Volume surges 27%, profits evaporate 39% — the margin collapse no one explained
Jharsuguda is ramping beautifully and the order book is fat. But PAT fell ₹3.1 crore despite revenue rising ₹63.3 crore. Management never addressed why, and the silence is the story.
₹293.7 Cr
+27.2% YoY | -12.4% QoQ
₹1.9 Cr
-38.6% YoY | -25.1% QoQ
4.1%
vs. likely 6%+ prior year
0.7%
margin compression signal
The quarter splits cleanly into two stories. Revenue jumped ₹63.3 crore year-on-year on the back of Jharsuguda ramping to 7,400 tonnes and strong pipe orders (3,000 tonnes monthly run-rate, doubling from 1,500 tonnes prior year). This is real and positive. But simultaneously, PAT fell ₹3.1 crore—profit moving backwards while sales moved forwards. Operating margin sits at 4.1% and net margin at 0.7%, both punishingly thin. The company reported this number and never explained it. That silence is the defining moment of this call.
Where the profit went
Revenue is up 27.2%, so the stock should feel like a winner. But when profit falls 38.6% in the same period, something structural has shifted. The call analysis points to three likelihoods: input cost inflation (steel, power), finance cost headwind from debt servicing, or one-time provisions. Management volunteered none of these. The CFO's opening remark—"we are expecting EBITDA growth"—sits uneasily next to the 0.7% net margin, and the Q&A revealed nothing further. For a ₹293.7 crore quarter where 80%+ of revenue comes from a single customer (Jindal), a 0.7% net margin means the company is taking home roughly ₹2 crore of profit. On Jharsuguda's 7,400-tonne output, that's ₹27 lakh per tonne net profit. It is not sufficient.
What the management claims held up
"Good 20% revenue increase this year from Jharsuguda and established products"
Q1 revenue ₹293.7 Cr, +27.2% YoY; Jharsuguda is the bulk
Supported
"Expecting EBITDA growth despite Q1 being a pleasant surprise"
OPM 4.1%, NPM 0.7%; PAT -38.6% YoY despite volume +27%
Overstated
"New products (poles, TLT) barely reflected in Q1, will show from Q2"
Poles 250T orders but only 80T sold (32%); TLT 2,000T orders, minimal dispatch
Supported but with execution risk
"Order books very healthy, can support 15–20 days of sales without new bookings"
10,000+ T backlog across sites (Mumbai 6,500T, Hyderabad 2,000T, Jharsuguda 4,450T)
Supported
"Galvanizing utilisation 100%; second tank online Sep 1 will unlock new products"
Second tank delayed 'couple weeks' from prior assumption; TLT/pole ramp depends on it
Supported but timeline slipping
"Jharsuguda can scale to handle TLT at 300–400 tonnes per month"
MD hedges: 'all we need is to appoint more manpower'; certifications pending
Aspirational, not guaranteed
What changed on this call
Three material shifts versus the prior FY26 guidance:
New products delayed one quarter. FY26 call promised 25–30% revenue contribution in the year. Q1 delivered poles at 1% of sales, TLT minimal. Execution pushes to Q2 onwards.
Galvanizing is now the acute bottleneck. Prior call implied existing capacity sufficient. Q1 reality: utilisation at 100%, second tank 'essential,' and timeline risk rising.
Margin trajectory inverted. FY26 call: new products at 7–8% EBITDA margins vs. pipe's 2–3%. Q1 result: OPM 4.1% overall, and PAT down 39% YoY despite volume up 27%.
Order book doubled. All sites report 2x+ typical monthly coverage. Mumbai orders jumped to 6,500T. Credible demand signal.
The bull-bear ledger
Revenue growth at 27% YoY is real and supported by strong Jharsuguda ramp + pipe momentum
Order book of 10,000+ tonnes and 15–20 days of sales cover is genuine operational strength
Infrastructure tailwind credible: government push on roads, rail, power; Jharsuguda benefiting
New product pipeline (TLT, poles, monopole) diversifying revenue and targeting higher margins
PAT collapsed 38.6% despite volume +27%—a margin compression that management never explained
QoQ softness (revenue -12.4%, PAT -25.1%) unaddressed; Q1 framed as monsoon surprise but sequential decline glossed over
Jindal dependency at 80–82% of revenue; if they cut 30%, VSTL revenue falls 30%. Diversification plan vague ('don't like to put a %')
New product execution lagging: poles 32% order realization in Q1; TLT pending certifications; timeline risk on Sep 1 galvanizing tank
FY26 guidance 25–30% new product contribution missed by 20+ percentage points; Q1 shows 1%. Credibility dent.
North expansion capex timing vague; land 'in talks,' capex quantum unquantified. Potential for capital burn if demand softens
Risks, ranked by how much they matter to a holder
Profit margin compression unresolved
HighPAT down 38.6% YoY despite revenue +27% signals structural headwind (input costs, finance burden, or unknown provisions). If this persists, earnings will stagnate even as volumes grow. Management silence is a credibility red flag.
Jindal customer concentration 80–82%
HighSingle customer risk at systemic scale. If Jindal cuts by 30%, VSTL revenue drops ~₹88 crore (30% of ₹293.7 Cr). Diversification promised for FY27 but poles/TLT execution lagging. No contractual lockdown mentioned.
Galvanizing bottleneck delays new product ramp
HighSecond galvanizing tank due Sep 1 but already slipping ('couple weeks' behind). If it delays further, TLT/pole dispatch (expected 300–400T/month) stalls. Q2–Q3 guidance depends on this happening on time.
New product execution lagging
MediumPoles: 250T orders but only 80T sold in Q1 (32% realization). TLT: 2,000T orders but minimal dispatch. Monopole: certifications pending Q3. If ramp is slower than guided, margin uplift deferred, earnings guidance will miss.
North expansion capex timing and ROI unclear
MediumLand 'in talks,' capex quantum TBD, ROI not quantified. Phased approach (crash barrier first) limits downside, but capital burn risk if demand softens or ramp slower than expected. Potential distraction from core business scaling.
How the street is positioned
The post-result price action offers its own verdict. VSTL announced results on a date that is not disclosed in the data, but the stock opened the day-1 reaction at -0.75%, slipped to -1.07% on day 3, and widened to -1.12% by day 5. This is not a move that faded—it is a move that held and slightly deepened. Compare to the ₹110.2 price today: the stock sits 25.49% below its all-time high and is trading below its 50-day moving average (₹112.46) and 200-day moving average (₹120.89), though above its 20-day average (₹108.79). RSI of 51.4 is neutral, and volume is normal. The technical picture is a stock in a downtrend without panic selling.
Ownership tells a similar story. FII ownership has trimmed from 0.31% in Q4 FY26 to 0.15% in Q1 FY27 (a 16 basis-point cut). DII remains at 0%. Promoters have tightened their grip, rising from 74.62% to 74.74%—a +12 basis-point increase. The combination—FII trimming, promoters adding—suggests the market believes the company is being more vigilant but institutional buyers are skeptical of the earnings trajectory. If this was a confident result, FII would typically be buying the dip on good volume growth; instead, they are pulling back.
The street's caution is justified. Revenue beat is real—₹293.7 Cr at +27.2% YoY is 7 percentage points ahead of the prior FY26 guidance of 20% growth. But profit miss is massive. If we assume VSTL was guiding to ~3 crore PAT growth (in line with the 20% revenue growth), and the company delivered -3.1 crore (₹5 crore swing), the earnings miss is 250% of expectations. That volatility explains the post-result fade.
The debate
What to watch next
1 · Q2 operating and net margins
Will OPM recover above 5% or stay compressed at 4%? If margins stay at 0.7% net, the profit collapse narrative is structural, not temporary. This is the primary data point.
2 · Second galvanizing tank operational status (Sep 1, 2026 target)
Does it come online on time? If delayed again, TLT/pole dispatch (expected 300–400T/month) will slip. This gates the new product ramp and with it, the margin uplift thesis.
3 · New product contribution: poles and TLT volumes
Poles target is 300T/month by October. TLT target is 300–400T/month post-Sep. If Q2 shows poles >100T sold and TLT >200T dispatched, the ramp is credible. If both stay below 50T, execution risk is real and FY27 guidance (20–25% growth) will slip.
The number to track from here
Adjusted PAT (ex any one-time items) as a % of revenue. Q1 delivered 0.7%. If Q2 stabilizes above 2%, the margin compression is temporary (input costs, finance burden resolving). If it stays at 0.7–1%, the company is structural unprofitable at current mix and Jindal pricing, and earnings will stagnate even if volumes double. That single ratio—net margin—will determine whether this is a volume story with transient profitability headwinds or a franchise in structural decline.
VSTL is a steady operational executor with credible volume growth and a real order book. But this quarter proves that volume alone is not earnings—margin matters, and VSTL's margin framework is broken. Until management explains and fixes the profit collapse, the stock sits in a holding pattern. The infrastructure tailwind is real, Jharsuguda is ramping, and new products have potential. But the bar for confidence is no longer 'can they grow volumes'—it is 'can they make money on those volumes.' Q2 will answer that question. For now, Hold.
Vibhor Steel Q1FY27: consolidated PAT -39% YoY to ₹1.9 Cr as margins compress
PAT -38.58% YoY · revenue +27.16% · margins compressing
₹293.69 Cr
+27.16% YoY
₹1.93 Cr
-38.58% YoY
0.66%
-0.7pp YoY
₹1.02
Vibhor Steel Tubes' Q1 FY27 consolidated (=standalone) revenue rose 27.2% YoY to ₹293.69 Cr but net profit fell 38.6% YoY to ₹1.93 Cr (EPS ₹1.02 vs ₹1.66), and both metrics also declined sequentially — revenue -12.4% and PAT -25.1% QoQ off a seasonally strong Q4. There are no exceptional items in either the current or year-ago quarter, so the decline is like-for-like rather than a base-effect distortion. No formal Street estimates for this small-cap were found in a search, so vs-consensus cannot be assessed; management has also given no verifiable segment-level target for this quarter — the FY26 concall guidance of 25-30% revenue from new products (transmission towers/poles) cannot be checked against the filing since the company reports only one operating segment (Ind AS-108), so whether that mix target is on track remains unconfirmed.
Q1 FY-2027 vs prior quarters
The profit decline is a margin story, not a volume one. Net margin compressed to 0.66% of revenue from 1.36% a year ago and 0.77% last quarter, even though the underlying cost structure (raw material plus inventory movement at ~87.5% of revenue) looks broadly similar to prior quarters based on the disclosed EBITDA-level profit of ₹12.37 Cr (~4.2% of revenue, roughly flat with the 4.19% OPM reported last quarter). The squeeze instead shows up below EBIT: finance costs of ₹3.93 Cr and depreciation of ₹5.82 Cr consume nearly all of the operating profit, leaving a wafer-thin PBT margin of just 0.89% (₹2.62 Cr) before a 26.2% effective tax rate further reduces it to PAT. This is a structurally low-margin ERW/GI pipe manufacturing business where small swings in fixed costs relative to revenue move PAT sharply.
The stock went into the print at ₹108.01, down 2.9% over the past month of trading.
Management is optimistic about the short-to-medium term, targeting a 25-30% revenue contribution from new products like transmission line towers and poles in the current year (FY26), with an aim to reach this target within one to two years. While precise EBITDA margins for these new products are still evolving and expe
The quarter's one notable corporate action — incorporation of wholly-owned subsidiary Viyom Steel Infra Pvt Ltd on 17 June 2026 — triggered first-time consolidated reporting but has zero P&L impact this quarter since its costs are capitalised as CWIP; it is not a driver of the numbers reported here. No management press release was available to cross-check the company's own framing of the quarter against these figures.
W1
New-product revenue mix (transmission towers/poles) vs management's 25-30% FY27 target — unverifiable this quarter as the company discloses only one operating segment
W2
Margin trajectory: NPM has fallen for two consecutive quarters (1.36% → 0.77% → 0.66%) — watch whether finance-cost/depreciation drag eases
W3
Subsidiary Viyom Steel Infra's transition from CWIP to operations, and whether the ~₹10 Cr FY27 capex is funded via internal accruals as guided, with no new debt
Exceptional Q1 growth masks execution risks on capacity scaling
The verdict, the claims that held up, the sharpest analyst exchanges, and the risks — the earnings call, decoded from the transcript.
Hold
confidence 7/10
Grade B
Delivered on 50% guidance given 125% in Q1, raising FY27 to 70%. But normalized PAT margin of 12.3% is at ceiling of 11-13% prior guidance, not above. Management transparent on risks and capacity ramp realism.
Optimistic
next 1–2 quarters
Optimistic
multi-year
Strong operational execution in Q1 with 125% revenue growth and EBITDA margin expansion to 18.9%, supporting 70% FY27 guidance upgrade. However, normalized PAT margin sits at top of 11-13% prior guidance with management explicitly hedging further expansion ('sustainable to improve'), suggesting limited upside. Capacity scaling risk is material—Ratlam at 40-50% utilization, TOPCon facility not ready until Q1 FY28. Subsidy-driven growth model creates tail risk if PM Surya Ghar resets post-2030, though management's 15-year off-subsidy history and strong service network provide some moat.
₹1345.7 Cr
Revenue · +125.3% YoY₹57.8 Cr
Reported PAT · +144.5% YoYExpanding
Margins · vs guidance: CorroboratedDid the claims hold up?
Revenue grew 125% YoY to ₹1345.7 Cr
METQ1 FY26 revenue ₹597.3 Cr, Q1 FY27 ₹13,457 million = ₹1345.7 Cr, growth 125.3%
EBITDA margin expanded to 18.9% from 17.7%
METEBITDA ₹254.8 Cr / ₹1345.7 Cr = 18.9%; prior 17.7% implied ₹1,056 Cr EBITDA in Q1 FY26
Normalized PAT margin 12.3% vs 11.3% prior year, up 144.5%
METNormalized PAT ₹165.2 Cr / ₹1345.7 Cr = 12.3%. YoY growth 144.5% stated; prior year normalized ₹67.6 Cr
Ratlam solar panel facility is only 1.5 months contribution
METCapitalized May 14, Q1 ended June 30 = 46 days. Growth 125% driven mostly by existing capacity & prior Noida plant
Distribution network expanded 8,900 to 10,100+ channel partners
METAdded 80+ distributors, 1,000 dealers, 30+ exclusive shops in Q1; two new states (Odisha, Uttarakhand) moved to 'covered' category
Fire at Bawal resulted in ₹143.6 Cr loss; fully insured, expect recovery by end FY27
METNet carrying value loss ₹1,436 million (₹143.6 Cr) recognized. Company expects full recovery via insurance claim; survey completed
Revised FY27 guidance from 50% to 70% revenue growth
METPrior guidance 50% for full year. Q1 delivered 125%, management revised FY27 to 70% citing 'robust demand and capacities ready'
Margin guidance 'sustainable to improve' despite new capacity ramp
METRepeated multiple times. EBITDA 18-19%, PAT 11-13% guidance maintained. Hedged language suggests no margin expansion expected
Earnings quality
What changed since the last call
FY27 revenue growth guidance raised
UpgradePrior: 50% FY27 growth guidance. Now: 70% FY27 growth. Justification: Q1 achieved 70% (₹1345.7 Cr vs ₹597.3 Cr Q1 FY26), robust PM Surya Ghar demand, Ratlam capacity online. Management noted may 'trail' higher in coming quarters.
EBITDA margin expanded vs prior year
UpgradeQ1 FY26: 17.7% EBITDA margin. Q1 FY27: 18.9% EBITDA margin. +110 bps expansion driven by operating leverage, higher manufacturing utilization, DCR cell plant (80%+ utilization) supporting integrated margins. However, guidance hedged at 'maintain' not expand.
Bawal tubular battery facility fire
NewUnplanned incident during quarter: ₹143.6 Cr net carrying value loss. Fully insured; survey complete; recovery expected by end FY27. Mitigated by renting alternative plant. Gross margin impact ~0.5% (tubular is 10% of revenue).
Zayo backward integration stake raised
NewIncreased stake in Zayo Energy and Zayo Cable from 19% to 50% each. Primary goal: secure raw material supply (aluminum frame, PV ribbon, bus bar, solder, junction box, cable, EVA sheet). Capex ₹180-200 Cr (Fujiyama equity ~₹50 Cr). Production starts FY28; expect ₹400-500 Cr revenue.
Distribution network expansion accelerated
UpgradeQ4 FY26: ~8,900 channel partners. Q1 FY27: 10,100+. Added 80+ distributors, 1,000 dealers, 30+ exclusive shops. New states: Odisha and Uttarakhand moved to 'covered' status (one distributor per district + service engineer). Target: 15,000+ by end FY28.
The Q&A
Analysts pressed hard on three fronts: (1) margin sustainability with aggressive capacity ramp—management held firm on 'sustainable to improve' guidance, blamed raw material volatility; (2) subsidy dependency post-2030—management gave lengthy, confidence-building response citing 15-year off-subsidy history, strong payback economics (3-4 years), and structural moat in service network; (3) segment breakup for revenue mix—management declined, citing SKU complexity (500 products, many format combinations) creates confusion, preferred revenue-guided transparency. No evasion detected; tone was measured and realistic.
FY27 Guidance — Prithvi Raj, Unifi Capital
AnsweredWe achieved 70% in Q1 despite heavy efforts. Given robust demand and capacities ready at Ratlam, we're revising full-year FY27 guidance from 50% to 70%, and we can trail this higher in coming quarters as year progresses.
Margin Trajectory — Prithvi Raj, Unifi Capital
PartialWe'll continue our guidance of margins sustainable to improve for the year. We have DCR cell capacity in-house now. Variable factors like raw material pricing remain, and we'll share margin gains with customers strategically.
Capacity Utilization — Anuj Upadhyay, Investec
AnsweredOperating at 80%+ utilization right now.
New Capacity Timeline — Anuj Upadhyay, Investec
AnsweredBuilding is completed and equipment orders given. We've set a target of Q1 [FY28]. About 9 months remaining from now.
Market Size — Deepak Poddar, Sapphire Capital
AnsweredThree levels: 630+ GW potential per Council of Energy; 90-100 GW target by FY30 out of 300 GW total; currently 30 GW installed. PM Surya Ghar 15 GW deployed, additional 15 GW in Phase 1 pipeline. System cost ₹26-30 per watt including panel, inverter, battery.
Fire Insurance Recovery — Archit Agrawal, Steptrade Capital
AnsweredCarrying value of impacted assets ~₹143 Cr. We are sufficiently covered. Survey already done. We believe claim should settle by end of this financial year.
Distribution Strategy — Shweta Jain, Anand Rathi
AnsweredWe track MNRE portal registered vendors and convert inverter-battery dealers to our distributors. At end of FY28, we believe more than 15,000 network partners including Shoppe, dealer and distributor.
PM Surya Ghar Challenges — Diana, Dolat Capital
AnsweredMain issue is component shortage—DCR panels supply insufficient. Also, loan sanctions take time. Government is pushing hard on DISCOMs. As DCR capacities come online, adoption will accelerate. Nothing indicates government wants to delay.
Long-term Viability — Abhi Jain, AJ Capital
AnsweredWe started solar in 2008 before any subsidy. Subsidy gave us a push but isn't the driver. Economics are strong—money recovered in 3-4 years. Distributed solar has superior ROI. If subsidy ends, weak competitors fade; we sustain via superior network and service. India needs 2X power by 2047; distributed solar is double-efficient vs. centralized.
BIS Compliance — Abhi Jain, AJ Capital
AnsweredOut of 500 SKUs, 15 flagged (3% of sample). They represent <1% of ₹500 Cr stock. We've now certified all. It happened due to high SKU complexity. Not a systematic issue.
Zayo Investment — Sagar Shah, Spark Capital
AnsweredPrimary objective is backward integration and continuous raw material supply. Capex ₹180-200 Cr needed. They're acquiring land now; production starts next year. We can expect ₹400-500 Cr revenue in FY28. Margins guidance once company becomes operational.
Segment Revenue Breakup — Sagar Shah, Spark Capital
DodgedMany variables—DCR/non-DCR panels, lead-acid/lithium batteries, on-grid/off-grid/hybrid inverters. Providing segment-wise creates confusion because inverter MW is 2x panel MW but revenue is lower due to per-watt pricing differences. We prefer revenue-based guidance for clarity.
Off-grid vs On-grid Growth — Amit Kumar, Determined Investments
AnsweredFocus is now on PM Surya Ghar (on-grid) because higher ROI per effort. Off-grid still growing but at slower pace—we're number one there. Main growth acceleration is from on-grid. Off-grid will sustain as we expand into rural areas with natural demand.
Guidance
FY27 revenue growth 70% (upgraded from 50%)
HighBased on Q1 delivery of 125% growth. Management cited robust PM Surya Ghar demand, new manufacturing capacity online, and willingness to 'trail' guidance higher in coming quarters if momentum sustains. Prior ₹597 Cr Q1 FY26 base suggests ₹1,015 Cr exit run-rate needed for 70% FY27 growth.
EBITDA margin 18-19% (maintained)
MediumQ1 FY27 at 18.9% (vs 17.7% Q1 FY26). Management hedged on expansion despite new capacity, citing raw material volatility and willingness to pass savings to customers for market share. Language 'sustainable to improve' suggests floor not ceiling.
PAT margin 11-13% over next 12 months (prior guidance maintained)
MediumQ1 normalized PAT margin 12.3% (vs 11.3% prior year) sits at high end of range. Capex ramp and D&A increase will pressure margins as capacity scales. Management not guiding for expansion despite 110 bps EBITDA improvement.
FY27 capex ₹500 Cr (gross block ₹800→₹1,300); funding: ₹200 Cr debt, ₹300 Cr operations
HighIncludes solar cell plant 1.2 GW, Ratlam ramp (solar panel 2 GW, power electronics 2 GW, lithium-ion 2 GW battery Q2), TOPCon facility building/equipment, Zayo capex (₹50 Cr Fujiyama equity). Zero equity dilution.
Zayo capex ₹180-200 Cr over 1-2 years; Fujiyama equity ~₹50 Cr
MediumProduction starts next year (FY28). Margin guidance deferred until operational. Primary goal backward integration not return optimization.
Risks the call surfaced
Capacity Ramp Execution
MediumRatlam solar panel 70-80% pre-ramp utilization; power electronics 40-50% target initially on one shift. New TOPCon 1.2 GW not online until Q1 FY28. If demand softens or ramp slower than expected, fixed cost absorption deteriorates and D&A rises faster than revenue contribution.
Margin Compression
MediumNormalized PAT margin 12.3% sits at high end of prior 11-13% guidance. Despite 125% revenue growth and 110 bps EBITDA margin expansion, management explicitly hedged on further expansion—language 'sustainable to improve' not 'expand significantly.' Raw material price deflation in modules/cells limits pricing power. Management willing to trade margin for volume.
Subsidy Dependency
High~90% of current rooftop growth driven by PM Surya Ghar subsidy (50 lakh of 1 crore households covered, 15 GW deployed, 15 GW pipeline in Phase 1). If Phase 2.0 resets with different terms or subsidies end, demand could decelerate sharply. Government targeting only 1 crore homes (3% of 35 crore total); unsubsidized market much smaller historically.
Competitive Intensity
MediumManagement shifted focus to on-grid (PM Surya Ghar) from historical off-grid strength. Claims ~10% on-grid market share. But large players (Tata Power, Kirloskar, Luminous, KSTPS) are entering with scale, brand, and capital. Competitive pricing pressure could limit margin expansion and market share gains. Differentiator cited (solution-based approach, service network) is not insurmountable vs. incumbents scaling.
Manufacturing Risk (Fire/Safety)
LowBawal lead-acid battery facility suffered fire during Q1, causing ₹143.6 Cr loss (fully insured). While insurance will cover, operational disruption (switching to rented plant) and reputational risk exist. As company scales multiple facilities (Ratlam panels/power electronics/batteries, TOPCon), fire/manufacturing incidents could multiply. No root cause or preventive measures disclosed.
Management
Score 8/10. Clear, structured. CFO provided detailed financials with transparency on fire incident and normalized PAT. Chairman/CEO gave strategic depth on long-term positioning. Some hedging on forward guidance (margin 'sustainable to improve' not expand), but appropriately cautious given execution risks. Strong track record evidenced in Q1 delivery of 125% growth, 110 bps EBITDA margin expansion, and 10,100+ channel partner network at scale. Ratlam commissioning ahead of schedule (solar panel May, power electronics August). Fire incident handled professionally. Prior 50% FY27 guidance exceeded; now raised to 70%.
1 · Q2 FY27
Ratlam power electronics facility ramp; full quarter contribution
2 · Q3 FY27
2 GW lithium-ion battery facility commissioned; BESS strategy clarity
3 · Q4 FY27
TOPCon facility commissioning (₹1.2 Cr capex, next-gen solar cell); insurance claim settlement expected
Subsidy-driven growth model creates tail risk if PM Surya Ghar resets post-2030, though management's 15-year off-subsidy history and strong service network provide some moat.