Technology shares on Wall Street have fallen sharply in response to the emergence of a low-cost chatbot. DeepSeek is already leading to a re-ranking in AI leadership. Agentic AI is basically a robot in a digital form. AI is sucking up incredible amount of capital. About 80% of the gains in the stock market this year have been powered by AI plays. I think the two big nations, China and the U.S. know that the country that's on top of the new technologies will probably emerge as the most powerful nation also of this century. In a few moments, I will sign a historic executive order instituting reciprocal tariffs on countries throughout the world. Reciprocal, that means they do it to us, and we do it to them. Very simple. We begin with developments from Kyiv, the ongoing war. Like the Ukrainians, I very much hope that we will have peace in Ukraine, but I am worried that we might push this to a cheap ceasefire, which will lead to a very expensive peace. You don't have the cards right now. The ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas, which came into force yesterday, appears to be holding. We need Greenland working with everybody involved to try and get it. One way or the other, we're gonna get it. Says he's serious about something, he means it. Is the United States now at war with Venezuela? There's not a war. An all-time high for the market, despite this remarkable backdrop of uncertainty. I actually think to have a long-term plan and a long-term mandate in these turbulent times is a very, very good idea. Right. Warm welcome. Who would have thought that, with that backdrop, the fund was now, at the end of the year, standing at more than NOK 21,000 billion? Strong returns, third years in a row, 15% up, third year with double-digit returns. Also, given the size of the fund, the return in Norwegian kroner has been very strong. We also had inflows last year, NOK 327 billion. That is a significant amount, albeit a little bit less than we've seen in the previous three years. If you take those three things together, that's what determines the change of the value of the fund from the beginning of the year to the end of the year. The returns are more than NOK 2,300 billion, the inflow of NOK 320 billion, you have a stronger kroner, which weakens the value of the fund measured in Norwegian kroner. We also released this morning a set of stress tests. Those are supposed to be scenarios which are somehow realistic and could have very severe impacts on the fund. We have four scenarios. One is one we call AI correction, i.e., that, you know, you have a broad market sell-off should, you know, the expected productivity gains and income from the AI not materialize. We also have one scenario, which we call Fragmented World, and as you can, you know, understand, it's more about the world dividing into blocks. You have less trade between these blocks. You have increased inflation, you have lower growth, and that will also impact the portfolio severely, up to 37%, as we model it. Third, stress test scenario that you could envisage is a Regional Debt Crisis. What that means is that you have high government debt in many parts of the world, and if the investors lose confidence in the ability for governments to service that debt, they would start to move their capital out of those regions. Finally, we also have a fourth scenario, which we call an extreme weather scenario. Here we try to model the impact of things like drought, you know, floods, storms, which would have impact on crops, which would feed through the value chain, and lower growth and higher inflation as a consequence. Relative returns, negative 28 basis points, and we will explain just where that is coming from. Equities had positive 7 basis points. Fixed income, very strong year. This is the bond portfolio, really great numbers. Real assets, that's real estate, the reason why those numbers are negative is because the real estate numbers have been flat, but what we measure it against is a combination of stocks and bonds. It's the relative kind of result of one thing being flat and the other one continuing to go up, which is a result of that. Allocation, -8, that's mainly an underweight we've had in equities. Altogether, -28 basis points. Since inception, still positive, roughly NOK 200 billion. Yeah. If you go through the different asset classes that the fund is invested in, the 15% on the overall fund is driven by, first and foremost, 19%, a very strong year in equity markets. That's the biggest part of our portfolio, 70% as a starting point. Very good returns in our infrastructure portfolio of 18%, but that's the smallest part of our portfolio. In the middle, also positive returns for our fixed income portfolio, roughly 30%, and also on unlisted real estate. Okay, equities up, as Trond said, 19%. What's been going particularly strong here? Well, the whole market, after a dip in connection with the introduction of tariffs in the spring, the market had a pretty kind of smooth recovery, and ended the year strong. When you look at what's been driving this, we've had basic material being particularly strong. You've seen what's happened to metal prices, gold, silver, copper, and so on, really driving that. Financials also strong, and then real estate being kind of the worst performing sector. In terms of where the monetary gains come from, given that the technology sector is the largest sector and account for many of the biggest holdings, you'll see that the returns here are nearly NOK 900 billion, financials nearly NOK 700 billions, and industrials at NOK 300 billion. If you break that down even further by single companies and see the contribution from our single company investments, you see this top 10 list dominated by technology, five of them are U.S. technology companies, but also a couple of other regions represented this year: Netherlands, South Korea, China. Yeah. That means that we've spoken about this many times before, how the concentration risk of the portfolio has increased, and also through 2025, increased even further. These top 10 holdings, or the top 10 holdings of the equity portfolio now constitutes 20% of that portfolio. Highest level we've ever seen. Yeah. Okay, to explain some of the developments we've seen in the market, we are very pleased to have some of our analysts just tell you what's been going on in the market. We start with Arnab, calling in from New York. Arnab? Good morning, Nicolai. Thank you. For years, the world of bits and digits outperformed the worlds of atoms and molecules, perhaps because they couldn't be quarantined or tariffed. In 2025, the metals in the periodic table made a very strong comeback. There are three main drivers behind this 40%+ return. First, inflation has eroded trust in traditional currencies. Hard assets such as gold have been climbing for years, but 2025 was exceptional, with gold stocks rallying over 150% as central banks bought aggressively amidst geopolitical uncertainties, wars, territorial ambitions, and trade disputes. The gold rally also spread to silver and other precious metals. Second, the world fears that we are running short on critical metals. Copper mines around the world have been having supply issues. Meantime, China controls most rare earth and downstream refining. Governments started asking, "Do we have secure supply?" The price has reflected this concern. Finally, AI needs physical infrastructure. Data centers and AI chips require enormous amounts of copper and other junior metals. This is adding to the fear around the demand-supply balances. In summary, in uncertain times, investors and speculators turn to what is tangible and scarce. You can't print more copper or gold, and this fear and scarcity proved quite valuable in 2025. Thank you so much, Arnab. That's very interesting. We move on to technology. We will hear from our portfolio manager, Karina Sutija, who is a portfolio manager in hardware technology. Karina, are you with us? Absolutely. Happy to be here. Yeah. 2025 was another remarkable year for tech. Can you hear me okay? Yeah. Go ahead. 2025 was another remarkable year for tech. As you saw, the sector gained over 20% and drove nearly 60% of total market returns. Under the hood, it was a year of exceptional volatility and wide gaps between winners and losers. Most of you may remember the DeepSeek sell-off in late January, when investors were confronted with the introduction of high-performing Chinese AI models and began questioning Western dominance in AI. Liberation Day tariffs in April triggered another sharp sell-off, was ultimately the starting point for a strong rise in stocks through October as investors rotated back into AI infrastructure. While the end of the year saw a growing number of large AI announcements from OpenAI, Oracle, and others, investors again began scrutinizing the size of these investments and started pointing fingers at what looked like circular funding between companies. Under the surface, not all tech was in the green last year. Semiconductor companies stood out as the relative winners, especially those that saw tight supply, while certain software companies underperformed as investors grappled with whether AI enhances or disrupts traditional business models. Among the tech giants, Alphabet stood out as a clear winner, reclaiming the AI crown, at least for now, with the successful launch of Gemini 3. The question moving into this year is how the adoption of AI will continue. Large companies around the world have started implementing AI tools at scale and are seeing meaningful productivity gains already. Over half of Fortune 500 companies are now using Cursor, the AI code editor, and ChatGPT now serves over 800 million users weekly. The market isn't without risks, and we're bracing ourselves for yet another volatile year in tech, where debates around potential bubbles, profitability, power constraints, and competition with China will continue to dominate the conversation. Thank you, Karina. We're moving on to financials, and we have Phil joining us from London. Hi there, Nicolai. It's a pleasure to be with you again. As your chart showed, financials delivered another strong year, up 30%. At the top of the list were the banks, big banks in the U.S., like Citigroup and Goldman Sachs, but notably European banks, many of whom doubled during the year, and perhaps interestingly for you in the room, the European Banks Index has now outperformed The Magnificent 7 over the last five years. Why is this happening? Let's focus on the banks, and I'll give you three reasons. Firstly, economies have continued to grow. This has fueled loan demand and has meant that debt servicing has remained, very strong. Secondly, Wall Street is booming. This is a combination of volatility, which is creating trading opportunities, and rising corporate optimism, which is fueling demand for mergers and acquisition services. Thirdly, regulators, politicians, and banks are all aligned in trying to get their economies to grow. Where do we go from here? This is a bit more tricky. Market now expects that banks will continue to grow their earnings in each year for the next three years. This needs Wall Street to keep going and economies to keep growing. This is certainly possible, but the bar is a lot higher given price movements. On the team, we are taking less risk today than we were 12 months ago, and we have rotated at the margin into some of the less favored segments of financial services. Let's see if that works, but that's what I have for you today. Thanks a lot, Phil. We'll move from equities to fixed income now. That's roughly a third of the portfolio, or 27%, to be exact. It had a strong year last year. We had 5% returns on our fixed income portfolio. To talk about what happened in the fixed income markets, we have Gøril Havro, who is Head of Fixed Income Europe for us. Gøril, please. Morning. Yeah, 2025 was a year when a lot of things happened, and yet fixed income markets were still, for the most part and with some major exception, relatively calm. You had tariff shocks, AI revolution, geopolitical shocks, renewed fiscal concerns, and then uncertainty both about how these would actually play out, but also about how they would affect inflation, labor markets, monetary policy. Take AI. Is it going to lead to increased productivity, therefore lower inflation, therefore lower rates? Or is it going to lead to increased investment, higher energy demand, and therefore higher rates? With many moving pieces, what are central bank policymakers weighing, when they set their interest rates? If you look at the market, there is sort of two main patterns in 2025 that I can see. The first one, which is a smaller difference between the 10-year yields in large economies, that isn't necessarily strongly connected to either one of these shocks. The highest yielders, the U.K. and the U.S., they saw their 10-year rates fall as central banks cut interest rates, and lower yielder Japan moved in the opposite direction. Yields rose as Japan raised rates, but also as fiscal concerns mounted. Second, yield curves deepened significantly. That is, as central bank cut short-term interest rates, the gap between the short term and the long-term costs widened. That's due to increased uncertainty as well, changes to investor preference, and also expected increased issuance. Take Germany, for example. The ECB cut rates 4x last year, and yet German 10-year yields ended slightly higher than where they started, which was largely driven by expectations of increased government spending. Looking ahead to 2026, it's already clear that it will continue to be a year with more uncertainty and more shocks, and we look forward to following it. Very good, Gøril. Real estate. As you know, real estate has been an area where we have not performed well over the last few years. Last year, the unlisted part was up 4%, but the listed part was down 4%, total result here is a big fat zero. We have made changes. We have a new strategy which is out, we also have new management running this, we are pleased to have Alex with us from California. Pretty, pretty early for you. Good morning. Thank you, Nicolai. For real estate, 2025 was a year of relative stability after several years of turbulence in the markets, really driven by the rise in interest rates. While an unexciting year was a relief for some, it still suffered real estate, that is, from a lack of relative appeal compared to those more exciting areas, like tech. The one area that was hot in our space was data centers, and the exuberance there was seen every day. Aside from that, the sentiment was relatively muted. At the same time, listed real estate even gave back some gains from the prior year. The expectation of a recovery was brought forward in listed markets, perhaps more than people expected. The market has been looking for that sign of recovery. Where it's gonna come from is almost certainly from what are actually quite strong occupational fundamentals. Rents have been gradually rising, development and new construction is subdued, and that is always a sign of a new recovery about to form. We expect the fundamentals to continue to improve through the course of 2026. We expect our new strategy to be able to take advantage of sellers who now, at the end of those years of turbulence, need to sell. We're cautiously optimistic about the road ahead of us. Thank you. Thank you, Alex, and thank you for staying up for us. We'll round off this walkthrough of the different asset classes with infrastructure for renewable energy. This is an asset class that came into the market five years ago. We were deliberately slow in building up that portfolio, but that has changed over the last few years. Now we're ramping up. We also built out the team. We think we are in a very good position to build this portfolio even further. It had a very good year last year, and to tell us more about that, we have Harald von Heyden, who is our Global Head of Energy and Infrastructure. Harald? Thank you, Trond. Yes, we are seeing that the renewables are coming back into favor for sure, and also record pace of build-outs. Last year alone, we saw a global build-out of 800 gigawatts of new renewable capacity. That's like adding 20x of Norway's entire power production system in just one year, and this took Norway 125 years to build. Also, we saw that the share prices of several of the largest renewable energy companies in the world have stabilized or even moved up somewhat in 2025. Why? Well, the world needs more electricity, for data centers, for AI, electric cars, heat pumps, and so on. We are seeing the electrification of everything, and wind and solar are still the cheapest and fastest way to add new capacity, now also supported by ever better batteries. This has created new bottlenecks, such as the grid, which is needed to move this clean energy to where people are. At NBIM, we have invested more than ever in unlisted renewable energy in 2025, over NOK 100 billion. We have now stakes in wind farm and solar farm projects around the world. We have new partnership with RWE in 2025, which secured significant positions in the largest offshore wind parks in Europe. These two transactions alone, more than doubled our portfolio. Our single biggest move in 2025 already, however, was to secure a 22% stake in TenneT Germany's largest TSO, transmission system operator. These transmission systems are critical for enabling the energy transition and for energy security. We'll continue to invest going forward, where we find the most robust returns, mostly improvement technologies, stable countries, and essential infrastructure. The energy transition is not going away. It gets less attention because it's become part of normal business, but it's moving faster than ever. Thank you, Trond. Thank you. Thank you, Harald. Okay, we'll round off this press conference with the key points for 2025. Another strong year, 15% returns. In accounting terms, that's more than NOK 2,000 billion, so one of the strongest returns there as well. We were slightly behind the benchmark, 28 basis points, and the fund stood at more than NOK 25,000 billion at the end of the year. We also published all our holdings, as we normally do, yesterday, so that's the holdings as of year-end. You can go in and find everything that we hold. We also this morning published the stress test that I talked about in this press conference. We have a few events coming up. We have a risk summit coming up on the 18th of March, where we basically showcase our really great risk department, all the types of risk assessments we do, how we use AI into all this work, and I think it's going to be very, very interesting. We've also here invited the main kind of risk departments of the various Nordic financial institutions. We will also have a seminar on how we use AI to drive down costs in the firm and in our trading operations, and I think this will be also interesting. We are still to set a date for this. I think that'll be interesting. We have our investment conference coming up in April. You know, when I started in this business, it was all about numbers and the next quarterly reports. As I've gained some age, I just realized it's all about people and the corporate culture, and so we have got together what I think is a really, really strong team of some of the best CEOs in the world. Okay, that's where we are. Nicolai and Trond, we will now move to questions. Please use your microphone when you ask a question because we have a lot of people following us on the stream. Just raise your hand, and I will give you the word. Okay, start with Kari, Bloomberg. Good morning. How have recent geopolitical tensions changed your thinking about regional diversification, particularly when it comes to exposure to the U.S.? Yeah. Well- We've seen this coming for a while, right? It is a question that is being debated many places, for many investors, also around the fund. This, only this week, we had an expert council that came out with a report, and they pointed to this exact issue as well. Their starting point, and I think that's the starting point for the whole fund, is that A good starting point is to spread your investments, you know, diversify. As we've seen, you know, with such diversification and following the rules of the benchmark, then you have a very big part of the fund in the U.S. They have set up what I would call a work plan to see if these issues should be addressed in a different way. Helle Lyng Svendsen. At what time will it be possible for Norges Bank or Oljefondet, and to just sell out of the AI companies in order for us to not be a part of the downfall that is likely to be coming? Yeah, I mean, it's a tough one. You say, there is a like, you know, a downturn to come. That's very uncertain. It's really difficult to just know where we are in the cycle, to which extent it is a bubble or not a bubble. You know, we see. we see it in the fund how we are benefiting from this in a tremendous way. When we do meet with the AI leaders like we did recently. Technology is accelerating further, right? It's a very, very difficult. It's very, very difficult to gauge just what type of situation we are actually in when it comes to AI. We cannot just sell out of the AI companies. You saw the top 10 companies are 20% of the index, and we do not have that kind of risk budget. If something happens with the portfolio, it would happen through the mandate and through a wish to be diversified in a different way and which is what John alluded to. There is now a process going on around this. How do you evaluate the depth that they're in and they're still taking up? Yeah, the new thing is that they are actually taking on debt. That's a new phenomena. There are some circularity in some of the structures as well. These are new. These are new things. Should we worry about a potential 35% fall this year? You should worry about all the factors we have highlighted in the stress tests. You should worry about a fragmented world. You should worry about debt levels generally amongst large countries. We should also be aware that a lot of the value of the fund is tied into these AI stocks. Thank you. [Foreign language] Jone, Minerva. [Foreign language] Avkastningen i eiendom har vært dårlig. Har unotert eiendom likevel gitt positive bidrag til porteføljen sett under ett fordi det er litt annet dyr enn resten av porteføljen. Har den ikke gjort det heller? [Foreign language] På de lange lengre tallene så er bidraget veldig lite. Jeg tør nesten ikke å si her på stående fot om det er positivt eller negativt, men det er veldig nære null når du tenker på det alternativet. I starten så var det jo statsobligasjoner som man brukte for å funde da investeringer i eiendom. Endret jo mandatet seg i 2017, hvor vi nå også har aksjer i fundingen av. [Foreign language] Altså relativt til resten av porteføljen. [Foreign language] Ja, relativt til resten av porteføljen. Ja. [Foreign language] Vi kunne hatt en portefølje uten real estate. Da hadde det blitt cirka det samme. [Foreign language] Ja. [Foreign language] Er jo det lett å si nå. Hadde det skjedd en stor korreksjon, hadde sannsynligvis eiendomsaksjene holdt seg bedre. Vi har jo det har jo ført til noe diversifisering og noe lavere risiko. Det er ikke store tall, vi er jo ikke fornøyde med eiendomsavkastningen vår. Det er derfor vi har gjort disse grepene, det er noe som ekspertutvalget peker på, det er noe vi peker på også i den rapporten vi leverte til Finansdepartementet. [Foreign language] Kjetil, E24. [Foreign language] Dere har jo kvittet dere med en god del selskap det siste halvåret, så over 1,000 selskap. Hvor langt ned skal dere der? Kan dere si noe om det? [Foreign language] Dette er jo en beslutning som er tatt av Finansdepartementet for four år siden, om at vi skulle redusere markedsdekningen i de markedene vi har investert i, fra å dekke 98% av disse markedene til å dekke 96% av disse markedene. Når vi startet på det, så det ut som det skulle redusere antallet aksjer i porteføljen med cirka 2,500. Reduksjonen fra start til nå er litt mindre, men allikevel om lag nesten 2,000 selskaper. Det er den effekten som er ferdig. Altså den overgangen er ferdigstilt i løpet av 2025, og derfor ser du et lavere antall nå per utgangen av året. [Foreign language] Det å ha færre selskaper reduserer jo kompleksiteten i systemet vårt, ikke sant? For vi skal jo treide disse aksjene. Vi skal jo stemme i disse selskapene. Det er jo bare et faktum at uansett når det skjer noe dårlige nyheter rundt forbi i verden, uansett hvor det er, så er liksom vi eiere der likevel. Det er greit å ha litt mindre, litt færre selskaper, tenker jeg da. [Foreign language] Dere er da ned på omtrent det nivået man skal være på. Det er jo fortsatt veldig mange aksjer som der man eier veldig lite, og ser jeg ut fra beholdningslistene. Dere er omtrent der dere skal være ut fra mandatet nå. [Foreign language] Sånn som fra ifølge det mandatet vi har nå, så er vi, er vi der vi skal være. Ja. [Foreign language] Are, Finansdebatten. [Foreign language] Ekspertrådet pekte på muligheten for å legge større vekt på statsfinansiell risiko i obligasjonsporteføljen, og legge større vekt på konsentrasjons og prising risikoen i aksjemarkedet. Ser dere for dere noen håndterbare grep for å etterfølge et slikt ønske, hvis Departementet skulle støtte det? [Foreign language] Ja, vi kan. Vi kan utføre hva som helst vi, så vi får beskjed. Kan ikke det? Vi jobber i servicebransjen. [Foreign language] Altså, til det med statsfinansiell styrke. Altså, det de sier helt generelt er jo at man bør se på rollen til obligasjoner i den samlede porteføljen. Når man har bestemt den rollen, skal det være likviditet. Skal det være risikoreduserende for porteføljen og så videre. Hvordan bør man skru sammen referanseindeksen? Først og fremst da, ikke sant? Der har det vært frem og tilbake opp gjennom tiden, ikke sant? Man begynte med noen regionale vekter, og så hadde man vanlig market cap vekter. Gikk man bort fra det i 2012, og i dag har vi GDP, altså bruttonasjonalprodukt vekter på det. Så har det vært et krav. Det kravet er fremdeles for så vidt i mandatet om at vi også skal se hen til statsfinansiell styrke når vi skrur sammen den porteføljen. [Foreign language] Det er for så vidt ikke noe nytt, men det er nok verdt å se på denne problemstillingen en gang til, eller nå i lys av det som skjer rundt oss. Det er jo allerede 14 år siden man så på det sist. [Foreign language] Kanskje bare minne om hvor viktig dette mandatet vi har er, og hvor bra det er for oss å ha det. Altså, i en tid med så store geopolitiske svingninger. Det å skulle drive med taktisk, liksom alle allokeringsforandringer er, jeg vil si klin umulig med et så stort fond. Det at vi på en måte er litt bundet til masten med det mandatet som er bredt forankret, også politisk, er veldig viktig. Jeg må bare minne om den viktige og gode jobben Finansdepartementet har gjort her gjennom årene. At disse forandringene vi gjør, de er gjennomtenkte, at det er en strukturert prosess på det, og at disse tingene tar litt tid. Det er veldig positivt. Richard, FT. Yeah, that graph that showed the total excess return, it's basically halved or nearly halved in the past few years. Does that worry you? Well, we would always. First of all, this graph does not account for reinvestment of the excess return. If you reinvest, the excess return is roughly twice the size. Hey, we would always love the excess returns to be higher. A lot of the downdraft in excess returns have been due to the way the real estate portfolio is measured. It's measured against the combination of bonds and shares. We've been through a period where the real estate market has performed particularly badly for several reasons, and where we had a continued rally in the equity market. Kari, Bloomberg. Just wanted to follow up on the tech and AI question. It looked from your holdings list, like you trimmed a little bit in tech last year. Will that, I mean, maybe you described it as underweighting, will that continue into 2026? If so, where are you putting extra capital? Yeah. The way we manage the portfolio is that we delegate mandates to different portfolio managers. You saw one of them on the screen, Karina. Right? They have the liberty to, you know, choose their investments within their universe. You know, it's up to them, and they could have different views, right? Two people with a more or less the same mandate could have different views on one single company. We allow for that. We want that to happen, right? We want it to be delegated. Now, what we do is when we look at the total portfolio, bottom up from all of these single person decisions, do we like what we see? At some point, we saw that we did have an overweight compared to the benchmark, at the fund level, we decided to trim that overweight down to be more neutral. This is dynamic. This is dynamic. We don't have a big position relative to the market. We are relatively equal weight- Yeah. ... in tech. This goes back. I mean, this is not in any way, shape, or form, a reflection on your views about an AI bubble, if there is one, you know, has been there's certain sectors that are in the AI space that are maybe more resilient, if that does happen. Yeah, there is no, there is no strong view on that. Hey, I just think AI is, it's just incredible what it does to productivity. It's amazing. I mean, Norway is one of the most, is one of the best situated countries in the world to really benefit from this. You know, high education, high digitalization, and then I'm not going to say that we don't like to work, but we also like to spend time in our cabins. The combination of these things, it should be, it's the perfect place to really put AI into everything we do. [Foreign language] Kjetil, E24. [Foreign language] Hvordan vurderer dere risikoen for eventuelle nye skatter på fondet i USA? [Foreign language] Dette er jo noe vi følger med på veldig tett. Den skatteposisjonen som fondet har i U.S., eller i de aller fleste markeder, hviler på lokal lovgivning i de enkelte markedene, og ikke på skatteavtale, for eksempel, mellom Norge og et annet land. Det er vært en lang prosess i U.S. på det som kalles Section 892, hvor det man egentlig bare prøver å gjøre er å si at kommersiell virksomhet, det skal skattlegges i U.S. Investeringsvirksomhet, det skal ikke skattlegges. Vi følger med på dette her og passer på at vi driver kun investeringsvirksomhet og ikke kommersiell virksomhet, sånn at vi blir rammet av de skattesatsene. [Foreign language] Da er det Jone, Minerva. Just kind of a shout out to our legal department, which is doing a tremendous job keeping track on all these rules, right? There is just an endless amount of rules and tax situations around the world, and we have a super team. [Foreign language] Etter Liberation Day falt verdien av både aksjer og obligasjoner. Hvis fondet ikke kan legge til grunn at den tradisjonelle samvariasjonen mellom aksjer og obligasjoner holder under uro, er det noen andre former for å balansere ut den uroen på, som dere har sett på? Also, we have seen several situations where the normal correlation between shares and bonds have, you know, didn't hold, right? We had a situation where, you know, yields were negative and where we lost money on bonds and equities at the same time. I don't think it's given that this situation will hold. You know, what are the other ways of diversifying? Well, you know, we have, well, we have both listed and an unlisted market. That's a possibility. We are diversifying through the investment in renewable infrastructure, which I'm, like, really optimistic about. When we got the mandate, it was such a hot market, you know, huge competition for all the projects. Really low return. Really not attractive. We were very, very slow. We only made one investment in Brussels for several years. We just kept back because there was a huge premium because things were green. Now it seems like it's a discount because things are green, right? They are just much more attractive. We are in a unique situation that we can make big investments. In many cases there is less competition for the very big investments compared to the mid-size investments. I think that looks very promising. We built up a team now of 20 people. Really, really excellent. Richard, FT. Just following up a little bit on that. There's been President Trump in particular, has been taking aim at the wind industry in the U.S. Does that mean you're avoiding the U.S. on renewable infrastructure? Not necessarily. We do not do offshore wind in the U.S., where the way we read it is that that's the most difficult area. There is still a lot of wind and solar being built in the U.S., also in, places like Texas. We think that it continues to be one of the areas we look at. [Foreign language] Agnes, NRK. [Foreign language] Hvordan ser dere på risikoen for at Oljefondet skal bli en brikke i det politiske spillet rundt USA i USA? [Foreign language] Nei, vi har ikke noe syn på det. Fondet har hele tiden vært forvaltet på den måten gjennom et mandat på armlengdes avstand fra politikerne, med utgangspunkt i at vi er en finansiell investor, langsiktig sådan. Det er ikke opp til oss å bestemme om dette blir dratt inn i noen diskusjoner eller ikke. Det er på en måte bare det vi har å si. Vi gjør vårt innenfor det mandatet og prøver å unngå å gjøre sånn at fondet skulle oppfattes på noen annen måte enn å være en finansiell investor. [Foreign language] Mandatet er krystallklart. Vi er her for å tjene penger. Finansministeren er krystallklar. Vi er ikke et politisk instrument. [Foreign language] Tone, TV 2. [Foreign language] Noen demonstranter som var utenfor som aksjonerte, noen med blant annet. Jeg lurer på hva vil dere? Hva slags tanker gjør dere om at de er her, og hva vil dere si til de? [Foreign language] Ja, jeg må jo bare si det at ytringsfriheten er noe av det fineste vi har i dette landet. Det er ekstremt viktig og ekstremt flott. Jeg synes det er positivt at folk, ytrer meningen sin. Det er bare min generelle statement. [Foreign language] Ja, og det det som er på en måte litt mer på oss da, det er at vi har jo dette dreier seg om, er jo investeringer i Israel selvfølgelig, som har vært debattert mye. Dere kan se på beholdningslisten, vi har fremdeles investeringer i Israel. Det ligger i den referanseindeksen som vi måles mot i mandatet vårt. Den beholdningen er veldig stabil siden den siden september omtrent anslag. Det er ingen nye selskaper som har kommet inn. Det er noen selskaper som har gått ut. [Foreign language] Kjetil. [Foreign language] har vi stor fokus på å ha overvåke situasjonen, og hva selskapene på bakken gjør. [Foreign language] Da var det Kjetil, E24. [Foreign language] Ja. Alle de etiske nedsalgene er nå satt på pause i ganske lang tid fremover. En brukte å selge seg ned flere ganger i året. Det var jo riktignok Norges Banks styre som bestemte det. Dere får fortsatt inn råd fra Etikkrådet. Hva gjør dere hvis dere får beskjed om at det er risiko for at et selskap har grov uetisk virksomhet, barnearbeid, utnyttelse av arbeidskraft, grov miljøskade, den type ting? Må dere da gå til Jens Stoltenberg og be han om å ta grep, siden de etiske nedsalgene er avskåret nå? [Foreign language] Akurat som du sier. Etikkrådet fortsetter å gjøre sitt arbeid. De overvåker porteføljen. De sender informasjon til oss, ikke tilrådninger. Det skal ikke tas noen enkeltstående beslutninger om å ekskludere selskapet. Sender oss informasjon. Vi tar til oss denne informasjonen og putter det inn i våre risikostyringssystemer. Vårt første og viktigste virkemiddel er å engasjere oss med selskapene, altså ha en eierskapsdialog om disse forholdene. Så får vi se hvor langt det fører og hvordan det fører frem. I siste instans så kan man velge å selge seg ned på det vi kaller risikobasert og nedsalg. Dette blir fra sak til sak, en vurdering. [Foreign language] Det blir kun av finansielle grunner da. Hvis det går bra med selskapet finansielt, så risikerer dere da at dere får et råd om at her er det barnearbeid, for eksempel. Vi må bare fortsette å eie det i et år til vi får tilbake igjen muligheten til å gjøre etiske utelukkelser. Det har man ikke i dag da. Er det riktig oppfattet? [Foreign language] Det som er riktig oppfattet er at vi skal gjøre en helhetsvurdering, og vi skal se på hvorvidt det som er påpekt, den informasjonen som er tilflytt oss, innebærer en risiko for at selskapet på lang sikt ikke vil være lønnsomt å være investert i. Da vil vi kunne velge, som en, som du sier, som en investeringsbeslutning, og ikke være investert i det selskapet. [Foreign language] Lenge det er lønnsomt, så må dere beholde selskapet, selv om det kanskje er risiko for barnearbeid, for eksempel, eller den typen uetiske virksomheter. [Foreign language] Nei, vi må ikke det. Vi kan gjøre en helhetlig vurdering her, og det er, det er det ESG- [Foreign language] Det er det ESG, det de ESG risikobaserte nedsalgene våre går på. Det er å ta, [Foreign language]betraktninger rundt faktorer som på sikt kan påvirke det finansielle. Det er generelt dårlig business å drive menneskerettighetsbrudd og ødelegge miljø og den type ting. Det er generelt dårlig for business, og det betyr at vi vil kunne selge ned den type business. [Foreign language]Det er et slingringsmonn da, på en måte, for på en måte omdømme, risiko og den type ting? [Foreign language] Altså, alt dette her går inn i de betraktningene. Kari Bloomberg. One follow up on the tax question. You said you're keeping an eye on taxes and have people monitoring that. Are you doing any contingency planning for, say, if assets in the U.S. are frozen or confiscated or sanctioned? What we do is that we have an enterprise risk management framework, which deals with both financial risks and operational risks. As the world around us changes, we take those, you know, new signals and new factors into that framework and evaluate the risks that we're running. I'll be very honest with you, right? On the technology side, for example, it's very hard. You know, if you were concerned about, you know, whatever, potential U.S. influence on tech companies that we use in our daily operations, it's very often very difficult to find suitable alternatives, i.e., European players and so forth. We are keeping an eye on it. Richard, up to you. Yeah. After the expert panel report, are you slightly more hopeful that private equity could come back on the table or back under discussion? Well, I mean, what I would say is that This is, this is now in a political process. The process continues, and we just have to see what they, what they come up with. You know, the potentially increased diversification is on the agenda, and I assume that private equity would be part of that discussion. Any other questions? Okay, I don't see any more hands, so we'll wrap up this session and move to individual interviews. Thank you so much for coming. Thank you for watching us on the stream. Have a good day.