“$0.03 of that $0.06 could be offset in the second-half.”

In context

“tors of that, which is authorizations of new clinical trials and new activity. But I would expect that, that would sort of flow through the rest of the types of work we do as the year continues to unfold and as we get into '25. So I think that's a very positive development. Puneet Souda: Okay. Great. And just a follow-up for Stephen. On the EPS beat, it was about $0.25 at the midpoint and -- but you raised the guide only by $0.10. So just wondering how much of that is a reflection of the end market versus what's within your control in terms of cost management? Or is there anything specific that you would point out to? Stephen Williamson: Yes. So Puneet, so $0.06 of the beating in Q2 is really timing-related. When I think about the FX rates and kind of the outlook for the rest of the year, $0.03 of that $0.06 could be offset in the second-half. And then from a tax standpoint, we're not assuming the change in the overall rate for the year. That's timing with that. So that $0.06 is good beat in Q2, but it's net neutral for the year as a whole. And then with the rest, we've raised the low end $0.15, and we raised at the high end $0.05. And I think that's a strong raise at this point and think it's appropriate and enables us to be better positioned for the second half of the year. And I wouldn't really read anything else into that. It's just -- I think that's just appropriate at this point. Puneet Souda: Got it. Okay, thank you. Rafael Tejada: Operator we have time for one more question. Operator: Yes, Our next question is from Dan Arias with Stifel. Dan, your line is now open. Please go ahead. Dan Arias: Good morning, guys. Marc, w”