© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Gabelli & Company
22nd Annual Aerospace & Satellite
Connectivity Conference
Mark Aslett
President and CEO
Gerry Haines
Executive Vice President and CFO
September 8, 2016
2© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Forward-looking safe harbor statement
This presentation contains certain forward-looking statements, as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995, including those relating to the products and services described herein. You can identify these statements by the use of the words
“may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “plans,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “continue,” “estimate,” “project,” “intend,” “likely,”
“forecast,” “probable,” “potential,” and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that could
cause actual results to differ materially from those projected or anticipated. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to,
continued funding of defense programs, the timing and amounts of such funding, general economic and business conditions, including
unforeseen weakness in the Company’s markets, effects of continued geopolitical unrest and regional conflicts, competition, changes
in technology and methods of marketing, delays in completing engineering and manufacturing programs, changes in customer order
patterns, changes in product mix, continued success in technological advances and delivering technological innovations, changes in, or
in the U.S. Government’s interpretation of, federal export control or procurement rules and regulations, market acceptance of the
Company's products, shortages in components, production delays or unanticipated expenses due to performance quality issues with
outsourced components, inability to fully realize the expected benefits from acquisitions and restructurings, or delays in realizing such
benefits, challenges in integrating acquired businesses and achieving anticipated synergies, increases in interest rates, changes to
export regulations, increases in tax rates, changes to generally accepted accounting principles, difficulties in retaining key employees
and customers, unanticipated costs under fixed-price service and system integration engagements, and various other factors beyond
our control. These risks and uncertainties also include such additional risk factors as are discussed in the Company's filings with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2016. The Company
cautions readers not to place undue reliance upon any such forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made. The
Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which
such statement is made.
Use of Non-GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles) Financial Measures
In addition to reporting financial results in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, the Company provides
adjusted EBITDA, adjusted income from continuing operations, and adjusted EPS which are non-GAAP financial measures. Adjusted
EBITDA, adjusted income from continuing operations, and adjusted EPS exclude certain non-cash and other specified charges. The
Company believes these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to help investors better understand its past financial performance and
prospects for the future. However, the presentation of adjusted EBITDA, adjusted income from continuing operations and adjusted EPS
is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for financial information provided in accordance with GAAP. Management
believes the adjusted EBITDA, adjusted income from continuing operations, and adjusted EPS financial measures assist in providing a
more complete understanding of the Company’s underlying operational results and trends, and management uses these measures
along with the corresponding GAAP financial measures to manage the Company’s business, to evaluate its performance compared to
prior periods and the marketplace, and to establish operational goals. A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial results discussed
in this presentation is contained in the Appendix hereto.
3© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
…to address the industry's challenges and opportunities
Pioneering a next generation defense electronics company…
• High-tech commercial
business model
• Secure processing subsystems
• Serving defense Prime
contractor outsourcing needs
• Deployed on 300+ programs
with 25+ Prime contractors
• FY16 $270M revenue;
Growth YoY:
– 15% revenue
– 37% GAAP income(1)
– 29% Adj. EBITDA
– 38% backlog
• FY17 guidance(2):
– $368M-$376M revenue
– $15.5M-$18.1M GAAP income(1)
– $82M-$86M Adj. EBITDA
(1) GAAP income from continuing operations.
(2) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither reconfirming
such guidance as of the date of this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of modeling and guidance, we
have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or financing-related expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in the period discussed.
4© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Investor highlights
Proven Management
Team
Pure play defense electronics company.
Embedded on key growth programs aligned to DoD priorities
Leading Positions on
Well-funded Platforms
Pacific pivot, aging platform modernization, foreign and
international military sales, SOF quick reaction capabilities
Aligned with Industry
Growth Drivers
Internally-funded R&D. IP retention. Commercial sales model.
US development, manufacturing and support
Next Generation
Defense Electronics
Business Model
Secure processing subsystems, software and services for critical
Defense and Intelligence applications
Innovative Technology
Leader
Captive Prime outsourcing largest secular growth trend.
RFM and secure processing content expansion on key DoD programs
Low Risk
Growth Strategy
Scalable business, engineering and manufacturing platform
to facilitate future acquisitions
Business Platform
Built to Scale
Successful business transformation.
Double-digit revenue growth with strong profitability
5© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
We are deployed on 300+ programs with 25+ Primes
RADAR
EW
EO/IR – C4I
Triton; NATO AGS
Global Hawk
Aegis
Aegis AshorePatriotF-16 F-35
Global Hawk SEWIPBadger/BuzzardF-15 AH-64 Apache
F-35 FuryP-8F-16 Reaper/Gorgon Stare
6© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Mercury’s vision is to be the…
Leading commercial provider
of secure processing
subsystems designed and
made in the USA
7© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
…provider of outsourced defense electronics subsystems
Acquisitions have transformed Mercury into a pure play…
• Acquired capability expands
total addressable market
• Moved up the value chain
• Facilitates greater
customer outsourcing
• Accelerates customer
supply chain consolidation
• Disintermediate traditional
competitors
• Low-risk content expansion
organic growth strategy
• Integrating the carve-out
businesses from Microsemi
SECURE PROCESSING
SECURE PROCESSING
DIGITIZATION
DIGITIZATION
RFM
RFM
RFM
RFM
RFM
RFM
SECURE STORAGE
SECURE STORAGE
Defense Electronic Subsystem
(1)
(1)
(1)
(1) Represents carve-out acquisition from Microsemi Corp.
(1)
8© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Defense will likely remain a $500B+ industry…
…despite the ongoing political and budget uncertainty
Crowding Out of Defense Spending and Investment:
Rising interest rates, healthcare and social spending;
MilPer expense growth, aging military platforms’ O&M costs rising
Defense Procurement Reform 3.0:
Firm-fixed-price contracts and less government-funded R&D
changing economics and competitive dynamics of defense industry
Political Dysfunction:
Sequestration-driven cuts and repeated Continuing Resolutions
disrupting DoD budget process and spending
Industry Has Cut Capacity to Innovate:
Reduced headcount, fewer engineers and aging workforce;
Less IR&D and growth investments, increased dividends and buybacks
Challenging Global Security Environment:
Resurgent Russia, Chinese militarization and power projection, ISIS
threat, North Korean agitation, Middle East instability
9© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
530
495 496 496
534
547
556
564
570 581
500
512
525
537
551
524
585
522
480
500
520
540
560
580
600
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
PBR16 2011 Budget Act PBR17 FY16 Enacted 2015 Budget Act
Defense budget outlook improved
Expect continuing resolution in GFY17
PBR17 adjusts FY17 to new budget caps but not FY18-21
Sources: National Defense Authorization Act of 2016, FY2017 President’s Budget Request. Numbers may not add due to rounding.
Topline Base Authorization Budget vs. BCA Caps & Bipartisan Budget Act Agreement ($B)
10© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
…representing ~19x addressable existing COTS merchant market
Mercury is benefitting from Primes’ outsourcing…
• Defense electronics is a
$37 billion dollar market
• Captive market is ~19x
Commercial-Off-The-Shelf
(COTS) merchant supply
• Outsourcing trend not
tied to increased
defense spending
• Primes outsourcing to
more capable suppliers
willing to invest, share risk
Source: VDC Webcast: Budgetary & Strategic Shifts - Creating Opportunities for Merchant Embedded COTS Systems in Mil/Aero
1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9
32.7 33.1 33.6
33.8 34.2
35.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Merchant Captive
~19x
Total Global Market, COTS Systems, Merchant & Captive ($B)
11© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
…serving the US defense electronics industry
How we operate as a high-tech commercial company…
• Start with commercially
available technology
• Internal R&D funds the
development of modular,
reusable open innovations
• Pre-integration improves
affordability, time to market
• Rapid customization and
adaptation to platform
• Mature technologies and
manufacturing lower cost
and reduce risk
• Support rapidly changing
commercial technology for
a decade or more
Fund
Develop
IntegrateMature
Support
Adapt
Commercially
Adapted
Technologies
12© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
…as customers seek affordable outsourced pre-integrated subsystems
Business model built for speed, innovation and affordability…
• Traditional COTS board model
broken (“Plug-n-Pray”)
– Product procurement cost low
– Large hidden integration costs
– Lower Prime IR&D spending
– COTS lifecycle support difficult
• Defense procurement reform
– Less Government-funded
cost-plus integration
– Under firm fixed price, Prime
bears risk and expense
• Acquired and pre-integrating
sensor chain technologies
– More affordable, lower risk,
simplifies supply chain
– Open architectures and open
middleware speed adoption Primes
RFM Digital
Secure
Processing
Mercury Pre-integrated
Secure Subsystems
Government
Traditional COTS Model
“Plug-n-Pray”
Operating System
COTS COTS COTS
Proprietary Middleware
Classified Prime/Gov’t IP
36+ months Time
to Market
12 months Time
to Market
Open Middleware
Application Ready
Software Toolkit
Classified Prime/Gov’t IP
13© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
From highly leveraged Teraflop modules and RFM subassemblies…
…to secure servers and pre-integrated sensor processing subsystems
Rugged Secure Teraflop
Server Blade
Rugged Secure
Servers for the Tactical Edge
ATCA Secure
Blade Server
Integrated
Microwave Assemblies
MOSA Pre-integrated Sensor
Processing SubsystemsRF & Microwave
MOSA Building Blocks
2U
Secure
Server
14© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
• Pre-integrated
end-to-end
sensor capability
unique
• Lower integration
costs, time, risk
• Facilitates Prime
outsourcing
• DoD mandate
• Unique
capabilities
• Important
relationships
• Critical programs
• 2-3 years ahead
of traditional
competitors
• Intel server
class embedded
processing
• SWaP optimized
packaging
• Multiple form
factors driving
TAM expansion
Factors leading to a unique market position for Mercury
• Processing supply
chain integrity
• Modern, scalable,
redundant RFM
manufacture
and test
• Authored
OpenVPX standard
• RFM Digital MOSA
Modular Open
System
Architecture
Designed and
Made in USA
Server-class
Processing
Performance
Integrated
Product
Security
End-to-End
Subsystem
Capability
15© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Mercury’s capabilities and opportunity for growth…
…are aligned to DoD investment priorities
Pacific Pivot:
Platforms need improved sensors, autonomy, electronic protection and
attack, on-board exploitation. Greater demand for onboard processing
Aging Platform Modernization:
Port customer software to available state-of-the-art open architectures
to rapidly and affordably upgrade electronics on aging military platforms
International and Foreign Military Sales:
Upgrade subsystems with security for export to expand addressable
market, grow revenues and access international customer R&D funding
Special Operations Forces Quick Reaction Capability:
Provide rapid reaction and affordable new capabilities to support
anti-terror and other special forces missions globally
16© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Defense industry growth drivers translate into specific…
…company growth drivers that we are pursuing
Outsourced Secure Processing Subsystems:
Grow blade-server processing applications. Expand into other mission-
critical secure compute applications beyond the sensor
Outsourced Pre-Integrated Sensor Processing Subsystems:
Provide more affordable pre-integrated MOSA sensor processing
subsystems that preserves customer software value-add
RF and Microwave Outsourcing:
Grow share in integrated RF and microwave assemblies and MOSA
RF subsystems by providing customers a better alternative
17© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Acquisitions and investments driving significant growth opportunity
• Low-risk content expansion
growth strategy
• Key production programs
• Total potential value grew
2.4x to $3.8B in 4 years
• Converted 1.1x of possible
to probable value in 3 years
• After 4 years, RFM now
represents ~50% of our
opportunity pipeline
• Opportunities driven by
Radar (54%) and EW (33%)
Note: Refer to Appendix for definitions of “Bid”, “Won”, “Probable” and “Possible”.
Probable and Possible values are as of FYE 2016. Numbers are rounded.
1,770
1,593
2,035
1,008
1,204
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2012 2012-2016 Increase 2016
Key Programs Pipeline Value ($M)
Processing RFM
3,805
Probable
Possible
Possible
Bid 27%
Won 73%
Processing
1,938
51%
RFM
1,867
49%
Airborne
1,983
52%
Naval
1,328
35%
Ground
389
10%
Other
104
3%
Radar
2,050
54%
EW
1,272
33%
Missiles/
Munitions
294
8%
C4I
189
5%
18© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Strategy and investments have positioned Mercury well
• Pioneering a next-generation defense electronics business model
• Unique technology and capabilities on key production programs
• Low-risk content expansion growth strategy with demonstrable progress
• Largest secular growth trend is Prime outsourcing
• Above industry-average growth; dramatic improvement in profitability
• Transformative acquisition drives strongly accretive growth
© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Financial Overview
Gerry Haines
Executive Vice President & CFO
20© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
We are pioneering a next-generation business model…
…creating an opportunity for growth and strong returns
Mercury Model Characteristics Implications and Benefits
Merchant supplier of secure processing subsystems Little competition at the subsystem level
Commercially designed, made in USA, military ready High barriers to entry; strong margins
Strategic sales model targets DoD production programs Decades-long platforms yield strong revenue streams
11 – 13% of revenue on Research and Development Innovative design for reuse. Retain IP rights
Anticipates goals of DoD procurement reforms Largest secular growth trend: Prime outsourcing
21© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
194
209
235
270
5%
$9.9M
11%
$23.5M
19%
$44.4M
21%
$57.3M
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Revenue to Adjusted EBITDA trends
Mercury Revenue ($M) Mercury Adj EBITDA (%, $M)
Strong revenue growth and operating leverage…
…yielded dramatic growth in adjusted EBITDA
Notes:
• Fiscal years ended June 30; FY13-16 figures are reported in the Company’s Form 10-Ks.
22© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY13-FY16 revenue CAGR of 12%...
…with steady gross margin expansion, expense reduction
Notes:
• FY13-16 figures are as reported in the Company’s Form 10-Ks and Form 10-Qs, except as noted below.
• The first three quarters of FY16 were subsequently adjusted for the reclassification of sustaining engineering expenses from Cost of revenues to Research and
development. The impacts were $0.8M, $1.2M and $0.9M for the 1st quarter, 2nd quarter and 3rd quarter of fiscal 2016, respectively.
46 46
50 52 51 51
53 54 54
57
60
64
58
60
66
85
42%
36%
42%
41%
43%
48%
46% 46%
44%
47% 47%
49% 48% 49% 48%
45%
67%
52%
46%
48%
50% 51%
48%
46%
43%
41%
37% 36%
43%
39% 37%
36%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Q113 Q213 Q313 Q413 Q114 Q214 Q314 Q414 Q115 Q215 Q315 Q415 Q116 Q216 Q316 Q416
G
M
/
O
p
ex
(%
)
R
ev
en
u
e
($
M
)
Revenue GM% Opex %
23© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY13-FY16 Adjusted EBITDA CAGR of 79%
Notes:
• FY13-16 figures are reported in the Company’s Form 10-Ks and Form 10-Qs.
• Adjusted EBITDA is income from continuing operations before interest income and expense, income taxes, depreciation, amortization of intangible assets, restructuring and other charges, impairment
of long-lived assets, acquisition and financing costs, fair value adjustments from purchase accounting, litigation and settlement income and expense, and stock-based compensation expense.
1.2
0.6
4.7
3.5 3.3 5.2
7.8 7.2 8.0
10.7 11.5
14.2
11.8 12.6
14.6
18.3
3%
1%
9%
7% 7%
10%
15%
13%
15%
19%
19%
22%
20%
21%
22%
21%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
0
5
10
15
20
25
Q1 FY13 Q2 FY13 Q3 FY13 Q4 FY13 Q1 FY14 Q2 FY14 Q3 FY14 Q4 FY14 Q1 FY15 Q2 FY15 Q3 FY15 Q4 FY15 Q1 FY16 Q2 FY16 Q3 FY16 Q4 FY16
Adj EBITDA $M Adj. EBITDA Margin (%)
24© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY13-FY16 backlog CAGR of 28%...
…yielded record backlog and revenue coverage exiting FY16
Notes:
(1) Revenue Coverage Ratio = 12-month ending backlog/Next 12 months Revenue (or initial revenue estimate for current/future year).
(2) Organic only; omits impact of Microsemi carve-out businesses acquired on May 2, 2016.
(3) Estimate based upon guidance from the Company’s most recent earnings release; includes impact of Microsemi carve-out businesses.
109 144
166
239
136
174
208
288
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Mercury Ending Backlog ($M)
12-Month Ending Backlog Total Ending Backlog
52%
61%
Fwd Revenue Coverage Ratio⁽¹⁾
66%(2)
64% - 65%
Estimate(3)
25© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY15 FY16 FY17
Production
Years
Probable
Bid vs. Won
Expansion Probable Possible
Process RFM Total ($M) Total ($M)
Aegis
Sensor
Processing
FRP: FY14-25 Won 209 504
Processing
Expansion
FRP: FY19-25 Won 29 59
RFM FRP: FY16-25 Won/Bid 46 168
SEWIP
Block 2 FRP: FY16-26 Won 199 294
Small Ship FRP: FY18-26 Won 67 94
Block 3 LRIP: FY18-20 Won 58 144
F-35
Existing LRIP: Up to FY21 Won 152 196
Processing LRIP: FY19-21 Bid 104 210
RFM LRIP: FY19-21 Bid 2 121
Radar Programs(1) LRIP/FRP Bid/Won 416 873
EW Programs(2) LRIP/FRP Bid/Won 253 575
Missiles/Guided
Munitions(3)
LRIP/FRP Bid/Won 212 378
C4I Programs(4) LRIP/FRP Bid/Won 23 189
Total:
vs. Nov. 2012
% Growth:
$1,770
1,138
56%
$3,805
1,593
139%
Program focus driving substantial growth potential
Mercury’s perspective on phase, timing and potential value EMD LRIP FRP FMS
(1) Radar includes Predator/Reaper, E-2D Hawkeye, F-16 SABR, BAMS/Triton, AWACS, LRDR, TFAL, Patriot, Classified
(2) EW includes F-15 EW, SIRFC/AIDEWS, DEWS, EPAWWS, ADAP, ProVision
(3) Missiles/Guided Munitions includes PGK, MALD, SDBII
(4) C4I includes P-8, Gorgon Stare, Classified
Note: Refer to Appendix for
definitions of “Bid”, “Won”,
“Probable” and “Possible”.
Probable and Possible values
are as of FYE 2016. Numbers
are rounded.
26© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Strong performance in FY16
15% revenue and 29% adjusted EBITDA growth YoY
In millions, except percentage and per share data FY15⁽¹⁾ FY16⁽²⁾ Change
Backlog $208 $288 38%
Revenue $235 $270 15%
Gross Margin(²) 47% 47% 0 Pt
Operating Expenses(²) $91.9 $103.6 12.7%
Adjusted OpEx (% of revenue)(3) 38% 36% (2) pts
GAAP Income(4) $14.4 $19.7 37%
GAAP EPS $0.44 $0.56 27%
Adjusted EPS(5) $0.82 $0.96 17%
Adj. EBITDA(5) $44.4 $57.3 29%
Notes:
(1) FY15 figures are as reported in the Company’s Form 10-K.
(2) FY16 was adjusted for the subsequent reclassification of $2.9M of sustaining engineering expenses from Cost of revenues to Research and development.
(3) Excludes $3.3M of restructuring and acquisition costs and other related expenses from GAAP operating expenses in FY15 and $5.2M in FY16.
(4) GAAP income from continuing operations.
(5) Non-GAAP, see reconciliation table.
27© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Q1 FY17 guidance vs. Q1 FY16 actual
Q1 FY16 adjusted for applicable GAAP accounting changes
Notes:
(1) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither reconfirming such guidance as of the date of
this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of modeling and guidance, we have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or financing-related
expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in the period discussed.
(2) Q1FY16 was adjusted for the reclassification of $0.8M of sustaining engineering expenses from Cost of revenues to Research and development.
(3) Includes $2.1 million negative impact of inventory valuation step-up from purchase accounting.
(4) GAAP income from continuing operations. Q1FY16 was adjusted for the adoption of FASB ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. The tax benefit
(provision) was $0.9M, $0.9M and $0.02 for GAAP income from continuing operations , tax provision (benefit) and GAAP EPS, respectively.
(5) Non-GAAP, see reconciliation table.
In millions, except percentage and per share data Q1FY16 Q1FY17⁽¹⁾ Change
Revenue $58 $82-$87 41%-50%
Gross Margin(2) 48% 44%-45%(3) (3) – (4)pts
Operating Expenses(2) $25.2 $33-$34 31%-35%
GAAP Income(4) $2.9 $1.0-$2.3 (21%)-(66%)
GAAP EPS(4) $0.08 $0.02-$0.06 (25%)-(75%)
Adjusted EPS(5) $0.19 $0.19-$0.23 0%-21%
Adj. EBITDA(5) $11.8 $17.0-$19.0 44%-60%
28© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY17 annual guidance
In millions, except percentage and per share data FY16(1) FY17(2) Change
Revenue $270 $368-$376 36%-39%
GAAP Income(3) $19.7 $15.5-$18.1 (21%)-(8%)
GAAP EPS $0.56 $0.39-$0.45 (20%)-(30%)
Adjusted EPS(4) $0.96 $0.96-$1.02 0%-6%
Adj. EBITDA(4) $57.3 $82.0-$86.0 43%-50%
Notes:
(1) FY16 figures are as reported in the Company’s Form 10-K.
(2) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither reconfirming such guidance as of the date of
this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of modeling and guidance, we have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or financing-related
expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in the period discussed.
(3) GAAP income from continuing operations.
(4) Non-GAAP, see reconciliation table.
29© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
New target business model beginning FY17
Notes:
(1) FY15 figures are reported in the Company’s Form 10-K.
(2) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither reconfirming such guidance as of the
date of this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of modeling and guidance, we have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or
financing-related expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in the period discussed.
(3) FY16 was adjusted for the subsequent reclassification of $2.9M of sustaining engineering expenses from Cost of revenues to Research and development.
(4) GAAP income from continuing operations.
(5) Non-GAAP, see reconciliation table.
FY15⁽¹⁾ FY16⁽¹⁾ FY17(2)
Revenue 100% 100% 100% 100%
Gross Margin(3) 47% 47% 45%-50%
SG&A 21% 20% 16%-18%
R&D(3) 14% 13% 11%-13%
Amortization 3% 3% ~5% 4%-5%
GAAP Income(4) 6% 7% 4%-5% NA
Adj. EBITDA(5) 19% 21% 22%-23% 22%-26%
New Target
Business
Model
30© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Conservative balance sheet and flexible capital structure
Ample liquidity, unused $100M revolver, $400M Universal Shelf capacity
Notes:
(1) Discontinued operations numbers are Mercury Intelligence Systems, which was divested in January 2015.
(2) $200 Term Loan A facility entered into on May 2, 2016 in connection with closing of Microsemi carve-out acquisition.
FY14 FY15 FY16
(In millions) Actual Actual Actual
ASSETS
Cash & cash equivalents 47.3 77.6 81.7
Accounts receivable, net 59.7 53.8 95.9
Inventory, net 31.7 32.0 58.3
PP&E, net 14.1 13.2 28.3
Goodwill and intangibles, net 193.1 186.1 460.7
Other 21.6 24.2 11.6
Assets of discontinued operations⁽¹⁾ 6.2 0.0 0.0
TOTAL ASSETS 373.7 386.9 736.5
LIABILITIES AND S/E
AP and other liabilities 44.2 36.8 71.5
Debt 0.0 0.0 192.0⁽²⁾
Liabilities of discontinued operations⁽¹⁾ 2.4 0.0 0.0
Total liabilities 46.6 36.8 263.5
Stockholders' equity 327.1 350.1 473.0
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND S/E 373.7 386.9 736.5
31© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Poised for continued, profitable growth
• Recent acquisition transforms top and bottom lines
• Substantial cost synergies and revenue opportunities
• Above average growth & profitability driven by strong, well-established programs
• Record backlog enhances forward visibility, facilitates operational execution
• Conservative balance sheet and strong cash flows support growth, future M&A
• Improving defense environment enhances opportunity set
© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Appendix
33© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Q1 FY17 guidance (as of August 2nd)
Notes:
(1) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither
reconfirming such guidance as of the date of this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of
modeling and guidance, we have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or financing-related expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in
the period discussed.
(2) Q1FY16 was adjusted for the adoption of FASB ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. The tax benefit (provision)
was $896, $896 and $0.02 for GAAP income from continuing operations , tax provision (benefit) and GAAP EPS, respectively.
(3) Non-GAAP.
In millions, except percentage and per share data Q1 FY16 Q1FY17(1)
YoY
Change
Actual Est. Range
Revenue $58 $82-$87 41%-50%
GAAP Income from continuing operations(2) $2.9 $1.0-$2.3 (66%)-(21%)
Adj. EBITDA(3) $11.8 $17.0-$19.0 44%-60%
Adj EBITDA Reconciliation:
Income (loss) from continuing operations 2.9 $1.0-$2.3
Interest (income) expense, net (0.0) $1.8
Tax provision (benefit) (2) 0.4 $0.5-$1.2
Depreciation 1.6 $3.3
Amortization of intangible assets 1.7 $4.5
Restructuring and other charges 0.3 $0.0
Impairment of long-lived assets 0.0 $0.0
Acquisition and financing costs 2.3 $0.0
Fair value adjustments from purchase accounting 0.0 $2.1
Litigation and settlement (income) expense, net 0.0 $0.0
Stock-based compensation expense 2.7 $3.8
Adj. EBITDA(3) $11.8 $17.0-$19.0 44%-60%
GAAP EPS(2) $0.08 $0.02-$0.06 ($0.06) to ($0.02)
Adjusted EPS(3) $0.19 $0.19-$0.23 $0.00 to $0.04
34© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
FY17 guidance (as of August 2nd)
In millions, except percentage and per share data FY16 FY17(1)
YoY
Change
Actual Est. Range
Revenue $270 $368-$376 36%-39%
GAAP Income from continuing operations $19.7 $15.5-$18.1 (21%)-(8%)
Adj. EBITDA(2) $57.3 $82.0-$86.0 43%-50%
Adj EBITDA Reconciliation:
Income (loss) from continuing operations 19.7 $15.5-$18.1
Interest (income) expense, net 1.0 $7.1
Tax provision (benefit) 5.5 $8.5-$9.9
Depreciation 6.9 $15.2
Amortization of intangible assets 8.8 $17.4
Restructuring and other charges 1.2 $0.0
Impairment of long-lived assets 0.2 $0.0
Acquisition and financing costs 4.7 $0.0
Fair value adjustments from purchase accounting 1.4 $2.8
Litigation and settlement (income) expense, net (1.9) $0.0
Stock-based compensation expense 9.6 $15.5
Adj. EBITDA(2) $57.3 $82.0-$86.0 43%-50%
GAAP EPS $0.56 $0.39-$0.45 ($0.17) to ($0.11)
Adjusted EPS(2) $0.96 $0.96-$1.02 $0.00 to $0.06
Notes:
(1) The guidance included herein is from the Company’s most recent earnings release and is as of the date of that release. The Company is neither
reconfirming such guidance as of the date of this presentation nor assuming any obligations to update or revise such guidance. For purposes of
modeling and guidance, we have assumed no restructuring, acquisition or financing-related expenses and an effective tax rate of approximately 35% in
the period discussed.
(2) Non-GAAP.
35© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Adjusted EPS reconciliation
Notes:
(1) Numbers shown are in cents.
(2) Upon the adoption of FASB ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, the Company recognized $1,100 of excess tax benefits in FY16. The tax benefit
(provision) impacts were $896, $247, $(169), and $126 for 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter and 4th quarter, respectively. The GAAP EPS impacts were $0.02, $0.01, $0.00, and ($0.03)
for 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter and 4th quarter, respectively.
(000's) FY13 FY14 Q1 FY15 Q2 FY15 Q3 FY15 Q4 FY15 FY15 Q1 FY16 Q2 FY16 Q3 FY16 Q4 FY16 FY16
Diluted net earnings (loss) per share⁽¹⁾⁽²⁾ $ (0.46) $ (0.13) $ 0.02 $ 0.09 $ 0.14 $ 0.18 $ 0.44 $ 0.08 $ 0.15 $ 0.13 $ 0.19 $ 0.56
Income (loss) from continuing operations⁽¹⁾ $(13,782) $ (4,072) $ 717 $ 2,886 $ 4,694 $ 6,132 $ 14,429 $ 2,856 $ 5,041 $ 4,357 $ 7,489 $ 19,742
Amortization of intangible assets 8,222 7,328 1,762 1,762 1,744 1,740 7,008 1,713 1,638 1,754 3,737 8,842
Restructuring and other charges 7,060 5,443 1,268 1,162 27 718 3,175 338 221 409 272 1,240
Impairment of long-lived assets - - - - - - - - 231 - - 231
Acquisition and financing costs 318 - - - 200 251 451 2,298 25 1,726 653 4,702
Fair value adjustments from purchase accounting 2,293 - - - - - - - - - 1,384 1,384
Litigation and settlement expenses - - - - - - - - - - (1,925) (1,925)
Stock-based compensation expense 7,854 8,999 2,551 2,256 1,870 1,964 8,640 2,702 2,392 2,149 2,330 9,573
Impact to income taxes⁽²⁾ (8,776) (5,772) (1,956) (1,658) (1,088) (2,030) (6,733) (3,466) (1,722) (1,978) (2,808) (9,975)
Adjusted income from continuing operations $ 3,189 $ 11,926 $ 4,342 $ 6,408 $ 7,447 $ 8,775 $ 26,970 $ 6,441 $ 7,826 $ 8,417 $ 11,132 $ 33,814
Diluted adjusted net earnings per share ⁽¹⁾ $ 0.10 $ 0.38 $ 0.13 $ 0.20 $ 0.22 $ 0.26 $ 0.82 $ 0.19 $ 0.23 $ 0.25 $ 0.29 $ 0.96
Weighted-average shares outstanding:
Basic 30,128 31,000 31,635 32,052 32,298 32,436 32,114 32,778 33,120 33,251 37,811 34,241
Diluted 30,492 31,729 32,481 32,686 33,233 33,330 32,939 33,616 33,831 33,991 38,954 35,097
36© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Adjusted EBITDA reconciliation
(000'S) FY13 FY14 Q1 FY15 Q2 FY15 Q3 FY15 Q4 FY15 FY15 Q1 FY16 Q2 FY16 Q3 FY16 Q4 FY16 FY16
Income (loss) from continuing operations⁽¹⁾ $(13,782) $ (4,072) $ 717 $ 2,886 $ 4,694 $ 6,132 $ 14,429 $ 2,856 $ 5,041 $ 4,357 $ 7,489 $ 19,742
Interest expense (income), net 31 40 5 4 1 3 13 (23) (21) (36) 1,120 1,040
Tax provision (benefit)⁽¹⁾ (10,501) (1,841) - 1,047 1,469 1,850 4,366 368 1,433 2,643 1,101 5,545
Depreciation 8,445 7,625 1,700 1,590 1,510 1,532 6,332 1,588 1,619 1,566 2,127 6,900
Amortization of intangible assets 8,222 7,328 1,762 1,762 1,744 1,740 7,008 1,713 1,638 1,754 3,737 8,842
Restructuring and other charges 7,060 5,443 1,268 1,162 27 718 3,175 338 221 409 272 1,240
Impairment of long-lived assets - - - - - - - - 231 - - 231
Acquisition and financing costs 318 - - - 200 251 451 2,298 25 1,726 653 4,702
Fair value adjustments from purchase accounting 2,293 - - - - - - - - - 1,384 1,384
Litigation and settlement expenses - - - - - - - - - - (1,925) (1,925)
Stock-based compensation expense 7,854 8,999 2,551 2,256 1,870 1,964 8,640 2,702 2,392 2,149 2,330 9,573
Adjusted EBITDA $ 9,940 $ 23,522 $ 8,003 $ 10,707 $ 11,515 $ 14,190 $ 44,414 $ 11,840 $ 12,579 $ 14,568 $ 18,288 $ 57,274
Notes:
(1) Upon the adoption of FASB ASU 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, the Company recognized $1,100 of excess tax benefits in FY16. The tax benefit
(provision) impacts were $896, $247, $(169), and $126 for 1st quarter, 2nd quarter, 3rd quarter and 4th quarter, respectively.
37© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Sales-related definitions
Design Win A design win means that the customer has selected us to provide services, products, or intellectual
property for a program of record or equivalent. In addition, the customer has won the program and
we have an initial purchase order from the customer.
Bid We have a Design Win with a prime contractor who is bidding to win a program of record, or we are
bidding to win content on a program of record that has been awarded to a prime contractor.
Won We have a Design Win with a prime contractor for a program of record, and the prime contractor
has won the program and received its contractual award.
Possible Possible value is a projection based upon our current information and assumptions regarding the
system configuration, systems or units utilized per platform or installation, current and potential
future Design Wins, our average sales price for current and/or future content, the number of
platforms, spares, and potential retrofits, as well as the potential for foreign military sales - all of
which could change materially as and when new information becomes available or assumptions are
revised. Possible value is the highest outcome we believe to be reasonable given a range of
potential outcomes based upon available information and our current set of assumptions.
Probable Probable value is a projection based upon our current information and assumptions regarding the
system configuration, systems or units utilized per platform or installation, current and potential
future Design Wins, our average sales price for current and/or future content, the number of
platforms, spares, and potential retrofits, as well as the potential for foreign military sales - all of
which could change materially as and when new information becomes available or assumptions are
revised. Probable value is the outcome we believe to be most likely given a range of potential
outcomes based upon available information and our current set of assumptions.
38© 2016 Mercury Systems, Inc.
Glossary
ADAP Advanced Decoy Architecture Payloads EMD
Engineering and Manufacturing
Development
OpenVPX
System-level specification for VPX,
initiated by Mercury
AEGIS Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System EO/IR Electro-optical / Infrared PBR President's Budget Request
AESA Active Electronically Scanned Array EPAWWS
Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability
System
PGK Precision Guided Kit
AGS Alliance Ground Surveillance EW Electronic Warfare RFM Radio Frequency / Microwave
AIDEWS
Advanced Integrated Defensive Electronic
Warfare Suite
FMS Foreign Military Sales SABR Scalable Agile Beam Radar
AMC Advanced Microelectronics Center FRP Full Rate Production SDB Small Diameter Bomb
ATCA
Advanced Telecommunications
Architecture
IMA Integrated Microwave Assembly SEWIP
Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement
Program
AWACS Airborne Warning and Control System LRDR Long Range Discrimination Radar SIGINT Signals Intelligence
BAMS Broad Area Maritime Surveillance LRIP Low-Rate Initial Production SIRFC Suite of Integrated RF Countermeasures
BCA Budget Control Act MALD Miniature Air Launched Decoy SOF Special Operations Forces
C4ISR
Command, Control, Communications,
Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance,
Reconnaissance
MILPER Military Personnel SWaP Size Weight and Power
COTS Commercial off-the Shelf MOSA Modular Open Systems Architecture TAM Total Addressable Market
DRFM Digital Radio Frequency Memory O&M Operations & Maintenance TFAL Terrain Following Airborne Laser