In contrast to Heineken’s dramatic reaction to the crisis, with plans to cut nearly 10% of its workforce, ABI demonstrates a model of steady efficiency. ABI management often says ‘efficiency is in our DNA’, and the evidence would support that claim. Its operating expenses as a percentage of sales are consistently 10-15 percentage points lower than Heineken and Carlsberg, and as a result there is no major cost savings plan required to combat the pressures of the crisis. ABI is already both efficient and agile. ABI is also helped by its relatively low exposure to the challenged W. Europe region (c. 9% of sales) and high exposure to the more dynamic US market (c. 30% of sales) compared to peers. Regarding the outlook for W. Europe, Carlsberg cautioned that the on-trade would probably not re-open fully until June, and Heineken expects 10-15% of on-trade establishments across W. Europe will close permanently, with a recovery to 2019 levels not anticipated until 2023. Less exposure to W. Europe is helpful over the medium-term. ABI has capitalised on the growth opportunities of low & no alcohol and seltzers faster than its peers. Low & no is only 6% of beer volumes at Heineken while it is already approaching 10% at ABI. Heineken is only just entering seltzers now, whereas ABI has been involved in the category for over a year. ABI reports FY results on 25th February; consensus expectations are summarised in our full report. Compared to recent FY results from peers, ABI is expected to have performed better than Heineken but worse than Carlsberg. Carlsberg was helped by its uniquely high exposure to China and Russia, where growth is rebounding (in the latter case off of a low level). We expect a more upbeat outlook from ABI than either of its peers delivered. For investors looking for a cyclical recovery play, ABI would seem to fit the bill nicely.