Thank you very much, operator, and good morning, everyone. I am Andrés Rubio, the CEO of Intrum, and I'm here with Michael Ladurner, our Chief Financial Officer. Thank you for taking the time to listen to this review of our financial results for the third quarter of 2022. We are conducting this call from the headquarters of our Greece business in Athens. We're here celebrating the third anniversary of our entry into this market with a strategic partnership with Piraeus Bank. In the three years since the initial partnership with Piraeus, we have grown in this market to be a clear leader with SEK 60 billion of assets under management, 1,800 employees serving not only the Greek market but also conducting call center services for several other Intrum markets, and 17 third-party servicing clients. During this time, and commensurate with this business growth, Greece has become one of the best performing markets among our 24 markets in Europe. Now on to the results presentation. Starting on page three. What I wanted to do here is start with how I see the business and some initial impressions from my first two months as CEO. As you can see here, I view our business as one single operating platform that does one thing, collect on unpaid claims on behalf of third party clients or on behalf of our own portfolio investments or PI business. This platform is the largest in the industry, with 10,000 employees in 24 countries across Europe. On the servicing side, we have the trust of 80,000 clients, and we make contacts, not just telephone calls, but confirmed communication across a wide range of channels with 250,000 consumers or customers per day. Over 60 million of these communications per year. This business has over SEK 10 billion third-party servicing revenue and SEK 3 billion internal servicing revenue on a rolling 12-month basis. Grew AUM 10%, cash revenue 12%, and cash EBIT 19% versus third quarter 2021. With recent very significant and key client wins across our platform, but particularly in Italy with Crédit Agricole and the UTP Italia fund and in Switzerland with Glarner Kantonalbank. On the PI side, this business is also the biggest and in my opinion, the best in class with SEK 40 billion of book value of investments and greater than SEK 80 billion of estimated remaining collections with significant granularity across 19,000 portfolios and generating mid-teens ROI and an unmatched track record dating back over nearly 20 years. With regard to my first and initial impression, I'm incredibly impressed, as these numbers indicate, with the sheer scale and breadth and depth of our business, plus the significant cash generation and the resiliency of our business. You'll see many of these themes coming through in the subsequent pages in this presentation. Above all, I'm incredibly impressed with the consistent quality and the high motivation of our employees. Finally, we need to keep in mind the importance of what we do at Intrum. We not only collect on the claims of our clients, but more importantly, we connect with and offer solutions to a vast number of consumers across Europe. In 2022 year to date, I'm incredibly proud to say that we have helped 2.5 million consumers across Europe repay their debt with Intrum in full and reintegrate into their financial system. People talk understandably about sustainability in the context of the environment. What we do is fundamental to the sustainability and the proper functioning of the financial system and economy as a whole. Now on page four. Here, regarding servicing. We believe the market dynamic is going to put a tremendous pressure on the consumer and therefore increase the demand for our collection services and solutions. High inflation and low growth are contributing to a severe economic environment. Greater than 20% of consumers in Europe are having difficulty in paying their energy bills. On top of this, with higher interest rates, that same consumer's car loan, mortgage, or other household costs are increasing as well, piling pressure onto the consumer. We have seen this already manifest itself in the increase of our industrial clients needing our help on the payment of their invoices, and have heard from our clients and observed that this trend of delinquency is shifting into the financial system, with Stage 2 loans continuing to increase and reaching 9.5% of European credit assets and consumer credit usage also increasing. All of this means that there will be greater demand for our servicing capabilities over the near term. Initially with regard to invoices, something we've already seen for several quarters, and then transitioning to higher margin financial claims, and then eventually to meaningful PI opportunities. This is a perfect example of the counter-cyclical nature and resiliency of our core servicing business. Page five. These developments can be seen on this page where off of a Q1 2021 low point, our AUMs have grown 7% per year. Our collections have grown 24%. But there's been a muted effect on servicing revenue and EBIT as the revenue conversion of these collections have yet to increase given the lag regarding financial institution claims. Looking at page six. Regarding portfolio investments. This market is affected by the following factors. Across the board funding cost increases, more difficulty to collect given the tough macro environment, a natural lag in the accumulation of NPLs leading to portfolio sales by financial institutions. There is a more developed NPL industry in the market now than in the past, which will lead to more orderly sales increases unlike past crises. There has been a repricing of risk across the spectrum. These factors are very evident in our results given that our underwritten IRRs in the third quarter are at 15% versus 12% in the first and second quarter. We completed SEK 1.3 billion in the quarter of PI deals at 15% but even just as importantly or more importantly even, at a money multiple of 2.3x. We have controlled funding costs given ample liquidity of SEK 17 billion and termed out debt, but we don't have any meaningful maturities until 2024. Collections, yes, are down from the 110% year-to-date average, but at 106% are still meaningfully above our original forecast. Turning to page seven. This slide shows the fact that no one in the world has our experience and track record in collections performance, which then translates to consistent investment returns for our PI business. Since 2004, over 18 years, we have grown our annual collections for our PI business 16x from a little bit under a billion, i.e., SEK 0.8 billion to SEK 12.9 billion annually, and we've expanded from purely consumer unsecured to also include almost SEK 1 billion of secured collections. Over this extended time period and with a much larger base of annual collections, we have averaged over 18 years 106% collections versus original underwritten forecast. We have demonstrated extreme resiliency, having endured three crises with the global financial crisis, the European sovereign debt crisis, and the global pandemic. Yet our collections have never fallen below 98% of original underwritten forecast on a rolling twelve-month basis, and in every case, has sharply bounced back from these lows. This consistency in collections over the long term, combined with the 12%-15% IRRs and greater than 2x money multiple, in my opinion is the best track record in the industry and shows not only the resiliency of our business model, but also the benefits of our integrated business model, where world-class servicing and investments are combined under one roof. Page eight. Transitioning now to the One Intrum transformation program. In my first two months, I have prioritized a comprehensive review of this program, and I'm glad to say that we have validated that the recurring cost benefits of SEK 1 billion are achievable. This is important as we have visibility on these recurring cost savings, but it is also important to note that this estimation of benefits doesn't reflect that this program should make us the most efficient and the most highly functioning credit management platform in the industry, which in turn should translate into more new client wins and more revenue from existing customers. This could be much more than and more enduring and impactful than the estimated recurring cost savings. As you can see in the bottom graph, we have paused migration during the quarter to ensure the quality of past migrations where we are operating at least at the functional level prior to migration, and to ensure that future migrations maintain this level of quality of service. On page 9, here you can see the progress to date where we have continued to build out our four global front offices, one of which is here in Athens, now serving 18 Intrum markets and 20% of all calls and growing, all while not sacrificing quality with higher customer satisfaction than the local front offices. This effort has driven greater efficiency with cost to collect dropping to 5.3% of collections during the third quarter of 2022 versus 6.1% in the third quarter of 2021 and dropping nearly 20% on a like-for-like basis since the prior peak in earlier 2021. All of this while we are ahead of the expected cost saving realization on the transformation program on a run rate basis. We will continue our review and optimization of this program, and I will come back with a more detailed review of the transformation early in Q1 2023. Pages 10 and 11 are my bragging slides where I get to highlight the fact that we play an important social purpose while generating strong financial performance and returns. On page 10, you see the virtuous cycle of our employees offering solutions to consumers in an ethical and respectful manner, generating financial recoveries for our clients on their unpaid claims. Enhancing the sustainability and well-being of the financial system and the economy as a whole. It bears repeating, and I'm very proud that in 2022 year- to -ate, we have helped 2.5 million consumers across Europe repay their debt and reintegrate into the financial system. Listening to page 11, you can see that we play this important role in the functioning of the financial system and economy while producing incredibly strong financial results. Since 2018, we have grown annual Cash EBITDA by 35% overall and 8% annually. We've increased our total assets from SEK 76 billion-SEK 92 billion, all while deleveraging from 4.3- 4.0. We have been increasing our dividend payout to our shareholders by 25% in aggregate and 7% a year. After highlighting this long-term strong financial performance, I now turn it over to Michael to walk you through the results from the quarter. Thank you, Andrés. Good morning, everyone. I'm now turning to page 13 of the presentation, our group key financials. The third quarter was as expected, seasonally slower, but with continued strong underlying performance despite an increasingly challenging macroeconomic backdrop. While the pre-announced negative adjustments following the Q3 revaluation impacted accounting earnings leading to a loss, they are non-cash in nature and principally related to one portfolio with no read across the overall investment book. I will cover this point in more detail later in my presentation. Underlying, we saw a continuation of trends from the preceding quarters with all three segments contributing positively with 9% growth in cash revenues compared to Q3 2021. CMS inflows are still skewed towards invoices with increase in collection and costs, but lower revenue conversion while strategic markets and PI continue to perform well. The overall cost development is impacted by the level of operating activity underpinning the growing collection trajectory, as well as the range of projects which support us in becoming an ever more effective and efficient market leader and shaper. In rolling twelve-month terms, cash revenues, cash EBITDA, cash EBIT and cash EPS are all again up with cash EPS also again above 30 SEK. On the leverage side, the ratio is 4x, principally due to the continued adverse currency development with the Swedish crown depreciating a further 2% versus the euro in the quarter. This effect alone negatively impacted our gross debt by circa SEK 0.6 billion and our net debt by circa SEK 0.4 billion. Cash EBITDA at the same time continues to increase on a rolling twelve-month basis and is now up to SEK 13.2 billion. Overall, in the third quarter we delivered cash revenues of SEK 5.8 billion, Cash EBITDA of SEK 3 billion, Cash EBIT of SEK 1.4 billion, cash EPS of SEK 2.48, and a Cash RoIC of 7.3%. I'm now looking at the next page 14, group cash earnings generation. Here our progress over time and the resilience as well as operating leverage of our franchise become very visible. Year-over-year growth in cash revenues of 10% drives a growth in Cash EBITDA of 13%, Cash EBIT of 15%, and recurring cash earnings of 25%, while cash expenses are up 7%. What this also shows is that underlying on a rolling twelve-month basis with a Cash EBITDA of SEK 13.2 billion, we essentially generate SEK 13.2 billion that net of cash finances and tax we can deploy on a discretionary basis. Which means that we self-generate the means to invest in our business, invest in portfolios to both replenish and grow, as well as paying a substantial dividend. All while keeping gross debt large in fact and substantially growing Cash EBITDA. From a returns perspective, this then equates to recurring cash earnings yield on total shareholders equity of 16% as well as the return on equity of 17% based on adjusted net income. The substantial cash generation together with our strong liquidity of circa SEK 17 billion, our track record of resilience and the diversification between servicing and investing gives us a good starting position to both manage through challenging times as well as the flexibility to act on attractive opportunities in dislocated markets. Now on to the segments and starting with GMS of page 15. Andrés has already given you a perspective on the key developments here which are a continuation of what we have observed in the preceding quarters, both in terms of segment dynamics as well as results. Collections in the segment are increasing up 30% versus Q3 2021 with the associated activities also driving costs. However, revenues are still lagging as the inflows and collections are still skewed towards lower balance, lower margin invoices and therefore lower revenue conversion. The current environment, where more than one-fifth of European households are struggling to pay their energy bills and consumer credit balances are rising, should not only continue to underpin invoice inflows, but also translate into increasing financial services claims over time. Financial services claims are generally higher value and higher margin and will positively impact revenues and the segment margin in due course. In Q3 2022, we produced Cash revenues of SEK 1.04 billion, Cash EBITDA of SEK 360 million, and Cash EBIT of SEK 346 million. This translates into Cash RoIC of 7% for the quarter, as well as an adjusted segment margin of 20%. Now turning to strategic markets on page 16. This segment yet again delivered continued strong performance across all three geographies, with cash revenues increasing by 22%, cash EBITDA by 45%, and cash EBIT also by 45% compared to the same quarter last year. This very positive development is also clearly visible on a rolling 12-month basis. Greece continues to perform very strongly. Efficiency and effectiveness of the Italian platform has significantly improved over the last 24 months. A development that is clearly reflected in segment performance as well as externally recognized with more new client wins, as mentioned by Andrés. In Spain, the offboarding of the RAD volume has now been completed with the associated loss of revenues going forward. As previously mentioned, the expected bottom line impact of this is immaterial. In the seasonally slower third quarter, cash revenues came in at SEK 1.4 billion, Cash EBITDA at SEK 718 million, Cash EBIT at SEK 699 million, and Cash RoIC at 18.6%. In Q3, the adjusted segment earnings margin was 32%. I'm now looking at portfolio investments on page 17. In portfolio investment, Q3 was again a strong quarter with collection outperformance versus active forecast of 106%. The Q3 reduction in outperformance versus previous quarters and also the year-to-date level of circa 110% is consistent with a gradual normalization in the context of economic cycle. A more challenging macro environment primarily leads to fewer and lower settlements, while sustainable payment plans remain stable and resilient. Gross cash collections of SEK 3.2 billion increased 7% compared to the same quarter last year. All other key metrics also improved in Q3, with cash revenue up 6% to SEK 3.4 billion, cash EBITDA up 8% to SEK 2.5 billion, and cash EBIT up 10% to SEK 999 million compared to Q3 2021. The adjusted return on investments was stable at 14%. In Q3, we also saw the first tangible signs of the potential market repricing with like-for-like yields up compared to preceding quarters and an IRR on new investments of circa 15% with a money multiple of 2.3x. Our investment pace was more moderate with SEK 1.3 billion deployed as we become even more selective in the current dislocated macroeconomic environment. Page 18. Here I wanted to give you some additional detail on the pre-announced negative revaluation adjustments. Final adjustments of SEK 3.2 billion are very much in line with the range previously communicated. All adjustments are non-cash, principally related to the Italian PV portfolio with no near-term impact. In aggregate, these adjustments reduce ERC by circa 2% relative to Q2 2022 and impact collection expectations in 2025 and onwards. The factors driving these adjustments are portfolio specific with no read across to other exposures we have invested into, which has been confirmed by a thorough risk-led exercise. It also needs to be mentioned that outside the effect of exposures, we have a positive revaluation of SEK 40 million for the quarter, supported by continuous outperformance versus the actuarial forecast. Out of the total SEK 3.2 billion, SEK 1.7 billion are an impairment in participation in joint ventures. SEK 0.9 billion reduced earnings from joint ventures. SEK 0.4 billion are related to an impairment in client relationship with an additional SEK 95 million fair value loss. Turning to page 19. The chart on the left clearly highlights the dynamics I mentioned earlier in the context of portfolio investments with the average rolling 12-month underwriting IRR starting to turn up. Given the increase in cost of credit, this is then also reflected in cost of funds increasing. As a reminder, our liability structure is turned out with principal maturities between 2024 and 2027 and largely fixed rates, i.e., 72% of net debt. We are currently considering options to refinance the 2023 and 2024 bond maturities. Our liquidity stands at SEK 17.3 billion at the end of the third quarter. Looking at page 20. Here I tried to depict some key elements underpinning our business model. We generate a substantial amount of cash. RTM Cash EBITDA was SEK 13.2 billion, while the average over the last three years was SEK 12 billion. Our cash generation is resilient and growing, also due to the offsetting characteristics of servicing and investing throughout the cycle. Let's call it an internal hedge. The use of this cash generation, excluding debt service impact, is largely discretionary. We have used some of this cash generation to replenish and grow our portfolio investment business, which as of today is run as a self-financing cash compounder. We have therefore, over time, built a business with a current book value of SEK 40 billion and estimated remaining collections of SEK 83 billion. This business is self-liquidating with over the last three years on average 19% per annum being priced to prevailing market conditions. This business is also highly resilient, with an RTM index versus original underwriting expectations of no lower than 98% and on average 106% since 2004. Similarly, circa 20% per annum of our gross debt, which is termed out on largely fixed rate, will on average reprice over the coming five years, and we have liquidity of SEK 17 billion. In aggregate, this means that we have repricing on both the asset and liability side, integrating market pricing in terms of returns and costs as we move through time, combined with significant and resilient cash generation and a substantial liquidity buffer. These factors gives us the confidence and flexibility to face challenging times and exploit opportunities as they arise. I'm now turning to page 21. It was nearly two years ago in November 2020 that we held our capital markets day on the back of Q3 2020 figures. It is now also just over two years that I have acted as chief financial officer for Intrum. This then gives me the opportunity to not just focus on the challenges, but also on what we have achieved during these two years. To put it into a nutshell, we have significantly grown our cash generation with RTM cash EBITDA up 14% to SEK 13.2 billion over the last two years. Increased recurring consolidated cash EPS by circa 10 SEK or 35%. Improved our profitability with a cash ROIC up 1.4 percentage points and added to our dividend year after year. All of this while deleveraging from 4.2x- 4x with more to come. Overall, we've made substantial progress versus our medium-term financial target, balancing growth, shareholder returns, and leverage while navigating a challenging difficult operating environment and adapted to the current challenges. Now back to you, Andrés, for the concluding remarks. Thank you, Michael. Now going to page 23. I would like to make some concluding remarks on our outlook going forward. With regard to servicing, we expect marked increase in the demand for our services and a renewed client focus and deployment of technology, excuse me, to increase both our revenues and margins meaningfully. On PI or portfolio investments, we expect to collect with more difficulty but still above original forecasts, while selectively investing and investing at higher IRRs. On the platform, we expect to continue our progress to be the most efficient and most highly functional operating platform in the industry. More specifically on the financial outlook, we expect a seasonally strong servicing fourth quarter to end the year on a high note. We expect selective PI investing as the environment adjusts to higher cost of risk. We are going to continue to focus on growth, commercial success and cash generation. Finally, we will continue to work towards achievement of all our financial targets as soon as possible, including in particular the leverage ratio of 3.5x and greater than SEK 3 cash EPS. With this, I'd love to thank you for listening to our presentation and turn it back to the operator for questions. Thank you very much. We will now begin the question- and- answer session. To ask a question, you may press star then one on your telephone keypad. If you are using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing the keys. If at any time your question has been addressed and you would like to withdraw your question, please press star then two. At this time, we will pause momentarily to assemble our roster. The first question comes from Jacob Hesslevik from SEB. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good morning, Andrés and Michael. Good morning. Good morning. My first question is on leverage. You stated before that your target was to reach a ratio of 3.5 by the end of this year. In your comment, Andrés, you now state that you aim to achieve it as soon as possible. Can you give us any more clarification on the timeline, please? Jacob, I start and then hand over to Andrés. Essentially, where we started the year was with a very clear plan and trajectory to get to 3.5x. We are executing on that plan and trajectory. The element that we can't control is foreign exchange. About 70% of our debt is euro-denominated, as for our revenue. It's pretty well matched. What happens as we move through time and the SEK is depreciating versus euro, we translate our balance sheet at spot and our P&L at the average. That is the one effect that we cannot control. Just to give you a sense, we started the year at a EUR/SEK exchange rate of round about 10.2, 10.3, and we're up to nearly 11. What I'm trying to say with this, from an underlying trajectory, we're executing what we plan to do, which is consistent with getting the leverage down to the ballpark we've mentioned. We're contending against an FX situation that's out of our control. That does not change our commitment and our focus to get down to that ratio as soon as possible. Maybe, Andrés, you can add to that. No, Listen, on leverage, we've heard the market. We understand the need to delever in this uncertain environment. We maintain that target of 3.5 by year-end, and we're gonna get as close as possible, if not achieve it. Okay. If FX suddenly were to reverse, you might think you are able to do it by Q4 this year still? Yeah, we can't control FX. Putting FX aside, we can only control actually de-leveraging, and we're going to achieve this goal. Okay. Perfect. If we then move to slide 19, we can see that your cost of funds continues to increase slightly. Have you been able to update your reference curves to reflect the new macro situation when purchasing new portfolios? And how often do you update your funding cost and your discount rates? To give you a sense, and this again ties into how we operate, we have an ongoing process where we update our hurdle rates, and a key input into those hurdle rates is the funding cost, not on a locked-in basis, but on a risk-adjusted current basis as we look at our entire footprint, right? From that perspective, we are obviously updating our own perspective, but we're also starting to see repricing in the market. When we look at this quarter, we've invested at an average IRR of 15%, last two quarters round about 12%. If you look at this in a real like-to-like basis on the deals we invest in, this is up one to a bit more than two percentage points. We are starting to see that repricing. As I mentioned, and this is really important to me, our assets and liability reprice over time. Our liabilities are termed out largely fixed rate, and our assets are self-liquidating, and we choose to deploy some of the cash we generate into replenishing and growing, and thereby both sides update the pricing in accordance with the prevailing market conditions at the same time. I also think. I mean, it's very clear, and I tried to state in my comments that we're being selective in PI because the market hasn't fully adjusted, and we're not going to do deals for the sake of doing deals. We're gonna do deals that we think we're getting paid appropriately for the risks. I would also highlight that while in the secondary market our funding costs have expanded, they've expanded less than all our direct competitors. In this environment, this should actually become a competitive advantage for us over time. Yeah. All right. Perfect. If I may move over to collections. How do you see collections has developed in October, and what input has made it worse? I mean, you said electricity bills, so what's 23% in Europe is having issues, and then, the prices haven't moved up that much yet. But then gas and petroleum prices are down. Is it just what is the biggest input here going forward or the main challenge you think? I think, again, this is a differentiated impact across geographies. You know, Scandinavia has slightly different dynamics and rules around energy prices versus, for example, the U.K. or France, right? The repricing and resetting happens at different paces. I think what we can all agree on, and I think what we see wherever we operate, is that the current environment is increasingly challenging for the consumer, which is not just something we feel. It's borne out by statistics, with 23% of European households being challenged to pay their bills, which is something we see in Stage two loans continuing to increase, which we see in consumer credit increasing, and is also borne out by our numerous client conversations, largely with European banks and obviously all the other companies we serve as well, showing that delinquencies are on the increase. Listen, I think having the experience of being in this industry in past crises, I think the beauty of where we are now with Intrum is we have the resiliency of collection. We've never dropped below 98% or 99% in the most severe of economic environments. That's number one. Number two. Apologies, I've missed my train of thought. And also what we have now is a much more orderly NPL market. Our clients are clearly going to see an accumulation of NPLs. We see it. I've seen it in past crises. I'll see it this time. What's different this time is that it's a much more orderly NPL market, and you're going to see gradual increases but definite increases in servicing volume and then in PI volumes. It's not gonna be an abrupt have-to-sell type of an onslaught. It's going to be a gradual increase and inevitable increase. Being the leading industrial player, we stand to benefit from that. Yeah. That's good. Thanks for the color. Just one last quick question from me. I mean, looking forward, will you decrease amicable collections and rather focus more on legal collections in order to get the low willingness to pay segment to actually pay its bills? As on slide six, I believe you said non-payers are more challenging to activate in adverse macro. I think this is less of a comment about amicable versus legal. We obviously always try to do the appropriate thing for our customers in an ethical manner, right? This comment is much more about if the backdrop is challenging, then when you make that first contact to get over the hurdle to establish a payment plan to become a payer, to start on the path to being reintegrated into the financial society, is that little bit more difficult. I see. Absolutely. Shifted strategy focus heading into the recession of preparing that you're gonna do more legal collections now. No. Honestly, what this depicts is an environment which leads to increasing volume being externalized and driving our servicing inflows. At the same time, given the macroeconomic challenges, we see collectability come down a little bit. The volume out-effect generally outweighs the collectability effect. That also then translates across to PI, where in the first instance we see the collectability and then the further investment opportunities down the line. Which is really what Andrés talked about before, how our two businesses balance themselves or balance each other as we move through the cycle, which leads to the stability of cash flow generation that we've exhibited over decades. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for your questions. Thank you. The next question comes from Patrik Brattelius from ABG. Please go ahead. Thank you. My first question is to Andrés. I was wondering if you could talk a little bit about your view now being a new CEO on deleveraging and what is a sustainable long-term leverage ratio for Intrum in your view. On deleveraging, I mean, deleveraging is important in a number of factors. Obviously, when we think about the deployment of our capital, as Michael said, we have a very large cash generation, and we can invest that in portfolios, we can invest in our servicing business, we can invest it in dividends, we can invest it in deleveraging. We have to evaluate all of that. Today, I believe that we do need to deliver at least to our target of 3.5x, and then at that point, focus on cash generation and maintenance of leverage. Today, I'm very comfortable with our leverage level, although we are progressing towards that 3.5x level because we have ample liquidity, we have termed out debt, and we have two businesses that reprice. We have a very large asset base in our SEK 40 billion of book value, SEK 80 billion of ERC relative to our debt level. I'm very comfortable, and I think the market reflects the fact that on a relative basis, we're much better than our competitors, which is a comparative advantage that will manifest itself over the coming months, as I said earlier. We're much better than our competitors on an absolute basis. Regardless, long- term, I'd like to get down to that 3.5 target, and then we will reassess how that should proceed. We're always gonna focus on cash generation. Just to reiterate, it's getting there as soon as possible. Correct. We're getting there. That is an objective, and we're getting there as soon as possible. Okay. Thank you. You talk about being more selective here in your investment pace for new portfolios in Q4. You also talk about coming down as soon as possible with the deleveraging to the target ratio. How should we think about investment in new portfolio in 2023, more granular, please? I mean, 2023, I suspect that what you're gonna see is this wave. Right now we're seeing the invoice wave, then you're gonna see NPL starting to accumulate, the Stage 2 loans starting to turn into non-performing loans, which is gonna impact our servicing business first. I suspect that in the latter half of 2023 is when you're gonna see acceleration of PI opportunities. I would suspect at the beginning of 2023, it will be similar to 2022 in terms of the opportunities. While the market is adjusting, we're gonna be selective. I think we're gonna be in a great position to capitalize on what will be an increased volume of PI opportunities going into the latter half of 2023 and into 2024. That's the way I view the progression of the opportunities. In total investments, you write here SEK 7.5 billion in 2022. Do you think that will be larger in 2023 given this opportunity or approximately at the same level or what do you think? Patrik, just to sort of make one point very clear. We do not have volume targets and investments. That's the wrong thing to do. We are now obviously approaching that end of the year, so we have a good view of roundabout where we would land. Our primary focus is on doing good deals. We are driven by our internal capacity, what we can do, and by what's available, and we try to be selective, pick out appropriate deals with the right risk return, and then deliver. Again, the chart that Andrés showed and commented really is a testament that we don't just do that today, but we've done this over nearly 20 years, right? Yeah. I've been an investor in the NPL world for 20 years. You don't invest for the sake of investing. I think I said that earlier in some of my comments or maybe in response to the first question. You know, we're gonna be opportunistic, and we're gonna be careful, and we're going to invest where we think we're getting paid for the risk. I can't predict whether it's gonna be the same volume, greater or lower. I can tell you that over the coming years, I expect greater volumes. I also suspect that we will explore other things, like not only investing our own capital, but potentially partnering or investing third-party capital to grow our PI business. Because the PI business has growing opportunities in my opinion. Great. Thank you. Just as a last question here, you talked about it throughout the presentation, but if we can really dig down into the coming quarters, this adverse macro scenario where new case inflow benefits while collectability is negatively impacted. How do you expect this to play out in the short term? Is there any lag effect here which we'll see first into the numbers, please? I mean, I think you're seeing it already in our numbers. This is more of a phenomenon in what we call CMS versus strategic markets currently. I suspect that's going to reverse itself going into year-end and the beginning of next year as you see those Stage 2 loans become NPL. The pressure on consumers is inevitably going to lead, and higher interest rates, it's gonna inevitably lead to greater volumes. We're gonna start seeing that, in my opinion, although you can never have a perfect crystal ball into year-end and certainly into the beginning of next year. Yeah. It's important to also recognize that once you see the inflows, there's a certain small time lag till they turn into revenues. Obviously you have a compounding effect because obviously we've had lower inflows from financial services for quite a while. You know, this builds up over time. I've talked about that previously. Again, I said it earlier, I've been doing this for 20 years. It's inevitable. It's coming. What's great now is that we have an orderly market and that we're the leading industrial player. Perfect. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Ermin Keric from Carnegie. Please go ahead. Good morning. Thanks for the presentation. A few questions, if I may. Maybe if we start on slide number five, just to understand there. It looks like the collections have continued to increase at quite a strong pace, but we don't really see any impact on the revenues. I know before we've talked obviously about the mix with lower financial claims and so on. Is there still actually a churn of financial claims and kind of an increasing tilt towards utility bills and so on? Or have we seen a bottom of that kind of mix shift already? I mean, it's a very good question. What we're trying to show on this page is that in terms of business activities and inflows and then ultimately also collections, we're moving up. We're lacking some of the revenue conversion, which is largely due to that financial services inflow effect. This is really what that fundamentally depicts. I think in terms of where we are in financial services, I'd be very hesitant to call it green shoots, but generally in our conversations throughout the quarter with the various markets, we do see some initial signs. It's a bit uneven across footprint, but I think it's more important just to sort of go back to what Andrés just said, it's a little bit inevitable. We see it moving through the pipeline. For me, from a funnel perspective, you have a more challenging environment. First, you see the invoices, that's what we're seeing. That's driving costs because there's activity to collect, and it's driving collections and revenues to a lesser extent. The next step is really the financial services where we're seeing Stage 2 increasing, which will have to translate into NPL. That obviously then creates the basis for gradual increase in the PI business in due course. Yeah. I mean, again, I've been doing this for a long time. I sound a little bit like a broken record. I speak to many banks across Europe. Every single one of them are assuming this is gonna happen. What's great now is that our industry is much more established. The relationship with our clients is much more established, so you're gonna see a much more direct relationship from accumulations of NPL to our servicing activity, and then with the lag PI opportunities. In my opinion, it's inevitable it will come. We can't really call the bottom. I don't know. We will see this in the coming months, I'm sure of it. Great. Thanks. That's helpful. On slide number seven, I think that's a very helpful slide to get, so thanks for that. Just if you could give us your thoughts on that the portfolio has kind of changed in composition maybe from the financial crisis, both with having a bigger exposure to Southern Europe, but also as we have some secure assets in the mix. Do you think the risk is lower unsecured? Would you give us any flavor on what's kind of the average LTV there for instance, and also on the regional mix that's changed, how that plays in? I mean, obviously every portfolio is a living thing over nearly 20 years, right? The world has changed it. I think what is important is that our key principles and how we approach this business haven't changed. The part of the market is learning a lot as we've moved through time. From an unsecured perspective, there's a dynamic, even though they're specific to each individual market and portfolio. There's some general conclusions, which is when you're very granular, very diversified, and focused on sustainable payment plan, then you create resilience, and you also do right by your customers 'cause you are able to look at their individual circumstances and offer them a path for reintegration into financial society. Now, I think this also very clearly highlights that we have complemented this unsecured history with a bit of secured exposures. You can also see that has a relatively limited impact in terms of total loss collection. Also from an investment perspective, our book is very much majority 80% or 80% plus unsecured. Obviously secured has, depending on the specific situation, more volatility. For example, in the pandemic, when the court system literally shut down, that had a more pronounced impact on secured and unsecured. Overall, it's really that diversification, the mix, and our approach in being very careful in terms of only investing in what we can operate and on having superior data that really differentiates us and that really, I think in this chart, tells a story of resilience and success over a very long peperiod of time. Yeah, I mean, I think the fact that we are much bigger now than we were gives us more data. The fact that we're in more geographies than we were previously is more diversified data. We can do better underwriting. We have better underwriting analytics, and we're also prudent. The vast majority is still unsecured, as Michael said. Secured is a natural evolution of our PI business, but it's still a very small piece of our global picture. Being this big in this many geographies is better because I think we can better capture the risk opportunities that are available, the return opportunities that are available to us relative to the risk. Great. That's very helpful. On OneIntrum, we can see that the migration of cases had a little halt in Q3, as you mentioned. Could you just give us some flavor now we've been about two years into your program. What is the feedback? Do you see any change kind of in quality or efficiency when you have migrated? Is that a cause for having to pause it a little bit before you continue on? Or is there any other reason for this little pause now in Q3? Well, there's various factors here. As everyone who's ever operated in any kind of an industrial technological environment, migrations are complicated. We have the benefit also of having a captive client, like portfolio investments, that we can migrate before we migrate third party volumes. Our collections on PI have been great. I think the functionality of some of the migrated cases or some of the markets that have migrated has not been at the level that I would have liked. That's one of the reasons we hit the pause button. The returns and the collections are. It's a testament to our people. The collections continue to perform, and we wanna get that right so that we can accelerate it. We don't migrate for migration's sake, just like we don't invest for investment's sake. We actually migrate to make sure that we're capturing the opportunities of cost savings, and we're capturing the opportunities to improve our functionality, which this does. We're doing so in the most important and the most prudent in the markets where we think this is gonna have the greatest return, not in every single market at one time. Migrations are complicated, and we're gonna have ups and downs going forward. There's no doubt about it. That's the reason for the pause. Maybe a bit from a CFO perspective, but to my mind, the whole OneIntrum rebuild and people and processes and systems, and it encompasses changes across all these dimensions. You know, but through the CFO lens, what's really important to me is that has to be cost-effective, right? That means that the elements are starting to play together. That's really a curve that we wanna extend and continue on. 100%. Thanks. Then maybe one final question, suppose maybe a little bit tricky one. When you mentioned now on the financial targets, which ones you are focusing the most on, it sounded like it was kind of the Cash EPS and the leverage. Are those superior to the dividend, for instance? No, those are the two that I chose to highlight in my commentary. Leverage is obviously been very topical. The questions have indicated that today. Cash EPS to me is the ultimate measure of our profitability to our shareholders in cash forms. I wouldn't say it's superior or inferior to the dividend. I would just add to that. I mean, we've tried to illustrate that in terms of what we've done over the last two years, right? We've really focused on progress in all of those, and I think Andrés made the point also very clear in his concluding remarks. We focused on achieving all our medium-term. Yes Financial targets. Obviously, leverage being particularly topical, so we've singled it out. We're focused on achieving all of those. Yeah, I wouldn't read into that commentary. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you. The next question comes from Wolfgang Felix from Sarria. Please go ahead. Thank you. I really only have one question left, I think, maybe two. First of all, back to that slide seven, which I think is really good to have. Thank you. If I go back to 2011 low point of 99%, that sort of came two years-ish after the great financial crisis. Not that we perhaps have a great financial crisis right now, but would you sort of envisage that perhaps the low point, irrespective of the absolute level of 99, 98 or perhaps above 100, is about two years away from where we are now, you think? Is that a sort of reasonable way of thinking forward, or do you anticipate a different speed of the cycle? It's a good question. I think we're going to see a steepness in our collections over the coming years. I think it's going to be more difficult to collect on a unitary basis. There's no doubt about it. Whether it's one to two years or three years, I don't know. I do think we have a better functioning market, and we are certainly more capable today than we were during the pandemic, than we certainly were in the early part of this past decade. Hopefully we don't hit these levels of bottoms, but it's inevitable that it's going to be more difficult to collect going forward. It's inevitable. Yeah. I would just add, I think the shape of how it pans out exactly also depends a little bit on the degree of government intervention across footprint, right? There will be a cycle. I think that's normal. Exactly how that moves over the coming quarters and years is very hard to predict. I think fundamentally, when I look at our business then, as we've shown, given that we're exposed to servicing and investing, we continue to grow cash generation through our difficult times. I think that's number one. I think fundamentally, the macro trends that support growth in our industry are a bit decoupled from that cycle. That's much more about outsourcing. It's much more about development of the financial system. It's much more about concentration of our clients into invest suppliers, given the quality that they look for. I think given that we're the market leader, given that we're building scalability, and we are striving to be ever more effective and efficient, we're very well-positioned to capture these opportunities, not just over the coming quarters, but over the coming years. I think it's very important to highlight that we are definitely better than we were even as recently as a few years ago. You know, part of the One Intrum transformation is not just the migrated cases that everyone seems to focus on, but it's giving our people better tools. Giving them digital tools, particularly in the north of Europe, to deal with a more granular and sophisticated and mature client base. Using our data, we have a number of test cases right now that have very meaningful profit and collections impact. You know, that's stuff we didn't have three or four years ago. That will also mitigate the steepness of this decline, I think. Historically, we've been very resilient. I think we're going to be even more resilient with these tools, which all come as part of our natural evolution, but also the focus on it from the One Intrum program. Okay. Thank you. That's certainly very helpful. My only remaining question, I guess, is around how you set your discount rate with respect to your back book. I mean, not so much the JVs, but what you have on your own 100% owned book. How is that related to your funding cost? How do you set that level, I suppose in a way to help us understand when and how you are valuing that book as we go through obviously quite some significant change in macro rates overall? Sure. I take that one, and I apologize in advance. This is gonna get a little bit technical. In terms of our on-balance sheet book, that's held to maturity at amortized cost, which means in terms of accounting standards, we're subject to IFRS 9, which means that we lock in the effective interest rate at inception. When we do an investment, we look at the rate of discount that we get on that investment, and that does not change over time. As I said, our investment is self-liquidating. As we replenish and grow, we integrate market pricing over time into that book. It's important to note that it's our back book. Yeah. We set the discount rate initially. We have an underwritten IRR, and we've outperformed across, as you can see on page 7, at 103% on average over 18 years, and with much more collections, much bigger business now than at the beginning of that period. There's a resiliency here that I think means that, you know, it's not just a technical point as Michael said, but a legitimate point where we produce cash flows, and we're much less sensitive to negative macro environment. We shouldn't have big swings in the discount rate or in the return or the value realized from our back book. We do adjust on all new investments, as we've already highlighted a number of times in today's session. But- That's very helpful. Thank you. We adjust our expectations. No. It's just. Correct. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from analyst Zach Kalish from Jefferies. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning, and we hope you're enjoying the Athenian sun. We're quite jealous from where we are. Look, I'll dig down a bit to some of the questions that have already been asked. So if you may give us a little bit more detail on how you're thinking about the maturities of your bonds, meaning do you want to, when the market stabilizes a bit, do a more holistic refinancing or address the maturities one by one as they come due? How are you thinking about the currency composition of your debt moving forward as well? That's the first one that'd be very helpful to know. I have a couple of others. Should we answer that now before you get to your second one? Yes, please. Perfect. Michael, you wanna start? I can make a start on that. As I've stated, we're obviously looking into refinancing of the 2023 and 2024 maturities and, you know, we're actively observing the market as it develops. I think in terms of your question of doing something that's more holistic, I think one of our competitive advantages is that we're termed out, that we have locked-in rates that extend quite far into the future and that are quite attractive. I mean, let's recall 70% of our net debt is fixed rate. I think from that perspective, it's really addressing those maturities and maintaining a termed out structure because we really see that as a competitive advantage, just to reiterate. I think in terms of currency composition, I mentioned it briefly before, that 70% of our gross debt is euro-denominated, and round about 70% of our revenues are euro-denominated as well. From that perspective, the mix we have and the approach we have is something that is appropriate to our business and that we want to carry forward into the future. Obviously, having said that, we always explore efficiencies and out-of-pockets of funding as they develop. On a bit of broad strokes approach, we wanna stay termed out. We don't wanna have too much of maturities in any individual maturity bucket. We see this as a competitive advantage. Again, we reprice over time on the assets and the liability side. That's very clear and helpful. Thank you. We understand that obviously you need to do right by all your stakeholders. So, help us reconcile a bit, you know. First of all, we've been following the company for quite a while. If I remember correctly, before COVID, which was a very different world, your medium to long-term leverage target was 2.5 on the low end. Is that something that you've revised or you still think you can achieve? Or is 3.5x where you'd be happy to be at also in the long- term? Maybe just a small tactical point before I hand it over to Andrés, that our leverage target has consistently been 2.5-3.5. Obviously, we were working towards that, didn't probably make as much progress as we would've liked to, and then in the context of COVID had to push it out in time, right? The target per se is unchanged and one of our key goals, our key goal is really to get to that 3.5%. I think to discuss what happened next is a little bit premature. Let us first focus on getting there. We believe, given all the characteristics that we've laid out, the cash generation that we have, the resilience that we demonstrated, 3.5 is a good level for starters. Let us get there and then we can see how we develop further. Andrés, maybe- No, Reiterating what I said earlier, kind of repeating somewhat what Michael just said, our goal is 2.5-3.5. That was the stated goal. We're gonna get to 3.5 as soon as possible. I think reducing to that level is beneficial to all stakeholders. When we get to that level, I want to personally reassess how we address it, and I want to always focus on growing our cash. Even if we don't, even if debt remains constant, we're gonna grow our cash flow production, so we will delever that way. I'm comfortable with our debt load today, given the fact that we have liquidity. It's termed out. Our debt is termed out. Our maturities are termed out. The businesses, as Michael very well demonstrated, adjust to the environment meaningfully every year. You have to look at our PI book, which is our fundamental asset, and the ERC against that PI book, which is our debt load, to see that, you know, it's, you know, I'm not worried about the debt level except in market context where we need to be prudent, where we need to be thinking about all our stakeholders and long-term benefits of our business. As Michael answered your prior question, we're gonna be both tactical as well as strategic in looking at how we deal with our maturities. Fair enough. I'll stop with the debt questions now then. I'm sure you're tired of answering them. On your PI, you mentioned it was 80% unsecured versus 20% secured. Obviously it will depend on the market opportunities moving forward. Is that a ratio you roughly want to maintain? Is the first part of the question. The second part of the question, more of a judgment call and maybe a little bit color on what you're seeing now in your markets. You think there will be more unsecured or more skewed towards the secured, the supply that will steadily come into market in the coming months? I'll start with the second question. I think it's a bit part of the funnel we discussed, right? I mean, you start with the invoices, it goes to financial services, it goes first to servicing, then it creates BI opportunity. If you think about the priority of payments from an individual perspective, right? First, you maybe missed the payment on a gardener invoice, right? To give an example. Then maybe your credit card becomes a bit more difficult. I think your mortgage is the one element that you maintain as long as you can. That gives a sense to the timing. That then also translates into potential timing throughout this coming market. I think in terms of that in the mix, I'll hand it to Andrés. No, I mean, it's important to note that 80/20 is the mix of the current book value. It's not the mix of our more recent investments. Our more recent investments Our more recent investments have been more skewed towards unsecured. I think you have to also put it in context. The unsecured market is large, but it is much smaller than the secured market. We're gonna continue to grow our position within unsecured. That's our core expertise, and we're gonna continue to grow it in secured. I can't tell you what ratio there is going forward. We can grow on both sides, much smaller base than secured, but we're gonna grow on both in both asset classes. Thank you very much. All very clear. Thank you. I can assure you that it's 28 degrees and sun here in Athens is wonderful. I will be in Stockholm next week. Thank you. The next question comes from David Ljungstrom from Nordea. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. I guess most of my questions have been answered already, but one more question on the topic of rising funding costs, if I may. So how would you describe the price discipline currently among portfolio bidders, and how do you expect that to develop ahead? Thanks. It's a very good question. As we said, we see initial signs that the market is starting to adjust. I think, without blowing our own trumpet, we feel that we're quite sophisticated. We look at our hurdle rates on a continuing basis. We started integrating that far earlier than a lot of other market participants. Now we see them following suit. I think the other element is there hasn't been real refinancing in the back door rule. I think once we start seeing that, I would think that discipline would accelerate. I think from our own perspective, we look at mark to market pricing in terms of our own risk appetite and our hurdle on a continuous basis. Yeah. I mean, even though we have fixed term funding and it's termed out and it's largely fixed rate, we adjust to the environment today, which includes the elevated funding costs when we look on to write. Which as you've seen it in this quarter, 15% versus 12%. That's a clear evidence of the fact that we're adjusting. That will impact some volume. Some quarters will invest more or less because we just don't find the opportunities that are going to pay appropriate to the risk, and that's the way the business is. We continually adjust to the current market environment, the risk environment, even though our debt is prudently termed out and largely fixed rate. Very helpful. Thanks. Great. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from Lars Dueser from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead. Good afternoon, everyone, and thank you for, you know, taking the questions. First of all, if we assume that the high yield market remains, you know, in a difficult place and probably shut for a few more quarters, would you consider, you know, repaying the near term maturities with your existing liquidity? Because clearly you have like SEK 17.3 billion. The RCF is obviously well protected from a springing maintenance covenant perspective. So this is really liquidity which sits with you and could be used in my book. Would be interesting to hear your thoughts. I think in general terms, and maybe that's also a competitive advantage, we have that significant access to liquidity, number one, n umber two, we are termed out. We don't have cliffs in our maturity profile, so we have it well spaced out. Between our cash generation, our liquidity, we maintain a lot of optionality as we move through time. We are not beholden to the environment in any given quarter. From a risk perspective, I would think this puts us into a relatively good position. Very clear. Moving on with the last questions. When I think about next year, you know, obviously the question on the call has been asked about where will your portfolio purchase level go? In my view, you know, it has to be somehow related to what's happening on the collection side. It seems like leverage, you know, is really what you are solving for here. You want to get to 3.5x as soon as possible. Would it be fair to assume if, you know, next year collections come in, you know, well below par in a stress case that you would make sure portfolio purchases, you know, get trimmed accordingly to protect your leverage and make sure you can reach that target. are we still looking at, you know, SEK 8 billion of spend per annum? Yeah. I look at the connections slightly different way. I think if you assume a bad environment, right? That will drive servicing inflows and servicing over time, right? On the other hand, obviously our collections performance, given that we price our own track record and operations, and I would argue we have the largest database there is obviously then integrated into how we look at portfolio investments in our active product. I think you're on something, but it's the other way around from my perspective. No, I mean, I completely agree with what you just said. Understood. Then last but not least, if you look into your collection performance right over the cycle, it looks like you have always consistently, you know, been around 105%-110%. There was obviously also a change in ERC accounting, so you know it might have come down a bit. It was always well above par, you know, meaning that probably you guys are more prudent or have just better underwriting skills or better collection skills, whatever it is. Doesn't that buffer help you also, you know, going into next year, so that we probably- Absolutely. You know, don't drop materially and can still maybe defend a little around par. Others, you know, look through the cycles, looking at peers in good times and in bad times, they have been in the low 90s%. So just to get an understanding of that as well, please. Yeah. I again put a slightly different twist on it. When you look at that slide seven, we've on purpose given you two lines. One is the active forecast as it's developed through time, and that's principally then also impacted by revaluation. We've also given you the original forecast, which is really the level at which we underwrite. I think there we really show that with 106% since 2004, we really do get better over time and we outperform. I think the other page I would draw your attention to in our investor presentation is page 33, because there on a vintage basis, and this is the unsecured book, which is the vast majority of what we do. You really see that every single vintage we put on our books, it stabilizes, and then it starts improving as we get better. When we price a portfolio, we never price in future improvements. We only price in what we have actually delivered in our operation. I think this is these factors that we've sort of listed throughout the call today, together with that track record of continuous improvement that we're doing upfront, really drives that outperformance and will continue to drive that outperformance. You're absolutely right, that is a buffer that we inherently have that's built on the quality of our underwriting, the quality of our operation, and the resilience that we've demonstrated. I mean, I think the answer to this question and the answer to your prior question from my perspective at least is I'm not worried about collections. You highlighted the fact that, yes, it's gonna drop. I talked about the fact that it is gonna be more difficult, but even this quarter we're at 106%. That's partially August is a complicated month, a slow month, but it's also somewhat of a slowdown because it's more difficult to collect versus 110% year to date. You know, and that's a function of our underwriting and our collections capability. You know, as an investor, which I have been for the last 20 years, there are not many pools of capital of SEK 40 billion or roughly speaking EUR 4 billion that produce 12%-15% unlevered returns across this level of granularity, 19,000 portfolios consistently over time. That's really only possible because our integrated business model, because that pool of capital is attached to our industrial platform in these markets and our servicing platform. Collections doesn't worry me. What we do focus on is the discipline of investing at the right level of expected return, which Michael already talked about. Performance on what we already own and what we are going to own against forecast doesn't worry me because we have the best data set, we have the best industrial capability, and we're prudent underwriters. Oh, very, very clear both. I guess the last question then, we spoke about that, book base at 80%, you know, coming from the unsecured side, 20% from the secured side. Can I just ask that 20% from the secured side, that includes the JVs, right? If I look at own balance sheet assets only, the unsecured mix is much larger. No, absolutely. I mean, again, we have the breakdown for our ERC, which includes the cash returns from us to the JVs as well. If you look at that on page 32 of our presentation, secured makes up 14%, real estate 1%, unsecured 85%. We've given you the collections from two different buckets in slide 7. Around about 20% is actually on the larger end, right? To really simplify it there. No, very clear. Clearly the secured assets sitting in the JVs, I mean, the cash contribution from these JVs is clearly different as we know, right? Because you are not expecting to receive any cash at least out of the Intesa JV for the next three years or so as you pointed out. Correct. Very clear. Okay, thank you. Thank you for your questions. Thank you. This concludes our question and answer session. I would like to turn the conference back to Andrés Rubio for any closing remarks. Over to you, sir. No, I would just like to thank everyone for their time. We're incredibly proud of the result, and we look forward to engaging with some of the market participants on a more one-on-one basis going forward. Thank you for your time today to listen to this call and for your questions.