Good morning and welcome to ABN AMRO's Q3 Results Presentation. I'm joined today by our CFO, Ferdinand van der Haar, and our CRO, Serena Fioravanti. After our presentation, we will hold a Q&A session to address all your questions. Let me begin with a highlight of the third quarter on slide two before moving to the announcement of our intention to acquire NIBC. The third quarter was another solid quarter for ABN AMRO. Net profit reached EUR 617 million with a return on equity of 9.5%. The inclusion of HAL contributed EUR 26 million to our results. Across all products, we managed to grow this quarter. Our mortgage portfolio increased by EUR 2.1 billion, and corporate loans grew by the same amount. Net new assets increased by EUR 4.3 billion. Cost discipline remained a priority, with FTEs declining by 700 in Q3 and by almost 1,000 year- to- date, excluding HAL.
Credit quality remained strong, with EUR 49 million in net impairment releases reflecting recoveries in improved macroeconomic variables. Our CET1 Ratio stands at 14.8%, and we finalized a EUR 250 million share buyback in September. We will review our capital position in Q4 to assess the potential for further capital returns. Now, turning to our other announcement of the day, I'm very pleased to announce that we have reached an agreement to acquire NIBC. This acquisition is fully aligned with our strategy and presents a unique opportunity to reinforce our leading position in the Dutch retail market and accelerate our personal and business banking strategy. NIBC is a well-run, primarily Dutch-focused entrepreneurial bank with a strong specialization in mortgage lending and savings products. It serves around 500,000 retail clients and around 175 corporate clients with a high-quality portfolio mortgage and very low REOs.
NIBC will add around EUR 28 billion of mortgages, significantly increasing our scale in this market, further cementing our leading position in the Dutch mortgage market. Around half of the mortgage portfolio will be off-balance as NIBC has an attractive originate-to-manage franchise with long-dated mortgages. The acquisition also brings an attractive savings platform serving 300,000 clients across the Netherlands, Germany, and Belgium. The savings offer an interesting cross-sell opportunity with our investment platform, BERX. Given NIBC's domestic focus and the overlap of service providers, there is substantial potential for cost synergy with limited execution risk. This transaction is expected to deliver a return on invested capital of around 18% 1/8th and will improve our group's financial profile. The capital impact of approximately 70 basis points is anticipated at closing. The acquisition is, of course, subject to regulatory approvals and is expected to be completed during the second half of 2026.
We look forward to welcoming NIBC's clients and colleagues and to the opportunities this acquisition will bring to us all. Now, turning to our third quarter results, I will start with the Dutch economy. While the Dutch economy continues to perform well, supported by a strong fiscal position and low unemployment, the housing market remains robust, with prices still rising, though at a lower pace than in the first half of the year. Employment continued to rise and is at a record high. The debt-to-GDP ratio of the Netherlands remains very healthy, and that's a French person telling you that it is significantly lower than other European countries. The Dutch election results have been announced, and coalition talks have begun. Ideally, a quick and stable formation process will allow the new government to start addressing important national issues, for example, the housing shortage or the nitrogen issue.
Given this economic context, on the next slide, I will discuss our results. We, again, showed a quarter with strong mortgage production growth thanks to a robust housing market. Our mortgage portfolio grew by EUR 2.1 billion in Q3, with our market share in new production rising to 19%. We made some important amendments to our mortgage terms. We now automatically adjust the risk premium after repayments, reviewing it monthly instead of only at the end of a fixed-rate period. This led our mortgage product to obtain the top rating in the intermediary market, which accounts for nearly 75% of new volume. We observed an immediate increase in new volumes following this. Today, we also announced a rationalization of our mortgage brand lineup. Going forward, we will focus on our core labels, namely ABN AMRO and Florius, and we will discontinue the Moneyou brand.
This allows us to focus investment in our core labels in technology and innovation to further improve our services. Moving to corporate loans, further organic growth and the inclusion of HAL resulted in EUR 2.1 billion loan growth this quarter. Loan growth was partially offset by the wind down of asset-based finance. This quarter, we sold our U.K. lease portfolio. Moving to deposits, HAL added close to EUR 11 billion of client deposits. Within wealth management, we also have provided targeted offerings starting in Q2, which have resulted in net new assets of over EUR 4 billion this quarter. Given this positive development in our lending and deposit franchise, let's now look more closely at how these have supported our net interest income. Our net interest income increased to EUR 1.5 billion. HAL's inclusion contributed positively to NII by around EUR 34 million.
The inflow of NHG Mortgages and the adjustments we made in the mortgage terms I just mentioned before led to slightly lower margins. However, the strong growth in our mortgage book offset this. Deposit margins declined partly, related to targeted offerings within wealth management at reduced margins. Treasury results increased during Q3. However, the increase was a bit lower than initially expected. Based on last quarter's forward rates, the inflection point of the replicating portfolio yield was expected at the beginning of next year. However, current interest rates have brought this timing forward to this quarter, bringing the decline in the replicating yield to a standstill. In the coming quarters, we expect the deposit margins will start to become a tailwind. Looking ahead to next quarter and assuming a modest increase in Treasury NII and stable deposit margins, we expect full-year NII of at least EUR 6.3 billion, including HAL.
Now, turning to fees. Looking at our third quarter fee income, the fee contribution from HAL becomes evident, increasing overall fee income by around 10%. Fees, excluding HAL, continue to increase, with fee income for the third quarter reaching its highest level in the past two years. Personal and business banking fees increase mainly from higher seasonal payment transactions. Wealth management fees rose primarily thanks to higher advisory and mandated business volumes. Order income is volatile by nature and ended at EUR 28 million for Q3. The decline was caused by a number of factors, all having a negative impact on order income this quarter. Specifically, we booked lower equity participation results, lower order income within Treasury, and a negative fair value correction of past bookings related to some mortgages. Now, moving to our operating expenses. We have further reduced expenses as we worked on right-sizing our cost base.
This quarter, FTEs showed a significant reduction of 700, half of which related to contractors in group functions. Since the beginning of the year, the number of contractors has declined by 1,100. To a limited extent, we onboarded externals for their skills, which explains the small increase in internal FTEs over the same period. The Dutch collective labor agreement increased wages by 3.75% on the 1st of July, leading to an increase this quarter in personnel expenses. Thanks to our ongoing cost discipline, our underlying cost base declined this quarter. At the beginning of the year, we projected our underlying cost, excluding HAL, to be between EUR 5.3 billion-EUR 5.4 billion, and we are confident now of ending at the lower end of this guidance. Including HAL, this now translates to a full-year cost guidance between EUR 5.4 billion-EUR 5.5 billion. Now, turning to our credit quality, which, again, remained very solid.
Prudent risk management supports our strong financial results. We recorded impairment releases of EUR 49 million this quarter, mainly related to recoveries in corporate loans and improved macroeconomic variables. We saw some inflow into stage three for specific individual files, although this was lower compared to the last few quarters and fully offset by releases. The total stage three ratio decreased slightly to 2%, and our coverage ratio was broadly stable for each of our lending products. Given the impairment year to date, the cost of risk for 2025 will likely end around zero for the full year. Now, moving on to our capital position on the next slide. Our CET1 ratio remains stable at 14.8%, well above the regulatory requirement of 11.2%. The impact of the consolidation of HAL was offset by the quarterly contribution of our net profit.
The total impact of HAL on our CET1 ratio as of Q3 is 40 basis points. Seven basis points of impact were already taken in Q2. The formal move of certain loan portfolios to the standardized approach had no impact on our capital ratio. While RWAs increased by EUR 1.6 billion, this was offset by lower capital deductions in our CET1 capital. During Q3, data quality improvements were realized around EUR 1 billion of RWA reductions, mainly from data improvements on real estate collateral. Further progress on data remediation is anticipated, for example, related to the SME support factor, which may result in further reductions in Q4. Looking ahead, as I mentioned, NIBC will impact our capital ratio by around 70 basis points at closing, expected in the course of next year. Our capital position remains robust, and our capital generation is strong.
In Q4, we will review our capital outlook and incorporate all the relevant capital and RWA developments. Now, to summarize our third quarter results. For 2025, we expect net interest income of at least EUR 6.3 billion and costs between EUR 5.4 billion-EUR 5.5 billion, both including HAL. We are delivering on our cost discipline, improving our data quality and sourcing, and are delivering profitable growth in mortgages and deposits. The seamless integration of HAL and closing the acquisition of NIBC are important strategic milestones as we build scale in our core markets. Looking ahead, we are excited to invite you to our capital markets day in just two weeks' time. There, we will present our updated strategy and financial targets with a sharp focus on right-sizing our cost base, optimizing our capital allocation, and unlocking profitable growth opportunities.
We look forward to sharing our vision for the future and the next chapter in our journey with you. With that, I would like to ask the operator to open the call for Q&A. Thank you.
Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press pound key five on your telephone keypad. If you wish to withdraw your question, please press pound key six on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Gulia Miotto from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
Yes, hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I'll start with a question on NIBC. Why do you think that the execution risk here is low? Can you give us any, I don't know, qualitative comments on, for example, do you have the same systems or anything that can give us confidence on essentially achieving these quite significant synergies? That would be my first comment.
Then secondly, I wanted to ask on the costs. The quarter was very good, was a bit versus consensus expectations, excluding the one-off, the EUR 55 million. However, the exit rate is actually quite high. If I take the mid-range, if I take basically 5.4, 5.0, and then I remove the 3.9 that you've done so far, underlying would be EUR 1.55 billion for Q4, which is more than what I would expect, and then it's quite a high run rate for 2026. How should we think about the exit rate and, yeah, on the cost side? Thank you.
Thank you very much for your questions. I will start with your first question on NIBC, and Ferdy will take your question on cost. On NIBC, bear in mind that this is an asset we know very well. We operate in the same market, in the same businesses, mortgages, savings.
This is an asset we know very well indeed. You're right, we have evident synergies. I'm going to give you just one. We use, for instance, for mortgages, the same service provider, Starter. This is an evident synergy. Just to flag this one. It is too early to share all the details, of course, of the target operating model. Bear in mind that the transaction will be only closed in the second half of 2026, but we are indeed confident that this is a low execution risk transaction for us. Now, Ferdy, to the cost this quarter and looking forward.
Yes, Julia, I think the most important message on cost is that underlying our costs are going down, evidenced by the FTE reductions year- to- date, and this offsets the more-than-offset CLA increase.
As Marguerite said already earlier, we will end at the low end of the guidance range, excluding Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe . If you add the cost of Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe , we will add in the range of EUR 5.3 billion-EUR 5.4 billion. If you look at the exit rate in Q4, we always have some prudency in our guidance specifically for Q4 because, as usual, you can always expect some seasonal cost increases. Last year, that was around 4%. That is what you need to take into account if you look at the exit rate and guidance.
Okay, thank you. Just to clarify, the Q4 costs will probably be higher than an exit rate for 2026, it sounds like, because there is some Q4.
No, I mean. There can always be, Julia, that is the question. Underlying, we expect the cost trend to continue as we've seen in the previous quarters, but normally there's some prudency of the seasonal cost increase you can see in Q.
Understood. Okay.
And the guidance is fairly clear, between the EUR 5.4 billion and EUR 5.5 billion, including the cost of Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe.
Okay, thanks.
The next question comes from Namita Samptani from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. The first one on the NIBC deal, thanks for the EUR 100 million of first run rate cost synergies in 2029. But when you speak about further upside from revenue synergies, what are you referring to? Are these funding synergies, and do you have a sense of quantum? And also the legal merger of ABN AMRO, Hypotheken Groep , into ABN AMRO. Is that included in the deal maths that you've given today?
My second question, on the replicating portfolio, is it still EUR 165 billion in size, and how should we think about the long-end part of the replicating portfolio? Is it more mechanical, for example, just a very simple five-year swap rolling mathematically or in fairly even tranches? It's just that the replicating portfolio slide on page 16, it confuses me a bit, and I can't understand when year on year I'm going to see a benefit from the hedge. Is it in 2027? Is there any color there? Helpful. Thank you.
Thank you very much. I will take your question on NIBC, and Ferdy will take your question on the replicating portfolio. Yes, we see this transaction on NIBC as very accurate indeed because there are synergies in costs as well as in revenues.
Just to give you a few highlights, we are adding 500,000 new retail clients to the ABN AMRO Group. These are clients that are mass affluent clients, so they fit very well our group. We think that we can bring more products and services to these clients. We also see, as I briefly mentioned, an opportunity in using BUX to serve these clients. Bear in mind that NIBC has clients, of course, primarily in the Netherlands, but also in Belgium and Germany, so BUX can really help with that. Yes, in terms of synergies, there are also funding synergies, both on the revenue side as well, I would say, on the cost side, just to hint at a few of the positives we see in these transactions.
Yeah, maybe to come back and to add to that, Marguerite, indeed, we're prudent in our assessment. The EUR 100 million is the post-tax cost synergies. Of course, there can be some funding synergies. For example, we can, over time, refinance the debt securities at a lower rate and also potentially reduce the LCR targets. Overall, on the other hand, you might also see some disynergies from deposit churn. Overall, if you look at the synergies, it is negligible in our assumption on the revenue and the funding synergy side. If your question on the replicating portfolio, yes, I can confirm the size is still around EUR 165 billion. As you have seen some turning in, that means that it has increased somewhat over the past two quarters. It is also still there, around 40%-45% of the replicating portfolio reprices within one year. The overall duration is around three years.
If you look at the sensitivity slide in the presentation, it's an update on a quarterly basis. The starting point is slightly different from the previous quarters. There you can see that we have seen the inflection point already on the income side. If you purely look at the sensitivity, it does not take into account any changes in volume, and it does not take into account any cost changes, i.e., changes in deposit pricing. You should just look at it as a sensitivity on the replicating income as an SA situation.
Forgive me because I realize I forgot to answer your question on the legal merger. Of course, yes, the transaction with NIBC is subject to all regulatory approvals, and that, of course, includes the legal merger. Let's say we do not anticipate difficulties on that front.
Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Tarik El Mejjad from BofA. Please go ahead.
Hi, good morning, and thanks for taking my questions. Just another question on NIBC and one on cost, please. I mean, I guess you'll share with us more detailed maths on the deal with the synergy expected with some time frame because, I mean, clearly, usually, at least on my M&A model, I mean, revenue synergies is not something I would push too much. I know the costs sound quite punchy here, but I mean, Marguerite, you gave some indications of what kind of synergies, but yeah, if you can share more with us, would be very helpful. I mean, this is very important for your capital allocation, I guess. My question is, what's next? I was more expecting a deal on the wealth management, to be honest.
In Bloomberg, you mentioned that this is it in terms of deals to be announced. Is this now back to focus on restructuring the bank and costs, or should we expect more potentially disruptive deals to come? That is number one. Number two, just maybe a question for Ferdinand on the cost guidance, 5.4-5.5, is that excluding incidentals, or is all in reported guidance? Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much for your questions. A couple of things. Yes, this deal is highly accurate. The 18% return on invested capital, we are very confident it is achievable. Indeed, what we primarily factored and what we factored in this model was primarily cost synergies. If there are revenue synergies on top of it, it is an upside. I agree with you, this is not the primary thing that we looked at in this deal.
Looking forward, we will be sharing, yes, more details on the target operating model, but that will come in due course. Just to clarify the answer I gave to Bloomberg, this was more an answer on saying, we're not going to call every morning to announce a new M&A deal. I think the question I got from Sarah up there was like, oh, is there something else coming up at the CMD? No, in the next two weeks, do not expect any other announcement from us. As far as our strategy is concerned, organic and inorganic, we will share everything in two weeks when you come to our capital market day.
Yeah. Tarik , to come back to your question on the guidance, initially, the guidance was equal to last year. We expect to end up at the lower end of that range.
Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe adds between EUR 130 million and EUR 140 million. This translates in the updated guidance. Clearly, the updated guidance is excluding the incidentals as announced today.
Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Benoit Petrark from Kepler Cheuvreux.
Please go ahead. Yes, good morning. Just to come back on NIBC, sorry for that. Just again, the strategic rationale, because it sounds like a very financially attractive deal, and it seems that, yeah, from a strategic point of view, that was the main reason behind this deal. I was also a bit expecting a bit more of a type of deal, let's say. Maybe I miss it, but do you see kind of any franchise value in NIBC, or do you see it just purely 100% as a financial attractive deal with 10% accretion by 2029?
Just wanted to clarify that because I also see a very low fee base at NIBC. I was also expecting a bit more fee business as target. I was also wondering if you could provide some timing on the EUR 140 million pre-tax synergies, whether we'll start to see some positive effect from that in 2027, or that will be more back-end loaded. Just second question on NII. Your guidance of more than EUR 6.3 billion implies roughly EUR 50 million quarter- on- quarter on NII in Q4. I was just wondering if you could provide the moving parts, deposit margin, lending margin, treasury income, what will drive this improvement in the fourth quarter? Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for your questions. On NIBC, it is indeed both a financially sound deal, an accurate deal, and also a strategic deal. I think it's a good way of proving how we look at M&A. M&A strategy will always be disciplined, and we will only pursue it if we find it shareholder accretive. This is one of our criteria. You see it with this deal and the 18% of return on invested capital that it brings to the bank. This being said, we see a natural strategic fit with NIBC. It brings us scale in our domestic markets, in mortgages and in savings. The NIBC brand is a very good brand in the Netherlands. This is a brand that has been existing for 80 years. It has an entrepreneurial flavor. It appeals to a client base that's also slightly different from the clients we already have at ABN AMRO. It is a great way for us to keep growing and strengthen our positions in our domestic market.
To your question of, yes, when will we see the full benefit of the synergies we mentioned, we express it as 2029 just because, as I said, we do expect the closing of the transaction to only happen in the second half of 2026. We do expect the full benefit of the synergies to be there in 2029. It does not all happen in the last year, of course.
Yeah. Benoit, maybe on your NRI, arguably you could say NRI for this quarter is slightly lower, but I want to reiterate here that is mainly by our own decision. It was a targeted wealth management campaign, and there you see a very good M&A growth of almost EUR 4.3 billion. Now it is key that we start transferring that in valuable assets.
Number two is an acceleration in the ABF wind-down, specifically portfolio sale in the U.K., which is ahead of plan. What Marguerite already said, that is the implementation of what we call here ARNA, and it has clearly a positive impact on our position with the intermediaries. Also, if you look at our market share now up till 19%. For Q4, we expect the modest improvement in the treasury results as well as stable deposit margins. If you look at the update on the sensitivity slide, what we discussed earlier, the inflection point of the replicating portfolio is already reached this quarter, or I should say start of Q4. That brings the decline in the replicating yields to a standstill. If you look at the sensitivity, the tailwinds will be very limited initially and will be more pronounced in the second half of next year.
Great. Thank you very much for that.
The next question comes from Benjamin Goey from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hi, good morning. Two questions, please. First on NIBC again, which over the last six-seven years has built up a significant off-balance sheet mortgage book. Just wondering your thoughts on that part of the business because you very much rely on on-balance sheet growth. Secondly, you also call it low execution risk. Just wondering, when you look at capital return going forward, do you basically take your current capital ratio - 70%, or would you include a buffer given the uncertainties and execution risk? Thank you. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. On your question of the originate to manage portfolio that NIBC has and that represents roughly half its portfolio, we see it as actually an interesting and value-added opportunity for ABN AMRO because it's not something we're doing already, and we see opportunities with that. We welcome that addition in our business model. I confirm that we've been thoroughly assessing the CET1 impact of this transaction that amounts to 70 basis points, and this takes into account a very prudent approach to the transaction, including all forms of day one provisioning and so on that may be needed. I would say it's a fully loaded 70 basis points.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Chris Hallam from Goldman Sachs International. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Just a couple of follow-ups. Sorry about this. First, just on funding synergies, Ferdy, I think you said those would be negligible, i.e., not particularly incremental to the 18%, but I'm just wondering how that works given their funding mix, which is much less skewed to deposit funding than your own, and their own deposit funding cost, which is higher than yours. Is there a reason why either you wouldn't fully change the funding mix or why you would expect to see a very high level of deposit attrition? Second, acknowledge we've got the CMD coming up very soon, but just looking specifically into 2026 as you're going through the year-end budgeting process, what are the key items you're focused on for the cost side of the business?
Are there any specific items or challenges for ABN AMRO that we should consider for 2026 in particular, both for ABN, I guess, on the one side, but also for the industry more broadly? Thank you.
Yeah. Let you take it.[audio distortion]
Yeah. Chris, I'll start with the first one. Absolutely, there is a potential, but again, the argument here that we try to be prudent and specifically look at cost synergies. Of course, there can be some revenue synergies, but also the funding synergies here. It's too early to start communicating on the potential here, and some of the funding synergies arguably will be further out, also beyond the indicated 2029. For sure, this provides potential on top of the indicated cost synergies.
On your question, 2026 happens to be the first year of our strategic plans. I promise we will share everything on 2026 as well as for the following years at our CMD in two weeks. This being said, I believe in discipline, and I believe in saying what we do and doing what we say. We've been very clear from the beginning that right-sizing our cost base, steering on capital, and pursuing profitable growth are our three leitmotifs. 2026 will look like that.
Perfect. Thank you both.
The next question comes from Farquhar Murray from Autonomous. Please go ahead.
Good morning, all. Just two questions, if I may. Firstly, more broadly on M&A, you now have kind of two integrations with HAL and NIBC. Do you think there's sufficient management room, kind of bandwidth, for another deal in the near term? Maybe coming back a little bit to HAL, actually, as an integration, given it's come on board post-closing. I just wondered if you could give us an update on how that business is performing as compared to the original expectations of acquisition. In particular, I'm thinking about the cost synergy target of EUR 60 million there. Thanks.
Thank you very much. I'll take your first question on bandwidth, and I will let Ferdy comment on the HAL integration. I think that was your second question. Do we have the bandwidth? Yes, we do. We are moving at pace. We have a very strong management team. I'm very happy with our Executive Board. Basically, Troy, who is in charge of wealth, is very much involved in the integration of HAL and making it a success.
We have colleagues that have been very much involved in the due diligence regarding NIBC, and we will be, in due time, fully ready also to be there for the integration. We are very confident that we have all it takes to make these integrations a success. With M&A, you do not necessarily plan in advance, but we will know how to be opportunistic if needs be. As I said, always with discipline and only if it is shareholder accretive.
Yeah. Maybe just on how our first lump, as indicated earlier, cost synergy is year 3, EUR 60 million. Also, if we look at the first quarter after consolidation, we are confident we are going to reach that. No unexpected surprises in here. We have also said that we need around one-off cost of around EUR 90 million, one-third integration cost and two-thirds restructuring cost.
We booked so far this year around EUR 8 million in integration cost. The integration is fully on track. The legal merger between HAL Investments and ABN AMRO is to be completed by the end of 2026, and that will really simplify the further integration. The bottom line is here, offer results, what we see now is in line with expectations, and we're very confident we're going to reach the EUR 60 million run rate synergies in year three, which is 2028.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Delphine Lee from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Hi. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. My first question is just going back to NIBC and just your thoughts about M&A in general. I mean, just wanted to understand kind of what areas of priorities you would have.
I mean, is it because is the intention in the long run to continue to strengthen your position in the Netherlands, or would it mean more to kind of diversify a little bit away from your mortgage book through private banking or corporate banking? Just trying to understand a little bit kind of where your focus is M&A-wise. My second question is just in terms of excess capital and the usage and how you allocate capital, more generally speaking, is the intention over the long run to sort of manage it to kind of increase the payout? Do you still think there is room with the transaction further down the line? Just trying to think about how you manage your capital with buybacks and what we should expect.
Thank you very much. You are anticipating on what we are going to share in two weeks. I will only reiterate that we only consider M&A when it is disciplined, when it is shareholder accredited. We think that adding scale in our home market is a smart strategic move. Back to the HAL acquisition that the bank recently completed and Ferdy was commenting on, this is also a strong strategic fit for us as we grow in wealth in Northwestern Europe, which is part of our strategy. We will describe all of this at our CMD. In terms of our capital position and our capital usage, again, this will be the topic of our CMD in two weeks. Basically, in a nutshell, we will continue to optimize our RWA, both in data and from steering. More to come on that. The outcome of our capital assessment will be communicated with our Q4 results, including potential capital distributions.
We have a strong balance sheet and a strong capital position. I think, yeah, the rest will come. Bear with us for two more weeks.
Great. Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Juan Pablo Lopez Cobo from Santander. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. First one, it's regarding NIBC. Probably I missed some of the KPIs, but you mentioned that the deal is highly accretive regarding EPS accretion. If we assume, let's say, EUR 100 million net income coming from NIBC and the EUR 100 million synergies, lower post-tax, is it fair to assume an EPS accretion of around 7%-8%? Does it sound reasonable for you? That's my first question. My second question is regarding the deposits campaign. If you could share some color on this deposits campaign, volume, can we assume around EUR 3 billion?
Cost, probably around 2% or slightly above 2%. Maybe duration, if I got it right, I do not know if we can assume the NII impact in this third Q coming from the deposit campaign could be something around EUR 15 million-EUR 20 million. It would be interesting to know, to listen to you, the duration and what percentage of these deposits you think will stay in the bank. Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you very much. I will let Ferdy answer both your questions. Maybe just a clarification because I am not sure that we fully agreed on the figure, but when we mentioned cost synergies, it is EUR 100 million post-tax. Basically, pre-tax, it is higher. Just to clarify that point. Ferdy, I will let you go into the EPS equation.
No, I think if you look at the underlying, how you come to your calculation, fully synergized profit of around EUR 200 million, indeed, you would come in 2029 to around 7% EPS accretion. If you look at the offered deposits, yes, we assume some outflow, but we expect it to be limited from the offered deposit campaign. The most important part of the targeted deposit campaign is increase our net new assets. It had an impact on our margins, but now it should really translate into valuable assets. That is a transfer into either discretionary portfolio management, either in advisory or private markets.
Usually what we observe is that it takes usually six months for bankers to actually transform into more valuable assets.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Anke Reingen from RBC. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Thank you very much for taking my questions. It's just two number questions, please. Firstly, on the other income that was quite weak this quarter, and I just wonder if it's sort of like a run rate. I mean, a number of banks talked about NII and other income of their value result are like mixed effect. Should we see that, yeah, the Q3 other income could be a run rate going forward? And then on the deposit costs, is there sort of like a change in trend? While in the past, we were talking about cuts in savings rates, we are now talking about, yeah, some selective campaigns on how higher deposits would benefit to volume. Would you say the trend has changed here? Thank you.
Thanks, Ferdy, on these two questions.
No, let me start on other income. It was low this quarter at EUR 28 million. Also, quarter- on- quarter, significantly down. We explained that the main impact here is, number one, equity participation. You're always dependent when the revaluation is done. In Q2, we had a successful exit of the portfolio. ALM results are always volatile, and in this quarter, it always depends on your economic hedges and hedge ineffectiveness. The main driver this quarter was lower fair value revaluations on IFRS 17, and it was specifically related to a one-off correction of past bookings in the mortgage book, and that impact was roughly EUR 30 million. If you look for the coming years, other income is volatile by nature. It also includes XVAs, ALM results, and private equity revaluations.
Overall, excluding incidentals in the past years, it was around EUR 450 million. If you would also exclude volatile items, around EUR 400 million. If you look at changes on pricing, no, the deposit campaign was very targeted at wealth management. We really target the specific client group. As said earlier already, we are willing to do that at very low margins because there we see the opportunity to transfer that in valuable assets. It is absolutely not a change broader how you should look at our pricings.
Okay. Thank you.
The next question comes from Jason Kalamboussis from ING. Please go ahead.
Yes. Good morning. I am coming back to what Tariq mentioned. While the deal is good value for money, strategically and from a higher level, it looks like it distracts to what I thought was a clear focus on wealth management.
If you have any additional thoughts, welcome there. Moving on to wealth. Could you please provide a split year- to- date of the inflows in custody and the rest? Is it something that we could see provided on a quarterly basis? The second thing is on HAL, how does the AUMs that you brought in split again into, can you split out the custody and cash elements if possible? My third question is, is it a reasonable assumption when I'm looking at your AUMs to assume that most of the custody and cash assets, so above 75%, are in the Netherlands? That would be very useful. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much. I'll take your first question, and we'll let Ferdy answer the two others. In terms of strategy, we believe that it is a perfect strategic fit to actually keep growing and add scale in our home market. We have the platform for that. We already have 5 million clients in the Netherlands. NIBC has roughly 500,000 new retail clients. We do believe in scale and in using our platform both in mortgages and savings in the Netherlands. This being said, we also do believe that wealth management is an extremely good business of ABN AMRO. I mean, we have a strong number one position in the Netherlands with a market share of about 35%. We have now a strong number three position in Germany. We also are present in France and to a lesser extent in Belgium. We will share our strategy for three businesses at our CMD. Indeed, we do like very much the wealth management business. Ferdy, on the two other questions?
Yeah. Jason, number one is the split between custody. Overall, you should see that there is the difference between core net new assets and total net new assets. Overall, core net new assets, we had a very strong quarter, as discussed earlier, mainly reflecting the cash inflow from targeted offerings. Indeed, the majority of this was wealth management in the Netherlands. Total NNA + EUR 4.3 billion. The custody included in here for this quarter was +EUR 1 billion, more or less. If you look at the total custody within wealth management, because that was also a question, I think that is around the EUR 50 billion today. I also think, but I did not hear you that well, the client asset inclusion of Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe .
In total, this was around EUR 26 billion. The split there was around EUR 23 billion in securities and EUR 4 billion in cash. The majority of that inclusion is in securities.
Thank you very much. That is very useful. Just a quick follow-up. I mean, on the NIBC deal, what I am a bit surprised is that the fee element is quite small. You have less than 10% that is coming in fees. That was a bit the sense of my question, is that yes, I understand the scale, and also it is a good deal financially. On the other hand, I would have thought that your focus would have been towards increasing the fee side within your income, whereas this goes a bit the other way. Again, if you have any comments, that would be great. Thanks.
I understand your question. As I said, it adds scale, which is, I think, a very positive strategic move. It is also financially very accretive. We saw it as two very good reasons to pursue this acquisition.
Yeah. Maybe to add there, it also had the addition of the savings account to the BUX platform. That might provide at least investment propositions there where we are absolutely focusing on transferring NII into fees towards fees.
Very clear. Thank you very much.
There are no more questions at this time. I will now hand the word back to the speakers for any closing remarks.
I thank you very much all for your questions this morning. We look forward to welcoming you at Capital Markets Day on November 25th. For the time on, goodbye. Thanks again. Have a great day.