Gregory S. Bentley
Good morning, and thanks to each of you for your interest in BSY. Please pardon my voice, which is suffering from a summer cold. CEO, Nicholas; and CFO, Werner, will, as always, report in detail Bentley Systems continued excellent operating and financial results for '25 Q2, and thus, for the first half of 2025 as we track consistently towards our outlook range for this full year. Earlier this year, in reviewing 24 Q4 I looked back over the years since BSY's IPO in 2020 to quantify that our outlook range for 2025 would complete the process of at least doubling over these 5 years each of our key financial metrics of ARR, revenues, adjusted operating income less stock-based compensation and free cash flows while minimizing equity dilution. Then most recently, in reviewing '25 Q1, I likewise looked back 5 years to quantify the respects in which we've purposefully gained further business resilience over the span. It is even more clear this quarter that we're currently benefiting from those improvements. Our excellent operating performance to date in 2025 is in keeping with a primary sustaining long-term growth driver over this period and which will prevail foreseeably. Going digital has become the enduring priority for infrastructure engineering, in particular, because of pervasive resource constraints. To keep up with the world's imperatives for infrastructure performance, resilience and adaptation, each BSY user and account needs each year to achieve step functions in productivity and value generation through enhanced utilization of software, cloud services and AI. To help quantify such progress and software consumption per engineer, I would like now to, again, but for the last time, I think, look back over 5 years but this time with reference to external market data. This slide, which we still use in our intro deck today, shows global counts of engineers and related technicians and their software expenditures as tabulated by U.K. global research firm, Cambashi. Conveniently, for our process of monitoring the long-term trend, this last data that we had on engineering employment and spending is for 2019, immediately preceding BSY's IPO. We originally compared spending per engineer/technician for infrastructure engineering to that of product engineering to glean a data point for the market potential headroom. But now for the purpose of this look-back, let's examine the changes in just infrastructure engineering spending over time as Cambashi has just provided an update, which slightly refines 2019, and which most importantly, introduces the most recent year for which this data, including engineering employment is available, 2023. I do not find it surprising that over these 4 years, the total number of infrastructure engineers and supporting technicians has only increased by about 1% per year on average. While there isn't sufficient granularity in both data sets to establish this, I believe that even this nominal increase is concentrated in less developed countries, while I believe that in countries like the U.S., infrastructure engineering retirements have exceeded new graduates. Most significantly, Cambashi finds that software spending by infrastructure engineer/technician has grown at a compounded annual growth rate of about 10% over this period. And this is in nominal rather than constant currencies. Cambashi's estimate is that the constant currency growth rate was a full percent higher. By virtue of BSY's constant currency revenue growth rate during the period, we somewhat outgained this broader market. Hence, software spending per infrastructure engineer/technician has grown about 9% in nominal currencies or indeed approximately 10% in constant currencies over this period. Even so, the $514 annually per engineer or technician tends to appear low compared to averages for BSY users. Usefully, for this newly available 2023 data, Cambashi has provided refinements for better understanding. To start with, we can now focus on employment and spending just for engineers rather than also including the technician categories, which are rather miscellaneous and less representative of BSY's primary user profile. See here Cambashi's observation that in 2023, 17.6 million infrastructure engineers globally spent $10.2 billion on engineering and GIS software averaging a relatively higher annual spending of $579 per engineer. For this new 2023 data, Cambashi also provides analysis of employment and spending down to the level of countries classified together within the 5 quintile tiers of per capita GDP. The wide variation in average spending is striking to me. The engineers in the most developed Level 1 countries, while nearly the least numerous, spend the significant plurality of the global total, averaging over $1,900 per year per engineer. This is generally consistent with BSY's average and global uniform pricing and utilization for E365. So the numerical bulk of infrastructure engineers in less developed country levels represent a multiple of long-term upside opportunity as they inevitably will tend to catch up in going digital and in expenditures to do so. Now coming back to Bentley Systems and our standing as the market leader in so many infrastructure engineering market segments, as we show in our own assessment of the competitive landscape in this slide from our intro deck, let's examine Cambashi data to understand how so much of this $10 billion in software spending by infrastructure engineers obviously goes elsewhere than to BSY. To do this, let's parse the full $14 billion of now 2024 software revenue, which Cambashi ascribes to BIM. This term originally referred to building information modeling decades ago, but has come to connote as here a catch-all for what could otherwise be described as AEC for architecture, engineering and construction as opposed to product engineering or manufacturing. Within this total, BIM design is not only the largest submarket, but we believe it is the prerequisite to success throughout the others. The greatest ultimate opportunity is for digital twins to support infrastructure, operations and maintenance. Although this submarket is only nascent so far, we think our asset analytics initiative portends its comparatively unlimited potential monetized per asset rather than per engineer. But the potential compounding value of a digital twin depends significantly upon its assimilation of the digital context, digital components and digital chronology from the BIM design. So here, per Cambashi, are the market shares within the $6.5 billion of BIM design revenues. The largest by far is for Autodesk followed significantly by Bentley, Schneider, Hexagon, Nemetschek, Trimble, and in all China, I have grouped together all the Chinese companies identified by Cambashi listed here in the fine print. To help understand the widely varied mix across infrastructure segments per competitor within BIM design, Cambashi analyzes each company's such revenues by product category within plant; architectural, which includes mechanical, electrical and plumbing or MEP; civil; and structural. Looking here at the relative proportions for each company, one sees says that every one of these punitive competitors has a considerably different primary focus than Bentley Systems. At Bentley Systems, we don't break out product revenues in these same categories. and I suspect that Cambashi's estimates here seem to discount Seequent's major share of geotechnical and environmental software used in civil engineering. While we have a comprehensive portfolio across all disciplines required for major infrastructure projects, including their plant and building engineering aspects, our focus is characterized by civil in supporting structural products, primarily for horizontal infrastructure networks. By contrast, Hexagon and Schneider's design products are clearly focused primarily on plant engineering Nemetschek design products are concentrated in architectural/MEP. Trimble's design products are primarily divided between architectural MEP and structural to support such buildings. China has more or less official state-owned software for its country-specific structural analysis code and many competitors for building software. Finally, the primary design product focus for our principal competitor, Autodesk, is architectural/MEP for vertical infrastructure buildings. Within Autodesk's civil product share, its offerings for civil site design likewise associated with buildings loom large. And as you may recall, we at BSY see this as a substantial competitive upside opportunity. Our BIM design software peers and competitors are worthy and resourceful. While our space is desirable and envied, each of these others have a principal focus that is clearly different. I believe that we are favorably differentiated by virtue of our established franchise as the outright market leader in comprehensive infrastructure engineering software, particularly for the horizontal networks of public work/utilities, grids, roads and bridges, rail and transit, water and wastewater and resources and the geo professional disciplines, structural disciplines and project delivery collaboration across all of this. Given the world's prevailing imperatives for infrastructure performance, resilience and adaptation, I wouldn't trade positions with any design software peer or competitor. Notwithstanding this favorable competitive backdrop, our consistent execution should not be taken for granted, and I commend our management and colleagues for '25 Q2. Over now to Nicholas.