Curbline Properties (CURB) Q3 2026 earnings call transcript

Thank you. Good morning, and welcome to Curb Line Properties third quarter, 2026 Earnings Conference Call. Joining me today are Chief Executive Officer David Luke and Chief Financial Officer Connor Fennerti. In addition to the press release distributed this morning, we have posted our quarterly financial supplement and slide presentation on our website at curbline. com, which are intended to support our prepared remarks during today's call.

Please be aware that certain of our statements today may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from our forward-looking statements. Additional information may be found in our earnings press release and in our filings with the SEC, including our most recent reports on Form 10K and 10Q. In addition, we will be discussing non-GAP financial measures on today's call, including FFO, operating FFO, and same property net operating income. Descriptions and reconciliation of these non-GAP financial measures to the most directly comparable gap measures can be found in today's quarterly financial supplement and investor presentation.

At this time, it is my pleasure to introduce our Chief Executive Officer David Luke.

Good morning, and welcome to Curb Line Properties third quarter conference call. Third quarter results highlight a continuation of trends from the first half of the year, with more than $300 million of investments and fundraising, providing ample liquidity and capital to drive significant growth into the fourth quarter in 2027. Given that our company celebrated its two-year anniversary just a few weeks ago, I wanted to start with some details on what we've accomplished to date before pivoting to what we are seeing in the market and some operational highlights.

I'll then turn it over to Connor to walk through quarterly results in our guidance increase. As many of you know, Curb Line was spun off from our predecessor on October 1, 2024, with a simple and focused strategy as the only pure play read dedicated to convenience real estate, which we believe offers sustainable capital efficient growth in excess of the retail real estate industry.

Our clear first mover advantage has allowed us to construct an unmatched portfolio in this unique sector and scale the fragmented but liquid convenience marketplace.

In the two-year period since spinoff, we have acquired just over $1.7 billion of convenience centers almost entirely on an individual basis. We funded these acquisitions with $800 million of cash on hand at the time of the spinoff plus an additional $1.6 billion of capital raised, including almost $1 billion of common equity.

This net investment activity, along with greater than 3% same property growth in 2024 and 2025, and retained cash flow stemming from the capital-like nature of this sector, has led to significant per share earnings growth on both an absolute and relative basis.

Specifically, annualized OFFO growth has grown from $0.91 per share in the fourth quarter of 2024 to $1.28 per share if you annualized the third quarter of 2026, which is an increase of over 41%. It has also led to compelling total return for shareholders with shares outperforming the read index by over 30% and the shopping center peers by a similar amount.

We are all obviously incredibly proud of our accomplishments to date, but what's most encouraging in our view is that we are still in the early stages of our company's growth plan, and we are highly focused on the large addressable market in front of us within this unique and capital efficient business.

Putting curblining context, at the end of the third quarter, we owned 239 convenience centers as compared to ICS's estimate of over 68,000 convenience shopping centers in the country. Not every property will fit our mandate, but it's clear to us that there is a meaningful stream of opportunities available to us that are consistent with the assets we own or want to own, and we are making sure that we are positioned with the right team in the right place to win.

For the current year, we've acquired just over $800 million of assets through last Friday, and now expect to exceed our prior expectation of $1 billion of total investments with visibility on our pipeline through the early part of next year. What's interesting to note is that the addition to the themes I've called out previously, including our marketing efforts, our extensive brokerage network, and the generational tailwinds as owners look to monetize their assets for their families or heirs.

You will notice this past quarter that we acquired four properties that are immediately adjacent to or part of our existing centers.

And if I look at our pipeline, we have a handful of additional acquisitions of adjacent properties extending another potential path for curb lines growth. We expect this theme or trend to continue going forward with our boots on the ground driving this effort. In each case, we continue to filter our acquisition opportunities by the factors most accretive to long-term cash flow growth, primary vehicular corridors, strong demographics, high traffic counts, and credit worthy tenants.

Simple, flexible buildings with a straightforward row of shops support an extremely wide range of tenants, and the result is a growing curb line portfolio of highly diversified credit tenants with limited capital needs over time.

Moving to operations, we continue to see the elevated demand for space and signed just under 170,000 square feet of new leases and renewals this quarter. Trailing 12-month spreads remain consistent with our five-year averages as the shortage of space in the affluent markets where we operate continues to lead the attractive leasing economics.

And importantly, as I noted last quarter, commencement of our SNO pipeline started to pick up at the tail end of the third quarter with the majority of our almost $8 million SNO pipeline expected to commence by March of next year. This operational tailwind, along with the aforementioned investment activity, is driving significant earnings growth with our raised guidance representing over 18% growth, which is among the highest in the entire reach sector.

In terms of same property growth, third quarter growth of 3.4% accelerated as we expected with Conner providing more details on this later. Our capital expenditures also remain well below 10% of NOI, placing us among the most capital-efficient operators in the entire public reach sector. An important hallmark of the convenience asset class and a differentiator in a rising rate environment.

In summary, we remain incredibly optimistic about the opportunity ahead for curb line as we exclusively focus on the fragmented convenience real estate sector in an effort to deliver compelling, relative, and absolute growth for stakeholders.

I'd like to thank everyone at curb line for their contributions that have positioned us and the company for outperformance. And with that, I'll turn it over to Conner.

Thanks, David. I'll start with third quarter earnings and operational operating metrics before shifting to the companies revised 2026 guidance and then concluded the balance sheet.

Third quarter NOI was ahead of plan, driven in part by higher year of year occupancy and recoveries. Total NOI was up 11% sequentially and over 50% year of year, driven by acquisitions along with organic growth.

Outside of the quarterly operational performance, there are no other material variances for the quarter highlighting the simplicity of the curb line income statement and business plan.

In the third quarter, we recorded a gross up of $1.8 million of non-cast DNA expense, which is offset by $1.8 million of non-cast other income.

This gross up, which is a product of the shared services agreement and that's to zero net income, is expected to continue through the third quarter of 2027 and is excluded from any DNA figures or targets.

In terms of operating metrics, the least rate was effectively unchanged sequentially down 10 basis points to 96.4%. I can see was up 20 basis points sequentially and 60 basis points year over year as we began to see the impact of rent commencements.

Trilling 12 month leasing volume continues to grind higher on elevated activity and portfolio growth. Though quarterly volumes and figures remain volatile, given the lack of available space in the portfolio.

As David noted, we remain encouraged by the amount of activity and depth of demand for available space. As expected, same property N. O. I. accelerated it in the third quarter to 3.4% with base rent growth of 2.8% and an easier comparison as compared to the second quarter on recoveries.

Importantly, this growth was generated by limited capital expenditures with trailing 12 month CapEx of less than 8% of N. O. I. Moving to our outlook for 2026, we are increasing OFO guidance to arrange between $1.25 and $1.27 per share, which at the midpoint represents just over 18% growth.

We believe that this level of growth will be the highest, certainly in the retail space and among the highest in the entire reach sector.

Underpinning the midpoint of the range is one, just over $1 billion of full year investments, two, CapEx as a percentage of N. O. I of less than 10% and three, GNA of roughly $32 million, which includes fees paid to site centers as part of the shared services agreement.

Those fees totaled $1.4 million in the third quarter. In terms of same property N. O. I, we are now forecasting growth of two and a half percent to 4% in 2026 following 3.3% in 2025 and 5.8% in 2024.

As I have noted previously, the same property pool is growing but small and it includes only assets owned for at least 12 months as a December 31st, 2025, resulting in a large non-same property pool, which we expect to grow at a similar rate to the same property pool over the course of the year. That said, we continue to expect an acceleration into the fourth quarter and 2027, driven by lease commencements with almost 75% of the SNO pipeline expected to commence by March 31st of next year and over 98% expected commence by the end of the third quarter.

The speed of the deliveries speak to the simplicity of the buildings that we buy and operate and differentiates curb line from other purpose-built retail formats.

For moving pieces between the third and the fourth quarters, as a result of the timing of equity settlements in the third quarter, the quarter end share count was higher than the weighted average.

Assuming no additional settlement activity, the fourth quarter share count would average about 121 million shares, which is a good starting point to layer on additional share settlement, which will be the primary funding source for fourth quarter end acquisitions.

Additionally, non-cash revenue is expected to climb sequentially by about $300,000. Finally, GNA is expected to total just under $9 million in the fourth quarter.

Additional details on 2026 guidance and the moving pieces that I just outlined can be found on page 10 of the earnings slides.

Ending on the balance sheet and some thoughts on growth in 2027, curb line was spun off with a unique capital structure aligned with the company's business plan. In the third quarter and fourth quarter of the day, curb line sold just over 3.6 million shares on a forward basis with roughly 102 million of expected gross proceeds, which we expect to use to fund acquisitions, including cash and deposits at quarter end of $133 million, total unsettled equity proceeds of $612 million, and expected proceeds of $150 million from a term loan expected to close in the fourth quarter. Curve line has $895 million of immediate equity before taking an account operating cashflow or at any additional capital.

In addition, we expect the end of year with a net debt to even a ratio of under two and a half times, providing substantial additional dry powder and leverage capacity, continue to acquire assets and scale, resulting in significant earnings and cashflow growth well and excess three average. And with that, I'll turn it back to David.

Thanks, Connor. Operator, we are now ready to take questions.

Sure, Ron, good morning, it's David. I think one thing we've learned over at least the last five or six years in the sector is that the liquidity of the sub-sector primarily result of the fact that most of this is owned by private families. And I think life events dictate a lot of need and desire to sell. We've seen a pretty consistent stream of assets every week that come from what is effectively a very, very large sub-sector.

And every time there's been any capital markets disruption or interest rates movements or geopolitical events, we just haven't really seen a change in the total volume of deals that are hitting the market. You add to that the the unlisted assets where we're getting phone calls from sellers at least half the time for assets that we're buying. I think our confidence level that the deal volumes remain high is also very high.

So in terms of deal volumes, I think our expectations are we're continuing to see a whole lot of real estate. A small portion of that is real estate that fits our buy box. And so if I tie that back to your question about cap rates and pricing, I think you just have to remember that given that borrowing rates have gone up and on the margin, I would say, so have cap rates. I think it warrants some commentary about the fact that this sub-sector does contain numerous assets that are lower quality, lower growth, lower credit, and not a lot of spread between market rents and in place. And those types of assets, I think are traditionally bought by levered buyers that are private.

And I suspect that those cap rates have already moved up substantially. On the other hand, there's a portion of this sub-sector which we're very intrigued and interested in. It fits our buy box and it generally has strong credit, strong traffic, and a lot of market market on the rents. Given how those market rents keep growing with inflation, I would suspect that the cap rate movement is gonna be a little bit stickier for growth type assets.

Sure, Ron, it's Connor. I would say there's two pieces to that question. As we talked about last quarter and this quarter, we are expecting acceleration in the same property from the third to fourth quarter and into 2027. That is largely occupancy driven, as we called out, it's really a function of our SNO pipeline.

To your point on pricing power and to David's commentary time that all together, we still have what we think is a pretty significant supply demand imbalance in the markets we operate in, which is a huge benefit for us. And I think our biggest asset management question with each renewal is, do we renew the existing tenant with 3% annual bumps or do we potentially upgrade the tenant in terms of credit and market market? So again, it doesn't feel like a material change in terms of the operating environment.

I would say it's stable given the supply demand imbalance. All that said, I wouldn't expect a dramatic change in renewal rates or renewal spreads or new leasing spreads. We've kind of hovered right around 20% on new leasing spreads and renewals who've been in this called 68% range. So again, don't expect a material change in that, but the same property and a Y acceleration really is a function of occupancy as opposed to pushing rents order.

Good morning, Todd. I think absolutely they have. Our cost of capital has gone up, both on the equity and the debt side, and so our unlevered IRR expectations have also increased.

I'll just remind you that it depends on the risk level to generate that IRR, but there's no question they've gone up. I'm sure Connor has some commentary as well respect to how we look at returns relative to our five-year plan.

Sure, I mean, Todd, as we discussed a number of occasions, we look at everything through a five-year cash flow creation model in addition to the kind of other traditional e-metrics. And so if it was a creative to acquire a property today under that calculus and we thought I was added at the company, we would consider it, you know, to David's point, I would point out three things. You know, we've never adjusted our buy box or characteristics of properties regardless of our share price, but it's higher or lower.

And then the second piece is the source and the user, the critical part of the analysis, so you write cost of capital has gone up, but I think just looking at either cost of debt or cost equity alone misses out in the other important piece of the equation, which is what's going in yield or, to David's point, what's the growth profile?

And the last point I would just make is, you know, as I mentioned in my comments, we've got over $900 million of immediate liquidity on hand. And so if we were just to invest the remainder of that capital of the course of 26 and 27, we're still in position to generate well-ended double-digit growth next year, which is pretty encouraging.

And speaks to our earlier comments about, you know, being flexible or maintaining optionality, which has been our kind of core principle or guiding principle since we completed this spin-off two years ago.

So Todd, if you think back to our spin-off timing, we initially put out kind of guidance or target of $500 million per year, right? And so you think about, that would imply about $1.5 billion of total investments from the time that's been off to the end of the SSA in October of next year. We bought $1.7 billion in the first two years. So from a scale perspective, we're well past what we expected to be or where we expected to be, excuse me. And if you're a call since our spin-off, we've updated our kind of G&A bogey of saying, hey, we thought we could be as efficient as site too. We think we could be more efficient in the site.

So whether or not we buy a single property from here, we feel really good by our scale or positioning our G&A leverage, et cetera. In terms of the combat discipline, I would just say, again, we bought $1.7 billion. I think it's only two investments have been greater than $50 million. I eat two portfolios greater than $50 million. So I would just say we've been incredibly disciplined, incredibly focused on making sure we've been buying the right real estate over that period. It might look like a significant number of dollars, but it's all under written at an individual basis, which I think is really important. So again, I kind of dovetail is backed my response to your first question to David's response to Ron.

We've been incredibly disciplined from the start in terms of how we invest capital. I don't expect a higher return hurdle to change that. It just means that we're looking at through a different lens. So, and then lastly, I think to your question about how we think about the pace of deployment, et cetera, we've got a pipeline that really goes out for the next two quarters. And that's been consistent really over the last year plus. So our visibility on investments and the spread, et cetera, for the initial spread is to say for the fourth quarter and the first quarter next year is incredibly high.

And I think that helps give us a lot of confidence in terms of our growth for next year and deploying capital over the course of 2027.

Thanks, Todd.

Yeah, good morning, Craig. It's David. I think that the buyer pool out there for this asset class has been very large for a very long period of time. I mean, there are a significant number of private buyers that are active in the space. We infrequently run into the same people in bidding tents across the country because there's so few regional and we're the only national operator, but there's a number of regional operators.

But I would say the frequency of running into the same names is pretty low. And given that we're only buying a certain small percentage of the overall sector, I think you could appreciate that there are a lot of buyers. So whether we behave or act in an aggressive or a conciliatory manner, I think the pricing of the entire sector at large is being priced through by the numerous other transactions where we're not involved.

I think my commentary earlier was that I will freely admit that I think a lot of this subsector is bought by levered local buyers and therefore that going in spread is really important. But there's a pretty substantial group of buyers that are indeed looking at how growthy this property type is. And because of that, I think unlevered IRR expectations on the one hand, you would expect the math to make cap rates go up substantially with borrowing costs. On the other hand, the reason borrowing costs are going up is because of inflation. And inflation rolls right through to the retailers and how they raise their prices on goods and services and it affects market rents because replacement costs goes up.

So I'll give you an example. If you look on page 16 of our SOP, you'll see the number of assets that we bought this quarter and I'll just kind of highlight too. There's a large group of assets we bought in Los Angeles called Candlewood Shops. And if you look at the entire rent role of that property, which is a pretty large group of assets, the average tenure of all those tenants in place is 18 years.

Same thing with Lexington Station and Minneapolis. The average tenure is 11 years. So when you have national credit tenants that have been in a property for 10 or 20 years, the market to market is really substantial. And I think a lot of buyers are less concerned about going in Cap rate and they're more concerned about the lack of Cap X to generate pretty substantial same store growth over the next five or 10 years.

That's why I think the Cap rates are likely to be stickier. But again, it's only been a couple of months since we've been in this environment. And I think we'll see what happens over the next couple of quarters.

Sure, correct. So as I mentioned in my prepared remarks, we have just under $900 million of liquidity on hand. And that includes a $150 million term loan that we expect to close in the fourth quarter.

That's before retaining cash flow, which is pretty significant relative asset base. On top of that, our entire asset base is on comfort. We have no maturities until 2029. And we expect to end the year with a debt to even ratio called two, one, two, two. So we can be incredibly tactical and look at a variety of findings versus of course a year.

Not all those available to our peers, not all those are available to private investors. So I would just tell you, we feel really good about this environment. This is almost tailor made for our platform in terms of how much liquidity we on hand. And you're right, we like to be tactical and turn things on and off with a debt equity, et cetera. But I would just tell you, with $900 plus liquidity, immediate liquidity on hand, I feel like we're in a really good spot on a relative asset basis. I would also come back to my response, I think, as the Todd.

Even if we just invested just the cash on hand, we're well into the double digits for next year in terms earnings growth. And that's before PBI, which I think doesn't get a lot of air time, the operational growth that David was referring to a moment ago with assets like Candlewood. So again, just to tie it all back together with that much liquidity relative or asset base, before free cash though, we feel like we're in a really good spot, particularly given what we think is a pretty steady stream of investment opportunities in front of us.

Yeah, so we're about to close, as I mentioned a couple of times, a $150 million term loan in the fourth quarter. If we weren't to swap that, our all on rate would be about a four or nine. We've obviously swapped a hundred of that $150 million and called the low five. So let's just call that product 5152.

I haven't checked the five year treasury today, but probably the place in market, we're about 130 over. So depending on the hour of day, we're looking at that, we're anywhere in the high five low sixes. And that's just two options. Again, as I mentioned, again, just a moment ago, we're a hundred percent unencumbered, we have no joint ventures.

We've got, I mean, we just got incredible optionality, which has been our focus and our focus of our to maintain since our spin off. So again, those are two markets, just going out the top of my head, but very different types of markets, they're very different rates. But again, as you've kind of your questions alluded to and as they respond to, we're four months into a pretty dynamic time and we'll see how things flush out of the next, you know, called nine to 12 months.

Thanks, Greg.

I would say, Alex, we love optionality, not to be the debt horse here. But if you think back to our spin off in our initial business plan, it was to invest the cash and raise some debt over the five year period.

And that was what led to double digit FFO growth and invest $500 a year. Things have obviously dramatically been different in a positive way since then. We've obviously raised just under a billion dollars of equity. We bought over $1.7 million. We pivoted because of a different cost of capital. So I would just tell you every morning we wake up, we look at our screens, we look at our menu of options, we look at new options and we say at that point in time, based off our uses, what is the best path for us to consider? And so I know it sounds like an invasive answer, but that'll be our kind of our job tomorrow morning is to wake up, look at our screens, see what the best available source is, and then compare it to the use, which is critical.

So I wouldn't imply that we'll be more equity-focused or debt-focused going forward. I would just tell you, we will pivot based off what the market has available to us based off our uses.

Sure, Alex. I would say that six months ago it was a talking point, now it's becoming a bit more material, meaning it's a trend that's picked up, the more dense we are in a certain market. We do have tended to just get more opportunities from friends of friends. We heard you sold fraud to curb line. Can you give us their number? We'll give them a ring. We're thinking about selling. I mean, that is happening more and more, just word of mouth. There are also situations where we bought a property from someone and got a right to purchase basically a first right to purchase if they ever sold another property nearby, and we've exercised those rights sometimes.

And the third situation would be that someone has a family interest that controls adjacent parcels. One side of the family wants to sell today. The next side of the family may decide to sell six months or a year later. So it's been a variety of reasons, but I would say that, you know, as John and I and Connor have been looking at the pipeline and kind of witnessing the deal makers and what activity they're doing, we've seen this to be a bit more of a trend than it had been last year. And it makes us just remember that having the amount of allocated personnel sourcing deals out in the field is reaping other benefits other than just waiting for a property to hit the market.

So I think that's kind of the important piece is that it's not a on its own. It's not meaningful. But when you add it to all of these other arrows in our quiver, we just feel like sourcing deals is becoming easier and easier. And so our confidence level that the volumes can stay high for opportunities is pretty strong.

Thanks, Alex.

Good morning, Florist. David. All right. So, you know, it's interesting is that we seem to come back frequently to talk about going in cap rates, but I know that we've discussed many times that there are other important factors to unlevered IRR other than just going in cap rate. Going in cap rates for this asset class, I've always been from the low fives to, I would say, the low sevens. I mean, there's a very wide range of going in cap rates for unanchored strips, just depending on the credit quality, the market available, kind of the demographics, the shape of the building, the releaseability of, I mean, all these things factor into whether it's a growth asset or whether it's kind of a risky asset.

So going in cap rate, it's very difficult to quantify for an entire sector. And so I tend to focus more on what we're interested in and we're interested in growth assets. So to your point, if we look back at the year leading into the spin and the first year after the spin, what happened to our underwriting versus actual? And I would say we were fairly consistently wrong on mark to market in the fact that we were just too conservative.

You could either say that we didn't fully appreciate the market market at the time, or it could be that market rents have continued to grow, but we've generally outpaced the renewal spreads and the new leasing spreads from our original budgets. And so I think what you've seen is the unlevered IRRs have been higher than our hurdles were.

The second component is that CapEx has been a little bit less than we had expected. You know, we mentioned that at the spin, we were targeting a less than 10% CapEx load for the entire sector. We're running about 8% over the last few years. And when you run that through your model, you know, a little bit more aggressive on market market, a little bit better renewal spreads and maybe a 20% reduction in total CapEx. The unlevered IRRs have been really healthy.

And so I do think that our expectations need to increase and reflect the signals we're getting from the market, both on equity and debt. But there are other levers within each underwriting that we can look at pretty carefully and still feel confident that we're making a good long-term decision.

Yeah. I mean, I think we've said in the past that if we could snap our fingers, we would be equal-weighted in the top 30 markets in the U. S. But the reason we say that is primarily from a diversification standpoint.

Specific targets by each sub-market don't really exist for us in practice because we're simply underwriting each asset across the country that comes available and we're a little bit more agnostic as to how that MSA starts to rank up. Atlanta specifically has just had a lot of growth, a lot of strength, and it's also had a lot of assets that have been available to us. And so we've been a lot more active in Atlanta.

It's also a ring city, and you know, as you know, a ring city tends to have lots of pockets all the way around the city center. And those pockets each are different factors that are available. You can't say that about some other cities that are a bit more linear. South Florida is different, right? And so you've got just less geography to work with than some of the larger cities.

I just lost the second half of your question. Yeah. It was moving into Madison. Yeah. I mean, moving into, you know, other cities that we see strong demographics and we see opportunities to come available. We're open-minded to it.

Thanks, Scott.

Sure. Good morning, Mike. It's Connor. On credit, we haven't seen over the course of the year change. It hasn't come up in a lot of our calls, but I think I don't think our placeholder for the year has been about 60 basis points of uncultural revenue. And we've been running just under that. There has been an uptick in national bankruptcies. You've seen the sleep number and Leslie's pool supplies and a couple on the anchor side as well. And you've seen a little bit of pain on the entertainment side of late in the credit markets. But for us, we have not seen a material change in AR, age AR or renewal rates. So as I mentioned at the start of my answer, 60 basis expense or basic points has been our placeholder.

And there isn't a change in that going in the fourth quarter. In terms of the S&O pipeline and the gap between the kind of lease occupied spread. And we said a couple of times before, if we're 96 and a half percent lease, it feels like Mike 150 basis points or 100 basis points is probably a good.

Spread in terms that lease occupied gap just given it's a shorter timeline to sign a lease and get a commence, unlike some of the more purpose built retail formats. So from a percentage lease perspective, I would I would look at that way. The challenge is percent of lease and dollars won't line up. And so I do think using the S&O dollars as a as a ramp as opposed to the lease occupied gap is a better way to kind of model it out over the next three quarters.

You're welcome.

Good morning, Linda. David, I really don't have a statistically good and accurate response. I mean, we get imperfect information, but as you know, we've looked at a lot of deals and we bought a pretty large number of deals. So we do get some anecdotal information. I would say the traditional mortgage borrower is a lot more focused on kind of, you know, flatter assets with a higher yield. And so we tend to not bump into them very frequently on the higher quality on anchor. It is a lot more common for folks to use debt if they're private. But I would say a lot of times that debt appears to be sourced through, you know, private wealth networks and other types of financing, not, not a traditional mortgage.

So I think they're, they're all in borrowing rates tend to be lower than if they did a non recourse debt piece.

I certainly think we're the only, Linda, I certainly think we're the only, you know, effectively unlevered or all cash buyer, but there are other ones that have a similar appearance.

We don't report on a quarterly basis when I don't have the number off top of my head. My guess is, I think I want to say for our nationals, it's below 90s over the last five years. And to my response to, to Mike from a moment ago about credit, we really haven't seen a change in that retention rate, albeit there have been an uptick from a very low basis of bankruptcy as I mentioned a moment ago.

No, it's a good question. I mean, it feels like if you're rewind back to 27, 18, there was a little more seasonality to bankrupt season or there was, I would say, call it 10 plus years ago, it feels like it's a little less seasonal today. But there haven't been that many. And by me saying there's been an uptick in banksies, I'm not saying in our portfolio, I'm just saying in the kind of national retail space.

It does feel like it's the kind of COVID winners who then became losers, i. e. pool entertainment focused that are the kind of recent headlines of sorts. We really have had no exposure. But again, it does feel like an uptick. I'll be it from a very, very low base. As we look into 2027, I would imagine, yeah, the credit markets will, if they remain tighter, will definitely have an impact. Again, there's no one on our watch list that that is of scale and that's purposeful, right? That we've got on our list that we're worried about in 27, but I would have to think if GDP growth slows and or the credit markets can be tightened, that would have an impact on the retail environment.

Overall, for us, just given our payback period and our leasing, our diversification of credit, again, it feels like it's a real relative win for us. But there's nothing on our radar that's jumping out to us. It's just an observation based off economic growth in the credit markets.

You're welcome.

Thank you all for joining our call. We'll speak to you next quarter.