Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by, and welcome to the Lufax Holding Limited Q4 2020 earnings call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the management's prepared remarks, we will have a Q&A session. Please note that this event is being recorded. Now I'd like to hand the conference over to your speaker host today, Mr. Yu Chen, the company's Head of Board Office and Capital Markets. Please go ahead, sir. Thank you, operator. Hello, everyone, and welcome to our Q4 2020 earnings conference call. Our Q4 2020 financial and operating results were released by our Newswire services earlier today, and are currently available online. Today, you will hear from our Chairman, Mr. Ji Guang Heng, who will start the call with updates on recent changes to corporate governance structure as well as regulatory development. Our Co-CEO, Mr. Greg Gibb, will then provide a review of our business in the quarter and future strategies. Afterwards, our CFO, Mr. James Zheng, will offer a closer look into our financials before we open up the call for questions. In addition, Mr. Y.S. Cho, our Co-CEO, and Mr. David Choy, CFO of our Retail Credit Facilitation business, will also be available during the question and answer session. Before we continue, I would like to refer you to our safe harbor statement in our earnings press release, which also applies to this call, as we will be making forward-looking statements. Please also note that we'll discuss non-GAAP measures today, which are most thoroughly explained and reconciled to the most comparable measures reported under the International Financial Reporting Standards in our earnings release and filings with the SEC. With that, I'm now pleased to turn over the call to Mr. Ji Guang Heng of Lufax. Okay. [Foreign language]. Hello, and thank you everyone for joining our Q4 2020 earnings call. Before discussing our quarterly results, I would like to provide updates on three different aspects of our business. First, changes to our corporate governance structure since becoming a U.S.-listed company. Second, our interpretation of recent regulatory development. Third, our view of future regulatory trends as well as the steps we are taking to stay in front of these changes. [Foreign language] Starting with corporate governance, Mr. Renjie Li, Chairman of the Board, has submitted his retirement application as he reaches the golden age of 65. In strict adherence to U.S. listing regulations, our board held a meeting on 29 January and approved Chairman Li's retirement, along with the resignation of four other shareholder directors and one independent director. As previous co-chairman of the board, I will now assume the sole role of Chairman of the Board, in addition to my role as Chairman of Lufax Executive Committee. We have also appointed Mr. Yunwei Tang and Mr. David Xianglin Li as our independent directors, and Mr. Rui Li as our shareholder director. Following these changes, our board now consists of nine directors, among whom three are executive directors, five are independent directors, and one is a shareholder director. Additionally, our nomination and remuneration committee, as well as our audit committee, now solely consist of independent directors. Such changes have brought us into full compliance with the NYSE listing requirements for a majority independent board and for both of the aforementioned committees to solely consist of independent directors. As representative of a U.S.-listed company, our new board of directors will remain dedicated to improving the company's corporate governance, protecting minority shareholders' interests, and establishing prudent corporate strategies in an efficient manner. In addition, after careful reviews and thorough discussions, our board of directors has decided to adopt a co-CEO executive structure As a result, Mr. Yong Suk Cho and Mr. Gregory Dean Gibb will serve as the company's Co-CEOs going forward, with Mr. Cho in charge of our Retail Credit Facilitation business and Mr. Gibb in charge of our wealth management business. We strongly believe that this new management structure is in the best interest of all stakeholders, enabling us to cultivate more synergies across business segments and better integrate our overall business resources. [Foreign language]. In addition to his role as running the Retail Credit Facilitation business, he will also assist me in managing the finance, planning, and treasury functions of the company. [Foreign language]. In addition to running the wealth management business, Greg will also assist me in managing the technology and IR functions of the company. [Foreign language]. Now turning to regulatory development. Fintech industry regulations continued to be tightened in China throughout 2020. At the end of 2020 and beginning of 2021, for example, regulators introduced a series of new regulations, including the interim measures for the administration of online microfinance business, the antitrust guidelines for the platform economy industry, the interim measures for the administration of sales of wealth management products from wealth management subsidiaries of commercial banks, and the notice on regulating commercial banks to conduct personal deposit business through the Internet. At a fundamental level, these regulations represent the government's desire to promote prudent innovation, prohibit monopolistic practices, protect consumer interest, and maintain financial stability and security. Facing increasingly stringent regulatory oversight, we have adopted an overarching strategy of embracing regulatory change, engaging in proactive dialogue with the regulators, and forging collaborative and productive relationships with local authorities. While we do recognize that stricter and more standardized regulatory requirements may result in some short-term pressure on the company, we also believe that such changes should foster more long-term benefits for Fintech market leaders such as Lufax. Allow me to elaborate on how these policies have impacted our own businesses. [Foreign language]. First, for our retail credit facilitation business, we seek to thoroughly understand the spirit of regulations and proactively communicate the value of our services to the regulatory authorities. Our understanding is that current policies intend to prevent excess consumer borrowing costs and overextension of consumption and credit limits by younger consumers. In respect to lending costs, the latest legal explanation from the Supreme People's Court of China stipulates that the four times LPR interest rate cap is neither applicable to the lending businesses of financial institutions nor local financial organizations. Since September 2020, we have restricted our all-in lending costs for facilitating all new loans to no more than 24%, which is in line with the latest requirements. What is noteworthy is that our loan facilitation services differ from other Internet consumer lending services in borrowers' use of loan proceeds. We primarily serve micro and small business owners and meet their operating needs. In doing so, we help the physical economy to grow and prosper, which is in full alignment with policy directions. Although we face temporary pressure from the uniform enforcement of regulations across the board, we are engaging in active and persistent dialogues with the regulatory authorities so that our business's mission and societal value are fully understood and appreciated. [Foreign language]. Secondly, for our wealth management business, we have stopped facilitating online deposits and shifted our focus to wealth management technology empowerment. In fact, before the PBOC and the CBIRC jointly issued the notice on regulating commercial banks to conduct personal deposit businesses through the internet on January 15th, 2021, we had already ceased offering online deposit products. Since these products only represent a small portion of our total income, we expect that the financial impact of these adjustments on our business will be both limited and manageable. Looking ahead, we will continue to promote standardized products and structured products on our platform, propelling the growth of our business through superior product recommendations and user experience. We will also continue to work towards empowering small and medium-sized commercial banks through advanced technology. [Foreign language]. As a U.S.-listed company, Lufax will remain in compliance with the regulatory rules of both China and the United States. Moreover, to improve the compliance and transparency of our business operations, we will also remain vigilant of relevant regulatory development. We believe that our unique Hub-and-spoke model will enable us to enjoy sustainable growth even under strict regulatory oversight. Although the increased scrutiny towards certain companies may severely affect small and medium-sized platforms, we believe that stricter regulations will be more advantageous to Lufax in the long run. As an industry leader, Lufax possesses advanced technological capability, sophisticated management know-how, strong pricing power and versatile risk mitigation expertise, all of which should enable us to thrive in any environment. [Foreign language]. Finally, I would like to share our views on the future development of regulatory policies. As mentioned on our previous quarterly earnings call, we expect that regulations for Retail Credit Facilitation will focus on seven different areas, including interest rate cap, capital requirements, bundled sales, geographic coverage restrictions, funding institution risk management, user proceed verification, and consumer protection. We are actively preparing our businesses to maintain compliance in those seven aforementioned areas. In addition to lowering our lending costs, we have also increased our overall risk taking rate to 6.3% as of 31 December 2020. By mid-2021, we intend to have increased our overall risk taking rate to 20% for all new loans facilitated. Based on our analysis and forecasts, we will have sufficient net access to cover potential capital needs going forward. In regards to geographic coverage restrictions, in recent years, we have established branch offices in key cities across the country to ensure that our nationwide operations remain smooth and compliant. Furthermore, on the consumer protection front, we have upgraded our apps and processes, implementing more timely response protocols for customer complaints, and providing our borrowers with more credit enhancement choices to better protect their interests. [Forein language]. In conclusion, we believe that we are well prepared to navigate through the regulatory uncertainties as we engage in active communications with the regulatory authorities. We are confident that we will complete our business transition smoothly while maintaining regulatory compliance. With our refined operational processes, technology-enabled cost optimization, and risk-matching pricing mechanism, we should be able to sustain our healthy and proper growth for the long run. [Foreign language] I will now give the floor to Greg, who will share our business updates for the quarter. Thank you, Chairman Ji. Before I begin, please note that all the numbers are in RMB terms, and all comparisons are on a year-over-year basis unless otherwise stated. In the face of regulatory uncertainties and overwhelming market noise, we upheld our commitment towards driving high quality and profitable business growth. As such, we exceeded our previous guidance, delivering solid financial and operating results in the Q4 of 2020. As of 31 December 2020, our balance of loans facilitated have grown 17.9% to RMB 545 billion, while our client assets in wealth management have also grown by 23% to RMB 426 billion. Moreover, for the full year of 2020, our total income grew by 8.8% to RMB 52 billion, while our non-IFRS adjusted net profit grew by 2.1% to RMB 13.6 billion. Underpinning these positive outcomes were several driving factors. First, we continue to observe improvement in our credit quality. The C to M3 flow rate, the leading indicator of risk performance on our lending platform, continued to stabilize around its pre-COVID-19 levels. In Q4 2020, our flow rate was 0.4% as compared to 0.4% in Q4 2019. Additionally, our 30-day past due plus further improved to 2% in the Q4 from 2.2% in the Q3 of 2020, while our 90-day past due decreased to 1.2% in the Q4 from 1.3% in the Q3. Second, we received more clarity surrounding the interpretation of the application of interest rate caps. We're pleased to see, as Chairman Ji just mentioned, the recent Supreme People's Court guidelines and local court cases providing additional clarity on the interest rate cap. These developments were largely in line with our expectations, and all of our loans from 4 September last year have been below 24%. We do not expect any further adjustments to our lending rates in the short term. Third, in line with our clients, we continue to make good progress in establishing a more sustainable risk-sharing business model. It is encouraging to see that our funding and insurance partners have remained supportive and embraced this new model. As of 31 December 2020, our outstanding balance of loans facilitated with guarantees from third-party insurance partners decreased to 88.8% from 95.6% a year ago. Moreover, Ping An P&C accounted for 77.7% of new loans sold in the quarter, down from 93.2% a year ago, while our funding partners bore the risk for 6.7% of new loans in the Q4. Fourth, we further penetrated into our core and target customer segments. During the Q4, 72.7% of new loans facilitated were disbursed to our core segment of small business owners, up from 63.1% in the same period of 2019. In the wealth management business, the contribution from customers with investments of more than RMB 300,000 as a percentage of our total platform client assets increased to 75.5% as of the Q4 versus 73.1% a year ago. Moreover, our 12-month investor retention rate remained high at 96.8%, as compared with 93.3% in the same period in 2019. Lastly, we observed strong growth in our current product client assets in the wealth management business. Current product client assets grew by 67.2% year-over-year and thus accounted for 95.5% of our total client assets as of the quarter end. The remaining legacy client assets decreased to $19.4 billion or 4.5% of total client assets as of the quarter end. Next, let me provide some more context regarding new loan sales, take rate, and PTOX margin in the Q4. In Retail Credit Facilitation, our new loan sales for the quarter were RMB 132.7 billion, slightly ahead of our prior guidance and representing a 3.2% year-on-year increase. We also observed stable credit demand from our small business owners in Q4, as well as a very strong start to the new year. In fact, for January 2021, we just recorded our highest-ever single month new loan sales, representing a year-on-year double-digit increase. As a result of our adjustments to borrowing costs back in September 4th 2020, our revenue take rate did experience temporary pressure in the Q4, declining to 9.1% in Q4 from 10.3% a year ago. As these adjustments at the time occurred overnight, we believe this decline is temporary in nature. Nevertheless, we are now renegotiating with our partners to reduce our funding and credit costs as we continue to adjust our cost structure that will take some time. We believe our revenue take rate and net margin will improve in the future throughout the course of this year. I'm going to circle back on this in just a moment to explain to everyone how we're going to get there in 2021. For now, despite the regulatory uncertainty, we expect double-digit top-line and bottom-line growth going forward through this year. As I mentioned, we've already had a very strong start for the year, recording the highest ever single month new loan sales while maintaining the full and steady backing of our insurance and funding partners. We also decreased our sales commission rates starting this January, and we've continued to optimize our funding costs, and we've started to enjoy lower CGI costs as insurance partners adjusted their pricing on the back of better credit and customer quality. All of these factors are leading to a recovery in pre-tax net margin as compared to Q4 2020, as we expect this trend to continue throughout the remainder of 2021. Due to the complex accounting treatment of revenue recognition for loans that we facilitate versus trust-funded loans and the initial recognition of credit costs for our risk-bearing loans, there will likely be some quarterly volatility in our net margins, which James will elaborate more on next. In spite of this, our strong performance in January has given us confidence in the healthy momentum of new loan sales, as well as our underlying unit economics. In fact, after overlooking the accounting treatment complexities, we believe that both, and here we're talking about take rate and unit economics, have already bottomed out and will continue to improve throughout 2021. For our 2021 business priorities, we'll continue to monitor the new regulatory requirements and be prepared to adjust quickly when required, similar to how we have operated in the past. Now, as we look ahead in Retail Credit Facilitation, the stabilization of borrower rates and continued optimization of external and internal costs are expected to improve our underlying unit economics. We will also continue to execute our plans for the new risk-sharing model, diversify our funding channels, secure more funding partner support, and enhance our deployment of technology. In Wealth Management, we will prioritize revenue optimization and product mix over client asset growth. The reason we have made this decision is in reflection of the tightening regulations in some areas that we've seen, such as the bank deposit distribution. We expect revenue growth to be in line with our own expectations as we explore more qualified investor products and increase our focus on those insurance and equity-related products capable of generating better returns for our business. Our two businesses will also be working together to expand our technology-enabled services in lending and wealth management to small bank partners. We expect this strategy to deepen our ties with the partner banks, and to generate additional revenue opportunities. I will now turn the call over to James Zheng, our CFO, to go through the financial details. Thank you, Greg. I will now provide a closer look into our Q4 financial results. Please note that all numbers are in RMB terms and all comparisons on a year-over-year basis, unless otherwise stated. We continue to deliver solid financial results in the Q4 of 2020. Our total income was RMB 13.3 billion, up 5.9% year-over-year. More importantly, our net profit increased by 17.4% to RMB 2.8 billion in the Q4, while our net profit margin further expanded to 21.4% from 19.3% in the same period of 2019. Before diving deeper into our Q4 numbers, I want to highlight two factors that create a mismatch between our revenue and earning growth and the actual business growth. These factors have impacted our 2020 Q4 results and will continue to impact our 2021 results. First, our increase in on-balance sheet loans slows the pacing of revenue recognition in comparison to that of off-balance sheet loans. Revenue and expenses are recognized over the life of the loan. For loans that we facilitate, retail credit facilitation service fees are recognized under IFRS 15, and a great portion of the revenue is thus recognized in month one, reflecting a larger portion of the service that is provided to the borrowers in month one. We utilize trust as a funding channel. Certain trust-funded loans for which we meet accounting consolidation requirements are recognized as on-balance sheet lending, and revenue for these type of loans is recognized as net interest income and IFRS 9. Recognition of monthly revenue and IFRS 9 is more evenly spread out across the life cycle of the loan. Furthermore, in IFRS 9, all revenue associated with these loans, whether facilitation, interest, or guarantee in nature, is all recorded as net interest income. Whether a loan is funded by a bank, therefore recognized under IFRS 15, or funded by a consolidated trust and therefore recognized under IFRS 9 makes little business difference as the overwhelming majority of the loans are funded by third parties in any case. However, the accounting treatment differs greatly as on-balance sheet revenue is recognized at a slower pace than off-balance sheet revenue in month one. Therefore, creating a temporary deviation between accounting results and the business performance. Second, self-risk-bearing loans front-load loan credit costs. As we start to bear more risks, we expect to earn more margin over the life of a loan, as the margin previously earned by our insurance partners will now come to us. However, accounting standards require us to record a provision determined by IFRS 9 for the month in which we take on a new loan, while the revenue associated with bearing that risk is recognized over the loan's entire life. This timing mismatch means that our net margin will also be under pressure during those periods in which we increase our own risk-bearing balance. Nonetheless, once this stabilizes, we expect our net margin to return to its previous levels. These factors affect the pace of our recognition for revenue and expenses, creating a timing mismatch between our financial and business results, and will likely result in more quarterly movement and volatility. With that, now let's take a closer look into our Q4 numbers. During the Q4, our total income increased by 5.9%, while our revenue mix continued to change as a result of our business model's ongoing evolution. As discussed earlier, such revenue mix change has slowed the pace of revenue recognition. Following our decision to increase funding from those consolidated trust plans that offered lower funding costs and continued to increase the volume of loans for which we bear credit risks, our net interest income and guarantee income grew significantly to RMB 2.6 billion, or 19.5% of total income in the Q4, from $1 billion or 8.2% of total income in the same period of 2019. As a result, our Retail Credit Facilitation service fee increased by 9.9% to $9.3 billion or 69.9% of total income from $10.3 billion or 82.1% of total income in the same period of 2019. The annualized take rate for current products and services on our wealth management platform was 31.4 BPS in Q4 as compared to 21.5 BPS a year ago. We calculate the take rate by dividing total wealth management transactions and the service fee for current products by our average current product client assets. As we upgrade our business from product distribution to focus more on providing our partners with comprehensive technology enablement offerings, we are generating a greater portion of revenue from those service fees that are not directly linked to products. In light of this ongoing transition, we believe this take rate measurement better reflects our business and thus plan to continue using it going forward. Now moving on to our expenses. In the Q4 of 2020, our total expenses increased by 11.7% to $9.1 billion, driven by accounting factors related to early customer repayments and the credit cost from self-risk-bearing loans, as I mentioned previously. Our sales marketing expenses increased by 30.5% to $4.9 billion during the Q4 from $4.1 billion a year ago. Our borrower acquisition expenses, which are a major component of our sales marketing expenses, increased by 22.3% to $2.8 billion from $2.3 billion a year ago, mainly due to the accelerated recognition of selling expenses that we recorded in the quarter as a result of customers' early repayment. Since we started to change how we charge monthly fees in September 2020, the negative impact of early customer repayments on revenue has largely been minimized. However, early customer repayment also will impact our sales marketing expenses. When a loan is repaid early, we are required to recognize all of the remaining sales and marketing costs that have not yet been amortized in the same month. Therefore, in the period of high early repayment, sales marketing costs are likely to be inflated when compared to actual activity in the period. Meanwhile, our investor acquisition and retention expenses decreased by 17.5% to RMB 237 million in the Q4 from RMB 275 million a year ago, mostly due to our improved investor acquisition efficiency as we leverage technology to achieve greater precision in investor profiling and targeting. At the same time, our general sales and marketing expenses, which are mainly comprised of payroll and related expenses for marketing personnel, brand promotion costs, consulting service fees, business development costs, as well as other marketing and advertising costs increased by 24.9% to RMB 1.8 billion in the Q4 from RMB 1.5 billion a year ago. This increase was mainly due to our previous postponement of marketing campaigns and subsequent resumption in the quarter as business across the country restarted their operations in the post-pandemic period. Our general administrative expenses increased by 47.8% to RMB 986 million during the Q4 from RMB 667 million a year ago. The increase included employee Social Security payments for the first three quarters of 2020, which were previously delayed following the release of government policies made in response to the outbreak of COVID-19. We also recorded a higher share-based compensation expense for the Q4. Consistent with the growth of our outstanding balance of loans facilitated, our operations and services expenses increased by 10.6% to RMB 1.7 billion during the Q4 from RMB 1.5 billion a year ago. Our outstanding balance of loans facilitated grew by 17.9% to RMB 545.1 billion as of December 31st, 2020, from RMB 462.2 billion as of 31 December 2019. An increase in our loan repayment volume led to an increase in our payment processing expenses and the consolidated trust plan fees to trustees during the Q4. This increase was partially offset by our use of AI to improve the efficiency of our loan approval and collection process, helping to reduce the related costs. Our technology and analytics expense decreased by 17.4% to RMB 461 million during the Q4 from RMB 558 million a year ago, as we continue to improve our efficiency. Our credit impairment losses increased by 1.4% to RMB 985 million during the Q4 from RMB 971 million during the same period last year. This increase was primarily due to our higher loan-related risk exposure as our business model continued to evolve, causing us to start to bear more risks and record credit impairment losses upfront. The increase was also due to an increase in our loan-related receivables, which was mostly driven due to the residual effects of COVID-19. Conversely, the increase in credit impairment losses was partially offset by the year-over-year decrease in our asset management impairment losses during the Q4. Our finance cost decreased by 17% to RMB 326 million in the Q4 from RMB 393 million a year ago, mainly due to the decrease in our borrowing cost during the period. Consequently, our net profit increased by 17.4% to RMB 2.8 billion during the Q4 from RMB 2.4 billion in the same period of 2019. Our basic and diluted earnings per ADS were both RMB 1.25 as compared to RMB 1.12 in the same period of 2019. As of 31 December 2020, we had RMB 24.2 billion in cash on hand compared to RMB 7.4 billion as of December 31, 2019. Looking into 2021, because of the previously discussed accounting and the temporary business factors, we expect our margin in Q1 to be somewhat impacted, but profit growth to resume starting from Q2 and beyond. For Q1 2021, we expect new loan sales to be in the range of RMB 175 billion-RMB 180 billion. Client assets to be in the range of RMB 385 billion-RMB 395 billion. Total income to be in the range of RMB 14.3 billion-RMB 14.6 billion. Net profit to be in the range of RMB 4 billion-RMB 4.2 billion. For the H1 of 2021, we expect new loan sales to be in the range of RMB 340 billion-RMB 350 billion. Client assets to be in the range of RMB 375 billion-RMB 385 billion due to the stoppage of online bank deposits. Total income to be in the range of RMB 28.5 billion-RMB 29.3 billion. The net profit to be in the range of RMB 7.8 billion to RMB 8 billion. This forecast reflects the company's current and preliminary views on the market and the operational conditions, which are subject to change. This concludes our prepared remarks for today. Operator, we are now ready to take questions. Certainly. We will pause for just a moment to compile the Q&A roster. Your first question comes from the line of Elsie Cheng from Goldman Sachs. Your line is open. Good morning, Ji, Greg, Y.S., and James. Congratulations on the solid quarter again, and thank you for taking my questions. I have two questions here. First is on the RCF take rate. Understand that we're targeting to serve higher quality client cohort with lower interest rates amid this environment. However, given the recent clarification on applicability of four times LPR restriction, just wondering, can we expect some upside in RCF take rate for us now that we probably have more flexibility in interest rates as well as targeted client cohort? My second question is really on the guidance. If my calculations are correct, our new loan sales in H1 2021 is guided to grow at a very solid pace of 21% year-on-year at the midpoint. Can management share a little bit more color on the major drivers of the growth? Can we actually extrapolate this growth momentum into H2 as well? Thank you. Thanks. Y.S.? Let me first explain the first question. Think of our mini economy. Q4 last year, our new loans, it came with lower take rate and then margin because we reduced borrowing costs. Funding costs, CGI premium, and borrow sourcing costs, they didn't drop at the same pace immediately. Q4 new loans, it took about 25% of 2020, our year-end loan balance. That's why we had lower take rates in Q4 last year. Also versus 2019, we had more first-time and third-time TR portion. Those are other reasons. If you look at January 2021, our last month's number, as Greg said, in January this year, we delivered record high new loan sales, almost close to 100 billion new loan sales in one month. We are able to see that the funding cost, CGI premium, and borrow sourcing costs obviously drops. Take rate as a result, take rate and margin are very much in line with our previous expectations. In overall, it's back to 2020 overall take rate and net margin levels. We believe this will continue. That we are very confident for full year 2021, our take rates and net margin for RCF new business will be sustained without much change. Speaking of APR, the Supreme People's Court, they clarified four times of APR does not apply. It does not apply to financial lending institutions, including guarantee companies and customer finance and smaller companies. However, we believe the general guidance from CBIRC remain unchanged at 24%. We don't have any plan to adjust up our price. Depending on the progress of funding cost, credit cost reduction, and the operating cost optimization, we further want to reduce our borrowing costs gradually, slowly to be more price affordable and competitive in this retail credit market, while we can maintain current take rate and net margin level. We don't have any immediate plan to decrease price at this moment. Going forward in the long term, we still plan to gradually decrease our borrowing costs. That's the answer for the first question. Second question is, our sales volume growth, as I just mentioned, we already have proved January this year we delivered almost close to RMB 100 billion new loan sales, which is very strong sales momentum. Going forward, we believe sales growth, the market demand is plenty. Our sales force productivity increase is very obvious. For example, last year, without any increase of sales force headcount, we delivered 14.4% annual sales volume growth. We focus on more and more productivity improvement. At the same time with AI applications such as AI video loan, that we try to obtain and develop new inbound channels going forward. In the meantime, because in this China tech credit market, our experience is, for now, we do not see any other online channels which can give us as good quality borrowers as offline channels, such as our direct sales or life insurance agents with high CGI and with borrower acquisition cost less than 3%. In the meantime, our offline driven sales, this will continue with about 85% contribution ratio. Going forward, we are trying to develop further sales acquisition channels. Got it. That's very clear. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of May Yan from UBS. Your line is open. Thank you. Morning. Thanks for giving me this opportunity to ask questions, and congratulations on a very steady quarter again. My question, first one is related to regulation, if I can ask Ji [Dong]. I'll ask this in Chinese. [Foreign language]. This question, it's related to PBOC, their earlier draft consultation paper on credit rating business. Some people interpret this may apply to loan facilitation business, and loan facilitation companies will be required to have a credit rating licensing. Is this something relevant to Lufax? Okay. Second question, still on the take rate. As I understand that the take rate may be temporarily down in the Q4. Net pre-tax profit take rate 3.1% and revenue take rate 9.1% is below the previous expectation. This year you said it's going to gradually recover to the range of 3.5%-4% on the net take rate. What will be the path for that? What is the recent CGI cost that you mentioned will be 6.7% in Q4, and also on the funding partners cost. Our loan size, the new loans are all below 24% interest rate. Are the size much larger than before? I remember in the Q3 you mentioned about RMB 200,000 per loan. Is it even higher than that as of now? Any guidance from the CBIRC to increase the 20% credit risk exposure to be higher, maybe to 30% or so? Thank you. [Foreign language]. Income [occurred] in business, within the guidelines of the moment early and preliminary. Shareholder requirements of a [inaudible] institution, the rules from PBOC are not that clearer. We do think it probably tagged [inaudible] it as a part of ratification plan. This is why it came out. Of course a new reply to actual case could be widely applied to the industry. In terms of long facilitation business we don't think it's currently directly involved. We don't think our business will be classified as a pre-disguised future at a stage. We are maintaining [inaudible] dialogue to the regulators, so in the future as the [inaudible] become the cape. Rest assured we'll get enough free warning, so we can plan accordingly and early. In conclusion, we think it's early and preliminary stage. We need more clear requirements from PBOC, before we can react to it. [Foreign language]. It may take another quarter for the rules to be cleared. [Foreign language]. The second question. Actually, I think there are three more questions. There are four questions in total. The first question is again about Q4 take rate, 9.1%. I explained that mainly because the Q4 new loans came with lower take rate and the margin had to reduce high borrowing costs to less than 24% from September last year. If you see January number, I believe fourth number changed, and maybe they made sure we give you the presentation. January, our take rate and net margin already recovered back to our expected level. In overall, if not less than overall 2020 level already. We are in a very good shape by now. How we reach it to that point. There's a obvious drop of funding cost and the CGI premium. CGI premium, our interest partners, they also changed charging method from the loan amount state to balance date from mid-January. That as a result, we use CGI premium ratio. We also decreased our borrow sourcing cost. Starting from January, we reduced our sales commission by 15%. As a result, we saved lots of borrowed acquisition costs. Net-net, our take rate net margin recovered very nicely, back to original level. The next question, ticket size. Ticket size, we don't see much change in recent few months. Before 4 September, our average ticket size was, if you remember, it was RMB 160,000. Then since we reduced high borrowing costs and then switched to better quality segments from 5 September with low price, that increased ticket size from RMB 160,000 to RMB 200,000. Ticket size increased by about a little more than 20%. This is the reason why we could reduce sales commission by 15%. Lastly, about our sales guarantee portion, 20%. As of December last year, for new loans, our sales guarantee portion increased to 13.6%, and then we also made it up to 20% in June for new loans, as per discussion with regulator. Further than 20%, we don't have any plan at this moment. What I can say, if regulator requests more than 20%, for example, 30%, for that, we have enough organic capital to support the extra, more sales guarantee portion. We don't have much concern. Your next question comes from the line of Winnie Wu from Bank of America. Your line is open. Thank you very much for giving me this opportunity. Two questions, I guess. First, regarding, again, the regulation and our licenses. Since November last year, CBIRC published the consultation paper for those online microloan companies license. Have you started to communicate with the regulator regarding application for a national operating license, and is there any feedback from regulator on the outlook of when we will get clarity, certainty on getting this national operation license? Lufax obtained the consumer finance license earlier last year. What's the progress in using the consumer finance license? How much of the business, whether it's the loans facilitated or the outstanding balances being done via this consumer finance license, and what's the plan there? That's the first regarding those licenses. James mentioned the accounting difference from booking loans online versus offline. I think by end of last year, on-balance sheet versus off-balance sheet. As of end of last year, you had slightly over 20% of the total loans outstanding on-balance sheet. What's the plan there? Do you see that further increase to 30%, 40% or is that going to stabilize at around 20% level? Meaning, the related question is when we will see the normalization or stabilization of the account booking for those revenue and expenses? When will this base effect be normalized? Thank you. Okay. Thanks for the question. The first question about two licenses, online microloan licenses. We have two licenses in Chongqing, Hunan, and Shenzhen, and out of three, two are nationwide online micro-lending licenses. We haven't got clarity and confirmation from regulator about the next level of development of those businesses. Those licenses are not in use at this moment. CF license, we got it in April last year. We started business from May last year. As of December last year, we booked RMB 6.5 billion new loans, with about a little more than 200,000 new customers. The ending balance was about RMB 3.5 billion. We made a very good start. This is very much different from our total business. This is very complementary business to serve younger and consumption borrowers. We believe this is an opportunity for us, and then this can be a new engine going forward. The focus about accounting method, that James already took the lead. On-balance sheet versus off-balance sheet. It depends on our funding mix. It's already stabilized, I think. Going forward, our funding mix will be stable with 70% from partner banks and then 30% from trust. I believe that mix will continue without much change. As a result, on-balance sheet and off-balance sheet, this mix, I think it's already got stabilized. Sorry, just to clarify, how about you taking more? Okay. This 70/30 between banks and trust is already stabilized. Is there any plan, like for example, growing of the consumer finance business might mean that you will have more loans funded by yourself. Is that going to change the picture? That's correct. That's very correct. If you think about our overall scale. Our total loan balance as of today is almost RMB 600 billion. Consumer finance business is how much? It's only RMB 3.5 billion. No matter how quickly it grows, it does not take much portion out of our total loan balance scale. It will take some time. I think we can say with. Stabilization in funding between bank and trust in terms of other on-balance sheet will basically be driven by where we take the credit risk. That is why I said our target would be to 20% by June. It'll be a little bit more. Over time, but it's roughly stable. I think it will be already at 4.5%. Right. For the consumer finance license, it will be more contained to do a pretty differentiated business line, which is the unsecured consumer loan. What's the average ticket size there, and what's the lending rate? Is this significantly different from our traditional business? Yes. Very much different from our traditional business. The consumer license is core. The ticket size cannot be more than RMB 200,000. Actually, it's controlled at less than RMB 50,000. Our ticket size, even for those CF borrowers, is less than RMB 20,000 per borrower. Then we average price less than 17% APR. Thank you. How about the maturity? Are those similar to the loans of Ant WeBank, which is only a few months of maturity? Maturity is quite open because it is line of credit products. It is like a virtual credit card. Customer can choose whenever they spend and then select different months repayment service. They can select three months or six months, and it is 12 months, and it is 24 months. I see. Thank you very much. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Thomas Chong from Jefferies. Your line is open. Hi. Thanks management for taking my questions. I have a question about the wealth management first. Can you provide us some updates about how we are using our technology in our automated portfolio strategy in Q4? On the other hand, talking about the online deposit, how much does it contribute to our client asset mix? Then, my second question is about the H2 outlook. Given that we have a Q1 and the H1, how should we think about on a full year basis in terms of the top line and the bottom line? Thank you. Great. Thank you, Thomas. It's Greg here. On the wealth management side, in Q4, we basically did two things. There was the existing portfolio management tools, where we continue to use more and more market data to help provide a set diversified investment strategy for the clients. That has continued to progress in the Q4 as it has in the recent year. What we've also done is opened up the platform to allow other financial advisory providers to come on and basically providing more product, more service to the customers. This is an area that continues to grow at a good pace. We think it's going to become more important in the market as a whole. We're continuing to drive more and more automation and more and more content sharing with customers in that line so they can get used to diversified investing. On the deposit question, if you go to the end of last year, of the total client assets, the deposits made up about 16% of the total, so about RMB 660 billion. That represented the revenue generated by that business was less than 0.4% of the total company. As we let those deposit products mature naturally, we will try and direct clients' money from those products into other areas on the platform as we've done in the past with the likes of P2P. It'll be an ongoing transition for that area. On the Q1, just a quick response. We do believe, or rather in the H1 for the full year, we do believe that we will see double-digit top line and double-digit bottom line growth. We're pretty confident of that certainly for the H1. We'll continue to monitor the regulatory situation as it goes. Overall, we do think that the outcome for 2021 will be double digits on both top and bottom line. Got it. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Hans Fan from CLSA. Your line is open. Thank you for offering this opportunity to ask a question. This is Hans from CLSA. I got two questions. The first one is on the wealth management side. Greg just mentioned that the strong growth in AUM in Q4 last year, but looking to the guidance for Q1 and also H1 this year, we look at the client assets is actually showing a slowing down in terms of growth rate. Just wondering why we are prudent in the wealth management client assets outlook. Also related to the wealth management side, we're wondering why the take rate for the covered products were actually down quarter-on-quarter. What's the reason behind this? That's number one. Number two is that, just wondering on the dividend side. We understand that management mentioned previously that there's no near-term plan to pay out any dividends. Just wondering in terms of longer term, once we are good at the capital front, do we have any intention to offer any dividends to investors? Thank you. Thanks, Hans. On the wealth management question, we anticipate two things happening in the Q1 with regards to client assets. Number one is as those deposits mature, that 16% of the client assets mature, they will actually mature reasonably quickly. The average duration of most of those products was about six to nine months. That will have some dampening effect on the CA growth. The other thing is that we continue to accelerate the final resolution of the P2P products in the Q1. We really are going to probably push both the deposits and that P2P portion down. We will be shifting client money to other areas. The outlook, therefore, that we've taken, at least in the H1 for the wealth management is we will focus more on continuing to optimize the product mix. That will allow us to continue to meet our revenue expectations for this business. We'll put a little bit off the accelerator on the client assets as we optimize the mix. That is the focus for the near term, but we will update if that situation changes. On the take rate question, we actually did have very strong growth in the Q4 in CA before some of these changes like the deposits came into effect. The growth in the Q4 was a combination of bank asset management products and bank deposits. You had an accelerated growth of the denominator, which brought the take rate down a little bit so that you had a 5% decline quarter-on-quarter, but a year-on-year increase of 10%. As we look forward into this year, 2021, we expect over the course of the next three or four quarters that we will continue to see improvements in take rate as we drive that mix in product on the platform. On the question of dividends, we have no immediate plans to issue dividends. Our intent is still very much to grow the business, to deepen our use of technology. At a later date we could look at it, but it's not on the immediate radar. Thank you. Your final question comes from the line of Binnie Wong from HSBC. Your line is open. Hi. Good morning. Thank you for taking my question here. My question here, actually two questions. One is on the Retail Credit Facilitation service fee. I think there is, of course, we see the decline in the past two quarters. We are, I guess, consensus is also looking at this to accelerate, especially into the H2 this year. What are some of the challenges that you might foresee that might not be able to yet see the inflection point or might delay that inflection point? With that also can you have some color in terms of the service fee take rate as well? Also one follow-up question on the regulatory side is that, remember earlier on since I hear we talk about the interpretation, right, by different on the four times one year loan rate and whether that also includes the credit guarantee fee. Interpretation as to different local courts, you also said there's different rulings. Just want to see any updates on that. I just have a very quick follow-up. Thank you. Y.S.? Yeah. About [100 basis points] regulation four times the APR. When we went long time ago, months ago, we said we want to keep our high price to be 24% APR. Within that if we exclude guarantee and all the credit enhancement fees such as guarantee fees and insurance premium, all the rest we try to cap within 15.4%. I believe now we have clarity. We don't care about this mix. The Supreme People's Court, they clarified. Four times the APR does not apply to financial lending institutions like our Lufax Holding or small finance or smaller components. They see that guideline 24%. The mix it doesn't really matter. As long as overall price is less than 24%, we believe this is very much compliant and then this is fine within current regulatory environment. The first question is about the ICF fee. The overall effective APR will remain unchanged throughout 2021. We don't have any planned increase or decrease overall borrowing cost. Then refer to January number, I said our take rate and then margin is already back to our 2020 level. In overall, our profitability comes from take rate and margin are very much in line with our previous expectations. Overall take to the APR will stay unchanged or a little bit changes, numbers changes, throughout 2021. Wyatt, I think one part of the question may have been the mix. In the service fees versus other interest income as we also increase the risk sharing or change to the sharing model. Yeah, in terms of our fee mix. As we increase our self-guaranteed portion to 20% for new loans by the end of June. That will increase our fee mix. They increase our guarantee fees portion, and then service fee, they will decrease while guarantee fee increases. Maybe I can add a little bit. As I explained in my portion, basically, the revenue mix change is driven by two things. One is between on-balance sheet versus off-balance sheet mix change, because we have seen that the on-balance sheet loan has increased from 10% by the end of 2019 up to 22% of 2020 as a result of we have been consolidating more trust loans. Okay? Second change is we are taking more risks. The self-guaranteed risks has been risen from 2.2% by the end of 2019 up to 6.3%. Because of these two factors, it's changing the revenue mix so that we see the RCF kind of a platform fee is coming down a little bit, but the revenue from the interest income from guarantee income has substantially increased. That's why at the beginning, at the middle, we talked about, because of these kind of business factor changes, it's reflected in our financial numbers. That concludes Q&A for today. I now turn the call back to management for closing remarks. I think so. I think we've had a chance to lay out the basic situation here on the call. We certainly look forward to engaging with the analysts very deeply over the next day or two to answer all of the questions that are out there. We thank you for your attention and support. Thanks so much. This concludes the call. That concludes today's conference call. You may now disconnect. Thank you everybody for joining today.