Earnings Call: Q4 2016

Feb 15, 2017

Can we start with this meeting? Is it possible? Okay, thank you very much. We'll just start with this meeting. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. With Jérôme, we are very pleased to be with you today. We thank you very much for being present or connected for this meeting or conference. In a few minutes, Jérôme will comment you on our main figures about the last quarter, but for the whole year too, of course. First of all, I would like to take some minutes just to highlight that 2016, the last year, was really a key year for this transformation of Crédit Agricole Group, for three main reasons. The first reason is, of course, that we did this very important operation that we have called Eurêka. As you know, Eurêka has really simplified the organization of the group, the ability to read the different figures of the group. Eurêka normalized too the solvency of Crédit Agricole S.A., both in terms of level, in terms of quality, since, as you can see today, the Core Tier 1 of Crédit Agricole S.A. has reached from 10.7% at the end of 2015 to 12.1% at the end of 2016. Of course, this level of solvency includes the reimbursement of Switch 1. The second reason for which this year was really a key year is that we launched a new medium-term plan. We would like to highlight once again that this new MTP was naturally, for us, focused on the universal banking model. Why the universal banking model? Not only because, as you know, it is a stable, so a safe model, but mainly for us, because it is the necessary model that we need to create, really, a global and sustainable relationship with our customers, so as to be able to provide loyal solutions for any of their needs. The third reason, the third cornerstone of this 2016 year, was of course the announcement of the acquisition of Pioneer. I can confirm you that yesterday, the board of Crédit Agricole S.A. has confirmed that our target will be 70% within Amundi, so that to increase the level of liquidity that will be available on the market. That was, sorry, the three main reasons for which 2016 was a very special year for the transformation of Crédit Agricole Group. I would like simply now to explain to you or to give you the key messages for 2016 in terms of main figures. Let us go to slide 4, if you want to look at that. Only six points in terms of key messages. First, as you can see, the underlying net income group share has significantly increased, +53% when we compare the fourth quarter to the fourth quarter, and +23% when you compare the total year to the precedent year. Second key message. You can see, or to be more precise, you will be able to see that we have really a continued strong commercial momentum in all our businesses. Of course, I can summarize that, because it is right both in terms of banks as regional banks, LCL, Cariparma, and it is right too for our business lines as insurance, consumer finance, or CIB activities. Third key message is in terms of digital transformation. I think I can say we are really on track. Because, for example, but of course, this is just an example, more than 50% of our customer journey processes for subscription of products and services are already digitalized for Crédit Agricole Group, especially in regional banks. Fourth point, you can see an improvement in terms of exploitation because our cost-income ratio has decreased of 6.6 points for the cost-income ratio. When you compare the fourth quarter to the precedent, the cost-income ratio now is at 65.54%. Next point, in terms of financial strength, I have already highlighted that the solvency of Crédit Agricole S.A. has reached 12.1%, but I would like to highlight too that the solvency of Crédit Agricole Group has increased to reach 14.5%. Last, but you already knew that, we confirmed, of course, our dividend of EUR 0.60 per share, because we had already announced that during the third quarter. It is very special. Probably, we were the only bank to give you very precisely the dividend level for the whole year during the third quarter. As we have already said that for next year, our intention, of course, is to have this payout policy of 50% and to maintain at least this level of EUR 0.60. Well, that is all for the key message. If I can, I shall come back on the customer project to explain to you what we are trying to do so that to increase the attractiveness of Crédit Agricole Group for the future. I give the floor to Jérôme so that he can explain to you some more precise explanations about these main figures. Jérôme, if you want. Thank you, Philippe. Good morning. Good afternoon, excuse me, to all of you. I am used to hold this call in the morning, that is the reason why. Let me start with something I want to address first in order to allow us to concentrate afterwards on the underlying figures. I want to just present you what we call the specific items, or the restatements that we apply to our stated figures in order to obtain the underlying figures. This quarter, I think that we have a limited number of significant specific items that we restated. Of course, we can start with the partial impairment of the goodwill that we have on LCL. Actually, we have published a press release on this one by the end of January, so it is not news of today, I would say. Obviously, this has an impact on the published figures for us this quarter. As you know, it's not tax-deductible. It has no impact on our capital ratio, and it has no impact on our cash. So it's a pure, I would say, accounting element. But of course, we want to explain this difference between the stated figure and the underlying performance. The second element is something you are probably used to with French corporates and French banks since a few weeks now because the French government decided to pass a fiscal law at the end of last year, through which the level of corporate tax is going to be reduced starting in 2020. This generates for us a partial depreciation of some deferred tax assets that we have in our balance sheet. The figure for Crédit Agricole SA is EUR 160 million. It's more significant at the group level. At group level, it is a global amount of EUR 453 million because the regional banks have significant deferred tax assets in their balance sheets. Then we have the usual traditional elements of what I would call accounting volatility, like the issuer spread, DVA running, and things like that, which represent this quarter an amount of EUR 39 million. I just remind you that in the previous quarters, we also had some significant one-off items that you probably have them in mind. Some positive ones we have had in the first quarter, for the last time, a dividend from the regional banks that we, of course, restate because we no longer will get any dividend from the regional banks since the Eurêka transaction. We have had the capital gain on the Eurêka transaction in the second quarter, and we have had in the third quarter, excuse me, and we have had also the Visa capital gain in the second quarter. Some negatives, too, mainly two in the respectively first and third quarter. This was the cost of the liability management operations that we performed, one in the first quarter at the level of Crédit Agricole SA globally, one at the level of LCL in the third quarter. These are the specific items that we restate in order to produce the underlying figures. Now, if you want, we can concentrate on the analysis of the underlying performances of Crédit Agricole SA and its business lines. So on these figures, you have the global figures, profitability figures. You have them in mind. I will not spend too much time on those. The stated net income group share, excluding the goodwill impairments, stands at EUR 782 million for CASA, EUR 4,032 million for the whole year. The underlying net income group share, the most interesting figure from my viewpoint, stands at EUR 904 million this quarter for Crédit Agricole SA, EUR 3,137 million for the whole year, respectively an increase of 52.6% and 22.8%. If we look at the group's figures, the underlying net income group share stands at EUR 1,648 million for the fourth quarter, and EUR 6,353 million for the whole year. I will skip the next few pages because probably Philippe will go back on these ones at the end of the presentation, explaining where we stand in the implementation of the new medium-term plan, and of course, presenting more in detail the elements regarding the customer project, as he said. Maybe we can go directly on page 16. I want maybe to spend a few minutes. Excuse me, I missed a few of them. Here we are, page 16. I think this one is very important because you can see that in all our businesses, and with a vast diversity of indicators, we have had globally this year, a very dynamic commercial momentum. This is true for the retail banks of the group, and of course, the retail banking activities are the heart of the group. Everywhere, we grow faster than the market, and so we gain market shares. This is true in France with the regional banks and LCL. This is also very true in Italy with Cariparma. This is also true with another category of retail customers, the consumer credit customers, with a very significant increase in the production of new loans. This is, of course, true with the asset management activities and insurance activities, and this is a very strong indicator of the further development of cross-selling that we have had last year on the customer bases of the regional banks, LCL and Cariparma, through Amundi, through the different insurance companies within Crédit Agricole Assurances. You can see that we have had a very strong increase in the assets under management within Amundi, nearly +10%. Also, a significant increase in the assets under management in the life insurance business, +3.5%, which is much more than the pure capitalization of the contract, the policies existing in the beginning of the year. In the P&C businesses, we are now above 12 million policies in France, which is another, I would say, very significant gain of market shares in the French market, which is more or less stable. It's a mature market. Lastly, in the large customers division, we also gained market shares in the activities which we consider as core activities for us, credit origination and bond issuing, investment banking in M&A, and equity capital markets. If we now take a look at the evolution of the underlying net income group share between 2015 and 2016, and also on the fourth quarter of those two years, what you can see is that we have had first, a significant growth, 22% and 52%, nearly actually 23% and 53%. We have had an acceleration in the fourth quarter, and finally, all business lines did well. On the fourth quarter, it is absolutely obvious because each and every business line improved its contribution to the net profit of Crédit Agricole S.A. Even in the full year, what you can see is that on the retail business activities, which are the most impacted by the context of low interest rates, the evolution between 2015 and 2016 is very, very little actually. It's a decrease of EUR 18 million between the total profit in 2015 and the total profit in 2016. More importantly, this good quality of results has been reached through, what I would call, a virtuous model because it's been obtained through a top line that is increasing more rapidly than the cost line or than the cost of risk line. We think it's the most, I would say, virtuous and stable way of generating additional profit. Indeed, as far as the top line is concerned, what you can see is that for the full year, the underlying net banking income increased by nearly 4.5%, and in the last quarter, it increased by nearly 11%. In the retail banking activities, of course, and we already commented it in the previous quarters, we have an environment which is challenging. What you can see is that actually, we have had a significant improvement of the situation between the first half of the year and the second half of the year. Even on the last quarter, you can see that the decrease of the net banking income is very limited, EUR 48 million. Outside of this EUR 48 million, three quarters are explained by simply the depreciation of the Egyptian pound. Meaning that actually, in France, in Italy, in the other retail banks, it was more or less stable. As far as the other business lines are concerned, what you can see is that we have had significant increases in the level of net banking income. If you take a look at the specialized financial services division, you must remain aware of the fact that a growing part of the business does not translate into an increase in the top line, but translates into simply an improvement of the equity accounted entities due to the very rapid development of the joint ventures of Crédit Agricole Consumer Finance, especially in the car financing businesses. Last point, as far as the corporate center is concerned, of course, the improvement of the net banking income is linked to the first positive effects of the Eurêka transaction, with a decrease in the financial cost, for example, the ending of the Switch 1 premium and the increase of financial revenues linked to the loan that we granted to the regional banks to finance their acquisitions of the CCI and CCAs. As far as the costs are concerned, it's very difficult, actually, to comment such low evolutions. 0.2% for the full year and 0.8% for the last quarter. I think what is interesting to note is that the retail banking division has had a decrease in its cost basis, and an acceleration of this decrease in the last quarter. For all the other business lines, actually, where you have an increase, it is especially linked to investments that we have decided for the medium-term plan, and that are designed to foster the further development of the activities of those business lines. All in all, of course, the cost-income ratio has improved significantly. Philippe mentioned 6.6 points for the last quarter. For the full year, it's already 2.8 points, and for the full year, the cost-income ratio stands at 66.6%. As far as the cost of risk is concerned, what you can see is, as I mentioned, it's very stable. At group level and at CASA level, we are actually more or less stable in the last quarter. In addition to that, we continue to be significantly below the assumption that we made when we published our medium-term plan. We embedded, I would say, in our business plan, a 50 basis points cost of risk at CASA level and 35 basis points cost of risk in average at group level. We are significantly below, which means that even if it's not a forecast, we would be in a position to accommodate a potential increase in the cost of risk in the coming quarter or even years. Last point on this issue of the cost of risk, the level of non-performing loans in our balance sheet was more or less stable between the end of Q3 and the end of Q4, at 3.6% going down to 3.5%, and the coverage ratio remained stable at 67.7% in both cases. By business line, the cost of risk is also completely under control. On this slide, maybe just two comments. On the consumer credit activities, there is, I would say, a base effect linked to a very low level in Q4 2015. But there is no real deterioration in the cost of risk. On the contrary, actually, this year, we significantly strengthened and hardened the provisioning parameters on these business lines, meaning that with the same parameters as last year, the level of cost of risk would have been significantly lower. In Italy, what you can see is that in the retail banking activities in Italy, the cost of risk continues to decrease, and we can forecast a further decrease in the coming quarters, simply because what we see is that the new entries in default continue to slow down very significantly, which means that in the coming quarters, we will have less loan loss provision to pass. For LCL or for the CIB financing activity, nothing much to say. If we now zoom on the different business lines, I will not spend too much time on those slides in order to leave you time to ask your questions, but maybe just a few highlights on those slides. Globally, in the asset gathering division, I think what we can say is that we have had an acceleration in the fourth quarter, significant one, with a special mention for the wealth management business, which had a quite difficult start in the beginning of this year due to market conditions, and which improved significantly during the year in order to produce, at the end of the year, an increase in the underlying net profit of this business, +6.8%. If we take a look at the insurance business, I think that, again, and excuse me if I'm repeating the same words, we have had a very good momentum globally, with an acceleration in the non-life businesses. Again, new gains in market shares in the P&C business, +6% in the premium increase in the French market, again, which is a mature market. A significant takeoff in group insurance, for example, with a very significant increase in the number of new people insured in our group insurance activities. At the same time, we continued to transform the life insurance business in order to adapt it to this new low-rate environment with the further development in the unit linked component of this activity with, for example, unit linked products, which represented 27% of the growth inflows in the fourth quarter this year. We also had a very prudent management of the life insurance activities, and we again increased this year the PPE, which is the Policyholder Participation Reserve, which is now reaching the level of EUR 7 billion within Predica, our life insurance subsidiary. Lastly, we improved the solvency, which was a little bit challenged by the low-rate environment. You remember that by the end of the first half of the year, it was around 155%, and it is now above 160%. We have had especially strong results in the fourth quarter. We had good markets actually in the fourth quarter. We took some opportunities to capture gains in order to, I would say, average a little bit for the whole year, the level of revenues generated. Of course, the capital gains that we realized in the fourth quarter were shared with the policyholders in order to continue to generate provisions, PPE or even réserve de capitalisation, which is the special reserve in which we put the capital gains on bonds. In the asset management business, I think we can pass very rapidly because Amundi published its results last Friday, and you are fully aware of the good performances of Amundi. I just want to remind you that Amundi managed to capture, again, significant net new inflows, more than EUR 60 billion for the whole year. It is driven by the medium to long-term assets. It is driven by the international businesses, and we have had good inflows in the retail banking activities, which is, of course, a very satisfactory indicator. The net income group share is significantly up, and it is even up if you consider the contribution to Crédit Agricole SA, even though the average percentage of detention by Crédit Agricole SA decreased between 2015 and 2016 because we had a decrease at the time of the IPO by the end of 2015. If we now go to LCL, as we say for other business lines, we have had a very dynamic level of activity with customers assets up 2.3%, but loans outstanding up 5.6%. It is not only home loans that drove this increase because, for example, corporate and small and medium enterprise loans increased even more rapidly than the home loans. We have had also a significant level of renegotiation at the end of this year. All in all, what you can see is that due to a very tight control of costs, due to a very good development in the cross-selling on the customers of LCL, with, for example, a very strong performance in the sale of P&C insurance policies. We managed to have a level of underlying revenues in the fourth quarter, which was more or less stable as compared to fourth quarter 2015 and to third quarter 2016. We managed to generate a significant increase in the net underlying profit in the last quarter of this year as compared to the last quarter of 2015, plus 35%. Maybe more importantly, I want to stress two other elements. We have a cost-income ratio which remains, from our viewpoint, too high, but which at 73% is comparing quite correctly to some other competitors. And more importantly, we generated a level of net underlying profit for the whole year above EUR 500 million, which represent a return on normalized equity after tax, after cost of subordination, close to 12%, which again is a satisfactory performance, even though if it's not at the level we are targeting in the future. In Italy, more or less the same story, because the market is difficult. The pressure on net interest margin is significant, but the commercial activity is very good, outperforming the market. The cost control is very good also. The cost of risk is declining, so all in all, the underlying profit is increasing both on the fourth quarter and on the full year. With a cost income ratio below 58% for the full year, and again, a return on normalized equity after tax close to 12%. I also want you to take note of the fact that globally for the group in Italy, we continued to increase the level of profitability with EUR 482 million plus 6% for the total profit generated by all our activities in this country. For the rest of International Retail Banking activities, I think we can just summarize by saying that we have a very sound underlying performance with a very tight look taken on the deposit surplus. We are nevertheless impacted by the depreciation of the Egyptian pound, which has had effect in the fourth quarter of this year, and which is obviously going to have effect for the full year in 2017 because the depreciation started actually somewhere between Q3 and Q4, and we will have the full year effect next year. In Specialized Financial Services, I think, again, we have had a very good level of production of new loans with a managed loan book, which increases more rapidly than the consolidated loan book. Which means that we are perfectly inside our asset-light model we presented when we unveiled the medium-term plan. The cost of risk is down, and I have explained the apparent and small growth in the fourth quarter this year, which is absolutely non-significant. The profit is sharply up, and the return on normalized equity is again satisfactory. In the Large Customers division, globally, we have had an overall good year this year, and it's been a good year for most of the business lines of our CIB and asset servicing activities. I just want to insist on the fact that we are probably less subject to the volatility of market parameters than some peers. We have a VaR which stands at below EUR 13 million. So which means that our activity is really client-driven, and we depend very much on the appetite of customers to develop their businesses. But we are gaining market shares. We are improving our ranking in the chosen activities of CACEIS. So we are confident that we can continue to develop our businesses and our profitability whilst maintaining a tight control on the level of RWAs, as has been the case between 2015 and 2016. In terms of profitability, these business lines generated a total profit, which was close to EUR 1.3 billion for the full year 2016, increasing by 15% as compared to 2015 with a cost income ratio which stands at 60.7% and a return on normalized equity, again after tax, and again, including all the elements of subordination, which is close to 10%. Let me now give you some elements on the regional banks. I think we can go directly on page 33. As you know, the regional banks are no longer directly contributors to the profitability of Crédit Agricole S.A., but nevertheless, they belong in the heart of the group. First, because they add some financial strength to all the components of the groups and to CASA, obviously. Secondly, because they are key for the development of the business lines of Crédit Agricole S.A. and for the development of the revenue synergies that we target as a main driver of our medium-term plan. All in all, the regional banks also have had a very good commercial dynamic in 2016, with customer assets increasing by 4%, loans outstanding increasing by 4.4%. Again, a strong momentum in personal and property insurance, and all in all, a level of revenues which were up for the full year. If we go now to the financial structure of the group, and I should say to the financial robustness of the group, let me start with the group globally. Philippe already mentioned this figure, the fully loaded CET1 ratio for the group, excuse me, I skipped one page, stands now at 14.5%, which is for the quarter up 10 basis points, and for the full year up 70 basis points. In a context where the level of RWAs remained between September and December more or less stable. As far as Crédit Agricole S.A. is concerned, the fully loaded CET1 ratio improved also by 10 basis points in the fourth quarter. It stands now at 12.1%. This quarter, we have had, of course, a very significant contribution of retained earnings because we had provisioned the full dividend by the end of September, so it is an increase of 24 basis points. We also have had the employees' capital increase that was completed in November. We have had a 16 basis points decrease in AFS unrealized gains, which was in connection, obviously, with the increase in interest rates by the end of the year. So all in all, at 12.1%, we are very significantly above our medium-term target, which remains at 11%, but you know that we will have to finance our contribution to the Amundi capital increase, which is going to take place in the coming weeks or months. This is going to represent a 65 basis points impact, considering the target of retention post capital increase that was explained by Philippe, 70% for the group. TLAC and MREL, it is always the same story, so I will not take too much time to explain it. We are also, by the end of 2016, we are again above the target that we are supposed to meet by the end of 2019. We are above those targets without taking into consideration any element of senior debt, which are at least partially eligible to these ratios. So, nothing much to add on this slide. Liquidity, again, not a very difficult issue for us. We continue to keep our surplus of stable funds above EUR 100 billion. We continue to manage our liquidity coverage ratio above 110%, which is, of course, very conservative. In terms of market funding, maybe just two elements on this slide. The first one is that the market funding program of Crédit Agricole S.A. for 2016 was a EUR 14 billion program, and we completed it with an achievement of 108%, to be precise. Actually, we completed it by the very end of the year with the first-ever issue of senior non-preferred debt on the European market. The 2017 medium-term market funding program has been set at EUR 16 billion, and it is already completed at 38% by the end of January. We decided in this year of uncertainties to take advantage of any available window in order to issue the required market funding that we need. This slide explains the two senior non-preferred debt issues that we did, the first one by the end of 2016 and the second one in the beginning of January. The first one was in euro; the second one was in dollars. I think you are now very familiar with this new category of debt, especially because we have been waiting a very long time for the government to pass the law, so maybe it is not useful to spend too much time on it. Just maybe one simple comment. What we expect from this new category of debt is not, obviously, to help us to reach the TLAC or MREL ratios, because we are already there. It is to help us to continue to decrease the cost of the corporate center, because we are going progressively to replace part of the Tier 2 debt that we have, and that is costly, by this new category of debt that is much cheaper. Because what we calculate, what we have seen, is that, in average, we have a saving of around 60% of the spread between the cost of a Tier 2 debt and the cost of a senior unsecured preferred debt through this senior non-preferred. I think I have reached the end of this presentation with three elements of conclusion, which go back to what Philippe said in introduction. This was a key year for the group's transformation. This was a year of good financial performances, and this was the first year of our normalized dividend policy. Now, Philippe, if you want to- Yes, thank you very much. Thank you, Jérôme. I would not like to be too long, but let me come back to slide number 8, if you want. Just to have a look on our 40ème belle fenêtre. That means the implementation of our medium-term plan. On slide number 8, you can see that we said we had four priorities for the foreseeable future. The first one was to simplify the financial organization of the group. Of course, that is done. It was done on last August. Then we said that we were about to launch a real new project in terms of customer project at the group level. I shall explain that on the next and last slide. Third point, we said that we gave the absolute priority to organic growth and synergies of revenues. Of course, this is an ongoing process. I can tell you, and I think you can see that it works. Lastly, we said that we need plans for cost reductions, but not in terms of reducing means, because this can have impact in terms of development, but mainly by sharing support functions between the different entities of Crédit Agricole Group. We have really the good plans for that, and I can tell you that will be implemented as soon as 2017. All those plans are on track. Let me come back lastly on the last slide for me. That is slide number 11, just to try to explain you what is really the customer project of Crédit Agricole Group. This is not so often explained by banks. I think it's very important for you, and it's very important for me to try to explain you that, of course, if in analyst conferences, we explain you the main figures within our P&L, of course, the matter we have to manage is not an Excel dashboard. The matter we have to manage is fundamentally the attractiveness of the group, so to have more and more customers and, of course, more and more pleased customers. This is probably the most important thing we have to explain to stakeholders to see the foreseeable future of our group. In a group as Crédit Agricole Group is, that means very decentralized, very diversified, the hugest mistake we could do could be to consider that the customer project could simply be the addition of the different customer project of each entity. You understand immediately that this can create real differentiations in terms of difference for the brand, for customers. Now our challenge is really to create real value added at the group level and not at each entity only. This very, very simple drawing just explains some things. Our customer project is really organized at three levels. The first level is what we call the organizational level, this very special model that we have called the Customer-Focused Universal Bank. The commitment for our customers is very precisely to be able to bring all the expertise of a universal bank to each customer. You could think this is not so original. It is original, because this strategy doesn't mean that we simply select the different activities that are the most profitable on each territory or on each market of customer. Our business is really to assemble all the expertise, all the know-how of universal bank, so as to be able to bring that to each customer. This is very concrete, this is very precise, this is very difficult, and this is the core strategy of the organizational step. On the second level, you have the level of the distribution. How do we do to distribute our products and services? As you know that our target that is quite already implemented, not fully, but almost implemented, is the target of a full multi-channel bank. What does it mean? It means that really we don't want that the customer has to choose. That means that for any question of subscription or to be helped or to be advised, the customer can choose between a 100% human bank and a 100% digital bank. That is the same. That is only a single bank. The difference with many other banks is that we say that we shall be both 100% human and 100% digital, and that there always be a commercial team available in proximity for customer that is really this team responsible of this multi-channel relationship with the customer. Never mind if the customer comes every day, sometimes two times or never the branch. The most important, of course, item is the level of business in a multi-channel relationship. The third level that is often forgotten, that is very surprising in terms of precise management, is the level of the relationship. That means the commitments we have to take to be really true partners for our customers and to be very precise and concrete at this level. That means that we have to state precise commitments, for example, in our advising process on the whole perimeter of holdings for customers, for savings, for loans, for insurance, for solutions in real estate. We have to take very precise commitments in terms of loyalty in this kind of process, and we must be able to certify that. I think we shall be the first brand able to certify this kind of process, and I think it will be a kind of revolution in the advising activities. Well, I stop with that, but this is just to explain you that the title, A Whole Bank Just For You, is not just an advertising for us, it is really the tradition of our real and concrete customer project. Well, that is a time now to take questions. Thank you very much for listening. So first question. First, you need a microphone. I think you need the microphone. Yes. As- The first one Some people are listening to this No matter for us On the phone, I think we should also, even if we know you, tell your name before Present yourself. Thanks. Yes. Jean-Pierre Lambert from KBW. Three questions, one on capital, one on LCL, and one on large customers. On capital, you have 12.1% fully loaded. If we did that, Amundi IFRS 9 and unrealized AFS gain, then you come to 10%, and so very close to 9.5%, which is 8.5% plus 1% P2G. So not much scope to absorb Basel IV if you were to take it fully loaded. Just if you could comment on your view on that. On LCL, there's a decline in mutual funds, somewhere like 20% year-on-year. That's on slide 61. That's a contrast to your peers, which is also using the same Amundi. So I was wondering what's the rationale or what's the reason. On large customers, you have a target of 2% CAGR. Your peers have 4%-4.5% target, and you have achieved 5.5%. So what's the outlook for 2017? Is it 2%? Is it 4%? Thank you. Let me try first to answer the first question very globally. I do remind you that our target in terms of CET1 is 11%. That means that today we are too high. We are 12.1%. 11% because we are within a group, a global group, whose CET1 is 14.5%. It's a real advantage for shareholders of Crédit Agricole S.A. to have a share that can only reach or have a target at 11%. So I think we are comfortable in terms of solvency. Really, I do consider that capital questions are really off the table for us. So Jean can be more concrete in terms of planning for our capital planning. But really now our mind is really concentrated, is focused on the customer activities and not on capital concern. But Jean can be more precise. Yes. No, your reasoning is mathematically correct, but there is only one piece missing, is the time and the fact that while time passes, we are generating additional capital through our results. Obviously, we are not going to lose 100% of our AFS reserve tomorrow morning. We have a capital planning through which we integrate a diminution of nearly 60%-70% of our actual AFS reserve in the course of the medium-term plan. The capital planning that we have shows that we have the capacity to absorb this reduction in the AFS reserve whilst obviously participating in the Amundi capital increase, with absorbing one of the IFRS 9 effect. There is probably going to be some, I would say, implementation disposal that could enable us to spread a little bit in time this effect. We have made the assumption that we are going to take it one-off beginning of 2018. We have the capacity to, of course, absorb a small organic growth of RWAs plus the diminution of AFS reserve with staying at our target. Just maybe also one correction. You made an assumption in your calculation, which is the level of Pillar II G. We are not going to disclose the level of our Pillar II G, but this is an assumption that you made. Maybe one last point, you also directly jumped to the end game of the Pillar II R, which exactly stands at 8.5%, but as of today, it is lower because it's going to phase in the next two years. All in all, mathematically, and if you take all the events you were mentioning on the same day without us generating any EUR of capital through profitability, you are right, but you have also to take into consideration the time lag of these processes. For LCL and for the mutual funds, we do not disclose the breakdown of this line between two very different categories of mutual funds, money market funds, which are decreasing very rapidly, and we are almost now at a level which is absolutely marginal of money market funds among LCL customers. More, I would say, interesting funds for Amundi and for us, which are equity-linked or which are bond funds, and which are developing, not rapidly enough, but which are developing on the customers of LCL. Last point on large customers, what we claim is that we are targeting a stable CIB. We are not targeting to be the best CIB in the world when markets are good, at the price of being non-profitable when markets are bad. We claim to be profitable in the long run and a stable CIB. We have targeted for the duration of the Medium Term Plan, a 2.5% average annual growth of our net banking income in this division. We made a good year in 2016. We have, obviously, finished our budget procedure, and we have tried to set ambitious targets also for this division for 2017. We are not going to disclose the target, but obviously, when it is possible to be above the average target of the Medium Term Plan, we are going to do it. Next one. Switch on of the microphone. Thanks. It is Guillaume Tiberghien at Exane. I have got three questions. One is on the CIB. You had a good control of RWA, and I wanted to know whether you could share with us what we should expect for RWA in large corporate this year and next. The other one is the corporate center. If I clean the goodwill and the fair value gain on owned debt, and I annualize, the Q4 is at EUR 1.3 billion loss. I think your target is EUR 700 million for 2019. That is a big improvement, even if I take into account the comment you made on cost of subordination, because it means a PBT improvement of EUR 1 billion, roughly, between now and 2019. It does not seem to come only from cost of subordination. So I wanted to understand what else is driving that. And the third element is a small one, but on Banque Saudi Fransi, the contribution seems to have halved in Q4, and I wanted to understand what is going on there. Thanks. That is all right. I try to answer the first question, perhaps because I am the chairman of CACIB, the CIB activities of Crédit Agricole Group. I think that, of course, there is always a concern in terms of weighted assets for CIB activities. But I think that the right way to manage that, so that to have both development and a correct level of profitability, is to increase what we call the PI for each customer. The PI, exactly, revenues less standard cost of risk divided by weighted assets. That means that perhaps if you need weighted assets, this is not a problem if you can have a profitability on those new weighted assets. So that the new weighted asset that CIB can have can be covered by the new result we can do with these new weighted assets. And the fact to manage that in each relationship with customer gives us a huge level of potential to master the weighted assets and both to develop activities. This is exactly what we do, and I think that this is absolutely correct in this model of universal bank that is ours. Second question- On the corporate center, if you want to be precise. This is for you. No, please. Actually, the underlying performance of the corporate center this year was a little bit hidden by two or three elements. The first element is that contrary to last year, to 2015, we had only a normal contribution from our participation in Eurazeo. You remember that last year we had a very significantly high contribution from Eurazeo. This year was only a normal contribution. But the most important thing was that between 2015 and 2016, the tax rate within CASA, in connection with the corporate tax rate decrease in France, significantly decreased. Which explains that actually, as the corporate center is loss-making, there is a tax benefit inside the corporate center, and this tax benefit significantly decreased between 2015 and 2016. Those two elements explain why you see no significant deviation in the underlying net loss of the corporate center when the negative net banking income of the corporate center improved by roughly EUR 650 million between 2015 and 2016, and it's only on its way to the target that we have set for 2019. Yes, we continue to guide toward a level of corporate center loss of around EUR 700 million in 2019. Yes, this is going to be made not one shot in 2019. It's going to be progressively reached. We target a significant improvement as soon as 2017 through a continuation of the improvement of the net banking income line through the management of costs and through the management of all other items, which are below the gross operating income within the Corporate Center. The last question was on BSF. On BSF, this quarter, the last quarter of this year was impacted for BSF as well as for many other banks in this country by a significant loan loss provision on a specific counterpart, which, of course, and obviously we do not disclose. This explains the significant reduction in the contribution of BSF this quarter. But there is no, I would say, deterioration of the underlying profitability of BSF. Maybe just on RWA in CIB, just an additional element on what Philippe said. We are targeting the stability. We are targeting the reallocation of RWAs between counterparts with a low profitability and a low PI toward counterparts with a higher profitability and a higher PI. We are, of course, subject to certain elements of volatility, especially Forex volatility. So stability in the long run or slow increase in the long run doesn't mean that from one quarter to another one, we will not have from time to time a certain volatility linked especially to Forex effects. Okay, next question. Good afternoon. It's Jean Neuez from Goldman Sachs. I have two questions, please. The first one is thank you for the slide 11, which is in front of us now. These values, they seem very much to fit and be consistent with the mutual, also business model, where it seems to me as though the way I read this is that there is a sacrifice on cost that you make for the benefit of the clients to an extent, and also having the full multi-channel bank and so on. Reason why I'm saying this is, as of today, LCL, if you put the capital ratio of the group instead of 9.5, and after cost of Corporate Center, is not covering its cost of equity, no? The point I'm trying to make here is, does LCL in particular, another group with 14.5% and accumulating super quickly, doesn't LCL belong rather into the rest of the group as opposed to the listed business? The next question is just on to come back on Guillaume's point on the revenue on the Corporate Center. Can you please re-clarify the guidance for revenues between the cost of funding and the other, if you want, capital management line? Because that particular bit seems to have come in maybe lower than what would have been needed to reach the long-term guidance. Thank you very much. Well, first, for your question, I would like to highlight something I have not said that this kind of customer project we have described on slide 11 is probably new, but it is, of course, in the DNA of Crédit Agricole. That means at the spring of what was the successes of regional banks. I would like just to highlight that with this kind of behavior with customers, regional banks reach a very, very high level of profitability. That means that when you play the satisfaction of customer in a global and sustainable relationship, this is absolutely positively correlated to the level of performance in terms of financial results. That means that for LCL, it's of course a little different because LCL is not a regional bank, it's a national bank. I would like to highlight that the fact to be linked with all the other business lines so that to create those added value in a global relationship is absolutely possible for LCL. I've already said for several quarters that if LCL was impacted, it was just impacted as other banks are impacted by this low level of interest rates environment. The ability for LCL to go up and to get profitability upward than today is really important. The fact that we would like to highlight today is that when you really look at the profitability, the RoNE for LCL, it is already at 11.9% in underlying net income definition. That's not so bad. That's not sufficient, but that's not so bad. I wouldn't like you to just think we have a specific problem with LCL. That means a problem that other banks wouldn't have. I do think that as we are really aware of the impacts of very low interest rates, as we have really decided to manage in a positive situation the wave of renegotiations and early reimbursement with a very dynamic attitude, I think that now we are really in a good position. The first result we have, for example, by the increase of revenues, when you compare the last quarter to the third quarter, seems that prove that we are really on the right way. So we have absolutely no problem to keep LCL in our global way to do banks. More than that, you can't be a universal banking model if you don't have the retail disposal in this global organization. So really, I'm very optimistic with that. Simply, you have to understand that it's difficult to assemble the different business lines of a group so that to create this sustainable added value for customers, that this is really what we are going to do and what we do through LCL. Maybe just in addition to that, I think it's not correct to impose to LCL the average level of capital of the group, because there is no specific capital requirement on LCL besides the regulatory requirements. So, I think that the calculation that we made applying the level of capital that we put at LCL is correct. As far as the attribution or allocation of the cost of the corporate center, I don't know how you made your calculation, but just bear in mind that LCL is now representing something like 10% or 12% globally of Crédit Agricole SA. So even if you allocate to LCL a small part of the cost of the corporate center, it must be only a very small part of the actual cost of the corporate center. So all in all, it would not deteriorate significantly the return on normalized equity that we calculate for LCL. As I mentioned, Cyril is insisting rightly on it, the cost of subordination are allocated to LCL while we calculate this return on normalized equity, which means that LCL is bearing a significant amount of the cost of AT1, which is already integrating a significant part of the overhead in this calculation. For the corporate center, maybe just a few figures, but we don't want to provide too precise guidance on the different elements of the P&L of the corporate center. The net banking income, normalized net banking income of the corporate center last year in 2015, was close to a negative amount of EUR 1.8 billion. This year, it was close to negative 1.15. So it's a significant improvement. Again, we have room for further improvement through at least two different elements. The first one being the fact that the full Eurêka effects are not embedded in the 2016 figures, because we have only a half a year of the savings of the Switch 1 premium. It's going to be a full year for 2017. We have also less than half a year of the financial, of the revenues of the loan that we grant to the regional banks, because the loan was put in place in the middle of August, and so we have only maybe five months of this interest of the loan. So the first reason for a further improvement of the top line of the corporate center is the full integration of the Eurêka effect. The second element is the continuation of the decrease in our financial costs linked to our debt. First, because we are going to progressively replace part of the Tier 2 debt by this new category of senior non-preferred debt. Second, because progressively, we are going to continue to improve our cash flow, so we are going to be able to continue to save on the amount of debt that we have to continue to keep within the corporate center. So for all these reasons, we think that the top line of the corporate center is going to continue to improve significantly. Second component of the corporate center, as I said, the cost line, and we have launched within the scope of the action plans of the Medium Term Plan some significant cost-cutting efforts, which are directly focused on the entity Crédit Agricole S.A., which is going to provide for further reduction in the cost basis of the social entity, Crédit Agricole S.A. So this is going to improve also all in all the final cost of the corporate center. This is why we have a precise capacity to be confident with our target of around EUR 700 million in 2019. Next question. Yes, Stephanie from JP Morgan. Four questions from me, if I may. The first one is just a clarification on the corporate center, what you just said. The benefits from basically the funding on the senior non-preferred versus Tier 2, that was already embedded in your business plan, or is that incremental benefit and positive impact? Not precisely, but globally embedded, because we didn't know at that time when we published the MTP that this was going to be precisely this category of Tier-3 debt that was going to be put in place by the government, and we had no clue of exactly the level of spread that this debt would bear. But we had embedded in our medium-term plan the capacity of reducing the cost of subordination through the issuance of a new category of debt between the Tier 2 and the senior. Okay, great. On the French retail, just wanted to get a feel of, now that it seems like close to half of your loan book mortgages have been renegotiated, what you expect for this year. Is that the same type of trend we should see? Do you feel that LCL is better positioned relative to peers given the LME exercise that you have carried out in 2016? Or do you think the outlook is pretty much the same? One quick question on the tax rate. I don't know if you can guide to what sort of impact, given the adjustments you've made in Q4, we should expect for future years. My last question would be on regulation. Just maybe if you have any thoughts or color on the ECB internal review, which is starting in TRIM, basically. Thank you. Okay. So maybe on French retail, do you want Philippe to address the issue of Yeah. I just come back on LCL. I would like just to explain you something that is very important in our French model of transformation between long mortgage loans on the asset side and short liabilities on the liability side. Because sometimes this is very difficult to be understood. First, what is happening with retail banking now? Business is good, really. You can see the momentum of commercial activities. The problem that is a more important but non-listing problem is the impacts of this low interest rates environment, especially on the second half of 2016, post-Brexit, because now interest rates have already increased, just like they were at the beginning of the year. And in this kind of situation, we have to cope with this huge phenomenon of renegotiations. That means what? That means that in a one-shot negative impact, very important, you have to decrease the level of revenue. But this is, I insist on this point, this is a one-off negative impact that adds all the positive impacts of new flows, of new loans based on new liabilities. And that means that for time being, you see mainly the first impact in the accounts and the P&L of retail banks, and you have to do a choice. Either you are afraid and you say, "Well, I do not want to do any more mortgage loans that are so difficult to, on which it is so difficult to have important margin." Or you say, "Well, the most important point is to keep customers with you." So you accept you are in a positive situation, just like LCL was. That means that the positive attitude of the second half allowed LCL to keep customers, to win customers, to cope with the one-shot negative impacts on revenue, but to be able to increase new positive margins for the future. I should not say for the future, it is for time present. But there is just like a tree may hide a forest, you see now on the second half the impact of renegotiation. And I think we have to cope with this phenomenon. So when you ask, is LCL in a better position? I think it is not a situation very easy for all retail banks in France or in Europe, but it is absolutely not a dangerous situation, and we are right to be in front of the battle of competitors' battles. So once again, I think that LCL is not in a better position. It has never been in a bad position. I always said that. Simply, with LCL, you see a pure retailer because there's no excess of capital, there's no activities of diversification to offset or to mitigate the impacts. You have a direct ability to read the impacts of interest rates that are low. You can see now that the revenue can increase with a higher level of customer. I don't tell you why the future is very easy. I just tell you that we are in a good situation in terms of competition with our peers. To come back to your question, long-term mortgage loans are very important in this strategy to keep customer and to keep the ability to sell insurance, to sell all the other products that are necessary for the fees of the P&L of LCL. Maybe in addition to that, to help you in order to try to identify the future trends, what we've put there in this chart is three elements which are linked to each other. The first one is the 10-year swap rate. It's been decreasing significantly in 2015 up to the middle of the year, then it increased back. We have had a significant decrease after the Brexit vote, and it's now increasing back since the end of 2016. This is triggering some moves on the second curve, which is the curve, the monthly average rates of customer loans on the French market, on home loans. What you see is that in the last three months, it increased very modestly, but it increased. I think it went up from 1.3 up to 1.38. It increased a little bit. The third element of information is the level of renegotiation, because the 10-year swap rate is progressively triggering an increase in customer rates, and the increase in customer rates is progressively the incentivization of customers to renegotiate. Of course, then it has an effect on the net interest margin. It's a progressive move. What we think is that if the level of interest rates, market rates, continue at least to stabilize or to grow a little bit, we are going to see, hopefully, and if all the market participants are reasonable, a continued increase in the level of customer rates, and this is going to significantly slow down the wave of renegotiation. Obviously, when you see newspapers in France, the motto is, hurry up to renegotiate because the window is going to close. This is what we see. Of course, I'm not trying to guess where market rates are going to be, but the logical move is this one. You had a question on tax rates. Tax issues are always a little bit difficult, but what we can say is that in average, an underlying level of tax rate for Crédit Agricole, let's say around 25%, is probably something reasonable. It's probably something reasonable because considering the fact that the tax rate in France has decreased between 2015 and 2016, and considering the mix of activities that we have between France and other countries in which corporate tax rates are lower, 25%, 26%, maybe, is something reasonable. You are going to have a significant volatility from one quarter to another one because you have many elements which are either not tax-deductible or which are, on the contrary, tax-free products. You can see some moves, but on the underlying basis, something like 25%-26% is reasonable. Finally, regulation and TRIM. I do not know if, Philippe, you can say something on that. There was a question about Basel IV. Yes. This is absolutely some question. On Basel IV, we do not know. We think that perhaps there will not be any agreement, perhaps there will be an agreement. I am sure on one point that if there is an agreement, it will be an agreement, we should be easy to cope with this agreement for our group, for Crédit Agricole. When ECB comes to do a TRIM, that means the revision of internal models, I think it is absolutely a normal process. It is important so that internal models can be seen as very resilient, very good, because the battle for Basel IV is in fact a battle between Basel I with standard models and Basel II with internal models. We have to prove to all the Earth that internal models are really good models. French banks really can prove that, because when you look at the level of cost of risks for the last years, you can see that we have really mastered the level of risks, and probably thanks to the fact that we have hugely invested in internal models. This is why banks are very, I would not say angry, but are very cautious for this negotiation because, if an agreement could be signed, our concern is not to come back with a lighter level of mastering of cost of risk. Once again, the cost of risks today is really mastered by the French banks, especially because we have hugely developed internal models. When ECB comes to review internal models, I can say this is quite a good news, because at the end of the day, internal models will be always there for the appreciation of our risk. I think we have to accelerate in the answer. Okay, I will just ask one question then. John Peace from Credit Suisse. I have a question about Switch 2. You have got the ability to buy that back this year. Is that something that expires at the end of this year, or could you do it in 2018 or 2019? Either or once. Okay, thank you. How do you make that decision? What would you be prepared to see your CET1 ratio dip to? Would you have to keep it above 11, or could you, on a temporary basis, see it dip into the 10s? We have a medium-term target of 11%, so we do not want to miss our target. As far as the Switch 2 mechanism is concerned, this is a decision that we permanently can reassess by just simply doing the math. If it is both possible and in the best interest of shareholders, this is something we could consider, but this is only a mathematical issue. There is no pressure on us to unwind this mechanism. We have the full ability to trigger it whenever we think it is relevant. So it is a pure mathematical issue, no political dimension and no regulatory dimension. Okay. Hi, Tarik El Mejjad from Bank of America, Merrill Lynch. Just one question as well, on Slide 11, actually, which is interesting one. I will focus on the middle circle, which is the distribution of your franchise. The 100% human, 100% digital, that is the omni-channel concept that it is end game for a lot of banks at the moment, but it comes with a lot of costs. Some of the very advanced banks, like the Dutch banks, have been investing in that concept for now more than five years and still spending every year quite a lot of money. So my question, I really expect to hear quite detailed answers from you on what is your setup now, do you expect to invest more on IT to deliver that? You are right to say that it is good to have a retail base in Italy, in France to distribute that universal banking product you have, but what are the capabilities you have there to do now on digital fronts? Well, first of all, I have to explain to you that we are already a multi-channel bank for a long time, for long years, at least since the web banking activities have been created. I do remind you that in France, we are the first bank in terms of activities on the web, in terms of subscription for different services. When we say 100% human and 100% digital, that does not mean 200% of cost. That just means that all our means are organized in function of the decision of the customer. As you can see, that operation will be more and more done by customers by digital capacities and less and less with human contact. But never mind, we have to adapt our means to that. The point that is very important is to keep and to maintain commercial teams available for this global relation. The real price is the cost-income ratio. The real price is this one. Just look at regional banks that are really quite full multi-channel banks in terms of relationship, they have a very low level of cost-income. I do not say when I write 100% and 100% that we can accumulate all the cost. I just say that this is the way to have relation with customers, and we have to do so that the means drive us to the lowest level of cost-income ratio. For time being, it is always in Crédit Agricole Group that you can find the lowest cost-income ratio. There is absolutely nothing adverse between that. The only point is to be sure and not to forget that our success is not to be the most efficient in terms of distribution, but to be the more relevant in terms of relationship with customers. No problem, just look at our cost incomes, and you will have the answer to your concern. Good afternoon, Jacques. Henri de Larquier, Terre Froide. I have three questions quite quickly. The first one, when I hear your answer to Delphine, I have the feeling that 2016 may well be the trough for the French retail revenues. It seems like if it is the case, you would be a good year ahead of your competitors in France. Just a question mark. The second question is on the insurance business, where obviously you had very good numbers, but also financial revenues which are higher than expected. Probably Q4 is not a great proxy, but are you happy as the full-year result being a good proxy for how we should build our forecasts? Lastly, you are a quarter through your medium-term plan. It is your first year. I guess that versus where you considered the year back in March, because you had said at the time that it is going to accelerate towards 2018, 2019, the financial performance, it is going to be reasonably slow in 2016, 2017. Has 2016 been as slow as you thought, or have you been positively surprised? Thanks. Thanks. Is 2016 going to be the bottom in the top line of retail banking activities? I think I will answer this question probably within one year or something like that, if you don't mind, because I am not completely able to really confirm that. I have tried to explain that there is a link between market rates and customer rates, and there is a link between customer rates and the level of renegotiation. Finally, there is a link between the level of renegotiation and the net interest margin. I am not able to guess where market rates are going to stand in the coming months. I am trying to give you clues in order for you to be able to adapt your anticipation, taking into consideration the level of market rates. As far as the insurance is concerned, you know that our capacity to generate financial revenues differs from one quarter to another one considering market parameters. This is why probably you are right, it is better to try to assess the level of top line for the insurance activities on a full year, rather than on a quarterly basis. This is what I have been trying to explain in my presentation. Probably the level of revenues in Q3 was a little low. The level of revenues in Q4 is a little high, but again, the capacity to really capture the financial revenues quarter after quarter is not completely stable. Take notes of the average year. To come back to your question on MTP and what is on my mind since last March. It is amazing, probably as an observer, I would like to tell you that, in terms of business, really, I think it is easier than I thought. Just look at the momentum of our commercial activities. Just look at that. Probably for a simple reason that when you give the priority to synergies within the group and to organic growth, we have really the culture of organic growth and of mastering cost income. As you can see that in the result of commercial activities, you can see that in spite of some adverse situations, business was better than I feared when I presented the MTP in March. Same thing for the links between the different entities of the group, because this group is very difficult to manage, so that to create the links between the different entities, but when you really want that, it works. Just a few hours ago, I was explained that business between Crédit Agricole CIB and Amundi was higher and higher just because now teams are working together. That is all. I think that, once again, our MTP is very simple. We said that all around us we have a high level of uncertainties. We shall only do what we have in our hands. What we have in our hands is our customer project and internal synergies. We do that, and for the time being, really, it works. I am not optimistic, I am just realistic in terms of report for the implementation of this MTP. If you are going to take the last two questions, if it is possible. Hi there. We have some questions on the phone, too, so we have to really be quick. Okay. Okay. Bruce Hamilton, Morgan Stanley. Two quick questions. Just on the cost of risk. As we look forward, are there any sort of pockets of risk or is it reasonable to expect that you will continue to run below the sort of cross-cycle level, so 2016, any reason that is not a good guide? Then secondly, just going back to your customer project, outside of the financial targets you set yourselves, what are the key ways you measure success? Would it be in terms of cross-sell, length of customer relationship? Anything you can help us with there, just out of interest. On the cost of risk, I am really not keen on giving guidance because it is always very difficult. What I have been saying is that on some specific businesses, we think we can forecast a further decrease. This is, for example, the case in Cariparma, because what we see in the inflows into default is a significant slowdown. We can there forecast a further decrease in the coming quarters. For the rest, we see no sign of deterioration. We know that some areas are a little sensitive, like of course the shipping activities. In some other areas, things are improving, like the oil and gas sector. All in all, we see no sign of deterioration, but I am not predicting that finally we are going to review our targets and to lower them to where we stand now. For the key of successes for our customer project, well, very simply, I will show to you that the main key of success is the internal synergies. We are ready to manage what I have just presented to you. I think that the easiest way to go to the success is first to state, on an external point of view, commitments to our customers that will be available for all the group, then just to measure the satisfaction of our customers. Of course, that is not so simple because you can have only one way to measure that, in function of the different activities. I think that really we are succeeding in that. Once again, when you look at simply our figures, I just do the report that we have more and more customers, more and more activities, more and more business. I think that the success is here. Same thing, because this customer project is really the DNA of Crédit Agricole Group. That means the universal service for the different markets on which we are invested. Yes. Next question. It's Rob Down from HSBC. Two very quick ones for me. First, I just want to elaborate a bit on Jack Henry's question about insurance. In the past, we used to be guided to a sort of EUR 250 million a quarter bottom line. You've been very successful at managing that bottom line. We're now running at kind of EUR 300 million. Interest rates have gone up, your volumes have gone up. Do you have in mind the sort of quarterly run rate figure for 2017 that you could share with us? No, I don't want to begin to give too precise a guidance for next year. I think that what you can say that our underlying business is improving. Of course, market conditions are still challenging for this type of business, but our underlying business is improving. What is important in insurance is first to see the development of non-life activities as compared to life activities, and in the life business, what is important is our capacity to diversify the type of businesses that we do and to try to generate as much as possible new inflows in unit-linked products rather than in euro-denominated products. Obviously, we've talked a lot about the refinancing activity in France. We saw mortgage pricing picking up a little bit through Q4 and further again through January. We're halfway through Q1 now. Do you have any sort of feel for how refinancing has gone in the first six weeks of the year? No. Yes, I think we have some questions on the phone. Thank you, indeed. We will take now our first question from Alex Koan from Natixis. Please go ahead. Yes, hello, everybody. A few questions from my side. The first one is on RWA growth in SFS Corporate Center and Insurance. I do not know if you can just update the guidance going forward, and because in SFS, we see that we are having some kind of RWA growth. I do not know if this is due to business or only model effect. In Corporate Center, we saw on the quarterly basis an increase in RWA since Q1. Can you just elaborate on that? And in Insurance, we see a drop in RWA Q-on-Q. So please, if you can just give some color around this. Second question is on the revenue. If we look at the consumer revenue, we see a nice growth on the revenue by 4% year-on-year. I do not know if you can just elaborate on this. Is that a sustainable trend, or is that something exceptional in Q4? Can we take this as, let us say, run rate for the coming quarters? The other question is related to your AT1 coupon. It has come at EUR 474 million for the full year. Is that something that we can consider the run rate for the coming quarters, for the coming year, sorry. And the last question is, again, in the corporate center, we saw that the minority are dropping sustainably for the last three years. Can you just consider this trend to continue? Thank you. Some technical questions, Alex, today. On RWAs in SFS, I think the evolution is essentially, if not only due to small adjustments in models. So there is nothing significant in there. In the corporate center, the biggest part of the RWAs of the corporate center are linked to the equity accounted value of the insurance business. So I think that this is linked simply to the equity value of our insurance business, but I have to check precisely this issue. And if it is not exactly that, the team will revert to you. And in the insurance activities, I think that the issue is not about RWA, but it is about simply the solvency ratio. So it is the solvency evolution between the numerator and the denominator. And you know that under Solvency II, both are sometimes moving in the same direction, which is leading to some volatility in the ratio. In your questions about revenues, was it in the consumer finance business, or was it in another business? I didn't- No, consumer finance, indeed. In consumer finance. Well, the move that we have had in the beginning of the year was that we had a nice development of the production of new loans, but due to the fact that at the same time there was a move, a transfer between revolving loans to amortizing loans, we have had a reduction in the average margin on loans. This movement is finding its end, so that's the reason why we see now a little pick up in the level of net banking income in this division. Again, in this division, part of the revenues are generated through joint ventures, so you find them into the equity accounted entities line. In AT1, yes, we are done with AT1 insurance, so there will be no additional issues, so no additional coupons. As the last issue was made in the beginning of 2016, there should be no significant change linked to a full-year effect. On the corporate center, your question was about minority interest. I think that this was linked to some specific refinancing vehicles which are more or less in run-off. So probably you are going to see, but again, we are going to check this precisely. You are going to see a complete unwinding of minority interest in the corporate center. Thank you very much. Well, I think this was the only questions by phone because many people were attending physically this meeting. I think that we are running out of time. So again, Philippe, thank you very much for every one of you attending this meeting. We give you rendezvous for Q1 results. Thank you so much. Thanks. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. This will conclude today's conference call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.