Ed Tilly: We’ll start with just from an exchange perspective. We’ve recognized the power of the stack, the interplay and the rotation. We’ve talked about that for years that our customers are very rational in the way they deploy their hedges or exposure. You’ve called this out. If in the — over the last year, the observations of incredibly large moves interday like today, yesterday, as I said earlier, all this week, the Greeks associated with the exposure in the SPX allow — customers believe that they allow themselves a much better chance of monetizing those positions. Gamma, for example, the group that you pick up in the SPX. We did see in the observation yesterday is when investors think that the market may have run too far, they do grab the optionality and the hedge that’s afforded by fixed exposure.
So again, indifferent from — basically indifferent from the economics there, what we are — have always said is the rotation makes sense. The hedges are rational. So, we continue to teach the differences in the expected payout and just want to make sure that we’re bringing those exposures to customers with every sized wallet and teaching that through many contracts in futures, for example. And of course, I mentioned earlier, XSP is the mini-500. So that’s the approach, but we do see Derivatives as sticky and sustainable.
Operator: Thank you. And the next question comes from Kyle Voigt with KBW.
Kyle Voigt: Maybe just one more on expenses. I apologize, Brian. But I wonder if you could talk about the potential expense flex and how dependent it is on the revenue environment. So for example, if revenues came in below the low end of that 7% to 9% organic guidance range, should we expect a similar outcome in terms of coming in line with the expense guidance range? And would there be any pause on investments? And then likewise, if revenues come in above the guidance range, should that cause expense growth to move higher than the range? Or should we expect the incremental growth to fall to the bottom line? So, any kind of framework you could help us with understanding that the really the expense flex on either end of that range will be helpful?
Ed Tilly: Thanks Kyle. I think your next — if you choose to have another career as a CFO as part of that, that would be awesome. So, I think you think about exactly the way we frame that and the way we’ve talked about it, right, is that we’ve laid out this guidance. We’ve laid out our plans. We have certain expectations around how these investments are going to contribute to the revenue and some of the traction we think we will gain. So, there’s definitely opportunity to flex. There’s obviously our natural flex that is a part of our incentive plan, our short-term incentive plan that will flex based on how we’re doing relative to, I would say, these very strong growth targets that we’ve set aside, so we set for ourselves. So, there’s definitely an inherent part of that is that we are not achieving that, we will titrate the various levers there to say, how does this pull back to make sure we get to those earnings expectations of what we’re trying to deliver for shareholders and continue to measure that.
And then on a go-forward basis, outside of, call it, that incentive structure as far as exceeding expectations. We’re a little bit more cautious on the upside. We’ll be faster to move on the downside as far as pulling that back, if we don’t see the results that we’re expecting, but we’d be more cautious to actually raise it as you’ve probably seen historically with some of that kind of expense growth going forward. So that’s the way I would frame it, Kyle.
Operator: Thank you. And the next question comes from Rick Fellinger with Autonomous.
