Future Generation Global Limited ($FGG)

Well, good morning, and welcome to the 11th Future Generation Global Limited Annual General Meeting. This is a hybrid meeting held both online and in person here at the Museum of Sydney. I would like to begin by acknowledging the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation and pay my respects to Elders past and present. Thank you for joining us and for your support of Future Generation Global. Before we begin, our disclaimer is displayed on the screen for you to read. I am Jennifer Westacott AC, Chair of the Board of Directors. Joining me today in person are my fellow Board members, Adelaide McDonald, Kiera Grant, Kate Thorley and Geoff Wilson AO. Joining us online is Hanna Ebeling. As announced this morning, I would like to acknowledge the recent retirement of directors, Sarah Morgan and Geoffrey R. Wilson. Both have served the company with exceptional dedication, generosity and a deep commitment to stewardship for 10 and 7 years, respectively. I extend my sincere gratitude for their outstanding contribution and acknowledge Geoff your presence here today, and thank you for all you've done for Future Generation Global. We're joined today by Lee Hopperton, Future Generation's Chief Investment Officer; Bonnie Ashton, Future Generations General Manager; Sandra McIntosh, the Joint Company Secretary from Acclime Australia; and Chris Chandran, a representative from our Auditor, Pitcher Partners Sydney. Chris will be available to address any questions relating to the company's financial statement. Joe Camilleri, Director of Finance at Wilson Asset Management will moderate today's meeting and assist with questions received both online and in person. As a hybrid meeting, today's format allows participation from shareholders attending virtually and here in person at the Museum of Sydney, a model we hope enhances accessibility and engagement. Again, thank you for joining us. This morning, we are all here to support a truly unique investment model, one which provides solid financial returns for our shareholders, while simultaneously helping to address the youth mental health crisis. Today, I'll provide an update on the company's financial performance beginning with the share price to net tangible assets discount narrowing significantly to 0.1% discount as at the April 30, 2026. We'll also talk about the successful active management of the portfolio, resulting in strong investment performance and the delivery of both a final and special fully franked dividend to investors. Following this, I will discuss how we have achieved our social impact objectives making our tenth annual donation of $6.6 million to our social impact partners who are supporting the mental health and well-being of young Australians. As it is 11:30 a.m. and a quorum is present, I declare the meeting open. The Notice of Meeting has been circulated to shareholders and in the absence of any objection, I'll be proceeding on the basis that the notice has been taken as read. I encourage you to read the Chair's address announced to the ASX. Shareholders who have logged into the webcast with your username and password will have the opportunity to submit questions online and to ask audio questions as well as vote on the resolutions. If you are joining us online, questions can be submitted at any time. For those shareholders joining us online who wish to ask a verbal question, an audio questions facility is available during the meeting. For those shareholders joining us in person, please raise your hand and wait for the microphone to be brought to you. Voting today will be conducted by way of a poll on all items of business. When I open the poll, the voting icon will appear on the navigation bar. Simply select one of the options to cast your vote. If you change your mind, select another option. I now declare voting open on all items of business. You can vote at any time during the proceedings until I declare the voting closed. I will give you a clear prompt later in the meeting to warn you of the close of voting. In 2025, the company reported another year of solid financial performance for shareholders. We are pleased the share price discount to NTA has narrowed significantly over the past 12 months from a share price discount to NTA of 18.1% in January 2025 to 11.6% in December 2025. We've continued this momentum and the share price has moved towards NTA parity, most recently trading at 0.1% discount as at the April 30, 2026. We also delivered a total shareholder return of 16.2%, including franking credits for shareholders and have continued strong share price performance through a volatile period. The investment portfolio increased 11.5% during the year and 18.1% on average per annum over the last 3 years. In 2025, Future Generation Global made our tenth annual donation of $6.6 million to our social impact partners, bringing our total social investments since inception to $50.5 million. We are deeply grateful to our fund managers, service providers and directors and Investment Committee members who collectively waived $12 million in fees in 2025, or around 1.9% of our net assets exceeding the annual donation to our social impact partners. The company's strong financial position has allowed us to increase the fully franked full year dividend to $0.08 per share, together with a special fully franked dividend of $0.03 per share, bringing the total dividends payable for 2025 to $0.11 per share. When including the $0.03 per share special fully franked dividend, this represents a fully franked dividend yield of 7.2% and a grossed-up dividend yield of 10.3%, which is significantly higher than the global equity market yield and the average U.S. equity market yield. The company has increased its dividend every year for the past 7 years, demonstrating the sustainability of the company's structure and strong financial position. Since inception, the company has paid $0.544 per share in dividends to shareholders when including the value of franking credits. We currently have 8.9 years of dividend coverage with a profit reserve of $0.715 per share. Global markets have continued to experience high levels of index concentration in 2025 and into 2026, particularly in the U.S. market, driven by the strong performance of megacap technology companies and improvements in AI. The Future Generation Global investment portfolio remains underweight America and overweight Europe with a bias towards small and mid-cap companies to reduce concentration risk and deliver better-than-market returns over the medium to long term with lower than market volatility. Our investment portfolio performance has increased 6.7% per annum over the last 5 years, and 9.2% per annum since inception with less volatility than the market and is a testament to the quality and expertise of our pro bono fund managers and our Investment Committee. We shall now conduct the formal part of the meeting. There are 5 items of business for the AGM today as set out in the Notice of Meeting. Four items are to be voted on. The Notice of Meeting and explanatory memorandum was circulated to shareholders, and in the absence of any objection, I will take -- I will be proceeding on the basis that these items are taken as read. Boardroom are the returning officers for today's meeting and will conduct our poll. I further note, Resolution 1 is subject to voting exclusions as outlined in the Notice of Meeting. The Board recommends approval of each resolution, and as Chair, I will be voting on all open votes provided to me for each resolution. We will advise the ASX as soon as the results are determined, which will be later today. You may submit any questions or comments you have on financial statements and reports now. The first item of business is to receive and consider the financial statements, the director's report and the auditor's report for the company for the year ended December 31, 2025. Chris Chandran, a representative of our audit partner, Pitcher Partners Sydney is present to answer any questions. No resolution is required on this matter. We will now pause and allow for any questions. If you are joining us online today, please send them through the question function or request to speak. Firstly, do we have any questions in the room? David?

Thank you, Chair. David Kingston. Look, firstly, congratulations on the charitable nature of the entity. Geoff, I think you were instrumental in founding it, so well done. I think it's been a great vehicle. Look, my first question relates to the performance of the investment portfolio. Page 13 of the annual report shows past 5 years the performance was 8.7% per annum compared to MSCI of 14.4%, so a deficit of 5.7%. And to look further since inception, the performance has been 9.9% per annum versus MSCI of 12.2%, so a deficit of 2.3%. Look, clearly, this is a fund of funds with the funds managers selected by the Investment Committee. As you said, Chair, one of the issues has been that the entity has been underweight U.S.A. and heavily, heavily underweight Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta and Tesla. Good to see the Investment Committee is proactive. You've made changes to the funds. You've included GCQ, you've included Langdon, Fairlight and increased in Vinva. You've exited Caledonia, reduced Ellerston, reduced Paradice and Cooper and Templeton. So my first question is to Kiera as Chair of the Investment Committee, if that's the right Chair. Page 22 of the Annual Report states: The investment portfolio aims to deliver better-than-market returns over the long term. I think that's fine, Kiera. It's wrong to look 1 year, 2 years, 3 years. But as I've mentioned, your own report states since inception, you are significantly under the index. So my question is, do you still consider that the entity can turn around and finally beat the index when statistics show that most funders underperform the index?

Sure. Sorry, do you have that page open? So what page was that?

The performance stats on Page 13 of the Annual Report and the quote is Page 22 of the Annual Report.

Lee, if that's okay?

Yes, sure. Thanks for the question and for pointing out those numbers. And you're right, we have made some changes to the portfolio over the last little while. The objective of the portfolio is to deliver returns with a lower volatility than the market and that's done through diversification, both at the fund manager level and, therefore, at the underlying stock level. We've been through many years now of a very concentrated market where not only have markets been concentrated by market cap into a large number -- a small number of companies, but also performance has also been driven by a small number of companies. Our portfolio is tilted towards being more diversified, having more smaller and medium-sized companies. That's partly a risk management tool because obviously, if those large companies experience a problem, that's going to have an impact on absolute returns. So the fact that we've been absent in some of those larger names to the same extent as the market and have had a bigger position in some of the smaller companies has impacted the relative performance. If you look at it against -- our performance against the small and medium-size index, it's been much more comparable.

But Lee, you've chosen -- the company has chosen the comp of MSCI, that's not my choice. So I'm reading out the comps versus what you've chosen. Secondly, I accept that your volatility is slightly below the index, but that's pretty marginally. But I would appreciate Chair, if the Chair of the Investment Committee, Kiera, which is the crucial thing, there's 2 entities here. There's the Board of Directors and these Investment Committee. I think the Investment Committee is the key one.

Sorry, to be clear, Lee is the full-time executive, but I'm happy to answer your questions.

I accept that, Kiera, but you are just there as a director. You are also on the Investment Committee. And you are Chair. Ultimately as Chair, along with the Board, you have the power to hire or fire the funds managers. So I'd just be interested in your view, do you think this entity, which has underperformed since inception, do you think it can finally turn around and beat the index?

Look, I would argue that the decision I was Chair when we had the decision that we had Caledonia, we had 3 managers that we decided to reduce exposure to. And that decision was not taken lightly. And the decision, particularly with Caledonia was that we felt it was just too concentrated. And I don't know if we'd run the numbers, how that would have performed if we had included them, but you do bring them up as one of the ones that we -- I think it was a positive contributor to decide to withdraw from that fund. So I do believe that we are in a much better position now with a far broader exposure to the market than where we've been.

Kiera, you're a politician. It's a very simple question. Do you believe...

I said, I think we're in a much better position...

But do you believe you can actually beat the index going forward? Simple question.

We're certainly aiming to do that.

Do you think you can?

Yes, I think we can.

Okay. Look, my second question Chair on the opening item, I have some questions later on. Look, as the annual report correctly points out -- it's a good annual report. It's a lot of transparency. It's got some good details, so well done. As it correctly points out, NTA is very important. And as you correctly point out, Chair, the company has done well and that it's narrowed the gap considerably to NTA. So that's great. Adelaide knows that I'm a big one for discounts to NTA with my friend, Rob Luciano. But my second question is that, and it's similar to the Wilson Funds. It's really hard, Chair, to assess this metric because if I want to know the NTA of FGG in May, you know what, I've got to wait until the 14th of June. Now I know Geoff and Kate, that's their practice, but in my view, it's poor practice because the majority of LICs are either daily or weekly. There's very, very few that are monthly. And I know you're independent of Wilson, but albeit there's an association. But I'd just ask on you, Chair, would you give a commitment that you will introduce weekly NTA?

Well, let me hand over to Lee and get him to answer that as to our rationale for that.

It would be great, but it's structurally impossible for us to do because we rely on the pricing of the fund managers in whom we invested and not all of them are daily priced, which means we have to wait until we get the monthly price -- sorry, the weekly price or the monthly price from them when it's published and then build up the unit price from that. So it would be good to be able to do it, but it's not possible.

Look, that may be the case certainly, but again, I think it's something that Geoff and Kate have, they have monthly NTAs, which is quite unusual. But maybe you can ask those Funds Managers if you could get weekly.

I will take it on board to try and get the frequency as fast as possible, but we...

I think we can certainly give a commitment to try and look at ways of increasing frequency. But I think obviously you've got some structural issues there. But let us at least respond to that.

Particularly in a volatile market where your NTA can go up and down easily 5%, 10% in a month. And you're quite correctly in the annual report. It's a good annual report. You quite correctly point out NTA is a very important issue, correct? But you're asking your shareholders and investors to fly blind because sometimes it's 6 weeks in arrears before they can get the NTA. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. Are there any questions online? Or are there questions in the room first? And then questions online? Thank you, Joe. There being no further questions, we come to the items of business for which a vote is required. Resolution 1 relates to the adoption of the remuneration report. You may submit any questions or comments you have on Resolution 1 now. The proxies received are on the screen. For the open proxies, which have been granted to me as Chair, I will be voting in favor of the resolution. We will now pause for any questions. Are there any questions in the room? David?

Thank you. Look, Chair, Geoff Wilson, thankfully, there's only 2 Geoff. One Geoff Wilson now after the previous 1 resigned. But Geoff is a key management personnel. So under the rem report, he qualifies. Geoff, we all admire you, a great guy, larger than life, bang, bang, bang. I'd just be interested in your view, though, Geoff, the performance of Future Generation is similar to your own LIC WAM Global. They're both similarly underweight U.S. and similarly underweight the Mag Seven, which has meant -- contributed to underperformance relative to the index. But Geoff, a very simple question. I appreciate your insight to help shareholders -- multiple choice to make it easier. Can you clarify which is the preferred investment option? Number one, Future Generation? Option 2 is WAM Global? Option 3 is punting on Geoff Wilson's amazing horse Queen Regent, which won last week at the odds of 150-1. Thank you.

Hi, Chair, are you passing it to me?

I believe I am.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the question, David. And thank you very much for coming along. And again, thank you for being a shareholder of Future Generation Global. I may be wrong, but I understand you own 310 shares. I assume that's a tongue-in-cheek question because if we knew that the Queen Regent, which was $151, if it was going to win, then it wouldn't have been 150 to 1, and if the trainer thought it was going to win, it wouldn't have been 150 to 1 either. And obviously, I can't give financial advice, but it's all about what people want. Do you want maximum high return with maximum risk, then probably #1 is a horse in a horse race. If you want to have less risk, then you have a less diversified portfolio, and that's probably when WAM Global comes in. If you want less risk again, then you have a more diversified portfolio that Lee and Kiera already mentioned. So I mean, that's how I'd like to put it. And now in terms of -- with what the government is doing, if you want to overlay the changes in capital gains tax, then if you look at what Matt Barrie was quoted in the Australian, I think, a couple of days ago, he was saying, he is a high -- sorry, a technology founder. He was saying, you're better off punting on the horses than investing in start-ups in Australia. So here is a slightly different view. So does that answer your question?

Just a brief follow-up. Look, you're right, Geoff, I have a tiny holding here, again, because the performance is under the index. So I'm happy to buy the ETF in MSCI at 10 basis points and get superior performance, or MFF or L1 or whatever. So delighted to open the shoulders and by plenty if the performance goes up. So -- but thank you for answering that multiple choice question.

And can I just ask you a question because you've got an enormous amount of experience. So you're of the view that over the next few years, that the Magnificent Seven are going to drive all the performance or the majority of the performance in global markets again?

Look, I tend to agree with your positioning at the moment. I think you've been too early both in WAM Global and also in Future. You've been too early. But from today onwards, Geoff, I think your positioning, I would prefer to be in WAM Global and apart from the fees, but also Future Generation given your positioning is being underweight at the Mag Seven. So I think that's a sensible position today.

Thank you, David. Any other questions in the room? Joe, do we have any questions online? As there are no further questions or comments, I now put the motion that the resolution be approved as set out in the Notice of Meeting. If you are a shareholder or a proxy holder and eligible to vote, could you now please complete your vote for Resolution 1? [Voting]

Resolution 2 relates to the election of Director, Hanna Ebeling. Hanna, would you like to make a short speech on your election as Director for Future Generation Global, and welcome Hanna.

Yes. Thank you, Chair. Good morning to fellow directors and shareholders. It is a privilege to be joining you today from Gadigal Country as to consider my election to the Future Generation Global Board. My career has moved across what people often describe as 2 worlds, traditional finance and the social impact sector. I started in global private banking at HSBC before joining Liechtenstein Global Trust's venture philanthropy arm in the Philippines, supporting social enterprises across Southeast Asia. That period truly reshaped how I think about capital less as an end in itself and more as a tool that can be deliberately designed for social outcomes. Since 2019, I have been CEO of Sefa, a leading Australian impact investment intermediary and also responsible for our sister organization Sefa Partnerships, an entrepreneurial charity. We provide flexible finance and tailored advice to community-led organizations doing essential work. So why Future Generation Global? Future Generation sits squarely at the intersection of where I have spent my career, and it is a model I find genuinely compelling. It takes investment seriously, and it takes impact seriously. Fund Managers waiving their fees so that 1% of net tangible assets flows to organizations supporting youth mental health is not a gesture of goodwill. It is intentionally embedded in the structure itself. What I hope to bring to the Board is a dual lens shaped by working across both investment and philanthropy. And how I think about long-term investment performance, sustainable growth in funds under management and the alignment between commercial discipline and social outcomes. Youth mental health is one of the defining challenges of our time, and I will hold the responsibility with the care and rigor deserves. I'm grateful for the trust the Board has shown in nominating me, and I would value your support in confirming this appointment today. Thank you.

Thank you, Hanna. You may submit any questions or comments you have on Resolution 2 now. The proxies received are on the screen. For the open proxies, which have been granted to me as Chair, I will be voting in favor of the resolution. We will now pause for any questions. Do we have any questions in the room? David?

Yes. Look, it sounds like you are South African, which we all respect them, they're smart people. I'm just interested in -- quite often, we split our investments and our charitable contributions, and it's fantastic that this company does a bit of both. So well done. But I'm just interested, do you have any stats that indicate the relative results of impact investors compared to clinical unadulterated, unfettered for-profit investors. Sometimes I find that the impact investors underperform what people who are motivated solely by profit. But I'd just appreciate if you could give us some guidance on that?

Yes, sure. I'm actually originally from Germany, but I assume that doesn't change the questions. I'm very happy to answer that. So obviously, the Future Gen model looks at their commercial performance and then the philanthropic component. So it's a duality of total return. And I would say that impact investing, there's other forms that also combine them at the same time where you're looking to create the value through the social outcomes in addition to the commercial return. So it really depends on what value you put on the social return and the Future Gen case, it's very clear. It's the 1% on paper, but it ultimately comes down to every individual, what's the personal attachment they've got to that, I guess, financial value equivalent of the social impact. So you can't -- I would say my personal view is, you can't necessarily measure it in the same way as the financial return.

Are there any other questions in the room? Do we have any questions online? As there are no further questions or comments, I now put the motion that Ms. Ebeling be elected as set out in the Notice of Meeting. If you are a shareholder or a proxy holder and eligible to vote, could you now please complete your vote on Resolution 2? [Voting]

Resolution 3 relates to the reelection of myself as Director, and as such, I will call on Geoff Wilson AO, to handle this resolution.

Look, thank you very much, Jennifer. Jennifer, do you want to say a few words, actually, just about your reelection.

So thank you, Geoff. And look, it's been a great privilege to chair Future Generation Global. Many of you know my background, I have a long history in both business and in public policy and government. I was the longest serving Chief Executive of the Business Council of Australia, on the board of Wesfarmers Limited for over 12.5 years. I serve on the board of a large Canadian utilities company now, Canadian Utilities Fund and ATCO Australia. I'm a special adviser to KPMG and was a partner at KPMG. I'm also the Chancellor of Western Sydney University and some other government roles, including the Governance Board of the Reserve Bank. I'm very committed to this model. It's what I call the double dividend model, a strong, stable investment model, and a unique model that delivers funding to a crucial area of need, youth mental health. I'm also very committed to the way we have gone about working with our not-for-profit partners to allow them to grow and expand and indeed measure the social impact that they're having and the well-being they're creating in this very urgent crisis that we have in Australia on youth mental health. We're very proud of the results we have delivered for you last year. We're very pleased to have been able to pay a special dividend. And most pleasing for me has been the movement of the share price towards NTA parity. You can be assured that we will continue to serve your interest to deliver strong returns and continue our commitment and investment in youth mental health, an absolutely vital part of improving the social fabric of our society. Thank you, Geoff.

Great. Look, thank you very much, Jennifer. Do we have any questions in the room for Jennifer? David?

Look, Jennifer, obviously a long and extremely distinguished career. So everyone has a lot of respect for you. However, you don't seem to have any experience, direct experience with global funds managers. So perhaps you could just clarify how are you as the Chair of the company controlling and ensuring that the results for shareholders are optimized. Obviously, it's partly Lee, it's partly Kiera, who is Chair of the Independent Committee. You've got the ability, the benefit of investment services contract with Wilson's, which I think is now $500,000 a year. But how are you drawing all those different people together to ensure that you're optimizing the investment performance?

Yes, thank you for the question. It's a good one. And the Board certainly takes that responsibility very seriously, and we see it's the responsibility of the Board to ensure the oversight of the performance of the funds, the oversight of the performance of the share price as well as the oversight of the distribution of the 1% to our not-for-profit partners. So we see this as a shared responsibility. I've spent a fair bit of time really understanding how the LICs work and how the global funds management system works. But you can be assured that we take that responsibility as a collective very seriously, and we have tremendous expertise sitting around the board table that we access and utilize. And of course, we brought on Lee Hopperton, who I think has done a fantastic job at both the -- on the investment side as well as the interaction with our shareholders.

So how are you finding it at the moment? Do you think it's some enormous science with these ingenious managers who know exactly what's going to happen? Or is it one hell of a big casino?

Look, I wouldn't describe it as a casino. I think as Lee described and as Kiera described, we have tried to get that balanced portfolio to get that portfolio, certainly on the investment side, on the funds management side, that's less subject to volatility, and we've worked very, very hard this year to close that discount rate to NTA. And so I think it's not a casino. I mean, obviously, we're operating in a very volatile market and a very volatile system at the moment. But you can be assured that we're very, very focused. And to your question to Hanna, we are absolutely committed to making sure that both the share value and the investment portfolio perform well because we don't believe that the model is sustainable over time to deliver the social dividend if we do not. And so you can be sure that the bulk of the conversation around that table is a conversation about performance of the shares and particularly on that discount rate to NTA and the performance of the funds management.

And David, thanks for your question. And I know you did comment a little bit about the fee that Wilson Asset Management get. Just so you're aware, Wilson Asset Management actually both Future Gen entities cost us from a profit perspective because we pay for the people that work there. So -- and just to clarify that. Do we have any other questions in the room? Any questions online?

Yes, Geoff. There is one question. It's not directed specifically at an individual director, but Mr. David Horton asked how many directors on the Board are qualified with the AICD?

How many are qualified? It looks like pretty much everyone. We're just not sure about Hanna. So everyone who is in the room. So everyone on the board. In terms of the proxies that we've received, if you -- look, we've got them on the screen there. For the open proxies that have been granted to me as Chair, I'll be voting in favor of the resolution. So we've done a lot of questions. I now put the motion that Ms. Westacott be reelected as set out in the Notice of Meeting. If you are a shareholder or proxy holder and eligible to vote, could you please complete your vote for Resolution 3? [Voting]

I'll now pass back to Jennifer. Thank you.

Thank you, Geoff. Resolution 4 relates to the reelection of Director, Kate Thorley. Kate, would you like to make a short speech on your reelection as a Director of Future Generation Global?

Thanks, Jennifer. And good morning, everyone. I am Kate Thorley, and I'm standing for election today as a Director of Future Gen Global. Hopefully, I've spoken to a lot of you over the years. But for those of you who I don't know, I have been at Wilson Asset Management now just over 20 years, and for the last decade as CEO. I'm a qualified accountant and so bring financial accounting and corporate governance experience to the Board. I often talk about my career highlight being the launch of the first Future Gen vehicle with Geoff when we traveled around Australia raising the first pool of capital for FGX and the stories of the Social Impact Partners as a mother of twins, they do stay with you because there's a lot of young Australians that need a lot of support from a mental health perspective but also from disadvantage on the FGX side. So I'm really proud of what Future Gen has been able to achieve on the social impact side. I also am very passionate about retail investors at Wilson Asset Management. And with the Future Gen team, we do spend an enormous amount of time engaging with shareholders and advocating on behalf of a lot of retail investors speaking with you on the phone and meeting you at road shows, et cetera, is something that I really enjoy as part of my role. And I think those insights of spending a lot of time with shareholders and understanding what they look for in their investments is another really important part that I think I bring to the Board. So I do currently sit on the Audit and Risk Committee, and I really hope that I can continue to do so with your support.

You may submit any questions or comments you have on Resolution 4 now. The proxies received are on the screen. For the open proxies, which have been granted to me as Chair, I'll be voting in favor of the resolution. We will now pause to allow for any questions. Do we have any questions in the room? David?

Thank you, Chair. Geoff Wilson said to me before the meeting, he enjoyed my questions. So I had to ask a question on every resolution. So I'm just complying with your request, Geoff. Look, Kate, it's a pleasure to meet you today. I don't think I've met you before, but you're the second most boarded Executive Director in Australia behind Geoff. I think you're on 9 boards, but it's pretty streamlined. But I do have a serious question for you, Kate. There is a big difference between -- a few differences between WAM Global and this Future company. Obviously, this is a fund of funds. But in terms of investment profile, there is a big difference in that WAM Global, I believe, is primarily long only, which is fine. This company, which is fine also, it gives people choice. So that's good, is a bit different in that it is 53% long-only, it is 19% absolute bias, and it is 16% cumulative -- quantitative strategies. The balance is cash. I don't have a problem with that. But Kate, bearing in mind your experience on 9 boards and you obviously know WAM Global well. Could you clarify for shareholders why this future entity has taken a different approach and is moving away from long-only? Obviously, that's diversification. But I'd just be interested, I'm sure people would, in your view, about the relative merits of long-only compared to absolute compared to quantitative. Thank you. You are a director, come on.

No, I'm not quite sure what the question is. As in -- so sorry, you wanting me to comment on WAM Global's portfolio versus Future Gen's portfolio? Or do you mean the composition of the types of managers and because that's been an investment committee. In terms of the strategy, the investment committee strategy sets the bands of the weightings of the various managers per their style.

Yes. Look, they're obviously very different, long-only is long-only. Absolute bias, it's very different. Your 19% absolute bias and quantitative strategies. You've got all sorts of algorithms and whatever it's 16%. So it's a huge difference from a long-only fund. I'm just giving you the stats out of your own annual report, which, again, I congratulate you. I think it's got a lot of good information in it. So thank you. I'm just interested in you as a very experienced director and just giving us your thoughts about the relative merits of those 3 different types of investment strategy.

Okay. I mean what I would say in terms of for Future Gen and as I said, talking to a lot of shareholders, and I think hats off to Lee and the team, they've done a lot of work on simplifying the message around what this investment vehicle does return for shareholders in terms of the look through underlying exposures. So I think when we've looked at the portfolio, and for that long-term investment strategy for retail investors, having a group of not just long-only managers but combining it with absolute and the quants provides that further diversification away from purely one manager with long-only, which is similar to what Geoff was saying earlier with WAM Global. So in terms of wanting to provide strong returns with lower than market volatility, that's how the Board and the Investment Committee have come up with the, I guess, the investment strategy in terms of which managers creating those -- each of those 3 styles.

Maybe Lee can comment because I think it's an important issue. I'm not sure that every shareholder is focused on the fact that you've split into these 3 very different style of investment management. So appreciate some clarification.

So the 3 buckets are quite broad, but they have very different risk and return profiles. So the long-only managers typically relative to the market, more likely to be focused in the companies, which represent a larger portion of the index that there -- that they're investing against. The absolute managers is a broad range of managers. Some simply can hold more cash than others. Some are long short, some -- so they have very different investment profiles. And again, the quant managers typically very highly diversified, probably have slightly different factors that drive their performance. So ultimately, that blend leads to what we think is the optimal diversification for the moment. But this isn't something that we come up with around a board table or an investment committee table just by chatting. We have a bunch of tools which are supplied by some of our pro bono managers, which help us to figure out where the factors that drive the portfolio are positioned, and to decide on the appropriate mix at a point in time.

And do you think that split is going to stay relatively similar going forward? Or do you think that's going to move around a bit?

Expected to move around a bit.

Within those 3 asset classes that we moved in. So for instance, quantitative, we've moved up to the upper end of that. Sorry, Dave, while I've got -- given this is obviously a hot topic for you. Page 57, just to give you greater insight into how the Investment Committee operates. We've detailed all the members of the IC. You'll see that Adelaide and I are both members, but we're the only 2 directors. The rest of the committee is populated by executives, full-time executives who work for either Lonsec, JANA, ex-Morningstar, they're all experienced individuals who do this for their day jobs in addition to the oversight that we provide in a governance perspective as well.

I appreciate that. And I was aware the Investment Committee is generally apart from you too, quite different from the Board of Directors. So I think that's good.

Thank you very much. Are there any questions online? As there are no further questions or comments, I now put the motion that Ms. Thorley be reelected as set out in the Notice of Meeting. If you are a shareholder or proxy holder and eligible to vote, could you now please complete your vote for Resolution 4? [Voting]

I now declare the poll closed and formally charge Boardroom to count the votes. The results of today's AGM will be released to the market as soon as they are determined, which will be later today. As there is no other formal business for the meeting, I declare this AGM closed. In closing, I'd like to thank our incredible pro bono fund managers, service providers, the investment committee members, my fellow directors and Wilson Asset Management for their generosity, their expertise, passion and commitment to Future Generation Global. I would like to thank our social impact partners for their extraordinary work supporting young people, their families and our broader community. Dedication continues to inspire our work to address one of the most pressing issues facing our society today. As mentioned at the start of today's meeting, Sarah Morgan and Geoffrey R. Wilson have decided not to stand for reelection as directors at this Annual General Meeting. We thank them for their significant contribution to Future Generation Global Board. I would like to acknowledge our new Director, Hanna Ebeling, CFA, whose experience across the financial and philanthropic sector will be an asset to Future Generation's Board. Ms. Ebeling will be joining the Audit and Risk Committee; and Adelaide McDonald has been appointed to Chair the Audit and Risk Committee. Ms. McDonald has almost 2 decades of experience in corporate advisory and equity research and significant expertise in listed investment companies. The Future Generation Global Board is confident that robust and effective governance frameworks are in place. The Board is comprised of 5 highly experienced directors and has an independent Chair, each bringing relevant and complementary expertise and a strong commitment to safeguarding the company's long-term interest while delivering on its investment and social impact objectives. In February 2025, Lee Hopperton was appointed as Chief Investment Officer, and we thank him for the excellent work he has been doing. His appointment has significantly strengthened the company's investment capabilities and supports the next phase of growth. Following the resignation of CEO, Caroline Gurney, in February 2026, Bonnie Ashton, who is here today was appointed as the Company's General Manager. Bonnie brings extensive experience in investor and stakeholder engagement as well as philanthropic strategy. Finally and most importantly, I thank you, our shareholders, for your ongoing support. You are critical to proving that we can achieve investment and social returns together. Thank you all for joining us today. Thank you.