Welcome to Barclays' full year 2024 results fixed income conference call. I will now hand over to Anna Cross, Group Finance Director, and Daniel Fairclough, Group Treasurer. Good afternoon, everyone, and welcome to the full year 2024 fixed income investor call. I'm joined today by Daniel Fairclough, our Group Treasurer. Let me begin with a brief overview of our financial performance. As Venkat and I stated this morning, we set out a three-year plan last February to deliver a better run, more strongly performing, and higher returning Barclays. We believe the plan is constructive for fixed income investors, and we appreciate your ongoing support. We are encouraged by the progress so far and have delivered against our 2024 financial targets. Return on tangible equity was 10.5%, in line with our target of greater than 10%. We delivered against our NII guidance, and our cost-to-income ratio was 62%, below our guidance of around 63% for the year. We continue to manage our credit carefully, with a group loan loss rate of 46 basis points below the 50-60 basis points through the cycle guidance. We remain well capitalized, ending the year with a CET1 ratio of 13.6% within our 13%-14% target range. We are on track to achieve our 2026 group targets, all of which remain unchanged. In addition, we have provided guidance for 2025. This includes a RoTE of around 11% and a progressive increase in our total payout while maintaining a CET1 ratio of 13%-14%. The increase in RoTE will be supported by group NII growth to around 12.2 billion, including an increase in Barclays UK to circa 7.4 billion. We expect to improve the group cost-to-income ratio to circa 61%. As debt investors, I appreciate credit quality is a key focus area, so I will cover this topic in more detail on the next slide. Credit quality has continued to develop as we expected. Both the 2024 group impairment charge of GBP 2 billion and the Barclays UK charge of GBP 0.4 billion included a circa GBP 0.2 billion day one charge for Tesco Bank, where accounting rules require balances to be brought onto our books at stage one. The UK credit picture remains benign, with low and stable delinquencies in our consumer books and wholesale loan loss rates below our through-the-cycle expectations. The Barclays UK charge, including the day one effects from Tesco, resulted in a loan loss rate of 16 basis points for 2024. We still expect the Barclays UK loan loss rate to track towards circa 35 basis points over time as we grow the balance sheet. The U.S. consumer bank charge of $1.3 billion improved year on year, in line with expectations and equated to a loan loss rate of 431 basis points. Looking ahead in 2025, we expect the loan loss rate in the U.S. consumer bank to be similar to 2024. This includes the lagged effect of higher delinquencies in the past 12-18 months and the anticipated day one effect of bringing the General Motors partnership on board in Q3 2025. I would also note that loan loss rates in this business tend to be seasonally higher in Q1, given holiday spend in Q4. I'll now hand over to Daniel for the balance sheet highlights. Thanks, Anna. Our balance sheet continues to be strong, as evidenced by the metrics on slide six. Let me begin first with capital on slide seven. We ended the year with a CET1 ratio of 13.6%. This included around 140 basis points of capital generation from profits, excluding the day one P&L benefit of the Tesco Bank acquisition. We previously highlighted two inorganic transactions that would impact capital in the near term, both of which have now completed. The first was the circa 20 basis points of capital consumption from the acquisition of Tesco Bank in Q4. The second is the circa 10 basis points accretion from the sale of the German consumer finance business, which was completed last month and will benefit the CET1 ratio in Q1 2025. The GBP 1 billion share buyback we announced today will also lower the ratio by around 30 basis points in Q1. Looking ahead, we maintain our guidance for between GBP 19 and GBP 26 billion of regulatory-driven RWA inflation. The U.K. regulator's decision to postpone the implementation of Basel 3.1 to January 2027 may, however, alter the mix and phasing of this change. Adopting IRB in the U.S. consumer bank is still expected to increase RWAs by circa GBP 16 billion. Whilst the ending of the American Airlines partnership in 2026 has increased uncertainty around the size and mix of the portfolio at the time of implementation, this remains our best estimate for now. In the meantime, there are a few changes in the regulatory landscape. Prior to implementing IRB for U.S. cards, our pivot to a requirement will increase by 0.1% from Q1 2025. We expect this pivot to a capital to be removed once the IRB model is implemented in 2026 or 2027, when the £16 billion RWA increase is reflected in Pillar 1. Consequently, our maximum distributable amount ratio, or MDA, is expected to rise to 12.2% from Q1 2025. We previously expected that this would reduce in January 2026 following the implementation of Basel 3.1, but this now will be delayed to January 2027. Reflecting this, you should continue to expect us to operate towards the upper half of our 13%-14% target CET1 range, as we have been doing. Naturally, our distribution expectations remain unchanged. We have a clear hierarchy for capital allocation in order of priority. First, to hold a prudent level of capital with an expectation we will continue to operate towards the upper half of our 13%-14% CET1 target range, taking into account regulatory requirements. Second, to distribute capital to shareholders. And third, to invest selectively in our higher returning divisions, resulting in a more profitable RWA mix over time. As we grow returns in line with our plan, we expect to generate around 170 basis points of capital during 2025 and more than 200 basis points in 2026. Our strategy should promote greater capital resilience, supported by a more balanced business model and growth in more stable income streams. Moving up the capital stack, on slide 10, we show our capital requirements as a proportion of RWAs split out by tier one and total capital, as at year-end 2024. We continue to target a prudent buffer against each of these requirements. Our Tier 1 ratio is 16.9%, with a healthy headroom above our 14.4% regulatory requirement. Within this ratio, we had an AT1 component of 3.4%. During 2024, we called GBP 2.8 billion of AT1 and issued GBP 1.6 billion. This net reduction of GBP 1.2 billion was consistent with our net negative AT1 issuance guidance last year. Moving into 2025, our robust starting position will allow us to be thoughtful around issuance. We are comfortable with our current levels of AT1 and expect issuance and redemptions to be balanced over time. AT1 provides value in our capital stack, given its contribution towards our Tier 1, total capital, MREL, and leverage requirements. Moving on to total capital, the buffer over our regulatory minimum remains healthy at 200 basis points. This was supported by two Tier 2 transactions, which included our inaugural Australian dollar Tier 2 issuance in November. The strength of our Tier 1 ratio also continues to contribute to this total capital position, and as a result, our Tier 2 requirements are modest, largely replacing our existing call and amortization profile. Turning now to slide 11, we issued a total of GBP 15 billion of MREL in 2024. We have already been active in 2025 with a GBP 750 million GBP senior in January, and we expect to issue a further GBP 13 billion of MREL across AT1, Tier 2, and senior unsecured, largely replacing our existing MREL rolloff profile. While the majority of our issuance will continue to be focused on benchmark execution in USD, EUR, and GBP, we will seek diversification where it makes sense. This can be achieved through different currency offerings, as demonstrated by our JPY, AUD, and SGD transactions in 2024, or other opportunities such as private placements. You can find the details of our issuances in the appendix. Moving on to slide 12, deposits have grown solidly across all business lines this quarter, including in the U.K., which had growth of £8 billion, primarily driven by the acquisition of the Tesco consumer portfolios. This was complemented by strong customer deposit growth in the private bank and wealth management business, as well as continued progress in the corporate bank franchise. We also saw strong growth in the U.S. consumer bank, where deposits were up 20%, driven primarily by our new tiered retail savings product. This aligns with our strategy to grow the proportion of funding from retail deposits to improve the overall net interest margin in the business. Against a backdrop of modest growth in UK household money supply, we expect to maintain strong deposit levels into 2025, subject to normal seasonal variation, supported by the strength and diversity of our franchise. Onto the next slide on liquidity, our average LCR of 172% was £128 billion in excess of our regulatory requirements, and our average net stable funding ratio was at 135%, both demonstrating a continued robust liquidity position. This liquidity position also continues to provide ample coverage for our TFSME drawings of £18 billion, of which £8 billion is repayable this year. We welcome the recent communications from the Bank of England around proposed changes to their repo operations to support the management of bank reserves. Ensuring banks can make routine use of a range of facilities to source reserves without stigma in a quantitative tapering environment is beneficial for the resilience of the financial system. We are supportive of this goal. Moving on to slide 14, the structural hedge is designed to reduce income volatility and manage interest rate risk. NII from the hedge increased £1.1 billion during the year to £4.7 billion. Income from the hedge is significant and predictable. We've now locked in £9.1 billion of gross income over the next two years, up from £7.8 billion in Q3 and £4.8 billion a year ago. This will continue to build as we reinvest maturing assets at higher yields. As customer deposit behaviour has stabilised, the average duration of the hedge has increased modestly to around three years. The high proportion of balances hedged reduces our sensitivity to the short-term effect of rate cuts, as shown on the table on the next slide. The table shows an illustrative sensitivity to interest rate moves for our customer banking book, including hedges. It assumes a static balance sheet and an instantaneous parallel shift down of 25 basis points to both base and swap rates, with a year-one total impact of approximately £80 million. On the slide, we've broken out the swap and base rate components separately. The swap rate component shows the impact of rolling the hedge onto lower rates, which compounds over time, while the base rate component mainly reflects the impact of the timing lag between base rate cuts and changes in our customer rates in year one. It's important to note that the income impact will fluctuate slightly depending on the exact proportion of balances hedged at any given point in time. This has caused a modest increase in sensitivity since H1. Turning to credit ratings on slide 15, our aim is for Barclays PLC Senior to qualify as single-A composite across all indices. This remains an important medium-term target. Of note, we welcome the clarity provided by Moody's on required levels of profitability for an upgrade. We will continue to engage with the credit rating agencies as we progress with the execution of our three-year plan. Throughout 2024, we have continued to demonstrate the strength of the Barclays balance sheet. We expect our plan to deliver increased capital generation, supported by a more balanced business model and growth in more stable income streams. With that, I'll hand back to Anna. Thank you, Daniel. In conclusion, we remain focused on disciplined execution. This is the fourth quarter of progress against our 2026 targets that we are reiterating today and remain on track to deliver. We'll now open the call for questions. Operator, please go ahead. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you change your mind and wish to remove your question, please press star two. Our first question comes from Lee Street from Citigroup. Lee, please go ahead. Hello, good afternoon, and thank you for the call, and thank you for the progress update. I have three questions, please. Firstly, obviously, you're targeting 50% of risk-weighted assets within the investment bank. Obviously, the investment bank got at the lower end of the return on tangible equity targets for 2026. So I suppose my question is, why is 50% the right number to target for the investment bank, and why would you not be, I guess, more aggressively looking to allocate capital elsewhere? Secondly, on SRTs, are you able to quantify the CET1 benefit you get from them presently? And just in terms of thinking about SRTs, under what circumstances could you see that capital benefit disappear suddenly, potentially? Just to help us understand a little bit the risks. And finally, a bit of a specific one. You've got a couple of legacy Tier 1 securities losing their grandfathered Tier 2 benefit in June. Just how do you think about looking at the economics of those securities once that capital value has disappeared? They would be my three questions. Thank you. Thanks, Lee. I'll start with the first one, and then I'll hand to Daniel. So it's a good question, one we thought about a lot. To start, though, what I would say is that the IB at sort of the same level as group, so greater than 12, is at the lowest end of group, but it's not its expected final destination. So we were pretty explicit this morning that certainly in 2026, it will not have a market-leading cost-income ratio. We think there's still more to go on capital utilization, and many of the areas that we are looking at are capital light in growth terms. So we think we can push on from there. The second thing I would say is it's not the final place for the U.K. businesses either. We think we can grow the UK, the UK corporate bank, and indeed private banking and wealth into 2026 and actually beyond 2026. And all the while, what the IB is doing is generating capital for us to either distribute or invest in the UK. So I wouldn't think of 2026 and that 50% as a final destination. It's more a reflection of where we think we can realistically get to within that time frame. And by that, I really mean how quickly can we deploy RWAs into the UK. So it's not a reflection of what we think the optimum balance in the group is. Yeah. So the other two questions, first one on SRT. So we give the notional that is subject to protection. That's in the presentation. It's GBP 57 billion. We don't give the RWAs or capital associated with that, but you could look at Pillar 3, and you could probably get somewhere approximate using that data. In terms of the risk on it, I mean, we don't really see that there's a risk of a sudden loss of capital treatment for these instruments. In terms of the sort of profile of the structures, they're either full true sale securitizations, or they're synthetic where the amortization of those transactions matches the underlying loans. And then all the transactions go through a very rigorous process, both internally and with the regulator, to ensure that they meet the Significant Risk Transfer requirements. So it's a pretty well-governed process. Your last comment was on legacy transactions and loss of capital treatment in June. So I mean, there are two transactions that are in question here. So we're getting quite specific, and we obviously don't comment on individual securities. But what I would say is we think we've made really good progress in terms of reducing the amount of legacy capital. And these legacy instruments, we think, are better in that they're not from the resolution entity. In terms of sort of capital or liability management, I mean, just the normal general principles apply here. We'll consider refinancing costs. We'll consider upfront costs, including FX. I might also consider market expectations, but sort of nothing further specific to say at this point, Lee. All right. Thank you for all that. That's really helpful. Thank you. Thanks, Lee. Next question, please. Our next question comes from Paul Fenner-Leitão from Société Générale. Paul, please go ahead. Hi. Thank you very much. Hi, Daniel. Hi, Anna. Thanks very much for the call. I've got four questions, but they're super quick. The first is on supply. Thank you for the color around the GBP 14 billion. I just wanted to just check with you. I know you don't love giving specific color on each level of the capital structure, but you've obviously got something like 2.5 billion of 81s coming up for the call. They're very high back ends, so it's going to be no secret that you're likely to want to look to call those. Can we assume, is it sensible to assume that the proportion of 81 and tier two subdebt in this year's supply is going to be greater than it has been over the last couple of years just because of that 81? You've also got a Tier 2 coming up for replacement later on in the year. That's question number one. Question number two, you had a really nice slide, which I couldn't find during the call. I think it was in this morning's call around forward rate indicators, what's going on in the mortgage book and refinancing at higher rates. I know you're saying that you're not seeing any kind of red lights, but there must be some pain somewhere, and you guys have such amazing wealth of information in terms of current accounts and Barclays Wealth. Are you seeing anything in terms of behavior around reduction in deposits or reduction in investment product as people refinance at higher rates? And what proportion has already refinanced, and what's still to come? Question number three, in terms of the rating, stable outlooks in the two ratings that are the lowest, Moody's in particular looks like a little bit of a laggard. Where are we in terms of the potential for an upgrade there? And associated with that, you've got Ba1 rating at Moody's at 81. How much do you care? How important is it to you in terms of funding? Do Do you perceive to have that pushed up to a composite of IG? And then the very last one, sorry, is regulation. Obviously, lots going on in the U.S., a lot of excitement. That obviously helps share prices. What is it that you think? What's the low-hanging fruit for you? I know we've had the delay, but for you and the other big banks here in the U.K., since you've now left the E.U., what is the low-hanging fruit in terms of reducing regulation meaningfully that's going to be impactful to us in our conversation every quarter or whatever? Thank you. Thank you very much for that list of questions. I'm going to let Daniel do number one and three, and I will do two and four. Okay. Let me start on supply. Look, I think you've probably got there on your own in the question, actually, Paul. So you're right. You should sort of think about 81 as being broadly balanced throughout the year. And as you said, we've got a bit to call this year. And the Tier 2 amount is probably—you can just reference it on the redemption and the call schedule that we've got upcoming. So it will be relatively modest, but it'll be driven by that for refinancing. And then the balance will be really in MREL. In terms of ratings, yeah, obviously, we are very focused on particularly Moody's and S&P, given our rating objective. In the Moody's recent report, they put out a comment around the profitability guidance. They obviously did that in their own specific Moody's metric, but we're very focused on that. Quite frankly, it aligns to our RoTE delivery, really, in terms of meeting that threshold. Clearly, there'll be other things that they consider, but for us, really, it's that profitability and delivering on the plan. In terms of the AT1 rating, of course, it would be nice to get an upgrade there, but it's probably a mix of things that we think about in terms of our market access and our market spread. It's a component, but generally, at the AT1 level, the investor base is probably doing much more sort of fundamental credit work on their own. It's a factor, but not the only factor. So Paul, I'll take your question on mortgages. I mean, clearly, we are seeing customers coming through and refinancing on higher rates, but there are no perceptible signs of strain there. And on one hand, that might be quite surprising, but if we just sort of reflect on how these customers were stressed for affordability before they were actually lent to, front book rates have never gone anywhere near the rates at which we stressed customers at the outset. And so we've not seen any meaningful signs of strain at all. If anything, the mortgage market looks pretty robust, actually, and I think that's coming from a few things. The first would be real wages are growing. The second would be HPI is pretty steady. On average, it's been about 2% a year over the last few years. And there does appear to be real demand there. If I were looking for real clues and really delving into all of the detail that we have, I would say there are still signs of really robust behavior and a bit of caution in customer behavior. So if I look at deposits, customers definitely sold some investments pre the budget, actually, and they've retained that liquidity. And you saw that in our deposit numbers in the fourth quarter. You can see it in U.K. retail. You can see it in private banking and wealth. If I look at spending data, hard spending data from Barclaycard would indicate that spending is still lagging inflation. So customers are being very, very careful. Although interestingly, what's now happened is that non-essential spending is overtaking essential spending in terms of growth rate. I would say that speaks to two things. Firstly, just the impact of slowing inflation on sort of fundamental goods and services, but also maybe a slight uptick in confidence. As I look at our cards behavior, again, there's nothing there. Maybe balances are growing slightly more slowly than we would expect them to in both the U.K. and the U.S. And I would put that down to customers are still repaying at relatively high rates, and that's all the way through the risk stack. And then finally, when you get to the credit performance, there's just nothing to see. It's very low, very stable, historic lows of delinquencies across cards and mortgages in the U.K. So it's really, really extremely benign, but customers are being careful. Just on your point on regulation, I think the thing that we welcome is obviously the sort of pause in U.K. implementation. As you can imagine, the conversations that we have are, it's really important for us to align international implementation both in terms of timing and in terms of the fundamentals. We think that's good for the banks themselves, but it's also really good for our clients and certainly really good for our investors to have that degree of international alignment, so we'll continue to have those conversations. In terms of specifics, I think that will be very different by different banks, but one of the things that Daniel and I talk to the regulators here about a lot is really simplification, how the entire system can be more holistically sort of hung together. By that, I mean capital stress testing, resolution recovery, all of that as one coherent framework because actually, they've grown up quite individually. And that makes it a bit more difficult for us and you to navigate it. Daniel, anything you'd add? No. That's good. Okay. Thank you, Paul. Perhaps we can go to the next question, please. Our next question comes from Corinne Cunningham from Autonomous. Corinne, please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks very much for holding the call. A couple of questions from me, please. The first one is on buffers. So here I'm talking about management buffers to the overall capital requirements. We always think about banks really needing something like 200 basis points plus to be able to provide a good level of comfort to investors, particularly AT1 investors who obviously face some consequences when you get close to the individual capital requirements. Your buffers are heading to the low side when we compare you kind of across European banks. When you're setting your management targets, do you think about this in the context of, well, first of all, other banks? Secondly, in the context of earnings? I know you're forecasting a pickup in earnings, but if you were to be facing some kind of downturn, would you consider building the buffers, or do you just think that where you are now is absolutely fine? Then the second question, a little bit similar to Paul's, but just looking at SMEs and just wondering if sort of post-budget, you're seeing any signs of weakness in U.K. SMEs and any signs at all of early deterioration in asset quality? Thank you. Thanks, Corinne. I'll hand the first question to Daniel, and I'll take the second one. Yeah. Thanks for the question. Absolutely. We think very carefully about the right level of buffers when thinking about our capital positioning. And sort of as we sit here, we've got an MDA point at 12.2%. We've signalled that we're going to operate towards the upper half of the CET1 target range. So if we just sort of, for illustration, 13.5%, that's 130 basis points of buffer. And a couple of ways that we think about that. Firstly, we think about it in the context of the CET1 organic capital generation that we have each quarter. That provides us with flexibility. Secondly, we think about how dynamically we're able to manage the balance sheet. I think a couple of other relevant points when you think about comparison. I think the first one is that in the UK, we have a 2% countercyclical buffer. That is generally something that we would expect to be released in the event of a U.K. macro stress. So the U.K. regulatory environment has already built in some element of buffer into the minimum requirements. That's obviously not the same in European jurisdictions. And then in terms of sort of comparison in the U.K., I won't make comments on other specific U.K. banks, but obviously, it's important to look at where the old SIFI level is for those operating big ring-fenced banks. And I think kind of if you take all of that in the round, we think our capital level is in the right place. Thanks, Daniel. And to your second question, I mean, I think the answer is similar across SMEs. And as you sort of stretch into our UK corporate bank, we see similar sorts of things. So post-budget, no obvious signs of strain. Obviously, we remain very close to our clients. If anything, deposit levels remain high. We've gone into this environment with a relatively limited risk appetite around the areas that we think are probably more impacted by elements of the budget, so particularly retail and discretionary consumer. And we've talked about that before. So we've got slightly restricted risk appetite there anyway. And then I think the last thing I would say is that the conversations we are having with that type of business is really how do they drive their own productivity in order to be able to navigate this? That will, we believe, actually give us some opportunities in terms of how we grow with them. There's no obvious signs of strain to the extent that we've seen any impairments in corporate or SME. They've been very isolated, nothing systemic. Thank you very much. Thank you. Can we go to our next question, which I believe is the final one, please? Our final question today comes from Robert Smalley from Verition Fund Management. Robert, please go ahead. Hi. Thanks very much for taking my questions. Just three quick ones as I'm at the end, and a lot was asked and answered. First, on deposits, you have four rate cuts. Are you seeing customers starting to want to term out deposits? And if they do, what does that do in terms of your hedge, etc.? Second question is going to page 10 in the deck where you've got contractual maturities and calls on Tier 2. Just give us a little idea of your philosophy around issuing Tier 2 as these securities amortize, as you know. Do you do it at maturity? Do you look a year or two ahead of time? How do you really strike that balance? And then third, just looking at your call report and some other U.S. bank call reports, when I look in the categories for loans to non-depository financial institutions like private equity funds, BDCs, etc., I see, at least for Barclays Bank, there's zero. Barclays Bank Delaware, I'm sorry. There's zero. Are you doing this business? Can you give us an idea of the scope? And am I looking in the right place for these numbers? Thanks. Thank you, Robert. I think Daniel's going to take those questions. Yeah. So on deposits, I mean, we've seen quite a bit of tailing out over the last couple of years. Obviously, the proportion of our deposit balances that are in, say, one-year fixed has increased over time. But we are seeing that slow over time. And we can hypothesize on the reason for that, but clearly, you might expect that those customers that were more inclined to do that and had more flexibility on their savings would have done so already, would have done so earlier. And obviously, the shape of the yield curve, although that might be a rationale for turning out, also it means that those one-year fixed rates maybe look less attractive kind of optically. So look, it's something that we're really watchful of, but we are definitely seeing stabilization of that trend and have done in recent quarters. In terms of the philosophy on the structural hedge, so every month we consider this, and we obviously have the flexibility to what extent do we roll the structural hedge depending on our assumption of those deposits remaining in hedgeable form. So I think we have lots of room to maneuver and to consider data and events as they unfold. But there's lots of signs of stability at this point. In terms of the Tier 2 question, so we kind of think about it more on the amortization schedule. Not that we size our Tier 2 issues exactly on the particular amount, but generally, we will issue these instruments for capital, even though they provide funding. And therefore, our sort of issuance plan will be more keyed around either bullet maturities or when the instruments are amortizing out. So if you think about a kind of 10 non-call 5, effectively, we'd be refinancing that over the last five years. That's sort of how we would think about it. The last question is quite a specific question in the notes of the account. So if it's okay, I think, Robert, we might follow up on that one with you after the call with investor relations. Sure. Happy to do that. Thank you. And thanks for answering my other questions and doing the call. Thank you, everyone. I think Robert was our final question. We thank you very much for attending the call. Thank you for your continued interest in and support for Barclays. I'm sure we will see you or see many of you on the road in the coming weeks. Thank you.