Good morning and a warm welcome to Mandatum's Q4 Results Audiocast. My name is Lotta Borgström. I am Head of Investor Relations here at Mandatum, and I am pleased to be joined today by our CEO, Petri Niemisvirta, and our CFO, Matti Ahokas. During this audiocast, Petri Niemisvirta and Matti Ahokas will initially walk you through the highlights and key developments on Mandatum's last quarter and full year 2024, after which we'll take the Q&A, where you have the possibility to dial in for any questions you might have. Also, please don't hesitate to contact us at investor relations should you have any further questions. With these remarks, I will hand over to Petri. Please go ahead.
Thank you, Lotta. And now let's move on to the figures. All in all, I'm very pleased with Mandatum's performance during the past year. In the fourth quarter, we experienced a steady 39% increase in the fee result, reaching EUR 18.6 million . Client assets under management rose by 5% quarter-over-quarter to EUR 14 billion , driven by strong net flows and positive asset returns across all client segments. Net flow increased to EUR 392 million , reflecting an 86% year-over-year increase. It is worth noting that the level is unusually high due to some larger client tickets, but our net flow development in general, considering the current market situation, has been very good throughout the year. Our Net Finance Result decreased by 5%, totaling EUR 23.7 million , with a quarterly investment return of 0.3%, impacted by weaker financial market returns.
Profit before taxes fell by 24% year-over-year to EUR 35.1 million due to the negative impact of EUR 6 million from updated long-term actuarial assumptions. Earnings per share (EPS) stood at EUR 0.07 , and Organic Capital Generation per share was EUR 0.10 . For the full year of 2024, our fee result increased by 27% to EUR 67 million . The main reasons for the positive development were growth in Client Assets under Management and improved cost efficiency, which I'm very happy about. As we have stated before, our business is scalable, and we can now clearly see that in the figures. Client assets under management grew by 17% year-over-year to EUR 14 billion . Net flow reached EUR 983 million , up 30% year-over-year, representing 8% of client assets under management, which is well above our target of 5%.
The Net Finance Result declined by 9% to EUR 136 million , with a year-to-date investment return of 4.3%. Profit before taxes for the year was EUR 203 million , down 4% year-over-year. Organic Capital Generation per share at EUR 0.44 was clearly above the EPS at EUR 0.33 . The solvency ratio stood at 210% as of December 31st, 2024, compared to 221% at the end of 2023. The level is well above our midterm target, and Mandatum continues to be a very well-capitalized company. Our aim is to be an attractive dividend payer to our approximately 213,000 shareholders. As our dividend capacity developed better than we expected last year, Mandatum's Board of Directors has decided to propose to the Annual General Meeting an ordinary dividend of EUR 0.33 , plus an extra dividend of EUR 0.33 , totaling EUR 0.66 per share.
The core of our strategy is growth in our institutional wealth management business. Accordingly, the highest growth in assets under management, as well as in the net flow, came once again from institutional and private wealth customers. However, also the corporate and retail businesses contributed with double-digit growth to the hefty increase of 17% year-on-year in assets under management. Roughly half of the increase came from net flows and the other half from positive market movements. In the retail business area, 2024 was a clear game changer. The cooperation with Danske Bank took off, and both investment and loan insurance sales continued to outperform the previous year, which can be seen in the improving net flow development. It is worth pointing out that the following year's pension payments are booked in the last quarter of the year, now decreasing the net flow.
The full-year net flow development in corporate business was fairly stable, and the net flow increased mainly in personnel funds . 50 new personnel funds were established during the year. We still have a very dominant market position in both the unit-linked pension business and personnel funds , and our continuous efforts ensure that our market share will remain high. Demand for risk life insurance products continued to grow, and the premiums increased roughly by 3% last year. The largest increase, 14%, in net flow was once again in institutional wealth management, amounting to EUR 912 million. I'm very happy with that outcome. In general, we have been able to deliver a good performance in both the net flow and assets under management during the recent years.
One of our most important financial targets is the annual net flow proportion to assets under management, as it shows how much new money we succeed to get in. Excellent sales activity contributed to the inflow, and the client outflow has remained low, partly due to the consistently high level of customer satisfaction. Also, Mandatum's assets under management have grown steadily during recent years, reaching new levels almost every quarter. The fee income was up by 14%, supported by an increase in assets under management and stable fee margin levels. Even though most of our sales were related to credit and fixed income types of products, our fee income margin remained at the same level at 1.2%. This means that we have good discipline in our pricing during the quarter and the whole year, which is also one of our financial targets.
When it comes to operational efficiency, I'm really pleased with our improving cost- income ratio. As we have stated before, our business is scalable, and we can now clearly see that in early yearly development. In terms of assets under management, the largest growth came from international institutional clients: 67%. This is a sign of huge market potential, but also the appeal of our investment products abroad. Our award-winning credit products, such as the Nordic High Yield Fund, are good examples of leading industry expertise. Also, we succeeded in acquiring the first clients outside the Nordics in Central Europe. The majority of net flow went to the credit and allocation products, followed closely by external products. The returns on our credit and fixed income products are still at attractive levels, and the good performance gave additional support to our sales.
I would also like to remind you that Mandatum's real estate exposure is very low. Mandatum was ranked as top institutional asset manager within large companies in SFR Research survey in November. Mandatum received top scores in its category for long-term investment returns, market insights, and the clarity of its investment process. In addition to customer service, we were praised for our product range and reporting services. During the past five years, Mandatum has succeeded in climbing to the absolute top of its industry, which is a great achievement. Strong investment expertise and proven track record have contributed to the success. Not only do institutions seem content with Mandatum's performance, but customer satisfaction is high even among the private customers. The NPS score measuring customer satisfaction and loyalty was 83.2 in private wealth management and 76.4 in all customer segments. Mandatum continues to perform clearly above industry average.
Mandatum was included to OMX Helsinki 25 ESG Responsible Index last week. The fulfillment of the index criteria is based on the sustainability rating, among others. We are positioned among the best in our field in the sustainability ESG risk rating, updated in December 2024, ranking in the low ESG risk category, 13.6. Among our peers, the result was in the top 2%. The result has been good also in the sustainability assessments. We have recently put extra emphasis on our sustainability efforts, which are now reflected in our ESG ratings, and now over to you, Matti.
Thank you, Petri, and now let's look closer at the Q4 result components. Our fee result, as Petri mentioned, was up 39% year-on-year, with AuM up by 17%. Client margins remained stable in the fourth quarter and throughout the year.
We've also continued to focus on the expense side, and this contributed positively in the fourth quarter. If we zoom in to the fee result a bit closer, the fees from investment and asset management services were up by around 100%. At the same time, the other part of the fee result, or the Insurance Service Result from the CSM release, was slightly down due to one of a lower CSM release due to updated actuarial assumptions during the quarter. Our Net Finance Result came in at EUR 24 million, which is below the historical average. Q4 was actually a pretty difficult investment quarter, with a lower than normal investment return. We had negative returns in both our equity and real estate portfolios. In addition, we had a EUR 5 million negative value change impact from our holding in Enento this quarter.
On a positive note, we actually received a EUR 16 million dividend from Saxo Bank in December. Our result related to risk policies was lower than a year ago, and this line was also impacted by updated long-term actuarial assumptions. In addition, there were no CSM releases related to the portfolio transfer to If P&C, like we saw in the previous quarter. Then the group Net Finance Result decreased, as I mentioned, to EUR 24 million, and in the with- profit segment, it was down to EUR 10 million. The with- profit investment return in the quarter was 0.3%, clearly lower than last year. However, if you look at the with- profit fixed income assets, they continue to generate good returns with a mark-to-market yield of 4.7%, and as you know, this is largely unchanged compared to the previous quarters.
Our equities contributed negatively this quarter, EUR 11 million , but again, I think it's really important to stress that our own equity portfolio is not an index portfolio, rather reflecting the legacy of Finnish small caps. In addition, we also had a EUR 6 million negative value change in our real estate portfolio in the fourth quarter, but overall, as Petri also mentioned, our real estate exposure is small, only around 3% of total investment assets. Private equity and private credit also had a bit of a softer quarter in the fourth quarter. As long-term rates increased towards the end of the year, the discount rate had a EUR 15 million positive P&L impact. The quarterly unwinding cost was unchanged at EUR 18 million , but as we mentioned before, the unwinding cost will drop to, we expect, around EUR 12 million per quarter in 2025.
Although market interest rates fell in the fourth quarter, especially in the short end of the yield curve, this had actually a limited impact on our result, as especially our hedging strategies continue to work well. Also worth remembering is that our future profit generation is a function of the return we can achieve above the discount rate and not the actual level of interest rate, and the spread has actually remained largely unchanged. We continue to consistently generate capital. Organic Capital Generation was EUR 50 million in Q4 and EUR 191 million for the full year. In addition to the reported profits, this measure takes into account, for example, the own funds generation from income booked in the CSM, as well as potential capital release from lower Solvency Capital Requirement.
As we pointed out several times before, we think the OCG is a more relevant measure than the reported profits when assessing our performance, and especially our dividend generation. Our own funds generation increased the solvency margin by 24 percentage points in the full year of 2024, and if we look at 2023 and 2024 combined, we've generated a total of around EUR 500 million of capital, or almost EUR 1 per share, and this is also reflected in the board's dividend proposal. Our group solvency margin decreased following the larger dividend deduction, but remains well above the 170%-200% target range, and as you can see, our solvency margin is robust in different stress scenarios as well, and now I'll leave it over to Petri for some concluding remarks.
Yes, the fee result is expected to increase in 2025, provided the market environment remains stable, and the with-profit portfolio is expected to decrease further. Overall, results are influenced by various factors, including client behavior and asset allocation, competition, market environment, as well as actuarial assumptions that are updated from time to time. Thank you for your attention. We are confident in our strategic direction and committed to delivering strong financial results and value for our shareholders.
Thank you, Petri. And now let's move on to the Q&A. Please dial in for any questions.
If you wish to ask a question, please dial pound key five on your telephone keypad to enter the queue. If you wish to withdraw your question, please dial pound key six on your telephone keypad. The next question comes from Antti Saari from OP Markets. Please go ahead.
Hi, and thanks for taking my questions. I would like to talk about the fee result. You made some savings measures to your support functions in Q4, some personnel cuts, etc. So was this already visible in Q4 expenses? And on the other hand, was the cost level in asset management on a normal level, so to say, that it wasn't especially low in Q4?
Yeah, hi, Antti. You're absolutely correct that we started the change negotiations in the fourth quarter, but this actually did not have an impact in the quarter. Actually, there was a minor negative impact in terms of the costs in the fourth quarter, and overall, as you know, the third quarter is a bit lower in terms of cost because of holiday season in the Nordics, and in the fourth quarter, the activity picks up, so that's normally we see that happening, but there was nothing really kind of out of the ordinary here, except, as pointed out, that we had the actuarial assumptions decreasing the fee result, mainly due to kind of updated cost assumptions, quite technical factors, but apart from that, there was nothing kind of out of the ordinary in the fee result.
Okay, so to put it short, the cost level for asset management in Q4 is a good baseline going forward, and on the other hand, your cost reduction measures should improve the situation going forward.
Yeah, I think that's a fair assessment. However, as we've discussed and we announced that the staff reductions are not significant, so it will not have a huge impact. But of course, as we pointed out, we pay a lot of focus on the cost development overall, and this will, of course, be helpful. We said that 17 FTEs will be reduced in 2025.
Okay, thanks. And another one. Last year, you stated in the guidance that you expect to achieve your targeted net inflow level of above 5%, but you haven't stated this for this year. So has something changed in the outlook, or do you believe that you can achieve the target this year?
Yes, thank you, Antti. Petri Niemisvirta here, so yes, that's our original KPIs when we were listed in 2023 October, and this 5% net flow target is still relevant, and we will come back in our Capital Markets Day in June, and then we will tell more about our KPIs going forward, but it's the 5%, of course, when the bigger you are, of course, it's a little bit getting harder to achieve the target, but at least now we have reached the target and well above that.
Okay, thanks. That's all from my side.
The next question comes from Michele Ballatore from KBW. Please go ahead.
Yes, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. So I have three questions. So the first question is about the capital generation, in particular the part coming from the capitalized, let's say, the fee business. I mean, in fourth quarter, it was like EUR 5 million of capital generation coming from there. So what I'm wondering is when we think about the development of this metric long- term, considering that the with-profit business is quite quickly decreasing, I mean, how should we think about that? I mean, at a certain point the fee business has to take over. So if you can give us some guidance on what should we expect and also maybe think about this metric. So this is the first question. The second question is about the assets under management development.
In particular, clearly the international business had the lion's share, let's say, of the increase in net inflow. I mean, what kind of products you are pushing there? Yeah, I mean, any color on this would be helpful. And the third question, sorry, is about Saxo Bank. I mean, I know that you can give specifics, but there are a lot of rumors about the development of this story. Any comment would be very helpful on this. Thank you.
If I start , Michele, on the first capital generation question, yes, you're absolutely correct that the capital generation has slowed down a bit. Remember that we've actually grown our unit-linked assets by over EUR 2 billion during 2024. So even though it's capitalized, it is still consuming some capital. And then, of course, the other aspect of it is that the with-profit business continues to decrease. So we haven't given any guidance on how the OCG would develop, but I think it's important to note that there's two different forces. The capitalized business, the fee result, which is increasing by a significantly higher percentage than the around 10% decrease in the with-profit liabilities. So if you do the math, you should get to some kind of indication how it looks like.
As Petri also mentioned, we probably will come back on these topics at our Capital Markets Day, kind of also quantifying the potential impacts here, but it is clear that the OCG is a very important measure and also reflected in the board's dividend proposal. We generate around EUR 1 of OCG in 2023 and 2024 combined, and actually, if you then calculate the dividend of 2023 of EUR 0.33 and the EUR 0.66, you get to around a similar figure, so yes, the OCG is a clear important figure. No, we can't give you more guidance, but I think you can do the math yourself and get to relatively kind of consistent figures from that end, but we'll come back with more details early summer.
Yes, and another second question, Petri. Here is your question related to our products and net flow internationally, what we are selling and what is the customer demand. We are currently especially increasing our business in Sweden, and what is selling extremely well is our high yield product, which is Lipper Award, the best high yield in Europe when it comes to its performance in three years and five years term. So that's one of our flagship products. Another one is Senior Secured Loan product, which one we are selling not just in Sweden, but also outside of Scandinavia. As well, Senior Loans product and also our Fixed Income Total Return product as well. So mainly credit and fixed income side products are those one we are selling outside of Finland. Then third question about Saxo.
Yeah, there's a lot of rumors in the market, but we don't want to comment on the Saxo situation at all. So no comments from this side.
Sorry, sorry, if I can follow- up on this. Of course, I mean, I know you can comment. The only thing is I think there was a bit of confusion around capital, sorry, capital distribution. Lots of people, me included, I mean, we were thinking about maybe additional capital distribution will happen after the disposal of the, let's say, non-core private equity assets, but then you have done it. Now you have done it with a special dividend. So that's why I'm asking. I mean, it's just, I don't know, do you expect something to close like this year in 2025, or sorry.
Maybe I could kind of comment a bit on the kind of thinking around the dividend. So as I mentioned, if you look at the kind of combined capital generation in 2023 and 2024, that's around EUR 1 per share. And now if you then calculate the dividend we paid out in 2023 or for 2023, EUR 0.33, and now EUR 0.66, you get to roughly that. So we've kind of the proposal is more kind of under the thinking that we're paying out the capital generated in these two years, and that's the kind of thinking behind it.
Okay, thank you.
The next question comes from Johan Ström from Carnegie. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much. I have actually a couple of follow-up questions. I'll start with a question on Saxo Bank. Well, it's really two. First of all, what is the book value of Saxo Bank at year end 2024 in your books? If you were able to sell that stake at book value, what will be the sort of capital available to be paid out to shareholders? Then I have a follow-up on Michele's question around the OCG. I understand you will come back to more details at the CMD, but if I can ask on the EUR 191 million own funds generation during 2024, do you think that this number includes any extraordinary effects, any positives or negatives? That was my question on that.
And then, finally, did I hear you say that at the moment you expect underlying costs for 2025 to be around EUR 12 million per quarter? Thank you.
Yeah, hi, Johan. We actually booked this Saxo stake at fair value, so the fair value in our account is EUR 302 million, and so if at some stage we're able to sell it at EUR 302 million, it will not have a P&L impact, but the Solvency Capital Requirement for a stake is at the moment 49%, so it's around EUR 150 million of capital SCR required there, and then, of course, we have our own solvency target above that, so you can calculate the math, so it is a significant capital contributor or SCR contributor to us. Regarding the OCG, there's nothing funny there or no kind of one-off factors that one should keep in mind. I think actually, if you do the math, I don't expect huge changes overall in the kind of OCG levels.
Of course, that depends on a number of factors, but we've given you the kind of SCR reduction path, so you can calculate that quite easily. And then, of course, the question is how much own funds we generate on the rest of the business. Those are, of course, the most important factors to look at. But when you do the math without giving any kind of guidance, I'm pretty sure that you will see that there's no huge changes to any direction altogether. And then you had the last question, which was, yeah, it was the unwinding cost indeed. So our unwinding cost is expected to decrease from 3.4%- 2.4% this year. So it's around EUR 12 million per quarter.
Thank you, Matti. And just to be sure, there's no funding, no debt funding behind the Saxo Bank assets, which means there will be a potential reduction of payouts if you sell it.
No, there is, of course, but that's not in the SCR. So if you look at it, we funded it with a EUR 200 million bridge loan when we made the acquisition from Sampo in early May. But from a capital perspective, that does not matter. So it's more on the fact that we would, provided we would sell the asset, we will then repay the loan and get around EUR 100 million of liquidity, which is the kind of cash, which is the more relevant factor when it comes to kind of the dividend bank capacity. And overall, if you look at 2024, one of the main reasons why the board has also proposed that the dividend will be increased is that our liquidity position has been very strong in terms of internal dividends. We got dividends from Saxo Bank. We've got dividends from Mandatum Asset Management, Mandatum Life.
And of course, it means that the liquidity position of the group was very good and the solvency position as well. So the relevant factors to look at are not only the solvency, but also the liquidity, but both would be positively impacted in case of an exit of the Saxo Bank stake.
Thank you very much for that.