Hi everyone. Thank you for joining us on Jyske Bank's Conference Call for the Financial Results for the Second Quarter of 2025. This is Simon Hagbart from Investor Relations speaking. With me, I have Jyske Bank CEO Lars Mørch and CFO Birger Nielsen. Lars and Birger will walk you through our prepared remarks. Afterwards we'll open up for questions. I'll now hand over to Lars.
Thank you, Simon, and welcome to all of you on this call. Much appreciated that you're taking the time to dial in. We've had another solid quarter of 2025, building upon the positive momentum from recent quarters and growing earnings per share compared to the year before, despite the significantly lower short-term interest rates. On the back of the positive development in the first half of the year, we are now targeting the upper end of our outlook for 2025. We continue to improve customer satisfaction in all areas. In Q2, Private Banking customer satisfaction was the highest in Denmark for the 10th consecutive year. Additionally, the satisfaction of corporate and business clients with 20+ employees is also the highest, and personal customer satisfaction is showing a very strong momentum, already reaching our 2028 target level with a top three position.
The latter is a major progress compared to where we were a couple of years ago. The improved customer satisfaction has underpinned mortgage financing for personal clients, which reached the highest growth rates in several years as we continue to gain market share. Additionally, assets under management have been resilient, reaching a new all-time high amid turbulent markets, supported by healthy net inflows. Meanwhile, our credit quality remains solid. We booked reversals in Q2 while slightly increasing our post-model adjustments and reducing our Stage 3 exposures. Lastly, our capital position improved further in the quarter following a very strong capital build, leaving significant excess capital versus our capital targets. With that, let me hand over to you, Birger, for a walkthrough of our financial results.
Thank you, Lars, and I would like just to start off with a little kind of a busy slide, but nevertheless an overall solid footprint in Q2 with good momentum in the group. Looking at the ratios, return on tangible equity 11.5% and 11.3% for the first half. Cost income slightly above 50%-51% here in Q2, but 49% for the first half, and looking at cost of risk, we saw reversals in Q2, 2 basis points. Earnings per share steady, going at DKK 20 in the quarter, and the CET1 ratio stood at 16.3% here in Q2, up from 15.7% in Q1, underpinned by a lower risk.
Looking at the left-hand side at the bottom, you can see that the earnings per share DKK 20 return in Q2 is very much similar to what we've seen in the last five quarters, so six consecutive quarters with a steady earnings per share return. Looking at the P&L at a glance, the NII was as expected due to lower policy rates. We still see solid fee income in the second quarter. Financial markets were positive due to the spread tightening, and looking at core expenses, they were on track exclusive of one-offs due to the location shifts here in Copenhagen. Finally, small reversals on impairments underpinning solid quality in the credit book. Finally, net profit up 2% in the quarter to DKK 1.3 billion.
At the right-hand side, you can see that volumes, as Lars said, AUM up in the second quarter after the turbulence and volatility we saw back in March in Q1. The mortgage book is up, driven by both personal and corporate customers by 1% in the quarter, whereas bank lending is more steady going. Moving on to the outlook, we have updated our outlook for 2025 given the performance we saw here in the first two quarters. We now expect net profit to reach the upper or very upper end of DKK 3.8 billion-DKK 4.6 billion. Of course, that also applies to the earnings per share expectations, which now is in the other end of the DKK 60- DKK 73 interval. Handing over to Lars and a few remarks on customer satisfaction.
Yes, and when we look at the corporate clients and business clients in Jyske Bank, we've seen quite a development during the last couple of years. We came from a fairly solid number three in the Danish market during the integration process. When we integrated Handelsbanken into our operation, we saw a decline in customer satisfaction, which you normally do during those kinds of processes due to the time-consuming nature. Now time is back to fully concentrate on the day one of the mill. On top of that, a big number of different initiatives have strengthened the development so that we are now in a much stronger position than we were prior to the integration of Handelsbanken . For companies with 20 employees or more, we are now, according to Voxmeter, number one in Denmark. Moving to the personal customer satisfaction, more or less the same picture.
Our starting point was a little bit weaker back in 2023 and we saw the same impact during the years that follow. Again, here time has freed up to the run of the mill and on top of that a number of targeted initiatives, boot camps, and a reorganization means that we are now back and we are actually back in a stronger than we would have anticipated already. Now moving to private banking, we've been in terms of customer satisfaction ranked number one for 10 consecutive years. For now we have the largest gap that we have ever had to number two in the market. Obviously this is important when it comes to retaining clients, but it's also important in terms of building momentum with the clients that we have.
Turning to the momentum, we can see that the development in assets under management, as Birger alluded to, has been strong for quite a long time. We've seen that investment results are generally positive after a little bit more turbulent first half of the year. We've seen strong inflow during also the second quarter here, predominantly from private banking customers and from personal banking customers, a little bit more mixed on the institutional clients, but generally speaking a strong inflow here. Again, on the lending to personal clients, mortgage lending, we have had 17 consecutive quarters with no growth. Now we've had five quarters with growth. As you can see here on the right-hand side, momentum has been building during the last couple of quarters. We connect this to a large extent to the higher customer satisfaction.
Yes. Looking at the deposit margin, you can see a slide here which demonstrates that we saw this uplift in the three months CIBOR rate from 2022 until the end of 2023 and then the reversal from a peak around 400 basis points down to now close to 200 basis points. In the meantime, of course, as you look, you can see the light green showing the implied deposit margin. We have done our utmost, of course, to take advantage of the situation in the market. We have lifted the margin in the period until end 2023 and afterwards we try to mitigate the negative implications from lower policy rates on our margin. Just to demonstrate, we took off the interest rates on transaction accounts for private individuals back in April, so now it's a 0% account.
Savings accounts for private individuals were reduced to both a 0.25 % for amounts below DKK 500,000 and 0.5 % for amounts above DKK 500,000. On the corporate businesses, we also reduced margins or interest rates on deposit transaction accounts to zero in April. We have done, and on top of that, we have reduced the preferential risk. We have done a lot of things in order to mitigate the implications from lower policy rates. That, of course, brings us into a position where the ability to withstand further cuts will gradually become more limited, as especially savings rates are close to zero, as you understand from my words here. Turning to the competitive landscape, we have shown this before and I will not spend much time on it.
Just to rephrase what we have said before, after the agreement now of 15% tariff for European exports to the U.S., we still expect, after this investigation done by the Danish National Bank back some months ago, that the short-term effect will be fully manageable and the longer-term effects will be small, very small. Since trade patterns gradually shift, they will have very limited impact on the Danish economy and therefore also on our customer base. Turning to the credit quality, it's the same message that we have told you several quarters now. We have a solid credit book. We have seen small reversals in Q2 where impaired customers have migrated to slightly better grades. That has been the main trigger for the reversal here in Q2.
Secondly, looking at post-model adjustments, they are steady from Q1 to Q2, but up shy of DKK 100 million since the end of last year. If I look at the write-offs, as you can see on the graph, they're very low here in the first half, 1 basis point. As we see now, there are no leftover from former non-performing loans in the book. Finally, if I look at the stage 3 exposures, those which are mostly impaired in our book, they are now down to 1% of total exposures from 1.2% a year ago and 1.1% a quarter ago. All in all, a very solid performance so far and also a solid outlook for the rest of the year. Turning to capital, the EBA stress test during the summer demonstrates our solid capital position. On top of that, we have relatively high risk weights in our books.
Looking at the Q2 numbers, they also underpin the same conclusion with a level of 16.3% CET1 ratio, up from 15.7% in Q1. Also, as you can see on the graph, slightly lower risk in the second quarter of this year after the implementation of CRR3 by January 1st of this year . Given the current risk weights, we see no further significant impact from upcoming regulations going forward. We expect the target for the CET1 level to be at the lower end of 15% - 17%. That's the reason why we, as we speak, pursue buybacks. We have a DKK 2.25 billion program up and running. We have bought back, as we speak, DKK 1 billion of those. On top of this, we will add another approximately 30% in dividend. Yes. Over to you, Simon.
Thank you, Lars. Thank you. Birger will now open up for questions. If you would like to ask a question, please raise your hand or unmute your device. First question in line comes from the line of Mathias Nielsen from Nordea. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much. I hope you can hear me now. I have three questions, one on guidance, one on capital, and one on lending growth. If you take them one by one, I think it's going to be easier for you. The first one on guidance, looking at the guidance and comparing that to where consensus were ahead of the Q2 numbers, it actually seems like you imply that consensus should come down for the second half of 2025. Is that also how you see it? Related to this, we also hear a couple of peers being slightly more bearish about the Q-on-Q development on NII for Q3 compared to what we saw in Q2. Is that also how we should think about it for you, or how should we think about that for you?
We are looking at the updated outlook for 2025. I think we stand on, as we said, strong credit quality, decent feature development, mitigated lower policy rates, and positive financial market, as I mentioned. Those elements are all in good shape. We have demonstrated that in Q1 and Q2, moving into Q3 and Q4, as you said. Yes, it's clear that there is more pressure now on NII than if we go back a few quarters since we have lowered the internal rates, the deposit margins, etc., the deposit raised to a degree where we have used a lot of the tools that we have at hand. If you look at transaction accounts now at 0% and savings accounts up to 0.5%, of course there is limited room to mitigate further movements on the policy risk if that were to happen in the second half of this year.
Of course, you still have geopolitical uncertainty and we still need to be confirmed in a strong activity also in the second half of this year. We have seen a very decent development, both on the investment side, but also on mortgages in Q1 and Q2. Of course, we need to see that also be replicated in the third and fourth quarter.
Okay.
If I could just add, Mathias, I think our guidance is now higher than it was yesterday. We are confident with the new guidance, which is in the very other end of the interval that we had yesterday. I see no reason for you to look that differently at this. Secondly, I think that the things that we know now and the things that we can control ourselves when it comes to asset quality and initiatives, we are also confident on having those in place.
Great. Thanks for that on the capital side. You say that the target is still the low end of the 15% - 17% and that eventually means that you need to pay out quite a lot over the coming period. How should we think about that? Is it possible to go above 100% payout ratio or would you rather do it gradually where you reduce the capital over a number of years? How should we think about that? What is your preference from a strategic point of view?
What we've communicated thus far is that we have a policy of paying out in cash a dividend of 30% of the result of the previous year. On top of that, we pay out by buying back shares so that we stay within the capital limits that we also have communicated of 15%. We have not communicated anything in relation to if that potentially could be above 100%. We would have to communicate on that a little bit later. It stands clear and firm that a 30% cash dividend, on top of that we do share buybacks to the extent possible and within capital ambitions.
Okay, the last question on lending growth on bank lending, it looks a tad soft this quarter. Also, in the light of that, new customer satisfaction is actually coming up. Is it because customers are more price conscious, or how should we think about the development on lending growth?
If you just, you should decompose it. If you look at our lending across bank and mortgage lending, we have a positive development. It's the mortgage lending that is driving the development during the last year. If you look at the reasons, there are different reasons. Looking at the personal client customer base, when we acquired Handelsbanken , most of their lending was basically bank funded lending. As they get new loans, they tend to migrate towards most loans, traditional Danish mortgage loans instead. There's a natural tendency of moving out of bank funded products into mortgage, the products of the mortgage institution. That's what happens within the personal customer space. Within the business customer space, we are not concerned with the development here in terms of volumes. What we see is we have a high customer satisfaction and improving.
We see that the mid sized customers, they stay with us with the churn rate that we've had the last year up between 40- 50 years. That's obviously a theoretical view, but basically that's the low level of churn that we have then. What we've seen is a couple of industries, utility and financial institutions, we've not basically been losing customers, but a limited number of the largest ones is using our balance sheet a little bit less than they did a year ago or they did two quarters ago. If you include also public institutions, that more than explains the small decrease that we have had in the bank lending part. It's not a loss of clients or a loss of future potential here.
It's merely a couple of industries that is cyclical and is a little bit down at the moment in terms of the usage of our balance sheet and on the personal customer base, it's a migration towards mortgage lending instead.
Great, thanks a lot.
Thank you, Mathias. Next question comes from the line of Asbjørn Mørk from Danske Bank. Please go ahead.
Yes, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions and sorry for coming back to net interest income. I just didn't really get the answer that you gave to Mathias earlier. Just looking at the sort of sequential move and the actual NII for Q2, if I look at your sort of lending deposit split on the banking side, it's the highest since Q4 2023, and if I look at your administration margin in the mortgage business, it's a record high. I guess it's really the other NII that is causing sort of the decline, which obviously makes sense considering the money market rates movement. If we look at the money market rate movement in Q3, obviously quite flat, but went down quite a lot during Q2. Just trying to understand what is sort of the impact going into Q3 Q- over-Q from this move.
All else equal, assuming that money market rates stay sort of where they are right now. Just trying to understand the bridge into Q3 and how we should look at that versus also Q4 would be very helpful, thank you.
Yes, you are fully correct, Asbjørn. What we saw, basically what we tried to allude to was the fact that we have been able to retain our deposit margin in the first half of the year to a very large extent. What's been driving the negative development in NII has been other NII and that's likely to persist. What we were basically just saying is that now we have not emptied our toolbox, but we have fewer tools going forward if rates continue to decline. In terms of the deposit margin, we would expect a larger pressure in Q3 than we saw in Q2 and in Q1, given that we can or we don't expect to lower the transaction account, for example, to below zero. We basically have increased risk flow risk on our deposit margin.
In terms of the sequential move, we saw a negative development of DKK 30 million in Q1. That was partly because we saw a positive effect from repricing on the mortgage side in that quarter and then in Q2 we saw a negative of DKK 34 million, so slightly more, but back then we were pricing transaction accounts down and also savings accounts and we were reducing preferential deposit rates. We would expect if rates continue to decline in Q3 versus Q2, we would expect a larger sequential drawdown than the DKK 34 million.
Simon, just to clarify, also as I mentioned, we did change the accounts for transactions both for private clients and corporates in April. Of course, there is also a full quarter effect in Q3 from lowering these rates for personal and corporate clients.
Is that assuming an incremental rate cut from the ECB, or is it just assuming flat policy rates from here?
This was merely just to state the fact that we did make some changes that had its impact from April, and we'll have a full quarter effect in our margin book in Q3 for both private index as well as corporates.
No, the point is more on the floor risk. The more than DKK 34 million drop in Q3, was that assuming a red card or not?
That's assuming the way forward rates are currently. I see a small decline in the three-month CIBOR rate, but it's also taking into account the fact that we have seen half a year where rates have been continuing to decline in the first half of the year, and our bond portfolio, part of that is semiannual interest rate resetting, so that part of the portfolio should have a. Of course, you could always question whether it actually has an impact on bonds specifically. That depends on whether we lend it out as bank loans or we place it in bonds, but like for like, the rate on our bond portfolio should go down in July given the half year of semiannual interest rate resetting.
Is it then fair to assume if we, I mean the money market is pricing 94% likelihood that the ECB will not cut rates in September, if we assume that they are right and we don't get a cut, is it fair to assume that NII will pick up in Q4?
I think it's difficult to. I mean, if you. It depends. It depends how the short term, but if rates just were flat from Q2, I can't see why we shouldn't be able, if we saw some growth on the balance sheet at least and that's not outweighed by margin pressure, then I agree that that should be the case. I would maintain that we still expect NII bought margin at the beginning of 2026.
Okay, fair enough. On the AUM, you mentioned that you see quite nice growth from retail and private banking, less from the institutional side. Could you comment on how your margin is developing within the asset management business? Growing AUM 7%. How should we think about the asset management income base?
Sorry, the income base of asset management.
Exactly. You are the margin, the nominal margin that you may make from the AUM.
Yeah, in Q2 versus.
Yeah.
Let's start with Q2. If this continues, how should we model it going forward?
I think overall some margin pressure is likely to remain. I think that's been the case for several years and that's likely to continue to some extent. The quarter movements are usually a bit, I mean Q2 you have some yearly fees that are paid in Q2 and Q4. There will be some swings from quarter to quarter. I think the overall trend is likely to be some margin pressure.
Okay, fair enough.
On the other side, Simon, I think the development that we're seeing now, which is, as Asbjørn correctly stated, predominantly from our private banking custom and private personal individuals, helps. Where we see mixed development is on the institutional, where you normally have a lower income per AUM. That helps us, the mix.
Okay, that makes sense. Just final question a little bit back to the first question from the guidance. I get your point on NII coming down in Q3, but if I look at your, the beat that you make today versus consensus is almost DKK 200 million. It's including DKK 60 million of one-off costs. I'm just struggling to see how you can sort of maintain the guidance, why you're not lifting the upper end. Is there something you're seeing or you're just being conservative?
What I'd find to state before was that with what we can see and what we can control when it comes to asset quality and what we see so far, we don't see any negatives that's going to impact the second quarter apart from what you just discussed in terms of interest rate levels. It is an uncertainty, and you can call it conservative or how you would look at this, but I think we are confident with what we are saying today, which is very close to the 4.6 billion.
All right, that's very helpful. Thanks a lot.
Thank you, Asbjørn. The next question in line comes from Jacob Hesslevik from SEB, please go ahead.
Good afternoon everyone. The first question is also on fees and asset under management. It developed quite nicely until end of June. Given the poor performance from Novo Nordisk, that's to name a few of the blue chip names in the Danish market, how is the sentiment for Danish retail investors right now and could we potentially see a backlash in the AUM development already in Q3?
Retail clients are buying no Nordea shares to an extent that we've not seen before. I think underlying to your question, obviously these are two of the household names for Danish investors and that could impact the sentiment and the willingness to invest. So far we've not seen that. We're seeing that our private banking customers and personal client customers, they've not dramatically changed their view and they basically behave as they did before and they are buying up some of them, the Nordea shares, as is in general the case across Denmark.
If I look at the split between what is market driven and what is net inflow of new funds from customers in the first and especially the second quarter of this year, we are still on a very strong momentum in gaining new customers and funds. I think that could be a very strong defense against what you allude to here.
We could see that more clients ought to have the bank playing a bigger role in helping them doing the investments, because the clients that have had advice from the bank would tend to have less of single shares, and they would tend to come through this turmoil better. There is also a business opportunity from our side.
You see this as an opportunity to maybe get back some clients who moved to Nordnet, for example, by giving advice, etc.
Yes, some of our own clients that have decided to a large extent to invest themselves. That's also an opportunity here.
Interesting. Could you help me understand what drove the increase in the post-model adjustments this quarter? In my world, interest rates are coming down, GDP growth for 2026 looks strong, and unemployment is low in Denmark. The increase can't be macro driven in my view at least. What caused it? I find it a bit silly when you had reversals in this quarter as well to increase your buffers.
Yeah, that's a good question. If you look at the first half, we saw an increase in our post-model adjustment of shy of DKK 100 million, as I mentioned, due to the fact that we in Q1 of this year lifted our macroeconomic buffer because of uncertainty due to geopolitical uncertainty. In the second quarter of this year, there's been a shift in, I think, DKK 6 million or DKK 7 million. We are moving around the DKK 1.9 billion mark in the second half. What has driven that? The change and reversal of impairments in the second half has been individual impairments. The post-model adjustment was very steady going in the second quarter this year.
Okay, now that makes sense.
I fully understand the reason for asking the question in terms of how we have to deal with this. It's two different methodologies. Where we do the reversals here is basically on single clients and where we put aside money for potential future losses and where we see that the clients come out better than anticipated. The post-model adjustments is to a large extent math on the entire portfolio.
Yeah, that's clear. Could you also give me any guidance on when we should expect these overlays to be released? Is it over the next 18 months or is it closer to the next 36 months?
If you look at it in historical context, we built up the post-model adjustments post-Covid back in 2020 from DKK 600 million to DKK 1.6 billion and then up to, well, close to DKK 2 billion. You have seen a few swings afterwards. I have mentioned before, and I still think it fully applies, that we can see some dynamics in these numbers. You're right that if we put on a specific PMA charge or buffer, we need to see it move in one or another direction within typically 12 months. Yes, there will be some swings to the buffers, which also has been the case. If you go back and look at our quarterly and annual reporting, you can see that the buffers have shifted from different macro elements to process elements, etc. Of course, that still applies.
If you ask me if we could see a much lower level of PMAs, yes, we can see a lower level, but much lower back to the level pre-Covid is not what we expect within the coming few years.
I think this is maybe a little bit Denmark specific here. I think with the way that those post-model adjustment rules are implemented and dealt with in the banks, you would tend to see that the bank hold a little bit more on that line than in some other countries.
Thank you, that's very clear.
Thank you, Jacob. Next question comes from Namita Samtani from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Hi and thanks for taking my questions. My first question, I just wanted your thoughts on Nykredit and Spar Nord . It's just that Nykredit had results last week and they talked about gaining mortgage market share and they're yet to offer all the discounts to Spar Nord customers. I just wondered if that worried you and how does your proposition compare and are you able to compete?
Yeah, good question. I'm confident that we can compete in this. Basically, nothing has changed apart from them having a task of integrating two banks on top of running the banks here. Obviously, they will be successful in doing that. The discounts that they have on their mortgages, Spar Nord has had in the past also. That's probably not going to change. We are confident that we can compete with this, and we're doing it to a large extent already today.
Thanks. Just on the Novo Nordisk, can I ask the question in a different way? Just from a perspective of the company actually impacts Denmark's GDP quite a lot and I guess jobs as well. From a top down perspective, do you see that as like a potential headwind, more for like lending, et cetera?
Not really. Obviously, if there's a meltdown in [Novo Nordisk], it will have an impact on the GDP. It will have an impact on certain geographies in Denmark. One of the geographies where they have the headquarters is one of the geographies where you feel strong. That could potentially have an impact. What we're looking at is a company that still earns quite a lot of money, that still has new products released just yesterday again, which holds a significant promise for the future. We've seen a growth in the company during the last couple of years, and we saw a projected growth. The latter, the projected growth, is probably not going to happen. If what is the base case now and what the company has communicated is how it's going to develop, this will still be a large and strong company in Denmark if they should scale down.
There's a lot of competency within one of the industries where Denmark in general is strongest, and we believe that most of the people would be able to find new jobs. On the new geographies where they're building new plants, it's basically not Jyske Bank land to a large extent. Where the new investments are being done, families are moved to and so on, we don't have a lot of business. We have it around Copenhagen where the job market is strong altogether, but we don't have it in the outskirts areas where they're building factories.
That's helpful, thank you. Just last question, the lending margins on bank lending, I think they're quite a lot better than I was expecting or compared to how CIBOR moved. I just wondered why that was the case.
Yep, we have a bit of a lag effect on some bank lending rates. That was the case on the way up. If you just compare to a short, like a kind of a three-month rate, we saw significant margin pressure, bank lending margin pressure, and that's the reverse. As rates come down, some of those fixed rate elements help in increasing versus a three-month rate, at least the lending margin. Other than that, I think we haven't been very explicit in terms of what we are doing in terms of lending rates because you can see, at least on the private client, it's a question of there is a bit of a lag effect and also maybe we didn't fully pass through on the way up and that's why we're not fully passing through the rate cuts on the way down.
Thank you.
Thank you, Namita. Next question comes from Mathias Nielsen from Nordea. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much. I have just had one follow-up question on the capital. If I heard you right, you said you are about to apply for the buyback. Given the time that it takes to get those awarded, should we then expect the buyback to be announced prior to the Q4 2025 results in February, or how should we think about that?
A good question. Hopefully you didn't hear me saying that we were applying because that's nothing that I can actually talk about. I can't give you any clear answer to whether we are in a process or not. Please bear in mind that we have a program now that is running until the end of January next year, and we have said formally that we want to be very predictable here to set up a program that is running throughout the normal calendar year, more or less. I think that is what you can expect from us going forward.
For now, Mathias, we'll just be positive about the fact that we believe that it seems as if there'll be room for buybacks.
Sure.
I didn't really get the point on that. Last year you were quite clear saying we should not expect anything more than once annually, and that should be in connection with the Q4 results or somewhere around that. Is that still the approach, or how should I understand what you mean?
That is the guidance that we are also getting from the FSA, that they would like banks in general to deal with this once a year and have a trial in our position, probably a fairly substantial program, and they would deal with that once a year. We would stick to what we've communicated on that.
Sure.
I have a technical one on that. If, let's say, I'm not knowing if you are applying now or when you will apply, but let's say that you apply in a couple of weeks. Would that then be based on what the actual CET1 ratio was at the end of Q2, or would that be based on an adjusted CET1 ratio and based on your expectations for the remainder of the year? How is that in the process?
Yeah, the normal process is rather straightforward because you have to build on your actual numbers whenever you apply anything with the Danish FSA. If we were to apply, as you say, in a couple of weeks, that would probably be based on our existing Q2 numbers. We will do a stress test as they require, a harsh one, and demonstrate to the extent what is the room for buybacks in a three years stressed period.
Okay, thanks a lot. That was all from my side.
Thanks a lot.
Thank you, Mathias. It seems as if there are no further questions in line. We would like to thank you for participating in today's conference call. Recording of the call will be made available on our IR website in the coming days. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have further questions. We appreciate your interest in Jyske Bank and wish you a nice day.