Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Investor and Analyst Conference Call for HSBC Holdings plc's Q1 2023 results. For your information, this conference is being recorded. At this time, I will hand the call over to Mr. Richard O'Connor, Group Head of Investor Relations. Morning, good afternoon, everyone. Before I hand over to Noel, I want to give a quick reminder of the reporting changes that have taken effect this quarter. Numbers in the presentation today are on an IFRS 17 basis. Thank you to all those who attended. Our focus is now on reported numbers, but we will call out specified notes. Our global businesses are still the primary basis while reporting of legal entity rather than as our reporting. Consensus hasn't yet fully caught up with all these changes, but now we've made them, we believe they will give you more clarity, transparency and ultimately benefit your modeling. Noel, over to you. Thanks, Richard, good morning and welcome. Thank you for joining our first quarter results call. Georges is going to lead the presentation, but I'd like to make some opening comments. We've announced a strong set of Q1 results. We delivered a strong profit performance, which was spread across all our major geographies. All three global businesses performed well and cost discipline remained tight. In the first quarter, excluding the gain on SVB U.K. and the part reversal of the impairment on the potential sale of our French retail bank, we delivered an annualized return on tangible equity of 19.3%. Our strategy is working. I'm also confident about the future for two main reasons. First, we have built a good platform for growth. We have a strong balance sheet, broad-based geographic profit generation, a good combination of net interest income and non-net interest income, and a tight grip on costs. This growth potential was evident in the inflow of new invested assets of $22 billion in the quarter, with a cumulative $93 billion over the last 12 months, which shows that our Wealth strategy is continuing to gain traction. You have my commitment that we will continue to drive strong performance for the rest of the year while maintaining cost discipline and investing in growth. The second reason I'm confident is the diversity and connectivity of our geographical footprint, where we have access to markets that are exhibiting good growth and return potential. I've seen firsthand the strong economic recoveries underway in Hong Kong and mainland China. I've also visited the Middle East recently, where I saw a strong economy that is well-placed to continue to grow. The U.K. economy is also showing good resilience, and our HSBC U.K. business is performing well. Investing in growth is critical, and we saw an opportunity to do that by acquiring SVB U.K. For 158 years, HSBC has banked the entrepreneurs who have created today's industrial base. With the SVB U.K. acquisition, we have access to more of the entrepreneurs in the technology and life sciences sectors who will create the businesses of tomorrow. We believe they're a natural fit for HSBC and that we're well and uniquely placed to take them global. You will have seen the recent hires that we've taken on in the U.S. in that regard, and we're going to continue to invest to grow this part of the business on a global basis. We announced that the sale of our French retail bank has become less certain due to significant interest rate rises in France and the related fair value accounting treatment impacting the capital position of the purchaser. We still believe it's right to sell the business, but we also have to keep our shareholders' interests in mind when negotiating revised terms. We are working with the buyer to try and find a solution, but the uncertainty on deal terms and timing has led us to reverse the impairment. Finally, we made two important announcements today. The first was the resumption of quarterly dividends with an interim dividend of $0.10 per share, which is the same level as the last time we paid a first quarter dividend before COVID. The second was that good continued capital generation enabled us to announce a share buyback of up to $2 billion. Our AGM on Friday will be an important milestone. As you know, resolutions have been tabled by shareholders on the strategy and structure of the bank, as well as to fix the dividend. The board has recommended that shareholders vote against resolutions 17 and 18. I believe our first quarter results reinforce our recommendations and demonstrate that our current strategy is the fastest and safest way to improve returns. I'll now hand over to Georges to take you through the numbers. Thank you, Noel. A warm welcome to all of you. Thank you for being with us on this call today. Let me begin with the first quarter highlights. Profit before tax was $12.9 billion, up $9 billion on the first quarter of 2022 on a constant currency basis. This was driven by an $8.6 billion increase in revenue, which includes $2.1 billion from the part reversal of the impairment relating to the potential sale of our retail banking operations in France and a $1.5 billion provisional gain on the acquisition of SVB U.K. Credit performance was benign, with expected credit losses of $0.4 billion. Costs were up 2% in the first quarter against our 2023 target of limiting cost growth to circa 3% on a constant currency basis and excluding notable items and hyperinflation. Our annualized return on tangible equity was 27.4% or 19.3% excluding the gain on SVB U.K. and the part reversal of the impairment on the potential sale of our French retail bank. As Noel said, we're providing strong capital returns in the form of the first quarterly dividend since 2019 of $0.10 per share and a share buyback of up to $2 billion, which we expect to start after the AGM and complete in around three months. Going into more detail, net interest income of $9 billion was up $2.9 billion or 47% on the first quarter of 2022, and was stable on the fourth quarter on an IFRS 17 basis. non-net interest income of $11.2 billion was up $5.7 billion, which includes $3.6 billion of notable items in the first quarter and was driven by strong performances in Markets & Securities Services and in Wealth. Lending balances increased by $32 billion in the quarter on a constant currency basis. This was made up of $25 billion from the reclassification of balances associated with our retail banking operations in France, and $7.3 billion from SVB U.K. Deposits also increased in the quarter due to the same factors. If we excluded these items, lending and deposits were both stable. The tax charge of $1.9 billion included a credit of $0.4 billion. The CET1 ratio was 14.7%, which was an increase of 50 basis points on the fourth quarter and included a 30 basis point gain relating to the part reversal of the France impairment and the SVB U.K. acquisition. As Noel said, all of our global businesses performed well. This slide gives you the evidence for that. Wealth and Personal Banking had a strong quarter with revenues up 82%. Within this, Wealth was up 13%, driven by the economic resurgence in Asia and increasing traction from the investment we've made in digitization and in people. Personal Banking also had another good quarter, up 64%, benefiting from our strong deposit franchise. Across both Commercial Banking and Global Banking and Markets, the Global Payments Solutions had revenues of $4 billion, which was an increase of 176% on the first quarter of 2022. Global Banking and Markets also performed well overall. Markets & Securities Services revenue in particular were up 12% with a strong performance in foreign exchange. Reported net interest income was $9 billion, which included $1.4 billion of interest expense due to the funding costs booked in Corporate Centre to fund the trading books. This was offset by $1.4 billion of non-net interest income reported in Corporate Centre. On a reported basis, the net interest margin was up by 50 basis points on the first quarter of last year and up by 1 basis point on the fourth quarter. For the avoidance of doubt, our net interest income guidance is unchanged from our 2022 full year results. On an IFRS 17 basis, we expect to achieve net interest income of at least $34 billion in 2023. This is equivalent to at least $36 billion of net interest income on an IFRS 4 basis, which was what we told you in February. Our current view is that the things we told you about net interest income at our 2022 full year results remain unchanged. Non-net interest income of $11.2 billion was up substantially by $5.7 billion, which was a combination of, one, $3.6 billion of notable items in the first quarter. Two, a Global Banking and Markets trading income increase of $0.4 billion. Three, a $1.3 billion increase in Corporate Centre income for funding Global Banking and Markets trading activity. Four, other income, which grew by $0.2 billion and included higher Wealth revenues. Fees were broadly stable compared to the first quarter of 2022, with a good payments fee performance partially offset by lower Wealth fees. Net new invested assets in the quarter were $22 billion and $93 billion for the last 12 months, which bodes well for future growth. I called out the global business revenue highlights earlier. There is a detailed non-net interest income breakdown on slide 17. Our credit performance in the quarter was benign, with a $0.4 billion charge for expected credit losses, which was $0.2 billion lower than the first quarter last year. This reflected a favorable shift in the probability weightings of our economic downside scenarios as well as low stage 3 losses. China CRE was also benign, with a small charge relating to technical adjustments for two customers. We saw no China CRE defaults in the quarter for the first time since the fourth quarter of 2021, though there were also limited repayments. We are encouraged by the first quarter. There are still downside risks. Our 2023 guidance remains unchanged at a charge of around 40 basis points of average gross customer lending, including held for sale balances. We will review this at our interim results. On a constant currency basis, excluding notable items, costs were up by 2% in the first quarter once we also exclude the impact of retranslating prior year costs in hyperinflationary economies at constant currency. As you can see, most of the spend was on technology. We remain committed to limiting cost growth to approximately 3% in 2023 on that basis. As I shared at the year-end, one of my top priorities is cost discipline. Equally, I also shared that another of my top priorities is to support our businesses to deliver growth and returns. The acquisition of SVB U.K. was an opportunity to do that. This is expected to result in incremental cost growth of circa 1% to group operating expenses, the majority of which is the acquired cost base of SVB U.K., together with some additional investment in the U.K. and other geographies. This will be in addition to our 2023 target of limiting cost growth to circa 3%. At year-end, we also flagged $300 million of expected severance costs this year. A large portion of these severance costs are now expected to be incurred in the second quarter, with the cost benefits starting to come through in the second half of this year. Moving on, we usually include information on customer deposits in the appendix, we have moved it up to the presentation this time because we appreciate the current interest. Overall, customer deposits are stable year-over-year and quarter-over-quarter. Of the $1.6 trillion of deposits we hold, half are invested in high-quality liquid assets, which gives you a sense of our strong liquidity position. This is a historic feature of the way that HSBC manages its balance sheet, it has not changed. Around 40% of our high-quality liquid assets are held in cash or cash equivalents. There are only around $1.4 billion of unrealized losses in our hold-to-collect-and-sell portfolio, which is down from around $1.9 billion at the end of 2022. Three main points on capital. One, our CET1 ratio was 14.7%, up 50 basis points on the previous quarter, 25 basis points of which was from the reclassification of our French retail business from held for sale. Pending the outcome of negotiations for our French retail bank, there would be a commensurate reduction to CET1 in the event that the deal closes. Number two, as you know, our business in Canada remains classified as held for sale, we now expect the transaction to complete in the first quarter of 2024 as we work with the purchaser to ensure a smooth transition. We continue to expect to pay the potential special dividend of $0.21 per share in the first half of 2024. As previously indicated, we expect almost all excess capital from the Canada transaction accruing into CET1 to be returned to shareholders, primarily through a rolling series of share buybacks in 2024 and 2025 that would be incremental to any existing buyback program at that time. Number three, share buybacks remain an active part of our capital management plans, and we will update you on our assumptions for share buybacks in 2023 and beyond at our interim results. In summary, this was a strong quarter. There was a strong profit performance. Net interest income was stable. Strict cost discipline was maintained, which I told you would remain a key focus area for myself and the management team. Our credit performance was benign amid a more positive economic outlook. We are starting to see the impact of strong economic rebounds in Hong Kong and Mainland China, and our Wealth strategy is gaining traction. I am pleased there were strong capital returns, a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share, and a share buyback of up to $2 billion, which we expect to start after the AGM and complete in around three months. As Noel said, we are clearly on track to meet our returns target for 2023 onwards, and this upward trajectory would give us substantial distribution capacity, including, of course, the potential proceeds from the Canada transaction. With that, operator, can we please open it up for questions? Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Elhedery. If you would like to ask a question today on the line, please press star one on your telephone keypad. Please ensure that the mute function on your telephone is switched off. If you find your question has been answered, you may remove yourself from the queue by pressing star two. Once again, to ask a question, please press star one. Please ensure that the mute function on your telephone is switched off. Our first question today comes from Joseph Dickerson with Jefferies. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning, gentlemen. Congrats on a good, a good set of numbers and what was the easiest environment in Q1. Just a quick question on the buyback. It's been very precise in discussing, that you would expect to complete the buyback over three months. Is this something now we can expect to be a regular, quarterly event, given the strong capital generation, not to mention Canada completing early next year? Is it gonna be slightly more erratic? Joe, thank you for your question. I'll ask Georges to answer that. Thank you. Thank you, Joe. Yes, indeed. First, we are hoping to achieve $2 billion in the next three months. In the past, we've managed to achieve between $1 billion and $1.5 billion in a quarter. Obviously, we have five months to complete this program. We're hoping to complete it in three months. Going forward, we're certainly considering a rolling series of buybacks in 2023, 2024, 2025. Those will be supported by organic capital generation as well as the Canada sale proceeds in 2024. And Joe, it remains our intention to return excess capital, including the Canada proceeds, if, you know, if the conditions justify it. Thank you, Joe. Great. Thank you. Next question, please. Thank you, Mr. Elhedery. Our next question today comes from Raul Sinha with JP Morgan. Your line is open. Good morning, gents. Thanks very much for taking my questions. Maybe just to follow up on that capital return question firstly, and then another one on asset quality. When we look at your headline capital ratio, which is very strong, and quite a significant pick-up over the last couple of quarters in particular. I guess there are a few adjusting items in there. Should we kind of exclude, you know, the French disposal, let's say reversal from the headline ratio? I guess if we exclude the share buyback, we kind of get back in your range towards the lower end. I guess the question is, you know, how much RWA growth you anticipate, the business to require over the next sort of 12 months, and linking to the, to your loan growth outlook as well. I was just wondering if you could give us some color on RWA growth expectations there, and that hopefully gives us a good idea of how much buybacks we can expect. The second one, again, re-related to how much capital you might be able to generate in the remaining part of the year. Your guidance on asset quality, still implies quite a significant tick-up in provisions, given your very strong performance in Q1. I guess the question really is: Are you guiding us to something specific, in terms of the 40 basis point provision charge, or is that just an element of conservatism built in to your guidance there? Thank you. Georges, do you want to take both of those? I can always add something to the asset quality later, but you take both first. Sure, Noel. Thank you, Raul. On your first question, Raul, I think it is prudent to adjust for the French part reversal of the impairment insofar that capital is concerned. You know, as indicated, if we do reach a transaction, there is a likelihood of a commensurate kind of capital reduction taking place. Just to remind you, our capital target operating range is 14%-14.5%, and we expect, you know, this to be reviewed slightly lower in the medium to long term. As we do our capital return projections or our share buyback projections, we look at our medium-term capital outlook and compare it to that range. This is, you know, obviously cautiously compare it to that range. This is what's giving us now the flexibility to announce the share buyback and to consider additional buybacks, going forward. As regards RWA growth in line with loan growth. It has been subdued in the first quarter. It may remain subdued for another quarter. We may see some pickup, particularly with the Hong Kong and China bounce back. Again, for this year we have not given guidance on loan growth, recognizing some of the economic conditions. We do remain committed for medium term or mid-single digit growth in loans for the medium term, which is what you can factor in for RWA growth commensurately and equally for our share buyback. If I move on to your next question with regards asset quality, I would lean towards your latter comment, Joe, sorry, Raul, that we, you know, we are baking in some conservatism, or we think at this stage the full year guidance, which we have retained unchanged from February, is now leaning towards conservative. Just wanna highlight some tailwinds. The certainly the situation in the U.K., the possibility that we may dodge a recession is a, you know, is a tailwind. Equally, the recovery in Hong Kong and mainland China, you know, following the opening up of the borders and, you know, resumption of, you know, activities and trade is a tailwind. At the same time and you know, obviously the China real estate has shown some positive signs both from the economic standpoint as well from the policy measures. At the same time, we wanted to remain cautious. There are a number of refinancing taking place in Q3 in the China real estate, corporate real estate commercial real estate portfolio, which we would like to stay cautious on. We continue to watch some of the U.K. SME space, in particular, those heavily reliant on discretionary consumer spend, before we revisit the guidance. We intend to revisit this guidance at the H 1. Just one additional comment from me, please, if I can. You'll notice on the capital schedule, can't remember what slide it was, but there's a capital walk on CET1. In there you'll see that we've accrued dividends at 50% of the profit generation in Q1. If you do the maths on that, the accrual on dividend is higher than the $0.10 that you've got in the Q1 declared interim dividend. We're accruing capital distribution at a higher rate, a dividend distribution at a higher rate than the payment of the $0.10. That's just factored into our CET1 ratio as well. Thank you. Next question, please. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next question today comes from Manus Costello with Autonomous. Your line is open. Manus, hi. Good morning. Thanks for taking the questions. A couple, please. On that slide you were talking about, Noel, about the RWA walk, I noticed that the risk-weighted assets from Silicon Valley were just short of $10 billion, which seems quite high relative to the loans that you've taken on. I wondered if you could share with us what the nature of those assets is and give us some indication about asset quality within the Silicon Valley Bank acquisition from what you've seen so far. Secondly, with a thought to the structure of the group, you've obviously showed some willingness to make some acquisitions recently, and indeed do some disposals where possible. I just wonder if there would be any interest in further moves. In particular, I'm wondering if there would be anything around some of your businesses, such as insurance manufacturing, which you might think about being non-core to the group going forward. Thank you. Thanks, Manus. Just on the asset quality of SVB, everything that we've seen since we bought the business out of, lost track of time, must be about six, seven weeks ago now. It's been a busy quarter. Everything we've seen reinforces the view that we had at that weekend when we did due diligence, that the book was a good quality book. We've seen no nasty surprises. We did do a bit of mark- to- market on acquisition accounting, but that was evident to us when we did due diligence that weekend. Georges can give you a little bit more detail on that, but fundamentally, the asset quality of the SVB book is as we expected it. The team have done a good job in building that business over the past 14 years. They've got good client relations, a good quality book, and good business development potential. On the back of that, we decided to invest in putting more people on the ground in some of the key markets around the world that have strong technology and life science centers to take that business model not just to the U.K., but to take it globally. We're invested in that as well. No nasty surprises on that. Then in terms of other acquisitions that we may consider or M&A activity, I mean, I think the insurance business is a key component of the Wealth proposition that we have. We have a very profitable insurance business in Hong Kong. It's a combination of manufacturing and distribution. The team have done a good job in building out the product line up in Hong Kong over the past few years to put us back into a market-leading position in Hong Kong. We get access to the full value chain. One of the challenges we've often faced in the past is getting full recognition of that value as a bank shareholder in an asset, in an insurance manufacturing business. You can rest assured the economics of that business are very strong. We've got a market-leading position. We obviously, like all businesses, keep the strategy under review, and if we think there's a better position to take, we'll take it. At the moment, we're pleased with the way the insurance business is performing. Georges, was there anything else you wanted to add? Maybe just getting some of the math. We acquired a loan book that is just shy of GBP 6 billion, that's about $8 billion. We've acquired $10 billion of RWA. If you consider those loans and some of the additional RWAs on treasury books, operation risk, et cetera, you kind of land on these numbers. Manus, we also acquired $1.5 billion of capital after the fair value adjustments. You're talking about effectively a 15% CET1 ratio business that we acquired. We think it is where it should be. Thank you. Next question, please. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from Omar Keenan with Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Omar, hi. Good morning. Thank you very much. Hi. Thank you very much for taking the questions. I just had a quick question on rate sensitivity. if I look at your rate sensitivity at the end of 2022, it looks like you've been quite purposefully bringing down your rate sensitivity on the year 1 view. I was hoping you could perhaps give us a little bit of color of the direction that sensitivity over one year had changed in the first couple of months of the year. So we assume that, you know, some of the structural hedges have been further increased and well, the sensitivity at the interim is might have reduced further. any kind of color with that would be really helpful. Thank you. Georges, do you wanna answer? Sure. Thank you, Omar. At the end of 2022, the rate sensitivity on the downside 100 basis points scenario was reduced from around $6 billion at the half year to around $4 billion. That $2 billion reduction for a, you know, NII sensitivity reduction for 100 basis points is for about a third of it justified by the structural hedges that we started putting in place or that we continued putting in place as of last year. Two-thirds of it is due to the fact that we're at just higher level of rates, and therefore we have less convexity on the negative convexity on the downside. If you look into Q1, we have not published a revised rate sensitivity, but we continued the trajectory of our structural hedges. Just as a reminder, structural hedges will reduce somewhat our rate sensitivity, and our target is to take that $4 billion in the medium term to circa $3 billion. We are on that journey. We certainly have not arrived there. We'll be giving you an update at H1. I think I've addressed your points actually, Omar. Yep. Excellent. Thanks, Georges. Thanks, Omar. Next question, please. Thank you. The next question is from Perlie Mong with KBW. Your line is open. Hi, Perlie. Thank you. Hello. I've got two questions. The first one is, well, obviously the beat there was very strong, and a lot of it comes from non-interest income. It appears that a lot of it is from Commercial Banking and maybe some from Global Banking and Markets. How much of that do you think is sustainable? You know, presumably, you wouldn't encourage us to annualize it a whole lot. You know, how much of that do you think is sustainab le? Secondly is, I guess, on the AGM on Friday. I guess a lot of the attention on Friday will be around the debates you are having with Ping An, and they obviously recently published an announcement that made some critiques, especially around your cost income ratio and RoTE. W ell, you've obviously printed very strong numbers today, but in some ways you have gathered to a lot of it already, especially around costs. I'm sure you've also been communicating with them anyway. Why do you think those critiques were still made? Okay. I'll deal with the second one later. I'll ask Georges to deal with the non-NII first, if that's okay. Sure. I'd be expecting many of you will adjust your full year numbers to reflect our Q1 outperformance, that's a fair assessment, Perlie. I would caution you not to annualize Q1. If I just unpack it, the non-NII relating to the funding of our trading activities, $1.4 billion is fairly reasonable to assume this number will annualize. The Wealth business, obviously with the outlook improving in Wealth, fairly reasonable to assume we will see regained traction and bounce back, in particular in Hong Kong. Some of the other activities, such as the foreign exchange trading outperformance, I would caution you not to annualize this number and just to bake it in as a Q1 outcome, you know, Q2, Q3, we'll see how they fare. Just on that and on the Wealth performance, you said most of the non-NII was CMB and GBM. I think it's also fair to say that in WPB, the Wealth business performed well in Q1. Its revenue was up 13% in Q1 relative to Q1 last year. I think what Georges is saying is, you know, I think we've seen a recovery taking place in that Wealth revenue. We're not expecting that to just be a Q1 phenomenon. That is something that will continue in Q2 and Q3 and Q4. It's still early days to predict whether the 13% is an annual number, or it's higher than that or lower than that. We don't expect it to disappear in Q2, Q3, or Q4. There should be a level of annualization on that as well in the WPB non-NII line. With respect to the AGM comment, look, I think we've said for a while that we believe the safest and fastest way to achieve higher returns, better performance, better dividends, and capital generation was the existing strategy. I think the Q1 results provides a lot of evidence that that is the fact, that that is the best way. We guided the market over the last 12 months to a 12% plus RoTE I did emphasize at the year-end that we should focus on the plus, not the 12, and I think you see in Q1, you know, even excluding the notable items, we've done a RoTE of 19.3%. I would just draw attention to the fact that in that RoTE of 19.3, there is a tax credit, and Georges can probably cover that as well. You know, that tax credit is not something that will repeat every quarter. Even if you adjust for that, it's still a very healthy return on tangible equity. I, you know, I think it's in the you know, what we're focused on is driving performance on behalf of all our shareholders, and we believe doing what we've done is the best way to get improved returns, improved performance, rather than some more radical corporate restructuring action. We believe Q1 is strong evidence of that. Georges, you just wanna clarify the tax situation. The, you know, we basically shown $1.9 billion as a tax charge, which is an effective tax rate of 14%. I just wanna caution you that 3.2% relate to the provisional gain on SVB, which is a non-taxable item, and another 3.3% relate to the release of provisions for uncertain tax provisions, which is also a one-off item. Therefore, if you adjust it for those two, we still expect a 20% ETR guidance for the rest of the year. Thank you. Next question, please. Thank you. The next question comes from Andrew Coombs with Citi. Your line is open. Good morning. One strategic question and then one numbers question. On the strategic question, if the proposed French retail sale no longer goes ahead, what would be the plan? Would you be back on the block again, or would there be a plan to reabsorb it into the broader HSBC group? Don't think you can say on plans for France given that sale process and where we've got to. Secondly, on costs, you've actually had a very good cost trend this quarter. You're down 2% year on year on a constant currency basis, and yet you're still guiding to 3% cost growth or 4% with SVB U.K. Is this a timing issue? Is it a case of the wage inflation coming through from Q2? Anything you can elaborate there? Thank you. Two good questions. Georges will cover the second one. I'll cover the first one. Listen, we still believe that a sale of the French retail business is the right strategic outcome, that business probably has a stronger future in another purchaser's hands. However, we have been in discussions for a few weeks now with the current buyer to try and overcome the challenge they have on their acquisition accounting impact on their capital base. We'll continue that dialogue. We're hoping we can reach a mutually agreeable settlement with them on that, but we can't be guaranteed of that outcome. We have to consider what is financially the right decision for all shareholders. It's, you know, it's hopeful that we can reach an agreement, but it's not guaranteed. In the event we can't, then I still think, we'll continue to run the business, but I still think over time, we wouldn't see that as a long-term strategic hold. We'll have to wait and see what happens thereafter. We're very much focused on trying to reach an agreement with the current buyer, to bring that transaction to a close. That's the update I have for you. On cost, I'll hand over to Georges. Sure. Thank you. Thank you, Noel, thank you, Andrew, for the question. Our reported costs on a constant currency basis is down 2% Q1 last year to Q1 this year. If you adjust for notables, remember last year Q1, we had $450 million of additional cost due to the CTA program. If you extract that notable item from last year's base, our reported cost adjusted for notables will show us up 2% Q1 to Q1. This is the basis on which we're measuring ourselves for this year, it's on that basis where we would, you know, we are targeting to achieve a 3% annualized number where our quarter one basically is coming in at 2%. Why from 2% to 3%? Just want to highlight a few things. The first one is, we still haven't incurred by and large the severance costs, which we announced at the year-end, now we expect to incur the majority of it in Q2 this year. The second element, just to highlight, is that some of the pay increases have only been factored partially in Q1, starting March, and will start, you know, kind of, being fully factored in from Q2 onwards, and this is why our Q, our 3% target for the full year, is where it is. As you said, Andrew, and just for avoidance of any doubt here, the acquired cost of SVB, and some of the additional investments we need to do there, will add another 1% to that 3% target. Just a couple of additional comments from me. On the that reconciliation between the headline reporting number and the cost target, what we're trying to do is be very straightforward and not try and, you know, baked in what was a CTA last year into the cost base of this year. We're adjusting down the prior year reported number for the notable CTA last year, so that the cost target of 3% is on an apples and apples basis with the cost base of this year. We're not looking to take an easy option on that. We think it's the right thing to do. As we say, we're 2% against the 3% target in Q1. On SVB, I just wanna clarify as well. The SVB business we bought, we acquired a cost base with that, and we acquired a revenue stream. That revenue stream was in excess of the cost base. We've acquired a positive P&L that was contributing, if I remember correctly, around about, $80 million-$90 million of PBT. Although we've acquired $300 million. From the majority of the $300 million is the acquired cost base of SVB, it is a profitable cost base. Just to finish off, we provided the reconciliation on slide 30 to show you the work from reported cost to our cost target. We will be showing this slide every quarter. Thank you. Next question, please. Next question comes from Guy Stebbings with BNP Paribas Exane. Your line is open. Hi, Guy. Hi. Morning, everyone. Thanks for taking questions. One on net interest margin and one back on SVB. On NIM, I guess the U.K. ring-fenced bank did quite a lot of the heavy lifting this quarter, allowing for 1 basis point sequential NIM growth. As we look ahead, perhaps that tailwind fades, at least in quantum. Is that going to make it tricky from here to deliver NIM sustainability, or is the drop in HFAP and the headwind from deposit mix, in particular, likely to fade in your view to allow for some sort of stable NIM backdrop? The second question on SVB. In addition to the acquired cost base, you flagged the incremental investment spend and plans to build the business outside the U.K. Could you talk about sort of associated revenue ambitions and what sort of timeframe you expect to see any noticeable uplift there? I mean, sort of how big a shift in that $8 million-$19 million PBT reference could we see of SVB inside HSBC with that incremental investment? Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I'll take the second in a moment. I'll ask Georges to cover the NIM, please, and U.K. ring-fenced bank. Sure. Thanks, Noel. Thanks, Guy. Indeed you did call out the headwinds, you know, the possibility of headwinds in the U.K.. Obviously, there may be still one or two rate hikes for which we will be passing most of that to customers through pass-through rates. We do see continued headwinds in Hong Kong with around 1% per month migration into term deposit, with the mix now at 25% term deposits across both our entities in Hong Kong. This being said, we also have tailwinds. The first one is we still have a strong momentum from Q1, which we're carrying over. The second tailwind is HIBOR normalization. I mean, just for reference, in Hong Kong, HIBOR and Exchange Fund Bills rates in Q1 were 65 and 35 basis points lower on average than where they were in Q4, and that was a major headwind for us in Q1. We are seeing now, you know, over the last few weeks, we have been seeing normalization in those rates. If we continue to see normalization, and just for a reminder, we're about 200 basis points off their equivalent rates in dollars. If we continue to see normalization, this will provide us material tailwinds in the Hong Kong base. The other tailwind is our resilient deposit and loan base and you know, we, you know, we continue having stable deposits and loans despite the, you know, some of the competitive pressures, and we continue to aim for mid-single digit growth in both in the medium term, which should give us some supportive tailwinds. Just to reinforce what we said at the full year results in February, you know, we noted the guidance that was in existence when we reported in February, and we said we were not uncomfortable. Sorry. With the consensus. We noted the consensus that was in existence in February, and we said we were not uncomfortable with where consensus was. We still have that view. The only adjustment you need to make to NII is for the IFRS 17 adjustment. Everything else remains as we said in February. The guidance that existed at that point in time, we were not uncomfortable with it. The same is true today. Just adjust for IFRS 17, which is around about a $2 billion adjustment from IFRS 4 to IFRS 17. That's the only change that needs to be made, based on what we've given you as an update today. On SVB, we acquired. Sorry. We recruited 40 people, over 40 people in the U.S., to build out our SVB capability in the U.S. We did not bring a book with them, purchase a book, so they will be in build-out mode, so there will be a payback period on that investment. We think it's a relatively short payback period based on the quality of people we've hired. We're looking at other geographies around the world. We think it's a sensible and modest investment to do that organically, and we're pretty confident on the payback. We'll be relatively sure. We'll provide more details once we complete that build-out. Hopefully, by the half year, we'll be able to give you more information. There will be a profit drag to a degree, probably in the first year, 18 months, but then I think it will be back into profit territory, even on those organic build-out strategies. We'll give more of an update at the half year. I think strategically, it's absolutely the right thing to do for the medium term. This is a sector of the economy that is critical for all geographies and has huge growth potential on revenue. Thank you. Next question, please. Thank you. The next question comes from Robert Noble with Deutsche Bank. Your line is open. Hi, Rob. Hi. Most of my questions have been asked. If we just talk about the LCR, it's relatively low in a European context, obviously, with deposit bases. It's a different kind of structure. Are you happy running with that level in the medium term with the uncertainty in the market? How do you expect the regulation or approach to liquidity to change given what's happening in the U.S.? Thank you. Georges, do you wanna handle that? Sure. Thank you, Rob. We don't target LCR. We are continuing to target medium-term, single to mid digit loan growth in our portfolio, and we obviously continue to cherish deposits and attract and continue wanting to attract deposits. The LCR would be an outcome. I think insofar that we look at our liquidity management, it's the high-quality liquid assets ratio that we look at. It's the cash and cash equivalent within it that we look at. In terms of loans, again, if the short-term is somewhat subdued, in particular in Hong Kong, in the medium term, some of the bounce back and some of the trade bounce back that we're seeing as well, may support that loan growth ambition in the medium term. I think on the regulation impact, I think we have to wait and see what the various regulators around the world do on regulation. I think the way I look at it, the primary responsibility for running a prudent balance sheet is on the management and the board of a financial institution. That's a responsibility we've taken seriously throughout our history. You know, our high-quality liquid assets has been a feature of our heritage. Our high-quality cash and cash equivalents has been a feature of our heritage for many decades. We put the primary responsibility on liquidity management on ourselves, and then we'll see what the regulatory environment does as a consequence of some of the recent changes. Thank you. Next question. Next question is from Aman Rakkar with Barclays. Your line is open. Aman, hi. Good morning, Noel. Hey, good morning, Noel. Good morning, Georges. Morning. I just need to come back to revenues. Both your net interest income and your non-interest income are performing really well in Q1. They are annualizing at levels that would suggest pretty material upside to market expectations for both of those lines. Your net interest income is annualizing north of $36 billion on the Q1 number. Your guide is obviously greater than $34 billion. I appreciate there's lots of moving parts here, but I guess to be more specific, Noel, in terms of your commentary around consensus at full year and now, there's a kind of $1.7 billion gap between where the Street is and what you're guiding for, $3 billion-$35.7 billion. It doesn't actually sound like you see much downside to that consensus number at $35.7, unless there's something here around term deposit mix or it feels like there's a lot of conservatism in that NII guidance, or there's something I'm missing. Can you help us with that? Secondly, on the non-interest income, I totally appreciate your markets business might have overearned in Q1, but you are also pointing towards a Wealth Management business that's trending higher and underlying momentum in your fee businesses. You talked about strategic initiatives at full year that sit behind that. Like, to what extent is that revenue number an over-earn, or is this the kind of level that we can expect you to crank out on the year? This is well ahead of where the Street is. Any color that you can give us there would be really helpful. Thank you. Aman, two good questions. Let me just clarify what I said about what we said in February. I think you're right on your math. I think if you go back to what we said in February, we talked about $36 billion+, and when people were sort of talking about our NII, they were sort of annualizing it to about $38 billion. The consensus was around $37 billion-$37.5 billion. I think we said we were comfortable with that. I think if you go back to then, we sort of said, yes, we're sort of comfortable there. Consensus had a calculation on the plus bit of the $36 billion. That put it sort of north of $37 billion. That was a roundabout consensus back then. All I'm saying to you now is the only thing you need to adjust for is IFRS 17, which takes about $2 billion off of that. We're talking about $34 billion+, and that, therefore, would put you north of $35 billion. I think what we're saying is there should be We're sort of saying the street has probably got NII around about the right place back in February of last year, and we're saying there's no need to change what the street is. You only got to do the mechanical adjustment for IFRS 17. Hopefully that helps. Then Georges, I think, do you wanna just come back on the non-NII? Because I think you're right, there's elements of our non-NII performance in Q1 that Georges is saying annualize. There are just some elements that are saying it may be unwise to annualize them fully for some of the trading income. Georges, do you just want to re-clarify what you said? Sure, Noel. Aman, you know, if I kind of unpack the non-NII, some of the outperformance that we've seen with regards funding of the trading book, where we've seen $1.4 billion this quarter against $0.1 quarter one last year, because rates were at $0. Against $1.3 billion quarter four, somewhat flat to just slightly up from quarter four. That number it is fair to annualize it given current rate forecast consensus. Equally, as Noel mentioned earlier, the discussion on Wealth, the growth in NNIA in Wealth, the resumption of activity in Hong Kong in particular, it, you know, bodes well for the future, and I think it is fair to assume that we will see continued performance in Wealth. On the other hand, some of the outperformance in some of the markets activities such as foreign exchange trading, which had a record Q1, it may not be repeated. Obviously, we will have to look at it quarter by quarter in terms of what business opportunities are there. While you can bake in and factor in the results, the Q1 outperformance, I would caution you not to annualize that outperformance. In general, Aman, if I take a step back, it is a good set of results, and we are confident about the future. In light of the strong Q1 performance, we will have to review, and we will review the guidance in H1. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much. Next question, please. That comes from, Martin Leitgeb with Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Martin, hi. Yes, good morning, Noel and Georges. First of all, congratulations to the good set of results. Thank you. Just one broader question on growth and one follow-up on deposit, please. Just looking at the much improved profitability levels of the group with now NII doing around $2 billion-$3 billion high of the quarter, displays capacity to scale up growth. I was just wondering, if we look into the leading term or starting 2024, do you see the scope for the group to lean more into growth so that single-digit loan growth could potentially be higher? Or should we just think that any increase in profitability could be essentially returned to shareholders, just in terms of the trade-off between opportunity for growing more versus shareholder return? Secondly, with regards to the deposit trend. I was just wondering if you could comment on the strength of HSBC's deposit trend size during the quarter. Have you seen in particular inflows in certain parts of your footprint helping delivering that stable deposit trend in the quarter? I was also wondering with regards to deposit migration, part of CASA into time deposits, whether you have seen any change in trend. Are we towards the end of that cycle in terms of deposit migration, or could this still go on for a number of quarters? Thank you. Okay. Just a couple of comments. One comment from me on growth. listen, I think clearly we want to pursue growth, but I think we have the capacity in our dividend payout ratio of 50% to pursue growth and with the option of doing buybacks as well. At the moment, I think we're seeing a relatively subdued lending market in corporate banking. I think the demand for term loans around the world is not particularly high at the moment and probably isn't gonna be particularly high in the very near term. As Georges said earlier, you know, Once we get to 2024, one would expect there to be an increase in demand starting to emerge. For the near term, for the next few months in 2023, given the economic uncertainty, we're seeing subdued loan demand. I think the message I'd give you know, in a 50% payout ratio world, we believe the second 50%, after we pay the dividends, there is potential to fund both growth and buybacks. That's our plans going forward. Georges, do you wanna just cover the deposit trend, the inflows, the outflows, and deposit migration? Sure, Martin. Yeah, I mean, if I start with some of the outflows that we're seeing, and then I go into the tailwind. Some of the outflows we're seeing, particularly in the U.K., obviously U.K. retail, you know, Q1 is a tax payment period, there is seasonality here. We're still seeing high cost of living, resilient inflation in the U.K., which is obviously draining some of the, you know, U.K. consumers' savings. We're to a lesser extent competitive pressure as well in the U.K.. Likewise for corporates in the U.K., you know, Q4 was a year-end where people shored up their liquidity, whereas Q1 most of the companies pay dividend, you can see some of the drain of liquidity. We're also seeing de-leveraging of loans using some of the deposits to de-leverage on the loan side, especially for those, you know, with a strong rate differential between what they're paying on their loans. This being said, we continue to see growth and strength in the deposit proposition. If I take Hong Kong and all of Asia actually, we're seeing definite deposit growth in the retail and the personal banking space. We have seen 5% growth of our deposit base in Commercial Banking in the U.S., we were one of the beneficiary banks of the deposit migration from, you know, from medium-sized banks into large banks. You know, we obviously continue to cherish our propositions and deposits to continue attracting deposits at the right price. Okay. thank you, Martin. next question, please. Thank you. We will take our last question today from Tom Rayner with Numis. Your line is open. Hi, Tom. Yes, thank you. Hi there. Good morning, guys. Two please. First one, Noel, just on the loan growth. I mean, you flagged the corporate demand and maybe that is the answer. I was gonna ask, because you're quite upbeat on the economic recovery you're seeing now in Hong Kong and China, and the U.K. I think you said was quite resilient. Is there any other reason why you're so sort of cautious in the short term on loan growth? Or is it purely a lack of demand from corporates? I've got a second question on costs, please. Okay. What's your question on costs? Do you want or do you want to... Um- Yeah. I mean, really it's the sort of looking at the 3% target for this year, and thinking forward to next year, 'cause I guess you're still enjoying some of the flows through this year from cost savings from the previous cost program, which has now ended. So I just wondered if you or Georges would comment on your sort of approach towards costs in 2024, whether you'll be thinking in terms of an absolute growth maybe similar to this year or whether a jaws approach might be more appropriate. I don't know if there's anything, any color you could add for n ext year. Yeah, thanks. T hanks, Tom. Just on loan growth, listen, I think your point's a fair one. I think if there is a place where I think loan growth could pick up more in the near term, I think it would be Asia. I think Middle East is another option. I am being a bit cautious on the near term loan growth. I think probably it will start to emerge more in the working capital side of the balance sheet, trade finance, before people start investing in fixed capital. I think there is a level of nervousness out there in the corporate world about, you know, taking long-term investment decisions in fixed capital. That is aside from sustainability. I think there's a lot of infrastructure spend taking place, and I could see some loan growth coming in and around that sustainable infrastructure investment. Maybe I am being a bit cautious on loan growth at the moment. I think I'd rather be that way in the near term. I don't think I do believe there's going to be medium-term loan growth, and I think it is fair to say that Asia has the potential to pick up faster than elsewhere in the world. Yeah, I think it may be fair that I'm being a bit cautious. If I kind of just adding to Noel's comment, Tom. If you look at Hong Kong, in the retail space, both cards and mortgages have been growing in the first quarter. Even in the U.K., we are seeing green shoots in the mortgage sector. I mean, our market share in the mortgage sector in the U.K. for the first two months of the year is at 15%. That's, you know, for new business. That's against a book market share of about 7.5%, and a Q4 new business market share of 9%. We're certainly there in the retail space where we're seeing growth. On the wholesale side, I just wanna add one comment, to, you know, Noel's description, which is also bear in mind the rate differential between China and Hong Kong. All those Chinese companies who used to use Hong Kong as a base for raising funding internationally will be less doing so as long as the rate differential between USD rates and onshore China rates, you know, are that wide. It is cheaper for these corporates to raise funding in mainland China as opposed to Hong Kong, and that will remain the case up until the time we see a reversal in that rate trend. If I move to your second question, Tom, we have not shared targets for 2024 as yet, but the few guiding principles I can share with you. The first guiding principle, paramount guiding principle is that you should expect our focus on cost discipline to continue. The second guiding principle is that we will continue doing transformation and restructuring as part of our BAU cost base and expect some of those saves to flow through also into 2024 and beyond. Case in point is the spend on severance, which we're planning now to do in Q2 this year, for which the benefit will flow through mostly into 2024. Thirdly, at this stage, we're still looking to guide towards a dollar cost number as opposed to jaws in the way we will be looking at 2024 as we come to be able to give you additional guidance later in the year. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you all for your questions. Really appreciate you taking the time. To close our first quarter results, I just wanna say that the first quarter results provide further evidence that our strategy is working. We had a strong first quarter profit performance. Cost discipline remains tight, and we're clearly on track to deliver our RoTE target. We've resumed quarterly dividends and announced a share buyback of up to $2 billion. I'm also confident about the rest of 2023. We built a strong platform for future growth, and our geographical footprint puts us in areas of high growth. I look forward to speaking with you soon. Have a good morning or afternoon. Thank you. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. That concludes the call for HSBC Holdings plc's Q1 2023 results. You may now disconnect.