Back
Earnings Call Transcripts

Albemarle Corporation

ALB
Quarters2 Quarters
ContentQ&A Sections
SourceEarnings Conference Call
Quarter 1

Q1 2026 Earnings Call — May 7, 2026

Analyst David Browder (Deutsche Bank): Good morning. Kent, have you seen any, at this higher level of lithium pricing, have you seen any change in buyer behavior, either getting ahead of or whatever else to deal with the higher pricing in the lithium market? Thank you.

Executive Kent: Thanks, David. So I don't know that we've seen the real change in behavior. I mean, it is evolving. So it's only been a few months, right, since price has changed. And I wouldn't say we've seen a change. The conversations may be a little different. Eric's a little closer to it, so maybe you can comment.

Executive Eric: Yes, good morning, David. I would say that I'd substantiate what Kent said. It's fairly new. Most of the growth has been on the ESS side, as we described in the call here. There's a lot of interest in sort of the carbonate supply chain that contrasts with EVs outside of China, which are a little weaker on the hydroxide side, you know, in terms of sentiment. All in all, though, we've got a pipeline of customers who are very interested in talking with us about certainly spot bids but also contracts, and we're being very cautious as we look at that in terms of how we think about or we want to take that contract mix over time.

And just on the deal, the opportunity in Chile, any early thoughts on potential cost improvements or benefits from this route versus your, you know, traditional solar evaporation route?

Executive Kent: Yeah, so it's more about being able to access more lithium in the solar at the cost position we're at rather than trying to do it. It's not really a cost improvement program. It's about being able to access more lithium in the solar under kind of the environmental conditions there.

Analyst Patrick Cunningham: Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. You seem to hint the broader deployment of renewables as a result of the crisis could be a potential positive for lithium demand. I guess, is that anything that you've seen already? And how would you expect the market to respond to a higher embedded risk premium in oil, concerns around energy security?

Executive Kent: Yeah, so there's a lot there, and it's difficult to see that in the market. I mean, we think that may have an impact on both EVs but also the energy storage segment, as we're calling that now. It's difficult to see, but I would say energy security and grid resiliency is probably one of the bigger drivers around that. I'm not sure that's about the Middle East crisis, but it's clear that's a big driver around the world.

Analyst Patrick Cunningham: Got it. And then just on green bushes, I think one of your JV partners noted some issues around grade recoveries and production stability, maybe even suggesting that they're more systemic. I guess is this in line with your assessment, and how does it affect the ramp-up at Greenbushes?

Executive Kent: So Greenbushes is operating in line with our expectations and the outlook considerations that we put forward. So every year we look at all of our assets, and we make a risk-adjusted forecast around that, and we're fully in line with that. And the ramp of CGP3, so we started that up at the end of the year and we expect it to ramp through this year and I would say that ramp is on schedule.

Analyst Mike Sisson (Wells Fargo): Hi there, this is Fabiola for Mike. Thanks for taking my question. So as you look further ahead to your brownfield projects, what are the hurdle rates for these? Is there any scenario which any of these don't happen? And then how much capacity do you think these would add, you know, beyond 2027?

Executive Kent: So, look, we look at it as so we are now kind of ramping investments that we've made. That gets us through that profile that we showed you there. So it slows down a little bit of growth into 2027. That's ramping the kind of bigger investments that we've made over time. The next phase would be those brownfield investments, and we think that gets us a somewhere in the high single-digit growth rate, maybe for that period of time. And those are at existing assets. So that would be, for example, Greenbushes, Wajana, and at the Salar de Atacama.

Executive Kent: And we think of over time after that, we think there are more significant investments we could make on resources that we own, Kings Mountain, for example, and then further trains at the Salar de Atacama. So we have a pretty good line of sight for growth. But the first tranche of that would be those brownfields. The returns would be – it's hard to say what the – if you look for hurdle rates, it would be traditionally the way we look at that. And we'll make those decisions at the time depending on how we see the market growth pricing, what the costs look like from those assets.

Analyst Mike Sisson (Wells Fargo): Okay, got it. Thanks. And then for the 2026-2027 projects, you're talking about requiring minimal additional capex. Can you just give us a feel for size there? Any color you can give would be helpful.

Executive Kent: Yeah, well, I think for 26 and 27, it's really just ramping up the projects that we've built and done. Probably the most significant one there would be is the full ramp of Greenbushes, CGP3, and then getting WADS and operating on three full trains. We're operating three trains today, but we anticipate working through a more difficult part of the mine, so the quality of the resource is not as good. We expect that to improve significantly in the fourth quarter. That's the thinking around that and that's kind of where those incremental volumes come from plus just the normal productivity things that we do with better recoveries solar yield and at Salar de Atacama for example the project we've invested in and we're still working to get more and more out of that.

Analyst Chris Perrella (UBS): Hi, good morning. It's Chris Perrella on for Josh. Can you unpack the puts and takes to the 1Q energy storage margin? Given the $20 a kilogram spot price you guys experienced in the first quarter, I would have thought margins would be closer to 50%. But just kind of, you know, why were they so much better?

Executive Neil: Yeah, hi, Chris. Sure, I can take that. Really, the main driver of that is the traditional lag that we see in spodumene costs and how we consume spodumene through our supply chain. So, really, there was a small uplift in margin because, essentially, we're consuming spodumene that we purchased from our mines in the fourth quarter, which was obviously a lower price than what you saw in the first quarter. But, you know, it's minimal. I think you see that our full-year outlook, if you assume kind of flat pricing across the year, we've guided to energy storage potentially being in that mid-50% range. So there was a little bit of an uplift in the first quarter due to that, but obviously that will start to normalize as we go through the year, assuming pricing stays consistent for the rest of the year.

Analyst Chris Perrella (UBS): All right. And then just as a follow-up there, the special fees outlook, you did $75 million, $76 million in the first quarter, even higher in the second quarter. What's causing that to drop off in your outlook in the back half of the year?

Executive Neil: Yeah, I can start with that, Chris, again. It is really at this point just the uncertainty that Kent mentioned in the opening remarks. You know, right now the visibility that we have is at least through the middle of the year, and we are driving some price and volume initiatives that give us that confidence around the second quarter. I think we'll continue to give you updates as we go through the year. There's obviously a lot of uncertainty around the world, of course, stemming from the situation in the Middle East, and we're just watching that very closely.

Analyst Vincent Andrews (Morgan Stanley): Thank you. Good morning. I just wanted to follow up a bit on the brownfield opportunity and just color a few things in. Kent, were you saying that, you know, these assets could potentially start up as early as 2028, or would the timeline on that be a bit longer, if you could just help us understand what the lead time would be?

Executive Kent: Yes, well, none of the projects are finalized, so there are opportunities now, so I'm not sure we've even called them projects, but there are things that we've talked about and discussed over time and then we'll bring those on when we think it's the right time, right? And obviously a couple of those are with joint venture projects, so we need to align with our joint venture partners as well. So somewhere in that it's after definitely clearly after 27 in that time frame but we think that is the next leg of growth for us in that phase.

Analyst Vincent Andrews (Morgan Stanley): Okay. And Neil, can I just ask you, you know, slide 10, you talk about it at 20,000 or 20 kg, the free cash flow or the operating cash flow conversion would be 60 to 70%. As prices ramp higher than that, how much of that drops down to cash flow versus how much, you know, we go up to working capital? So would we stick with the 60% to 70% range? Would it be higher than that? Would it be in the lower end of the range? How should we think about it?

Executive Neil: Yeah, Vince, look, I think it, of course, always matters in the shape of how that pricing moves up. If it's a very sudden move up in pricing, particularly if it's towards the end of the year, then I would expect that our cash conversion will compress in the immediate just because of how sharply the working capital runs up and how quickly we can get that back in terms of cash. If it's a little bit more gradual, look, I still think that 60% to 70% when we've done our benchmarking and our modeling, that seems to be the right place for us to be from a steady state perspective. So if it is a little bit more of a rateable kind of movement up, I would expect us to be able to still be in that range.

Analyst Aaron Vissanathan (RBC Capital Market): Great. Thanks for taking my question. Congrats on the strong results. And apologies if this was asked earlier, but did you discuss the reduction of output at Greenbushes? It looks like it's about 10 to 15% and how that affects kind of your own operations.

Executive Kent: Okay, so we said that in an earlier question. So, Greenbush is operating in line with the plan that we have, right? So, and as we look at that every year, we build our plans, we look at all of our resource assets and we risk adjust those. And so what we've built in our plan for Greenbush is this year, the mine is operating to those plans including the ramp of CGP3 so we are we're on our plan for the ramp of CGP3 and the it was we started at the we started that project at first or at the end of 25 and we felt like we could ramp it throughout the year and then it's a schedule according to that ramp but we should be at full capacity by the end and we think we're on that schedule.

Analyst Aaron Vissanathan (RBC Capital Market): Okay, thanks. And then you noted that ESS demand could be a little bit stronger, I guess. And, you know, we did notice kind of stronger EV demand also in the last month versus the first few months of the year. So are you seeing demand improvement? And obviously I think you're still guiding to about flattish volumes. So is there any way you can address that upside on demand if there is any, or would that be – unlikely this year and potentially likely next year. How should we think about, you know, your opportunities to capture some of that extra demand if there is any?

Executive Kent: Yeah, Eric can talk about maybe a little bit more detail, but I would just say if market's growing, it is strong, but we're working through the seasonality, right? The early part of the year is always difficult to figure out what exactly is going to happen with the Lunar New Year. China is such a big market. That has a big impact, and we're off of that now. Demand is strong, but I'm not sure we're ready to kind of say it's at a different level.

Executive Eric: Yeah, so this is just to add on a demand basis. Our customers of the battery companies around the world, particularly in Asia, who produce for this market, their order books are full from now through the beginning of 27th. So, demand is very strong in energy storage, driven by the factors of grid reliability, renewables in various parts of the world, as well as AI and behind-the-meter storage. So, there's very favorable trends that are driving that kind of an outlook.

Executive Neil: And, Arun, this is Neil. I think you had asked about our volume growth forecast for this year, which is flat with last year. Look, underneath that volume forecast was an assumption, as Kent highlighted, about how we see our resources ramping through the year. That's one part, CGP3, and the other one being the improvements that are getting driven at Wajana. Everything is going according to our plan, which is why we're still holding on to that volume outlook. But obviously, as we go through the year, if we start to see upside, you know, we'll continue to give you updates. I think our volume growth potential this year in particular is really driven by how well those resources continue to move in their capacity expansion.

Executive Kent: Yeah, it's about availability of product from our perspective rather than market. Market's pretty strong.

Analyst Lawrence Alexander (Jefferies): Good morning. I have two questions. First, can you talk a little bit about whether there's any advantages or disadvantages for you if the LFP producers need to switch to yellow phosphorus to reduce their sulfur consumption and also how higher sulfur prices are affecting your economics versus your peers?

Analyst Lawrence Alexander (Jefferies): And then secondly, just longer term, you know, if you do undertake something like Kings Mountain, what would you see as, like, the desired, desirable range for your balance sheet, and what balance sheet metrics would you use as boundary conditions?

Executive Eric: Okay, so maybe, Eric, you can talk about the LFP chemistries a little bit, because, yeah, so you might have to expand a little bit on your question, Lawrence. Let me answer the part of it that is clear to me and I think is important to understand. We talked in the call about raw material costs rising $79 million and across the enterprise and we have a variety of ways we're mitigating that. One of those drivers, a fairly big driver, is sulfuric acid. I don't think we are advantaged or disadvantaged versus anybody who buys sulfuric acid around the world, particularly in Asia where a lot of the conversion activity happens for hard rock conversion. So that's a cost that's affecting supply.

Executive Eric: Frankly, any acid-roasted leaching process is going to be impacted by that. Your first question was not clear to me. Maybe you could restate it.

Analyst Lawrence Alexander (Jefferies): My understanding was that one way to offset the cost on sulfuric acid for the LFP producers is for them to switch to yellow phosphorus, and that if they did, I was curious as to whether there's any issues with the contaminant profiles of lithium from different mines. My understanding is you have an advantage in terms of being able to reformulate your product, but maybe I'm just overthinking kind of the dynamics there.

Executive Eric: Well, I think one of the advantages of those LFP producers, the cathode producers who reside almost entirely in China, that they have is their upstream capabilities to access phosphorus in various forms of it. I've had some discussions with some of these companies about how they do that. I understand any tradeoffs are not impacting their ability to deliver quality, and that's the best I could say. If we learn more, we'll certainly share more.

Executive Neil: And then, Lawrence, this is Neil. Maybe I can start with your question on Kings Mountain. Look, what I would say, as you can see as a company, because of the, you know, extreme volatility that we've seen over the last five years, we are obviously in a position of balance sheet strength. and we are on purpose taking a conservative stance right now just because of the volatility we've seen in general. But as we look at Kings Mountain, and I want to highlight, we're nowhere near a final investment decision.

Analyst Joel Jackson (BMO Capital): Hi, good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. The first question is, so you're talking about Q2 margins guidance or commentary as if spot prices hold Q1 levels. Spot prices or market prices are actually higher in Q2 than Q1. So can you talk about that? I mean, what quarter-over-quarter price increase would you need to hold Q1 margins, or how would you frame it?

Executive Neil: So I think, let me start, Neil, and then you can talk a little bit more in detail. But there is, you know, a portion of our volume is on contracts. We're about 40% on contracts, and there's a lag on that, right? There's typically a three-month lag on how pricing moves through that. So that will move up slightly just as we go through the quarter if prices stay where they are. So we're not forecasting prices, but that's just a function of the way our contracts work. So it will move up.

Executive Neil: And that will impact margin as we move forward through the quarter, then it becomes more steady state as it will catch up as long as prices are flat.

Executive Neil: Yeah, just to add to that, look, if you hold everything flat, you know, essentially to get to that higher margin that you're assuming, you know, basically from our $20 scenario to our $30 scenario, everything basically scales linearly. So to get to the higher margin, you have to make an assumption around just a higher price realization scenario. In the second quarter, all other things being equal. So it really comes down to pricing.

Analyst Joel Jackson (BMO Capital): Okay, and Ken and Tina, if I circle back to the Greenbush's question, which is, I've heard your answer a couple times now on what you're saying about Greenbush as being the plan, but one of your JV partners really went public the other week and talked about safety and was in the prepared remarks and was very aggressive in wanting to call that to the public what they feel should be happening or is happening at Greenbushes. It is a different commentary than you're giving today. Why do you think your J.D. partner is wanting to do that? Is this just about negotiating how the mine plan should go forward, production, throughput, concentrate grades, and you have different interests being a customer of the spodumene as well? Why do you think your partner is so aggressive in the market talking about safety and Greenbushes issues?

Executive Kent: Yeah, so I guess I would look, I'm not going to comment on their perspective of what they're doing. I would say they're our partner's partner, right? So as we go through that, but we do have, we're not happy with the safety position at the mine. We've had lots of conversations with the management team and our partners around that. We have a plan and it's improving and we're working toward that. Safety is not something that you move overnight. It's a long-term program. We feel that we're on the right track there, but the mine is operating to the plan that we thought they would during the year, and we don't see exceptions.

Executive Kent: We don't see exceptions to that. So the way we view it is that we are on plan. The CGP3 project started up last year and is ramping through the year, and we're on that ramp plan. So we don't see a variance in our plan, and I can't comment on what our partner is thinking when they talk publicly.

Analyst Colleen Rush (Oppenheimer & Co.): Thanks so much, guys. You know, as we look at some of the NDAA compliance deadlines coming up at the start of 2028, I'm just curious about how you're planning to meet those, you know, and what we can think about from a CAPEX perspective, if there is any, to meet some of those requirements.

Executive Kent: I'm not sure I understand that question. Can you just say that again?

Analyst Colleen Rush (Oppenheimer & Co.): Yeah, so NDAA requirements for military batteries, we're looking at having to have entire supply chains in North America to meet some of those requirements. I'm just curious about your ability to meet those volumes and any CapEx plans that you have here over the next two years to be in line with them.

Executive Kent: Okay. So, yeah, that's a segment of the market that we would want to serve. We actually have probably the only lithium produced today in the United States comes from Silver Peak and processed at Kings Mountain. So that's the only kind of pure lithium processed in the U.S. today. We have that. It's a pretty small volume. It's not a big piece of the market, but we can serve that through other locations with allied countries like Chile as well. So it is an opportunity for us. And as we look going forward to make investments, obviously Kings Mountain, the mine itself, would be one of the opportunities to serve that particular volume. I would say we're not over-indexed on it. We think about the total market overall, but military applications in the U.S. is definitely an opportunity for us.

Analyst Colleen Rush (Oppenheimer & Co.): Great. And then if you look at the European demand for EVs and seeing that grow, is there any concern that there's new regulations coming out of Europe in terms of compliance around supply not being able to come from China for any of those OEMs or through the EU properly from a regulatory perspective?

Executive Kent: Yeah, so there is a lot of conversation going now around critical minerals, and when we hear that, we think lithium, and around diverse supply chains, global supply chains, allied countries. That's going to move a lot over time. From our standpoint, we have a diverse portfolio, so around the world, so both Brian and Hard Rock, but in a variety of different countries, and we think we'll be able to satisfy that one way or the other. So if it's tighter regulation, it just makes a different opportunity for us. If it's not as tight, we have our full portfolio to work with. So we see it as an opportunity, not a concern, but we have to wait and see exactly how it plays out.

Analyst John Roberts (Mizuho): Thank you. I have just one. Assuming this year plays out according to plan, where do you think your debt level should be this time next year? What would be a targeted debt level?

Executive Neil: Yeah, John, this is Neil. Look, I mean, I guess there's a lot of estimating and forecasting to get to that number. But, look, I'm sure you're doing this math on your side. If you just take flat pricing from where we are today and just run that across the end of the year, you know, we exited first quarter at one times net debt to EBITDA, and you can imagine that these kind of prices will probably trend down from there below one times. So, obviously, like I had said before, you know, our stance right now is to be in a little bit more conservative balance sheet position and, you know, for all the volatility and uncertainty that we see in the world, and that's our posture for the year.

Executive Kent: Yeah, I would add to that, look, we've fought ourselves through a tough period, and we clearly want to be a little more conservative as we go through that. We haven't worked out all the details around that, but we're trying to – our overall goal, we're building a company that will be able to work through this cycle, regardless of where it goes, and that we would still be – can be opportunistic at the bottom of the cycle. That's what we're trying to do. In fact, the balance sheet is a part of – is definitely a part of that strategy.

Analyst Kevin McCarthy (Classical Research Partners): Yeah, thank you, and good morning. I was wondering if you could speak to the quarterly cadence of your lithium sales volumes. You're guiding flat for the year. I think in the first quarter, you had 53 kilotons, which was up appreciably. It looks like your comps are a little tougher in the back half. So maybe you could speak to how you would foresee that flowing through in the second quarter in the balance of the year.

Executive Neil: Yeah, hi there, Kevin. This is Neil. I'm very happy to start. So, you know, the first quarter is typically our softest quarter, of course, because of Chinese New Year and just general seasonality. You should expect volumes to pick up here in the second quarter and the third quarter. I would not expect our fourth quarter volumes to be as strong as they were last year, mainly because we had – inventory reductions that we did at the end of the year as we saw that kind of strength in demand come through in the fourth quarter. And so that's the reason why we've been guiding to this overall sort of flat volume year over year. It's exactly what you said. We have tougher comps on a year-over-year basis as we go through the year.

Executive Neil: And so that's why you saw some volume growth here in the first quarter. That was the easiest of all the comps. Those will get tougher as we go through the year just because of the elevated sales volumes that we had last year.

Analyst Kevin McCarthy (Classical Research Partners): Very good. And then I'm tempted to ask, does Albemarle have any visibility at all into sales? whether your lithium molecules end up in an EV versus an energy storage system. And if you do have any visibility, do you care? In other words, is there any strategic or commercial effort to influence your mix in one direction or the other? How do you think about that?

Executive Kent: So, I mean, we do see where it goes. I mean, it's not 100% transparent because a lot of times it's the same customer, but we have those discussions. We know where they're going. We understand order books and one versus the other because they have different profiles. So, I think it is important that we understand that. We think we have pretty good visibility of it. It's not perfect because it is the same customer base, but it relies on customer conversations and their transparency with us. But we feel like we have a pretty good handle on that.

Executive Eric: No, I think that's right. I think that's right. Clearly, you know, someone buying carbonate for LFP production, that could go EV or ESS, but it comes down to the knowledge we have on the ground to be able to ascertain the difference. And to the second part of your question, it does matter in that we want to make sure we're close to understanding what's driving growth so we can plan our own capacities and approaches to the market accordingly.

Analyst Lizahi Ememadli (Rothschild): Thank you. I just wanted to ask about the lithium market. So if we assume that the current market conditions persist, what kind of supply response would you expect over the coming year or so? And particularly, would you say that the current prices are high enough for some of the unconventional supply that we saw in 2022 2023 to come online?

Executive Kent: Thank you. So I guess first I would say it takes time almost for anything to come back right so if you've idled capacity and you've kept it in the right shape condition you can bring it back in pretty short order but if you really put it in care and maintenance it's going to take some time when you come out mines you have to think about things like yellow equipment and all of that which is not sitting on the shelf and even brownfield mines a couple of years and it's greenfield that's further than that so and then some of the unconventional I don't know that we're at prices where things get a little crazy I think also people learned a lesson in the last cycle about the nature of the market I don't think we're going to see a massive supply adjustment to this at least that's not how we're thinking about it at prices where we are now you're here in if you think about a lot of projects that were on the books and maybe even still happening we're now getting to the point where they their financial forecasts are in the market so to speak it's not that we've gone way above them that we're just getting back to the numbers they were using to justify projects so I don't think you see a huge supply response.

Analyst Lizahi Ememadli (Rothschild): Thank you. And just a follow-up on the specialties business. So the broadening price in China, if you look at the current price, is almost as high as the peak in 2022. And in 2022, this segment generated EBITDA of over half a billion. Is that a trajectory we should expect if the broadening price stays at this level or there are other parts moving parts that we should think about?

Executive Kent: Yeah, so there's a bit in there so prices they did peak they've actually come off fairly quickly recently but they were at a higher level and we're below the performance level we were so and but we recognize that we have some operational cost issues we need to address around that, and we're working on that. We've got projects around that.

Executive Eric: And the other piece, and Eric can talk about this, but that bromine price you see, there's a small amount of our bromine that we sell on that basis. But it is the most visible index that you can see, so I understand why you watch it. We watch it as well, and it's indicative in the market, but it's actually a very small part of our bromine that we sell on that index.

Executive Eric: Yeah, if you look at, just to add to Ken's comments, as you look at our overall specialty sales, which of course includes lithium specialties and bromine specialties, it's 20% or less of our sales that are exposed to that kind of index, which is prevalent in China for upstream bromine. If you go around the world, regional markets behave differently. If you go down our value chain into deriv...

Quarter 2

Q4 2025 Earnings Call — February 12, 2026

Analyst Name (Firm): David Begleiter (Deutsche Bank) Executive Name (Title): Kent

Thank you. Good morning. And first, thank you for the additional disclosures. Very helpful. Kent, on your lithium volumes, they'll be flat this year in 26. How should we think about volume growth beyond 27, in the 27, 28, 29 timeframe? Thank you.

Yeah, thanks. So I would say that we probably grew a little faster than we anticipated. It's kind of why we're running into a flat spot this year. And I think the headwinds from pulling inventories down so we were able to sell those last year and not this year. We still have growth opportunities at Greenbushes, at Wajana, and then we have longer-term growth from – Kings Mountain, and then the Florida Atacama. So I think we'll continue on a growth profile. We pulled back on our capital spending, so it's not as prolific as it once was. But I think we still continue that growth profile after 27, and we'll have to start investing once we see how the market looks for that. But we have opportunities. We have the fundamentals for it, the resources that we have, and the technology basis we have for that. It's just a matter of executing against that.

Understood. And just on Kemerton, Kent, how much higher cost is that asset than your Chinese conversion assets? And what lithium price would you need to see to restart Kemerton? Thank you.

Yeah, so in the Kimerton, I think, and then your point, I think you made it. We've idled the asset. It's not a shutdown. It's idle. So we keep it in a position where we can restart it if we get into those conditions. But the cost structure between China and, say, Western supply, but particularly Western Australia, I mean, it's across the industry. It's across areas like China. Reactants tailings disposal is a big difference; there's a big industry in China that kind of works through tailings and we don't have that in the west. We've made progress in Australia with government support around taking those costs down, but it's still significantly different. Labor's higher power, so there's a gap there between China and the west and Australia. It's probably four or five dollars something like that, and that's going to have to be addressed if you're going to build out a Western supply chain. We either need differentiated prices to cover those costs from the West, and we've not been able to get that support so far.

Analyst Name (Firm): Jeffrey Zakowskis (JPMorgan) Executive Name (Title): Eric

Thanks very much. Can you comment on how much Chinese lithium capacity you think was closed down from about the middle of 2025 today because of various actions? And do you think that the Chinese government or steps that the Chinese government took were key to that capacity coming offline?

So I'm going to let Eric get into some of the specifics around maybe the mines or the capacity that comes around it. But I think there is – I mean, the Chinese government has been paying attention to this. I think it has had something to do with that. It's not all driven there. So you've had some capacity come on. We've also been surprised to the upside on demand, particularly the fixed storage applications have been much stronger. So it's where – Demand didn't grow. I mean, supply did not grow as much as we had anticipated. It's still growing, but it's not as much as we've anticipated. And demand grew more than we thought. So that's where it's gotten. It's getting tighter. And I think the Chinese government looking at environmental regulations and some of the permitting, they're getting a little bit tighter on it. And it's had, I would say, some influence.

Executive Name (Title): Eric

Yeah, so Jeff, we would say that just a bit of an update. There are about seven petalite mines that continue to operate even while they await permits. So it's not that petalite capacity in China has completely disappeared. There's still a good amount that is online. The one large facility you may have heard about is owned and operated by CATL. That is still offline. In total, we think about 30,000 to 50,000 tons of capacity came off in 2025. We'd expect that that's possible to come back on at some point in the coming year. Effectively, we've modeled that. Now, your question about the regulatory environment, there is an increased oversight on waste tailings generation and general environmental operating conditions in China. It's probably too early to say how that will play out. Safe to say if implemented it would affect all operators and the cost division of all operators because it hits all elements of how to manage handle and dispose of mine tailings and environmental waste.

Great and thank you for that. And then I guess on slide 27 you have your forecast of specialties adjusted EBITDA for 2026 which you put in a range of 170 to 230 versus 276. What's behind that decrease?

So just to clarify, Jeff, this is Eric again.

Your question is what's behind the decrease in specialties year-on-year earnings?

Yes, for 2026.

Indeed. Okay. So a couple of things that are there. Well, number one, as Kent described in the call, we're not getting much of a lift from demand growth year on year. So that's not a helpful tailwind. Just to clarify that, the issues there are that in certain markets, such as process chemical industries, oil and gas, elastomers, that's a part of your coverage universe. You know that that's an industry that's not particularly healthy, and that's impacting our demand growth in those areas. There's some offsets, pharma, semiconductors. Those are performing well. I think the big driver is lithium prices, lithium specialties prices in particular. This is a business that does not contract or move like the energy storage. It's not very commoditized, especially, but it does echo the price curve of LCE over time. And we were successful in the past years of getting long-term contracts based upon very high LCE prices at that time, and those have now come off. And we saw a step down of that a little bit in the fourth quarter, and Neil mentioned that in his comments, and we're going to see more of that to come this year. Obviously, now that's turned, but it's too early for the turn in LCE prices to affect a subsequent series of contracts. We'll just have to wait and see.

Analyst Name (Firm): Josh Spector (UBS) Executive Name (Title): Management

Hi, good morning. I wanted to ask on just your approach on how you're thinking about investing in this cycle. You guys did a lot of work over the last couple of years to get free cash flow to where it was last year. So how long do prices need to stay at the 20 to the round plus level before you think about started spending? Or are you going to harvest cash for longer than what you might have in a prior cycle, just given what we've learned here?

Yeah, so we probably will be a bit more conservative than you've seen us be in the past around that. But we do have projects. I mean, we've been mindful as we've cut capital, taken out some of the big pieces. We've tried to get our sustaining capital in a place where we think we can – hold it, and we're investing in our assets, but not over-investing, but also looking for incremental projects, smaller capital, quick returns. You've heard us talk about that in the past and over the down cycle, particularly focused on that. And then the growth programs are more incremental, like we said before. You can see us ramping up CGP3 at Greenbushes, for example. At Wajana, we've got a third train there that when we get to Better Ore, we can operate that without significant capital. And then we can build Salar to Atacama. Salar Yield Project is still ramping, but it's going very well. It's generating good data. So we think that's going to really help our efficiencies and recoveries as we go forward. So we have... the opportunity to make smaller investments and still get some growth. The bigger ones are to come. Kings Mountain, some other projects, DLE, for example, in the Salar that would give us additional volumes are bigger investments. Those are not right in front of us, so we'll have the opportunity to see how the market responds before we make commitments on things like that.

Okay, thanks. Just quickly on Kemerton, you talked about the $100 million shutdown costs. Can you just go through other pieces? I guess how quickly is the payback on that cost? And then are there any ongoing basically costs to keep the capacity idle?

So there are ongoing costs to keep it in a ready state, so to speak, idled. And they're not dramatic, but they are significant costs. And it's something we can do for a period of time. We can't keep it here forever, but we can keep it here long enough to see if we can – bring it back, the market changes, and really the change we're looking for is probably a bifurcation where Western prices are different than prices in China. That's really what we're looking for and to see that that's sustainable over time to cover those costs. And the payback on that, I mean, I don't want to, I'm not going to say exactly what the savings is around that, but it's a reasonable payback.

Analyst Name (Firm): John Roberts (Mizuho) Executive Name (Title): Management

Thank you. Could you talk about the differences between China and ex-China lithium market pricing? I know you don't want to discuss your own contracts, but what's the market doing ex-China?

Well, I'll take, I'll make a broad comment. Eric, you can jump on that if you want, but I don't, there's not, I mean, there's not a big difference, right? For the most part, everyone wants the China price. There are some circumstances where you can get that a little bit of a differentiation. But for the most part, and the way it's been for the last several years, it's more or less the same price. There are some incentives in the U.S. where some of that will flow through to lithium prices from resources outside of China or material outside of China, but it's not, it doesn't characterize the whole market, I would say.

Executive Name (Title): Eric

Yeah, John, just adding. So structurally, you would know that in the past, when China has been a big producer of lithium, the general difference has been the 13% VAT. So prices have been about 13% higher outside versus in. That's just a structural difference. I think, though, however, what Ken's alluding to is important. The market is dynamic and it's changing. The growth and maturity of the GFX futures exchange is increasingly becoming the benchmark. There's, given that it's traded every day, there's great transparency to that number, or one can see it very clearly. And outside of China, people have tended, even our contracts, contract relationships have tended to rely on PRAs, Price Reporting Agencies. And with the dynamic change of what's going on with the GFX, the challenge is, are the PRAs keeping up with that rate of change?

And then I think you said you modeled CATL's capacity coming back this year. Could you share when you've modeled that back online?

I mean, I think we've probably, we've taken an assumption that the metered in slowly. Again, John, we're talking about 30 to 50,000 tons. You look at the scheme of what's the demand growth, the supply-demand balance, and where inventory levels are. I don't think it's going to make that much of a difference.

Analyst Name (Firm): Lawrence Alexander (Jefferies) Executive Name (Title): Management

Good morning. First of all, can you discuss whether there's any material difference in contract structures developing between stationary storage and automotive in terms of their degree of emphasis on reliability of supply or consistency of quality control or product formulation?

Yes, so for us the material goes through the same supply chain right so we're selling it into the same supply chain that we do for automotive and we do for fixed storage. Probably the biggest difference is by definition all the fixed storage is carbonate and that we tend hydroxide tends to be go to the West. So those tend to be where our long term contracts are. Carbonate tends to be more on the spot market and the China price. So that's the biggest difference. But it's really driven by the product mix that goes into fixed storage versus there's a combination for carbonate. The EV market, and it's pretty much all carbonate and LFP for fixed storage.

And just a couple of characteristics to add to that that make it important maybe to get at the root of your question, Lawrence. For one, fixed storage is largely carbonate, that's largely LFP, and that's almost entirely China. And carbonate has a pretty harmonized spec. It's closer to being like a classic commodity than hydroxide. Hydroxide has a lot more requirements that the automotive producers put on it for the life of battery and the safety they're looking to get. And there's, as a result, given the challenges of making consistent grade hydroxide, there's a much more of a variation across producers. So it's a more detailed qualification process. Some of it is the user, some of it is the chemistry, I guess is the point.

And then just in terms of how you think about the lessons learned about balance sheet management against strategic comparatives or longer term, how are you thinking about the development of solid state as a solution in the battery market and the potential competitive threats from sodium ion batteries?

Yeah, so, okay, two ends of the spectrum there. So, look, on solid state, I mean, it's still, it's lithium, and we still, the driver will be EVs, so the lithium intensity for solid state goes up a little bit, so it gives us a kicker, but it's really driven by the EV penetration and that growth in that. So that seems... From our standpoint, it's a positive. It's going to grow that a little bit. But again, we've got time because we don't see it becoming mass market immediately. So we have time to understand, allow the market to mature. So we're early in the cycle, probably earlier than we anticipated from lithium. We think we've just been through the second cycle since the advent of EVs. So that's still immature from a commodity cycle perspective. So we're still watching that and learning and making sure we understand that.

On fixed storage and sodium ion, we think it's going to be relevant. It'll be a technical player in the market, but it still has to develop technically and it has to scale. So it's not impacting us, we don't think, much this year. In our forecast, as we kind of build out the forecast, I think we built early on 10% sodium ion as fixed storage and that growing to 15%, maybe toward the end of the decade. Just, again, to add some context, I think it's important. One, as Ken said, solid-state, a good news story. A solid-state battery has 2x the amount of lithium in it that a cell would for a lithium-ion battery. There's some different tech involved. There's a different supply chain involved. So it's going to take a while. Similarly, sodium is going to take a while as well. And that's obviously a drawback. And it's part of the reason we have such a variation in our ESS forecast in the deck that we presented is because there are some things that have to happen. Sodium energy has to get more energy dense to be cost competitive with LFP. At the range of prices we shared in these scenarios, LFP is always more cost competitive today than is sodium ion battery.

So there has to be innovation. We expect innovation to happen. The second is scale that Ken said. And then the third is it will be limited because in the end, it will never have the volumetric energy density that lithium would, whether that's lithium iron phosphate or lithium metal. So it's limited in storage spaces to where space is not an issue. So think a cornfield versus New York City. New York City isn't going to work so well. Cornfield will work out in Iowa. And then obviously EVs has the same limitation. Volumetric energy density is critical for EVs. So we see very limited penetration there. So it's two different ends of the spectrum, as Ken said. Those are all the drivers.

Analyst Name (Firm): Vincent Andrews (Morgan Stanley) Executive Name (Title): Management

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. Just thinking through, you know, sort of shipments versus consumption, you know, early in the cycle, there tends to be, you know, sort of a reload that helps prices, you know, move higher. And, you know, ESS obviously is a big driver, and some of the data would show that ESS shipments are moving, you know, kind of a 2x the level of ESS installations, which, you know, to a certain extent makes sense, right? It's a very growing part of the market. So as it grows, inventory needs to grow in between, but how do you assess sort of where customer inventory levels are and where customer behavior is sort of as prices have gone up and then maybe come off the bottom as you think about what actual demand or consumption is going to be in 2020 segments?

So, look, there's a couple different supply chains you have to think through. But, I mean, kind of across the board, we think inventories are at a pretty low level, particularly from a lithium side. But sitting in batteries everywhere, the inventory levels are pretty low. Now, we're in the Lunar New Year period. And as we come out of that, that's where we'll get information to see exactly what demand is going to look like this year. But everything seems to be pointing in the right direction. And we see installations on fixed storage kind of continuing the trend and keeping up. We follow that versus what goes in. So the batteries are probably where we ship is probably six months ahead of where it gets shipped to an installation, six months to a year before an installation happens. And we see that reasonably balanced. So it looks pretty real from our standpoint.

Analyst Name (Firm): Neil Executive Name (Title): Management

That's very helpful. Neil, could I ask you to fill us in on some of the other cash flow statement items on working capital? Just thinking through, you've got higher prices, your inventory is at low levels, but what should the makings of AP, AR inventories look like in 2026, just given what's happening from a price perspective, both for your revenue and your sparring costs?

Yeah, hi there, Vincent. Thanks for that question. So maybe I won't go through every line of working capital, but I will say, first of all, on inventory, obviously we saw very strong demand at the end of the year, of last year, and we capitalized on that, and we're able to bring down our inventories a little bit. As you can expect, in 2026, our production levels are up. Some of that will go towards restocking our inventories and making sure that we have the right amount of inventory to supply the demand. But in a rising price environment, you do bring up a good point that in a rising price environment, working capital could be a short-term cash flow headwind. The way we think about it is generally speaking for the company, our working capital balance sits at about 25% of sales. That's usually a pretty good rule of thumb. So maybe that is helpful as you think about in a rising price environment, how to model the working capital piece.

Analyst Name (Firm): Joel Jackson (BMO Capital Markets) Executive Name (Title): Management

Hi. I just want to follow up on slide eight. So, you know, you talk about your sensitivities and your margins. And if you look at Q1, you know, you're talking $20,000 a ton is about the spot price. You said for the January prices. So should you be delivering mid 50s EBITDA margin in energy storage in Q1?

So, well, you have to consider the lag on the way our contracts work. So we'll get the benefit of the current market price on the spot business we do, but our contract volumes all kind of have about somewhere a couple of months lag, usually three months lag that works through that. So we have to have the opportunity for that to work through our P&L. Otherwise, once we get that, that should be the case.

Okay, so just following up on that then, so you should have been, if spot price is exactly where it is, you should be achieving mid-50s EBITDA margins in energy storage in Q2.

It's just a bad question. And also, just clarifying, Kent, you talk about $4 to $5 a kilo of conversion costs now in Kemerton. Were you talking about that's your absolute cost? You see that conversion costs were in Kemerton or Western Australia? Or were you saying that $4 to $5 a kilo was how much higher the costs are in Kemerton versus China? It's just a two-part second question, I think, Hugh.

Yeah, so it wasn't a Kemerton answer. It was a general, broader answer, and it was like a $4 to $5 difference between China and her, I would say, to be clear.

Analyst Name (Firm): Kevin McCarthy (Vertical Research Partners) Executive Name (Title): Management

Yes, thank you, and good morning. Ken, I'd welcome your latest thoughts on potential to acquire lithium capacity versus build it. It seems to me you've delevered the balance sheet quite a bit. You've got more cash coming in from catching. We're talking about price recovery and positive revisions to ESS demands. So if we zoom out the lens and just think about where you are financially and where we are fundamentally in the cycle, might we see more inorganic growth from Albemarle in the years to come?

Yeah, so, I mean, we'd be talking down the road, if you're thinking from that perspective, because we still have, but one, we want to make sure we've got really good footing, understand where the market's going as we go forward, because price has moved up, and we just want to make sure that that consolidates, so to speak. And we also have pretty good opportunities within the portfolio for investors. I'd say it's incremental growth. It's lower capital than building greenfield facilities. And it's mostly around resources. And then it's incremental capacity at our conversion facilities, whether that's at Lenegra or in our conversion facilities in China. And then we also have tolling opportunities as well. So I think we've got good organic growth opportunities. We'll look at acquisitions as they come up, but that's not our focus. And we would have to see the right opportunities for that. The right fit at the right price, we would look at it. But that's not really our focus at this point in the cycle.

Analyst Name (Firm): Colin Rush (Oppenheimer) Executive Name (Title): Neil

Yeah, I wanted to just follow up on the cash question. You're really in a fundamentally different place from a balance sheet perspective. And I'm curious about, rather than acquiring new assets, looking at optimizing your cost of capital on the balance sheet and some of the instruments that you have, if there's real opportunities to streamline things.

Yeah, hi there, Colin. Thanks for that question. This is Neil. So, yeah, I think one of the key things that we're focused on is making sure that we have the right kind of headroom to navigate through the cycle. And you saw in our capital allocation slide today that in addition to, you know, making sure that we meet our dividends, we are also focused on ensuring that we have deleveraging opportunities. So we're going to continue to look at that. You know, if you're looking at other parts of the capital structure, look, the best thing I would say is we evaluate where is the best economic place for us to delever and strengthen our financial profile. And I think our comments today really highlight where we see the best opportunities. I really think the best opportunities are in the deleveraging space. But we do look at all of our options. And certainly with our cash position where it is today, that's kind of our first and foremost priority right now.

Analyst Name (Firm): Eric Executive Name (Title): Management

Okay. That's super helpful. And then, you know, for Eric, I'm really curious about customer behavior here, I mean, getting a deposit is a pretty big signal to the market about where folks see overall supply-demand balance on a multi-year basis. As you look at EV versus stationary storage and increasingly robotics and customers, can you talk a little bit about the different behavior and concerns around regional nuances, tariffs, and security of supply and supply chains between those three buckets of customers?

Sure, happy to call. And it is a very dynamic time, to be sure. And I think so much has happened so fast, it's going to be hard to draw hard conclusions right now at this moment. I would say that when it comes to the EV market, it depends on who you're talking to. If you have someone whose market is largely the United States, it's a very different picture than someone whose picture or view is Europe or China. When it comes to grid storage unanimously, that's an area of interest. Remember, though, that in some levels, it's the same customer for us, depending on where we're in the supply chain. Obviously, we do have some contracts with OEMs. The balance of our contracts with battery producers, we do a lot of spot business with cathode producers. So we see the whole supply chain through different eyes. The further up you go, the more bullish you get because they're less focused on any specific end market. We have seen a lot of customer dialogues come forward with the rise in prices, but it's way too early to say where that's going to go. I mean, at this point, again, depending on who you're talking to, they have a very different view of their needs. And so we're just going to have to see how that plays out over the long term in terms of our contracts. But right now, it's just too early to call.

Executive Name (Title): Management

Thank you. That's all the time we have for questions. I will now pass it back to Kent Masters for closing remarks.

Thank you, operator. In closing, I want to thank you all for your continued support and trust in Albemarle. Our strong results this quarter, improved outlook for 2026, and ongoing focus on operational excellence position us well for the future. With our world-class resources, strong track record of cost and productivity improvements, leading process chemistry, and commitment to customer success, we're confident in our ability to create lasting value for our shareholders and seize opportunities ahead. We appreciate your partnership and look forward to connecting at our upcoming events. Stay safe and take care. Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.