tradingkey.logo
搜尋

康尼格拉品牌 (CAG) 2027 財年第一季財報電話會議:通膨與第二季展望

TradingKey2026年9月30日 20:01
facebooktwitterlinkedin

Conagra Brands公佈第一季財報,維持2027財年規劃假設,預期第二季有機銷售額將下降2%,主要受價格彈性及感恩節出貨時間差影響。通膨率預計落在5%-6%區間高端,因運輸成本上升抵消蛋白質成本利多。公司營運重點為削減債務,預期全年槓桿率維持在4倍左右,並透過精簡產品組合與行銷投入提升長期獲利。

該摘要由AI生成

Conagra Brands (CAG) 在第一季後維持其 2027 財年的規劃假設,同時強調運輸成本上升、審慎的價格彈性假設以及品牌投資的增加。管理層繼續以削減債務為目標,並預期產品組合精簡的大部分效益將在 2028 財年顯現。

主要重點

  • 管理層預期第二季有機銷售額將下降 2%,反映出價格彈性以及與感恩節相關的出貨量與消費量之間的時間差。
  • 2027 財年通膨率預計仍為 5%-6%,但目前趨向預測區間的高端,主因運輸通膨率約為原先規劃的兩倍。
  • 受通膨高企、銷管費用 (SG&A) 時間點調整以及廣告與促銷支出增加影響,第二季營運利潤率預計落在高個位數區間,低於第一季的 11.5%。
  • Conagra 第一季結束時槓桿率為 3.99 倍,預計在償還約 2.5 億美元債務的同時,2027 財年結束時的槓桿率約為 4 倍。
  • 全年毛利潤率預計仍將與上年基本持平,定價、價格彈性以及冷凍食品銷量下降均已反映在財測中。
  • Conagra 正加快 SKU(庫存單位)精簡速度,包括審查 400 多個單人份餐點 SKU。管理層預期大部分財務效益將在 2028 財年顯現。

關鍵財務數據

指標公布數據或展望管理層評論
第一季營運利潤率11.5%預期第二季利潤率下滑的起點
第一季廣告與促銷費用 (A&P) 占淨銷售額比重2.3%預期第二季支出將會增加
第二季有機銷售成長下降 2%包含價格彈性及感恩節出貨時間點因素
第二季營運利潤率高個位數區間受通膨、銷管費用時間點及更高的 A&P 投資施壓
2027 財年通膨率5%-6%,趨向高端運輸通膨完全抵銷了蛋白質成本下降的利多
第一季槓桿率3.99 倍優於管理層內部預期
財年底槓桿率約 4 倍長期目標維持在 3 倍
預計 2027 財年債務減少額約 2.5 億美元可自由支配現金流仍專注於去槓桿
全年毛利潤率與去年同期相比大致持平成本與定價的消長變化已包含在財測中
新發行債務利率 5.4% 的 5 億美元在近期兩筆債券到期前於 7 月發行

業務與營運表現

第四季法說會後推出的價格調整正在進入市場。管理層表示零售商的接受度符合規劃假設。Conagra 將雜貨價格彈性設定為約 2:1,零食約為 1:1,且未假設競爭對手會跟進其價格調整。

甜點第一季表現強勁,而健康零食 (permissible snacking) 仍低於管理層預期。肉類零食和瓜子堅果類產品高度依賴便利商店通路,而汽油價格上漲對便利商店的人流造成了壓力。Conagra 計劃從第二季開始加大對肉類零食和爆米花的行銷與創新投入。

管理層表示,公司在冷凍食品方面獲得了一些來自環孢子蟲 (Cyclospora) 相關需求的效益,但影響並不重大,且部分被產品組合中其他業務抵銷。公司強調 Birds Eye 的品牌信任度、便利性與可靠性是支持消費者進一步參與的領域。

Conagra 還對促銷活動採取更嚴格的投資報酬率標準。管理層表示將不會重複舉辦會稀釋獲利能力的促銷活動,包括 Sandwich Bros. 的某些活動。這些假設已包含在 2027 財年的預測中。

精簡產品組合仍是主要營運重點。Conagra 退出了 Celeste 披薩業務,雖然對第一季淨銷售額產生輕微負面影響,但提升了獲利能力。更廣泛的企劃著重於減少低生產力的 SKU、包裝規格和配方,同時提高採購規模、製造效率和上架週轉率。

單人份餐點是重點領域,目前產品組合中有 400 多個 SKU。管理層表示,精簡並不代表減少對該品類的投入;相反地,旨在將投資和通路集中在影響力更高的產品上。

管理層財務預測

管理層維持第二季有機銷售額下降 2% 的預期。該展望包含了審慎的價格彈性假設,以及感恩節前後的季節性時間差,這可能導致出貨量低於消費量。

第二季和第三季的通膨率預計高於第一季,且 Q2 和 Q3 的通膨率相當。管理層預計 Q4 通膨率將較 Q3 放緩,因為 Conagra 開始基於高基期的運輸、食用油、瓦楞紙包裝和鋁成本進行比較。2028 財年更廣泛的成本比較可能變得更加有利。

營運利潤率預計從第一季的 11.5% 降至第二季的高個位數,主要有三大原因:通膨上升、銷管費用時間點效益的反轉,以及 A&P 支出增加。第一季銷管費用效益約有一半為一次性,另一半預計將移至第二季。第一季總銷管費用效益約相當於每股 0.03 美元。

Conagra 繼續預計全年毛利潤率將與上年基本持平。財測已包含預期的價格彈性、冷凍食品銷量下滑以及相關的製造吸收效應。

管理層重申 3 倍的長期槓桿率目標。預計 2027 財年底槓桿率將保持在 4 倍左右,隨後透過提高獲利能力及公司的股利調整,在 2028 財年取得進一步進展。

風險與關注事項

  • 由於司機短缺和油價上漲,運輸通膨已加速,目前運作速率約為 Conagra 原定計劃的兩倍。
  • 冷凍食品的定價調整仍陸續進入市場,實際消費者價格彈性仍具不確定性。
  • 冷凍與冷藏食品銷量下降可能會對製造成本吸收造成壓力,儘管管理層表示該影響已包含在財測中。
  • 汽油價格上漲使便利商店需求面臨壓力,進而影響肉類零食與瓜子堅果類產品。
  • 小麥價格波動使得 Ardent Mills 的大宗商品交易貢獻難以精確預測。
  • SKU 削減必須與零售商的重新上架時程及庫存管理相互協調,使得大部分預期效益延至 2028 財年才顯現。

分析師問答焦點

為什麼儘管消費趨勢相對穩定,Conagra 仍預期第二季有機銷售額將下降 2%?管理層提出了價格調漲推進、審慎的價格彈性假設以及感恩節時間點等因素。該季度的季節性消費量可能會超過出貨量。

推高通膨預期的因素是什麼?蛋白質成本表現優於預期,但該利多被運輸通膨完全抵銷。管理層預計第二季和第三季通膨將超過第一季水平,隨後在第四季放緩。

為什麼預計第二季營運利潤率會下滑?主要因素為通膨高企、銷管費用 (SG&A) 從第一季轉移至第二季,以及 A&P 支出增加。投資將集中於單人份餐點、肉類零食和爆米花。

槓桿率能多快降至 3 倍?Conagra 預計 2027 財年將償還約 2.5 億美元債務,年底槓桿率接近 4 倍。管理層預計 2028 財年將取得更大進展,但未提供該年份的具體槓桿率預測。

Conagra 如何管理再融資風險?公司表示,除了用於營運資金的商業本票外,其債務幾乎全為固定利率。公司於 7 月在兩筆近期到期債券(包含一筆 5 億美元和一筆 2.6 億美元債券)到期前,發行了 5 億美元、利率 5.4% 的債券。

小麥價格波動如何影響 Ardent Mills?其核心麵粉磨製業務相對穩定,而小麥價格波動可創造大宗商品交易機會。Ardent Mills 在第一季比 Conagra 的內部預期高出約每股 0.03 美元,但管理層表示該項貢獻難以精確預測。

法說會完整逐字稿


完整財報電話會議逐字稿

管理層陳述

Operator

Good morning, and welcome to the Conagra Brands Q1 Fiscal Year '27 Earnings Q&A Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] Please also note, today's event is being recorded.

At this time, I'd like to turn the floor over to Matt Neisius, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Matthew Neisius

Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Once again, I'm joined this morning by John Brase, our CEO; and Dave Marberger, our CFO. We may be making some forward-looking statements and discussing non-GAAP financial measures during this Q&A session. Please see our earnings release, prepared remarks, presentation materials and filings with the SEC in the Investor Relations section of our website for descriptions of our risk factors, GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliations and information on our comparability items.

I'll now ask the operator to introduce the first question.

Operator

[Operator Instructions] Our first question today comes from Andrew Lazar from Barclays.

分析師問答

Andrew Lazar

Maybe I want to start out -- can I pointing to organic sales in fiscal 2Q to decline 2%, a bit heavier than current consensus. It looks like quarter-to-date, maybe scanner looks to be running maybe closer to flattish. So, I guess, I'm just curious if anything has changed in your 2Q top line outlook and whether it's elasticity or something else that might cause a sequential deceleration or perhaps it's just more prudent planning?

John Brase

Andrew, let me start and turn it over to Dave. But I think in general, the pricing we discussed in the Q4 earnings call is really just hitting the market kind of as we speak. And so I would say in terms of our pricing assumptions, at this point, results are in line with how we planned the year. And I like the word you use, Andrew.

I think we've taken a very prudent approach to our elasticity assumptions and these assumptions remain unchanged, which is really frozen at more of a 2:1 elasticity that we've modeled for the year in grocery and snacks at more of a 1:1 elasticity. Now in terms of competitors and followership, I would say we have not assumed any followership our pricing moves. Obviously, if that happened, there could be some upside to those elasticity assumptions, but we have not modeled that in.

David Marberger

Just one additional piece of color. So we guided to 2%, down 2% organic for Q2. This contemplates Thanksgiving timing because you have the second quarter of this year versus third quarter. So we may ship a bit below consumption in the second quarter because of the seasonal items may have some more consumption versus shipments. So the 2% is consistent, like John said, with our original planning posture.

Operator

Our next question comes from Peter Galbo from Bank of America.

Unknown Analyst

Just wanted to touch on the updated inflation guidance for the year, having moved kind of at the higher end of the $5 to $6 million I know you had kind of Q1 inflation in the 5-ish percent range, more towards the low end. But just kind of how you see it pacing over the balance of the year? And maybe just help us think about exit rate. Are we above that 5% to 6% as we get and kind of how we might think about it again from a phasing perspective.

David Marberger

Yes, Peter, thanks for the question. Let me try to give you a little bit of color here. So as we talked about for Q1, we did have some favorability in proteins relative to our planning -- so we were a bit favorable, which drove some of the favorability we saw in Q1. But as we went through Q1, obviously, we've seen an acceleration in inflation around logistics or transportation cost, really driven by the driver shortage and oil prices as well. So as we forecast inflation, we're still in that 5% to 6% range for the year, we said towards the higher end of the range.

And really, what's happening is the favorability that we've seen in proteins, which we would continue to see is a little bit more than offset by the -- basically the doubling of inflation in transportation versus where we planned it for the year. So it's kind of a trade-off there. In terms of the flow of the year, we would expect -- and we usually don't give this much detail, but I think it's important because I think there's some confusion on this inflation. We would expect our inflation rate in Q2 and Q3 to be higher than Q1 and and that to be about the same.

And then we expect our Q4 inflation rate to actually be lower than Q3. So that's kind of the flow. And as we sit here today, we have no reason to believe that we wouldn't be wrapping on not just the transportation costs that we're seeing but things like edible oils and kind of our corrugated aluminum, we have a lot of areas where we're still seeing high inflation which we will have all during fiscal '27. I don't see a reason why we couldn't expect that we would wrap on that. So obviously, we'll have to get closer for that. But I feel like Q4 will be lower than Q3, and we should be wrapping on a lot of these higher inflation categories in our materials when we get into fiscal '28.

Operator

Our next question comes from David Palmer from Evercore.

David Palmer

I wanted to ask you about the pricing, the acceptance at retail, how much is that factor into what you're thinking there? Or your price elasticity modeling just basically a price impact to the consumer in a vacuum of competitors, not also pricing? And I have a quick follow-up.

John Brase

Yes. Thanks for the question. I think in terms of pricing, I kind of go back to my opening comments, I'd really say really in line with our expectations. And so we're really past kind of the customer acceptance of that now pricing is effective in market. And I would tell you that customer acceptance there was no surprises versus our planning posture. And so that's how I think about pricing as we move forward.

David Palmer

And then I noticed you had some comments about not not repeating a promotion from last year on the Sandwich Bros brand. Is that the kind of thing that you will be seeing throughout the year that there'll be promotions that you see that you already see that were not effective from a profitability standpoint? And is that baked into your guidance? And I'll pass it on.

John Brase

Yes, great question. And again, I think we continue to look at our promotional dollars through a real ROI mindset. And I think we've been really prudent of saying, hey, we're not going to repeat promos that have been dilutive to the company. And I think that's what you're seeing in some of this simplification, really focusing on those high leverage elements that can bring value to not only the consumer but also to the shareholders. And so we're going to continue to make that a part of how we operate. But I would tell you, again, everything -- all those assumptions have been embedded into the fiscal year forecast.

Operator

Our next question comes from Tom Palmer from JPMorgan.

Thomas Palmer

I wanted to maybe just clarify on your second quarter expectations. You've got this high single-digit operating margin outlook incremental pricing is flowing through. There was the SG&A call out. I just want to make sure I kind of have my arms around the gross margin cadence here. Like is there a step down expected in gross margin as we move into 2Q? Or is this really about the timing of SG&A that swings the margin lower?

David Marberger

Yes, Tom, let me take that. There's really 3 drivers. If you would look at where we landed on operating margin, let me just kind of go there at 11.5% for Q1. We said higher single digits for Q2. There's really 3 drivers. One, as I just mentioned, we expect higher inflation in Q2 versus Q1. The second piece is the SG&A favorability that we had in Q1. It was roughly $0.03 of our EPS beat.

Half of that was a onetime benefit. Half of it was timing where it didn't hit in Q1. It's going to hit in Q2. And then the third piece is accelerating our investment in A&P. So we expect to increase A&P as a percentage of net sales to versus 2.3% as it was in Q1. So they're really the 3 drivers. So you will see a little bit of a on gross margin from the higher inflation versus Q1.

Operator

Our next question comes from Alexia Howard from Bernstein.

Alexia Howard

Great. Could I ask about the leverage. So, you've talked about the 3x being the long-term target. And I think it increased a little bit this quarter. I think you're saying that you'll still probably be at 4x by the end of the year or you said through fiscal '27 it will remain at this 4x. So how quickly do you expect to start on that deleveraging trajectory? And how quickly do you expect to achieve that goal?

David Marberger

Yes. Alexia, if you start with this year, yes, we -- we guided to expecting to finish the year approximately 4x on our leverage. We finished Q1 at 3.99x, that's actually favorable to where we thought. Usually, what will happen in Q1 and Q2 as our leverage will click up because we're very seasonal with our inventory, right, with our seasonal businesses and things like our tomato operations, we built all the inventory in Q1 and Q2. So obviously, we use cash in the first half and then we have cash inflow in the second half. So that's very normal.

So we're still on track with the approximately 4 times that -- we don't get specific with this, but it's implied. We do expect to pay down debt in the year for the full year. Approximately $250 million of debt pay down is what we would expect for this year. Our target is 3x. We are maniacally focused on getting there as soon as possible.

As we get into fiscal '28, John talked about it, we're focused on improving margins and profitability of this business. So with improved profitability and the dividend adjustment that we made, we feel like we're going to be able to make great progress in fiscal '28 on getting that leverage down. We're not going to give you that number today, but we want to get to 3x as soon as possible.

Operator

Our next question comes from Chris Crey from Wells Fargo Securities.

Christopher Carey

This is Chris Carey. I wanted to ask about the -- next portfolio. Can you just give us a sense of maybe where you are on some of the interventions to improve performance. You talked about, I think, popcorn, Blim Jim, yes, what are the expectations more from a volume standpoint as you look forward and perhaps lap some of the elasticities over the medium term?

And then just maybe not a location, but just curious whether you're seeing or you thought you saw any benefit in your frozen business from Cyclosp-related demand and if that's a factor in how you're viewing the next few quarters in frozen.

John Brase

Great. I'll take both of those. As you think about snacking, let's start with the positives. Really, our Sweet Treats portfolio continues to perform really, really well and had a very strong quarter Q1, and that's really behind both StackPac and Swiss must continue to really be performing very well in the market. I think permissible snacking, as you said, is really where we're not where we want to be there. And I think a couple of points of drivers there. The first is, obviously, we're very overdeveloped in our meat snacks and our seeds business in the convenience channel, which has been really challenged lately with the higher gas prices.

But I think aside that, there's work to do from my standpoint in terms of from an execution and a channel lens, we need to do a better job of participating where the growth is really coming from, specifically in the meat snacks category. As you take a step back and you think about meat snacks and popcorn and seeds, these are fantastic categories, and we are the market leader. And so it's our responsibility to kind of drive these categories forward.

And so I think what you're going to see, and you're already seeing as we go into Q2, a significant step-up in our brand building and marketing specifically pinpointed at meat snacks and popcorn specifically there, but then also innovation, a major step-up in innovation. We think those are the -- those are the 2 critical levers that kind of get us back to a growth trajectory in those important businesses.

On Cyclospora, just a quick one there. We did see some benefit, but I would tell you, nothing material as we think about Q1 and we also actually saw some offsets from Plecospora as you think about like our Wish-Bone salad dressing as an example. So again, nothing material there. But I think more than the onetime benefit, I think what's really important is this is a reflection of consumers coming to a brand they know and trust with Birds Eye, and we did a great job of delivering for them. And so I think as you think about that brand, we've got such an opportunity to drive better -- more trial and more engaged with consumers. We deliver great taste great convenience and honestly, reliability that they're looking for in their vegetables. So we think a great opportunity to continue to drive.

Operator

Our next question comes from Max Gumport from BNP.

Max Andrew Gumport

Question, just coming back to the 1Q and your reaffirmed outlook for the year. Obviously, it was a sizable EPS to be versus consensus, and I think first year expectations too. They get some help from inflation. There were some SG&A timing benefit as well and your inflation outlook for the remainder of the year has picked up. But I'm curious to what degree the firmed outlook maybe has embedded additional conservatism in that, especially with regard to mills as well given the weak price volatility.

David Marberger

Yes, Max. Let me take that. Starting with Q1, you kind of hit it. We had a beat to our expectations really driven by, I think, 4 things: our SG&A which was the timing and then the 1 time we had the Ardent Mills benefit. We had the inflation lower than our internal forecast. And then we did get a bit of benefit on the tariff refund that we got in the quarter, which was close to us then.

When you look for the full year, SG&A, we talked about it, the onetime, the onetime and then you have the timing and -- but that's pretty much on track. The big -- the big impact is the acceleration of transport and inflation. It's double the rate that -- and we had assumed inflation for transportation at double the rate. The good news is that we have some other areas in materials where we're favorable to that. So there's a lot of puts and takes there.

The other dynamic is we're just starting with our frozen pricing. And so we really need to see how this plays out. We've been very clear on how we've modeled elasticities there could be a scenario where maybe that winds up being conservative, maybe not. So we just need to see how that plays out. And then Ardent Mills, we were favorable about $0.03 in the quarter to our expectations for Ardent Mills. Wheat prices have been extremely volatile, right?

If you just kind of look from May to now, they're up significantly, but they've been up and down. And so that creates trading opportunities for the ethos the Ardent business. And so the thing with that is it's a little bit more difficult to forecast that with Precision for the full year. So we thought it was prudent to hold the year, it's 1 quarter, and then we'll update at the half and if things continue as they do in Q1, then maybe we have some upside there, but we want to wait a little longer to see.

Operator

Our next question comes from Robert Moskow from TD Cowen.

Robert Moskow

I don't know if I saw kind of a firm guide on gross margin for the year, 3 months ago, I think the guide was kind of flattish. But now you have the higher cost and the other element that I wanted to ask about, Dave, is in the frozen and refrigerated division, the volumes are going to be down like 10%. And at the same time, you were also increasing capacity, particularly in frozen chicken. So I'm just wondering if there's -- how are you managing through the leverage consequences of that. Is that a drag -- have you already put into your numbers a drag from that dynamic?

David Marberger

Yes, Rob, good questions. The first one, we've held our guidance for operating margin for the year. So obviously, gross margin is a big part of that. We've had puts and takes in the cost. And so we're still where we were before, which is relatively flat to the prior year in terms of gross margin. To your second question, yes, obviously, we have modeled the pricing and the elasticity impacts and there's volume impacts where we have decreases in volume in our frozen business. We've modeled that. We've taken into account the absorption impact. So all of that is included in guidance that we provided, and we'll just see how that plays out.

Operator

Our next one comes from Rob Dickerson from U.S. Bancorp.

Robert Dickerson

John, I just want to ask you about the simplification process, kind of how you're thinking about SKU rationalization and then maybe even brand rationalization, right? I realize you said last quarter prepared remarks this quarter again, kind of looking at everything, but there was -- it was noted in those prepared remarks that, I guess you exited Pizza -- and I'm just curious, I mean, clearly, when you exit that, that rationalize SKUs. So like are there parts of the portfolio such that you could simplify by just kind of stepping away from certain brands that are online that you have? And then I guess, secondly, just kind of broadly, like how are you thinking at this point about the manufacturing footprint.

David Palmer

Rob, thanks for the question. And if you guys will indulge me, I'm going to go a little bit long on this 1 because I think it really is important for you to kind of understand how we're thinking about this. I am incredibly excited about the opportunity we have to really reduce complexity across the enterprise. And I will tell you, SKU optimization is definitely one of those areas. As we've discussed before, we have an extremely long tail of SKUs that we are getting after. Right now, we did -- we stood up an internal work stream that's really looking to significantly reduce SKU count.

And I put this work into 2 buckets. There was smaller bucket, which you just alluded to, is there are certain brands and categories where we simply just don't see a future. And it just makes sense to exit those, those small really unprofitable brands or low-profit brands as soon as possible. And so we made the decision, as you saw with Celeste pizza, which had a minor impact on net sales for Q1, about impact, but it was actually profit accretive to the enterprise. And I think we'll continue to look for more of those small opportunities that we do see in front of us.

I think the larger opportunity though is what I'm really calling the simplification of our core platforms. And I want to use an example here that I think will bring this to life, single-serve meals. We've got over 400 single-serve meal SKUs and I believe there's a future where we can have a much simpler, more productive assortment. That doesn't mean for a second that we don't believe in the category that we have any plans to see distribution we're going to stop innovating. I would say just the opposite. We want to double down in this business.

And we think an optimized assortment can help drive velocity on our most impactful SKUs. So that -- in terms of SKU complexity, that's one component. But I would also tell you, we're looking to optimize our formats and formulations. We just have to do a better job of eliminating nonvalue-added complexity that the consumer quite frankly, isn't willing to pay for. So as looking at this, we're not just looking to do we're looking at formats and formulations as well. And I think as you fast forward, this is going to do several things for us.

It's going to drive stronger operational efficiency. It's going to drive procurement savings as we're procuring fewer items, but with greater scale. It's going to help us drive improved focus, which I think is so important. When we get focused on something, we execute with excellence. We need to focus our organization a bit more, and this will do that. And then and finally, improved velocity on shelf, which is good for us, good for our customers.

And so the last thing I'd say here is we're going to take a real measured approach in how we roll out the SKU simplification. We really need to coordinate this with our customer reset timing and look at inventory impacts. So I would see the majority of this benefit from this work to happen more in fiscal '28, but the decisions are happening right now.

Operator

All right. Our next question comes from Scott Marks from Jefferies.

Scott Marks

Wanted to just ask a little bit about the consumer. You made some comments in the prepared remarks talking about the consumer just being thoughtful about where they're spending their dollars, obviously, manage them through a volatile environment. Any updates you can share with us in terms of what you're seeing? Have things improved, gotten worse? Just any changes that you've seen recently?

David Palmer

Yes. Thanks for the question. And I think I would describe the macro environment is dynamic. That's probably an understatement. But in terms of the consumer, I would kind of say the word -- I would use is muted and continues to be kind of bifurcated by income, no doubt about it. But having said that, we really haven't seen any material step change in consumer behavior. There's pockets. C-store as an example, that's been a bit more pressured in recent months because of the gas prices, but overall, I would say the consumer has been relatively stable and resilient.

And our job is to continue to stay incredibly close to the consumer. And we've got to evolve alongside how they're evolving and delivering the food they want, where they want it, but also importantly, at the right value. And this is what I love about our portfolio we've got brands that compete all across the value spectrum, value brands like Banquet all the way up to more premium offerings like Healthy Choice. And so we've got a portfolio that can meet this dynamic consumer wherever they are.

Operator

Our next question comes from Lee Jordan from Goldman Sachs.

Leah Jordan

Just if you could provide more detail on the changes in your approach for the step-up in the A&P spend. It sounds like you've had some early traction. Just curious what's been working, how are you measuring that return? And where you allocating the step-up in spend you're planning to do in 2Q?

John Brase

Yes. As you think about A&P, this is a big one for me. We have so many great brands. But if I'm being truthful, we haven't consistently invested behind them. at the levels that are required to drive that brand affinity and awareness. And so we have a tremendous opportunity communicate more with consumers to ensure they understand we've got great value propositions out there. And our job is to make sure they fully understand it. And so as you think about the investments, I'm really pleased in 2 fronts. One, we're investing more; and two, we're getting that money to work a lot harder for us.

And this is kind of this new modern marketing machine that we're building internally that I think can become a real competitive advantage. And so as you think about where we're focusing these investments, it's really in 3 places: single-serve meals, meat snacks and popcorn. We're going to be very, very targeted in those important growth ambitions.

And your last point is a good one, too. We're already seeing some really positive results in terms of improved reach and engagement from some of the changes that we're doing. We've gotten a lot more targeted in who we're going after, how we're going after them and our messaging is just sharper and more compelling. And so I think this is a tremendous opportunity to use this increased focus on brand building to help kind of return us to growth and then drive brand relevance.

Leah Jordan

That's very helpful. And then my follow-up was just on interest expense. I thought it was reiterated for the year. We've had to move higher in rates here recently. I think you're mostly fixed exposure, but I did think you had a little bit of floating. So just kind of catch up, remind us where your exposure is there. And then I also thought you may have some refinancing needs in the relative near term. So just how are you thinking about that in this interest rate environment as well?

David Marberger

Yes, let me take that. The first one, we're pretty much 100% fixed right now. The only variable debt that we have is our commercial paper and so we use that as sort of our working capital needs. So we're very high percentage fixed that we're really not exposed to the interest rate environment. Now yes, we do have 2 bonds coming due this month.

We have a $500 million note and a $260 million note. We actually went into the market in July and financed ahead. And so we issued a $500 million note, the rate came in at 5.4%. The timing was actually pretty good there, given what rates have done since then. So between the -- from the proceeds of that and just our normal kind of borrowing capacity, we're very comfortable refinancing these notes this month.

Operator

And our next question comes from Carlo Casella from JPMorgan.

Carla Casella

One on that last question as well as Lexia's earlier question on leverage. Have you had your conversations with the agencies because we've seen, in some cases, other peers that have cut their dividend and focused on deleveraging, but still gotten downgraded. Do you think they're kind of changing their view at all on your business?

David Marberger

Yes, Carla, we talk to the agencies all the time. And so they're very clear on our financial policy our priority of using our discretionary cash flow to pay down our debt as quickly as possible. So we're always working and talking to the agencies. They obviously looked at our cut of the dividend as a positive in terms of our credit rating and our position. So they know where we're going. They know what our priorities are. So now it's a matter of just continuing to get that leverage down.

We know the markers for levels where if you -- leverage exceed certain levels, you may be putting investment grade at risk. We're not near those levels. And we're moving in the right direction, which is down with our leverage and they know that. So that's our strategy. That's our focus, and they're very aligned with that.

Carla Casella

Okay. That's great. And then just one follow-up on Ardent Mills. How do we think about the volatility in wheat and how that flows through the numbers? I know it was a benefit for this quarter. But how should we think about that going forward?

David Marberger

Yes. So think of Ardent Mills as really two different businesses. They have a business where they mill flower and they sell flower at a margin and they're selling flower to the Domino's pizzas of the world and everything. So they're dealing with the same volume dynamics that the entire food industry is, but they do an amazing job of providing great customer service, that's a competitive advantage for them. But that business is more stable and more flattish. If you look at the other part of their business, it's what we call commodity revenue, and that's the trading opportunities they create when you have volatility in the wheat markets.

And so that's what we saw in Q1 and the hard part there is when that comes, it's a little bit difficult to forecast with precision. But generally, with more volatility Ardent Mills will benefit from that volatility with their commodity trading business. And so -- and the good news for us is we're very aligned from a capital allocation perspective. So in terms of profit, we have a minimum of 80% cash flow conversion on that profit, and we're very aligned with Ardent and our partners on that philosophy.

Operator

And ladies and gentlemen, at this time, we'll be ending today's question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the floor back over to Matthew Neisus for closing remarks.

Matthew Neisius

Thank you, Jamie, and thank you all for joining us today. Feel free to reach out to Investor Relations with any additional questions. Have a good day.

Operator

And with that, we'll conclude today's Q&A session and conference call. We do thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.

本文部分內容由 AI 生成和翻譯,並經人工審核,僅供參考且做為一般資訊用途,不構成投資建議。

免責聲明:本網站提供的資訊僅供教育和參考之用,不應視為財務或投資建議。

推薦文章

tradingkey.logo
風險提示:我們的網站和行動應用程式僅提供關於某些投資產品的一般資訊。Finsights 不提供財務建議或對任何投資產品的推薦,且提供此類資訊不應被解釋為 Finsights 提供財務建議或推薦。
投資產品存在重大投資風險,包括可能損失投資的本金,且可能並不適合所有人。投資產品的過去表現並不代表其未來表現。
Finsights 可能允許第三方廣告商或關聯公司在我們的網站或行動應用程式的任何部分放置或投放廣告,並可能根據您與廣告的互動情況獲得報酬。
© 版權所有: FINSIGHTS MEDIA PTE. LTD. 版權所有