Title

Presentation

ICU Medical, Inc. beats earnings expectations. Reported EPS is $1.97, expectations were $1.78.

Operator: Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to today’s ICU Medical, Inc. First Quarter 2026 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Also, please note that today’s event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Deirdre Thomson with ICR. Please go ahead.

Deirdre Thomson: Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us to discuss ICU Medical’s financial results for the first quarter of 2026. On the call today representing ICU Medical is Vivek Jain, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman; and Brian Bonnell, Chief Financial Officer. We wanted to let everyone know that we have a presentation accompanying today’s prepared remarks. To view the presentation, please go to our Investor page and click on Events Calendar, and it will be under the First Quarter 2026 Events. Before we start our prepared remarks, I want to touch upon any forward-looking statements made during the call, including beliefs and expectations about the company’s future results. Please be aware they are based on the best available information to management and assumptions that are reasonable.

Such statements are not intended to be a representation of future results and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Future results may differ materially from management’s current expectations. We refer all of you to the company’s SEC filings for more detailed information on the risks and uncertainties that have a direct bearing on operating results and financial position. Please note that during today’s call, we will also discuss non-GAAP financial measures, including results on an adjusted basis. We believe these financial measures can facilitate a more complete analysis and greater transparency into ICU Medical’s ongoing results of operations, particularly when comparing underlying results from period to period. We’ve also included a reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures in today’s press release and provide as much detail as possible on any addendums that are added back.

And with that, it’s my pleasure to turn the call over to Vivek.

Vivek Jain: Thanks, Deirdre. Good afternoon, everyone, and we know it’s a busy earnings day, so we’ll try to be as brief as possible. I’ll walk through our Q1 revenue and earnings performance and provide some commentary on the businesses and then turn it over to Brian, who will recap the full Q1 results and explain our current view of how we can manage this year’s new macro events. After that, I’ll come back with a few comments on where we are on our near-term goals, our mission of creating a comprehensive infusion therapy company and our capital allocation strategy. Revenue for Q1 was $526 million for total company growth of 1% on an organic basis or minus 12% reported. And as a reminder, the reported results are impacted by the mid-2025 creation of the Otsuka ICU Medical joint venture and resulting deconsolidation of IV Solutions from our income statement.

Gross margins increased sequentially and were above 41%, driven by overall mix in our infusion businesses. Adjusted EBITDA was $99 million and adjusted EPS was $1.97. Free cash flow was strong, and there was no real change in net leverage. The broader demand and utilization environment in Q1 was previewed on the last call. The sharp flu spike in late 2025 did soften January, but volumes returned to expected levels from February onwards and feels fine through today. The capital environment is status quo, and it does appear investments that customers need to get done are getting done. Currency continues to move around a bit with the Mexican peso at elevated levels this year. Getting to our businesses more specifically. Our consumables business grew 5% in Q1 reported and 2% organic.

As previewed on the February call, like prior years, Q1 revenues were down sequentially and in line with our expectations as we knew the changing environment from December to January. For Q2, we would expect growth rates to return to our historical levels. Our IV Systems business grew 8% reported and 6% organic, and it was again a record quarter in pumps. Dedicated sets generally follow the same trend as consumables and capital sales were strong through the quarter. For Q2 and the near term, we would expect organic growth to continue at this rate or above while absorbing the previously mentioned OEM wind down. Just wrapping up the businesses, Vital Care decreased 14% on an organic basis and decreased 59% reported due to the deconsolidation of IV Solutions.

We’ve mostly wrapped up the work described on the last call of discontinuing certain SKUs as we had more contractual or operational flexibility with the largest impact of this felt now in Q1. I’ll come back with an example of this shortly. We believe we should see sequential stability to improvement organically here and continue to believe the right revenue assumption for the near term is flat to slightly down in the face of our decisions to improve profitability. I wanted to close the business unit commentary with some updates on the different product development initiatives within the company. As we’ve mentioned more recently, we’ve been increasing the volume of new 510(k) submissions for our consumables offerings where the innovation is more incremental and intended to create new adjacent niches.

Last year, we received a new 510(k) for our core MicroClave and Neutron needle-free connectors, which updated our label with recent favorable published evidence in infection control. In Q1, we received 2 additional 510(k) clearances, which were some of the images that have been highlighted in our investor deck. First, we received approval for an adjacent product in our oncology line that bonds our market-leading Clave needle-free connectors to access ports and empty non-PVC, non-DEHP IV bags. The second is a 510(k) for a revised disinfection cap, which complements our existing SwabCap portfolio and provides customers with another product to assist in infection control and accessing needle-free connectors. Both thematically aligned with our effort to add safety to each step in the infusion delivery workflow and are examples of the singles and doubles we need to consistently hit for continued long-term growth in consumables.

On Infusion Systems, in Q1, we received FDA approval on the latest version of our LifeShield safety software. This version includes new enhancements for improved analytics and reporting plus features to improve the experience for our large enterprise customers and to add safety in each step in the infusion delivery workflow. However, it’s going to take a little bit more time to get the clearances on the new hardware platforms as the FDA is appropriately elevating testing requirements for new infusion pump submissions. Specifically, regarding the new Medfusion and CADD hardware submissions, the FDA is seeking additional testing data, which in plain English for us means a larger sample size across a larger number of set configurations. We believe the increased testing is a result of the FDA continuing to raise the bar to ensure improved safety in the Infusion pump landscape.

Nothing about the additional testing relates to the core product technology around its mechanism, usability, human factors, et cetera. The testing the FDA is asking us to do is standard. It’s just a larger volume that takes some time to complete. Our current strategy is to prioritize finishing the testing first on Medfusion and then on to CADD. As context over the last 2.5 years in the pump business, we have successfully received 6 510(k) clearances with a first pass clearance each time, so we have the expertise to deliver on this. All in all, a lot of right things are happening in the product development process. I’ll come back after Brian with how these items align with our progress against our near-term goals and to help us — that help us create a comprehensive infusion therapy company.

So with that, over to you, Brian.

Brian Bonnell: Thanks, Vivek, and good afternoon, everyone. Since Vivek covered the Q1 revenue for each of the businesses, I’ll focus my remarks on recapping the Q1 performance for the remainder of the P&L, along with the Q1 balance sheet and cash flow and then provide commentary on a few puts and takes for the remainder of the year relative to the full year guidance we provided on our last call. As you can see from the GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliation in the press release, adjusted gross margin for the first quarter was 41%, which was slightly ahead of our expectations due primarily to favorable product mix with our two higher-margin core business units of consumables and Infusion Systems growing faster than Vital Care. And the Q1 gross margin rate continued to benefit from the deconsolidation of the IV Solutions business, along with the ongoing capture of integration synergies.

In the first quarter, we recognized $10 million of tariff expense, which represents approximately 2% of adjusted revenue. The impact from higher oil and diesel prices was not meaningful on the Q1 gross margin rate as we only experienced those increases in the last month of the quarter. Adjusted SG&A expense was $112 million in Q1 and adjusted R&D was $21 million, representing approximately 21% and 4% of adjusted revenue, respectively, which is consistent with our previously provided full year guidance for each of these areas of spend. Restructuring, integration and strategic transaction expenses were $17 million in the first quarter and related primarily to our IT systems integration and manufacturing plant consolidation projects. This represents a sequential decline relative to the fourth quarter, and we anticipate continued reductions in both the level of activity and the amount of spend in the second half of this year as we move towards completion of several of these longer-term projects.

Adjusted EBITDA for Q1 was $99 million, which is the same as last year. However, similar to the past several quarters, the year-over-year comparability is impacted by two discrete items. The first is the deconsolidation of the IV Solutions business, which contributed $6 million of earnings in Q1 2025 when it was included in our consolidated results. And the second item is the increase in tariff expense of approximately $8 million year-over-year. The impact of these 2 items was essentially offset by higher earnings from the core business of $14 million. And finally, adjusted diluted earnings per share for the quarter was $1.97 compared to $1.72 last year, an increase of 15%. The current quarter results reflect net interest expense of $16 million and an adjusted effective tax rate of 24%.

Diluted shares outstanding for the quarter were $25.2 million. Now moving on to cash flow and the balance sheet. For the quarter, free cash flow was $28 million, and it was another solid free cash flow quarter, which reflects strong quality of earnings and our typical lower CapEx spending in the first quarter of the year. During the quarter, we invested $9 million of cash spend for quality system and product-related remediation activities, $17 million on restructuring and integration and $11 million on CapEx for general maintenance and capacity expansion at our facilities as well as placement of revenue-generating infusion pumps with customers outside the U.S. And just to wrap up on the balance sheet, we finished the quarter with $1.3 billion of debt and $288 million of cash.

Overall, the first quarter results were very much in line with our expectations. And based on our outlook for the remainder of the year, we believe our previously provided full year guidance is still applicable. But there are a few risks and opportunities that have emerged since our last call that could impact our full year results. Based on current projections, we believe the financial impacts for these risks and opportunities largely offset. But because they relate mostly to macroeconomic factors and trade policies that are still evolving, the eventual impact will depend on their ultimate degree and duration. In terms of risks, the most relevant is the price of oil and the resulting impacts on diesel costs that get passed along by our freight carriers.

We estimate that a $10 increase in the price of a barrel of oil results in a total of $3 million of annualized incremental expense on our P&L, of which $2 million is related to our core operations and $1 million of which relates to our 40% ownership in the joint venture. Applying this math to the latest market forecast for oil and diesel results in approximately $10 million of additional logistics expense in 2026. On the opportunity side, we do expect tariffs to be slightly lower than our initial estimates for the second and third quarters of this year as the current Section 122 tariff rate of 10% is less than the average rate we paid under IEEPA. And it was the IEEPA tariffs that served as the basis for our original full year guidance range of $40 million to $50 million of tariff expense.

However, given the current Section 122 tariffs are temporary by nature, and it is not yet known what new framework may ultimately replace them, we are not assuming this benefit will continue beyond the expiration of the 122 tariffs. The benefit from the lower Section 122 tariffs, when combined with a little earnings upside from accelerated operational efficiencies that we now expect to realize this year should together largely offset the impact of higher diesel costs. And just to be clear, the upside from lower tariff expense that I just mentioned is before consideration of any potential IEEPA refunds that could be received this year. We are not considering potential IEEPA refunds in any of our guidance commentary. To wrap up, we’re pleased with the business performance for the first quarter, including the highest ever revenue quarter for Infusion Systems and the continued gross margin expansion as the benefits from some of the long-term integration projects are realized.

The goals we’ve set out for 2026 have not changed, deliver at or above our long-term revenue targets for our core businesses, expand our margins by capturing some of the remaining 2 percentage points of opportunity and improve free cash flow generation. Although recent events have created some macroeconomic headwinds, we believe the momentum we have in the business should allow us to still deliver on our original goals for this year. And with that, I’ll hand the call back over to Vivek to discuss some of the initiatives to get us there.

Vivek Jain: Okay. Thanks, Brian. And we hope it’s clear that at this moment, we believe we can handle the new volatility alongside tariffs and rates, and we continue to believe on building off the last two years of more predictable revenues with attractive growth in our core — all of this is obviously part of our near-term goals or part of our near-term goals in addition to showing that we’re improving our earnings power. To provide an update to some of our near-term goals from the previous call, we had stated that most of our IV systems growth this year will be back half weighted. We’ve been working hard to increase our ability to install customers early in the year and now believe growth in IV systems will be more balanced throughout the year, which helps manage the near-term volatility.

Another key near-term objective of ours was to lower cash consumed in integration and remediation activities. And as Brian also mentioned, that will materially decrease later in the year, but will again be down sequentially in Q2. Previous calls have discussed all the various projects, so we won’t go through them again, but investors can assume that peak spending is behind us. Strategically, our goal has been to build the most comprehensive and innovative infusion therapy focused company. Throughout the last few years, we’ve not skimped on R&D and innovation nor capital investments into the manufacturing assets of our consumables and systems businesses, and we found a win-win with Otsuka in the JV that will modernize the IV Solutions business.

As a result, we believe in IV systems. We have a complete platform solution that will anchor this segment for the next 10-plus years as the product life cycles are incredibly long. In infusion consumables, we have scale underpinned by leading brands with great clinical data that will be supported with more innovation in the core and in the adjacencies of this business. Financially, we believe these investments alongside good commercial execution will allow us to continue the attractive revenue trends in our core businesses longer term. And when combined with the annualization of operations and logistics cost savings previously described into 2027 and more time to mitigate tariffs via pricing and operational decisions, we can get the company’s earnings power closer to where we think it should be.

The ideal portfolio also matters in creating the most comprehensive infusion therapy company and in optimizing margin and EPS. We have been pursuing both operational and strategic choices in Vital Care. And as I mentioned in the introductory remarks, we’ve tried to exit certain SKUs or lines that have not made sense. One smaller example of note, in our 10-Q, we will disclose that we’re exiting certain Japanese surgical commodities, a product line that was more than $20 million in revenues a few years ago, but down over 50% cumulatively, including currency and has nothing to do with our core infusion business. Given the removal of the broad 2021 warning letter earlier in the year, we’ve been spending more time exploring different outcomes for the pieces of the Vital Care portfolio with several different work streams.

While nothing is certain, our team has shown the ability to be creative in finding the most logical strategic outcomes. Even independent of the portfolio discussion, our goal has always been to be 2x or less leverage, which felt appropriate for a mid-single-digit growing manufacturing company. We’re now within the half turn of that — and we can get there the old-fashioned way via organic cash flow generation over this year or via any of the moves just discussed. Since our time here, we’ve tried to protect the share base with the only meaningful equity dilution resulting from the shares used in the Hospira and Smiths transactions. We know returning capital can be attractive on a thin share base and our external M&A needs are minimal as we have enough organic innovation in-house.

So it’s pretty obvious what we should be doing. In summary, it’s a good place to be with our best businesses growing. Both will again reach record revenues in 2026, and we can see a vast number of projects nearing completion. We expect our consumables and systems businesses to be reliable growers with an industry acceptable profit margin, the tightest and most optimized manufacturing network and each with a multiyear innovation portfolio. And ultimately, we want to transfer value from debt to equity. There’s no confusion about that within the company in the pursuit of these goals. we don’t really have any frivolous activities here. We produce essential items that require significant clinical training, hold manufacturing barriers and in general, items that customers do not want to switch unless they must.

The market needs ICU Medical being an innovative, reliable supplier and our company is stronger from all the events of the last few years. Thanks to all of our team members and customers as we improve each day. And with that, we’ll open it up to questions.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts

Operator: [Operator Instructions] We’ll take our first question from Jayson Bedford with Raymond James.

Jayson Bedford: Maybe just a few questions. First, on Infusion Systems, the growth kind of stood out off a tough comp. Wondering if you can — and I apologize if I missed it, but LVP growth, did you comment on LVP growth in the quarter? And if not, can you do so now?

Vivek Jain: Jayson, I think we prefer towards the end of the year to kind of reflect on each business line rather than do it each quarter. But I would say, given the results that were pretty transparent towards the end of last year, the strongest growth driver was LVP by far and away in the segment.

Jayson Bedford: Okay. Okay. Fair enough. In terms of the timing on the new hardware, — how long — I guess, is there a way to kind of frame the push out, if you will? I realize you don’t have full control of this, but what is the extension here?

Vivek Jain: It wasn’t that long ago, Jayson, where we used to say in these scripts, we would only talk about new products when we had the approvals in hand, right? And when things got harder, we had to — in the warning letter, we had to give more color on the resolution. We certainly would like to get back to that. I think we would say the part we control a couple of months to get the testing done, a little bit of time to get the analysis together. And then it’s about how long the dialogue takes. So certainly, our goal is as fast as possible. We didn’t really plan for anything meaningful from a financial perspective for a while anyway. I mean it took us 18 months even with Duo and Solo to really get going. So we — things go slow in infusion, as we’ve said over and over again, and we take our time on the releases, et cetera. So a little bit of time, still trying to move as fast as we can.

Jayson Bedford: Is the expectation that you get Medfusion cleared first?

Vivek Jain: I think we would say right now, that’s where we’re going to do our testing first, which tells you where we think the priority is. Again, both parties would have to agree on everything there, but that’s certainly our prioritization.

Jayson Bedford: Okay. Fair enough. On Vital Care, I think it was down about $10 million year-over-year apples-to-apples. How much of this is related to the exit of the Japanese product line here?

Vivek Jain: Some of the — we haven’t — we’ve announced the exit. We’ve made a very small transaction to do that, but it’s still on the income statement today. A little bit of the $10 million is related to that product line continuing to shrink. It’s literally nickels and dimes in the other areas. It’s $1 million here, $2 million. There’s not one spot you can point to across any of the 4 or 5 businesses there.

Jayson Bedford: Okay. Okay. And then maybe I’ll ask one last one, a quick one, and then I’ll get back in queue. Brian, $28 million in free cash flow, remind me what is the expectation for the full year?

Brian Bonnell: Our full year guidance for that was to do improve upon last year and be close to $150 million.

Operator: Our next question will come from Brett Fishbin with KeyBanc Capital Markets.

Brett Fishbin: I’m going to ask just a follow-up on the systems business. And I think you mentioned previously that you were gearing up for more of a back half weighted dynamic this year. And today, you changed the message a little bit. So I was curious what changed and what’s allowing you to see more balanced performance through the year rather than kind of the inflection into 2H?

Vivek Jain: I think it — as you roll out new products, it’s important to be cautious of what can get installed when. And over the last 6 months to a year, we’ve been trying to make sure we have the available installation resources on hand and that those the scheduling of the installs meets the customers’ needs and aligns with their own schedules. And I think we just got better at synchronizing that and had a little bit of caution in there for ourselves because it’s always a little choppy when you put new products into the market.

Brett Fishbin: All right. Great. And just one more from me. I think this would be more on the consumables business. Just wanted to parse out some of the commentary on hospital volume trends. It seems kind of obvious that January was softer and you saw a pickup into February and March and indicated that things are fine. Maybe if you could just comment on how material you think the January weakness is to the quarter, thinking about like the normal 5%, 6% consumables growth as a baseline. How much of the delta do you think was driven by January?

Vivek Jain: Thanks, Brett. I think I don’t know that we actually have that exact level of precision, Brett. I think if you just looked at kind of the previous years and said, okay, the business has been down sequentially Q1 over Q4 of the last couple of years, average it out, this was more the difference is probably that number. I don’t think we have a more high-tech answer than that. And we tried to make sure everybody is aware of that when we were talking in February.

Operator: We’ll take our next question from Michael Matson with Needham.

Joseph Conway: It’s Joseph on for Mike today. Maybe just a broader question on the quarter. I was curious if the Smiths warning letter resolving that, did that have any effect on — in the quarter just in terms of — was this an overhang with any hospital administrators and now that’s passed, it’s not affecting the company anymore. I imagine it’s maybe not that short term, but just curious how you guys are thinking about that.

Vivek Jain: Nice to meet you, Joe. Thank you for the question. I would say the original warning letter that was received by the business we bought between signing and closing is resolved. That’s the 2021 warning letter. We still have a subset of products that are covered under a warning letter that came in 2025. I think I would say, I don’t believe that’s necessarily an overhang or correlated to commercial activities of the company. And if you kind of dig what’s going on there, it’s been a very hot topic for many, many manufacturers certainly over the last 18 months. So I think our answer would be not correlated to commercial activities. And of course, the agency is doing what they should do and try to ensure safety and quality, and we need to be the most compliant company we can be.

Joseph Conway: Okay. Yes, makes sense. And then just one more. Just on Plum Duo and Plum Solo. In terms of active conversations with health systems or valuations on contracts, I’m just wondering if you could maybe quantify or give some more color on the customer pipeline here in 2026 or over the next 12 months? And then maybe just to nail down on one of your prior comments for Infusion Systems rather than as maybe you talked about in the past of being a second half acceleration. Just trying to understand this a little bit more. Is the framing now more of a steady acceleration or more of stable to lower growing over the year, if that makes sense?

Vivek Jain: I’ll let Brian do the second half of that. On the first half, I think we went into a lot of detail on the last call or the call prior, I can’t remember about the 2 different ways we create value in the infusion pump business. We create value either by winning competitive share or by rolling our own and reprofitizing our own installed base. And on the last call, we said we felt pretty good about what we were holding for signed competitive situations. Most of this year’s business is still that. We haven’t really focused on the rollover situations very much. And the pipeline for the competitors is still active and robust as all vendors are saying, and we’re out there competing. After we feel like that has reached its point and the aging of devices, and we’ll shift our energy to our own installed base. But I don’t think anything is different than our previous comments on the competitive opportunity for pumps.

Brian Bonnell: Yes. And I think the question on just kind of the calendarization of the installs and what does that mean? I think it’s — I think we’re saying that the full year for Infusion Systems looks the same as it did when we gave our original guidance. We just think that it’s going to be a little less back-end weighted because we have been able to accelerate a few of those installations. So the growth rate, I think, would be a little bit more steady across the Qs 2 through 3 or 2 through 4 as opposed to just being in the back half.

Operator: We’ll take our next question from Jason Bednar with Piper Sandler.

Jason Bednar: On the guidance commentary, Brian, I appreciate all the moving parts you highlighted from the prior update to today. Just so we have those dialed in, I heard the assumption of the higher $10 million in logistics costs that you’re baking in. I maybe confirm that you’re assuming oil is where it is for the rest of the year, if that’s the assumption. But then — sorry, if I missed it, what were the numbers on the lower tariff assumptions? And then how much are you pulling forward on efficiencies to net against that $10 million?

Brian Bonnell: Yes. I think just on the forecast for oil prices, I do think if you look at kind of the ’26 forecast, it does have some reduction in oil prices kind of as we continue throughout the year. So I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily exactly at today’s spot price. But nonetheless, if you look at the offsets, I would say of the $10 million that we need to offset, roughly 2/3 of that is probably to come from lower tariffs, the remaining 1/3 from accelerating some of our operational efficiencies.

Jason Bednar: Okay. All right. Helpful. One on price points here. I know part of the conversation with the new pump cycle is that we are going to have higher — are going to be selling at higher price points with better margins. Given where we are in the cycle, you booked a lot of orders, you’re out there developing the funnel further. Are you seeing those price points stick? Are you having pushback on those higher price points? Anything there would be helpful.

Vivek Jain: Sure. Jason, it’s Vivek. I would say we believe that technology offering is in line with its value. And so I would also say when we took over and got into the pump business 7 or 8 years ago, in the dark days when we had acquired Hospira had come off of just a decade of share losses. There were moments we discounted heavily and it didn’t change anything. And so I think our experience in the pump business is to ensure that the technology in the device is commensurate with its value. We believe that to be the case. These devices have more and more technology in them, and it’s important that, that value is recognized. So we’re certainly trying to hold firm on that. And the answer to your question will ultimately flow through the P&L or not. And you can see the strength we’ve had in the systems business.

Jason Bednar: Okay. Perfect. One more quick one just from a modeling standpoint. I think and I’m not always quick on math on the uptake, but I think you were implying that this Japanese product line, maybe roughly $10 million or maybe sub-$10 million today in annual revenue. So are you counseling us to be taking out $2 million to $2.5 million per quarter out of Vital Care or — and starting that in beginning in 2Q? Or help me out.

Vivek Jain: Yes. I think you’re overthinking that so that wasn’t the intent. I would just say we had examples of dumb things we were doing in there, and we were trying to clean them up. And it’s not that there was some catastrophic issue with some of the product lines. There are some unique circumstances that we’ve been trying to take action on those when we have the contractual flexibility. That’s still in our P&L. It’s drifted down $10 million. That’s been part of the things going on over the years in Vital Care, there’s a couple of items like that. So I don’t know, Brian, please add to that, if I to provide any deep guidance on that. It’s just — it’s hard to explain what’s been going on. I felt like since it’s going to be in the Q, we should give an example of it.

Jason Bednar: Okay. We can follow up offline. I got a couple of other follow-ups related to that, but I won’t bog things down here.

Operator: We’ll take our next question from Larry Solow with CJS Securities.

Peter Lukas: It’s Peter Lukas for Larry. In your prepared remarks, you mentioned gross margin of 41% ahead of estimates due to favorable mix. Do you see this as sustainable? And can you kind of give us an idea of cadence through the year and the overall OpEx on this and the overall OpEx, I should say?

Vivek Jain: Peter, nice to meet you. Good question. I think Brian said in his script that we believe we still had 2 points of opportunity to hit our target gross margins even from where we are today. We haven’t been very specific other than saying we thought we would be exiting around that rate at the end of next year. We don’t really provide quarterly gross margin guidance. So I think we’re happy with where we are. We think we continue to have areas to improve it. I don’t think we necessarily give out gross margin by quarter guidance. But if you look at the chart in our investor deck, you’ve seen the last 7 or 8 quarters, we’ve continued to improve pretty consistent there. So it’s obviously a very hot topic for it. And with all the capital we’ve been pouring into manufacturing and logistics consolidation is to improve that line, very important. disappeared from the screen.

Operator: We’ll take our next question from Michael Toomey with Jefferies.

Michael Toomey: I just want to check on the messaging to be clear. Are you reiterating the EBITDA and EPS guide or stepping away because of visibility on the cost? I just want to be clear on that.

Brian Bonnell: No, I think we’re still — we still have a high degree of confidence in our original guidance there. And we just wanted to make sure folks understood kind of the puts and takes that we could potentially have given some of these emerging items. That’s all.

Vivek Jain: Sorry, Mike. We took a lot of work. let’s be clear.

Michael Toomey: 1Q guide as the previous guide, sorry, you’re just highlighting a lot of moving parts.

Brian Bonnell: No change. No change.

Vivek Jain: Sorry. We’re just trying to explain the real things that we’re dealing with. No change.

Michael Toomey: No, that’s helpful. And then on the replacement cycle we’ve talked about. I appreciate you said that’s more of a 2027 opportunity. Just wondering if you’ve seen any earlier evidence coming through in the orders or pipeline of that replacement cycle?

Vivek Jain: Yes. Great question. Yes, you need to line those things up. They don’t happen overnight. So we’re starting those conversations today, right? But the real energy, I think, again, will be towards the end of this year. But the same inertia or incumbent benefit that accrues in the infusion industry also accrues to us where we have a full-line customer, a lot of experience with the device. And so we think we’re well positioned there. The devices operate well for a long time, and so you don’t like to force those changes on people until really the life cycle is used up with the device. The timing sort of lines up more with next year and the competitive opportunities are what we should spend our time on if they’re here. And we think the results will show our success in that over the balance of the year. So opportunity there, starting cautiously, important part of next year’s story.

Michael Toomey: Okay. Yes, that’s great. Just one more as well. Becton this morning talked about 50 bps share gain in the quarter. Do you have any commentary on the share trends for ICU?

Vivek Jain: Not really. I mean everybody — it’s not necessarily everybody compares these things apples-to-apples. We’ve always tried to stay away from that, as you know, like the results in the P&L should speak for themselves because I’m not sure everybody counts exactly the same tongue in cheek, everybody has been taking share and the market is kind of what it is. So I think we would prefer not to comment other than say we’re materially off the lows in this business where we were a few years ago.

Operator: And at this time, this concludes our question-and-answer session. I will now turn the meeting back to Vivek for closing remarks.

Vivek Jain: Thanks, everyone. I know it’s been a very hectic earnings calendar the last day or 2. So we will end quickly here and say thank you very much. Look forward to discussing our results with you on our Q2 call, and have a good start to the summer, everyone. Thanks.

Operator: This concludes today’s meeting. We appreciate your time and participation. You may now disconnect. Thank you.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts