Good morning. Welcome to Lumo Homes Q1 result webcast. I am Niina Saarto, Treasury and Investor Relations Director. Today, we'll present you first quarter's figures, and we will also give an update on the acquisition of nearly 4,800 apartments, which we completed after the review period on 1st of April. CEO Reima Rytsölä starts the presentation, and then CFO Erik Hjelt will continue. In the Q&A, we will open the phone lines for questions. We also take questions via chat. All is set. Gentlemen, now it's your turn.
Thank you, Niina, a very good morning on behalf of myself as well, and welcome to this inaugural Lumo Homes Plc interim report. Fantastic to be here under this Lumo brand. Going a little bit through of our first quarter results, and we have shared with the CFO, Erik Hjelt, so that Erik will go more thoroughly the figures, and I will have a kind of a overview of a market conditions and overall situation. All in all, our like-for-like rental income grew, and occupancy rate improved from previous year, and that was a kind of a, how would I say, consistent and development for us.
Even though the kind of a total revenue and net rental income decreased, and that was mainly due to the sale of a portfolio approximately 2,000 apartments, which was closing in last July. We had, especially the people who are living in Finland, remember that we had a extraordinary cold January, February here in Finland, and that affected our FFO as well, which declined due to that cold weather and of course, the revenue declined as well. Our liquidity position remained very good, and our balance sheet is strong and our loan-to-value improved and came down to 42.5%.
The market situation, I will come back in a minute. We also published our strategy and we had our capital markets day in March, where we released our new strategy and where the customer experience is in the core of our strategy. Happy to notice that even though it's early days, but already now we hit the record high in NPS at 60 this quarter. Going to the right direction, although having said that it's early days, and of course, the NPS figure might show some volatility, but at least a promising start in a sense that strategy start to work.
We have already took a lot of measures to kind of improve our capabilities to focus on customer experience. A big part of that was of course the as I said, that this is an inaugural interim report for Lumo Homes Plc, so big part of the new strategy is also the brand change that we will operate under the name of Lumo Homes Plc, and annual general meeting kind of approved that proposal in last March.
As Niina told already, I will give a glance of an acquisition that we bought 4,761 apartments, and that deal was closed after the review, right after the review period on 1st of April. I give some glance of how, what's, what are the first takeouts after one, a little bit over one month of owning those apartments. The market environment or operating environment has stayed muted.
Of course, there's a lot of volatility in global economy, and not the least because of Iran war, and through that, rising interest rates. The last year already was in Finnish GDP growth close to zero. At the moment, the different offices expect GDP growth to 1%. We had in a very promising pre-GDP figure from Q1, which was 0.9, Statistics Finland. It remains to be seen what's the kind of a final figure, but it was a kind of a promising sign anyhow.
When talking about the rental apartments, and oversupply of rental apartments, we still face oversupply, and the market conditions haven't improved significantly yet. Although having said that, we kind of repeat ourselves that in a medium and long term, the outlook looks very promising. The main reason is that the new startups for residentials are coming down even more rapid pace than anticipated. The current estimate or forecast is even lower for this year than it was previous year.
The Confederation of Finnish Construction Industries just revised their forecast to 15,000 apartments. My personal view is that we won't even reach that. The main reason is that actually the subsidized part of new startups will probably be lower, even lower than in this forecast, which was 11,600 apartments. The how would I say, main reason is that actually the math is not working at the moment for starting new startups and especially now when there's still oversupply, but also the kind of current price level for existing apartments are way much lower than the new buildings. That's the main reason.
Although the combined with the kind of very low level of a new startup, still the urbanization carries on and how the population is growing all the time in biggest cities in Finland. That's why we are confident of a medium and long-term outlook on supply and demand balance. I won't clean the table for the figures, so I let Erik to go through the figures more thoroughly.
Just one word that our carbon neutral target is well in line and intact, and we are ahead of our plan and reaching the carbon neutrality by apartment in 2030. This is, of course, one key component for us for a cost efficiency as well. That's why It's kind of a double-sided, so to say, the target. It beneficiary, of course, for a climate change as such, but also for our profitability.
About the acquisition, as I said that we acquired the 4,761 apartments from Varma Mutual Pension Insurance Company, and that deal closed right after the review period, so 1st of April. We have roughly a little bit over one month behind us now that owning those apartments. The start has been very promising. As you remember, the occupancy rate of the portfolio was very low, 83 on the time of signing. We said that we are confident that we are able to rise that occupancy rate to our kind of a stabilized level.
At the moment, the kind of a first month of April looks very promising and even above our expectations. The lease-up plan is progressing very well. Also the kind of overall the takeover has gone very smoothly. I would like to here also thank our own people that they have worked very hard and this is a big portfolio to acquire. It has so far gone very smoothly and the lease-up plan has progressed really well.
We are even more confident than in the signing of this deal that we are able to raise the occupancy to the more of a stabilized level. I think this was all in my first stint. A s Niina said, that we are ready to answer the questions after Erik's financial development and outlook part. I ask Erik to join on the stage.
Thank you, Reima, and good morning everybody from my side as well. Page 11, total revenue aside, it declined EUR 3.5 million from the corresponding period, but it's good to keep in mind that in July 2025, we disposed almost 2,000 apartments. Those sold apartments actually contributed EUR 5.4 million for the top line last year. If you exclude that, actually the top line growth was EUR 1.9 million, and main contributor there was improved occupancy. Net rental income came down by EUR 2.9 million. Of course, the total revenue plays there a role. Repairs came down by EUR 0.6 million. Despite a slightly smaller portfolio, the maintenance expenses moved sideways. Main reason there is actually the heating costs.
The winter was very harsh here in Finland, and the heating expenses was EUR 2.4 million more compared to last year, Q1 last year. On a positive side, cleaning and outdoor maintenance came down by EUR 0.8 million, and property taxes down by EUR 0.6 million. On page 12, on the right-hand side, FFO down by EUR 2.1 million. Of course, net rental income plays a role there as well. SG&A expenses increased EUR 1.1 million. Finance expenses came down by EUR 0.3 million, mainly because of the smaller loan portfolio. It's good to keep in mind that the closing of the acquisition, big acquisition was 1st of April, so it has no impact in any of our figures during Q1 this year.
Current taxes came down by EUR 0.8 million. Occupancy rate improved from previous year. Q1 figure, year-to-date figure is, of course, in Q1 the same, so 95.6%, and it's up by 2.8 percentage point from the Q1 last year. Tenant turnover slightly up by 0.6 percentage point. We saw very strong like-for-like rental income growth, mainly driven by the improved occupancy. Very strong figure there, so 4.3%. Impact of rent overcharges, negative side 1.1%. We are still increasing the rents for existing tenants. At the moment, the monthly increases are on average between 1.4% and 1.5%, and we are still flexible in rents what come to the vacant apartments, and that flexibility brings the impact of rents overcharges on a negative territory. Altogether, like-for-like rental growth very strong, 3.2%.
Investments were on a low level in first quarter. We had one ongoing development project, 119 apartments, t hat was completed in February, located in Helsinki. Modernization investments increased from a comparison period because we started few larger modernization project. We sold during the first quarter 166 apartments and of course, after the period, we completed acquisition almost 4,800 apartments. Modernization investments up by 2.5% because of this couple of bigger modernization investment project we started. Fair value on investment properties down by EUR 42.6 million. We didn't change any valuation parameters in Q1 valuation.
There was four transactions during Q1, and including ours, and all these are taken into account our valuation Q1. The main reason for the negative impact of the valuation was due to the change in calculation parameters as properties age. That's embedded in our valuation model. The change in yield requirement is based on age of the property. When it turns, when the property turns 16 years or 30 years after completion or renovation, we increase the yield requirement. 15 years point, we increased the yield requirement between by 12.5%. That was the main reason the value change in Q1.
There was unusually amount of aging properties. Most of these properties that we changed the yield requirement because of the aging was assets turned to 16 years old. Remaining part of this year, we anticipate no major impact because of this aging question. Page 17, loan-to-value, a strong 42.5, well in line with our new target to keep our loan-to-value below 45%, so there's quite sizable buffer against that level. Equity ratio quite stable as well. Page 18, our financial position remains strong. After the reporting period, we signed a EUR 600 million acquisition finance related to the portfolio acquisition, and the idea there is to refinancing that with the debt from the capital markets.
In March, we paid back the remaining part of 2026 maturing bond, EUR 135 million, now the 2026 maturing loans are already covered or paid back actually. Now the focus is to refinance 2027 maturing loans, we will address that in some point during this year. Financial key figures remained strong, so hedging ratio very high, 96%, average interest rate 3.3%, coverage ratio excluding repair expenses as our peers are calculating this, so 2.6x. Key figures per share remain strong. No major changes there. FFO per NTA pretty much in line with the previous figures, same goes with equity per share. As we revised our strategy, we have released our new financial targets for 2026-2028.
We have four cornerstones, if you like, there, so growth, customer satisfaction, profitability, and risk management. The growth, the target is to grow 5%-7% annual customer satisfaction to have Net Promoter Score 65 profitability, average annual growth, FFO per share 3.5%, and loan-to-value to keep below 45. We have the figures for Net Promoter Score and loan-to-value because growth and profitability figures are annual figures, we didn't calculate it in linked to this Q1 report. Of course, the whole year figures will be included when we are there. Page 21, our outlook. We kept our outlook unchanged. We estimate that the total revenue will amount between EUR 484 million-EUR 497 million, and an FFO between EUR 147 million-EUR 157 million.
If you look the midpoint of the top line growth guidance, there we penciled in slightly improvement in occupancy, moderate trend increases, and flexibility in new rents, but reducing amount compared to last year and beginning of this year. Then successful implementation of the acquired portfolio, and we are proceeding well there as Reima already discussed. If you look the FFO guidance, that of course the range reflects the top line outlook there. If you take the midpoint of the FFO guidance, there we assume the average weather and the cost of refinancing on a constructive level. Now, back to Reima.
Now we can start Q&A. Let's start with the audience question.
Yes. Thank you for the presentation first. Timo Nyman from Nordea Bank. I was just wondering, the occupancy rate, considering that you took over the Varma portfolio with a relatively low occupancy. You have still been able to improve the occupancy. Does that go hand in hand with lots of incentives or how did you manage that one?
You mean the Varma por-.
Yes
Acquired portfolio? I think it was very much in line with the business case that we calculated with the rent levels. We noticed that there were some kind of overpricing in the portfolio which partly explained the very low occupancy rate. But it's well in line with our business case plan, the rent levels.
Thank you. Now we can move on to phone line questions.
The next question comes from Anssi Raussi from SEB. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hi, all. It's Anssi Raussi from SEB. Thank you for the presentation. I have three questions, and I go one by one. First, I want the new on occupancy. If you exclude this Varma acquisition, occupancy came down a bit quarter-over-quarter. How much of this decline was maybe due to seasonality, and how much due to underlying market conditions? That, that's the first one. Thanks.
Okay. If I take that. It's of course very difficult to kind of divide or divide those components, but I would say that it's for sure that there's a true seasonal effect on first quarter. I would say that the kind of a tiny decline from quarter-to-quarter is mainly of a seasonal effect. As I said that market conditions seem not to have improved. But I think it's as fair to say that the market conditions haven't worsened either.
In that sense, I think it's mainly kind of a seasonal effect.
Thanks. That's helpful. Then about your refinancing this year, have you changed your plans in terms of timing, or are these initial plans still in place?
We are of course monitoring the market very carefully and try to figure out whether this is special circumstances in a short term. But definitely we want to approach the refinancing of 2027 maturing loans. We can tap the market even before the summer, or we can postpone it after the summer depending on the market conditions.
Got it. Thanks. Finally, on your possible discussions with the credit raters, have you had any discussions or of course, you're maybe planning to have at some point because of we know what has happened in geopolitical situation and interest rates have gone up? Any changes on this situation?
We have set a meeting, a management meeting with Moody's in August. We discussed with Moody's several occasions when we prepared ourselves for the acquisition, so they were well-informed and they knew our plans there. Since that, the normal liquidity discussions. Other than that, we haven't lately discussed with Moody's.
Okay. Thank you.
The next question comes from Jonathan Kownator from GS. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Just wanted to follow up on the cold winter. Do you see any risk to your guidance or being towards the lower end of the guidance? Was that more than you expected at the beginning of the year? Again, to go back to the occupancy question, I think generally speaking, what are you expecting later in the year and what is your view on pricing as well? There was obviously a negative impact on pricing in your like-for-like rental income. How do you expect to move your pricing going forward this year, and what do you expect it to be the impact on occupancy? Thank you.
Okay. If I take the occupancy view, you can then have an answer on the first one. We actually expect the occupancy to improve going further this year. We need to stay flexible over pricing, as Erik also already said during the first quarter, we see that there's less need in the future to be as flexible on pricing for new tenants. As Erik already communicated, we have been already risen the existing tenants' rents from 1.44% to 1.5%.
This is not the whole stock, but it's kind of a rolling process. All in all, we kind of stay optimistic of occupancy rate. Of course, that's, we think that we have room to improve occupancy also in our legacy portfolio. Especially when combining the new portfolio where there's a lot of potential to improve the occupancy. In both sides, we expect to improve the occupancy.
When it comes to the impact of the heating cost, of course, that's on the negative side. When you look our outlook, there are still many moving pieces there. We estimated what is going to be the remaining part of this year. We don't know the weather factor, of course. On the positive side, there are some savings we achieved already. Then the acquired portfolio occupancy has been quite strong the starting from leasing up. That of course on the positive side. Then the question mark is when and when we do the refinancing and what is the price for refinancing. There's many moving pieces still.
We didn't find any reason to change the outlook at this stage.
Okay. Thank you.
The next question comes from Andres Toome from Green Street. Please go ahead.
Hi. Good morning. I have two questions from my end. Firstly, could you maybe give some more color just around how the sort of the rental market is trending in terms of how in the last few months, the stock of advertised apartments in the whole market has been trending? Is it still going down or has there been some hiccups just also looking how the occupancy has trended recently?
Well, I would say that the market supply hasn't come down so far. Of course, as we discussed already earlier that there's definitely a kind of a seasonal effect as well. That seasonal effect will turn on a landlord's favor in coming months. So that's for sure. We are not kind of guessing that how will the seasonally adjusted supply will react in coming quarters. As I said in the very beginning, we are confident that that will ease up in a medium term.
Understood. On the Varma portfolio, just wondering, just how that portfolio is placed and could there be any cannibalization to your own existing Lumo stock as you start ramping up, Varma occupancy with maybe a bit more, aggressive pricing?
I think it's if you can see now here, so the split of a breakdown of acquired portfolio is 75% in Helsinki region and Tampere region close to 18%, and Turku region 4.2%. It's very well located. We don't see kind of a meaningful cannibalization effect or threat as such.
So, at the moment it looks like so that the asset is as we're convinced and when we released the deal that after our DD process that we liked the asset pool very much and it has been kind of a verified already in the first weeks of when owning the apartment. It's there's definitely a demand for that. Given the fact that still our overall market share is relatively limited, we don't see kind of a significant or meaningful cannibalization threat in that sense.
Okay. Then, finally, just on the refinancing side as well, you sort of Erik, you sort of mentioned that, you have a sort of a assumption for your cost of debt there. How is the cost of debt right now in the marketplace versus that assumption? Is it higher? What are the sort of spreads you're talking about here?
In big picture it's in line.
It's in line? Okay.
In line, yeah.
Maybe finally just on the guidance as well for this year, I guess, not putting words in your mouth, but it sounded like revenue, you see good odds of getting to the midpoint, but maybe on FFO, just because it's been more difficult winter in Q1 and maybe the financing costs have gone up this year, it could be lower than the midpoint.
Yeah.
It's your assumption. The building blocks are of course there. The top line growth is proving proceeding nicely so far. On our expensive side, some savings can be achieved. Of course the cost of refinancing plays a role there. It's too early. I said there's so many moving pieces, it's too early to say in which position in that, at that range we are going to land. The these are the building blocks if you like.
We appreciate Jonathan, your words that you don't try to put words in our mouth.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Céline Soo-Huynh from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Hello, Reima. I got two questions for you. The first one is on tenant retention. Remember we've talked about tenant retention at your CMD, and I'm noticing that your tenant turnover ratio has gone up. If you could please comment on this number. Second question is about your guidance. I'll follow up on the previous question. The Q1 results are quite below expectations. How confident are you on your guidance? Should we expect FFO to be more on the low end than on the higher end? Thank you.
I think it's the latter one. I would say immediately kind of a repeat Erik's answer already. There's many moving points and we won't give you kind of a guidance for guidance, so to say, or kind of specify more of the guidance. That will be kind of or wouldn't make sense at this point. On the churn of a tenant. That's correct that it has increased a little bit, but I would say that it's more a link to the seasonal effect as such as than anything else.
Not being super worried about that at this moment.
Sorry. Can I follow up on your point about the guidance? Put it in other words, is there a risk that you might miss this guidance?
No. No. We released our guidance. I think it tells that we are with our best knowledge of a future, which is of course limited in our side as well, but with our best knowledge. We are kind of confident that we will stay in the band of guidance.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Stéphanie Dossmann from Jefferies. Please go ahead.
Hello. Good morning, all. I was just trying to reconcile the FFO in EUR million and the per share basis. Am I right saying that the FFO per share decreased by something like 6.4%? Is there a reason that you don't guide on the per share basis for the full year, and what's your expectations? I know it's hard for you to reply to this because of the previous questions about the guidance, but that would be good to have per share guidance as well. Maybe this will be the first question. I have a couple of others.
Yeah. We discussed internally whether we should give the guidance, total FFO per share. We felt that the total FFO is quite prudent. Of course, we released the amount of shares. Of course, it depends on whether we ask you guys to do the math or do we do it for you because we don't anticipate any changes in amount of shares. It's pretty much quite easy to calculate that. That's why we felt that the FFO as we've been giving the guidance in history as well, total FFO. We felt that we keep giving guidance in that form.
Fair enough. In your disclosures, it's a bit misleading to see that the FFO per share is flat in Q1 while it's down mid-single digits. That was my point. The second question is much related to the modernization CapEx. You launched a modernization program last year. We see the impact in Q1. What would be the impact for the full year, please?
We estimate that the full year modernization investment is going to be somewhere between EUR 30 million and EUR 40 million.
Thank you. Maybe a last one, regarding you said, you said math don't work for new builds. Could you quantify the spread between new builds and existing homes? I suspect you would not launch a new development any time soon due to the market oversupply. I just wanted to clarify your strategy going forward on that, please.
I would say that, of course, it's difficult to give a kind of a precise figure, but in a range of 15%-20% it's more expensive to start the new build-ups. It's 15%-20% more expensive than the existing ones. Your question that, or assumption that we are not going to start a new build-up, definitely not in a meaningful scale. Of course, there might be some kind of a single or individual cases where there's, for example, kind of additional construction or building rights that needs to be utilized or something like that.
Apart from that, not any major new developments.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Neeraj Kumar from Barclays. Please go ahead.
Morning, everyone. A few questions on my side. Starting with your LTV, you mentioned that you have a sizable buffer to the LTV threshold of 45%. May I confirm that this reported number of 42.5% is excluding the recent acquisition, which has EUR 600 million debt associated with it. How much buffer do you have if you were to include that transaction, and how well you're positioned for a potential valuation decline? That would be my first question.
We made a pro forma calculation when we prepared ourselves for the acquisition. Based on that pro forma, we should be still below 45%. That's our long-term target. We want to definitely be below 45%. It's good to keep in mind that Moody's Baa2 threshold is 50%. 50%. We have even bigger buffer for that level. As said, our target is to be below 45%.
Got it. Because I was just adding the current transaction and the number I reached was 45.1%. It looks like you're bank on 45%. If there was to be any valuation decline, you're kind of breaching your internal threshold.
In that sense, yes. We don't anticipate it that, and we are not giving any guidance for future value changes. Of course, given the dividend policy, the FFO, big portion of FFO is left inside the company, and we can use that to pay back loans. There's a path to bring down the loan-to-value without any actions. It remains to be seen where the value is closing in the future.
Got it. That makes sense. You mentioned that you have a strong liquidity position. Again, may I confirm that the EUR 750 million debt maturing in 2027 is excluding that EUR 600 million bridge loan? You have nearly EUR one and a half billion of debt maturing by end of next year.
Correct.
So-
Our plan is to.
Like-
Our plan is to approach that refinancing this year, obviously. Perhaps even some part before the summer and some part after the summer. That's something that we are considering. In our case, it's good to keep in mind that we have access for different sources of financing. The bond market is there and it's open and indications are well in line what our expectations are today. We have access of bank financing as well. We've been discussing with the banks to look their portions there as well. We are confident that we are able to refinance all needs what we have.
Got it. You mentioned that the bond market is open. I was looking at your current six-year bond, which is trading at a yield of over 4.3%. Is that the kind of refinancing you're using in your assumptions when you're providing a guidance on your FFO, or are you assuming a bit lower number than that?
We looked the different indications. Of course, the tricky part is that, today it's something else than it's tomorrow and it was yesterday. In our calculations, we penciled in a coupon or slightly north of 4%.
North of 4%. That's helpful. Just an associated question with it. Like how do you see the impact of this on your ICR going forward given material debt maturities in next couple of years, you mentioned about Moody's. The ICR at Moody's was 2.28 for full year 2025. That's much lower than their downgrade threshold of 2.5 times. Given the recent increase in interest rates and material refinancing needs, do you see a risk of negative rating action from Moody's in future?
Of course, we've been discussing with Moody's, their matrix, and ICR is one important KPI there, but it's not the only one. Actually, they are not today looking one or two specific KPIs, and they replace the ICR requirement. Now they are talking about financing strategy, and they take into account in their view all factors. In our case, they communicated clearly that all other KPIs in our case is strong. The only one that is slightly under pressure is ICR. Taking all the actions by the company, they estimate that the ICR will go below 2.5, but they start to improve afterwards. They say that that's fine.
Of course, they can change their view, but, this was the latest discussion with Moody's.
Got it. That's very helpful. Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Alex Kolsteren from Van Lanschot Kempen. Please go ahead.
Hi, team. Good morning. Couple of questions at this point. Maybe first on the Varma portfolio. You commented that the leasing is progressing really well. Could you quantify that a bit more?
Actually not. We are not willing to quantify it anymore, but try to kind of give you an impression with the qualitative measure that it's, as you said, it's progressing very well and even above our expectations. We of course can quantify the figures then after the Q2 or in Q2 release. At the moment we stay on qualitative measures.
All right. Understood. On your reported disposals in Q1, is it correct to assume you sold at a 8% discount to the book value?
In a ballpark, yes.
All right, thank you. Lastly, which it's been discussed a bit already, the seasonality, which you commented on. If I look back into Q3, Q4 numbers, there you say that typically, let's say towards the end of the year is when the seasonality effect is worst on your occupancy, and now you say it's Q1. What has led to that change?
Well, I think it hasn't changed that much. The exception was beginning of 2025, where our actually occupancy was higher in Q1 than Q4 at 2024. Apart from that, the Q1s have been a bit lower than Q4s.
All right. Very clear. Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Anssi Raussi from SEB. Please go ahead.
Yes. It's Anssi from SEB again. One follow-up from me. I think you mentioned that you're increasing your rents from 1.4% to maybe 1.5% for your existing tenants. I guess you're still facing quite significant pressure to keep your rents unchanged for new tenants or even declining year-over-year. How do you manage this spread? I guess you might be receiving some angry feedback from existing tenants. How long you can continue increasing your rents for existing tenants without inflation in new tenant rents? Thanks.
Yeah. You're right that of course it can't continue from here to eternity, that's for sure. It requires that market improves. We already see that the kind of, how would I say, the amount of a flexibility when pricing the new tenants are decreasing at the moment. That's very kind of encouraging in a sense. But as you mentioned that if they are going to do kind of do different directions, the existing and new tenants rents, it can't carry on for a very long time. But at the moment we are I would say that we are managing the issue fairly well.
It's of course, in some cases you might receive feedback. On the other hand, it's, as we all know that it's a bit of a cumbersome to move as well. You might, if you have a good customer experience as such, you're willing to accept a bit higher rent than moving to a different location.
One additional note, if I may. This 1.4%, 1.5% is average the whole portfolio. We look of course, how much we increase the rents for existing tenants, property by property and apartment by apartment. Already, for example, in Tampere, the rent increases are between 2% and 3%, and in some sub-areas in Helsinki, 0 because of the very reason that the sub-area they are not the same. That of course plays an important role in how much we are able to increase the rents compared to what we do with vacant apartments.
That's really helpful. Thank you.
The next question comes from Alex Kolsteren from Van Lanschot Kempen. Please go ahead.
Hi. Yes, one follow-up question actually on the disposals, on that 8% discount. Is that reflective of your wider portfolio in your view?
Actually, no. All transactions from the market, Q1, and all our own transactions taken into account in the valuation. The valuation is made property by property, and these two were well in line what this is our valuation. No impact in our valuation.
All right. Thank you very much.
There are no more questions at this time, so I hand the conference back to the speakers.
Thank you. I think we covered so many topics. We only have one left, so it's about the transaction market. Have you seen that there would be a lot of interest from international investors who are actively seeking portfolios in Finland?
Well, there are some foreign interests, and it has somewhat picked up, at least in the very beginning of the year. Of course, at the moment, due to fact that there's a clear uncertainty of interest rate market that's up, so that has probably cooled down the transaction market as well. We definitely have seen a kind of during the first quarter already the kind of picking up the foreign investor interests.
Coming back to transaction market, and perhaps related to last question as well, we have seen in the kind of some transactions on the market, portfolio transactions, which yield requirements have been kind of encouraging as such, so, for example, much lower than the one that we released from our from our acquisition of 4,761 apartments, yield requirement. That's why it seems so that it's getting healthier, the transaction market.
Okay. Thank you. That was the very last question. Thank you everyone for joining us today. We will publish our half year result on August 13, so hope to see you all then. Thank you very much, and have a lovely spring.
Maybe, Erik, this was your last interim report.
Indeed.
Maybe you would like to give.
This was my last interim report, and more than 60 altogether on my belt right now. I really want to thank you all guys participating these calls and in meetings, it has been great to work with you and good discussions, good dialogue. Thank you very much for all these years and meetings.
Thank you.
Bye-bye.