Abhi Khandelwal: And just to build on it, I think the other thing it points to that we’ve had a lot of conversations around is normalization of the supply chain. So it’s a lot faster when it turns on, a lot faster when it turns on because people know that the lead times are back to normal levels that they can adjust their demand as they see the markets move up and down.
Deane Dray: That’s real helpful. And I’m glad you mentioned about that normalization of supply chain because that’s been a focus. And just a separate question on the life sciences, analytical instruments market. We’ve been watching this and just kind of waiting where and how that – the destocking might run its course and it just really hasn’t turned the corner yet. I did see one of the life science guys report a strong quarter, but that was more on the bio processing side, less on the instrument side. But what’s the typical lag between what you see from the OEs in terms of their sales of instruments versus your supply of these components? I mean, I guess, some of it has to do what their inventory levels are and whether they’re running off their current stock and then whether they’re pulling from – to you for their orders. But just the typical lag and any color there would be helpful.
Eric Ashleman: Yes. So I think there’s a couple of points to hit there. I’ll start with the first where you ended. I mean the lag is – I mean it’s not extended for us because most of our replenished cycles and lead time fulfillment abilities and capabilities of components going to companies like that is really fast. I mean it’s one of the reasons that in this sort of destocking cycle started, we were one of the first to come and recognize it back in Q4 of 2022. And so I think any sign of life, we’re going to see that first and it’s – and we’re going to see it probably pretty close to the time that they’re talking about selling the instruments just because of the natural way that forecast would roll in and come back into our factories.
We – typically, this is for most cases, I mean, we’re not requiring months and quarters of heads up on that just because we’re set up to quick turn most of the components. I think maybe the only exception would be, look, if there’s a material shift in the overall demand profile, then we’ve got to think about making sure that we get those same broader signals out to our suppliers and they do that with us. You have to have that conversation, but sort of the early turn an inflection would be relatively quickly aligned. The only other point kind of embedded in the earlier part of your question to come back to is just as we’re all reading signals from the broader market, as you’re thinking of IDEX, it’s always important to recognize, we participate in the instrument side of those sales.
And often, you’ll see people are talking about consumable streams. And maybe those would tend to advance and start to move ahead of instruments. And so it’s an interesting point, but you always have to kind of equate it back to and what’s the velocity on instruments because ultimately, that’s where the components that we supply go.
Deane Dray: That’s really helpful. Thank you.
Eric Ashleman: Thanks, Deane.
Abhi Khandelwal: Thanks, Deane.
Operator: Our next question comes from the line of Vlad Bystricky with Citigroup. Please proceed with your question.
Vlad Bystricky: Hey good morning everyone and thanks for taking my question. I guess can you just talk about, and sorry if I missed it, what – price versus cost overall actually was in the quarter and your expectations for price versus cost for the year and what you’re seeing in terms of inflationary pressures versus your expectations coming into the year?
Abhi Khandelwal: Yes, Vlad. This is Abhi, more than happy to answer that for you. So if you recall, when we talked about our Q4 earnings, what we talked about was price for 2024, we’d laid it out at about 2%. But more importantly, what we were focused on was this price/cost spread of 80 basis points to 100 basis points. So as you think about where we exited Q1, we’re closer to that 100% from a price/cost standpoint, in line with expectations, in fact, on the high end of expectations. If you go back in time and just look at IDEX historically, we’ve seen from a pricing standpoint is something in the neighborhood of 80 to 1.2 – or 0.8% to 1.2%. So this price – pricing that we have laid out for 2024 is higher than normal levels.
And then the price/cost spread typically, what we’ve seen historically is 30 bps to 40 bps versus what we’re seeing here, which is 80 bps to 100 bps. To answer your second question on inflation, what we’re seeing is the input cost slightly favorable compared to what we had assumed in the guide that we had laid out as part of the Q4 discussion.
Vlad Bystricky: Great. That’s helpful color, Abhi. I appreciate it. And then just to go back to HST. In terms of the organic sales decline that we’ve seen in the quarter, are you able to give us more color on the underlying growth rates in industrial and semicon versus what you’re seeing in life sciences and analytical instrumentation?
Eric Ashleman: Well, a couple of things there. I mean, the comparisons in a lot of HST are at pretty exaggerated levels given the rapid destocking that we saw last year. And so let’s – we’ve been talking about life science and analytical instrumentation as being in a general condition of kind of flat waiting for signs of recovery. And that, just from a segment percentage, is just over a third of the entire segment. I think semicon, certainly has high single-digit growth potential, and we’re starting to see some early signs. I mentioned some things in ceiling and a couple of other places, but really have a little bit more of that dialed in, in the back half as we start to kind of approach that entitlement. It’s probably 2025 though, before it really comes in at that full level.
