Good morning, everyone. It's my pleasure to welcome Ferdinand Vaandrager, CFO of ABN AMRO. Ferdinand, 10 months ago from the Capital Market Day, profits are up 30%, ROE back above 12%, guidance raised on income and cut on costs, and CET1 ratio that's even on 100% payout, still sits at above 15%. Budget day was actually a non-event for Dutch banks, which is a positive. Nothing taken from your pocket, and we can call it a good year. Let's spend the next 40 minutes on to see how this nice story could continue or even improve, and where it's from. Importantly, at what point you reset the targets rather than keep beating them. Ferdinand, welcome.
Thank you.
Maybe you can just say very quick words on the budget, just to clear the air on this. What do you see as potential? It's not a topic for you, but it's ongoing for many other big jurisdictions in Europe and could be actually a big impact for profitability and so on. For you, what do you see there?
No, and I think it's very important. Number one, you need to realize, we have a minority coalition in the Netherlands. For all proposals, they need to find support from the opposition. That will also mean before it's adopted by the Senate, it will take more time. You mentioned already what is important if you look at what will potentially impact capital or earnings of banks. In the Netherlands, we have already a banking tax for much more than 10 years. It's already in our planning, and we have not seen any proposals in increasing those.
Also there, you have not seen any proposal in significant increases in corporate taxation, which might impact the earnings for banks as well. And the third point is, there have been lots of talks about Box 3, is the wealth taxation in the Netherlands on unrealized gains. Also, that is off the table for now. I think it will take longer, but up until now, there are no elements in there which might impact our execution of the strategy. I think the positive thing there is budget discipline.
We have a debt to GDP of low- 40s. I think if you look in European context, that is quite healthy. And also the growth in the Dutch market is good, and one of the important points of this coalition is really start building houses and really support that by financial incentives towards the municipalities. Secondly, also reducing red tape. They have an ambition of around 100,000 houses, and that should really be helpful to our business model as well, with 60% of our balance sheet in residential mortgages. Overall, it looks no worrying signs-
Very good.
...on the strategy, Tarik.
Sounds like a safe haven versus the neighbors. Then maybe moving on to NIBC integration. You have closed the transactions in the summer. Maybe you can update us on how it is progress, operation on the ground in terms of teams integration and accounting as well.
Yeah, I think NIBC is an example. What we said before, if in our core geographic footprint and business mix, we find attractive opportunities, we might look at bolt-ons. I think NIBC, we closed the transaction. Now we are full working towards a legal merger. We need to wait until the legal merger somewhere pre-summer 2027, and then the real integration can start. Overall, I think the discussions are really going in the right direction, and we really have the roadmap towards integration.
As I said before, deployment of capital. This brings a return on invested capital of around 18%, and we are really leveraging on both deposits and mortgages in the Dutch market. What I really like, that we also get a quite significant OtD platform for mortgages, which we were lacking. No, I am looking forward, and the indications of integration are going in the right direction.
Thank you. On CMD next year, it was November last year, so, it started clearly great, and you have been ahead in many fronts. Can you maybe tell us at a high level, and then we will go into detail, what are the areas where you have been actually foreseeing some challenges to achieve the targets? Or the opposite, you thought you have been too conservative?
Well, I know what you think, Tarik. Let's, yeah, if you see where we are today in the third quarter of the strategic plan, I think we are delivering. On quite a few elements, we are doing better than planned. Number one, on costs. I think we have at Q2, we already almost realized 50% of our FTE target of a reduction of 5,200. We realized around EUR 300 million absolute cost savings of the EUR 900 million. If you look in terms of cost, we lowered our cost guidance twice this year at Q1 and Q2 with EUR 100 million.
Clearly we are delivering faster on cost, but you should be mindful that the trajectory will start to slow down because a lot of the FTE reduction is externals and people with fixed term contracts. Number two, if you look in terms of capital, also in terms of RWA reduction, I think we realized already around EUR 9 billion. EUR 6 billion of the EUR 10 billion with the corporate bank. Also there, we are going faster than planned, and we are going to see an additional benefit, which was not part of our plan, is the removal of the mortgage floor, which brings around EUR 7 billion relief in Q4.
But also there, the next phase in RWA optimization should really come from portfolio management in being very strict on refinancing of corporate clients which don't meet our hurdle. Fees are also quite good. Also there, you should take into account also partly some cyclical elements in there, because financial markets are very good for assets under management and wealth. Also our clearing operations is really benefiting from a significant volatility in the market.
I think on all three key elements, we are doing better than expected. What is more outside our own control, but clearly a very big driver for profitability, is the liability side of the balance sheet. Forward curves have improved significantly. So far, you have not seen any pass-through of those rate hikes into the Dutch market. Where we stand today, and we have seen an upgrade underlying of EUR 250 million in our NII guidance, is really on the back of the improvement of the forward curve rate.
Thank you. Let us start with the net interest income. You are a rate-sensitive bank. You pointed out that you have already upgraded with Q2 net interest income, but how much is more there? The curve has moved since-
Yeah.
...Q2. If you look at your assumptions of pass-through 100%, which some could argue is conservative. On the other hand, you do not expect any flow from current account to term deposits. If you can give us some sensitivities-
Yeah.
...to the current curve and what makes you comfortable to actually translate that into new guidance.
Well, Tarik, your challenge also earlier that we are conservative, so far you have been right. You have not seen the path through yet, but every quarter with improved curves, your assumption of stable margins. I would translate a full pass-through that the margin of your savings accounts or interest-paying deposits stay at the same level. Every quarter for extrapolating is a higher starting point, so it is more potentially ambitious to have that.
Yes, if you look overall at deposit, as I said, deposit market is growing. In the Dutch market, less than 20% is in current accounts, so most of the migration has taken place. But if you look at Q2, for example, in our analysis under the flat margins for interest-paying deposits, yes, our liability margin in 2028 would be 10 basis points higher than our assessment at the Capital Markets Day. So clearly, t he benefit of the replicating portfolio of refinancing at higher rates really starts to come through and might have a significant benefit, most pronounced in 2026 and 2027.
Can you touch, please, on the deposit competition in Netherlands? Rabobank increased the rates by 10 basis points so far-
Yeah.
after two hikes at ECB. How do you see the competition there? Maybe you can draw into-
Yeah.
...the previous rate hike cycle, which we admit is very different in magnitude and the reasons. How do you see the players moving?
The players. The majority with the deposits are with the incumbent banks in the Netherlands. It is a rational market, and all banks price off their replicating portfolio. Yes, it is true, the only base rate increase in savings you have seen with one player you just mentioned. There are clearly around 30, 35 players in the Dutch market with a deposit license, so there is definitely competition. It has not resulted in any significant outflow. If you look at our market share and deposits of around 15%, has stayed relatively stable this year.
So yes, there is competition, but there are no significant aggressive marketing campaigns happening in the Dutch market. You also see a tendency that the deposits with the bank are actually quite sticky. That is partly related that you are the house bank for most of those depositors, you have more product, etc . The loyalty and the stickiness of those clients is proven to be there. As you said, the migration from current accounts to savings, we have seen most of that migration, so we expect also the base of current accounts to remain relatively stable.
Thank you.
But when margins increase, that is why I always say, "A stable margin, which is elevated compared to history, at a certain point, that might also attract a tougher competition." We should be able to offer more products as an alternative to lower savings rates.
You mentioned the 20 or close to 30 deposit license given. If we focus on those probably more into the competition, the digital banks.
Yeah.
Netherlands is, we can call it digital, with 20 branches. How do you see-
26.
26. How do you see the competition from those specific players shaping up? You see in Germany it is picking up. In France, there is a big player who has huge ambitions.
Yeah. No, of course, it is there, right? We are fully prepared for the more digital offerings. But as you say, the market is digital already. We moved to 26 branches, and all our daily banking services are digital or remote. That will not be a sea change. Of course, the expectation, if you move to agentic world, that the competition might intensify for where they stand today. But we are also investing in our capabilities and the products we offer, Tarik. Up until now, the competition is there, the stickiness is also there, and we keep investing in our offering as well. We are not sitting still while not passing through the recent increases we have seen.
Thank you. Moving to the lending part. You have had very healthy lending growth.
Yeah.
On mortgages in Netherlands. I think your own economists expect a slowdown in transactions, 3%-4%.
Yeah.
In the coming quarters. How do you see the lending evolving in the region, and is it more organic and self-help, say, market share ambitions to take, or you are going with the market's growth, and you see that slowing down as well?
No, if you look at the lending, let's start, as you say, with mortgages. We have a market share of around 18%, 19%. When NIBC joins the family, that will add 2%- 2.5%. What we do see, it's a competitive market. And you do see that in margins on new production. One element is that we've seen quite a significant shift at lower rates from longer maturity mortgages, 20- 30 years, where you have much more competition from insurance companies and pension funds. Now, around 65% of the mortgage market is with the banks.
But specifically in the state-guaranteed mortgages, with the maturity up until 10 year, there are significant competition. And we don't target for market share, we target for profitability. So we are very strict on pricing and meeting the ROE hurdles. That might mean that you're going to see a little bit more fluctuation in terms of market share. So we have in our plan that we have a gradual pressure on asset margins on the back of this, but at the same time, the profitability, because the risk rate is low, is quite good.
You do start seeing, and you mentioned that correctly, is that the housing market starts to cool. If you look in terms of transactions, if you look in terms of house price rises, and also if we see further increases in rates, that will start to impact the affordability for new mortgages. So the mortgage market is healthy. If you look at the corporate loan side, also there you see healthy growth. The Netherlands is the right ZIP code.
You also see there the benefits of the spilloff effects of the ASML in the Netherlands and the ecosystem around that. Also on the lending side, we're really looking at financing the larger transition trends in Northwestern Europe. So that is defense, digital infrastructure, and new energy. So also there, the loan demands on those products is actually rather resilient.
Very good. So you mentioned still stable or the pressure a bit low, asset margin.
Yeah.
Liability margin, we discussed with all the caveats of the market. Putting all this together, it still points to growth in NII improving margin, which is in your guidance.
Yeah.
But I guess we have to wait a bit more to see how that really will translate into versus your current guidance.
No, that is it. The current guidance, and I think we are quite transparent there, right? We provide an absolute guidance on cost and NII on a 12-month forward-looking base, again, we are updating that on a quarterly basis. Of course, you have set your target in November. We are in the third quarter of execution. We are very happy with the progress, but it is for clear some elements, and also benefits from different rate environments, means that the outlook can be-
Yeah.
...is where we stand today is more positive.
Very good.
For sure.
Moving to fees, which is another record delivery you have in the quarter.
Yeah.
Two quarters in a row, above EUR 600 million quarters. This is really driven by the wealth, but also the clearing business. Do you see this again as a structural trend? You've been mentioning yourself that you've been above or really tracking well ahead of your own targets.
Yeah.
Should we just stick with your targets, or you discovered some hidden gems there?
Where do I start? Yes. If you look at the fee growth over the past 12 months, it has been around 25%, right? But then, let's peel this off. Number one, it includes now our German acquisition, Hauck Aufhäuser Lampe. If you strip that out, you come to around 15% underlying. We have provided a CAGR of 6%-7%, including M&A at the Capital Markets Day. We're still confident with that growth outlook. Then the second step is what is structural and what is cyclical. You mentioned already wealth management and clearing.
Yes, with the backdrop of the financial markets, you see the AUM increase on the back of market performance has been significant, right? So there is a certain sensitivity. Partly cyclical of market performance. Secondly, if you look at clearing, the volatility in the market, we have seen record quarters in terms of transaction cleared. To give you an example, we see peak days where we clear around 80 million transactions on a daily basis. So also there you see elevated fees on the back of volatility in the market. So yes, I would stick to the 6%-7%, what we provided at the CMD. So you should see this year that part of it is also potentially a little bit more cyclical and still structural.
Very clear.
Do not start extrapolating the trend completely, Tarik.
Thank you. Then maybe another new fee opportunity for you with whole and then the acceleration of growth, organic and inorganic, in the wealth. How is actually under-penetrated the corporate clients from being advisory or-
Yeah.
...discretionary mandates? How is that a new opportunity? I do not think you have touched much on that on the CMD.
No.
That's-
No, and I think it's a very fair point. Because now on fees we're really focused on what's happening in wealth and clearing. Clearing is part of the corporate bank. But also there, if you look fees in our retail bank is also important, right? If you look in terms of payment transactions and payment package fees. On the other hand is the corporate bank. At the CMD it was very clear, priority is improve the profitability of the corporate bank. It has been steered historically too much on top line growth.
We have now implemented a very strict client selection framework. It really needs to meet the return hurdles of the bank, and that means that on the back of the stricter selection framework, we're more selective on onboarding new clients, and that's more a move to the mid-markets, where we have a broader product relationship for cross-sell.
Number two, it also means that the tail end of clients who are unprofitable at refinancing, so according to the maturity schedule, that will be a refinance with potentially more profitable clients where you have a broader product relationship. So yes, also from that side, and it's not only the advisory capital markets business, et c, it's a broad range transaction banking products, where we're really focused in the corporate bank on profitability. So it is ROE and it's also income of RWA.
Very clear. Before I carry on, is there any questions on the floor? No, then I'll carry on. So on moving to the costs. As you mentioned, you've been already taking 1/3 of the EUR 900 million target.
Yeah.
45% of FTEs. First on the FTEs reduction. Lots of those probably is within the [whole] within the Sorry. Yes, [whole] and NIBC. But how is those FTE reduction impacted the mood within the bank or the idea that everyone is pushing in the right direction? That's because it's a big number that you came up with at CMD.
Yeah, it's a big number, but you should also look at the starting point. You're right, it's significant, and I think it's new in the bank that we are very strictly steering. If you talk about cost, we made a conscious decision that we steer on absolute cost, we steer on FTEs, and we steer on cost income, because in the end it's about the cost income towards the end of your strategic ambition. Yeah, on FTE, I think of course, it's been a lot in the media. This was unlike ABN before, but you do start to see the organization accepting it, and you also see the organization, the ability to deliver with less people.
It also shows that we can really accelerate in areas like financial crime, in customer care and operations, where people really start deploying automation and AI tools to become more efficient. As long as you set the incentives right in the organization for people and the tools available to automate and become more efficient, you also start to see the flywheel effect, that you have the cost heroes in the organization, and we have much more attention for that. So I think, yes, the delivery is good, but I also said the earlier part in terms of headcounts is easier. It's the external terms contract. Now it really depended more on RFAs, discussions with the works council, et c. So the harder parts will start now as well.
Very clear. I think Marguerite, the CEO, has said that AI would feature more permanently if the CMD were written today. I hope I'm not misquoting her. AI was featured in your CMD, but, if everyday it goes, implementation and user cases increases. So for a company like yours, where do you see actually the benefits of AI and how that's going to actually benefit even more your cost saving in the plan announced?
Yeah, that's also, Tarik, if I look back when discussing the financial plan and communication November last year, it was really said that we see lots of opportunity in AI, and it's not only cost, it's productivity, improving client journeys, simplifying processes. But there we said in setting our targets and our financial plan, we only use proven granular business cases. Since the CMD, we've really scaled up our AI use cases to around 50 live cases, and now we really start scaling up, to be able to also start quantifying more what we do see in terms of productivity and cost savings. To give you an example, when we were in November last year, for example, software development.
Software development was something, okay, we make to all the engineers in the organization, GitHub Copilot. We expected an efficiency of 15%-20%. We now see efficiency 25%-30%. This is before enabling them for agentic coding. If you look at preparation time for your commercial staff, for a wealth manager visiting a client, all the prep work for getting the client document together, which took hours, now takes like 50 minutes. Also the productivity gains, this is something we should start seeing and really increase in the commercial intensity.
Last one is specifically in those areas where you automate, as I said, customer care and operation of financial and economic crime. There, we still have very FTE-intensive businesses. We have 5,000 people there. There, we really think we can reduce by around 35%, partly offshoring, but also really accelerating now in the efficiency gains on the back of deploying AI.
There are multiple fronts. I do see more opportunity there, but also coming back to your cost question, we also said embedded in the plans is an inflation of around 2%. Also there we need to see. We need to have more plans if inflation increases further. We also said we will absorb that to stick to our targets. It is also key to steer on that we are more ambitious than the plans we presented.
Yeah, looking at your cost income ambitions of 55%, for a bank of your profile, Dutch domestic, presumably mortgage bank with 26 branches, wealth management, it is clear you are not your natural level, 55%. So what will it take to be in a four handle?
Yeah, if I take a step back. If you set your strategic targets, we have chosen deliberately for 2028, so it is shorter dated, and also cost is important. So next to the cost income, we also provided absolute cost and FTEs. When the benefit of the tailwind of your liability NII is better, then clearly it will result, if you also steer on absolute cost, to a lower cost income ratio. What look like below 55% is a step in the right direction.
Where ABN always has been above 60% is very clearly in a world where we are today, we need to be more ambitious there. But that's also what we said, below 55% is absolute not something what we see as an endgame for ABN AMRO. You've seen also, in general, for banking peers that the outlook is more ambitious than the outlook we have provided. But for me, it's much more important, deliver on the plan. Deliver on the plan, and if we can accelerate, we will accelerate and become more ambitious than that.
Very good. Really just a question on those qualities, just to check if there's nothing there I might overlooked. But you look very confident about the book to remain a very good quality with no issues. Anything there? Rates going unexpectedly higher. You grow quite a lot recently, so are you still comfortable with the quality of the book?
Yeah, we're comfortable. You also need to put it in perspective. At the Capital Markets Day, we said we always want to provide a through the cycle indication what we would expect. We lowered that to 10 basis points- 15 basis points. We also said we only expect a gradual normalization towards that level. Take into account that 60% of our balance sheet is residential mortgages with an LTV of around 52%. For the rest is if you look at the corporate lending part, the majority of our book is fully collateralized loans. There are no specific topics of concern.
Outlook is good. Of course, if we are going to look at a complete different economic scenario with a really prolonged conflict in the Middle East and a closure of the Strait of Hormuz and inflation starts really to spiral out and interest rates going up, of course, it will start to have an effect, specifically in your corporate lending towards SME in the Netherlands.
But at the moment, there are no indications of that. But clearly, with our energy prices, we're in constant dialogue with our corporate clients to see if we pick up any signals of stress, and that can be in high energy intensive sectors. It can be the agri sectors where it has an impact on fertilizer cost and crop yields this years. We're always mindful, but we're very comfortable with the credit quality of our book.
Very good. Now we move to a very important topic, capital optimization, which was one of the key pillars-
Yeah.
...of your CMD. You've done very good start, delivered EUR 9 billion of RWA optimization so far. And 60% or 63% of the corporate banking ambitions. How much of the remainder are actually easy to deliver, or was it just the quick wins so far?
Well, again, what is the starting point? I think where we started, I think Q1 last year was a transition to Basel IV, and at the same time transitioning the remainder of our non-retail models to the standardized approach. We said from this point, we have a predictable outlook and base in terms of RWA, but we also said, in terms of data remediation, sourcing of collateral in our systems, we had a significant book of work where we delivered on last year. Even if you look from Q1, the RWA relief has been more than EUR 9 billion. If you look at this part, the biggest part has been RWA optimization, and that is really investing in the data quality.
But also, and there I come back to cost again, how do you set the right incentives in the organization that the front end of the bank, imagine you're on the commercial side, you're a lender, that you spend most of your time getting all the underlying data of the collateral on a granular basis in the right place, in the right system. And you will then see directly the benefit in terms of RWA on your overall portfolio of customers you manage. And this has really helped, because at the end of the day, you're very dependent on improving your data quality on the front end of the bank. So a big part has been realized there.
The second part is much more looking at portfolio optimization, and there we look at the very strict client selection framework, as I said. It is really looking at exiting portfolios which are unprofitable. Asset-based finance in the countries is one of them, which we put in wind down. And the third element of this, because we also want a growing bank, that we also deploy much more SRTs and other products to really facilitate the growth, but keep our overall RWA stable. So the stable RWA outlook does not mean we're not growing, but we're also using SRTs to self-finance that growth.
Okay. Maybe a bit controversial question here. Would RWA should not be actually going down in the corporate bank, given the returns? At CMD, you've admitted yourself that the targets is a drag to the overall group ROE. So should we expect more forceful actions there to fix the returns of those unprofitable exposures more structurally rather than name by name?
Yeah. Of course, but you should always take into account, the ROE of a corporate bank, specifically in our portfolio versus the much less capital-intensive retail and wealth management, will always be the lowest of the three. Capital intensity, where can you do your own work in terms of reducing the RWA density, and data quality is step one, and you are more strict on your client selection. You should also take into account that corporate bank is a feeder channel for wealth management. If I look, for example, in the countries, in Germany and France, but also in the Netherlands, wealth management's the biggest inflow is really from entrepreneurs.
Why do we know the entrepreneurs? Because we finance the enterprise early on. We have the advisory around it, and at a certain point, the company is being sold, the money goes to wealth management, and it is reinvested again. There are lots of cross-sell opportunity into the dual clients. It is not as an excuse that more of the cross-sell benefits in wealth management are not in the corporate bank.
But you should also take into account it is very relevant for the clients where we have lending relationship for broader cross-sell than just within the corporate bank. But for sure, it is much more steering into deepening the client relationship, and increasing the cross-sell ratio. It is harder work for our corporate bank because, yes, we do a lot in terms of RWA optimization, but the RWA density is still in a relative basis, quite high, but I am optimistic we can do more there.
Very clear. Just checking again in the floor if there is any question. No. Then we can move to, we have five minutes to the last-
Yeah.
...topic I would like to address, is capital return. You moved to an almost over-capitalized bank. You are at 15.3%, assuming 100% payout.
Yeah.
You want to sit at around 13.75%.
Our former target is above 13.75%.
Above 13.75%. Are you on one of those banks now where capital is trapped, and we need to find a way to return to investors? 100% payout is probably a cap, I would say, on what you can pay. Maybe you tell me other way. What are the other actually routes to deploy this capital?
Yeah. No, it is a good question. Before we start talking about trapped capital, let us first start in our intention, and I think it is a significant step up, and we really take capital return extremely seriously if you have the ambition over a three-year period to pay out up to 100%. That is the starting point of our strategy, and really steer on capital, we can still grow. So we are comfortable making the statement that we pay out 100%. Yeah, if we keep it stable, you always need to have some buffer for uncertainties, and you always have your discussions, what do you pay out?
Or how much buffer do you have in a more stressful scenario? But if we deliver in keeping a relatively stable RWA and can grow the bank, yet then over a longer period of time, we have structural excess capital above the 13.75%. We are explicit in our distribution policy, up to 100% payouts. If there, over time, a structural excess capital, we might consider non-ordinary distributions on top of that. But we also said in November, for the forecasted period, it is too early to start factoring that in. If I look at excess capital, number one priority is growing the bank profitably.
So if we see organic opportunities to accelerate, that is what you can control yourself. M&A, we do not hold a structural M&A buffer. But if there are opportunities which really meet the financial hurdles and criteria, and also are in the existing business mix, we might consider that as well. But if those two options do not provide credible, accretive returns, then the third option is returning it to shareholders. We do not want to carry structurally a significant buffer above our capital target, Tarik.
Look, it is a good problem to have, but-
Yeah.
...it is two follow-ups here. First on the considering specials above the 100.
Yeah.
You had, I presume, observing from the outside, we never know, but some difficult discussions with ECB and so on approving buybacks in the past. They approved your 100% payout, which is already a big achievement. Going above 100%, I am looking across Europe, there is not many, actually, actors that have been allowed to distribute above. I am looking at you probably-
Yeah, not allowed or no, not doing that. One correction, Tarik.
Yeah,
The 100% approved by the ECB is not approved by the ECB. We have the intention to pay out up to 100%, but every share buyback Request for Application needs to be, at that moment in time, approved by the ECB.
Or I meant in principle when he presented the plan, it was 100%.
Yeah. Okay. They know what our intention is.
Yeah.
That is true. Are they difficult? No, but the ECB is clearly in a position that in times of economic uncertainties, they like buffers. That is for sure. So the processes of getting share buybacks approved are quite granular processes with lots of instance stress testing on your capital that you have healthy buffers also in periods of downturns. But where we stand today, I think what really has improved, the most important thing is, that your RWA outlook is stable and trustful, that you are not going to see the volatility in there. I think where we stand today, also with a big part of your models on standardized, that should provide the confidence there.
On the non-organic, obviously there is the Dutch market, the wealth management, which areas you think actually you would put more scrutiny into finding opportunities to grow non-organically?
Well, there are two things, and that has not changed. So number one, we want to diversify in less capital-intensive businesses. So wealth management has always had. We have a very good brand name. We have a high market share. Economies of scales in the countries are important. So if there are any opportunities, again, which meet the financial criteria, and where there is low execution risk, we might look at that. Transitioning more into wealth management really fits into our current strategy.
Number two is our home markets, in-market consolidation, which is all about cost synergies and realizing more economies of scale in your core products, also retail banking. You see that with the acquisition of NIBC, you would always look at that. But there are more options over time. You can look more at, are there certain products you are missing or product factories which might also help towards your intimacy with your wealth management clients, where you can get a bigger piece of the pie in terms of fees revenues. So it is still the same in the potential pockets we might consider.
Ferdinand, thank you very much.
Thank you.