Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Julius Bär 2025 Half-Year Results Presentation for Analysts and Investors. I am Sandra, the course co-operator. I would like to remind you that all participants have been listened-only mode , and the conference is being recorded. The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session. You can register for questions at any time by pressing Star and one on your telephone. For operator assistance, please press Star and zero. The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast. At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Alexander van Leeuwen, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead, sir.
Good morning, everyone. This is Alexander von Leeuwen, Head of Investor Relations. Welcome to the Julius Bär H1 Results Call. Before starting the presentation, I would like to flag the important information provided on Slide 2 of the presentation. It's now my pleasure to hand over to our CEO, Stefan Bollinger.
Thank you. Thank you, Alex, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for dialing in for this Half-Year Result Call. It's been an intense first six months of the year for Julius Bär, and it feels like it was only yesterday that we met many of you at the strategy update, where we discussed extensively the actions undertaken so far this year and our plans for the medium term. I'll come back to some of those key points later in this presentation, but first, let me share with you my take on our H1 financial results. Overall, I see an improvement in underlying performance as some of our actions start paying off. After a slow start to the year, it was encouraging to see net new money momentum build during the period, with net flows ultimately more than doubling versus the same period last year.
To be clear, I expect net inflows will continue to be subject to our ongoing de-risk measures this year, but based on the almost CHF 8 billion net inflows in the first half, the guidance of around 3% that we gave in February for the year still holds today. Monthly average asset under management increased by 7% year- on- year to CHF 491 billion. However, asset under management stood at CHF 483 billion at the end of June, which is a year-to-date decrease of 3%, mainly due to the impact of the weaker dollar and the sale and deconsolidation of Julius Bär Brazil. Underlying net profit increased by 11% year- on- year to over CHF 500 million. IFRS profit was, of course, impacted by the loan loss allowance disclosed earlier with the Interim Management Statement in May and the non-cash impact from the sale of our Brazilian onshore business.
When stripping those out, the underlying cost-income ratio improved by 3 percentage points to 68.2%. In other words, some of our cost-saving efforts are starting to pay off, although there is obviously still a lot to do. Our capital position remains strong, with the CET1 capital up 140 basis points to 15.6%, and our balance sheet remains highly liquid with an LCR of over 300%. As we reported last month, the credit review by our new Chief Risk Officer is continuing, and we aim to complete it in the next few months. To date, no additional loan loss allowances to report. Once the credit review has been completed, we'll be in a position to decide whether or not additional loan loss allowances are required.
Before handing over to Evie, let me highlight that we launched a conduct and culture program, including a risk culture awareness training for employees, with the goal to reinforce accountability, high standards, and develop a strong risk culture. With that, over to you, Evie.
Thank you, Stefan, and good morning, everyone. As usual, before discussing the results, I'll start with some of the key external market developments in the first half of the year. Most stock and bond market indices are provided in US dollars, and on that basis, markets were up in the first half of the year. However, the dollar weakened substantially versus the Swiss franc, almost 13%, the worst half- a-y ear for the greenback in decades. For Julius Bär, reporting in Swiss francs, the currency-adjusted market performance was negative. We saw further rate cuts in Switzerland and Europe, with the Swiss National Bank reducing rates by another 50 basis points to 0, and the European Central Bank reducing the main refinancing rate by a further 100 basis points to 2.15%. While the U.S. Fed kept its rates steadfastly unchanged so far this year in the target range of 4.25%-4.50%.
The third set of graphs on the bottom left of the page shows that the shape of the key yield curves continued to normalize for European and Swiss rates, but for U.S. rates, it inverted again in the belly of the curve in the 1- to 5- years range. Finally, stock market volatility saw a massive spike early April after Liberation Day in the United States, but then dropped off rather sharply again in the last 10 weeks of the period. Moving on to Slide 7, which shows assets under management down 3% year to date to CHF 483 billion, as the positive effects of net new money and buoyant markets were more than offset by the drastic weakening of the dollar, as well as the sale and deconsolidation of our onshore Brazilian business that Stefan already referred to earlier.
Monthly average AUM, important for the margin calculations, grew by 7% year- on- year and by 3% compared to the second half of the year. Proceeding to the net new money page on Slide 8. After a slow start to the year and against the backdrop of continued linear de-risking of the client book, the net new money pace picked up, ultimately resulting in net inflows doubling year- on- year to CHF 7.9 billion, or 3.2% annualized. Essentially in line with our unchanged guidance of around 3% for 2025. In terms of regional contributions from key markets based on client domicile, I would like to highlight Asia, especially our key markets, Hong Kong, Singapore, and India; Europe, with a strong contribution from the U.K. and Germany; and the Middle East.
The new relationship managers we welcomed onto our platform in recent years, either ones that are still working on delivering their hiring business case, delivered again the majority of the net new money, around CHF 4.8 billion. Rather encouragingly, we saw an increasing contribution from seasoned RMs as well. There was a small bit of re-leveraging around CHF 0.3 billion, but it added just 0.1 percentage points to the net new money pace in the first half of the year. On Slide 9, we show the development of the RMs year- to- date. The number of RMs declined by 94 in the first half of the year. This reflects, number one, the hiring of 55 RMs; Number two, the departure of 78 RMs to a large extent driven by low performance management, but also natural attrition.
Number three, a further net decrease of 43 RMs following internal transfers and the changes of the front operating model that we discussed extensively in the Strategy Update on June 3rd in London. Finally, 28 RMs leaving as part of the sale of Julius Bär Brazil. Please note that by the end of the first half of 2025, we had also already signed on another 28 RMs due to join us in the coming months. Now let's go to Revenues on Slide 10. Adjusted operating income now excludes M&A-related impacts the same way we adjust on the expense side. On that adjusted basis, operating income was down 2% year- on- year to CHF 1.910 billion.
However, as we already disclosed two months ago in the interim management statement, the increase in credit provisions for selected positions in the mortgage and private debt loan books following the extended credit review resulted in net credit losses of CHF 130 million, of which roughly about a quarter came from the remainder of the private debt book and the rest from selected positions in the mortgage book. If we strip out those CHF 130 million, then the underlying operating income showed a year-on-year increase of 5% to just over CHF 2 billion. Looking at the revenue composition and starting from the largest contributor to our revenue base, we see that net commission and fee income was up 5% year on year to CHF 1.143 billion, largely driven by the year-on-year increase in average assets under management.
Moving beyond commission and fee income, we saw a CHF 151 million decline in net interest income being more than compensated for by a CHF 170 million increase in net income from financial instruments or trading income. NII was strongly impacted by the year-on-year decrease in interest rates, by a makeshift lower interest rate Swiss franc-denominated loans, a slightly smaller treasury bond portfolio, as well as the further wind down of the private debt portfolio, which is now down to CHF 0.1 billion ahead of schedule, might I add. As a result, while deposit expense fell substantially by 19% on the asset side, interest income on the loan portfolio decreased by 27%, and interest income from the treasury portfolio fell by 14%, resulting in net interest income of CHF 72 million.
Against that, net income from financial instruments at fair value through profit and loss improved by 27% to CHF 807 million, essentially all on the back of a rise in treasury swap income, or quasi-interest income, as we like to refer to it. This was a result of a 25%, or roughly CHF 5.3 billion, year-on-year increase in average swap volumes to CHF 27 billion, as well as higher average spreads. While income related to structured products and FX trading initially grew in the first four months of 2025, especially during the market volatility spike following Liberation Day announcements in early April, it then tapered off quite substantially again in May and June, which helps explain the relatively large decrease in our gross margin in the last two months compared to the one we reported for the first four months in the interim management statement.
I should also mention here a technical detail which is also mentioned in footnote 2 on this page, and that is that we revised the logic of how we book interest income on non-Swiss franc-denominated bonds in our treasury portfolio in order to better reflect the economic substance and reduce the impact of FX fluctuations on NII. This change was applied retroactively back to the start of the year in June, and relative to the old methodology led in effect for H1 to a one-off increase in NII of CHF 27 million and a one-off decrease of CHF 27 million in trading income. But to be clear, this improved booking logic had no impact on overall revenues, only on the split of revenues between NII and trading income and how these are presented.
On Slide 11, we regroup the IFRS revenue lines, aim to better reflect the three key business drivers, i.e., recurring income, interest-driven income, and activity-driven income. Those who have been following us for longer know that we have been showing this alternative split already for several reporting periods, but so far we only showed it in gross margin terms. On this slide, we now first show the alternative breakdown in absolute Swiss franc amounts as an intermediate step to discussing it in gross margin terms on the next slide. For the definitions and how we derive this alternative split from the IFRS view, please refer to Slide 30 in the appendix, and I note that the treasury on management accounts.
What this alternative view shows clearly is how the CHF 151 million year-on-year decline in net interest income has indeed been more than compensated for by CHF 184 million higher treasury swap income. In other words, what we call interest-driven income, which is the sum of these two items, actually increased year-on-year by CHF 34 million, or 6%, to CHF 580 million. On Slide 12, we show the same picture, but in gross margin terms.
When comparing the 83 basis points underlying gross margin with the preceding two periods, the main driver of the differences in both cases comes from activity-driven income, i.e., versus H1 2024, the total gross margin is two basis points lower, mainly driven by two basis points lower activity-driven gross margin, and versus H2 2024, the total gross margin is three basis points higher, driven by two basis points higher activity-driven gross margin, as well as an additional one basis point from interest-driven income.
Perhaps it's useful to add here that the 27 million revision, which I mentioned in the discussion of operating income, is equivalent to one basis point in gross margin terms, i.e., it led to a one basis point higher NII gross margin and one basis point lower gross margin from income from financial instruments for H1 2025 versus H2 2024 than would have been the case under the old booking logic. Had we applied this change already at the start of the year instead of retroactively in June, then the monthly developments would have been different, and the interest-driven gross margin that we showed in the IMS would then have been 23 basis points instead of 21 basis points, and the activity-driven gross margin 27 basis points instead of 28 basis points.
The exit rate that some of you will already have tried to calculate this morning is then also impacted, i.e., for interest-driven income, the exit rate was 25 basis points, not 28 basis points, and for activity-driven income, 14 basis points and not 11 basis points. I wouldn't try to extrapolate too much from the exit margin. Looking ahead, we now expect interest-driven income to be closer to 24 basis points for the year, assuming no further material shifts in the balance sheet. Now let's move to operating expenses on Slide 13. Costs were up 2% year-on-year to CHF 1.426 billion, mainly driven by somewhat higher personnel expenses, as well as an increase in legal provisions and losses. Costs include CHF 27 million cost to achieve related to this year's cost-saving program, of which CHF 22 million in personnel costs compared to CHF 18 million included a year ago.
In that period, all- in personnel costs. Personnel costs increased by 3% to CHF 937 million, in part due to a rise in incentive and performance-related costs, a small increase in pension fund-related expenses, and slightly higher severance payments. General expenses were up 1% to CHF 371 million, as legal provisions and losses increased by CHF 24 million to CHF 36 million. Excluding provisions and losses, general expenses decreased by 5% to CHF 335 million, mainly on the back of a reduction in consulting and legal fees, as well as lower spend on external staff. Depreciation and amortization went up by 3% to CHF 118 million, following the rise in capitalized IT-related investments in recent years. As a result, the expense margin improved by four basis points year-on-year to 57, and the underlying cost-to-income ratio by three percentage points to 68%.
In other words, a decent first step towards driving operating leverage in the business. As usual, we also show the approximate split of expenses by currency, and given the much commented on strength of the Swiss franc, it is encouraging to see that our efforts to reduce the share of Swiss franc-denominated costs is starting to become visible and bear fruits. The share now is 53%, whereas a year ago it was 57%. At year-end 2024 at 56%. All in all, headed in the right direction. Slide 14. Here we provide an update on our cost-savings program. As you may recall, last February, we announced we would extend the pre-existing program and aim to save another CHF 110 million gross costs this year.
Last month, in the strategy update, we indicated that we believe we can outperform on this and deliver CHF 130 million run rate savings by the end of this year. In fact, at the end of June, we were already at CHF 110 million, plus we already identified the further CHF 20 million that we expect will bring us to CHF 130 million by year-end. In terms of fiscal year gross savings, we reached CHF 60 million in H1, and we expect that we will get to CHF 60 million fiscal year gross savings by the end of the year. As a reminder, the main levers that were used in H1 were the simplification of organizational structure, the optimization of the front operating model, as well as a significant reduction of non-personnel spend.
Finally, just to reconfirm that in the strategy update, we also announced further structural efficiency improvements, also for CHF 130 million, with a phased implementation by 2028. The preparations for this program are well underway. On Slide 15, we summarize the profit development. IFRS net profit was impacted by the net credit losses in the sale of Julius Bär, Brazil, as already reported and discussed in the IMS in May. On an underlying basis, that is excluding M&A-related items and the net credit losses, it is good to see positive operating draws, with operating income up 5% and expenses up 2%, resulting in an 11% year-on-year increase in underlying pre-tax profit to CHF 614 million and an underlying net profit to CHF 511 million, and the pre-tax margin improving by one basis point to 25 basis points.
Return on CET1 on this basis was 28%, a bit lower than the 30% print a year ago, as CET1 capital grew even faster than underlying net profit, as we will see in a bit. The underlying tax rate was 16.7%. Our forward tax guidance continues to be between 18%-20% for the current full year and the next two years, taking into account the currently expected impact of the implementation of the OECD minimum tax rate in various jurisdictions. Onto our balance sheet on Side 16. Our balance sheet remains highly liquid, with a loan-to-deposit ratio of 63% and one of the highest liquidity coverage ratios in Europe at 303%. As large positions of the balance sheet are denominated in dollars, the year-to-date weakening of the dollar against the Swiss franc had a meaningful impact on how those balance sheet items developed in Swiss franc terms.
For example, the loan book declined marginally by 0.5%, or minus CHF 0.2 billion, to CHF 41.6 billion, but on an FX-neutral basis, the increase in loans was plus 4%, or plus CHF 1.5 billion. Deposits declined by 5%, minus CHF 3.4 billion, to CHF 65.3 billion. On an FX-neutral basis, deposits increased by almost 2%, or plus CHF 1.1 billion. As Swiss interest rates drop to zero, it is probably no surprise to see that almost all Swiss franc deposits have shifted to current accounts by the end of June. Turning to the capital development on Slide 17. The Basel III final standard was fully implemented in Switzerland as of the current year. In the graph on this slide, we show for end 2024, the CET1 capital ratio pro forma for Basel III final at 14%. The development from there to the 15.6% level at the end of June.
CET1 capital grew by 4% to CHF 3.7 billion, as the combined benefits of net profit generation and the continued OCI pull-to-par effect more than offset the impact of the dividend accrual. In the appendix on slide 33, you can find the usual linear estimate of the timing of the remaining pull-to-par benefit of just over CHF 100 million. At the same time, risk-weighted assets decreased by 5% to CHF 24 billion, mainly on lower market risk positions, as well as lower credit risk positions, which was partly the result of the further wind-down of the private debt loan book, which typically carries a risk rating of 100%. As a result, the CET1 capital ratio improved to 15.6%.
As we explained earlier this year, for Julius Bär, the main impact of Basel III final is on operational risk weights, the calculation of which reflects operational losses incurred over the preceding 10-year period. For Julius Bär, until the end of this year, these still include the $547 million legal provision we took back in 2015 for the agreement at that time with the U.S. Department of Justice about the group's legacy U.S. cross-border business. This inclusion is therefore temporarily inflating operational RWAs by CHF 1.7 billion before being eliminated again from the calculation at the end of 2025. Pro forma for that impending elimination, the look-through CET1 capital ratio is 120 basis points higher at 16.8%. Risk density was 23% at the end of June, and our risk density guidance is unchanged from the 22%-24% range we gave in the strategy update last month in London.
As we also discussed extensively last month, while our capital distribution policy did not change, any capital distribution in the form of future buybacks remains subject to regulatory approvals from our home regulator, FINMA. Finally, on Slide 18, a quick review of the development in the tier-one leverage ratio. As a result of the CET1 capital development and the net impact of the CHF 350 million AT1 call in June and the $400 million AT1 issuance in February, tier-one capital was unchanged at CHF 5.3 billion. The leverage exposure declined by 1% to CHF 107 billion, basically in line with the balance sheet evolution. As a result, the tier-one leverage ratio was essentially unchanged at 4.9%. Comfortably above the regulatory floor of 3%. With that, it is my pleasure to hand the microphone back to Stefan.
Thank you, Evie. I would like to conclude with a short recap of our new medium-term targets announced last month in the strategy update. In terms of net new money, we aim to improve progressively towards a 4%-5% range by 2028. In that context, I reconfirm my conviction that we need to focus on quality. Quality both in terms of net new money and relationship management hiring. Quality in net new money implies that we are very focused on advancing our de-risking exercise as much as we can in the second half. When it comes to RM hiring, our focus is firmly on hiring the best, leveraging our strong employer and brand recognition, as well as our unique business model. In addition, we want to drive structural and sustainable operating leverage, aiming for a cost-income ratio below 67% in 2028.
Our underlying cost-income ratio stands at 68.2% in H125, so we're moving in the right direction. Note the 68.2% was against a gross margin of 83 basis points, but as we said at the strategy update, we're using a gross margin input factor of 80 basis points. Plus, we are making substantial investments into the franchise in the upcoming years. Hence, I expect our target of below 67% to be reached towards the end of the strategic cycle. The higher return on capital nature of the Julius Bär business model is reflected in our return on CET1 target above 30%. To unleash the full potential of Julius Bär, we'll continue focusing on the implementation of our strategic agenda with disciplined execution throughout. We're all committed, and the entire organization is fully mobilized.
As mentioned at the strategy update, we'll provide you with an update on our progress at the full-year results presentation in February next year. With that, I would like to close the presentation and transition to the Q&A. Thank you very much for your attention, and we welcome your questions.
We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question or make a comment may press star and one on the telephone. You will hear a tone to confirm that you have entered the queue. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use only handsets while asking a question. Anyone with a question may press star and one at this time. Our first question comes from Hubert Lam from Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I've got three of them. Firstly, for mid-June, I think when I calculated, you'd have about 4.5% annualized net new money. Should we assume that's a bit of a one-off? Should we expect more de-risking outflows to come for the rest of the year? That's my first question. The second question is on. You also talk on flows where you also talk about the increasing contribution from seasoned RMs. Can you talk a bit more about this? Is this in reaction to your new actions and incentives, or is this a bit too early for that to come through? Lastly, just any update on the FINMA investigation would be helpful. Thank you.
Morning, Hubert. I'll take questions one and two, and Stefan will address the third question. You are correct. May and June were quite good in terms of annualized growth rates in terms of net new money. However, as we said, we do expect that a continuation of the linear de-risking, and therefore we still perceive that 3% is the right guidance for the full year in terms of net new money. Now, with respect to seasoned RMs and their contribution, we are quite pleased or encouraged with the development. They contributed roughly 40% to the total print. However, this is a cyclical number, and what we are really aiming to do is make sure that their seasoned RM contribution becomes sustainable and on a repeated basis. Therefore, I think it is too early to run a victory lap on that count.
In terms of the contribution of the RMs on business case, of which roughly there is 28% of our population right now is on business case, we are very pleased with the development there. The business case achievement rate is tracking at 70%. As we said in the strategy update, we want to fully deploy both levers for sustainable, high-quality net new money growth in the years to come.
Hubert, on the FINMA, as our Chairman said at the strategy update last month, there are two preconditions that need to be met before any dialogue can be started with FINMA about buybacks. The first is that we want to be back in the terms of strategic envelope in our wealth management lane. Second, we want to complete the risk review, which we said earlier on will be completed in the next few months.
Once these two conditions have been met and we are fully comfortable with the risk position, then this is the time, from our point of view, to have a dialogue with FINMA about share buybacks again. In the meantime, we continue to have an active and constructive dialogue with all of our regulators, and we work hard to build a relationship of trust by being proactive and transparent.
Great. Thank you.
The next question comes from Benjamin Caven- Roberts from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead.
Morning. Thanks very much for the presentation and for taking the questions. Just two from me, please. First, on margins. I believe you cited an exit margin of 14 basis points for activity-driven income. How would you expect that to trend into the second half? On the interest-driven income exit rate of 25 basis points, I think you mentioned, with 24 basis points guidance for the full year, is that effectively implying a slightly lower second-half print just on the back of lower dollar rates? Secondly, just on the risk-weighted assets. You mentioned there is the 120 basis point impact from the DOJ settlement being eliminated. Is there anything else of that sort we should also bear in mind beyond 2025? Thank you.
Thanks, Ben. Let me start with question two. The answer is clearly no. That is the only. The $1.7 billion related to DOJ is the only thing we expect as of right now. In terms of the 2025 outlook for recurring margin, we remain focused on increasing recurring income to 37-39 basis points by 2028.
For IDI or interest-driven income for the second half of the year, we would expect IDI margin to stabilize around the H1 2025 levels of 24 basis points. With respect to activity-driven income, as always, this piece is very difficult to forecast and depends on support from the market environment. What I can tell you is that for the first four months of the year, we had the VIX at 22. In May-June, it dropped to 19. Now in July, it has dropped to 17. In fact, we have had, I think, 16 or 17 consecutive days of the S&P 500 not moving more than 1% in either direction, which is the longest stretch of relative tranquility since, I think, December. That being said, I think activity-driven income is the hardest one to forecast.
Thank you.
T he next question comes from Anke Reingen from RBC. Please go ahead.
Thank you very much for taking my questions. The first is on the relationship manager leaving your platform. I just want to confirm, basically, that the impact has not been seen in the net new money, but I would suspect also not in the cost yet. Do you think you have basically come to an end in terms of the departures? Secondly, you said you are going to update with full-year results on your strategic progress. What is sort of like the goal posts you put up on the path on the 2028? Is this the RM, net new money, and cost-income ratio, or what should we be expecting? Thank you.
Let me try and tackle the first one, Anke. Out of the 78 RMs that left the platform in the first half of the year, some of them, a portion of them, is because of intensified low-performer management over and above the low-performer management we do as a matter of ordinary course of business. Some of them are also from natural attrition and retirements. We have a pretty high retention rate for RMs that depart the platform. All of that should be reflected in our net new money guidance of 3% for the year.
Have the departures now come to an end, or should we more expect leavers in the second half?
I would not say that the departures have come to an end. For the reasons that we mentioned, low-performer management, natural attrition, there will be further departures.
Okay.
I should also add to this, Anke, that there will be also further hiring. We have hired 55 for the first half of the year. We have signed on another 21. I would expect us to be able to get to 130-140 gross hirings by the end of the year. We definitely remain a very attractive destination for talented relationship managers.
Okay.
Anke, good morning [crosstalk]
Thanks for that. I am sorry.
Let me take the other question on the strategy update. I mean, as you can imagine, Anke, we are very focused on our three medium-term goals: net new money, the cost-income ratio, and the return on CET1. In the meantime, we launched some speed boats on selected initiatives, to mention a few, ease-of-doing business, which is all about our risk-based approach, compensation review, culture and conduct program, ultra-high net worth clients, and so forth. As you can imagine, we have a lot of communication internally to mobilize the organization around this. The detailing is ongoing, and the remaining initiatives will be launched in 2026. I will give you an update on that at our full-year results.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Benjamin Goy from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Two follow-up questions on the de-risking. Can you maybe highlight the impact it had on your net new money numbers in the first half, and then also the good-to-see modest leveraging up of clients again? Was it impacted also by the de-risking activity? If yes, could you share the magnitude of it? Thank you.
Hey, Ben. Good morning. Evie here. For the first half, we had de-risking-related outflows of around CHF 1 billion. On re-leveraging, we had de-leveraging for the first four months of the year, but then we saw re-leveraging in the last two months of the year.
I would like to remain a bit cautious in terms of hailing a proper restart of re-leveraging. The reason is that dollar rates remain still at the range on the short end of 4.25%-4.5%, and a lot of our clients who are prone to leveraging investments are dollar-based investors. Therefore, I think we have two necessary preconditions to call the start of re-leveraging in earnest. Number one is for the short rates to come down, and number two is to see an upward-sloping yield curve, particularly on the dollar yield curve.
Maybe to clarify, Anke mentioned de-risking outflows should continue in the second half, but is it fair to assume this would be less than the CHF 1.4 billion in the first half?
We have said it is going to be linear, so I would expect a similar quantum.
The next question comes from Mate Nemes from UBS.
Please go ahead. Yes. Good morning and thanks for the presentation. Three questions, please. The first one would be still on re-leveraging. Could you give us a sense where you are seeing clients re-leveraging regionally? Is that mainly Singapore, Hong Kong, Southeast Asia, or any other regions? That is the first one. Second one would be on Slide 9 in the RM waterfall. Specifically, the 43 FTEs or RMs related to new front operating model and internal transfers. Have we seen the bulk of the impact in H1 on that front, or should we expect anything incremental in the second half as well? And finally, just the last one. If you could share your thoughts briefly on the interest rate sensitivity from here onwards and specifically on the prospect of negative rates in Switzerland, how that would impact your financials. Thank you.
Thanks, Mate. Good morning. In terms of the regional breakdown of leverage, in the first half of the year, we saw some re-leveraging in Western markets and Switzerland, our new combined region. We also saw some re-leveraging in Asia, and we saw some de-leveraging in emerging markets. Now, the second question you asked was around the 43 RMs on slide nine that are a result of the changes we made from the new front operating model and some internal transfers. That should be it. I do not expect anything else going forward. On the interest rate sensitivity, I think while our in-house view, at least from our economic research team, is that rates will stay at zero by year-end, the market consensus, as you know, is currently pricing a certain likelihood of a further 25 basis point rate cut.
The impact of potentially negative rates in Swiss francs is limited under always a constant balance sheet structure and AUM assumption. We note, however, that there is a dependency on potential future Swiss National Bank policy decisions, including things such as negative rate exemption thresholds on sight deposits at the Swiss National Bank, as well as the competitive environment, what competitors are doing. If you look at the interest rate sensitivity slides that we show, as usual, on Slide 31 in the Appendix, with the caveat that, again, we are talking about a balance sheet structure that is unchanged and AuM as of June 30, an unexpected 100 basis points parallel shock to current rates will result in a small positive impact in Swiss franc. So positive FX swaps, negative on NII.
Maybe just to add on relationship manager hiring, I would say the momentum has picked up post-strategy update. This has really resonated with potential candidates. I would say we continue to be a very attractive destination for high-quality talent. As you may have seen, we just hired a fantastic team in Latin America, including a new market head. Having said that, we hired 55 so far. We signed on another 21. We probably get to 130 or so this year, as opposed to 150, as we focus on quality and we apply more scrutiny to increase the chances of RMs to be successful once they're on the platform.
Thank you, Stefan.
The next question comes from Amit Ranjan from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Yes. Hi. Good morning and thank you for taking my questions. The first one is on the review of the front office compensation model that you had talked about. Has that been completed? If it's been implemented, or when do you expect to implement it? And if you could highlight any key changes you plan to implement under that new plan? The second one is on cost. In the first half, you have talked about the reduction in external staff spend and consulting and legal fees. Do you see further scope of reduction there? Going forward, what would be the key drivers of the expense reduction? Thank you.
Thanks for the question. Let me start on RM comp. This is still in the making, and it is subject to regulatory approval as well as sign-off from the board. I would say we are well advanced in our thinking, and the basic premises I mentioned at the strategy update is to align our relationship managers with the bank and hence with our shareholders.
That basically means that we'll make sure that our relationship managers have an incentive to stay in our core wealth management lane, that we manage our tail risk, and we incentivize relationship managers to focus on sustainable growth, which in my view is not leading to any change in terms of attractiveness of the platform. I continue to think we're a great destination for talent.
Amit, on costs, we do indeed believe there is further scope. Hence, we announced further structural efficiency measures of CHF 130 million for the next couple of years. These are going to be anchored across three buckets. Number one is the completion of the front-to-back operating model optimization.
Looking at potentially further delayering and structural synergies in the mid- and back- office units, an acceleration of near- and offshoring of non-front operations, which helps, as you know, diversify a little bit our Swiss franc cost base in the long term, at least. A re-evaluation of our footprint and certain, I would say, ancillary business propositions. Second bucket would be process and IT simplification. Stefan has alluded to that. We've already started one of the speed boats around process simplification. Of course, that will, on the one hand, free up time for the RMs, but hopefully as well, it will create some savings as well. Really a redesign and simplification of key front-to-back processes. We will try and leverage, to the extent possible, technology for that. Also streamlining and consolidating our IT application landscape. The third bucket, and perhaps the most important one, is a continued focus on cost discipline, frugality, and performance culture.
There, we plan to continue focusing on rationalizing external spend. Yes, there is more scope for that. We have mobilized our procurement team, improved demand control, and, of course, continued stringent low-performer management across the firm.
Thank you.
As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star followed by one. The next question comes from Stefan Stalmann from Autonomous. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Thank you very much for the presentation. I wanted to ask first about your income from treasury swaps, please. I hope I get the numbers correct, but I think they are probably not affected by the restatement. On my numbers, you had 19 basis points of treasury swap-related income in the first month and 21 for the six months, so roughly 25 basis points in May-June. Quite an increase versus the run rate in the first four months. Could you add a bit of color of what happened there, what drove this, and how sustainable this contribution was? Given that you mentioned it, I am curious, could you maybe suggest how close you actually are to the SNB's exemption thresholds for current account remuneration? The final question, could you maybe explain what exactly drove this restatement between NII and fair value results on these non-Swiss franc bonds? That would be useful. Thank you very much.
Good morning. Let me start with the income from treasury swaps. The May to June exit rate is around 24 basis points. If you look at the increase in our swap income in the first half of the year in 2025, that was mainly driven by higher volumes.
That explains about 80% of the increase, and also by the widening of the dollar-Swiss franc interest rate differential. Our average FX swap volume in H1 was around 27 billion. That is five to five and a half billion more than H2 and H1 of last year, and that is mostly against the dollar. We saw a further increase in FX swap volume to 29 billion in June, which obviously drives the increase in the exit margin. I think there are several factors at play here. Number one that drives the increase of swap volume is higher deposit volumes. Number two is a change in asset composition, so you have fewer dollar loans and more Swiss franc loans. Number three, seasonally higher funding from our markets business. We issued quite a few term deposit notes in the first half of the year, which obviously contributes to those swap volume increases.
In terms of the SNB exemption threshold, that is at 4.9 billion, and we try to manage the balance sheet close to that exemption threshold in our treasury. Your third question was, can you repeat the third question, please? What drove
Exactly, the use for the restatements?
Yep. So, I think what we've done is we've gone basically from a full reversal booking logic to an incremental booking logic. Not to get too technical here, but I know you like the details, so I will go ahead. Full reversal booking logic is when interest accruals consisting of amortization of discounts and coupons are fully reversed and then re-recognized at the new spot rate. This approach leads to interest income being measured at the spot rate on payment dates.
With the new logic, incremental monthly interest accruals are locked in at the respective spot rates, and the sum of the fixed amounts is reported as interest income at payment. The difference between this interest income and the actual payment is recognized as FX gain or loss on trading income. Now, it's important to highlight here that this is not a restatement. It's not a change in accounting estimate or a change in accounting policy. It's just a shift between NII and trading income. To answer concretely your question on why we thought this was something that was necessary to do, number one, I think it's market practice. It's an improved booking methodology. Number two, it better showcases the economics of net interest income.
All right. Thank you very much.
The next question comes from Giulia Aurora Miotto from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Yes. Hi. Good morning.
Thank you for taking my questions. I have two. The first one is about the Chief Compliance Officer. I guess you're still looking for one. How close are you to recruiting a new one if you can give us an update there? Would you expect him or her to then start yet another client review when he or she starts? Secondly, on technology, if I remember well from the investor day, you're investing quite a lot, especially in Switzerland, to basically change the infrastructure, including the core banking system. How is that project going? Thank you.
Thank you, Giulia. On the Chief Compliance Officer, we want to hire the very best, and it will take as long as it takes. We'll update you in due course. I think we have so far seen some great candidates, so I'm very positive on finding a great person.
Of course, we look both internally and externally. On the IT project, it is well underway. We are, of course, applying a lot of scrutiny, but early indications are that we are making very good progress.
Thanks. When do you expect to migrate from the old system to the new system?
Be a few years out. Okay.
Thank you.
The last question for today's call comes from Jeremy Sigee from BNP Paribas. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Morning. Two questions, please. One, I just wanted to follow up on the capital management discussion. You've got a big surplus building. You've been very clear on what you need to get done before you talk to FINMA about buybacks. Is the year-end and the full-year results, is that a key sort of deadline for you to be ready for some action on capital management? Or if it needs longer, it just takes longer? I just wondered how you're thinking about that. My second question is just on the weaker dollar, and particularly if there's a risk of further weakening, are there any changes you're making to adapt to that, either thinking about further cost savings or relocation of costs?
Let me take the first question, Jeremy, on capital management. I think what I refer to is when we are ready and what steps we are undertaking to get ready. Of course, the ball will be in the court of our regulators once we'll have done our homework. Then it's entirely up to them what timing they have in mind. Unfortunately, I cannot give you a clear timeline because I don't have one. It's driven by our regulators.
Jeremy, good morning. Evie here. I mean, currently, our efforts to reduce the currency mismatch are largely focused on driving nearshoring opportunities in our service centers in Madrid, Spain, and in Mumbai and Chennai in India. We're obviously also looking at bolstering our position in Switzerland because it's not only a story around cost. It's potentially also a story around increasing Swiss franc-related revenues. We've made a little bit of progress, I would say, going from 57% of the cost base in Swiss francs to 53% as of June. I think it's very difficult to make statements around drastically changing that currency mismatch in the midterm.
Okay. Thanks very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Alexander van Leeuwen for any closing remarks.
Yes. Thank you very much all for your questions and for listening in. The IR team is available for further questions offline. On behalf of all at Julius Bär, I wish you a great summer, and we will be back with our next update at the IMS in November. Thanks again and speak soon.
Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. Thank you for choosing ChorusCall, and thank you for participating in the conference. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.