And the challenge with deals like these is there’s not always a kind of compelling event for a specific date for them to close because if you’re doing a vendor consolidation decision. There may be a kind of the timing of maybe a competitor solution that may have a contract up for renewal. So that may be one element of a compelling event. But in general, that these are very strategic decisions for customers and so there is a serious and significant evaluation when they go through that. And we’re just building an incremental level of prudence that nothing, as I said before, nothing has fundamentally changed in the demand environment is still healthy. The pipeline is still very robust. As I mentioned in my prepared remarks that these deals that are over $1 million have — in the pipeline are up over 39%.
And I remind you that we had a huge Q4 last year. So this is a significant movement in the pipeline. It’s just a matter of when you have very large deals like this to call it within a 90-day window is a little bit more variable. We tried to build a level of prudence into it.
Rick McConnell: I would just add, Matt, that with GSIs in particular, since you mentioned the partner front, we continue to be very enthusiastic about the evolution of the GSI partner opportunities, especially with some of the core GSIs I mentioned, like Accenture, Deloitte, DXC and Kindrel. And those deals are inherently going to be bigger and take a bit longer to close as well. But we feel very good about our posture and position associated with the GSI evolution.
Matt Hedberg: Thanks guys.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Mike Cikos with Needham & Company. Please proceed with your question.
Mike Cikos: Hey guys. Thanks for taking the question here. And I know a lot has been made on the ARR guide. And I just — I really want to fine-tune it. I know, Jim, you’ve spoken about incorporating incremental prudence tied to these larger, more strategic deals. So the first question is, can you elaborate on what the magnitude of that incremental prudence is? I think that would help level set expectations as we’re thinking about this change to the guidance philosophy or construction now. And then the second point, which would go a long way in helping investors think about the guidance today, really, were it not for these larger, more strategic deals, which are taking longer to close. Excluding that, would management actually be raising the fiscal ’24 constant currency ARR guide today?
Jim Benson: Well, you can imagine, the pipeline is just a basket of opportunities. There’s large opportunities, small opportunities. So I think what we are seeing though is the funnel is becoming a bit more weighted to these large opportunities. And I will tell you that the guide that I provided last time, which was 19% to 20% growth, in the guide now, 18% to 19%, the way you should think about that is the difference in that of 100 basis points is literally just incremental improvements. Nothing else has fundamentally changed.
Mike Cikos: Terrific. Thank you for that. Appreciate it.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Fatima Boolani with Citi. Please proceed with your question.
Fatima Boolani: Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Jim, just along these lines, historically, it’s been very helpful for us to internalize your growth algorithm between new logo acquisition and the installed base expansion. So just bearing in mind some of your commentary on some of the expansionary behavior, the DPS uptake and what you’re seeing in the pipeline, I was hoping you could help us flesh out for us what your expectations are as it relates to a new logo business versus a potential recovery on the installed base expansion side?
Jim Benson: Yes. The way to — I think I shared this before, that — and I shared it in the last call that we thought that expansion rates would be in the 112% to 113% range in the near-term. And I expect that to be the case for the remainder of this year. And we had said before that we’re probably going to be in the low single-digit growth in new logos, but at higher land sizes. So our land sizes have been call it, roughly 140,000 on a trailing 12-month basis. So those two underpinnings continue to be kind of the building blocks underneath that. And on the new logo front, it’s because we’re focusing on a larger set of customer lands that we have seen have a higher propensity to expand when we land at a larger size, they tend to expand.
So those fundamentals won’t change. Obviously, when I provide fiscal ’25 guidance, I’ll give you guys a little bit more color on that, but those continue to be the kind of the major building blocks. And obviously, the other one being we continue to have best-in-class retention rate. So the product is very sticky. We don’t have a lot of churn or downsell. So obviously, we don’t expect any changes in that regard either.
Operator: Thank you. Our next question is from the line of Ray McDonough with Guggenheim. Please proceed with your question.
Ray McDonough: Great, thanks. Rick, when we talk to some of your partners, it does seem like tool consolidation is accelerating, and you’ve hit on that throughout the call. But is that acceleration due to a change in control at a couple of your competitors? And if so, can you help us understand where those opportunities are coming from specifically? Is it some of your traditional APM competitors? Or are you seeing displacement opportunities in log management and other areas at this point? Obviously, you mentioned it’s still early on for logs, but any color would be helpful.
