Good morning, welcome to Catella's earnings call for Q1 2026. With me today is our new CFO, Gustav Jansson. Welcome, Gustav. We will share an update on our strategy and financial performance, followed by key focuses for 2026, open for questions. Catella stands as a leading real estate investment and advisory platform, driven by our deep understanding of the local markets and a proven track record for delivering results.
We have SEK 160 billion of assets under management, That's managed by approximately a little under 500 employees, divided upon operations in 12 countries, a revenue of SEK 2 billion per annum. At the heart of Catella's operations are our two business areas: Investment Management and Corporate Finance. They form the foundation of our company.
They leverage on our expertise and positions us to capitalize on the opportunities in the real estate investment sector. This structure enables us to pursue long-term sustainable growth, particularly as the trend of allocating portfolios towards real assets continue to gain momentum slowly but surely. Currently, nearly two-thirds of Catella's income is derived from recurring revenue streams, providing a stability and predictability to our financial results. Moving forward, strengthening and expanding our recurring revenues remain a central strategic focus for us.
It ensures resilience and supports our vision for sustainable growth. We recognize that ESG is a fundamental to our business, as it shapes both our investment approach, but also our client relationships. It's integral to our vision for growth. Our strong and reputable brand is evident as we approach Catella's 40th anniversary next year, a remarkable milestone for the company.
I'll now hand over to you, Gustav, and Gustav will take you through the financial performance of the quarter.
Thank you, Ulrika, and good morning, everyone. Looking at the key highlights for our first quarter and how we deliver on our strategic journey, back in our Q4 reporting, we mentioned the need to strengthen and align Catella organizational structure. Last week, we announced that we have hired a Chief Digital Officer, Nils Sommersel, who will join us in June. We continue to monitor our legacy balance sheet investments, and there are no material financial impacts to report in Q1.
We continue to utilize our strong balance sheet, for example, through the JV with Pictet Alternative Advisors to deliver 205 apartments in Greater Copenhagen. This structure, combining a limited equity commitment with a long-term development mandate, is intended to generate both fixed and variable fee income while maintaining capital efficiency and scalability.
On the topic of Catella's balance sheet, we have also proposed to the board to launch a share buyback program which, subject to approval at the AGM on the 12th of May next week, would allow us up to SEK 100 million of shares to be bought back during 2026. We will share more details following the AGM. All right. Looking at the Q1 financials, we delivered net revenues of SEK 303 million and an EBIT of -SEK 45 million. EBIT still being a negative number, if we adjust this EBIT for non-recurring items in 2025 reporting, this is an improvement of SEK 26 million year-over-year. Reported asset under management increased from SEK 155 billion at the end of 2025 to SEK 160 billion at the end of March 2026.
This increase is driven by a reporting change implemented in 2026, where assets under development are now included in our asset under management. Excluding this effect, asset under management declined by SEK 3 billion during the quarter, reflecting softening valuations and termination of mandates in Finland. Our Corporate Finance division reported better EBIT despite lower revenues, this is a sign that costs are well controlled as the business navigate a cautious transaction market.
Although the transaction market is moving slower than envisioned, we remain positive that transactions will complete during the year, and we are encouraged by the mandates won by our Corporate Finance teams across Europe. Supporting this view of the market is transaction volume data showing that activities are starting to pick up. Turning attention to our business areas' performance, starting with Investment Management.
As mentioned, asset under management decreased in quarter due to headwinds in fund asset valuations and lost mandates, but it's helped in the quarter by currency movements. As mentioned earlier, you see the asset under management growth helped by reporting change, now including assets under development, and that's the little reddish box at the final graph.
Our revenues from investment management remain stable, which again support our strategic imperatives outlined earlier. The 5% drop in management fees in the reported Swedish currency figures is almost entirely explained by currency translation changes. The EBIT improved compared to previous year with a healthy margin. For corporate finance, the revenues were flat compared to the same period in 2025.
The negative EBIT is a reflection of the low number of transactions completed in the quarter, so more seasonality driven by anything else, with a majority of transactions typically occurring in the fourth quarter. While still negative, the EBIT is looking better as a result of lower operating expenses. Lastly, we share details on the legacy balance sheet investments business. The key financial impact here comes from the Kaktus disposal, which following that disposal no longer generates rental income for us. We move on to looking at the results on a consolidated basis. We have explained the EBIT performance in the business area section, and therefore will now focus on a few items below the EBIT line.
The largest impact come from FX, where weakening Swedish krona in Q1 contributed to a positive result of SEK 12 million in the period, compared to the opposite in Q1 2025, where FX moved negatively by SEK 104 million. A swing of SEK 126 million in net financial result. Further positive impacts are SEK 90 million from borrowings related to Kaktus, where there were a cost in 2025 but no cost in 2026. The net loss for the first quarter of 2026 is SEK 50 million. Excluding FX, that number is a loss of SEK 62 million, which is better than the FX-adjusted result for 2025. We believe that this shows a solid improvement in the business and market conditions on an underlying basis. With that said, I'm handing back to you, Rikke, thank you.
Thank you. Before I open for questions, I'd like to be clear about our strategic priorities for 2026. What we will and do focus on already, and how we will deliver stronger, more resilient performance long term. Our priority is clear. We will sharpen Catella's strategic focus and concentrate all our resources behind a defined scalable growth path. We'll support this by stronger cross-border collaboration across the company. We're prioritizing earnings quality and resilience.
We'll expand our recurring revenues as an originator and manager of real estate investments while we will strengthen our operational profitability. Our strong capital position gives us the ability to accelerate investment management through disciplined seed investments and selective deployment of capital via minority partnerships. This year we already repurchased bonds. Subject to AGM approval, we also aim to use some of our available capital to buy back our own shares.
Further details on the program will be made available after the AGM. Operational excellence is a defining priority in 2026. We've strengthened our leadership team with key appointments. Gustav, who's with me here today, our CFO, Dominik Röhrich as our Head of Investment Management in Europe, and Nils Sommersel as Chief Digital Officer. They bring a deep expertise and a strong track record from leading companies in their respective fields.
These capabilities will raise execution equality and pace across the group. To deliver our objectives, we'll increase targeted investments in strengthening capabilities, track record, and operational efficiency. Looking ahead, we see a European real estate market in gradually recovery, offering attractive opportunities even if uncertainty still remains. We're building on a strong heritage and deep expertise. We see significant untapped potential.
By focusing on what we do best and strengthening the collaboration and operational excellence across the company, we're positioning Catella to act selectively with a focus on value creation. Together, these actions will reinforce one direction, a more focused, scalable Catella, delivering stronger, more predictable earnings and long-term value. Thank you all for listening. We will now open for questions.
The next question comes from Emil Jonsson from DNB Carnegie. Please go ahead.
Thank you, and good morning. I'd like to start off with a question for you, Gustav. I know you're very early in this role so far, but I was wondering if you could share something about what your main priorities are starting in this role. Anything we should expect in terms of financial strategy, reporting, capital allocation priorities, or anything else of note?
Thank you for the question. My priorities, I said it's early days, but I'm very much aligned to what Rikke mentioned are the priorities for the year. We need to continue to make the organization effective, and we're looking at opportunities where we can strengthen the business as well. Still too early to give any details on what that would look like.
All right. Fair enough. On the financials side, I'd also like to ask, as far as I can tell, fixed fees as a percentage of AUM has been on the decline for the past five years, from about 16 basis points in 2021 to now just about 12 basis points. Would you say that this is a reflection of an actual decline in the prevalence of fixed fees across the AUM? Is this obscured by something else? If it is an actual decline, is there any plan on how to turn this around?
I have to get back to you, having analyzed those numbers. I mean, it's a long time period, so I can't answer that in this call. I'll look into it and I'll come back to you, Emil, afterwards. It's a good question.
All right. Maybe one last question. Your performance fees in investment management, they tend to sort of come as a lump sum in Q2.
Yeah.
I can only track the public fund performance from the outside and conclude that at least those look unlikely to generate performance fees this year. From your perspective, is there any reason to believe that there's anything else in the business that should generate significant performance fees in 2026? In other words, is there any reason to believe that performance fees in 2026 will be any higher than they've been in 2025 or 2024?
Yeah, if I may, just to jump in here quickly, Emil. You're right, they normally come in Q2 when they're from the funds, because that's when we have finalized the financial years and can calculate the performance fees. I think what's important here now is with the strategic move we made last year of including our development or our co-investments in our balance sheet, but moving our development capabilities and development business to our Investment Management business area, I think you will find that we will get performance fees from a different source as well. What's important to realize is with the co-investments we do alongside strong capital partners, majority partners, we both have an upside on the real estate itself.
When we sell the properties, we will get our cash back and hopefully a good return on investment on that as well. At the same time, we also get development fees and performance fees when we sell these properties, these investments. Over time, when we start selling off again our developments where we have co-invested in, we will both get a return on investment on the equity invested as well as an overtime development fee and performance fees if we have performed, of course. You will see more performance fees over time because of development, or development activities now being part and reported under Investment Management.
Okay. From an equity investor's perspective.
Sorry
The performance fees themselves are more important than any potential profits from the actual divestment of these.
co-investments. Because
Yes
The last few divestments, apart from taxes, haven't really generated much profits to speak of. In fact, you did a pretty significant write-down of one of the projects last quarter.
It I think the performance fees are more important when it comes to the actual earnings. Is there any reason to believe that we will see any performance fees even if you include the developments projects which have been reclassified in into investment management? Is there any reason to believe that they will be of any significant size during 2026?
We have a policy of not giving any indications. If everything aligns as we hope it does, I think you will come back to that question. We might discuss that over the year again, hopefully we have other better information for you at that time. I think you will find that over time we will get performance fees from our development activities, that will be reported as we go along, as we receive them. I think that's the best thing I can tell you, Emil, without breaching my kind of confidentiality.
Okay. That's fair enough. Those were all my questions. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Emil.
The next question comes from Gustav Jørgensen from ABG Sundal Collier. Please go ahead.
Hi, Gustav.
Yes, good morning. My question is, you've now repurchased SEK 140 million of bonds and plan a SEK 100 million buyback program.
How do you prioritize between further debt restructure and returning capital to shareholders, looking ahead?
Hi, this is Gustav. Thank you for your question. I would say given the cost of our bonds, I think that could be something we look at to repurchasing before. The buybacks obviously run in parallel, so right now, we have to see how things develop. One doesn't exclude the other is probably the first answer. From my perspective, the bonds have a high price attached to them, and that would be potentially for us saving money for the company that way.
Okay, fair enough. Thank you. Those were my questions.
Thank you.
As a reminder, if you wish to ask a question. The next question comes from Rasmus Jacobsson from Redeye. Please go ahead.
Good morning and welcome, Gustav. Two short questions on my end. Could you just help us understand how we should think about the fee relative to the AUM for the different different fee structures now that you incorporate the development properties in your AUM? Then I have a follow-up. Thank you.
Yeah. The fee questions, I mean, there's so many different funds. It's not a quick answer. I just want to point out on the asset under development point, we didn't have much in the past. Even if they are now helping, if we look at the interim reports, on the exhibit on page seven, you will see that a year ago, there was 0 of development fees. It is helping us, but it's still kind of a relatively new feature for us. I don't have the details at hand to explain exactly how the fees are moving between the different funds of ours.
We'll do the work, and we'll try to see if we can share some of those insights with you during the next reporting.
Was it about what type of fees we're getting, how we calculate the fees, or was it how they move? Just to be sure.
I'm trying to understand how we should think about the fees relative to the AUM going forward based on the fixed income variable performance and so on. Like, what is a reasonable baseline to expect?
Well, I think that has to do with our fee structure. The issue is in our funds, we, for the bulk part, we get basis points based on the NAV of the properties, which means of the valuations. Which means when the valuations increase, our fee increases alongside the valuations. Our cost should, all else considered, remain stable, which means our profit margins should, in theory, go up. In terms of assets under management, it's the same. We get basis points based on the valuation of the properties, and our cost should remain the same.
When it comes to development projects, we have a standard like everybody else in the in development, and that is we get a, normally a percentage of the total development budget for managing such developments. On top of all of these three types of fees, we get a performance fee if we meet the agreed IRR or higher. We get a percentage, and very likely around 10%-20% of the performance fee that the investors get, we will receive as performance fee.
Okay
tell you right now. I hope that answered your question a little bit better.
All right. That's great. Thank you very much. Then as a follow-up, I'm just curious, as you look ahead and, gradual improvement in the market and so on, how do you anticipate AUM to develop in a medium-term scenario? Thank you.
In a medium-term scenario, which I would then say is 3-5 years, would you agree to that, just so we have the same medium-term definition?
Sure, that's fair enough.
Okay, fine. Thank you. In a medium-term scenario, we do expect a growth in our assets under management, both based on our work that we're currently doing with setting up new products to discuss with potential investors. Our ability to having attracted asset management mandates over the past few years, we will continue that work, and it will be helped by the pickup in the transaction market, because the transaction market is an indicator of that valuations will start increasing on properties, coming back to the question you had with the fee structure. Which impacts our fee structure. These three key focus areas will secure a growth in assets under management over the medium term.
All right, great. Thank you. That's all for me.
Thank you.
There are no more questions at this time, so I hand the conference back to the speakers for any written question and closing comments.
Thank you all for listening in, and thank you for the great questions. Gustav and I will continue to try and inform you as best possible. If you are interested in further discussions, please do reach out to Gustav Jansson, and he will be happy to pick up the conversation with you. Thank you all, and have a great day.