Good day, ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the Q4 2017 Sunrun Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference maybe recorded. I would like to introduce your host for today’s conference Patrick Jobin from Investor Relations. You may begin.

Thank you, operator and thank you to those on the call for joining us today. Before we begin, please note that certain remarks we will make on this conference call constitute forward-looking statements. Although we believe these statements reflect our best judgment based on the factors currently known to us, actual results may differ materially and adversely. Please refer to the company’s filings with the SEC for a more inclusive discussion of risks and other factors that may cause our actual results to differ from projections made in any forward-looking statements. Please also note these statements are being made as of today and we disclaim any obligation to update or revise them. On the call today are Lynn Jurich, Sunrun’s Co-Founder and CEO; Bob Komin, Sunrun’s CFO; and Ed Fenster, Sunrun’s Co-Founder and Executive Chairman. The presentation today will use slides, which are available on our website at investors.sunrun.com. And now, let me turn the call over to Lynn.

Thanks, Patrick. We are pleased to share with you Sunrun’s fourth quarter financial and operating results along with progress against our strategic priorities. In the fourth quarter, we deployed 85 megawatts generating $91 million of net present value, up 35% year-over-year. We created NPV per watt of $1.22, the highest margin in the company’s history, highlighting our cost efficiencies and the value of our products. We are now solidly the market leader in the residential sector. Q4 caps a breakout year for Sunrun. In 2017, we beat both our full year NPV margin and cash generation targets. We grew aggregate NPV at almost 50%, deployments at 15% and now have more than 180,000 customers. We gained 4 percentage points of market share while turning structurally cash flow positive and we expanded our home solar and battery service, Brightbox, to strong customer reception. We also forged key strategic partnerships with Comcast and National Grid. We expect an even better 2018 despite the impact of tax reform and tariffs. We plan to continue our market share gains with 15% growth in deployments and growth in cash generation well above this rate. These results are supported by NPV targets above a $1 a watt and a strong project finance pipeline to turn that value into cash flow. In the immediate term, we have experienced some external headwinds. Q4 deployments fell slightly short of our expectations due to the wildfires in California. Q1 is always the toughest quarter of the year. Typically, deployments declined from Q4 levels due to seasonality and the pull-forward in installations from Arizona exacerbated the trend this year. We took a particularly cautious position in Q4 given the unknowns from tax reform and the tariff, but we are pleased with where margins have settled out and that the uncertainties are…

Thanks, Lynn. In the fourth quarter, we recorded the highest NPV per watt in the company’s history and exceeded our cash generation and NPV targets. NPV was $1.22 per watt in Q4, resulting in aggregate NPV created of $91 million, representing 35% growth compared to the prior year. While NPV per watt can fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter given business mix, Q4’s strong results highlight our leading position and our continued focus on managing the business to drive NPV. We are particularly pleased with the unit economics we achieved this quarter, especially as we invest resources in additional product offerings such as Brightbox, grid services initiatives with National Grid and in new market entries. We calculate NPV as project value less creation costs, so let’s go through the components. Q4 project value of $4.52 per watt was $0.03 higher than Q3 and $0.11 higher than last year. As a reminder, project value is very sensitive to modest changes in geographic, channel, and tax equity fund mix. We expect project value will decline slightly over time, but with costs declining more, although in the short run there can be quarterly fluctuations. As Ed will describe, we expect the impact of tax reform to reduce project value by about $0.10 per watt beginning in 2018. Turning now to creation costs on Slide 13. In Q4, total creation costs were $3.30 per watt, an improvement of $0.11 year-over-year. Similar to project value, creation costs can fluctuate quarter-to-quarter due to changes in geographic and channel mix. As a reminder, our cost stack is not directly comparable to those of peers because of our channel partner business. Blended installation cost per watt, which includes the cost of solar projects deployed by our channel partners, as well as installation costs incurred for Sunrun built systems, improved by $0.10…

Thanks Bob. Today, I want to touch on three items. First, I will review the changes during the quarter to gross and net earnings assets; second, I will discuss the impacts of tax reform; and third, I will discuss the finance market, which is the most robust we have seen in the company’s history. Turning first to our installed asset base on Slide 16, Net earning assets was roughly flat in the quarter at $1.2 billion, reflecting a 16% year-over-year increase. Non-recurring items of about $50 million depressed net earning assets in the quarter. First, we experienced impacts in the draw timing of tax and cash equity financings. Our primary objective is to optimize for the lowest long-term cost of capital. We focused first and foremost on the best execution of our financings, which can materially affect the timing of our total cash balance at any specific quarter end measurement date. Second, we have estimated the total expected impact of corporate tax reform. Finally, we purchased tax equity investors’ stakes in a couple early and unusual funds, allowing us to retire our most expensive piece of debt and placing us in position to execute financings on advantageous terms in the ABS market. In addition, the net cash proceeds from the closing of a term loan B in Q4 reduced net earning assets, but generated cash. Because we reinvested this cash into working capital, such as inventory to hedge the solar panel tariff, we have not yet seen the corresponding increase in cash. We expect working capital investment will peak in Q1. I turn now to a discussion of federal tax reform and the impacts to the Sunrun. Most importantly, the investment tax credit was unchanged, which is no surprise given the bipartisan support for solar. In fact, Congress newly extended…

Thanks, Ed. Let’s open the line for questions please.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] And our first question comes from the line of Brian Lee from Goldman Sachs. Your line is now open.

Hey, team. Thanks for taking the questions. I guess first one on the cash generation comments, I think you mentioned Bob that they will be ahead of deployment growth. So, just wanted to be clear, does that mean better than 15% growth on the $43 million you generated in 2017. So, inferring $50 million of incremental cash generation expected in 2018?

Yes, Brain, that’s exactly what we mean.

Okay, great. And then maybe digging into a bit more granularly, can you talk to maybe some of the high level puts and takes that are embedded in that view. I know 2017 there were a couple of one-time issues that impacted it and you adjusted for, anything that might be in the 2018 numbers as well that we should be adjusting for or budgeting for?

Hey, Brian. The investors in that would be equivalent one-timers similar to what – similar to inventory buy or the acquisition, we don’t anticipate any of those, so the guidance is for really the steady state operating business.

Okay, that’s helpful. Maybe couple of more questions just around the cash flow profile here for the year. First on Slide 16, you showed cash equity of $155 million to end the year, was that all National Grid related, I thought they had invested $100 million or so, so just wondering if there is something else reflected in there or how we should be thinking about that line item as we move through 2018?

Hi, Brian. This is Ed. Great question. I think you maybe referring to the $155 million pro forma debt adjustment that we show in Q4 of ‘17 that does relate to the National Grid transaction, but it is not their investment specifically. So, what happens when we placed assets into the National Grid transaction is that we eliminate the gross earning assets that those assets would have provided if we hadn’t placed those cash flows effectively to National Grid. And because we are therefore eliminating the growth contracted assets of those systems, we are also eliminating 99% of the debt against those systems. So, the $155 million in debt is the debt that has currently been raised in that partnership with National Grid. So, their equity investment is still expected to be approximately $100 million. Does that answer your question?

Yes, no, that does clear it up. That’s helpful. And the $155 million is it fair to assume they were fully deployed on the 200 megawatt target for 2017?

So, Brian let me just add to that with two comments. The first one is that the fund is materially, but not totally deployed and the second one though is that there are debt surprise as those systems continue to be placed in service in 2018.

Okay, fair enough. Last one for me, I will pass it on after that. The $50 million headwind you guys spoke to for the net earning assets this quarter, you mentioned that the early fund repurchases obviously, which are going to be to your benefit that was part of it. And then without that and some of the other factors you would have grown sequentially on that metric. Can you quantify specifically on the early fund repurchases, what the dollar impact was in the quarter? And then to your comment around 50 to 100 basis point compression in spreads, the refi that you are planning on the back of those early fund repurchases, are those for 2018 and should we be expecting those to generate significant cash flow for you in 2018, and i.e., is that in part of your $50 million incremental cash generation target for the year? Thank you.

Hey, Brian. So, those are good questions. So, first when I described the three components of the $50 million we did that in order. So, the working capital component was greater than the tax component, which we disclosed at $13 million, which was in turn greater than the effect of the buy end of the funds, so that hopefully can give you a view towards the order of magnitude. The further refinancings of our post-flip assets such as those may not occur until as late as Q1 2019 and so we do not at this point expect that to occur in 2018.

Okay. So put another way that the cash from that would be in your 2019 view at that point?

Correct.

Okay. Thank you. I’ll pass it on.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Julien Dumoulin-Smith from Bank of America. Your line is now open.

Hey, good afternoon.

Hi, good afternoon.

I wanted to ask – hey, thank you. Just a follow-up on the last question, can you talk a little about the advance rates you are seeing on tax equity and just how that market has evolved if at all – if I take it from your commentary that it’s still quite robust, but what is kind of a good ballpark assumption on $1 per watt tax equity raised assumptions in light of everything that’s transpired with tax reform?

Great. Great question, Julien. So, I think what we are saying is we expect to receive about $0.10 a watt left in 2018 than we did in 2017, because of all the changes to tax reform. In terms of what’s happening in the market, I would say first I think casual industry observers may have underestimated two components of the tax bill, the first that it’s creating new cash taxpayers and the second the elimination of corporate AMT appears to be driving several tax departments towards the total elimination of tax liability rather than a desire to land near the AMT threshold. And so we are actually seeing slightly declining after-tax yields but because of the lots of the depreciation benefit that’s still manifesting is about $0.10 a watt less than proceeds does. But Bob’s comments on NPV and cash flow for 2018 take those expected impact into account.

Got it. Alright. It wasn’t just changes in construction costs etcetera. Can you also talk about the terminal view market obviously you are talking about a step up here in total proceeds. How are you thinking about that in the light of the tax equity comments you just made and also with respect to desirability of pursuing other Nat Grid like transactions here? How are you thinking about sort of a mix if you were to think about all about a mix and/or just the total proceeds on that front as well? I mean, is it basically backstopping and filling in the delta that is created with the tax equity?

Yes. So, I think the headwind that we are seeing the $0.10 from tax equity will be addressing that operationally and financially. The good news right now is that all components of the capital stack are attractive to us, A loans, B loans, cash equity where we are seeing as I was describing spreads on average between 50 and 100 basis points lower taking all those into account. So, I don’t want to make specific predictions of the exact transactions that we are going to undertake in 2018, but we have many degrees of freedoms and good opportunities ahead of us.

Got it. And then lastly quickly on commenced construction for the ITC, I mean are you expecting any clarity or commentary from treasury here?

I don’t have any particular view as to when that clarity will be providing.

Great. Alright. Thank you all.

Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Michael Weinstein from Credit Suisse. Your line is now open.

Hi, this is [indiscernible] on behalf of Mike Weinstein. Could you talk about the impact of all the tariffs with solar, steel or aluminum on the cost structure in 2018 and how does that play into your expectations for next year?

Hi, this is Ed. Great question. This would have we think very diminimis effects on our cost structure potentially in the range of a $0.01 per watt. So, it’s not something that we foresee as a major issue one way or the other.

Got it. And last week the IRS issued a private letter clarifying rules for tax credits on retrofit storage, could you just throw some light on that – probably it’s too soon to speak about that, but does that – is it new for you or does it create more demand for retrofit storage for you and how should we think about monetizing such retrofits?

Yes. So just for background for those on the call that IRS has clarified that if you put a battery on an existing solar system that that would be eligible then for the tax credit. So it’s a terrific outcome. I think the way we are currently going to market with our Brightbox product is on new originations only. So any of the commentary we have been making is around new business. And as I said on the call, it’s still early, but the demand is surpassing our expectations and particularly as these extreme weather events continue to happen are seeing increasing interest from customers who are wanting to backup their home with power. So, we launched that Brightbox messages today, I think with the latest storm 2 million people that didn’t have power. So increasingly, what we are finding is that utilities aren’t meeting the needs of their customers. It’s too expensive and it’s not reliable power. And so the demand for storage is better than we expected. That said on the retrofit side that is not something we are currently offering, but certainly something we are taking a look at.

Thanks for the clarification. And just one last question from me looking at the 2018 deployment guidance, how should we think about the geographic mix or which regions are driving that growth versus what we saw in 2017?

Sure. I think certainly the big factor with the Q1 numbers and laid in last year was Arizona. I think as we described on the phone call last year, there was a strong pull forward in demand there and Arizona ticked up above the 10% share in our overall business. And so actually, if you would have kept Arizona at historic levels, there would have been strong growth in Q1. So the reason why we feel confident in the growth returning and coming back in Q2 and beyond is the following, Nevada is coming back, which would quite strongly our new markets are starting to contribute the 7 new states that we entered last year. So, Texas most notably on the East Coast we are seeing very strong demand. California, I believe the external forecast shows California as about flat this year, but we believe we will do slightly better there. So, across the board consume and Arizona is going to come back to. So, what we typically see is after there is one of these pull-forward companies clean out their backlogs and then there is a little bit of an air pocket, but the market comes back. And so we are starting to see strong sales in Arizona as well. So, that will come back into the picture. The place where there is some risk is South Carolina as we are potentially going to reach the net metering cap this summer to fall. And we are accounting for that in our plan. We expect that it gets extended, but that would be a market where our current plan shows some decline year-over-year in that market, but across the board, very strong growth and very, very pleased with where consumer demand since today.

Thanks for the color.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Philip Shen from Roth Capital. Your line is now open.

Hi, guys. Thanks for the questions. Quick follow-up on [indiscernible] question there on storage and storage in general I think you mentioned that the attach rate has hit 20% in some states. Looking ahead further in 2018, how do you expect that attach rate to revolve, what levels can we reach by the end of the year?

Great question, it’s still early to say. I think there is – it’s going to be different market by market too depending on what the regulatory setup is. So in California what we – the specific comment we made was that in California we are seeing attach rates at 20% which is a doubling already year-to-date versus Q4 last year. So, it’s accelerating very quickly. And if you just look at from a consumer value proposition standpoint, particularly in the San Diego market, it’s arguably more affordable for someone to get solar plus storage because of the ability that store the power during the day and ship it to the grid when it’s most expensive in the afternoon. So, you could imagine attachment rates in that market well above 50%. PG&E and Southern California Edison, it’s going to be driven by consumer interest in the extra reliability and the backup capability, but again, we are being pleasantly surprised with how important that is to people and it’s more front of mind as the extreme weather continues to persist. I think if you look at the other markets we look at to try to estimate penetration will be generator markets what kind of share is that and that’s maybe 10%ish. So, we would think again really early to say, we would think that it would still be the minority of customers that would elect to attach storage outside of California, but certainly 100% in Hawaii and parts of California might exceed that 50%.

Great. Thanks, Lynn. And that’s really interesting about more than 50% in some locations, shifting gears to new geographies, can you walk us through how many new spacecrafts or opportunities or regions that you might hit in 2018?

We don’t anticipate that same level of expansion as we put forward last year. So, last year, we added, I think it was 7 states and those take a few quarters to ramp. So, we didn’t see much of the benefit from that last year and are starting to see it now today. So, the growth that underlies that 15% growth plan really is an existing market. Another area of the country we have our eye on although not promising anything in terms of market entry is Illinois and the Midwest area. It’s the economic we are starting to look at there is some favorable policy there. So, that could be an interesting and promising market. Puerto Rico is also interesting and that the consumer interest speaking of the utilities was not meeting the need of their customers, it’s a perfect case in point there and the consumer interest in rooftop solar and battery storage is incredibly high. So, just a question of is the market, do we get comfortable that the market is a stable from a risk perspective. So those would be two highlights, but again the strong growth rate we are forecasting here is supported by the existing markets.

Great. One last one here, I just want to clarify in terms of your outlook for the year and the cadence by quarter with the 67 megawatts in Q1 and I think you talked about 20% growth for the rest of year. I think we ease into that in Q2, is that right? And then there is great acceleration in Q3 and Q4 to get to the blended 15% just if you can comment and confirm that cadence that would be helpful?

Absolutely. We specifically said we will approach 20% in Q2. So, I would assume slight discount there and slightly above for the back half of the year. So you are not going to see it super-hockey stick second half, but yes, there will be a little bit of a gradual step into that. The other thing I should mention that helps us get confidence with that back half acceleration is the Comcast partnership as well, which we have spoken about, but we have really been still in testing mode to figure out what’s the right messaging, what’s right packaging before we unleash that amount will be a second half contributor, but we believe we have good visibility into those quarterly growth rates and are looking forward to delivering them.

Great. Thanks, Lynn. I will pass it on.

Thank you.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Colin Rusch from Oppenheimer. Your line is now open.

Thanks so much. Can you guys provide a little bit of guidance on the cadence of megawatts that will become unencumbered by the tax equity investors throughout the course of this year?

Colin, I am trying to think – we haven’t – it looks reasonably close to just what our deployments look like 5 to 6 years ago, but what we have said is that we are expecting to do a first refinance of the post-flip assets in Q1 2019. We would expect that transaction size to be about $200 million and then to set us up to be in a position to be a recurring annualization of those sorts of assets.

Okay. I will pass you guys a little bit offline with that. And then can you talk a little bit about the pricing dynamics, obviously, this is somewhat geographic, geographically dependent, but with the lower competition here, are you guys able to take price a little bit here in some of these markets and should we think about a little bit of extra cushion in terms of the NPV that you guys are capturing along the way?

We really manage it to that NPV of around a $1. I think if we – it is our just like a typical sort of software SaaS business if you want to keep spending on acquisition channels that are justified by the long-term value you are going to get from your contracts. So I think we feel that to generate the right long-term value and right cash flow profile that sort of $1, a little above the $1 or what is the right threshold. And so the trade we would probably make more is invest more on the growth side. And as you can see we are just even given that the haircuts we took with the tax reform of about $0.10, that’s 10% of your NPV and we are able to recover that, but the majority of that is not through pricing, no, it’s through better operating, better capital strategy.

Okay thanks so much.

Thank you. And our next question comes from the line of Vishal Shah from Deutsche Bank. Your line is now open.

Hi, it’s Rachel on for Vishal. Thank you for taking our questions. So first one is on the Brightbox, so in terms of the NPV accretive, so what are the kind of drivers for NPV, have you guys kind of assumed some decline in the battery cost there or can you just give us a little bit more color on that?

Sure. The NPVs we are currently selling in the Brightbox side are strong and we are not anticipating in terms of our current financial time, we are not anticipating significant declines in the cost of storage this year, but all the things are really positive, there was a ton of innovation happening in batteries there is. We currently have partners as we have mentioned with LG and Tesla, but there is Mercedes and BMW, there is Samsung, there is UID and there is a lot of inverter manufacturers who are looking to put that storage and the inverter in the same box, which is going to drive cost out. So there is a lot of exciting innovations happening there, but right now, we are staying disciplined with our margin targets and pricing our Brightbox, it’s at a nice margin seen customary less and see learning more and that’s the strategy there.

So in terms of the Comcast partnership, do you give us a bit more specific kind of your plans for the second half of the year?

Sure. I am glad you asked that question. When things are outside of our direct control we are cautious with them as a general amount, of course, so that the partnership is very promising in terms of the signals we are getting from them, the testing we are doing, the visibility and again the pilot results make it worth our while to invest in this area. That being said, we are cautious about how much contribution we are going to count on from Comcast in the back half of the year. It’s a multi-year partnership. So, that certainly is not the biggest driver of the strong back half growth years – back half growth forecast.

Okay, great. So the last question is you guys mentioned your targets do not include any strategic initiatives, so just wondering what kind of initiatives you are maybe considering, does that include any potential M&A opportunities that you are thinking about?

That phrase would certainly catch those, but there is nothing that we are anticipating pursuing right now.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. [Operator Instructions] And our next question comes from the line of Joe Osha from JMP. Your line is open.

Hi, there.

Hello.

Hi. I wanted to drill down a little bit more in the cash flow issue you mentioned better than 15% growth off the $43 million does that include any assumed refinancing from post-flip assets? And then I have a follow up.

Hi, Joe, it’s Ed. There is not material impacts in there. There can be modest changes as we move assets into warehouse facilities and whatnot, but it is – flipping assets is not a material source of cash flow in the year.

Okay. And then I believe I heard you say that we would not see anything in terms of securitization transaction until it was the first quarter of 2019 was that €200 million you referred to, I assume we would be talking potentially about an ABS or you are just leaving your options open at this point?

Yes, sure. So the transaction I was mentioning earlier would be a refinanced transaction, very likely in the asset-backed security market of 5-year approximately season assets. It is certainly possible that during the course of this year we would engage in ABS transaction on flip assets if it were competitively priced with our other alternatives. So, we are certainly not foreclosing the possibility of an ABS transaction broadly speaking during the calendar year.

Okay, which would not reflected either in these cash generation numbers that you just talked about?

Well, our general raising of whether it back leverage or ABS on new assets does is incorporated in our full year view.

On new assets, but not on existing assets. Okay, alright. Thank you.

Thank you. And I am showing no further questions over the phone lines at this time. I would like to turn the call back over to Lynn Jurich for closing remarks.

Thanks everyone. We are excited by 2018. 2017 was the breakout year for us taking the market leadership position and turning to cash flow positive and we are really excited to exceed that next year. Appreciate all the great questions. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation in today’s conference. This concludes the program and you may now disconnect. Everyone have a great day.