Hello and welcome to The Download. I'm your host, Dave Richardson, and it is Stu’s days. And today we are live from the Metro Toronto Convention Center. This is the 2026 Investment Sessions. We have approximately—I didn't count but—500 or 600 people here, advisors from all across the country, some of the top financial planners in the Canadian financial planning business, here to hear from top investment professionals. And there's no one better to start with—the reason we call it Stu’s days—than Stu Kedwell, Global Chief Investment Officer with RBC Global Asset Management. Stu, welcome to your podcast, but this is your first live one.

That's right. Well, thanks, Dave, and thanks to everyone for coming today to hear what we have to say. Thanks for everything you do for our clients. As Dave said, it's been a very challenging environment, and the discussions you have with the clients is absolutely key.

Yeah, absolutely. One of the things that we always emphasize on, although we're talking to people like yourselves who are investment managers, or in your case, managing groups of investment managers all around the world, the most important piece of the puzzle is the advisor and the advice and the financial plan and investment plan in front of the actual investor, the actual client. And that's why we love working with advisors so much. I know you love getting opportunities to come out and spend time with advisors because we know how critical the role that these people play in forging the success of clients. They're the key piece.

100%. When you have a relationship with a client, you need to understand their capacity to take risk, their tolerance to risk, and then we need to evaluate the attractiveness of risk. Two-thirds of that equation is taking place in the financial planning relationship, which is why it's so important.

Absolutely. And then the other piece of the puzzle is to get great investment management, to get people who are delivering great performance on a risk-adjusted basis at a fair price, and that's what you and your team are put in place to do.

Yeah, it's been really something. Obviously, I knew many elements of our firm before I started this role a little over a month ago. I worked with Dan for almost 30 years, so the idea that there would be some radical change, if I had all these ideas, I would have suggested them to him. So there's a lot of continuity, but it has given me the opportunity to get to know parts of our firm even better. And it's hard not to be impressed by the depth of investment process and the seriousness with which people take their roles.

We were just over in London with a different group of advisors a couple of weeks ago. We have another group coming over in a couple of weeks, which is always great because then we really get to spend time talking to advisors. And what they walked away with was really a sense of the depth of the team. And you were also able to, as you say, paint a picture, as you come on and you take on this big role and you say continuity is important, but what are some of the things you're looking at in terms of where you might want to evolve the investment process or evolve some of the product lineup? What do you look at first thing and say, there's an opportunity there that we want to take a look at?

Probably artificial intelligence is going to be a big opportunity, which we can discuss. But I'll start with a story about Dan's retirement. Many of you heard him talk about Sky Racing, the bicycle team. And this racing team had gone through studying every component of how long the racers slept, what they ate, how the bike worked, the pedals, the chain, etc. And that was the analogy that we used for investment research and investment process for a long period of time. I did joke with them that it was always this incrementalism that drove Sky's success. But it didn't defeat the analogy. In the early 2000s, there was a fantastic article which is still on the New Yorker website called The Checklist. And it's had such a significant impact on how we do investment process where Dave mentioned we don't predict, we prepare. We try and envision all sorts of scenarios in advance. And you really try and break a decision down into its minutiae parts and then improve each one to get to better long-term results. Along those lines, when you think about an investment manager, what they do. We have 4 groups of analysis, and you're going to hear from most of them today. We have Eric doing top-down analysis. We have portfolio managers and analysts doing fundamental analysis. What's the management of the company like? What is the business opportunity at hand? How's the company going to put capital to work and what type of returns might they earn? There's quantitative research, which Jaco Van der Walt—I'm not sure if he's on the list today—but he runs our quantitative research program. And that, historically, has purely been the study of the financial component of the business. So, you could have two businesses, and you could say, well, this one's revenue grows faster than its peer over long periods of time and it has slightly higher margins. And our analyst thinks the other one's really good, but the stats just don't bear it out. So it's a great check to the fundamental analysis. And then the last leg of analysis is what they call technical analysis, which is listening to the stock market for feedback around what you might think. Everyone can look at a stock chart. We're not the type of investors that just buy a stock because it's at a new high. But technical analysis should force a question back to the portfolio. So if the stock you like is going down, then you should consider, well, what is the bear case? What is what someone else is worried about that maybe I've discounted? So we have these 4 types of analysis. And then you get into portfolio construction, which is how you put the portfolio together. You get into risk management, which is stress testing the portfolio in advance for a variety of different outcomes. And then you have execution, which is trading. So across GAM you have these 400 investment professionals and each one of them are involved in one of those 7 buckets. Now we've thought very carefully about each of those 7 over long periods of time. And with the incorporation of artificial intelligence, the convergence is coming between what they call quantitative investment and fundamental investment, this convergence between the two. Jaco is leading what we call AI for Alpha. And it's really trying to identify this convergence. And by that, I mean that quantitative model that might have looked at financial metrics in the past, now it will be reading social media, it will be reading transcripts, it will be reading government documents. The same things that the fundamental analysts might have done, but doing it in that very rigorous and methodical manner to say, is there a change going on in this business? And there'll be lots of opportunity. I think one thing that's underappreciated by most money managers, we make mistakes and usually our long-term success is determined by the speed with which we deal with our mistakes. And this convergence of analysis is going to be very powerful in highlighting and dealing with mistakes earlier. We normally have more questions on the podcast, but I'm kind of working with this. Everything we do, we try and look at it very methodically. My wife was a physician, and I always was amazed how rigorous when she was in medical school and as a resident, when there was a mistake inside of the hospital, without assessing blame, how rigorous they were at figuring out what went wrong so it wouldn't happen again. So when we came in last year and my role started to morph, the first thing we did was we looked at all of our performance across what I would call 4 buckets of performance. The first is the returns you get from the stocks you own. Every investor would say, yeah, I need that. The second bucket is the negative returns from the stocks I own. So, occasionally I'm going to have stocks that don't perform well and that's going to be a draw on the portfolio. So I have my wins, my losses, and then there's all these stocks in the stock market I don't own. And sometimes not owning them generates performance. So that would be the third bucket. And sometimes not owning them costs you performance. And those are things where it's either a risk you're unwilling to take or you didn't pay enough attention. Each of those 4 buckets have very specific things that you need to study in order to maximize them. The interesting thing across all of our portfolios is our bucket 1 is very large. Which is the first ingredient for a portfolio. Looking at our performance, what we determined was if we could lower or half our bucket 2, that was going to be one of the largest sources of incremental performance. This kind of counterintuitive. Quite often you would think about a portfolio and you’d think you need more good performance. Everyone's going to say, I need more of bucket 1. But our bucket 1 already was quite large. So how do we eliminate bucket 2? That's where we think, the long way around the convergence of quantitative and fundamental investing through artificial intelligence, we think is going to be very helpful on identifying and changing positions early that might be in that bucket.

So the tool just gives you the power at so many levels to provide better inputs or to get inputs faster for what you've identified. Because to have that great bucket one, what you have to have is a bunch of people who are very good at picking investments, great stock pickers, great bond pickers, credit pickers. It just allows people who are great at doing that picking to have better data in front of them so they can make better decisions, be even better stock pickers, and as you say, it's going to highlight the mistakes, the positions you want to get out of faster to reduce what you're suggesting. Maybe the most overlooked and most important piece of portfolio management is, don't get killed by your mistakes.

100%. Baseball's a great analogy for the investment business. We can look across a portfolio manager's batting average and we can say, well, your batting average is more than good enough to win. It's just that, sometimes like when you strike out, it's not just like 3 strikes and you're down. It's like you took tremendous rips at each one of those stocks, you pulled muscles, you did all sorts of things that were unnecessary. So much of the business is behavioral. You see it all the time in dealing with your clients about how their behaviors change in response to different events and different emotions. Well, portfolio managers are exactly the same. And if you can go to someone with something small to work on, the odds of that being executed are much higher than just saying you're struggling. You go to them with a prepackaged set of solutions. And step up like that bucket one was very good, more than enough across our funds. So, that’s an example of process. And then, I do think this convergence with AI of fundamental and quantitative investing. You will have a transcript. Companies will have quarterly conference calls and the tone on that conference call might give something away even if the words are the same or one of the words might change. The artificial intelligence will be listening to the tone, marrying it with the financial results, with the fundamental analysis. It's going to be very positive.

One of the things we've talked about on the podcast before, and I think for advisors, anyone listening, one of the most important things is make sure that you're using these tools that are available to the public. And then I'd even recommend going beyond that and going for the pro version, paying a little bit of a fee per month so that you get the best of what's available in AI so that you can learn how to adapt because things are going to evolve very rapidly in AI as they are in the investment management business. They're also going to evolve very quickly in the advice business. What you're doing. Your clients are going to be using these tools as well. You need to be on top of those things. You've got tools in-house, but use some of the tools that are out-house. That was going to be a bad one. That's why people tune in to listen to you, not the dumb host. But you want to make sure that you've got the best tools available, you're learning what is out there, because other people are taking advantage of that. You want to take advantage of it too. And you're definitely doing it inside the investment management shop.

We're one of the guinea pigs inside the bank. Many of you will know that the bank has a division called Borealis, which has been in place for a long time, which has lots of data scientists, lots of physicists and mathematicians, and people that understand computers in a manner that I could only dream of. But our quantitative group through Jaco is working with them. RBC Assist, which some of you may have on your desktop. RBC Assist Pro is the latest version. Getting access right through to the internet, working in a confined area. So from a regulatory standpoint, everyone is very comfortable. That has been a huge advantage for this team. And I think it's going to really pay off. And these projects cost a lot of money. It's going to be very difficult for everybody to do them. And I think it's going to be a benefit of a large asset manager.

Yeah, and as you say, this is not something that we're just sitting and waiting to have happen to us. We're out in front of it. And that's what you have to be.

100%. Like you say, 5 or 6 years ago, every younger person that came into the business, we encouraged them to learn Python. Having domain expertise is a huge benefit when it comes to these skills. But also now the artificial intelligence will tell you how to download Python, write a script for you. So it is evolving very quickly.

What I've been pumping into my AI bot over the last few days is what's going on around the world. We should probably at least spend a little bit of time on that today. So the most important thing is the process. The most important thing is that we're using all the tools, we're getting all the right data in front of people, but we also have to be aware of what's going on around the world. Any quick comments out of the gate on the conflict in the Middle East and how that's been shaping or changing the views of the firm in relation to investing around the world.

For sure. We can delve into this a number of different ways. You're going to hear a lot about it today from the other money managers. So, as a firm, we have multiple investment committees that meet. We've probably met 3 or 4 times in the last 7 or 8 days to have a discussion around how these events are evolving. There's a couple of things. Backing up to the 10,000-foot view, before these events started to come to the surface, we had a market where valuations were elevated. They've been very strong in recent periods of time. There had been what they call private credit, which is not an area that we have exposure to, but there has been some loan losses and some frauds in private credit. In and of itself it’s not a large pool of assets in the grand scheme of the global environment, but it still is a couple of trillion dollars. So it's not insignificant either. Before these events came along, you had valuations at somewhat elevated levels. You had some concerns. I think there were two bubbling concerns. The first was some losses on the private credit front. And the second thing was, as excited as we might be about artificial intelligence and the benefits to our business, for the first time in the last 6 months, the amount of capital that is going into artificial intelligence investments moved past the free cash flow that these businesses were generating. The way to think about that, if I was doing construction on my house and I was paying for that construction out of my paycheck, then in your head you're like, okay, as soon I need to stop it, my paycheck resumes, but if I start borrowing money to do the construction, then I'm taking on incremental risk. So the returns that I get on that investment need to be even more homed in and subject to what I hope for. So in the last 12 months, when you look at Microsoft, Apple, Google, and others, the amount of free cash flow they generate, as large as these investment numbers are, until last year it used to be coming out of their pocket. And last year it started to come from borrowing money. So, the stock market naturally takes a view when that takes place of, oh, that's a little different. There’s a little bit of uncertainty. Just like when you build a house, if you're sitting there talking to your contractor and they say, well, this is the quote. And you say, well, when is this quote a really good number? And normally the contractor will say, look, if we can get the foundation done and we get to ground, then I know I'm in good shape. And we're at that kind of phase of this incremental spending where we're not yet at ground. So people are likely to be a little bit uncertain around, is all this going to pay off? Is it going to end up costing more? It's not that I can't see the ultimate benefits, but what will the ultimate economics look like? So there were two things that were in the attention of the market before the war in Iran started. And against that, we had kept risk at the lower end of the spectrum that we might otherwise have. We weren't negative, but if there was a scale of 1 to 5 of how much risk you would take, we were down around 1. Then the war in Iran comes along, and there's a tremendous amount of historical financial data to deal with to give you scenarios about how to play these types of events. And at the top of the list, it says don't panic because they normally resolve themselves. And in fact, there was so much discussion over that first weekend that markets were actually up on Monday, as I think people were almost hoping for some type of panicky reaction. And it really didn't present itself. Since then, the war has evolved in a manner that has created a little bit more uncertainty, and unlike the tariffs, it's harder for the United States to put an end to some of this uncertainty. Many of you will have heard in the news, it takes two to tackle. That's unfortunately where we're at on the Iranian war. If you sat there on Friday night and you had written down a list of things that you thought might take place in the next 2 weeks, there's a bunch of things that certainly wouldn't have been on that list. Seeing Iran attack some of its neighbors and things like this. And then watching over the weekend some of the missiles going after the Diego Garcia base, some of the missiles into Israel, which traditionally would've been intercepted by some of the technology. I think it has changed the tenure a little bit of how people think about this and lead to maybe more prolonging and doesn't make it quite as clean from just an event that's going to come and pass. So then you have all this discussion around the war itself, but you still need to revisit where was the starting point. And the starting point was markets were at the higher end of valuation and there were some beginning events that we had to think through. So I think it's going to take a little bit more time to work our way out. You can go back and you can look at history with COVID. When we'd all been inside for 12 months and there was the hint of a vaccine, markets just said, pfft, it's over. And that was at a very low starting point from valuation. And we also knew that there was all this pent-up demand as we'd all been inside for 12 months. Here you could have a conclusion to the war, and obviously that's everyone's hope, but where is the pent-up demand? Where is the valuation to grow into? Those are harder questions to answer because of where we were before. So, we're thinking through a whole variety of scenarios. And this is not something that upsets the applecart for an intermediate-term investor, but it does create a little bit more of a malaise in the short term.

Yeah, and I just wanted to point out, coincidentally, as you mentioned COVID, when the market started to move with the COVID bottom, that was March 23rd. We got a little rally yesterday, so I'm just hopeful that March 23rd is the bottom and the worst of this. But when you look out at scenarios, you use the scenario analysis. Sarah Neilson was on the podcast a couple of weeks ago, and hopefully everyone had a chance to listen to it. Please make sure you subscribe, that's a good thing, and for your investors who work with you, make sure that they're subscribing to the podcast, checking in on YouTube, giving reviews, because if you miss something, like Sarah said, really critical that when you were looking at the scenarios coming into the fall and in December, January, one of the scenarios, because the US was accumulating military assets in around the Middle East, was to say, hey, with valuations, there's an opportunity here in energy. And you took advantage of that, the one big winner so far this year. And by the way, what's surprising about it is the bulk of the outperformance was driven before the crisis started, and that was in energy. And so that scenario analysis allowed you to make a call, which again added value for the investors with RBC.

Yeah, for sure. I remember sitting there in January and I was having a discussion with a group not dissimilar to this. Agnico-Eagle, which is Canada's largest gold producer. The amount of free cash flow that was coming from Suncor was the same as was coming from Agnico-Eagle. And Agnico-Eagle was 2.5 times the size of Suncor. And that was based on $5,500 gold and $60 oil. So that's a classic scenario analysis type discussion where you don't need to know the ins and outs of Agnico-Eagle and/or Suncor just to sit there and say I'm getting more free cash flow at a lower price in this business. I think it's pretty hard for crude oil to go much lower than this because of the cost of bringing it online. So you were collecting these series of free options in a stock like that at the time. And free options, that's like nirvana for a portfolio manager. Risk is never fully asymmetric, but when it starts to really lean in your favor, that's something you want to take advantage of.

And just another great example of what a professional investment manager does that's a little bit different from just someone who's buying and trying to cobble together a portfolio of stocks, that level of analysis and identifying—and now the tools you've got are even more powerful to do this—to identify what was essentially two mispriced assets. Now you don't know exactly when that's going to change, but I'd rather have the cheaper version and take a bet on that for the long term than the more expensive. I think the cost of producing an ounce of gold is around $2,000, $2,500 an ounce. So gold sitting at $5,500, clearly overvalued. And if oil's sitting at $60—that's kind of fair value, maybe, probably not taking into account the risk premium that we've now come to appreciate—but oil's probably undervalued. So there was an opportunity to make a bet that most people weren't betting because gold was shooting through the roof and energy didn't look like it was going anywhere.

Yeah, going back to that toolkit as well, technical analysis is not something that most investors put in their toolkit. But, there's a great line around technical analysis, which is when I go hunting, I take my dog, but I don't give him the gun. And technical analysis is like that. It's always sniffing out where opportunity might exist in the market. And then you can look at a bunch of technical scores and say, I don't have that opportunity in my portfolio. Why is that? And then sometimes you conclude, no, it's not something I want, but it does move you towards different things. Starting last November and December, there was a real movement towards energy and some basic material stocks, and some industrial stocks that have proven to be beneficiaries. So that's another way of just listening to the markets. I'm sure we've all heard the birds chirping in the last week. Even though it's cold, the birds know spring is coming. And technical analysis can be a similar type of form of analysis.

Let's just finish off, and we'll make the comment that one of the critical elements that technical analysis would have been highlighting over the weekend was you had a breach of the 200-day moving average. Maybe you can give a brief comment on what the 200-day moving average is, what the significance is. The major market averages fell below their 200-day moving average. Yesterday brought them back up to that 200-day moving average, and so it's sitting there waiting for how everything plays out. Very headline-driven at this point, not so much fundamental, but the significance of where we're sitting right now from a technical perspective, and then maybe paint out the best worst-case scenario that we might see out of this. You are the global chief investment officer, you can handle multiple questions all at once. What do we say to our customers about everything given what's out there?

Yeah, there's a lot in that. When you start with valuation, it is not a wonderful timing tool. And when valuations are elevated, it often leads to slightly lower longer-term returns. So then you look for other clues. There's a great investor line that says narrative follows price. So when price is rising, people focus on all the optimistic things that are taking place. When price is falling, they focus on all the negative things, even though the optimistic and the negative things didn't really change that much. So as markets have pulled back into this war-related activity, if you take the price over the last 200 days and you make an average, it's like saying that's where anyone who's owned stocks for the last 200 days, that's the price that they owned it at. And when the stock market is above it, people in the last 200 days have been making money. And we all know—you know better than me with all your discussions—when people are making money, they feel good. And when they start to lose money, so it goes below the 200-day moving average, then they start to question, what am I doing? Why am I doing this? I don't like losing money. And it tends to be initially some type of support, which we've seen, in the last couple of days. And it's often an area that markets will bounce on and will try tactically to take advantage of some of those opportunities. But it is also a period of time when you get more of this discussion. This is what would I say to investors: over a long period of time, markets are like staircases. They tend to do nothing and then it all comes in a hurry. And a great case in point for this is the Royal Bank. I think if you look at long periods of time, you can often have a couple of years of this kind of range-bound type activity and we're collecting our dividends and we're having discussions around the pros and cons. And then eventually the pros tip the scales, and you get this price movement in a shorter period of time. And broad markets are similar. So we know that over time, earnings drive markets, and we know over time that valuations are fairly dependent on interest rates. So, on those two fronts—and you'll hear today lots about interest rates—but there's lots of concern in the short term around inflation and will there be inflation from higher oil prices? That tends to be fleeting. You get a bump and then it ends up actually being a little bit deflationary over time. So we can run different scenarios on, well, what if inflation is 2%, 2.5%, 3%? At the same time as we have concerns on the supply side that might add to inflation. We've also had these massive discussions around artificial intelligence and will they be deflationary. So, when you have a bond yield in the neighborhood of 4 to 4.5%, that's probably okay for a variety of the inflation expectations that we start with. The range of outcomes. If you said, well, interest rates had to be 50 basis points higher or lower, is collecting the coupon and a change in a 10-year bond of around 3.5%. That seems relatively modest compared to what we've seen in some of the equity markets. The bedrock of valuation is interest rates. And you say, well, that's probably not a tailwind, but it’s not likely to be a headwind. That part's okay. The valuation is okay. Then you get back to earnings and earnings are a function of revenue and margins, and those have been cast a little bit into doubt in the short term. And that's why you're seeing additional volatility. When those clear, and that volatility can last for a period of time—and that's why they always say «time in the market», not «timing the market». Because when those clouds clear, the staircase can be quite quick. You think back to something like the Canadian bank stocks where the discussion was heavily focused on the health of the Canadian consumer. And then one day that just ended and up they went. And it's not that the Canadian consumer is now massively strong. He is actually still struggling with a lot of issues, but the stock market just concluded that those issues are dealable inside of the banks. We talked a lot about the phases of the stock market. There's «good and getting better». That's a good time to be an investor. There's «good and not getting better». It can be trending. There's «good and getting worse». That's a tougher time in the short term. And then there's «bad and getting better». And that is often the best time to be an investor because you're saying, well, I'm worried about all these things. And then a week later you're like, well, there's nothing else on my list. It's still the same list. And then 2 weeks later, well, it's actually one shorter. Even though you think it's still not great, you still have this list of worries. As it starts to shrink, the stock market is crossing them off the list and prices are doing better.

Yeah, and I think you were telling that exact story a year ago when we were in the midst of all of the concerns around tariffs and around the Canadian economy. You'd already moved to more of a weighting in Canada, outside the US, more to Europe, Japan, and the idea that at that point, in the midst of all the tariff issues, Canada was in that situation where it was bad, and it couldn't get a whole lot worse. So even bad news coming beyond that was probably going to be better than the last bad news, and sure enough, that's how things played out, and we had a great year in Canadian equities. One of the things that we need to learn as advisors, and I think we know it intuitively, all of our training, all the education. We're all doctors. I'm a financial planner myself. We're the doctors of financials, of the financial industry. We take the patient in, we assess the patient. We figure out what the patient needs. We know what the right course of action is, and then we recommend the remedy. For doctors, though, the patient generally, about 100% of the time, takes the recommendation. In our case, that's not always the case. And part of the reason is emotion around money. It's hard for someone when the news is still awful. You used the COVID example, it's one of my favorite examples when I'm out talking to investors. If you go back to March 23rd of 2020, we were talking about a vaccine, but that was the bottom. The market dropped 35% and that was the bottom. And really, we were right in the teeth of COVID at the time. Nobody was walking around thinking that this thing was going to be over. Again, if you really think back and you really honestly reflect on the way we were all feeling at that time, we were wiping down boxes that were being delivered to our house. Because we thought that was part of the problem. That's where we were on March 23rd, 2020. But the market took off at that point. And so, for investors, it's to recognize that sometimes your best opportunities, they're not there right in front of you, so the best thing to make sure you are is you're invested, you're in the market, and you're ready to take advantage of those moves when they happen.

Yeah, and I think the other thing that's always worth remembering, whether or not it's on a specific company or a market, the same things that we worry about, you worry about. When we go have discussions with company management, they're worried about them as well and they have contingency plans. What happens if this happens? Well, we reorient our business this way. We do this, we do that. We've got this long list of things that we do in response. And the stock market often will not imagine that. And it's great to have those discussions. The same thing with markets. We began joking around some of the TACO-type analogy, but there is a legitimacy to that as well, is that central banks, governments, they understand the needs and the importance of different things in the economy and how far their actions can go. Watching markets, it's like a symphony. The music rises, it falls, it rises, it falls. And the end goal needs to be clear, but if something gets pushed a little bit too far, there'll be a natural reaction inside of it.

Are the advisors going to see big changes out of RBC Global Asset Management, or is it that we've just got a great team and we steady the course, or somewhere in between?

I think it'd be somewhere in between. We're constantly evolving. There's been lots of change over the last 20 years. We don't detail all of it on the surface, but it's hard not to be impressed internally by the amount of focus. How could that have been better? What can we do differently? There's some evolution inside of Select that we're looking at and Sarah's been leading the charge on that front. It's a very strong product in its own right, but there's new tools available in markets. There are always things to be considering. So whether or not it's multi-asset, those 7 boxes of things that we need to think about in the firm. The evolution. I could have joked 20 years ago, we used to have pink and blue tickets. You would fill in your order, and you would take it to the trading desk and you would timestamp it and you would give it to the trader and lo and behold, it would end up in your account in a couple of days. I wouldn't have felt the need to come out and say, oh, we're getting rid of pink and blue tickets. But the evolution that's gone on in the trading systems over 20 years, if you did it point to point, you'd say it's a revolution. If you looked every day, you'd say it's an evolution. So across all of our components, there's just a tremendous amount of study and enthusiasm for the task at hand.

Yeah, and I think for the advisors here, and hopefully having Stu here today is just more evidence for you. But I know most of you know Stu anyways. It's not like Stu came out of nowhere to be sitting in this chair. I hope everyone is as confident in the ability of this firm to deliver for you and your investors as ever before. And you're going to see that, of course, it runs way beyond Stu. I see Dagmara and Sarah Riopelle sitting over here. An incredible team, an incredibly experienced team that's there to deliver for your clients. And Stu, you get the privilege of working with those people every day, and it's an amazing thing.

It is. The quality of the people. And don't get me wrong, we do have fun, but the seriousness with which everyone takes the task at hand has been just wonderful to see.

That's right. The only comedian is me. And even that's iffy. But anyway, Stu, thank you very much for coming out today. I hope this got captured because that was a great conversation.

Thanks, Dave. And thank you.

Yeah, thank you.