Good morning and a very warm welcome to the Judo Bank Result briefing for the full year ended 30th of June 2022. My name is Andrew Dempster, and I am General Manager, Investor Relations at Judo. We're in Melbourne today, and before we begin, I'd like to acknowledge the traditional owners and custodians of the land on which we meet, the Wurundjeri people of the Kulin nation. I pay my respects to elders past, present, and emerging. This morning, we will first hear from our CEO and Co-Founder, Joseph Healy, with an overview of the results and an update on our progress. Chris Bayliss, our Deputy CEO and CFO, and also a Co-Founder, will then discuss our financials in detail. Joseph will then return to discuss our outlook. There will also be time for questions. Our result material was lodged earlier this morning with the ASX. The material is also available on the Judo website in the investor section. A replay of this session, including the Q&A, will be available on our website later today. I will now hand over to Joseph. Thank you, Andrew, and good morning to everyone. This is a highly symbolic date for Judo. It's our first full year set of results as a public company, and we believe we have a great set of results to mark the occasion. Let me start by restating some important context around Judo. We are a purpose-led organization. We have defined our purpose as being the most trusted SME business bank in Australia. Our vision, which guides how we are running and planning the future of the bank, is to build a truly world-class SME business bank. The metrics to scale that we'll touch on shortly will provide some evidence for progress on the journey to becoming world-class. First, however, I want to remind everyone about one of the unique characteristics of Judo, and that is specialization. We believe passionately that specialists outperform generalists. Being a unique specialist bank allows us to focus all of our attention and resources on SME banking. It's all we think about and all we talk about. Generalists might be bigger with more resources, but they can't move with the same degree of speed and agility or provide the same level of bespoke customer service. As a purpose-built and pure play specialist bank, we have so many advantages in which to compete and succeed. Before getting into the results, I want to remind everyone of Judo Bank's reason for being. This is also important context. Judo was born out of a belief that SMEs were being poorly served by a banking industry that had increasingly industrialized SME lending. In dealing with banks, SMEs were exposed to a triple U virus of being unloved, undervalued, and underserved. There had been a clear market failure with many good quality SMEs unable to access credit on sensible terms and conditions. SMEs were universally dissatisfied with the way that the banking system was meeting their needs. The industrialized operating model of the banking industry is one of expediency rather than one of service. It is product and sales-centric rather than relationship-led. In architecting Judo Bank, we wanted to go back to the fundamentals of SME banking or the craft of SME banking, where relationships trump products. A critical element of our success formula has been the deep experience of our management team. Our leadership team has over 200 years of banking experience. We are fundamentally a modern bank built by bankers that have deep domain experience and expertise in the craft of SME banking. FY 2022 has been transformational for Judo. We completed our IPO on November 21, and in doing so, raised the core equity capital we require to reach our metrics to scale. It's worth mentioning, and anyone who has been through an IPO will know this, that such an event is a huge distraction on management and the organization. It's at least six months of painstaking preparation, and this followed four years of private capital raising and obtaining a banking license. All this in addition to managing a fledgling bank in the eye of the COVID-19 storm. We head into FY 2023 without the burden of any of these significant distractions. At the IPO, we provided FY 2022 targets, and I'm happy to report today that we have achieved or exceeded every single one of these commitments. We remain highly confident in our ability to achieve the key business metrics to scale, which are, of course, the medium-term targets that we included in the prospectus and which are part of our definition of world-class financial performance. We have proven our specialist SME proposition. Our CVP, which is based on strong relationships, judgment-based lending, and fast turnarounds, is clearly resonating with customers, evidenced by our 73% growth in lending over the last year. Lastly, our asset quality remains strong. Judo was built on the foundation of risk management. In financial terms, this translates to a superior risk/reward outcome. Let me now turn to our numbers. On the slide, we've provided our key prospectus metrics against our reported results. As you can see, we have delivered against all the metrics. In the case of our pro forma profit before tax, we've delivered AUD 50.6 million, which is more than double the original prospectus of AUD 7.4 million. We delivered gross loans and advances at AUD 6.1 billion, ahead of our prospectus target of AUD 6 billion. Our lending growth has been supported by continued recruitment of high-quality relationship bankers. We have 115 bankers at 30 June versus our original target of 98. We've also had several bankers start with us since the beginning of the financial year, and as of today, the number of bankers at Judo is 123. We've been delighted by our ability to attract exceptional talent. Our underlying NIM at 2.79% has remained ahead of our original prospectus target. On costs, we have finished ahead of our prospective CTI target of 76.3%. We're still very much in a phase of ramping up recruitment, which is continuing this year. Credit quality was strong, and we remain very comfortable with our portfolio. We're now starting to generate profits and are confident that we can achieve market-leading ROE of low- to mid-teens% when we get to scale. Chris will get into the details behind these numbers shortly, but I do want to emphasize that we view these as a great set of numbers. Numbers that we're very proud of, and numbers that shine a light on the potential of a pure play specialist bank. We have a truly unique specialist model where all elements of the model have been designed from the ground up to deliver superior outcome for customers. As highlighted on the last slide, our loan portfolio has increased significantly throughout the year. The demand we have seen for our relationship-led approach has driven growth in all regions of the country as well as in all sectors and channels. In addition to expanding our geographical footprint, we have also established specialist segments in agri and health. Notwithstanding the growth we have enjoyed, we remain barely 1% of the market. Significantly and importantly, we have maintained a market-leading NPS of +78. We have significant growth runway ahead of us, but growth only has value if the risk-reward economics go hand in glove, particularly the cost of risk. From our foundation, a core belief is that banking is fundamentally in the business of risk management. When it comes to credit risk, a core belief is in the fundamental importance of the four Cs framework, where we look at security or collateral only after we are happy with character, cash flow, and the equity capital in the business. We are rigorous in the application of the four Cs framework, and as a result, some 45% of all credit requests are declined at a very early stage. Once the application passes through our initial screening, approximately 85% result in a loan, but not always in the form originally submitted. As a service-based bank, we will seek to provide an in principle answer on all applications within three days. Evidence of our risk management culture is reflected in the health of our credit portfolio. While the very nature of our philosophy is to stay in regular contact with customers, we recently undertook a deep dive forward-looking credit review of all customers in those sectors viewed as most sensitive to current environment of rising interest rates, higher input costs, and supply chain challenges. That review provided comfort that our approach to customer management is consistent with our risk management principles. A key feature of our CVP and approach to risk management is a low ratio of customers to banker at approximately 24 currently. This is in stark contrast to the industrialized models with call centers and with customer-to-banker ratios often in excess of 100. We'll dig deeper into portfolio risk later, but I want to emphasize that we're feeling very comfortable with the quality of the credit portfolio. An important feature of our business in the current environment is just how leveraged we are to rising interest rates. Chris will cover this in more detail, but the key takeaway is that 91% of our lending is priced on 30-day BBSW, while our term deposit book, which is most of our funding, has an average duration of nine months at fixed rates. As Chris will describe shortly, we have also been actively hedging our interest rate risk, which has had a positive impact on our cost of funds. Before passing to Chris, let me just summarize the headlines from our full year results. First, our results meet or exceed what we promised in the prospectus. Second, there is no question that our CVP is proven and is scalable. At approximately 1% market share, we have barely scratched the market potential. Third, our competitive advantage will underpin our growth aspirations regardless of competition or market conditions. We believe our CVP provides a strategic hedge, and I'll come back and explain what I mean by this shortly. Fourthly, the credit portfolio is in good condition, having just completed a customer-by-customer analysis in all sectors most vulnerable to changing conditions. Fifth, we have significant positive leverage to rising interest rates. Six, we remain confident about our ability to meet the metrics to scale that we outlined in the prospectus. I think we've also demonstrated the three must-haves of building a new bank, namely access to sufficient capital. We've raised over AUD 1.5 billion of equity since 2017. Second, a clear and sustainable competitive advantage. Third, a strong management bench with deep domain expertise and with a founder-centric mindset. I'll come back later to touch on the operating environment and draw some conclusions, talk a little bit about our culture and comment on the outlook. In the meantime, over to Chris. Thank you, Joseph. I really am delighted to present such a strong set of maiden results as a public company. Results which demonstrate great momentum in our business, which has continued throughout July and August, which we'll talk about a bit later. Our headline is a PBT of AUD 15.6 million. The fact that we're now profitable, and hence capital accretive, is important. The profit we have delivered is genuine and sustainable. While we have benefited from some unexpected tailwinds, there are no large one-off items that have flattered these results. Our profit is a result of a now proven sustainable business model, and as the loan book continues to grow, our profits will also grow with positive year-on-year jaws to our metrics at scale and superior ROE to our peers. Underpinning this profit is a very high quality doubling of our NII. I say high quality because it's the result of a trifecta of ands. Significant lending growth and higher margins for our new customers and favorable funding costs. The latter, of course, we spoke about at our trading update, and which is still very prevalent today. As highlighted earlier in the call today, our expenses that also grow as we continue to invest in scale, as you would expect for a young company. However, our CTI was comfortably lower than the prospectus target, and we also saw a 12% improvement from the first half to the second half, highlighting the economies of scale, and they started to manifest themselves. In terms of the detail, I'll start with lending growth. This is clearly the number one driver of our ability to meet the metrics at scale. GLAs were AUD 6.1 billion at the end of June, up 73% year-on-year. I mentioned that the momentum has continued since the end of June and can advise that we anticipate the GLA balance at the end of August being a very healthy AUD 6.5 billion. I would stress that we do not include undrawn lines of credit in our GLA, even though we receive line fees on these facilities and of course hold capital and cost of risk provisions. Today, this is an additional AUD 200 million, taking total facilities to AUD 6.7 billion. Consistent with previous reporting, the portion of the loan book that is on floating rates has remained steady at 91%. SMEs typically prefer the flexibility that comes with variable rates, and this hasn't changed in the current rising rate environment, and we don't expect it to change. The average size of new loans has remained consistent at just over AUD 2.2 million, highlighting that loans between AUD 1 million and AUD 10 million really do represent the sweet spot of our CVP. The mix of our originations between broker and direct has stayed constant at 75/25. Now that the operating environment for broker and network is returning to pre-COVID norms, we do expect this to continue its trajectory to 50/50 over time. Finally, a comment on the lending pipeline, which remains strong at AUD 1.2 billion last night. Our conversion rates are very stable, and so we would expect 90% of these facilities to be on our balance sheet by the end of November. Now, this is a material factor underpinning our forward guidance that Joseph will talk to shortly. Over the next few slides, I'm going to talk about the various components of our underlying NIM. A reminder that underlying NIM is a measure of the NIM, excluding the impact of the TFF preservation strategy. This time next year, underlying NIM and actual NIM will be the same number, but for now, the difference is the negative spread between raising deposits and then investing those funds into treasury instruments, which have temporarily secured part of the already drawn TFF balance. On screen, I've shown the drivers of underlying NIM since December, with a strong 11 basis point improvement to 2.84% for the second half. Underlying NIM for the full year was 2.79%, 10 basis points above our prospectus target. As you can see from the slide, the key drivers of the uplift were firstly, lower cost of deposits on a hedged basis, with some back book hedging, which had a big impact in May and June. Secondly, the continued replacement of the preserved component of the TFF with self-securitization AAA-rated SME loans. Thirdly, the tailwind we receive from interest rate increases. Offsetting these tailwinds was the full year impact of the decline in lending margins we experienced 12 months ago, and I'll touch on that a bit more in a minute, and also the higher average liquidity during second half of 2022, which reflected an opportunity to prefund deposit growth at attractive margins, making hay while the sun shines. I'll run through each of these elements in more detail over the next few slides. I'll start with deposit costs, where the current market really is very favorable for us, and this has continued into July and August. As we've reported previously, our through the cycle NIM of over 3% assumes TD margins of 80-90 basis points over one-month BBSW. Up until recently, our TD margins were broadly in this range, with headline rates stable at around 1% over a cash rate of just 10 basis points. Importantly, our deposits were unhedged as there was no real downside risk. Fast-forward to April, May of this year, when the rate environment began to change, TD rates increased rapidly, as you can see from the top chart. Now, many people interpreted this as a large headwind to our NIM. As discussed at the trading update, to manage this risk, we began hedging our portfolio to receive fixed and pay floating, matching our repricing profile. The bottom chart is what's important and shows the cost of new deposits after the impact of hedges. For a range of reasons, the pricing of swaps means the margin that we are locking in is well below our 80-90 basis point assumption. In fact, it's 36 basis points in June. This has resulted in a tailwind to NIM in the second half of FY 2022, which we will receive the full benefit of in the next half to December. Now, I'll come on to that again shortly, as this is an important component of guidance. Before leaving this slide, it is important to stress we clearly do not expect TD rates to remain at current levels versus the matched swap rates. Having said that, in July and August, our average margin on a hedged basis continues to be well below our 80-90 basis point assumption. Next to overall cost of funds, consistent with our long-term strategy, TDs have remained our primary fuel for lending growth, with the TD book standing at AUD 4.6 billion at the close of business last night, which isn't even 0.5% of the system. The book has grown by over AUD 1.5 billion for the year, with record volumes in recent months. It's also pleasing to note that the system for TDs has returned to growth for the first time in many years, a feature of a yield curve which rewards tenor versus cash flow call accounts. We've also continued to diversify our options for repayment of the TFF ahead of June 2024, which is essentially to leverage our investment grade credit rating with wholesale deposits, NCDs, senior unsecured, and renegotiated warehouses. Though on the latter, we're making excellent progress and anticipate having AUD 2 billion-AUD 2.5 billion of renegotiated committed lines in place by Christmas. In summary, the total blended cost of funds, including deposits, has continued its improving trajectory, falling from 220 basis points in June 2020 to just 60 basis points now. The TFF is becoming increasingly more valuable, where we've hedged one-third back to floating, which has reduced the overall effective rate of the full AUD 2.8 billion facility to just one basis point. Next are our lending margins. On the slide, we have shown gross margins over one month BBSW. Pleasingly, these remain stable at around 4.5% over the year, which is consistent with our original thesis. As we have previously discussed, the majority of lending is on floating rates. We do, however, also have a small portion of the portfolio that is fixed, largely the asset finance book, and so accordingly, this is set off different base rates. For this reason, reporting the all-in gross margin is not as useful moving forward as the cost of funds denominator is no longer one single number. The thing that most stands out on this chart is the period of elevated margins in FY 2021. We believe a key driver of this was the incumbent banks going risk off during the onset of COVID-19. Following this, the expectation of an extended period of low interest rates resulted in a lot of intense price competition, particularly in commercial property lending, where we've consciously reduced our portfolio concentrations. However, following the recent interest rate increases, we are already seeing the main banks return to risk off. We've had a number of instances where high-quality applications have been shown to us because the major banks have made blanket decisions regarding particular sectors. This is the strategic hedge Joseph referred to, and we believe continued economic uncertainty is likely to be a positive for our lending margins. Next to our leverage to rising rates. As Joseph has already mentioned, our balance sheet has a structural positive bias to rising interest rates. This is simply the timing benefit of floating assets versus long-dated fixed liabilities. Previously, we provided a very crude calculation of what that benefit is, but today we provide more specific sensitivity outcomes to enable investors to undertake their own modeling. These also take into account our revised approach to hedging interest rate risk. Conservatively, our base rate scenario is a cash rate of 2.5% by December this year, which then remains stable for the rest of FY 2023. In this scenario, we would see an additional 40 basis points tailwind to underlying NIM over the year compared with our second half, which we've just revealed to be 2.84%. This then phased into FY 2024 as TDs reprice, with the only permanent benefit being higher treasury returns. The one sensitivity that might surprise is the positive accretion to FY 2023 and FY 2024 NIM from a 1.5% cash rate, i.e. 1% below our base case. Given today's cash rate has already exceeded this level, you can conclude our NIM is still very much in a one-way growth trajectory. This nicely takes me on to the next slide, which is our NIM outlook. This analysis brings together all of what I've just discussed over the last five slides. We have shown this slide before. The key update is that we're now calling out our expected underlying NIM range of 3.3%-3.5% for this first half of FY 2023, which is reflective of the three major tailwinds set out on the slide. First, continued cash rate increases, as I said, conservatively assumed to be 2.5% by Christmas. Then second, the low margin at which we have originated a significant amount of TDs in July and August. Those TDs are up AUD 500 million since the end of June. Then thirdly, the continued execution of our TFF strategy, with full drawdown expected by the end of this calendar year or very early 2023. Now, clearly the benefit of the TFF and the cash rate increases are temporary. While there is the potential for some of these tailwinds to extend into H2 next year, the impact will eventually dissipate. We've also assumed that the deposit market returns to more conventional margins. Fundamentally, however, we are confident we're now taking NIM above the 3% metric at scale and holding it there post repayment of the TFF. Next to credit quality. I want to start by stressing that as a high-growth bank, the vast majority, in fact 80%, of our impairment expense is provision build in accordance with accounting standards which require us to take our provisions up front. In fact, only 20% of the charge or AUD 5 million represented actual write-offs. Actually, our first write-offs since since inception, which is substantially below the 50 basis point metric at scale guidance at only 11 basis points of our averaged FY 2022 GLAs. This is clearly not sustainable and reflects the newness of the book, so Joseph will talk to guidance shortly and provide an actual dollar range for the impairment charge in FY 2023 to allow investors to understand the combined impact of continued provision build with a larger book and assumptions around likely write-offs over the next twelve months. I would stress that the metric at scale guidance of 50 basis points assumes a static loan book, where annual write-offs and the impairment charge should be a similar number. In terms of leading indicators for this year's likely write-off number, our book is in very good shape. We have seen a jump in the 30- 90-day past due, but off a very low base of just five basis points last year. At 33 basis points, this causes us no concern at all and is just five customers. Our 90-day arrears numbers is virtually nonexistent and when added to impaired assets only totals 16 basis points and is made up of just nine customers. Shortly, Joseph will also give some insight into the performance of industries most exposed to inflation and interest rate increases, where you can see we have no concentration issues. Now, before I move off credit quality, I do want to make a few comments on the commercial property sector. As we know, this is of particular interest to investors. While the sector does account for 21% of our portfolio, our exposures here are well secured and diversified by sector and largely investor borrowers. With a forward outlook, we've been very conscious of our asset selection in this sector and made conscious decisions to rebalance the portfolio. As you can see, while GLAs for this sector are clearly increasing, the percentage weighting has come down as a result of us not competing aggressively for loans on price and through a consistent application of our four Cs approach to credit. Pleasingly, we've had no write-offs in this sector today. Now on to our operating expenses and CTI, noting these also include the payment of incentives to our team, which the prospectus target excluded and flagged as being self-funding from outperformance. As you can now see that outperformance did allow us to reward our team with a bonus payment, all of which is set out in our Remuneration Report. While our expenses have clearly increased significantly, this is all consistent with our investment thesis as we invest to support growth and as you'd expect for a young business. Importantly, our jaws is significantly positive, highlighted by CTI, which dropped 21 percentage points to 76%. This down trajectory continued into the second half with a CTI of just 71% on a standalone basis. To allow some modeling of our likely FY 2023 expenses, our exit expenses for June 2022 were AUD 14 million for the month, and we're also assuming just another 10% increase to include inflation as operating leverage starts to come through in a meaningful way. Lastly, our CapEx for FY 2022 was slightly lower than our previous guidance of AUD 15 million, reflecting a very tight labor market for hiring staff with the necessary technical experience in data, digital, and core systems, which we did, of course, highlight during our May trading update. Now to my last slide, which is focused on capital. There really is no new news here. Following our IPO, we remain very well capitalized with enough core capital to reach our metrics at scale. This has been reinforced by the pleasing reduction in our risk weight to 83% at the end of June, and the expected benefits arising from APS 120 in January next year, which should take these down further to about 80%. We do anticipate bolstering our total capital position with an AT1 issue early next year, and then more Tier 2 in the second half of calendar 2023 as we start to optimize the entire capital stack. Our at-scale ROE metric assumes capital ratios pitched midway between the regionals and the majors, noting we are a standardized bank. As an advanced bank, we would of course be targeting ROE in the high teens. On that, I'll now hand back to Joseph to provide his concluding remarks and also provide guidance for FY 2023. Thanks, Chris. Let me spend a few moments on the operating environment, then summarizing some of the key messages from our results. I also wanna touch briefly on our culture and then turn to the outlook. We are in an environment that's moving from COVID risk to the potential of stagflation risk. I come on to the sectors most vulnerable on the next slide, but I wanna call out that we continue to watch the mortgage market and the risk of a correction of valuations and the emergence of financial distress as interest rates rise. We see this as the biggest macro risk. There was far too much lending done at high multiples to income and a significant repricing of low fixed rate loans still to occur. These conditions create the risk of distress which cannot be wished away. The risk is not with the average borrower, but with the tail, where history informs us that contagion risk can spread quickly. Notwithstanding these macro concerns, we are confident that the Judo CVP will shine in whatever economic environment we have to operate in 2023. With a low ratio of customers to banker, we are across our portfolio in a way that others simply can't be. The in-depth portfolio review just completed is reassuring, but we're not gonna be complacent. As mentioned earlier, part of our analysis was to look at our exposure to those sectors deemed most sensitive to inflation and interest rate pressures. There's a lot on this slide, but the key takeaways are. Firstly, there are no material concentrations, and we have been lowering our CRE exposures, Chris highlighted earlier. Secondly, we are well secured. Thirdly, as Chris mentioned, there are only nine customers that are 90 days past due and impaired. Fourthly, our construction exposure is approximately one-third asset finance, with the remaining exposures secured by non-construction assets. Our pure construction exposure is negligible. Naturally, we will continue to monitor these and other exposures closely going forward as market conditions change. Let me spend a moment now on why we believe we have a strategic hedge. Our relationship model and our CVP are core strengths heading into whatever conditions we are presented with. As commented earlier, an important feature of our strength is our emphasis on the four Cs of credit and our low customer-to-banker ratio. Judo relationship bankers have averaged 15 years of experience, and as mentioned, we have a management team with unparalleled experience. We see ourselves as having a strategic hedge to the environment in that we will prosper where there is growth, and we will do the same in a correction. As the banking industry has a history of freezing when conditions become challenging, leaving many good businesses without certainty of support. This creates an opportunity for Judo, as was evidenced at the onset of COVID in early 2020. In the twelve months to March 2021, when the systems shrank 2.2%, Judo doubled its loan book. I wanna spend a few moments on the priorities that we see as critical to our success. When we think about our priorities for building a world-class bank, there are five areas of focus. First, maintaining our unique culture. This is so important, and I'll come back to it in a moment. Second, always and forever keeping our customers front and center in everything we do. Remember, Judo came about because there was a market failure in servicing SMEs. Third, maintain a challenging mindset and consistent with that. Fourthly, avoiding the many risks of sleepwalking to becoming a smaller version of the big players. Fifth, continue our journey in building a world-class bank through a strong commitment to investing in technology. We have made great progress since the IPO and hiring key executive talent into our technology team with the appointments of a chief technology officer, a chief information security officer, and a chief data officer. I want to spend a second on some concerns. All businesses face challenges. Over and above the credit portfolio, we see our top four challenges as, first of all, the shortage of specialist talent in certain functions, in particular, IT. The increasing burden of regulation, which doesn't discriminate between small banks and large banks. The real risk of entrenched inflation. Fourthly, preserving our unique culture as we grow. Over 60% of our staff have been with us less than 18 months. In fact, we doubled our headcount during the COVID-19 lockdowns, which is no easy feat from a cultural perspective. I'd like to spend a moment on culture as we see this as defining to our future success. Culture, as Peter Drucker famously said, "Eats strategy for breakfast." We would add lunch and dinner. A great culture combined with a strong competitive advantage is a powerful combination in driving financial outcomes. A couple of months ago, we surveyed our people and asked them why they joined Judo. You can see from the data that all things that underpin a unique culture dominate responses. Most importantly, we then ask them, "Has Judo lived up to the promise when they joined the company?" Our people and our culture stand out as having lived up to the promise in a very compelling way. This is very exciting as it says a lot about the future of our business and our ability to differentiate and deliver superior economics. The power of culture as a foundation and driver of competitive advantage and superior performance is often underestimated by business, but not at Judo. We spend a significant amount of our leadership dialogue on this. Before wrapping up, let me return to the metrics to scale and our FY 2023 guidance. You can see that we remain very committed to the metrics to scale, and in FY 2023, we expect to demonstrate clear progress to getting there. Based on our current read of market conditions, we are confident of growing our loan book to above AUD 9 billion. We're very confident in earning a NIM north of 3%. We will take our CTI to below 60% on a continued downward path, approaching 30%, and our cost of risk will reflect our continued growth in the loan book. In so many ways, FY 2023 is a seminal year in terms of demonstrating our ability to hit metrics to scale, and we will show an ROE of low- to mid-single digits on a pathway to mid- to low-teens. I'm pleased also to tell the investor community that our communication plan in the year ahead is to present in-depth operational market briefings on three key aspects of our business. Firstly, credit quality. Secondly, the path to the CTI target. Thirdly, on our culture. Let me finally make some concluding remarks before opening up for questions. As this slide heading declares, the strategic narrative on Judo remains unchanged, which has been the case since 2016 when we started architecting the business. We are a truly unique pure-play SME bank, a specialist which will deliver specialist economics over time. Our CVP represents a strategic hedge, so we're well-placed in whatever economic environment we might see. Risk management will remain a core competency, and our commitment to our metrics to scale is unwavering. We will compete by playing to our strengths and avoid mispricing risk simply to build volume. We will continue to be disciplined business managers. Building a new bank capable of scale and getting it to profitability within three years and in a period dominated by COVID-19 challenges is hard work. There's no precedent globally for what Judo has achieved, and we are very proud of that achievement as outlined today. Thank you, and let's open for questions. Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two. If you are on a speakerphone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Jarrod Martin from Credit Suisse. Please go ahead. Good morning, congratulations on beating consensus. No mean feat in this type of market. Two questions. Maybe first question for Chris, second question for Joseph. If I look at the guidance that you've provided, and thank you very much for that, Chris, you've got expenses running at AUD 14 million per month, and you're looking at that growing by 10%. That implies an expense base of AUD 185 million in FY 2023. If I then take the top end of the CTI range of 60%, that then implies a revenue of AUD 308 million, and therefore an underlying profit of AUD 123 million at the top end of the range. Just checking, do I have the math correct in that? Yes, good morning, Jarrod. Yes, you do have the math correct on that. As for exactly the reasons that you just set out, yes. I mean, the CTI guidance, I think is the key number supporting that math. Yep. Okay. Thank you. Then perhaps a question for Joseph or Chris can come in on this. If I look at your at scale metrics, and you say this is medium term, but if I look at where your loan growth has been, it's 70% this past year. Your AUD 9 billion or at the low end of the implies 47% growth. If you then scale that down a bit, you know, 30% then 25%, you're getting to the bottom end of your at scale metrics. Are you prepared to actually, instead of saying medium term, put an actual quantifiable number in terms of number of years? 'Cause it does look as if that the bottom end of that scale is in sight within three-year timeframe. Chris, you wanna take that question? Yes. Thanks, Joseph. Thanks, Jarrod. Look, I think the better metrics, Jarrod, rather than the percentages are the you know the amount of absolute growth and how that's scaling with our banker numbers. You will obviously see from the results today that we grew by AUD 2.6 billion last year. We're giving guidance that we're gonna grow by at least AUD 2.9 billion this year. If you extrapolate that sort of AUD 3 billion per annum you know forward, you'll get you know you'll probably get somewhere close to where you know how we see the trajectory. I don't think there's anything heroic in that. As Joseph said, you know, our banker numbers closed at 115 at the end of June, which was ahead of the prospectus target. That's partly fueling the cost growth is that we've brought forward those investments in bankers because, you know, the talent is out there and wants to join Judo. We gave the spot number for banker numbers at 123 presentation. Even at those banker numbers, we're not looking for gross originations any higher than what we actually achieved last year per banker. I think you should look at the absolute growth and start to extrapolate that forward. You know, I would make the point that you're quite right to focus on that number 'cause it's the key, it's the key metric at scale, for you know, getting to an underlying ROE. You know, I think we're providing guidance that we're pretty much there on NIM, you know, they're over 3%. You know, the write-offs at just 11 basis points over GLAs for last year suggests that the 50 basis point guidance is purely a through the cycle assumption. Yes, it does all hinge on that loan book growth as you highlighted. Chris, just to kind of add a footnote to your comment. Chris mentioned the growth in banker numbers. We mentioned earlier the growth in our geographical footprint. We're now covering far more parts of the country than we were last year. Also we've moved and we've started to develop a specialization proposition. We're obviously coming from a low base. When we talk about a strategic hedge, we remain confident of getting the loan book to the AUD 9 billion in 12 months time, regardless of what the economic environment looks like. We still continue to benefit from the poor service proposition that many of the banks offer to SMEs. I mean, I think close to 70-75% of all our loan origination are customers dissatisfied with the service that they're receiving from the major banks and see Judo as much more suitable to their needs. You know, we're not relying on systemic growth or macro conditions. We believe that given where we are in the market and the investments we've made that we will achieve our FY 2023 guidance lending volume notwithstanding the market conditions. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Nick Dalton from JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi, everyone. A couple of questions from me. First on deposits. It looks like deposit growth came mainly through the retail channel in half. In your opinion, what do you think it's gonna take to get better growth in intermediated middle markets? Secondly, earlier in the year you increased your interest rate buffer on the loan serviceability calcs. Given economic conditions have arguably deteriorated in the half, have you made any other changes to your lending standards since? Yeah. I'll deal with the second part of that question and Chris, you deal with deposits. Let me start maybe earlier this year when conditions were showing evidence of potentially deteriorating, we did reevaluate our risk appetite and by sector. We've already mentioned that we reduced our the percentage of our portfolio in the commercial real estate market. We increased our buffer for sensitivity analysis for new lending to 300 points above our lending the risk-adjusted lending rate. We continue to monitor market conditions. We continue to adjust our risk appetite statement based on those conditions. That's very much part of the way that we're running the bank. We don't look at a risk appetite statement as an annual exercise. It's something that we review every month, and adjust accordingly. That's gonna be an ongoing feature because we are in an environment of significant uncertainty as we head into 2023. Therefore, you know, adjusting, adapting risk appetite will continue to be an important feature of the way we run the bank. Chris, do you wanna talk to the deposit question? Yeah. You know, absolutely. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. I mean, Nick, retail deposits are obviously our preferred channel for a number of different reasons. They're cheaper and also more, you know, we get longer dated tenure on those. So just to give some flavor for that, even today, the average duration of our retail deposits at point of origination is over 12 months. So our absolute preference is on retail deposits. The intermediated deposits, I mean, they do oscillate. The price point on those oscillates depending on what else is happening in the market. So we come in and out really depending on whether the market is favorable for us. Growth in that. I mean, we got a huge kick in terms of our access to that market with our investment grade credit rating. Obviously, you know, we're hopeful of getting a second investment grade credit rating soon as well, and that will obviously only continue to increase the size of that market opportunity for us. You know, our preference are those retail term deposits, long-dated, more attractive margins. As I think I said in my commentary, you know, July and August has that tailwind has just continued for us. Thanks. Thank you. The next question comes from Andrew Lyons from Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Thanks, good morning. Chris, just a question just around your first half 2023 NIM guidance of 3.3%-3.5%. It does appear to imply a continuation of the very low deposit spreads you've enjoyed towards the back end of the FY 2022. Just two things. Firstly, can you just talk about how your deposit growth itself has actually tracked since June 2022, and maybe just a little bit more detail around the extent to which spreads have remained sort of at that very low, sort of 30-40 basis points? A second question. To the extent that these deposit costs do need to normalize, and you say that they do normalize to your 80-90 basis point target, is that consistent with a 3.3%-3.5% first half NIM? Is it like I guess what I'm asking is 3.3%-3.5% with very low deposit costs sufficiently high? As that normalizes, you're still gonna be above 3%. You give a bit of detail on slide 20- Yeah Just keen to understand that in a bit more detail. Thanks. Yeah, yeah. No, no problem at all, Andrew. I think in my commentary, I highlighted that the deposit book as at last night was AUD 4.6 billion, which is AUD 500 million higher than at the end of June, so AUD 500 million of growth. We also indicated that the loan book growth is AUD 400 million. The fact that we've, you know, we've raised more deposits and loan growth, you can conclude from that the market has remained very favorable for us in June and July. In July and August, yes, we have been continuing to lock in those margins around that sort of 30, 40 basis point mark, and that's still true today. Today, if you go onto the right comparison sites after this call, you'll see we're still number one at those. The a big part of the full year impact of the full half impact from the tailwinds in sort of May and June, plus what we've been originating in July and August, give us the confidence to provide that quite specific NIM guidance of 3.3%-3.5%. Now, to answer your question, we have assumed, because I think it would be reckless to do anything other, we have assumed that those margins you know, return to the eighty/ninety pretty very quickly. You know, that it's not sustainable. If that's not the case, then you know you can absolutely look at the higher end of that range than the lower end of the range, but I don't have a crystal ball. You know, the 10-year average, as we've always said, is that 80-90 basis points. It was very much the cost at which we were originating deposits a year ago. And so when you get beyond that first half, and then you start that waterfall down to the over 3, you know, we have put 80-90 back into our model. The good news about that is that even putting 80-90 back into our model, we still now hold our NIM over 3%. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Josh Freeman from Macquarie. Please go ahead. Hey, guys. Thanks for the opportunity. Just a couple of questions from me. If I just sort of get you guys to turn to slide 20 with the margin bridge. The implied NIM in first half and your FY 2023 target imply a pretty wide range of outcomes, given the base rate of 2.5% implies a NIM of 3.3%-3.5% in first half. If we use that as a base, that can imply a range of outcomes for NIM in second half ranging from flat to sort of 2.7% or even a little bit lower. Would you guys be able to provide any further color on the impact you see coming through in second half 2023 and the phasing there? No, I mean. And then- Sorry, Josh. No, no. Go on. All I was gonna say, in my commentary, I said that, you know, we have now taken NIM above 3%, which is the long-term metric at scale, and we are now confident that we will hold it there. You can conclude from that in the second half, you know, we are still factoring a NIM of over 3%. Now, not 3.3%, 3.5%. We do believe that's the peak. Unless, you know, in terms of just how I answered the previous question, unless deposit margins do continue to be so favorable for us. It certainly doesn't drop below 3%, Josh, in that second half. Understood. Thanks for that. I guess second question. I think Joseph mentioned that you guys have started to see that major banks have started to move to risk off in SME, given what you guys have seen coming through your pipes. In that margin bridge, you don't speak too much towards lending margins. I guess I just wanna check on how you guys see the competitive intensity in SME trending from here in the short term. Well, we see it favorably in the sense that, as Chris mentioned, we have seen evidence across the country of banks adjusting risk appetite. The pricing of risk up to 30 June, or in fact, up to the end of July, really, was influenced by the access that banks had to the SME Recovery Loan Scheme, and a lot of banks were using that to price risk at a much lower rate than you would absent that government guarantee. Obviously, that government guarantee scheme matured at the end of June, although facilities can be drawn to the end of September. What we're seeing is that risks that were being priced, say, in the low 3s or the high 2s, given access to that scheme are now being repriced at more sensible levels. We anticipate, and again, it all really depends where the economy heads. That's gonna be contingent on where the cash rate heads. If conditions do show a marked deterioration from where we are today, then history tells us that banks do become quite risk averse. That means that some good businesses get kinda caught up in that because it is a one-size-fits-all approach that large institutions have to adopt, just given the scale. That really creates opportunities for Judo. We saw that at the beginning of COVID. Given that scenario, price becomes much less of an issue, and our ability to price a higher risk premium is much more a feature of the way that we would lend money. You know, depending on how it all plays out, there is an opportunity that we could see a lending margin adjusted for risk increasing. We're not forecasting that at this stage. It's simply a feature of the way we're thinking about a competitive environment. If that trend of banks you know, tightening up on credit risk continues, then we see that as a favorable opportunity for us. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. The next question is from Jonathan Mott from Barrenjoey. Please go ahead. Well, I've got a question on the cost guidance, if I could. They're really using that June run rate and then the 10% growth from here. My question is that sufficient? If you think about where you are, you already have 115 bankers, so the headcount is still growing. Obviously the ongoing business growth is coming through. There's been a lot of discussion about really needing to invest in technology to get to the better automation. Over time that you can get to a 30% cost-to-income ratio. Now, we all know that it's very difficult to get IT staff. It's very difficult to get developers coming through, and they're costing a lot more money. I think the capitalized costs that you have are a bit lower than you expected. It sounds like the IT development, if anything, is progressing a bit slower than you're anticipating. Do you need to accelerate the spend, especially for development and automation, so that you can get to that 30% number over time? Do you need to spend more in 2023? I've got a follow-up question from there. Chris. Okay. Thanks, John. Look, firstly on the comment on banker numbers. I think as we've said, you know, we have 123 bankers working for us today. That has been a bring forward on what we were originally anticipating. I think you can assume a much slower profile to banker growth in these next 12 months. Joseph highlighted that those bankers have, you know, sort of 20-25 customers each. As I said earlier, our growth assumption from a book of AUD 6.5 billion today to AUD 9 billion does not rely on any significant acceleration in those banker numbers. That'll have a much flatter profile to it. Yes, we provided exit guidance around our cost at AUD 14 million. You can do your own math on that. As Jarrod said, you know, you'll get to a cost base of about AUD 185 million. We have included in there basically everything we know about our cost base. Our wage settlement has already been signed off by the board and it's been communicated to our staff in the next couple of weeks. We believe that is a wage settlement that more than accounts for the current inflationary pressures. You know, staff do account for 75% of our cost base. In terms of the residual, that's largely fixed and not subject to any inflationary pressure over the next 12 months, whether it be license costs, maintenance costs, rent roll, marketing, et cetera. We're wouldn't be giving such specific guidance on our FY 23 costs if we weren't confident about them. In terms of investment in tech, you're absolutely right. Of course, that's a CapEx line largely. We have allowed AUD 20 million for CapEx for the next 12 months, which was what we flagged in the Investor Day a couple of months ago. As Joseph highlighted, we are gonna provide a deeper dive, you know, a briefing to you on technology and the path to that low 30% cost income ratio. We'll provide a lot more flavor for you know, when we provide that briefing. Yeah. I think this, Chris, it's worth adding that we've given the guidance on expenses. We don't see any risk to those expenses being higher than we've given guidance and partly 'cause we're across the expenses. Secondly, there is a natural level, a capacity level at which you can grow. Even, you know, we've set out the lending target, which is a proxy for growth. If the market presented an opportunity to go higher than that, it's unlikely that we would take that. We wanna be make sure that we're not overtrading in terms of the evolution of the operating model. We're very conscious that, you know, that credit risk is one thing, but there's also a significant operational risk if you try and grow this business too fast. You know, we're comfortable that the expenses will be within the limit that we've declared. We don't see any risk to that running away from us because we wouldn't allow it to happen. Okay. Then just a follow-up question, just putting a couple of pieces together. You've kind of said that you'd like to grow the book about AUD 3 billion per annum. Is the level that you think is a good number. We know the NIM is going to be higher in the first half then falling away in the second half, which would mean that 2024 NIM would be lower than 2023. It looks like your revenue trajectory will slow down into 2024, and also you'd have natural growth in that cost base, coming through. If anything, and obviously credit quality, if you do have a lagged impact of higher rates, that will come through over time as well. It seems to me that 2024 is going to be the biggest and most challenging year for Judo as you try to get to the scale numbers. Is that fair that 2024 is the challenge that we should be thinking about? Let me keep this one, Chris, and you add. I mean, one of the things that we've not factored into any of our commentary on the future of the company is the productivity premium we're going to get from the investments that we're making in technology. I mean, we've already said to the market that with our banker ratio to customers that's sitting at circa 25, over time we'll grow that to circa 40 customers per banker. The technology investment that we're making and will continue to make will deliver productivity benefits that mean that there will be the delta on expense growth will start to fade. I think we'll, you know, on that journey to the lower 30% CTI, you should not anticipate that expenses will continue to grow at the pace that we've outlined for FY 2023. Chris, anything you would add to that? No, no. I mean, just the same, really. I mean, we've. As I said, you know, positive year-on-year jaws, continual down trajectory of the cost-income ratio. I mean, you're right, John, of course, you know, a AUD 3 billion growth on a AUD 9 billion back book is a lower percentage. But as Joseph said, you know, we. That the increasing size of that back book needs management. Now, of course, the beauty of banking is you make money on your back book, not your front book. And so as our banker portfolios start to increase from those, you know, 20 to, say, 40 customers, then obviously the rate of growth is gonna slow accordingly. We're also being very conservative around the consumption of capital. As Joseph said, you know, you know, even if the opportunity did arise to grow the book higher than AUD 9 billion, as well as the reasons that Joseph gave as to why we would be cautious to do that, we have a very specific sculpting of our path to those metrics at scale so that we can stand by that statement we've made that we do not need any more capital. Core equity capital. Core equity capital. Thank you. Mm-hmm. Thank you. The next question comes from Brendan Sproules from Citi. Please go ahead. Good morning, team. Thanks for the opportunity to ask a question. Look, I just want to question around your cost of risk guidance, the AUD 50 million-AUD 60 million. Looking at your loan book growth, you expect around half of that expense to come from the growth in the loan book, given your current provisioning levels. My question is, why are you expecting such a low amount, maybe half, you know, AUD 20 million-AUD 30 million due to higher provision coverage and higher forecast write-offs? Just given the environment that we're facing where, you know, cost of debt is sort of going up considerably, but businesses are also facing significant challenges with inflation and slowing revenue growth. Brendan, it's Chris. We've given obviously very specific guidance on the cost of risk number, you know, in terms of an actual dollar range, because we want to make sure that everyone in their models is factoring into account the impact of, you know, IFRS 9 in terms of the growing size of the book, as opposed to modeling 50 basis points. The medium-term target of 50 basis points against GLAs year-on-year. I think the key thing is that our coverage, you know, we do say at the bottom of page 21, slide 21, that provision coverage is expected to remain stable or increase. We've got it at 91 basis points today. We are not expecting any material significant write-offs to come through in the next 12 months for all the reasons that we've already said in terms of the quality of the book. The deep dive analysis we've just done. You know, the disclosures we've given around our 30- and 90-day arrears positions. The lack of exposure to the construction industry. The fact that we've been reducing our exposure to corporate real estate, et cetera. You can make your own assumptions around write-offs and then use the residual amount of that guidance for provision build. All I'll say is flagged is that we have a total provision coverage in June 2023 higher than the position of 91 basis points that we've just declared for June 2022. Maybe I could just follow up on that. I mean, it does sound still relatively very benign conditions when you take the book growth out of that forecast or that guidance. What I mean, given that you've kind of indicated that you're a bit deeper on the risk scale than, say, where the major banks largely play. I mean, what is gonna cause them to pull back? Because it does sound like you're expecting in at least the next 12 months, a really benign environment generally for asset quality. I would've thought the major banks would be very happy lending into that environment. Well, I mean, Joseph here, Brendan. I mean, what we've said is, well, on the assumption that conditions deteriorate and banks do tighten credit, risk appetite and, you know, and having seen this so many times in the past, I know exactly how it works. Good businesses find it difficult to get access to the credit that they deserve. That creates an opportunity for us to grow. We talked about the strategic hedge and our ability to grow whatever market conditions are. We are already seeing, as Chris mentioned, a tightening in the credit appetite of some major banks, as I guess some people are assuming an outlook that's less than benign. From where we stand today, we're Our core assumption is that conditions will be somewhat benign heading into FY 2023. We have done a whole lot of scenario planning around, you know, a deteriorating economic environment and what that means. But as things stand today, we, you know, we're comfortable with the assumptions that we've made on cost of risk. Chris, you want to add to that? Yeah, I think. Thank you, Joseph. I mean, Brendan, I think just some specific data just to share. I mean, just to basically support everything we've just said. I mean, our provision coverage at the end of June 2022 was 91 basis points as we set out in this presentation. Now, our collective provisions are 88 basis points, and that obviously reflects the fact that we've said we really don't have anything in impaired or over 90 days. So the vast majority of that provision on the balance sheet today are collective provisions. Now, to compare that to the regionals, I mean, the regionals, I think, are their balance sheet coverage is 30-40 basis points, so the majors is 60-80 basis points. You know, we think we're very well provided for in addition to everything that Joseph has just said, which is why we're comfortable giving such specific guidance with regards to our impairment charge for FY 2023. Okay, thank you. Could I just squeeze one more question just on deposits? On slide 16, obviously, you show us quite a downward fall in the margin above the one-month BBSW. To sort of Jonathan Mott's question around the challenges you may face in 2024, I mean, there's AUD 190 billion of TFF across the system that's gonna need to be repaid. Most banks have a strategy that involves the deposit market to help fund that. Should we expect that, you know, during that time that we would expect that, you know, the margins on deposits that you'll actually have to pay for will be well above averages and well above what we've seen since you've been, you know, incepted as a bank? Look, I think what's important to note is that the major users of the TFF, of course, are the Big Four banks. Okay? I mean, they're the vast majority of that number. The Big Four banks, I think 75% of their deposits pay less than 25 basis points. If there's a war between the major banks for deposits, we're just gonna sit back and pass the popcorn and watch it. You know, we're playing in a very different part of the market, which is the branchless banks. You know, which is the neobanks, et cetera, the INGs, the Rabos, which aren't accessing the TFF. I see no reason why the refinancing of the TFF is gonna disturb the rates that the branchless banks have to pay for deposits. You know, we're very confident that, you know, at 80 and 90, which is, as I said, we have factored into our guidance the fact that we have originated AUD half a billion dollars of deposits in the last two months at margins more reflective of that 36 basis points on slide 16. But we're also assuming that the market does return to its sort of long-term average of 80-90 in the branchless banks, and we think that's a conservative assumption. I don't think the refinancing of the TFF is gonna change that, personally. Chris, just adding a footnote to your comments. I mean, our core assumption on pricing of deposits has consistently been that we will be about 60 basis points, taking a 6- to 9-month tenure, 60 basis points above the average of the major four banks. There's significant headroom already built into that pricing. It would be economic suicide for the major banks to try and engage in a deposit price war, given, as Chris mentioned, that they've got such a significant lazy deposit book paying very little. We don't see that risk. The second important point is that we remain such a small percentage of the deposit market. Chris, I think it's, like, less than 0.05%. Five, yes. I mean, the deposit market is, the TD market is an AUD 800 billion market and, you know, we've got AUD 4 billion of that. Yeah. We, you know, we will continue to monitor, but I think our underlying assumptions on the deposit, the prices we have to pay for deposit are well placed and provide significant headroom for us. Thank you. Appreciate the ability to ask three questions, too. Thank you, gents. Pleasure. Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'll now hand back for closing remarks. Well, thanks, everybody, for making the time, for this call this morning. I mentioned it in my remarks that today is a very symbolic day for Judo. It is our first full year results as a public company. Still a very young company, but a company with a very clear, and I would say simple strategy. You know, as a company that you'll find that our strategic narrative will remain unchanged. We are a pure play SME bank. We believe in the power of specialization. We believe that by sticking to what we do well and building the company by staying true to that we're gonna be able to deliver superior economics, and we're gonna be able to build a world-class SME bank. Everything that we've achieved, announced today, and the way that we're thinking about the journey to scale only underlines our confidence that we're gonna be able to do that. We look forward to the in-depth deep dives that we're gonna provide the market with on CTI, on culture, and on credit quality. That's part of the plan that I mentioned for the year ahead. We, you know, do very much appreciate the interest that you've shown in Judo. We're very excited about the company and about the prospects for the company. We very much look forward to the next chance to engage. Thank you, everybody, for your time this morning. Thank you.