, where we will also operate clients' equipment as well as managing our own fleet and equipment there, which will see a step up in terms of activity on that site. And it's also under a slightly different commercial structure, whereas the commercial structure of the extension was sort of an hours-based recovery versus a production-based contract, which is more consistent with the rest of our business.

So with that, the full year contribution of evolutions project, which started in February, this year in '25 -- or sorry, FY '25. Again, we'll see full year contribution from Castle Hill. So a very different picture, assuming the weather goes back to long-term norms, we should start to see those margins tick back up in the business, particularly this year and obviously in fourth [indiscernible]. Active tenders still pretty strong, quite a diverse group of tenders in there across gold, coal, and other metals. So I think we're very active in terms of our tendering at the moment at $2.9 billion is a pretty good position to be in.

We go on to our MET business. Again, very strong performance from MET in terms of top line growth and also margin improvement, both Diab and RCR had a very strong year, particularly in the second half. and Primero has continued to grow through its contract at Fimiston. We completed Western range and some work that was doing Pilbara Minerals as well. But lots of activity happening a couple of good contracts awarded during the period, 1 at Coastal Waters for Rio Tinto and also the hope downs to satellite embedded Hilltop NPI projects. So lots of work ahead, $1.3 billion in the order book at this point, there's a very strong position to be in and also, obviously, a pretty large active tenders pipeline as well across projects, FEED studies, a number of other things that we're working on at the moment. It's a very busy period.

Some of the key highlights for me in terms of RCR. We launched the Seal Panfeeder, which is our new innovative product which reduces the capital intensity capital costs for our clients. And that product has been rolled out at the mine expo in Vegas, which was last September, and we're very encouraged by the interest from clients, not only in Australia but also internationally. So we'd expect to see our products, parts and services business to significantly expand in the period to come, which is a great opportunity for us.

And again, the MET business continues to work on Primero on lithium processing technologies that we've been involved in. We're on to our second -- on to our third pilot plant now, getting to the commercial pilot plants at a stage -- and again, these things that we're working on in the background, absolutely part of the potential of our future evolution as a company. So that brings us to the group outlook and guidance.

As I said, the tender pipeline has actually grown. I think from the half it was about $15 billion to $17 billion. current active tenders very strong at 5.6%. And of the order book, $3 billion is already secured for FY '26. And that would be as high as we ever see it going into a new year in terms of our secured order book. So clearly, opportunity to do better. Balance

sheet remains strong, as Pete touched on as well, obviously, enabling any other strategic or corporate opportunities that we may wish to do despite the impacts, obviously, of Laela during the period. And in terms of guidance, our full year guidance is the revenue expected to be a minimum of $3.4 billion. and EBITDA between $218 million to $228 million, with cash conversion at sort of long-term averages.

So that's essentially the summary. Happy to go to questions now. Obviously, this plenty of good stories about our underlying results. We've had a couple of backdrops this year, but I'm very positive about the outcomes for '26 and beyond. So with that, I'll hand over to questions. Thank you.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from Will Park with Citi.

My first question relates to guidance. I mean you called out that there's 88% revenue coverage versus $3.4 billion that you're guiding to. So there's around $400 million left to be secured. Given the context of your robust active tender balance, can we give some sense around the timing of when these opportunities are likely to land and some maybe if you could sort of call out some of the larger ticket items that we should be watching out for in the next 6 to 12 months, please?

Will. Look, there's lots of opportunities across the business and that news flow to deliver those additional earnings obviously would happen, you'd expect to be a first half style awards, but they're across mining and civil I can't be too specific in terms of what the actual project.

And then just thinking about mean, 8.6% in second half. Just wondering how sustainable that is. And what the key drivers of that second half uplift in margin, presumably, given your comments earlier on this call, it's driven by RCR and Diab. And just wondering what the, I guess, contribution from Fimiston was in terms of project margin profile there, please?

Yes. Well, RCR and Diab did have a strong year. sustainable. I mean Diab is a little bit more of a project's business than RCR. So RCR is becoming more of a product. Obviously, it is a products business that did do projects. So there is clearly more sustainability in that model going forward. Diab will have for 1 of the better term swings around about occasion will have good years and it will have better years. So it's had a very good year in terms of the project profile and how those projects were completing during that period in terms of booking those profits. There's no additional margin being recognized at Fimiston at this point in time, and we've been very clear that we're recognizing at the sort of the base end of that margin profile and assuming everything gets delivered per plan, which we've got 12 months left to do, then there is an opportunity there. but that is not baked into our assumptions at this point.

Just to clarify, could you kind of give us a sense as to what you're kind of expecting in terms of MET's margin for FY '26. Is it sort of 8% level? Or is it slightly below that? Just trying to get a sense as to...

Without any abnormals, I mean, obviously, there's -- Fimiston is a large project, and there is a potential gain share there, depending on how the project comes out, time-wise and all the rest of it in terms of cost targets. But that business should be doing 7% to 8% margin on a regular basis. We've always called that out. We've had obviously some challenges in the past and whether it's post-COVID, et cetera, et cetera. But the combination of those businesses should be at 7% to 8% margins.

And then my next question relates to the eliminations component in the top line. It's stepped down a fair bit in the second half. Just wondering what's happened there? What are the key drivers? And how should we be thinking about the eliminations component going forward, please?

So the intercompany revenue elimination, you're referring to?

That's it, yes.

Yes. Well, that's just a factor of the number of contracts between different parts of the group. And it moves around depending on what's being done.

And then just 1 last question. Cash conversion that you reported in FY '24 was around 95%. And -- and just looking at your releases this morning, is sort of suggesting that it's more like 82%, 83%. Just wondering whether if that's relating to the some of the late cash receipts that you sort of touched on in last fiscal year. I'm just wondering why there is that discrepancy.

Will, I wasn't here for the last financial year, I'm not so in the commentary. But Certainly, our target internally is to be in between 80% and 90%. The nature of the business where we have advanced payments, et cetera, does mean is it's going to move around a little bit. I think my comment would be my view on the debtor book at 30 June as the debt book was in very good shape. So that target range of 80% to 90% is where we should track. There might have been an anomaly is an advanced payment for Fimiston last year perhaps, but I'd have to probably review and revert to you on that.

Your next question comes from Kerry Page with NRW Holdings. We might move along to the next questioner. We have Nicholas Rawlinson with Morgans.

Maybe 1 for Pete. You guys did a good job of reducing CapEx through the year. How should we think about that in depth by '26?.

Yes. Good question, Nick. We haven't given capital guidance. I think the $140-odd million this year is probably the kind of bottom end of the range. So I think if you use $140 million as the bottom number addition might be somewhere between $140 million, $160 million depends upon what projects come across.

Yes. Nick, it's -- we didn't have a lot of growth CapEx in the last 12 months. So that number can move around subject to what we're doing, but that's obviously driven by new projects. We're working hard to kind of manage the sustaining CapEx and maintenance CapEx, obviously, to continue to drive those costs down. within reason, obviously, making sure that we don't have any availability issues with our fleet. So close focus on that. The bit that will swing a bit is growth CapEx. But at the moment, we actually don't need anything to hit the numbers that we're forecasting in our capital-intensive businesses, right? We've got capital. So you could assume a similar number, but it just depends on if we pick something else up that needs some growth CapEx.

Yes. Okay. Great. That's helpful. And just on your guidance, trying to unpick it a little bit. like obviously, you had terrible weather this year. And if weather normalizes, you would suspect a big sort of EBIT uplift in your margin business. So I'm just trying -- in your mining business rather. So I'm just trying to understand, does your guidance take into account any coal projects potentially being placed on care and maintenance? Or is it really business as usual assumed in mining with a bit of better weather?

It's business as usual. The couple of fleets have come out of Coronado or Cura, but we obviously flagged that during this year that happened at the end of the first half. So but those fleets likely will be redeployed. So it's the same activity, but you've got a full year contribution of Castle Hill. You've got the contract at South Walker Creek changing from January '26 onwards. So we get growth with our capital without any major [indiscernible] of any current jobs, which we are not factoring in. Really, it's the weather piece is the challenge, obviously, given the year we've had, where we thought the second half would improve and it was probably worse the level the rain impact or at least equal. So that's probably where a little conservatism is.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Evan Karatzas at UBS.

Okay. Obviously, the rain that impacted the mining base from a revenue perspective and then you get the margin impact on that fixed cost base weather permitting, do you want to just touch on how you're thinking about, I guess, the improvement in revenue for the mining business into FY '26. Just some of the moving parts or the building blocks there?

I think, well, the Southwark of Creek contract goes into the 300s in terms of an annualized run rate. So that's dependent on, obviously, timing of client fleet arriving, us then taking over operating client fleet plus our own. So that project scales up in terms of annualized run rate. And given Castle Hill only started in February, again, you get a full year contribution to that. So you see the business, the mining business tick up without winning any new projects. It went up 1% versus PCP this time and obviously being very unproductive during -- because of the rain has obviously impacted those margin returns.

So if we see a longer-term averages come back, which is entirely reasonable through our mining business, you'll see a much better performance.

Yes. Okay. It looks like it's a decent setup providing to '26 provided the rain normalizes there. yes. And then the Civil resources pipeline as well, like it stepped up massively over the 6 months compared to where you were in December '25. It sounds like it's across both iron ore and infrastructure. George, do you want to just touch on, I guess, the competitive dynamics you're seeing there in Civil. Any changes in the resources or the infrastructure markets? And then also how your customers are speaking to the contract structures, especially in the infrastructure space, too.

Okay. Well, look, there are 2 different -- the resources space, -- if you look at the Pilbara market, obviously, lots of activity, probably not a lot of competitors of size and scale -- we've been doing it for such a long time. It's obviously the core of the original NRW business that we are well placed to participate. And this pipeline, I talked about it in a couple of the results is probably years of pretty high activity levels. So I think that's kind of it from an earthworks perspective, a lot of the things that are happening in sustaining tonnes and replacement tonnes does require heavy earthworks components. And it certainty is obviously important. -- certainty of delivery is very important.

So there's sort of a couple of big guys or 1 or and then everyone else is sort of a lot smaller and the scale of these projects is quite large. So that's a real positive for us. When you flick to the public infrastructure phase, is pretty busy on public work still. So there's quite a number of opportunities that we're either JV-ing on or pricing at this particular point in time, which will replace -- we did an excellent job of the [indiscernible] ring road, good financial results, good quality of product. So we've established ourselves pretty well in that market as well.

So that's kind of the drivers in the West, East Coast Civils Urban is obviously going to remain strong. housings and desperate demand and short supply. So I think that market will continue to be strong. And again, was impacted by weather Brisbane area, not so much the Balan, but the whole of Queensland obviously had impacts, which also impacted our civil and urban business. So really pretty buoyant in terms of the infrastructure pipeline in the East Coast, Golding don't play very hard in the biggest stuff. And there's been challenges in that infrastructure market in Queensland because of BP and other union industry issues going on. So it's not an area we play well in, but there's more than enough to do across the business in terms of that Civil space. There's a lot of work over the next few years.

On the mechanical side, obviously, those projects that are sustaining tonnes, projects will require crushing plants and overland conveyors and non-process infrastructure and other things. So I think that's, again, another area that we sit very well in terms of the Primero business, the die business and RCR providing the pro it's pretty good at the moment.

Your next question comes from Matthew Chen with Moelis.

Okay. Just wanted to ask about corporate line looks well held. Can you just talk to how you think about that going forward?

Yes. No, I think -- and I think that corporate line going forward should be broadly consistent with how it was this year. There's a little bit of a step-up in the first year, which I know Alex explained on the -- sorry, in the first half, which Alex explained on that call. But I see a runway in your similar.

[Operator Instructions] Your next question comes from Gavin Allen with Euroz Hartleys.

Just a quick 1 for me just at the end. So just for context, in terms of your pipeline, where would something like Roads Ridge fit into that these longer term, much bigger sort of things? Are they in the recess of the pipeline or sort of beyond that, would you say?

Yes. Look, it is in there, but it's still a fair way out. So there's an awful lot of other things happening in the meantime. But it is something that clearly we've been involved in. I mean, Rose Ridge is the equivalent of 5 very large mines across a very long strike length. So it's an enormous undertaking in earthworks and construction -- so it's very much part of the longer-term pipeline.

It's part of the long-term thinking. But -- so it's probably in that 17 in a preliminary sense sort of thing?

It's more likely to be not much happening. I wouldn't have thought until '27. Don't necessarily quote me on that, but there are things happening in the interim. In terms of that sort of planning and early tonnes and other things. But look, it's not for me to talk about the timing of those projects and not sure what guidance we give around that.

Your next question comes from Mitch Sonogan with Macquarie.

Just a quick follow-up. Just in the net business. I think you said earlier, just on [indiscernible] not expecting completion for about 12 months. Just to clarify, can you just talk about when I guess you'll get full visibility as to when you might be able to release or recognize more profitability on that? Just give a latest update on expected timing and when you could do that.

Sure. Look, in terms of the construction profile, we wouldn't do anything -- well, obviously, we haven't done anything in this result in the next results for the half year. We could, at the half year, be at a point where we're satisfied it's sufficiently complete. So it's obviously not happened in this result, but it's entirely possible in the next 2 -- but it's not been factored in any forecast or guidance.

That does conclude our question-and-answer session. And I'll now hand back to Mr. Pemberton for any closing remarks.

Look, thanks, everyone, for listening. Look forward to catching up with those of you that we will see in the next couple of weeks. But that's it from us. Thank you very much.

That does conclude our conference today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.