Earnings call transcript: SLC Agrícola's Q3 2025 results reveal EPS shortfall

SLC Agrícola SA (SLCE3) reported its financial results for the third quarter of 2025, revealing a significant shortfall in earnings per share (EPS) compared to forecasts. The actual EPS came in at 0.0367, sharply below the expected 0.3368, marking an 89.1% miss. However, the company surpassed revenue expectations with actual revenue reaching 1.94 billion USD against a forecast of 1.83 billion USD, a surprise of 6.01%. Despite the EPS miss, the company's stock rose by 4.53%, closing at 16.84 USD, reflecting investor confidence in its revenue growth and strategic initiatives.

Key Takeaways

• SLC Agrícola's Q3 2025 EPS fell significantly short of forecasts, missing by 89.1%.
• Revenue surpassed expectations, reaching 1.94 billion USD, a 6.01% surprise.
• Stock price increased by 4.53% post-earnings, indicating positive investor sentiment.
• Significant YoY growth in net income and revenue, with net income at 2.1 billion BRL.
• Strategic focus on expanding irrigation and improving operational efficiency.

Company Performance

SLC Agrícola demonstrated robust year-over-year growth, reporting a 28% increase in net income to 2.1 billion BRL and a 27% rise in year-to-date revenue to 6.3 billion BRL. The company's strategic expansion of its planted area and improvements in crop yields contributed to this strong performance. Despite challenges in the cotton sector due to drought, the company maintained competitive yields, particularly in soybeans and corn.

Financial Highlights

• Revenue: 1.94 billion USD, exceeding forecasts by 6.01%.
• EPS: 0.0367, missing expectations by 89.1%.
• Net income: 2.1 billion BRL, a 28% increase YoY.
• Adjusted EBITDA: 531 million BRL, with a 25.5% margin.

Earnings vs. Forecast

SLC Agrícola's earnings per share of 0.0367 fell significantly short of the forecasted 0.3368, marking an 89.1% miss. However, the revenue of 1.94 billion USD exceeded expectations, providing a positive offset to the EPS shortfall.

Market Reaction

Despite missing EPS forecasts, SLC Agrícola's stock rose by 4.53% in the aftermath of the earnings release, closing at 16.84 USD. This positive market reaction may be attributed to the company's strong revenue performance and strategic initiatives aimed at future growth. The stock remains within its 52-week range, with a high of 21 USD and a low of 15.57 USD.

Outlook & Guidance

Looking forward, SLC Agrícola is focusing on expanding its irrigation projects and improving operational efficiency. The company plans to increase its irrigated area significantly, aiming to enhance yields and revenue. The strategic partnership with BTG Pactual private equity funds is expected to unlock further value from its real estate assets.

Executive Commentary

CEO Aurélio Pavinato emphasized the importance of irrigation in boosting yields, stating, "With irrigation, my yield will rise to 110%. I'm not going to lose any yield. In terms of revenue, if today I get 100, this will go to 220." He also highlighted the potential for unlocking value from real estate assets.

Risks and Challenges

• Weather-related challenges, particularly in cotton production, due to drought.
• Fluctuations in global commodity prices impacting revenue and profitability.
• Potential supply chain disruptions affecting crop protection inputs.

Q&A

During the earnings call, analysts inquired about the company's partnership with BTG Pactual and its implications for future growth. Questions also focused on the expansion of irrigation projects and the strategies in place to mitigate weather-related risks.

Full transcript - SLC Agricola SA (SLCE3) Q3 2025:

Conference Moderator: Your preferred language: Portuguese or English. For those listening in English, you may mute the original audio in Portuguese by clicking "Mute Original Audio." For the Q&A session, please submit your questions using the Q&A icon at the bottom of your screen. As usual, your names will be announced so that you can ask your question live. At that point, you receive a prompt to enable your microphone and camera. If you prefer not to appear live, please type "No mic" at the end of your question so that I can read it aloud for you. We would like to remind you that the information in this presentation and any statements made during the video conference regarding our business outlook, projections, and operational and financial targets are the beliefs and assumptions of the company's management and are based on information currently available. Forward-looking statements are not performance guarantees.

They involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions, as they refer to future events and depend on circumstances that may or may not occur. Investors should note that general economic conditions, market factors, and other operational elements may affect the company's future performance and lead to results that differ materially from those expressed here. Now, I would like to turn the floor over to our CEO, Aurélio Pavinato, to begin the presentation. Pavinato, please proceed. Thank you very much, André. Good morning. We thank everyone for joining SLC Agrícola's 3Q2025 earnings video conference. Please let's advance to slide four to discuss the cotton market. The third quarter of 2025 was marked by stable cotton prices in both the international and Brazilian markets, hovering around $0.68 per pound, reflecting global supply and demand fundamentals.

According to USDA data, global cotton consumption for the 2025-2026 crop year is estimated at approximately 120 million bales, compared with production of 118 million bales, resulting in a global supply-demand deficit of about 1 million bales. On the demand side, the spinning industry has been operating strategically, keeping inventories of raw materials and finished goods below historical averages. This behavior reduces future market liquidity and puts downward pressure on prices. The industry has scaled back amid growing risk aversion, driven by a tougher global backdrop of high interest rates, inflation, and geopolitical tension. We believe that stabilizing inflation and the interest rate cuts now underway in the United States and Europe, both of which are key textile-consuming regions, are fundamental steps towards improving business and consumer sentiment globally. Now, let's move to slide five to discuss soybeans.

Soybean prices, both on the CBOT spot contract and the Paranaguá basis, showed significant volatility throughout the third quarter of 2025, while in Mexico, prices remained relatively stable. One of the main factors to watch right now is the progress of the U.S. soybean harvest. The country's planted area has fallen roughly 7% from 87 million acres to 81 million acres, and globally, supply is projected to exceed demand by about 2 million tons, one of the smallest surpluses in recent years. Now, moving to slide six, we'll discuss corn. Corn prices on the CBOT spot contract and in the Brazilian domestic market fluctuated in divergent ways over 3Q25. In Brazil, corn prices, in spite of some short-term declines, continued to find strong support from increasing domestic demand, fueled by the expansion of the corn ethanol industry.

Globally, the corn market is currently balanced, with production now outstripping demand by only 5.7 million tons. Let's go now to slide eight to discuss our operational performance in the past crop year, 2024-2025. Soybean harvest was fully completed, reaching 3,960 kilograms per hectare, 21.4% above the previous year, virtually in line with budget, and 9.4% above the national average. Cotton reached an average yield of 1,845 kilograms per hectare, below both the plan and the national average, mainly due to drought conditions in Bahia. Second crop, corn, achieved a historical record yield of 8,243 kilograms per hectare, 9.3% above initial projections and above the national average as well. In slide nine, we look at unit costs for the 2024-2025 crop year, which, due to higher productivity, showed a significant drop compared to 2023-2024. Soybean unit cost fell 27.4% in comparison to the previous crop year.

Corn decreased 17.5%, while cotton averaging first and second crops rose 3% due to lower yields and higher use of crop protection inputs. In slide ten, we will show you our current hedge position for the 2024-2025 crop year. We have further advanced in our hedging positions for the 2024-2025 crop year for soybeans, including commitments we locked in 99.7% of production, and for corn, 96.4%. For cotton, now I'll turn it over to my colleague, Ivo Brum, to comment on our financial performance. Ivo, please continue. Good morning, everyone. Could we please turn to slide twelve, which highlights a few key points in our income statement? Net income for the quarter totaled BRL 2.1 billion, up 28% year on year, reflecting higher soybean and corn volumes sold. Year-to-date revenue reached BRL 6.3 billion, up 27%, both quarterly and in the nine-month totals. We marked record highs.

Our adjusted EBITDA in the quarter was BRL 531 million, with a margin of 25.5%. Year-to-date adjusted EBITDA reached BRL 2 billion, with a margin of 32.3%, consistent with historical performance. Net income for the quarter was a loss of BRL 14.5 million, a decrease of BRL 2.8 million versus the prior quarter. The variation reflected an increase of BRL 343 million and also higher SG&A expenses and other operating items, totaling BRL 132.4 million, of which BRL 51 million were non-recurring, linked to the sale of Sirius Spinoff Company. A negative financial result of BRL 126.6 million and an increase of BRL 81 million in income tax and social contribution taxes. The main factor behind the loss recognized on the sale of the Sirius Spinoff was the inclusion in that spinoff of all historical development capex related to those areas.

Since these amounts had been incurred in private periods, they were not directly considered in the valuation of the transaction. Over the nine-month period, net income reached BRL 636 million, up 19.3% year on year. Cash generation was BRL 567 million in the quarter, while nine-month cash flow was BRL 1.5 billion, reflecting ongoing investments. Free cash flow was positive in the quarter, capturing the typical financial cycle moment between harvest cost payments and the 2024-2025 crop and start of the corn and cotton billing. During the quarter, we paid the first installment for the Sirius Agro acquisition and received proceeds from the sale of the spinoff company to Terrace, resulting in a net outflow of BRL 268 million.

For the year-to-date, key investments included BRL 180 million, final payment for the Pisandu Farm, BRL 229 million, final acquisition of the minority stake at SLC LandCo, BRL 361 million, Fazenda Paladino acquisition, BRL 95 million, acquisition of Fazenda Unaí, BRL 103 million, minority stake in SLC MID, BRL 268 million, first Sirius Agro payment net of Terrace proceeds, and BRL 241 million relating to dividend payments for the fiscal year of 2024. On slide thirteen, we look at our debt position. Adjusted net debt at the end of 3Q25 stood at BRL 6.2 billion, up BRL 2.8 billion versus 2024. This increase is mainly due to strategic investments we made. The net debt over adjusted EBITDA ratio closed the period at 2.34 times. On slide fourteen, we look at the debt profile.

There was an evolution compared to 2Q 2025 because our long debt share rose from 65% to 69%, with an average maturity extending from 980 days to 1,168 days. On November sixth, the board approved a new share repurchase program of 10 million shares to be held in treasury for subsequent sale or cancellation. Now, I'll turn it over again to Pavinato to discuss the 2025-2026 crop outlook. Let's turn to slide sixteen to discuss the outlook for the 2025-2026 crop year. Planted area for this season will total 836,000 hectares, up 13.6% over 2024-2025. Cotton area will grow 11.1%, soybeans 14.2%, and corn 29.3%. We can now go to slide seventeen to talk about the planting of soybeans.

Early soybean planting, which allows for subsequent cotton and second crop corn cultivation, began on September eighteen, and by November four, we had planted 62% of the area, and the fields have been showing good development. On slide eighteen, we look at the productivity and estimated yields for 2025-2026. Company's expectations for crop potential are based on historical trends and consider its historical trend and also the maturity of the fields. We now go to slide nineteen to comment on costs per hectare. Total budgeted total cost per hectare stands at BRL 7,082 per hectare, up 9.7% from 2024-2025. Final cost adjustments reflect the procurement of inputs now nearly completed. The main factors driving the increase are higher fertilizer volumes for soil nutrient replenishment and also improvements to our crop protection programs. Now, moving to slide twenty, we discuss the current hedging position for 2024-2025 and 2025-2026.

We have also made advances in the 2025-2026 hedging. We have now 60.2% of soybean output fixed, 27.2% of cotton locked, and 18.6% of corn. On slide twenty-one, we announce our sales forecast of seeds for 2026. Estimated seed sales to third parties, combined with internal use, total 1,800,000 bags, up 28% year on year. Cotton seed sales, including internal consumption, are projected at 157,000 bags, an increase of 8.3% in comparison to the previous year. On slide twenty-seven, we revisited the irrigation project disclosed on July nine, in which we shared the company's expectations regarding the growth of the irrigated area. In the 2024-2025 season, the company had 16,025 hectares of irrigated area. For the current season, an additional 6,303 hectares will be implemented, totaling 19,385 hectares with irrigation. The goal is to reach 53,180 hectares in coming years.

Irrigation will help mitigate climate risks, maximize land use through second crop production, increase land value, and boost yields and stability in a sustainable way. Now, let's turn to slide twenty-five, in which we'll discuss the business strategy of the deal announced yesterday on a material fact, the association between SLC Agrícola and the private equity investment funds managed by BTG Pactual. The objectives are to monetize farmland at market value, maximize operational efficiency through irrigation projects, and establish agricultural partnership contracts. The remuneration of the partner is 19% of our agricultural output, and the term of the agreement is 18 years, which later can be renewed every three years. Finally, we go to slide twenty-six, in which we'll take a look at the structure of this deal.

Special purpose entities will be created with SLC Agrícola holding 50.01%, and the private equity investment funds FIPS managed by BTG Pactual with 49.99%. SLC Agrícola will contribute Fazenda Piratini and its irrigation infrastructure at market value. The funds will invest BRL 1,033 million, of which BRL 914 million will be paid upfront at the closing and BRL 119 million upon completion of Piratini's irrigation project, expected for the second half of 2026. Using these proceeds, the SPEs will acquire Fazenda Paladino from SLC Agrícola for BRL 723 million, paying BRL 361 million upfront and BRL 361 million in March 2026. Besides that, the SPEs will also purchase irrigation infrastructure at Piratini and Paladino for BRL 86 million and BRL 27 million, respectively. Remaining funds will go toward project implementation at the SPEs. The land-owning SPEs will sign rural partnership agreements with SLC Agrícola for grain and fiber cultivation with sharing of production outcomes.

SPE remuneration will be equivalent to around 19% of agricultural output from the partner areas. The initial contract term is 18 years, automatically renewable every three years. On the next slide, slide twenty-seven, we look at the irrigation project and farm locations in this deal. Fazenda Piratini is located in Jaborandi, and Fazenda Paladino is located in São Desidério, both in the state of Bahia. The two farms together have a first crop area of 39,523 hectares, with plans to irrigate 27,934 hectares. Adding both, we'll reach 67,457 hectares of planted area with a growth of 71% and expansion of 71% in our irrigated area. Projects include monitoring of the Urucuya aquifer, the use of artesian wells, and efficient pumping systems to reduce losses and increase efficiency. Thank you very much, and now we'll open our Q&A. We will now begin the Q&A session.

Please send your questions in writing all at once and wait for the company's reply. To submit questions, please use the Q&A icon at the bottom of your screen. As usual, your name will be announced so that you can ask your question live. At that point, you'll receive a request to enable your microphone and camera. If you prefer not to appear live, please type "no microphone, no camera" at the end of your question, and in this case, I will read it aloud. Here is our first question from Mr. Lucas Ferreira. Lucas, please go ahead. Please enable your microphone and camera. He is from JP Morgan. Hello, can you hear me? Yes, we hear you just fine, Lucas. My apologies, my camera is off, but thank you for entertaining our questions. I have questions about this transaction announced yesterday with the FIPS, with the private equity investment funds.

I would like to understand if this transaction is just something for, you know, used for leveraging your balance sheet or if there is room for a larger partnership in the future. It is clear that you want to accelerate your irrigation project. The second question is really, since this is quite a complex deal, part of the production will be with the FIPS later, with the funds later. Did you consider Piratini based on your annual valuation? What can you share in relation to the implicit costs of this deal with the sharing of volumes later down the road? Thank you very much, Lucas, for this question. Yes, Lucas, let me try to give you more details on the deal. We have contributed the Piratini farm at the appraisal value.

This is what we contributed in addition to the irrigation systems we had implemented as late as last year. Now the SPEs will own the land, they will own the infrastructure, and also the irrigation system. SLC Agrícola will run the two farms. With the funding we have obtained, we are going to acquire the Paladino farm. When we consolidate both of them, we'll have 50%, and the funds will have 50%. It is as if we had sold half of each farm. We will continue to own 50% of Piratini and 50% of the Paladino farm. This is the rationale, right? Our contribution is the Piratini farm, and the investor's contribution is the money. The money we will use to buy Paladino that we had acquired from Mitsui just a couple of months ago. We are incorporating it in the deal.

The SPEs will be doing additional investments in irrigation. With this, we can accelerate our irrigation project and also accelerate value creation in the farms. They are now, of course, going to start producing irrigated crops. We are going to have two crops a year instead of one, like today, with much more stability. In our understanding, we will add value without contributing any funding. This is the mathematical equation behind this deal. We are unlocking value from our real estate assets. We are using our real estate to unlock value and accelerate irrigation investment, adding value to our agricultural output. The 19%, this is the rationale in which we will have adequate return for both investors and ourselves. Thank you. Very clear, Pavinato. Thank you, Lucas. Now let's continue with Isabella Simonato, Bank of America.

Isabella, could you please enable your camera and microphone and ask your question? Isabella, are you there? Now I am. Can you hear me? Yes, we hear you. Good morning, Pavinato, Ivo, and André. I apologize for my camera being off. I would like to know about the COT and cost performance in the 2024-2025 crop year. There was a revision of realized costs. Could you please shed some light on the drivers behind this performance? If you could also give us some flavor on the 2024-2025 crop that is still to be sold in the 2026 fiscal year, I think that this will give us a clear understanding of the picture. Can I answer? Isabella, in fact, the cost of the 2024-2025 crop year was under the impact of the climate issues in Bahia, and we applied more crop protection inputs.

Of course, this raised costs. When we analyze costs, it's important to compare the costs with the budgeted dollar exchange rate at the time. Part of the inputs were more expensive, but at the same time, we had an offset with revenue. This, you know, actually balanced off our hedging. There was no loss of margin. We have to factor the exchange rate variation as well. This is what explains the difference in costs. By the way, Isabella, that's why our realized cost 2024-2025 was above budget. When we look at the budget, we see an increase of 9.7% in comparison to the budget. In comparison to the realized, it's a much lower increase. We are delivering the results in 2024 and 2025. The increase in cost is 9.7% for us.

In comparison with the actual this year, it's a much lower difference, 4%, not 9% of increased costs in the comparison between those two years. Also, in terms of volume, we want to deliver at least 45% of the volume produced 2024-2025 until the end of the year. The harvest was completed in August. We started processing, so the volume carried over in this quarter is not significant. Most of the volume will be recorded in the fourth quarter, in fact. Very clear. Thank you so much. Thank you, Isabella. Now, our next question from Mr. Henrique, Bradesco BBI. Please ask your question, Henrique. Henrique, are you with us? Yes, I am. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for taking my question. There are two areas I would like to explore.

Firstly, on the deal, the first point is how easy it is to replicate this model in the future, creating partnerships to finance expansion and also the installation of irrigation systems. Also, with the BRL 836 million for SLC, what changes in the way we consider your capital allocation strategy from now on? The reason I'm asking is because you were incorporating the transactions to deleverage, but this gives you some room in the balance sheet to expand acreage and also to implement irrigation systems. Should we consider this? Also, in relation to cotton this quarter, when we look at the cotton margin, unit margin, where there was a 3% increase and the unit cost also changed, how recurring is there a recurrent effect on the margin for cotton like this quarter?

I know that it was a mix of farms that could be the reason, but how representative it is as a recurring factor from now on? Thank you. Thank you very much, Henrique. Let me talk about the deal and expansion. We were really, we had a long negotiation and, the future is yet to come. Nobody knows what could happen, but the model we created is a first for us. If it is, you know, if it is successful, it will open doors for rolling out the replication of this deal, this deal that we created with the funds. Okay, Ivo, would you like to discuss capital allocation? Yes, it is just like you said, Henrique. This created an important opportunity to continue growing. If opportunities arise, we will not buy as many assets. We will focus on leases. There is a working capital and capex and also machinery.

There are some constraints, but this positions us on a good platform for growth. Now, speaking of cotton, we had loss of margin in cotton this quarter resulting from, of course, the mix of farms. In this quarter specifically, we harvested in Bahia, and Bahia, of course, we had an early harvest in August, and the margin specifically for Bahia was smaller because we did not have as big as an output. There is an expectation that margins will improve because we will have now Mato Grosso harvesting. We should not consider this margin as the average for the entire harvest this quarter. Thank you very much. Henrique? Thank you very much, Henrique. Now, our next question is from Mateus Enfeld, UBS. Mateus, please open your camera or activate your camera, please. Mateus, are you with us? Hello. Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Thank you very much.

My first question is about the soybean productivity and the 2025-2026 harvest. We are tracking rainfall on your farms, and it seems that in October, rainfall was a little below expectations and also quite below the historical record, which was last year. Did your yield consider this? Did you consider the effect of climate for this year, or is there any reason to be concerned in relation to rainfall? Also, the second question on cotton, Pavinato, could you give us some insight on the potential for Brazil to continue adding cotton acreage? Some analysts are saying that, you know, cotton acreage will reduce next year. Do you see an opportunity for expanding cotton acreage in Brazil? Also, there was an expectation of conversion of additional areas to cotton in future years.

Are you thinking of following up on this plan, increasing cotton, especially considering the price levels we're witnessing today? Thank you very much, Mateus. Mateus, in Mato Grosso this year, you know, in September, it rained above the historical average, so it was very good. Rainfall at just the right time. In October, we did not get much rain in Mato Grosso. There are some farms that were under some rain deficit and others not. When we look at the overall picture in Mato Grosso, it is fine. We have some farms with great potential and some fields, no more than 5%-10%, that suffered with the rainfall deficit in October. In November, the rain cycle resumed as normal. It will depend on November and December. If it rains as expected, we are looking at very good yields in Mato Grosso.

This is the summary, right? The Mato Grosso farms are going well, and in the other farms, Maranhão and Bahia, it is now raining. We are expecting that our project will be met. This is a La Niña year, very similar to last year. We expect normal rains in the coming months in the northeast with a very good crop. About cotton now. In recent years, Brazil has really secured a strong foothold in this market. Brazil today is responsible for 14% of the world's output. We represent 30% of the exports, something that 30 years ago, we used to import cotton, and we were completely irrelevant in this market, in the cotton market. In the interval, consumption really did not change much. In fact, we were occupying the position of other players. Why? Because Brazil is very competitive.

Our yields in Brazil in cotton are the best in the world. So when we think of Brazil, we are really a strong player. The price levels today are low. They are not really encouraging the expansion of planted areas. We are seeing some downward revisions in planted areas, especially among the new entrants. They are now suffering more. Those who have stable operations will maintain their planted area, but in the average, we'll see a reduction in the planted area in Brazil, which is convenient, especially considering the slowdown in demand. Demand is growing very slowly. It's really inching little by little. We are now going to reach 169 million bales of consumption. When prices are lower like they are now, this encourages, you know, some pickup in demand.

At SLC, we analyze the data really farm by farm to see what crop is more profitable in each farm. At this price level, we probably will not be stepping up on the gas in terms of new projects. We are going to wait for the price moves to really make our decisions. We want to maximize the use of the assets we have today. Cotton is a long-cycle crop with a long financial cycle as well. With high interest rates, you should not really allocate much capital in CapEx and working capital, which is something cotton is very demanding about. You have to think of how much we are going to grow in one year and a half. This is our vision on the expansion of the cotton area.

Now, the irrigation project in Bahia is aimed at planting first crop, soybeans and cotton in three-fourths of the area for the second crop. We are going to expand in Bahia cotton as second crop, which is the cheaper and the more efficient cotton. That is why we see now the second crop in Mato Grosso for cotton expanding and now also in Bahia, but supported by irrigation. Just a quick follow-up, Pavinato, if I may, this idea of waiting a little bit for the cotton expansion, does it also apply to the seed rinsed areas that you had been planning to start planting cotton on in two or three years? In fact, we now have three farms. We have one farm where we are building, you know, a cotton farm right beside it.

We're going to have, and the other farm has great potential for soybean and second crop corn. We'll calculate, make the crunch the data, and probably in this case, we're going to delay the investment in cotton in the second Maranhão farm. As for the Pará farm, we never thought of planting cotton there, just soybean and corn. This combination of high interest rates and low prices is discouraging. Now, if interest rates go down, then maybe it will make sense to plant cotton because to invest paying 15% a year in interest rate is a weighty consideration in any investment. Thank you. Thank you, Mateus. Our next question is from Gabriel Coelho Barra, Citi. Gabriel, please, you may proceed. Is Gabriel still with us? Hello, can you hear me now? Yes, we do hear you. Thank you.

Pavinato, Ivo, and André, thank you very much for this opportunity to ask my questions. In fact, I have a question and a follow-up. When we think that, you know, the buyback program, the share buyback program you have just approved, I would like to give it more of a framework. When we consider the liability of the company, we see that, you know, the amortization cycle from now on, we will still have a very comfortable position in terms of income, and the net, however, is a little higher than expected. I would like to combine this question with the following. How do you view the buyback program in view of the deleveraging process of the company, especially now that this program has been approved?

The second point on capital allocation in the rolling of that, Ivo has just talked about interest rates in Brazil, and your debt still is correlated with the BRL and CDIs. Are you thinking of having issuance of a paper overseas? We see that the credit markets are a little more stressed out. What's your view on your liability management program? At the risk of sounding repetitive in relation to the deal, a very interesting point for me is the remuneration of SP, you know, which is different from the sale lease back in bags of soybean. If I understood it correctly, there is also an upside in terms of productivity and yield. It's a win-win. My question is, what do you expect in yield by implementing irrigation in both farms? Do you have an estimate?

What could we expect in terms of increase of yield after irrigation? About the share buyback program, Gabriel, I think that what's important in this deal is that we're going to bring the company to a leverage level we feel more comfortable with. Our board discourages us from going over two times, and we're now at 2.3 times. It is really our objective in deleveraging. Of course, we, you know, we could go back to using other leases, but in terms of share buyback, since the shares are being traded at a very low price, it doesn't make sense to buy more land. If we had, for example, an opportunity emerging of buying more land, we know that SLC is the best investment for our shareholders. We want to grow leases instead of owned land. This is what the share buyback program indicates.

About issuance of a paper, we have been thinking of taking debt in USD. You will see at the balance sheet that we have now some debt coming in dollars now related to the seed rinsed acquisition. We, of course, have to adjust this with our hedge accounting policy. We think of taking short-term loans in dollars because long-term dollar debt is more difficult to manage. This is what we are considering in terms of exposure to dollar. Okay, what about yield? Pavinato, you go. What is the rationale when we create a business plan thinking in the long term like this? If you look at our history, we have an EBITDA margin, a net margin, and this is the result of commodity price, production cost, exchange rate, and yield. Those are the four variables that define this.

A long time, the productivity gains, the yield gains generated value, added value to whom they add value to the entire chain. Brazil has increased yields more than competitors. We are capturing some of this value and applying this to our operations. In 15 years' time, yields will be even higher than the yields we have today, of course. As a consequence, production costs will be higher in 15 years' time. Will our EBITDA margins be higher than now? No, we do not believe so. We will be more competitive in the international markets, but our EBITDA margin will be similar to the one we have today, depending on how efficiently the operations are managed. The partner will participate in the revenue, but not in the costs. Maybe this is the bottom line of your question.

We are going to transfer a percentage of the EBITDA margin to this part of the SPEs. In the SPEs, we hold 50%, a 50% stake. It actually goes back to us. This is the rationale. In fact, agricultural partnerships for us as agriculture operators is the sharing of the proceeds, but in a much more resilient way because we know that there are some years in which we experience crop failures with low yields and who suffers. The operator, the landowner will get just as much. Now when we have a real partnership, like in this case, if there is a climate event leading to crop failure, the partner shares the losses too.

Considering the long-term plan to grow our leased areas, this agricultural partnership mitigates risks, in fact, because I will never pay in a lease a higher percentage than that, even in years when the output's not so good. In fact, the partner is now going to be exposed to both variables, not only to price. Today, when we lease based on bags per hectare, the partner is only exposed to price, not on, you know, anything else. This is what we believe will add value in a very fair way to both partners. I'm sorry, I think maybe I wasn't clear. It was about the upside and downside. You know, with high yields, your partners will also get more. I would like to know how much you can generate in terms of additional yield thanks to irrigation. This was the focus of my question.

Okay, let me complement that. You know, today we have one culture that sometimes, you know, has good yield and sometimes 70-80% of the potential. The productivity of this farm is just at 90% of the potential. Now with irrigation, my yield will rise to 110%. I'm not going to lose any yield. In terms of revenue, if today I get 100 in revenue, this will go to 220, you know, with irrigation. 220, 230. This is the potential value generation with irrigation. Thank you, Pavinato. That's very clear. Thank you, Barra. Our next question is from Tiago Duarte, BTG. Could you please activate your camera and microphone? Hello, good morning. I have a question about the gains to be obtained with irrigation, but from a different angle.

Pavinato, what's the, you know, what's the cost associated with the building of infrastructure for irrigating one hectare, right? Especially considering what this, you know, the comparison between the irrigated land and the dry farmed area. I would like to know what would be the return considering the market conditions of today. Let me answer this question, please, Tiago. Including all of the infrastructure that you need, electrical fitting, etc., BRL 25,000 per hectare, this is the cost. Okay. For you to generate this additional revenue. Actually, I would even think that it's, you know, I think that the gains will be even higher because it's cotton, second crop, right? With even higher unit revenue. Yes, yes, you're right, in fact, Tiago. If you consider only yield, it's 230.

If you consider cotton, yeah, because I have one year soybean, one year cotton, in two years, 20,000 and 20,000 with cotton. So 30,000 in a two-year period. Now the 30,000 will be generated in addition to the higher yield per year. In the same year, both crops with much higher yields. In the case of cotton in Bahia, cotton with irrigation, it's been very good and really surprisingly good. With lower risk because there won't be any crop failure. You become the rainmaker. Yes, perfect. This is very clear. Now my second question. This has been already discussed, right? The project and the budgeted costs for next year, growth of 9.7% or 4% if we consider the effective cost for 2024-2025. Could you please explain more about the increased costs?

You know, really trying to break down what is volume and what is cost because I am under the impression that part of the cost hike is associated with, you know, the need for greater soil correction. So is this part of the picture, this one-off effect with the land that you're adding, especially when we consider the costing base for next year? Perfect. Tiago, in fact, our budget for 2024-2025 was defined, but we had to use more crop protection, especially in cotton and some of the varieties, and we ended up spending more than expected. Now in 2025-2026, crop protection again, we have prepared the budget, adding additional products, and we have now a package of crop protection for 2025-2026. As for fertilizers, we are applying fertilizer in a more efficient way, and this not only in the newly added land.

In this scenario where fertilizer prices, for example, the phosphorus and potash, we bought more cheaply than last year, and our fertilizer package did not really see any increase in costs. A very small variation of 2-3% in dollar. In BRL, the prices did not go up. We made, you know, good purchases for 2025, 2026. We planned our fertilization program in a more efficient way. We really were trying to find out why the cost, it is really our planning that is leading to this increase, especially in the dollar-based accounts, which are the inputs. In BRL line items, we have inflation and services. This is what also drives costs up. This is the summary. This is what justifies the increase of costs in a 2025, 2026 crop year versus 2024, 2025.

We are compensating this with higher yields, actually outstripping the target for this year. There is an offset also because the prices in BRL, we have some hedging in that are favorable to us. We will be able to deliver higher profitability rates at, you know, this will also depend on yield. Yield will be the determining factor in the 2025-2026 crop year. Okay, but this, you said that it is actually more volume per hectare than price that is causing the impact, right? Is this volume a one-off thing or is it something different? I would like to understand how recurrent this effect is. I'll answer. If prices continue low, volume will go down in the following crop year. If prices rebound, maybe it will not go down. It is correlated with commodity prices and how much we invest. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Tiago.

Our next question is from Mr. Leonardo Alencar from XP. Leonardo, you're on. Please activate your camera. Good morning, Pavinato, Ivo and André. Congratulations on the results. By the way, I would like to go back to the deal, if I may. Pavinato, you said that this is something that was an elaborated deal. It took a long time to prepare. Considering that part of the attractiveness of this deal lies on the fact that you had recently acquired some land that required irrigation. If we think of other occasions that could lead to this unlocking of the land value at the appraisal level, would it make sense for you to think of different sharing schemes? You mentioned that this model, you could have another lease model where the leasing partner would also share the risks.

Do you think that, does it make sense to you? In addition to this, a quick follow-up on SG&A where there was an increase, you talked about the freight for corn because of Sirius. Is this a one-off thing or will there be more impacts coming in the future? Thank you. Thank you, Leonardo, for your question. I'll start the answer with the second one. In fact, we have created this deal. It's a structure that worked, but rolling out more deals like this will depend on opportunities that emerge. We were able to create this and we think that expectations were met both on our side and the investor side. This is not going to be automatically replicated.

We need this good fit in terms of the value of the land, the value potential of the operation so that we can really create more similar deals. There is always potential to do more, but something that we have to think about in the long term. Let me just explore that for a moment. If there is another partner on the table, do they share any other strategic value or is there demand from other partners that seek this type of deal or this is something, you know, something that is very new and people prefer the traditional lease deals? Think of an eight-year agreement. Nobody who is, you know, thinking of the short term and short term results would engage in something like this. This is the profile of the investor looking at deals like this.

That is why, you know, there is always a rationale and a strategy behind each deal. It takes, you know, proper analysis and the commitment of long-term investors really to work out. What about SG&A? There is an important difference in the way Sirius would sell, would trade their commodities. They deliver at the port corn as well. There is a freight cost that, you know, could be better, but we need to factor in. There was also, you know, a super production of corn. This increased our storage costs and had an impact in our SG&A. In administration, we had significant expenses related to the Sirius deal that was also reported under this line. Yesterday, the deal also, you know, we had to use, you know, auditors, consultants, attorneys. All of this adds to the expenses, but they are one-off expenses.

They're not recurring in any way. Thank you, Alencar. Now let's continue with Gustavo Troiano, Itaú BBA. Gustavo, please go ahead. Can you hear me? Yes, we hear you. Good morning and thank you very much. Two points I would like to discuss with you. Firstly, we've talked about the SPEs and potential return, but what about the timing of these irrigation investments specifically? You said that Paladino would be from 2028 to 2030, but what is the step-by-step process to get there? Once approved, you know, in terms of water intake and electrical fitting, is this CapEx going to be dispersed all at once? To understand what the curve looks like. The second question about capital allocation. Can you tell us a little bit about future opportunities?

We have talked about expansion in leases, expansion in irrigation, and I would love to hear from you, especially considering the growth of corn-based ethanol in Brazil. Can you ride this wave either through a partnership with an industrial operator? We saw some of these deals taking place in Brazil. In the relation between lease, irrigation, and potential of corn-based ethanol, what would you give priority to? Because of course, there are, you know, lots of projects and limited capital, but I would like to know what's in your mind. Thank you very much, Gustavo, for this question. The investment in irrigation in this project that we announced yesterday at Piratini, where we have the water intake facilities and the power is already established. We are starting with the investment in 2026. Cash generation and the creation of the SPEs.

In Paladino, we have said 28 and 2 from 28 to 2030, we have most of the water needed and all the licenses will probably get obtained very soon, but we do not have yet the electrical fittings. That is why we consider that the investment will run as of 2028. In the SBE cash generation, we will have the funding for those investments in three years or in two years. It depends on the decisions taken at the specific time. We are feeling comfortable with the design for this project and the meeting of the deadlines. About capital allocation, when you have several options to allocate your capital, it is always a good thing. You are not, you know, forced to choose just one way, right? It really depends on the cost of capital. Right now, cost of capital is very expensive.

We really have to think, think it over. As we said before, irrigation, we are going to allocate the capital because it makes sense. It is a strategy because it will increase output, will increase yield, it will add stability and helps mitigate risks for the company. There is no doubt in our mind. As for the other possibilities you have mentioned, they are, you know, possibilities. We are going to decide how to allocate your, our capital. Maybe considering, you know, the share buyback program, maybe this is the best way to go. Especially because as the company grows and we start deleveraging below a level of 2 times, then we will be able to invest or make other investments. Buyback is always a good option, especially now that SLC is being traded at, you know, 50% of our NV.

But thinking of the long term, am I going to grow? Am I going to add value or am I going to buy my shares back? All of this has to be factored in.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.