Hej och hjärtligt välkomna till Handelsbankens presentation av resultatet för 2022. Vi kommer att inleda med att vår vd och koncernchef Carina Åkerström presenterar resultatet. Den här presentationen livesänds och länken hittar ni på handelsbanken.com under Investor Relations. For those of you who are listening in English, you can find the presentation simultaneously translated if you choose English in the menu. Efter presentationen så tar vi en kort paus och därefter så inleds en frågestund, en öppen frågestund på engelska. Och ja, så välkommen nu Carina Åkerström. Tack så mycket för det Louise. Återigen god morgon allesammans och varmt välkomna till presentationen av Handelsbanken's resultat för kvartalet Q4 och för helåret 2022. Om vi börjar lite grann övergripande och summerar 2022 så skulle jag kort vilja säga att banken går bra. Det är naturligtvis så spelar ränteläget in. Framför allt så går banken bra utifrån att vi har en hög aktivitet. Våra befintliga kunder och nya kunder gör helt enkelt mer affärer med oss. Det förklaras också naturligtvis av att vi också har en fin volymutveckling under året. Intäkterna i banken de ökar till nya nivåer, både för helåret och för kvartalet så nådde vi de högsta nivåerna vi har sett tidigare. Provisionsnettot håller emot väldigt väl. Börserna har ju som ni vet gått ner ganska ordentligt. Trots allt så fortsätter vi att faktiskt ta successivt marknadsandelar i den viktiga sparmarknaden. Vi investerar mer, jag kommer tillbaka till det. Vi investerar väldigt mycket i det digitala mötet med våra kunder med en tillgänglighet. Trots detta att vi ökar våra kostnader något så ser vi också att KI-talet fortsätter att förbättras. Våra kreditförluster är fortsatt på en låg nivå. Jag skulle vilja säga övergripande så speglar resultatet en bank med stabila finanser och nöjda kunder. Om vi går in och kikar lite grann på helåret 2022 så ser vi på ett KI-tal som fortsätter att förbättras. Det uppgår nu till 42.4%. Det är den lägsta nivån som vi faktiskt har sett under flera decennier. Vi har en lönsamhet på 12.5%, det vill säga avkastning på eget kapital. Intäkterna växer med 13%. Den stora driving i detta är naturligtvis ett starkt räntenetto, men det i sin tur drivs som jag sa av en hög aktivitet i det att vi också har en väldigt fin utlåning, en balanserad utlåning. Kunderna gör helt enkelt mer affärer med oss. Provisionsnettot, vi tappar något på provisionsnettot, men håller ändå emot och ligger kvar på höga nivåer. Trots som sagt var de vikande börserna. De underliggande kostnaderna ökar med 3%. Ökningen förklaras faktiskt i sin helhet i stort sett av sedan också 2 år tillbaka den digitala utvecklingen eller satsningen på den digitala utvecklingen och affärsutveckling. Övriga kostnader om man exkluderar våra utvecklingskostnader är då uppe marginellt. Då ska man ha med sig att detta är under en period med väldigt snabbt stigande inflation. Som sagt var kreditförlusterna är fortsatt på en väldigt låg nivå. Summerar vi årets rörelseresultat mässigt ökar vi med 17% när vi då också justerar för den riskvikt på SEK 1.3 billion som nu ligger i resultatet. Fortsätter vi att kika på resultatet på det Q4 ser vi den positiva resultatutvecklingen håller i sig även under detta kvartal. KI-talet uppgår till 41.8% och räntabiliteten, det vill säga avkastning på kapitalet, uppgår nu till 13.2%. Intäkterna växer med 9%. Det är räntenettot som fortsätter att bidra till den intäktsökningen. Det är naturligtvis också drivet utav effekter från de stigande marknadsräntorna. Provisionsnettot ligger relativt still under det här kvartalet. Kostnaderna ökar. Jag kommer komma tillbaka till det. Förutom att vi ser de sedvanliga säsongseffekterna under det här kvartalet. Vi har en del engångsposter också som förklarar ökningen. I övrigt ökar kostnaderna. Vi vill att de ska öka helt enligt plan och som jag sagt med fokus på det digitala, den digitala utvecklingen. Kreditförlusterna under kvartalet fortsatt på en låg nivå. Som sagt, summerar vi rörelseresultatet under kvartalet så har vi ett underliggande rörelseresultat som ökar med 5%. Tittar vi tillbaka under de senaste tre åren så kan man väl säga att vi har berättat tidigt vad vi skulle göra. Vi har gjort det vi har sagt att vi skulle göra och det ser vi också nu i termer av att intäkterna ökar, kostnaderna är under kontroll och vi har ett KI-tal som rör sig i helt rätt riktning, det vill säga ständigt förbättras. Som jag sa inledningsvis så har aktiviteten hos våra kunder varit hög under året. Vi har gjort fler affärer med befintliga kunder. Vi har gjort fler affärer, nya affärer med nya kunder. Det här ser vi i alla våra hemmamarknader. Totalt sett ökar bankens utlåning med 7%. Vi börjar titta på företagsutlåningen som är den högra delen utav sidan, ökar företagsutlåningen med dryga 11% under året. I Sverige var banken vår största aktör under året. Vi tog hela 26% av nettoutlåningen till företag i Sverige. Det är också en väl diversifierad utlåning till företag, både när det gäller fastighetsutlåning och icke fastighetsrelaterad utlåning. På hushållssidan de senaste åren har vi haft en stabil tillväxt i våra hemmamarknader, som marknaden och marknadsläget utvecklade sig från sommaren och framåt har ju det här bromsat in. Ursäkta. Vi har fortfarande skulle jag säga en relativt stabil utveckling. Det vi ser inte bara i Sverige utan i någon av våra andra hemmamarknader, det är att våra kunder amorterar i en betydligt högre grad än vad man har gjort tidigare. Det tas då ifrån befintliga sparmedel. Det här har ju en dämpande effekt på volymutvecklingen, både på utlåning men också på inlåning. Vi kikar lite grann på räntenettot då under helåret så ökar räntenettot med 21%. Det som också är glädjande att se det är lite det jag återkommit till hela tiden, att vi ser också att det här är en balans mellan faktiskt volymökning, det vill säga vår utlåning, men självklart också i det ränteläge som vi nu befinner oss i. Ursäkta. Vi kikar lite grann då på vårt provisionsnetto. Återigen, de senaste tre åren så har vi haft en fin utveckling på vårt provisionsnetto. I banken, som ni vet, så har vi en stor del av vårt provisionsnetto kommer från vår fina sparaffär, från vår kapitalförvaltning. Självklart så påverkas ju den utav att marknaden ser ut som den gör att börserna faktiskt faller lite och det påverkar också våra intäkter på, när det gäller fondprovisioner, ingen tvekan om det. Trots allt så håller man emot väldigt väl. Det vi också ser på provisionssidan om man säger lite som möter det är att också våra betalprovisioner ökar löpande över de senaste 3 åren. Det är klart att vår sparaffär för att lyfta den, som jag sa, den håller emot väldigt väl trots de här börsfallen. Vi ser i Sverige när vi tittar på fondmarknaden så är faktiskt Handelsbanken den som under det här året, 2022, har tagit in störst nettoinflöde. Vi tar in hela 53% av de nettoinflödena som finns i marknaden landar in i Handelsbankens fonder. Det gör också att vi successivt flyttar vår marknadsandel från 12 till 12.2%. ursäkta, om vi då går in och kikar på våra kostnader på helåret så ökar kostnaderna med 7% under året. Justerar vi då för valuta och för en del engångsposter, så är den underliggande kostnadsökningen 3%. Utvecklingskostnaderna ökar våra kostnader med 2.6%. Det som jag sa, det är fortsatt en ökad takt i den digitala utvecklingen. Det är där vi har lagt resurserna. Det är affärsutveckling, det är gentemot kunderna, det vill säga en tillgänglighet som vi fortsätter att förbättra. Underliggande ökar kostnaderna med under 1% och återigen ska man ha med sig att under det här året har vi då haft en kraftigt stigande inflation. Kostnaderna är under kontroll. Vi lägger våra resurser där vi också ser att vi framtidssäkrar banken helt enligt plan. Vi då tittar lite grann på vad vi faktiskt gör och försöker klä det lite grann i ord, är ju fokus, precis som jag sagt vid ett par tillfällen nu, den digitala utvecklingen, den digitala tillgängligheten för våra kunder. Jag tillträdde som vd för några år sedan gjorde vi en genomlysning utav hela banken. En av de sakerna som vi identifierade vid det tillfället var att vi behövde öka tempot i våra digitala investeringar. Det handlade då i huvudsak om kundmöte för att helt enkelt gå i takt med våra kunder. Det här avsåg alla våra hemmamarknaden. Ni minns också att vi la en extra SEK 1 billion över 2 years, årsperiod för att också göra detta, för att så att säga öka tempot i den utvecklingen, för att förstärka och förbättra vår kundmöte. Bilden till vänster visar då som sagt vad vi har lagt det på. Vi har pratat tillgänglighet, vi pratar också processer, vi pratar möten med kunder i det digitala. Vi pratar också om hur vi effektiviserar och hanterar vår data för att supportera den affärsutveckling vi nu ser att vi successivt faktiskt gör och också får återkoppling från kunder har lyckats med när det gäller mötet med våra kunder i de digitala kanalerna. Staplarna till höger, där ser ni trenden sedan 2020. Vi har successivt ökat takten fram till nu Q4 2022. Vi är mer i fas nu och vi ser också att det planar ut. Vi ligger på en bra nivå och vi har de resurserna nu som vi behöver för att utveckla det vi önskar med fokus på affärsutveckling. Det här är för att framtidssäkra banken. Vi är på en nivå, vi har ökat tempot, men där vi är nu är vi på en bra plats där vi ser att vi kan fortsätta utveckla banken på ett klokt sätt. Om vi då tittar på vår kreditkvalitet eller på vår portfölj, har ju även 2022 präglats av låga kreditförluster. De kreditförluster, ja de speglar naturligtvis en väldigt god kreditkvalitet, men också speglar att vi har goda kunder. Det här är kunder med hög motståndskraft, det är kunder med goda marginaler och ordning och reda i sin ekonomi. Just nu ser vi ingen dramatik i vår kreditportfölj. Det som vi har reserverat sedan 2019, det har uteslutande handlat om att bygga upp de generella reserverna. Tittar man på den högra bilden så kan man väl säga lite det jag sa: vi har en god kreditkvalitet. När EBA gör sin Transparency Exercise så ser vi längst ut till höger en liten stapel, det som också är Handelsbanken. Det vill säga väldigt låg. Låga problemlån så att säga. När vi också jämför oss med våra nordiska kollegor så ser vi samma resultat, det vill säga kvaliteten i portföljen är god. Som sagt var, ingen dramatik som vi ser just nu. Om vi lite grann bara ska titta närmare på våra hemmamarknader så är ju Sverige, det är det stora dragloket, ingen tvekan om det. Har ett rörelseresultat om man exkluderar den bankskatt som nu läggs på våra hemmamarknader så ökar man sitt rörelseresultat mellan 16%. KI-talet fortsätter att förbättras. På kvartalen, de sista 2 kvartalen så har också Sverige haft KI-tal som ligger både under och väldigt nära 30%. Man har väldigt fin aktivitet, hög aktivitet, både på våra kontor, men vi också ser ju det i våra digitala kanaler. Det vill säga en fin tillväxttakt i sin utlåning. Det är klart att det driver ju upp en stor ökning utav räntenettot. Tittar vi då på det kanske största trendbrottet under 2022 är definitivt då verksamhet i UK. Siffrorna talar lite sitt tydliga språk. Här ökar rörelseresultatet, det dubblas, rörelseresultatet sedan 2021. KI-talet sjunker. Det dubbla rörelseresultat, intäkterna ökar. Vi ser en väldigt kraftig ökning på våra intäkter. Det är självklart drivet till stor del utav räntemarknaden som sådan, där vi i U.K. har en väldigt fin inlåningsaffär och har haft sedan väldigt många år tillbaka. Kostnaderna sjunker och som sagt var, det som också är intressant är att provisionsnettot ökar i det här. Summa summarum, KI-tal som föll ner till 56%. Det vi också ser i U.K. på liknande sätt som jag nämnde i Sverige, det är att när vi tittar på tillväxten på utlåning så är det väldigt mycket kunder som fortsätter att amortera i en kraftigare takt än vad vi har sett tidigare. Lite kort om Norge och Holland så kan man väl säga så att de fortsätter att visa på en väldigt fin utveckling. I Norge är ett exempel på där vi faktiskt också nu lägger ytterligare resurser på att utveckla de digitala mötena. Kapitalet. Stabila finanser, en väldigt god kapitalsituation. Det har givit oss och det ger oss utrymme för nya affärer med befintliga kunder, med nya kunder. Det vill säga att vi fortfarande kan ha en tillväxt alldeles oavsett konjunkturläge. Styrelsen föreslår en ordinarie utdelning på SEK 5.50 per aktie och en extra utdelning om SEK 2.50 per aktie till bolagsstämman. När vi gör avdrag för den föreslagna utdelningen så uppgår kärnprimärkapitalrelationen till 19.6%. Ursäkta. När vi jämför med de regulatoriska kraven så tar vi höjd för de ytterligare påläggning på kontra cykliska buffertkraven. vilket innebär då som sagt var att vi får ett avstånd till, det vill säga 1.2 procentenheter kommer vi då ligga över vårt måltalsintervall, det vill säga vi har fortfarande en god stabilitet och goda möjligheter till fortsatt tillväxt. Ska man summera det här året och det sista kvartalet så kan man väl säga det som vi alla känner. Det har varit ett år med väldigt stor makro och geopolitisk osäkerhet. Prognosmakaren har väl försökt gissa. Det har inte varit enkelt, det har blivit värre än vad jag tror man gick in i 2022. Trots det så gör banken sitt bästa resultat någonsin. Vi har stabila finanser som ger oss utrymme att möta och stötta våra kunder. Vi investerar samtidigt för att framtidssäkra banken och inte minst som sagt i det digitala kundmötet. Vi säkerställer att vi går i takt med våra kunder. Resultatet 2022 skulle jag vilja säga speglar en bank med stabila finanser, med en god tillväxt och nöjda kunder. Jag tänkte stanna där och tack så mycket för alla ni som har lyssnat in och vi bryter helt enkelt för 5 minuter paus innan vi inleder frågestunden. Louise? Ja, vi tar en kort paus här som sagt och om ett par minuter så kommer våran Chef för Investor Relations, Peter Grabe, att inleda frågestunden som då hålls via vår telefonkonferenstjänst och information om hur ni hittar den är handelsbanken.com under Investor Relations. Välkomna tillbaka då. Tack! Hello everyone and welcome back. Before entering into the Q&A session, could we just please ask for the limitation of the number of questions to one per analyst. If you have follow-up questions, you're more than welcome to sign up to the queue after the initial question. With those words, operator, please can we start the Q&A session. Thank you. Dear participants, as a reminder to ask a question, you will need to slowly press star one one on your telephone and wait for a name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Please stand by, we'll compile the Q&A roster. This will take a few moments. Now we're going to take our first question. The first question comes to line of Magnus Andersson from ABGSC. Your line is open, please ask your question. Okay, thank you. Can you hear me? We hear you. We hear you. Yeah, good. Okay, just on costs then. First of all, a clarification or my question is on cost. Just a clarification, you talk about that the development costs we saw, or the cost that we saw towards the end of the year should be a good proxy for what we should expect for 2023. Just to be clear, is the annualized Q4 development spend then a good proxy for what we should expect for '23? Also, what happens beyond 2023 here? Do you see this as a temporary elevated level, or will the '24 level be subject to whatever income growth, or cost income ratio, et cetera, you have? Finally on cost, just I noted that the capitalization level is increasing again, quite significantly, how you think that will look during 2023. You've commented on this earlier, depending on what you have been investing in. Thanks. Yes. Thanks, Magnus, for the question. Well, first of all, obviously, yes, you are correct in that one. The trend we're, or the pace we're entering or we're exiting Q4 is the pace we're foreseeing to have during 2023. Then when it comes to the levels after 2023, as you say, we've been highlighting that we wanna run the bank below 45% in cost to income level, and that's, we don't have any more to say on that topic. We appreciate that we are in a situation where we have ample of room for growth in all of our home markets, and that's the reason why we're investing quite a lot right now. The capitalization level, as you say, it has been very low, below 20 for quite some time now. The investments especially we do in U.K. and in Norway do have a bit more long-term perspective around it. Therefore, you should expect capitalization level, all else equal, to increase a bit going into 2023. As we've been saying, the actual level in the end is from an accounting perspective. Very little subjectivity in it is more of core system development as well in U.K. and Norway. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The next question comes to line of Nicolas McBeath from DNB. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Thank you. A question on capital. As you mentioned, Carina, you're well now above your target interval also if we add the announced increases to the countercyclical buffers in 2023. I was just wondering what you're still waiting for before calibrating down your capital ratio to within your target range. Should we see that you want to keep an additional buffer on top of the buffer you're targeting? Help us understand here why you're not being more keen to trim down your capitalization to the range you're guiding for. I think it's fair to say that obviously when we entered 2022, we didn't foresee the year as it has passed by. I think that holds for the future as well. We live in extremely uncertain times now where a lot of things can happen. We could actually grow quite a lot more than we'd used to do in the past. We could also see, obviously, the economies running into trouble. From that perspective, we think it's very prudent right now to stay at elevated levels. In the long term, we haven't changed anything to our target range, no. Okay. If I may just follow up on that. I mean, I understand there's macro uncertainty and all that, but I guess that's why you have the buffer to start with. I mean, with regards to growth, do you think that the growth outlook for 2023 is kind of above normalized in terms of growth opportunities, or how should we think about that? We think there's a lot of volatility around the growth assumptions going into 2023. I think you can, you can find arguments for seeing slow growth, but you could also find arguments actually for quite a lot of growth. I think some future questions now from the audience will most likely address the growth question. Let's leave that for that question. Okay. Okay, thank you. Thanks. Thank you. Now we'll go and take our next question. The question comes to line of Maths Liljedahl from SEB. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Yes. Hello, Maths Liljedahl here. I guess it was me I dropped out of the call. If we ask on NII sensitivity going forward, we have a rate hike tomorrow. Do you think that will be more or less pushed on to clients in terms of deposit yield? I see U.K. deposit is growing very strong. How do you think in the U.K. operations, are you still managing to charge or to keep interest rates at a low level in the coming rate hikes? Thanks. Thank you. Peter, please fill me in here. I think first of all, obviously, we've actually during 2022, we've actually increased the rates on the savings accounts as much as we've increased the mortgage rates. We might differ there a bit to the other banks, but we think that's been really good to our clients to do that. Nevertheless, obviously we've seen quite a lot of increase in the NII margins or the NIM. Going in now into this year, yes, we most likely will see quite a lot of increase when with the rate hikes, we'll most likely follow it. As you know, the competitive landscape has been moving around quite a lot in mortgage margins and also deposit margins. We won't guide on any NII sensitivity, nevertheless, increasing rates most likely is beneficial to us. As well, when it comes to the, we can guide you on that we 30% of the volumes in deposits are on transaction accounts, and they will obviously stay. 40%, sorry, 40% are in transaction accounts. They, we don't pay any interest on these accounts. On the NII or the NIM in Norway, I think it's worth to highlight that we obviously have the notice periods there, they accumulate to the size of NOK 300 million at least, that should be a tailwind going into 2023. In the end, as you say, in UK, we're in a very fortunate situation in UK that the bank's rating is higher than even the country as UK, their rating. We actually attract a lot of deposit flows from solicitors and municipalities, et cetera. Yes, we've been in a situation where our client base is not very rate sensitive in the UK. We will foresee to have a higher margin increase in UK when rates are being hiked. Okay, thank you. Very helpful. Thanks. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The next question comes to line of Andreas Håkansson from Danske Bank. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Thanks. Good morning, everyone. Follow-up question on the NII. On the mortgage side, it seems like you've been lagging the market in terms of how you've been pricing up mortgages. At the same time as your funding structure, you keep a very big portion, covered bond funding, so it's relatively expensive. Can you tell us what's happening with your mortgage margins at the moment? If you don't hike your list prices, how does that really impact your back book? The discount sets sits or compares to your list prices, right? What's driving the back book margins at the moment? Thanks. No, you are correct in the sense that we have been extremely, we've decided quite a lot when we price the mortgages that we obviously like the market and we want to give our clients a really good offer. We have been competitive in the mortgage pricing, definitely in the last quarter of the year. We will keep on playing this, you know that we've been highlighting on all the time that the NIM consists of many buckets now and the mortgage part is one part of the NII. Obviously the total NIM of the bank increases quite a lot, but we see actually the mortgage margins are dropping. When it comes to the pricing, yes, you are correct in the sense that when we change the list prices, we need to go through the client base because obviously their rate is dependent on the list price and the discount. We have obviously both automatic support to do that, but we obviously contact our clients as well. It's not going automatically in changing the back book margins, but there is definitely a correlation, so we need to work with that one. Yeah. Just following up on that, you say that you've been wanting to play in that market, but it seems like you're losing market share. Since there's very little growth in the system overall, is it really worth lowering prices to capture that little volume growth of new lending? Or is the problem that you see on a growth basis that you're losing clients? I think it's rather fair to say that we've been highlighting that we have two core offerings in the bank, first the financing part and then the savings part. In Sweden right now, we have the top position in accumulating corporate lending growth, deposit growth, and also savings growth. Yes, we trail a bit on the mortgage perspective, but of all of these ones, we really want to give our clients a long-term confidence, gain the client satisfaction. We won't short term try to optimize the NII in that perspective. We think that's been really helpful behind the results of this year as well. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The next question comes to line of Maria Semikhatova from Citi. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Maria, your line is open. Yes. Hello. Thank you. I'd like to follow up on your NII comments. You mentioned that 40% of deposits are on transaction accounts. Just wanted to clarify if that's households only and if it relates to Sweden or the group and if you could break down the remaining 60%, how much of that is actually on term deposits. You also mentioned that you raised rates on savings accounts as much as mortgage rates. Could you please maybe comment on deposit beta in different markets that you've seen by end of last year? Yeah. When we talk about the deposits that are on transaction accounts, we refer to Sweden, it's roughly 40% of the both households as well as corporate deposits that are currently running with 0% interest rates. Those are the 40%. When it comes to deposit beta, we typically don't give any guidance. I think, given where the expectations were ahead of the report, it seems like the market has been quite good at actually capturing the dynamics. Unfortunately, we don't provide any specific details when it comes to the deposits in the other countries, in terms of how much is on savings and transaction accounts. In terms of the remaining 60%, those deposits are at different types of deposit accounts, but we don't specify how much is on different specific deposit accounts, savings deposit accounts. Just maybe, I understand, you don't provide the breakdown, but generally, because I believe some of the peers mentioned that they're seeing the trend of customers in Sweden switching from transaction accounts into savings and term deposits. I think, based on your previous comments, your share of transaction accounts, hasn't really moved over the quarter. Just want to confirm if you are seeing similar trends or there are other reasons why, in your case, customers are keeping their liquidity on the accounts with zero interest rates? You can say that in terms of Sweden, as that's where we specify the split. The amount of deposits with 0% interest rate has moved from around 50% at the end of Q3 to 40% at the end of Q4, just to give you a hunch. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes from line of Sofie Peterzens from J.P. Morgan. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Yeah. Hi, here is Sophie from J.P. Morgan. Thanks for taking my question. I was just wondering on slide 31 on your theory exposure, if I look at kind of market statistics, it seems house prices fell on average 7% quarter-on-quarter. If I look at your property management LTVs on the slide, there was no change in any of the loan to values. I'm just wondering, for example, if you assume a 20% fall in house prices and we already had a 7% fall in the Q4, how come the LTV is exactly the same at end of the Q3? Kind of related to the asset quality, I also noticed that your Stage two loans increased by 23% quarter-over-quarter despite kind of selling Denmark. I was just wondering if you could kind of give some details around why kind of loan losses remain so low and why the property management slide is unchanged versus the Q3. Thank you. When it comes to the property management slide, yes, you're correct. It's not updated with Q4 numbers. We will obviously wait for the year-end reports of our exposures to do a reassessment again. In Q1, it's probably fair to assume that this slide will be updated. When it comes to Stage two loans, yes, the volumes are increasing in the quarter, but it's due to revised PD assumptions in the very, very low risk classes, meaning that the volumes technically move to Stage two. As you can see on the provision side, you can see that that has not triggered any uptick in the provisions for the Stage two loans, suggesting that the quality of the loans that have migrated into Stage two obviously is very strong. Okay. Okay. Yeah, I mean, once we update the real estate exposures and the loan values, would it be fair to assume that we potentially need to see a little bit more provisions for the property management exposures? Not necessarily, but obviously there will be more information, when we get the annual reports, but not necessarily there will be updates, no. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes to line of Riccardo Rovere from Mediobanca. Please ask your question. Your line is open. Hello? Can you hear me? Yeah, we hear you. Yeah. Okay, sorry. Okay. I just wanted to follow up a little bit on Sophie question. I understand you will be updating at some point the LTV slide on page 32. Unless we're starting from- Kind of 40% for commercial real estate and say 50% for residential real estate. I mean, the value of the collateral is basically double, or more than double the residual debt exposure. Is it fair to say that to see a material impact on your asset quality, you would need a collapse in the real estate prices in general? Is it fair to say? I mean, the buffer here is technically extremely large. Is that a fair assessment? A second thing, if I may, to Carina Åkerström is, you extended the buyback request, but at the end of the day, what we see is a cash dividend plus an extraordinary dividend. Is it fair to say that you, at least at the moment, prefer cash versus buybacks? Is it fair to say? Thanks, Riccardo, for the questions. Well, first of all, obviously, yes, obviously we do like the position in the LTVs we have, and we obviously run a very conservative view on credit policy. Nevertheless, obviously if house prices drop quite a lot then we obviously estimate that impact from if prices were to drop 20%, obviously our LTVs would go up a bit, a touch more than 10%. We're not unimpacted, but yes, we like the situation we are in the asset quality and the collateral we have in place. The second question, we obviously, it's a board decision around it, but as we've been highlighting before, we obviously have the possibilities to do share buyback programs. We will definitely reconsider it, but that will obviously be a case between the equity price and the way we choose between dividend and share buybacks. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes to line of Namita Samtani from Barclays. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hi. I've just got a quick question on corporate deposits in Sweden. I saw they went up quarter on quarter, that's quite different to what we've seen at the other banks. Is there a reason for this? Thanks. Yeah. In, I mean, our corporate deposits did go down on the quarter. But as you say, we, I think the reason when you compare us to other banks, it is the ratio of financial corporates vis-à-vis non-financial corporates. The non-financial corporates are more stable in their deposit base, behavior, but the financial ones do more massage their holdings, et cetera, over the quarterly ending. I don't think we had an increase. No. Okay. Thanks very much. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The next question comes to line of Omar Keenan from Credit Suisse. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Good morning, everybody. Thank you very much for taking the questions. The first question I had was on mortgages and customer behavior. I was wondering if you could add some color around the accelerated amortization in mortgages. What can you see around the particular cohorts in your customers in terms of who has high levels of deposits versus high levels of mortgages, where you can see that, you know, this pay-down behavior might continue for a little bit longer? I was just wondering if you could just flesh out a little bit how you're thinking about the amortization trends. What were they sort of normally, and where do you think they could pick up to? My second question was just on capital and regulation. I just wanted to check in on your view, your latest view on whether there might be any impact from the IRB overhaul. What impact do you think there might be from Basel 3.1 on the first of January, 2025? Whether you think there's an impact from the output floor in 2030 and whether it's binding. Thank you. Thank you for the questions. Well, first of all, I think, it's early to say, to draw conclusions from the amortization behavior. What we can say is that we've seen, two or three times the level of amortizations in the end of the last quarter. We, in many cases, that has actually been the really strong client base who's been using their deposit and just paying off loans. Obviously that's quite rational and quite intuitive when mortgage rates are up now in the level as some of the share dividends you can see in the markets. I think you can't draw any more conclusions than that it is strong client base who pays off right now. When it comes to the capital, we do have a few uncertainties, obviously, going forward. The IRB overhaul is obviously one, but we don't have any more information to give you there. We don't foresee any changes as of yet. When it comes to the future Basel IV implications, we think we will have little impact when we move into it. So that's the best guidance we can give. As you know, we have the structural FX case as well, which we do think, if anything, should have a positive impact. I think we have some pros and cons, but not any large size in either of them. Thank you. Could I just ask a quick clarifying question? I think in an earlier response to one of the questions, you said that you expect the overall capitalization to increase in 2023. Could you just confirm and elaborate the comments a little bit because it sounds like you're not expecting much in terms of regulatory headwinds, and there's already an excess capital position that could fund growth. Why do you think the capitalization should increase further? Could you just help us a little bit more with that? This might be a misunderstanding, actually. When I addressed the capitalization level when it come to the IT spending, the amount of the investment we put on the balance sheet, and they will most likely increase in 2023 based on the kind of development we do in Norway and UK. I didn't mean that we were foreseeing that the capital demand from a regulatory perspective we think is going up 2023. Understood. Could you give a bit more color on the payouts then and capital ratio levels in 2023, how we should be thinking about that? I think it's, let me say a few words then on the capital level and the profitability of the bank. You know us as a bank, and we like really to. We have a conservative view. We really do believe that being conservative both in funding and capital, in the way we treat our asset quality, in the way we treat our client, is the recipe for long-term success. now we live in really uncertain times, and then we think it's prudent and a good position to be in to have even higher buffers. We haven't changed our long-term target range. If you were to look at the absolute return on equity level, yes, there are some Swedish peers who are above us at the time being, but if you were to compare over long term and even the last years, if you were to dig into risk-adjusted return on equity, you would see that the stability our bank is showing, really puts us in a really good position when it comes to risk adjustment, adjusted return on equity. Therefore, I mean, you as investors and analysts, you could just increase the size of the position in our bank, and then you could increase the absolute return on equity. I think that's the way you should view us. We play the capital level over a longer term cycle. Obviously, we haven't seen the downturn yet. We really do believe the uncertainty, the uncertain times right now favors being prudent. We do foresee there could actually be really big position or big possibilities actually for growth as well. We think this is prudent to do at the time being. We haven't changed anything in our long-term target range. okay, understood. You'd expect to run with something a bit higher than the long-run management buffer in the near term because of the growth opportunities and uncertainty, but over time it should come back within that range? I don't know if. Just to confirm, all the questions- Yeah. Sorry. Please go on. Just wanted to confirm, have you answered all the questions or not yet? I think we've answered all the questions, but please get back if there were any questions you didn't get an answer on. Thank you. Now I'm gonna take our next question. The question comes to line of Jacob Kruse from Autonomous. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hi. Thank you. Could I just ask on the expenses for the pension claim or the reimbursement that you took this quarter? I think you said that that was to rebuild the consolidation ratios of the pension foundation somewhat. Are you at the level you want to be, or would you expect to continue to treat it this way given that on a sort of net tax basis it seem quite neutral to you? Should we see this as a one-time effect on the cost base, very strictly 2022? Thank you. Thank you, Jacob. You should definitely see this as a one-off because we, as we've been highlighting for some time now, our pension system has gone from, if you, if you look back two, three to 10 years, obviously it has created a lot of volatility to the capital situation. We have managed to reallocate the pension system on a very good timing. We sit in a really good and solvent situation when it comes to the total pension system. We have some technical factors, how to treat when we can get the contribution from the pension foundation. These kind of technical issues made us treating it this way during the last quarter. We don't foresee that to happen going forward. Rather our message is that our pension system is in a really good situation. We didn't need to do this to increase the solvency of the system. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes to line of Nick Davey from Exane BNP Paribas. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Good morning, everyone. A big picture question on costs, please. If we take a step back and look at this run rate of costs that you're guiding us towards into 2023, it's obviously very substantially higher than the aspirations you originally had for the Handelsbanken cost base, around the same time. Now, I appreciate inflation's been a bit of a surprise, but if we exclude that element, can you help us to better understand tangibly what has disappointed you or what has made you see the bank as in need of so much development spending, versus your original plan? As we go into sort of 2023, 2024, can you help us to better understand these big step up in development spending? Do you view what you're doing as a sort of defensive spending to catch up Handelsbanken to maybe where peers are in terms of capabilities? Or is there some component of what you're doing that you view as really revenue positive into the future? I think we've just got into this mode of noticing costs are higher, but I'm not sure within this development spending bucket, I'm fully on top of what the money's being spent on and why. Thank you. Thank you, Nick. Thanks for the question. I think this is a really important topic actually. I think Carina was saying in her press conference alluding to when she entered a CEO role and the analysis we were starting in the bank. That, as you all know, we went through a phase where we thought we needed to adjust the stability of the bank. The analysis of that one was rather that we should focus on the areas where we're really strong, we should narrow down the geographies we're present in, et cetera. We've come quite far in that journey actually, and we've created a really profitable bank right now. We stand on geographies and in areas we really like, and we see ample of room for possibilities there. We... In that sense, we've then gone from a stability phase into a profitable phase, and we really think we're in a good position to enter a really growth phase as well. What you see right now is obviously. In that sense, we changed from obviously having an absolute cost target to rather steer the bank towards a cost-to-income target. In these cases now, we what we do is we invest quite a lot. We have really good position, we have really good client satisfaction, and we are really profitable in the underlying business in all of our four home markets now. We really do see possibilities for us to strengthen this position and grow even further. In that sense, we're spending quite a lot on the digital capabilities, especially in definitely Sweden, UK, and Norway. We actually really see the benefit of this to some extent. You can see that in client satisfaction, we actually increases the digital satisfaction quite a lot in a few of our home markets. We really view this as an offensive move. We think we run a bank with a really strong cost control in the underlying business with huge possibilities actually to grow. We keep coming back to the guidance that we wanna run the bank below 45 in cost to income. That should really be seen as a really efficient underlying bank, but also quite a bit higher spending rate than we've seen in the past. Okay, thanks for the clarification. Briefly, just to pick up on the UK and Norway spending, what kind of areas is it being spent on, and what's the tangible outcome of the spending two, three years from now? What will your capabilities be that they aren't today? Yeah, if we start with U.K., U.K., we are a small bank. We are very niche to the private banking segment. We have the highest client satisfaction with some magnitude. We already have the best combination of return on equity and cost-to-income levels vis-à-vis our peers in U.K., and we foresee that difference to actually improve further. Our challenges in U.K. is the I.T. perspectives. We do invest actually in changing our core system there, but we also invest in the digital capabilities because we know that we have room to improve there. As you know, we've been going through a few years of some tough challenges in U.K., which we think we turned around quite nicely now. We look really, really promising in the possibilities for us to grow even further in U.K. in the segment we're in. In Norway, we have a possibilities with a really good position vis-à-vis corporates and lending. As we've been highlighting before, we like to balance that to more retail side and also to more saving side. In that sense, we're investing quite a lot in the digital capabilities of the bank to strengthen that perspectives. That's the key highlights of the investments in U.K. and Norway. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes line of Rickard Strand from Nordea. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hi, good morning. Follow-up question on costs. Looks like the FTE development is currently where you're growing at a 3% quarter-over-quarter growth rate, and it's also up quarter-on-quarter. Just want to hear your view here, looking ahead, how you expect this to develop. Is it fair to assume that you will continue to grow in 2023? If so, in what areas? Then also a short follow-up question on the one-off there, related to the payroll tax. I think I missed the quantification of how big that was in Q4. Thank you. Yes. Thanks, Rickard. Well, first of all, I mean, FTEs, yes, we don't see a structural decline anymore in FTEs. We're rather increasing, obviously, the development spend. In that sense, that requires more resources. That could be FTEs or it could be external help with consultants. I don't think we can guide you on the level of the FTEs 'cause you will most likely have an increase in development, but we could also have a shift from consultants into employees of the banks. We can't guide you on the absolute level there. I think your second question was alluding to the pension one-off. As you say, it was. The cost increase is SEK 152 million, but we actually do decrease the tax line with SEK 160 million. From a net bottom line, it is actually positive with SEK 8 million, but it do increase the cost. In that sense, obviously, we've viewed that as a one-off to the cost line. yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The question comes line of Piers Brown from HSBC. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hello, can you hear me? We hear you loud and clear. Sorry, I missed the operator there. it's Piers Brown at HSBC. Just a quick question on your risk appetite in commercial real estate at this juncture. I mean, most of the Q4 reporting we're seeing from the property management companies in Sweden looks surprisingly good in terms of still very high occupancy rates and increasing rental values, resilient property values, et cetera. In the context of that, how do you assess your appetite for taking on further credit to these companies? Because the problem we're still confronting is the refinancing wall that they face in 2024. If you could just talk to that point, given that you're obviously already 30% of the portfolio is to the property management sector, would you be happy to increase that percentage even further from here? Thanks. Thank you, Piers. Well, as we've been highlighting many times, obviously, we don't view our exposures from a portfolio perspective. We do like good clients and many of the clients we have, which are good, is obviously in the real estate sector. As you say, yes, you can see that the Q4 reports are decent. I don't think that's the way you should view our bank, that we will. You can see the way we will behave when it comes to credit appetite has very strong correlations with the reports they're posting. We will definitely continue to do business with the clients we deem good. We think there's definitely both a need and a possibility for us to grow when you see the shift from bond to bank in the financing perspectives. We definitely see that already happening. It is. We're in the midst of it. That's clear. Thank you very much. Thank you. Now we're going to take our next question. The next question comes to line of Andreas Håkansson from Danske Bank. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Excuse me. Andreas, your line is open. Hi. Can you hear me now? Yeah, we hear you. Yeah. Yeah, sorry for that. Just a follow-up. On the capital side, you asked for a new buyback mandate, which I guess you've done all years. Should we see that as an indicator that you actually want to do any buybacks? If you would plan to do it, wouldn't you have announced it now? Is that just to have the flexibility on trading in your own security and stuff like that? How should we view that mandate? I think, we can't guide you anymore. It is obviously flexible. It is a mandate. As you say, we've been having it for many years. It creates flexibility for us. If we would have instigated a buyback program today, we would obviously have said it. You should see that as flexibility for us going forward. Okay, thanks. Thank you. Now we're going to take our last question. The question comes through from the line of Jacob Kruse from Autonomous. Your line is open. Please ask your question. Hi, thank you. I guess I just wanted to ask you if you could say anything about the underlying inflation you see outside of this development spending, in terms of any indication from wage negotiations or contract negotiations with suppliers. Just how do you think about cost growth for 2023 versus 2022 outside of the development spending? Thank you. Thanks, Jacob. I think it's fairly hard actually to tell the various components. What we can say is that if you go back and look at our other cost line, and you look at the seasonality, the average seasonality for the last 15 years, that has been at the pace of 24% roughly. In that sense, you can actually explain quite a bit of the cost increase we see in Q4. It is quite difficult to divide this into what is normal seasonalities, what is inflationary tendencies. What we can say though is obviously that the salary negotiations in Sweden, they are obviously we obviously do local ones, but the official ones are being held now. I think that, most guidance point that to somewhere roughly 4% or so. That From a European perspective, that's obviously quite low. Most likely the agreement will also be short ones. It might be a one-year agreement, and then we have the uncertainty going into the next year. We don't foresee massive inflation, but nevertheless, obviously some inflation will go through. In that sense, you can actually find arguments for the cost increase being fairly muted anyway vis-à-vis both seasonality and in inflationary terms. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Dear speakers, there are no further questions. Thank you to all of you who have participated during this session. If you have any further question, please don't hesitate to talk to Peter or to Carl during the day. Thank you very much to all of you. Thank you all. Thank you.