Exhibit 1.01

Conflict Minerals Report of Woodward, Inc.

For the reporting period from January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024

This Conflict Minerals Report (the “Report”) of Woodward, Inc. (the “Company,” “Woodward,” “we,” “us” or “our”) has been prepared pursuant to Rule 13p-1 (“Rule 13p-1”) and Form SD (“Form SD”) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) for the reporting period January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024 (the “Reporting Period”).

Rule 13p-1, through Form SD, requires the disclosure of certain information if a company manufactures or contracts to manufacture products for which certain conflict minerals (as defined below) are necessary to the functionality or production of such products. As defined in Form SD, and as used herein, “conflict minerals” means: (i)(a) columbite-tantalite (or coltan), (b) cassiterite, (c) gold and (d) wolframite, or their derivatives, which are currently limited to tantalum, tin and tungsten; or (ii) any other mineral or its derivatives determined by the U.S. Secretary of State to be financing conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo or an “adjoining country” as defined in Form SD (collectively, the “Covered Countries”).

Woodward’s Manufactured and Contracted-to-Manufacture Products

Woodward, including our consolidated subsidiaries, manufactures and subcontracts for the manufacture of products for which conflict minerals are necessary to the functionality or production of those products. We provide energy control and optimization solutions for the aerospace and industrial market segments through the precise and efficient control of energy, including motion, fluid, combustion, and electrical energy. Please see (i) our Form SD for a detailed description of our products, including those products that we believe are likely to contain one or more conflict minerals, and (ii) Item 1 in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2024 for a more detailed description of our business, markets, services and product applications.

The Company’s Due Diligence Process

The Company’s due diligence measures have been designed to conform to the framework in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (“OECD”), “OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chain of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High Risk Areas,” Third Edition (2016), including applicable supplements thereto (the “OECD Guidelines”).

Woodward has implemented or is addressing each of the steps in the OECD 5-step due diligence framework as discussed or referenced below:

Woodward has adopted a written conflict minerals policy (the “Conflict Minerals Policy”). The Conflict Minerals Policy affirms the Company’s commitment to responsible sourcing of minerals from conflict affected and high-risk areas. The policy is publicly available and can be accessed at https://www.woodward.com/about/ethics-and-compliance. The policy is reviewed annually to determine if any revisions are appropriate.

Our Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (the “COO”) oversees our Sourcing function and is responsible for ensuring our compliance with conflict minerals due diligence requirements, including the establishment of related compliance measures. Senior Sourcing leadership oversees the day-to-day conflict minerals program activities, and they provide regular updates on the conflict minerals program to the COO. Woodward’s Director of Governance and Securities serves as an advisor on conflict minerals compliance. The Sourcing team is responsible for reaching out to the Company’s in-scope suppliers on an ongoing basis (both independently and through Assent) to collect information, including, once per year, a Conflict Minerals Reporting Template (“CMRT”), regarding the presence and sourcing of conflict minerals in the products supplied to the Company. Other functions within Woodward provide focused support as required. When appropriate, conflict minerals and our conflict minerals program are a topic of discussion and review by our Board of Directors, or an appropriate committee thereof. These actions have aligned existing strategic and organizational structures to address the due diligence and reporting requirements of Rule 13p-1.

Our enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) systems provide controls over our supply chain. The ERP systems currently provide:

We have contracted with Assent Compliance, Inc., a provider of compliance solutions, (“Assent”) to license the Assent Sustainability Manager (“ASM”), and we utilize Assent’s support services to automate supplier inquiry, data collection and data validation tasks, and automated CMRT generation. In addition, Woodward maintains full membership with the Responsible Materials Initiative (“RMI”).

Woodward is committed to conducting business in a socially responsible manner and is determined to partner with suppliers who are similarly committed. We continue to engage with our suppliers regarding conflict minerals requirements. Our standard purchase order terms and conditions and our standard long-term supplier agreement require our suppliers to support our conflict minerals reporting, and we review these provisions on a regular basis. We desire to achieve improved supply chain transparency and responsible sourcing to increase the traceability of materials from each supplier.

The following language is included in our standard purchase order terms and conditions:

“…warrants and certifies that it complies with Section 1502 of the Dodd Frank Act and the Final Rule issued by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and any subsequent rules and regulations related thereto issued by the United States Government and, where identified by Woodward, other governments and/or authorities in regions that Woodward provides its products (“Conflict Minerals Regulations”), and has implemented compliant processes to ensure its suppliers are in compliance with the Conflict Minerals Regulations.

Where Supplier does not have direct and formal reporting requirements under the Conflict Minerals Regulations, and upon request by Woodward, Supplier agrees to provide due diligence and Responsible Country of Origin Inquiry (“RCOI”) information under this Agreement to Woodward in support of Woodward’s reporting requirements (the “RCOI Requirements”).

Further, Supplier shall promptly comply with all requests by Woodward to provide documentation, and other substantiating data and assurances with respect to its compliance with Conflict Minerals Regulations and the RCOI Requirements as Woodward may deem necessary from time to time. In the event: (a) Woodward deems Supplier is not in compliance with the Conflict Minerals Regulations or the RCOI Requirements, (b) Woodward is not satisfied with the outcome of any review of Supplier documentation and/or data or otherwise, or (c) Supplier does not provide the documentation, other data and/or other further assurances to Woodward as requested by Woodward, Woodward shall have the right to terminate this Order or any portion thereof without penalty or further liability to Woodward.”

To the extent a supplier needs assistance, Woodward conducts one-on-one contact sessions with suppliers to address their inquiries and provide guidance where needed. Through our contract with Assent, our suppliers have access to an extensive suite of training videos, slide decks, how-to manuals and regulation guidance documents. Our suppliers also have access to online chat with an Assent specialist if they have difficulties or questions while preparing their responses.

Woodward has a comprehensive Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (the “Code”) and employees receive regular training on a variety of ethics and compliance topics. Woodward also has robust reporting mechanisms for employees’ ethics concerns and grievances, including concerns regarding our supply chain and ethical sourcing. All Woodward employees have the right and responsibility to promptly report concerns, including but not limited to suspected or known violations of applicable law or regulation. We have established an Ethics Help Line that employees (or third parties) can contact to report concerns, including on an anonymous basis. The reporting mechanisms are set forth in the Code which is available on our website, and the concepts are reinforced during employee trainings. Investigations of alleged violations are handled pursuant to the process established by our Business Conduct Oversight Committee, and are ultimately overseen by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.

Woodward suppliers are encouraged to contact their Woodward point of contact or the Ethics Help Line if they believe elements of Woodward direction may cause them to be noncompliant with Woodward’s stated social responsibility goals and compliance requirements. The Woodward Product Material Compliance team and other Woodward employees are available to provide guidance regarding conflict minerals issues, including compliance matters and contract flow down requirements. Further,

Woodward has adopted a Supplier Code of Conduct, which can be found at https://www.woodward.com/about/ethics-and-compliance.

Woodward is a downstream manufacturer. As such, Woodward does not control the origin, source or composition of many of the materials provided by our suppliers. Consequently, we ask our suppliers to inquire, identify, and conduct data collection and due diligence activities, which in turn are fundamental elements of our due diligence activities. Woodward analyses the data collected from our in-scope suppliers for accuracy and completeness in order to identify and assess risks in the Woodward supply chain. This analysis includes:

ASM generates for us the Woodward CMRT based on the valid supplier CMRTs we receive. We then compare the SOR list in the Woodward CMRT against the RMI SOR list and the RMI compliance and country of origin databases to ensure the accuracy of our data as of the conclusion of our conflict minerals campaign.

We use supplier CMRTs to identify the parent companies of our suppliers (if any), parent company contact data (if applicable), and whether the supplier reported conflict minerals data at the parent company level or at the affiliate level. This approach enables us to improve the targeting of future campaigns.

Data from our suppliers can be inaccurate or incomplete. For example, from time to time our suppliers report smelters in their supply chain (i) that do not match publicly available smelter data and therefore cannot be confirmed as a smelter, or (ii) for which the conflict-free sourcing status has not been validated. In such cases, ASM automatically provides a corrective action request to suppliers. Assent and Woodward jointly work with suppliers needing additional assistance to correct or eliminate these undetermined inputs as appropriate.

There is significant overlap between our RCOI efforts and our due diligence measures performed. Our RCOI process is described in our Form SD.

We continue to work closely with Assent to perform assessments of supplier-provided SOR data as described in the “Woodward Calendar Year 2024 Due Diligence Results” section of this Report. Both of our business segments conduct periodic reviews of critical supply chain matters for the segment, including conflict minerals and product materials compliance. Additionally, each year, senior Global

Sourcing leadership engages in a strategic planning review with senior management of the Company to provide strategic oversight of our supply chain strategies and performance.

Woodward has several established procedures and tools that form the foundation of the conflict minerals aspects of our risk management plan. These procedures and tools include but are not limited to our supplier approval process, purchasing procedures, purchase order and supplier agreement terms and conditions (described above), supplier registration portal, and parts transition process, as well as the evaluation of other existing and possible future software solutions. In addition, Assent and ASM enable us to perform a risk assessment of, and assign a risk rating to, each supplier CMRT we receive.

Together with many other companies, we co-sign an annual letter coordinated by Assent that is sent to every SOR that has not completed or that was not actively participating in an independent conflict-free sourcing practices audit. The purpose of the letter is to encourage participation in an independent third-party audit program and the use of conflict-free sourcing practices, and to leverage the collective influence we may have on the SORs. We also send letters directly from Woodward to our suppliers who do not adequately respond to our initial data requests.

We continue to engage in additional fact finding and risk assessments to identify risks requiring mitigation or after a change in circumstances.

Woodward is significantly downstream in the supply chain from smelters and refiners. In order to obtain SOR information, Woodward seeks information from our upstream suppliers and from third party data aggregating services. Woodward is an RMI member and leverages the RMI Responsible Minerals Assurance Process and the resulting audit data from that program.

The Form SD, this Report, and our Conflict Minerals Policy can be found at https://www.woodward.com/about/ethics-and-compliance.

Woodward Calendar Year 2024 Due Diligence Results

Woodward Conflict Minerals Data Requests and Supplier Responses (the Due Diligence in Acquiring Supplier Data)

We initiated our 2024 campaign for in-scope Woodward suppliers in November 2024 by sending CMRT requests. All CMRT requests were sent at the part level. If suppliers were unable to provide part-level CMRTs, then we accepted company-level CMRTs. To eliminate ambiguity in our requests to suppliers, we provide each in-scope supplier a complete list of the specific parts that Woodward purchased from them that were incorporated into our calendar year shipments.

As part of the 2024 campaign, two follow-up inquiries were sent to non-respondents and, where suppliers had still not responded, we followed up with three further “escalation” inquiries. As part of the escalation, Assent separated those suppliers who reported a “no 3TG” status last year into a separate simplified campaign, asking them if they could confirm their “no 3TG” status for this year. Additionally,

Woodward twice followed up with suppliers that returned incomplete or invalid CMRTs with corrective action requests.

Summary results for our 2024 campaign, as of April 18, 2025 are as follows:

We continue to make improvements in identifying suppliers who do not supply parts to us that contain 3TG, which has enabled us to engage in more direct campaigns with targeted suppliers. We experienced an increase in our supplier response rate this year. We believe this increase was primarily driven by our improved identification of in-scope suppliers, which enabled us to perform a more targeted campaign.

Supplier Response Assessment (Smelter Determination Due Diligence)

ASM generated an integrated roll-up CMRT from all valid supplier CMRTs received as of April 18, 2025. This resulted in 372 SORs with RMI identification numbers who provide, through our supply chain, conflict minerals used in Woodward’s products. See Exhibit A to this Report for a list of these SORs. Woodward conducts no direct transactions and has no contractual relationship with these SORs or their sources of ore.

We used RMI’s SOR compliance status data and the results of our 2024 campaign, in each case as of April 18, 2025, to evaluate the 372 SORs with respect to RMI compliance. The summarized results are as follows:

Certain suppliers reported potential sourcing from a gold smelter in the Uganda that has not been assessed by RMI (CID003185 – African Gold Refinery)(“AGR”). On March 17, 2022, the U.S. Department of the Treasury added African Gold Refinery in Uganda to the OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) List. Because of the over-reporting nature of the industry CMRT information collection process, and the nature of the supply chains and goods, we are unable to confirm if minerals from AGR are in our products. Woodward is in contact with suppliers who reported potential sourcing from AGR and will continue to engage with those suppliers to improve due diligence efforts and transparency.

We have identified 40 SORs in our supply chain that are categorized as “high risk” based on the sourcing practices and relationships of the applicable SOR, including AGR. Woodward conducts outreach via Assent multiple times each year to all in-scope suppliers who utilize one or more high risk SORS and to encourage these suppliers to (i) request the supplier perform additional smelter validation and due

diligence work, (ii) request that the applicable SORs participate in a responsible mineral sourcing validation program, and/or (iii) find alternative sourcing relationships with conformant SORs. Additionally, Woodward requests these suppliers to conduct additional due diligence to confirm the chain of custody of parts supplied to Woodward.

Smelter or Refiner Mine Country of Origin Results

Mine country of origin data was available for all 233 of the conformant SORs. Of these 233 SORs, the mine country of origin data for 59 were provided on an aggregate basis to RMI by the LBMA. See Exhibit B to this Report for our country of origin findings as of April 18, 2025.

Concluding Statement

We continue to refine our supplier conflict minerals risk analysis, relevant supplier identification, SOR identification, and mine country of origin through improvements in our due diligence activity, our use of the ASM and other Assent services, and our association memberships. However, because (i) Woodward has not yet achieved a 100% supplier response rate; (ii) a significant majority of our supplier responses are still at a company level and not yet focused on Woodward specific parts; and (iii) complete SOR conflict status and mine country of origin data is not yet available from centralized sources specializing in the collection and assessment of such data, Woodward does not have sufficiently complete or discriminating data at this time to confirm the conflict-free or may-not-be-conflict-free status of any of its product families or individual products. We have also found that many supplier respondents have supply chains using SORs that were not conformant to a responsible mineral sourcing validation program, and we will continue to actively address this issue to mitigate such usage through targeted supplier outreach enabled by our use of ASM and other Assent services. Woodward is continuing our efforts and progress on the improvement actions described above.

Exhibit A: Smelter and Refiner List

Exhibit B: Mine Country of Origin Data

Potential Countries of Origin for Conflict Minerals associated with the SORs listed in Exhibit A