Ladies and gentlemen, o n behalf of my colleagues on the Supervisory Board, I would like to welcome you very warmly to today's Annual General Meeting of DWS Group GmbH & Co. KGaA. I am particularly pleased that I'm able to do so in person, face-to-face at a physical meeting for the first time today. Interacting with you in person is important to me, and despite the advantages of a virtual annual general meeting, this should not be overlooked. As already announced last year, we therefore plan to hold in-person annual general meetings at regular intervals going forward. Thank you. Let me now come back to today's annual general meeting of DWS, which I hereby open. Ladies and gentlemen, before I move on to my speech, let me briefly turn to a number of housekeeping formalities required at an annual general meeting.
The annual general meeting was convened in proper form and in due time with the publication of the agenda in the Federal Gazette of 21st of April, 2026. All members of the Executive Board of the General Partner are present here today. They are Stefan Hoops, Dirk Görgen, Karen Kuder, Markus Kobler, Manfred Bauer, Rafael Otero, Vincenzo Vedda. I'm pleased to be able to welcome you all here in person. Moreover, all members of the Supervisory Board are present here in person today. The Shareholder Representatives are my Deputy, Ute Wolf, Karl von Rohr, Margret Suckale, Aldo Cardoso, Tomohiro Yao, Richard Morris, and Christina Bannier. The Employee Representatives are Erwin Stengele, Christine Metzler, Stephan Accorsini, and Angela Meurer. Let me also welcome all of you very warmly here today.
Our notary, [Dr. Habita], is sitting on the far right from your perspective. He will be taking notarized minutes of today's annual general meeting. The list of participants is currently being drawn up. Once the list has been completed, I will announce the attendance. The attendance area covers the assembly hall, designated as Harmonie, and the lobby of Congress Center of the Frankfurt Trade Fair grounds, all the way to the entry and exit control, and including the restrooms and sanitary facilities accessible for the shareholders.
You will find corresponding information on the screens in the lobby. As long as you remain in the attendance area, you're considered to be participating in the meeting, and the shares you registered at the entrance control will be recorded in the list of attendees. However, you may only actively participate in the voting and exercise your right to ask questions and speak here in Harmonie Hall.
We are broadcasting the speeches and comments from the assembly hall to the foyer on this floor of the Congress Center and to the sanitary facilities and restrooms. This is a complimentary service provided by the company. Should the broadcast be interrupted or should you be unable to follow it for some other reason, please return to Harmonie Hall for your own convenience. The agenda with the wording of the proposed resolutions is available for inspection here at the speakers registration desk. A copy is held by our notary. The full wording of the agenda is also available on our website. Should you wish to speak at today's annual general meeting, please sign up at the speakers registration desk as soon as possible. Please indicate your name and the agenda items on which you would like to speak.
The speakers registration desk is located at the front right of the hall from your perspective. Even if you have already submitted questions or announced a counter motion in the run-up to the annual general meeting, please register at the speakers registration desk. Should you wish to make a point of order or raise an issue regarding a specific agenda item, please briefly indicate the subject matter when you ask to speak. This will allow me to take a pertinent decision on when to grant you the floor. The entire annual general meeting will be broadcast live on our website today as a video and audio transmission. The broadcast can therefore be followed both by our shareholders and the interested public. In addition, a photographer hired by us will take photographs during the annual general meeting for documentation and communication purposes. Your privacy rights will be fully respected in this process.
Your comments will also be transmitted to our back office. In our back office, staff members will note down your questions, compile information, and assist in preparing the responses. I would ask you to refrain from taking any photos or making any audio recordings at this annual general meeting. In the interest of all shareholders, we also ask you to mute your mobile phones while in this room. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the housekeeping formalities. Please allow me to continue with the report of the Supervisory Board about its activities in the completed financial year. In order to ensure the effective performance of its function, both in the plenary and on the committees, the Supervisory Board receives regular reports and specific updates as and when appropriate, particularly from the members of the Executive Board.
We obtain information about the company's business development and strategy, corporate, financial, and human resources planning, profitability of the company, as well as its risk, liquidity, and capital management activities. The main activities of the Supervisory Board in financial year 2025 are covered in detail on pages Roman 7- 15 of our annual report 2025. At this point, I would just like to highlight a few of the topics we dealt with in the completed year. Thank you. The Supervisory Board and its standing committees held a total of 30 meetings last year. The average attendance rate was over 98%. The full Supervisory Board met seven times. In addition to monitoring day-to-day business operations, our primary task here was to advise the Executive Board on the implementation of the strategy and the various core projects.
The focus was first of all on the further strategic positioning of DWS in the next phase of growth and development for the period following the completion of the three-year strategic plan. Our second priority was analyzing the results of the comprehensive strategic review, which formed the basis for the increase in the company's midterm financial objectives carried out by the Executive Board in January 2026. Together, the Supervisory Board and the Executive Board focus on implementing the strategy and, in this context, examine the related trends, risks, and opportunities. In doing so, we focus not only on assessing the results achieved, but also on the structural drivers behind this performance. We also looked at their significance for DWS's medium and long-term strategy, the path to future growth, and the sustainable profitability of our business. As in previous years, we held a two-day strategy off-site in September of last year.
It was attended by the Supervisory Board, the Executive Board, and representatives of the extended leadership team. Apart from focusing on organic growth, the Supervisory Board also discussed the possibility of pursuing inorganic growth options in order to enhance DWS's product expertise and expand its presence in growth regions. We reviewed developments in our active funds, alternative investments, and our Xtrackers business, and we also turned our attention to other core growth initiatives, such as the ambition to strengthen the company's role as a gateway for international investors into European markets, the further development of digital and embedded investment solutions, and the selective expansion of partnerships in key growth regions. Furthermore, we discussed our strategy in Europe, in the APAC region, and the Americas with our regional experts.
In particular, we highlighted the importance of our home market, Germany, as a central pillar of the DWS franchise, as well as close cooperation within Deutsche Bank Group, especially in distribution. As last year, we again placed particular emphasis on discussing the strategic risks relevant to us. Other topics included our sustainability, IT, and data strategy, as well as our HR strategy. Besides strategy-related questions, we continued to work on systematically enhancing our internal control processes. Control topics are an essential part of all our Supervisory Board meetings. Ladies and gentlemen, in the first quarter of the year, a number of developments took place regarding the future composition of our Supervisory Board.
Supported by the recommendation of the shareholder representatives on its Nomination Committee, the Supervisory Board decided to propose Bas Nieuwe Weme for election as a Shareholder Representative to the Supervisory Board under item seven of the agenda at the AGM. This followed an intensive selection process carried out over many months by the Nomination Committee. Mr. Nieuwe Weme was nominated as Ms. Wolf has decided to step down from the Supervisory Board with effect from the close of today's annual general meeting. It is intended that following Ms. Wolf's departure, the Supervisory Board will appoint from among its existing members the person or persons to assume the roles of Deputy Chairperson and Chairperson of the Audit and Risk Committee. I would like to use this opportunity to thank Ms. Wolf for her excellent and highly constructive work on our governing bodies.
She has played a crucial role on the Supervisory Board since DWS's IPO in 2018. In her role as Deputy Chairperson, as well as Chairperson of our Audit and Risk Committee, providing untiring support with her strategic advice, considerable expertise, and wealth of experience. Ute Wolf will be greatly missed. On behalf of the Supervisory Board, the Executive Board, and the entire staff of DWS, we wish her all the best for the future and hope that she will remain closely associated with our company. Mr. Nieuwe Weme will briefly introduce himself later as the new candidate for the Supervisory Board. At this point, therefore, I will only reveal that he is the former Chief Executive Officer, CEO that is, of Aegon Asset Management Holding B.V. in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. He also has many years of global asset management experience in a range of senior roles.
Moreover, he has extensive experience working on committees through various board appointments, including on international supervisory committees. We are confident that we have found an outstandingly qualified candidate to complement our Supervisory Board. Therefore, I'm very much looking forward to welcoming Mr. Nieuwe Weme as a member of the Supervisory Board and wish him every success in his role, even at this point. Ladies and gentlemen, let us now return to the activities of the Supervisory Board. As every year, the Supervisory Board also dealt with the Dependency Report. The report lists the company's relationships with affiliated companies and thus with Deutsche Bank. This Dependency Report was prepared by the Executive Board and audited by KPMG as our statutory auditor. KPMG raised no objections and issued an unqualified audit opinion.
The wording of the audit opinion is found on page Roman 14 of the German version of our Annual Report 2025, page Roman eight in the English version. Moreover, KPMG has audited the Annual Financial Statements and the Consolidated Financial Statements, as well as the Summarized Management Report for the Annual and Consolidated Financial Statements for financial year 2025. Here, too, an unqualified audit opinion was issued by KPMG. The wording can be found from page 178 on of the Annual Report 2025. The Supervisory Board has also reviewed the Annual Financial Statements and Consolidated Financial Statements drawn up by the Executive Board, along with the Dependency Report. Based on the recommendation of the Audit and Risk Committee, and following an in-depth discussion with the representatives of the statutory auditor, KPMG, we unanimously approved the Annual Financial Statements as well as the Consolidated Financial Statements .
The review of the Dependency Reports and the Audit Report of KPMG, our auditors, did not lead to any objections. Likewise, there were no grounds for objections to the final declarations of the Executive Board. Ladies and gentlemen, let us now move on to the activities of the various Supervisory Board committees. The Audit and Risk Committee met six times under the chairmanship of Ms. Wolf. It supported the Supervisory Board in monitoring the control, reporting, and financial reporting processes, and addressed intensively the Annual Financial Statements and Consolidated Financial Statements , as well as the Interim Report and the Statutory Auditor's Report. In this context, the committee reviewed the valuation of goodwill and other intangible assets, as well as the service fees charged by Deutsche Bank AG and its subsidiaries, and related governance processes.
The committee also monitored the effectiveness of the risk management system, in particular with regard to the internal control system and internal audit. Furthermore, the committee examined the group's risk appetite statement and the overarching risk strategy embedded in the risk management framework. The committee dealt with various regulatory initiatives on a regular basis. Examples include, in particular, the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive, or CSRD, and the EU regulation DORA, the regulation that aims to improve the digital operational resilience of financial entities. In addition, the committee dealt with the development of the dividend and future dividend policy. Moreover, the Audit and Risk Committee held a number of extraordinary meetings. One task on the agenda was to discuss audit findings. Moreover, at the beginning of last year, the committee also recommended to renew the audit engagement of KPMG for financial year 2025.
The deliberations took into account the results of the review of the statutory auditor's independence, which did not identify any indications for any risk to independence. Another central topic for the committee was the proposal to be discussed under agenda item five regarding the selection process of the auditor of its Annual and Consolidated Financial Statements, as well as the auditor for its Sustainability Reporting. For financial year 2026, the Audit and Risk Committee recommended engaging EY to audit the Annual and Consolidated Financial Statements . EY is also to be appointed to carry out the audit review of the Condensed Financial Statements and Interim Management Report as of 30th of June 2026, and, if applicable, any other intra-year financial information prior to the 31st of December 2026.
This proposal, which the Supervisory Board has adopted with its proposal to the annual general meeting, is a result of a selection process conducted by the Audit and Risk Committee. With the entry into force of the law implementing the aforementioned EU CSRD Directive into German law, EY is to be appointed as independent auditor to confirm the Sustainability Reporting for financial year 2026. Nevertheless, the Supervisory Board should only execute the resolution to be taken by the annual general meeting if the CSRD implementation law stipulates that the auditor of Sustainability Reporting be appointed for financial year 2026. Ladies and gentlemen, the Remuneration and Personnel Committee, chaired by Ms. Suckale, held four meetings in 2025.
It monitored the appropriate structure of the compensation systems for employees and material risk-takers whose activities have a material influence on the overall risk profile of the group. In addition, the committee reviewed the corporate culture and was regularly informed about significant regulatory developments and their impact on the group's compensation framework. The Nomination Committee, chaired by myself, met 13 times in 2025. In particular, the committee considered the aforementioned process for selecting and proposing for election our new Shareholder Representative, Mr. Nieuwe Weme. This selection process was conducted with the assistance of an independent executive recruiter. As in previous years, the Nomination Committee carried out an efficiency review in 2025. In doing so, the Nomination Committee prepared the self-assessments of the Supervisory Board and analyzed, in particular, the results of that evaluation, identifying areas of focus and recommending possible measures to the Supervisory Board.
The implementation and evaluation of this efficiency review was supported by an impartial external consultant, as in the past. Details on the activities of the committees can be found on pages Roman 10 - 12 of the Annual Report in the German version, Roman 9- 11 in the English version. Please allow me next to outline the activities of the Joint Committee in the past financial year. You will find further information on this starting on page Roman 18 of our Annual Report. The Joint Committee met five times in 2025. In accordance with its statutory duties and powers, the committee discussed in depth variable remuneration, the compensation structure, and individual targets for the Managing Directors of the General Partner. The Joint Committee submitted proposals on variable remuneration to the shareholders' meeting of the General Partner.
The shareholders' meeting is responsible for determining the compensation of the Managing Directors and followed these proposals. Moreover, in the completed financial year, the committee considered the proposed appointment of Vincenzo Vedda as a member of the Executive Board and Chief Investment Officer , as well as Co-Head of the Investment Division, effective from 1st of August 2025. In addition, the committee reviewed the succession planning for members of the Executive Board and their interim performance assessment. It also explored potential opportunities in the field of mergers and acquisitions. At the end of the completed financial year, the Joint Committee proposed to the responsible shareholders' meeting that the contract of Manfred Bauer be extended for a further three years. The extension was approved accordingly. Moreover, in the current financial year, it was proposed to extend Markus Kobler's contract likewise for another three years.
This extension has also been granted in the meantime. Ladies and gentlemen, following these comments, most of which are in particular required by law, let us now move on to more higher-level business issues. Since our last annual general meeting held in 2025, DWS has made important progress in implementing its strategy. Let me share a brief summary with you, sharing a number of key examples. In India, DWS reached significant milestones in establishing the planned partnership. In November 2025, DWS agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding on a strategic cooperation with Nippon Life India Asset Management, and in March 2026, DWS signed binding agreements to acquire a minority stake in its subsidiary for alternative investment funds, Nippon Life India AIF Management Limited. In addition, Deutsche Bank and DWS decided to expand their collaboration to strengthen discretionary portfolio management.
This underlines the shared ambition of Deutsche Bank and DWS to combine their respective strengths in the best interests of clients. Furthermore, DWS's joint venture AllUnity launched the first euro-denominated and Bafin-regulated stablecoin in August 2025. This was one of the key objectives of DWS's digital initiatives to help shape the future of finance and open up additional growth opportunities. Our CEO, Stefan Hoops, will present the progress delivered by DWS in implementing its strategy in greater detail in a moment. Ladies and gentlemen, this brings me to the financial results for the completed financial year. DWS achieved a new record in terms of revenues while keeping costs nearly stable. This means that we were able to deliver both record levels in both profit before tax and net income, with assets under management also reaching a new high.
Based on the substantially improved financial results, we propose a further increase in the ordinary dividend for financial year 2025. To be more specific, the dividend will be increased for the seventh year in a row, and the proposal is to increase it to EUR 3 per share. At the same time, 2025 concluded our three-year strategic plan. DWS did not only meet, but actually over-deliver on its financial targets for 2025. At EUR 4.64, DWS notably exceeded its ambitious earnings per share target of EUR 4.50. Our company also outperformed its cost-income ratio target, delivering 58%. Encouraged by these excellent results and the aforementioned strategic review in late 2025, DWS has therefore set itself more ambitious medium-term financial targets, and Stefan Hoops will present these targets to you in a moment.
Ladies and gentlemen, these achievements are the result of the excellent work delivered by the Executive Board and all DWS employees around the world. On behalf of the entire Supervisory Board, I would therefore use this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to them all. Our recent decision to extend the contract of our CFO, Markus Kobler, already mentioned, was therefore only logical. Together with the contract extensions of other members of the Executive Board, which I announced at our last AGM, and the contract extension of Manfred Bauer, this ensures stability on the management team. Moreover, Stefan Hoops' appointment to Deutsche Bank's Management Board as of 1st of May is also a recognition of the excellent work that he and his team have delivered over the past few years.
In addition to his role as CEO at DWS, he is now responsible for the asset management segment of Deutsche Bank. The board member previously in charge of asset management in Deutsche Bank, I would like to use this opportunity to thank James von Moltke very warmly once again for his commitment and excellent collaboration on the Joint Committee in recent years. Ladies and gentlemen, the geopolitical environment has worsened substantially since the end of February. We are seeing the impact not only on the economy and financial markets, but also on clients. DWS has seen clients make adjustments, in particular by reducing risk positions. As a result, long-term net inflows declined year-on-year in the first quarter of 2026. However, thanks to DWS's diversified business model, they remained positive. The financial results improved significantly over the same period.
Higher revenues and reduced costs led to increases in profit before tax and net income of over 30%. Being able to respond flexibly to changes in the environment when it comes to costs is of particular importance in a more challenging environment. Ultimately, it was also this flexibility that encouraged DWS to reconfirm its full-year targets at the end of April. In order to achieve these targets, DWS will continue on its path and consistently implement its strategy with the constructive and critical support from the Supervisory Board. Shareholders, our CEO, Stefan Hoops, will now take over to explain DWS's strategic alignment and present the business results. Thank you very much for your attention.
Thanks. Shareholders, ladies and gentlemen, I too should like to welcome you on behalf of the entire Executive Board to this ordinary annual general meeting 2026. I'm delighted to see you all here today, especially as we celebrate the 70th anniversary of our DWS. Personal interaction has a quality of its own, especially when it comes to trust, mindset, and open dialogue. At the same time, recent years have shown the advantages of digital formats, a wider reach, lower barriers, greater accessibility. Although we will continue to use digital options from time to time, we are also determined to meet in person on a regular basis. I'm happy that in spite of the public holiday coming up tomorrow, and also in spite of the JP Morgan run taking place here in Frankfurt, you managed to come here today. Thank you.
The annual general meeting is where we report on the past financial year while presenting the outlook for the implementation of our strategy, priorities in the next phase, and our forecast for the next few months viewed from today's perspective. We come together in an age of new geopolitical uncertainty. Tariffs and retaliatory tariffs, regional conflicts, hybrid attacks, and strategic competition between the U.S. and China all define the environment. This leads to an increased volatility in the capital markets and a noticeable uncertainty. As asset managers, we are highly sought after in a climate such as this. More than ever before, customers require guidance. The very service our portfolio managers and capital market experts have been providing for years. The challenge now is to consistently deliver on that promise while continuing to grow on this basis as a company.
I'll come back to this challenge in a moment when I talk about the start into the year and our current business development. Ladies and gentlemen, 2025 was a special year for your DWS. We successfully concluded our three-year strategic plan and performed over and above our original targets. At the same time, it's important to me to emphasize that this is not a victory lap. That's not our style. Rather, it's a sober, fact-based assessment of what we delivered, the lessons we learned, where we have to improve, and what that means for our priorities in the next phase. Here are a few facts and figures to sum up 2025. Revenues amounted to EUR 3.155 billion. Profit before tax rose to EUR 1.324 billion. Net income came in at EUR 927 million.
Buoyed by strong net inflows, assets under management reached a new record level of EUR 1.085 trillion at the end of the year. Net flows of long-term assets under management comprised EUR 33.7 billion in 2025. Including cash and advisory services, total net flows were even EUR 51 billion. Costs totaled EUR 1.831 billion, virtually unchanged year- on- year. Accordingly, we can report a further improvement in the cost-income ratio. At 58% in 2025, it was well below our target of 61.5%. Moreover, and most importantly for you, our shareholders, earnings per share in 2025 were EUR 4.64. Here, too, we over-delivered on our original target of EUR 4.50. When we presented our three-year plan in late 2025, circumstances were not exactly on our side. In addition to a challenging environment for asset managers, we were also facing DWS specific issues. In response, we reduced costs, accelerated organic growth, and systematically addressed structural issues.
Of course, we have benefited from positive market developments since our Capital Markets Day 2022. At the same time, however, our development was largely driven by management actions in terms of both costs and revenues. We concentrated on structural aspects that we initiated at an early stage, implementing them consistently with disciplined planning. It is precisely this approach that has enabled us to deliver through very different market phases. Dear shareholders, as with any multi-year plan, some areas performed better than expected, and others fell short of our expectations. Please allow me to describe some of these areas and how we can do better, starting with the environment. Overall, the market provided a tailwind for the industry as a whole. Nevertheless, margin pressures and inflation proved a great deal more challenging than we had assumed at our Capital Markets Day 2022.
Despite solid organic growth, demand has skewed even more strongly towards passive than anticipated, which we were able to benefit from thanks to our range of Xtrackers ETFs. By contrast, Active was less dynamic, and business with alternative investments fell short of our original assumptions. Regarding the development of our customer base, we are satisfied with our distribution partnerships. At the same time, we are well aware the institutional business offers further potential that we intend to leverage. Overall, we were highly disciplined concerning costs. Nevertheless, we see clear opportunities to further streamline and increasingly automate the organization and realize additional efficiency gains. Compared with our Capital Markets Day, DWS is currently recognized for the right reasons, for our market perspective, for innovation, and because our business is relevant to our customers.
At the same time, recent years have shown we still have significant upside potential in terms of brand awareness beyond continental Europe and among institutional clients. I could go on to name other areas where there's room for improvement. Complacency is not a trait we want to cultivate, I promise you. You may rest assured that we judge our own performance more strictly than you perhaps would. Undeniably, the last three years have been tough. During this time, we have gained credibility among our stakeholders for implementing plans consistently. However, the years have also boosted our confidence, encouraging us to set bolder financial targets. I will come back to this in a minute.
Before doing so, however, I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere gratitude to our customers for their trust and to our employees for their dedication, their achievements, and their unwavering focus on the interests of our customers. Our staff work every day to generate value for our customers, thereby securing the basis that enables us to create value for you, dear shareholders. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, based on this strong result, for the 2025 financial year, we propose to the annual general meeting an ordinary dividend of EUR 3 per share, which is in accordance with our dividend policy. Including these dividend payments, we will have distributed a total of more than EUR 4 billion in dividends to you since our IPO in 2018. At the end of 2025, our excess capital was approximately EUR 1 billion.
As you no doubt recall, we have repeatedly stressed that organic and inorganic growth are key components of our strategic agenda. Since our IPO, we have said loud and clear, if we cannot find any effective ways of using this excess capital to add value, then we will return it to you, our shareholders. In light of this capital position, we intend to propose using a substantial part of this excess capital for an extraordinary dividend in 2027, subject to capital commitment for organic and inorganic growth initiatives. Dear shareholders, let me now discuss how we started the current fiscal year. At the beginning of my speech, I referred to the geopolitical uncertainty of the market environment. These geopolitical tensions dominated the first quarter, which was challenging, at times even unpredictable.
Who would have seriously expected just a few months ago mutual blockades by the U.S. and Iran in the Strait of Hormuz? The impact on oil prices and inflation was immediate. Shocks like this not only hit markets in terms of pricing, they also affect expectations. This type of environment is highly relevant for asset managers for two reasons. Firstly, the more volatile and divergent the markets become, the more different market views emerge. This is exactly the kind of environment where our active portfolio managers are in high demand. Secondly, in an environment like this, it is crucial to operate at a low cost-income ratio. This is important to ensure that we have room to maneuver, and this is exactly what we are prepared for. Let's start with the relevance of active asset management.
Our investment conference in early March took place at a time when the situation had just become significantly more critical, five days after the outbreak of the Iran war. Our Chief Investment Officer, Vincenzo Vedda, made an observation at the conference that has been validated again this year. Market reactions to political effects are often short-lived. Markets have a tendency to return to pre-crisis levels around 60 days after external shocks. That was also the case here. This goes to show that the experience and calm judgment of active asset management is exactly what we need now. It is an environment that offers us the opportunity to generate alpha. In these turbulent markets, our investment performance in the first five months was particularly gratifying, especially that of our large mutual funds. Important flagship funds have developed well.
Allow me now to briefly elaborate on the significance of a low cost-income ratio. We generally consider the earnings per share as the figure that most clearly expresses the creation of value for you, our shareholders. However, it is equally obvious that high earnings per share paired with a high cost-income ratio may be dangerous, because volatility in the markets can be reflected in earnings very quickly t hat we strive to improve the result with the definitive condition of a low cost-income ratio. This provides greater earnings stability and gives us the flexibility to continue investing in growth organically, and where appropriate, also inorganically. In view of the above, we delivered a solid first quarter. Earnings per share were EUR 1.32. Our cost-income ratio improved to 54.1%, and our cost base of EUR 444 million demonstrates that cost discipline is firmly in place.
In the first quarter, revenues came in at EUR 821 million, while net income increased to EUR 265 million. We have reconfirmed our full-year financial targets. In late 2025, we had again focused specifically on additional cost levers. I had already pointed out in the quarterly report in January that earnings stability cannot be taken for granted during this phase. Even though at that time we had certainly not been able to anticipate the impact of an Iran war, this additional focus on costs is now paying off. The initiatives that we have launched early this year have put us ahead of our schedule, and we have thus specified our cost expectations for the full year in the region of EUR 1.80 billion. This would be equivalent to a reduction of 2% compared to last year.
Ladies and gentlemen, I had just mentioned that concluding the three-year plan has given us the confidence to be even bolder in setting our financial targets. Accordingly, we carried out another comprehensive review of our strategic priorities at the end of 2025, purposely challenging the key assumptions. On this basis, we set ourselves even more ambitious financial targets to reflect the progress we have made over the past year and highlight the increased confidence in our strategic direction, especially where we see long-term competitive advantages and attractive growth prospects. These deliberately ambitious targets until 2028 include earnings per share growth of 10%-15% per annum over the next three years, underpinned by rigorous cost management, improved operational leverage, and a more dynamic earnings profile. Accordingly, our cost-income ratio is expected to improve further to below 55% by 2027.
We aim to achieve cumulative long-term net inflows of more than EUR 160 billion over 2026-2028. Lastly, we remain committed to optimizing our use of capital and acting in the interest of our shareholders i n line with our disciplined approach to capital allocation and the payout ratio of around 65% for the ordinary dividend. After the first quarter, we explicitly reconfirmed our earnings per share growth target of 10%-15% for the full year, assuming the markets remain constructive. Shareholders, these are clear financial targets. The crucial question, of course, is how do we achieve them? How, at the same time, do we ensure the necessary stability in a volatile environment? Let's begin with the cost.
We differentiate, on the one hand, between volume-based costs that scale with the business and are thus largely beyond our control, such as custodian administrative charges, and on the other hand, so-called discipline-based costs, that is, those over which we have control. The aim of all of the following measures I'm going to describe to you is to further reduce this cost base that can be influenced by our discipline. Firstly, nurturing and further developing our human capital. Despite sounding technical, it actually describes the simple reality in asset management. People are the key difference. Over the past few years, we have invested heavily in further training and talent development, quadrupling the number of our graduate hires, scaling up performance management, and ensuring roles and responsibilities are more clearly defined. Internal mobility remains a core focus.
Looking ahead, our goal is to employ expertise more effectively, distribute work more evenly, and pool skills where they create the greatest value. This entails adjustments at senior level and a disciplined approach to external recruitment. When employees leave, we primarily fill those vacancies internally, thereby offering our talents the best opportunities for advancement. Our goal is to be an attractive employer while also keeping costs under control. Secondly, adjusting our operating model. Straightforward in theory, but seldom the case in practice. Organizations should regularly check whether structures are still fit for purpose. Regulations, customer requirements, and technology constantly evolve and require the modernization of organizational charts and value chains. Our strategic review identified areas where streamlining and consolidation were useful. We implemented these changes in the first quarter, with most since concluded. Thirdly, optimizing IT and operations.
Last year, as you may recall, I presented our transformation program, which focuses on those areas that truly set our company apart as an asset manager. Since then, we have left our own cloud and migrated applications to the Deutsche Bank cloud, thereby freeing up resources for automation and artificial intelligence. This builds resilience and efficiency while our teams focus on more complex automation-driven tasks. Moving on to revenue growth. We will continue with what has worked well. In other words, we continue to invest in Xtrackers, expand our private credit capabilities, and scale our infrastructure business. We are seeing encouraging improvements in flows in active equities and are delighted that the cornerstone of our business is regaining momentum. Moreover, we have set several growth priorities across our platform, spanning all asset classes and customer types.
Some of these priorities are already firmly established in our strategy and are thus well into the implementation phase. As these early investments are now having an impact, we can set more ambitious targets. One such example is the gateway to Europe that I introduced a while back. This is where we distinguish ourselves by offering our clients access to the European transformation. Our identity as a European asset manager with deep roots in Germany is an asset we leverage, as is our ability to bring together global perspectives. This has been a key topic for some time, and the sentiment towards Europe has improved visibly. Opening our office in Abu Dhabi in December is a tangible case in point, along with the announcement of a Middle Eastern investor to invest EUR 1 billion in a German Opportunities Mandate. It shows that client outreach is making headway.
With extended capabilities in alternative investments and intensified dialogue with sovereign wealth funds, we see growth potential here. Another example is the future of finance. This initiative focuses on three core pillars that are important to us, in which we have been investing for some time. Let's start with Embedded Investment Solutions, the invisible infrastructure that makes investment solutions available where investors seek them. We see digital channels becoming the dominant gateway. At Xtrackers, more than 1/3 of assets under management already come via digital platforms. This is why we invest in scalable IT that weaves our investment intelligence directly into our partners' systems. Our first interfaces, known as APIs, are live. The first customer is already connected, and our ambition is clear.
In the coming years, we will continue to expand this lineup with additional services and capabilities in a partner ecosystem that enables modular, flexible solutions, seamlessly embedding our expertise in the portfolios of private and institutional investors. Digital assets are the second strategic element. I'm sure you recall the progress of our joint venture, AllUnity, which I have regularly reported on over the past two years. AllUnity has now launched EURAU. That is the first fully regulated MiCAR -compliant euro-denominated stablecoin in Germany. This year, CHFAU, or spelled CHFAU, the first stablecoin denominated in Swiss franc followed suit. We will continue to support the joint venture as it works to scale its offerings and expand its product, service, and tokenization capabilities. Thirdly, we see artificial intelligence as a lever that can make processes more efficient, optimize decision-making, and improve the client experience.
We carry out a wide range of tests and experiments, taking inspiration from Harvest Fund Management, our Chinese investment, where the use of AI in asset management is already well advanced. As a CEO, you can easily get bogged down in truisms when talking about the omnipresent topic of AI. Allow me therefore to state succinctly and matter of factly, we will stay realistic on this subject matter. Process improvements are the primary short-term goal. That's why our initial focus has been on robust data management. Now we can support and challenge portfolio managers in their day-to-day tasks with integrated AI functions and applications. Our ambition to become a top five international asset manager in the world's top five economies is gaining traction, organically and through selective partnerships.
The joint venture with Nippon Life India Asset Management, which we announced at the end of last year and are currently setting up, will create a platform for alternative investments in India, one of the world's fastest growing asset management markets. However, the partnership goes much further than that and will support growth across all asset classes. In regards to China, we are interested in expanding our interest in Harvest Fund Management.
Deutschland, G ermany remains our home market and the central pillar of the economy. As Germany's number one for securities mutual funds by assets under management, we are well-positioned to benefit from the current momentum and structural developments in our home market, boosted by the German government's ambitious reform packages. Even in our largest market, we see additional opportunities from the pension reform and infrastructure investments right through to fund a program such as the Deutschlandfonds . This highlights our constructive view of Germany. As Germans, we tend to view our country in a rather matter-of-fact way. For DWS, I can tell you, we are definitely bullish Germany. Lastly, our collaboration with Deutsche Bank. We pinpointed this partnership as a source of additional value creation at our Capital Markets Day 2022. This opportunity is now being addressed a great deal more clearly on both sides.
Being part of the Deutsche Bank Group gives a significant competitive advantage, granting us access to origination and distribution capabilities that few asset managers can replicate at this scale. The Private Bank is already our largest global distribution partner, offering additional potential, for example, in joint product development and in discretionary portfolio management. Moreover, we see additional opportunities to expand our portfolio for institution and corporate customers through the cooperation with the Investment Bank and the Corporate Bank, including holistic pension solutions across all pillars. Ladies and gentlemen, dear shareholders, your DWS has delivered and has restored confidence, but l et's be honest. Although we have grown organically during the last few years, this has been mainly driven by the need to catch up. We have made up leeway on things we had missed in the past, and we have sorted out costly internal issues.
On top of that, we practiced discipline in allocating resources, for example, by consistently prioritizing gems like Xtrackers. For the next chapter, however, it is important to move on from the catching up mode into a position that allows us to overtake. Our ambitions are international, and that calls for a new approach, more presence with institutional clients, greater visibility in regions outside Germany and Europe. They require an organization that takes an even more holistic view of customer relationships, an organization with a more global vision and approach, and an organization that is clearly recognizable for clients and talents around the world. With this in mind, at the end of May, we expanded the responsibility of the Executive Board to increase our customer focus, commercial responsibility, and regional presence.
Today, the Wealth segment, that is our business with retail clients we address via wholesale partners, as well as the Institutional segment, both revolve around solutions tailored to the needs of our clients. It is no longer just individual products, but rather integrated offers based on bespoke portfolio construction. To this end, we have aligned our Client Coverage Division even more clearly with our client segments and set up our distribution organization for Private Wealth and Institutional clients. We have already established this client-centric setup in our German home market and recently also in our Americas business, and our experience there has been very good. Consequently, we are now implementing this in the regions Europe and Asia as well. In addition, we created the position of Chief Commercial Officer. Our former Chief Client Officer, Dirk Görgen, has taken on this role on the Executive Board.
In addition to global responsibility for distribution, he now also has overall responsibility for sales development and management, as well as for our home market, Europe. In taking this step, we have not just appointed essential supervisor for our revenues, but have also facilitated the more holistic management of our client business. At the same time, our Chief Investment Officer, Enzo Vedda, will serve as Head of Americas on the Executive Board and relocate to New York. Thus, we are ensuring a stronger Executive Board presence of this region, which is so vital for our business. Ladies and gentlemen, nonetheless, it also takes global visibility and an identifiable brand to effectively unlock our potential and remain attractive to customers and future employees. The DWS brand has a strong foothold in its German home market. Outside Germany, however, it is not so well-known, and that is something we have to tackle.
At the same time, however, we must ensure that the DWS brand continues to be perceived as a premium brand focusing on active asset management. This is what we're working on. To conclude, allow me to summarize the most important points. Firstly, we delivered a strong performance in 2025. Our result, net inflows, and cost discipline give us momentum. Having exceeded our three-year financial targets should have boosted our confidence in our own ability to perform. Secondly, we are approaching the next phase with clear, deliberately ambitious targets. Our focus is on creating value for you, our shareholders. Thirdly, we are systematically investing in growth while continuing to expand future fields. Fourthly, that is lastly, we specifically address the growth opportunities in the international and institutional business, and we are working to further strengthen our global presence.
Ladies and gentlemen, at DWS, we are guided by the concept of the disciplined optimist. Optimistic when looking towards a positive future, and disciplined in doing everything to make this positive future a reality. In other words, invariably questioning assumptions, consistently learning from experience, and above all, delivering on one's commitments. All of which you can expect from your DWS in next chapter of our growth story. Thank you for your kind attention.
Thank you, Stefan, for your explanations, which should give our shareholders a very good overview of the company's current situation. Ladies and gentlemen, before we move on to the items on today's agenda, we would like to begin, as we do every year, by paying tribute to the employees and pensioners of DWS who have passed away. I would ask you to pause for a moment and, if possible, to rise from your seats. Thank you for your remembrance. I now have the list of attendees. We will therefore now turn to the attendance at today's annual general meeting. Based on the data available, I can inform you of the attendance as follows. The total share capital of the company amounts to EUR 200 million and is split into an equal number of shares. Of those represented at today's AGM are 179,372,395 shares carrying an equal amount of votes.
That corresponds to 89.68% of the share capital. Moreover, we have received absentee votes representing 111,406 shares. In total, this results in 179,483,801 shares, which corresponds to 89.74% of the share capital. A copy of the list of attendees is available for inspection at the speaker's desk. In this context, I would like to expressly point out that only those shareholders and shareholder representatives listed in the register of attendees who have registered at the entrance control desk and have presented their admission ticket are considered voting members of this annual general meeting. Anyone who has not yet registered or has not registered with all admission tickets may still do so now in the entrance area at the entrance or exit control, respectively. Changes to the list of attendees will be recorded in addenda.
Copies of these addenda will also be available for inspection at the registration desk or at the speaker's desk without my announcing any changes to the attendance list in each instance. Shareholders and shareholder representatives who leave the annual general meeting early and definitely, and who wish to authorize the company's proxy, are requested to report to the entrance or exit control point presenting their admission ticket. The staff at the entrance or exit control point will be happy to assist you and also have the relevant forms available. Should you leave the annual general meeting early and definitely and do not wish to appoint a proxy, then please inform the staff at the entrance control desk so that the list of attendance can be updated.
Shareholders who have duly registered and provided proof of their shareholding may still exercise their voting rights today via the shareholder portal by means of a postal vote, or they may issue a proxy and instructions to the company's voting representative and also amend their instructions. I will inform you in good time as to the exact time at which the window for submitting votes closes. To use the portal, please use the login details on the admission ticket that was sent to you following your proper registration and proof of your shareholding. Ladies and gentlemen, I had already outlined the Supervisory Board's report on its activities during the past financial year to you prior to Stefan Hoops's speech.
For the sake of good order, I would like to take this opportunity to address item one on today's agenda and discuss the further financial reporting documents of DWS for the 2025 financial year. These include, amongst other things, the Annual Financial Statements and the Management Report for DWS Group GmbH & Co. KGaA, which were prepared in accordance with the German Commercial Code, HGB, and also the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Group Management Report. Ladies and gentlemen, these documents and the proposal for the appropriation of profits have been available on our website since the annual general meeting was convened on 21st April 2026. They were also available for inspection at our head office.
The Annual Financial Statement and Management Report, as well as the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Group Management Report for the entities, have been audited by the auditor elected by the annual general meeting in 2025, which is KPMG Aktiengesellschaft Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft . Neither the audit by the auditor nor the review by the Supervisory Board, which also covered the proposed appropriation of profits, gave rise to any objections. The auditor issued unqualified audit opinions. The Supervisory Board approved the Annual Financial Statement and the Group Statement, the Consolidated Financial Statement that is at its meeting on 11th of March 2026. The adoption of the Annual Financial Statements is the responsibility of today's AGM. The auditors, Mr. Fox and Ms. Adilova from KPMG, are also present here in the main hall.
I take it that you are familiar with remaining items on the agenda, the full text of which is available on our annual general meeting website, amongst other places, as well as with the management's proposed resolutions on these matters. Finally, I would like to point out that in accordance with the legal requirements under Sections 126 and 127 of the German Stock Corporation Act, we have published a counter-motion on our website. Dear shareholders, to supplement my introductory remarks, we would now like to give Mr. Bas Nieuwe Weme, a new candidate for election to the Supervisory Board, the opportunity to introduce himself briefly to you. Mr. Nieuwe Weme is here in the hall and will now address you. He will introduce himself in English. An interpreter will provide a translation into German afterwards. Mr. Nieuwe Weme, the floor is yours.
[Non-English content]
Dear shareholders, it is a great honor and pleasure to me to be able to introduce myself to you today personally as part of our AGM here. My name is Bas Nieuwe Weme, and the Supervisory Board of DWS has appointed me as a candidate to represent the shareholders on the Supervisory Board.
Contribution for today. I will now continue in English with your permission. [Non-English content] As I would kindly ask for your support for my nomination, please allow me to share some key information about my personal, academic, and professional background [Non-English content]. I was born in 1972, and I'm a Dutch national. I currently live in Amsterdam, in the Netherlands. With regard to my academic background, I studied law at the University of Amsterdam, where I obtained a Master of Laws degree. Later in my professional career, I completed an Executive MBA at NYU Stern School of Business in New York, which further shaped my international management perspective [Non-English content].
Turning to my professional experience, I've spent more than 25 years, of which 20 years in the United States, in the global asset management and financial service industry holding senior leadership positions in both Europe and the United States. Most recently, from 2019-2024, I served as Global CEO of Aegon Asset Management in parallel with my role as a member of the Management Board of Aegon Group Ltd. In these functions, I was responsible for a global asset management organization operating across multiple regions, with a strong focus on institutional and intermediary clients, public and private market offerings, governments, and long-term value creation [Non-English content].
Prior to this, I held senior international roles at PGIM in the United States, the global asset management business of Prudential Financial, where I was a Managing Director and Global Head of the Institutional Relationship and Client Advisory. Earlier in my career, I spent many years with ING Investment Management and later Voya Investment Management, where I served, among other roles, as Global Head of Institutional Distribution and as a Management Board member. Across these positions, my work has consistently focused on global asset management, client strategy, and leading complex international organizations [Non-English content].
In addition to my executive experience, I currently serve as a Senior Advisor to BCG's Financial Services practice. I also bring non-executive and supervisory board experience. I'm a member of the Supervisory Board of DMFCO Asset Management in the Netherlands and an Independent Non-Executive Director of Clearwater Analytics Holdings, a New York Stock Exchange-listed company in the U.S. I've also previously served on the Supervisory Board of La Banque Postale Asset Management in France and as a Non-Executive Director on the board of AIFMC in China.
On a personal note, I'm married and a father of four boys. Outside my professional life, sports has always played an important role for me, in particular, field hockey. I played for many years on the Dutch National team. I currently act as the Team Manager of the Dutch National Men's Hockey team, preparing for the World Cup this summer and the Olympics in L.A. in 2028. I'm also passionate about endurance sports, including marathon running [Non-English content].
Dear shareholders, I sincerely believe that my international leadership experience, my background in asset management, and my supervisory board expertise would enable me to contribute constructively and thoughtfully to the work of the Supervisory Board of DWS. I would therefore kindly ask for your support in electing me to the Supervisory Board. I look forward to serving DWS, its shareholders, and all stakeholders with commitment, independence, and dedication [Non-English content]. Thank you very much for your attention [Non-English content].
Thank you very much, Mr. Nieuwe Weme, for your personal remarks. Ladies and gentlemen, we shall now proceed to the discussion, which we will take in the form of a general debate. I would ask those shareholders and shareholder representatives who wish to speak on individual or on all items on the agenda to come forward to the speaking desk, stating their name and ticket number. The speaker's desk is located at the front on the right-hand side as you face the stage. I will call upon those shareholders and shareholder representatives who have requested to speak individually during the general debate. Once your name has been called, you may then speak and ask your questions during the general debate here in this meeting room from the lectern, which you can see here at the front to my right.
If you have any points of order, please indicate this when requesting the floor. This will facilitate the handling of such points. If you want to make a statement regarding the notary public's record, especially lodge an objection, the notary public would ask you to, if possible, register those contributions with his assistant at the speaker's desk. There is generally no limit on speaking time. However, I would ask all speakers to focus their remarks on the items on the agenda and to aim at being objective and brief.
Should it become necessary due to a large number of requests to speak, I reserve the right to limit speaking time in order to ensure that the agenda is dealt with within a reasonable time frame. I would ask you to approach the lectern to deliver your speech and ask questions once your name has been called, and to state your name at the start of your contribution. We have already received the first requests to speak. As the first speakers, I may now ask Mr. Klaus Nieding, before the next speaker will be called, which is Mr. Andreas Schmidt. Before I give the floor to Mr. Schmidt, I would like to ask Klaus Nieding, and following that, Ida Mielke, to please be prepared to take the floor. Mr. Nieding, the floor is yours.
Thank you, Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, I'm Klaus Nieding. I'm a lawyer in Frankfurt am Main, and I speak here in my function as the Vice President of DSW, which is the German Association for Private Investors, which is Germany's largest retail investors' association. Chairman, at the start of my remarks, let me thank you for returning to the only format that is in the interest of shareholders for today. After six years of rather boring Management Board TV, you have, as many other companies, returned to a physical in-attendance meeting. Ladies and gentlemen, only such an on-site AGM allows us as shareholders to really obtain a comprehensive view and overview of the company and its bodies and boards, and to have a personal exchange. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hoops, let me call upon you to please stick to this format for future AGMs.
Only companies who have anything to hide or who shy away from direct contact with their shareholders will change back to virtual AGMs, and you really don't need to do that. If you hear as a counterargument that on-site AGMs take so terribly long, so it's more effective to do it in the format of a virtual AGM, I can only tell you, why not simply also keep your part briefer and shorten it in the most brutal manner? We've been sitting here this morning for an hour and a half listening to you very patiently. I would say you can simply keep that a bit shorter and maybe also refer to pre-publications on the internet or other documents, and that will take us quicker to the debate. Ladies and gentlemen, we also have to be self-critical.
If we so insistently ask for on-site AGMs, and that's what I'm doing, then please, on days like this where the company says, "Yes, we will spend the money. We are ready to meet with you in person here in this room, and we are going through the entire organization effort," then this room should pretty be more than full. It should be bursting, to put it carefully. If I look around here, then that unfortunately is not the case. We really need to work on it at our end as well. Now, first of all, about the possibility to reach your new medium-term targets. You're aiming for an EPS growth of 10%-15% per year, cost-income ratio of below 55%, and cumulative net inflow of more than EUR 160 billion.
I'd like to know which proportion of that target achievement is due to operational growth and how much on capital market effects. Also, how sensitive are those targets versus a scenario with a stagnating stock market or decreasing interest rates, and which measures would then be initiated? Regarding the sustainability of the profit increase, e xcuse me, g roup profit after tax increased in 2025 by 43% to EUR 928 million. At the same time, we're profiting from positive market fluctuations and more assets under management. What's the share of that that's due to structural improvements in the business model, and what proportion is due to market-related valuation effects? What would the result be in an unchanged market and without a positive valuation effect?
Also, I would like to know about the profit before tax of DWS under a stress scenario with an assumed global stock market drop of 20%, a clear expansion of the credit spreads, and negative cash inflow. What measures to stabilize profitability have been prepared for this? The record inflow of EUR 51 billion over 2025, we've mentioned already, t hese are in particular due to passive business and Xtrackers. At the same time, inflow from active securities transaction business were rather weak over a long period. What's the average margin quality of the assets under management if a considerable part of growth stems from passive products? Could you please quantify if the net inflows in 2025 have rather increased or diluted the average fee margin? Until 2028, you average at an annual EPS growth of 15%-20% and the already accumulated net cash inflow of EUR 160 billion.
What are the macroeconomic conditions and assumptions on which you base these targets in specific terms, and what would be the impact of a long-term lower capital market return, a recession across Europe, or decreasing ETF inflows versus our target achievement? Now, on the alternatives business. You consider it a key growth driver for the years to come, but a t the same time, you say that individual activities in the, for example, Asian private credit business are to be decreased. At the same time, the market environment in that area has become more demanding. Which returns currently do you plan for newly acquired funds, and in what do they differ from three years ago? Where does DWS see the largest valuation risk within the alternatives portfolio, and what are the return and risk criteria that led you to withdraw from parts of the Asian private credit business?
What are the lessons you draw from that for your global alternative strategy, and which regions or segments are to grow overproportionately? The cost-to-income ratio, i t has improved to 58%. It's to drop below 55%. Please tell us about the cost-to-income ratio of the next two competitors. Also, I'd like to know what are the specific functions or responsibilities and business segments that are to supply these next increases? To what extent have personnel jobs been cut or automated, and how do you ensure that this does not negatively impact either investment performance or regulatory control? Talk about controls. With the greenwashing matter, we've had quite some discussions in recent years. What were the specific changes addressed since the end of the various proceedings regarding product classification, ESG data collection, and marketing data disclosure?
How many products in 2025 were reclassified because of exacerbated ESG checks and tests or were adjusted in their marketing? How does our Supervisory Board these days measure the effectiveness of such measures, and which KPIs are regularly reported to you on this? Also, I'd like to know what are the specific measures the Supervisory Board took in order to make sure they can strengthen their control function versus management. To what extent did the Supervisory Board question strategic decisions taken by management, change them, or maybe not approve them? How is that transparently communicated to shareholders? Mr. Hoops, you're no longer just holding the return ticket to Deutsche Bank, but actually you've already taken a seat in one compartment of the train, if you want to stick with that metaphor.
As of 1st May, you've additionally become a board member of Deutsche Bank, and in the press you're already considered as a potential successor to Christian Sewing. Congrats on that. Question to the Chair, w hat does the Supervisory Board do in this respect? Are you already looking for a potential successor for Mr. Hoops, just to be on the safe side? How do you ensure continuity at the top of our company? Let me say this quite clearly, Mr. Hoops, towards you, you have really done an excellent job for our company, and that is also the reason for you being promoted back to Deutsche Bank, so to speak. You really did well. Speaking of personnel matters, we've just heard from the new Supervisory Board member candidate who introduced himself, and I, myself, really liked his introduction. He's definitely from the industry.
You might put it in positive terms, ladies and gentlemen. This gentleman definitely knows what business our company is in and what it is all about. You may, of course, also answer the question whether he might be lacking some critical distance towards our company, as in one crow doesn't interfere with another one's hunting grounds, so to speak. What are the interconnections between DWS and Aegon Asset Management? Also, maybe we can hear that from our Chairman, is the fact helpful that, at Deutsche Bank, the long-term Supervisory Board Chairman is Alexander Wynaendts, who's the former CEO of the Aegon Group? Is that possibly helpful for us? Since we're speaking of this, I would also like to know what are the business connections between DWS and DMFCO Asset Management, or also Clearwater Analytics Holdings, where our Supervisory Board candidate is also active.
Other than that, I have to say I had a very good impression of his introduction. Very approachable, very likable, and respects actually four sons and lots of sport. That really makes him a very likable person. At this point, I would also like to thank all of our employees on behalf of the shareholders, and that also goes to Management Board and Supervisory Board, of course. Without your commitment, restabilization of our company would not have been possible like that. Mr. Hoops, please make sure you also communicate this into the company. In conclusion, I'd like to speak on item five on today's agenda, ladies and gentlemen. Of course, also in this year, as we usually do, we will vote against EY being appointed auditor.
For as long as EY does not stand by their responsibility as part of the Wirecard toward the shareholders and investors who sustained damage, and as long as they don't contribute to repaying those damages, for as long as that's the case, we will not approve them being appointed auditor. Thank you very much for your attention.
Thank you very much, Mr. Nieding, for your contribution.
Thank you, Mr. Nieding. Thank you very much for your contribution. Next, Andreas Schmidt will be given the opportunity to ask his questions, and Ida Mielke is asked to please keep ready. She's from Dachverband der Kritischen Aktionärinnen , and after her, Jari Bertolini from Dachverband der Kritischen Aktionärinnen will also be given the floor. If the two of you could get ready. Mr. Schmidt, the floor is all yours.
Ladies and gentlemen, shareholders, guests, m y name's Andreas Schmidt. I'm speaking on behalf of SdK, Schutzgemeinschaft der Kapitalanleger, Shareholders Association in Germany. I do not hold any shares or derivatives in DWS. Nevertheless, I'm hoping that I will be given the opportunity to ask a number of questions and raise a couple of points on your behalf, shareholders. I hope this will also be quite useful for the future in terms of what's next on DWS's agenda. Many of you will have met me before at other AGMs or a number of years ago from the in-person DWS AGM.
It's nice to be back to a physical AGM. Ladies and gentlemen, I've made a lot of critical comments over time. This is just my nature. I will continue to be critical, but I also have to clearly commend the board this year. Over the last few years, a lot of things have been achieved. We've had a lot of critical discussions. I was always doubting whether the cost-income ratio was going to be reduced to this extent, but in the framework of passive investment and the various measures, you've managed to do so, and you've done away with my doubts. Let's see how this will continue, but so far, I have to admit you've delivered excellent work.
Thanks a lot to you, and thanks a lot to your entire team, all the staff that have been involved in making this possible. Of course, this has also been positively reflected in the share price, so that there isn't much to criticize here today. Nevertheless, let me make a number of critical comments. One quick comment. I was mentioning the share price that reflects recent developments. Mr. Hoops, of course, I would like to congratulate you very warmly on your appointment as board member at Deutsche Bank. Nevertheless, on the other hand, I'm not all that happy with that appointment. Maybe I feel a bit frustrated, in fact, because my fear is you might not have sufficient time for your role at DWS, and also because I believe there might be a conflict of interest. Please comment. Of course, you deserve it, no doubt about that.
Nevertheless, I do believe there's a number of critical aspects in this respect. As far as I know, there isn't a profit and loss transfer agreement between Deutsche Bank and DWS. In my view, as a CEO of a KGaA, you are not limited by instructions. Is that true? What are you going to do if you were to be faced with having to take part in a decision that might be advantageous for Deutsche Bank or maybe even necessary, but disadvantageous for DWS or its shareholders?
For example, an excessively high profit distribution due to an unnecessarily high capital increase in DWS, or a takeover of risk assets, I'll come back to this in a moment, in order to relieve the burden on Deutsche Bank, or a major acquisition that you might want to carry out, but that Deutsche Bank would not be prepared to support, and that Deutsche Bank might consider to be a burden on its dividends or capital. You cannot serve two masters, as the Gospel says. Mr. Hoops, who would be your master if the worst came to the worst? To be honest, I wouldn't ask this if I didn't appreciate you as a board member. I would just be glad you're gone. This is also to commend you, but please comment. Let me next turn to strategy. You were saying that Deutsche Bank is a very important partner.
Yes, I acknowledge that, without any doubts, and it helps a lot in your day-to-day business operations in all areas within DWS. Nevertheless, I'm very concerned. I'm very concerned with regards to private debt. I believe there are immense risks here, and they remind me back of the CDO crisis, which brought the bank to the verge of a global banking bankruptcy, and a number of banks did go bankrupt at the time. In large parts, debt is expanded here without any state control. Very often, there's back-and-forth transactions collateralized with weird promises, in particular in the tech industry and AI industry. Of course, this is a general comment, but of course, it also affects you and your relationship with Deutsche Bank. How much is your private debt position, and also in terms of AI, cloud, IT, so anything that you could cluster in that area?
How does the process actually take place? Does Deutsche Bank send you a contract as a client, and then you put them into your funds? Can you define the criteria yourself? Those of you who are a little bit older will know, for example, that there were situations in the tech bubble or before that, where everything that was not placed in the market, that was not issued, was simply put into the funds. That must not happen. Who will be liable in the event of any defaults or in the event of any due diligence failures? This reminds us back of the CDO crisis, where that was the case, where due diligence was not observed. Is Deutsche Bank the initiator here, and DWS acts as the poor intermediary? Who has got what percentage of the fees?
Would DWS also hold private debt in its own portfolios? Well, I hope not really. You wouldn't really do so, or maybe only a few selected ones. Do you have experts to assess the risks yourselves? In the CDO crisis, external ratings from the rating agencies that were responsible at the time were not to be relied upon. You need external expertise to manage that kind of business. How, if at all, but I'm hoping so, how does your DWS model differ from the private debt use in the U.S.? Next, another topic, your interest in Nippon Life India. Mr. Behrens also commented on that in his speech. Is this more like a distribution partnership, or are you planning to place entirely new products, for example, infrastructure investments? Do you want, or is your goal to make this accessible to clients in other countries?
What are the volumes we're going to acquire in the medium term? Is this interest a strategic project aiming to have a presence in India and get a foot in the market, or are you planning to deliver and achieve your own return? I presume that, quite apart from the acquisition, the investment will be quite low compared to other costs because this is actually based on a partnership approach. Now, if so, could this also be a model for other markets in Asia, Latin America, or Africa, or specifically in China? You were mentioning the Harvest investment that you are intending to expand. Would this be possible under a similar model, which would be positive for the cost-income ratio? Let me turn to another point. It has struck me that you are regularly reporting about new funds. Everybody does that.
Everybody says, "Well, we've got a new funds, Vietnam investments or what have you." In order to be able to offer each client a tailored solution, this tends to be communicated this way. I actually find it very confusing, and I don't believe it will actually help selling more funds. Probably small funds are not particularly cost-efficient. Wouldn't it make sense to focus on fewer but bigger funds in order to then sell them as flagships of DWS know-how? In your initial video, you were referring to excellence. Excellence is best exemplified by bigger funds, and I'm not talking about individual persons, but simply bigger funds that are more well-known. In your speech, you were referring to DWS's visibility in the international arena. Wouldn't this help, and maybe also help save costs in parallel? Would this be a feasible solution in your view for the future?
Mr. Hoops, in your speech, you referred to private pensions. This is an area with a big potential for the future. How does this area develop at this point? Do you believe there will be standard products or maybe more specific products? What has happened with regard to resale contracts? How much are the assets under management, administered funds due to new contracts? What are you expecting, for example, for the next five years, and from which volume will this be beneficial for you, and from which volume are you going to be profitable? I'm not sure whether you will be able to achieve the profitability you would achieve with your existing business in actively managed funds right from the beginning. Now, in your analyst call and similar calls, you have already communicated that the high infrastructure performance fees are going to come down.
A number of large transactions have expired. How much were the performance fees? No, sorry. Now, given that these funds are going to expire, it's going to be more important for you to focus on your Kaldemorgen flagship fund. In your analyst call, you were saying that the Kaldemorgen funds in Q2 will have delivered the performance fee level aimed at. How far away are you from the high-water mark at this point? Will this fund become too big at some point to achieve outperformance? Its volume should have been around EUR 11 billion. Managing such a big fund is a real art, and if you then also want to outperform the benchmark, it's not easy. Thanks a lot to Mr. Kaldemorgen and the entire team in this context.
This is an excellent performance, and of course, it also helps a lot when it comes to communicating this excellence topic that you are associating with DWS. Two other points before I close. Firstly, thank you for carrying out an in-person physical AGM. Secondly, as mentioned before, in addition to the ordinary dividend, you are also going to pay a special dividend. That's your plan, and you were referring to EUR 1 billion of excess capital that you are going to distribute in 2027. Just to be very clear about this, does that mean EUR 1 billion worth of dividend, or are you planning to also buy back shares? Quite clearly, we as SdK are in favor of a dividend distribution [inaudible]. Shares should only be bought back to the extent this is necessary to serve employee share programs.
Here, of course, if you have to do so, and in the future, share prices might go up, and of course, you need to do so in the framework of employee stock programs. What is your strategy in this respect? Just to get that very clear. The second, at SdK, we explicitly endorse this way of proceeding about this. We want to acknowledge and have it. When you have too much capital, how do you calculate that? If I take a look at that calculation, well, if you don't do any major acquisitions, once I've heard time and again, you are working in that direction. At Supervisory Boardings, you're talking about controls, et cetera.
Let's assume you are not going to do any major acquisitions, then [inaudible], that every few years we can expect a special dividend that you will want to pay, or maybe have to pay, if you continue your strategy. I think it'd be a major feat every two or three years we were to receive a special dividend. Times are and remain challenging, unfortunately so. We are able to cope with that a gainst that backdrop. Thanks a lot, and thank you for your attention.
Thank you, Andreas Schmidt. Ida Mielke from Dachverband der Kritischen Aktionärinnen on the floor, and I'm asking Jari Bertolini and Tilman Massa to please keep ready. We do not have any further requests for the floor at this time. Ms. Mielke, over to you for your presentation.
Management Board, Supervisory Board, t here was a time when you allegedly was a fixed element of our DNA, as DWS claimed. What's become of that in the meantime? A fine paid in 2025 due to the public prosecutors in Frankfurt. DWS, unfortunately, did not have a market-leading position in ESG, unless telling their shareholders. Actually, we are quite disappointed. We had hoped for a lot of things to happen in terms of coal, because the coal policy went out, oil and gas policy, but now, Mr. Hoops, you have not mentioned human rights.
DWS expects its portfolio companies to commit to the Net Zero path in the long run and to the Scope 1. You are deciding about the business’s future. You have an influence on what's going to happen in the future and what is not going to happen in the future. In a global context, such as h iding behind or looking at transformation when, in fact, there isn't any transformation, is tempting. Dear boards and Management Board, it's up to you [audio distortion] e vents, a number who are going to lose their homes. Last year, we had 38 degrees centigrade in Spain. In France, seven people died of the heat. Investments in coal and gas and oil, where new oil fields and gas fields are still being explored, are going to be published in June.
Investments in TotalEnergies, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and Eni share the fact that they are not on a Net Zero path in the long run. On the opposite, they are massively building new [resources]. Science and scientific findings, there are enormous economic risk, and regarding investments in the six companies mentioned just now. Producing 220 Gt of CO2 emissions, so-called carbon bombs in [Cabo Delgado], Argentina, and the Permian. Two carbon bombs that are particular [audio distortion]. DWS also seems to be in favor of TotalEnergies, a company where DWS invests in the share of $2.5 billion worth of invest, largest investor in TotalEnergies worldwide and the biggest one in Germany. DWS should have a significant influence on [inaudible]. Why is this group so attractive for you, TotalEnergies?
The world in exploring new oil and gas fields, the group is ranked number two in the world, even in comparison with the other, [audio distortion] and others. Mozambique LNG, for example, and other companies are involved or in other projects. It was severe human rights violations. Companies had to pay a fine because they allegedly supported crimes of war. The 1.5 degrees target has also been given up by TotalEnergies. In spring [2020], so far as to do a deal with the Trump administration, they are withdrawing from wind power and instead going to invest in oil and gas. The carbon bombs and the human rights violations to do with Mozambique and your engagement in 2025, i f so, investigations of the human rights accusations in relationship with Mozambique. TotalEnergies, to no longer finance TotalEnergies or other companies that act accordingly.
Please tell us specifically as from when. It's raised with TotalEnergies, with Chevron, Shell and TotalEnergies, for example, the Net Zero Initiative, there are certain targets by 2030. What are these targets like at this point, and what does it mean to adjust the scope? In comparison with 2024, investments in fossil fuels have not declined. However, in the light of the climate strategy, this would have had to be expected. When are you going to adopt an oil and gas policy that does justice to your responsibility as an investor? Are you planning to invest in fossil fuels, and are you going to use fossil fuel investments as an exclusion criteria, be it upstream or midstream, for your fund projects? Are you going to reflect in the so-called SFDR 2.0 strategy? If no, why not?
Are you going to give up new bonds of oil and gas groups that continue to expand in fossil fuels? ExxonMobil seems to be one of the six oil majors that plays a special role. In terms of your engagement report, you're no longer referring to ExxonMobil. Why is that? Why is that not mentioned in the engagement report? Were you not in engagement with ExxonMobil? What topics were discussed with ExxonMobil if there was an engagement? Why were you not using your investments in ExxonMobil shares worth more than $1.5 billion, in terms of your engagement with ExxonMobil? What are the conclusions you draw from the failed dialogue with ExxonMobil for your investments? What does this mean for climate protection?
Please, in answering these questions, also take into account, for example, the answers that ExxonMobil or Shell have given you in terms of your questions asked in the framework of engagement. Why is it you stopped that dialogue altogether? Your continued investments in irresponsible oil and gas companies show that the profits of the oil and gas majors are too tempting for you to assume responsibility. We would prefer it if you had ESG in your DNA. Thanks a lot.
Thank you very much for your contribution, Ms. Mielke. Now I call Jari Bertolini and Mr. Tilman Massa, please be ready to go next. Mr. Bertolini, the floor is yours. Thank you. After Tilman Massa, so far, we haven't received any requests to speak.
Management Board members, Supervisory Board members, and shareholders. The Association of Ethical Shareholders is celebrating its 40th anniversary this year. For four decades, we have been present at AGMs of AGs, and with that, we try to bring to justice groups against social and environmental issues. You have mentioned the geopolitical situation, which is exacerbating, and conflict globally, which is also exacerbating. One thing wasn't mentioned by you, the defense and armaments industry. The stock price of defense companies such as Rheinmetall have increased by the factor of 10 since 2023. Funds that invest only in armaments and defense are well on trend.
Only in the six months from end of February until the end of 2025, 12 of such funds were founded, and 11 of those with a focus on the European defense industry. I, as a shareholder, wonder to what extent you are earning money in this business with defense and weapons technology. How high is the stock in companies of the armaments and defense industry that DWS holds, and how did the share develop in the years 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, and 2025? Please differentiate according to actively managed funds, ETFs, and institutional mandates. To what extent did DWS funds invest in armaments companies that provide weapons, dual-use goods to Sudan, Israel, Yemen, Myanmar, or Libya, so conflict zones, or that can be indirectly used in these regions? Now let me come back to what my previous speaker, Ms. Mielke, said, the ESG backlash.
In your Annual Report 2025, you are writing on page 83, "In the year 2025, as a reaction to the ESG -Zielmarktkonzept , we adjusted the DWS Basic Exclusions filter, and the exclusions for the armaments industry were lifted." Apparently, investing in the armaments industry is now conformous with the further development of the ESGmax concept. However, I want to make sure that you are independently and self-critically looking into the requirements. I do not understand how you can arrive at the thought that investments into the armaments industry would be sustainable. The military sector globally makes up 5.5% of carbon dioxide emissions, so it is by no means sustainable for the climate. You could also look at what happens to nature or what the environment looks like in Ukraine, in Gaza. Here you can see the direct impact of weapons on the environment.
It is not sustainable. Apart from the fact that these companies manufacture weapons that kill other people, which is also not very sustainable, these companies have a monopoly, and they can dictate prices and push up margins. An analysis of the University of the Bundeswehr Munich shows that out of 60,000 tenders of the Bundeswehr, only in 58% of the cases, only one offer was received. That means that our taxes, that by the way, are needed elsewhere as well, are invested into ever-increasing dividends of armaments companies. That might be in the interest of individual shareholders who are here today, yes, but it is definitely not socially sustainable. Some of you might say now that armaments companies contribute to our defense capacity and to maintaining democracy, and that is why they should be ESG-conformous .
With the boom and increased growth of single companies, for example, Rheinmetall, we prevent to have nationally industrial capacities and prevent cooperation between European armaments companies. This profit-driven national armaments policy that is in the interest of individual armaments companies is contrary to a cost-efficient and coordinated European procurement procedure, and that is why it's a security risk. If your argument is that stock-listed armaments companies contribute to European security and to upholding democracy, well, it is wrong. That is why investments into the armaments industry are not ESG- conformous. There are very few arguments why armaments companies should be sustainable. Just by way of a side mark, we, GLS Bank, Union Investment, and Deka, have arrived at the same conclusion, and that is why armaments companies are not part of funds with sustainability criteria.
I'm asking you, and I don't want you to justify these questions by coming back to the ESG-Zielmarktkonzept . I want you to answer personally, why did you, as board members, apart from the changed ESG requirements, decide to lift the exclusion of the armaments industry? Were there internal discussions on this decision? Were there any concerns to award this title of being ESG conformance to armaments companies? Do you think, seriously, that the armaments industry will contribute to sustainable economic growth? The industry has been booming only since the war in Ukraine broke out. Doesn't that show that investing in the armaments industry is not sustainable, but rather it's an investment that brings high profits in times of crises and wars? Now, let me address a couple of further questions with regard to your strategy towards armaments companies.
What concrete engagement targets does DWS have with regard to armaments companies in the light of export controls, human rights risks, and supply chains? How many of these risks were addressed last year, and with what results? How did DWS vote when voting as a shareholder in armaments companies, particularly with regard to motions referring to export practices or weapons exports or human rights risks? Please give us a detailed statement. Does DWS share the view that broadly distributed shares and fund investments into armaments industries are financial support, even if the end use of the weapons cannot be controlled? What consequences does DWS draw if companies deliver weapons into countries that regularly violate human rights or that regularly use authoritarian regimes? Why does DWS argue for engagement rather than exclusion criteria? Under which conditions would a full inclusion of individual companies from this universe be thinkable?
Does DWS plan to provide more detailed information to investors on which armaments companies are part of the portfolio, and into what regions of the world they export, and what human rights risks are attached to that? How does DWS assess the systemic risks for investors that arise from investments into armaments companies that are active in conflicts where there are human rights violations? Thank you. That was it from my side.
Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Jari Bertolini, for your contribution. With that, I would call Mr. Tilman Massa. He's already at the lectern. The floor is yours, Mr. Massa. Currently, we have not received any further requests to speak. Thank you. The floor is yours.
Thank you, Mr. Behrens. Ladies and gentlemen, dear Management Board and Supervisory Board members, I'm Tilman Massa, and I'm also speaking on behalf of the Association of Ethical Shareholders.
With the voting rights we have, we demand that you invest more into human rights and climate protections rather than withdrawing in this area. We have already heard a couple of questions with regard to climate and armaments. Let me now address human rights again, and let me also make a couple of general remarks. First of all, on today's format, we have already heard a couple of opinions. We would also like to thank you for the in-person format. Mr. Hoops, maybe you can also prove that you're independent from Deutsche Bank if you invite us to an in-person meeting again next year. Deutsche Bank doesn't want to do that, but of course, you're independent. You don't have to go along with that. The AGM is an important tool in terms of governance. Greenwashing has already been mentioned.
I also want to emphasize again and criticize that your communication last year wasn't that fortunate in this regard. The investigations by the public prosecutor are now concluded, but when the communication arrived at the media, and it was stated that investigations with regard to certain funds was wrong, but then ARD and ZDF researched that your flagship fund, Top Dividende, was at the center of the investigations. Mr. Hoops, I do want to treat you fairly, definitely. It is also the right intention to bring a fund such as Top Dividende to invest more sustainably. That was also the intent. We want to encourage you to go further down that road. However, we are, of course, interested in getting your answers to the questions we have already received. What were the lessons you learned? What has changed?
Because misleading consumers or fraud, that shouldn't, of course, be the standard. The AGM itself, that is the point in time when we bring you to justice, when we are allowed to ask critical questions. Therefore, let me say the following. We want the AGM to be more interesting. What we see in the Anglo-Saxon area, for example, with regard to climate protection, is that shareholders do have the right there to put agenda items on the agenda and to have votes on these agenda items. That is not possible under German Stock Corporation Act. Deka Investment, for example, asked at plenty of AGMs whether the German DAX groups could imagine to have a say on climate. A separate agenda item at the AGM, where the climate strategy is voted on.
Of course, the DAX groups rejected that because the argument was also, why should we vote on something that the group is doing already and where there is consent? Maybe you could think about how we get a higher say and more commitment here. Deka does ask these questions to the board members because they say, well, according to the German Stock Corporation Act, it is only the Management Board that is responsible for operating the company. Apart from the say on climate, maybe more generally on this issue, how can we make voting more interesting here in Germany?
Would you support a reform of the EU Shareholder Rights Directive or of the German Stock Corporation Act that would make it easier for shareholders to bring in their own strategies or resolution proposals referring to human rights, so comparable to shareholder resolutions in the U.S. or in Great Britain? If so, what would be your ideas on that, or what would you support? If you don't support it, what do you think are the reasons against strengthening shareholders' rights and options for having an impact? Under agenda item 5.2, the Sustainability Reporting, let me address that. My questions here concentrate on the information you have provided in your current annual report on the last financial year. If you have read that, you will have realized that there are a couple of changes in the annual report.
First of all, we do welcome your transparency and also the ESRS and the CSRD standards that you are pursuing for Sustainability Reporting. It is important for there to be common standards across Europe. If you have ever compared two sustainability reports, you will have realized that we do need common standards. For you as a capital market participant, it's interesting to assess also the performance of companies that you're invested in. The general thought behind this harmonization is that companies that put in effort that really want to make a difference shouldn't have a competitive disadvantage, and we don't want to have the fact that companies that are involved in greenwashing are punished and cannot be invested in. Of course, sometimes it is ridiculous that the financial sector and you, with your lobbying activities, try to be excluded from due diligence obligations.
However, you yourself do take over responsibility, and you have so, and you have pointed that out in the Annual Report. I also wanted to mention what Hendrik Schmidt said, because it does make a difference if you allow critical questions at the AGM or not. Last year, there were 214 commitments you had. That's a decline of 34%, and here I'm quoting you, you said you would be refining your commitment processes. Does that mean that you have a shift in strategic priorities, or is it due to the methodology? You're referring to the U.S., and the anti-ESG movement in the U.S. is, of course, very strong, and each and any commitment for climate protection there might come with legal consequences.
How do you make sure that with the reduction of commitment in ESG, your actual impact, also with regard to U.S. companies, does not come with a disadvantage? You also mentioned that you want to concentrate more on Europe and Asia. How do you assess the risk that, in globally active supply chains with high risks or human rights risks, for example, in raw materials, well, there might be less commitment here? You are describing a systematic commitment and control system. Overall, you're also describing the process itself, what we can see also according to other standards, but w e cannot see concrete results and the effectiveness of your measures.
Please do tell us concrete cases from the last financial year where your commitment was applied and your escalation process was applied and mention, or do you use concrete and measurable threshold values for escalation of commitment processes? Please tell us a couple of examples from the last three years where you dispersed your investment because companies were involved in human rights violations, and you had received notices of that. How many of your more than 400 engagements were primarily referring to human rights, so supply chains, but also labor rights, and raw materials, and how many of these cases have been successfully concluded or have been continued? What concrete and measurable improvements for human rights standards could be achieved with your engagement, whether it's with policy changes or audits or supply chain adjustments, or was it only a qualitative adjustment without hard outcome indicators?
Last year, you voted at almost 6,000 AGMs. Very often, DWS agreed to applications. How often did DWS have a vote in favor of obligatory due diligence duties with regard to human rights violations? After the end of the AGM season, you sent out more than 700 individualized letters where you gave the reasons for your voting behavior, and you also gave the reasons for rejections. Here, you are going beyond your voting behavior. My question on this is, because your annual report is slightly intransparent, how many of those concretely referred to human rights or supply chain risks, and what changes have been triggered by these letters? Is it only a communicative escalation without any binding consequence? Your ESG Engine and external data providers, that are your central steering elements.
My question is, what concrete human rights indicators or triggers of your engine led to higher risk scores, engagement intensification, or divestment decisions? How many portfolio companies have fallen under the high human rights risk category currently? You are also underlining your fiduciary duty, but you also see the responsibility with others, for example, your portfolio companies. That is correct. Now, the question is, what is the limit between fiduciary duty? Are you responsible for human rights risks if there are engagements that continue to be without any substantial improvement? Is there any maximum duration of your commitments with serious human rights violations? Last question, in your new reporting system, you are describing your processes, and in part, you had already given concrete cases rather than describing only the processes. Now, it is more general.
My question is, could you, in future annual reports, provide comprehensive case reports with regard to your commitments and not only concrete voting results, but also the reasoning for your escalation decision and divestment? Thank you very much for your attention. I look forward to receiving the answers.
Thank you very much, Mr. Massa. Currently, we have not received any further requests to speak. I do, however, see that we have already a couple of answers ready. With that, we would start answering some of the questions. Stefan Hoops will start.
Yes, happy to do that. Mr. Nieding, you asked what part in the increase of the profit was due to structural improvements of the business model, which share was due to market-based evaluation effects, and how the income would have unfolded with unchanged market.
Well, the profit increase is due to higher revenues, and at the same time, we had disciplined cost management. Our revenues in 2025 increased by 14% to EUR 3.2 billion. Drivers of that particularly were increased performance and transaction fees, particularly with regard to alternative investments. Apart from that, we had higher management fees as a consequence of a higher assets under management on average and an increase in other income, in part from evaluation or valuation effects. The increase in management fees, apart from market-based increases in assets, were also due to net inflows amounting to EUR 51 billion. In a scenario of stagnating markets and without positive evaluation effects, the profit development would have been more moderate, and at the same time, we would have benefited from our operating growth, particularly because of net inflows and the extension of our strategic growth areas.
You further asked in what scope there were personnel measures and how we made sure that neither investment performance nor regulatory controls were affected. Generally speaking, when there are personnel measures, we always look at what the need is. We need to have a long-term planning that both takes into account further development of our employees and the business. At the same time, we focus on operating stability due to established governance structures and continuously developing robust control and management processes further. On this basis, investment performance can be boosted further, and regulatory requirements can be complied with. Mr. Nieding, you asked what share of the objectives that we reached was based on operating growth rather than capital market-based growth and what the objectives are. Well, the ambition behind our financial targets is a combination of operating growth and supporting market conditions.
Operating growth, particularly due to net inflows and the extension of strategic growth areas, that is what it boosts it. In a scenario with weaker markets, we focus on our established tools, meaning disciplined cost management, prioritizing investment, and boosting efficiency in order to make sure that profit is stable and that we can react to frameworks that have changed. You further asked what the pre-tax income would be of DWS in a stress scenario with a global stock market drop of 20%, significantly higher credit spreads, and negative net inflows, and what measures have been prepared to stabilize profitability. Particularly in volatile market phases, we are working with different scenarios, also stress scenario, in order to derive the impact of market gyrations on incomes and costs. To stabilize profitability in a weaker market environment, we particularly base ourselves on disciplined cost management, prioritizing investments, and having ongoing efficiency measures.
Please understand that we do not publish scenario analyses separately. You further asked about the macroeconomic assumptions which we base our targets on, and what impact lower capital market returns, a recession in Europe, or lower ETF inflows would have on our objectives. Well, our targets are based on the assumption of a generally constructive market environment, where positive net inflows, stable or increasing assets under management, and solid demand in growth sectors are an underlying factor. However, we do take into account macroeconomic conditions and capital market conditions. In a weaker market environment at lower returns or if the economy is sluggish, then particularly assets under management and income can go down. In such an environment, we use disciplined cost management and a further extension of scalable and diversified business areas to mitigate the impact on our targets and to stabilize profitability.
You further asked about the cost-income ratio of our two next competitors. Please do understand that generally we cannot make any statements on KPIs of our competitors. In our reporting, we concentrate on transparently showing our own business development and our own KPIs. To add to this, we do have it in mind. I think we're well-positioned, but there might be two or three competitors that are slightly better positioned with regard to cost-to-income ratio. You further asked what concrete functions or business areas are to provide the next efficiency increases. We expect further efficiency increases by optimizing our structural cost bases, including IT, operating processes, and by simplifying operations as well as targeted automation and efficiently using resources in a targeted manner.
Mr. Schmidt, thank you for your words of appreciation and your questions on the KGaA structure and whether I, as the Managing Director of the KGaA, am bound by instructions of Deutsche Bank, and thank you for asking about possible conflicts of interests and with regard of the time I have available when I became a Management Board member of Deutsche Bank AG. First of all, the KGaA structure of DWS means that the personally liable shareholder, DWS KGaA, is a subsidiary of Deutsche Bank AG that is 100% held by them. As mentioned in the Annual Report on page 249, the members of the Management Board are responsible for operations of DWS Management GmbH and also the business of DWS KGaA.
We do that in compliance with the laws, the articles of associations, the rules of procedure, and subject to any supervisory limitations, also the instructions of the shareholders' meeting. The objective of the management is, first of all, to create value in a sustainable manner in the interest of the society. Against this background, before I was appointed Management Board member of Deutsche Bank AG, we looked into possible conflict of interest. We do not see any structural conflict of interest. In the management of DWS, we clearly focus on making sure that DWS is successfully developed further in harmony with its communicated strategy. Deutsche Bank AG, as the main shareholder, shares this interest.
That is why, with regard of the operating business and also orderly governance of DWS, we do not expect there to be any conflicts of interest based on my additional mandate in the Management Board of Deutsche Bank AG. If, in individual cases, there were to be conflicts of interest, then I would have an abstention in the voting according to the rules that are laid down in the rules of procedure in the Management Board of Deutsche Bank AG. When in doubt, I would always act in favor of DWS. You asked about the time I have available with regard to the dual role here and being responsible for asset management at Deutsche Bank. Well, the focus of my activities will remain with DWS, and I can ensure you that looking at the time I have available.
With regard to the tasks at DWS, we have further clarified them. The responsibility for Alternatives Investments division was handed over to Vincenzo Vedda as of the 1st of May. This is how we make sure that I can still assume my tasks as the CEO of DWS, as well as Management Board member of Deutsche Bank AG, with the time necessary. Mr. Schmidt, you further asked about our shareholding in Nippon Life India, providing more background on that, as well as the economic implications and possible options to translate that to other markets. The shareholding in Nippon Life India AIF Management is part of a long-term strategic partnership that we have consciously established with Nippon Life India Asset Management, and the target is to build up a scalable India-focused investment platform and, with that, further drive the top five strategy of DWS.
This cooperation is not solely a sales partnership, but we also want to develop a joint product offer, particularly with regard to alternatives. Beyond that, there is potential for cooperating on passive products. The planned cooperation also accounts for increased interest of international investors in long-term growth opportunities in India, and the objective is to further improve access to investment opportunities. As the cooperation is in a very early phase, at the current stage, we cannot make any concrete statements on expected volumes or impact on figures such as the cost-to-income ratio. What's decisive is that the initiative is both strategically sensible and economically sustainable, and it has to provide sustainable value added. We continuously review to what extent successful partnership models can be translated to other markets. However, each region has to be individually assessed, taking into account the market environment, regulatory framework, conditions, and strategic objectives.
That is why models such as the one in India cannot be generally translated to other regions, but they have to be reviewed on an individual basis. Mr. Nieding, you wanted to know how the margin quality of assets under management develops at an increasing share of passive products, and whether net inflows in 2025 rather increased or diluted the average fee margin. Passive investment products, generally speaking, have lower management margins than active or alternative investment classes. That is also the reason for your question. At the same time, growth, scale effects, and continuous efficiency increases in the passive business positively contribute to DWS's overall profitability. In 2025, there was a decrease in the overall management fee margin of around 1 basis point, so 0.01%.
In the same timeframe, there was, however, a growth of management fees that was supported by higher assets under management and positive net new inflows. Strong growth in the passive business was the main driver for this development. Overall, we continue to have balanced growth across all investment classes to control margin effects by having diversification and scaling. Back to you, Mr. Schmidt. You asked about the planned use of the excess capital of EUR 1 billion that was recorded after the possibility of share buybacks after the calculation of excess capital, and you asked about the excess capital of EUR 1 billion, possibilities of share buybacks, and the excess capital and perspectives of special dividends. The management of DWS intends to propose a special dividend in 2027, as at the end of the business year 2025, the excess capital stood at around EUR 1 billion.
When determining the special dividend, we will take into account the use of capital for organic and inorganic growth initiatives. Plans for share buybacks instead of or in addition to the special dividend currently do not exist. The excess capital is calculated using the difference between our tangible return on equity and target capitalization. With that, we make sure that we are always adequately capitalized at all times. We continue to want to use our capital in the interest of our shareholders and to return any excess capital. Whether or in what timeframe any other special dividends can be paid, that depends on the business development, capital planning, and potential growth and investment opportunities.
Thank you very much, Stefan, for answering those questions, and we'll continue answering questions. I just want to point out that so far we have not received any further requests to speak, and I now give the floor for answering questions to Dirk Görgen.
Thank you. Mr. Schmidt, you asked the question regarding our new funds and whether it might not make sense to focus on fewer. As a globally diversified asset manager, we service different customer groups and regions and distribution partners and react flexibly to market changes and changes in demand. Our product strategy aims at making a wide offering across different asset classes and topics in order to seize opportunities and at the same time limit risks from market development.
We also optimize our product portfolio continuously by launching new products or adapting existing ones and, if necessary, close certain products or transfer them into new concepts. Mr. Schmidt, you asked for the economic effects of the Riester successor scheme and also forecasts regarding potential clients changing the schemes. Since the law on the reform of publicly subsidized private pension provisioning only enters into force on 1st January 2027, the market at the moment is in the preparational phase for implementation. New signings are not possible at the moment. We make use of this period in order to finalize our new product offering and in order to jointly with our distribution partners, prepare comprehensively. We would like to ask you for understanding that a reliable forecast regarding the specific volume or the precise economic impact at the current point in time are not yet possible.
The new legal framework allows for new product concepts which will be even stronger able to cater for individual needs of investors. Against this backdrop for the future, we expect the willingness to change with quite a few clients into this new product and subsidy world. Mr. Nieding, you wanted to know which are the expectations for returns of newly acquired alternative funds and whether the underlying market assumptions have changed. Also, you wanted to know where DWS at the moment sees the largest valuation risks within their alternative portfolio. Moreover, you asked for some more explanations as to what are the return and risk criteria, which are largely responsible for withdrawing from part of the Asian private credit business.
Finally, you also asked which were the strategic conclusions that DWS drew from this for the global alternative strategy and which regions or segments respectively would in the future be the focus of disproportionate growth. Specific return expectations very much depend on a number of factors such as asset class, investment strategy, region, and product structure. That is why we do not give any generalized target returns. Against assumptions three years ago, the market environment has changed. Higher interests can create more attractive ongoing returns, and at the same time, valuation discipline, credit checks, and liquidity management continue to be important. Valuation risks for alternative asset classes are met with a combination of investment-specific factors and overarching macroeconomic framework conditions, in particular interest rates, inflation, and energy prices.
In the case of geopolitical developments, such as, for instance, the U.S.-Iran conflict, valuation risks may increase to the extent that such macroeconomic factors impact the respective asset classes. The valuation risks resulting from that are managed by governance frameworks, which amongst others, also allow for the use of external valuation advisors to support the valuation processes. With a view to individual activities in the Asian private credit business and as part of our regular strategic review, we realized that certain markets within the Asia-Pacific region, compared to established markets such as Europe, are structurally less developed. This goes amongst others for the transparency of regulatory framework conditions, the reliability of legal recourse, and market liquidity. This can have an impact on valuation and ongoing management of investments and make it more difficult.
Therefore, we decided to more strongly focus on regions where we have an established market position and where we have a clear risk-return profile. As for alternatives, we continue to expect long-term growth potential borne by increasing demand on the side of institutional and retail investors. We use our strengths, our competitive advantages, and the success story of our established asset classes and expand our product offerings in the areas of real estate and infrastructure. At the same time, we focus on our strategic growth initiatives, which, amongst others, include the expansion of our private credit offering. Against the background of geopolitical and economic changes, particularly in Europe, we see a growing need for investment, for instance, into infrastructure, digitization, and defense. These developments open up opportunities of mobilizing capital for change in Europe and to also diversify our offerings of alternative assets.
Mr. Schmidt, in connection with our private credit offering, you asked for the risks of private debt, particularly for AI, cloud, and IT. In that, you wanted to know what's the amount of the corresponding items at DWS, what the selection audit process is like, what is the role of Deutsche Bank in it, and who is liable in case of defaults, how fees are distributed, and whether DWS private debt, in view of their good liquidity position, generally would also hold own assets, and whether DWS has their own sufficient expertise for risk assessments. Also, you wanted to know how the DWS approach differs from U.S. American private debt models. Globally, DWS manages more than EUR 80 billion under structured and private credit. That includes structured credit, CLOs, as well as real estate and infrastructure credits.
Private credit in the stricter sense, that is, without CLOs, accounts for only a small part of this so far. That's a business field that we've only just started building up the past year with a dedicated team. For the funds under its management, DWS uses diversification rules as part of the investment policy, which amongst others, also affects sector concentrations. While the market trend goes more and more towards software investments, DWS, in its European Direct Lending Fund, for instance, uses a sector-agnostic strategy. That means the software exposure in this product is rather low at round about 0% - 4%, and there are generally no massive concentrations in individual sectors. This approach reduces proactively portfolio risks from industry-specific distortions and also underlines a risk management aiming at diversification.
For individual products, Deutsche Bank and DWS have already for several years been working closely with medium-sized European companies in handing out loans to them, and we are about to expand this now. For selected funds, Deutsche Bank will make available credit transactions from their broad customer network. The portfolio management of the respective DWS fund is free to decide whether to be involved with these credit transactions, to select them or to deselect them. In case of selection, any transaction at DWS goes through its own established check and investment process. The trustee responsibility for respective participation of DWS funds, including risk management, lies with DWS. The fee distribution goes by the respective contractual agreements and the responsibility going along with that along the evaluated chain of the funds. The focus of DWS in private credit is on the administration of the corresponding strategies for our customers.
To the extent that own capital is used, this would typically happen as part of market standard seed and co-investment structures. For instance, to support new strategies or to streamline interests with investors. These investments are subject to the established audit risk and governance processes within DWS. Mr. Nieding, you asked for the process, product, and control adjustments that were made as part of the ESG discussion and how its efficiency is measured by the Supervisory Board. Our findings from investigations in connection with the ESG matter were made part of the further development and improvement of sustainability-related governance and processes and controls. In order to be able to meet the needs of our customers and the ever-increasing and further developing regulatory environment, we review and improve our sustainability approach, our product offering, and our processes on a continuous basis.
In 2025, we implemented the requirements of the ESMA Guidelines on fund names, which bear ESG or sustainability-related terminology for the funds impacted by it, or we have made the corresponding changes to the fund names. Further details on implementing ESMA Guidelines can be found in our Annual Report on page 103. Management regularly reports to the Supervisory Board and, as needed, additionally on the sustainability strategy of the group, its state of implementation, and the opportunities and risks stemming from the sustainability strategy. Moreover, the Audit and Risk Committee generally reviews the efficiency of the internal control system and the risk management system. Ms. Mielke, you asked about the progress of our engagement with TotalEnergies. To the extent you didn't make it clear in your question, we will, in our answers regarding stewardship activities, will refer to the engagements and voting right execution activities handled by DWS Investment GmbH.
In 2025, we were in direct exchange with TotalEnergies, amongst others, regarding human rights and climate-related matters. Further information regarding our engagement activities can be taken from our Stewardship Report 2025, which is available on our website. Going beyond that, we do not disclose details regarding the details of our engagement activities. Ms. Mielke, you wanted to also know whether in the past year we were in touch with ExxonMobil. We temporarily suspended the dialogue with that U.S. company in 2025, and this meant that individual planned engagements, amongst others with ExxonMobil, could not be carried out as planned. Ms. Mielke, you also asked whether we continue to support the demand for an internationally independent investigation of human rights allegations at Mozambique LNG. Yes, we continue to welcome such investigation, which creates more transparency and help fact-finding.
Ms. Mielke, you also wanted to know what we think of the progress of large oil and gas corporations on their way towards Net Zero, and whether we also address the expansion of fossil activities in a critical manner. We consider fossil expansion from a risk perspective and in the context of the overall strategy of a company. Here, we in particular take into account that the expansion of fossil infrastructures can lead to an increase in long-term transaction risk. What is key for us is how such investments are embedded into the overall strategy, the demand scenarios, and the transition plans of a company. These aspects we also address in dialogue with companies, in particular with a view to assumptions regarding future demand and the strategic orientation during the transition to a lower CO2 energy system.
Details regarding our engagement activities with individual companies can be found in the Stewardship Report of DWS Investment GmbH. Please bear with us that we do not disclose any further details. Ms. Mielke, you also asked how DWS justifies that over the past two years they acquired new bonds from TotalEnergies, although those funds could potentially also be used for fossil expansion projects. We ask you to understand that we do not disclose specifics on individual securities. Moreover, it is important to recognize that our customers and our products pursue different investment targets. They can contain specific sustainability objectives, but that doesn't necessarily have to be the case. Therefore, we offer products with different investment strategies and exclusion criteria, which reflect the differing interests of our customers. Individuals on the exclusion criteria applied in each respective case can please be taken from the product-specific investment policies.
Moreover, you wanted to know under which conditions we would reduce an investment into fossil companies, especially acquiring new bonds, or whether we would de-invest. Now, as an asset manager, we make investment decisions based on the investment targets and the requirements of our customers, and on the basis of the product-specific investment policies. Against this background, we cannot make any general statement. Moreover, we also take into account financial material risks, including sustainability risks, in our active investment decisions. Buy and sell decisions in portfolio management are made based on the expected risk-adjusted return. Information from our engagements can have an influence on such decisions. Our escalation measures are summarized in our Stewardship Statement, and we also report about concrete escalations in our Annual Stewardship Report. Both documents can be found on our website. Moreover, we do not disclose details of our engagement activities.
Mr. Bertolini, you wanted to know what our current portfolio of assets under management in the defense industry is, and how that proportion has developed over the years. We'd like to ask you to understand that we do not disclose specific information on sectoral allocation, particularly under the disclosure of investment vehicles and across several years. You went on to ask about our investment volume into defense companies which export weapons or dual-use goods into conflict or war regions, or that could be used there indirectly. Again, please bear with us and understand that we cannot disclose specifics about investments into companies based on their potential activities. Ms. Mielke, you asked about the most important results in climate protection, which were the result of an exchange with the various companies and groups.
We monitor across our portfolio that the energy turnaround is generally progressing and is also developing further in structural terms. At the same time, it's a rather differentiated picture. The development is vastly different depending on sectors and regions. Hence, risks and opportunities are distributed along the entire value chain in a very heterogeneous way, and that's a development we take into account both in our investment decisions and also as part of our stewardship activities. Moreover, you asked with how many companies we interrupted and discontinued the dialogue. Please bear with us that we do not disclose the number of engagements where we discontinued a dialogue. However, if over a longer period, we do not detect any sufficient progress from our point of view, we will adapt our measures as part of a tiered escalation approach. For example, intensifying dialogue, adapting our voting behavior, or other appropriate steps.
Against this backdrop, we see engagement as a continuous process which is geared towards development and not on formal discontinuation decisions. Mr. Bertolini, you asked for the reasons for our decision to remove restrictions for defense companies from the DWS Basic Exclusions filter. Moreover, you wanted to know whether there were concerns to title the defense industry as ESG conformity. When deciding to adapt our DWS Basic Exclusions filter, we took into account both the changed societal consensus regarding the defense industry, the increasingly more specific regulatory requirements in the sustainability context, and the adaptation of the ESG Target Market Concept in Germany. We want to make it clear, though, that in the sustainability context, we see the role of the defense sector in a differentiated way and continue to do so.
Accordingly, our Europe-based public funds or mutual funds, which report under Article 9 or 8 of the Disclosure Regulation and which have ESG or sustainability-related terms in their name, continue to show investments into defense titles.
Ms. Mielke, you were asking what makes the TotalEnergies group so attractive for us in terms of investment. Please bear with us for not commenting on individual names. As an asset manager, our activities focus and are aligned to the investment goals and requirements from our clients. It is therefore important to acknowledge that our clients have different investment targets. These may include sustainability-related targets, but that does not necessarily have to be the case. We therefore offer products with different investment strategies and exclusion criteria that reflect the different interests of our clients. Details regarding the exclusion criteria applied can be taken from the product-specific investment policies.
You were also asking as to when we are going to introduce an oil and gas policy defining fossil expansion as an exclusion criterion, regardless of future regulatory developments, and whether we will dispense with subscribing to newly issued bonds from oil and gas groups in the future. We're currently not planning to launch any new additional policies beyond the approaches and activities already implemented. Our client groups have different investment targets that may include sustainability targets, but that does not necessarily have to be the case. We therefore offer products with different investment strategies and exclusion criteria reflecting the different interests of our clients. For details on the exclusion criteria applied in each case, please refer to the product-specific investment policies. We also aim to enter into dialogue with oil and gas companies and companies that drive demand for oil and gas.
Mr. Massa, you were asking about the Shareholder Rights Directive of the EU and the climate-related decisions that can be taken at AGMs. In the framework of the current and ongoing consultation process in the EU, DWS has actively taken part in discussions regarding the second Shareholder Rights Directive. In our opinion, that you will also find on the website of the EU Commission, we address the following four topics. Firstly, transparency and reliability of the overall chain. Secondly, a lack of harmonized digital infrastructure. Thirdly, bureaucratic hurdles in cross-border exercising of votes. Fourthly, the use of a European Stewardship Code. We believe that the options available to German shareholders are generally appropriate in order to exercise an influence on companies, for example, by asking for complementary requests or countermotions on AGM agendas.
Mr. Massa, you were also asking whether the stronger regional focus of our engagement on Europe and Asia leads to a situation where human rights-related risks, in particular in global supply chains, are not addressed so much any longer, and whether this approach is based on systematic risk analysis. In 2025, we suspended our dialogue with U.S. companies temporarily, and in Q4, we re-entered into that dialogue. Human rights-related risks, also with regard to global supply chains, remain a key element of our engagement activities and will continue to be addressed
You were also asking about the reason for the decrease in our engagement in 2025 and thereafter, and you wanted to know how we're going to ensure that this does not lead in a decline in actual influence on companies with human rights-related risks. First of all, let us point out that the numbers you referred to referred to the total number of engagements in 2024 and 2025. The decline in the number of engagements is attributable to the temporary suspension of our engagement activities with U.S. companies. It is also driven by a deliberate development and stronger focus of our engagement approach towards fewer but more selective engagements with companies and topics where we see the biggest risks and the biggest lever. This stronger focus also bears in mind the increasing complexity of sustainability risks and enables us to enter into a high-quality, intensive dialogue with companies.
We selectively choose our engagement companies and prioritize based on financial materiality, their relevance in our portfolios, and their overall role. Mr. Massa, you were asking us to give you examples where we have fully sold interests and participations because companies were involved in major human rights violations or because there were any indications that these might exist. Our escalation processes are summarized in our Stewardship Statement and our Stewardship Report that we publish annually. You will find both documents on our website. Please bear with us for not providing you with any further details regarding our engagements in specific companies. Mr. Massa, you asked about specific measurable improvements in human rights standards that we have achieved with our engagement.
It is generally difficult to relate progress achieved with a specific engagement in an individual investors because there are many other factors that play a role or may have played a role. Details regarding our engagement activities in 2025 are available in our Stewardship Report and on our website. We will not comment on any specific individual engagement. Mr. Massa, you wanted to know how frequently DWS voted in favor in the event of shareholder motions in 2025, whereby stricter due diligence, human rights-related obligations, more independent supply chain audits, or stricter ESG controls were required, and how often we voted against, and you asked for the reasons. In 2025, we were involved in 192 motions on social topics, 37 of which related to human rights topics, and we supported about 70% of these.
For more detailed information about our voting behavior in 2025, you will find these in our Stewardship Report on our website. Mr. Bertolini, you asked about our engagement targets vis-à-vis defense and arms companies, and you also wanted to know for how many companies we addressed these and with what results last year. In general, we are focusing on topics that contribute to the long-term development of a company in the framework of our stewardship activities. Our engagement approach is cross-sectoral, but it takes account of sector and company-specific differences in assessing financially material risks for companies. In the defense sector, we do not have any specific separate engagement targets, but address them in the framework of our overall activities. For details regarding our engagement activities and the sectors we address, please refer to our Stewardship Report.
Mr. Bertolini, you wanted to know more about our voting behavior last year in the event of shareholder votes in defense companies, and you wanted to have more details. Our voting behavior is based on an approach based on our principles, and we do not have any specific breakdown of our voting by sector available. For more details, we can only refer you to our Stewardship Report, and you will find information about our voting behavior on our website. Mr. Bertolini, you wanted to know from us whether we share the view that share and fund investments in defense companies also constitute financial support if it is impossible to control the final use of the weapons. Our investment decisions take place in conformity with our clients' investment targets, the product-specific investment strategies, and the corresponding regulatory requirements.
We also take into account financially material risks, including sustainability risks, in our active investment decisions. Whether our investment decisions make financial contribution to political or economic targets depends on other external factors, such as the political or economic environment. Mr. Bertolini, you asked us what the consequences are that we draw if a portfolio company supplies weapons to a country that regularly violates against international humanitarian rights or are used by authoritarian regimes. Generally, we expect companies to comply with internationally recognized standards. In the framework of our stewardship approach, we address severe violations and identified risks in a dialogue with the companies affected.
For our actively managed funds domiciled in Europe that have ESG or sustainability reported terms in their names, we exclude companies that generate an essential part of their revenues with defense goods, and we also apply the most recent sanction lists of the United Nations, the EU, the Export Control Authority of the U.S., Ministry of Finance, and the Ministry of Finance and Economy of the U.K. As an asset manager, we will not assess ourselves whether there are any violations of international humanitarian law. For further details, please refer to our product-specific investment policies. Mr. Bertolini, you also wanted to know why we prefer clear exclusion criteria for particularly controversial export practices in the arms trade engagement, and you also asked about the conditions under which a full exclusion of individual companies might be feasible from our investment universe.
A full conclusion of a company might be considered if that is foreseen in the product-specific investment policies. Our products apply different investment criteria for the defense goods sector in order to take into account the different investment targets of our clients. In Europe, for example, for our actively managed funds that have ESG or sustainability-related terms in their names, companies are excluded that generate an essential part of their revenues with arms or defense goods. Our engagement also enables us to gain a better understanding of key risks, address our expectations to companies, and provide impetuses for improvement. Mr. Bertolini, you asked about whether or not we are planning to provide more detailed information to investors in future as to the arms and defense companies that export to certain countries, parts of their portfolios, and what human rights risks are associated with that.
In general, our product-specific disclosures comply with the relevant regulatory requirements. For details regarding sustainability-related aspects, we refer you to the corresponding documents and annual reports. For new regulatory requirements or industry standards, these of course, may impact our approach on product disclosure, but currently, we're not planning to provide any specific information on exports or human rights-related activities. Mr. Bertolini, you wanted to know what our assessment is of the long-term reputational and systemic risks for investors arising from investments in defense companies actively involved in conflicts that are controversial from a humanitarian rights point of view. Well, in the active business for traditional asset classes, sustainability risks, including potential reputational and systemic risks, are taken into account in line with the corresponding investment process. Sustainability risks do not lead to an exclusion of investments but are assessed in the framework of other risks and factors.
Sustainability risks are also part and parcel of our selection process for companies with which we want to engage. Mr. Massa, you asked about the scope and assessment of our engagement activities on human rights issues. In 2025, we were in dialogue with 25 companies on human rights-related topics. We address in particular the compliance with internationally recognized standards, appropriate due diligence processes, and transparency in handling identifiable risks. All engagements are part of our continuous approach that we continuously follow. Mr. Massa, you also asked about specific human rights indicators or trigger incidents in our DWS ESG Engine. In order to assess violations of internationally recognized standards such as the UN Global Compact, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, or the core labor standards of the ILO, the DWS ESG Engine aggregates data from different external data suppliers, public sources, or internal assessments from DWS.
On that basis, we exclude companies and certain products if very severe infringements are found, and we also use this assessment as a criterion for the prioritization of engagement activities. In the framework of our stewardship activities in human rights, we also take into account topics that might be financially material from our point of view. This includes labor and employment standards, aspects related to supply chains, and questions related to data privacy and ethical business practices.
Thank you, Stefan. We're getting closer towards the end of this round of responses. I will continue with the questions addressed to me. Mr. Nieding, you asked which specific actions the Supervisory Board had taken in financial year 2025 to strengthen its control functions versus the Executive Board. You also want to know in which cases the Supervisory Board has questioned, amended, or not approved strategic decisions of the Executive Board.
As reported in the report of the Supervisory Board and the Letter from the Chairman of the Supervisory Board on pages 6- 15 of the German version of the Annual Financial Statement, the Supervisory Board has exercised its control function in the year 2025 through close and continuous supervision of the Executive Board. For that purpose, a total of 30 meetings of the Supervisory Board and its standing committees took place. Seven meetings of these were for the plenary of the Supervisory Board.
In addition, the Special Committee met six times to closely monitor the ESG matters, as well as the internal affairs of the Supervisory Board. On top of that, we had a two-day strategy meeting where the further alignment of the corporate strategy and its specific direction taken by DWS were discussed intensely. Strength in the control environment and the control culture remains a continuous priority of the Supervisory Board. Furthermore, the Supervisory Board also supervises the further reduction of audit findings and the continuous further development of the corporate process and data management, which is also top priority for the Executive Board. For further details of internal discussions and voting results of the Supervisory Board, here we generally cannot comment on these matters.
Mr. Nieding, you asked whether the Supervisory Board has already started searching for a successor for Dr. Hoops and how continuity at the very top of DWS can be ensured. First of all, we as the Supervisory Board highly welcome the appointment of Dr. Hoops to the Management Board of Deutsche Bank, in addition to his function as the CEO of DWS. Of course, we have also stated this publicly. This is a strong signal for the significance of DWS for the growth strategy of Deutsche Bank as a whole. At the same time, it also emphasizes the strategic growth potential of DWS, and of course, also is a clear recognition of the outstanding efforts delivered by Stefan Hoops and his team during the last couple of years. We're looking forward to his ongoing tireless commitment to our company.
Of course, the Supervisory Board is very much interested in continuity, and via the Joint Committee with Deutsche Bank, the Supervisory Board is also involved in systematic succession planning for all members of the DWS Executive Board. This is taking place in the context of the shareholder meeting of the General Partner. Mr. Nieding, you also wondered whether the Supervisory Board candidate that has been proposed is lacking the necessary critical distance to the company and which business relationships exist or did exist between DWS and his former companies. As stated in the invitation to the AGM on page three, Mr. Bas NieuweWeme, former CEO of Aegon Asset Management Holding B.V, was proposed for election to the AGM.
The proposal for election by the shareholder representatives on the DWS Supervisory Board is based on a very thorough selection process of the Nomination Committee, which was conducted with the support of an independent HR recruiter. Deutsche Bank AG was not involved in that process. Mr. NieuweWeme does not hold any operational leadership function anymore as he did recently or until recently as the CEO of Aegon Asset Management. He's holding only mandates in control bodies, amongst others, as a member of the Supervisory Board of DMFCO Asset Management B.V. , as well also as an Independent Non-Executive Director of Clearwater Analytics Holdings Inc. There are investments of individual companies in our generally accessible products. There are no material business relationships with DWS. In the view of the Supervisory Board, there are no personal or business relationships that would jeopardize the independence of Mr. Bas NieuweWeme.
If conflicts of interest should arise in individual context nevertheless, then the procedures stipulated in the rules of procedure of the Supervisory Board apply. Potential or existing conflicts of interest must be reported and disclosed immediately, and if necessary, the respective person will have to abstain in voting or will not participate any consultations and discussions and votes on the respective agenda items. On this basis, the Supervisory Board continuously verifies whether there are any conflicts of interest of its members. That marks the end of the questions I had to answer, and with that, I hand over to Dirk Görgen again.
Ms. Mielke, you wanted to know what our reduction targets as part of the NZAM initiative until 2030 are and what the adaptation of the scope of its validity of our applications actually means. We have limited our NZAM commitment to certain European companies of the DWS Group.
Currently, we are revising our climate-related interim goal. This process has not been finalized yet. Please understand that while this review is still ongoing, we cannot share any details with you regarding our climate-related target. Regarding our previous [reduction] target, we still continue to report the relevant KPIs for 2025 in our Annual Report as of page 91 of the German version. Mr. Massa, you also wanted to know how many of the more than 700 individual letters to companies related to specific human rights or supply chain risks. You also asked which measurable changes had thus been achieved, and whether this letter had any binding consequences going beyond communications and escalations. Our objective with that individual letter is to draw attention to those cases at the portfolio companies where we did not approve the proposals of the management because they did not tally with our expectations.
In general, developments cannot be directly assigned to specific individual actions because typically they are influenced by the interplay of various factors. Please understand that we do not disclose any further details on the contents of the individualized.
[Non-English content] I just thought that there's another question or a follow-up question by Mr. Massa. Mr. Massa, you are invited to ask your questions right now. You just lost one of your documents. I hope this is not going to slow down you in your questions.
No, that was the wording, and I'll be very brief. There's one thing I had forgotten to ask, Mr. Behrens. You mentioned that a counterproposal had been submitted, which was ours, and that related to our criticism in the insufficient implementation of the climate actions, and I also would like to formally present this proposal.
Now, during all of the virtual AGMs, I forgot that I have to present that proposal officially here at the in-person AGM, because at a virtual AGM, you just have to submit it, then it's considered accepted. I hereby now officially also present that proposal and that counterproposal and countermotion. I've got another question. You several times referred to your right not to provide the detailed information on certain matters, similar to what Deutsche Bank did as well. You have also at some times in the past been more clear and precise in your Stewardship Report. We try to come up with a wording in our questions to make it not too easy to you.
In some cases, companies provide the number of engagements that they pursue, others don't, and it would be interesting to hear from you when you can be more specific on these matters. I've got a specific follow-up question nevertheless. I had asked about the shareholder rights and the possibility of shareholders to submit new agenda items. You answered that you think that the current regulation is sufficient, but at the same time, you favor standard rules for the entire EU. My follow-up question, w ould you favor an EU-wide standard regulation where shareholders, if they have a certain number of shares or percentage, can also submit their own agenda items? To me, it felt like your answer to that question was not clear enough. Apart from that, thank you very much, and thanks for your attention.
Thank you very much, Mr. Massa, for your follow-up question and addition. We, first of all, now continue by answering questions, and Dirk Görgen will continue.
Yes, Mr. Massa. You asked about the maximum duration of engagement in the case of severe human rights violations. Now, our engagement activities are not tied to a fixed time horizon. Experience of the last couple of years has shown that a fixed time window, let's say of three years, is not appropriate for the diversity of business models, matters, and constraints. In addition, our approach is based upon a case-by-case review. If companies do not respond to our requests or if no sufficient progress is identified within an appropriate period, then we take a step-by-step escalation approach. The basis of this staggered escalation approach is described in the Stewardship Statement of our company.
Further information on our engagement activities in the fiscal year 2025 can be found in the Stewardship Report 2025 of DWS Investment GmbH. Mr. Massa, you also asked why we do not publish any comprehensive case-based reports on companies with severe human rights risks, including specific voting results and respective derived escalation decisions. This year, again, we have published our Stewardship Report, which describes our engagement and voting activities in the year 2025. This report also contains selected case examples on our focus topics, including one example related to human rights. Furthermore, on our website, we also publish our voting decisions in a transparent and verifiable manner for investors, clients, and companies.
Mr. Massa, you would like to know where, in our view, the separating lines between fiduciary responsibility to generate returns and dealing with human rights risks on the other end, especially if our engagement does not result in any significant progress over an extended period of time. As an asset manager, we act in the best interest of our clients. Our objective is to generate long-term risk-adjusted returns for our clients. Doing so, we also take financial risks and return drivers into account, including sustainability and human rights risks, and we do so in the context of our investment and stewardship processes.
If companies do not respond to our concerns or requests in the context of our engagement activities, or if no measurable or sufficient process is identified in an appropriate period of time, then we review step-by-step escalation measures, and the basic principles of the escalation approach are described in the Stewardship Report.
Thanks very much, Dirk. We are approaching the end of the Q&A session, and we are thus approaching the voting procedure. For that reason, at this point, I already would like to point out that at this point that it will no longer be possible to issue or amend instructions to the company's proxy or to cast votes by postal voting via our shareholder portal will no longer be possible once I have briefly explained the voting procedure to those of you who are here in person.
If you are following our annual general meeting via the internet, and if you would like to still use these functions on our shareholder portal, then please cast your votes or submit your instructions within the next few minutes. Thank you very much. With that, it's once again back to Dirk Görgen.
Mr. Massa, you asked about specific measurable thresholds that might lead to an escalation of our engagement in the event of severe or repeat human right violations. You also asked for specific examples from the year 2025 on this matter. We are not operating with fixed thresholds in the escalation process. We rather pursue a case-by-case approach where we monitor the development of companies over time. We also then, of course, assess it accordingly.
The effect of engagements cannot be measured in an isolated manner or clearly assigned to an individual investor or one specific single action, because the development of companies is always subject to various factors. Our escalation actions have been described in our Stewardship Statement, and furthermore, we also report on specific escalations in our Annual Stewardship Report , and both documents can be found on our website. Please understand that beyond the Stewardship Reports and the respective details, we do not comment and report on any specific engagement cases or specific escalation steps taken with individual companies. Mr. Bertolini, you asked whether, in our view, the defense industry can contribute to sustainable economic growth or whether it only generates high profits during times of crises and wars. Our investment decisions are aligned with the specific investment targets of our clients, the product-specific investment strategies, and the corresponding regulatory requirements.
Beyond that, we also take financially material risks, including sustainability risks, when we take our active investment decisions. Mr. Schmidt, you asked about the performance fees in the Kaldemorgen Fund in 2025 and the current distance to the high water mark. You further asked whether the fund at some point will be too large in order to achieve outperformance. The performance fee for the DWS Concept Kaldemorgen for 2025, according to the published liability report or accountability report, amounts to EUR 91.5 million. The current distance to the high water mark as at the end of May 2026 stood at 3.4% for the FC share class. Details on the calculation of the success-based fee can be found in the product prospect. The fund volume of currently EUR 15.7 billion, from our point of view, is not a limiting factor for efficient implementation of the investment strategy.
Well, thank you very much, Dirk Görgen, for the comprehensive answers to the questions. There are still a couple of answers pending on the last questions that were asked. Until we have these answers ready, we're going to interrupt the meeting, and we'll have a 10-minute break. We will resume at 1:53 P.M. Thank you. See you soon.
[Break]
[Non-English content ] Welcome back. We will now resume the annual general meeting. I do see that Mr. Jari Bertolini has another request to speak. Mr. Bertolini, please prepare to take the lectern. You can proceed to the lectern directly and ask your question. There he is. Just one second. [Non-English content ] Once you're at the lectern, the floor is yours directly.
Thank you very much. A couple of follow-up question on the armaments industry and sustainability, because I wasn't that happy with the answers given. Just one example on the question, to what extent the armaments industry contributes to sustainable economic growth?
Here, you refer to product-specific contexts, or you refer to the ESG directives. I would be interested in getting a more personal assessment, a political or philosophical assessment. To what extent do you believe the armaments industry contributes to sustainability or can operate sustainably? Because that's the core question ESG is about. If you decide going forward to deem armaments companies as sustainable, well, you will have looked into that question, and it doesn't seem to be the case. You're referring to this and that. You're pushing responsibility away, and I would like to hear to what extent you have seriously looked into this question and have seriously discussed that. Again, my question, without you pointing to others with regard to responsibility, to what extent can the armaments industry go along with sustainable growth?
Looking at the fact that this industry grew only since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, doesn't that show that the armaments industry is a non-sustainable investment because it only benefits from war and crises and only generates profit in these times? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bertolini, for this follow-up question. That brings us back to answering the pending questions. No, I see that we're not done with answering the questions. We are ready. Okay. We can give you a couple of answers, and I would hand over to Dirk Görgen.
Mr. Massa, you asked about our assessment on an EU-wide harmonized rule, so that investors with a certain shareholding have the opportunity to put their own agenda items on the agenda. German law deems that a quorum of 5% of the capital stock, or as an alternative, EUR 500,000 in nominal terms needs to be given.
From a European law perspective, it is made sure that no higher quorum than 5% can be defined as this threshold. That is why the German rule, from our perspective, is boosting or strengthening shareholder rights because this lower quorum of EUR 500,000 from nominal terms is sufficient for larger companies. Looking at the fact that a supplementary request is of significance also with regard to other shareholders, we believe that the threshold is an adequate one. Generally speaking, the possibility for shareholders to submit motions or to put other items on the agenda is deemed to be sufficient by us. Further harmonization that would make it easier on an EU level to exercise our voting rights across borders, that is what we are open-minded towards. Mr. Bertolini, you asked us to give a personal assessment, you called it philosophical, with regard to the armaments question.
Purely personally, of course, we can discuss that later on. I'm a member of the SPD. I also provide advice to the Green Party with regard to economic issues. We do try to show commitment. Now, if we entered into this discussion of whether armaments is sustainable or not, it would be a difficult discussion, and we have a large audience here. We could argue that armaments investment also leads to more investments in, let's say, cybersecurity or something else. There is an additional benefit from it. Of course, what is happening with weapons, that is, of course, something none of us likes. It's horrible. However, from the perspective of an asset manager, my personal ideology or the portfolio manager's ideology is irrelevant. What do you mean with that? We at DWS, of course, are not offering everything and anything.
It's not the case that no matter what you want to invest in, we're doing that. No, we exclude quite a lot of things. For different, let's say, democratic ideologies, we have different fund vehicles that are clearly classified. You can, of course, decide to exclude something. We wouldn't call armaments ESG, w e wouldn't call it sustainable, but w e have funds that don't have these labels where the armaments industry is represented. Again, it's probably difficult to discuss that at an annual general meeting, but as fiduciaries, our ideology is in some areas of relevance, and we try to bring it into our products to the extent that we can. Other than that, it's not the case. The topics are a part of our products that are described in the prospectus.
We can, of course, discuss that privately, but as an international fiduciary asset manager, we have to look at our investors' interests at least to the extent that it's not topic content that we don't want to offer as DWS. Thank you very much.
Yeah, thank you very much. With that, I assume that all questions raised by you have been fully answered. I see no objections and note that all questions have been answered. I would like to thank the speakers for their contributions and questions. To the Management Board members, thank you for their comprehensive answers, and I hereby close the general debate. That brings us to the voting procedure. Ladies and gentlemen, I hereby set out the following regarding the voting procedure.
We will conduct the votes on agenda items 1- 10 in a single round using tablets and using your admission tickets, which were registered at the entry and exit checkpoints. A few explanations. The voting assistants will come to your seats with the tablets. I will provide further details on this shortly. To vote, you must have all your paper or digital admission tickets ready for verification. The voting result will be determined using the so-called addition method. This means that only the yes and no votes will be counted and evaluated. Anyone who has not cast a vote is not taking part in the voting or is abstaining. Abstentions, like the determination of attendance, are irrelevant when using the addition method.
Anyone wishing to take part in voting here on-site by casting a yes or no vote must now proceed to the Harmonie Hall and cast their votes using the tablets. A different procedure applies to authorized intermediaries such as credit institutions and shareholder associations. You do not need to enter any data into the tablet provided you have already submitted your voting instructions to the data center. Only if you wish to vote differently, for example, due to amended instructions, must you notify the special counter of a corresponding change to your voting instructions. The voting result is determined electronically using a computer system. The notary public has previously verified the voting system's adequacy and reliability and will supervise the entire voting process. Absentee votes received by the deadline are stored electronically and will be taken into account by the computer system during the vote count.
I would ask the company's proxy to release and cast the votes in accordance with the instructions given to them. Please note the following when voting using the tablets. Our voting assistants will come to your seat with the tablets. Using your paper or digital admission ticket, the tablets will first record your shareholding. An overview of the agenda items on which we are voting today will then appear on the tablet screen. As soon as the individual items appear on the tablet, you can inform the voting assistant of your vote or cast your votes yourself on the tablet. Once your vote has been recorded, the voting assistant will show you the recorded vote again for confirmation. Please then check your vote carefully and confirm it on the tablet. Also here, the voting assistants will be happy to help you with this.
Finally, you will see a message on the tablet confirming that your vote has been successfully recorded. Please note that you must repeat this procedure separately for each admission ticket if you have multiple tickets. Please also note that once a vote has been confirmed, it cannot be changed. We will vote on the proposed resolutions under agenda items 1 - 10, as published in the Federal Gazette on 21st of April 2026, as part of the notice convening today's annual general meeting. For the sake of good order, I would like to draw your attention to the voting restrictions that apply under agenda items three, four, five, and seven. The persons and companies concerned have been notified of this. Compliance with the voting restrictions is ensured.
I would like to point out that it is now no longer possible to issue proxies or instructions to the proxies appointed by the company. The same applies to absentee voting via the shareholder portal, which is now no longer possible. Of course, you may still instruct another shareholder or shareholder representative present at the meeting to exercise your voting rights. We, however, ask that you do not do so during the voting process. Proxies and instruction given to the company's proxy holder in the run-up to the vote will be included in the voting. The relevant instructions for casting votes via the company's proxy holders are stored in the IT system used to determine the voting results and are included in the tally once released by the proxy holder. The voting assistants will now go through the rows. As already explained, voting takes place using the addition method.
That means the yes and no votes cast are counted separately, and the total number of votes cast is determined by addition. Abstentions are not recorded or counted under the addition method. For a resolution to be passed, only the ratio between the yes votes cast and the no votes cast is relevant. This means that every shareholder who wishes to take place in the vote and vote yes or no must cast their vote. To simplify and speed up the voting process, we will conduct a consolidated voting round, meaning that you will cast your votes on agenda items 1- 10 in a single round of voting. I will now put the management's proposals on agenda items 1- 10 to the vote.
I would now ask voting assistants to walk through the rows with the mobile data processing devices. I ask you, shareholders and shareholder representatives, to raise your hands if you wish to vote yes or no. The voting assistants will then come to you. I would now like to ask the company's proxy holder to release the votes.
[Break]
[Non-English content] Has everyone, every shareholder or shareholder representative, had a chance to cast their vote? If not, please make yourself known now, preferably by raising your hand clearly so that we can register your vote. I can see that it is not the case, and I note that all shareholder and shareholder representatives have had the opportunity to cast their votes. Thank you very much. I hereby close the voting on agenda items 1 - 10. It will take a few minutes to tally the results.
We will therefore take a short break of 15 minutes and will then continue. When is it? Yes. Sorry, at 2:30 P.M. Now it's 2:16 P.M., so at 2:30 P.M., I will welcome you back here in the room, and we're going to resume the meeting with the announcement of the results. Thank you very much. See you in a minute.
[Break]
[Non-English content] All right, ladies and gentlemen, I now have the voting results, and I will hence proceed to announce the resolutions passed, and following the announcements of the resolution, I will immediately close the annual general meeting. The number of valid votes cast in each case, their proportion of the registered share capital, and the number of the respective yes and no votes can be seen in the presentation behind me. I hereby expressly declare the information shown there to be the subject of my statement. Furthermore, the voting results are available for inspection at the speaker's desk and will also be made available on the company's website following today's AGM.
I therefore confirm with reference to the figures displayed and announce, of the registered share capital of the company amounting to EUR 200 million divided into EUR 200 million no-par value shares, we have represented at today's AGM 179,375,399 shares, representing an equal amount of votes. That corresponds to 89.69% of the registered share capital. Moreover, absentee votes in the amount of 122,193 shares were received, and in total, this results in 179,497,592 registered shares, which corresponds to 89.75% of the company's share capital. I hereby announce and state for each resolution as follows. We voted on the resolutions as published in the Federal Gazette of 24th April 2026. On agenda item one, the AGM passed the resolution with the necessary number of votes.
This resolution, in keeping with Section 286 (1) of the German Stock Corporation Act, requires the approval of the General Partners, and as I can see, the representatives of the General Partner, Ms. Kuder and Dr. Hoops, are granting said approval. As regards agenda item two, appropriation of the distributable profit for the 2025 fiscal year, the AGM has passed the resolution with the necessary majority of votes. As regards agenda item three, ratification of the acts of management of the General Partner for fiscal year 2025, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes. Thus, the countermotion that was tabled has become moot. Agenda item four, ratification of the acts of management of the members of the Supervisory Board for the fiscal year 2025. The AGM has passed the resolution proposal with the necessary majority of votes.
As regards agenda item five, election of the auditor of the Annual Financial Statement and the Consolidated Financial Statement and the Interim Financial Report, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes. As regards agenda item 5.2, election of the auditor of the Sustainability Report, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes. Regarding agenda item six, resolution on approval of the Compensation Report, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes. Regarding agenda item seven, election to the Supervisory Board, Bas Nieuwe Weme, the AGM has passed the resolution and has elected Mr. Bas Nieuwe Weme with the necessary majority of votes into the Supervisory Board. Mr. Nieuwe Weme had already declared in advance that he would accept his election.
Regarding agenda item eight, cancellation of the authorized capital pursuant to Section 4 (4) of the Articles of Association and creation of new authorized capital and change to the Articles of Association, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes and capital represented. This resolution also requires the approval of the General Partner, which in Section 285 (2) and (3) of the German Stock Corporation Act has already been granted in the run-up to this AGM and has been recorded by the notary public and just been handed to me. This here is the corresponding certificate.
As regards agenda item nine, cancellation of the authorized capital pursuant to Section 4 (5) of the Articles of Association and creation of new authorized capital and the corresponding amendment to the Articles of Association, the AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes and capital. This resolution also requires the approval of the General Partner, and in keeping with Section 285 (2) (3) of the German Stock Corporation Act, this again was submitted before the AGM to the notary public and has just been handed to me, and it is certified by the notary public in the same certificate here. Agenda item 10, cancellation of the existing and creation of a new authorization to issue participatory notes and other hybrid debt securities. The AGM has passed the proposed resolution with the necessary majority of votes and capital.
Also, this requires the approval of the General Partner, and in keeping with Section 285 (2) and (3) of the German Stock Corporation Act, this approval also was submitted to the notary public before the AGM and was recorded by him and is also part of the notary record that has just been handed to me, and which I'm showing here for a third time. Thank you very much. With this, we have recorded the resolutions as passed. Dear shareholders, that means we have now reached the end of the agenda of our annual general meeting. I would like to thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for your interest in DWS and today's meeting. Likewise, my gratitude once again goes to Stefan Hoops and Dirk Görgen for answering the questions, and to all the staff involved in preparing and conducting this annual general meeting. I hereby close the meeting.
We look forward to the DWS annual general meeting in 2027, and it will again take place on the 3rd June. Until then, I wish you all the best, and goodbye. The meeting's closed. Thank you.