Good afternoon. This is the Chorus Call conference operator. Welcome, and thank you for joining the Azimut Holding Full Year 2021 Results conference call. As a reminder, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Should anyone need assistance during the conference, please signal an operator by pressing star and zero on their telephone. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Gabriele Blei, CEO of Azimut Holding. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you very much, and good afternoon to everyone. We'll go through the presentation as usual, and then leave as much time as possible for Q&A. On slide number four, we have highlighted the five key features of last year results and performance. First, inflows with almost EUR 19 billion that brought our assets under management to EUR 83 billion, of which 40% are coming from our international operations. Within the fundraising activity, a good chunk of our effort was dedicated to our private market initiative, which increased its assets to EUR 4.6 billion, reaching 8.4% of total managed assets, as well as some activities and M&A transactions we have done in the FinTech environment, delivering some growth that we will see in a later stage. Solid performance vis-à-vis clients, net weighted average performance of 6.5% in excess of the benchmark of 1.6%. All of this produced a record net profit, which was already anticipated to the market at the beginning of January of EUR 605 million for 84 basis points as far as average assets are concerned. The board has proposed to the AGM, which will be held in April, to pay a dividend of EUR 1.3 per share, representing 63% of recurring earnings. Turning to the next slide, the evolution of assets under management. As you can see, there is a 16% cumulative aggregate growth rate, and this is especially thanks to the last year performance, where our assets under management in our international businesses grew two times. Also, thanks to the contribution of Sanctuary transaction. Our Italian business developed nicely, with a 15% year-on-year growth rate. A snapshot of the pie chart on the bottom right of the page. 8% is clearly something that we didn't have just two years ago, if you remember. Now it's starting to build up, and as we have mentioned in several occasions, we will continue to focus part of our commercial attention to develop this business. Turning to the following slide six, net inflows by region and product. You see how all the regions have posted positive net inflow development, with clearly Italy of EUR 3.5 billion, of which 90% is into managed products, which is exactly what we dedicate ourselves to. As far as Sanctuary is concerned, we bought Sanctuary when it had EUR 7 billion, roughly. Between organic growth and the M&A, the inclusion of the assets that they had at the beginning of February, we are having EUR 18.3 billion coming from Sanctuary in terms of flows. All in all, almost EUR 19 billion of net inflows, clearly a record year, which, as you can see on the following slide number seven, it's just a continuation of what we have been doing since the IPO time, back in 2004. Sometimes it's useful to look at the longer periods of time just to observe how the business has developed throughout different market cycles, both in terms of assets that grew nine times since the IPO times, almost. We have doubled the number of clients in Italy as well as the number of financial advisors. Turning to the following slide, number eight, focusing on our full year 2021 results. Assets grew 38%, of which 40% again in our international business. The growth has been basically driven by the net new money that we have seen and positive market performance. All in all, total revenues have grown to EUR 1.45 billion, with recurring fee margin that has developed nicely and is standing at 191 basis points. This figure is clearly taking away or stripping out Sanctuary as well as Australia from the management fee and all the other fee is. Sorry, from the management fee and clearly the asset base. Operating costs up 24%, mainly due to higher rebate to the network linked to the higher recurring fees that we have seen just a moment ago. Change in the perimeter that is having an impact, but we will dig into the detail later on. Higher variable compensation, but with a stable percentage of distribution cost as a percentage of recurring revenues excluding performance fees. Net profit up 59% to EUR 605 million as we have just seen. Turning to slide number nine, digging into the details of the results. Total revenues, as far as same perimeter is concerned, I remind you as far as the same perimeter, we're stripping out the acquisition of Sanctuary and some M&A transactions we have concluded in Australia. If you want to have the same perimeter, this is the picture we're looking at. As far as the breakdown is concerned, recurring revenues are up 25% to EUR 966 million. Clearly, in December, we've closed the year nice in terms of performance for our clients, which had also a very sizable contribution towards performance fees that stood at EUR 322 million out of our fund, mutual funds, discretionary accounts and advisory business. If I look at the right-hand side of the page, recurring revenues are growing quarter after quarter, hitting EUR 260 million. Of that, the change in perimeter in terms of recurring revenue amounts to EUR 60 million. If we include EUR 12 million of other income booked in the other income line related to Sanctuary and Australia and an acquisition we did in Italy, all in all, the change in the perimeter in total revenue stands at EUR 72 million that you see on the left-hand side of the page. Looking at the expense breakdown, distribution costs are on a same perimeter basis, clearly up 8%, year-over-year, whereas SG&A are up 11%, again, on a same perimeter basis. The change in the perimeter amounts to EUR 78 million, which net of what we have already seen as far as the change in the revenue contribution coming from the change in the perimeter, is a negative contribution of EUR 6 million, which is mainly linked to Sanctuary that, as we've stated several times during 2021, is going through a period of very sizable growth and investment, which is still producing or has produced in 2021 a slight negative result. As far as the fourth quarter is concerned, we wanted to highlight a couple of drivers behind the step up in the costs in Q4, which are mainly driven by higher variable compensation both at the network level, at fund management level and employee level. Some growth linked to the organic as well as inorganic growth, both in Italy and abroad. For instance, in the other cost line, we had to make an extra provision in terms of the pension fund products, given the termination of the contract from the insurance company that is behind this product, simply because the new parameters are having a worse effect in terms of guaranteed returns that we have to guarantee to the subscriber of this pension fund. Turning to slide 11, snapshot, the usual snapshot of our international business development. As you see, total assets are up to EUR 33 billion with a good contribution as far as net inflows are concerned. Total revenues with Sanctuary included has reached almost EUR 250 million, and EBITDA at EUR 70 million, whereas excluding Sanctuary, the EBITDA is standing at EUR 77 million. Turning to slide 13, a snapshot of the performance. We have delivered 17% in the last three years of net positive performance to clients. This is net of fees, clearly. The beginning of 2022 has been challenging for us as well as many industry participants, although we haven't had any issue or material exposure to Russian assets, which is less than 0.5%, so quite negligible for us. The net weighted average performance is somewhat down almost 5%. As far as looking at the longer period of time, which is sometimes interesting to have a look at. Over the last 25 years, we have delivered performance to our clients of 3% per year in excess of the benchmark of the industry by 70 basis points. This is something that clearly is pleasing us as well as our clients. Turning to slide 15, not much to add. We continue to overperform in terms of net new money collection in the Italian industry, and this is driven by a mix of the contribution coming from Italy as well as our international operations. Focusing on Italy on slide 16, we have hired in 2021, 141 new financial advisors coming from competitors, a mix of banks and competitors in terms of independent financial advisors. The FAs have brought EUR 1.7 million average in terms of net flows in 2021, of which 99% are going to managed assets. Whereas clients, 96%, so almost all of them have enjoyed a positive net weighted average performance in 2021. EUR 25 million, the average per financial advisors. Clearly in this number, there is a good divergence between the traditional financial advisors as well as the wealth managers. The higher end spectrum, which are trending towards a EUR 50 million average AUM per wealth manager. 92% of this money is invested in managed assets. Again, a confirmation of our focus to be and continue to be an active manager for our clients' money. 18,000 gross new clients, of which 76% from existing financial advisors, which we're quite pleased to see, also thanks to a portion of that is coming through the fact that we are launching this private market initiative that is attracting interest from non-admin clients. Where do we stand? We stand that 85% of our financial advisors have sold at least one private market product to clients. If we look at the clients that have invested in at least one private market product that we have launched, these are just 13%. This explains the higher potential that we have going forward in terms of future penetration of this asset class into our clients' asset allocation. Turning to slide 17, the usual snapshot on Sanctuary. You see how the business is developing both in terms of revenues as well as reducing the loss at an operating level. As I mentioned before, we bought the company at roughly EUR 7 billion. They closed in 2021 with $16 billion in assets under management. This has been produced also thanks to strong recruitment activity as well as the organic net flows of the existing advisors that are producing solid results. Turning to slide 18. The diversification of our private market offering is ongoing both in terms of geography as well as asset class. As you can see, 64% is in private credit, whereas the rest is spread across private equity, 23%, and our infrastructure fund at 7%, that stands at EUR 400 million of assets under management. In the bottom part of this chart, you see a snapshot of our 2022 product pipeline, at least for the beginning of this year, where we have the second version of an Italian VC fund that is almost already closed with EUR 35 million of potential assets under management. We're launching finally a RAIF fund in Luxembourg with the management of our partner in the US, Kennedy Lewis. As well as the second version of our digital lending product that originally the first version collected EUR 225 million of assets, and now we're targeting something between EUR 200 million and EUR 250 million. Last but not least, we are launching our global product market next generation fund, which is a product that will invest in the staking business as well as seeding the funds of alternative asset managers in which we will buy stakes. We will offer to our clients the possibility to invest in a similar way to what we do with our Azimut Alternative Capital Partners business in the U.S. Moving to slide 19, a snapshot of our FinTech lending activity. As I mentioned at the beginning, the market is growing extremely strongly between 2019 and 2021, 10 times in terms of loans and bonds. We are taking a market share of 17%, thanks to our positioning and the recent acquisition of Azimut Direct that is playing a good role in this market. In the bottom part of the slide, you see how our FinTech offering is developing across different kind of segments. We are launching our application for the young generation that is going to offer products dedicated to this application for planning investment and as well as potential objectives that these net new clients will have along the way. For the SMEs, we are quite active with the synthetic bank project, which is articulated across a number of companies that we have in order to attract a different type of businesses in terms of size. We're also, as you know, quite active in the new innovation through the token that we have launched and the block, and studying how the blockchain can be applied to our business. We are also developing a fee-based advisory model, which is called Azimut Next, that will optimize the asset allocation going forward of our financial advisors. This will certainly help advisors in managing better the clients. I will leave now the floor to Alessandro for the usual comments on the income statement and net financial position. [Thank you, Gabriele]. We can move on slide 22. I will not bother you line by line, as the main variation and explanation in terms of effect on the P&L, 2021 has been already clearly explained before. Therefore, probably make sense to focus, it has additional effect on total revenue, on the insurance revenue, as you can see increased by EUR 50 million. Comparing this variation to 2020, the effect is coming mainly from the recurring fees of the business, thanks to our growth in terms of AUM and the market effect. At the level of the utility cost, again here, probably I mean, doesn't make sense to add something more. We already explained what is coming from the new perimeter, therefore, the rate is linked to the significant increase in terms of of the revenue that we registered during the year. Focusing on the last part of the income statement. On finance income, we have a positive effect of EUR 43 million. This is the result of the unrealized gain coming, let's say, that we can divide into parts, 50% is the effect of the fair value option. The other 50% is mainly linked to the unrealized gain generated on the cash that we invested on our fund. At the level of the net, the non-operating costs, we are almost in line, slightly less compared to 2020. At the level of the tax, the overall tax rate is in line with 15%. This is the guidelines that we always keep as reference. Anyway, slightly higher compared to 2020 due to the variable fee part that significantly have the effect on the P&L in 2021. Moving to the net financial position. The total debt is slightly less compared to 2020. At the end of December, we paid back the loan with BPM, and now we are ready to pay back the single bond at the end of March. We will traditionally reduce our debt to EUR 500 million. Cash and cash equivalents increased significantly compared to 2020. The net financial position, therefore, is higher by EUR 378 million compared to 2020. This can be reconciled considering obviously the results of the year, less the cash dividend paid for EUR 136 million, plus EUR 4 million for the dividend paid to the foundation. Almost EUR 75 million has been paid in terms of tax advanced, and then EUR 130 million, I mean, coming from the M&A activity. I'm gonna give back to Gabriele. Thank you, Alessandro. Dividend policy. We are proposing EUR 1.3 per share, a 30% increase versus 2020. Most importantly, we are proposing a dividend that is 63% of our recurring EPS. As you remember, in November, we stated that in the next years, we would have stayed between the range of 50%-70%, bearing in mind the M&A, the debt repayment, and the buyback opportunity that we could exploit. We consider that we are maintaining our words and proposing this EUR 1.3 per share dividend. Moving to the summary and outlook. Just as we are at the end of our three-year term, we wanted to provide you a snapshot of what has been the result, just unfortunately on a numerical approach, because otherwise we would have to write books on the many things that have been done in the last three years. We have increased on average the assets 18%, EUR 28 billion of net new money. A good start of our private market initiative with EUR 3.9 billion of net inflows into this new asset class. As far as net profits are concerned, we have cumulatively reached EUR 1.35 billion. As far as dividend, we paid out EUR 456 million of dividend. Moving to the business development, we will continue to focus our attention on our integrated business model. This is what makes the difference for our clients and I assume also for our stakeholders. We will also expand our production capacity globally in order to better integrate our asset management capabilities and leverage on our distribution wherever they are based. On the sustainability front, 46% of our Lux funds are compliant with Article 8 under SFDR. We target to reach 75% by 2025. On the product market front, we have a very strong pipeline of products in the launch phase for 2022 and beyond. We're working on implementing new partnership in the U.S., which will be announced over the coming months. Once again, we reiterate the target to reach at least 15% of AUM by 2024 in product markets, neo finance and FinTech. This is the new edition and the new era of where probably financial market will go. In the next years, we need to be present significantly. Our target to develop EUR 1.2 billion in loans by 2025 is confirmed. We are standing at EUR 350 million today, and we will explore ways to further use technology to improve our business across products and services that are offered to our clients. Lastly, our U.S. partnership, this is something that we'll stress in the future as well. We will continue to invest in our alternative capabilities as well as to integrate Sanctuary with our production centers. Moving to slide 27. I guess, this is something that you were expecting from our side. The new fulcrum fee, it has finally been approved. It will start to be applicable on our Luxembourg funds as of first of April 2022. So on EUR 27 billion, roughly speaking, of assets under management. The total expense ratio for clients will remain in line with our historical average. We're not charging on top. We are just changing things because of the ESMA guidelines, and we don't want to be attacked or accused to be someone that are applying commissions not in line with the ESMA guidelines. Therefore, the average increase of 50 basis points would be on the EUR 27 billion of and will be booked within the recurring fee level. Based on the overall underperformance against a benchmark, the benchmark will depend on the type of funds, we will apply a fulcrum adjustment, whereby we will increase or decrease linearly the management fee, and capping this at ±20% of the respective management fee of the fund. As far as the performance period, this is a rolling 3-month period. The variable fulcrum adjustment crystallizes after the end of each calendar month. If we assume the 1st of April as the starting point, then we will start to apply the fulcrum from July 2022. If any performance fee using the existing model, so prior to this change, will be there, will be crystallized on the 31st of March 2022. Moving to the last slide, short and midterm targets. We are expecting under normal market conditions, although during these times it is extremely difficult to define what normal means, and the impact of volatility is clearly quite dramatic beyond our imaginations. EUR 6 billion-EUR 8 billion is our best estimate at this current time for what we can do in terms of net new money. As of 1st of April, as I just mentioned, we will apply the new fulcrum fee, aligning our interest with that of the clients. Net profit for the year is expected to be at least EUR 400 million, again, assuming normal market conditions. We are ongoing with the deleveraging of the balance sheet. EUR 350 million will be repaid. We will be going down in terms of net debt to EBITDA to 0.66 times. Something that nobody believed could be possible just a few years ago. Dividend is going to be paid as every year. The yield of this dividend, based on today's pricing, is in excess of 6%. As far as tax rate is concerned, what we are hinting at is, given the international development with the introduction of Pillar Two and our geographical presence, we will be trending towards somehow in excess of 20% sustainable long-term tax rate, which is something 5 percentage points more than our existing target. As far as the international business is concerned, we expect a contribution of EUR 150 million of management net profit by 2024, and this is something that we will have to work on and will be achieved through the integration of production and distribution. We close it here and leave it to you for any Q&A. The first question is from Alberto Villa of Intermonte SIM. Please go ahead. [Foreign language], Gabriele. Good afternoon. I have a few questions. The first one is on the net inflows target of EUR 6 billion-EUR 8 billion. Can you give us an indication of what is the target for managed assets, and if there is any embedded assumption on M&A on this target? Eventually an indication of what Sanctuary Wealth contribution within this number is considered. Staying on Sanctuary, maybe you can elaborate a little bit more on the trajectory you are expecting for the future profitability of the asset. Maybe when, according to your projections, Sanctuary will reach breakeven and contribute to the target you have given of international business contribution to the future net profit of the company. In that sense, you said rather than EUR 50 million in 2024 at management net profit. Just if you can clarify what management net profit stands for in this case. Finally, I have a question on the net average performance as of today. You mentioned during the presentation it's down around 5%. I guess this one is not including the private markets. It's probably related to the market funds and not the private markets. Just a clarification on that as well. Thank you. Thanks, Alberto. Starting from the last one, yes, it is indeed not including any mark-to-market funds. It's just the liquid products that we manage. Roughly speaking, we're in that range. Going backwards, in terms of questions, net inflow target. What's the basic mechanics that we have done. We think M&A will continue to contribute to our net inflows. Clearly there is a portion of contribution that will be incorporated in this target. We're not incorporating a deal that can increasingly or significantly increase the net new money expectations as in 2021 in the case of Sanctuary. Clearly, we will continue to perform M&A both in Australia and or the U.S., but this is kind of physiological by now for a group like ours. The contribution from managed assets very much will depend on the market. We're working under the assumption that we will not go, or the most of the countries will not go to war. Therefore, the situation will normalize and stabilize at a certain point. Therefore, the contribution of inflows into managed assets will be, let's say, 2/3 of our expected projection. Clearly, the flows coming from Sanctuary will increase the proportion of administrative assets. As we work with them to transform part of these assets into inflows into products that we manage, this will improve over time. At the current stage, being more precise than this, it's quite hard, given the many uncertainties that we see and we have under our eyes. From what we are seeing in the first two months, the network is still focused on managed products as well as product markets, as well as insurance products. These are the three most selling products as far as Italy is concerned. Abroad, we have a situation of Sanctuary having a strong pipeline up to June, I would say. And flows from Brazil are reverting back to strong positive flows. For the current situation, we're not seeing major impact, given the macroeconomic scenario. As well, Sanctuary, the future profitability, we expect this to become profitable in 2022, slightly profitable. Clearly, we will update you over the course of the next quarters on where we stand. Management net profit, what this means, it means that some of the profit that we generate is not within the company that generate this profit, because eventually we use product factories in other company, in other countries. We are simply grouping the contribution coming from the international operation, although somehow is spread across a number of different product factories. Okay. Just to give you an idea, the management net profit, how does it fit with the, let's say, the one that you report? It is exactly that. No, nowadays, we report the management EBITDA. [crosstalk]Okay. We're just saying we will go down to net profit, but applying the same principles that we use today. Thank you. I have a follow-up, but maybe I come back later if no one[crosstalk] asks about the fulcrum. Bye. The next question is from Hubert Lam of Bank of America. Please go ahead. Hi. Good afternoon. I got a few questions. Firstly, maybe just give us an update in terms of client risk appetite at the moment. I know flows in February were good, but how have March flows been so far, just given the market sell-off and what's been happening in Russia? Are clients relatively cautious, or they've been de-risking? Just want to get a sense of client sentiment so far. That's the first question. Second question is on costs. There are numerous one-off effects at least for year-end for distribution costs, G&A, depreciation, et cetera. Just wondering if you can kind of give us what the one-off effects were for each of these items, just for us to give a sense of the run rate that we should think about going forward into 2022. That'd be helpful. Third question is on the repricing. I just wanted to double-check. So if you have EUR 27 billion of assets at 50 basis points, that's a EUR 135 million. Does that mean that EUR 135 million of performance fees will shift to management fees? And I guess is that number fixed? I guess it's subject to the fulcrum fee bands, but is that the way to kind of look at it? And also just want to make sure that the, t hat you don't pay commissions on this additional fee change to your advisors. That's yeah, those are my questions. Thank you, Hubert. Absolutely, we don't pay commission and we don't share this with our distribution system. It is quite correct what you're saying. If we assume EUR 135 million, this is the additional fee that we will have. Then depending on the performance of the product vis-à-vis the benchmark, we might have to give back a portion of this extra revenue. In essence, what we have is higher recurring fees and higher visibility going forward of this component, no rebate to the network of this new element, and eventually ±20% difference vis-à-vis this EUR 135 million you just mentioned. As far as the risk appetite of clients, you know, unfortunately, we are getting used to extreme events. After COVID, now this one, so our network is becoming more and more skilled to manage the client emotion and the concerns that clients may have at different points in time. I want to stress and remind everyone how important it is to have an integrated system of production and distribution and a strong diversification of products in liquid or illiquid. We're much better off today than several years ago. We have a lot of tools and investment solutions that we can propose to clients and that can improve the asset allocation going forward. We knew that at some point the volatility will have kicked in. We didn't know when and due to what, and we were already trying to move away from bonds our clients because of no possibility to extract a positive performance. What has happened has affected all the asset classes, and clearly the clients that have a high proportion of private market products are suffering less the mark-to-market of their assets at this current stage. As far as the risk appetite, we're not seeing major impact on the numbers. Typically, it has a lag effect of some couple of months eventually, especially if the situation does not normalize. At this current stage, there is certainly huge concerns among clients. We are very close to them. Our fund managers are spending enormous amount of time talking to our network and to clients directly to advise them on where we are invested, how we manage the situation, and the fact that our exposure is very limited to these specific countries. It's somehow reassuring. The problem, as for everyone, is the 90+% that is not exposed to these countries that they are subject to volatility. As far as the one-off effects on the cost line, I'll try to answer in a different way, but then let me know if you want to dig into the details. I will not suggest or recommend to take the EUR 230 million of Q4 costs and project this over 2022. Why? Because this is the result as it was in 2020 of several one-off effects, driven by the fact that all the objectives have been more than reached, and therefore, with the multiplier effect on our variable compensation package for most of our people. We have somehow applied approved accounting principles to a number of aspects. Therefore, the EUR 230 million of Q4 costs are not a good indication. Probably, I would take the average of the four quarters, and then apply the usual 5%-7% cost inflation, that is our normal range based on the same perimeter. Okay, that's clear. Sorry, if you don't mind, I've got another [crosstalk] follow-up. Around the fulcrum fees that you're charging. Based on history, how much have you outperformed indices? Just give us a sense on that. On top of that, should we expect any performance fees from here? Just because where markets are, I'm just wondering if everything's just been transferred to the manager fees, or should we expect anything on performance fee line as of now? Listen, as far as the overperformance is concerned, we wanted to show you our overperformance in the last 25 years, just to share the fact that we didn't just perform in the last two years because markets were going up, although with some volatility. We're active managers, and we manage our clients' money to beat the benchmark. This has been done consistently over the last 25 years by 70 basis points. You may think that this is too little, but at least we beat the benchmark. This has resulted in a performance fee generation across different market cycles. Going forward, we're the same people, we're just changing the fee structure. We can expect that our fund managers, wherever they're based, will continue to perform and manage the assets in similar ways to the ones that they have applied so far. Although, given the new system of fees, our expectations of performance fee generation, if I compare this to the past, I would assume that this would be limited vis-à-vis what we have today. Okay, great. Thank you. My pleasure. The next question is from Domenico Santoro of HSBC. Please go ahead. Hi there. Just some follow-ups and some more questions about the new mechanism. First of all, on the operating cost, I listened to your answer before. I just wonder whether your answer was related to SG&A only. Shall we take just the average of the four quarters and then apply the 5%-6% that you were mentioning before? Well, first of all, thanks for giving out the slide on Sanctuary. That's very helpful. Then on the new mechanism, I just want to understand more. So 50 basis points repricing on the EUR 27.135 billion more of recurring fees. This is clear. But when you calculate these variable fulcrum adjustments, have I understood well that it can be a plus or a minus on top of the EUR 135 million? It could be an additional source of revenues in terms of performance fees, or eventually, it can also work as a clawback. If the market is negative, as you said, you mentioned 5%, in case of overperformance compared to the market, shall we expect also that you might book variable fees on top of these 50 basis points? To make it very simple, if now you said your performance is -5%, but the market is worse, what could be year to date the additional variable performance fees, just for the sake of clarity? Maybe a very naive question, but with all the mechanism so far, year to date, do we have additional variable fees, you know, eventually booked at the end of the quarter? The other question is, the EUR 400 million profit target for this year. What is the assumptions in terms of fulcrum adjustments? Have you made any positive or any rollback just to be clear. Another question on dividend. Sorry to be very long, because the 1.3 is of course below the 70%, assuming that in your decision there was some M&A that they might have probably lowered the bar a little bit in terms of payout. Now for next year, given that you mentioned some M&A and also repayment of debt, is this 63 a sort of, you know, limit for next year as well, or you can do better? And then should we assume also buyback on top of it? The EUR 400 million, what is the tax rate implication? Because you mentioned that it's gonna be 22% in 2023. What about 2022? And then what I mean, probably that was the question of the colleague before. What's the comparable EUR 150 million management of profits for the international business in 2022? Thank you. Sorry for the long question. Okay, Domenico, I'll try to answer them, and if I forget something, please do remind me. Cost, thank you for the clarification and the questions. I was commenting on the EUR 213 million, which is clearly the operating cost, the total of distribution personnel and depreciation and amortization. If you remember the distribution cost line, half of that line is linked to the rebate of the management fee, whereas the other half is almost evenly split between cost of the recruitment and overhead marketing costs and so on and so forth. Clearly, the assumption there is that we will manage this line as we have done this year. Clearly, what we do not control is the recruitment costs entirely, in terms of cost. It depends on where the market is going to go, in terms of activity. On the flip side, the rebate of the management fee is something that goes hand in hand with the development of recurring fees and the mix effect as an impact. Ideally, the 5%-7% is on the total cost line, and can have a different mix in terms of SG&A and/or distribution costs. The look-through method, what does it mean? If you assume 50 basis points applied to EUR 27 billion is EUR 135 million, based on the current mix of AUM. Assuming a management fee, an average management fee of, say, 130 basis points, you know, we might have to give back 20% of that, which is roughly speaking EUR 70 million. That's the kind of math that you should take into account, higher or lower, depending on the capability to overperform the benchmark. We have a lot of different strategies, so it's quite difficult to be, at this stage, too precise. We will see how the system runs, and we will keep you updated on how we are seeing the development. [crosstalk]In terms- You said 17, right? 17, correct? 70. 70. Crystallization, I would put a zero just to be on the safe side today. Because of the current environment, I would be not expecting any major contribution or performance fee coming from the changeover from the old to the new system. EUR 400 million, the fulcrum assumption, we are not assuming any major contribution coming from performance fees on this number, at this current stage. As far as the payout, dividend payout is concerned, I would reiterate what we have stated in November. The range is 50%-70%. We will not commit on a year-on-year increase of the per share dividend nor on a specific percentage between 50%-70%. There is a range for a reason, which is explained by the fact that we have to repay the debt and we want to have flexibility for M&A and buyback. Tax rate, can you remind me of your question? The target is 22 for 2023. What about this year instead? This year, the expectation we have is to be shy of the 22%, but somehow higher than the 15% that we have had this year and that we have always guided. Assume that a portion of our original estimate is beaten up by the 5 percentage point higher tax rate than we historically had. Sorry, can I ask very clear, very quickly. As of today, if the performance is -5%, you said, and the market is doing worse, would the fulcrum give an additional positive or not? Yes. How about, what about the EUR 150 million target on the international business? What's the comparable number for this year? For 2021, sorry, the base. Today we're standing at around EUR 30 million. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. My pleasure. The next question is from Giovanni Razzoli of Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Good afternoon to everybody. Two very quick questions. The first one is, again, on fulcrum fee. Very clear to me, the new system. I was a little bit confused by the fact that, Gabriele, you mentioned that you may have EUR 70 million of maximum clawback. Because if I assume that you have EUR 130 million of, you know, theoretical contribution out of the EUR 27 billion, and you have a quarterly, you know, crystallization period. In the unlikely event that over the next four quarters that your asset managers all underperform, you should, you know, lose this EUR 130 million in total, because of underperformance on four consecutive quarters, given the 20%, you know, [crosstalk]clawback. [crosstalk] Giovanni. Yeah. My apologies for interrupting. I don't want to be rude, but EUR 135 million is on a fee that we call distribution fee in our chart on slide 27. The fulcrum fee is applied to management fee. Oh, okay. Okay. Okay. Sorry. You know, if you do give back 20% of it in four quarters, you should, you know, theoretically lose most of it. Why you say that you are retaining EUR 70 million of that fulcrum fees? I was wondering whether at the end of the day, you know, depending on the market performance, you know, you may lose part or all of it. That's my first question. The third one very quickly, you mentioned the percentage of your clients' assets exposure to Russia, if you can please confirm that, and what's the equity exposure of your clients today? The third question, if I compare Azimut now with the past, it seems to me that you are more diversified in terms of asset classes. For example, you have a lot of, in drastic terms, private equity and private debt and private market instruments. You are more diversified in terms of geographies. Your area is, you know, the sub perimeter of the group. Shall we look to the future, even in the context of extremely high volatility environment, more positively than in the past in terms of, you know, earnings evolution? Thank you. Well, Giovanni, certainly, yes, we are more diversified in terms of geography, in terms of products and in terms of distribution channels. We have different sources of growth that is exactly what we wanted to have back in 2008 when we started thinking over international development. Ideally, we're better positioned both in terms of trying to deliver performance to our clients as well as diversify our sources of net inflows and growth. Unfortunately, we are living in an uncertain time where all the markets are impacted but indirectly, clearly. We're still capable of generating net inflows, and we're trying to defend the good performance that we have achieved over the last years. I think today the business is positioned much better than it just used to be 3-5 years ago. The fact that we're consistently pushing a diversification between liquid and illiquid will help us in generating performance over the next 3-5 years. As well as our Russia exposure, or direct exposure to Russian assets, I would say it is, you know, indeed negligible, less than 0.5%. We don't have nor a direct presence, we don't have an office down there, and we don't have major exposure both to bonds or equity to this market. On the fulcrum, eventually maybe Alessandro wants to- Yeah. I'm gonna try to answer your point, even if I'm not sure I get exactly your point. When you compare the 20% to the average management fee of 130 basis points, obviously we are looking to the full year management fee. Therefore, when you apply the monthly crystallization, as we mentioned in the slide, that's obviously you have to consider that the amount of management fee is not the full year. Therefore, you have to build the 20% and apply to a value of management fee that you are building as well during the year. Therefore, probably you don't match the first percentage to the level that we said before, because we are not probably consider it. I'm not sure if I answered. Anyway. Yeah. I was referring to the 50 basis points of average increase in the management fee. If you can have a clawback on the 20% of it on a quarterly basis in total, in four quarters. Apply to a different amount because you are considering that the 20% I mean, you are assuming that we apply the 20% to the distribution, therefore to the 50 basis points, right? This is your point. It's not applied to the 50 basis point, it is applied to the management fee. Okay. [crosstalk] [crosstalk] It is something different with a different value obviously. Okay, thank you. The next question is from Angeliki Bairaktari of Autonomous Research. Please go ahead. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. Just to follow up to make sure that I understand what you've said, 130 basis points is the management fee on the Luxembourg fund. On top of that, we get what you call now a distribution fee of 50 basis points. Then any performance fees based on the fulcrum model can reach a maximum of 20% of the 130, so that's 26 basis points. I guess I'm getting to a range of 155 basis points - 205 basis points, depending on sort of whether the fulcrum fee is at the max or at the top end or at the bottom end of the range. Can you confirm that this understanding is correct, that effectively the total expense ratio can shift from 155 basis points - 205 basis points in a given year based on this new mechanism? Second question, excluding the M&A perimeter change that you show on slide nine for revenues, the recurring fees were flat quarter-over-quarter in Q4 versus Q3, despite the fact that assets under management were higher. Can you give us some color on what prompted this management fee margin decline, please? A clarification on the provisions that you mentioned that you have booked within expenses for guaranteed pension funds. What is the amount? Do I understand correctly, is that effectively a provision on the pension AUM that you manage, or is it something else, please? No, it is something else. It is something that the company is provisioning for potential difference between the type of guarantee that we used to have and the new guarantee. We are provisioning a couple of million just in assuming the worst case scenario that we might eventually face. I'm sorry, just a clarification. Is that the pension funds that your employees have access to effectively? It's effectively employee cost. No, it's the pension funds. We have two pension funds, Azimut Previdenza and Azimut Sustainable Future, that we manage on behalf of clients and eventually people that work in the business, that want to transfer their severance payment to these pension funds. Okay, thank you. Okay. Going back to your questions, the fact that the recurring revenue has not grown. Consider that in Q4, as we mentioned back in November, and then we reconfirmed at the beginning of January, we closed EUR 600 million of inflows into private market products. Clearly, you're not seeing in the recurring revenue the contribution coming from the money that is linked to switch. Eventually you have a missing component there, but which might help to explain the flattish environment despite the growth in assets. When it comes to the fulcrum, I would say that up to the range you've given us, you understood it correctly. When it comes to the range, there is, y ou should also consider the fact that we have a promotion and an admin fee that is running, and therefore there might be some slight variation to the range that you've given to us. The next question is from Elena Perini of Intesa Sanpaolo. Please go ahead. Yes, good afternoon. Well, I've got only a follow-up on your cost because you tried to give us an indication about a quarterly average. I was just wondering if you can give us some help on an annual level that we can consider as a recurrent one, and then apply the growth percentage that you suggested us. Thank you very much. Elena, thank you. I was suggesting to consider the total cost as an average of the four quarters. No, we don't have it here, but we can provide it to you later. If you take the average of the first four quarters and apply an increase of 5%-7% for the next year, we are running at EUR 186 million on average for the four quarters of 2021, and then apply a 5%-7% cost inflation. This is, at this current stage, a good indication of what we might see for 2022. Okay, thank you very much. My pleasure. The next question is a follow-up from Alberto Villa of Intermonte SIM. Please go ahead. Thank you again. Just a couple of clarifications on the fulcrum fee because I think maybe there is a little bit of you know confusion or at least we have to get familiar with the new system. My question is, can you give us an idea or if you have run any backtesting on 2021 numbers, if you would have applied this new mechanism, how the P&L would have looked like, in particular, of course, the management and variable fees lines. Secondly, I understood correctly that all the fulcrum adjustments, positive or negative, will be booked in the variable fee component. This is a line that in the future could be eventually negative in the case of adjustments up to, let's say EUR 70 million in the very worst case. Is that correct? Sorry, Alberto, can you repeat the second question? The second one is the fulcrum adjustment mechanism. If I understood correctly from the slide, it will be booked in the variable fees line. Assuming there would be clawbacks, this line could be negative in the future. Let's say the calculation of the recurring fees is not affected by the fulcrum adjustment calculation. Yeah. Alberto, you understood correctly. The variable fee line, assuming no other variable fee from any other source and applying just the fulcrum, can be negative in the future. You will see in the evolution of our revenue line is clearly a high recurring fee because the 50 basis point increase on average is falling within that recurring fee line. That's the kind of combination. As far as the first question is concerned, no, we did not run a backtesting on 2021 numbers. It's an exercise we can do and come back to you later. Okay. Thank you very much. As a reminder, if you wish to register for a question, please press star and one on your telephone. For any further questions, please press star and one on your telephone. Gentlemen, there are no more questions registered at this time. Thank you very much to all of you, and, myself and my colleagues are available for any further follow-up, and we'll speak to you soon. Bye-bye. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. The conference is now over. You may disconnect your telephones. Thank you.