Societe Generle Ord

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Société Générale conference call. Gentlemen, please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. Welcome to our nine-month 2025 financial results presentation. I am pleased you could join us today. In line with previous quarters, we are once again achieving a solid performance. The financial indicators remain above our annual financial targets. Our quarterly and nine-month revenues have grown significantly compared to last year. This is happening while we continue to demonstrate discipline with regards to RWA organic growth, strict cost control, and risk management. Over the first nine months of the year, revenues were up by 6.7% compared to last year, reaching €20.5 billion, at the end of September, excluding asset disposals. This highlights the strength and relevance of our commercial franchises and validates our strategic decision to be a more compact and synergistic group that focuses on its strengths. At the same time, we remain committed to reducing our cost base in a structural and sustainable manner. costs are down by more than 2% for the first nine months of the year, excluding asset disposals versus nine months 24. The result, very strong positive draws and the cost-to-income ratio of 63.3% over the first nine months of the year. That's better than our 2025 target of below 65%. In terms of credit risk, For the first nine months, the cost of risk remains in line with our guidance at 25 basis points. Asset quality remains sound as we continue to navigate the macro environment. Overall, the group net income reached €4.6 billion in nine months 25 and a group return on tangible equity of 10.5%. That represents an increase by 3.4 percentage points versus nine months 24. And it puts us well on track to meet our 2025 target of a ROTI around 9%. These solid earnings contribute to the further strengthening of our capital position. The CET1 ratio is up by 20 basis points this quarter, despite a slight increase in organic RWA. And ultimately, the CET1 ratio stands at 13.7% at the end of September 2025. As mentioned last quarter, it takes into account the €1 billion additional share buyback program, which was completed this month. This performance keeps us above the updated targets we set for 2025. It marks another step in the right direction, but our goal is to do better, and we will. Making the bank even stronger will require continued focus, perseverance and determination. A little more than two years ago, we held our CMD, and since then, we have made tangible progress. First and foremost, the bank has a much stronger capital base. This is a cornerstone of our strategic roadmap to ensure greater stability amid the inherent fluctuations of the macro environment. And with a CT1 ratio of 13.7% in the Basel IV regulatory environment, The Group is well above its target of 13%. This allows us to successfully pursue our dual ambitions of supporting our sustainable growth and providing additional returns to shareholders. With regards to operational efficiency, there is certainly more to do. But to date, the Group has already significantly improved its operating leverage. That is reflected in the sharp drop in the cost-to-income ratio, which improved from more than 70% on average over the five years before the CMD to 63.3% over the first nine months of 2025. Again, this is primarily the result of our relentless and successful execution of our cost-saving initiatives across all businesses. This is also the result of the solid and improving commercial performance of our core businesses. Consequently, the group significantly increased its profitability, its ROTI, which almost doubled despite a higher denominator as it rose from 5.8% on average over the 2018-2022 period to 10.5% in 9 months 25. Coupled with the implementation of share buyback programs, which have been increasing for two years, this has resulted in a substantial boost in EPS. When you compare the nine month 2025 with the average nine month period during the five years preceding the CMD, that EPS rose almost 180%. Increasing profitability in a sustainable manner and ensuring greater value creation for shareholders are at the heart of our commitments. In this, we are at the beginning of a rewarding journey. There is still a lot to do to get where we want to be, but real tangible results have pointed us in the right direction. Now, let me hand over to Leo, who is going to take you through our Q3 25 performance.

Thank you, Slavomir, and good morning, everyone. As usual, let's now dig into the financial performance for the third quarter. The group results once again are a very solid set of results this quarter, with a group net income of 1.5 billion euros, second highest third quarter since 2006, leading to a quarterly return on tangible equity at 10.7% versus 9.6% in the same quarter last year. This excellent performance is the result of sustained strong commercial activity, which led to another solid increase in revenues, combined with continued strict cost discipline, leading to a strong positive Joe evolution. In details, revenues were up by 3% versus Q3-24 excluding disposals, and even by 7.7% when excluding also, the circa 300 million euros exceptional income booked in Q3-24 to close out our past presence in Russia. At the same time, costs continue to decrease in absolute terms and are down by 1.1% excluding asset disposals, demonstrating our ongoing strict cost discipline. This consequently translates into further improvement in operational leverage with a cost-to-income ratio of 61% in Q3-25 versus a 63.3% in Q3-24, and below our annual target of 65%. Regarding asset quality, the cost of risk remains contained at 26 basis points and within the lower range of our annual guidance. We've also made further progress in streamlining our business portfolio, with the closing of the disposals in Guinea-Conakry and in Mauritania. As I move to slide seven to go through the revenue bridge, which you may now be familiar with. Excluding other disposals for comparison purposes, which generated around 400 million euros of NBI in Q3 24, group revenues increased by 3% in Q3 25 compared with last year. And as I just mentioned, by 7.7% if we were also to restate the exceptional income recorded last year in the corporate center in connection with the closeout of our remaining exposure in Russia. As illustrated in the chart, all businesses contributed positively to this solid increase. French retail, private banking and insurance, the revenues grew by 4.5% in Q3 25 versus Q3 24 excluding disposals. The rise is mostly driven by both NII and insurance revenues, which are up by 4.7% and 6.9% respectively. On global banking and investor solutions, revenues increased by 1.6% compared to a very strong Q3-24, thus consolidating a high revenue base around €2.5 billion this quarter, thanks to solid performance in FIC and financing and advisory. The commercial performance of the businesses within mobility, international retail banking and financial services are also strong, with a 9.1% increase in revenues in Q3-24, excluding asset disposals. Finally, if we exclude the exceptional income of €287 million related to the exit of Russia, revenues at corporate centres increased by €175 million, mainly due to sound and improved liquidity management. On the cost front, on slide 8, we can see that operating expenses fell further in Q3 compared with last year, not only at group level, but also across all pillars. It perfectly illustrates how the new cost policy launched since the CMD has spread throughout the bank. Overall, on a year-on-year basis, costs are down by 1.1% this quarter, excluding disposals, and by 6.2% on a reported basis. Similarly, the cost-to-income ratio declined further in the third quarter compared with last year, as did the ratios for all the pillars. The group cost-to-income ratio landed at 61% in Q3, a level well below the annual target. After the first nine months of 2025, the group reports a cost-to-income ratio of 63%, which makes us very confident in our ability to achieve our 2025 adjusted target for a cost-to-income ratio below 65%. Let's now have a look at the asset quality evolution on slide nine. The cost of risk stands at 26 basis points this quarter and 25 for the first nine months of 2025. In both cases, in the lower range of our annual guidance. This quarter's cost of risk mainly comprises stage three provisions, which account for 437 million euro with notably a transfer of provisions from Stage 2 to Stage 3, which contribute to a net reversal of €68 million in S1 and S2 provisions. On the later, total outstanding Stage 1 and Stage 2 provisions remain high at €2.9 billion, or two times 2024's cost of risk. Asset quality remains robust, as illustrated by the NPL ratio at 2.77, stable from the last quarter. It is important to highlight that the group is not exposed to the recent U.S. defaulted companies, which made the headlines, and we have a negligible exposure to U.S. regional banks. Finally, the net coverage ratio remains high at 82% in Q3, up one percentage point from Q2-25. Let's now turn on to capital on slide 10. Thanks to very strong earnings, which contributed with 18 basis points in Q3, after accruing 50% payout, the CT1 ratio of the group increased further to reach 13.7% at the end of September 25, versus 13.5% at the end of June, which represent a level around 340 basis points above MDA. The other moving parts have a global minimal net impact of 3 basis points and are split between, on the one hand, positive impact of seven basis points related to the group employee share ownership, as stated in a dedicated press release published on 24 July. And on the other, limited negative impacts related to the RWA variation for around five basis points, and some regulatory impacts for four basis points, which come after a positive contribution of eight basis points on that topic in Q2-25. while other items have a limited one basis point net impact this quarter. Last, as you can see at the bottom right-hand side of the slide, all the other capital ratios remain comfortably above the regulatory requirements. On slide 11, we can see that liquidity reserves remain high at €328 billion, with a relatively balanced mix between cash and securities. Regarding the liquidity profile of the group, we maintained strong liquidity ratios with an LCR at 147% this quarter and a NSFR ratio of 117, which in both cases represent a buffer around €90 billion. We completed the 2025 long-term funding program in Q3 on very competitive terms and have even began the pre-funding of 26 program with a new senior non-preferred debt in US dollars successfully issued in September. Access to liquidity remains very good in our currencies and the deposit base remains strong, granular and highly diversified, having grown by 10 billion euros in the quarter. Overall, the loan-to-depot ratio stands at 75% at group level. In slide 12, we show a summary of the P&L for the group for Q3, which we will cover in more detail in the following slides. So let's move now to business performances on slide 14, starting as usual with software network, private banking, and insurance. In Q3 2025, loans outstanding increased by 1% compared to last year, with both retail and corporate loans growing, excluding for the later state-guaranteed loans, BGEs. Home loan production continues to increase strongly this quarter, by 74% versus Q3-24. Volumes of deposits are down by 5% versus last year, or by 2% versus Q2-25, in a context of continued strong growth of retail saving and investment products, which are off-balance sheet products, and contribute to the continued strong momentum in asset gathering, as we can see on one side, AUMs in private banking increased by 7% versus Q3-24, if we're just for disposals, and reached 135 billion euros at the end of September, 3 billion more than at the end of June 25. On the other side, life insurance outstandings reached 153 billion euros, increasing by 6% versus Q3-24, and representing 3 more billion euros than in June 25, thanks to continued strong net inflows. Moving on to BursoBank. As highlighted last quarter, thanks to a sustained growth pace of acquisition over the last two years, BursoBank has reached its CMT targets of 8 million clients, nearly 18 months ahead of its initial objective. In Q3, BursoBank gained nearly 400,000 new clients. In Q3-24, it represents an increase of 1.5 million clients, or 22%. with a consistently low churn rate below 4%. Asset standard administration continued to grow steadily. They reached 76 billion euros at the end of September, or circa 10,000 euros per client, which represents an 18% increase versus Q3 24, thanks in particular to the continued strong increase in deposits of 17% versus Q3 24. Similarly, life insurance outstanding increased by 11% versus Q3 24, with net inflows four times higher than in Q3-24, while market orders grew by 38% compared to last year. On the lending side, total loans outstanding are 8% up versus Q3-24. Looking at the whole pillar on slide 16, we can see that net income lands at 439 million euros for this third quarter, or 18% higher than in Q3-24. with a RONI close to 10% under Basel IV requirements, which compares to an 8.2% last year under the previous Basel III standards. This is driven by, on the one hand, a solid increase in revenues by 4.5% versus Q3-24, excluding disposals, largely linked to a 4.7% increase in NII, despite the absence this quarter of positive base effect impact related to short-term hedges. And on the other hand, cost improvement. This is a decrease of minus 0.3% of operating expenses compared to Q3-24 excluding disposals. Both movements lead to a cost-to-income ratio of 65.7% in Q3 versus 70.1% in Q3-24. On the asset side, cost of risk lands at 38.3 basis points in Q3-25. Let's move now to global markets and investor services on slide 17. Starting with global markets, market activities continue to generate high level of revenues, above 1.4 billion during this quarter. They are up by 0.5% in Q3 25 versus an already very strong Q3 24, despite unfavorable FX impact and one day accounting base effects. Note that restated from this day one P&L impact, global markets revenues would have grown by double digit. The increase in reported revenues was mostly driven this quarter by our FIC platform, whose performance improved by 12% versus last year, thanks in particular to a strong momentum in derivatives and financing with growing activity in FX and rates. With regards to equity activities, revenues remain high at 824 million in Q3-25. Year-on-year comparisons show a 7% decrease due to both a very strong basis for comparison, where Q3-24 was the highest third quarter in 16 years in this activity, and the aforementioned FX and Day 1 accounting impacts. In security services, revenues eased by minus 1% versus Q3-24, as a result of a decrease in interest rate, despite steady commercial momentum in the quarter in SGSS. Let's turn now to slide 18 to comment on the evolution of our financing and advisory platform, which performed very well in Q3-25 with a 4.2% increase in revenues versus the same period last year. This strong outcome is driven by a solid growth in global banking and advisory by nearly 7% versus Q3-24, thanks in particular to both solid performance of financing activities overall with continued strong momentum in terms of regeneration and distribution. In addition, our DCM and ECM platforms benefited from solid dynamics in the market. With regards to transaction banking services, revenues slightly declined by 2.5% in Q3 versus Q3-24 due to lower rates, which mask the good overall commercial performance illustrated by the continued increase in deposits. Overall, GBIS delivers another solid performance as illustrated on slide 19. with revenues reaching 2.5 billion in Q3 25, up 1.6%, versus a very high Q3 24, making this quarter the best Q3 for GBIS since 2009. We continue to drive costs down, with expenses decreasing by 0.8% in the quarter, and the cost-to-income ratio declined 1.5 percentage points, from 61.5% in Q3 24 to 60% in Q3 25. while the cost of risk remained moderate at 13 basis points this quarter. As a result, GBIS posted a net income of €734 million in Q3 2025, translating into a high RONI of 17.4% under Basel IV. Moving on to the international retail banking on slide 20. We can see that both Europe and Africa posted good performance this quarter, with revenues up by 4.6% compared to Q3-24 at constant exchange rate and perimeter. In Europe, loans are up by 6% and deposits by 2% versus Q3-24 at constant exchange rate and perimeter, while revenues increased by 4% versus the same quarter last year at constant exchange rate and perimeter, supported by higher net interest income in both KB and BRD. In Africa, loans are resilient with a slight decrease of 1% versus last year at constant exchange rate and perimeter, while deposits continue to increase by 4% in Q3-25 versus Q3-24. When we look at revenues, they increased strongly this quarter by 5% at constant exchange rate and perimeter, largely driven by a solid level of peace across most regions. Turning now to mobility, financial services, the combined business posted another strong increase in revenues this quarter, by 12.4% at constant exchange rate and perimeter. AVEN's revenues contribution to sub-gen is increasing by 13.2% versus Q3-24, benefiting from positive base effect related to depreciation adjustments and non-recurrent items. When adjusted for those on inspects, Revenues are stable, with two opposite trends largely anticipated. First, a continued increase in margin, which reaches 593 basis points in Q3, versus 521 in Q3-24, which is basically driven by the strategy implemented, but comprises this quarter some non-recurrent elements. On the contrary, as expected and guided, an ongoing normalization of used car sales results per unit, at €1,100 this quarter versus €1,500 1,420 in Q3-24. Together with a tight monitoring of costs, the customer income improved strongly this quarter to 53% excluding UCS and non-recurrent items versus 63% in Q3-24. Finally, regarding consumer finance, business delivered a good quarter with revenues up by 6.6% versus Q3-24, still benefiting from margin expansion mainly in France. So in terms of the overall financial performance at the pillar on slide 22, we see very strong positive jaws again this quarter, thanks to a solid increase in revenues of 8.7% on one hand, while on the other, a decreasing cost by 3.9% in Q3 2025 versus Q3 2024, both at constant perimeter and exchange rate. And this is naturally driven by mobility and financial services. The cost of risk is also down at 37 basis points in the quarter, versus 48 in Q3-24. Overall, the whole pillar posted a net income of 393 million euros, up 19.2% versus Q3-24, adjusting for the perimeter and exchange rates. Finally, the RONI improved by 1.7 percentage points versus last year, and reaches 14.9% under Basel IV in Q3-25. To conclude with the quarterly results, let's move now to slide 23 with Corporate Center. Year-on-year revenues are down by circa 100 million euros due to the base effect linked to the circa 300 million euros of exceptional income accounting in Q3-24 related to the closing of the remaining exposure that we had in Russia. Excluding this one-off, revenues continue to improve this quarter thanks to continued efficient liquidity management. In addition, the closing of the sale of our subsidiary in Guinea-Conakry generated a positive impact accounted in net profit or losses from other assets. Let me now give back the floor to Slavo Man.

Thank you, Leo. As you can see, despite the shifting landscape, we continue to deliver on the commitments the group has made in regards to our sustainability roadmap. We are progressing well towards our targets in terms of financing the energy transition, and we continue to demonstrate our pioneering spirit with bold and innovative transactions. We are also driving sustainable finance through partnerships, deepening our collaboration with the IFC, for instance, and developing new collaborations with other multilateral organizations. In conclusion, our objectives are clear and our progress is measurable. We continuously assess both in order to keep our momentum going so we can achieve our goals. We remain firmly on track, and our determination is unwavering, and we are fully committed to ensuring success. Thank you very much, and let's now start the Q&A with our usual polite request to stick to two questions per person. The floor is yours.

Thank you, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to ask a question, please press star and 1 on your telephone keypad. The first question is from Tariq El-Mejad of Bank of America.

Hi, good morning, everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. Two on capital, please. I mean, congrats first on this strong print again. But my question, and I think one missing part of saying this print, to me at least, was potentially managing more your excess capital through distribution and buyback. So I think I have a very simple question here. Did you and can you share with us if you actually asked for it and didn't get the answer in time? Because, you know, you repeated many, many times that there's no point to build buffers on buffers, and now it's literally, you're talking two and a half years of organic generation of buffer. So can you share with us more color? And then I'm sure you've seen the news and share price action that the ARN has managed to pass an amendment in the parliament on this discussion on budget on the income side. taxing from 8% to 33%, and most importantly, increasing the scope to share price or acquisition price rather than the nominal value. So in this context, I know it's early, but just maybe you can share your thoughts. In this context, would you see better value in using this as capital for buyback minorities of events, or maybe you can accelerate distribution before these things go through? Thank you very much.

Thank you, Tarek. Hi. So on the buyback, let's try and be very, very clear. So one, you know the framework. The framework is indeed, one, no intention to accumulate excess capital. Two, when considering excess capital, considering organic growth at high marginal rates of return, inorganic growth, if and when it makes sense with a very conservative approach to execution risk and expected returns and return to shareholders preferably right now because of the maths still favorable to the buyback in the form of buybacks. So that's the framework. I'm repeating it so that it's very clear. Second statement, you know, we have been having this conversation for a while, so to speak, and I think we have been strategically predictable from this perspective, and so you should expect us to remain predictable from this perspective. Now, equally at the bank conference recently, I said that, you know, buybacks and these decisions because of various factors are not necessarily you know, quarterly processes. And finally, I would point to the fact that this quarter we are announcing a buyback at the AVENS level. These are the parameters of what I can say. Now, in terms of the amendment that you're referring to, so for us, our understanding at this point is that it's not intended to be on the value, but indeed on the nominal. But more importantly, I would not want to comment on tax too much, especially on the race that we do observe these past few weeks and days even. in the parliamentary debate. That's not my job, not my role. Obviously, if and when things are stabilized and become law, we will adjust our thinking and you should expect us to be the most rational players out there in terms of dealing with whatever the framework is. But again, I would not be at this point focusing too much on the race that you can see in terms of proposals that you can see like literally every night in France today. Let's take a step back. France has a history of being a Overall, a rational jurisdiction where, as you can see, even this year, companies are able to go through the instability, go through some of the news flow and continue to do their job, and I expect the jurisdiction to overall remain similar in the years to come. Thank you.

The next question, sir, is from Flora Bocahut of Barclays.

Yes, thank you. I wanted to ask you a first question on the cost of risk in French retail banking. It's picked up slightly this quarter. So maybe if you could elaborate if it's a single file, it's coming from several, is it the sign of the beginning of a slight deterioration there? And then the second question is on the equities revenues. You mentioned in the slide back the negative impact from the day one P&L year on year. Was that very concentrated on Q3 last year and therefore unlikely to be a drag from here? Or is there potentially a bit more drag year on year coming from that in the coming quarters? Thank you.

Thank you. Hi, Flora. So, CNR, net cost of risk, NCR, sorry, net cost of risk in French retail. So, it's fairly stable in the retail individual plans part at a reasonably low level. nothing very material happening there. And indeed, you have an increase in the SME segments with basically no big files, no one-offs, but more something which is in line with what you may have seen as a market feature with the increase with the bankruptcy rate in France. So this is the explanation. It remains contained. As you can see, the cost of risk is still low, but indeed this is the dynamic that we've seen in Q3. And we don't expect today any material deterioration at this point in time in the coming quarters, but there is a slight increase in bankruptcy rates in Q3. France. So, in terms of the equities and the specific day one question, which indeed is the most of the explanation for the performance of equities this quarter, it's very simple. It was concentrated, the positive impact was concentrated last year on Q3, and this year it's a drag which the absence of which would have resulted in a growth of double digits of the market revenues. So you can see it's a substantial feature, which is a positive one because, as you know, a negative impact of day one is the sign of a very strong production, of a very strong origination. in terms of commercial activity, but indeed it is a drag. Now, today it's dependent on market conditions, but today there is no reason to believe that it will remain the same constant in the coming quarters. At this point in time, it's more of a Q3 phenomenon.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next question is from Jason Napier of UBS.

Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. The first one, Bolsa Bank has turned in another pretty strong quarter for customer acquisitions. There's some concern amongst investors that, you know, when a good thing is going so well that you might choose to extend the investment in customer acquisitions, you know, substantially further than might have been expected. Perhaps in simple terms, could you just talk about what we should be thinking in terms of fee income, net fee income uplift? next year and the year after as you presumably do start to invest less in customer acquisition offers. And then secondly, congrats on another quarter of very widespread beats on the cost line. I wonder if you could talk a little bit about whether you have any sense as to what a more modern SOCGEN cost-income ratio might look like. We've just come off a another company called talking about you know real hope that AI might substantially change the efficiency of modern banks. I just wonder whether you could talk about where you see the sort of medium-term cost income for the group. Thanks.

Thank you. Thank you very much. So on Boursaubanque first. We have committed to delivering 300 million euros of bottom line in Boursaubanque in 2026. and we will deliver a bottom line of 300 million euros at least in Boursauban in 2026, and it is one of the drivers, one of the main drivers of actually reaching another very important objective, which is the 60% cost-to-income ratio at French retail banking. So from this perspective, again, you should expect us to be predictable and to stick to our commitments. And to your point, it will be achieved by a different balance, right, a different balance in terms of customer acquisition costs, both in volume and in value, because we also are working hard to deliver growth at a lower cost. And as you know, because we've spoken about this in the past, we had projected a GOI investment, a negative GOI throughout the plan to reach Burso Bank's objectives in terms of customer acquisition of minus 150 million euro. The reality is that we have executed the plan and actually more than executed the plan with a largely positive contribution from Boursaubanque. So working on volumes, working on cost of the customer acquisition is what's going to help us achieve the objective. It's still generating growth, but again with a different balance so that we can deliver on our commitments. In terms of the cost line, I mean, I'm not going to... go beyond in terms of guidance here, beyond what we have for 2026, which is, as you know, a 60% target, below 60% target for the group and for French retail. But I can tell you two things, right, before moving to AI, is that we are, and you see this quarter after quarter, working very diligently and we are very focused on continuing to improve our efficiency, right? We recognize that there's substantial room to do better. I said in the past that I don't see any reason, any philosophical or otherwise reason for Sochgen not to be delivering something which, you know, comparable business model and jurisdiction but something that would be much closer if not within the best average performance of the European banks again adjusted for business mix and jurisdiction but which clearly points to something in the next cycle that would be, well, significantly lower than 60%. I'm not saying anything that you wouldn't expect here but that's how we're thinking. Then the AI piece, I think it's an absolutely critical topic for anyone really, but for banks indeed because of the nature of our business where you do have a lot of processes and technology which resembles to some extent a big factory where you would expect naturally significant improvements in efficiency and in the cost base linked to AI. I think what we need to recognize is that in our heavily regulated environment, the pace of final implementation at scale of these tools will be a process, right? You know how demanding the regulators and supervisors are in terms of model validation. You can imagine that for something processing sensitive data and processes in a highly regulated banking environment, you would have expectations in terms of the quality of the modeling underpinning the AI solutions. So it will happen, it will happen at scale, and it will continue to drive substantially the costs down and actually the client satisfaction and the quality of service and actually maybe quality of risk management up, but it's something which will be taking some time, in my view, to be really at scale and widely adopted within the banks. Thank you.

The next question is from Julia Miyoto of Morgan Stanley.

Hi, morning, thank you for taking my questions. I have two. The first one is a follow-up on the capsule distribution point. Some banks are doing buybacks twice a year, and some banks just do a large one in Q4, for example. So how should we think about the cadence of your buyback? Should we think that, you know, comes Q4, you'll most likely distribute everything down to 13% or close to that, or would you keep something for the second half of the year? And then, secondly... HSBC took a provision on some withholding tax trading issues related to France. I'm wondering if there is any read-across for SOCGEN or if you have any comments here. Thank you.

So on the first point, it is true that as much as we had already in place the normal distribution, annual distribution buyback part of this policy, it's true that, you know, we executed our first additional share buyback this year. And so we're in the, let's say, the beginning of a process which is will eventually have some regularity, depending on the performance, et cetera, and the excess capital position. But indeed, the way we think about it is that we do have the annual distribution as part of the Q4. And during the year, depending on the position, at this point, it's more position-driven, right? And taking into account all the processes that are involved in in potential additional distribution, we follow this pace, if you will. I hope that that's clearer than the usual Fed chair explanation, but this is where we are.

But sorry, so just to follow up to make sure I understand, of course you have a 50% payout, half-half buyback, so we all expect that in Q4, but I think it would be rational to expect an additional one given the excess capital starting point. Is that not a realistic expectation for Q4?

I mean, I don't want to comment on the expectation, but I'm going to comment on something else you said. Would it be rational? Yeah, it would be rational.

Perfect. Okay, thank you. That's clear.

The next question. Second question on the tax side with the competitor that you mentioned. Of course, I don't know much about that rumor, and we don't comment specifically on these situations. All I can tell you is that we have not booked anything, nor are planning in the short term to book anything on this topic at this time.

Thanks.

The next question, sir, is from Jeremy Sigi of BNP Paribas Exane.

Thanks. Good morning. A couple of follow-ups on topics that have already been touched on. Firstly, I just wanted to check. You're not changing your full year 25 guidance, but you're obviously way ahead at the nine-month stage. I just wanted to check that you're not flagging deterioration or adjustment back down again in Q4. We shouldn't interpret anything differently. from that. Is that a fair thing to say? And then second question, just you mentioned, obviously, we've seen the Avon's share buyback. I just wondered how you position in relation to that. I can't see whether you've said that you're going to participate in the buyback or whether this is an opportunity to adjust your own shareholding in Avon's.

Hi, thank you. So on the first question, important question. I'll be very clear. It is to be interpreted exactly the way you said it. So there's absolutely no message regarding the Q4. It's a process thing whereby we do not update our annual targets every quarter. And we do confirm, and we said it very clearly, that we are a above, well above our full-year 2025 targets, and that you should infer from this that in normal market conditions, which is our basic expectations at this point, we will, of course, outperform the target, right, just mathematically. One only nuance, which we have discussed in the past, is you should, in normal business circumstances, expect the the Q4 to have a run rate slightly different from the average of the year because of usually, right, the seasonality of costs with all kinds of true-ups that happen in Q4 and also with sometimes a slightly softer revenue generation, especially in the CIB. But apart from this totally business-as-usual phenomenon, yes, clearly, if you are do simple math and assuming normal market conditions, we would outperform the targets. In terms of the stake in events, post share buyback, we're going to move from roughly 53% to 55% of ownership, and this is the only thing that's going to happen. We're very happy with this position. We have full control. We work hard on making this asset, and you can see the improvement, including this quarter, making this asset a as profitable and as strong as possible and we're happy with the current situation and with the increase to 55%.

That's very clear. Thanks very much.

Thank you.

The next question is from Joseph Dickerson of Jefferies.

Hi, thank you for taking my question. I guess just coming back to the, I guess two things. Coming back to the capital distribution question, as I read this amendment, it does look like it's on what they refer to as the valeur d'achat and not the valeur nominale. And I'm wondering if that sticks through the budget process, how would you then think about mediating your capital returns and managing the capital returns, because that's clearly less effective. So I guess a thought process on that, and then I didn't hear you answer Tarek's question necessarily as to whether or not you'd actually applied for a buyback this time, so I'm confused as to why Avens went for one and you didn't at the second quarter. So that's questions on capital return. And then more of a fundamental question on the business, you know, can you just talk about some of your cross-selling potentials in France? Because you've got life insurance, private banking AUMs that are record high. You've got, you know, home loan production up 74% year on year. I guess, you know, how can we expect this home loan production to translate through to cross-selling and how are you benefiting from that today? Many thanks.

Thank you. So, on the capital distribution, yeah, first, you didn't hear my answer to Tarek's question because I didn't answer directly whether we have filed... I was being diplomatic. Yeah, yeah. I know. Thank you for that. And simply because, you know, I mean, if I start to comment on what I'm filing or not filing with the ECB, you know, we're filing so many things every week. that it would be a difficult process to follow. Listen, again, take comfort from some of my other answers. We have been extremely rational and consistent in looking at this, and while going through all the processes involved, and ultimately, by the way, the decision of the Board, but we do intend to remain rational, extremely rational, as it pertains to managing the excess capital. And today, risk adjusted, the SBB is obviously the best option. In terms of the tax thing, again, right, I mean, this just came out. I don't want to comment specifically. If it were to stick, so hypothetically, this was your question, If it were to stick and be really substantial and not on nominal value, therefore not so substantial, we would simply adjust the maps, right? And again, choosing between organic, inorganic, and any inorganic opportunity that we would have, NSVB. we would very rationally, like you would expect us to do, including, of course, like considering the cash distribution as well, we would make rational, mathematically sound decisions in terms of how to deal with the excess capital. In terms of the cross-selling opportunity and home loans, you're spot on. I mean, in many jurisdictions, not all of them, but clearly in France, the home loan is an anchor product. An anchor product because one, its features, including its long-term fixed rate features, usually at competitive rates because of the market dynamics. is making the customer stick with you for usually a long time, right? I mean, the number is actually in decades. And so it allows you to develop the relationship across the entire offering of the bank. And you pointed that out, our performance, both in terms of the private banking. I'll come back to private banking for a second in a second. but in terms of the private banking, but also in terms of all the investment products. And you see that our pace of fundraising in the life insurance investment envelope is extremely high. It's market leading and it's extremely high. Just to give you a sense, it's a pace which is well, well, well above almost double the size of our inventories in the space. So we're doing extremely well there. The private bank is doing extremely well and the private bank is deeply connected with our retail operations. So it's not, you have obviously an ultra-high net worth team and segment, if you will, but it is also very connected and by connected, some of the teams are actually embedded within the teams of the retail bank so that we can extract structurally, on an industrial basis, if you will, the growth in value and the growth in assets that our individual customers experience throughout life. And usually, yes, it started with home loans. So this is exactly the strategy. The only thing I'll add is, nevertheless, you still need to make sure, right, that basically the investments you're making in terms of the home loans are worth it and that you have constantly an investment case that works mathematically. What I'm trying to say here is there have been times in the French market, you know, take for instance 22 and 23, where the market was pricing this product because of all kinds of usury rate considerations, but not only, eventually competitive dynamics at a deeply, deeply negative level in terms of margins, So we had retrenched substantially at the time with production rates down 70% because while the logic of the anchor product and the investment in the long-term relationship is a prevailing one in the French market, on the other hand, there are level of prices which obviously don't make sense in terms of this investment. So we have been I think very nimble and conservative when considering this, but yes, the level of cross-energy is very important within this pillar. Great. Thank you.

The next question is from Chris Hallam of Goldman Sachs.

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. Two quick questions, both on equities. First, how far through the build-out of the cash equities platform would you say you are? I guess you're about 18 months or so on from the announcement on Bernstein. And how would you assess the market share opportunity on the one hand there versus the potential for, I guess, increased competitive pressure and capital relief on the other? And then the second question, it's a bit of a follow-up to the earlier question on withholding tax. I guess thanks for the clarity there. what would the threshold be for either taking a provision or settling? I guess, how do you see this playing out from your side, and how should we think about the quant of the outstanding risk? Thank you.

Thank you. So, on your first question, we're well advanced now, and we will be closing in 25 our first full year with the caveat, which we discussed in the past in this call, that the U.S. operations are not yet fully integrated. They will be next year. But you're talking about a contribution from Bernstein, basically, of roughly 200 million euros already, right? So it's a substantial contribution. enhancement to the franchise. And if you see some of our rankings, it has helped us break into the top 10. And if you look at some of what we have been able to achieve in the U.S. market in terms of primary equity, having for the first time ran significant book runner mandates and which delivered, you know, and I'm not going to comment with the number, but not insignificant contribution to our primary equity. So let me put it this way. All the assumptions are valid. So in terms of the trading revenues, we are firmly holding at the addition of our respective market chairs. The team is happy. The retention level is extremely high, much higher than what we expected. In terms of the research, we are making the forays that we were expecting. And the only disappointment, it's not about us, it's about the primary equity market in Europe, which, as you know, has been more than subdued in the last few years. So we're happy and we will be continuing to investing and with the integration of the U.S., the full integration of the U.S. platform next year, we'll be making another step in this direction. In terms of the withholding tax, I mean, again, right, I mean, you can't expect me to comment specifically on these kind of files, but my earlier answer was clear, and the way you should think about this is... Let me put it this way, right? If we have this stance, which obviously, as you can imagine, as a matter of process, is not just a discretionary decision of management, but it goes through all the governance, including the auditors, you know, is that, you know, it points to a position that we think we have in this matter. Okay.

Thanks very much. Thank you.

The next question is from Andrew Coombs of Citi.

Morning. I think most of my questions have been answered, but perhaps I can do one on French retail and one on international retail. OPEX management, you previously answered about no reason why you can't be comparable to other European banks after adjusting the business mix and jurisdiction. I mean, I think that's far off. your cost sets have been pretty broad based, but from here, the major levers you can pull in French retail, or do you think it is much broader than that? And I'm thinking more about headcount, considering the amount that your branch network has come down by. And then second question on international retail, are you happy with the perimeter now? And can you just touch upon some of the volume growth you're seeing both in Czech and Romania? Thank you.

Thank you. So on the very last piece, I'll leave the floor to Pierre on the volumes in Czech Republic and Romania, and I'll address all the others. In terms of my comment about jurisdictions or business mix, it's simply to recognize that if somebody has a very pure, for instance, retail banking mix, a monoline mix in a in a jurisdiction that happens at that point in time to benefit from strong dynamics in terms of rates, for instance, well, obviously you would not be able to compare just the cost of incomes one for one between us and that particular player. But on the other hand, I would like you to focus more, if I may, on the fact that this is not an excuse for us not to do our job. and to continue to reduce our costs versus the per unit of revenue, of course, but also, you know, another way of looking at it, per unit of RWA, right? This is another way we're looking at it. And we think that, you know, these metrics help level the playing field, so to speak. And we clearly are aiming at continuing to increase substantially our efficiency and to decrease substantially over time our cost to income at the group level, but also at the French retail level, right? We have been improving there substantially, but we're still at 65.7% in Q3 of 2025. So you have already a pretty healthy improvement to be expected next year. But even beyond that, we do believe that we can do better and we are working on ways to operate this business with a lower cost. cost structure, as simple as that. I mean, we have been late to the game of efficiency, but we are now fully, fully committed and working on this with a lot of focus. In terms of, I feel like I'm missing your other question. I think it was the perimeter of the international retail. Oh, yeah, the perimeter of international retail. And then on to Pierre for the volume. On the perimeter, listen, we're happy in the sense that virtually all our assets, not all of them, but really, really most of them, deliver stable performance at a high level of return and performance you know, are also managed in a very sound manner in terms of risks. Now, in the end, what we said about how we're going to manage our portfolio, business portfolio, remains true, right? So we need to make sure constantly that ROE headline is high, that ROE is above cost of equity in a sustainable manner, and some other parameters. I'm not going to list them each time, but I'll add the level of tail risk as well. And from this perspective, you know, if and when we believe that we should be making adjustments, we will continue to make adjustments. But overall, today, the portfolio is delivering a sound average performance. Here, on the volumes of KB and BRD,

So in terms of volumes at a constant perimeter and change, for KB we see an increase in loans by 4% and a flat deposit level compared to last year. As far as Romania is concerned, it's a big increase by 13.5% in terms of customer loans. and 10% in terms of customer deposits. So this translates into an increase in NBI globally in Europe by 6.6% in Romania. again at the constant perimeter and change. 9% in terms of NII and 2.4% in terms of fees. What is important is that BRD is gaining market share. The market share is up 35 bps. As far as KB is concerned, in terms of NBI, the NII is increasing by 1.7% and the fees by 2%. Thank you.

The next question is from Delphine Lee of JP Morgan.

Yes, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. My first one, sorry to come back on this issue of the tax on buybacks and dividends. Sorry, it's just an important one. So on this topic, would you consider changing a little bit of the mix between buybacks and dividends because it looks like the tax on the dividends could be a bit lower? So from what you said earlier, I understand that you would reconsider a little bit the usage of excess capital in favor of inorganic, which would be the rational thing to do, versus buybacks. So just on the inorganic, I mean, what areas would you kind of focus on? Then my second question is also on some of the proposals that seem to be, I think, discussed today in Parliament in France around the banking fees, the proposals from the national rally to kind of like cap these. So just wondering how much of an impact could that represent for your French retail business? Thank you.

Thank you, Delphine. Hi. Listen, I mean, again, I need to start with the same introduction. You know, I can't move into the business of commenting on the current. And you know that, right? I mean, you know our country here. It is a political race. for headlines, right? So I can't possibly be in the business of commenting a very intense and intensifying competition for headlines by various parties in a very divided parliament in France. Now, going back to the substance, I think what matters, and maybe this is the most important message, is that Whatever happens, you should expect us to be rational, right, so that we would make the calculations that need to be made and then, you know, starting off a mathematical reality, you know, compose something which is a convincing whole, if you will, right? So meaning organic growth, organic growth, is a good opportunity. Today, on the marginal rate of return, we are able to generate high, high levels of marginal rate of return in various businesses, in particular in GBIS, in financing and advisory, where the commitment of this additional capital comes also with a very high level of diversification from a sector perspective, from a client perspective, from a geography, geography perspective, so in a sound way. The real limit there is to do it at a cost to income which is not deteriorating, and second, it's in terms of risk management. Of course, right, because we're not going to, you know, pour all the excess capital in organic growth regardless of the environment in which we're working. So it's a balance, right, but it's a rational balance, but organic growth is a substantial opportunity, and you... should expect us over time to allocate part of the excess capital to organic growth. Inorganic growth can be an opportunity, but there you need to really expect us to have a conservative approach in terms of risk-return considerations, right? Inorganic growth is an opportunity. We have delivered historically on some. We have failed at others. And clearly, we learned our lessons. And execution risk would be always very carefully looked at. And from this perspective, Share buybacks, and again, depending on what that hypothetical word might look like, you know, might still be interesting because you need to adjust to these returns for the risks taken, right? And obviously, a share buyback or a dividend distribution would both carry basically zero risk to the investors versus the other opportunities. So you should expect us to be very rational, whatever the framework might be. And I am reasonably optimistic about where this whole thing lands. And the framework will be giving us inputs into a rational, mathematically sound reasoning about returns and risk-adjusted returns for our shareholders.

Thank you. And our second question is on the banking fees.

Oh, on the banking fees. Yeah. So, I mean, it's a little bit of the same thing, so I'm not going to say what I said again. You know, today, one thing I can tell you, for instance, is that The banking fees, if you compare them, retail banking fees, if you compare the revenues to the loan outstanding, it's roughly 2.3% in France versus something which is more 3.6% in EU. So one thing I can tell you is that it's quite easy to make the case that in terms of the average return on risk, if you will, for a retail bank in France, we are already, and it's to be expected given the level of competition in the market, we are already lower than the European Union. So I think, again, my current stance on this is that I do believe that reason in the country of Descartes will eventually prevail in these discussions. because I think that eventually no one, no matter their political color in France today, wants to make the business conditions impractical in France.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next question, sir, is from Pierre Chedeville of CIC. Thank you.

Yes, thank you for taking my question. I promise not to ask a tense question on tax issues. Maybe a follow-up to a strategic point. Regarding consumer credit, it seems that you are a little bit in the middle of the game in terms of size. Your run is below your cost of equity. Your outstanding is a little bit decreasing. But yet, we see that margin are improving in this business. So I wanted to know where do you stand from a strategic point of view with that franchise? Do you want to invest in it and develop? You stay still or maybe one day it could be something to sell. Regarding asset management, we all know that you are concluding negotiation with Amundi. Probably you will not tell exactly where you stand there. But my question is more general. Do you think it would be interesting for you to try to develop a small part of your asset management internally for some specific areas and not depend in vast majority on Amundi And do you think an evolution could be seen in asset management for you as this is a very profitable activity which is lacking your global business model? Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much. On consumer credit, I mean, you almost said it all. The overall condition of this business within our mix is improving after years of challenge, obviously, because of either regulatory aspects, the usual rates and the compression of margins linked to the negative jaws, if you will, between the funding and the allowed authorized maximum rate. plus obviously some of the post-COVID normalization in terms of cost of risk, et cetera, et cetera. So all these dynamics were broadly slowing down this business and lowering its performance, to your point. So what are we doing? We're doing what we're doing everywhere, which is, We'd like, and you've seen it at Avens, you've seen it in international banking, you've seen it very much at CIB. To some extent, it's a simple recipe. focus on the quality of the business and more, again, on structural profitability and margins rather than on volumes and, you know, focusing on the high quality, high return on capital, sound risk management, in my view, is always preferable to uncontrolled growth. And that's what you're seeing happening in this business, and it is indeed improving. And for instance, like in terms of NBI, we're up 6.6% with a much, I would say, sounder generation of revenues than maybe in the past. From a strategic perspective, it's a very important business, obviously, in the continuum of value creation within the French retail. And we have a few assets in Europe which are performing from very well to acceptable and similar to everything I said about, you know, our international network or any business that we have, we will continue to assess them very rigorously and in a very demanding way. And if an asset, you know, is not delivering what we should expect in terms of return versus cost of equity or, again, quality of its positioning, and if we're not the best shareholder, we will not keep this asset in the long run. It's a commitment on which we have delivered and we will be continuing to deliver. In terms of the Amundi partnership, indeed, I'm not going to break any news here, but it's a strong partnership, a long-standing one, one that works reasonably well for both partners in terms of performance, in terms of revenues, etc. So we learn as we mature, and so we are discussing all kinds of things with our partner. but we will clearly make sure that any partnership with anyone is always as balanced as possible between the product quality, the product support, the product's performance, and of course the fundamental asset of the client relationship that we bring to the table. Are we going to develop something in terms of Proprietary asset management, we are. We are already in terms of some of the high end of our client base is actually serviced by an in-house asset manager. And we do intend to very selectively, exactly the way you implicitly, you implied in your question, very selectively where it makes most sense with a, again, high high focus on the returns and the costs. We will be developing this further over time. And the other way of looking at it is In alternative asset management, we are, through the Brookfield Partnership and through our investments in the transition fund that we have created and funded with our own equity, we do intend, for instance, through these two vehicles, to increase our reach in terms of alternative asset management where we can bring something, again, proprietary to the table and build this on an organic basis.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

The next question is from Alberto Artoni of Intesa San Paolo.

Thank you very much for taking my question. Good morning. Just two questions from my side. The first one is more strategic on the direction of return on tangible equity. I know you have a target for 2026. But some competitors started to look beyond the target that they had given in the past. So I was wondering if you intend to perhaps provide in the future guidance for intermediate targets. going forward. And secondly, a more technical thing on FRTB, I think you mentioned in the past that you expect a negative impact on the 40 basis points. I was wondering if that is still all true today, and what do you expect with the legislation? I know there are discussions of postponing it, potentially changing it. What is your take on that? Thank you.

Thank you. So the direction of travel on ROTI is up There's no other direction of travel. It's true for what we have been doing and long term, it's true. And it's intrinsically, by the way, linked to all the discussion we've had today about cost and efficiency and cost to income. Of course, we intend to drive the cost down while continuing to to grow, right? And you've seen our growth rates excluding disposals, which are very substantial and very balanced across the businesses. That's exactly what we want to keep on doing, which is delivering as regularly as possible as big positive jobs as we can. And it's not always going to be perfect, but we will focus all our efforts on this. And so, indeed, this is how you should look at direction of travel. Now, in terms of actual guidelines and guidances you know we will we believe that being very transparent with our investor community with you guys is obviously critical and expected and so we will be at some point next year sharing with you our detailed views about the next few years and be able to not only throw a number right because throwing a number is one thing but also explain to you how we think about how we're going to get there and improve our performance and deliver value to all the stakeholders, but to investors in particular. In terms of the FRTB, it's still an unchanged estimate that we have, 40 basis points. It's 2027, if it happens. And for the rest, the impact from the output floors or other, let's say, tail end impacts, they're all either zero for the output floors, that's our assumption today, or very, very small and long term. So this is where we are in terms of what's going to happen to EFOR TV. Again, I'm not in the position to give you a firm answer, but again... I think that in the end, a little bit like the tax discussion in France, I think that in the end, people understand what is a right balance between safety and soundness concerns, which are obviously not only legitimate but important for everybody, for society, and competitiveness. And I think there is a balance to be struck. And in that balance, in my view, FRTB, given the nature of regulations here, And given what's happening worldwide, it is likely to be adjusted in my view. But, of course, I can't speak for the Commission and the other participants in that discussion at this point. Thank you very much.

The next question is from Sharath Kumar of Deutsche Bank.

Good morning. Thank you for taking my question. I have two, please. First on Borsa Bank, very encouraging to see the evolution there. But I wanted to ask you about the risk you see from Revolut and their aggressive pace of client acquisition. Would this entail a continuing pace of higher client acquisition even in 2026? Second one is on equities. Can you quantify the year-on-year growth excluding the day-one accounting adjustments that you had in the prior year period? The lower growth versus peers, is it a mixed effect or you not being on the front foot still on organic capital deployment? Thank you.

I'm not 100% sure I got the end of your second question. You asked for day one for growth in equities adjusted for day one. Is that what your question?

Yes. The year-on-year revenue growth if we don't have the accounting adjustments. And how it compares with peers.

Okay. What was the point about organic growth or organic capital?

So basically the lower growth in equities franchise, is it to do with the mix effect or you're not still being on the front foot for organic capital deployment?

I understand. All right. So in terms of the Boursaubanque and Revolut question, I would say the following, right? First of all, as I said also at a conference recently, when you have a strong, highly competitive company, new entrants in the market, you have to pay attention, you have to make sure you understand what they're doing, you have to recognize their strengths, study them, and adjust if needed. And so this is how we are treating this market evolution, meaning very seriously. Second comment, we are not exactly in the same business. If I oversimplify, they are wide geographically, and reasonably shallow in terms of products. We are very far geographically, it's France, but very, very deep in terms of product and in terms of planned relationship. Again, as I mentioned in the past, we're talking about $60 billion of assets, $50 billion of deposits. You're talking about a churn with a high level of cross-selling, a churn which is well below 4%. You're talking about basically the best of both worlds, which is like a real universal bank for individuals with a very wide product range across virtually any banking product from the simplest to the most sophisticated one. But you're talking also, again, about the number one bank in terms of client satisfaction. So from this perspective, we're talking about different players, but again, you know, we are trying to make sure that we give enough attention to this new entrant. Is that going to affect directly our acquisition policies or whatever? It certainly affects our thinking about this, and we clearly want to make sure that the way we acquire clients, the cost at which we acquire clients is optimized, and it's my earlier answer, and we're the proof point of having actually delivered a higher growth than expected with a much lower cost than expected. It shows you that we are very focused and have been for a while now on making sure that this equation works from a bottom line perspective. But is that going to make us change radically our approach in 2026 in particular? The answer is no. In terms of the day one adjusted performance for equities, I mean, we're not disclosing it like that, but it is, you have to think about this as high single digit for equities instead of the minus seven. And for the markets, it's a double digit, I mean, well into the double digit if you took both businesses. In terms of the mix, there is a bit of a mix. Yes, you're absolutely right. I mean, and even the the whole day one thing, which is linked to the strength in terms of origination on our structured product platform. So you see that there we're doing extremely well and, you know, likely gaining significant market share currently. On the flip side, you know, historically smaller activities on the flow side. We do have a slight mixed effect. Remember, there's also a slight FX effect. U.S. banks obviously publish in dollars. We publish in euro. You know, do the math. We're talking about a 7% or 8% differential quarter on quarter. I mean, year on year versus Q3, 24 and 25. So all these things play a little bit. But the most important one is the day one, which happened to be a very high release last year. And this year, the opposite trend. Thank you.

Thank you for that.

The final question, sorry, is from Anke Ringen of RBC.

Yeah, thank you for taking my question. Just two, please. One is on a 13% quarter one ratio. So assuming the tax wouldn't change, how quickly do you think you would want to be at that level? And then I'm just sorry for following up on litigation risk, but hopefully that's an opportunity for you to comment. I mean, with respect to the recent Sudan litigation for BNP, if you can maybe just talk about your own legal situation, if any claims have been filed or potentially is it already too late for any claims to be filed? Thank you very much.

Thank you. So on the first point, you know, the only thing I can say is, again, right, above 13, it's excess capital. And then we're not running the ship, if you will, down to 13. Obviously, there will be always some small technical buffer. You also have temporality, right? If you think about, for instance, hypothetically, asking for SBU authorizations to the supervisor, you have a four-month period. lead time, you build up capital during the quarter, etc. So basically, you will always be a few tens of basis points above 13%, even if you were to do a systematic buyback on the back of your capital generation. So this is how you should think about this. And then back to everything I said earlier, rational allocation between the various opportunities that we have in terms of using the excess capital. In terms of the litigation, I mean, first of all, of course, I can't comment on something that is not mine, but what I can say is, since you're asking, right, we don't have any exposure to Sudan or to this type of things. All right? Thank you very much. So thank you very much for your time. I know it's a busy day for you. Good luck with all the work, and I look forward to speaking with you next quarter. Thank you very much. Take care. Bye-bye.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.