Unicredito Spa Ord New

Good morning and welcome to Unicredit's fourth quarter and full year 2024 results conference call. Andrea Orchel, our CEO, will take you through the presentation. This will be followed by a Q&A session with Andrea and Stefano Porro, our CFO. Please limit yourself to two questions. With that, I hand over to Andrea.

Good morning. Good morning. It is my privilege to present the successful completion of the first phase of Unicredit Unlocked, crowned by our fourth quarter and full year 2024 results. We're now moving to the second phase of Unicredit Unlocked, acceleration. This will include our expectations and levers for the next three years, the guidance outlook and inorganic activity. Our performance would not be possible without the continued support of all our stakeholders. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our client for their trust, our shareholders for their belief and unwavering support, and above all, the people of Unicredit whose passion, dedication, and hard work make Unicredit what it is. I will start directly with slide five as I speak to all points in slide three and four later. Unicredit's transformation from 21 to 24 has been nothing short of exceptional, particularly as it has also consistently delivered outstanding financial results, quarter after quarter, while setting a new benchmark for banking. We have unified and refocused the entire organization around a single vision, strategy, and culture. We have simplified and streamlined our organization processes, and way of working. We have restored trust and empowerment among our 13 banks and our employees, all coming together as one group. By leveraging our scale, we have put to common denominator our product factories, building an ecosystem of partners. We have put our technology and data under one cohesive framework, driving efficiencies and innovation. These actions have been taken putting our client always at the center and have not only transformed Unicredit into a stronger, more competitive institution with leading financial KPIs, but also set us on a trajectory of continued success in the future. While the emphasis shall now shift, our transformation is far from over. We have surpassed all our targets. While macro tailwinds have favored our results in some areas, they have also masked the extent of our achievement. Our 14% net revenue growth was achieved with discipline. NII ROAC increased from 4% to 19% and is now best in the industry. Fees grew 6% ahead of our peers to 33% of total revenues. the impact of our investment in our factories has just started to show. Despite inflationary pressures particularly significant in our perimeter, we reduced costs by around $1.7 billion while reinvesting circa $1.4 billion to strengthen our group. Our cost-to-income ratio declined further to 37.9%, despite our complexity beating peers by a significant margin. Capital efficiency moved from laggard to leader, supporting 26 billion of distribution, 65% more than the original 16 billion target, while building an excess capital chest of 6.5 billion, taking 3.6 billion of integration cost in the period and 700 million of additional overlays. This excess capital shall now either boost our 25-27 distribution or provide us with strategic flexibility. Our net profit is more than double what we planned in 2021, no matter which definition you take. Our return on tangible equity is also more than double the Unicredit unlocked target despite the building of our excess capital. This performance balances excelling in the short term and preparing for the future. It is a testament to the dependability of Unicredit and its people. Unicredit now consistently delivers quality, profitable growth. We have generated positive jaws across all our key metrics. Our revenues have grown while focusing on profitability rather than volume in our chosen client segments. We not only reduced absolute cost in the face of inflation, but did so while investing for our future and increasing our top line. Unicredit remains a leader in the industry across all KPIs. We begin the next phase of our journey from a position of significant strengths. We delivered total shareholder return of 513%, four times our European peers. We delivered the best share price performance despite derating. We delivered the most generous distribution whilst building our excess capital. We're strong and able to offset the normalization of macro. We intend to grow our net profit at a high-teens return on tangible equity, delivering the highest sustainable distribution of a peer group. The trajectory ahead for our shareholders remains bright. Let's now focus on our Q4 and full year results in detail. Given the different definition, of net profit used by our competitor, lend-me-share hours, under the different views. Our stated net profit exceeded $9.7 billion for the full year. Our net profit, excluding DTAs, is now well ahead of the $9 billion we guided to, reaching $9.3 billion, up 8% year on year. Both are after absorbing $1.3 billion in integration costs and legal provision for Russia, without which our beat would have been much greater, and with which we furthered the risk 2025 and beyond. Our underlying net profit without integration cost and the extra legal provision for Russia reached 10.3 billion, a very strong base. These outstanding bottom line results have been achieved thanks to strong performance across every single line of our P&L and balance sheet. Net revenue increased 4% to $24.2 billion in the year, remaining flat in the quarter and up 1.3% if adjusted for the Commerce Bank hedge one-off. This is a result of strong profitable NII and fees and low and stable LLPs. Trading profit for the full year would have increased, excluding the one-off impact of the Commerce Bank hedge. NII grew on a quarterly and yearly basis despite the recent decline in rates due to excellent management of the pass-through and our replicating portfolio and investment portfolio results. In the fourth quarter, we also benefited from a $30 million contribution from the consolidation of Alfa Bank Romania and a $50 million one-off in Italy. Our NII remains highly profitable, with a ROAC of circa 19%, thanks to our continued focus on our target client segments and product and profitability over volume. Our asset quality remains strong and stable, with a gross NPE ratio of 2.6% and a net NPE ratio of 1.4%. Our gross NPE stock is half what it was four years ago. Our cost of risk remains structurally low at 15 basis points for the year and 34 basis points for the quarter, including an increase in our specific provision with overlays on touch at $1.7 billion. We're still benefiting from write-backs, confirming quality origination and conservative provisioning. The overall cost of risk is flat year on year with a default rate of 1.3% and only 1% flat versus fourth quarter 23, excluding a single name one-off in the fourth quarter. Fee growth has been strong across all categories, accelerating this year and even more so in the quarter of 9% year over year. our fee-to-revenue ratio stands at a top tier 33%, notwithstanding strong quality and high growth, highlighting the quality and diversification of our fee base. Overall fee performance has been driven by continued strong momentum in investment and P&C insurance, with growth at 17%, driven by increased client appetite, a broader product offering, and our ongoing shift towards affluent and private clients, Strong fee growth will remain central to our future success, fueling capital-light revenues and delivering exceptional results to clients and shareholders. This will allow us to extract positive differential value from any partnership or acquisition that we may make. Over the last three years, we have consistently reduced our absolute cost base of setting inflation while investing in the business. In 2024, we further reduced our costs by 0.6%, driven by non-HR down 1.3% and HR costs down 0.1%, despite increasing the remuneration of our people. This quarter, costs were impacted by bonus pool, two months of Alfa Romania consolidations, and accelerated digital investments. Without this intentional investment, costs would be flat in the quarter and lower still in the year. Our cost-income ratio improved to 37.9%, consistently leading our peer group. From disciplined cost management combined with targeted streamlining of our organization, reducing unnecessary overhead and investing efficiency. Our operational excellence has been a key factor in our success, and we intend to maintain it and defend it. Our best-in-class organic capital generation of 12.6 billion for the year allowed us to absorb headwinds, increase distribution to 9 billion, and maintain a stable CT1 ratio of 15.9%. Active portfolio management reduced RWAs by almost 13 billion. We now present our region in a way that we believe better represent very individual dynamic. We will separate Italy from Germany, from Austria, and pull together Central and Eastern Europe. So let's start with Italy. Our franchise in Italy is market leading in terms of profitability, efficiency, and capital generation by a wide margin. It is Unicredit's quality earnings powerhouse, and its results speak for themselves. Gross revenues grew 4% to $11.4 billion, driven by both NII, plus 5, and very strong fees, plus 7. We continued to focus on profitability rather than volume. NII ROAC exceeded 23%, significantly above our peers. All fee categories grew, with investment and insurance delivering a standout performance of plus 16%, and fees-to-revenue reaching almost 40%. We're leading in terms of our investment products growth in Italy. Operational efficiency improved further. Costs were down despite growth and investment in technology and our people, allowing us to reach a cost-income ratio of 34.5%, unparalleled in the country. Capital efficiency improved yet again, with net revenues over RWAs of 10.5%. Net profit rose 10% to 4.4 billion. Roarct reached 31%, the best in Italy. As a result, organic capital generation reached 5.5 billion, again, well in excess of our net profit, underscoring the quality and profitability of our growth. This outstanding performance provides the firepower to constantly deliver innovative solutions and support for our clients. This year alone, we facilitate almost 11 billion in financing to support Italian SMEs, none of which would be possible without our people. We welcome over 1,000 new team members this year and launched professional retraining and upskilling initiatives, delivering 1.3 million hours through Unicredit University. Germany. Our German bank is the most profitable and efficient in the country, with the best balance between gross and profitable NII and quality fees. One of our two key anchors for the group, it delivered its highest profit ever. This is the financial result of our successful transformation. Gross revenue grew 1% to $5.5 billion, driven by fees up three to $1.6 billion, accelerating plus eight in the quarter. Fees compensated NII down 3.5% in the quarter while maintaining the leading NII ROAC in the country above 18%. Operational efficiency improved yet again. Costs were down 8% despite growth and investment in technology and people. Cost income declined to below 41%. Capital efficiency improved yet again with net revenues over RWAs of 7.5%. Net profit rose 12% to 1.9 billion. ROAC reached 20%. As a result, organic capital generation reached 2.8 billion, well in excess of net profit. Our disciplined approach to profitable growth stands out. We have restrained ourselves from chasing some competitors who have recently significantly reduced pricing to inflate revenue which are well below the cost of equity and will impact their profitability over time. This success is thanks to the caliber of people who make our business. In the last year, we hired more than 300 new colleagues and announced the creation of over 140 new jobs as part of our integration of the custody business. We have been awarded Top Employee Germany for the 15th time in a row. Our team is united behind a common vision and ambition and in a market-leading position from which now accelerate. Austria. Our bank in Austria is the most profitable and efficient bank in the country. The second anchor to our group, it continues its transformation, showing improvements on every line and delivering its best net profit ever. Gross revenues grew 3% to $2.7 billion, driven by fees up 8% due to strong investment and client hedging fees, and resilient NII plus 2%. We are maintaining discipline as compared to Chase volumes, reflected in our NII ROAC of 15%, well ahead of all peers. Operational efficiency improved yet again. Costs were down more than 1% despite gross and investment in technology and in people. Our cost-to-income ratio declined below 38%. Capital efficiency improved yet again with net revenues over RWAs of 7%. Net profit rose 14% to 1.3 billion. ROAC reached 24%. As a result, organic capital generation reached $1.5 billion, again in excess of our net profit. We supported the growth of our SMEs through the provision of $3.4 billion in new lending and rolled out a digital trade decision engine to provide SMEs faster access to it. We kept a strong focus on supporting our customers, employees, and communities, launching a special tranche of mortgage loans with favorable conditions for young families. And under the umbrella of Unicredit University Austria, we continued expanding our development and upskilling program, while our new well-being framework reached more than 1,000 people. Central and Eastern Europe. Our Central and Eastern Europe franchise also leads in profitability and efficiency. It is the growth engine of our group. It demonstrated excellent performance as our local countries lead in their own right, in their individual markets, whilst leveraging benefits from our group-wide factories, network, and platforms. Gross revenues grew 8% to $4.5 billion driven by fees, plus 13%, and resilient NII plus 5%, with an NII ROAC of 26%. We are maintaining discipline without sacrificing market share as competitors chase volumes. Operational efficiency improved yet again, with cost income at 33%, whilst capital efficiency remained high, with net revenue over RWAs at 8.7%. Net profit rose 3% to $2.2 billion. ROAC reached 30%. Organic capital generation reached $1.6 billion. I would like to underscore that Central and Eastern Europe's underlying growth is twice that of a core European Union, with low FX risk. We have unchallenged leadership in corporate and a significantly growing retail contribution, which should further be enhanced by our re-entry in Poland, leveraging Vodeno Ion. Four banks contribute 70% of our region's revenue. In Bulgaria and Croatia, we have a leadership position in both retail and corporates. In Romania, we are top tier, and in Romania and Czech and Slovakia, we lead in corporate. We are complemented and accelerated by our other five banks, which, while smaller, deliver outstanding performance. This year alone, we upskilled 900 branch managers, set up bespoke initiatives to recognize and nurture talent within our Gen Z cohort. We continued with our dedicated development to build a solid pipeline of future managers. Russia. We have been working towards an accelerated, orderly wind-down of Russia from day one. always within both the letter and the spirit of a complex legal, regulatory, and sanction limitation. We met the target communicated in H1 one year early. Local deposit declined to 900 million, 89% down since first quarter 22. Net local loans declined to 1 billion, 86% down since first quarter 22. Cross-border exposure declined 94% to date and will become practically nil this year. We minimized our loss to only 11% of principal. Cross-border payments are below $10 billion, 64% down since Q1 2022. They are now almost exclusively in euro and US dollar. We have reduced the capital impact of a full write-down of Russia from circa 130 basis points on a 14% CT1 in Q1 2022 to now circa 50 basis points, 10 basis points lower than recently, on a 16% CT1 today. We are now compliant with this ECB order. Turning to our product factors, we see strong delivery of our sustainable capital-light fee-based revenue. Client solution revenue grew by 9% to $11.3 billion, two-thirds of our fees up 8%. Individual solution rose by 14% to $3.3 billion, driven by investments up 18% and protection up 13%. We're increasing the use of our markets products within our investment offering to create better solution for our clients. Our one market funds reach 14.5 billion and our own managed funds gross to total sales reach 31% up from 14% in 2023. Corporate solution revenue rose by 9% to 5.4 billion driven by client risk management up 17 and advisory and financing up six. Payment solution rose 4% to 2.3 billion, driven by payment, up seven. We are entering the next phase on Unicredit Unlocked, in which we focus on accelerating our top line, driven profitable growth. Our goal is to solidify our position as the leading pan-European bank and further widen the gap versus competitors. the industry faces headwinds such as net interest income pressure, cost inflation, normalization of risk, Russia, and ongoing digital evolution. We are confident in our ability to complete our transformation while building on our unique structural advantages through targeted alpha initiatives. This will allow us to not only overcome the impact of headwinds on our record net profit, but also grow it to over $10 billion, excluding DTAs, maintaining return on tangible in the high teens and our organic capital generation broadly in line with net profit. Structural advantages. Our roadmap is clear. We are a transformed bank. Now harnessing its structural advantages, which are an attractive geographic footprint, combined with a quality client and product mix, to deliver superior profitable growth and distribution over time. We operate as a federation of 13 individually empowered banks, each executing independently, yet benefiting from being part of one group. This profitable and diversified footprint, Italy's quality earnings, anchored by Germany and Austria resilience, and powered by our Central and Eastern European growth engine, strikes the ideal balance between highly capital-generative, stable markets and dynamically expanding one. We serve 15 million clients with 60% of our revenues from high-value segments such as SME, private and affluent, and we intend to increase that weight. By leveraging our global product offering, centralized procurement, and technology and data infrastructure at scale, we further enhance our competitive edge. This is how we drive our fee-to-revenue ratio towards 40%, outpacing market growth through internalization, superior fee, and profitable lending products. No other peer is in such a favorable position. Alpha initiatives. To build on our structural strengths, our targeted alpha initiatives are split into commercial and operational. Together, they support our ambition financial goals, ensuring we continue to build on our momentum and unlock new avenues of value creation. Turning to our geography, all regions will maintain strong performance throughout the plan. Our powerhouse for quality earnings will see its share of group net profit shift from 45% to around 40%. Having benefited most from rising rates, Italy will feel the impact of rate reversal more acutely. Yet, the quality of its earnings will continue to improve. Fees as a share of revenue will rise from circa 40% to 48%. And Iraq will normalize at 17%, well ahead of cost of equity. The overall country, Iraq, will normalize at 25%. Germany and Austria, both high-rated economies, serve as resilient anchors for our group. They have benefited much less from the positive rates impact, hence are now much more resilient on the way down. Combined with the continued improvements in their operational and capital efficiency and their readiness to now again gain profitable market share, Germany and Austria will bring their net profit contribution to 35% and ROAC to 22%. Finally, Central and Eastern Europe, our proven engine of profitable growth, will increase its contribution to about 25% of net profit despite a normalization of provision. Their growth should then accelerate from there. The region's operational and capital excellence will persist. Their cost-income ratio will further reduce to 31%, with ROAC reaching 30%, and strong top-line growths. This attractive, diversified geographic mix will allow Unicredit to deliver superior profitable growth and capital generation, supporting outsized distribution. Building on these structural advantages, we will strategically increase allocated capital and investment across all regions. We will, however, prioritize those with the highest profitability and growth potential. with Central and Eastern Europe receiving the most, but all regions growing. Our clients remain at the heart of our strategy. While we strive to add value to all, our gross initiative focus on targeting the most attractive segment with strong capital light potential. we are decisively shifting our focus towards SMEs and private and affluent individuals, which currently account for 60% of our revenues and 75% of our fee growth going forward. We have built market-leading product factories that enable us to better serve our clients' diverse financial needs, a key competitive advantage. The impact that these factories are having on each one of our 13 franchises, and now also on that of our partner in Greece, demonstrate the significant value we can unlock, not only internally, but in any acquisition. Looking ahead, we will continue to invest in these factories and improve their connection to the end client, adding an additional 1.4 billion in fee growth by the end of our plant. Our ambition is to offer a truly integrated experience that blends digital innovation with personalized human interaction across both retail and corporate. This is done through the continued enhancement of our distribution model and channels, coupled with a team of motivated professionals providing prompt, high-quality advice rooted in local expertise. Meanwhile, our digital channels are secure, user-friendly, and increasingly capable of delivering an exceptional customer experience. Through our corporate portals, clients receive personalized solutions in the areas of transactional payment, trade finance, factoring, client risk management, regardless of their location. Our mobile channels provide on-the-go services tailored for digital-first lifestyles. By seamlessly integrating these channels, we can serve clients when, where, and how they prefer 24-7, delivering bespoke, outstanding service and support at all times. Bringing it all together by leveraging our attractive geographies, our factories, and our channels, we will be able to become the go-to bank for our clients. While we have achieved strong NPS gains, our true priority lies in providing a distinctive experience that sets us completely apart from our peer group. We aspire to become the benchmark for quality when clients think about financial services. Our linchpins. Our people are the linchpin between our commercial and operating machine. They are the most valuable asset and what ultimately makes our ambition possible. We remain committed to investing in them. We believe that by empowering them, developing them, offering them clear career opportunities, they will achieve professional fulfillment. While not yet there, we are committed to continue on this path. We reward talent transparently. We have increased non-executive bonuses by 30% over the last two years, higher than those of executive. We offer the highest VAP in Italy, for example. In parallel, we aim to foster an inclusive, engaging culture by promoting employee-led initiative. Most of the 2,000 simplification initiatives we have rolled out came bottom up from our people and not top down. Our gender pay gap was 4% when we started the plan. We practically closed it today. Our ultimate goal is to create an environment in which our employees feel connected, valued, and empowered because they are the driving force behind our continued success. Let's move to the operating machine and organizational processes. Our operating machine has undergone a major overhaul to better support our business and create further value for our clients. We streamline organizational structure, flatten the hierarchies, and focus resources on high-impact areas, enabling our teams to act more swiftly. By eliminating inefficiencies, our cost base remains flat whilst funding investment. We're increasingly leveraging technology and AI to automate and reduce complexity. improving our ways of working and redirecting savings towards business growth. And the result speaks for themselves. Time to approval for a consumer loan in Italy dropped from over 24 hours to just 25 minutes, with more improvement on the way, and you will see them this year. We will continue to identify and remove inefficiency, accelerate automation, and use of data, whilst treating every process, workflows, and organizational structure as a blank slate for continuous improvement. Our digital strategy revolves around two core imperatives. First, uncompromised reliability, security, and compliance fully aligned with local and ECB regulation. Two, outcome-driven technology investment with every euro spent demonstrating that it can deliver clear return and meet specific business organizational needs. Our ultimate ambition is to develop a digital foundation that not only meets but surpasses best-in-class peers and is able to compete with fintechs. Our IT spend is in line with or above our peers. That said, the efficiency of our spend has significantly improved and, we believe, trends towards market leading, allowing us to achieve more with less. With respect to technology and data, investing in the right initiative and with the lowest unit cost is far more important than the headline number of what one spends. Our security measures have become ever more effective, reflected in our reduction of incidents by 67% over three years. We have consolidated our data centers and reskilled our digital workforce, improving our tech to non-tech ratio by 18 percentage points. We maintain proactive oversight of regulatory requirements bolstered by a robust digital operational resilience strategy. We are now in a position to accelerate, leveraging technology, data, and AI to elevate our performance to the next level. By continually experimenting to meet evolving needs, we're driving innovation and expanding our offering across multiple integrated platforms and channels. You will increasingly see the outcome of that. Our ambition is to build our capacity to transform, evolving with a changing environment and the needs of our clients and ensuring we continue to provide outstanding products and services. To do so, we have and will continue to invest. We are planning to add $2.5 billion of IT investment over the plan, delivering IT projects at a lower unit cost and faster time to market. as a result of a disciplined focus on efficiency within our IT and AI spend. Vodeno Ion. Unicredit's latest acquisition, Vodeno Ion, is a proprietary technology and fintech solution that aligns perfectly with our acceleration. It combines all the aspects of our alpha initiatives. Our initial pilots consist of reentering the Polish market, expanding in select Western and European countries, and offering embedded finance solution. Thanks to Vodeno Ion's high flexibility, extremely low cost to serve, and quick time to market, we have the ambition to add 2.5 million clients and build a business with a meaningful impact on group net profit, a ROAC above 25%, and a cost-income ratio of 34% within three years. We plan to progressively invest up to 200 million on an iterative basis with a payback of under two years. Our guidance on cost already includes the maximum investment that we expect to make. In summary, our alpha initiatives and our investment in Vodeno Ion are at the base of our exciting organic growth story, a story that, together with the finalization of our transformation, will allow us to absorb expected future headwinds in full and significantly grow without diluting profitability nor distributions. Similarly to phase one of Unicredit Unlocked, we are again setting ambitious targets for phase two. Our ambition is to match 2024 record net profit in 2025, absorbing all headwinds and growth from there to circa 10 billion, excluding DTAs, by 2027. We're determined to do so, maintaining a return on tangible equity in excess of 17% and an average 25-27 organic capital generation broadly in line with our net profit. Together with a return of our excess capital, we aim to distribute more than in 24 in each of the next three years. 50% of net profit will be in cash. This would result in six years of improving performance and growth at an increasing margin over our cost of equity, coupled with best-in-class distribution. This should lead to a significant re-rating of our stock. We're excited about the challenge and determined to meet it. While we are realistic with respect to the challenges from a macro environment that will normalize, we believe that we are the best place to deliver the differential value and growth necessary to offset it and grow. We have built unique lagons of defense, including 1.7 billion of overlays, to insulate us from the cost of recycle. We have front-loaded non-operating item and external charges equal to 1.3 billion in 2024 alone, absorbing these within our beat of net profit and distribution. These should trend to zero over the plan. Together with the strengths of our transform group and our alpha initiatives in flight, these lines of defense will de-risk the achievement of our net profit ambition. Finally, we will have six and a half billion excess capital to return to our shareholders by 27, which will further de-risk our distribution. 2025 is the year of interest rate normalization, cost of risk trending up, inflationary pressure on cost, and for us, further Russia compression. We expect NII to decline, over mid-single digits, starting from a high base. This includes some loan growth for the group that is driven by Central and Eastern Europe. Our cost of risk should remain stable at around 15 basis points, including partial overlay usage. Fees and net insurance results should grow by more than 5% as past investments increasingly deliver. As a reminder, in the second quarter, we expect to start reporting the insurance line as a separate line in our P&L. Trading high in 24 should reduce by a couple of hundred million, mainly due to the negative effect of lower rates on the funding of the trading book. The other revenue line should reduce by a couple of hundred million as 24 benefited from some one-off, and the contribution from insurance is reflected elsewhere. This leads to net revenue over 23 billion. Costs on the same perimeter would be slightly down. On the expanded perimeter, they will be around 9.6 billion, with cost income targeted at around 40%. Non-operating and extraordinary items will significantly reduce, providing a large buffer to absorb any operating profit shortfall. This is protection of our results. Both stated net profit, including DTAs, and net profit excluding DTAs, are expected to be broadly in line with 2024. RWAs will increase to around 300 billion due to the impact of Basel IV models, changes, and strategic investment, partly offset by further portfolio action. Basel IV impact will be around 80 basis points for the first quarter and 60 basis points for the full year, mostly from the standardization of operational risk models. Distributions are expected to be greater than in 2024. We're confident we can continue to deliver strong EPS and DPS growth. Phase two of Unicredit Unlock sees us shifting our focus on top line profitable growth while completing our transformation, aiming to maintain our leadership in operating and capital excellence while investing in digital data and our people. We aim to achieve 10 billion of net profit, excluding DTA, by 27. Stated net profit and net profit should converge as DTAs should disappear. Hence, you should compare the 10 billion ambition with the 9.3 billion of today. We intend to distribute in each of the next three years more than 24, with 50% of net profit in cash. This is supported by a 17% return on tangible and average organic capital generation broadly in line with net profit and the return of our excess capital. We continue to target strong EPS and DPS growth. Our target CT1 currently remain between 12.5% and 13%, notwithstanding the impact of BAL4 and model changes, particularly on operational risk, not substantially changing our risk. We have just gone through phase two of Unicredit Unlocked, which remains our main focus and a compelling base case that we believe will deliver positively differentiated performance and distribution versus our peers. Any M&A activity shall be executed solely if it further enhances our base case. Solely if it further enhances our base case. It must be consistent with our strategy and meet our strict financial criteria, delivering returns that compare favorably to buying back our own shares. This is a high bar. We're not afraid to walk away, if not met and demonstrated this much so far. BPM, at the offer price, despite its valuation at a significant level, Price-earning and price-to-distribution premium to ours has enough potential to add value to meet our criteria. Commerce Bank, still an investment, fully hedged on the downside. Our ability to add massive value to Commerce Bank is demonstrated by HVB's transformation in only three years. But we would only make an offer at the right terms and conditions. There is no risk of overlap between these two potential deals as they would be sequential and would be led by separate local management teams in separate legal entities overseen by separate regulators. Just for transparency, we are about to announce that our total holding in Generali, including position that we hold on behalf of our client, has crossed the 5% thresholds. This does not change our position on the stake, which remains financial and does not imply any interest to acquire the company or the like. A unicredit BPM combination would build a stronger number two in Italy. Network and client franchise are complementary and would be highly protected. The combined client base of 12 million would be further tilted towards Unicredit-targeted segments, affluent, private, and especially SMEs, in which we do not expect any concentration issue, instead seeing significant growth potential. The combination allows BPM to access scale, benefiting from Unicredit's greater balance sheet, factories, superior investment firepower, particularly in the areas of technology, data and AI, and the network. BPM clients would all benefit from a refurbished branch network and an improved branch network, integrated physical and digital channels, premium product factories including consumer finance, asset management, and insurance, superior capital and balance sheet strengths, meaning improved lending capacity, access to unique Spanish-European network. BPM's people would be offered better career, development, opportunities, and reward. Any cost efficiency will be made with limited impact on the network as the efficiency will be focused on non-business overhead, back-end of the bank and external providers. This approach was effectively delivered at Unicredit and in full cooperation with trade unions. Italy will benefit from the bank's enhanced ability to support local community, institutions and families. We offer a price that incorporated a 15% premium to BPM's undisturbed share price, the level prior to the announcement of the offer on Anima, where a 100% acquisition is not a foregone conclusion. And further M&A speculation linked to a potential combination, one which is now off the table. We are offering all BPM stakeholder an opportunity for a strong, certain, and rewarding future. There is a clear performance gap between the two banks today. Unicredit Italy is the most profitable and efficient bank in the country by a wide margin. In terms of gross revenue growth, we outperformed BPM by 10 percentage points between 2021 and 2024, a comparable nine-month period. In terms of capital efficiency, our net revenue to RWA is two percentage points higher than BPM. In terms of operating efficiency, our cost income ratio is 13 percentage points lower. Our ROAC is 14 percentage points higher. Unicredit trades at a significant discount to BPM on 2026 consensus price to earnings and even more so on price to distribution. Given the strengths of our organization and our confidence in our preparedness to face the future, we believe it should be otherwise. Commerce Bank. While today Commerce Bank is just an investment and there is no offer on the table, an in-market combination with HPV would create the number two private bank in the country with minimal overlap in key regions and clients. The combined entity would be larger and more stable, operating under German law, protected by German deposit insurance, and run day-to-day with decisions made in Germany for Germany. The two banks would almost equally contribute to reaching a low teens market share in the Mittelstand. All its clients could benefit from access to Unicredit's higher quality product and services, as well as its 13 markets in Europe, where we hold leading presences. Superior capital positioning and balance sheet strengths and lower cost of funding. the impact of higher, better targeted investment capacity, particularly in technology, data and network. Poland would benefit from being fully empowered, but also capable to leverage the number one CEE franchise, a much stronger bank in Germany and leading franchises in Italy and Austria. It too would be able to access our product factories and much needed investment in its technology. Commerce Bank's people would have better opportunity as part of a wider group. Unicredit would continue to engage constructively with employee representatives and efficiencies will have a limited impact on the network. This deal would be a circa 20 billion vote of confidence on Germany, on the German banking system, on the European banking system, and on Europe. It is a sign of belief in the potential of our banking industry and ability to compete against foreign and fintech competitors that are gaining significant share. There is a massive performance gap between the two banks today, despite them being the mirror image of each other in Germany. Herein lies both the size and the credibility of the value creation opportunity, even before considering any synergy. HVB is number one for profitability, operational, and capital efficiency in Germany. Our capital efficiency net revenue, RWA, is two percentage points higher than Commerzbank. Our cost efficiency, cost to income ratio, is 18 percentage points lower. Our ROAC, is 11 percentage points higher. This gap is likely to widen, in our opinion. HVB's top line will continue to benefit from our focus on profitability rather than volume and is now ready to grow in a quality way without the hand winds of cleaning up the past. HVB will further leverage best-in-class operational and capital excellence together with the impact of past investment and future one in technology and data. Conversely, we believe Commerce Bank will both need to do the hard work, temporarily affecting the result of the next three years, and be credible in its execution given the missed of the last two efficiency plans. Regarding any potential target, we would look to understand, number one, efficiency. Has past cost management focused solely on reducing expenses without reinvestment to the detriment of strengthening the organization? Is any catch-up now needed at a particularly more difficult time? Are efficiencies supported by changes in the organization, processes, way of working, model, automation, or is the target overstretching the organization? Secondly, investment. Has the bank adequately invested in its network, people, technology, data? If not, is there a plan to catch up And how will that be funded? Preparedness. Is the bank able to sustain the turn in the macro environment as the sector is exposed to rates and cost of risk normalization and inflationary pressure on cost? How robust is the starting point in terms of NP coverage, overlays, NII profitability, and approach to lending? On Commerce Bank, we're looking for clarity on the following. Corporate center. representing almost half of the bank, on which limited information is ever provided. The opaque nature of this structure raises questions on transparency, risk, volatility, and the true efficiency and profitability of the core business. Technology and data. What is the state of technology and data system, especially obsolescence and level of integration of past acquisition in particularly Dresdener? Are future investments sufficient to maintain an efficient IT, supporting its people and the business? Strategic plan and execution credibility. Are the new target realistic, particularly given failure to achieve some of the previous one in efficiency? Or do they rely on overly optimistic assumption and the pressure to counter a potential offer? Are they overly focused on volume and dropping margins? Are sufficient steps taken to structurally improve efficiency, core banking, earnings, and reduce volatility? Given the timeline we look at today, we will have three, four, or even five full quarter to observe execution. We look forward to more clarity on all of these points. In closing, and before I open up for question, I would like to leave you with our key messages. 1. Unicredit delivered 16 consecutive quotas of profitable growth, reaching its best year ever. 2. We are now transformed into Europe's best-performing and rewarding bank, given our distributions. 3. We are entering in the next phase of our winning strategy from a position of strength and intend to widen the gap with our competitors. 4. We have an exciting organic growth and distribution story ahead. As of now, the most generous. Five, M&A will act as a further accelerator and will be executed only within our strict metrics or not at all. Overall, Unicredit remains a unique investment proposition still accessible at an attractive valuation. As our team in Bulgaria loves to remind me, the best is yet to come. Thank you. And we now open to questions.

Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on their touchtone telephone. To remove yourself from the question queue, please press star and two. We can be honest to use handsets when asking questions. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question is from Britta Schmidt of Autonomous Research. Please go ahead.

Yeah, thank you very much for taking my questions. With regards to the Commerzbank stage, you say you've got three to five full quarters observing how Commerzbank will execute whatever they are going to announce. But do you have a fixed plan as to what you consider doing after these five quarters in terms of divestment or continuing to hold it as a financial investment? And another question I have is just regarding the RWA guidance to $300 billion in 2025. Can you help us break down the drivers a little bit? We've got the Basel IV impact, but what are the other moving parts, considering that this is above consensus expectations? Thank you.

Okay. I'll take Commerce Bank. So... So obviously the reason we have three or four quarters is because we are sticking by what we said and we are waiting to be able to engage with a new government before we do anything else on Commerce Bank such as launching a bid. If you go through the timeline, that takes you through three, four, five quarters depending what you assume. I also highlight to everybody that If and when we were to launch a bid, the decision remains firmly with us, and we would launch a bid when we're ready, not in automatic following of whatever we achieve in terms of negotiation with the government. So that is why the timeline. In terms of the maximum time and what we do next, it will very much depend on the outcome of all of these conversations and discussions. So at the moment, I cannot tell you.

So in relation to risk-weighted asset guidance, so let's start from starting point, $277 billion. Q1, we have Basel impact. So the Basel impact is in basis point, 80 basis point in terms of risk-weighted asset number will be between $14 and $15 billion. The Basel impact on the full year, taking consideration the mitigating actions that we will perform during the course of the year, will be around 12 billion euro. So that's the reason why the full year impact is around 60 basis point of common equity ratio. Then we have model changes during the course of 2025 are primarily related to multinational clients and AID model locally from overall amount of around 8 billion euro during the course of primarily first half of 2025. Important to take into consideration that we will keep on doing active portfolio management action during the course of the year. In 2024, we have done around €13 billion. In 2025, we will do more than €7 billion of active portfolio management action, including also securitization. The business dynamic will be driven by the lending volumes that are expected to be higher than 2024 with a growth rate that will be, let's say, in line with the GDP expectation for 2025.

The next question is from Andrea Filtri of Mediobanca. Please go ahead.

Thank you for taking my questions. The first is in distribution. You guide for organic distributions over 9 billion each of the next three years and net profit condition going towards 10 with distributions close to net profit while also targeting 6.5 billion excess capital redistribution by 2027 after M&A. Keeping the math simple, can we therefore dream of over 30 billion cumulative 2025-2027 distribution. And this is on a standalone basis while you have more than one M&A front open. So how should we look at your 2025 targets and how would they change if you would be successful on the BPM offer? And how should we consolidate the Commerce Bank's stake in 2025? Second question. is on Russia. You're providing 2025 targets and saying you're compliant with the ECB order. Can we therefore consider the credit being forced to sell Russia at one euro as an unlikely event? And finally, if you could just provide the balance sheet DTAs remaining.

Thank you. Okay. All right. So I like to dream But you have a calculator, you can get to your own numbers. What I can tell you is that we have just committed to pay in excess of nine billion per year for three years. And we confirm that we are returning the entire six and a half billion of excess capital by 27. That's also within three years. I think it's a little bit more than a dream. Let's put it this way. And the second thing is, yes, this is the base case. So as you can say, and I underscore that because given the excitement that M&A brings, everybody tends to deviate. And I remind everybody that everybody tended to deviate the first day I got here. And I think you would agree that not doing M&A got us quite far. This is the same for the next three years. The difference is that we now have two possibilities on the table, but there is no way that we will risk derailing what we feel is an exciting plan that combines profitable growth higher than most of our peers and distribution definitely higher than most of our peers to do M&A at the wrong terms or in the wrong way or at the wrong price. So this is the premise, and I want to make it clear. So that then brings you to your question. Well, if you M&A, what happens to our distribution, et cetera? At the moment, I can only give you what I have for certain. So first, 2024 distribution will be done, meaning they will be done just after the M&A complete one way or the other because we have committed to them. So what remains to be done in terms of dividend distribution will be done slightly before. What remains to be done in terms of share buyback will be done later because we cannot interfere with our share price during the offer period. Secondly, if we were to do M&A, what is the impact on 2025 distributions in general? So that's the second question. So if we were able to complete M&A, BPM, what would happen? My view, nothing would happen, meaning the 2020, we have said that we will strive to maintain the dividend per share equal for our shareholders. And that will happen. Secondly, all the plan distribution to shareholders will continue as if the acquisition has not What you would have is a dilution of your excess capital at the tail of a 2027, right? Because we're using some of it. We would be using some of it to do the transaction. But by the time you get to 2027, we would have fully integrated the bank. it would be more than halfway through getting to the level of performance that we are, and it would positively contribute to our distribution on an organic, recurrent, ordinary fashion. So it's secretive, and that's exactly what we have said we would do. I am not going to speculate on Commerce Bank because it's not on the table, and if you think about it, Andrea, if you believe, and I let you decide, three quarters, four quarters, assuming it goes ahead, After that, you should add nine months. It takes you very quickly into 27. So I know a lot of people are speculating about that, but most of our plan is gonna be done without any impact from that. The second thing that I would say is even if we consolidated the stake, in 25, because we get authorization to reach the 30% physical shares, that consolidation will only very mildly affect our CT1 ratio, given that it would remain to be hedged. And therefore, the distribution would not be affected by that in the least. The other thing, Russia. let me remember what we said so I cannot speculate on what may happen or not happen but you do know the way we have managed the situation finding the right balance between doing what we felt is right morally correct and defending the interest of our shareholders and incidentally of our people we will continue to do so And therefore, as far as we're concerned, you're selling for one euro, et cetera. If it's me, unless I'm forced, I will not be selling Russia for one euro or for anything that is not an inverted commas fair price. At the moment, I remind you, we have a bank that has less than a billion in deposit, less than a billion in loans. that is probably a payment reference in corporate, but all within the sanction framework and increasingly under the ECB order, and that focused on Euro and US dollar, which is primarily targeted to serving Western clients that still are operating in the country. The retail is being reduced to zero, and this is what we have. Where we go from there will depend on a number of other scenarios, but selling for zero is not in the card. I also would like to highlight that Russia becomes quite marginal in our numbers. One of the reasons why we grow in inverted commas only to $10 billion in net profit is because we absorb the entire contribution for Russia during the period. So we are assuming that the contribution will trend to zero by 2017.

So in relation to the capital impact of the carbon mass stake, the overall exposure is currently impacting the capital for around 10 basis points. If we will move from an equity position, so with shares from 9 to 29, as highlighted by Andrea, during the course of 25, in such a case, the impact will be around 30 basis points of common equity to one ratio, so well within... the capital buffer that we have. In relation to the DTAs, so we have imbalanced DTAs in relation to Italian perimeter for 4 billions of euro. There is nothing more that we can recognize in Italy. That means that from this moment onwards, it's not a P&L topic, it's a capital topic. So when we will utilize these DTAs, we will generate capital. By when we will do that, we will do that in the course of the next six years, which is the overall capital benefit from this is around 140 basis points of capital. In relation to the off-balance sheet DTAs that we can further writing up, is around 400 million euro pertaining to the Austrian perimeter. And we might do the write-up, let's say, already during the course of 2025, provided that the profitability will bring us to such a conclusion.

Thank you. The next question is from Antonio Reale of Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Good morning, everyone. It's Antonio from Bank of America. I have two questions, please, one on strategy and one on your mid-term profit aspirations. On the first question, since you've joined Uniqloid, you've launched a number of initiatives to grow back into your product factories. We've seen it in payments, life insurance, and a number of others. So I've seen increasingly this trend in Italy. There's been, I think, a shift in focus and attention towards preserving Italian savings and you've often talked about Unicredit when it comes to asset management being a distributor of EUM products rather than a manufacturer. So I wonder if your strategy or vision about this with respect to asset management in particular has changed in any way. That's my first question. Maybe I can complement that or you can complement the answer by also sharing your views on insurance. and why you've decided to cross the 5% stake in Generali ahead of their board renewal in May. And you've partly answered the second question, which is around your profit aspirations. I think you have clear standalone targets, and people will give you credit on delivery. You've talked about your vision for Unicredit to become the bank of Europe's future, which is a project that's taking shape as we speak. It's becoming more and more tangible, at least versus when you first talked about it. So my question is, why not put a number on this vision and aspire to more than the 10 billion euros? That's my second question. I'll stop here. Thanks.

I like the try on the more than 10 billion euro. So, Antonio, let me start with the last one. If, as I'm sure you have, if you did the numbers on the inertial impact that we all tend to minimize of rates normalization, cost of risk increase, impact from inflation on cost on European banks, I think you would agree that the number is quite large. So for us to add to that the additional compression to zero of Russia, and tell you that by 27 we are adding 700 million is, I would say, ambitious and realistic. That does not mean we can't do better, but it does mean that at this point in time, based on all the uncertainty and the scenarios that we have, we put on the table what we believe we can do, and then we review if the scenarios improve. Not every bank scenario is as, let's say, demanding as ours in terms of the macroevolution. We believe it will have a very important impact. But what I believe we're not wrong is that whatever the scenario will be, we will do better. I am absolutely confident and determined to do that. because of the strengths of the organization, of the reengineering of the organization, of the lines of defense, of the clarity and granularity of each single action that every bank, every division, every person has and is executing. So I cannot control the environment. But on parity of environment, I am absolutely confident we will do better than everybody else. So for the time being, 10 stays, because my best view of the macro environment is one that is quite conservative, and we will operate within that. With respect to, and then obviously if we do M&A, the number moves, but for the time being, let's keep it there. If we do strategy on the factories and savings, et cetera, Firstly, there is an important question out there that some of you, or in particularly one person, give some reasoning, is whether the Danish compromise square is going to have a life or not. I remind everybody that for the time being, it's somewhere in purgatory. It hasn't been confirmed. Okay, so as I said at the beginning of a plan, I did not believe into internalizing certain areas of insurance. but if a Danish compromise was going to be passed, we would. It was, we are. Let's see if a Danish compromise square is passed, and then let's review the position. That's number one. Number two, there is a big difference between what we're doing in insurance and what we would be doing in asset management. In insurance, we're processing unit-linked and quite standardized and simple products for banks. In asset management, we do not believe we have the scale across products to compete with the leaders in the segment. I don't believe many people have. That does not mean we cannot have some, let's say, focused niches where we do internalize info. We have that in our asset management company, primarily for Central and Eastern Europe, but now extensively more for the group in Croatia. We do have that in our project with Azimut. If you look at our capability to drive, differentiate, own our brand with one market, it speaks by itself. If we were to do an acquisition in Italy and that acquisition came with a factor in asset management which is quite focused on certain standardized, simpler products that work well in Italy. That would complement that element of internalization. But by and large, if you look at the totality of our masses, the ability to have our own asset manager in-house for everything, I don't think is realistic. Honestly, I don't think it's realistic for any bank, in Italy at least. So that, I think, is that. So I think it's a question of degrees. And I would also say that the control, if you want to call it this way, of the savings remaining in Italy can be done if the distributor has a very strong position in all the contracts and in all the partnership and in all the way it allocates those funds. This is what we have today, and therefore I'm not concerned about that. Why cross 5% of Generali? I could tell you why not, but it's also, I highlight, we do not only hold what we hold as Unicredit, we also hold what our clients want to hold, and as a result of all this speculation, our clients are quite active. So I'm just telling you, together with our clients, we've crossed 5%. I mean, if you look at the magnitude of it, we've already spent a lot of time on it. But what is important is that is not industrial. That is not aiming to buy or otherwise engage or whatever. It is a financial stake. It is in our investment portfolio. Because we bought it over several months, we have a significant capital gain. Part of it is hedged, as always. They are a partner in Central and Eastern Europe and in other areas. And it is something that at this point in time makes sense. And for those of you, as I repeated, that know me by now, we will not engage in adventures. We will engage in in value creation, industrial projects, and creating value for shareholders. And that should frame all the questions on Generali.

Thank you.

The next question is from Delphine Lee of JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Yes, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. My first question is on Banco PQM. I just wanted to have a bit of an update of where you are in terms of your discussions, what you expect coming back from the Italian government, and how are your discussions progressing with CREDAG? And then my second question is on your net profit guidance and outlook, 25 and up years. Just wondering if you wouldn't mind giving us a bit more color around net interest income within that and how much exactly headwind you have in mind, specifically also for 25, you know, if you could try if I would comment around the moderate decline. Thank you very much.

So on BPM, I think we are in the middle of a transaction or of an offer. And therefore, we are limited on what we can share. The transaction has, or the offer has a timeline. We are in the phase where we need to obtain authorization from regulators, from antitrust, golden power, et cetera. And therefore, we are in a situation of hold. There is nothing out of the ordinary into that process, and we are continuing along the timeline. We have already set an indication for a potential EGM. It may move forward, backwards, depending on the time to obtain those authorizations. At the time being, it's our best guess. I personally, I think that the government or the leadership of the government was quite clear that they respect markets and they respect they let it work. And that is what is happening at the moment. With respect to discussion with any and all shareholders, I remind you that we are in a in an offer, so we need to observe. We can talk to them, but we need to observe pari passu and treat them all the same. Crédit Agricole is a partner of ours in asset management. It's a partner of ours in custody. It's a partner of ours in a number of places. We have talked to them, and that is the extent for the time being. So as we get closer to the offer, There will be more discussion, but at this time, that is what it is. With respect to net profit, and then I'll pass to Stefan on NII in general, but look, I think there are a lot of moving parts. In my opinion, if you go from an average URIBER of 3.6%, and you drop to 2.3 or could even drop to 2 or could even drop to 1.8, for people to say that it will not have an impact on, a material impact on your NII, particularly in countries where the pass-through has been low, is not realistic. We believe we will have most of our impact in NII will be concentrated in Italy. Hence, our attention to what people say, because I do think that if Italy has a very low pass-through and benefit on the way up, just mathematically, it's going to be affected on the way down. Other countries, take for example Germany and Austria, have a pass-through already in the 50s, because one is mostly a corporate bank, etc., obviously they're going to be affected by the declining rate to a much lesser extent because they will manage the margin. And Central and Eastern Europe will grow. So in our profile, if I were to tell you about NII, Italy gets hit, the rest of the group supports and offset parts of that hit. And obviously Stefan will look at that. But there is another thing that we're doing or we have been doing, and I don't think people have picked that back, to pick that up enough is over the last three, four years, when we say that our NIA grow arc is highest profitability, it also means that we have cleaned up our underperforming exposures in terms of profitability. That means we don't need to clean them up again. That means that when you look at our growth of NIA in the last three, four years, It is net of the cleanup we did in our tank of past exposures that were below the cost of equity. When we say that we grow with discipline, it means we are constraining growths because we only grow when it's above the cost of equity. So going forward, we will have some tailwinds from being in the right segments, in the right products, take consumer finance over mortgages. and having completed this cleanup. Even so, we think it's going to have a very meaningful impact, which we're trying to compensate through fees, through cost, through cost of risk, and then the balance below the line. But I'll leave it to Stefano to go in detail.

So let's start from the assumption. So rates, average URI 24 was 3.6, 25 we're assuming 2.3. So it's more than 100 basis point reduction. Our net interest income sensitivity is around 300 million for impact to revenues for every 50 basis points. So following the simple movement of the rates, we should have that impact. Then we have Russia. So we keep on reducing the exposure to Russia, but there is also an assumption in relation to the rate reduction in Russia. So we are expecting that the net interest income contribution from Russia to the group will be a few hundred million less in terms of net interest income. Then we have spread and volumes. On the loan spread side, we are expecting to have a higher client spread, similar to what happened during the course of 24. This will happen also during the course of 25. Every business point better is around 40 million better from net interest income standpoint. So this will be a mitigating factor. Volume-wise, as I was commenting before, we're expecting more loans, right? So this will also be a positive impact whose effect will be more in 26 than 25. On the deposit side, the deposit pass-through will remain substantially flat. Clearly, the client rate will go down. But as happened during the course of Q4, you saw that the deposit volume went up. So we're also expecting that deposit will grow so all in all these will counter mitigate the effect they're having from the reduction of the markdown on the deposit finally there is the replicating portfolio the replicated portfolio contribution so the edging on the deposit was more than 450 million positive in 24 we are expecting that in 25 the contribution will not be meaningful But if you look at the period 2025-2027, the contribution to the net interest income will be positive and it will be around €300 million. Last but not least, there is the change of perimeter. Watch out the change of the perimeter because there is Alfa Romania. So Alfa Romania contributed for only €30 million to the net interest income of Q4 2020. while the contribution for the full year will be clearly more than €100 million to the net interest income of the group.

Thank you very much. The next question is from Ignacio Ularqui of BNP Paribas Exxon. Please go ahead.

Thanks very much for the presentation and for taking my questions. I just have... One question on credit quality. If you could elaborate a bit on how you see credit quality evolving in your free key core markets, and whether there is any sign of deterioration, how much of that partial usage of overlays would be beyond 25? And the second question, I mean, just looking to your cost-to-income ratio going forward, you have done an excellent job in terms of cost-to-income. How much lower can it go? Do you think that 30% is around the bottom or we could see further improvements on cost income ratio?

Thank you. So let me start with the cost side. So obviously the cost income ratio has two elements and my revenues are compressing. There is a limit to where we can go. So we have set a target of of 40%, 40% for 25, 40% for the plan that we have in the next three years. I remind you we had 50% last time around when we did the first phase of Unicredit Unlocked. So to do 40% in a, let's say, more challenging top-line environment, it means we need to continue improving customer. And we need to continue improving cost in an inflationary environment. So this is what we discussed at the beginning. Now is the time that we were waiting for everybody to cross because we have revenue being compressed and cost being driven up by inflation. And the jaws are coming together. On revenue, we will discuss separately, or we have, on cost, partially by taking more than 3.5 billion of external charges in the last three years, we have prepared ourselves to be able to absorb the inflation and maybe grind slightly lower on similar perimeter, which means the enlarged perimeter at the moment with Romania, with Odena, with all of these is about 9.6 billion we are aiming to hold. And that means absorbing all the inflation, the renegotiation of contract and everything else that is within that. So not an easy one. And for us, the cost of holding has already been taken. So it's not going to be below the line in the following years, or it's going to be to a much lesser degree. So on that position, we think we are in a better position than almost anyone. With respect to the revenue line, Obviously, we have all the offset that we have discussed. Difficult in 2025 because the compression of rates has an impact on our revenue concentrated in 2025. Then it loosens as we go through growth in 2026 and 2027. And the fees continue to grow into 2025, 2026, 2027. So the revenue line will become more of an advantage once we trough in 2025. So 2025 is the difficult time. On asset quality, what I would say is, while we're cautious, because I've never seen a cycle where cost of risk does not go up, at the moment we don't have significant indication of worsening. Yes, we have a file here and a file there, but when I look at the numbers, they're really quite minor. I remind you that we had the first three quarters with a cost of risk almost in the single digits. And we... we again were conserving by, let's say, being over conservative in the force by creating specific provisions. We couldn't build more our overlays to make sure that whatever happens in the next three years, we're prepared. And therefore, the cost of risk of the last quarter is up, but it's not up because, oh my God, the asset quality is degenerating. It's up because of one position, but most importantly, because we are further strengthening our provisions. And so in 25, it depends, the use of overlays, it depends what you assume. If you assume that the cost of risk jumps for the industry or for us, 25, 30, 35, then you can calculate how much overlays we're gonna release on top. If you don't assume that, then we're not gonna use any overlays. But the overlays are there to be used. and I remind everybody in doing your numbers, if, as we are expecting, the cost of risk trends up materially, they will be used to keep it below 20 to 25 basis points. Actually, now we assume even lower because we've given you 15. If the cost of risk does not increase, as some people are assuming, Then the overlays are going to be released over the next three years. And we are going to become a net propeller of our bottom line as they get released. We can't keep them there forever.

So I can give you some data points more just to add. So if you look, 2024, the cost of risk of the group was 15. Then if you look at the different countries, we were at around 30 base point in Italy. Twenty in Germany. Austria was single digit, was seven. But Central Europe was having a negative cost of risk for, I mean, Eastern Europe specifically for around minus five. Why? Because we had a lot of redbacks. the situation will change, right? Because while we will see very likely a similar cost of risk for Italy, probably something less for Germany, in the case of Eastern Europe, we will go back to normal, right? So we will go back to a positive cost of risk. Commenting on the default rate, so as Alateba Andrea, in 24, the default rate of the group portfolio was 1.3. But then if we're adjusting for few big tickets... the overall portfolio had a default rate of one. That was fundamentally the same that we experienced in 22 and in 23. So fundamentally, there is stability in relation to that. And in 24, both Germany and Austria, just for these few big tickets, were below one. So we were respectively 0.7 and 0.9. So what we are currently assuming for the future is, let's say, a trend of the default rate that will not be significantly different from what we had in 2024. Slightly worse, but not meaningfully worse than this.

Thank you. The next question is from Giovanni Razzoli of Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.

Good morning to everybody. I have two questions. The first one is on your profitability target, you have increased the bar targeting a return on tangible equity that is now above 17%. Shall I take this new level of profitability also as a bar for the threshold to proceed with NMA? Because if I'm not mistaken, to my memory, you said in the past that you never have executed any deal with a return on investment capital below 15%, so I'm wondering whether With increased profitability of the standalone basis, this 15% has now increased to 17%. And the second question is on your general investment. Clearly, this is a financial investment, but you are now one of the four largest shareholders of the group. And as such, I would like to share, if you can share with us your views on the recently announced deal that generally exists. What are your views there? Are you supportive of it or not? Do you see some risk on that? Thank you.

So, profitability and M&A. What we said is that, number one, M&A needs to compare favorably with buying back our own shares, which, by the way, at this point in time, we're buying back at a premium to book, not at book. And secondly, we've often mentioned a return on investment of 15%. We also said that it's rate dependent and it's country dependent. But on average, it is correct. What do I mean by that? I mean that if rates were at four and now they're at two, I need to also not be unrealistic. But as of now, I would say that our commitment that if you do your projection on, I don't know, buying back X billions of our shares at current market prices versus M&A, I should be able to argue to you that M&A is better or not do it at all. I think it's the easiest way because my excess capital and myself are going to go in one of two directions, buy back my shares or buy the shares of another bank and bring in their earnings. If that does not compare favorably, I shouldn't be doing it. Okay? Okay. Then we can discuss whether it is immediately on day one or within the first one and a half to two years. But that is the point. So that will not change. And it is our bar. And this is what we committed to investors. And we're not changing on generally. I know everybody makes a big deal out of it. I am not going to comment on a deal of another company. let's say that at this point in time we are, we've made an investment, we know it has significance, but we are so focused on executing our Q1 and the two transactions that potentially are on the table that we don't spend much time on that. At the appropriate time, we'll make a decision.

Thank you. The next question is from Hugo Cruz of KBW. Please go ahead.

Hi, thanks a lot. Just a question on NII sensitivity. You know, your sensitivity is for a parallel shift, but it's more likely that you will see the short end come down, but the middle and long end of the curve stay where they are. How would that scenario change your stated sensitivity? Thank you.

Let's say there is not a meaningful impact in case of a scenario in which there will be an impact also on the long-term part of the curve. As I've alluded, the net interior sensitivity is calculated by the zone of parallel shift, so plus 50. Do consider that the mean impact they're having from the long part of the curve in our case is connected to the rolling of the replicating portfolios. we have a stock of 176 billion of hedging to the deposit, and consider that every year we are rolling between, let's say, 18 and 20 billion euro. That is that you can derive the sensitivity to the long-term part of the curve, because when we do the rolling, we are hitting the long-term part of the curve. So 10 basis points, you multiply 10 basis points by 20 billion euros. So this is the impact that they're having, for example, for a reduction of 10 basis points in the long-term part of the curve.

Thank you.

The next question is from Ignacio Cerezo of UBS. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. The first one is on Commerce Bank. asking you if you have changed your mind about not going hostile on Commerce Bank at any stage in the process, and given the recent language from both government and the company, what makes you think that they might be more open to negotiate at some point in the future? And the second question is more in detail, basically, on the quarter, if you can break down the 15 basis points CET1 impact from the strategic investments in the fourth quarter. Thank you.

Okay. So on Commerce Bank, our position is unchanged. So we made the investment, or we bought the shares from the government. We announced we would move to 29% or below 30% and ask authorization. We did that. When the position was made that we were not welcome, we said we would wait to engage with the government, and that is what we're doing. I don't have a position optimistic or other. I have a position of I do think the deal makes sense for all involved, and we will be waiting to present that position at the appropriate time in the future, and that is it. I personally am optimistic that with facts and figures, it will be recognized, but for the time being, that's where we are. As we are where we are, and we have a stake, Number one, as a shareholder, I am satisfied at the fact that the company is now shaking up things and trying to have a new plan and progress further. That's always positive. And hopefully that that drives an improvement in their structural profitability, core structural profitability. And we can observe that over the time that is needed to talk to all interested parties and see where we land. But that's not change. So we are where we are. We'll see at the end of that what will happen. But I'm optimistic that with constructive conversation, you get to a positive outcome.

So in relation to the strategic investment impact of 15 basis points is mainly deriving from the inclusion in the perimeter of Alfa Romania. So considering that the contribution is around $3 billion of loans, risk-weighted asset-wise is $2.4 billion. So he's explaining to you he's around, let's say, 13, 14 basis points out of the 15. So it's a change of perimeter in relation to Romania. Thank you.

The next question is from Chris Hallam of Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Just two quick questions left for me. On distribution, the 3.6 billion buyback in H2, does that approval process change at all? I guess when you speak to ECB and present the capital plan for approval, there may be a change in perimeter and elevated operating and integration risks associated with that perimeter change. So how should we think about the risks or complexities of getting that 3.6 billion approved and executed in H2. And then secondly, on the 2 billion advisory and financing business, how do you see the growth outlook for that business in particular in 2025, maybe in the context of sort of ongoing trade and political uncertainty impacting businesses across the markets? Thank you.

So the distribution, no, the two processes are independent. I don't think that the potential acquisition of BPM affects the authorization on the share buyback, which is ongoing and exactly as all the others. The execution is not, in fact, affected by the ECB or regulators. It's affected by the correct orderly market execution. maintenance of orderly market which counts of the expects and buying back your own shares while your shares are being offered for a transaction is not something that should be done so depending on all your theorization etc we will execute the share by back just after the transaction if for any reason the transaction is delayed we will execute as much of a share by back that we can before the transaction is launched. So that, and we remain committed to getting it done as quickly as possible. It's just a question that we will have a period within which we can't execute.

On the advanced financing fee growth rate, it's not different from the other categories when we're looking above 27 versus 24 and 25 versus 24. However, When we're looking to 2025, especially in relation to the German related activity, it is worthwhile to alight the expectations. So the pipeline is not bad, but clearly there is uncertainty also connected to election and to the overall evolution of the economy. So all in all, apart from consideration related to the market volatility, to the financial market volatility, we're expecting acceleration of the growth in the second part of the year.

Okay, helpful. Thank you.

Gentlemen, there are no more questions registered at this time. Back to you for any closing remarks you may have.

Thank you, everyone, for your patience, and we'll see many of you during the roadshow. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over. You may disconnect your telephones. Thank you.