ABN AMRO Bank N.V.

Welcome to ABN AMRO's Q3 2025 Analyst and Investor Call. Please note this call is being recorded, and for the duration of the call, your lines will be on listen only. Analysts will have the opportunity to ask questions after the presentation. This can be done by pressing pound key 5 on your telephone keypad. I will now hand the call over to the speakers. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and welcome to ABN AMRO's Q&A results presentation. I'm joined today by our CFO, Berlinan von Raher, and our CRO, Serena Fioravanti. After our presentation, we will hold a Q&A session to address all your questions. Let me begin with the highlights of the third quarter on slide two before moving to the announcement of our intention to acquire NIBC. The third quarter was another solid quarter for ABN AMRO. Net profit reached 617 million euros with a return on equity of 9.5%. The inclusion of HAL contributed 26 million to our results. Across all products, we managed to grow this quarter. Our mortgage portfolio increased by 2.1 billion euros and corporate loans grew by the same amount. Net new assets increased by 4.3 billion euros. Cost discipline remains a priority, with FTEs declining by 700 in Q3, and by almost 1,000 years to date, excluding HAL. Credit quality remains strong, with 49 million in net impairment releases, reflecting recoveries in improved macroeconomic variables. Our CET1 ratio stands at 14.8%, and we finalized a 250 million share buyback in September. We will review our capital position in Q4 to assess the potential for further capital returns. Now turning to our other announcement of the day. I'm very pleased to announce that we have reached an agreement to acquire NIBC. This acquisition is fully aligned with our strategy and presents a unique opportunity to reinforce our leading position in the Dutch retail market and accelerate our personal and business banking strategy. NIBC is a well-run, primarily Dutch-focused entrepreneurial bank with a strong specialization in mortgage lending and savings products. It serves around 500,000 retail clients and around 175 corporate clients with a high-quality portfolio mortgage and very low REOs. NIBC will add around 28 billion euros of mortgages, significantly increasing our scale in this market, for the cementing or leading position in the Dutch mortgage market. Around half of the mortgage portfolio will be off balance, as NIBC has an attractive originate to manage franchise with long-dated mortgages. The acquisition also brings an attractive savings platform, saving 300,000 clients across the Netherlands, Germany, and Belgium. The savings offer an interesting cross-sell opportunity with our investment platform, Bucks. Given NIBC's domestic focus and the overlap of service providers, there is substantial potential for cross-synergies with limited execution risk. This transaction is expected to deliver return on invested capital of around 18%, 1.8%, and will increase our group's financial profile. The capital impact of approximately 70 basis points is anticipated at closing. The acquisition is of course subject to regulatory approvals and is expected to be completed during the second half of 2026. We look forward to welcoming NIBC's clients and colleagues and to the opportunities the acquisition will bring to us all. Now, turning to our third quarter results, I will start with the Dutch economy. While the Dutch economy continues to perform well, supported by a strong fiscal position and low unemployment, the housing market remains robust, with prices still rising, though at a lower pace than in the first half of the year. Employment continues to rise and is at a record high. The debt-to-GDP ratio of the Netherlands remains very healthy, and that's a French person telling you that. It is significantly lower than other European countries. The Dutch elections results have been announced and coalition talks have begun. Ideally, a quick and stable formation process will allow the new government to start addressing important national issues, for example, the housing shortage or the nitrogen issue. Given this economic context, on the next slide, I will discuss our results. We, again, showed a quarter with strong mortgage production growth thanks to a robust housing market. Our mortgage portfolio grew by 2.1 billion in Q3, with our market share and new production rising to 19%. We made some important amendments to our mortgage terms. We now automatically adjust risk premium after repayment, reviewing it monthly instead of only at the end of a fixed rate period. This led our mortgage products, obtaining the top rating in the intermediary market, which accounts for nearly 75% of new volume. We observed an immediate increase in new volumes for Invis. Today, we also announced a rationalization of our mortgage brand lineup. Going forward, we will focus on our core labels, namely Aben Amro and Florius, and we will discontinue the MoneyU brand. This allows us to focus investment in our core labels in technology and innovation to further improve our services. Moving to corporate loans, further organic growth and the inclusion of HAL resulted in 2.1 billion loan growth this quarter. Loan growth was partially offset by the wind-on of asset-based finance. This quarter, we sold our UK lease portfolio. Moving to deposits, HAL added close to 11 billion euros of time deposits within wealth management We also have provided targeted offerings starting in Q2, which have resulted in net new assets of over 4 billion this quarter. Given this positive development in our lending and deposit franchise, let's now look more closely how these have supported our net interest income. Our net interest income increased to 1 billion 500 million euros. House inclusion contributed positively to NII by around 34 million. The inflow of NHG mortgages and the adjustments we made in the mortgage stamp I just mentioned before led to slightly lower margins. However, the strong growth in our mortgage book offset this. Deposit margins declined partly related to targeted offerings within wealth management at reduced margins. Treasury results increased during Q3, however, the increase was a bit lower than initially expected. Based on last quarter's forward rates, the inflection point of the replicating portfolio yield was expected at the beginning of next year. However, current interest rates have brought this timing forward to this quarter, bringing the decline in the replicating yield to a standstill. In the coming quarters, we expect the deposit margins will start to become a tailwind. Looking ahead to next quarter, and assuming a modest increase in treasury NII and stable deposit margins, we expect full year NII of at least 6.3 billion euros, including HAL. Now, turning to fees. Looking at our third quarter fee income, the fee contribution from HAL becomes evident, increasing overall fee income by around 10%. Fees, excluding HAL, continue to increase, with fee income for the third quarter reaching its highest level in the past two years. Personal and business banking fees increased mainly from higher seasonal payment transactions. Wealth management fees rose primarily thanks to higher advisory and mandated business volumes. Other income is volatile by nature and ended at 28 million for Q3. The decline was caused by a number of factors, all having a negative impact on other income this quarter. Specifically, we booked lower equity participation results, lower other income within Treasury, and a negative fair value correction of past bookings related to some mortgages. Now, moving to our operating expenses. We have further reduced expenses as we worked on right-sizing our cost base. This quarter, FDE showed a significant reduction of 700, after which related to contractors in group functions. Since the beginning of the year, the number of contractors have declined by 1,100. To a limited extent, we onboarded externals for their skills, which explained the small increase in internal FDEs over the same period. The Dutch collective labor agreement increased wages by 3.75% on the 1st of July, leading to an increase this quarter in seasonal expenses. Thanks to our ongoing cost discipline, our underlying cost base declined this quarter. At the beginning of the year, we projected our underlying cost, excluding half, to be between 5.3 and 5.4 billion, and we are confident now of ending at the lower end of this guidance. Including how this now translates to a full year cost guidance between 5.4 to 5.5 billion. Now turning to our credit quality, which again remains very solid. Prudent risk management, support of strong financial results. Recorded impairment releases of 49 million this quarter, mainly related to recoveries in corporate loans and improved macroeconomic variables. We saw some inflow into Stage 3 for specific individual files, although this was lower compared to the last few quarters and fully offset by releases. The total Stage 3 ratio decreased slightly to 2% and our coverage ratio was broadly stable for each of our lending projects. Given the impairments year to date, the cost of RIF for 2025 will likely end around zero for the full year. Now, moving on to our capital position on the next slide. Our CET1 ratio remains stable at 14.8%, well above the regulatory requirements of 11.2%. The impact of the consolidation of HAL was offset by the quarterly contribution of our net profit. The total impact of FAO on our CET1 ratio as of Q3 is 40 basis points. Seven basis points of impact were already taken in Q2. The formal move of certain loan portfolios to the standardized approach has no impact on capital ratio. While RWA is increased by 1.6 billion, this was offset by lower capital deductions in our CET1 capital. During Q3, data quality improvements were realized around 1 billion of RWA reductions, mainly from data improvements on real estate collateral. Further progress on data remediation is anticipated, for example, related to the SME support factor, which may result in further reductions in Q4. Looking ahead, as I mentioned, NIBC will impact on capital ratio by around 70 basis points at closing. expected in the course of next year. Our capital position remains robust and our capital generation is strong. In Q4, we will review our capital outlook and incorporate all the relevant capital and RWA developments. Now, to summarise our third quarter results. For 2025, we expect net interest income of at least 6.3 billion and costs between 5.4 and 5.5 billion, both including HAL. We are delivering on our cost discipline, improving our data quality and sourcing, and are delivering profitable growth in mortgages and deposits. The seamless integration of HAL and closing the acquisition of NIBC are important strategic milestones as we build scale in our core markets. Looking ahead, we are excited to invite you to our Capital Markets Day in just two weeks' time, There we will present our updated strategy and financial targets with a sharp focus on right-sizing our call space, optimizing our capital allocation, and unlocking profitable growth opportunities. We look forward to sharing our vision for the future and the next chapter in our journey with you. With that, I would like to ask the operator to open the call for Q&A. Thank you.

Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press pound key five on your telephone keypad. If you wish to withdraw your question, please press pound key six on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Julia Miato from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.

Yes, hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I'll start with a question on NIBC. Why do you think that the execution risk here is low? Like can you give us any, I don't know, qualitative comments on, for example, do you have the same systems or, you know, anything that can give us confidence on essentially achieving this quite significant synergy? That would be my first comment. And then secondly, I wanted to ask on the costs. The quarter was very good, was a bit versus consensus expectations, excluding the one-off, the 55 million. However, the exit rate is actually quite high. If I take the mid-range, if I take basically 5450, and then I remove the 3.9 that you've done so far, underlying would be 1.55 billion for Q4, which is than what I would expect, and then it's quite a high run rate for 26. So how should we think about the exit rate and, yeah, on the cost side? Thank you.

Thank you very much for your questions. I will start with your first question on NIDC, and Ferdie will take your question on cost. On NIBC, bear in mind that this is an asset we know very well. We operate, you know, in the same market, in the same businesses, mortgages, savings. So this is an asset we know very well indeed. And you're right, we have, you know, evident synergies. I'm going to give you just one. We use, for instance, for mortgages, the same service provider, Starter. So this is an evident synergy, just to, you know, flag this one. It is, you know, too early to share all the details, of course, of the target operating model, bear in mind that the, you know, the transaction will be only closed in the second half of 2026, but we are indeed confident that this is a low execution risk transaction for us. Now, fairly to the coast this quarter and looking forward

Yes, Julia, I think the most important message on cost is that underlying our costs are going down, evidenced by the FTE reductions year to date. And this offsets the more than offsets the CLA increase. As Margriet said already earlier, we will end at the low end of the guidance range, excluding , but if you add the cost of , we will add in a range of 5.3, 5.4. If you look at the exit rate in Q4, we always have some prudency in our guidance specifically for Q4, because as usual, you can always expect some seasonal cost increases. Last year, that was around 4%, so that's what you need to take into account if you look at the exit rate in the guidance.

Okay, thank you. But so just to clarify, the Q4 costs would probably be higher than an exit rate for 26. It sounds like. Because there is some Q4.

No, I mean... There can always be, Julia, that is the question underlying. We expect the cost trend to continue, as we've seen in the previous orders, but normally there's some prudency of the seasonal cost increase you can see.

Understood.

And the guidance is fairly clear. Between the 5.4 and 5.5 billion, including the cost of .

Okay, thanks.

The next question comes from Namita Semtani from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. The first one on the NIBC deal, thanks for the 100 million of posts run rate cost synergies in 2029. But when you speak about further upside from revenue synergies, what are you referring to? Are these funding synergies? And do you have a sense of quantum? And also the legal merger of ABM, AMRO, ISO, SICN groups into ABM, AMRO, is that included in the deal maths that you've given today? And my second question, on the replicating euros in size and how should we think about the long end part of the replicating portfolio is it more mechanical for example just a very simple five year swap rolling mathematically or in 30 even tranches it's just that the replicating portfolio slide on page 16 it confuses me a bit and I can't understand when year on year I'm going to see a benefit from the hedge is it in 2027 so any comment there helpful thank you

Thank you very much. I will take your question on NIBC and Ferdie will take your question on the replicating portfolio. So, yes, we see this transaction on NIBC as, you know, very accurate indeed because there are synergies in cost as well as in revenues. Just to give you a few highlights, we are adding 500,000 new retail clients to the Abenambo group. These are clients that are mass affluent clients, so they fit very well our group. We think that we can bring more products and services to these clients. We also see as I briefly mentioned, an opportunity in using Bucks to sell these clients. Bear in mind that NIBC has clients, of course, primarily in the Netherlands, but also in Belgium and Germany. So Bucks can really help with that. And yes, in terms of synergies, there are also funding synergies. both on the revenue side as well, I would say, on the cost side, just, you know, just to hint at a few of the policies we see in digital actions.

Yeah, maybe to come back and to add to that, Marguerite, indeed, we're prudent in our assessment. The 100 million is the post-tax cost synergies. Of course, there can be some funding synergies. For example, we can, over time, refinance the debt securities at the lower rates and also potentially reduce LCR targets. But over on the other hand, you might also see some dis-synergies from deposit churn. So overall, if you look at the synergies, It's negligible in our assumption on the revenue and the funding synergy side. If your question on the replicating portfolio, yes, I can confirm the size is still around to 165 billion. As you have seen some terming in, that means that it has increased somewhat over the past two quarters, and it's also still there. around 40 to 45% of the replicating portfolio reprices within one year, and the overall duration is around three years. If you look at the sensitivity slide in the presentation, it's now an update on a quarterly basis, so the starting point is slightly different from the previous quarters. And there you can see that we have seen the inflection point already on the income side. But if you purely look at the sensitivity, it does not take into account any changes in volume, and it does not take into account any cost changes, i.e., changes in deposit pricing. So, you should just look at it as a sensitivity on the replicating income as an assay situation.

And forgive me, because I realize I forgot to answer your question on the legal measure. And of course, yes, a transaction with NIBC is subject to all regulatory approvals. And that, of course, includes, you know, the legal measure. Let's say we do not anticipate difficulties on that front.

Well, thank you very much.

The next question comes from Tariq El-Majad from BOFA. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning, and thanks for taking my questions. Just another question on NIPC and one on cost piece. I mean, I guess you would share with us more detailed maps on the deal with the same expected with some timeframe because, I mean, clearly, usually, at least on my M&A model, I mean, revenue synergies is not something I would push too much. And I know the cost sounds quite punchy here, but, I mean, Margaret, you gave some indications of what kind of synergies. But, yeah, if you can share more with us, it would be very helpful. I mean, this is very important for your capital allocation, I guess. And my question is, what's next? I was more expecting a deal on the wealth management, to be honest. And in Bloomberg, you mentioned that this is it in terms of this to be announced. So is this now back to focus on restructuring the bank and costs, or should we expect more potentially destructive deals to come? So that's number one. Number two, and just maybe a question for Ferdinand, on the cost guidance, 5.4, 5.5, Is that excluding incidentals or is all in reporting? Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your questions. A couple of things. Yes, this deal is highly aggressive. You know, the 18% return on invested capital, we are very confident it is achievable, and indeed what we, What we factored in this model was primarily cost synergies. So if there are revenue synergies on top of it, it is an upside, but I agree with you, this is not a primary thing that we looked at in this deal. And looking forward, we will be sharing, yes, more details on the target operating model, but that will come into course. Just to clarify the answer I gave to, you know, Bloomberg, it was more, you know, an answer on saying, well, you know, we're not going to call every morning to announce a new M&A deal. So, it's just that, you know, I think the question I got from Sarah up there was like, oh, you know, is there something else coming up, you know, at the CMD? So, no, you know, in the next two weeks, don't expect any other announcement from us. And as far as our strategy is concerned, organic and inorganic, we will share everything in two weeks when you come to a capital market day.

Yeah, and Tariq, to come back to your question on the guidance, initially the guidance was equal to last year. We expect to end up at the lower end of that range. Alpha Zalampa adds between the 130 and 140 million, so this translates in the updated guidance, and clearly the updated guidance is excluding the incidentals as announced today.

Thank you very much.

The next question comes from Benoit Petrarch from Kepler Shoebrew. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning. So just to come back on NIBC, sorry for that. Now, just again, the strategic rational, because it sounds like a very financially attractive deal, and it seems that, yeah, from a strategic point of view, that was the main reason behind this deal. I was also a bit expecting a bit more other type of deals, let's say. And maybe I miss it, but do you see kind of any franchise value in NIBC or you see just purely 100% as a financial attractive deal with, you know, 10% accretion by 2019? Just wanted to clarify that, because I also see a very low fee base at NIBC, and I was also expecting a bit more fee business as target. And I was also wondering if you could provide some timing on the 140 million pre-tax synergies, whether we'll start to see some positive effect from that in 27, or that will be more back-end loaded. And just a second question on NI, so your guidance of more than 6.3 billion implies roughly 50 million quarter on quarter on NI in Q4. And I was just wondering if you could provide the moving parts, you know, deposit margin, lending margin, treasury income, what will drive this improvement in the fourth quarter? Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for your questions. So on NIBC, it is indeed both a financially sound deal, an accredited deal, and also a strategic deal. I think it's a good way of proving how we look at M&A. M&A strategy will always be disciplined, and we will only pursue it if we find it shareholder-accredited. This will be This is one of our criterion. You see it with this deal and the 18% of return on invested capital that it brings to the bank. This being said, we see a natural strategic fit with NIBC. It brings us scale in our domestic markets, in mortgages and in savings. The NIBC brand is a very good brand in the Netherlands. This is a brand that has been existing for, you know, 80 years. It has an entrepreneurial flavor. It appeals to a client base that's also slightly different from the clients we already have at ABN AMRO. So it is a great way for us to keep growing and strengthen our positions in our domestic market. To your question of, yes, the full... we see the full benefit of the synergies we mentioned. We express it as 2029, just because, as I said, we do expect the closing of the transaction to only happen in the second half of 2026. So we do expect the full benefits of the synergies to be there in 2029, but it does not all happen in, in the last year of course

Yeah, and Benoit, maybe on your NII, arguably you could say NII for this quarter is slightly lower, but I want to reiterate here that is mainly by our own decision. So it was a targeted wealth management campaign, and there you see a very good NNA growth of almost 4.3 billion. So now it's key that we start transferring that infallible assets. Number two is an acceleration in the ABF wind down, specifically portfolio sale in the UK, which is ahead of plan. And what Margrethe already said, that is the implementation of what we call here ARNA, and it has clearly a positive impact on our position with the intermediaries. Also, if you look at our market share, now up to 19%. So, for Q4, we expect a modest improvement in the treasury results, as well as stable deposit margins. And if you look at the update on the sensitivity slide, what we discussed earlier, the inflection point of the replicating portfolio is already reached this quarter, or I should say, a start of Q4. So, that brings the decline in the replicating yields to a standstill. But if you look at the sensitivity, the tailwind will be very limited initially and will be more pronounced in the second half of next year.

Great. Thank you very much for that.

The next question comes from Benjamin Goy from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.

Yes. Hi. Good morning. Two questions, please. So first on... And we see again, which over the last six, seven years has built up a significant off-balance sheet mortgage book. Just wondering your thoughts on that part of the business because you very much rely on balance sheet growth. And then secondly, you also call it a low execution risk. I'm just wondering, when you look at capital return going forward, do you basically take your current capital ratio minus 70% or would you include a buffer given the uncertainties and execution risk? Thank you.

Thank you very much. So on your question of the originate to manage portfolio that NIBC has and that represents roughly half its portfolio, we see it as actually an interesting and value-added portfolio. because it's not something we're doing already and we see opportunities with that. So we welcome that addition in our business model. And I confirm that we've been thoroughly assessing the CET1 impact of this transaction that amounts to 70 basis points, and this takes into account, you know, a very prudent approach to the transaction, including, you know, all forms of day one provisioning and so on that may be needed. So, I would say it's a fully loaded 70 basis points.

Thank you.

The next question comes from Chris Hallam from Goldman Sachs International. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everybody. Just a couple of follow-ups. Sorry about this. So first, just on funding synergies, Ferdy, I think you said those would be negligible, i.e. not particularly incremental to the 18%, but I'm just wondering how that works given their funding mix, which is much less skewed to deposit funding than your own. and their own deposit funding cost, which is higher than yours. So is there a reason why either you wouldn't fully change the funding mix or why you would expect to see a very high level of deposit attrition? And then second, you know, acknowledge we've got the CMD coming up very soon, but just looking specifically into 2026 as you're going through the year-end budgeting process, what are the key items you're focused on? for the cost side of the business. Are there any specific items or challenges for ABN AMRO that we should consider for 2026 in particular, both for ABN, I guess, on the one side, but also for the industry more broadly? Thank you.

Yeah, Chris, I'll start with the first one. So, absolutely, there is a potential, but again, the argument here that we try to be prudent and specifically look at cost synergies. Of course, there can be some revenue synergies, but also the funding synergies here. It's too early to start communicating on the potential here, and some of the funding synergies arguably will be further out also beyond the indicated 2029. But for sure, this provides potential on top of the indicated cost synergies.

And on your question, well, 26 happens to be the first year of Automatic Trends, so I promise we will share everything on 26 as well as for the following years at OCMD in two weeks. This being said, I believe in discipline and I believe in, you know, saying what we do and doing what we say. We've been very clear from the beginning that right-sizing our cost base, steering on capital, and pursuing profitable growth are all three leitmotifs, and so 2026 will look like that.

Perfect. Thank you both. Cheers.

The next question comes from Farquhar Murray from Autonomous. Please go ahead.

Just two questions, if I may. Firstly, more broadly on M&A, you now have kind of two integrations with HAL and NIBC. Do you think there's sufficient management room kind of bandwidth for another deal in the near term? And then maybe coming back a little bit to Thale, actually, as an integration, given it's come on board post-closing. I just wondered if you could give us an update on how that business is performing as compared to the original expectations of acquisition. In particular, I'm thinking about the cost synergy target, 60 million there. Thanks.

Thank you very much. So I'll take your first question on bandwidth, and I will let Freddie comment on that. on the HAL integration. I think that was your second question. So do we have the bandwidth? Yes, we do. We are moving at pace. We have, you know, a very strong management team. I'm very happy with our executive board. And basically, you know, Joy, who is in charge of, you know, wealth, is very much involved in the integration of HAL and making it a success. We have, you know, colleagues that have been very much involved in due diligence regarding NIBC and who will be, you know, in due time fully ready also to be there for the integration. So we're very confident that we have all it takes to make these integrations a success. With M&A, you know, you don't necessarily plan in advance. but we will know how to be opportunistic it needs to be. As I said, always with discipline and only if it's shareholder-accretive.

Yeah, maybe just on , as indicated earlier, cost synergies year 360 million. Also, if we look at the first quarter after consolidation, We're confident we're going to reach that, so no unexpected surprises in here. We've also said that we need around one-off cost of around 90 million, one-third integration cost and two-thirds restructuring cost. We booked so far this year around 8 million in integration cost. The integration is fully on track. So the legal merger between Holla Gay and ABN AMRO is to be completed by the end of 2026, and that will really simplify the further integration. So the bottom line is here, all four results, what we see now is in line with expectations, and we're very confident we're going to reach the 60 million run rate synergies in year three, which is 2028.

The next question comes from Delphine Lee from J.P. Morgan. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. My first question is just going back to NIDC and just, you know, your thoughts about M&A in general.

I mean, just wanted to understand kind of what, you know, what areas of priorities you would have.

Would it – I mean, is it – because –

is the intention in the long run to continue to strengthen the position in the Netherlands, or would it mean more to kind of diversify a little bit away from your mortgage book through private banking or corporate banking? Just trying to understand a little bit kind of, you know, where your focus is, M&M wise. And my second question is just, you know, in terms of excess capital and the usage, and how you allocate capital, more generally speaking, is the intention over the long run to sort of manage it to kind of increase the payout? Do you still think there is room with the transactions further down the line?

Just trying to think about, you know, how you manage your capital with buybacks and what we should expect.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much. You are anticipating on what we are going to share in two weeks. You know, I will only reiterate that we only consider M&A when it is disciplined, when it is shareholder-accretive. We think that, you know, adding scale in our whole market is a smart, tragic move. Back to how acquisitions that the bank recently completed and Ferdy was commenting on, this is also a strong strategic fit for us as we grow in wealth in Northwestern Europe, which is part of our strategy. But we will describe all of this at our CMV. In terms of capital acquisition, Again, this will be the topic of OCMD in two weeks. But basically, you know, in a nutshell, we will continue to optimize our RWA, you know, both in data and from steering, more to come on that. The outcome of our capital assessment will be communicated with our Q4 results, including potential capital distributions, but we have a strong balance sheet and a strong capital position. And I think, yeah, the rest will come. Bear with us for two more weeks.

Great. Thank you very much.

The next question comes from Juan Pablo Lopez Cobo from Santander. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. First one is regarding NIBC. I missed some of the KPIs, but you mentioned that the bill is highly accretive. Regarding EPS accretion, if we assume, let's say, 100 million euros net income coming from NIBC and the 100 million euros synergies lower post-tax, is it fair to assume an EPS accretion of around 7% to 8%? Does it sound reasonable for you? That's my first question. My second question is regarding the deposits campaign. If you could share some color on this deposit campaign, volume, can we assume around 3 billion euros, cost probably around 2%, slightly above 2%, and maybe duration. If I got it right, I don't know if we can assume the impact in this coming from the deposit campaign could be something around 15, 20 million euros. So it will be interesting to know, to listen to the duration and what percentage of these deposits you think will stay in the bank. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I will let Fede answer both your questions. Maybe just a clarification because I'm not sure that the We fully agreed on the figure, but when we mentioned cost energy, it's 100 million post-tax. So basically, you know, pre-tax, it's higher, just to clarify that point. Ferdy, I'll let you go into the EPS equation.

No, I think if you look at the underlying, how you come to your calculation, fully synergized, a profit of around 200 million. Indeed, you would come in 2029 to around 7% EPS accretion. And then again, if you look at the overall deposits, yes, we assume some outflow, but we expect it to be limited from the overall deposit campaign. The most important part of the targeted deposit campaign is increase our net new assets. It had an impact on overall margins, but now it should really translate into valuable assets. So that is a transfer into either discretionary portfolio management, either in advisory or private markets.

But usually what we observe is that it takes usually, you know, six months for bankers to actually, you know, transform into more valuable assets.

Thank you.

As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Anca Riengen from RBC. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much for taking my questions. It's just two number questions, please. Firstly, on the other income that was quite weak this quarter, and I just wonder if it's sort of like a run rate. I mean, a number of banks talked about NII and other income of your value result like mixed effect. Should we see that, yeah, the Q3 other income could be a run rate going forward? And then on the deposit costs, Is there sort of like a change in trend? While in the past we were talking about cuts in savings rates, we are now talking about some selective campaigns on how higher deposits would benefit to volume. Would you say the trend has changed here? Thank you.

Thanks, Teddy, on these two questions.

No, let me start on other income. It was low this quarter at 28 million, so also quarter-in-quarter significantly down. We explained that the main impact here is, number one, equity participation. You're always dependent when the revaluation is is done, and in Q2, we had a successful exit of the portfolio. ALM results is always volatile, and in this order, it always depends on your economic hedges and hedging effectiveness. But the main drive for this order was lower fair value revaluations on the IFRS 17, and it was specifically related to one-off correction of past bookings in the mortgage book. And that impact was roughly 30 million. So, if you look for the coming years, other income is volatile by nature. It also includes XVAs, ALM results, and private equity revaluations. But overall, excluding incidentals in the past years, it was around 450 million. And if you would also exclude volatile items, around the 400 million. Then if you look at changes on pricing, no, the deposit campaign was very targeted at wealth management. So we really target the specific client group. And as I said earlier already, we are willing to do that at very low margins because there we see the opportunity to transfer that in . So it's absolutely not a change broader how you should look at our prices.

Okay, thank you.

The next question comes from Jason Kalambousis from Ing. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning. I'm coming back to what Tariq mentioned. While the deal is good value for money, strategically and from a higher level, it looks like it distracts to what I thought was a clear focus on wealth management. So if you have any additional thoughts, welcome there. So moving on to wealth. Could you please provide a split, year-to-date, of the inflows in custody and the rest, and is it something that we could see provided on a quarterly basis? The second thing is on haul. What are the, how does the AUM that you brought in split again into, can you speak out the custody and cash elements, if possible? And my third question is, is the reasonable assumption to, when I'm looking at your AUM, to assume that most of the custody and cash assets, so above 75%, are in the Netherlands? That would be very useful. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much. I'll take your first question, and we'll, let's hear the answers to others. In terms of strategy, We believe that it is a perfect strategic speed to actually keep growing and add scale in our home market. We have the platform for that. We already have 5 million clients in the Netherlands and IBC has roughly 500,000 new retail clients. We do believe in productivity. We do believe in scale and in using our platform both in mortgages and savings in the Netherlands. This being said, we also do believe that wealth management is an extremely good business of ABNM Hall. I mean, we have a strong number one position in the Netherlands with market shares of about 35%. We have now a strong number three position in Germany. We also are present in France and to an extra extent in Belgium. So, we will share our strategy for three businesses at OCMV, but indeed, we do like very much the wealth management business. on the two other questions.

Yeah, and number one is the split between a custody Overall, you should see that there's the difference between core net new assets and total net new assets. So overall, core net new assets, we had a very strong quarter, as discussed earlier, mainly reflecting the cash inflow from targeted offerings. And indeed, the majority of this was wealth management in the Netherlands. Total NNA plus 4.3 billion, so the custody is included in here for this order was plus 1 billion more or less. If you look at the total custody within wealth management, because that was also a question, I think that is around the 50 billion today. Then I also think, but I didn't hear you that well, the client asset inclusion of Hauk, Alfhausen, Lamper. So in total, this was around $26 billion, and the split there was around $23 billion in securities and $4 billion in cash. So the majority of that inclusion is in securities.

Thank you very much. That's very useful. Just a quick follow-up. I mean, on the NABC deal, what I'm a bit surprised is that the fee element is quite small. So you have less than 10% that's coming in fees. So that was a bit the sense of my question is that, yes, I understand the scale and also it's a good deal financially. But on the other hand, you know, I would have thought that, you know, your focus would have been towards you know, increasing the fee side within your income, whereas this, you know, goes a bit the other way. But, you know, again, if you have any comments, that would be great.

Thanks. I understand your question. As I said, you know, it adds sales, which is, I think, a very positive strategic move, and it's also financially very accretive, so we saw it as two very good reasons to pursue this acquisition.

Yeah, maybe to add there, it's also the addition of the savings account to the Bucks platform. That might provide at least investment propositions there where we are absolutely focusing on transferring NII into fees towards .

Very clear. Thank you very much.

There are no more questions at this time. I will now hand the word back to the speakers for any closing remarks.

Well, I thank you very much all for your questions this morning, and we look forward to welcoming you at the Capital Market Day on November 25th and for the time on goodbye. And thanks again. Have a great day.