Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Crédit Agricole S.A. Fixed Income Investor Call, commenting the Q4 result and the full year 2025. I am Romain Beillard, in charge of the FI DCM in Paris, and I have the pleasure to have two Crédit Agricole S.A. representatives with us today. Florence Quintin de Kercadio, she's part of the Debt Investor Relation for Crédit Agricole S.A., and Olivier Bélorgey, Deputy CEO and CFO for Crédit Agricole CIB, and Group Head of Treasury and Funding for Crédit Agricole Group. So I think you are all familiar with this exercise now. So thanks again for joining the call today. We will open the floor for Q&A at the end of the session, and I leave the floor to Olivier to comment the results. Thank you, Romain. Good afternoon, everyone. As Cécile Mouton, the Head of Investor Relations, is not available unfortunately today, sorry for that, I will have the pleasure and responsibility to run the entire presentation, and Florence will help me and support me during the Q&A session. Let's start slide five with the key messages and key elements of these Q4 and 2025 results. First of all, to say that our financial annual results are very strong, supported by, as usual, I would say, a very dynamic commercial activity, and despite the additional corporate tax charge, which at Crédit Agricole Group level, represent almost EUR 300 million, EUR 280 million exactly. The very good news behind these results, strong results and this dynamic activity, we will come back on that, consist in the evolution of the net interest margin of the French retail. We will come back on that. On top of that, we have, I would say, our strong pillars, which remain exactly the same, meaning a very strong solvency ratio, very strong liquidity, and a very good and impressive return on tangible equity for Crédit Agricole S.A., as well as a good asset quality. So if we go further and in some details, in terms of revenues, the revenues at group level stands at almost EUR 40 billion, +3.9% versus last year in terms of annual results, while at Crédit Agricole S.A. level, they stand at roughly EUR 28 billion, +3.3%. The good news is that, as you can notice, the evolution at group level is higher, 3.9, that at Crédit Agricole S.A. level, this is clearly due to the evolution and positive evolution of the net interest margin at the French retail business level. For the quarter, for Crédit Agricole Group, almost EUR 10 billion, +1.6%, and for Crédit Agricole S.A., -1.8%, almost EUR 7 billion. The Q4 at Crédit Agricole S.A. has been impacted by some one-off elements, which are diluted at group level, thus, this negative evolution of the revenues. I won't come back in detail on these one-off. I think that you've already seen them and read them during the equity call or when already looking at our press release and so on and so forth, but of course, I will be ready for questions in this regard. The other element, perhaps, that I will comment on this slide, I won't comment of all, of course, all these figures. Cost of risk, 28 basis point at group level. Once again, we will come back on that. Slightly higher than the 25 basis point that we have disclosed as our main hypothesis for the medium and for the medium-term plan. It's in line with the macroeconomic environment, but we still consider that the 25 basis point is what should be the through the cycle level for the group. In terms of commercial activity, I was talking about it; it's very dynamic. In terms of customer capture, more than 2 million gross customer capture, so 2.1 million for France, Italy, and Poland. This is coherent with our MTP target of +8 million across four years for the solely French market, but clearly, this is coherent. In terms of retail banking loan production, both on corporate and SME and home loans, we will detail that; it is also very dynamic, +15%. It's even quite surprising in the current uncertainty that we have that kind of growth, but it is what we effectively have delivered in 2025. In terms of insurance and asset management activity, we reach record level in terms of commercial activity with, for insurance, a record level of premium above EUR 50 billion for the first time, EUR 52 billion, +20%. And for Amundi, net inflows at EUR 88 billion, it's almost one point. It's a little bit more than one point time, more than the previous year. And for the CIB business, it's record over quarter, both at the quarter level and annual results. As we have already many times commented, we've made a certain number of bolt-on acquisitions all these years, and during the MTP presentation, we had from yourself a certain number of questions around the return on investment about all these acquisitions. So we have provided here for these annual results what we have calculated as the return on investment for our past acquisitions. Of course, these figures have been audited by our auditors. So for the acquisitions that have more than three years, after three years, we were at 11% in terms of return on investment, and after more than three years, up to now, it's 13%. For the more recent acquisition, on the bottom of this slide, not yet after, so they do not have yet three years of life, we are already around 10% in terms of return on investment, so we are very confident that we will at least achieve the target and even go above it. And thus, in terms of where we stand versus the execution of the medium-term plan, 2025 being the first year of this medium-term plan anyway. So in terms of revenues, almost in line with an evolution 2025 versus 2024 on a pro forma basis, meaning pro forma of the first consolidation of Banco BPM and the application of CRR III. So for the revenues, almost 3.5% of, of evolution, a little bit less, to be honest, but this is the first year of the plan, and with all the investment we've made, and we will continue to implement, we are very confident that we will deliver what we have promised. In terms of net income Group share, already perfectly in line with the CAGR of this KPI, 5%. In terms of cost-income ratio, due to the pro forma, a high level, a high point in terms of cost income, but we clearly are totally confident that we will reach less than 55% in 2028. For the return on equity, on this pro forma basis, what we can show here is that we are already at 13.9%, meaning very close to the 14% we have delivered, which is, I would say, pretty normal. It's a little bit ambitious to just say that, but pretty normal, because we have very clearly stated and communicated that for this medium-term plan, we target 14% as a minimum, given the fact that we deliver during this plan, I would say, excess of capital that we intend to reinvest to provide more than what we have delivered in terms of our solely organic growth. So we are perfectly on track with the execution of this medium-term plan. I will now go pretty quickly through the next slide, because you know that by heart, and just perhaps stop here to mention that this slide is. We have actualized this slide for the revenue figures, not yet for the split, be it by business line or geographic axis. We will do that for the next presentation after Q1. And in terms of revenues, as you can see, this is once again a continuous story of growth in terms of NBI at group level. Once again, despite a lot of uncertainties and a lot of geopolitical environment, which is not so obvious, but we continue to grow and to deliver this kind of growth. Yes, sorry. Yes. In terms of cost of risk, as I was mentioning, we are today slightly above these the assumption that we show here, and we remind here left-hand side of this slide, which are, I remind, 25 basis point at group level and 40 basis point at Crédit Agricole S.A. level. Well, we cannot be always below the average. If there is an average, it's because there are some some moments you are above, some moments you are below. We've spent many years below, so for the moment, we are slightly above. But we remain with this hypothesis for the average period of the plan. Nevertheless, we also demonstrate and show here that we have loan loss reserves, which are very, very high compared to competition, and at group level clearly best in class in terms of loan loss reserve. So we have three years of loan loss reserves versus our NPL ratio. Perhaps here, just to remind you that we have stable outlook across the three main rating agencies, despite the fact that France sovereign has a negative outlook with Moody's, which means that for the foreseeable future we are comfortable with this kind of rating for Crédit Agricole Group. ESG, I won't take more time here, just to re-insist on the fact that, despite some pushback here and there, across the Atlantic, we remain totally committed to, to our ESG, plan, because we think that, it's, very important and essential for the planet to manage this energy transition. And, we remain focused, and anyway, it is still a very, important topic of discussions with, the majority of our clients. Well, to, to give, more, more details about our, commercial activity, so, once again, + 2.1 million net gross customer acquisition for our retail network, in line with, what we, intend to deliver for, for the medium-term plan. But also very important, at the retail banking level, the loan production is and has been, in 2025, very dynamic. Once again, both at corporate level and for the home loan production. And for the home loan production, what is interesting is to see that we continue to originate home loans around 3% in terms of yield, while the back book is at 1.9%. So we clearly continue to reprice the loan book of all loans, which is the bulk of our assets for the retail business. And with volumes which are consistent with, I would say, a speed of repricing, which is interesting. Clearly, we can say now that the inflection point in terms of net interest margin for the retail business is behind us. For the insurance and asset management, I've mentioned it, record level of annual premium for the insurance, EUR 52 billion, and for the asset management, a record level of net inflow, EUR 88 billion. For the Crédit Agricole Personal Finance and Mobility, to be honest, for them, this is not a very good year in terms of net result for several reasons, including at least two important one-off. But what is interesting is that in terms of commercial activity, the production remains at high level with margin which are, I would say, in line with our expectation. So the future should be brighter for CAPFM business line. For CIB, it's, I would say, continuous and gradual growth, so record Q4 and record year in 2025, with very good position in the league tables. What is important as well for the CIB business is that this growth come from the whole range of our businesses, be it financing activities or market activities. In terms of waterfall for the revenues and the NBI, Q4 versus Q4, first of all, evolution of 1.6%, despite all the one-off at group level. And once again, if you put aside the one-off, every operational business line contributed positively to this evolution. The pack being laid for this quarter, and it's very, very, satisfactory for us, because we've said that many, many, many times, the net interest margin will grow, will, recover. So here, here we are with an evolution of the net interest margin for the Regional Banks of 18.7% versus last quarter 24, and for LCS, LCL, sorry, +11%. And our Group CFO, Clotilde L’Angevin, as mentioned, in terms of guidance, that, for this net interest margin, in 2026, we should have a positive evolution versus 2025 in the high single-digit level. In terms of expenses, an evolution of 0.9%, so clearly positive jaw effect versus versus the the NBI. Once again, some one-off, but overall, positive jaw effect between NBI and expenses. So expenses under control, if I have to summarize. In terms of cost of risk, if we look left-hand side and the upper part of the slide, so a cost of risk total just above EUR 1 billion, which consists essentially in bucket 3 provisioning. And in terms of bucket 1 and 2, let's say the 139.9 million of bucket 1 and 2, these 99 million essentially consist in one-off. So first one-off is complement in terms of provisioning for the UK car loan file and legal risk that we have in the UK, is due to, I would say, new discussion and exchange between the industry and the FCA, and we have, after this discussion, readjusted our estimation of our potential loss in this regard. The other point is linked to the bankruptcy of Banca Progetto in Italy. And for this one, a small technical point, contribution to the deposit guarantee scheme normally are accounted as expenses. But so far, for this case, we have already been asked to pay EUR 5 million, which have been accounted in expenses. But we know already that this is not the end of the story, and that it will cost us more than EUR 5 million. So, waiting for the final amount and for the final payment. We have accounted temporarily in the cost of risk line, EUR 30 million, which is our estimation of what it could cost us overall. So in the future, we should have a reversal of this EUR 30 million and EUR 30 million contribution in terms of expenses, EUR 30 million or a slightly different number, depending on what the Italian authorities will ask us in order to refill this deposit guarantee scheme in Italy. So clearly, the main part of the bucket 1 and 2 provisioning comes from these two one-off, which means that the rest is clearly bucket 3 provision, which means that, yes, the cost of risk is materializing gradually. Nevertheless, even if it increases a little bit, we were, during the previous quarter, more or less, south of EUR 900 million. We are now, if you exclude the one-off, slightly north of EUR 900 million, it's a slight evolution, so we are not worried about it. We still consider, once again, that the through-the-cycle level should remain reasonable. Business line by business line, first, let's start with, I would say, a good news, which is that despite the one-off, for the UK car loan, at CAPFM level, the cost of risk overall average over the four rolling quarters remains stable. For Crédit Agricole Italia, the increase is clearly due to, this EUR 30 million that we have accounted for Banca Progetto. For CAL&F, it's more or less, slight, slight variation, but, more or less stable. And yes, for LCL and the Regional Bank, there is this continuous slight trend of increase in terms of cost of risk, but nothing very, very material. For financing activities, or meaning CIB activities, still a very, very low, cost of risk, 6 basis points, meaning around EUR 100 million. This is three years in a row that we have EUR 100 million of cost of risk at the CIB level, roughly speaking, around the figures. Clearly, here, one year, it will have to increase a little bit because six basis point is, in our view, clearly below the average level through the cycle. I'm not saying it will next quarter. I have no indication about it, but let's say, common sense lead me to say that, one day it should be, it should be a little bit higher. To conclude on this part, in terms of net results impacted by the one-off, the net results for the quarter are slightly below last year, but essentially due to the first consolidation of Banco BPM stake as equity accounted, while on an annual basis, as I were mentioning, it's a very strong financial results. In terms of capital and liquidity, so I won't comment on the first slide, which have been disclosed during the MTP presentation. No change, of course, since November, last November. So in terms of capital position, at group level, the CET1 ratio stands at 17.4%. It has been impacted by some model revision concerning the SMEs for Crédit Agricole Italy, LCL, and Regional Banks. The main part coming from Crédit Agricole Italia, we had already more or less indicated you that this will come. Except that, and knowing that we will have this impact, we have also increased a little bit our SRT, so significant risk transfer operations in order to mitigate for this quarter, a little bit this methodological impact. And at group level, what I wanted to add is that the first consolidation of Banco BPM is almost a non-event because we were more or less mark to market, either for half of the position through fair value, so against revenues and NBI, and for the other half, more or less against OCI. So in terms of prudential point of view, we were mark to market in terms of our the value of our stake in Banco BPM. We have accounted Banco BPM as equity accounted at book value, and the book value was below the market value, so we had to take a loss in this regard. So a loss means less numerator of the CET1 ratio, but as the value is lower, in terms of weight, in terms of RWA weight for this participation at group level, we have to take into account less RWA. RWA is not exactly CET1 or capital, but we also benefit from the fact that equity accounted stake is not subject to, from a prudential point of view, to prudential valuation. So we also take back the amount of prudential valuation that we had in front of this position. So overall, all in all, at group level, it's more or less an impact of quasi zero minus two basis points. While at Crédit Agricole S.A. level, as we were above the franchise, the loss in in NBI and OCI is compensated by a lower deduction of our own funds, and we benefit from the disappearance of the prudent valuation, which overall lead to a positive impact in terms of solvency for Crédit Agricole S.A. perimeter. Well, besides that, I would say, as you can see, evolution of the organic growth of the RWA at the business line level is very well under control, and a strict management of RWA, RWA is effectively in place. In terms of buffer above distribution restriction threshold, as usual, at group level, very, very high level. What we have provided here in gray and within the dotted frame is the first of January pro forma. Pro forma of what? Pro forma from the fact that Crédit Agricole Group, and that's why the figures are only on the left-hand part of the slide, not the right-hand part, because Crédit Agricole Group becomes a 1.5% G-SIB, January 1st, this year. Of course, the buffer will decrease by 50 basis points first of January, which at group level is not at all a problem because we have so ample excess of ratios. Crédit Agricole S.A. level, no impact because Crédit Agricole S.A. is not a G-SIB. And as you can notice, the AT1 bucket is very well optimized because the buffer at the CET1 level and Tier 1 level is almost exactly the same. I won't comment this one because this is our capital strategy, capital story. No change versus several what we say for several years now. Here, exactly the same, same message, no problems in terms of MREL, no change in our strategy, nor our level of the ratios. Perhaps here, one word concerning the customer deposit, perhaps right-hand side. First of all, because the customer deposit have increased a little bit more significantly during the quarter versus the previous quarter, so +2%, December versus September. And also, the fact that the proportion of the sight deposit is also slightly bigger, 52% versus 51%, meaning the proportion of sight deposit increase again versus several quarters of stabilization after the COVID period, or after the increase in the interest, after the COVID period and the increase of the interest rate, where this part have, has decreased was decreasing due to arbitrage to towards more remunerated products. In terms of liquidity position, so overall very, very stable, and once again, what is very important is the gray and green part above the HQLA reserve, so above the LCR ratio, above what is taken into account, the LCR ratio, the LCR being comfortable and in line with competitors. Nothing to say here about our liquidity balance sheet, very comparable to a previous quarter. Same thing about the breakdown of our long-term debt outstanding, very stable versus the previous quarter. So perhaps some words here before leaving you the floor for the Q&A. Concerning the funding plan of 2025, what I would like to highlight here is that, apart from the covered bond issuances that are in euro, because the asset that we use to collateralize these covered bond are home loans, and anyway, they are issued in order to refinance the home loans that we originate in France. So apart from that, which are issuances in euro, for the other part, we have issued 1/3 in euro, 1/3 in dollar, and 1/3 in other currencies. So very diversified with, I would say, a lot of local funding program, the Samurai program, historically, the first one, the Kangaroo program, the Panda program. Even last year, we have issued under the Maple law, or Canadian local Canadian law, Maple under the local Canadian law. So very diversified, and we have, I would say, adjusted our issuances to the investor appetite, for example, a little more skewed toward senior preferred in yen and more skewed towards Tier 2 or subordinated debt in dollar. So we are very diversified, and we have a very great capacity to adjust to investor appetite in order to distribute our funding program. For this year, a funding program of EUR 18 billion versus the EUR 23 billion that we have issued last year, so slightly smaller. In terms of what we need for, I would say, solvency purposes, so Tier 2 and senior non-preferred, more or less the same amount than last year. It's more or less a rollover of our position and our maturing debt, plus the eventual, but it's marginal, increase in order to follow the evolution of the RWA, but this is marginal. Thus, the adjustment and lower needs in terms of covered and preferred senior, only around EUR 6 billion. We will continue to be diversified. And, as of today, we have already issued EUR 11 billion, so 60% of the plan. Don't be too worried. We will slow down the pace of our issuances, and we do not intend to complete our funding plan before end of June or end of July. So we will slow down a little bit and spread our funding needs across the rest of the year. But as usual, we wanted to start very dynamically. One reason of that also is the fact that there is a seasonality in our issuances or in European issuances. We have a lot of maturing debt during the Q1, so we naturally also issue more during the Q1. Due to the fact that our funding program is a little bit lower than last year, we are slightly, I would say, from a mathematical point of view, in advance versus last year. But it's common in our case that anyway, we are around 50% in end of April or beginning of May in terms of funding program. So I would say, we act as usual in terms of funding plan for this year. I will stop there and leave you the floor for the Q&A. Thank you, Olivier. So I suggest, Florence, Olivier, you may want to read the question we receive and answer directly. And our first question: Any thoughts on recent ING Tier 2 call at reset date? Until what date do you cover your callable bond, please? Well, I can potentially tell you at which date we hedge our callable bonds, be it Tier 2 or AT1. But I don't think it's very useful for you because anyway we do not consider ourselves constrained by the maturity of the hedge. And perhaps more specifically, because we had this question many times during our one-on-one last week in London, and we'll talk about the AT1 and the call period, the six-month per call period. We will act, I would say, economically in terms of call or non-call. Anyway, we cannot say if we will call or non-call, be it at the first call date or reset date. As you can notice, implicitly, we position the maturity, the potential maturity of our AT1 at the reset date. But once again, it does not mean that we could call at reset date or first call date. We will act economically, meaning if we have issued, let's say, exactly six months in advance in order to replace an AT1 issuance, and we want to avoid the double carry, we can call effectively six months in advance. If we have to replace an issuance and we issue three months in advance, we can call three months in advance. Well, it will depend on market conditions, on our needs, and so on and so forth. So I would say we remain flexible, and we will act according to our interest in this regard and according to our, I would say, track record. Asset quality: Do you think the cost of risk could deteriorate a lot? A lot, no. I think we've said that very clearly. Continue to deteriorate a little, it's possible. I do not have crystal ball. Perhaps yes, perhaps not. So a lot, no. But clearly, so far there is a trend, and the macroeconomic situation is less great than two years ago. So it is what it is. But once again, we are not specifically worried about it. Next one is for me? Yes, for you. Thank you. How do you expect NII to develop in France? This quarter, the NII, as Olivier said, increased, both at regional bank level and LCL level. Inflection point is behind us, so it's a good news. Of course, we were at a low point. That means that, for next year, the increase will not be. Maybe it will, but, we don't think it will, be so huge that, 11% or more. So we think it will be more on a high single- digit, increase, and, but we are, we are confident because, so the book is repricing and, the activity is there. Our next question is a very interesting one. Thank you for that. What do you think about stable coins and digital euro, threat or opportunity? Well, let's start with a digital euro. There are two potential digital euro, the wholesale one and the retail one. For the wholesale one, well, threat or opportunity, I think things are balanced. It's a potential threat when you are Crédit Agricole, because we have a very strong rating, and even for settlement, day plus two, it's interesting for some counterparts to trade with Crédit Agricole versus some other counterparts. So, the disappearance with potential instant settlement will cancel some competitive advantage that we have at Crédit Agricole. Nevertheless, I don't think this competitive advantage is so big, because the settlement risk is a risk that has not materialized many times, and is with a very low probability. Nevertheless, it will cancel a kind of competitive advantage that we have. On the other side, it can provide, I would say, instant settlement with central bank. It can lower the need for reconciliation. It can lead to potential 24-hour, seven days a week, settlement with the central bank, because when you have instant settlement, of course, the tendency will be to extend this settlement, instant settlement, to the whole day. This can provide opportunities for us to provide new services to our clients and to be more efficient for the benefit of our clients. Thus, when you are more efficient with our clients, you have usually more business. So for the wholesale digital euro, I think it's something which will occur, and will have, I would say, balanced benefit and threat. For the retail, I'm sorry, but here I will say it's clearly a threat. It's today a scene from my perception is that it's very philosophical at the moment in terms of position by some authorities. I've still very, very big concern about the impact on our balance sheet and possible flow from the deposit on our balance sheet to some deposit on the balance sheet of the central bank. So I see that as a threat clearly, and I'm not so sure that all this threat, either in terms of flows from our balance sheet and/or in terms of cost for the whole system, not only the financial system, but also all the economic actors that will have to adapt their payment scheme to this retail digital euro, is worth what it intend to tackle in terms of problem. Of course, sovereignty has not to be questioned, and it's a fair objective to develop and to impose sovereignty and payment in Europe. Is it the only mean to achieve that? Well, the private sector has an alternative answer to that, and I've not seen today any fair pro and cons between this institutional answer by ECB and the private sector answer. So I see that as a threat, to be honest. In terms of stablecoin, I think once again, it's balanced because for some of our businesses, meaning the asset management business, the custodian business, it can be an advantage and or an opportunity to develop their business using that kind of tool. For the banking sector or the banking unit, banking business line, once again, it can be a threat, because once again, the, it can lead to some disintermediation, from of payments and or certain scheme from our balance sheet. So, once again, at Crédit Agricole Group, it is balanced, but I think this, this can be an opportunity for some businesses, but I think also that it can be a threat for the banking unit, because it can lead to some disintermediation, in terms of settlement and payments. We'll see. And that's why, perhaps to conclude on that, that's why, in order to, from the banking side, to answer that kind of a potential threat, which also comes from the fact that the financial, in fact, the economic actors are asking for instant settlement, we need to find, we'll say, on-balance-sheet answer to that kind of needs or new needs or expressed need, which can come from tokenized deposits, for example, the kind of things on which, for example, JP Morgan is working and investing hard. We are also looking at it and investing in this kind of technology. So we will see. It's still very early to say exactly what will happen. It's still very well working progress in this regard. But we look at it very closely, because clearly, these are things that could profoundly change some nature of our businesses. Next one is for you. Yes, sir. What is exactly the revision of remarketing value for used vehicles for Leasys? Does it call into question your mobility strategy? Olivier said there were some one-off this quarter, and one of them is at Leasys level. You know, Leasys is a joint venture with Stellantis, and for leasing. And with Stellantis, decreased is the new car price, because the product range of Stellantis is a little bit more in line with what customers want. So as Stellantis decreased its price, we decided to decrease also the used price, the used car prices. It's not only residual value, it's more larger than that because it's remarketing value, that is the value we have to remarket the car into our network. And now we have decreased it a little bit more than we should have done it, only based on Stellantis price decrease. And we are now in line with what we think is a good price, and it will be good for our MTP, medium-term plan, targets, because we have I would say cleaned those price. And this one-off shows also that what we identified as a key element in mobility, that is services and insurance, that are good things for us to develop in order to smooth the price of cars. And we still are in the mobility area, because we still think we need some more electric vehicles and more services around. We think this will, next year, go at the same level at previous year, and then we think the profitability of this will go on. Thank you. So next question, so I don't see why you ask a question, because obviously you already have a lot of answers. So sorry for this, this joke. Could you elaborate further on the 2026 issuance guidance? At this stage, we have assumed EUR 5 billion covered, EUR 1 billion senior preferred, EUR 10 billion non-preferred senior, and EUR 2 billion Tier 2, and no AT1. So I will, I would like to have a hiring meeting with you, because obviously you are very good at elaborating our funding plan. Now, so would you see it as broadly accurate reflection of your plan, and so on and so forth? So it's, I would say, it's not far from the, what we, what we should do. Once again, we want to keep the flexibility between covered and senior preferred. I think that you overweight a little bit the covered versus preferred senior. Also, because Moody's has expressed the fact that we are, I would say, immune from any evolution in the CMDI evolution. But, well, we have to roll over our preferred senior stack. For the rest, well, once again, it's not too far, but we want to versus what you say, we do not provide such an accurate guidance. Once again, when we say we target around EUR 12 billion of senior non-preferred and Tier 2, we want to keep some flexibility between senior non-preferred and Tier 2, depending on market conditions, depending on relative spread, depending on some potential arbitrage in terms of currency, given the cross-currency level. So, you're not far from what we should do. But once again, we want to keep some flexibility. In terms of AT1, clearly, if we go to the next slide, sorry, pardon, not this next one. You can, your assumption is, I would say rational, given the next potential call date of our issuances. So we are, we only have a very small amount in June this year. And as you can, as you have seen, we have today, slightly a little bit more than the strict optimum in terms of AT1 buffer, so we can clearly absorb these EUR 100 million maturing callable in June without any problem. Once again, I'm not saying we will call, but, today, it's very rational to do so. In fact, it seems to be very rational to do so. And, the next one, is, I would say is, sorry, December. next call date, December 27. So December 27, it's not for today. So yes, if you only look at it, and the fact that we are already at the optimum in terms of buffer, we have no need to issue. That being said, once again, we want to remain flexible. AT1 reset spread, as you know, we managed to reset at the tightest ever since the introduction of this instrument. So could be interesting at one point to envisage issuing, even if we have to bear some double carry. But the double carry is still very expensive, so, well, rationally, we don't need, but we do not exclude to act opportunistically. Hello, in Italy, what is your next step with Banco BPM? Well, do I really need to answer this question, to be honest? I read it, but, I think that you've heard the answer many times, and I won't say something different. Meaning, we have this kind of stake in order to protect our interest in Italy, meaning to be in a position to be an actor that you should talk to, you need to talk to, if anything is considered around Banco BPM. And besides that, the CEO of Banco BPM and the CEO of Crédit Agricole S.A. have expressed that they could envisage further cooperation with interest. That's what it is today, and I won't say more. What is your view on the ECB simplification and AT1 in particular? Do you believe the AT1 ECB proposal could be effective? So, I'm not so sure it is. I would say, a request from ECB. ECB has conducted a broad work in order to review and to potentially make some proposal in terms of simplification. So it's one, not only one, clearly, but it's one of the potential proposal of the ECB, that now has to be discussed in the legal European process. So, the commission has launched, if I'm correct. Consultation the consultation to the industry, end of last week, officially. So, we have until the sixth or 10th, I don't remember exactly, of April, to answer, and we will answer. And clearly, what I can tell you is our answer will be that we consider the AT1 as a very, important and, useful element in our, strategy. Why? Simply because, first of all, the regulation, when you have a CET1 ratio, a Tier 1 ratio, a global ratio, including the Tier 2, because the regulation is made, in a way, where it's, optimum to issue AT1, and not replacing it with CET1, if you want to keep a certain, profitability, there's a good competitiveness, with, other international banks for European banks. So for us, it is absolutely essential. That being said, it's also an instrument which is very well received and perceived by the investors, professional investors, which is perhaps one of the most liquid across the issuance made by financial institutions. So a lot of advantage, and we will effectively answer in this regard. That being said, I don't know what will be the output of this consultation of the industry, and I do not consider it is a prescriptive recommendation from ECB. It's one proposal across many others. Thank you, Olivier. Thank you, Florence. I think there is no more question. Olivier, maybe I'll leave you the final word for the conclusion. Thank you. Once again, thank you for attending this global investor call. For, I would say, agenda constraints, it has been put today, so 12 days after the equity call. I've also understood that it was a good output for you, because when we disclose our results, there were a crowded number of calls. It is what it is. Effectively, when looking at all your question, I think it was also good to have this kind of call, perhaps a little bit after the other one. It allows you to have perhaps more in-depth questions in some areas. So thank you for that. Thank you for this interaction, and see you next time. Thank you. Thank you.