Medpace Holdings Q4 2025 Medpace Holdings Inc Earnings Call | AllMind AI Earnings | AllMind AI
Q4 2025 Medpace Holdings Inc Earnings Call
Speaker #2: Good day, ladies and
Lauren Morris: Good morning, and thank you for joining Medpace's Q4 and FY 2025 earnings conference call. Also on the call today is our CEO, August Troendle, our President, Jesse Geiger, and our CFO, Kevin Brady. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that our remarks and responses to your questions during this teleconference may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve inherent assumptions with known and unknown risks and uncertainties, as well as other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our current expectations. These factors are discussed in our Form 10-K and other filings with the SEC. Please note that we assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements even if estimates change. Accordingly, you should not rely on any of today's forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date after today.
Lauren Morris: Good morning, and thank you for joining Medpace's Q4 and FY 2025 earnings conference call. Also on the call today is our CEO, August Troendle, our President, Jesse Geiger, and our CFO, Kevin Brady. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that our remarks and responses to your questions during this teleconference may include forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements involve inherent assumptions with known and unknown risks and uncertainties, as well as other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our current expectations. These factors are discussed in our Form 10-K and other filings with the SEC. Please note that we assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements even if estimates change. Accordingly, you should not rely on any of today's forward-looking statements as representing our views as of any date after today.
Lauren Morris: During this call, we will also be referring to certain non-GAAP financial measures. These non-GAAP measures are not superior to or replacement for the comparable GAAP measures, but we believe these measures help investors gain a more complete understanding of results. A reconciliation of such non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is available in the earnings press release and earnings call presentation slides provided in connection with today's call. The slides are available in the Investor Relations section of our website at investor.medpace.com. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to August Troendle.
Lauren Morris: During this call, we will also be referring to certain non-GAAP financial measures. These non-GAAP measures are not superior to or replacement for the comparable GAAP measures, but we believe these measures help investors gain a more complete understanding of results. A reconciliation of such non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is available in the earnings press release and earnings call presentation slides provided in connection with today's call. The slides are available in the Investor Relations section of our website at investor.medpace.com. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to August Troendle.
Speaker #3: Relations section of our website at investor.medpace.com. With that, I would now like to turn the call over to August Troendle.
August Troendle: Good day, everyone. Cancellations were elevated again in Q4. Backlog cancellations, in absolute and percent terms, were the highest they've been in over a year. This resulted in a lower than anticipated net book-to-bill ratio of 1.04. The good news is that with a backlog conversion rate of 23.6%, our book-to-bill rate does not need to be very high to generate growth. I see no reason to expect the higher level of cancellations to continue, but did not anticipate the spike in Q4. Only time will tell. Good opportunities continue to present themselves, and I rate the overall business environment as adequate and headed in the right direction. Jesse will now make some comments on Q4 and the year. Jesse.
August Troendle: Good day, everyone. Cancellations were elevated again in Q4. Backlog cancellations, in absolute and percent terms, were the highest they've been in over a year. This resulted in a lower than anticipated net book-to-bill ratio of 1.04. The good news is that with a backlog conversion rate of 23.6%, our book-to-bill rate does not need to be very high to generate growth. I see no reason to expect the higher level of cancellations to continue, but did not anticipate the spike in Q4. Only time will tell. Good opportunities continue to present themselves, and I rate the overall business environment as adequate and headed in the right direction. Jesse will now make some comments on Q4 and the year. Jesse.
Speaker #4: tell. Good opportunities continue to present themselves, and I rate the overall business environment as adequate and headed in the right finished. direction. Jesse will now make some comments on Q4 and the
Speaker #4: year. Jesse. Good day, Thank you, August.
Jesse Geiger: Thank you, August. Good morning, everyone. Revenue in Q4 2025 was $708.5 million, which represents a year-over-year increase of 32%, and full-year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, a 20% increase from 2024. Net new business awards entering backlog in Q4 increased 39.1% from the prior year to $736.6 million, resulting in a 1.04 net book-to-bill. For full-year 2025, net new business awards were $2.65 billion, an increase of 18.7%. Ending backlog as of December 31, 2025, was approximately $3 billion, an increase of 4.3% from the prior year. We project that approximately $1.9 billion of backlog will convert to revenue in the next 12 months, and our backlog conversion rate in Q4 was 23.6% of beginning backlog. With that, I will turn the call over to Kevin to review our financial performance in more detail and discuss our 2026 guidance. Kevin.
Jesse Geiger: Thank you, August. Good morning, everyone. Revenue in Q4 2025 was $708.5 million, which represents a year-over-year increase of 32%, and full-year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, a 20% increase from 2024. Net new business awards entering backlog in Q4 increased 39.1% from the prior year to $736.6 million, resulting in a 1.04 net book-to-bill. For full-year 2025, net new business awards were $2.65 billion, an increase of 18.7%. Ending backlog as of December 31, 2025, was approximately $3 billion, an increase of 4.3% from the prior year. We project that approximately $1.9 billion of backlog will convert to revenue in the next 12 months, and our backlog conversion rate in Q4 was 23.6% of beginning backlog. With that, I will turn the call over to Kevin to review our financial performance in more detail and discuss our 2026 guidance. Kevin.
Speaker #5: Good morning, everyone. Revenue in the fourth quarter of 2020 was $708.5 million. Which represents a year-over-year increase of 32% and full-year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, a 20% increase from 2024.
Speaker #5: Net new business awards entering backlog in the fourth quarter increased 39.1% from the prior year to $736.6 million, resulting in a $1.04 net book-to-bill.
Speaker #5: For the full year 2025, net new business awards were $2.65 billion, an increase of 18.7%. Ending 2025, was approximately $3 billion, an increase of 4.3% from the prior year.
Speaker #5: We project that approximately $1.9 billion of backlog will convert to revenue in the next 12 months. And our backlog conversion rate in the fourth quarter was 23.6% of beginning backlog.
Speaker #5: With that, I will turn the call over to Kevin to review our financial performance in more detail and discuss our 2026 guidance. Kevin?
Speaker #6: Thank you, Jesse. And good morning to everyone listening in. As Jesse mentioned, revenue was $708.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2025. This represented a year-over-year increase of 32%.
Kevin Brady: Thank you, Jesse, and good morning to everyone listening in. As Jesse mentioned, revenue was $708.5 million in Q4 2025. This represented a year-over-year increase of 32%. Full-year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, an increase 20% from 2024. EBITDA of $160.2 million increased 20% compared to $133.5 million in Q4 2024. Full-year EBITDA was $557.7 million, an increase 16.1% from the comparable prior-year period. EBITDA margin for Q4 was 22.6% compared to 24.9% in the prior-year period. Full-year EBITDA margin was 22% compared to 22.8% in the prior year. EBITDA margins were impacted by higher reimbursable cost activity driven by therapeutic mix. In Q4 2025, net income of $135.1 million increased 15.5% compared to net income of $117 million in the prior-year period.
Kevin Brady: Thank you, Jesse, and good morning to everyone listening in. As Jesse mentioned, revenue was $708.5 million in Q4 2025. This represented a year-over-year increase of 32%. Full-year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, an increase 20% from 2024. EBITDA of $160.2 million increased 20% compared to $133.5 million in Q4 2024. Full-year EBITDA was $557.7 million, an increase 16.1% from the comparable prior-year period. EBITDA margin for Q4 was 22.6% compared to 24.9% in the prior-year period. Full-year EBITDA margin was 22% compared to 22.8% in the prior year. EBITDA margins were impacted by higher reimbursable cost activity driven by therapeutic mix. In Q4 2025, net income of $135.1 million increased 15.5% compared to net income of $117 million in the prior-year period.
Speaker #6: Full year 2025 revenue was $2.53 billion, an increase of 20% from 2024. EBITDA of $160.2 million increased 20% compared to $133.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.
Speaker #6: Full-year EBITDA was $557.7 million, an increase of 16.1% from the comparable prior-year period. EBITDA margin for the fourth quarter was 22.6% compared to 24.9% in the prior-year period.
Speaker #6: Full-year EBITDA margin was 22% compared to 22.8% in the prior year. EBITDA margins were impacted by higher reimbursable cost activity driven by therapeutic mix.
Speaker #6: In the fourth quarter of 2025, net income of $135.1 million increased 15.5% compared to net income of $117.0 million in the prior-year period. For full-year 2025, net income was $451.1 million, compared to $404.4 million in 2024.
Kevin Brady: For full-year 2025, net income was $451.1 million compared to $404.4 million in 2024, which represents an 11.6% increase. Net income growth below EBITDA growth was primarily driven by lower interest income compared to the prior-year period, as well as a slightly higher effective tax rate. Net income for diluted share for the quarter was $4.67 compared to $3.67 in the prior-year period. For the full-year 2025, net income for diluted share was $15.28 compared to net income for diluted share of $12.63 in 2024. Regarding customer concentration, our top five and top ten customers represent roughly 25% and 35%, respectively, of our full-year 2025 revenue. In the fourth quarter, we generated $192.7 million in cash flow from operating activities, and our net daily sales outstanding was negative 58.7 days. As of 31 December 2025, we had $497 million in cash.
Kevin Brady: For full-year 2025, net income was $451.1 million compared to $404.4 million in 2024, which represents an 11.6% increase. Net income growth below EBITDA growth was primarily driven by lower interest income compared to the prior-year period, as well as a slightly higher effective tax rate. Net income for diluted share for the quarter was $4.67 compared to $3.67 in the prior-year period. For the full-year 2025, net income for diluted share was $15.28 compared to net income for diluted share of $12.63 in 2024. Regarding customer concentration, our top five and top ten customers represent roughly 25% and 35%, respectively, of our full-year 2025 revenue. In the fourth quarter, we generated $192.7 million in cash flow from operating activities, and our net daily sales outstanding was negative 58.7 days. As of 31 December 2025, we had $497 million in cash.
Speaker #6: Which represents an 11.6% increase net income growth below EBITDA growth was primarily driven by lower interest income compared to the prior-year period. As well as a slightly higher effective tax rate.
Speaker #6: Net income per diluted share for the quarter was $4.67, compared to $3.67 in the prior-year period. For the full year 2025, net income per diluted share was $15.28, compared to net income per diluted share of $12.63 in 2024.
Speaker #6: Regarding customer concentration, our top five and top ten customers represent roughly 25% and 35%, respectively, of our full-year 2025 revenue. In the fourth quarter, we generated $192.7 million in cash flow from operating activities, and our net daily sales outstanding was negative 58.7 days.
Speaker #6: As of December 31st, 2025, we had $497 million in cash. For the full-year 2025, we repurchased $2.96 million shares for $912.9 million. At the end of the year, we had $821.7 million remaining under our share repurchase authorization program.
Kevin Brady: For the full-year 2025, we repurchased 2.96 million shares for $912.9 million. At the end of the year, we had $821.7 million remaining under our share repurchase authorization program. Moving now to our guidance for 2026. Full-year 2026 total revenue is expected in the range of $2.755 billion to 2.855 billion, which represents growth of 8.9% to 12.8% over 2025 total revenue of $2.53 billion. Our 2026 EBITDA is expected in the range of $605 million to 635 million, representing growth of 8.5% to 13.9% compared to EBITDA of $557.7 million in 2025. We forecast 2026 net income in the range of $487 million to 511 million. This guidance assumes a full-year 2026 effective tax rate of 18.5% to 19.5%, interest income of $24.3 million, and 29.2 million in diluted weighted average shares outstanding for 2026. There are no additional share repurchases in our guidance.
Kevin Brady: For the full-year 2025, we repurchased 2.96 million shares for $912.9 million. At the end of the year, we had $821.7 million remaining under our share repurchase authorization program. Moving now to our guidance for 2026. Full-year 2026 total revenue is expected in the range of $2.755 billion to 2.855 billion, which represents growth of 8.9% to 12.8% over 2025 total revenue of $2.53 billion. Our 2026 EBITDA is expected in the range of $605 million to 635 million, representing growth of 8.5% to 13.9% compared to EBITDA of $557.7 million in 2025. We forecast 2026 net income in the range of $487 million to 511 million. This guidance assumes a full-year 2026 effective tax rate of 18.5% to 19.5%, interest income of $24.3 million, and 29.2 million in diluted weighted average shares outstanding for 2026. There are no additional share repurchases in our guidance.
Speaker #6: Moving now to our guidance for 2026. Full-year 2026 total revenue is expected in the range of $2.755 billion to $2.855 billion, which represents growth of 8.9% to 12.8% over 2025 total revenue of $2.53 billion.
Speaker #6: Our 2026 EBITDA is expected in the range of $605 million to $635 million. Representing growth of 8.5% to 13.9% compared to EBITDA of $557.7 million in 2025.
Speaker #6: We forecast 2026 net income in the range of $487 million to $511 million. This guidance assumes a full-year 2026 effective tax rate of 18.5% to 19.5%.
Speaker #6: Interest income of 24.3 million in 29.2 million in diluted weighted average shares outstanding for 2026. There are no additional share repurchases in our guidance.
Speaker #6: Earnings per diluted share is expected to be in the range of $16.68 to $17.50. Guidance is based on foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2025.
Kevin Brady: Earnings per diluted share is expected to be in the range of $16.68 to $17.50. Guidance is based on foreign exchange rates as of 31 December 2025. With that, I will turn the call back over to the operator so we can take your questions.
Kevin Brady: Earnings per diluted share is expected to be in the range of $16.68 to $17.50. Guidance is based on foreign exchange rates as of 31 December 2025. With that, I will turn the call back over to the operator so we can take your questions.
Speaker #6: With that, I will turn the call back over to the operator so we can take your questions.
Speaker #5: Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again.
Operator: Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again. In fairness to all, we ask that you please limit yourselves to one question and one follow-up. One moment while we compile our Q&A roster. Our first question will come from the line of Max Smock, William Blair. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. As a reminder to ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again. In fairness to all, we ask that you please limit yourselves to one question and one follow-up. One moment while we compile our Q&A roster. Our first question will come from the line of Max Smock, William Blair. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: In fairness to all we ask that you please limit yourselves to one question and one follow-up. One moment while we compile our Q&A roster.
Speaker #5: Our first question will come from the line of Max Mockwith, William Blair. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #7: Hi. Great. It's Christine Rains on for Max. Thanks for taking our questions. The first one is, what is embedded in your guidance for revenue growth excluding pass-throughs?
Lauren Morris: Hi, great. It's Christine Rains for Max. Thanks for taking our questions. The first one is, what is embedded in your guidance for revenue growth excluding pass-throughs? Last quarter, I believe you alluded to high single-digit to low double-digit direct fee revenue growth in 2026, but wondering if your growth expectations for this component are now higher given your strong EBITDA guide and also what you expect the cadence of this revenue growth to look like.
Christine Rains: Hi, great. It's Christine Rains for Max. Thanks for taking our questions. The first one is, what is embedded in your guidance for revenue growth excluding pass-throughs? Last quarter, I believe you alluded to high single-digit to low double-digit direct fee revenue growth in 2026, but wondering if your growth expectations for this component are now higher given your strong EBITDA guide and also what you expect the cadence of this revenue growth to look like.
Speaker #7: Last quarter, I believe you alluded to high single-digit to low double-digit direct fee revenue growth in 2026. But wondering if your growth expectations for this component are now higher given your strong EBITDA guide and also what you expect the cadence of this revenue growth to look like.
Speaker #7: Last quarter, I believe you alluded to high single-digit to low double-digit direct fee revenue growth in 2026, but I'm wondering if your growth expectations for this component are now higher given your strong EBITDA guide. Also, what do you expect the cadence of this revenue growth to look like?
Speaker #4: Yeah. Hi, Christine. This is Kevin. We don't provide guidance on direct service revenue. What I can tell you, though, is that from a reimbursable cost expectation, it's consistent with what we shared back in October in that we expect it to be kind of in the 41 to 42 percent of revenue in '26.
Kevin Brady: Yeah, hi, Christine. This is Kevin. We don't provide guidance on direct service revenue. What I can tell you, though, is that from a reimbursable cost expectation, it's consistent with what we shared back in October in that we expect it to be kind of in the 41% to 42% of revenue in 2026, so slightly higher than what we finished here this year. From a quarterly cadence standpoint, nothing I'd call out in particular. I would say in terms of revenue, I do expect that reimbursable costs will start the year higher as a percentage of revenue than when we end the year. And so that being said, I do expect maybe some flatter top-line growth throughout the quarters than what we've experienced in past years.
Kevin Brady: Yeah, hi, Christine. This is Kevin. We don't provide guidance on direct service revenue. What I can tell you, though, is that from a reimbursable cost expectation, it's consistent with what we shared back in October in that we expect it to be kind of in the 41% to 42% of revenue in 2026, so slightly higher than what we finished here this year. From a quarterly cadence standpoint, nothing I'd call out in particular. I would say in terms of revenue, I do expect that reimbursable costs will start the year higher as a percentage of revenue than when we end the year. And so that being said, I do expect maybe some flatter top-line growth throughout the quarters than what we've experienced in past years.
Speaker #4: So slightly higher than what we finished. You're here this year. From a quarterly cadence standpoint, nothing I'd call out in particular. I would say in terms of revenue, I do expect that reimbursable costs will start the year higher as a percentage of revenue than when we end the year.
Speaker #4: And so that being said, I do expect maybe some flatter top-line growth throughout the quarters than what we've experienced in past years.
Lauren Morris: Great. That was really helpful context. Then I noticed the acceleration in headcount growth in the quarter. What do you expect headcount growth to be in 2026? Should we expect this mid-single-digit growth cadence to continue, or will you need an acceleration in hiring to support your 2026 outlook? Thanks.
Christine Rains: Great. That was really helpful context. Then I noticed the acceleration in headcount growth in the quarter. What do you expect headcount growth to be in 2026? Should we expect this mid-single-digit growth cadence to continue, or will you need an acceleration in hiring to support your 2026 outlook? Thanks.
Speaker #7: helpful context. Great. That was really Then I noticed we had acceleration in headcount growth in the quarter. What do you expect headcount growth to be in 2026?
Speaker #7: Should we expect this mid-single-digit growth cadence to continue, or will you need an acceleration in hiring to support your 2026 outlook? Thanks.
Speaker #8: Hi. It's Jesse. We do expect accelerated growth. We anticipate hiring in '26 to be above 25 levels somewhere in the mid to high single-digit growth area.
Jesse Geiger: Hi, it's Jesse. We do expect accelerated growth. We anticipate hiring in 2026 to be above 25 levels, somewhere in the mid to high single-digit growth area.
Jesse Geiger: Hi, it's Jesse. We do expect accelerated growth. We anticipate hiring in 2026 to be above 25 levels, somewhere in the mid to high single-digit growth area.
Speaker #7: Great. Thank you so much.
Lauren Morris: Great. Thank you so much.
Christine Rains: Great. Thank you so much.
Speaker #5: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Justin Bowers with DB. Your line is open.
Operator: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Justin Bowers with DB. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Justin Bowers with DB. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: Please go ahead.
Speaker #9: Hi. Good morning, everyone. I was just hoping—can you sort of unpack the business environment and the commentary in the prepared remarks? Either quantifying RFP activity or win rates, and then also, there was a pretty good funding environment in the quarter as well.
August Troendle: Hi. Good morning, everyone. Just was hoping, can you sort of unpack the business environment, the commentary, and the prepared remarks, like either quantifying RFP activity or win rates, and then also there was a pretty good funding environment in the quarter as well? So can you just help us understand that? The business environment was, as I said, reasonably good. RFPs, if they matter, were up a bit, both on the quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year. But I don't think there's anything really to call out beyond that. It was a higher cancellation rate that led us to miss. So our gross bookings have, again, substantially better than last year, and I think doing fine overall.
Justin Bowers: Hi. Good morning, everyone. Just was hoping, can you sort of unpack the business environment, the commentary, and the prepared remarks, like either quantifying RFP activity or win rates, and then also there was a pretty good funding environment in the quarter as well? So can you just help us understand that?
Speaker #9: So can you just help us understand that?
August Troendle: The business environment was, as I said, reasonably good. RFPs, if they matter, were up a bit, both on the quarter-over-quarter and year-over-year. But I don't think there's anything really to call out beyond that. It was a higher cancellation rate that led us to miss. So our gross bookings have, again, substantially better than last year, and I think doing fine overall.
Speaker #4: A business environment was, as I said, reasonably good. RFPs, if they matter, were up a bit both on the quarter over quarter and year over year.
Speaker #4: But I don't think there's anything really to call out beyond that. It was a higher cancellation rate that led to us to miss. So our gross bookings have again substantially better than last year.
Speaker #4: And I think doing fine overall.
Speaker #9: Okay. Is there any way to help us understand if the cancellations were normal, what the sort of the net bookings would be? And then with those cancellations, was that could you help characterize those a bit more?
Justin Bowers: Okay. Is there any way to help us understand, if cancellations were normal, what sort of the net bookings would be? And then with those cancellations, could you help characterize those a bit more? Was it in any therapeutic area or customer area, vintage?
Justin Bowers: Okay. Is there any way to help us understand, if cancellations were normal, what sort of the net bookings would be? And then with those cancellations, could you help characterize those a bit more? Was it in any therapeutic area or customer area, vintage?
Speaker #9: Was it in any therapeutic area or customer area,
Speaker #9: vintage,?
Speaker #4: No. Cancellations
August Troendle: No, cancellations were a little bit skewed towards metabolic area. It's been growing quite a bit. So there were a higher level of cancellations there. Overall, bookings have continued to be oncology are strongest. Metabolic's still there, but there were some elevated cancellations. So it was kind of otherwise relatively normal. I don't have a, we're not providing what the booking would have been. We don't give gross bookings. We're just netting them out, the kind of directional magnitude of cancellations. But they would have been substantially higher if we had cancellations in a nice range.
August Troendle: No, cancellations were a little bit skewed towards metabolic area. It's been growing quite a bit. So there were a higher level of cancellations there. Overall, bookings have continued to be oncology are strongest. Metabolic's still there, but there were some elevated cancellations. So it was kind of otherwise relatively normal. I don't have a, we're not providing what the booking would have been. We don't give gross bookings. We're just netting them out, the kind of directional magnitude of cancellations. But they would have been substantially higher if we had cancellations in a nice range.
Speaker #4: We're a little bit skewed towards the metabolic area. It's been growing quite a bit, so there were a higher level of cancellations there. Overall, bookings have continued to be—oncology is our strongest. Metabolic is still there, but there were some elevated cancellations.
Speaker #4: So, it was kind of otherwise relatively normal. I don't have a—we're not providing what the booking would have been. We don't get gross bookings.
Speaker #4: We're just netting them out—the kind of directional magnitude of cancellations. But they would have been substantially higher if we had cancellations in a nice...
Speaker #4: range. Okay.
Justin Bowers: Okay. Thank you. I'll jump back in queue.
Justin Bowers: Okay. Thank you. I'll jump back in queue.
Speaker #9: Thank you. I'll jump back in queue.
Speaker #5: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Anne Hines with Mizuho Securities. Your line is open.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Ann Hynes with Mizuho Securities. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Ann Hynes with Mizuho Securities. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: Please go ahead.
Speaker #7: Thank you. I just want to ask some more questions on just the cancellations. Can you remind us what your historical range is, and maybe what it was this quarter versus maybe the heights that you saw in 2024 and early 2025?
Ann Hynes: Thank you. I just want to ask some more questions on just the cancellations. Can you remind us what your historical range is and maybe what it was this quarter versus maybe the heights that you saw in early 2025? Again, I think the past few quarters, cancellations have been very stable. Is this driven by maybe the competitive environment, M&A? Is it widespread, or is it just maybe one big client canceling something? Any more details would be great.
Ann Hynes: Thank you. I just want to ask some more questions on just the cancellations. Can you remind us what your historical range is and maybe what it was this quarter versus maybe the heights that you saw in early 2025? Again, I think the past few quarters, cancellations have been very stable. Is this driven by maybe the competitive environment, M&A? Is it widespread, or is it just maybe one big client canceling something? Any more details would be great.
Speaker #7: And again, I think the past few quarters, cancellations have been very stable. Is this driven by maybe the competitive environment, M&A, is it widespread, or is it just maybe one big client canceling something?
Speaker #7: So, any more details would be great.
Speaker #4: Sure. Now, it's widespread. There was no single or couple of very large projects that canceled. It was just a higher level of cancellations overall.
August Troendle: Sure. No, it's widespread. There was no single or couple of very large projects that canceled. It was just a higher level of cancellations overall. Comparable to the past year, it was the highest level of cancellations at a backlog. If you combine backlog and kind of our entire portfolio, I think Q1 was a little bit worse because we had such a high cancellation among projects that had been awarded but were not yet recognized in backlog. But it was a high level overall and, again, pretty widespread. I don't know, and I have no. There was no pattern to it to discern. It was just kind of the usual random stuff that was very heavily concentrated.
August Troendle: Sure. No, it's widespread. There was no single or couple of very large projects that canceled. It was just a higher level of cancellations overall. Comparable to the past year, it was the highest level of cancellations at a backlog. If you combine backlog and kind of our entire portfolio, I think Q1 was a little bit worse because we had such a high cancellation among projects that had been awarded but were not yet recognized in backlog. But it was a high level overall and, again, pretty widespread. I don't know, and I have no. There was no pattern to it to discern. It was just kind of the usual random stuff that was very heavily concentrated.
Speaker #4: Comparable to the past year, it was the highest level of cancellations at a backlog. If you combine backlog and kind of our entire portfolio I think Q1 was a little bit worse.
Speaker #4: Because we had such a high cancellation among projects that had been awarded but were not yet recognized in backlog. But it was a high level overall.
Speaker #4: And again, pretty widespread. I don't know the and I have no there was no pattern to it. To discern. It was just kind of the usual random stuff that was very heavily
Speaker #4: concentrated. And then your revenue growth, maybe what do
Ann Hynes: Then your revenue growth, maybe what are you assuming, just the cancellation trends for the remainder of the year? I know burn rate was very strong. Maybe what's the driver of that and what are you assuming in guidance for the rest of the year for burn rate?
Ann Hynes: Then your revenue growth, maybe what are you assuming, just the cancellation trends for the remainder of the year? I know burn rate was very strong. Maybe what's the driver of that and what are you assuming in guidance for the rest of the year for burn rate?
Speaker #7: You assume just for cancellation trends for the remainder of the year? And I know Burmate was very strong. Maybe, what's the driver of that, and what are you assuming in guidance for the rest of the year for Burmate?
Speaker #4: We don't guide to burn rate. Yeah. Kevin, you want to say
August Troendle: We don't guide to burn rate.
August Troendle: We don't guide to burn rate.
Speaker #9: Right. Yeah. No. To August's point,
Kevin Brady: Right.
Kevin Brady: Right.
August Troendle: Kevin, you want to say something?
August Troendle: Kevin, you want to say something?
Speaker #4: something?
Kevin Brady: Yeah. No, to August's point, we don't guide to burn rate. It's just not something that we do, Ann.
Kevin Brady: Yeah. No, to August's point, we don't guide to burn rate. It's just not something that we do, Ann.
Speaker #9: We don't guide to burn rate. It's just not something that we do.
Speaker #7: All Anne. right. Thanks.
Ann Hynes: All right. Thanks.
Ann Hynes: All right. Thanks.
Speaker #5: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Winley with Jefferies. Your line is open. Please go
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Windley with Jefferies. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of David Windley with Jefferies. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: ahead.
Jesse Geiger: Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. August, I wanted to kind of philosophically ask around therapeutic area concentration. You mentioned oncology being very strong and metabolic right behind it. And as people have seen and you've highlighted, metabolic has been on this very steep growth ramp. I guess to me, the difference between those two areas is oncology is spread across tens, if not hundreds, of different kind of microindications, and metabolic seems to be very concentrated in diabetes and obesity. And so I wondered how you think about the concentration risk in metabolic, the crowding, and the potential for cancellations like you apparently just saw because people say, "We don't have enough differentiation.
David Windley: Hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. August, I wanted to kind of philosophically ask around therapeutic area concentration. You mentioned oncology being very strong and metabolic right behind it. And as people have seen and you've highlighted, metabolic has been on this very steep growth ramp. I guess to me, the difference between those two areas is oncology is spread across tens, if not hundreds, of different kind of microindications, and metabolic seems to be very concentrated in diabetes and obesity. And so I wondered how you think about the concentration risk in metabolic, the crowding, and the potential for cancellations like you apparently just saw because people say, "We don't have enough differentiation.
Speaker #10: Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. August, I wanted to kind of philosophically ask around therapeutic area concentration. You mentioned oncology being very strong and metabolic right behind it.
Speaker #10: And as people have seen, and you've highlighted metabolic has been on this very steep growth ramp. I guess to me, the difference between those two areas is oncology is spread across tens, if not hundreds, of different kind of micro-indications.
Speaker #10: And metabolic seems to be very concentrated in diabetes and obesity. And so I wondered how you think about the concentration risk in metabolic and the crowding and the potential for cancellations like you apparently just saw because people say we don't have enough
Speaker #10: differentiation. Yeah.
August Troendle: Yeah. And another big area is MASH. And there are a few others that for us are meaningful. But yeah, it is, of late, heavily kind of toward the obesity, diabetes area specifically. I don't think we're at a level of overconcentration that that's a big worry. Metabolic will be decreasing as a percent of our revenue next year, I think. So I think it's going to kind of somewhat normalize, head towards a more normal range, but I don't really see that as a big risk for us at this time. Does that answer your question, Dave?
August Troendle: Yeah. And another big area is MASH. And there are a few others that for us are meaningful. But yeah, it is, of late, heavily kind of toward the obesity, diabetes area specifically. I don't think we're at a level of overconcentration that that's a big worry. Metabolic will be decreasing as a percent of our revenue next year, I think. So I think it's going to kind of somewhat normalize, head towards a more normal range, but I don't really see that as a big risk for us at this time. Does that answer your question, Dave?
Speaker #4: And another big area is MASH. And there are a few others that for us are meaningful. But yeah, it is of late heavily kind of toward the obesity, diabetes, area specifically.
Speaker #4: I don't think we're at a level of over-concentration that that's a big worry. It will be metabolic will be decreasing as a percent of our revenue next year, I think.
Speaker #4: So I think it's going to kind of somewhat normalize. Head towards a more normal range. But I don't really see that as a big risk for us at this time.
Speaker #4: Does that answer your question, Dave?
Speaker #10: I think it does. Yeah, I think it does. Thanks. And I guess in exploring the pass-throughs, I think I understand that these metabolic trials carry relatively high pass-throughs.
Jesse Geiger: I think it does. Yeah, I think it does. Thanks. And I guess in exploring the pass-throughs, I think I understand that these metabolic trials carry relatively high pass-throughs, and so it seems to track that your rapid growth in metabolic has also then contributed to the rapid growth in pass-throughs as a percentage of revenue. And I think Kevin kind of referenced this, and maybe the cancellation in metabolic is also what makes that moderate as you go through the year. Is that right?
David Windley: I think it does. Yeah, I think it does. Thanks. And I guess in exploring the pass-throughs, I think I understand that these metabolic trials carry relatively high pass-throughs, and so it seems to track that your rapid growth in metabolic has also then contributed to the rapid growth in pass-throughs as a percentage of revenue. And I think Kevin kind of referenced this, and maybe the cancellation in metabolic is also what makes that moderate as you go through the year. Is that right?
Speaker #10: And so it seems to track that you're rapid growth in metabolic has also then contributed to the rapid growth in pass-throughs as a percentage of revenue.
Speaker #10: And I think Kevin kind of referenced this and maybe the cancellation in metabolic is also what makes that moderate as you go through the year.
Speaker #10: Is that right?
Speaker #4: Yeah. That's absolutely right. I mean, in terms of pass-throughs, they have been driven largely by our metabolic programs. And we do expect them to start to normalize in this next year.
August Troendle: Yeah, that's absolutely right. I mean, in terms of pass-throughs, they have been driven largely by our metabolic programs. And we do expect them to start to normalize in this next year. And it does provide headwind to overall revenue growth, but it'll be more direct revenue, I guess, which is fine. So yeah, I think that's correct.
August Troendle: Yeah, that's absolutely right. I mean, in terms of pass-throughs, they have been driven largely by our metabolic programs. And we do expect them to start to normalize in this next year. And it does provide headwind to overall revenue growth, but it'll be more direct revenue, I guess, which is fine. So yeah, I think that's correct.
Speaker #4: And it does provide a headwind overall revenue growth. But it'll be more direct revenue, I guess. Which is fine. So yeah, I think that's
Speaker #4: correct.
Speaker #10: Got it. And if I could just
Jesse Geiger: Got it. And if I could just ask one clarification on this, to what extent have pass-throughs outstripped your expectations in '25? To what extent is kind of that underlying site-level inflation and things like that that you're having to rebudget and add, and therefore those adjustments are kind of going directly into backlog and right into revenue, and kind of the pass-through outstripping is what's driving this higher burn rate? How much would you attribute to that?
David Windley: Got it. And if I could just ask one clarification on this, to what extent have pass-throughs outstripped your expectations in '25? To what extent is kind of that underlying site-level inflation and things like that that you're having to rebudget and add, and therefore those adjustments are kind of going directly into backlog and right into revenue, and kind of the pass-through outstripping is what's driving this higher burn rate? How much would you attribute to that?
Speaker #10: sneak one clarification on this in. To what extent pass-throughs have outstripped your expectations in '25? To what extent is kind of is that underlying site-level inflation and things like that that you're having to re-budget and add?
Speaker #10: And therefore, those adjustments are kind of going directly into backlog and right into revenue. And kind of the pass-through outstripping is what's driving this higher burn rate.
Speaker #10: How much would you attribute to
Speaker #10: that? Almost
August Troendle: Almost none. I think this is not an issue of sites changing, getting more aggressive. These were known to be very high pass-through projects going in. The design of the project is just very heavy on investigator fees. And I think the characteristics of the stage of the project and what is burning overall in our backlog does cause our conversion rate to shift around quite a bit as we get other projects that don't have as much relatively short-duration, high burn that are being added have been awarded quarter to quarter. But it's not, I think, just the addition of pass-throughs. It's the study itself has been opened up. And there were some issues with recognizing it in backlog because of uncertainty of the program and stuff. And those relatively short-term programs come on, okay, you get awards, and they burn rather quickly.
August Troendle: Almost none. I think this is not an issue of sites changing, getting more aggressive. These were known to be very high pass-through projects going in. The design of the project is just very heavy on investigator fees. And I think the characteristics of the stage of the project and what is burning overall in our backlog does cause our conversion rate to shift around quite a bit as we get other projects that don't have as much relatively short-duration, high burn that are being added have been awarded quarter to quarter. But it's not, I think, just the addition of pass-throughs. It's the study itself has been opened up. And there were some issues with recognizing it in backlog because of uncertainty of the program and stuff. And those relatively short-term programs come on, okay, you get awards, and they burn rather quickly.
Speaker #4: none. I think this is not an issue of sites changing, getting more aggressive. These were known to be very high pass-through projects going in.
Speaker #4: They're just the design of the project is just very heavy on investigator fees. And our I think the characteristics of the stage of the project and what is burning overall in our backlog does cause our conversion rate to shift around quite a bit.
Speaker #4: As we get other projects that don't have as much relatively short duration, high burn that are being added have been awarded quarter to quarter.
Speaker #4: But it's not, I think, just the addition of pass-throughs. It's the study. Itself. Has been opened up. And there were some issues with recognizing it in backlog because uncertainty of the program and stuff.
Speaker #4: Those relatively short-term programs come on—okay, you get awards and they burn rather quickly. I think that will normalize over time. And it is driven partly by the metabolic studies that we have.
August Troendle: I think that will normalize over time. It is driven partly by the metabolic studies that we have, but not specifically because of a change in the expectation at sites.
August Troendle: I think that will normalize over time. It is driven partly by the metabolic studies that we have, but not specifically because of a change in the expectation at sites.
Speaker #4: But not specifically because of a change in the expectation at sites.
Speaker #10: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the extra question. Thanks.
Jesse Geiger: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the extra question. Thanks.
David Windley: Okay. Thank you. Appreciate the extra question. Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Charles Rhyee with TD Cowen. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Charles Rhyee with TD Cowen. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: moment for our next Thank you. One question. Our next question will come from the line of Charles Rahee with TD Cowan. Your line is open.
Speaker #5: Please go ahead.
Speaker #11: Oh, yeah. Thanks for
Charles Rhyee: Yeah. Thanks for taking the question. Maybe just two clarifications, if I could. Kevin, you mentioned earlier that you expect pass-through revenues to be higher at the start of the year than at the end of the year; does that suggest that you expect a lower metabolic mix as you exit 2026? And then second question being, and maybe this is a little bit of follow-up to Dave's question, the way I understand how you think about what goes into backlog versus when you talk about stuff getting canceled out of pre-backlog. So if cancellations were broad-based but elevated, were these cancellations less about funding and maybe more from either trials failing or decisions by sponsors to abandon programs?
Charles Rhyee: Yeah. Thanks for taking the question. Maybe just two clarifications, if I could. Kevin, you mentioned earlier that you expect pass-through revenues to be higher at the start of the year than at the end of the year; does that suggest that you expect a lower metabolic mix as you exit 2026? And then second question being, and maybe this is a little bit of follow-up to Dave's question, the way I understand how you think about what goes into backlog versus when you talk about stuff getting canceled out of pre-backlog. So if cancellations were broad-based but elevated, were these cancellations less about funding and maybe more from either trials failing or decisions by sponsors to abandon programs?
Speaker #11: taking the question. Maybe just two clarifications if I could. Kevin, you mentioned earlier that you expect pass-through revenues to be higher at the start of the year, that at the end of the year.
Speaker #11: expect lower metabolic mix as Does that suggest that you you exit '26? And then the second question being, and maybe this is a little bit of follow-up to Dave's question.
Speaker #11: The way I understand how you think about what goes into backlog versus when you talk about stuff getting canceled out of pre-backlog. So if cancellations were broad-based but elevated, were these cancellations less about funding and maybe more from either trials failing or decisions by sponsors to abandon programs?
Speaker #4: Maybe I'll take your first question, Charles. Just in terms of reimbursables, and I do expect it to start the year higher. So, yeah, to August's comments, we do expect some of that metabolic shift to slow down a little bit.
Kevin Brady: Maybe I'll take your first question, Charles, just in terms of reimbursables. And I do expect it to start the year higher. So yeah, to August's comments, we do expect some of that metabolic shift to slow down a little bit. I wouldn't say it's materially so, but we do expect it to slow down a little bit. What was your second question, Charles?
Kevin Brady: Maybe I'll take your first question, Charles, just in terms of reimbursables. And I do expect it to start the year higher. So yeah, to August's comments, we do expect some of that metabolic shift to slow down a little bit. I wouldn't say it's materially so, but we do expect it to slow down a little bit. What was your second question, Charles?
Speaker #4: I wouldn't say it's materially so, but we do expect it to slow down a little bit. What was your second question, Charles?
Speaker #11: Oh, yeah. I was just trying to understand. You've talked about backlog versus pre-backlog. And my understanding was that pre-backlog cancellations is perhaps more of a funding issue.
Charles Rhyee: Oh, yeah. I was just trying to understand. You've talked about backlog versus pre-backlog. And my understanding was that pre-backlog cancellations is perhaps more of a funding issue. But if something's canceling out of backlog itself, that's probably more of an issue that either a trial maybe wasn't successful and so was canceled, or sponsors actually decide to abandon a program?
Charles Rhyee: Oh, yeah. I was just trying to understand. You've talked about backlog versus pre-backlog. And my understanding was that pre-backlog cancellations is perhaps more of a funding issue. But if something's canceling out of backlog itself, that's probably more of an issue that either a trial maybe wasn't successful and so was canceled, or sponsors actually decide to abandon a program?
Speaker #11: But if something’s canceling out of backlog itself, that’s probably more of a—is that more of an issue that either a trial maybe wasn’t successful, and so it was canceled?
Speaker #11: Or sponsors actually decide to abandon a program?
Speaker #4: Yeah. I mean, that's the case. Things that start up, they restructure. They change. They decide to end the study early. So there were a number of studies ended early because of compound performance.
August Troendle: Yeah. I mean, that's the case. Things that start up, they restructure, they change, they decide to end the study early. So there were a number of studies that ended early because of compound performance. So yeah, but I don't think there was no pattern, and it wasn't just one or two very large projects.
August Troendle: Yeah. I mean, that's the case. Things that start up, they restructure, they change, they decide to end the study early. So there were a number of studies that ended early because of compound performance. So yeah, but I don't think there was no pattern, and it wasn't just one or two very large projects.
Speaker #4: So yeah. But I don't think there was no pattern and it wasn't just one or two very large
Speaker #1: Projects . Okay . Thank you .
Charles Rhyee: Okay. Thank you.
Charles Rhyee: Okay. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Sean Dodge with BMO Capital Markets. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Sean Dodge with BMO Capital Markets. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #2: One moment . Thank you . For our next question . Our next question comes from the line of Sean Dodge with BMO Capital Markets .
Speaker #2: Your line is open . Our next question . Our next question comes from the line of Sean Dodge with BMO Capital Markets . Your line is open .
Jesse Geiger: Yeah. Thanks, Zach. Good morning. Maybe just on guidance, if you could help us with some of the margin puts and takes. At the midpoint, you have about 10 basis points of margin expansion for the year. And that's despite, I know, you all said accelerating hiring for the year, maybe a bit higher percentage for the year of pass-throughs. How much pressure do you expect those to create? And then the offset, is it just predominantly more productivity gains you can drive? And then where are those productivity gains expected to come from? Is it technology, offshoring, something else?
Sean Dodge: Yeah. Thanks, Zach. Good morning. Maybe just on guidance, if you could help us with some of the margin puts and takes. At the midpoint, you have about 10 basis points of margin expansion for the year. And that's despite, I know, you all said accelerating hiring for the year, maybe a bit higher percentage for the year of pass-throughs. How much pressure do you expect those to create? And then the offset, is it just predominantly more productivity gains you can drive? And then where are those productivity gains expected to come from? Is it technology, offshoring, something else?
Speaker #2: Please go .
Speaker #3: Yeah . Thanks . Good morning . Maybe just on guidance . If you could help us with some of the margin puts and takes at the midpoint , you have about ten basis points of margin expansion for the year .
Speaker #3: know you all I And that's accelerated year , hiring for the maybe a bit for the percentage higher year . Pastors . much How expect those create ?
Speaker #3: you to then the And offset is it just predominantly more productivity gains ? drive ? And where are those productivity gains expected to come from ?
Kevin Brady: Yeah. And maybe just in terms of our guidance range, you're kind of at the midpoint. It assumes kind of normal cancellation rates. As Jesse mentioned, from a hiring perspective, we expect to be in the mid to high single digits, which is lower than the expectation on revenue growth. And so what's driving that is just continued expectation that we continue to see good retention throughout 2026, which enables the productivity that we've seen throughout 2025 and exiting 2024. And so it enables us to hire higher, but at a slower rate. So it's not that I would say that we've got major cost-savings initiatives that are out there, or we're certainly not planning on restructuring. We always look for ways to operate in a more efficient way. And so that contributes to some of that margin improvement around the edges.
Kevin Brady: Yeah. And maybe just in terms of our guidance range, you're kind of at the midpoint. It assumes kind of normal cancellation rates. As Jesse mentioned, from a hiring perspective, we expect to be in the mid to high single digits, which is lower than the expectation on revenue growth. And so what's driving that is just continued expectation that we continue to see good retention throughout 2026, which enables the productivity that we've seen throughout 2025 and exiting 2024. And so it enables us to hire higher, but at a slower rate. So it's not that I would say that we've got major cost-savings initiatives that are out there, or we're certainly not planning on restructuring. We always look for ways to operate in a more efficient way. And so that contributes to some of that margin improvement around the edges.
Speaker #3: Is it technology offshoring? Something else?
Speaker #4: just Yeah , maybe just in terms of our guidance range , you know , you're kind of at the at the midpoint at assumes kind of normal cancellation rates .
Speaker #4: As Jesse mentioned from a hiring perspective , we expect to be in the mid to high single digits , which is lower than than the expectation on on revenue growth .
Speaker #4: And so what's driving that is just , you know , continued expectation that we continue to see good retention throughout 2026 , which which enables the productivity that we've seen throughout 2025 .
Speaker #4: And exiting 2024 . And so it enables us to hire , hire . But at a slower rate . So it's not that I would say that we've got cost major savings initiatives that are out there , or we're certainly not planning on restructuring .
Speaker #4: We always look for ways to operate in a more efficient way, and so that contributes to some of that margin improvement around the edges.
Kevin Brady: But by and large, it's going to be driven by just slower hiring ability on good retention.
Kevin Brady: But by and large, it's going to be driven by just slower hiring ability on good retention.
August Troendle: Utilization overall. We also have laboratory operations, which are not huge, but utilization in lab is up. So it's across the board. We've had good productivity.
Speaker #4: But but by and large , it's going to be driven by by just slower hiring ability on on good retention
Speaker #4: But but by and large , it's going to be driven by by just slower hiring ability on on good retention .
August Troendle: Utilization overall. We also have laboratory operations, which are not huge, but utilization in lab is up. So it's across the board. We've had good productivity.
Speaker #4: . And . You know
Speaker #1: , utilization overall . we also You know , utilization have laboratory operations , which are not huge , but , you know , utilization lab is is up .
Jesse Geiger: Yeah. Okay. Thanks. And then maybe just one on AI, since perceptions around that have had a pretty big impact on the space over the last week or so. Just maybe any thoughts you can share on how big of a technological step change you think this is for the space over the next few years, and then to what extent you think that's a longer-term net positive or negative for Medpace, and how are you all positioning? Are you a little bit more insulated just given kind of the nature of your client base? How are you positioned for this? How are you investing around that?
Sean Dodge: Yeah. Okay. Thanks. And then maybe just one on AI, since perceptions around that have had a pretty big impact on the space over the last week or so. Just maybe any thoughts you can share on how big of a technological step change you think this is for the space over the next few years, and then to what extent you think that's a longer-term net positive or negative for Medpace, and how are you all positioning? Are you a little bit more insulated just given kind of the nature of your client base? How are you positioned for this? How are you investing around that?
Speaker #1: You know , test . So , you know , it's it's across the board . We've had good productivity .
Speaker #4: Yeah okay .
Speaker #3: Thanks . And then I'll maybe just one on AI . Since perceptions around that have had a pretty big impact on the space over the last week or so , just maybe .
Speaker #3: Any thoughts you can share on how big of a technological step change you think this is? For the space over the next few years, and then, you know, to what extent you think that's a longer-term net positive or negative for Medpace?
Speaker #3: And how are are you all positioning ? Are you a little bit more just given the , you know , the kind of the nature of your your client base ?
August Troendle: Yeah. I'll address that a little bit. Look, I think it's too early to know what kind of changes. I do think that they will occur slowly. I would not anticipate really any productivity advantage, overall net advantage to AI applications in 2026. And I think that's not because we're not rolling out and doing a lot of things in AI. It's that I think the investment is going to at least equal the benefits seen in this first year of kind of rolling out applications. Where this goes in terms of how much productivity enhancement there is in the long term and what that means to us, I mean, I do think that the productivity advances are going to be to the benefit apart; it's going to be rent to the providers of the models, etc., but are going to be benefits to clients.
August Troendle: Yeah. I'll address that a little bit. Look, I think it's too early to know what kind of changes. I do think that they will occur slowly. I would not anticipate really any productivity advantage, overall net advantage to AI applications in 2026. And I think that's not because we're not rolling out and doing a lot of things in AI. It's that I think the investment is going to at least equal the benefits seen in this first year of kind of rolling out applications. Where this goes in terms of how much productivity enhancement there is in the long term and what that means to us, I mean, I do think that the productivity advances are going to be to the benefit apart; it's going to be rent to the providers of the models, etc., but are going to be benefits to clients.
Speaker #3: How are you positioned for this ? Are you investing around that ?
Speaker #1: Yeah , I'll I'll address that a little bit . think Look , I it's too early to know what what kind of changes ?
Speaker #1: that they will think know , I do occur slowly . I would not anticipate really any productivity advantage . You know , net overall advantage to AI applications in 2026 .
Speaker #1: And I think that's not not because we're out and rolling and doing in a lot of AI . It's things that think the investment I is going to at least equal the , you know , the benefits seen in , in this first year of kind of , you know , rolling out applications know , where , you this goes in terms of , you know , how much enhancement there productivity is , you know , in the long term and what that means to us .
Speaker #1: I mean , I do think that , you know , the productivity advances are going to be to the benefit , you know , a party is going to be rent the to providers of the but models , etc.
August Troendle: And what that means in terms of encouraging more development, etc. But overall, you'd think on the surface of it, it's a net negative to a service company that makes money by providing staff to perform work that is now made more efficient. But I think that the timing of this. It's going to take years. Just what that means, what the opportunities for us are, are difficult to see. I don't really think we have, you'd say, barriers to prevent yeah. I mean, we're hoping to use AI in a lot of applications. We hope it does improve our productivity. And that means potentially, in the long run, fewer staff than you'd otherwise have. And that means a little bit less revenue than you would have otherwise had, at least net revenue.
August Troendle: And what that means in terms of encouraging more development, etc. But overall, you'd think on the surface of it, it's a net negative to a service company that makes money by providing staff to perform work that is now made more efficient. But I think that the timing of this. It's going to take years. Just what that means, what the opportunities for us are, are difficult to see. I don't really think we have, you'd say, barriers to prevent yeah. I mean, we're hoping to use AI in a lot of applications. We hope it does improve our productivity. And that means potentially, in the long run, fewer staff than you'd otherwise have. And that means a little bit less revenue than you would have otherwise had, at least net revenue.
Speaker #1: , , you know , are going to be benefits to clients and , you know what that means in terms of , you know , encouraging more development , you know , etc.
Speaker #1: . But , you know , I overall , you'd think on the surface of it , it's a net negative to , you know , a service company that , you know , makes makes money by providing .
Speaker #1: staff know , to , you You know , to , you know , perform work that is now , you know , made more efficient .
Speaker #1: But I think that , you know , the timing of this , it's going to take years , you know , just what that means , what the opportunities for us are , are , you know , are I difficult to see .
Speaker #1: don't I don't really think we have , you know , you'd say barriers to prevent , you know , you know , mean , we're we're I hoping to use AI in a lot of applications .
Speaker #1: We hope it does improve our productivity . And that means potentially , you know , in the long run , fewer staff you know , need to otherwise have .
Speaker #1: And that means a little bit less revenue than you would have otherwise had, at least net revenue.
Jesse Geiger: Okay. That's very helpful. Thanks again.
Sean Dodge: Okay. That's very helpful. Thanks again.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jailendra Singh, Truist Securities. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jailendra Singh, Truist Securities. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #3: Okay. That's very helpful. Thanks again.
Speaker #2: Thank you . And one moment for our next question . Our next question comes from the line of Jaylen dressing with Truist Securities .
Jailendra Singh: Thank you, Lauren. Thanks for taking my questions. So outside of cancellation spike, you guys called out, did you also see any slowdown in decision-making or business moving from pre-backlog to backlog or within pre-backlog?
Jailendra Singh: Thank you, Lauren. Thanks for taking my questions. So outside of cancellation spike, you guys called out, did you also see any slowdown in decision-making or business moving from pre-backlog to backlog or within pre-backlog?
Speaker #2: Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #1: Thank you . And thanks for taking my questions . So outside of cancellation , spike , you guys called out , did you also see any slowdown in decision making or moving from business pre backlog to backlog or within pre backlog ?
August Troendle: I'm sorry. Changes between pre-backlog and backlog?
August Troendle: I'm sorry. Changes between pre-backlog and backlog?
Jailendra Singh: Yeah. Just in general, in terms of decision-making, like, are projects being getting delayed or the way of moving from pre-Backlog to Backlog? Is the business still moving at the same pace outside of Cancellation?
Jailendra Singh: Yeah. Just in general, in terms of decision-making, like, are projects being getting delayed or the way of moving from pre-Backlog to Backlog? Is the business still moving at the same pace outside of Cancellation?
Speaker #1: I'm sorry , changes between pre backlog and backlog . Yeah . Just in general in terms of decision making like our projects being getting delayed or like the way moving from backlog to backlog is like is the business still moving at the same pace outside of cancellation .
August Troendle: Yeah. Look, I think things are moving along pretty well. There isn't at least an incremental sudden change in the progression of projects. Nothing's seizing up or anything like that. So I think things are relatively normal. You always have cases where some things are held or are slowed down for whatever reasons: drug availability, some they're waiting on results of something. There's always reasons why things can progress into backlog slower than anticipated. They can change the design of the trial. You have to then rework things before you get it launched. But I don't see any real trend there in terms of in the past, sometimes we've seen, because of funding, a seize-up in a lot of things and prevents them from moving forward. We're not seeing that at this time.
August Troendle: Yeah. Look, I think things are moving along pretty well. There isn't at least an incremental sudden change in the progression of projects. Nothing's seizing up or anything like that. So I think things are relatively normal. You always have cases where some things are held or are slowed down for whatever reasons: drug availability, some they're waiting on results of something. There's always reasons why things can progress into backlog slower than anticipated. They can change the design of the trial. You have to then rework things before you get it launched. But I don't see any real trend there in terms of in the past, sometimes we've seen, because of funding, a seize-up in a lot of things and prevents them from moving forward. We're not seeing that at this time.
Speaker #1: Look I think along moving things are Yeah . pretty well there isn't . There at least a incremental , you know , sudden change in , you know , the progression of projects .
Speaker #1: Nothing seizing up or anything like that . So I think things are relatively normal . You always have cases where , you know , some things are held or are slowed down for whatever reasons .
Speaker #1: You know , drug availability , they're waiting some on results of something . There's , you know , there's always reasons why things can progress into backlog slower than anticipated .
Speaker #1: You know , they can change the of the trial . You have to , you know , then rework things before you get it launched .
Speaker #1: But I don't see any real trend there in terms of , you know , in the past , sometimes we've seen a because of funding a seize up in a lot of things that in prevents them from moving forward .
Jailendra Singh: Okay. And then my follow-up, just in general about the competitive landscape, as you guys have called out about top three CROs kind of getting more aggressive in the market, have you seen them kind of continuing to get aggressive in terms of broadening their focus within biotech or in terms of price? Has that had any impact on your win rate? Just give us a little bit more flavor about the landscape in general with these top players getting in the space.
Jailendra Singh: Okay. And then my follow-up, just in general about the competitive landscape, as you guys have called out about top three CROs kind of getting more aggressive in the market, have you seen them kind of continuing to get aggressive in terms of broadening their focus within biotech or in terms of price? Has that had any impact on your win rate? Just give us a little bit more flavor about the landscape in general with these top players getting in the space.
Speaker #1: We're not seeing that at this time . Okay .
Speaker #5: then And my follow up , just in general , about the landscape , competitive as you guys have called out about like top three crows , kind of getting aggressive in more the market , have you seen them kind of continue to aggressive in terms of broadening their focus within biotech or in terms of price ?
Speaker #5: Has that had any impact on your win rate? Just give us a little bit more flavor about the landscape in general with these top players getting the space.
August Troendle: Yeah. I don't think there's anything to say there. I mean, I know they're more aggressively interested in the space because they say they are. But they've been involved in the space all along. And I don't really see a large change in the dynamic. So it's hard for me to know. I do not perceive a difference. We see the same competitors in the space, and it seems to be the same as it was five years ago.
August Troendle: Yeah. I don't think there's anything to say there. I mean, I know they're more aggressively interested in the space because they say they are. But they've been involved in the space all along. And I don't really see a large change in the dynamic. So it's hard for me to know. I do not perceive a difference. We see the same competitors in the space, and it seems to be the same as it was five years ago.
Speaker #1: Yeah , I , you know , I , I don't think there's anything to say there . I mean , you know , I , I , you know , I know there more aggressively interested in the space because they say they are , you know , but they've been involved in the space all along .
Speaker #1: And I don't really see a large change in the dynamic . So , you know , it's me hard for to , to know , you know , I do not perceive a difference .
Speaker #1: We see the same competitors in the space, and it seems to be the same as it was, you know, five years ago.
Jailendra Singh: Got it. Thank you.
Jailendra Singh: Got it. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for our next question.
Jesse Geiger: Hello.
Jesse Geiger: Hello.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Dan Leonard with UBS. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Dan Leonard with UBS. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #5: Got it . Thank you
Speaker #5: .
Speaker #2: One moment for our you . Thank next question . Our next question comes from the line of Dan Leonard with UBS . Your line is open .
Jesse Geiger: Thank you very much. My first question, it looked like from your disclosure that you had a pretty good quarter in large pharma revenue growth. Was there anything unusual to call out there, and would that be sustainable?
Dan Leonard: Thank you very much. My first question, it looked like from your disclosure that you had a pretty good quarter in large pharma revenue growth. Was there anything unusual to call out there, and would that be sustainable?
Speaker #2: Please go ahead .
Speaker #6: Thank you very much. My first question: it looked like, from your disclosure, that you had a pretty good quarter in large pharma revenue growth.
Speaker #6: Was there anything unusual to call out there? And would that be sustainable?
Kevin Brady: Yeah, Dan, I mean, nothing to really call out. I think it might have changed a percentage point, but nothing to call out there. It's not a focus. Large pharma is not a focus for us, so.
Kevin Brady: Yeah, Dan, I mean, nothing to really call out. I think it might have changed a percentage point, but nothing to call out there. It's not a focus. Large pharma is not a focus for us, so.
Speaker #4: Yeah . Dan , nothing , nothing to really call out . I think it changed the might have percentage point , but nothing to call out there .
Jesse Geiger: Thank you. And a follow-up on that AI topic, August, you mentioned that 2026 is the first year you're rolling out applications. Can you elaborate on that comment? What are you rolling out this year, and what do you anticipate? What are you trying to accomplish?
Dan Leonard: Thank you. And a follow-up on that AI topic, August, you mentioned that 2026 is the first year you're rolling out applications. Can you elaborate on that comment? What are you rolling out this year, and what do you anticipate? What are you trying to accomplish?
Speaker #4: It's not a focus . Large farm is not a focus for us . So .
Speaker #6: Thank you . And a follow up on that AI topic , August , you mentioned that 2026 is the first year you're rolling out applications .
August Troendle: Yeah. I don't think we're just going to Jesse, do you want to comment on that?
August Troendle: Yeah. I don't think we're just going to Jesse, do you want to comment on that?
Speaker #6: Can you elaborate on that comment ? What are you rolling out this year and what are you anticipate ? You know , what are you trying to accomplish
[Company Representative] (Medpace Holdings): Yeah. I would just say, in general, I mean, they fall into two categories. One, just a number of different initiatives that are targeted on improving efficiency. And that the blurry line between what do you call AI improvement that's really tech-enabled support, there are different things across the organization that are focused in that category. And then the other category would be assisting with data analytics for feasibility and site selection, and helping the team there with some AI-enabled tech. That's where we're starting.
Jesse Geiger: Yeah. I would just say, in general, I mean, they fall into two categories. One, just a number of different initiatives that are targeted on improving efficiency. And that the blurry line between what do you call AI improvement that's really tech-enabled support, there are different things across the organization that are focused in that category. And then the other category would be assisting with data analytics for feasibility and site selection, and helping the team there with some AI-enabled tech. That's where we're starting.
Speaker #6: ?
Speaker #1: Yeah , I don't think we're you want to that Jesse , do just going . ?
Speaker #7: Yeah , I would just say in general , I mean , they fall into two categories . You know , one , just a number of different initiatives that are targeted on improving efficiency , you know , and that there's a blurry line between , like , what do you call AI improvement ?
Speaker #7: That's really , you know , tech enabled support for different things across the organization that are focused in that category . And then the other category would be , you know , assisting with data analytics for feasibility on site selection and helping helping the team there with , you know , with some AI enabled tech .
Jesse Geiger: Thank you very much.
Dan Leonard: Thank you very much.
Operator: One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Luke Sergott with Barclays. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: One moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Luke Sergott with Barclays. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #7: That's that's where we're starting .
Speaker #6: Thank you very much .
Speaker #2: And one moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Luke with Barclays. Your line is open.
Jesse Geiger: Great. Thanks for the question here. I just wanted to kind of follow up on Dave and kind of the margin questions. So, can you help us understand the near-term leverage that you have to pull as a project starts to ramp on? And what I really want to get at is, let's assume you get some type of booking a year ago, and your assumption is that these are the types of resources that you're going to need to execute this trial. And as that ramps, it starts to either come out that you can actually use less resources or more resources. I just want to understand your flexibility to ramp here.
Luke Sergott: Great. Thanks for the question here. I just wanted to kind of follow up on Dave and kind of the margin questions. So, can you help us understand the near-term leverage that you have to pull as a project starts to ramp on? And what I really want to get at is, let's assume you get some type of booking a year ago, and your assumption is that these are the types of resources that you're going to need to execute this trial. And as that ramps, it starts to either come out that you can actually use less resources or more resources. I just want to understand your flexibility to ramp here.
Speaker #2: Please go ahead .
Speaker #8: Great . Thanks for the question here . just I wanted to kind of follow up on Dave and the kind of the margin questions .
Speaker #8: So , you know , as like , can you help us understand the near-term levers that you have to pull as a project starts to ramp on ?
Speaker #8: And what I really want to get at is , is let's assume you get some type of booking , you know , a year ago and your assumption is that , you know , these are the types of resources that you're going to need to execute this trial .
Speaker #8: And as that ramps , it starts to either come that you can out actually use less resources or more resources . I just want to understand , your like flexibility to ramp here .
Jesse Geiger: This is, I think, important as you think about the overall mix of the bookings and how this has changed from a burn rate and capacity needs as you get as metabolic and to continue to gain share.
Luke Sergott: This is, I think, important as you think about the overall mix of the bookings and how this has changed from a burn rate and capacity needs as you get as metabolic and to continue to gain share.
Speaker #8: This is important as you think about, I think, the overall mix of the bookings and how this has changed from a burn rate and other capacity needs.
Speaker #8: As you know, as metabolic and the like continue to gain share.
Kevin Brady: Yeah. I mean, in terms of our, just remember that in terms of our business model, we like to hire ahead because we are a training shop. We like to train and develop our people. And when you've got larger attrition rates, right, you're having to replace those individuals that you're leaving plus onboard new people. And so what we've seen over the last year or so is that with improved retention rates, you're having to do less of that training. You're only training the ones that are coming in. And because of that, you're seeing more improved productivity because you're spending less time on training and development, and you've got more experienced individuals and staff that are on site.
Kevin Brady: Yeah. I mean, in terms of our, just remember that in terms of our business model, we like to hire ahead because we are a training shop. We like to train and develop our people. And when you've got larger attrition rates, right, you're having to replace those individuals that you're leaving plus onboard new people. And so what we've seen over the last year or so is that with improved retention rates, you're having to do less of that training. You're only training the ones that are coming in. And because of that, you're seeing more improved productivity because you're spending less time on training and development, and you've got more experienced individuals and staff that are on site.
Speaker #4: Yeah , I mean , in terms of our you just remember that in terms of our business model , we like to hire ahead because we are a training like to shop .
Speaker #4: train and develop We people . And when you've got attrition larger rates right , you're having to replace those individuals that you're leaving .
Speaker #4: Plus onboard new people . And so what we've seen over the last year or so is that with improved retention rates , you're having to to to do less of that training , you're only training the ones that are , that are coming in .
Speaker #4: because of And that , you're seeing more improved productivity because you're spending less time on training and development , and you've got more experience .
Kevin Brady: So we continue to operate under that business model of hiring ahead, and we'll continue to do that, but it's at levels that are less than what we had to do two years ago. So what you're seeing is that productivity and that improved utilization continue to play through for us.
Kevin Brady: So we continue to operate under that business model of hiring ahead, and we'll continue to do that, but it's at levels that are less than what we had to do two years ago. So what you're seeing is that productivity and that improved utilization continue to play through for us.
Speaker #4: Individuals and staff that are on site . So we continue to to that business operate under model of hiring ahead , and we'll continue that .
Speaker #4: to do But it's at levels that are that are less than what we had to do . You know , two years ago what you're seeing is .
Speaker #4: So that that productivity and that improved utilization continue to play , continue to play through for us .
Jesse Geiger: All right. Great. And then I guess from your performance obligations over the last that are over three years long have continued to kind of trend down here off of your peaks of Q4 2024. Assume, obviously, that most of this probably due with the faster-burning business. But anything else going here? Is there a change in the duration of these trials or the type of work that's going on?
Luke Sergott: All right. Great. And then I guess from your performance obligations over the last that are over three years long have continued to kind of trend down here off of your peaks of Q4 2024. Assume, obviously, that most of this probably due with the faster-burning business. But anything else going here? Is there a change in the duration of these trials or the type of work that's going on?
Speaker #8: All right . Great . And then I guess from your performance obligations over the last , you know that are over three years long have continued to kind of trend down here off of like your peaks of four Q , 24 .
Speaker #8: Assume obviously there's most of this with the faster burning business , but anything else going here is like , is there a change in the duration of these trials or the type of work that's going on ?
August Troendle: There certainly was an average change in the duration of our trials because we had this substantial ramp in metabolic trials and a number of trials overall that were shorter. But that kind of changes over time. I don't think there's a change in a particular class of trial. I just think it's a change in the mix of trials that we've had in the last few years, last year particularly. But I don't think there's a long-term trend in terms of trial duration changing for a given indication and stage of a trial.
August Troendle: There certainly was an average change in the duration of our trials because we had this substantial ramp in metabolic trials and a number of trials overall that were shorter. But that kind of changes over time. I don't think there's a change in a particular class of trial. I just think it's a change in the mix of trials that we've had in the last few years, last year particularly. But I don't think there's a long-term trend in terms of trial duration changing for a given indication and stage of a trial.
Speaker #1: It certainly was a , you know , average change in the our duration of trials because we had this , you know , substantial ramp in metabolic trials and a number of trials overall that were , you shorter .
Speaker #1: But, kind of, you know, that changes over time. I don't think there's a change in a particular class of trial.
Speaker #1: I just think it's a change in the mix of trials that we've had . You know , in the last , the last years few , last year , particularly .
Speaker #1: I don't think there's a But long term trend in trend in terms of changing for duration trial a given indication . And , you know , stage of trial .
Jesse Geiger: Okay. Great. Thanks.
Luke Sergott: Okay. Great. Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Michael Turney with Leerink Partners. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Michael Turney with Leerink Partners. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #8: Okay. Great. Thanks.
Speaker #2: Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question will come from the line of Michael Cherny with Leerink Partners.
Daniel Clark: Great. Thank you. This is Daniel Clark on for Michael Cherny. Just wanted to ask about pricing. How did that look in your new awards in Q4, and how are you thinking about that for 2026?
Daniel Clark: Great. Thank you. This is Daniel Clark on for Michael Cherny. Just wanted to ask about pricing. How did that look in your new awards in Q4, and how are you thinking about that for 2026?
Speaker #2: Your line is open . Please go ahead .
Speaker #3: Great .
Speaker #9: you . This Thank is Dan Clark on for Mike . Just wanted to ask about pricing . How did that look in your new awards in four ?
August Troendle: I don't think pricing, our pricing on net, has changed materially over time. So I don't think it should have an impact on margin. I think our margin is going to be maintained. I mean, given all the other factors, it's not going to be a driver of a margin change.
August Troendle: I don't think pricing, our pricing on net, has changed materially over time. So I don't think it should have an impact on margin. I think our margin is going to be maintained. I mean, given all the other factors, it's not going to be a driver of a margin change.
Speaker #9: Q and how are you thinking about that for 2026 ?
Speaker #1: I don't think pricing is , you know , our pricing on net is changed materially over time . So I don't I don't think it should have a , you know , impact on margin .
Speaker #1: I think our margin is going to be maintained . Yeah . I mean , given all the other factors , it's not going to be a driver of a margin change .
Daniel Clark: Okay. Got it. Thank you. And then just one more on AI. When you're talking to customers or involved in RFPs, what are they kind of focused on, if anything, from an AI angle? Thank you.
Daniel Clark: Okay. Got it. Thank you. And then just one more on AI. When you're talking to customers or involved in RFPs, what are they kind of focused on, if anything, from an AI angle? Thank you.
Speaker #9: Okay . Thank you . Got it . And then one more on on when you're to talking AI involved or in RFPs , what are they kind of focused on ?
August Troendle: Okay. Go ahead, Jesse.
August Troendle: Okay. Go ahead, Jesse.
[Company Representative] (Medpace Holdings): I was going to say it's a balanced conversation because we do take a very measured approach to AI. We want to balance the benefits with risk management and ensure that, A, we have quality adoption, and B, that we're not putting any of their information at risk. And so the conversations are kind of twofold. One, what are we doing with AI to help with their studies? And at the same time, how are we being good stewards of data to make sure that we continue with high quality and confidentiality?
Jesse Geiger: I was going to say it's a balanced conversation because we do take a very measured approach to AI. We want to balance the benefits with risk management and ensure that, A, we have quality adoption, and B, that we're not putting any of their information at risk. And so the conversations are kind of twofold. One, what are we doing with AI to help with their studies? And at the same time, how are we being good stewards of data to make sure that we continue with high quality and confidentiality?
Speaker #9: If anything, from an eye angle? Thank you. Yeah.
Speaker #1: More . Go ahead .
Speaker #7: I was going it's to say a balanced conversation because we we do take a very measured approach to AI . You know , we want to balance the benefits with risk management and ensure that a we have quality adoption and B , that we're not putting any of their information at risk .
Speaker #7: And so the conversations are are kind of two twofold . One , you know , what are we doing with AI to help us with their studies .
Speaker #7: And at the same time, how are we being good stewards of data to make sure that we continue with high quality and confidentiality?
Operator: All right. Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jay Lewis with Baird. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Operator: All right. Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jay Lewis with Baird. Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #2: All right. Thank you. And one moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Jay with Baird.
Jesse Geiger: Hey. Thanks. I appreciate the question. I was wondering if you could give us any more color on the new signings in the Q4, that tranche of business that would have largely moved into your pre-backlog. And could you give any quantification on that pre-backlog and maybe how much it's up year-over-year, quarter-over-quarter?
Jay Lewis: Hey. Thanks. I appreciate the question. I was wondering if you could give us any more color on the new signings in the Q4, that tranche of business that would have largely moved into your pre-backlog. And could you give any quantification on that pre-backlog and maybe how much it's up year-over-year, quarter-over-quarter?
Speaker #2: Your line is open. Please go ahead.
Speaker #10: thanks . I Hey , appreciate the question . I was wondering if you could give us any more color on the new signings in the fourth quarter .
Speaker #10: That tranche of business that would have largely moved into your pre-backlog. And could you give any quantification on that backlog, and maybe how much it's up year over year, quarter over quarter?
August Troendle: Yeah. We don't provide details on that. Q4 was a bit light as was the prior Q4, but we don't give exact magnitude on that.
August Troendle: Yeah. We don't provide details on that. Q4 was a bit light as was the prior Q4, but we don't give exact magnitude on that.
Speaker #1: Yeah . We don't provide you know details on . Q4 that was a bit light on as as was the prior Q4 . But .
Jesse Geiger: Okay. And then could you speak to the impacts that you've seen from this accelerating M&A environment with large pharma buying your clients and any impact that may have had on your revenue, your bookings, or your future revenue projections?
Jay Lewis: Okay. And then could you speak to the impacts that you've seen from this accelerating M&A environment with large pharma buying your clients and any impact that may have had on your revenue, your bookings, or your future revenue projections?
Speaker #1: We don't we don't give , you know , exact magnitude on that .
Speaker #10: Okay . And then could you speak to the impacts that you've seen from this accelerating M&A environment with large the pharma buying your clients and any impact that may have had on on your revenue , your bookings or your your future revenue projections ?
August Troendle: I'm sorry. What would have an impact?
August Troendle: I'm sorry. What would have an impact?
Jesse Geiger: The accelerating M&A environment with large pharma buying some of your clients.
Jesse Geiger: The accelerating M&A environment with large pharma buying some of your clients.
Speaker #1: I'm sorry , what would have an impact ?
August Troendle: Yes. It's obviously a potential. A number of our clients have been purchased in the past year. They continue to be. But we have a pretty broad base of clients, so I don't anticipate that to be an issue. Generally, we don't lose the work that we're doing with the client. We generally lose the client long-term, and they get incorporated into a large pharma. But it's generally not a short-term risk, but it happens not infrequently.
August Troendle: Yes. It's obviously a potential. A number of our clients have been purchased in the past year. They continue to be. But we have a pretty broad base of clients, so I don't anticipate that to be an issue. Generally, we don't lose the work that we're doing with the client. We generally lose the client long-term, and they get incorporated into a large pharma. But it's generally not a short-term risk, but it happens not infrequently.
Speaker #10: Yeah. Accelerating M&A environment, with large pharma buying some of your clients.
Speaker #1: Yes . I it's obviously a potential our clients you know a number of our clients have been purchased in the year . They continue to be .
Speaker #1: But we a have pretty broad you know , base of clients . So I you know , I don't anticipate that to be a , an issue .
Speaker #1: Generally we don't lose the work that we're doing with the client . We generally lose the client long term , and they get pharma .
Speaker #1: Incorporated into a large, not a short, it's generally a long-term risk. But it happens not infrequently.
Jesse Geiger: Good. Thank you.
Jay Lewis: Good. Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. I would now like to hand the conference back over to Lauren Morris for closing remarks.
Operator: Thank you. I would now like to hand the conference back over to Lauren Morris for closing remarks.
Speaker #10: Good . Thank you .
Lauren Morris: Thank you for joining us on today's call and for your interest in Medpace. We look forward to speaking with you again on our Q1 2026 earnings call.
Lauren Morris: Thank you for joining us on today's call and for your interest in Medpace. We look forward to speaking with you again on our Q1 2026 earnings call.
Speaker #2: Thank you . And I would now like to hand the conference back over to Lauren Morris for closing remarks .
Speaker #11: Thank you for joining us on today's call and for your interest in Medpace. We look forward to speaking with you again on our first quarter 2025 earnings call.
Operator: This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.
Operator: This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. Everyone, have a great day.
