BorgWarner Inc. (BWA) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. We're excited to share how we're accelerating our shift towards electrification with you today. Before we begin, I need to inform you that during today's meeting, we may make certain forward-looking statements which involve risks and uncertainties as detailed in our 10-K. Our actual results may differ significantly from the matters discussed during today's meeting. For the safety of our presenters as well as our support staff, you'll notice that each presenter is presenting from a different location. In addition, our presenters will be appropriately distanced during our Q&A session. But now on to today's event. First, our CEO, Fred Lissalde, will provide an overview of our strategic shifts, why we are executing this now and how we believe we're positioned to succeed. Then Stefan Demmerle, President of our Power Drive Systems business, will discuss our technology leadership in electrification; and Kevin Nowlan, our Chief Financial Officer, will review our financial performance and our outlook. Fred will wrap with a few closing remarks. And after a short break, we'll begin the Q&A session. [Operator Instructions] Please note that we posted the presentation materials for today's event to the IR page of our website. It's under the Events and Presentations section. With that, I'm excited to turn the meeting over to Fred after the short welcome video. [Presentation]

Good morning, good afternoon, good evening, and welcome, everyone. You have probably sat through investor presentation in which very little is new. This will not be one of those presentations today. So let's skip the warm up and start with the conclusion. Today, less than 3% of our revenue comes from EV. We expect that to increase to about 45% by 2030. I hope you remember 3 things from today. One, we believe we can form this growth with our existing portfolio. This is not a certain change in the company's direction. It's a logical extension to what we've been building since 2015. Two, we know how to invest at the right time in growing products to secure the next decade's profit. We've done this before. And three, this align with an accelerated business effort towards sustainability and ESG overall. How are we proposing to get from 3% to 45% on EVs? You won't hear us talking about combustion, hybrid and electric balance anymore. We are evolving our mission to reflect an acceleration towards electrification. Don't get me wrong, the balanced strategy has worked for us, and we believe it has positioned us well to now accelerate towards EVs. As we evaluate the external environment and the opportunities available for the next decade plus for BorgWarner, now is the right time to revisit our mission. We are all energized by this acceleration towards electrification, which is already in motion. With a vision of a clean and energy-efficient world, it is natural for us to be at the forefront of the sustainability topics. The products that we deliver and even more, the ones that we will deliver, make the world more energy efficient. How we make these clean products is core to our thinking. We have been steadily reducing our energy usage and emissions since 2015, and we are already ahead of our plan. Today, we want to accelerate and to announce our commitment to reach carbon neutrality by 2035. BorgWarner will achieve this neutrality essentially through concrete actions on the plant floors. We're doing this because it's the right thing to do for our business. It aligns our business with climate and resource needs, regulatory changes, customer preferences, employee values and market expectations. We think our secret source starts with our people. We don't just assume we get the best people. We work to find them and track the data, which shows, by the way, that more people accept our job offers than competitors. Through our LAGS operating model, which stands for local accountability and global strength, we have full P&L and balance sheet responsibility at the plant level. These P&L owners get support from global experts in their fields to leverage the global size and scale of the company and share best practices. And as Stefan will discuss, we apply the same local accountability to other parts of our business, including engineering and product development. Empowering our local teams enables us to get new ideas more quickly, including from the fresh eyes of our diverse and junior people, and allows us to build succession pipelines. Personally, I run a significant plant P&L with BorgWarner when I was about 34 years old. Global, racial, gender, age and other types of diversity are the drivers of our innovation leadership, our speed and agility and our business management. The breadth of that diversity is shown on the data on this slide. We are consistently making progress in this field. And as a leadership team, we're committed to stay amongst the best in our sector. We have been deliberate in positioning ourselves over the years so that some of the strongest, most dependable, multiyear external drivers are tailwinds for our business. This slide showcases just 2 of these drivers. First, the rise in global temperature and the urgency of addressing this issue with every means possible, including cleaner and more efficient modes of transportation. The second graph captures regulatory standards that have been enacted with steadily tougher emission standards that vehicle must meet so that cleaner, more efficient vehicles we help create at BorgWarner are becoming, in short, nonoptional. On top of this, rising population and living standards are increasing demand for mobility. And customer preferences are shifting towards cleaner mobility. These, together, are a powerful set of external factors for us that also drive our acceleration towards electrification and our new mission. We are moving electrification to the forefront of our strategy. Let me summarize what we are planning to execute between now and 2025 to reach our 2030 milestone. One, we are significantly shifting organic investments towards electrification. Two, we expect to deploy up to $5.5 billion of capital to supplement our organic shift with strategic M&A actions. And three, we're steadily optimizing our combustion portfolio and are targeting $3 billion to $4 billion of annual revenue dispositions by 2025. We expect these actions to bring our revenue mix to about 45% from EVs by 2030. We have outlined concrete steps over the next 4 years and regular touch points. And as we see how the world of mobility evolves, we can always adjust our actions to increase this 45% on EV even further. We have been building to enable this acceleration for a number of years. As this time line shows, we've been steadily growing our electrification portfolio since 2015 through a series of strategic acquisitions and partnerships. Our acquisition of Delphi Technologies in 2020 was the cornerstone of the acceleration towards EVs. It gave us scale and technology leadership in electronics and software that we needed to accelerate towards EV mobility. Our recent agreement to acquire AKASOL strengthened our commercial vehicle electrification capabilities. These external investments have been supplemented with the internal development of our electrification products. This includes the organic development of green space products like our e-heaters for EV battery packs and cabins. It also includes the development of our motors and combination products, like our EDM, which combines motor and gearbox into 1 package and have been in production for several years. We are excited about this acceleration. The organic and inorganic actions we've taken so far have increased our content opportunity per ELV from about $400 in 2014 to $2,640 in 2020. That's more than a sixfold increase per vehicle. Before I get into more detail, I wanted to remind you that we've made this strategic pivot before and very successfully. You will see on this slide here, 2 examples that I know very well. In the '90s, we entered the turbocharger market through a series of acquisitions, including the merger of turbocharger producer 3K and Schwitzer in 1998. Since that time, we've grown the approximately 2 million turbos we acquired back then to about 13 million turbos produced in 2019. As you may recall, I led this business from '13 to '17. Similarly, we anticipated the dual-clutch module opportunity in China in 2009, which I was directly involved in securing. Since then, we have increased sales from around 4,000 DCT units in 2012 to about 2 million in 2020, both from our wholly owned and joint venture operations. Both of these businesses have not only been successful in term of revenue, but has been supportive of both our margin profile and our free cash flow generation. So today's acceleration is the latest demonstration of our resilience and ability to successfully advance our strategy. With that in mind, now let me focus on our plan, which we call Project CHARGING FORWARD. We expect this project to help us generate over 25% of our revenue from electric vehicles by 2025 and approximately 45% by 2030. Project CHARGING FORWARD has 3 key pillars. One, we plan to profitably scale eLVs through our continued integration of Delphi and our ability to capture synergies as well as pursuing organic and inorganic actions. Two, we intend to expand into eCVs. We'll do that by leveraging our position in light vehicle and building out a go-to-market product portfolio and operations capability organically and inorganically. And third, we plan to optimize our combustion portfolio, reducing our exposure by disposing parts of the portfolio that are lower growth or lower margin. Even as we refocus our combustion assets, we continue to benefit financially from this portfolio. One way to think about our strategy is that our combustion portfolio supports our pivot to electrification. It actually enables Project CHARGING FORWARD. Let's do a deeper dive on each of these 3 pillars, starting with eLVs. We plan to use organic investment to grow in eLV, and we'll be ramping up R&D investment accordingly, especially the development and application engineering efforts to support our growth. In 2021, we plan to spend between $200 million and $225 million on eProducts R&D, which is nearly 30% of our total R&D. By 2025, we expect eProducts R&D to approach 50% of our total R&D spend before acquisition. We expect the combination of our planned R&D and capital spending will result in a cumulative organic investment of more than $3 billion in eProducts by the end of 2025. We have already made substantial investments in eLVs to create our current portfolio. With the actions we have already taken, we are in a strong position to capture the market opportunity in eLVs with $2,640 of content opportunity per eLV in 2025 with the current portfolio. Let me give you an example. The content of one high-voltage silicon carbide, state-of-the-art inverter alone in an electric vehicle is close to the overall content per vehicle that we have in a combustion vehicle. In addition to our organic investments, we're continuing to evaluate inorganic growth opportunities in eLVs. Our inorganic investments will continue to focus on technologies, leading to better efficiency wherever the electrons flow in an electric vehicle propulsion architecture. We're seeing opportunities to expand our portfolio in a number of areas at scale and potentially explore vertical integration, where appropriate. Altogether, we project delivering close to $8 billion in revenue from eLVs in 2030. Now let's turn to the second pillar of Project CHARGING FORWARD, which is our expansion into e-commercial vehicles. We are still in the emerging stages for our eCV portfolio, like the market is, quite frankly. But it is large and fast growing, and we see major potential for BorgWarner to capture significant content. We believe there are opportunities in nearly all CV sectors. We see acceleration in buses, medium-duty trucks, delivery vans and various other areas. BorgWarner's strategy is to be a player in both light vehicle and commercial vehicle market. That's what we do today and very successfully. We learn from these areas and cross-fertilize products and ideas. We leverage the light vehicle scale for competitiveness in commercial vehicle. The acquisition of Remy, Sevcon, Delphi Technologies, the formation of Cascadia Motion and the JV partnership with Romeo Power has put us in a strong position. When combined with our organic development, this create a large eCV offering with battery stationary fast chargers, battery modules, packs, battery management systems, inverters and other electronic solutions, e-motors and e-heaters. As I mentioned earlier, we believe our recently announced acquisition of AKASOL will put us in an even better position by expanding our battery technologies, which is at the heart of electrifying a commercial vehicle. We particularly value AKASOL's product and technology leadership. They have flexible and low-cost design solution, which are already in production for blue-chip customers. This slide summarizes the growth potential we envision. We will leverage our existing product portfolio and continue to develop the assets we have acquired. We will pursue external opportunities, including potential partnerships, collaboration and acquisition, to further build out our eCV portfolio. We believe this initiative through 2025 will position us to achieve more than $2 billion in revenue from the eCV business in 2030. I now want to turn to the third pillar of Project CHARGING FORWARD, our combustion-based business. As we initiate our shift, we will take advantage of some of the strongest combustion assets that have leading market position, strong margin and cash generation. We consider ourselves very fortunate to be in a position to benefit from these important assets. Over the next 4 years, we're targeting $3 billion to $4 billion in dispositions to optimize the business. We have great assets, but some of them will be better positioned under a different owner. How are we going to benchmark ourselves? And how should you think about that? We intend to steadily increase the EV mix of our business to reach about 45% of revenue from eLV and eCV by 2030. You will know we are on track when we get to more than 25% revenue from E by 2025. As we rework the composition of our business, we will also expect to grow our overall revenue. And as Kevin will discuss later, we plan to do that while maintaining our strong margin profile and continuing to generate the cash that will enable our acceleration into electrification. We are, in other words, planning to create significant and sustainable financial value by aligning our businesses with the powerful drivers towards cleaner and more efficient mobility. Our company's 100-plus-year history is a story of evolution, built on superior product leadership and on an agile, decentralized operating model. We're taking great technologies, commercialize them globally and manufacture them to scale along with disciplined financial and operational management. That remains our story, now applied to eProducts. The electrification opportunity is large, real, near term and important to our shared sustainability goals. We have been building to capture that opportunity for years, and I'm very pleased today to give you more clarity on what our actions and future look like. I'm now going to ask Stefan to walk you through why our product strategy uniquely positions us to capture these opportunities in electrification. After that, Kevin will describe how we are financially positioned to move these initiatives forward. First, though, we'll play a short video that will show how our iDM is used in the Ford Mustang Mach-E. Thank you very much, and I'll be talking to you later in the day. [Presentation]

Good morning, everyone, and thank you, Fred. We are well aware that many people and companies share our vision for cleaner, more energy-efficient work, but not everyone can make it happen. I'm excited to talk to you today because I believe we have the talent and the organizational setup to accelerate our electrification strategy successfully. My name is Stefan Demmerle, and I manage the business unit, PowerDrive Systems, at BorgWarner. This entity now includes all the electronics and power electronics from Delphi as well as our EMOD and EV gearbox technology. It is the business unit most affected by the Delphi acquisition last year. Let us start there. The Delphi integration brought us scale in electronics for purchasing and production, which is crucial for our global competitiveness, plus deep expertise in electronics, power electronics, systems and software. Integrating these engineering capabilities is critical to our electrification acceleration and growth. This means we are combining BorgWarner's strength to commercialize new products at the right time, we call it product leadership, with Delphi's technology leadership. Our legacy Delphi teams have an intense focus on technology. I saw and felt that whenever I visited any of the former Delphi technical centers. This is extremely important for us, but to drive business growth we need commercialized innovation. And that's what we do very well at BorgWarner. So we are bringing together the 2 key strengths of both companies to win in electrification. Another strength of BorgWarner is our organizational structure. We give autonomy to the regions because they are the closest to our customers. And this drives speed and accountability. You certainly remember Fred mentioned it earlier today. This is so important because the speed of electrification varies by region. So it becomes very clear that the engineering organization is a crucial asset to drive growth for BorgWarner as we accelerate our electrification portfolio. So what does it mean for our engineering priorities? We believe our focus on executing flawlessly the program launches, working closely with our customers on pursuits and delivering innovative solutions at scale will enable us to win. Now let's go into more technical details about how we will do that. I will start with a fundamental point. We believe to be leaders in electrification we must have both, product capabilities and systems capabilities. I'll go even further and say that we do not believe companies selling only systems or only components can remain competitive. This is central to our success. Let me spell out why. To develop state-of-the-art components, we need to understand the systems into which they fit. To offer competitive systems, we need to leverage scale from the components. So let me say that again. We believe you need to do both to be successful. With this approach, we are able to respond to the diverse needs of our broad customer base for in-house production versus outsourcing and systems approach versus component approach. This is why I'm showing you on the slide the Integrated Drive Module. We call it iDM and its key components: the inverter, the e-motor and the gearbox. Now I will dig into the functions of the electric drive module components and our strength in each. Let's start with the gearbox. We'll follow this slide layout for each component. On the left, we show the addressable outsourced market in 2025 both as a percentage of OEM in-sourced versus outsourced and in U.S. dollars. Then on the right, we summarize our strategy and strength. With each, I'm going to show you why it is important to have the systems and the component capabilities. The EV gearbox is a good starting point because the manufacturer of the gearbox is usually the ones doing the mechanical integration of the components. You can think about the gearbox as the foundation for the drive module. Gearboxes reduce the speed of the e-motor output shaft to the wheels, which will take much slower than the e-machine. This also provides a higher torque at the wheels. We anticipate that, in 2025, roughly 2/3 of the gearboxes will be in-sourced by the OEM, leading to an addressable market of about $2 billion. This is where we have our legacy strength. BorgWarner is known for highly reliable products and its expertise in all-wheel drive, transmission components and clutching technology. For the EV gearboxes, we are leveraging this in-house design and manufacturing know-how. We are also a pioneer in this domain, delivering the EV gearbox for the first generation of the Tesla Roadster more than a decade ago. To summarize, key features of our gearboxes are: NVH-optimized design, which means quiet operation, this is especially important for electric vehicles as they don't have the noise of the internal combustion engine; high efficiency, which is key for the range of the electric vehicle; and state-of-the-art thermal management, characterizing the peak performance of the system. So in gearboxes, our customers view us as a partner and a product leader, which is evident in our track record. Here, we have a great example of just that. In 2017, Ford selected us to develop and build the integrated drive module for their Mustang Mach-E. We were responsible for developing the gearbox and the thermal management of the entire drive unit, including the final test in our production facility. For this award, we had to find solutions to a number of challenges. One, high-torque capability so the drive unit can be used in high-performance cars as well as light commercial vehicles. This required us to provide sophisticated thermal management. Two, integrated -- the full integration of the inverter and the motor into a very compact drive module. Here, we used the stepped planetary gearset. Three, high-NVH and high-efficiency requirements. So we implemented a sophisticated lubrication strategy. Let me draw your attention on the NVH as well as the efficiency and durability features. First, the NVH. Ford had a very specific target for gear emission noise and also asked us to set up the platform to handle a wide range of vehicle applications. We had the unique expertise to design for that noise level and also design raw castings that could easily be tailored to the duty cycle of different applications by just changing the machining, hence, cutting the overall cost. Now the efficiency and durability feature. We deliberately choose a planetary gearset that, when combined with seals, bearings and lubrication, provided an optimized result. The team tailored the passive lubrication from the rotating components to minimize the operating time of the electrical oil pump without compromising the systems' durability. This example really demonstrate that we need both, deep technical capabilities and system integration skills, to meet the customer needs and to be a leader in gearboxes. The next component I will discuss is the e-motor. The e-machine is the heart of the electric drive unit. The principal design of an e-motor is a rotating magnetic field created in this data that turns the rotor. While a modem may not be thought of as having a lot of innovation potential, we are working on compelling technologies, improving NVH, output power and efficiency as well as cost competitiveness. Take a look at the slide. Regarding the addressable market, we anticipate increased outsourcing compared to the gearbox, 60% in 2025, leading to an addressable outsourced market size of about $4 billion. That is a lot of demand. So how are we positioned to serve it? We have a broad range of motors for 48-volt, 400-volt as well as 800-volt applications. Since more than a decade, we specialize in e-motors using copper wire with rectangular cross-section. The higher slot fill provides superior power density compared to round wire motors. In terms of winding technologies, we use our High Voltage Hairpin or HVH design or our award-winning and patented S-wind design. The exciting part here is that it's not only the product innovation but also the manufacturing process innovation that differentiates BorgWarner. Our innovation efforts in the e-motor space are focused on new winding patterns, on new material as well as optimized cooling to continue to drive performance and cost competitiveness. So where are our revenue priorities in the e-motor space? Today, we are focused on integrated solutions for the light vehicle market, which means the motors combined with the gearbox or is part of a fully integrated drive module. Then in the CV space, we see significant opportunities in the component business as well as in the combination of the e-motor and the inverter. The key thing to understand here is that motors are the enabler for full system offerings. Also here, we have a great example. In 2020, we were awarded an 800-volt e-motor contract for global commercial vehicle customer. This e-motor will go into production in 2024 and uses our HVH technology. What's exciting here is that we are talking about a complete e-motor family for various applications that have up to 97% efficiency and deliver up to 400-kilowatt peak power. So why did we win this program? We won it because of our technology performance, specifically, the high-power density and the modularity of the e-motors across the power levels. This was supplemented by strong customer relationship. We expect these to remain competitive advantages as we pursue future awards. Now let's move to power electronics, known as the brain of the electric drive unit. The power electronics is essentially switching the DC current coming from the battery in a way that creates the rotating magnetic field in this data I was talking earlier about. The power electronics is the largest -- has the largest innovation potential, so it's a major growth driver for us. Here, we see more than 80% of addressable market being outsourced by 2025 and a $9 billion addressable outsourced market. Scale in electronics is critical to success in this area, and we got this through the Delphi acquisition. But scale alone is not enough. Delphi's deeply experienced automotive electronics team develop highly engineered solutions for the EV market and invested in specialized power electronics, test and validation equipment. This provides us with product offerings from 400-volt to 800-volt applications, supplementing the 48-volt inverters BorgWarner developed in the past. So how is BorgWarner differentiating itself in power electronics? First and foremost, with the core of the inverter, the power module. Our proprietary Viper power module that we produce in-house is a key advantage for our customers. We offer these power switches in silicon and silicon carbide, with silicon being the lower-cost alternative. With its modular design, it allows an easy transition from silicon to silicon carbide without tearing up the inverter -- without tearing up the design of the entire inverter. Furthermore, we have in-house capabilities to develop custom-integrated circuits combined with the necessary software skills. In summary, power electronics represents the area with the most innovation potential downstream of the battery in an EV. Therefore, this is where we will deliver great value to our customers. We hear a lot about 800-volt and silicon carbide in our industry, and BorgWarner is at the forefront of that evolution. So why do we see these technologies drive further change? And what does it mean for BorgWarner? We know that charging time is one of the biggest roadblocks for consumers deciding whether to buy an EV or to continue driving a vehicle with an internal combustion engine. We're going to help solve that problem. Our 800-volt technology reduce the charging time by 50% while also increasing power density. This will help removing one of the main barriers to buying EVs today. Improved efficiency and lower NVH are other key challenges in EVs. To use a silicon carbide in the power modules helps address both due to lower switching losses and its ability to increase the switching frequencies. In summary, these technologies will drive an increase in the adoption rate for EVs, which we believe will drive further growth for BorgWarner as a recognized leader in this space. Moving on to our in-house ASIC development capabilities. ASIC means application-specific integrated circuit. Custom-integrated circuits enable the management of growing technical complexity by optimizing cost, size and reuse. At the same time, custom-integrated circuits drive further innovation while also protecting our IP effectively. ASICs act as a unique selling proposal to sell BorgWarner electronic controllers, and we are continuing to focus on advanced ASIC development to maintain our competitive edge. So let's talk about them in more detail. In an integrated circuit, thousands to millions of circuit elements are condensed onto a small silicon chip called a die. If we look at the picture of the penny on the slide, you will see a small square to the right of Abraham Lincoln's nose. That is the size of the silicon die for one of our ASICs. We are leading in this area, too. Recently, our in-house design team won the PACE Award for one of our latest ASICs. So let's recap. What are the primary benefits that our ASICs provide? One, they add functionality while reducing size. Two, they reduce product costs. And three, they protect our IP. Here's an example of a power electronics product that is currently in the pre-launch phase for a major European OEM. We won this business for a few reasons, which all really come back to our technology. For this inverter, we use our latest 800-volt Viper power modules with silicon carbide technology and double-sided cooling. It is a high-power, high-efficiency inverter for the premium EV segment, which started production in 2022. Here, it's noteworthy that last year, we were named Innovation Award winner in the environment category for our 800-volt silicon carbide inverter by the European Association of Automotive Suppliers. Now let's talk about other power electronics. This is the next step in expanding beyond propulsion. We are seeing further opportunities for combining other power electronics into one unit, building on our existing technology and expertise. We believe this is a $10 billion market opportunity.The example we show on this slide is combining multiple functions in a hybrid vehicle for a European OEM. The unit combines a dual inverter, a DC/DC converter, and the supervisory control unit. There are several benefits for combining multiple electronic units. It saves space in the vehicle, which is always a valuable commodity. It facilitates installation in the vehicle, and it eliminates cables and hoses for enhanced reliability. Combined electronics can feature inverters, DC/DC converters, onboard chargers as well as supervisory electronics. And best of all, all of which are covered by the BorgWarner portfolio. Let's conclude my presentation outlining the key points. I would like to mention 3 things that differentiate BorgWarner. Let me reassure you there are many more, but Kevin is waiting impatiently. One, our decentralized organization structure, which drives speed. Two, we drive innovation in both systems and components. And three, our ability to commercialize these innovative technologies at scale. That's how we translate the innovation and speed into growth. We believe it's these competitive advantages that will drive success in the coming years. So where do we go from here? As I look out over the next few years, there are 3 areas we will focus on: inverters globally, complete iDM systems in Asia and components and subsystems in the commercial vehicle space. Thank you for your attention. Now you will see a short video highlighting one of our P2 hybrid programs in China. And then Kevin, who's still waiting, will take over for the -- to share the financial overview. [Presentation]

Good morning. Fred shared our vision and strategy, which will position us to be significantly overweight in EVs by 2030. And then Stefan outlined how we believe our technology and product leadership will facilitate this shift. I'm going to describe how this shift is enabled by our financial strength and how that strength can ignite our growth for years to come. We started preparing for this shift years ago. We've planned it carefully, and we intend to execute on it prudently from a financial perspective. To ground you in the future, I want to spend a little time reflecting on our recent past. The pivot we're executing now is consistent with how we've run the business historically. As technologies have shifted and created changes in our industry, we've pivoted our portfolio to take advantage of these changes. It's about managing for and not just talking about the long term. To be clear, when we evaluate portfolio actions, we're planning for the next decade with an expectation that we will deliver sustainable profitable growth along the way. Over the last 10 years, we've made carefully calculated decisions informed by a number of factors, including macro tailwinds, a deep understanding of our customers' needs and decades of product leadership and financial discipline. As a result of this approach, we've continued to generate strong results. Let me highlight a few examples. First, since 2016, we have consistently grown faster than the market. In fact, over the 5-year time frame you can see on this slide, this outgrowth has driven our revenue to be $2.8 billion higher in 2021 than it would have been had we simply grown with the market. Next, look at the right side of this chart. As we've been delivering this strong outgrowth, we've also consistently delivered top-quartile operating margins. Those margins have resulted in us being able to generate $3.2 billion in free cash flow over the last 5 years. And it's been a virtuous cycle. Because we've delivered strong outgrowth, we've been able to drive strong margin and cash performance. That's provided us with the opportunity to reinvest for growth even more so, which has then allowed us to continue to drive growth above market, deliver top-quartile margins and generate strong free cash flow. This type of consistent long-term performance doesn't happen overnight. It's the result of deliberate planning and positioning over a number of years. As we evaluate our investment strategy, we carefully consider our capital allocation alternatives with a focus on the expected returns on that invested capital in order to drive shareholder value. Looking back over the last 5 years, you can see that we've deployed about 70% of our available capital to fund organic and inorganic growth. At the same time, we've returned $1.5 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Related to that, I think it's worth noting that, unlike many others, we've maintained our dividend to shareholders on time and in full throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, which underscores the strength of our business model and the confidence we have in our ability to generate cash flow. When we identify an area of our portfolio that requires investment or when we assess the potential new business to pursue, we ask ourselves, "Will it drive an appropriate return for our investors? And if so, what is the most effective approach to our investment strategy, considering both organic and inorganic opportunities?" Our electrification strategy is a perfect demonstration of this approach. Given the profound shift that we saw coming in the market, we began investing in this space in earnest in 2015, knowing that there will be much more to come. Some of the investments we made were organic and some were inorganic. It was the combination of these investments that's given us a strong foundation from which we can accelerate our strategy toward electrification. Let me zoom in and talk more specifically about how we've been preparing for electrification. In 2014, we identified the accelerating trend in electric vehicles. At the same time, we understood that we were not positioned strongly enough to meet demand 5, 10 and 15 years down the road. So we asked ourselves, "How can we execute effectively and efficiently to better position the company to capitalize on this emerging trend?" This led us to the acquisition of motor capabilities with Remy and electronics and power electronics capabilities with Delphi Technologies, both of which complemented our preexisting portfolio. The result of this journey over the last 6 years is that our content opportunity per electric vehicle is expected to be over $2,600 in 2025, which is more than 6x what it was in 2014. And we're continuing to build on that with transactions like AKASOL that we announced last month. While these actions are really focused on positioning us well over the longer term, some of them are already delivering financial results in the P&L today. For example, we believe the Delphi Technologies integration is on track to achieve $90 million in cost synergies in 2021 and $175 million in 2023. It should come as no surprise that we're accelerating our electrification strategy even further. We believe the market opportunity is significant and that we can achieve product leadership in this space. In the next 4 years alone, we expect the total addressable market for our products in the eLV space to more than triple. And then looking out from 2025 to 2030, we expect it to double from there. Also keep in mind, the 2030 addressable market figures on this slide assume that only 1 in 3 vehicles is electric at that point. That's much higher than the 5% we're at today, but at least significant upside beyond 2030. So by scaling our eLV portfolio now and investing in product leadership, as Stefan took us through, we believe we'll be positioned to capitalize on the long-term growth in this market. Beyond light vehicles, though we already have a meaningful presence, our expansion into commercial vehicle electrification is now underway. The eCV market is not quite as robust yet as the light vehicle space, but the ramp up is starting to happen. With that growth in progress, we expect to follow the same playbook with our eProducts portfolio and commercial vehicles as what we've done on the light vehicle side. Specifically, you should expect to see us expand our eCV portfolio through a combination of organic and inorganic investments over the next 4 years. You saw a significant step in that direction with the announced acquisition of AKASOL, which should close in the second quarter. Overall, eCV is becoming an increasing focus of ours. So you should expect more to come here. Needless to say, the market opportunity across electrification is big. We have the foundational assets. We're generating capital to reinvest in the business, and we have clear lines of sight to grow. These things put together enable the significant shift in our portfolio mix that Fred talked about earlier. Now let me tell you how this translates to the top line. Jumping off the midpoint of our 2021 guidance, we're targeting about $4 billion in organic growth, coupled with $2 billion to $3 billion of growth from electrification-related acquisitions by 2025. We expect that revenue to be partially offset by the disposition of combustion-related products to generate approximately $3 billion to $4 billion in revenue. The result is that by the end of 2025, we expect to generate close to $5 billion in EV-related revenue, representing a dramatic increase from where we are today. As we break that down, about half of that is expected to come from our existing portfolio and the other half to come from new acquisitions. If we then simply trend with the expected evolution in end markets from 2025 to 2030, our EV-related revenue would then represent about 45% of our total. But let me be clear. That's just to illustrate the results of the actions we expect to take through 2025 and how, without further actions, we're still positioned to be growing and overweight in E through 2030. But as you saw earlier, simply growing with the market is not the BorgWarner way. Instead, we would expect to continue to drive product leadership, which will be evidenced by our ability to outgrow the market, even after 2025. Nonetheless, even without any incremental outgrowth, we expect our portfolio to be significantly overweigh EVs in 2030. I now want to walk through how we believe the acceleration of our electrification strategy will impact our margin performance over time. Today, almost 30% of our R&D spend already targets electrification. But remember, less than 3% of our revenue today is from EVs. So clearly, we're investing well ahead of program launches. Put another way, we're already absorbing the cost of electrification in our P&L ahead of the corresponding revenue generation, which is why you can see our EV operating margin is currently negative. But we've been able to fund that today by virtue of the strong underlying performance of our combustion-based businesses. As we grow our e-portfolio over the next 4 years, we do expect the R&D investments to grow, but we expect gross margin to grow at a much faster rate as revenues ramp up with program launches. That drives us to a point where we expect the EV portfolio to be roughly breakeven or better by 2024. Beyond that point, even with continued growth in R&D, we expect to drive increasing operating margins as the growth in revenue and gross margin accelerates. So how does this translate into overall company performance? Let's talk about our margin outlook. And let me start that discussion by reminding you we take a lot of pride at BorgWarner in delivering top-quartile margins. We don't expect that to change. It's core to our value proposition. You saw that at the beginning of my presentation, why I highlighted our last 5 years of strong margin performance. As we look ahead, we remain committed to achieving margins of greater than 11% in 2023. With our revenue growth and cost synergy performance, we believe we're right on track for that. Beyond 2023, we expect our margins to be increasingly impacted by the results of any acquisitions and dispositions as well as the mix of our business as it becomes more heavily weighted to the growing EV product portfolio. So there is a level of uncertainty about the specific margins we should anticipate then. That said, as we've looked at how we expect the business to evolve over the coming years, we do expect to remain solidly in the double-digit range from a margin perspective, and we believe that will continue to put us in the top quartile of companies in our sector. Driving this kind of financial discipline is core to our growth strategy. It's about delivering growth and profitability. And that's what enables us to support the significant shift in our portfolio that we're talking about today as well as to prepare us for the next inevitable shift down the road. As we sustain that strong margin profile on growing revenue, we expect our free cash flow to grow as well. In fact, between 2021 and 2025, we expect to generate $4.5 billion in free cash flow. And I think it's important to understand the quality of this cash flow as well. It's a function of our expectation that we will continue to convert more than 70% of bottom line earnings into free cash flow. We think that clearly demonstrates that high-quality earnings are the underpinning of our cash flow generation. Also, it's important to note that this cash flow outlook contemplates the funding of working capital investment to support revenue growth and restructuring initiatives, both those currently underway as well as a contingency for additional actions that could potentially be needed down the road. As I mentioned earlier, our approach to managing the business leads to a virtuous cycle, and that manifests itself in our cash flow. High-quality earnings convert into free cash flow. We use that free cash flow to reinvest in the business. And that, in turn, allows us to drive product leadership and outgrowth, which then supports our strong margins and free cash flow. And we're able to do this even as the market and our portfolio continue to evolve. Actively managing our portfolio is a critical element to sustaining our margin profile, and it's also critical to achieving the mix shift in our portfolio that we've discussed today. As Fred mentioned already, we're planning to dispose the businesses with between $3 billion and $4 billion of revenue by 2025. Of that, we currently expect the first $1 billion or so to be executed during the next 12 to 18 months. This is a more aggressive step in portfolio management than what you've seen us do in the last few years, and we think it's the right thing to do. To be clear, though, we're not focused on disposing all of our combustion-based products because most of them are actually still expected to generate solid growth and strong levels of profitability over the medium term. Instead, our focus is primarily on disposing of combustion businesses that we see as slower growing or that don't fit our long-term financial profile. In most cases, these are still good businesses. They're simple ones that will be more valuable owned by someone else. So how does this all come together from a capital perspective? Let me take you through the pieces and how they fit with our financial priorities going forward. First, I mentioned that we expect to generate $4.5 billion of free cash flow through 2025. Next, you can see that we expect to generate somewhere around $1.5 billion in proceeds from our combustion-based dispositions. That represents the potential proceeds we expect to receive net of the lost cash flows from no longer owning those businesses. Finally, as the company grows its revenue and earnings, we expect to be able to increase our gross debt balances by more than $1 billion through 2025, while maintaining a prudent investment-grade credit rating. We expect the combination of these things to yield more than $7 billion in capital over the next 5 years. So what do we expect to do with that capital? First, we expect to maintain our commitment of returning value to shareholders. But even after considering our current dividend policy and completion of our current share repurchase program, that leaves roughly $5.5 billion of capital available to invest in M&A to support our growth priorities in electrification. We fully expect that this capital deployment strategy, coupled with our organic growth initiatives, will support the company's aggressive repositioning into EV. As we talk about this capital deployment, I think it's worth spending a moment to remind everyone of our focus on the returns associated with our invested capital. We have a discipline at BorgWarner of evaluating all projects on a discounted cash flow basis, targeting returns that support long-term value creation. Looking back over the last few years, you can see that we've consistently achieved ROIC in excess of our cost of capital, even during the challenging COVID-19 environment last year. This focus remains core to planning and execution of our acceleration in electrification. But I think it's important to remember that as we make EV-specific investments, they tend to have longer return profiles. Remember, just as you saw in my earlier slide, we're investing significant amounts in R&D today to fund the profitable growth of tomorrow. The result of accelerating those types of investments is that you may see some level of pressure on the reported nearer-term ROIC metrics in any given year. This is merely a reflection of our rapid EV growth profile as we're funding investments that may have a longer payoff. The bottom line is this. Our discipline around requiring returns on our invested capital remains intact as we transition our portfolio more aggressively towards electrification. So let me wrap up by hitting on the key financial takeaways regarding Project CHARGING FORWARD. First, we expect to significantly increase the company's mix of revenue coming from EVs both in 2025 and in 2030. We started on this journey 6 years ago, and we're now accelerating our progression. Second, we expect to execute this mix shift while sustaining the company's historically strong margin profile. And that strong margin profile should allow us to continue to generate strong cash flow, which supports our ability to invest aggressively in electrification, both organically and inorganically. And finally, at the same time we're doing this, we expect to get more aggressive in executing our portfolio management strategies. This is an exciting time for the company. It's a meaningful shift in the positioning of the portfolio, one that we're executing from a position of strength. And ultimately, we think successful execution of this strategy will drive value creation for our shareholders. Before I turn it back to Fred for some final remarks, I wanted to share a video profiling our commitment to sustainability. [Presentation]

Last month, we unveiled Project CHARGING FORWARD to more than 200 of our top leaders. Even though, of course, we were virtual, we could feel the energy. The feedback was exceptional. Our leaders are highly motivated, and they inspire our thousands of global employees. And together, we will deliver for our global customers. We'll do our part to advance a clean and energy-efficient world, and we will create value for shareholders. I want to thank our employees who have truly enabled us to make this shift. They are the best in the business. On behalf of all of us, we're grateful for your interest in BorgWarner and committed to delivering for you and for the world. With that, let's take a short break, and we'll be back to address your questions. [Break]

[Operator Instructions]

Welcome back, everyone. So I'll be functioning as the emcee during our Q&A session. We're going to be balancing the questions that we have registered on the phone line as well as those that I've received thru the IR inbox. So with that, Sharon, we're ready to take the first question from the phone line.

First question comes from John Murphy with Bank of America.

Thanks for all the information today. It's incredibly helpful. I just wanted to focus in the first question and looking at Page 46, and thinking about the balance between the acquisitions and the dispositions. I'm just trying to understand -- I can understand the disposition side, what has been identified, but just curious what your sense of comfort is this will get executed at the prices you're thinking about during the course of the next 4 years? And if there may be more that could be divested over time maybe because you get better values for it? And also, conversely, on the acquisition front, how much has actually been identified and targeted for sale? And how much is sort of your plan on what kind of technology you think you need? I'm just trying to understand how fully baked those 2 swing factors are because they're -- about half, if not more than half of the swing in the EV penetration for revenue out in 2025.

John, thanks for the question. This Project CHARGING FORWARD has been in the making for years, right, with organic actions, inorganic actions. I think Delphi was the cornerstone of us being able to now accelerate in the world of electrification. From an M&A perspective, we have a robust pipeline of target that we are currently looking at. And so I feel pretty comfortable that both from a light vehicle and commercial vehicle standpoint, we will bring into the company targets that have the right technology. The right technology into making the flow of electrons as efficient as possible across the battery electric vehicle and also efficiency within our products. So maybe some vertical integration or avenues like this. From a divestiture standpoint, we always said that we would look at our product portfolio very actively, and that's what we're doing. So I feel confident about the fact that we have the right tool, we have the right process to execute this Project CHARGING FORWARD.

Maybe if I could just add to that on the acquisition side of the equation, when we talk about $2 billion to $3 billion of acquisitions over the coming years, that does contemplate AKASOL, for example, which gets us almost 1/4 of the way there towards the objectives that we have as we think about those growth prospects. And as you talked about the capital question, hey, do we have enough to be able to support the growth through acquisition? Remember, we have $7 billion or so of capital that we expect to generate over the next 5 years. The bulk of which, about 80% of which we expect to deploy or be available to deploy toward acquisitions. I think the pending AKASOL transaction actually fits with those types of economics and we would expect over the next few years to execute further on that.

And maybe to complement from a technology perspective, all our acquisitions we did in the past were both -- were based on technology. So -- and that is important for us. It's not about buying market share, it's about getting the right technology in order to grow.

Okay. That's helpful. And maybe just a follow up. There's 2 areas that seem like they could maybe enhance this going forward. It seems like you're implying that the crossover product in EVs is higher between commercial vehicle and light vehicle, so that may spur more growth on the commercial vehicle side than you would have had before in the ICE world. And also, when we look at the slide, Slide 30, 32 and 34, where you have the potential for gearbox electric motors and inverters, there is -- there seems like there's a lot of room for incremental outsourcing. I think the average of those more than 40% is still insourced. So just curious on those 2 nodes on the commercial vehicle side and the crossover and then how much more could be outsourced on the light vehicle side that really could enhance what you're talking about here about the EV growth potential?

We see outsourcing of some systems and when the customer insources systems, we see outsourcing in 2 components. The good thing is that since we understand systems, we can talk with the customer about systems because if they want to assess the make or buy, they have to have a system buy option, and we are one of those who can do that. So in the world of electronics, we see a lot of outsourcing. We see a lot of outsourcing also in commercial vehicle where customers don't want to be in the middle of the motor and the motor controller, so-called inverter, and we're working with customers on those programs.

And maybe a comment on the commercial vehicle. The commercial vehicles always have a challenge with the scale. And we, on the inverter side, can bring scale to the commercial vehicle, because the modules we're using for commercial vehicle inverter are very much the same than we use for light vehicle inverter. And that's where we have the base of the technology. And I want to give you an example. We recently won an inverter, which is 800 volt, 900 amps silicon carbide. So that is inverter -- it is extremely high power. It is for a high-performance car. But these components can very well be used for a commercial vehicle inverter. And with that, we can create scale, and that's the interesting part for the OEM.

So it's fair to say that, that scale is much more available in the EV world between commercial vehicle and light vehicle than it is in the ICE world, right? I mean that's what it mean?

Exactly, absolutely. Because we are not looking as an inverter as a complete unit because there are a lot of differences. But we need to break it down into modules. For example, the power module I mentioned earlier. The power module is absolutely crucial for the success and for the level of power you can achieve in an inverter. And that can be used in a light vehicle or commercial vehicle inverter. You just need to add a few more switches, and then you can go to higher power.

Sharon, we're ready to take the next question from the phone line.

Next question comes from James Picariello with KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Just at a high level regarding this EV, very clear EV strategy now with M&A as a key component here. What else needs to be filled or filled around portfolio capability? I mean it seems as though you have all the major categories covered now. So yes, just what's the strategy look like from a technology standpoint?

So the focus on M&A is going to be, as Stefan mentioned, on technology, and we're going to look at targets that enhances our focus on efficiently moving electrons, wherever those electrons move in the battery electric vehicle. It can be technology, it can be scale. Scale is important. It's not only product. Scale is important for competitiveness. It can also be some vertical integration back to technology. This is where I think you should think about when we go into M&A. Maybe one more element, Delphi was a big endeavor, and we're doing very, very well. We're absolutely on track in integration. AKASOL is an M&A that is single product, much easier to integrate. When you think about M&A, going forward, I think you should think about M&A that look more like AKASOL than other types of M&As.

Okay. That's helpful. And then on Slide 47, where you provide the estimated margin profile of BorgWarner's EV revenue out to 2025. That includes the future acquisitions portion pertaining to the $2.5 billion, is that correct?

It's really focused on what we have internally right now in terms of our organic growth. But I think you should -- because it's hard to project what those acquisitions specifically are going to look like, depending on what the profile is of those companies. But I think it's fair to think that the profile of those companies is likely to look somewhat similar to that profile as we look ahead to the types of acquisitions we would expect to do. But it's really modeled somewhat based on the programs, the organic pieces that we have in place today for an ELV, but I don't think it's going to be dramatically different when you layer in the acquisitions.

Okay. And then just one last one for me. Slide 55, right, this appendix slide with the 2023 framework, the wide range for 2023, I completely get it, it accounts for the variability and the acquisitions and divestitures. But the greater than 11% EBIT margin target for 2023, that would encompass any type of acquisition or divestiture activity, meaning that greater than 11% is a good number?

That's right. As we look at the potential acquisitions, as we look at the potential dispositions that are on our radar, and as we look out 3 years from now, we think we're on track even with those to be delivering greater than 11%. I think as you get beyond 2023 and you get a little bit more variability in the magnitude of those dispositions and the acquisitions and what the profiles of those businesses might look like, it gets a little bit more uncertain in terms of what the specific margin might look like in a given year, but we continue to expect, based on the modeling that we've done, that we expect to be solidly in the double-digit range, and we think that's going to continue to position us to be a top quartile margin generating company going forward.

Sharon, we're ready to take another question from the line.

Next question comes from Noah Kaye with Oppenheimer.

Thanks so much for all the very interesting and exciting details today. I want to ask a question about what the business itself may actually look like down the line, apart from sort of the EV exposure. One of your largest historical OEM customers had their battery day last week and talked about simplification, right? That being a through line as we go towards EVs, reducing the number of battery variants, obviously, reducing the number of parts components. Let's assume that's the case and that part of the EV transition is about simplifying the powertrain, what would it mean for the capital and operational intensity of BorgWarner's business? Do you think in the future, you need to be at the same level of capital intensity that you are today as we kind of go towards this EV transition?

Yes. I can speak to that. From a capital intensity perspective, as you think about BorgWarner's business model, by and large, and I'm generalizing a little bit, but whether we're talking about combustion products or electrified products, we tend to be in the assembly business, we develop technology, we commercialize that technology for product leadership, and then we tend to be in the assembly business. So the capital intensity of the product portfolios, whether we're talking about pure combustion based products or EV specific products tends to be relatively similar, relatively comparable. So we don't expect the capital intensity to change dramatically.

It sounds like there's no follow-up to that one. So I'll...

Apologies. Pat, sorry about that, I was on mute. No, I just wanted to follow-up there. I think right now, we're seeing the EV industry going through some growing pains from a supply chain perspective. So your point about being in the assembly business is a good one. We're clearly seeing, whether it's batteries or other components, some issues right now for OEMs. So I guess, as the EV transition continues, how does BorgWarner act strategically to help OEMs avoid supply chain choke points? And what's your strategy for growing and maintaining a sustainable supply chain for your own EV product base?

One thing I would say is that scale is important, relationship with our suppliers and customers are key. And in order to -- both from a technology standpoint, having a supplier, electronic supplier, develop a product for us or having continuous supply, scale is important. And that's what we do today. I think -- that's what we see today. I think going forward, we're very happy with the scales that we have from an electronics perspective with the acquisition of Delphi that has given us really great technology and great scale across the 3 continents with very, very strong supplier relationship. So we're pretty happy with what we're seeing. Now if you're talking specifically on semiconductors, I think it's touching each and everyone right now. So we're trying to do our best to keep up the deliveries. But supplier relationship, partnerships, scale are things that are going to mitigate those risks going forward.

And I would like to emphasize that the supplier relationship, it's a partnership and we need to go with our suppliers through these difficult times. And as Fred mentioned, it is an industry-wide phenomenon currently, which was triggered last year by the COVID pandemic. And we -- with the scale of Delphi, we will have these supplier relationships. And also, especially for power semiconductors. We have partnerships with semiconductor manufacturers, and that is very helpful in these times.

We have a number of questions thru the IR inbox, so I'm going to go through a couple here. So one that is being asked in a number of different ways. Clearly, there's a big shift in the strategy. So can you maybe just talk a little bit about why are we doing this now? What's -- either from an outside perspective and then just all encompassing, why is now the timing to take this step?

We've been working at this for years. I think it dates back to 2015, where we started embracing this change. It took a lot of organic work, inorganic work to be in the position we're in right now. I think, as I mentioned before, the acquisition of Delphi, the technology and scale that this gave us in electronics and power electronics is now the cornerstone of us being able to accelerate into the world of electrification. With those acceleration, those product pivots, we've done that before. And I talked about that in my prepared remarks, we are very good at taking grid technology, commercialize them globally and manufacture them at scale. And now we are at a point where our readiness converges with the market pull. So that's why we're moving now.

Maybe to complement that personal story for my answer. I joined BorgWarner in 2012. And in 2013, we came out with our vision, clean and energy-efficient world. That was in 2013. And then in 2014, at the time, I was involved in the Remy acquisition where we said, okay, we know where we want to go. Electrification is the future, so what do we need? And we knew we have the mechanical part, check. We need the electric motors and the power electronics if we want to play in the propulsion area of electric vehicles. And then we said, okay, what do we need? What is the variable? How do we go there? So we started with Remy in 2015, continued with Sevcon in 2017. And we knew with Sevcon that we didn't have scale, but we needed to start with the design. The design of power electronics is very important if you want to get there. And then 2020, with the Delphi acquisition, then we got the technology and the scale. And that's why I think now it's the ideal moment. We see the market growing. We see a lot of traction in the market. We see that we -- our strategy now is showing the fruit, and I think that's the right moment now.

And I think building on that beyond just the products and the markets where we are from a pure financial perspective, now is the right time as well. It goes back to this virtuous cycle I talked about, because with the product leadership we've been generating and the outgrowth we've been generating, we're delivering strong margins. We're delivering strong cash flows, record cash flows in 2020, on track for record cash flows in 2021. And that cash flow we're using to invest in the portfolio to be able to accelerate our transition toward electrification. So we're able to fund that prudently from within. So we think it's the right time right now with the level of cash flow we're generating.

So we'll take another one from the IR inbox. Being asked the question about, Fred, you talked about the level of R&D spending. The reaction I'm seeing here is, is 30% enough? Clearly, we're saying that we believe in electrification, it's real now at the time. Should we be spending that other 70% on combustion? Should it be higher today in terms of the electrification R&D spend?

So I think the first thing that we need to keep in mind is that we are not constraining R&D in electrification. And we're spending R&D in combustion, 70% of what we're spending in combustion is application engineering. We're not doing research in combustion. Application engineering focused on the program that we won and focused on the program that we see that we're going to win. In the next few years, and at minimum until 2025, we're still growing in combustion, especially with the hybrid application. So if we do a little bit of product development, is to make sure that our product are totally fitting the specific hybrid propulsion architecture needs, right? But -- so on combustion, it's essentially application engineering, and we're not constraining the electrification needs of R&D.

And I'd say just to build on that. I mean, remember, these are products that our customers are asking for. They're asking for fuel-efficient, low-emission products which we provide to our customers. And so they're asking for us to deliver these applications to them. And so when you look at the investment, these are programs where we have product leadership. We're delivering outgrowth, as Fred talked about. We're delivering strong margins and free cash flow. And that's the cash flow, by the way, that's going back to invest in our acceleration and electrification. But it's also a function, as I talked about, customer needs. It's where we see the market evolution. It's not as though the market for combustion based products disappears in 2025 or 2030. It's -- we're supporting the customer needs in that portfolio right now. And as you look at the investments we're making from an electrified propulsion perspective, we're investing in where we expect our business to be over the next 5 years. So as I look at today, we're talking about in 2021, investing 25% to 30% of our R&D today. Not accidentally, that happens to coincide where we think the portfolio is in 2025. And as we look out to 2030, where we expect to be 45% EV, we expect to be around 50% R&D, 5 years earlier in 2025. So it's really the evolution of the portfolio based on the evolution of the end markets. And then where we expect to be looking beyond that.

So I'm going to take one more from the IR inbox, then I'll throw it back to the line. So I've got another question, and Stefan, I think this is mostly for you. But a lot of that, your presentation was focused on power electronics and the opportunities that we see there. The question I'm seeing here is, to what extent do you think your technology leadership in that area opens the door for other components or for full modules?

I would say, to a high extent, very clearly because the power electronics is the most valuable part of the entire drive module. And with Delphi now, we have the scale and we have especially also the production capabilities, and that allows us to win more business. And even on the -- when we look at the motors, we have combinations that we're currently working on with motors and power electronics. And we -- you will see in the next weeks and months, that the programs and the pursuits we are currently working on are mainly focused on combining our power electronics with other components of the drive motor. So answer, absolutely, yes.

Sharon, why don't we take the next question from the phone line?

Next question comes from Rod Lache with Wolfe Research.

I was hoping, maybe just first, Kevin, you can clarify the implied multiples that you're anticipating for assets sold and assets to be acquired. And I'm not sure if I'm misunderstanding this, but you suggested $5.5 billion of capital by $2 billion to $3 billion of revenue. I just used your average 5-year EBITDA margin of 16%, and it implied 11 to 17x. And then similarly, if I did the same thing for the $1 billion of proceeds on $3 billion to $4 billion of revenue sold, it would be like 2x. So that seems maybe extreme. And maybe you could just help clarify how the profile and multiples look?

Yes. If I start with the acquisition side, the $5.5 billion of capital available is what we think is able to support the potential growth through acquisition in that $2 billion to $3 billion ZIP code, $2 billion to $3 billion being the revenue level in the year 2025. And so I think as we look at AKASOL as a particular example, I think it fits right in line with the types of proceeds that we -- or capital that we would expect to deploy for acquisitions like that. But we don't really look at it on a multiple basis. We really look at it on a return basis, looking at a discounted cash flow analysis it happens to maybe translate to some of the types of multiples you talked about. From a disposition perspective, you can see what we're talking about is disposing of $3 billion to $4 billion of revenue and generating, I'll call it, net proceeds that could be in that $1.5 billion ZIP code. Now that's a combination of potential proceeds we might receive for divesting some of those businesses, less some of the lost cash flow that we would have, depending on when we actually divest those businesses because they still are cash flow generating businesses by and large. So I wouldn't equate it to a multiple, but I think directionally, you can see, hey, we're assuming somewhere in the ZIP code of $1.5 billion of cash coming in net of cash flow [ loss ] related to that $3 billion to $4 billion of revenue that we would ultimately dispose of over the next few years.

So just to clarify, the gross proceeds from that would be higher, it sounds like, Kevin?

That's right.

And it -- the second question I just had is more kind of on the technology side on the acquisitions. Can you just maybe speak a little bit more to the competitive moats longer-term that you see for some of these? And I was hoping specifically, maybe Stefan could talk about battery packs, and how -- because I think in your presentation, you did convey a lot of the IP that you have in power electronics and gears and motors. But that was one area that I'm still a little bit uncertain about.

Maybe you talk about electronics and I can talk about battery packs.

You want to start with battery packs? Yes. So from a battery pack perspective, if you look at the competitive movement, there is -- it's very fragmented right now. And so with the technology focus that we have on battery packs, focused on energy efficiency, always back to the same thing, power density, both in volume and weight as well as cost, we think that we can make a difference. That difference is going to be made through technology. That's what's happening on battery packs. We can see that from what the customer requires technology and flexibility of manufacturing. From an inverter power electronic standpoint...

So from a power electronics standpoint, I think it's important to understand the -- as I mentioned earlier, the modules. And you see a lot of changes in the power modules. For example, today, you have mainly silicon. Tomorrow, you will have more and more silicon carbide, and there are other semiconductors in the future that are currently under investigation. But it's not only about the power module. It is about the cooling, it is about the other main components of the bill of materials, where there is still a lot of room in order to drive innovation and also in order, at the end of the day, to get a better efficiency and to get a better cost competitiveness. So -- and as I mentioned in my speech earlier, that's where we see the highest level of innovation that is ahead of us.

Yes. I don't think there's any question about your IP in power electronics, I'm just asking in battery packs, which is a big part of your growth. What is proprietary that you have long-term that gives you better energy efficiency or power density versus a sustainable moat versus other players in this space?

I don't know if you can talk about proprietary. It could be product secrets. It could be manufacturing techniques. It could be being able to be agnostic to the different sales. It could be being able to test the sales before you assemble. It could be around flexible manufacturing. On a pure IP standpoint, for sure, we're focusing on that, but I am not going to specifically answer that question right now, Rod. This is something that, obviously, is important. And the blue-chip customers that buy those battery packs are looking at all those functional outputs, and that's why they go to an AKASOL. That's why they go to a Romeo. It's because we are at the current point in time, their best bet from a technology and efficiency standpoint. Our goal is to remain the best bet in the longer term. And therefore, we need to carry on investing into this business and make sure that we are always launching new generation and faster than everybody else. That is typically what AKASOL is doing, if you want to talk about this particular topic of battery packs. They are, I think, launching their third-generation later this year, and they already have date for generation 4. That's how you're going to maintain product leadership.

And maybe to complement -- and sorry, Rod, that I cannot give you a lot of insight on batteries because that is outside of my business unit, and I'm not the specialist in battery packs. But I want to give you just a comparison. When you look at the e-motor, an e-motor -- what is an e-motor? It's copper, [ lam ] stacks and a little bit of paper. You could say that. At the same time, there is so much innovation potential still in the e-motor with different winding technologies, with how do we manage the thermal cooling of the e-motor because that drives at the end of day the performance. And that's where there are a lot of ideas out there, what we are also currently working on in order to drive that. So it's not only about, okay, it's a cell or it's a motor. There's a lot of ideas that are still around that can significantly improve the efficiency and the cost competitiveness.

Sharon, we'll take another question from the line.

Next question comes from Brian Johnson with Barclays.

Yes. Just want to -- sorry, similar to last question, but drill down on power electronics. Some of the OEMs have described it, for example, Ford in a public forum, as more of a build-to-print business, that is they claim their engineers are designing, going to the Crees and STMs and selecting the high-voltage chips they want and really looking for the tier 1 for packaging. So given that attitude, at least for -- on the part of OEMs, whether it's realistic or not, what is really the potential margin profile in power electronics? And kind of related to that, do any of the awards include your proprietary silicon? Or is it repackaging third-party silicon?

Okay. So I will take that. When you say the OEMs going directly to the Crees and so on of the world, today, when you look at the ECU market, the Infineons of the world and -- have direct contact with the OEMs. And the OEMs tell us this is the micro I want, because as a software platform that is built for that. So that alone, that the OEMs have a contact with the semiconductor suppliers, it's not on its own an indicator that it will be build-to-print. So that's the first, just a parallel to what we see today on the combustion side. When we look at the technology and when I -- when we talk to the customer, we currently see a few customers that have a lot of know-how in-house. But the majority of the customers looking for the innovation capabilities of the tier 1s in order to get the state-of-the-art inverter. And I think that's one of the big questions about insourcing or not insourcing. When I look at the insourcing of an inverter into the OEM, where do they get the scale from? We, as a tier 1, have the view on all our customers and have -- and know the needs of what different customer wants, and that drives innovation on our end. And that will help us to innovate, innovate faster and provide the scale. So that's why in terms of insourcing of power electronics, we see the probability is very low.

And I think the way that manifests itself in the financials is, again, as we look at these different programs on inverters and other power electronics, we continue to maintain that same discipline that we have across the company of focusing on return on invested capital. So as Stefan, Fred and I are looking at individual programs that are coming up, we maintain that discipline of driving an ROIC that covers our cost of capital and delivers real economic value creation. And that's what we do. And even with that, you can see we have a 1.1 million inverters, I think we talked about, with 3 of the premium OE programs that we talked about on our last earnings call. And you can rest assure that based on the type of analysis we do to make sure we're delivering the right returns on those programs.

And to jump back to technology. For these 3 inverter programs that we announced in last earnings call, all of them have either 800-volt silicon carbide or both. And that -- so which means that is driven by innovation and by technology.

And do they include the proprietary Viper switch or any proprietary content?

Yes. All 3 of them include our in-house Viper technology. Absolutely.

Okay. And a related question on commercial truck off-highway. Kevin come -- came from a place that was pursuing aggressively e-axles in Class 8, competitor Dana is also -- one can't imagine that Cummins and Eaton and the other powertrain manufacturers benefit still. So yes, you're doing a lot of turbo work in commercial vehicle right now. But when you look at both the package on the product side and then the distribution, OEM and especially fleet customer relationships, how do you think you'll stack up versus competitors?

Do you want to go?

Okay. I can take that. So when we look at the overall commercial vehicle market and the IDM, which means an integrated drive module with a motor, a gearbox and the power electronics. We see in the commercial vehicle market, we don't see an IDM as the trend for the OEMs are going after. Because the vertical integration within the OEMs is on the commercial vehicle side, it's much higher than you have on the light vehicle side. And like on the light vehicle side, we are looking at the components. And on the light vehicle side, we don't need the gearbox to sell our components. And in the same way, we don't see the mechanical part on the commercial vehicle side as that is something we need in order to sell the motor or the power electronics.

So I'm going to take another one from the IR inbox, actually a couple of them. So I know I think they follow-up nicely with these past two questions that we got. So first, on the divestiture side, the question I'm seeing here, are there any guardrails when you look at our combustion portfolio today that's going to guide those divestitures?

Yes. When we look at our dispositions, we're really looking at what products just don't fit with our long-term financial or product portfolio objective. When we look at the businesses we really like -- BorgWarner has really driven its recipe for success has been about profitable growth. And so we look at products that have a clear path toward product leadership, which drives outgrowth, which drives a strong margin profile, which drives strong cash flow generation over the medium or the long term. And so as we look at the types of things that we're looking at dispositions for, they're not ticking one of those boxes. It doesn't mean they're bad businesses, it just means they don't fit with our financial profile, what we're looking for over time. And so they're probably better owned by somebody else. And so those are really what I'd say are the guardrails we really look at, do they fit with our medium or long-term financial profile, and if they don't tick all those boxes or have a path to tick those boxes, then they're probably just not the right fit for BorgWarner.

Another question I'm seeing in a couple of different ways, is the idea of share assumptions in electrification, either from a light vehicle perspective, CV perspective. And then I'll probably follow-up with you Stefan about specific products, but Kevin, Fred, do you want to take that first one?

From a market share, from a BorgWarner marketshare perspective?

Yes.

I mean we're looking at it less that way and more about how we position the overall portfolio to be significantly overweight EV, both in 2025 and in 2030. I mean I think you can get a good sense as to looking at our revenue in the addressable -- relative to the addressable market. So as you look at the 2030, for instance, in the light vehicle side, we expect to be around $8 billion of EV specific revenue on a TAM of, I think it's $76 billion. While on the commercial vehicle side, somewhere in that $2 billion of good on a TAM that's in the high 20s. So I think that gives you a sense in totality how to think about share, but it's really more about making sure we maintain product leadership, drive the positioning that we expect so that we're significantly overweight in both 2025 and progressing out to 2030.

And as a follow-up to that, I see -- so Stefan, on the power electronics side, how are you feeling about your share dynamics there? We've talked about some awards? Any color you can share with what you're seeing in the power electronic side of the market?

On the power electronic side, it's very exciting. And we mentioned earlier the 3 programs that we announced last month in the earnings call. We are not -- I don't want to go into specific details on market shares. But we are one of the big ones, especially in the European space.

Yes. On that, I mean, I think you can do some math if you want to just look at the inverters on just those 3 programs that Stefan is alluding to. 1.1 million inverters in 2025. I think you can do your estimates around what you think the market for EVs in Europe looks like in 2025 and get a pretty good idea that we feel like we're establishing product leadership here.

Sharon, can we take another question from the phone line?

Next question comes from Emmanuel Rosner with Deutsche Bank.

I was hoping to ask you a few more details on the plan to accelerate vehicle electrification in light vehicles, specifically. So when you're highlighting your goal of acquisition over the next few years, it seems like a decent chunk, at least, would be sort of in light vehicles. Can you be a little bit more specific around what there you'd be looking for? Our understanding was that technology-wise, you probably have already acquired or developed most of what you need. So is it scale? Is it backlog? I guess, on the light vehicle side, how do we accelerate that growth?

So first of all, we accelerate it with using what we have built organically, booking business, launching business and getting the right return on invested capital, having good launch quality and just accelerating the number of business booked. Right now, I think we have -- we may have a priority issue. We have so much coming in for E that we have to prioritize right now. So organically, we are in a good way to really grow this business. From an inorganic standpoint, I think I talked about it before, we will focus on technology leadership that can enhance either the efficiency of our own distinct product or the efficiency across the system within the battery electric vehicle being like the core commercial vehicle, your question is more on light vehicle. This is what we're going to do. This is what we're going to execute.

And maybe to complement on that, light vehicle, I mentioned in my speech earlier, we are looking at inverters globally and IDMs in Asia. And also something interesting I want to share, Fred, Kevin and I worked on the specific incentive scheme for the business unit. I have the privilege to lead, which is we are looking at new bookings, but we are not only looking at new bookings. We are looking at the profitability of these new bookings. So that we're not just going after growth, but after profitable growth. And that is very helpful to have this clear goal for this business unit, who is one of the growth engines for BorgWarner.

Okay. Just a quick point of clarification, and then I have a separate question. But -- so Fred, when you're saying that going forward the M&A will look much more like AKASOL, can you just be specific around what part of M&A? I mean I guess what attributes of AKASOL specifically where we should be looking for?

Yes. The attributes that I want to allude to when I say it's going to be more AKASOL-like, I would say it's most probably going to be mono products focused on electrification, that will be much easier to integrate than the Delphi Technologies for which we're doing a very, very good job as far as integration, we are on track. But that's how I think you should think about what we're targeting in the future most probably even then.

Okay. That's very helpful. And then one -- second question would be around your disclosure around the EV margin trajectory on Slide 47, which is very useful information. So just curious, when you sort of look at this trajectory in getting to breakeven around 2024 or so, assuming it was all organic, when would you expect the margin profile to reach sort of the current company average or, I guess, combustion engine averages? It's hard to tell on the scale here where you're getting to by sort of like this 2025 on EV specifically?

Well, intentionally so. I mean that's why we didn't put numbers on the chart. But I think what you should expect is that -- is we're continuing to grow over time. Remember, the E products that we invest in tend to have longer return profiles. So even as we're continuing to grow, which is still happening in 2025 and beyond, we're continuing to chase that margin profile because it means there's still a lot of R&D going in upfront that's supporting revenue and gross margin out in the future. So we're constantly chasing that margin profile before we ever get to that steady state. So the faster we grow, the more it impacts the margin on that profile because of the upfront heaviness of the R&D investment. But as I talked about before, when we look at the ROIC on these programs, we maintain that discipline of making sure that we're delivering ROIC above our cost of capital to drive long-term value creation, but it just takes a longer time to get there, the more you're growing.

Sharon, we'll take another question from the phone line.

Next question comes from Dan Levy with Credit Suisse.

Thank you for a very helpful presentation, a lot of good information here. First question, I want to just ask about on the combustion side. I think one of your central points is that for now, your combustion product that plays a key role is that this is what fund you're EV development and opportunities, especially on the M&A side. So can you give us a sense of how you see your combustion margins playing out over the next 5 years and over the next decade as prices deemphasize? Is it at risk as your utilization presumably declined from the capacity that you have in place? Or maybe we could flip that around, do you actually think margins to be flat or better given automakers and a lot of the suppliers for the remaining combustion architecture? So how do you see combustion margins playing out as you deemphasize?

I think we expect to sustain our strong margin profile over time as a total company. We talked about being continuing to be on the path toward delivering greater than 11% in 2023. And even over time, continuing to deliver double-digit margins, which we think puts us in the top quartile, even as the electrification portfolio is ramping up. And as just to the last question from Emmanuel, about how you can see the ramp up in the margin profile, which takes until 2024 to get to breakeven or better, it means that's being offset somewhere else in the portfolio. So we continue to expect to generate strong margins from our combustion business. Remember, the businesses that we're talking about keeping when it comes to combustion, the ones that are not looking to be disposed of at the moment, are those where we have product leaderships, that are continuing to drive outgrowth over this horizon, where we have strong margins and are generating cash flows. They're generating profitable growth. Those are the types of businesses we like at BorgWarner, and you can assume that that's what's underlying the piece of the combustion based portfolio that we continue to retain over this horizon.

Great. And then as a follow up, you're assuming in your forecast, 30% mix of EVs by 2030, we've obviously seen a number of automakers with much higher EV assumptions by 2030. So if there's more bullish EV penetration numbers materialize, how does this change the outlook? Is it that even if this -- and I think you're implying that even if the EV outlook accelerates, then your EV mix just goes up, you're well positioned to ride the wave, and there's not much of a concern. So if this accelerates, how does that impact the outlook?

So first of all, I would say that with 30%, at least from what I see, we are one of the supplier that is kind of bullish on EV. I think IHS is low 20s. And out of that 30% market, we're targeting 45% of our revenue in EV. And you will have customers that are going to be more bullish that we will serve. Some customers that are going to be less bullish that we will serve. Therefore, on average, you can't align with the most bullish customers because we're not going to let the others down. The business is a business of partnership. It's a business of partnership in combustion, bridging to partnership in electrification. That's how we see it.

So I'm going to take a couple more questions from the inbox. A couple of related questions around visibility on the M&A side. So could you maybe talk to -- let's take the question in two buckets. So on the acquisition side in terms of timing and visibility of the potential targets, while obviously integrating Delphi, we just announced AKASOL, what is your visibility and think thoughts on the timing of those initial next steps on the acquisition side? And then I'll ask another one on the divestiture side.

Well, first, we need to see AKASOL coming our way. Secondly, I would say that we have a pretty robust pipeline of M&A targets, both from a light vehicle and commercial vehicle standpoint. And the way we see it is that, first, as we mentioned before, we're never going to do something that would disturb the current integration of Delphi Technologies. Second, the targets that we alluded to are more single product, easier to integrate in essence. And it's -- as you know, it's not easy to be precise on the timing of an acquisition. But I would say that if the opportunity comes later this year, this is something that we would look at.

Yes. I would just add to that. I mean exactly to that point, I mean you can't time acquisitions. I think we had a question coming out of our last earnings call and after we announced AKASOL, why didn't you do that deal before your earnings call, so you could have announced it on your earnings call. And it's you can't time acquisitions that way. You pursue targets that fit your needs or what fits your long-term strategy and you execute those when they become available. So to that point, if something became available later this year that we were targeting from a capital perspective we're prepared to deploy that capital. But obviously, we have the next few years where we look to execute and we'll execute prudently to make sure any of the transactions we look to close on ultimately meet our return thresholds.

And maybe also to complement on that, we talked about the opportunities, the financials, but how are we managing this? And also a little personal story, the Delphi integration is my fourth integration I'm doing with BorgWarner, started with Haldex, then Remy, Sevcon and now Delphi Technologies. And we -- and these are not the only M&As we did within BorgWarner. But I see that we learned a lot. We roll out lessons learned. And I think we'll get more and more comfortable in this type of work. And I see it in me and my team. So I think also from the management's perspective, we are ready.

So about the divestiture side. What's -- the question here is, what's the visibility in terms of the ability to dispose of these assets? Are there buyers out there? I think it's the underlying question.

Yes. I mean, I would say, keep in mind, we still think these are good businesses. They're just businesses that don't tick one of the boxes that fits with the long-term financial profile we expect from our businesses. And so it just means they probably are better owned by someone else. So we have a good idea of what those product portfolios are likely to be and what will head down the path of in terms of a disposition strategy. In terms of whether there are potential buyers for these things, I would tell you, over the last 6 months, we've had a number of inbound inquiries from both strategic buyers, from potential financial buyers, who are actually looking at pieces of our portfolio and expressing an interest. So we do believe there is a market opportunity to execute value-creating transactions out there as we look to dispose of some of these businesses. Again, generally good businesses, just not part of our long-term financial profile of what we're looking for from our company, but probably a nice fit for what some other companies are looking for.

Maybe one more from the inbox, and I know we have a few more on the line. So Stefan, I often get, and I'm getting it again today, questions about some of the OEMs that have said they're going to do everything in-house. Can you maybe talk a little bit about those conversations with the OEMs that we don't call up by name but have spoken to their insourcing intentions. Just are you having conversations with those customers? What is the nature of those conversations? And what is your long-term outlook there?

Okay. So bear with me because that answer will be a little bit longer. And I know it is a big question. And we put a lot of effort into the numbers we put together and I presented earlier, and we took into consideration all these announcements. But there's a difference between an announcement and what's happening on the, let's say, in the engineering offices and when we talk to the customers. So I would structure this answer in 4 areas. It's about what is outsourced; it's about when is the time that this will be outsourced; it's about the where, where in the region, in the world, what region are we talking about; and then also a little bit about innovation we touched briefly earlier. So let's talk about the what. When we talk about outsourcing, and I'm looking at the electric drive unit, where you have a motor, a gearbox and a power electronics. You saw in the presentation, it varies. There are products, because of legacy know-how at the OEM because of other constraints they might have, there are products that are more prone to be insourced. And there are others where scale is much more important, like power electronics is the other based on the other end of the spectrum, where insourcing is very unlikely. So to say they're going to insource everything, what does that mean? And we hear a lot of insourcing, specially on batteries. And when we look at the drive module, it differs and there's a widespread of variety. And I want to give you one example. One of these customers who made this announcement on the same platform and it's a future platform, we will come out in a few years. They have the primary drive and the secondary drive. On the secondary drive, they buy a complete IDM and on the primary drive, they buy the motor and the gearbox, and they're doing the integration in-house because of their gearbox technology and because of their know how, how to integrate it into the vehicle. Let's come to the second point, the when. So when is the right moment to be insourced? It's not permanent and it's not constant over time. There are customers who say, I want to go in the beginning insource because I want to understand the new technology. And then over time, when I need scale, I go out outsourced. We talked earlier about build-to-print, build-to-spec, it can very well be the case in the beginning to do that, and it's fully understandable. And we started in -- on the combustion side, too. There were areas on the combustion side where the OEMs started in-house and then outsourcing. Also, I want to give you a very concrete example here. A European customer started insourcing their high-voltage motor. And today, we delivered this motor because the decision of the OEM was to outsource it. And the constraint we had is this is the room where our model is. And we won this business because we have a higher power density. So we are in the next-generation of this technology because we can bring in more power in the same room. And that went from insourcing to outsourcing. So -- and it depends over time. And now the volumes are skyrocketing. So we are taking care of the scale. Then, the where. Outsourcing does not mean it will be everywhere in the world. We are -- we have a global presence. This global presence allows us to support the customers who might want to insource in one region, to help them in another region so that they can keep their CapEx under control. And also, a very concrete example. A European OEM insources the complete drive unit when they're in Europe and outsources it in China. So there are examples for that. Last but not least, I would like to talk about innovation. In the automotive industry, a lot of innovation comes from the supply base. OEMs need that innovation. They are also innovative, but they need the innovation through the partnerships with the tier 1s. And that's what we can provide because we see the -- all the customers, we see all the needs, and they're looking to us for how are others doing. Is there something I'm missing? And they can get this through us and working with us. And as I mentioned earlier, the 3 programs that we announced recently, all have very innovative features, 800-volt silicon carbide or both. So that's -- sorry, long answer, but I want to make sure that -- it's not a straightforward answer. It's very complex. But the outcome is we see a significant addressable market for us, which drives that growth. And it's shown, as Fred mentioned earlier, we have more demand than we can handle. And so we have the choice. We are in a good spot that we can say, okay, that's another product that fits completely with our strategy. So no, we are not doing it because there's a lot of others.

Sharon, why don't we take the next question from the phone line?

Next question comes from Ryan Brinkman with JPMorgan.

Maybe just starting with some around disposition strategy. Relative to these businesses that you intend to dispose, are you able to share the margin profile of these parts of the company. I'm not sure if maybe they are higher margin, but lower growth, for example, given maybe less required research and development costs or maybe more fully amortized tooling, et cetera. And then curious to gauge your willingness also to pivot back to instead potentially retaining some of these businesses should cash and cash returns be attractive in comparison to the multiples, they might be able to command in the market, et cetera.

Yes, a couple of things. I'd say that as we look at these potential products that we're looking at for disposition, they don't all necessarily look the same or have the same financial attributes. Some might be growing quicker than others. Some might have stronger margin profiles than others that are just not growing the way we would expect at BorgWarner. So again, they're just not ticking all the boxes we look for as we look for the medium or longer-term financial profile for these products. So I'd say it's varying in terms of what these products look like. In terms of the disposition strategy, I mean, ultimately, we're going to look for value-maximizing transactions. We're not going to simply exit for the sake of exiting. We're going to look at how we best maximize shareholder value. But we do believe that these businesses are best owned by somebody else who has more of an interest in those types of portfolios than what we have. The recipe for success at BorgWarner is about profitable growth, which means you tick all those boxes, product leadership, outgrowth capability, margin and cash flow generation. And that's what we're looking for, whether it's a combustion-based portfolio or even as we transition towards the EV portfolio more aggressively. So if they don't tick all those boxes, they're candidates for disposition. Which means that probably somebody else in the market probably really values those products more so than we would at BorgWarner.

Okay. Helpful. And then just lastly for me on the CV side. It seemed like maybe there was more emphasis today on commercial vehicle electrification than previously. And I realize you're likely to make a number of acquisitions in coming years. But just curious if maybe the commercial vehicle side may see more attention from an M&A perspective. Whether maybe you may desire there to expand more quickly in this area, such as you just did with AKASOL, for example, but maybe, I don't know, more on the propulsion side, et cetera. Maybe just to check in on how transferable you think some of your light vehicle capabilities from an electrification perspective are into the commercial world, just given that your feature set appears to be relatively complete on the light vehicle side?

Yes. Maybe I'll ask Stefan to comment on the transferability. But in terms of the size of the acquisition potential, you can see we're already doing a pretty large-scale transaction here with the AKASOL deal that's scheduled to close here in the second quarter. And you can see from kind of the magnitude of the bars of what we're displaying on the charts in our presentation, that the additional acquisitions that we're contemplating right now or think might come to fruition are probably smaller than what we have than that AKASOL deal. And part of that's really just driven by where we think the addressable markets are going. I mean when you look at the light vehicle side, we're talking about magnitude of the addressable market in the places we play that's probably 3x what it is in commercial vehicle as you look out to 2030. But I wouldn't look at those bars either as constraining us. There's -- it's intentional that we're not quantifying the specifics of those bars other than saying that, hey, we think the acquisition potential here over the next few years is in that $2 billion to $3 billion ZIP code inclusive of AKASOL and a piece of which is probably CV. But could you see that shift between CV and light vehicle? Certainly. I wouldn't rule it out. But I think as we sit here today and think about it, we think there's probably, putting AKASOL aside, more opportunity from an M&A perspective on the ELV side than the ECV side, but I wouldn't rule it out either.

Yes. And on the transferability, Rod asked a question earlier about commercial vehicles. When you look at the battery, I think what AKASOL also brings us is the know-how of the battery and the flow of the electrons from the battery to the drive unit. And that is even a bigger system, we talked about the system of the electric drive unit, but it's even a bigger system. And then that opens up possibilities in the battery management area. Today, we are supplying battery management systems to customers on the light vehicle side. With this additional know-how, we will strengthen our position on the battery management side, and that is perfectly transferable between commercial vehicles and light vehicles.

Sharon, we're ready to take our last question from the phone line.

We have time for one final question and that question comes from Joseph Spak with RBC Capital Markets.

Maybe just to take a big step back, if we look at Slide 46. If I'm looking at this right, it looks like you're looking for 6% organic growth through 2025. And I think light vehicle market assumptions are low single digits. So that would put you below the mid-4% outgrowth you talked about. And then the same through 2030, Kevin, I know you mentioned like you just have that moving with the industry. But do you think Project CHARGING FORWARD keeps you on a mid-4s outgrowth in the second half of the decade?

Yes. I mean I think starting with the 2025, there's a lot of moving pieces in there between the acquisitions and the dispositions that start to convolute the math, I'll say, of the outgrowth. As we talk about the outgrowth we expect over the next few years, we think we're on track with what we've talked about previously. So there's no change there. As you look at 2025 to 2030, as I mentioned in my presentation this morning, it's about all we're assuming there right now is just for the mathematical illustration is that we simply move with the market, whether that's moving with the combustion market on our combustion products, the hybrid market on the hybrid products or the EV market on our EV products. And what that means is because we're significantly overweight already in 2025 EV and because EV is growing more quickly than those other subsets of the market, our total mathematical outgrowth from '25 to 2030 actually is big. It's probably -- I mean, it's a few percentage points. But we're outgrowing the market. But that's not because we're assuming we're outgrowing the market by driving product leadership, it's simply because we're assuming from '25 to '30, we move with the underlying combustion hybrid or electric market. Our expectation as we truly get to 2025 and look out toward 2030, is that we're going to continue to drive product leadership, which is going to continue to drive outgrowth, not just moving with the market. So even though there is embedded market outgrowth simply because of how the markets are moving, we would expect to do better from delivering a market outgrowth perspective because of the product leadership we'll drive then. But it's hard to tell where we're going to be truly in 2025 looking out to 2030 and how things are going to change. So we tried to keep the math simple for that 5-year period.

Okay. And then maybe just one on the margins, you maintain double-digit margins even with the EV investment. It doesn't sound like you're going to help us with when EVs could be not margin dilutive or even although it does maybe seem like maybe disposing some of these ICE assets could help the margin profile a little bit. But I guess I want to attack it from a different angle, which is -- and I know you have the Delphi synergies and some of that other stuff, but if you look even on Slide 25, like you're showing lower volumes or lower revenue from the combustion side. So to keep the margins overall, despite some of those headwinds you mentioned earlier at that double-digit level, can you talk a little bit about what's driving that? Is there a continued restructuring and optimization along with just sort of deal with some of the deleverage?

Well, if you look at the next few years, I mean, clearly, there's still restructuring going on, both the legacy Delphi Technologies restructuring that we're continuing to execute on and the legacy BorgWarner restructuring that we announced a little over a year ago that we're still executing on. Both of those things are supportive of our margin profile. And then on top of that, we're delivering on the cost synergies associated with the Delphi Technologies transaction, getting up to $175 million in cumulative cost synergies per year by the time we get out to 2023. So I think those things are both contributing at the end of the day. As you look at our portfolios that we're continuing to stay in from a combustion perspective, these, again, are portfolios where we have product leadership, we are continuing to outgrow the market over this medium-term horizon, and they're generating strong margin profiles. So I think the underlying core combustion businesses that we're retaining throughout this time period are those businesses that continue to sustain those strong margin profiles.

Yes. I guess I understand that you're outgrowing, but isn't it still a smaller business in 2025 and 2030 than it is today?

Yes. I mean you have to look at the combustion and the hybrid pieces combined, but there's a little bit of movement in terms of where the market is going. Obviously, the market is coming down a little bit. We're outgrowing that market, and we're continuing to deliver the performance in the underlying business. So we feel good about the margin profile we see of the businesses we're continuing to retain, which tend to, again, have outgrowth characteristics as well as strong margin profiles and cash flow generating ability.

Okay. Fred, I will turn the call back over to you for any closing remarks.

Thank you. Yes, I would say, talk does not electrify vehicles. It takes expertise, it takes scale. We talked about that. It takes network and customer intimacy. It also takes a lot of humility and courage of a great team, and we have each. We're now focusing on delivering and executing Project CHARGING FORWARD. I want to thank you for being with us today. And I hope to see you very, very soon face-to-face, and turn it back to you, Pat.

Thank you all for joining us today. With that, we're going to conclude our meeting. If you have any follow-ups, feel free to reach out to me or anyone on my team. Sharon, you can go ahead and disconnect the line.

That does conclude the BorgWarner Investor Day Virtual Meeting. You may now disconnect.