Jyske Bank A/S Ord

Hi, everyone. Thank you for joining us on Jyske Bank's conference call for the financial results for the second quarter of 2025. This is Simon Haubart from Investor Relations speaking. With me, I have Jyske Bank CEO Lars Merck and CFO Bjorn Nielsen. Lars and Bjorn will walk you through our prepared remarks. Afterwards, we'll open up for questions. I'll now hand over to Lars.

Thank you, Simon. And welcome to all of you on this call. Much appreciated that you're taking the time to dial in. We've had another solid quarter of 2025, building upon the positive momentum from recent borders and growing earnings per share compared to the year before, despite the significantly lower short-term interest rates. On the back of the positive development in the first half of the year, we are now targeting the upper end of our outlook for 2025. We continue to improve customer satisfaction in all areas. In Q2, upright banking customer satisfaction was the highest in Denmark for the 10th consecutive year. Additionally, the satisfaction of corporate and business clients with 20 plus employees is also the highest. And personal customer satisfaction is showing a very strong momentum already reaching our 2028 target level with the top three position. The latter is a major progress compared to where we were a couple of years ago. The improved customer satisfaction has underpinned mortgage financing for personal clients, which reached the highest growth rates in several years as we continue to gain market share. Additionally, assets under management have been resilient, reaching a new all-time high amid turbulent markets supported by healthy net inflows. Meanwhile, our credit quality remains solid, We booked reversals in Q2, while slightly increasing our post-model adjustments and reducing our state-free exposures. Lastly, our capital position improved further in the quarter following a very strong capital build, leaving significant excess capital versus our capital targets. With that, let me hand over to you, Beaver, for a walkthrough of our financial results.

Thank you, Lars. And I would like just to start off with a little kind of a busy slide, but nevertheless, an overall solid footprint in Q2 with good momentum in the group. Looking at the ratios, return on tenable equity 11.5 and 11.3 for the first half. Cost income slightly above 50.51 here in Q2, but 49 for the first half. And looking at cost of risk, we saw reversals in the second quarter of two basis points. Earnings per share, steady going at 20 kroner in the quarter. And the CT1 ratio stood at 16.3% here in Q2, up from 15.7 in Q1, underpinned by a lower risk. looking at the left hand side at the bottom you can see that the earnings per share 20 kroner returning q2 is very much similar to what we've seen in the last five quarters so six consecutive quarters with a steady earnings per share return looking at the pnl at a glance the nii was as expected due to lower policy rates we still see a solid fee income in the second quarter. Financial markets were positive due to spread tightening. And looking at core expenses, they were on track, exclusive of one-offs, due to the location shift here in Copenhagen. And finally, small reversals on impairments, underpinning solid quality in the credit book. And finally, net profit up 2% in the quarter to 1.3 billion. At the right-hand side, you can see that volumes, as Lars said, AUM up in the second quarter after the turbulence and volatility we saw back in March in Q1. Mortgage, the mortgage book is up, driven by both personal and corporate customers by 1% in the quarter, whereas bank lending is more steady going. Then moving on to the outlook, we have updated outlook for 25, given the performance we saw here in the first two quarters. And now we expect net profit to reach the upper or very upper end of 3.8 to 4.6 billion. And of course, that also applies to the earnings per share expectations, which now is in the upper end of the 60 to 73 kroner interval. Handing over to Lars and a few remarks on customer satisfaction. Yes.

When we look at the corporate clients and business clients in Jyske Bank, we've seen quite a development during the last couple of years. We came from a fairly solid number three in the Danish market during the integration process when we integrated Hans Bank into our operation. we saw a decline in customer satisfaction, which you normally do during those kinds of processes due to the time consuming nature. Now time is back to fully concentrate on the daily run of the mill. And on top of that, a big number of different initiatives have strengthened the development so that we are now in a much stronger position than we were prior to the integration of Hans Banken. For companies with 20 employees or more, we are now according to VoxMedia number one in Denmark. Moving to the personal customer satisfaction, more or less the same picture. Our starting point was a little bit weaker back in 2023. And we saw the same impact during the years that followed. And again here, time has freed up to the run of the mill. And on top of that, a number of targeted initiatives, bootcamps, and a reorganization means that we are now back, and we are actually back in a stronger position than we would have anticipated already now. Moving to private banking, we've been, in terms of customer satisfaction, ranked number one for 10 consecutive years. For now, we have the largest gap that we have ever had to number two in the market. Obviously, this is important when it comes to retaining clients, but it's also important in terms of building momentum with the clients that we have. And turning to the momentum, we can see that the development in asset under management, as Bjo alluded to, has been strong for quite a long time. We've seen that investments results are generally positive after a little bit more turbulent first half of the year. We've seen strong inflow during also the second quarter here, predominantly from private banking customers and from personal banking customers, a little bit more mixed on the institutional clients, but generally speaking, a strong inflow here again. lending to personal clients mortgage lending we have had 17 consecutive quarters with no growth and now we've had five quarters with growth and as you've seen as you can see here on the right hand side momentum momentum has been building during the last couple of quarters we connect this to a large extent to the higher customer satisfaction

Yes, and then looking at the deposit margin, you can see a slide here which demonstrates that we saw this uplift in the three months cargo rate from 22 until end 23, and then the reversal from a peak around 400 basis points down to now close to 200. And in the meantime, of course, as you look, you can see the light green showing the implied deposit margin. We have done our utmost, of course, to take advantage of the situation in the market. We have lifted the margin in the period until end 23, and then afterwards, we have tried to mitigate the negative implications from lower policy rates on our margin. And just to demonstrate, we took off the interest rates on transaction account for private individuals back in April. So now it's a 0% account. Savings account for private individuals were reduced to both a quarter for amounts below half a million and half a percentage for amounts above half a million. On the corporate businesses, we also reduced margins or interest rates on deposits, transaction accounts to zero in April. So we have done, and on top of that, we have reduced the preferential rates. So we have done a lot of things in order to mitigate the implications from lower policy rates. And that, of course, brings us into a position where the ability to withstand further cuts will gradually become more limited as especially savings rates are close to zero, as you understand from my words here. Turning then to the competitive landscape, we have shown this before, and I will not spend much time on it, but just rephrase what we have said before, that after the agreement now of 15% tariff, for European exports to the US. We still expect, after this investigation done by the Danish National Bank, back some months ago, that the short-term effect would be fully manageable, and the longer-term effects will be small, very small, since trade patterns gradually will shift, and so they will have very limited impact on Danish economy, and therefore also on our customer base. Then turning to the credit quality, it's the same message that we have told you several quarters now, we have a solid credit book. We have seen small reverses in Q2, where impaired customers have migrated to slightly better grades. And that has been the main trigger for the reversal here in Q2. and secondly looking at post model adjustments they are steady from q1 to q2 but up shy of 100 million since the end of last year and if i look at the right also as you can see on the graph they're very low here in the first half one basis points so as we see it now there are no lifts over from former non-performing loans in the book And finally, if I look at the stage three exposures, those which are mostly impaired in our book, they are now down to 1% of total exposures from 1.2 a year ago and 1.1 a quarter ago. So all in all, a very solid performance so far and also a solid outlook for the rest of the year. Turning to capital. The EBA stress test during the summer demonstrated our solid capital position. But on top of that, we have relatively high risk weights in our books. And looking at the Q2 numbers, they also underpin the same conclusion with a level of 16.3% CET1 ratio up from 15.7 in Q1. And also, as you can see on the graph, slightly lower risk in the second quarter of this year. And after the implementation of CRR3 by 1st of January this year, and given the current risk weights, we see no further significant impact from upcoming regulations. going forward. So, we expect the target for the CG1 level to be at the lower end of 15 to 17. And that's the reason why we, as we speak, pursue buybacks. We have a 240 billion program up and running. We have bought back, as we speak, one billion of those. And on top of this, we will add another approximately 30% in dividend.

Yes, over to you, Simon.

Thank you, Lars. Thank you, Bjur. We'll now open up for questions. If you would like to ask a question, please raise your hand or unmute your device. First question in line comes from the line of Mathias Nielsen from Nordea. Please go ahead.

thank you very much i hope you can hear me now so i have three questions one on guides one on capital and one on lending growth but if you take them one by one i think it's going to be easier for you so the first one on guidance like looking at the guidance and comparing that to where consents were ahead of the q2 numbers it actually seems like you you you imply that concerns should come down for the second half of 25 is that also how you see it and related to this we also hear a couple of peers being slightly more bearish about the qq development on ni for q3 compared to what we saw in q2 is that also how how we should think about it for you or how should we think about that for you we're looking at the the updated outlook for 25 i think we stand on as we said strong bread quality decent feature development mitigated

lower policy rates and positive financial markets, as I mentioned. So those elements are all in good shape, and we have demonstrated that in Q1 and Q2. Moving into Q3 and Q4, as you said, yes, it's clear that there is more pressure now on NII than if we go back a few quarters, since we have lowered the internal rates, the deposit margins, et cetera. the deposit rates to a degree where we have used a lot of the tools that we have at hand. And so, if you look at transaction accounts now at zero, and savings accounts up to a half a percentage point, of course, there is limited room to mitigate further movements on the policy rates if that were to happen in the second half of this year. And of course, you still have geopolitical uncertainty And we still need to be confirmed in a strong activity. Also in the second half of this year, we have seen a very decent development, both on the investment side, but also on mortgages in Q1 and Q2. But of course, we need to see that also be replicated in the third and fourth quarter.

Okay. And if I could just add, Mathias, I think our guidance is now higher than it was yesterday. And we are confident with the new guidance, which is in the very upper end of the interval that we had yesterday. So I see no reason for you to look that differently at this. And then secondly, I think that the things that we know now and the things that we can control ourselves when it comes to as a quality and initiatives, we are also confident on having those in place.

Great, thanks for that. On the capital side then, like you say that the target is still the low end of the 15 to 17. And that eventually means that you need to pay out quite a lot over the coming period. So how should we think about that? Is it possible to go above 100% payout ratio? Or would you rather do it gradually where you reduce the capital over a number of years? How should we think about that? But what is your preferences from a strategic point of view?

What we've communicated thus far is that we have a policy of paying out in cash a dividend of 30% of the result of the previous year. And on top of that, we'll pay out by buying back shares so that we stay within the capital limits that we also have communicated of 15%. We have not communicated anything in relation to If that potentially could be above 100%, we would have to communicate on that a little bit later. But it stands clear and firm that a 30% cash dividend on top of that will do share buybacks to the extent possible and within capital ambitions.

Okay, then the last question on lending growth, on bank lending. It looks a tad soft this quarter also in the light of that your customer satisfaction is actually coming up. So is it because customers are more price conscious or how should we think about the development on lending growth? If you just can go through that.

You should decompose it. So if you look at our lending across the bank and mortgage lending, we have a positive development. It's the mortgage lending that is driving the development during the last year. And if you look at the reasons, there are different reasons. Looking at the personal client customer base, when we acquired Hannes Bank, most of their lending was basically bank-funded lending. And as they get new loans, they tend to migrate towards mortgage loans, traditional Danish mortgage loans instead. So there's a natural tendency of moving out of bank-funded products into the products of the mortgage institution. So that's what happens within the personal customer space. Within the business customer space, we are not concerned with the development here in terms of volumes. What we see is we have a high customer satisfaction and improving. We see that the mid-sized customers, they stay with us with the churn rate that we've had the last year up between 40 and 50 years. That's obviously a theoretical view, but basically that's the low level of churn that we have. Then what we've seen is a couple of industries, utility and financial institutions, We're not basically losing customers, but a limited number of the largest ones is using our balance sheet a little bit less than they did a year ago, or they did two quarters ago. And if you include also public institutions, that more than explains the small decrease that we've had in the bank lending part. So it's not a loss of clients or a loss of future potential here, it's merely a couple of industries that is cyclical and is a little bit down at the moment in terms of the usage of our balance sheet and on the personal customer basis, it's a migration towards mortgage lending instead.

Great, thanks a lot. Thank you, Mathias.

Next question comes from the line of Asbjorn Merck from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.

Yes, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. And sorry for coming back to net interest income. I just didn't really get the answer that you gave to Mathias earlier. Just looking at the sort of sequential move and the actual NRI for Q2. If I look at your lending deposit split on the banking side, uh it's the highest since q423 and if i look at your uh administration margin in in the mortgage business it's it's a record high so i guess it's really the other nii that's that is causing sort of the decline uh which obviously makes sense considering the the market money market rates and movement but i guess if we look at the money market rate movement in q3 uh obviously quite flat but but obviously went down quite a lot during q2 so just trying to understand What is sort of the impact going into Q3, Q over Q, from this move all as equal, assuming that money market rates stay sort of where they are right now, just trying to understand the bridge into Q3 and how we should look at that versus also Q4 would be very helpful. Thank you.

Yeah, you are fully correct, Asbjorn. So basically what we tried to allude to was the fact that we have been able to retain our deposit margin in the first half of the year. to a very large extent what's been driving the negative development in NII has been other NII and that's likely to persist and what we were basically just saying that now we have not emptied our toolbox but we have less tools going forward if rates continue to decline so in terms of the deposit margin that we would expect a larger pressure in Q3 than we saw in Q2 and in Q1, given that we don't expect to lower the transaction accounts, for example, to below zero. So we basically have increased risk, flow risk on our deposit margin. In terms of the sequential move, we saw a negative development of 30 million in Q1. That was partly, we saw a positive effect from TRE repricing on the mortgage side in that quarter. And then in Q2, We saw a negative of 34 million, so slightly more, but back then we were pricing transaction accounts down and also savings accounts, and we were reducing preferential deposit rates. So we would expect if rates continue to decline in Q3 versus Q2, we would expect a larger sequential drawdown than the 34 million.

Just to clarify, as I mentioned, we did change the accounts for transactions, both for private and corporate in April. So of course, there is also a full quarter effect in Q3 from lowering these rates for persons and corporate clients.

But is that assuming an incremental rate cut from the ECB or is it just assuming flat rates, policy rates from here?

But this was merely just to state the fact that we did make some changes that had an impact from April. And so we'll have a full quarter effect in our margin book in Q3 for both private and business as well as corporates.

No, but the point was more on the floor risk. So the more than 34 million drop in Q3, was that assuming a rate cut or not?

That's assuming the way forward rates are. Currently, I see a small decline in the three-month Kyber rate, but it's also taking into account the fact that we have seen half a year where rates have been continuing to decline in the first half of the year, and our bond portfolio, part of that is semi-annual interest rate resetting. So that part of the portfolio should have a, of course, then you could always, whether it actually has an impact on bonds specifically, that depends whether we lend it out as bank loans or we place it in bonds. But like for like, the rate on our bond portfolio should go down in July, given the half year of semi-annual interest rate resetting.

But is it then fair to assume if we, I mean, the money market is pricing 94% likelihood that the ECB will not cut rates in September. So if we assume that they are right and we don't get a cut, is it fair to assume that NRI will pick up in Q4?

I think it's difficult. I mean, it depends how the short, but if rates just were flat from Q2, I can't see why we shouldn't be able, if we saw some growth on the balance sheet at least, and that's not outweighed by margin pressure, then I agree that that should be the case. But I would maintain that we still expect an edge bottom out at the beginning of 2026.

Okay, fair enough. Then on the AUM. um you mentioned that you see quite nice growth from retail and private banking less from the institutional side could you comment on how your margin is developing within the asset management business so growing aum seven percent uh what should we how should we think about the asset management income base yeah sorry the income base of the management

exactly so you're the margin the the nominal margin that you may make from from the aum yeah in q2 versus yeah or just going forward but let's start with q2 okay this continues how we should model it yeah so i think overall um some margin pressure is likely to remain i think that's been the case for several years and that's likely to continue to some extent um the quarter movements are usually a bit I mean Q2, you have some yearly fees that are paid in Q2 and Q4, so there will be some swings from quarter to quarter, but I think the overall trend is likely to be some margin pressure.

Okay, fair enough. On the other side, Simon, I think the development that we're seeing now, which is, as Asbjørn correctly states, predominantly from our private banking customers and private personal individuals, that helps. And where we see mixed development is on the institutional, where you normally have a lower income per AUM. So that helps us.

Okay, that makes sense. Just a final question, a little bit back to the first question from Mathias on the guidance. I get your point on NII coming down in Q3, but if I look at the feed that you made today versus consensus, it's almost 200 million. It's including 60 million of one-off costs. I'm just struggling to see how you can sort of maintain the guidance, why you're not lifting the upper end? Is there something you're seeing or you're just being conservative?

What I tried to state before was that with what we can see and what we can control, when it comes to asset quality and what we see so far, we don't see any negatives that's going to impact the second quarter, apart from what you just discussed in terms of interest rate levels. So it is an uncertainty and you can call it conservative or how you would look at this, but I think we are confident with what we are saying today, which is very close to the 4.6.

All right. That's very helpful. Thanks a lot.

Thank you, Esbjorn. And next question in line comes from Jakob Heslovik from SEB.

Please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone. So the first question is also on fees and asset management. It developed quite nicely until end of June. But given the poor performance from Novo Nordisk, Örsted, to name a few of the blue chip names in the Danish market, How is the sentiment for Danish retail investors right now? And could we potentially see any backlash in the AUM development already in Q3?

Retail clients are buying Novo Nordisk shares to an extent that we've not seen before. But I think underlying to your question, obviously, These are two of the household names for Danish investors. And that could impact the sentiment and the willingness to invest. So far, we've not seen that. We've seen that our private banking customers and personal client customers, they've not dramatically changed their view, and they basically behave as they did before. And they are buying up some of them, the normal shares, as is in general the case across Denmark.

And if I look at the split between what is market driven and what is net inflow of new funds from customers in the first and especially the second quarter of this year, we are still on a very strong momentum in gaining new customers and funds. So I think that could be a very strong defence against what you allude to here.

We could see that more clients opt to have the bank playing a bigger role in helping them doing the investments because the clients that have had advice from the bank would tend to have less of single shares and they would tend to come through this turmoil better. So there's also a business opportunity from our side.

So you see this as an opportunity to maybe get back some clients who have moved to Nordnet, for example, by giving advice, et cetera.

Yes. And some of our own clients that have decided to a large extent to invest themselves, that's also an opportunity here.

Interesting. Then also, could you help me understand what drove the increase in the post-model adjustments this quarter? my world interest rates are coming down gdp growth for 2026 looks strong and unemployment is low in denmark so the increase can't be macro driven in my view at least so what caused it and i find it a bit silly when you had reversals in this quarter as well to increase your buffers yeah well that's a good question if you look at the first half

we saw an increase in our post-modern adjustment of shy of 100 million, as I mentioned, due to the fact that we in Q1 of this year lifted our macroeconomic buffer because of uncertainty due to geopolitical uncertainty. In the second quarter of this year, there's been a shift in, I think, six or seven million so we are moving around the 1.9 billion mark in the second half what has driven the the uh the change and reversing of of of impairments in the second half has been individual impairments so the post model adjustment was very steady going in the second quarter this year okay

I fully understand the reason for asking the question. In terms of how we have to deal with this, it's two different methodologies. So where we do the reversals here is basically on single clients, where we put aside money for potential future losses, and where we see that the clients come out better than anticipated. The post-model adjustments is to a large extent math on the entire portfolio.

Yeah, that's clear. But could you also give me any guidance on when we should expect these overlays to be released? Is it over the next 18 months or is it closer to the next 36 months?

If you look at it in a story context, we built up the post-model adjustments post-COVID, back in 2020, from 600 million to 1.6 billion, and then up to, well, close to 2 billion. And then you have seen a few swings afterwards. And I have mentioned before, and I still think it fully applies, that we can see some dynamics in these numbers. And you're right that if we put on a specific a pma charge or buffer we need to see it move in in one or another direction within typically 12 months so yes we there will be some swings to the um to the buffers which also has been the case because if you go back and look at our quarterly and the annual reporting you can see that the buffers have swift shifted from different macro elements to process elements etc and of course that still applies if you ask me if we could see a much lower level of pmas um yes we can see a lower level but much lower back to the level pre-coe is not what we expect within the coming few years

And I think this is maybe a little bit Denmark specific here. So I think with the way that those post-model adjustment rules are implemented and dealt with in the banks, you will tend to see that the bank hold a little bit more on that line than in some other countries.

Thank you. That's very clear.

Thank you, Jakob.

Next question comes from Lamita Samtani from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Hi and thanks for taking my questions. My first question, I just wanted your thoughts on NYCredit and Spar Nord. It's just that NYCredit had results last week and they talked about gaining mortgage market share and they're yet to offer all the discounts to Spar Nord customers. I just wondered if that worried you and how does your proposition compare and are you able to compete?

Yeah, good question. I'm confident that we can compete in this. Basically, nothing has changed apart from them having a task of integrating two banks on top of running the banks here. And obviously, they will be successful in doing that. But the discounts that they have on their mortgages, Spanoor has had in the past also. So that's probably not going to change. And we are confident that we can compete with this. And we're doing it to a large extent already today.

Thanks. And then just on Novo Nordisk, can I ask a question in a different way? Just from a perspective of the company actually impacts Denmark's GDP quite a lot, and I guess jobs as well. So from a top-down perspective, do you see that as like a potential headwind, more for like lending, et cetera?

Really, obviously, if there's a meltdown in Nordisk, it will have an impact on the GDP. It will have an impact on certain geographies in Denmark. And one of the geographies where they have the headquarters, one of the geographies where you feel strong. So that could potentially have an impact. But what we're looking at is a company that still earns quite a lot of money, that still have new products released just yesterday again. which holds a significant promise for the future. So we've seen a growth in the company during the last couple of years, and we saw a projected growth. And the latter, the projected growth, is probably not going to happen. If what is the base case now and what the company has communicated is how it's going to develop, this will still be a large and strong company in Denmark. If they should scale down, There's a lot of competence within one of the industries where Denmark in general is strongest. And we believe that most of the people would be able to find new jobs. And then on the new geographies where they're building new plants, it's basically not Jyske Bank land to a large extent. So where the new investments are being done, families are moved to and so on, we don't have a lot of business. We have it around Copenhagen where the job market is strong altogether, but we don't have it in the outskirts areas where they're building factories.

That's helpful. Thank you. And just last question. The lending margins on bank lending, I think they're quite a lot better than I was expecting or compared to how Kaibo moved. I just wondered why that was the case.

We have a bit of a lag effect on some bank lending rates. That was the case on the way up. If you just compare it to a short, like a three-month rate, we saw a significant margin pressure, bank lending margin pressure, and that's the reverse as rates come down. Some of those fixed rate elements help in increasing versus a three-month rate at least, the lending margin. Other than that, I think we haven't been very explicit in terms of what we are doing in terms of lending rates. But you can see at least on the private client, it's a question of, yeah, there is a bit of a lag effect. And also maybe we didn't fully pass through on the way up. And that's why we're not fully passing through the rate cuts on the way down.

Thank you.

Thank you, Namita.

Next question comes from Mathias Nielsen from Nadea. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. I have just had one follow-up question on the capital. If I heard you right, you said you were about to apply for the buyback. Given the time that it takes to get those awarded, should we then expect the buyback to be announced prior to the Q4 25 results in February, or how should we think about that?

Yeah, well, a good question. Hopefully you didn't hear me saying that we were applying because that's nothing that I can actually talk about. And so I can't give you any clear answer to whether we are in the process or not. But please bear in mind that we have a program now that's running until the end of January next year. and we have said formally that we want to be very predictable here to the set of a program that is running throughout the normal calendar year more or less and i think that is what you can expect from us going forward so that for now we'll just be positive about the fact that we believe that it seems as if there'll be room for buybacks

Sure, but I didn't really get the point of that. Last year, you were quite clear saying we should not expect anything more than once annually, and that should be in connection with the Q4 results or somewhere around that. Is that still the approach? How should I understand?

That is the guidance that we're also getting from the FSA, that they would like banks in general to deal with this once a year. and have a, in our position, probably fairly substantial program. And they would deal with that once a year. So we would stick to what we've communicated on that.

Sure. And then a technical one on that maybe. So like if, let's say, I'm not knowing if you are applying now or when you will apply, but let's say that you apply in a couple of weeks. Would that then be based on what the actual CT1 ratio was at the end of Q2, or would that be based on an adjusted CT1 ratio and based on your expectations for the remainder of the year? How is that?

The normal process is rather straightforward because you have to build on your actual numbers whenever you apply anything with the Danish FSA. so so if we were to apply as you say in a couple of weeks that would be probably be based on our existing q2 numbers and then we will do a stress test as they require a harsh one and demonstrate to the extent what is the the room for buybacks in a three years stress period okay thanks a lot that was all for me from my side thanks a lot thank you matthias

It seems as if there are no further questions in line. We would like to thank you for participating in today's conference call. A recording of the call will be made available on our IR website in the coming days. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have further questions. We appreciate your interest in Jyske Bank and wish you a nice day.