Howmet Aerospace Inc. — 2024 Q1
Transcript
Each turn shows the speaker, their inferred role, the section, and that turn's net sentiment (×1000).
Good morning, and welcome to the Howmet Aerospace First Quarter 2024 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please note, this event is being recorded.
Thank you, Gary. Good morning, and welcome to the Howmet Aerospace First Quarter 2024 Results Conference Call. I'm joined by John Plant, Executive Chairman and Chief Executive Officer; and Ken Giacobbe, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.
Thanks, PT, and good morning, everybody. Q1 2024 was an outstanding quarter for Howmet revenue, profit, margin, and earnings per share were records and all improved versus guidance last year and sequentially.
Revenue was $1.824 billion, up 14%. EBITDA was $437 million, up 21%, with a healthy incremental of 35%. EBITDA margin was up 150 basis points to 24%. Operating income was 27 -- was up 27% with a margin rate of above 20%. Earnings per share were $0.57, an increase of 36% year-over-year and 8% sequentially.
Thank you, John, and good morning, everyone. Let's move to Slide 5 for an overview of the markets. All markets continued to be healthy in the first quarter. On a year-over-year basis, performance was as follows: Total revenue was up 14%, driven by very strong growth in the commercial aerospace market, which was up 23%. Commercial aerospace has now grown for 12 consecutive quarters and represents approximately 50% of total revenue. Growth continues to be robust, supported by demand for new more fuel-efficient aircraft with reduced carbon emissions and increased spares demand for engines.
Thanks, Ken, and let's move to Slide 11 to show our progress on GHG. We continue to leverage our differentiated technologies to help our customers manufacture lighter, more fuel-efficient aircraft and commercial trucks with lower carbon footprints. Howmet remains committed to managing our energy consumption and environmental impacts as we increase production.
[Operator Instructions] The first question is from Noah Poponak with Goldman Sachs.
Hello. Hello. Can you hear me?
We can hear you now. Please go ahead.
John, I appreciate all the detail there. I wonder if you could just talk a little bit more about the MAX. What underlying rate did you actually deliver to in the quarter? And how are you assuming it moves through the year? And I guess, listening to some other suppliers in Boeing through the earnings season, it kind of sounded like Boeing kept the supply chain moving along somewhere near 30 despite their deliveries and then would plan to start to -- hope to start to ramp back up in the back half of the year. Your comments sound like maybe that didn't happen or that's not what you're seeing. So -- if you could just provide a little more clarity around that? That would be great.
Yes, I'd like to give you a real clear-cut answer, but I find it's a little bit confusing. In what we saw was, in the first quarter, schedules at rate 38. And I assume that Boeing had assumed that they would achieve that rate. I don't know. Whereas we note that actual bills were substantially less than that and probably well below 20%. And therefore, the increase in inventory, let's say, let's call it, I don't know, 15 to 38 per month, plus the 7 months of last year where rate 38 had been assumed, but more like a build of 30. Has resulted obviously in increased inventories in Boeing.
The next question is from Robert Stallard with Vertical Research.
John, maybe to follow on from Noah's question on the rates. Boeing has also seems to have slipped behind on the 787. So I was wondering if you could give us an idea of what you're now expecting for that. I think they're saying they want to get back up to 5 and supply chain is shipping at 5, but they're not producing at 5, you know what I mean?
Yes. So we cut our assumption from 6 aircraft per month down to 5. I don't know that we're going to see parts, schedule changes for the sake of 2 aircraft a month, especially if they're going to get back up to rate 5 by the second half of the year.
And is this the one that's also going to be ramping up a bit further in the second half, anticipating further rate increases for 2025?
Yes. And that's also part of our thinking is that previously, our assumptions have been going to rate 7, at the back end of this year ahead of where we'd assumed [ a 6 ] where we thought it was going to go and then probably with a higher rate sometime in 2025, on their March to 10 craft per month, which I know has now changed from 2025 to 2026.
The next question is from Robert Spingarn with Melius Research.
John, I'm going to ask again about the 737. You've been crystal clear that the situation is unclear. Having said that though, I'm curious if somehow Boeing gets above 20 later this year, is there enough inventory in the channel, whether you have it or they have it or GE has it to support higher production rates at Boeing? Or can you ramp quickly? How do we think about when you'd need to signal? And how you might respond?
Yes. So should Boeing produce rate 38. I'm very clear that we'll be at rate 38 with them. And should GE reinstate the planned increase to the 19 25 level of LEAP engines, which is obviously part of it into cadence to 1b that we'll be able to meet rate -- what the -- again, on labor, you can see while we've increased the overall guidance, and therefore, our labor recruitment will be fairly robust is that we have enough flexibility to be able to cope with those rate assumptions. Because, again, we'll know months ahead of they're actually achieving that. It won't be like go from, let's say, rate 15 to rate 38 in a month, it's going to happen slowly. And gradually if it occurs.
Okay. Okay. And then just as a follow-up. When we look at the commercial aero sales at fasteners and its structures, they outpaced versus the Engine Products segment despite the issues at Boeing. I was wondering if you could add some color on how you managed to decouple your commercial aero growth from Boeing's bill rates.
I think to some degree, it reflects the revenue potential and earnings potential of Howmet when it achieves the increased rates. And so while Boeing sales in the 787 might have been building a 3. But we were building in the first quarter of our parts at a rate significantly above that. So let's assume rate 6 or even in rate 7. And so this that's obviously a very good dynamic for the business and then showed with I thought, which was excellent margin improvement in the business, which was a combination of operational performance, commercial performance and the mix. And when that happened, we've put on 500-plus basis points in margin improvement year-over-year. And there's still -- I don't know what it was, 200 basis points sequentially.
Does that mean that possibly the first quarter is a high point with regard to some -- something like a 787 fasteners or if you were a rate 7 and they're at rate 3 and you get the point.
Yes. I mean, what we've guided to you in Q2 is that, in fact, revenues would be slightly higher than Q1. So we're still expecting overall to be good. But very much for our year would be -- we're cautious because of the rate assumptions I've given you on the 737 and therefore, expecting to have the impact of that.
The next question is from Doug Harned with Bernstein.
I want to switch away from Boeing here for a moment. And earlier this year, GE started making the first shipments of its redesigned LEAP-1A, HPT blades to Airbus. These are intended to last longer in harsh environments. And we expect to see that similarly for the LEAP-1B eventually a year from now, we're going to see something done in the geared turbofan.
Okay. Maybe the best thing I can do is to give you a picture of the revenue walk for the company first and then return to the specific question, obviously improved durability as a second subject.
The next question is from Ken Herbert with RBC Capital Markets.
John, I appreciate all the color there on the aftermarket you just provided. It sounds like you're seeing as part of that 100-ish million plus in the commercial spares business this year. What's your visibility on that beyond this year? Do you think we get a point assuming Boeing and Airbus start to clean up, Boeing in particular, deliveries of new aircraft that moderates fairly quickly? Or do you get a sense that, that could have substantial room to run even beyond this year, just considering increased use of some of the legacy aircraft? I know you went through maybe CFM56 peak is pushed to the right. But how do you view that flowing into your business on the spare side?
I see commercial aerospace sales going up in '25, '26 and '27. It's a bit too difficult to get up beyond that, but I see rising reducing the spares area during those years. I also see increased spares for the F-35. And in the past, I've said I think by the time we get to 2025, we could be seeing spares revenues almost as much as the current OE demand for F-35 turbine blades.
The next question is from Myles Walton with Wolfe Research.
John, on the fastening unit, the commercial aero underlying growth there was pretty outstanding and the acceleration in the last 4 quarters. I think about 1/3 of that business is distribution. Is it -- the distribution business growing faster than that average? Are they pulling because they see scarcity coming? And also, just to round out, are you feeling better about fastening eclipsing prior peak margins at this point yet?
Certainly, the program that we put in 3 years ago of creating a separate segment within our fasteners business for distribution is notable success for us. And I'm going to say we've probably seen an almost doubling of that business in the last 3 years. We don't provide like all makes to everybody and try to manage all the logistics of people, but this is trying to capture that margin previously that we had effectively passed on to other distributors. Because we distribute those parts. And we mainly focus on those parts which are proprietary with technology moats around them from the Howmet say, suite of fastener brands.
Yes, no guarantees from me, John. And just one clarification. The...
I realized that. That's why I put it that way. That's why I try to not to put my head in that noose because I had no plan...
I'll keep line it up for you.
No [indiscernible] that knows that sort of stuff.
One clarification. Are you saying that the commercial air foils are now close to $550 million in '24? Is that what the math gets to?
I actually don't think I quoted a number. You talked about the spares on commercial now?
Yes, exactly.
Yes, I think it's about right. I'd have to go back to my notes to guide what a more precise number. I think it's well above the $400 million that we saw in 2019. So I think $550 million is probably a best approximation, and Ken can jump in if he wants to correct me on that number. The defense spares for last year, we're already growing from like 400 to 600, and that's continued. So it's all good on that front.
The next question is from Sheila Kahyaoglu with Jefferies.
Thanks, John and Ken. Maybe can you talk about margins? You raised margins by 100 basis points at the midpoint. And we don't typically think about you guys having a different economic value on OE versus spares. So you're still hiring to have to flex on -- to match rates. And so I guess, what got better on the profit line? And how do you think about that trending throughout the year?
Inevitably, if you look at our rate of hiring, and we're also coming off a bigger base of experienced labor. So part of that is improved labor efficiency, Sheila. And notwithstanding, I'll say, the Boeing volatility, I'm hoping we can plan our way around because the overall revenue without -- obviously, it'll be a different mix and different plants, but I'm hopeful we can manage our way through to keep that the overall operating efficiency that we have had in Q1, and that's what we've guided to. You can see we've guided to a 24% EBITDA margin. So even though, let's say, we look to see that go down a little bit in the second half, and that's a, let's say, a 28% plus business. And therefore, we'll need to work the other harder just to keep it right 24% in terms of EBITDA margin percentage, which we believe we can, and we'll do otherwise, we wouldn't have guided there.
You did mention price in that, John. Can you sustain the Q4 net price drop through? Or does it actually get better?
What I've said previously is that we thought that we were going to be able to essentially hold and match what we did in 2023 into 2024. I think where we are today is that we're absolutely clear that we're going to -- we're going to be able to hold much and maybe improve a little bit over 2023 levels on that front as well.
The next question is from Gautam Khanna with TD Cowen.
I had 2 questions, John. One follow-up clarification from what was just asked. On just the fungibility of production within your operations, i.e., if in a quarter or a month, Boeing asks, or GES for a destock, I'm talking about the subcontract manufacturers to Boeing. Just -- how able you guys are to respond. It sounds like you're able to just move and navigate from one program to the next. And so it is pretty fungible. .
So we don't have, what I call, customer dedicated plants, more product focused. So we deliver to multiple customers from most of our plants. In the case of fasteners. Some are a little bit more wide-body narrow-body focused. And so that mix can make a big difference. So if you wind the clock back, a year, 18 months, where the -- I mean, essentially 787 was halted. I mean you could say, well, one a month, but I mean it wasn't really one a month. And I remember I'll say, I think Q4 '22, essentially or Q1 of '23, we were only producing the [ metallic ] fasteners. As that was having a negative effect on us because we had 2 or 3 plants which were grossly underloaded because the equipment required to make the fasteners going a composite aircraft is different to those on the metallic aircraft. So that was both the, I'll say, an idea in terms of both, I'll say, the mix and also the exposure that we had on plants. And obviously, we got massive on recovered fixed cost, that's a problem.
Next question is from Ronald Epstein with Bank of America.
A question we get and we've heard maybe from some of the engine OEMs is that the supply chain needs to make more investment to have the capacity for the upcoming ramp, right? As you highlighted in your remarks that when Boeing does get back to rate, the number of leaps [indiscernible] -- it's a huge amount of growth. And one of the areas that they've suggested that investment needs to be made is in tooling. Just curious your view on that and how you're thinking about CapEx for this potential ramp going forward?
Yes. So what I said previously, maybe I'll just amplify a little bit today is that we said we were going to take back CapEx. And so if last year was probably just over $200 million. I think the midpoint of that guide now is around $300 million, it could be $290 million, but $300 million, give or take, I think, in that region. So maybe just below $300 million.
This concludes the question-and-answer session, and the conference has also now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect.