Svenska Handelsbanken AB (publ)

Good morning everyone and welcome to this presentation of Handelsbanken's results for the first half and second quarter of 2024. In the second quarter we saw recovering earnings, the financial position remaining solid and high activity within the bank with execution efficiency enhancing measures. ROE improved to 15.2% from 13.7% in the previous quarter. Operating profit rose by 3% to 8.5 billion. As income grew, costs dropped and another quarter with net credit loss recoveries. The cost-income ratio dropped to 41.5 from 42.2. In short, a positive development on the key lines. The financial position of the bank remains very healthy. The CE1 ratio was 18.9%, was 400 basis points above the regulatory requirement, which was in line with previous communication. As of April 1st, a new organizational structure was implemented in the central and business supporting units. With the organizational changes, decentralization was enhanced and measures taken for increased efficiency and profitability going forward. Business support functions have been more closely connected to the business generating units and group functions have been streamlined. Group functions now accounts only for 4% of the workforce in the bank, down from 8% prior to the reorganization. As a result of the changes, the expenses and the revenues get more closely connected. With increased transparency facilitates the prioritization of business-oriented IT development and clarifies P&L responsibilities. As part of the efficiency initiatives in Q2, around 200 employees have signed agreements to leave the bank, which was reflected in around CEC 300 million of one-off cost for redundancy payments. About half of the related employees ended their employment at the last day of the quarter and the rest will leave in coming months. Hence, there was no visible effects on underlying costs in Q2 from these agreements. Furthermore, a review of use of external consultants concluded to decline in the numbers of contracted consultants by 15% at the end of the quarter compared to the end of previous quarter. While the efficiency work has started off and been executed on swiftly, the work will continue also in the coming quarters. Redundancies that will be recognized will be addressed and accounted for continuously. Finally, the bank's position as one of the few banks globally that have the highest combined credit ratings by the leading rating agencies was again confirmed in the quarter as Moody's not only confirmed its AA2 rating on the bank, but also raised the outlook from negative to stable. Now, if we look closer at the second quarter, we can see, as previously mentioned, that ROE increased to 15.2. The cost-to-income ratio dropped to 41.5 and credit losses amounted to net recoveries of two basis points. NII increased by 1% as the net effect of margins and funding recovered from Q1. Part of the effects related to volume mix effects on deposit, with a slightly bigger share of deposits on transaction accounts. Volume growth generally remains subdued in all of our home markets. Adjusted for currency effects, the fee and commission income grew by 6% and reached the second highest level historically. The key contributor was again the savings and mutual funds business, which saw asset under management, supported by stock market development, as well as net inflows. Expenses dropped by 1%. Adjusted for the one-off costs relating to staff layoff agreements, Octogonen and FX, the expenses dropped by 2%. Credit losses consisted of net recoveries of 133 million or two basis points. All in all, operating profit grew by 3% and 2% adjusted for the items affecting comparability. If we then move over to the accumulated numbers for the first half year compared to the same period last year. RE amounted to 14%, the cost income ratio to 41.9 and net credit losses recoveries of 228 million or one basis point. On underlying basis, NII was fairly flat compared to the same period last year and fee and commission grew by 3%. Expenses increased by 10%. The increase was attributable to increased staffing, which were up 70% in between the years, as well as the annual salary revisions. The net credit losses recoveries amounted, as said, to 228 million. All in all, the operating profits declined by 2%. Now, if we zoom into the NII development compared to the previous quarter, While the NII impact from volume changes remain muted, the key driver, apart from positive FX effects of 92 million, was the sum of the effects from margin, development and funding costs. In this category, there were always many different components, sometimes pulling in different directions. The cut in central bank interest rates affected negatively in the quarter, but was offset by a break in the trend of deposit volumes moving from lower to higher yielding deposits account and positive net funding effects. As always, our branches individually adjust and fine tune the customer rates to the prevailing local market and conditions. Furthermore, we saw net positive funding cost impact on our Treasury Department. Fee and commission income recovered in the quarter. Almost 70% comes from the savings related commissions, where we saw the main pickup in the quarter. Payment fees also rose in lines with normal seasonality. Now over to the expenses. First, to the left, the staff costs increased by 1% in the quarter. There were two main effects in the quarter that more or less offset each other. Firstly, there was a net positive effect of 307 million relating to octogonen. Last quarter, there was a total provision of 233 million, which included a final calibration of 170 million related to the provision for 2023, as well as a provision for Q1 of 63 million. In this quarter, there was instead a reversal of the latter, bringing the difference in octogonal provision to 307 million between the quarters. Then secondly, as previously mentioned, a one-off cost of 302 million was taken related to the redundancies. Again, the majority of the employees referred to were employed until the last day of the quarter, and hence the redundancies had no effect on the underlying cost in the quarter. The remaining staff cost increased by 2%, of which FX accounted for half of that. To the right, then, you can see other expenses, which declined by 4%. The decline was partly related to seasonality, but also effects from the scale down of external consultants' contracts during the course of the quarter, as previously mentioned. As we've said in Q1, we expect the IT development spend to run at a slightly lower rate going forward. The reduction of external consultants should be seen in that context. In the recent years, we have seen necessary but elevated investment in IT development. After the implementation of some larger development projects, such as a new CRM system for the bank, Microsoft 365 and cloud migration, we to some extent have an investment hurdle behind us. Going forward, we continue with our high ambition with our IT development and in a somewhat more focused way. Emphasis lies on a further strengthening of our already appreciated digital offering to customers, both individuals and corporates, as well as continuous improvements of tools for employees to increase internal efficiency and processes. We hear from our customers and also see in external surveys that our locally connected business model together with the strong digital offering create high customer satisfaction, which in turn form a foundation for long-term customer relationships and business opportunities. Now over to asset quality and credit losses, or rather the net credit recoveries that we have seen for the two consecutive quarters. For a long time, credit losses have been more or less zero and asset quality remains strong, just as it should expect it to be. The reason relates to the bank's limited risk appetite, the consistency in the underwriting, the preference for collateralized lending, and not least the local presence and local connection through our branches and their knowledge on their local business. Also in this quarter, the management add-ons was trimmed down, this time by 75 million. The add-ons is reassessed each quarter and stood at 454 million at the end of the quarter. The financial position of the bank is strong. The core T1 ratio stood at 18.9, which is 400 basis points above the regulatory requirement, which is in line with what we have guided for in 2024. The 100 basis point extra buffer that the bank holds on top of the long-term target range of 100 to 300 basis points above the regulatory requirement will be reviewed in conjunction with the year-end report at latest, subject to assessment of the prevailing geopolitic and macro uncertainties. In order to calibrate the CE1 ratio to 400 basis points above the regulatory requirement, the anticipated dividend in the quarter amounted to 4 SEK per share, or 116% of the quarter earnings. For the first six months, the anticipated dividend amounted to SEK 5.2 per share, or 78% of earnings. A few words about the respectively home markets. As I commented in the first quarter, Norway has struggled with the profitability over the past years, and a strategic review was made earlier this spring. A clearer profitability focus, a clarification of the responsibility between local head office and branches, and a review of the cost base have been carried out. In the second quarter, the earnings development was material. Operating profit grew by 37%. The cost-income ratio improved by 6 percentage points to 46%, and the return on equity increased from 7% to 11%. In Sweden, the development is quite natural and more stable, given the market position as the biggest lender combined on private and corporate customers in Sweden. Earnings grew by 2% in the quarter, and the cost-income ratio improved somewhat to 30%. The ROE stands at 18.3%, the highest among the home markets. In the UK, earnings and volumes remained stable and ROE of 18% was up from 17% in Q1 and was hence just shy of the level of Sweden's. Earnings grew by 1%, and the cost-income ratio was largely unchanged. Finally, the Netherlands, which is the smallest home market, operating profit dropped in the quarter, and the cost-income ratio increased from 53 to 55. ROE increased to 13%. So to sum up, earnings grew in the quarter as income increased, costs dropped, and there were, again, credit loss recoveries. are we increased in all of the bank's home markets. In the beginning of the year, we've initiated a review of parts of the bank in order to improve the efficiency in especially business support and central group functions. Since then, we've taken action. Today, we have a more business-oriented organization in place with the trimmed headquarter function and business support units more closely tied to the business-generating parts of the bank. We have identified, addressed and started to execute on redundancies with positive underlying financial effects yet to be materialized. We've also scaled down cost of external consultants which gradually materialized during the quarter. From a financial perspective, the bank stands strong. That means we're in a good position and have capacity to grow and ability to support customers regardless of the external factors that might occur. The position as one among only a handful of banks globally with the highest combined credit rating by the leading rating agencies confirms the stability of the bank, both from a business model perspective, risk level, as well as financial stability perspective. So the bank is in a good position, and we will continue to strive at becoming even more efficient, to grow with good profitability, and not least to continue to grow with satisfied customers, and thereby generate stable value growth to our shareholder over time. So thank you very much for listening in, and we will now take a short break before commencing the Q&A session. Thank you so much.

Thank you. ... ... ... ... ... . . . . . . Thank you for watching. . .

Hello and welcome back to the Q&A session. As always, we would appreciate if you would limit your questions to one per person in order to create a chance for everyone to ask their questions. With that said, operator, we're ready to take on the first question, please.

Thank you. To ask a question, please press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To answer your question, Please press star one and one again. We will now take the first question from the line of Magnus Andersson from ABGSE. Please go ahead.

Yes, thank you and good morning. Just on costs then, I was just thinking how you Think about the total level of IT investments in, let's say, 25 to 26 versus the level you had in 2023. And also costs in terms of potential redundancies. Should we think about what you've announced now as the low-hanging fruit so that we should expect more to come as we go along? Thank you.

Thank you, Magnus, and good morning, everyone. Well, first of all, the IT investment, I mean, we won't guide on the absolute level of the spending pace we will have, but what Michael said is obviously that we've gone through a period where we've invested in a few larger projects, i.e. CRM system, Microsoft 365, and setting us up for a cloud transformation. So we think we can slow down the pace. We haven't said anything about it, but obviously the slower pace, that do affect the consultancy ratios, et cetera. So we won't guide on the absolute levels, but it should definitely be smaller, we think. When it comes to the cost consequences, if I read you correctly, I mean, yes, we have signed agreements with a bit more than 200. We've also released a bit more than 160 consultants. So I think you more or less, you can judge by the level of the restructuring fee, the more or less, with a few assumptions of yours, you can judge the cost savings on that when it comes to the staff level. And you can also see that consultancy ratios are more, consultants are more expensive than staff. So it should definitely have an impact. And yes, obviously this has been, it's the starting of a journey, but but nevertheless material in this quarter.

So hello Magnus, Michael here. I just want to emphasize there are actually no low-hanging fruits. This is hard work and it's done with consistency and we will continue to do that when we execute on the plans we've put in place actually after the first quarter. So that will continue.

Okay, just to follow up then, I guess on the IT question then, with what you know now, you do not foresee any new large projects for 2025 and 2026. And secondly, on the cost, it was not so much on the financial impact. I can quite easily gauge that, but more whether this was just the first batch of headcount reduction. So that's... there could be more as we go along.

I think it's fair to say that we are spending more than $4 billion a year, as it is in the start of the year at least, and that has gone up quite dramatically. So including these investments is definitely a lot of bigger projects, and it will be continuously so. So it's wrong to say that we don't do a lot of larger projects, but nevertheless we think we can slim it down to a touch.

Okay, okay.

Thank you. We will now take the next question. Coming from the line of Gulnara Saidkulova from Morgan Stanley, please go ahead.

Hi, good morning. This is Gulnara from Morgan Stanley. Thank you for taking my question. On NAI, can you please elaborate on your outlook for lending and deposit margins in the coming quarters across your markets? What is your current expectation when it comes to the margin development? And do you think it is possible to see the visible improvement in the mortgage margins in the second half of the year? What are your key observations when it comes to the competitive behavior and the overall customer sentiment? Thank you.

Well, as you know, we don't guide on margin development going forward because there are many moving parts in that equation. So far, margins on mortgages especially are quite slim. We've obviously had a tailwind when it comes to our Norwegian business, but that comes from the notice periods going away. So that has increased mortgage margins a touch. We think, or at least if we reverse the outcome which we've seen during the rates has been going up, one might expect lending margins to increase a touch and obviously deposit margins to shrink. So the outcome of that one, I think we will have to wait and see. But it is quite fierce competition. So far, quite fierce competition, but expecting lending margins to widen when we drop in rates.

Thank you. Thank you. We will now take the next question. Coming from the line of Sophie Petersons from JP Morgan, please go ahead.

Yeah, hi, this is Sophie from JP Morgan. Thanks a lot for taking my question. If I look at the net interest income in your factbook on page 10, from loans to credit institutions and central banks, data has scattered over the past two years, increased from 2 billion to 9 billion. but the kind of opposite interest expense that hasn't really changed much over the past two years. If I kind of look, compare these two balances that you have with credit institutions and central banks, I get to do a very high yield, 6%, 7%. I mean, could you just elaborate what, Interesting. This is where does it come from? What central banks are you placing? Because it's kind of just back of the envelope. It would imply that you're putting money maybe with some other central banks than the Swedish Riksbank, given that the yield is so high on these placements. So that would be my question.

Thank you. Thanks, Sophie, for the question. But I'm sorry, I think we will have to get back to you on that topic because all of us are looking at each other and we don't really have a good answer to that one. But having said that, I mean, what has happened during the quarter is obviously that, yes, our funding, we have a positive impact from our funding mix. And I don't think you can see that from the rationale you're making in the fact book. But having said that, I think it's worth to highlight that yes, when we are attracting a lot of deposits, if we are attracting them in a local market, most likely we will place them at the Fed or something like that. So that has obviously impacted us quite good. And when the rating approval came as well, we were attracting once again even more deposits. So we could have a slightly beneficial from that one. But apart from that one, I think the major contribution of lower funding costs, first of all, it comes from a maturing 81 and a tier 2 bond. The tier 2 bond was pre-funded earlier on, so that's really good. The 81 maturing, we have a lot of capital, as you know, so we're not in a need to rush in to refinance that one. So that has impacted us positively. Apart from that one, I think it's fair to say that our bonds has traded quite nicely during the quarter, so we see actually a tailwind when it comes to the financing cost.

Yes, but I mean, you think the funding on the interest expense line. So I was wondering around the interest income line, because here it's really a quite significant improvement. I mean, even in the quarter, it's over half a billion Swedish kronor. In the past two years, it's seven billion. So it's not that it's been us. Could you maybe just remind us, in terms of your central bank placement, how much do you hold with the Fed? What proportion do you hold with the ECB? How much is with the Riksbank? To just try to work out the mix of these placements to maybe get a better sense with which central banks you're placing the money.

I think we will have to get back to you, Sophie. We don't have a good answer. Or we might look it up during the meeting and get back later on in the call.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Maria, I say, Sophie, on page 49 in the report, you have the assets and liabilities per currency. And I think that can provide some flavor as to the currencies which we have deposited money at central banks of. So you find some details there. But let us get back with more details on the previous question that you had.

Thank you. The next question comes from Nicholas McBeath from the EMB. Please go ahead.

Thank you. So a question on Norway, on the volumes there.

We saw a quite nice improvement in the household segment, both for mortgages and deposits. So just wondering what you're seeing there. Is the consequence of some of the already a consequence of some of the changes you're making there or some other explanation? Thanks.

So, hi, Niklas. So the growth comes from just, you know, continuous working with new customers, onboarding with the bank. Part of that, or actually quite a bit of it, it comes from the... collaboration we have with the unions in Norway. So that's actually, and I'm very happy to see that when we onboard customers now in Norway, we do it in a very balanced way, as you can see in the numbers where we have both deposits and lending and also to some extent, also asset management volumes coming on board, which I think is the way we should grow the bank profitability. with profitability, and then we need diverse income streams, which I think we do have in this quarter in Norway.

All right. Yes. Thank you.

Thank you. We will now take the next question. From the line of Shrey Srivastava from Citi, please go ahead.

Hi, and thank you very much for taking my questions. Again, on The cost, you've obviously reduced around 200 roles. And I know within this, the Swedish press talked about some roles in the markets function being very redundant. Overall, what do you think about as the sort of revenue impact from these cuts? And sort of looking forward with the CEO having been in the role for over half a year now, what do you see as the revenue impact of future cost cuts that you're considering?

All right, thank you. So the impact on earnings, on the income, when we get a few less people on head office and business support functions, that's not affected actually at all in my perspective. And when it comes to the, you refer to the few changes they've made in the markets area, That's kind of, as I see it, that happens sometimes. It's not a big thing. And they will be putting resources in the right place to be able to serve their customers going forward. So that's not going to have any impact as well, as from my perspective. So I think this is just kind of excluding the market area. It's overhead costs, which has no impact on the income side.

Okay. And having said that, I mean, I know you said that it's hard work to cut employees. How much more of these overhead costs would you say there are where reducing them would have no revenue impact?

Well, we do not forecast in how many people we will be less going forward. So the work that I've initiated and we started during the Q2 will continue as long as we find it necessary. And we will stop when we get the right service level and the right support and the relevant support to our branches throughout the bank.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Namita Samtani from Barclays. Please go ahead.

Morning. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one, given the volatility in some of the P&L items, how are you encouraging us to think about underlying costs and restructuring charges going forward? I just want to be crystal clear on what are you going to do with these costs savings from cutting employees? Or are you managing things via cost-income ratio? Like, what metrics should we use? And what are you using internally? Or is it just about solving for return on equity? And secondly, I want to ask why there's no urgency to increase the fee base given rates are getting cut. Handelsbanken has the largest exposure of investment grading across SME and large corporates across European banks. So why are you not taking advantage of this by tapping into fee commissions from corporates? Thanks very much.

Thanks, Namita. I will start from the end because I don't know if I followed actually your first question. It was a really bad line actually. But no, you are correct in that we are large obviously towards SME and we do quite a lot actually to try to attract the fee and commission income there. Over the last, I would say, I mean, I have the background from the investment banks, and Michael, you do as well. So I think it's fair to say that over the last 10 years, we've been refocusing the investment bank to suit the bank's identity quite well. And we made quite a lot of progress, actually, in setting us up to increase the commission income. So you should not think that we don't focus on that one, rather the contrary, actually.

Right, so can I just chip in there? I think you're spot on, something we're really emphasizing when we talk about growth. So you're totally correct, we have such a great impact, especially in Sweden with the SMEs throughout the country. And as I've also stretched and emphasized before, When we grow the bank, we should grow with great focus on fee and commission income in order to balance our income stream, as I just said. So the focus within the branches is, and they do a lot of their day-to-day work, is actually to serving all of these customers because there are quite a large number of customers there. They do their best in trying to serve them and create customer satisfaction and also put some emphasis on the fee commission-based income that we could generate from that part of the business. So I agree.

And could you please repeat your first question because I didn't follow that one.

Yeah, sure. I just want to understand. Are you encouraging us to think about underlying costs and restructuring charges going forward? I just want to understand, what are you going to do with the cost savings from cutting employees? Or are you managing things by a cost-income ratio? Or should we just look at solving for a return on equity?

I think it's fair to say that from the central departments and the support functions, we will strive to have the best of efficiencies all the time. So if we can cut costs there, we will continue cutting costs. And the more we can cut costs there, the easier we have to compete towards our client. When you look at the branch organizations, they will adjust their cost base to the cost to the market momentum and to the client business, etc. So that's really how we steer it. It's not from a top-down steering on cost to income, etc. Then as a corporate, we obviously have the corporate goal of return on equity. So that would be in the back end of all of us. Thanks very much.

Thank you. We will now take the next question. from the line of Marcus Sandgren from Kepler Chevreux. Please go ahead.

Yeah, good morning. So I was just thinking the return on equity report is adjusted for defined pension plans and that takes it about one percentage point higher than if you don't adjust for that. When you say that you should be on par with other banks, is that the number you're comparing with or is it the unadjusted? And secondly, I mean, if you don't adjust, you're around 13, 14 in Q1 and Q2 on return on equity compared to the others that are above 17. When do you expect this gap to close if you still have that target? Thanks.

Thanks, Marcus. Well, first of all, we, as well as most of the banks, are actually adjusting for pension schemes. I know the question came up yesterday, but we definitely adjust for pension schemes. And that was, I think, that was an adjustment being made when we moved over to IAS 19. So we do adjust, just to make that transparent. The corporate goal of us will then measure the banks when it comes to adjusted ROE, and that's the goal we have. And as you know, we are in four countries, so it will be, if or not we reach our corporate goal, will be dependent on all of the performance we have in all of these markets.

Okay. And if I ask and follow up regarding Octogonen, I mean, what's the take on this? Then you reverse the provision for Q1 and you're far below the others. What's the take for the year-end adjustments you usually do?

The octagonal, during Q1, Q2, and Q3, you should read the octagonal just as a mechanical movement with no guidance in for the future. What we do is the decision now is based on the outcome of Q1. So what you can read into it is that during Q1, no, we didn't reach our corporate goal. Having said that, I mean, we obviously seem, as of now, we do increase our ROE more than the largest Swedish banks, and we will have to wait and see what happens to the other ones.

Okay, thanks.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Andreas Hakkonsson from SEB. Please go ahead.

Thank you, and good morning, everyone. So I'm looking at page 15 in your presentation pack where you show the change of the NII split by areas. And could you tell us the funding benefits that you get from the AT1 and the T2? Is that entirely in pressure? Has it any impact on Sweden and other oil markets? That's part of my NII question.

Well, the ambition of the Treasury Department is to have as low results as possible, meaning that any surplus that arises in the Treasury Department is then allocated out to the respective business areas. So within the figures you see for Sweden, as well as the other home markets, you do indirectly have the impact from the 81 and Tier 2, as you touched upon.

Okay, so underlying in Sweden, for example, the margins did actually go down, but it was held up then by the load of funding costs, I guess.

Yeah, I think that's fair to say. I mean, we will have lower margins if the central banks are cutting rates. Yes, we're likely to see margins drop. On the other hand, we will have the financing impact, and that has been positively impacting this quarter.

And then I think it's... it's a lot of the six to eight weeks time issue you have in Norway. If our rates are flat for the rest of the year, should we assume that that will be zero from here, or are there any remaining benefits coming from it?

We have a slight positive impact coming, but the majority is behind us now in this quarter. But a slight one. And Andreas, if I just may add, I mean, obviously the margin development, all as equal, most likely margins will drop when central banks cut rates. But then we have the mixed shift between the transaction account and savings account.

and and and that we've been keep saying that for a few quarters that that are at levels where we think they should start bottoming out and and we've actually seen a touch of that one this quarter then we will see what happens going forward yeah no we heard that from another bank so it sounds like it it's true for the market then just follow up on sophie's question if i look in the balance sheet on your cash balances i mean if you if you look at the interest income divided by the cash balances Isn't it just a fact, or is it the fact that what you report in the balance sheet in Q2 now of $581 billion, is that a significantly reduced number by the end of the quarter? So the number that you had during the quarter is significantly higher, which means that the yield on that money is not at all as it looks when we just take the end of the quarter.

You're entirely correct. So that goes back to Sophie's question initially, that you can't compare the P&L impact to the quarterly end number. You must look at the quarterly average number. And then most likely the implied yields would change a bit.

So if I think that the yield you get in central banks could be around 3-4%, does that mean that the balance is actually closer to

eight nine hundred billion rather than five eight one that you have in the end of the quarter well we don't disclose balances per day we'll disclose them per quarter end okay that's it thank you thank you thank you we will now take the next question from the line of ricardo rovere from mediobanca please go ahead

Thanks for taking my question, and good morning, everybody. Just a quick follow-up. Can you explain very simply how can an AI go up quarter on quarter? Because with rates going up, an AI go up. With rates going down, an AI go up. So is it just a matter of these subordinated debtors that have come to expiry that generated in this quarter, or is there anything more underlying? And these 81 and subordinate debt in general, I would imagine those should be somehow replaced at some point, unless you tell us that your capital is so rich that you are you know, covering 81 buckets with common equity tier one. And then a clarification on the slide on capital, when you mentioned SEC 5.2 dividend, does this refer to the first half of Or does this refer to the full year because it is the 1.8 sec that you mentioned that you showed in Q1 results presentation multiplied by four. So probably it's just a coincidence. I imagine this refers to the first half, but just want to be sure about that. Thanks.

Good morning, Ricardo. Let's start with the NII. Yes, I'll try to do this as simple as possible and we'll see if we reach your ambition. First of all, as you say, yes, most likely when central banks cut rates, it will have an overall marginal negative component. Then, having said that, we have the deposit mix, and this quarter we've seen a positive impact from the deposit mix, i.e. money moving from savings account to transaction account. Then, thirdly, we have Norway, and we've kept saying that we're likely to see a positive tailwind in our Norwegian business coming from notice periods, and we see that this this quarter, apart then obviously from the positive volume change in Norway as well. And then thirdly, we have the financing component. And as you say, I mean, we've had the maturing 81 and T2, and you can see the volumes and the coupons. So that has obviously positively benefited us by roughly 90 million or so. The TA2 bond was a pre-funding, so that one should not, you shouldn't expect that to increase. As you say, the 81, obviously, yes, we can run a deficit there as long as we have more C81. And that's, so we're in a positive situation as of now. If we move down into the target range, we will obviously come back and talk to you about how we will think about 81.

Thanks. And on the dividend, if I may.

I didn't actually follow your question there. It was 5.2 crowns. And what was the question?

The question is, you show 5.2 on slide 15 or 16. Accrued for... I imagine it's H1. Because... So the question is, does this relate to H1 or to the full ER?

Yeah, that's a good question of yours. As you know, in Q1, we accrued 1.3 crowns per share.

Exactly, exactly.

Which times four gives you 5.2. No, no, no, no, no. That's just a coincidence. In Q1, we accrued 1.3. And in Q1, as you know, we had some negative components to our risk-weighted assets, i.e. the operational risks increased. We had some structural effects impacting us negatively. so so in q1 we we didn't manage to accrue that much of the p l in so that's 1.3 for the first quarter in the second quarter we have a positive movement in risk-weighted assets they drop that's due to quite modest growth numbers but also positively impact from the structural effects You know we have a subsidiary in UK. They've made a dividend to the parent company. So that decreases the risk-weighted assets. So in Q2, we actually anticipate 118% of the profit. So it is 1.3 in the first quarter and 3.9 in the second quarter or four crowns if you round it off. So the aggregate number is 5.2 for the first half. If we move into the second half and we still keep seeing slow growth, we shouldn't rule out that we will accrue more than 100% of the P&L. We will see.

Yeah, okay. No, that's clear that it refers to the H1. Thanks.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Hugh Moorhead from Berenberg. Please go ahead.

Good morning and thanks for taking my question. Just a little follow-up on the sort of positive shift in the deposit mix which you talked about. Could you just give us a bit more detail possibly on where you're seeing that both in terms of is it household or corporate deposits where you're seeing a shift back into transaction and also in which countries you might be seeing that shift? Thank you.

I think it's fair to say that, I mean, if you remember in Q1, we obviously had a movement, a bit bigger movement to savings account than we thought was long-term balanced. This quarter, we're actually reversing that one. So it is in households and in Sweden the predominant factor, and that is a movement from savings account over to transaction accounts. I think it's fair to say that we most likely see this in most of the countries, i.e. bottoming out levels now. So we're likely to see the similar direction, both when it comes to corporate and households in each country. But the bigger shift this quarter is in Swedish households.

Thanks very much.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Jacob Cruz from Autonomous. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you. So I just wanted to follow up on the discussion around deposits and NII. So if I'm back in the fact book on that chart, we've been talking about your cost of deposits increased by about half a billion in the quarter. Your deposit balances are roughly unchanged, or down a little bit. I don't quite understand how the deposit mix was positive when your cost of deposits goes up. Could you just explain what the moves we're seeing here are? Thank you very much.

Well, I follow your numbers, what you're looking at, but I think we will have to get back on that one. You're referring to the 11 billion rising to 11.5 in the quarter?

Yeah, which is meaningful. Especially when rates are coming down in the quarter, where I expected most of your deposit pricing to go down rather than up. And then you're saying mixed change is also supportive, but the overall cost is going against you. And I guess if I could just follow up, the moves we're seeing here still seem to say that there is pressure on the overall customer margin, with the cost of deposits increasing faster than the lending margin increases.

I think, Jacob, we will have to get back to you on that one.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Piers Brown from HSBC. Please go ahead.

Yeah, good morning. Just one on the capital target, so the 400 basis points CT1 buffer target that you've got. Why is that number still so high? I mean, it looks like macro risks are receding. Interest rates are falling. You're obviously generating a good level of profitability, but you're operating at a buffer to your previous buffer target, I guess you could say. What would be the trigger for thinking about operating at a lower risk? target buffer level than 400 basis points, maybe moving back to the old 1 to 300 basis point range you used to target. Thanks.

And hi, Pearson. Thanks for the question. I agree with you. I mean, macro risks are receding, and things look a bit better now. What we said is that at latest at the AGM, or rather at Q4, we will come back and tell you about how we view this. And yes, I mean, we still run with a normal target range of 1 to 3, and then we have an extra percentage point. But you will have to wait until Q4, and then we'll come back and talk about it.

Okay, thanks for that.

Thank you. We will now take the next question from the line of Andrea Hakanson from SEB. Please go ahead.

Hi, sorry, just a follow-up. About this mix shift on deposits, do you actually see people moving money from savings accounts to transaction accounts, or are we seeing a Q2 effect on transaction accounts where the tax... paybacks is coming into the accounts and the dividends is coming back. So it's a temporary increase in transaction accounts rather than a shift from one to the other.

Yeah, rather the latter one, new money coming into transaction accounts.

Okay, but have you got the feeling that it's a lot of tax money coming in or what's the drive of that?

No, it's just like you alluded to. I mean, in Q1, in particular in Sweden, customers pay in to the tax authorities. In Q2, they get money back from the tax authorities. And that money is typically placed on transaction accounts. So to some degree, you can say there was a temporary downturn in Q1 and a corresponding upturn in Q2.

Okay. Yes, sir.

Thanks. Thank you. We will now take the next question. from the line of Jacob Cruz from Autonomous. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you. Sorry, just another follow-up on the capital. Could I just ask, firstly, is your dividend allocation now basically not linked to payout ratio, but rather the 4% target? And secondly, on the capital again, You have a pension surplus of about, I think, 12 billion. Do you think that that's something that you could revert into the bank? Or is that kind of buffer not large enough to think about those kind of moves?

Well, thanks, Jacob. First of all, yes, you're correct. I mean, we do anticipate based on keeping the 4% constant. Then when it comes to Q4, the board will obviously make a decision of the actual dividend being paid out. But that's the way we do it. And yes, we have a pension surplus of 12 billion. That is the consequence of having that one. I know the discussions around the report of a bank yesterday. We have already deducted that one when it comes to calculating the ROE. But having a surplus in the pension systems will eventually lower the pension cost for the bank. So that's the way you will see the positive benefit for us.

Okay, but you're not anticipating bringing it back to the company in any way to just support your CT1 bill?

No, no.

Okay, thank you.

May I get back to the previous question regarding the cost for deposits? It's the same, actually, answer as to previous questions about quarterly end numbers and average quarterly numbers. In the fact book on page 31, you have the average deposit numbers for the group. And you can see that the average deposits grew by 2%. even though the quarterly end numbers did not move materially. So that could perhaps provide some flavor to the question about deposit costs going up.

Okay, but that still seems to miss a few percent. I think you would expect deposit costs to go down when rates go down.

We'll get back to you, Jacob. Great. Thank you.

Thank you. We will now take the final question from the line of Nicolas Macbeth from DMV. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Just some follow-up on lending. So I was wondering whether you've seen any pressure on margins on new loans to commercial real estate companies. borrowers now that the bond market funding conditions have improved in this segment and also related to that any outlook for increasing loan demand in H2 I guess I mean some of your peers have indicated that they're seeing increased size of increased activity on the mortgage side but then maybe you also have some negative implications again also from more active bond markets so whether you could comment how you see those dynamics playing out

So yeah, there is, if I compare to Q1, I see a slight pickup in interest and activity from especially our private individuals, customers, but also to some extent from the corporate sector. So there is a slight pickup. It hasn't been materialized, but we get quite a bit of more, what do you say, demands for activity on the mortgage side actually for a new business. When it comes to margins, I wouldn't say there is a margin pressure as I see it when I talk to the branches outside. But we have, the capital market is in much better shape now than it was before. So of course there is a competition between capital markets and the bank lending part of the business. But I don't see any change in the margins so far in this.

Okay, perfect. Thank you.

Thank you. I would like to turn the conference back to the speakers for closing remarks.

Well, thank you all for joining this session. I really appreciate it from my side. And I wish you all a very nice and good summer, everybody. And we'll talk later after the summer breaks, whatever. Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you, everyone.