10x Genomics, Inc. (TXG) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to day 3 of the Morgan Stanley Global Healthcare Conference. My name is Edmund Tu, and I work on the life science tools team here at Morgan Stanley. And it's my pleasure to be hosting 10x Genomics today. And representing the company, we have Co-Founder and CEO, Mr. Serge Saxonov. Thank you for joining us.

Thank you for having me.

Before we start, I'd just like to remind everyone in the audience, important disclosure information can be found on our research disclosure website at morganstanley.com/researchdisclosures. If you have any questions, please reach out to your MS sales rep.

And with that, maybe to kick things off, Serge. It's been a unique year with various policy and macro headwinds impacting your end markets. Understanding things have changed meaningfully since the start of the year, how would you sum up the past 9 months for 10x Genomics? And what would you say your hardest achievements in this challenging market?

Yes. It has certainly been a pretty eventful year. We started that with a really good momentum. And of course, there has been a lot of news flow, a lot of changes in the macro environment. And I would say at a high level, the things I would want to emphasize is just how proud I am of the team and their execution through all the sort of all the things that kept hitting them and all the challenges and all the changes in the environment, and that's across the board. The people in the field, the sales team dealing with the customers and all the issues and all the problems they are facing, the operations teams, R&D, G&A across the whole company really coming together and kind of navigating and persevering through this environment. In terms of like the subsequent achievements of the team, there's been a whole number, right? We finished our commercial restructuring, which again, is particularly kind of impressive in light of all the challenges we faced. We made really incredible progress in product development, including some of the products we launched already this year, another one that's about to launch soon, I'm really excited by Flex v2 on the single cell side. And really importantly, especially in the current environment, but also more generally as we think to the future, huge focus on cost management. And we came into the year with a strong balance sheet, and we have strengthened it further through the year through the actions and just the relentless cost discipline of the team. And so overall, we are -- puts us in a really good position to both navigate this environment and to come out stronger than ever on the outside of it.

Great. Before diving into your segments and products, let's maybe touch upon your end markets really briefly. And maybe starting with the academic end market. Serge, I think you mentioned that the customers in the U.S. are somewhat more optimistic versus earlier in the year, yet they remain cautious given the uncertainty around next year's funding and the slow pace of fund disbursements. So I guess, has there been any changes in sentiment for customers in this end market over the past couple of weeks? I know this question gets asked all the time, but ultimately, the question of when academic customers will likely to reopen their wallets remain a key focus for investors.

Yes, definitely a fair question. Obviously, a big focus for us. I would say, at the highest level, there's not really been a change, any significant change since the time when we had our call in terms of the customer sentiment and those kinds of patterns. Obviously, things were feeling really dire back in the kind of early in the year. People -- there's a continuous sort of stream of news that kind of made things continuously worse or kind of more dire and that created a lot of uncertainty, increasing uncertainty. At some point, the news flow kind of changed in the sense that the uncertainties may be stopped increasing, but it's still there, and it has been sort of to the extent that there is stability is a stability of uncertainty. It's still large. And it has been consistent until we see more clarity on what the budget is going to do next year around an age until we see more clarity around the actual cash, like actual money making their way into the bank accounts from the grants, maybe more clarity around sort of the direct versus indirect issues. People are going to be the academic institutions, the APIs are all going to be similarly cautious around their spending patterns for sure. So we're still kind of in that same state. I would say it hasn't gotten better. It hasn't gotten worse.

Got it. And then how are your OUS academic customers standing?

Yes. I mean certainly much better than in the U.S., right, the situation. I would say it's still -- the current environment is not like awesome, it's not amazing. Like several years ago across the world, there was a lot of investment in biomedical research. I don't think that's kind of the case anymore. So it's relatively subdued. And we're finding it particularly subdued in the capital equipment side of things, where it's doing a fair bit of travel in Europe and in Asia talking to customers. And yes, there's just materially more scrutiny when it comes to instrument purchases, whereas in the past, you might have a I just go ahead and buy an instrument, buy the sort of piece of equipment. Now the department comes over the top and ask some hard questions like, well, the instrument already exists at another place in the institution, like there's one at the core. Why don't you use that one for now instead of purchasing another one. And so we're seeing that kind of pattern across the world, just more pressure. Now not universal, obviously, different geographies have all their own sort of pattern. But I would say at a high level, the environment is somewhat subdued, not nearly as bad as what's in the U.S., but also not sort of the high flying days of several years ago.

Got it. That's super helpful. And maybe switching to the biopharma side. I know it's a smaller part of your business, but you guys have been very active in trying to further penetrate the end market. So maybe you can share some color on what you're hearing from your biopharma customers and maybe some updates or progress on how the biopharma commercial team has been progressing so far.

Yes. So I would say, like, first of all, very, very happy to have the biopharma focused team in place, both because it gives us much more clear visibility into kind of what's happening there and also levers much more sort of concentrated levers in terms of like kind of managing that business. So really good to have that, like really glad we did that reorg last year. So we're ready for this environment. Now in terms of like what is actually happening sort of with the macroeconomic environment, we kind of have our biopharma business is sort of composed of roughly half of biotech and half of larger pharma. And biotech has been in a sort of recession/depression for the past several years. And I would say still kind of is in that mode where companies are really struggling for funding and are really trying to figure out how to kind of make their cash last longer and so on. And so it's been certainly challenging from that perspective. Not to say that there aren't new companies coming on board or like you do see, you hear about these very large funding rounds and there's quite a few of them who are basing their sort of research programs or their development programs in large part on single cell and spatial foundations, and we certainly get kind of revenue from those. But by and large, on average, the environment within biotech has been very challenging for the past several years, and that has not really changed yet. On the big pharma side of things, one thing to keep in mind is that we tend to be indexed more toward the early development discovery kind of stage of the pipeline. And this year, so far, again, we saw kind of like really nice momentum at the end of last year, early this year, but then since sort of, again, a lot of news flow in the environment, they've been more cautious like. And a lot of that is just not like not having necessarily certainty around how things are going to look in the future in terms of pricing, in terms of tariffs, MFN, things like that, makes them cautious right now investing in like early-stage discovery and so on. And so there's kind of what we've seen so far this year is that reticence while they're waiting for things to shake out on the policy front.

Got it. Super helpful. And then I was just thinking about all the pressures that your markets are seeing today, are you seeing any sort of preference shifts for your customers in terms of either doing a single cell project or a spatial project?

Yes. It's kind of an interesting question. I would say, like I can't really say that, that has been the case, right? Again, the current environment is definitely -- so relatively speaking, there's a preference for consumable kind of versus as opposed to instruments and big capital equipment. But in terms of the sort of the applications and sort of these modalities, single cell and spatial, I wouldn't say that there's like relative sort of preference one way or the other. If you look at what people are actually interested in investing in and where they see their research programs going, where there's particular interest and enthusiasm, I think both single cell and spatial actually figure very, very prominently. I would argue probably at the top of the list. Like if you look at like what are the big areas of growth in tools, spatial is probably the most promising kind of still early emerging franchise and single cell is probably the most promising, relatively mature kind of like segment. And the cool thing, too, is now with single cell, we're seeing kind of almost a reemergence like these new applications that are kind of accelerating the interest and the intensity of interest in single cell. So both are, I think, are doing quite well at least from an interest perspective. I guess the dollars are somewhat more constrained these days.

Got it. And then maybe looking at your product portfolio, starting with the Chromium franchise. You mentioned Flex v2 earlier, your-based product. Tell us more about this. And I'm not sure if you've disclosed this, but timing for the launch.

Yes. We haven't given more sort of concrete timing. We talked about it at the beginning of the year that it's coming. It's still scheduled for later this year. The team has been doing -- has been making great progress. We're really excited. The product is doing really well. And we've been relatively cautious in terms of promoting it just yet, but we've engaged with a lot of early access customers and the feedback has been just phenomenal. And it is -- we do see it as -- I'm personally really excited about it, and I think it's going to be a major event for single cell analysis fundamentally. It opens up a whole new sets of workflows. So that is really exciting and especially in the context of running very large-scale perturbation streams, there's a kind of -- this new wave of interest and efforts that are coalescing around building large-scale AI models of biology. And we see Flex v2 as being the foundational technology for enabling that. In fact, we've heard that from our customers. And so there's this huge potential there. But then also just to step back, that kind of just the benefits of Flex in general that are going to be amplified with this product introduction are really exciting to me, too, like fundamentally has really, really great sensitivity and allows you to really to get the expression of even sort of the lowest expressed genes, which oftentimes are the most important ones like transcription factors and things like that. So it has really great -- it's incredibly robust by virtue of its fixation and so -- which makes it particularly amenable for broader adoption for people who are kind of new to the world of single cell and it's a lot more forgiving of kind of various sort of workflow deviations maybe. It works with big samples and in particular, works with FFPE and we've -- over the past couple of years have further kind of refined those capabilities and which makes it kind of uniquely amenable for translational and clinical now. And it also is like incredibly flexible in terms of how many samples like now with v2, how many samples or how many cells you want to run through a single cell experiment. So it's going to be a pretty big deal, and we're very excited about it as we're heading toward launch.

Great. Chromium consumables. last quarter, revenue was down, but reaction was up year-over-year and quarter-over-quarter. Where do you stand today in terms of the GEM-X transition? I know you pointed to expectations for it to be completed by around year-end, but you also said some customers mentioned that they would probably not switch to GEM-X because of certain features. Could you elaborate more on this? And are you ultimately expecting a certain percentage of customers to stay on Next-GEM ultimately?

Yes. So first of all, we -- there's not really any real reason substantive reason for people to stick with Next-GEM. It's more the fact that people have studies that are ongoing and they don't want to switch in the middle of a study in the middle of experiments. And then there's sort of a general kind of notion if you're used to running a particular assay and it works well for you, which in a lot of cases, it works really well, right, like you don't want to switch. But like in substance, GEM-X is just monotonically better like along every dimension than Next-GEM. At this stage, the vast majority of our customers have switched, not everyone. There's definitely kind of a minority that's still sort of the tail of running Next-GEM. We have announced publicly that they were going to be end of lifing Next-GEM, and we're expecting that to now kind of accelerate the last wave of conversion as we're heading towards sort of the end of this year and early next year.

Got it. And I guess the million-dollar question that everyone wants to know is what gives you confidence in the long-term elasticity in the single cell market? And when can we expect to see consumables return to growth?

Yes. The -- I mean there's some slightly different questions here. So the fundamental premise and the timing. The -- I would say the fundamental premise here, like why elasticity -- first of all, I'll just go back to the first principles. When we first launched single cell, it's always very clear to me, look, this is a foundational capability. It's a general purpose kind of technology that applies to just about every area of biology. Any time you're starting your analysis, you're starting with tissue or cells, you really need to be looking at it at the cell-by-cell level. That's the basis of biology. And I've never heard we've not seen any like argument to the fundamentally, if anything, that has become much like universally recognized, if that's the right way to look at biology. At the same time, we knew from the beginning, if you're charging $1,500 a sample plus more with sequencing, you're in the thousands of dollars per sample, that cannot be kind of a universal technology. And we knew that over time, you need to get into more like hundreds of dollars to drive to that universal ubiquitous adoption. And so that gives you kind of, again, from first principles kind of a view that there's got to be elasticity. There's huge amounts of money that's not -- that should be being spent on single cell that is currently not being spent. We also had a fair amount of empirical evidence along the way that we've gathered when we did experiments either with particular products when we first launched Flex and see kind of the adoption curve of customers once they kind of get to a lower price per sample, what it happens to their volume, what happens to their dollars and those increase, not immediately, but give it something like 3 quarters and the total revenue you make from that particular customer kind of increases and the reaction growth overwhelms the sort of decline in ASP. We've seen -- we've done some experiments geographically. And we also have predicates from other technologies that have gone through this as well at similar price points and so on. So that gives us a lot of conviction that there is elasticity. And in fact, I think there's massive amount of elasticity -- and also kind of going back to the point I made earlier, you can see now like as we've been communicating these lower price points, there's new applications that are opening up. We're seeing new use cases. We're seeing new customers taking interest. So at a high level, it's going -- it's all kind of going in that direction. And we're seeing now increase in reaction volumes, pretty significant, pretty consistent. Of course, it's on the background of ASP declines as well. And I would say that like I think in an environment where that was more normalized, we'd probably see even more like growth -- higher growth in reaction. And so to some extent, the point at which sort of you see true elasticity and the reaction growth leads to revenue increase is also a function of what's happening in the macro environment, right? And so we kind of have to see how that evolves. But in general, we feel optimistic that we are very much on the right path here, and we're set up for a much larger growth going forward.

Got it. And then your recent Scale acquisition announcement, this has also generated a lot of buzz in the investment community. Can you help us better understand the strategic rationale here? I mean, from a tech perspective, I think researchers have shown that if you incorporate one round of barcoding ahead of encapsulation, you can run a lot more cells. So is that the idea here?

I mean that's pretty perceptive. I would say, kind of overall, right, this acquisition, this is a technology -- the scale team, the founding team was -- is incredibly inventive, incredibly creative, and they developed a number of technologies that were -- I mean, they are both like really foundational and fundamental and really cover. And we're really looking forward to integrating them into our product lineup. If you think about it, like the general notion, like what does it take at the highest level to do single cell analysis, what is the key. You need to be able to separate cells. You need to be able to deliver barcodes within the individual partitions. And then you need to be able to do -- to make massive numbers of barcodes, huge diversity of Scale, right? And Scale presents like a really powerful approach for doing that for kind of pushing the third vector of scale. And yes, we expect to incorporate that into our Chromium product line, it gives us tons and tons of headroom to keep scaling the experiments and to deliver kind of on the road map and all the things that our customers are excited for the future.

Got it. And how big of a lift could that be? And when can we expect to hear something along the lines of the first product that incorporates technology?

Yes. I mean we haven't talked about our product road map beyond the current year. But as -- conceptually, kind of as you mentioned, these are very nicely complementary kinds of things, and it's not a huge lift at all to combine what we have with the scale -- fundamental scale technology.

Got it. And then to the extent that you're comfortable you can talk about this, are you able to provide us with an update on where the Scale and Parse litigation currently stands?

Yes. So Scale brought a patent infringement suit against Parse several years ago. And it's scheduled to go to trial in October, and that's still the timing forward.

Yes. Got it. And then what are your views on the single cell competitive landscape today? And in addition to, I guess, commercialized competitors, I know the preprint of [ Slam ] method last year generated a lot of buzz, and I think it was officially published and sell recently. So what have customers been saying about using spatial imagers for single cell transcriptomics.

Yes. I mean, so first of all, on -- in terms of just like single cell competition more broadly, obviously, the last few years, there has been a number of new entrants. And the dynamic has been largely the same. Our products have just like really -- there's a huge gap in terms of the capabilities of our products relative to what exists out there with competition. Customers invariably go and try all these products, and there's definitely a lot of trialing going on, and there has been now for the past several years. But also -- yes, just about invariably, they come back to us because, again, the much superior data quality, much better sensitivity, much better like robustness, the range of applications, customer support, all of these things that we've built out over the years to just make our products that much better and much better as a customer for customer experience. And to the extent that in the past, there was sort of a question of cost and pricing where that was kind of the wedge that people were driving through. That has also been, I would say, in many ways, addressed by virtue of the product introductions we had last year with -- let multiplexing with what Flex is able to do and now with like scale being in our portfolio as well. So that kind of gives us like a really nice breadth of coverage on the cost side as well. So generally, we're feeling really good about our position in single cell. As far as -- so the stamp approach is concerned, it is very exciting. There's definitely quite a bit of interest, at least conceptually in this approach. And to be clear, this is something that we were -- we have been excited for a long time. Since we first started thinking about spatial, it was like it's very natural to think like, hey, you can take the dissociated cells and put them on that spatial and on a flow cell and do the analysis. So that was always kind of part of our thinking. In fact, a lot of the very early customers of Xenium did decide to that they would just put individual cells on a flow cell and run these experiments. The fact is it's still like quite early, and there's not really a commercial solution for that. That's really your mind. And there's still a whole lot of trade-offs that you're making and will likely be making for quite some time to come relative to actually doing proper single cell analysis. Like the depth of information you get from individual cells when you're using Chromium is just like far and above what you currently do with the imaging approaches. But it is a really exciting area. And like in principle, it can certainly drive down the cost per cell really fire. For some applications, it is very compelling, not really the same applications that Chromium is used for. And so for that reason, for us, it's like it's all good. It's just more, right?

Right. Got it. And then I guess speaking of Xenium, your protein co-detection capabilities were launched recently. Just wondering what early traction and customer feedback or reception is sounding like. I think based on our channel checks earlier this year, it seems like a lot of researchers have gravitated towards a separate spatial transcriptomics imager and spatial proteomics imager. So just wondering what the research community is thinking about a co-detection on one platform nowadays.

Yes. So first of all, very early. I mean we just started shipping the product and the initial feedback has been quite positive. It's -- but it's too early to talk with a whole lot of sub yet on that. I think your general question around people kind of converting more towards having separate platforms. I mean I think that's probably true kind of in the current sort of environment. But I think that's more of a function of the technologies that are available as opposed to necessarily customer interest. I think what customers would ideally want is a single platform that can do from the same section, actually do kind of both modalities or more than that. We've seen it fairly consistently. Remember, Xenium can actually do also low plex protein image has been for -- since just about the beginning. You can take your Xenium -- your section, do the RNA analysis and then do immunofluorescence afterwards in the same section. And people do this all the time. And so we do expect that there is a fundamental customer need to do both. The issue is that there hasn't yet been a technology that did it in a way that wasn't compromising things of both sides. And so in the absence of that, for sure, I think what we see in the market is that people are going to get like 2 different platforms and do separate analysis. But I don't think that's necessarily what ultimate future is going to hold.

Got it. And can you talk about your approach there? It seems like you guys are using small panels with the option of combining all of them for detecting 20 proteins along with around 500 RNA. What is the thinking behind the strategy here? And when can we expect to see protein detection in 5G?

Yes. So again, I haven't talked about like more details of the road map and when the different things are going to be coming in what sequence. I would say, I mean, maybe I'd just emphasize a couple of points. First of all, there is a lot of -- when you talk to customers around how many proteins they really want and need. And obviously, the first order, the more the better, right? Like that's what everyone wants to -- but then when you press really like what is the real number that you need given that you can get a pretty comprehensive overview of your sort of biology from RNA something like 20 is like really where there's sort of like particularly kind of where the need really coalesces, right? So beyond that, it's better to have more, but it starts getting more marginal. So there's sort of one part of the equation. Then the other thing to just consider is that it's not that the platform itself is like limited to those numbers, right? Like with Xenium with this approach, you can do a lot more proteins for sure. But like one of the challenges is usually in these things is actually content where you've got put together the right set of antibodies that work really well together in concert and getting the appropriate validation. And this is the kind of thing where we're showing the capability. The first panel is very compelling on its merits for immuno-oncology for a number of applications. We've heard that from customers, but we're also giving the means for customers to kind of evolve and build their own as well over time. And so we'll see kind of how that goes, but we do expect that over time, both the Flex level and diversity of panels will increase as we go forward.

Got it. Great. And then on the topic of 5000 Prime, how has the traction been there? And are you starting to see any indications for customers that prefer smaller sized panels given some of the ongoing budgetary pressures?

It's kind of interesting. The panel has been more like it's been consistent in that people like 5k and it's been trending that way. So if you compare like right out of the gate, kind of exceeded our expectations. And then if you look at kind of year-over-year, people are -- the relative sort of utilization has been favoring -- has been trending more towards 5k versus kind of the smaller panels.

Got it. And then I guess one of the interesting things last time on the 2Q call was you talked about the Xenium utilization ramp, and it's coming from both early adopters and new users. So I was wondering if you could share some metrics on like how this is progressing and what's really driving this increase?

Yes. Like yes, it's too early to kind of -- like we haven't shared the specific metrics. I can say qualitatively, it's been very encouraging to see the like patterns, and it's kind of multiple vectors here that are encouraging for us. The average utilization is the number of runs people are kind of scaling up, and that's across both like people who are just kind of ramping up early, which we would expect them to increase their usage as they're learning the system as they're building their necessary panels, but also people kind of in the middle of their life cycle and also kind of our earliest users are still ramping up as well, which is, again, kind of an encouraging sign. And then also, there's the number of runs across the user base, but then also kind of how much they're spending per run has also been increasing by virtue of people doing more 5,000 relatively speaking. So all those trends are all kind of pointing in the right direction. with utilization, which makes us fundamentally really excited about the future of the platform because again, in the current environment when instruments are really pressured, it's a little hard to tell from the instrument sales, but utilization is all pointing in a really encouraging direction.

That's great. In terms of Xenium placements, I know in the past, before all of this stuff happened in the market, you guys have pointed to a range of about 50 to 70 units placed per quarter. Just wondering once the market recovers, is that something you guys are going forward?

Yes. I mean for now, we're kind of -- we've been in the past few quarters has been sort of in that range, low 30s. And we hesitate to make predictions until there's more clarity on the macro and so on. But first principle, like again, like the signals that we're seeing there from the market, there's a lot of interest in Xenium. And certainly, once the environment is more amenable, we do expect it to -- for things to improve going forward. And again, fundamentally, just got strong -- really, really strong conviction in this platform and the utility that we're seeing with the customers.

Got it. And then in terms of your spatial consumable growth, I think it's primarily driven by Xenium. Maybe we can touch upon how Visium and Visium HD has been doing of late and maybe what the current mix is between standard versus HD?

Yes. I mean Visium has been doing well as well. Like I don't want to kind of again say what's happening there. Like it's a nice set of applications, good resonance with customers. all that, I do think that there is kind of as we look forward because we're seeing what customers are planning to do, Xenium is getting more and more mind share and also in terms of kind of technology development, there's a lot more kind of headroom there as well. And fundamentally -- so Xenium is certainly getting more and more sort of focus. But Visium is doing -- continues to be like a robust platform. By and large, now people have switched over to HD. SD still kind of has a minority of kind of usage, but it's shrinking and more and more high definition, which is kind of what we expected.

Got it. And then in terms of the spatial competitive landscape, with litigation headwinds now lifted for competitors, Visium and NanoString, are you seeing any shifts in the competitive landscape on the spatial side?

No, not really. I would say the pattern has generally -- sort of -- what we've been seeing is a continuation of previous pattern. Like people are increasingly recognizing the -- just the superiority of Xenium relative to other platforms, the data quality, the sensitivity, specificity, the robustness of the workflow, the consistency of the data, all these things are all like really, really strong resonance and feedback from customers. And I think that sort of the awareness of that and recognition of that has been spreading and we feel really good where we are in the market. And I don't think there's been any real change to that sort of trajectory.

Got it. And then on the last call, scaling up of large-scale studies on both your single cell and spatial side. I think on the spatial side, you highlighted the Genome Institute of Singapore and your project with tissue map. Can you share some more color there and Xenium's role?

Yes. No, it's like this is a really exciting project. And like -- and it's a couple of reasons. First of all, the Genome Institute of Singapore is like they very much at forefront of like really deep expertise on single cell and spatial and genomics research in general to some of the best people in the world. They also are really intimately integrated into the health care system in Singapore, which in itself is really, really great in terms of keeping track of all the clinical data and having it all be integrated. And so it's a really, really great place to do a large -- like a study of the kind that we've been excited to kind of set up the foundation for translational research and ultimately clinical applications. In this case, the study is of 2,500 FFD samples in cancer and autoimmunity to discover biomarker signature for drug response, disease progression and also finding drug targets. So I think it's a really great example of the kind of research that will happen, and we know there's a lot of efforts around the world along similar direction, again, scaling up and kind of pushing towards translational side. You also touched a little bit on the single cell side, and that's another huge wave. both there's on the translational side. We're like running these large-scale experiments. We just set a press release with a company called CLISEQ out of Weizmann Institute in Israel to do this large clinical trial basically to study bone being able to diagnose kind of bone marrow diseases from blood draws instead of bone marrow caps. There's lots of other work like that. And also, I alluded to mentioned this earlier, this whole big wave of building virtual cells or really AI models of biology, which is necessitating running very, very large-scale experiments. And you're talking about billions, billions, we're talking about tens of billions of those kinds of cells, and that's a huge wave that we see coalescing around the world as well.

Got it. I realize we're close to time, but let's give you another 2 minutes. In closing, what are some things that you want to highlight to investors just to make sure they focus on this amongst all of the noise in the market today?

Yes. I mean it is true. There's certainly not a shortage of news and news flow and kind of macro environmental things one could try to track. But what I always do myself and encourage the team kind of zoom out and think about the fundamentals, right? And the fact is like the fundamentals of the business are incredibly strong. We are the single cell, like I said before, the cell is the fundamental need of biology and single cell and spatial approaches are fundamental to measuring biology. And I see like ultimately, the future if you're starting with the kind of tissue kind of cell, you really need to be analyzing those approaches, which is why I say it's the future of biological research, ultimately, the future of drug discovery and the future of diagnostics. And those are the technologies. That's why when you look -- when you survey do the customer service where you look at where the sort of people are focusing on where the attention is going to be in research, single cell and spatial feature as the -- probably the most promising franchises in all of tools. So from that perspective -- and then like when I think about from that perspective, given that, we're like probably in the best strategic position we've been as a company ever, right? We've got a great market position. We've got a full complement of technologies now. And we have an incredibly strong balance sheet and ability to deploy it and to use it to navigate both this current environment and invest for the future to take a full advantage of this, what we see as a massive opportunity going forward.

Great. Thank you very much.

Thank you.