Procept BioRobotics at Bank of America Conference: Strategic Growth Insights

On Wednesday, 14 May 2025, Procept BioRobotics (NASDAQ:PRCT) participated in the Bank of America 2025 Healthcare Conference. The discussion, led by CEO Reza Nizadno and CFO Kevin Waters, emphasized a strategic overview of the company’s performance and future directions. While the company is optimistic about new opportunities in prostate cancer treatment, it remains cautious with its financial guidance, reflecting a balanced approach to growth and profitability.

Key Takeaways

• Procept BioRobotics is expanding its focus beyond BPH into prostate cancer treatment.
• Q1 procedures exceeded expectations, with over 11,200 cases completed.
• The company is managing tariff impacts, reducing expected losses from $5 million to $1-2 million.
• Procept holds a strong cash balance of $300 million, supporting its growth strategy.
• The WATER-four study is central to its prostate cancer strategy, with potential revenue impact by 2027 or 2028.

Financial Results

Procedures:

• Q1 procedures surpassed expectations, totaling over 11,200 cases, a 4.5% increase year-over-year.
• Full-year procedure guidance remains unchanged, indicating a conservative outlook.

Systems:

• Q1 system sales met expectations, with the average selling price at the high end of guidance.
• Historically, Q1 is the weakest quarter for both ASPs and quantities.

Revenue and Gross Margin:

• Revenue guidance is conservative, designed for consistent "beat and raise" performance.
• Tariffs are expected to impact gross margins by $1-2 million in Q3 and Q4.
• Gross margin expansion will be driven by leveraging fixed costs.

Operating Expenses and EBITDA:

• Operating expenses are growing at half the rate of revenue growth, showcasing strong leverage.
• While EBITDA breakeven in Q4 is possible, the focus remains on long-term growth investments.

Cash Position:

• Procept maintains a robust cash balance of $300 million to support its strategic initiatives.

Operational Updates

Utilization and Installed Base:

• Q1 utilization rate was 7.1%, a 5% increase year-over-year.
• The ease of use of the Hydros system facilitates training new surgeons, enhancing procedure volumes.

Tariffs and Reimbursement:

• The company has increased its inventory of components to mitigate tariff impacts.
• A move from a Category 3 to a Category 1 CPT code is expected to align physician payments with other procedures.

Prostate Cancer Opportunity:

• The WATER-four study focuses on safety, incontinence, and sexual dysfunction, with enrollment expected to take 24 months.

Future Outlook

Guidance Philosophy:

• Procept emphasizes a "beat and raise" strategy, prioritizing capital placement over ASP to drive volume.

Prostate Cancer Strategy:

• The WATER-four study, costing $10-15 million, is pivotal, with revenue potential anticipated by 2027 or 2028.

Financial Strategy:

• The focus is on scaling the business and increasing procedures, with a clear path to profitability.
• Gross margins are expected to reach 70% within the next 1-2 years.

Q&A Highlights

• Analysts explored procedure progress, saline shortage impacts, and the company’s conservative guidance.
• Discussions included utilization rates and the WATER-four study timeline.
• Questions addressed gross margin leverage and operating expenses.

Readers are invited to refer to the full transcript below for more detailed insights.

Full transcript - Bank of America 2025 Healthcare Conference:

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Hi, my name is Craig Bijou. I’m one of the med tech analysts here at Bank of America. It’s a pleasure to have Procept BioRobotics and from the company, Reza Nizadno, CEO and Kevin Waters, CFO. Reza, Kevin, welcome.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: Thank you. Thanks for inviting us. I want

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: to start with Q1 results and talk about maybe 25 guidance as well. But let’s start with the procedures. And the procedures came in better than expected, which was good to see following some of the disruption from the saline shortage that you saw in Q4. So maybe if you could just kind of walk through how procedures progressed through the quarter and maybe how it looked on a monthly basis, that’d be great.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: Yes. Thanks. So as we had said in Q4, we saw that impact of the savings shortage that affected roughly half of our accounts. Coming into Q1, we saw improvement. So February was better than January and March was better than February.

In late February, we had guidance to about 10,700 procedures for the year for the quarter, and we finished the quarter at 11,200 plus cases. So we were very happy with that outcome. So overall Q1 year over year was about 4.5% more than the previous year. So considering the impact of savings going to January and February, we were very pleased with what we saw in Q1.

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: Let me just add to your second part of your question around kind of guidance, right? Mean, Renza just highlighted that we did beat Q1 procedures by essentially 500, but we kept full year expectations the same. And our guide beyond Q1 is really just a more reflection of conservatism, frankly, a market that when we reported at the February, probably wouldn’t have been terribly receptive anyways to companies increasing guidance. We feel very confident about the underlying trends and procedures, not just that we saw in March, but now into April as well. And just feel good about our ability to continue to kind of exceed what we say we’re going to do out there.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. That’s helpful. I want to talk about Q1 systems. So that’s, I believe it was in line with the street. I don’t know.

I guess the question is for you guys, how did it compare to what your expectations were? And then I guess along with that, I know a number of investors are asking about kind of the CapEx environment given the procedure number in the first quarter. So maybe just touch on how it played out relative to your expectations and then what you are seeing from a CapEx perspective.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: So related to CapEx on a day to day interaction of our reps and our communication with the accounts, we don’t see a change in the tone of the interaction. And we were very happy with the systems we placed. This was the, let’s call it, the second full quarter of Hydro’s launch. We were very happy and we saw, as we have indicated, we saw IDNs we sold many of the IDNs in this first quarter. But as far as the impact of the CapEx, we are not hearing that.

Kevin, do you

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: comment Yes. I mean, you asked it met our expectations, to answer your question directly. I mean, we gave guidance at the February. I mean, there’s being conservative and then there’s being realistic, right? And given guidance two thirds of the way into the quarter, we wanted to provide guidance that was realistic at that time.

Frankly, were happy before Q1 capital landed. Q1 for capital equipment companies, it’s always tough. It’s the toughest quarter to execute because budgets are not fully vetted within hospital systems. When we start working with our IDN partners, those typically take a bit longer to move through the process earlier in the year with capital budgets. But we feel really good about the funnel, that we’re seeing in the second quarter and for the rest of the year.

But Q1 met our expectations. We were pleased both with the absolute number of systems we sold and the average selling price. The average selling price was at the high end of our guidance that we gave. And historically, you always typically see with Procept Q1 being the weakest in terms of ASPs and quantities as well. So we feel good about where we’re positioned heading into the rest of the year.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it, that’s helpful. And I do want to spend a little bit of time just talking about guidance, kind of philosophy that you guys have. I know you have a history of beating raises, and you’ve impressively done that over the last couple of years. If you kind of look you gave some specifics on revenue details on certain lines. And if you kind of look at what you did in Q1 and some of the kind of run rate, thinking about the full year number, it looks a little I’d say it looks conservative.

So maybe just talk about you touched on it a little bit. It’s Kevin, to start the ear on the procedure side, you’re being a little bit conservative. But maybe just more broadly, how do you think about the guidance philosophy and kind of getting back to some of the beat and raise mentality? Yeah, mean, think philosophically we’ve

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: been very consistent since we went public in 2021, where we’re putting up numbers that even if we were just to achieve our guidance, I think if you look comparable around medtech, I think are still pretty fantastic and would be very successful quite frankly. But at the same time, you know, we appreciate that, you know, the valuation of our business and expectations are probably higher than other companies. And we just want to maintain our ability to continue to beat and raise both in terms of absolute units and then also in terms of pricing. I mean, I would characterize pricing. I’ll just say, Reza and I have received probably numerous questions today just kind of around pricing.

What does capital pricing look like? You know, I think historically, we’ve always used pricing as an upside lever. And why we do that, particularly on capital, is because ultimately placing the capital is far more important than the ASP. The ASP, we want to get a reasonable ASP, don’t get me wrong, but we will sacrifice some capital ASP to get systems installed sooner, to get volumes going with procedures in a more timely manner, and we’re going to continue to do that. So I think you’re right to characterize our guidance as conservative, but even our conservative guidance I think produces some really good growth.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. No, that’s helpful. And I want to touch on procedures maybe in a little bit more depth and utilization. And I think utilization was 7.1% in the first quarter. I think it was up 5% growth.

If you look at where the street is in Q2, I think it’s 2%, Q3 maybe mid single digits And I think you’ve alluded to this on the or talked about it on the call that it’s going to be 20 plus percent given the easier comp. So maybe just talk about kind of the cadence of utilization and procedures as we go through the year and like how investors should be you know, is the street kind of under, has the street got your message on how procedures should look and what should investors be thinking about in terms of utilization growth?

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: Yeah, so we did not guide to a quarterly number on procedures. With that said, I think now looking at kind of where consensus sits, we feel very comfortable with how it’s been modeled. I think it’s consistent with our prepared remarks and what we talked about in Q and A and feel good about where the street is sitting both in Q2, Q3 and Q4. I think you’ve highlighted growth in Q2 year over year in Q2 and Q3 is kind of low single digits and we feel good about our ability to execute against that.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. And then maybe just a bigger picture question on utilization. It comes up a lot and just thinking about how the utilization for the different cohorts are progressing. And this may have taken a little bit of a, you know, the Q4 disruption may have kind of interrupted the progress that you were seeing there. Don’t know.

I’m just kind of thinking about it, but I guess how would you describe the progress of the different cohorts on average? I know

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: you track that pretty closely. So we track, you know, we use many metrics to track the progress and we are very pleased with the results that we are seeing. Definitely different course, the longer the accounts they receive progress in them. But we track also the active surgeons in the account. We look at the number of surgeons per account that we see now we are in two to three surgeons per account.

For utilization, really, in an account is a function of the first surgeons that we call them existing surgeons doing more cases, but also other surgeons in existing accounts, bringing new surgeons in existing accounts. We track all of those along with other metrics to see how we are progressing and we see good progress in that.

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: I think progress and visibility, I think it’s important to call that out. I’ve been part of, now this is my fifth publicly traded medical device company, and the data we are able to collect and analyze a Procept. I mean, I’d argue it’s best in class. What I mean by that is we have visibility into every surgeon that’s doing our procedure. We have visibility into how many surgeons per account.

We have visibility into surgeon retention rates and surgeon satisfaction. And I think all of these factors, keeping our eye on procedures as opposed to handpieces sold, keeping our eye on surgeons as opposed to hospitals has really helped us produce a model that’s been highly predictable. And it also is a tool we use when we talk to the sales team. We’re not going to talk about kind of outer years here, but at the same time, if you look at expectations in ’26 and ’27, you know, we call it small wins for a very big impact. And we talk about that a lot as a management team and it’s permeated throughout our organization where if just every rep to get one more case per month that has an outsized impact on utilization, we feel good that we can execute against kind of long range expectations given that we already have numerous surgeons and many accounts at levels people expect us to be at one, two, three years down the road.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: And also reps are not compensated on handpieces sold. It’s on utilization.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. And then I know you even at AUA, you guys talked about this a little bit. Maybe just a follow-up on that. With hydros and even some of your later AquaBeam sales, you used to initially place a system and it was one doc, and you’re starting to see more docs. Maybe just talk about that dynamic and how that has changed or evolved over the last couple of years and how that can impact utilization.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: So as you mentioned, we always start with one or two surgeons at a given account, and those are typically the high volume surgeons of the account. With time, these other surgeons because in a high volume surgeon, there may be surgeons that don’t do any cases in a month. And those will with time that’s how we are increasing the number of surgeons. Definitely hydros because of the ease of use is much easier to train new surgeons. The training of that is simpler.

The setup time is simpler. That will help bringing more surgeons at existing accounts after the first two. Got it. Thank you.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Maybe moving on to tariffs. And I think some investors were surprised that you guys were exposed to tariffs when you said it on the Q1 call. Obviously, still just a small number. And so maybe just kind of frame for us what you guys did say on the call, the impact, I think it was three forty basis points 150, sorry, 150 basis points. And then what would it look like now with the new tariffs from this weekend?

MR.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: Yes. So I mean, we’re not going get into details of how we are mitigating tariffs as you know, this is a very dynamic situation. But coming into 2025, we were anticipating changes and for that we increased the inventory, particularly components we were buying from China, and we got an inventory of about nine months. So that mitigated that risk. In fact, we didn’t buy, haven’t bought anything at the 145% tariffs.

So as we are seeing tariffs improving, this headwind that we are seeing in the back half of the year on the gross margins will diminish.

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: Let me quantify kind of what we said and where we’re at, and tomorrow may be different. I’ll preface my comments with that. Our guidance on the call assumed a $5,000,000 impact to gross margins in Q3 and Q4. That was based on 145% import tariff of a few of our key components from China. My understanding as of yesterday is that 145% is now 30%.

So I think it’s fair sitting here today to take our impact that we gave on our last call and reduce it by the delta between one hundred and forty five and thirty. I think that probably puts the impact more in the million to $2,000,000 range as opposed to $5,000,000 And, you know, that would be the impact. Obviously that’d be significantly less than the 150 basis points that we communicated. With that said, we do recognize that this environment, you know, it’s going to persist at least for the foreseeable future. So longer term, we are looking at different mitigation strategies to bring some of those components that we currently import from China to either find a second source or perhaps work with the same suppliers to make that product in The US or in a jurisdiction that that would be subject to tariffs.

But that’s really a twenty twenty six-twenty seven impact. What I feel comfortable saying is even in an elevated tariff environment, we feel that our ability to expand gross margin and get this company to profitability isn’t impacted in any way, shape or form. Now, we going to have to go look at expenses in other areas if they were to stay at 145%? Sure. But I think we feel we have enough levers we can go pull on to offset that exposure.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Yeah. Helpful. Want to move on, come back to the P and L, but want to move on and maybe talk about the reimbursement and the CPT code change. Obviously, it’s on a lot of investors’ minds. You guys are moving from a Cat three code to a Category one code.

It’s going to happen this summer. So I mean, I guess I want to level set for investors, maybe you guys can talk about kind of where the professional fee is today and how to think about any potential changes. And then also, well, let’s go we’ll go with that right now.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: Yes. So the ROC process, you know, when you move from category three to category one, the ROC process surveys with about 100 surgeons. So that’s done. And then based on that, they establish an RVU and defined as surgeon payment. This does not impact the facility payment.

So the facility payment that that is separate that has not changed. So this is in the group of resective procedures. Today, whether it’s Durr, Us, Green Light, they are all paid depending on them especially with private pair anywhere between 700 to $800 So our procedure is in that group and we don’t expect this to be meaningfully different. They’re all going to be in the same group. And from an adoption point of view, it is the APC level six payment that makes the ROI for the hospital.

That’s not changed. This is the physician payment and it will be we expect that to be in the same range as other resected procedure. Quite frankly, surgeons are not using our product because they’re getting paid $600 or $800 is for clinical outcomes. They’re buying it for that purpose. And in the past when I understand anxiety, I don’t know what else I can frame this of people because in the past other companies when they went from category three to category one, there were other parameters that caused the payment to go down because maybe some part of the procedure was not done.

This is not the case. This is a procedure that has been there for the last five years and the time of the procedure is well established. We expect to be in line with other procedures. And

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: I guess that’s the key and at least from investor questions. It seems like that I don’t know if it’s being misunderstood, but in general, you guys today are in line with the other resective procedures. Going forward or whenever the reimbursement gets updated, you’re still likely going to be somewhere in the ballpark.

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: In the ballpark. And so it’s sometime in July when the it’s called the preliminary results will come out. And then by October, will be finalized. We expect that to be in line with other receptor procedures. Great.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: And then maybe moving on to you were at AUA a couple of weeks ago and maybe just wanted

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: to talk about some of the cancer opportunity. You highlighted some of the early clinical data at that conference. Maybe just give us a little bit on the opportunity in prostate cancer. Yeah, are very excited about this opportunity. We are early in this journey.

There are about three million men in The United States with prostate cancer, vast majority of them sit on the sidelines because of the side effects of current treatment, whether it is focal therapy or prostatectomy, high incidence of incontinence or erectile dysfunction. They ask the patient to be on the sidelines and wait until it progresses to later stage with vast majority of these patients. So it’s not that if, it’s a matter of when. So a procedure that can be, can have the low incidence of incontinence and erectile dysfunction or sexual dysfunction will be well accepted by the surgeons and the patients. So what we presented the first question is do we spread cancer?

The next question is do we reach the peripheral zone? Can we treat in the transitional zone? Is cancer a focal therapy or a diffuse or multifocal? These and also what has been the first result we have seen with our PRCD001. So these were the five areas we wanted to address at AUA.

Definitely on the first one, we had done some studies and showed the circulating tumor cells prior to resection, during resection and after we were not spreading cancer. We submitted that with some literature, sir, to the FDA. FDA removed the cancer contraindications. So that question is gone. We showed that MRI does not detect all prostate cancer.

So focal therapy that just focuses on the images that MRI showed is not sufficient to treat prostate cancers. You need to resect the vast majority of the prostate without inducing incontinence. And we also showed that in our PRCD001 and two, we were able to resect all the way to the peripheral zone. And question was, is our treatment will work for prostate cancer? The answer is if you use BPH treatment, no, it does not because for BPH you don’t need

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: to

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: remove vast majority of prostate. All you need to do is remove enough to remove the stress from the urethra. But for prostate cancer you remove almost double amount of tissue that you are removing in BPH. And we showed all of those. And then we showed data combination of PRC-one, two very low incidence of incontinence and ED.

And these patients at we had data on some number of patients at three months and six months that didn’t progress to a higher grade group. So, of course, we have to this, the purpose of that was to show the design of the study, WATER-four, to give a confidence why we designed the primary endpoint of WATER-four is safety, incontinence and sexual dysfunction. You want that to be as low as possible. The secondary endpoint is efficacy. So we’re very happy that we had three surgeons over there, they presented.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Thank you, Reza, for that. And maybe just the milestones, the timing milestones, like what should we expect, you know, what are for? And, you know, maybe if you could just kind of give us a framework for how to think about timing of the

Reza Nizadno, CEO, Procept BioRobotics: next couple of couple PRCTI001 and two, we finished PRCTI002 enrollment is finished, PRCTI001 there are still some patients left. As those patients we gather more follow-up, we will present as we have more follow-up and more patient because that’s a separate study. On water four, we will give information as we get to different conferences. Don’t know, Kevin, do you want to share about some of the timely?

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: Before talking about maybe the information dissemination, let’s just put the timeline, let’s put a realistic timeframe around this for everybody. A realistic timeframe to enroll water for is twenty four months. So we believe that that is a very reasonable goal based on comparable studies that have been done and given some of the nuances in enrolling patients in this study. With that said, we’re trying to influence that to the best of our ability. I think a best case scenario for Procept would be to have this study fully enrolled in eighteen months instead of twenty four.

That’s kind of how we’re thinking about it. That would mean the majority of patients would be enrolled in this study by the end of twenty twenty five, which, you know, we have kind of seven, eight months here, left to go and we feel good about that. That would put any prostate cancer revenue with a prostate cancer indication in the back half of twenty seven at the earliest, and probably the most likely scenario entering 2028. And I just remind everybody, if you look at where models sit today, you’d be looking at a company that has over a thousand robots installed in The U. S.

Exiting 2027. And while I still believe and don’t see our BPH growth slowing at all in those years, the growth that we could generate from prostate cancer is fully incremental. It’s leveraging an existing installed base, leveraging our existing physician relationships. It’s using the same sales force. And if you just put that in perspective, even if we charge the same price as we did for a BPH procedure, which we’re not prepared to comment on pricing for cancer today way too early, but let’s assume that it was the same.

If every one of our customers is doing two prostate cancer treatments a month, you’re looking at an incremental $100,000,000 that is just full drop through to the company in a relatively short period of time with a relatively small amount of investment. I mean, Water four is 10 to $15,000,000 for an incremental 100,000,000 in year one, you know, we think has a great ROI. And then in regards to how we’re going to disseminate information to everyone here and our investors in general, I think you should expect that at AUA next year, we would have another fairly robust and large update, but I appreciate AUA is now twelve months away. This is an important initiative. We’ll continue to update people with enrollment.

I wouldn’t expect much on our Q2 call, just to be frank, we’re coming off of AUA. So I think on our Q3 call, we’ll give a nice update as to kind of where we’re at with enrollment, how things are progressing and what the world’s looking like that time.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. That’s great. We have three minutes left. Maybe, Kevin, just touch on the P and L. So you guys have had shown a lot of gross margin leverage, shown a lot of operating leverage over the last couple of years.

So maybe just talk about kind of what’s driving that, how you see that playing out in 2025. And I think you’re going to be close to breakeven EBITDA maybe at the end of this year. Yeah, so

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: a few comments. I mean, I’m really pleased with the leverage ratio and OpEx. And what I mean by that is our ability in being kind of in this hyper growth mode to still only grow OpEx at roughly half the rate of growth in revenues. I think when you look at ’25, it’s a bit worse than that, but that is primarily the investments that I just highlighted that we’re making in the Water four study. I think what investors should expect though regarding OpEx is that our OpEx guide will not materially change throughout the year.

Meaning that if we have any revenue upside, we think this all flows to the bottom line. It’s similar to what we did in 2024. And we’ve built an operating base, particularly in our sales and marketing that could support much higher revenue. So anything incremental should drop through. You did mention EBITDA breakeven in Q4.

There is a scenario where we achieve EBITDA breakeven. That’s not our guidance. But I think if you look at kind of where consensus sits and what our full year guide implies, it would imply that Q4 is right around breakeven. But obviously, we’re not managing the business that way right now. We’re focused on scaling the business.

We’re focused on increasing procedures. We’re focused on showing all of you a very clear pathway to profitability, but we are not going to sacrifice investments that can continue to fuel growth in a market that’s large and we’re early. I mean, that’s one thing I stress to everybody. We’ve had a ton of success. We have a ton of growth.

There’s a long way to go here in terms of the opportunity. And we want to make sure that we’re being fiscally prudent and responsible. This will be a profitable company. Don’t get me wrong. It’s not if it’s just when.

And when with $300,000,000 cash on the balance sheet, we have more than enough cash to get there. So to answer your question directly, sure, we could be EBITDA positive in Q4, but it’s not a huge goal of us internally at all.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: And maybe just following up on that. So gross margin, you guys have done expanded that significantly over the last couple of years. So expecting a little bit less this year, putting the tariffs aside. But I guess maybe just anything to think about there or I guess why not expect similar type expansion that you have had?

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: So I think remembering the single biggest driver of margin expansion for us, it’s not pricing, it’s not mix. It’s really absorbing the fixed costs we’ve built into this business. I mean, we’re trying to build this business to a multi billion dollar business and our fixed costs are higher than I would say a comparable company of our size because we see the bigger opportunity. And as we continue to grow, we’re gonna continue to leverage overhead. And I believe kind of this march from 64, 60 five to 70 over the next one to two years that can be done by just leveraging our overhead alone.

And by the way, this company can be profitable at 65% margins. We’ve talked to all of you about kind of getting to 70% here in the next two to three years, but that’s not necessary Craig for profitability. And I think even at 70, once you get to that point, we are thinking even longer term, what can we do with the cost of our product? Now the simplicity of our disposable, can we produce the capital at cheaper cost? And I think that could drive margins even higher longer term, but none of that is necessary for profitability.

Craig Bijou, Med Tech Analyst, Bank of America: Got it. With that, I think we’re out of time. So Reza, Kevin, thank you.

Kevin Waters, CFO, Procept BioRobotics: Thank you. Thanks, Greg. Thanks, everybody. Thank you.

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