BNP Paribas Stock

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the presentation of the BNP Paribas Second Quarter 2026 Results with Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer; and Lars Machenil, Group Chief Financial Officer. For your information, this conference call is being recorded. Supporting slides are available on BNP Paribas IR website, invest.bnpparibas.com. [Operator Instructions]

I would like now to hand the call over to Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We are proud to present very strong second quarter results, which further strengthens our conviction that we will beat our '26 trajectory. We are well on track towards our '28 target of double-digit earnings growth CAGR over '25-'28, something that is not yet fully reflected by consensus. Our CET1 is now at target, paving the way for accelerated distribution in the future.

I will first start with a summary of our results on Slide 4. The Q2 amplified the solid positive trend we showed in the previous quarter. Revenue rose at a very strong rate of 12%, a level we haven't seen for a decade. Jaws effect was just shy of 3.7 points at constant scope and exchange rate and is at 1.6 points on a reported basis, reflecting largely the impact of the AXA IM integration.

Cost of risk was stable at 39 bps, including EUR 95 million of addition to S2 provisions for geopolitical environment and remains within our guidance of less than 40 bps, which we observed through the cycle. All in all, this means that operating income was nearly -- was up nearly 16%.

Below the operating income line, we obviously also have the Ageas/AGI transaction, which means that net profit was up by 1/3.

Beyond our very strong earnings, we also continued to deliver on capital. Our CET1 reached 13%, up 20 basis points, meaning that we have already reached our target previously set out for '27 -- end of '27.

I will come back to our distribution outlook in a few minutes, but let me mention that we will be paying an interim dividend of EUR 3.23, equivalent to 50% of our first half '26 EPS. Obviously, having reached the milestone of 13% was important, but we intend to continue and build capital.

If we focus on our revenues, they are up 12% with well-balanced growth between the businesses. More than 2/3 of our businesses generated revenue growth in excess of 9%. CIB revenues accelerated sharply, up 13%, driven by Global Markets and Securities Services. Furthermore, Global Banking pivoted this quarter, and we see a strong momentum moving forward into the second half of this year.

CPBS revenues maintained a very positive upward trend, up 5%, helped by strong NII and commercial momentum illustrated by increased financial fees. CPB was particularly impressive with revenues up 9%.

Finally, IPS grew 27% or more than 8% at constant scope, supported by market effect and organic growth in all divisions.

Let's now move to Slide 5, which highlights the positive momentum in the rate-sensitive part of CPBS, namely our commercial banks in the Eurozone and Personal Finance. The second quarter accelerated further with revenues up 8.2%. This very strong top line growth reflects the strong momentum we expected and translates into a sharp profitability increase.

Our deposit mix remains stable, enabling the reinvestment of our non-remunerated site deposits on the mid- to long-term end of the curve. Based on the current economic outlook, we expect this favorable environment to extend well into our next strategic plan, taking us through to 2030.

CPBS profitability will also improve substantially, thanks to the strategic plans that are already well underway. This is well illustrated on Slide 6. After a strong first half of the year, we confidently reconfirm both our '26 and '28 trajectories. Given the strong progress we have already made towards exceeding our '26 target, we are fully focused on accelerating EPS growth and delivering our double-digit growth target over '25, '28. We expect our return on tangible equity to exceed 13% in '28, and this will be driven by strong revenue momentum, very well illustrated in the second quarter, but also tight cost and risk-weight discipline. We will come back to this later.

As you see on the right, we are already well advanced in the execution of our strategic plans. We recently presented Belgium and will present BNL in Italy on 18th of November. Arval will follow in the first half '27 once the Athlon acquisition is underway. These plans cover most of CPBS and close to half of the group's risk weight. They all contribute to our return on tangible equity trajectory and share a very ambitious cost/income ratio improvement as well as disciplined risk weight growth. Overall, we expect our cost-income ratio to fall below 56% in '28 with a lot more improvement to come by 2030. Finally, our CET1 at 13% already meets our target and we'll consider excess capital for distribution on an annual basis.

On Slide 7, allow us to remind you of our key targets, double-digit earnings and EPS growth for '25, '28 and minimum 60% payout policy from '27.

On Slide 8, we summarize our equity story ahead of our strategic plan that will be announced on our fourth quarter results on 2nd February '27. Our business model is, in fact, simple. We have a very well-balanced model, both by activity and by geography. It's uniquely powered by cross-selling across business lines, accounting for 1/3 of our revenues.

And importantly, each of our 3 main divisions is on a clear profitability improvement path. In CIB, we have built a division at scale with strong positions across products and regions. Our originate and distribute model is well positioned to benefit from the Savings and Investment Union, supporting further market share gains in the context of the looming investment super cycle. In CPBS, we are accelerating profitability through self-help NII tailwinds and strategic initiatives aimed at improving platform efficiency while maintaining disciplined capital management. Finally, in IPS, we are building a leading asset gathering platform, supported in particular by the significant scale we have now achieved following the AXA IM acquisition.

Let's now move to efficiency improvement on Slide 9. Earlier in the year, we announced a comprehensive review of our support functions with a view to sharply amplify the annual savings from EUR 700 million annually to EUR 1 billion. We will pool and streamline our amplification portfolio, amplify the use of AI and simplify organization, optimizing processes and reducing silos. All divisions, geographies and functions will be impacted by our actions with an addressable cost base of EUR 15 billion.

Focusing on IT support functions, which account for roughly half of the addressable cost base, we have already identified around 80% of the savings targeted by 2030. Importantly, we expect approximately 25% of these savings to be delivered as early as '27. We will hit the ground running in our next plan. This provides a good illustration of how advanced our preparation work already is. It also gives us confidence that the improvement in our cost-income ratio can accelerate to around 2 points per year from '27 onwards. We will announce our 2030 targets early next year, but we clearly see a path towards a cost/income ratio of around 50% over the time.

Before handing over to Lars, let me say a few words on AI on Slide 10. Of course, AI represents a significant opportunity for us to enhance value creation across the group and will accelerate its deployment in an industrial manner. To support this ambition, I chair the Group AI Strategic Committee, ensuring strong governance and clear priorities. We'll focus on high-impact use cases with return on equity on investment with cost control and cyber risk at the heart of our approach. We'll share more details with you when we publish our strategic plan early next year.

Beyond what we can achieve with AI internally, we also see a significant revenue opportunity from the investment super cycle, capturing this opportunity will require origination and distribution capabilities as well as investment vehicles to finance future projects. Our integrated business model is well positioned to benefit from this.

Let me now hand over to Lars, who will present our second quarter results on Slide 12.

Thank you, Jean. Good afternoon all. I will not spend time on Slide 12 as in the meantime, you know all our numbers, but zoom on Slide 13, where I want to highlight the significant capital gain we booked on the AGI Ageas transaction for EUR 858 million. We are particularly pleased with it, not only because of the capital gain, but as it contributes directly to increasing our common equity Tier 1. It also improves distribution to shareholders to the tune of EUR 0.50 per share, and it will add EUR 40 million of annual recurring earnings starting next year.

So if we now go back to the business, and let's look at Slide 14. So you see our revenues are up 12% or 10.4% at constant scope and exchange rates. So let's first look at CIB. So CIB had an excellent quarter with revenues up 13%. Let's look at the 3 businesses. First, Global Banking. So Global Bank pivoted in the second quarter as FX and rates headwinds that we saw before eased. So we maintained our #1 position in EMEA investment banking amongst European banks. This quarter, we also ranked #3 in M&A, and we see a strong pipeline for the second half of the year. So that's Global Banking.

If we turn to Global Markets, which was particularly strong, up 17%, including if you look at Equity and Prime Services, which was up 43% with -- when we look at FICC revenues matching those -- EPS is matching those of FICC. FICC was stable compared to a high base last year. Remember, there was a lot of volatility a year ago in April.

The third division is Securities Services. It grew by 17%, taking advantage of high market levels, volatility, but also improved margins and client onboarding, of course.

If we move to CPBS, up 5%. And as Jean-Laurent explained earlier, our Eurozone commercial banks are enjoying very strong top line growth and double-digit net interest income growth on the back of an interest rate environment that is quite favorable to us now and to come. Moreover, client activity was strong as illustrated by the healthy uptick in financial fees.

If you then look at the specialized businesses, they benefited from improved volumes and margins at Personal Finance. Arval recorded double-digit organic growth, but obviously, the geopolitical environment and rising gas prices continue to impact used car sales results.

We now turn to the third one, IPS. They reported 27% revenue growth, which reflects the successful integration of AXA IM. Having said this, the division reported about 8% organic growth even at constant scope, thanks to strong business momentum in each of the 3 divisions. Assets under management were boosted by, on one hand, strong inflows and also market performance. So we've looked at the top line. Let's now move to Slide 15, and let's look at the costs.

On this Slide 15, if you look at the top left, you can see that our jaws reached 1.6% or 3.7% at constant scope and exchange rate. So all in all, at constant scope, costs grew around 6%, of which about half variable costs that are linked to the strong revenues, 2% for development and about 1% inflation in particularly in Europe-Mediterranean.

If you look at the group level, we keep on track for substantial cost/income ratio improvements, still expecting it to be below 56% in 2028, laying a firm foundation for our next strategic plan ramping up to 2030.

As you also see now on the opposite side to the bottom right, a significant portion of the restructuring charges for AXA IM integration will be booked this year. So that's one of the drivers between the jaws effect and the jaws effect at constant scope. So let's now -- we've looked at the top line, we looked at the costs. Let's now look at the asset quality, and we do this on Slide 16 to 18.

So on Slide 16, you see the cost of risk reached 39 basis points this quarter, in line with the first quarter. The intrinsic cost of risk is stable year-on-year, and we reinforced our forward-looking provisions by EUR 95 million. We booked that in the Corporate Center. So you see that the divisions cost of risk is stable and that EUR 95 additional million is to reflect the geopolitical environment. So bar unforeseen step-up in these geopolitical tensions, we anticipate cost of risk to be below 40 basis points over the year 2026.

In particular, as I mentioned, on the divisions stable, if you look in particularly on Stage 3 provisions, they show no deterioration, and we remain comfortable with the quality of our portfolio. So let me emphasize once again that we are very diversified with little reliance on French economy. I remind you that we have less than 10% of our profit before tax in France.

I will not comment on the review per business as I basically synthesized it, but you'll find the details on Page 17. So if we can move to Slide 18, where we provided an overview of the strong risk culture through the cycle. Indeed, our portfolio offers significant sector diversification and high exposure to investment-grade counterparts. This enables us to reduce the volatility of our cost of risk. We also want to remind you of our selective approach to all credits, but private credit in particular, and private credit, which accounts for, let's say, 3% of our loan book and 90% of that 3% is basically senior portfolio financing.

Moreover, this segment has no NPLs and is built on conservative standards with moderate loan to values, high diversification and exposure to the strongest private credit players, providing further collateral.

So having said that, let's now look at the regulatory metrics on Slide 19. So as mentioned by Jean-Laurent, common equity Tier 1 reached 13%, so up 20 basis points over the quarter, delivering a target that we had the ambition to be at 13% in 2027. We reached it 18 months earlier. And this shows our commitment to building capital and positions the group for accelerated distribution in the next strategic plan.

And so the improvement this quarter, it basically stems on one hand from the very solid results. So that solid results with contained risk asset -- risk-weighted asset growth generates 30 basis points of common equity Tier 1. 2/3 of that goes back to the investors. So there's 20 basis points that is accrued for distribution. And then there is 10 basis points perimeter, which is basically the AGI/Ageas deal.

And so note that in the second half of this year, the impact of the acquisition of Athlon, which is coming in the third quarter, will consume around 13 basis points, but this should be offset in the fourth quarter by the divestments of BMCI in Morocco. So that's the capital, but it's not only the capital that is doing well, it's also the liquidity. So we reported a very high LCR at 149% this quarter, so up from 125% a quarter ago. And so this highlights our strong ability to manage our balance sheet.

As a reminder on Slide 20, we wanted to give the overview of our SRT and our credit insurance programs, which we have discussed before. As of today, just to look at the impact, we have a cumulative risk-weighted asset benefit of around EUR 65 billion, which is equivalent to 90, 9-0 basis points of common equity Tier 1. So our priority is to diversify SRT so that it's not all happening in one moment and on one sector. And that, as you can see, we are doing that very well. And we also complement it with credit insurance in order to optimize here the setup.

So this gives me the opportunity to update you on the progress also on the Save and Invest Union, which you can see on Slide 21. And in particular, from what we understand in the second half of the year, the European Trilogue should be completed. So [indiscernible] started. So it's the Commission, the Council and the Parliament that basically paved the way for the first phase of SIU implementation in 2027.

So this SIU represents a significant opportunity for Europe, but in particularly for our CIB originate and distribute model, but also for our IPS asset gathering platform, further strengthened by BNP Paribas Asset Management new and leading alternative asset capabilities. Moreover, so it's good for CIB, it's good for IPS. And also in the meantime, CPBS will be well placed to increase its financing in the real economy.

So let me now conclude. We've covered the divisions. We've covered the prudential metrics. Let me conclude on Slide 30 with the Corporate Center. So the Corporate Center, we are adjusting our trajectory after first half performance that was better than anticipated. While we acknowledge that the Corporate Center can be volatile from one quarter to another, we now expect a better outcome for the full year than previously thought and guided on. We are, therefore, adjusting our gross operating loss trajectory from EUR 1.4 billion to EUR 1.2 billion, very much in line with the consensus. Let's not forget, this is a sizable amount, but it includes for EUR 800 million of restructuring charges, half of which are related to the integration of AXA IM.

So this is basically the view. I'll now hand it back to Jean-Laurent, who will offer some final remarks and conclude the presentation.

Thank you, Lars. So our second quarter results are a very clear illustration of our acceleration. We are delivering strong balanced and resilient earnings growth with group revenues up 12% and positive momentum across all divisions. Our '28 return on tangible equity trajectory is on the fast track, supported by strategic levers that are already being executed.

Costs remain tightly controlled, and we are making strong progress on the program to overhaul our support function, which will start to deliver benefits as early as next year. We expect our cost/income ratio to fall below 56% by '28.

Our earnings growth is accelerating towards a CAGR of more than 10% over '25, '28. And with our CET1 now at target, we'll consider additional distribution on an annual basis.

On February 2, '27, we'll announce the main targets of our next strategic plan, taking us to 2030. We are well advanced in our preparation with top-down and bottom-up processes nearly fully aligned now. We'll provide you with our divisional trajectory, and we'll continue throughout '27, our series of deep dives, notably CIB. These deep dives provide you with insight about our strategy, action plans and financial ambitions. Both externally and internally, these deep dives get significant recognition.

This concludes our presentation. We would now be happy to take any questions.

[Operator Instructions] First question is from Tarik El Mejjad, Bank of America.

I have 2, please. First, on the Global Markets. I want to understand how the Q2 actually strong performance, how much of it is sustainable? Can you tell us in the equities, which part is derivatives, which part is client demand versus pure volatility actually benefit? And would you qualify it as a super exceptional quarter or a quarter that could be actually largely repeated in -- if the current geopolitical and macro environment persists?

And then on Global Banking, you had RWAs up 5% quarter-on-quarter. I know it can be lumpy. Should we expect some more optimization through different tools to bring down RWAs there because the revenue has not really showed up yet in the quarter despite the big RWA increase. So that's my question on CIB.

And then on distribution, I mean, I think in the slide, you removed the -- in '26 results, the 60% payout confirmed that you had in previous slides. I mean, would you consider if, let's say, you do a buyback in Q4 calendar and then to start the higher than 60% payout already within '26 earnings into '27 calendar? Or is it clear that it would be really from '27 earnings that you would pay more than 60%?

On CIB and looking at the global market, this very strong performance derived from, in particular, equities. And what we are seeing is both the result of a certain level of volatility, market that was expanding, but also a strategy of continuous investments, especially in structured products.

Structured products, for example, in the U.S. domestic, we are #4 today. In APAC, we are just the same with roughly 9% market share. We're also having momentum in anything that is prime brokerage. So what we are having in the second quarter is, of course, the momentum derived from the global environment in those businesses, but also the fact that we have continuously invested in those domains with good results and good market share gains. So this is for global market.

Global Banking, those risk weights are very much linked to the ramp-up during the second quarter. And this is very much a phenomenon that took place at the end of the quarter. And those 5% growth for risk weight is not, I would say, represent the evolution of the second quarter, but it gives an idea of what is coming for the second part of the year. So this division is having a very good strong prospect for the second half. And to some extent, the risk weight evolution is an early signal of this upcoming evolution.

On distribution, well, as of today, the policy for the '26 plan is 60%, 50% being the dividend and 10% being the buyback. Yes, it could happen that the 10% might be, I would say, enforced in the fourth quarter like last year, this is a possibility. We have not decided, it's a possibility.

And then when you are saying that above 10%, we will have to take a decision in terms of additional distribution. It's difficult to say if it's linked to the '26 year or the '27. We are going to close the, I would say, the yearly accounts end of January 2027.

And at that moment, probably in between that moment and the general assembly, we will make a decision on the, let's say, excess. So this is coming in '27, and you can say it comes from the '26, I would say, results. So it's something that is -- can be read in the 2 dimensions. So this is the way it is. 13% is our target. Good enough. We're at 13%. Anything that is above will be considered for additional distribution, additional investment to be decided by the Board. And this come on top of the 60% policy. Of course, for the next plan, we will have to set a new policy in terms of, I would say, distribution and buybacks. This is going to be a piece of the new term plan. And clearly, it's going to be higher than the one in the current plan because the company is more profitable.

Next question is from Stefan Stalmann, Autonomous Research.

I wanted to ask about the LCR ratio, which saw this spike in the second quarter. Was there any particular reason to that? Or was it a bit of a random number at quarter end? And regarding Arval, I guess, back of the envelope, the business has probably lost around about EUR 200 million on the sale of used cars in the first half of the year. Can you give us any indication of whether this is going to get worse before it gets better or what we should expect to see maybe through the end of the year? And is there any need to revisit your residual value more fundamentally?

So for the LCR, I mean, we are having this quarter 149 percentage points. We're going to integrate Arval on the 3rd of August -- Athlon sorry, Athlon on the 3rd of August. So we have to prepare for that. So you need to have the liquidity upfront. Arval is roughly 12 -- 12, 14 percentage points.

And we want to operate at 135.

So through the cycle, 130, 135 is the target. So we are preparing for the integration of AXA. There is nothing very specific about the LCR. It's a good, I would say, testimony that the company can tap any kind of, I would say, any pool of liquidity worldwide in a number of domains through a number of different businesses. So we have absolutely no difficulty upgrading the -- or pushing up the liquidity ratio if needed. And here, there were something particular linked to AXA. So we went up at that level.

On Arval, the business, as you know, was hit in the beginning of March because of the war in the Gulf. This environment remains very much volatile. So it's difficult to understand exactly what's going to be the future, but we are, I would say, quite conservative. So we are having norms and accounting approach that are quite conservative. So we tend to adapt upfront, I would say, the values of -- the residual values of the cars we are having. This has an impact on the top line beyond, let's say, the day-to-day business. It's not, I would say, a loss that is being made on cars we are selling. We are not, I would say, posting losses in that domain, but we're anticipating something that could be slightly below the former, I would say, provisions.

So we are doing that in a quite conservative way. It has an impact. And it's moving because the environment is volatile. If you look at the consensus, looking at the consensus for the second half of this year, probably as of today, the consensus is still too high by, let's say, EUR 100 billion. So if you look at the consensus for Arval second half of this year, we still have something that is a gap of around EUR 100 billion. But you have so many other businesses that are delivering better results, in particular, the commercial banks in the Euro area, thanks to, in particular, the rate scenario with the steepening of the curve that is even higher than anticipated that -- well, this is going to be compensated in the company one way or the other. So this is just an information on Arval, but doesn't change the global outlook.

Because intrinsically, Arval is doing very well. If you look at the fleet, it's growing by 5%. And given the fact that we not only finance but also sell other services, the top line is basically up 12%, yes. So the intrinsic is fine. There is this weight on the resell of the cars, which, as Jean-Laurent mentioned, for the second half, and it will be a similar amount compared to the consensus again in '27.

Next question is from Giulia Miotto Aurora Miotto, Morgan Stanley.

I have 2. So you are providing a very useful slide on SRTs and you are 90 bps at the moment. What is the go-to level here on SRTs? Is 100 bps a good level? Could you do more perhaps? And could things change with the securitization reform? So that's my first question. And then secondly, Jean-Laurent, I heard much more conviction on costs and the path to 50% cost income. What makes you confident? How quickly can you get there? Yes, I would be curious, perhaps you learned something new on AI. So I would be curious on your take on the cost trajectory.

Giulia, I'll start with the SRT and then Jean-Hant will continue. So on the SRT, so it's -- as you mentioned, it's an important part. It's if I express it in basis points, we have a gain of 90 basis points. So as I mentioned, we do this over time. So we don't have it all in one go. So on average, of the instruments of the past, there is like 10 basis points falling over. So we do an additional 20 basis points every year. So if you look at it, we have the intention going forward, and this is before the Savings & Investment Union to have 10 basis points a year. If you look over the last couple of years, that is what we have been doing. That is what we continue to do. And as I said, that is before the SIU.

Jean-Laurent, on costs?

On costs, in the current plan, we are having every year an additional EUR 700 million of additional efficiency. The initial target used to be EUR 600 million, 2 parts. One was the, let's say, the infrastructure of the company, the functions, EUR 300 million per year. And the second half, I would say, the interface in between the bank and customers, EUR 400 million. We grow and invested quite a lot in the current plan and also in the previous one. And when you are investing a lot, increasing the level of diversification, increasing the momentum in a number of domains like CIB, asset management, wealth management and so on, insurance, when you are pushing quite far in terms of digitalization in the commercial banks, it's slightly more tricky to also, I would say, completely leverage that part that is the infrastructure of the company.

So most of this is done. So we can now tackle those domains. They represent -- this represents basically EUR 15 billion. Out of it, we will cumulatively extract EUR 2.4 billion over the period. So we will extract basically 15% of this. And the EUR 300 million that were coming every year from that part is going to be pushed up at EUR 600 million. On top of that, we will continue on a yearly basis to deliver the EUR 400 million. So this, in addition, is going to be EUR 1 billion per year. So roughly, the next plan is pushing the EUR 700 million up to EUR 1 billion and the EUR 300 million within the EUR 700 million up to EUR 600 million. So this is the story.

We are very well advanced. We are looking at this situation since August '25. So now we are 1 year later and bottom-up, top-down approach now are close to the conclusion and more than 80% of those EUR 2.5 billion over the period of EUR 600 million per year are now clearly identified and we are having plans and actions. So we are quite confident on our ability to deliver.

Next question is from Pierre Chedeville, CIC Market Solutions.

First question regarding asset management in Q2. The net inflows were only EUR 6 billion compared to EUR 15 billion in Q1, if I'm correct. And I wanted to know if you consider this figure a little bit disappointing and if there is any reason -- specific reason?

My second question is relating to the likely operation in Germany that we have in mind. And I wanted to know if you consider that it's a game changer, first, from your ambitions in Germany regarding the Mittelstand customers, but also from a more global view on the European banking landscape? What do you think of the potential birth of a new giant at the European level?

I'll start with -- so on asset management, listen, between quarters, you can have some difference in volatility and demand. If you look at the overall evolution, we've guided for 4% growth. We are at above that. So there is nothing else to read into this.

On Germany, tangentially, this is an operation that is very much around private individuals, SMEs, and this is not typically the domain in which we are really operating in Germany. We are very much an investment bank, global bank in Germany, wealth management, asset manager, C fleet financing. specialized consumer lending, which is not typically a business competing with commerce. We are not in the SME domain. So for us in Germany, it's neutral. We have nothing that can come from this transaction nor in a negative or positive way, if I understand well the point.

But anyway, I mean, if you look at it intrinsically, as you know, there are many banks in Germany. So the trend for consolidation is logical. But for us, it is not in our space.

Next question is from Delphine Lee, JPMorgan.

Just 2 quick ones. Just wanted to come back on capital. So you target 13% CET1 ratio in your new plan. I'm just trying to think a little bit about your approach on distribution. Is it -- would you want to distribute all the excess above 13% or keep some kind of buffer or set some capital aside for investment? Just if you could share a little bit your thoughts about just the general approach. And also related to capital, is the intention still to deliver the 20 to 30 basis points of capital benefit from disposals by '27?

And then my second question is on BNL, where NII is still a little bit under pressure. Just kind of wondering a little bit when we should see a little bit of that inflection point and an improvement on margin?

13% is 13%, but it's not 13.2% or 13.3% or 13.4%, it's 13%. So above 13% starts at above 13%. So this is very simple. And bps are coming from organic generation of equity or disposal or both, but they are just equity. So we do not make a difference in between additional equity coming from investments or additional equity coming from, I would say, organic generation. So once a year, the Board will have to take a decision, having in front of the a certain level that is going to be above 13%, and we'll have to decide which amount they will distribute on top of the regular, I would say, distribution. Once again, for the next plan, this could be different, meaning higher than in the current plan. So we could say instead of 60%, we could say 70%. This is a possibility. It's not decided, but it's a possibility.

We could say that.

We could say that. And then even at 70%, there is a possibility that even at 70% on a regular basis, the group might generate additional equity. So back again, you will have to decide year after year how to distribute through, I would say, additional dividends or buybacks. So still to be understood.

On BNL, the balance sheet is very much a fixed rate balance sheet because the strategy of the bank, which is a big difference compared to the market is to distribute fixed rate mortgages. It had some advantage in the previous cycle. It's a major complexity in the current cycle. This is the way it goes in banking, we have cycles. And in the next plan that will be disclosed in November, you will see that BNL will target a 20% return on notional equity, I would say, targets. So this is the this is the program. So you have a number of domains in which BNL can make and deliver good progress, the cost base, grabbing market share, additional cross-sell. So this is the point. So 20% is not as high as the Belgian bank that gave 26% in 2030. But if you look at the evolution, it's basically just the same. So this is for BNL.

Maybe if I can have one complement is even that given the fact that we have been repricing the deposits, you should see a pivot in that line for the second half. That's the one thing. And also, let's not forget that BNL is just part of what we have in Italy. So that's one of the other things we will do during the deep dive in November, show that there is adjacent to that, a similar activity that is complementary to what BNL is.

Next question is from Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs.

Just 2 quick ones. First, on restructuring, is EUR 800 million still the right number for this year? I expected it to be up a bit quarter-on-quarter, but it was down slightly. So I just wondered if we're going to finish the year below the EUR 800 million level you talked to earlier? Or whether we should be expecting sort of EUR 250 million to EUR 300 million per quarter in the second half of this year?

And then another one again on capital. You mentioned several times in the prepared remarks, RWA and capital efficiency. You've already got to the 13% target CET1 level. You've sort of ruled out any major acquisitions. So if I think about 2027 RWA growth mirroring the discipline you've seen this year, maybe you'll eat up 25 basis points or so from RWA growth, but that puts you in a position to distribute 80%, 90% of earnings a year from 2027 onwards before any M&A tailwinds or headwinds. Is that logical? Or am I missing something there? I think it chimes along with what you just said about sort of maybe thinking about 70 plus as the right run rate for 2027 onwards.

Chris, thank you for your questions. Now on the restructuring, we stick to EUR 800 million. That's what you see on Slide 30. I mean those restructuring costs, they are not linear. They can fall in different periods because you have to decommission systems and what have you. So we stick to EUR 800 million.

When you look at the 70 basis points on the common equity Tier 1, listen, as we mentioned, we typically have with the growth of the earnings and the risk-weighted assets that you see, we, on average, have a tad shy of 10 basis points that we generate a quarter. So that could go up a little bit. So let's say that, that could be 40 basis points. And then I don't know if getting to the 70, you add whatever the disposal of 25. But in the run rate, it is rather 10 basis points that those RWAs with the earnings we generate on a given quarter.

Just on 70, I meant 70% payout. And I think you still said 70%, it would be like 80% to 90%.

No. So then rephrase your question because then I probably misunderstood. Can you rephrase?

Yes. I think next year, if you were to do relatively disciplined RWA growth, there's no major acquisitions, the RWA growth maybe consumes 25 basis points. If I just think about your payout potential as a percentage of earnings, that puts you closer to 80% or 90% payout as a sort of structure from 2027 onwards, which I think chimes with what you just said earlier of 70% or more? I just wanted to double check on that.

That's right. So I misunderstood your question. So indeed, in the natural generation that we have and then if we will look once a year what the excess is and decide that we return it, it would indeed get you to a ratio of something around what you mentioned.

Next question is from Sharath Kumar, Deutsche Bank.

On the fleet growth, given that it's been growing by 5% annually for several quarters. So what can you say reassuring about the residual value risks in light of all of the used car price pressure that we have seen? And from an accounting point of view, do you also take prospective depreciation adjustment in anticipation of weaker residual value? So is that already included within your used car sales? And then can you provide the mix of electric vehicles versus ICE vehicles in your overall fleet? So that's the first one.

Second is on backlog. Given the pressure in used car markets, what gives you the confidence that the Athlon acquisition still on target to achieve 18% ROC? And can you quantify the P&L impact assuming that we have an August integration? And any integration costs we are aware of for this year?

So first, so on the fleet growth, so what is, as you mentioned, we see continuous the 5% that we see on the fleet. As a reminder on the distribution between ICE and EVs, so at a stock today, we have like 20%, which is EVs, 80%, which is ICE. If you look at what we saw in the last quarter, the production of new EVs was rather 28% and the ICE was 72%. So that's a bit how the fleet evolves, and that is why -- so that fleet evolution basically drives the prices up for the EVs and drive them down for ICE.

And so that is why every time we look at the cars that come back onto the market, well, they face EVs, which have a higher price, which is good. They have ICE, which have a lower price. But given the fact that we have 80% ICE, 20% EVs, that is what weighs on the resale value. And listen, I will not give more on that. Jean-Laurent mentioned compared to the consensus, what we see in our stance to be the difference.

So when it comes to Athlon, indeed, so we intend to basically have closing beginning of August. Remember that one of the things that we mentioned on Athlon is that it consumes capital, but that capital will be compensated by the sale of BMCI. And I remind you what we said. So the capital consumed by BMCI was generating EUR 30 million net profit, whereas with Athlon after integration, we anticipate that it generates on a yearly basis, EUR 200 million. So that's that.

And on the valuations of it, we are confident. So there was not -- if you look at what is the public data, Athlon did not revalue much during COVID. And with all of the due diligence we have done, we don't anticipate that situation to be that different. And moreover, Athlon has a higher fraction of EVs versus other. And I remind you, by putting it together, we really make a champion that now has material activities in many of the countries we are active. And so that is why we are very pleased to be closing the deal beginning of August.

Next question is from Andrew Coombs, Citi.

Just a couple around some of the previous questions actually. So firstly, a lot has been talked about the potential to increase the payout ratio next year, given where you already are on the core Tier 1 ratio, would you also consider increasing the 2% organic RWA guidance? Are there areas where you think you could deploy capital and you'd like to deploy capital given where you've already reached on the capital position?

And then second question, you asked about Italy and the interest margin there. But on the flip side, France and Belgium were very strong. You particularly called out the decline in term deposits. You've called out the reinvestment on non-remunerated deposits. But was there anything one-off in nature this quarter or anything you call out? Or could we expect further margin expansion similar to what we've seen this quarter?

So if you look at -- so indeed, Belgium and France, no, there was no one-off. So we've guided that the growth that we are having is basically on the -- that we take now the impact of the higher rates. On top of that, we have the cross-sell and that we step up. And if you look at that, so there is the impact, but then there is also, if you look at it, the deposits are going up. So the margins are kicking in. The volumes are going up. The overall pricing and particularly in Belgium, the margins versus the competitors are holding better. So those are all the elements that drive up and there's basically no one-off in it.

When it comes to the payout, so we basically answered it. On the acquisitions, listen, with what we have done, we basically considered that the setup of the bank is where it should be. So in the past, we have been building and redeploying capital in CIB. So we've been able to get Exane on board, the prime brokerage and so on and so forth. And so now that is a complete system. You saw our second quarter results. So we have that platform. We are growing it in several regions, and so that's working very well. We've done with AXA IM, we've basically done the same thing when it comes to IPS. So there also, we have the setup and within CPBS, within our networks, we have it as well. So that is basically what I would say with respect to that.

Operator, would there be any other questions?

Yes. Next question is from Anke Reingen, RBC.

I just have some small questions. On Asset Management, I'm a bit surprised to see the revenues down quarter-on-quarter given the strong growth in assets. Anything we need to consider here? And then a question on the Corporate Center. I know it's hard to estimate, but is the EUR 77 million negative adjusting for the EUR 80 million gain? Should we see this as a run rate? Or was there anything in terms of updated guidance? And then sorry, a sneaky question on capital. Apologies if I missed it. Is there still any guidance about model update headwinds that we should consider?

Anke, I'm a bit confused. So can you -- at least your question on the Corporate Center, can you rephrase so that I understand?

Any guidance on the run rate in revenues?

Yes. So the run rate what we've guided for is basically 0 over the year. You have seen that in the second quarter, we have EUR 200 million, yes. And so I adjusted the overall charge of EUR 1.4 billion to minus EUR 1.2 billion. So basically, the gain that we have taken this quarter, I've adjusted it. So that basically means I still -- with whatever I see, I consider it will be 0 for the rest of the year.

Listen, there are many volatile elements. There can be like here, there has been some elements on liquidity. And also given the transactions that we have been doing, that basically gets accompanied by derivatives in that time that impact. So our overall guidance remain on 0. Can you also rephrase your third question on the capital gains?

No. In the past, you've guided to regulatory headwinds. Is there anything we should consider?

Well, the headwinds we have been having in the past are indeed material. So there is the whole supervisory and regulatory changes that have been -- that we have seen. At this stage, we have seen it coming down. If I can look at it, if you look at Europe and the legislator, they basically see that they have to find the right balance. So on one hand, the FRTB is pushed already to the end of the decade, and we'll see what they do.

And if you look at the simplification document that has been published by Brussels last Friday, they are really looking and also reflecting on how the whole banking regulation can be coherent with banks supporting the economy. So that's a bit where it stands. Remember, our guidance, though, we have said that on average, what we still expect is the impact of 10 basis points given regulatory supervisory kind of things. So we stick to that. We don't see anything else on the horizon.

Operator, we're done?

We have no more questions registered at this time.

So again, as a conclusion, as you can see, we delivered on the CET1. I guess we gave some additional clarification on anything that is going to take place now in terms of distribution, return to shareholders and additional, I would say, buybacks, 13% is 13%, not more. We are very confident in our target that is earnings growing at a minimum of 10% on a yearly basis. We are well advanced in terms of preparing the next term plan, in particular for anything that is support function, additional efficiency, close enough to confirm that so far, we haven't found any, I would say, additional complexity or anything that could prevent targets we already, I would say, gave previously that is to say 50% cost-income ratio for 2030 and a return on tangible equity of 15%.

So this is, in a nutshell, the situation we are in. Good strong quarter, good momentum. And I would say, solid preparation of the next plan to come with those targets that we believe are, I would say, more than a possibility for us looked at from the second quarter of this year. And the next plan will start in only half a year because in 5 months, we'll be in the next plan. So we have to be confident and we are confident. Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you. Have a good summer.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the call of BNP Paribas Second Quarter 2026 Results. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Well, let's start. Good morning. I'm delighted to see you here for this General Meeting of Shareholders for Fiscal 2026, which is a key moment for all of you for the Board of Directors, for the senior leadership team of the bank. Thank you for being here. I believe that all of you have been able to get seated after due formality.

So I will now do what it takes to validly open this General Meeting of Shareholders for 2026. We are gathered here upon first convening. And this meeting is a public meeting, as is the case every year. The discussions and speeches of this meeting are recorded with the three [ beliefs ] of the Paris Court, which will draw up a detailed report in line with the legal requirements with recording posted on the website of the bank, with another recording being saved for a minimum period of 2 years. So please note that anything you say and yourself maybe recorded.

I would also like to mention the date of the next general meeting on the 11th of May 2027 at 10 a.m. So the universal registration document, including the report of the Board of Directors on the financial statements of the group was circulated to you as well as the integrated report, which gives all the information about BNP Paribas Group in a long-term perspective, and you have a digital format of these documents also as part of the documentation, which was circulated to you.

You have 2 forms, as is habitual. The first, pink-colored, for the agenda of the General Meeting questions which were asked in writing. The second green color form is for individual questions, which you may want to have as an individual client interacting with BNP Paribas Group. And you have a dedicated team here in attendance to help answer any questions you may have. And you also have audio headsets so that you'll be able to follow this meeting in good conditions. So we have hostesses around the room who'll take your question in writing, and you also have space in the lobby of customer service and the shareholders circle here and can answer you.

The officers of this meeting, I'll be chairing this meeting in line with Article 18 of the bylaws Article of Association, The Scrutineers will be the bearers of shares who are here in attendance who will be two individuals. I thank you for serving our scrutineers for this meeting. Madame Celine Vaessen who is here. Thank you for being here. She is a Chief Investment Officer in charge of the finance pillar at Societe Federale de Participations et d'Investissement, which is a Belgian state-owned company, which holds an interest in BNP Paribas.

And Sebastian is the second Scrutineer, who is here as well, who is a member of the Board of Directors of the global shareholding mutual fund. And Madam Guylaine Dyevre, sitting next to me, will be the Secretary to this meeting. And the Statutory Auditors of the group were validly convened and are here in attendance. They sit in the front row over there. There are two of them, Deloitte and Partners represented by [ Daniel Laurent ]; and Ernst & Young firm and others represented by Olivier Drion. Thank you, gentlemen, for being here today.

The temporary situation of this meeting given the attendance sheet give us the information that the shareholders in presence as well as those have 847,000,100 shares, i.e., 73% of capital stock, which gives us quorum, knowing that the meeting can be validly constituted. The various regulatory documents to validly hold this meeting in line with the commercial course requirements have been filed.

You have been informed of the agenda. So without further ado, I suggest that we collect the various written questions that you may have by way of the hostesses. We'll ask the hostesses to go around the room and collect your forms with written questions. I can see you better now. Thank you. You were in the dark, but now I can see you better.

So we'll have the questions collected. All right. Thank you very much. This is currently being done, collection of questions. I suggest now that we formally open the shareholders' meeting after the legal formalities, which are habitual. Once again, welcome. I'm very happy to see you all this morning. And speaking on behalf of the other directors who are sitting here who are very attentive to anything you will say, and also want to greet the members of the Shareholders Liaison Committee, who are here in attendance today who will contribute to interacting with the bank staff. And I want to thank them on your behalf.

And also the general management team under Jean-Laurent Bonnafe is here in attendance. And we'll try together to review the activity of the bank, the activity of the Board of Directors and to answer any questions you may have.

Now 2026 is a year of importance, very dense, a busy year, and 2025 was the same. The CEO and the CFO and Laurence Pessez will review in a few minutes the performance, the results, the achievements of development projects, the CSR activity. And before they do that, I want to tell you that -- to set the scene for what the Board did in 2025, knowing that the Board of Directors was especially active in 2025 in a fast changing context to pursue growth opportunities and to control both risks and cost. 2025 was marked by a balance of power between key global powers with a number of conflicts arising in several regions in the world, in Ukraine and in the Middle East. And I want to say this. I want to hail the extraordinary dedication and the commitment of the group staff who made it possible to continue providing service to clients and customers.

In the meantime, the multiplicity of barriers including tariffs had a result of upending global trade and interactions between countries businesses with these geopolitical dynamics, which are at the heart of the needs and discussions by each of our clients and customers. And we, as the bank, need to take these into account to better support and serve these clients next to these geopolitical dynamics, which had an impact on decisions by the bank 2025. So the advance of new technology are growing very fast with AI solutions becoming mainstream with all our clients adopting it, generating more efficiency, productivity, yet many doubts, many fears and concerns knowing that the bank was a key player in this process. And we'll discuss these further in this context.

The European Union and France have become aware of the need to adapt in order to protect their interest, to protect their values, to protect our model, including our social welfare model, including by deciding to shore up its domestic market energy transitioning. The transitioning of our business model remain key priorities while reconciling social acceptability, responsibility, accountability, which are key values operated by the bank, which will keep promoting. Such transformation involves massive investments, and banking balance sheets are of great importance and will help fuel and finance the economy.

But we need to take this one step further, not just by public funding, knowing that public funding has reached its limits. And in addition of the plans announced by Germany, EU should be able to mobilize European savings, which has been abundant to invest into strategic services like payments, defense, technology and energy transitioning in this respect, and Jean-Laurent will discuss this further. The integration of the bank's Asset Management business with that of AXA Asset Management will generate more added value to the group and will contribute to better managing long-term savings and assets for Europe.

In this context, BNP Paribas builds up on the diversified, well integrated banking model, leading the pack as a trusted partner and financial intermediary for all of our clients and customers to contribute to the stability and robustness of the economy to serve and support all of our clients, individuals and institutional clients, to meet their financial needs.

Under the drive of the CEO and the senior leadership team, whom I would like to warmly thank for their hard work and dedication, in fiscal 2025, the 3 business divisions of the BNP Paribas Group posted great performance in 2025, contributing to growth and expansion of the group and reaching its goals and target. The organizational structure of the group was adapted to optimize investment in technology, to keep developing new products and optimize processes. The bank engaged in a number of initiatives to contribute to the strategic sovereignty of Europe, and we have maintained our course to shore up our leadership position in sustainable finance.

Your Board of Directors, in addition to all this, has been on the Board with key projects for the group and for our general community. And among others, your Board of Directors, jointly with the senior management team, has followed and monitored the U.S. litigation related to the Sudanese affairs. So all in all, your Board of Directors has confidence in the relevant strategic direction for the group on the back of well-balanced governance mechanisms with a stable leadership team, which has garnered great experience.

We'll continue, thanks to the hard work and dedication of the bank's team to support and serve shareholders the best. Thanks to the trust of clients, we'll remain fully mobilized and engaged to serve a more prosperous, more sustainable economy as well as a more inclusive society. I wanted to say this because these are virtues, principles, but also context and goals which are being pursued by our Board of Directors, in line with and on the back of the group strategy, which Jean-Laurent will be reviewing, the way the group has been organized, the way capital and resources are being allocated with budget decisions and how they are made as well as the general business operations of the BNP Paribas Group.

It's of great importance to us. It is the foundation for our action for development work, and I wanted to review this as a foreword before we go into the gist of the meeting.

Before I turn over to the CEO I suggest we watch a short movie, which basically sets the scene, which was prepared by the Corporate Communication department and which reviews a few factor numbers which will shed light to what you'll be hearing during this meeting.

[Presentation]

So that's the stage set. You've seen the essential data and parameters of the strategy and its results.

Now to move forward in this analysis, I'm going to hand the floor to Lars Machenil, the group CFO, who will present the group's results and activity in 2025.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, good morning. It's my pleasure to present to you the results of 2025 of your bank.

You can see them behind me in sum. If you look at the bottom, the net result or net profit, which is up. The results for 2025 was EUR 12.25 billion, an increase of 4.6%. This reflects operating performance that is excellent. And if you look at this performance, looking at the P&L lines, you can look at the top there, and you can see that revenue has increased by nearly 5%. We can see that the costs have risen by 3.9% but with a positive jaws effect. Therefore, costs rose slower, more slowly than our revenue because we operate in places where we operate, where we are present and we can serve clients at a marginal cost. In other words, costs are growing slower at a slower rate than revenue.

The cost of risk is also contained is at 36 basis points at 0.36%, in line with our direction with our rule of being below 40 basis points. These are the results you can see. If you look at the bottom, you can find other factors as well. For example, the small box in the middle, you can see the return on results, which is 11.6%, and the CET1 ratio, which is at 12.6%. The two ratios aim to be at 13%. So if you look at capital at 12.6%, we're well on the way. And furthermore, it was at 12.6% at the end of 2025. In the first quarter, it was already at 12.8%, so in other words, on the right track.

If you look at the bottom right, you can see the net benefit per share, and you look at this, and at BNPA, it's at EUR 10.29, up by 7.5%. In other words, 60% of that amount is returned to the shareholder, to you. Turning the page and we look at the fact that this is based on a diversified and integrated model, which is resilient across economic cycles. On the left-hand side, you can see the distribution of the -- the breakdown of divisions is diversified. No activity accounts for the lion's share. And on the right-hand side, you can see these activities are very complementary and generate cross-reference sales or cross-selling. One-third of the income, I mentioned on the revenue, comes from cross-selling between divisions. That's our model.

If we look in a bit more detail at the P&L. Let's look at revenue. You can see, in fact, the results for 2024 in these columns and how it's moved into or traded at '25, up by 4.9%, as I said. But here, you can see it across the various divisions. The first one is what we call CIB or BFI in French, which improved by 5.6%. It's a very good performance. Even technically, it's a record performance, in fact. And this is in an environment impacted by what had happened on the 1st of April 2025, the U.S. Liberation Day with tariffs that weakened the dollar. And when the dollar is weaker, they buy less or fewer euros. So our results in U.S. dollars are translated into a few euros, in fact, than the previous year.

Even despite that, we still have a 5.6% improvement. If we look then at commercial, personal banking and services, there are two factors. There's the commercial banking, so I think with a very fine increase, thanks to that rate scenario, I'll get back to that later. And also, in addition, in specialist activity services, there's a contraction specifically in [indiscernible] because we had a positive effect of the new valuation of secondhand vehicles last year. And then there's IPS, which includes insurance and asset management. That rose by 19.6%, of course, positively impacted, and we'll go back to this, by the integration of the AXA AM business.

Now that concerns revenue. Now if we look at costs that reflect operational efficiency, which rose by less than 1% less than the revenue. So we can see that in these columns, you can see the trends described. That's the impact of AXA AM. It was added and increased basis. Furthermore, there was an increase thanks to inflation of EUR 707 million that was offset by optimization and operating efficiency that we continue to deploy. And these two factors canceled each other out. What you can see at the bottom is that jaws effect that I mentioned before can be seen in each division. That's for the trends.

If we look now at the 3 divisions, let's start off with CIB. CIB, as I said, is based on 3 franchises that are powerful, that also are, in turn, integrated and diversified. If you look over the last 10 years, you can see in these columns, there's an annual increase of 5.8%. And you can see the trend. And if you look at all 3 divisions, that positive trend of nearly 6% per year is driven by growth in Global Markets and Securities that has almost double-digit growth, slightly attenuated by Global Banking business that had a sound performance but in a less positive context, in a context I've mentioned of the dollar effect and also the tariff effects and uncertainties from geopolitical pressure that have led clients to have a more wait-and-see position.

This can be seen, and you're going to see this on the bottom right, we are the #1 bank in CIB in Europe.

With that, if we look at CPBS business, our activity in particular because we talked about this last year. I'd like to look at revenue from commercial banking in the Eurozone and also everything to do with personal finance. Why? Because intrinsically, if you look in particular at commercial banking, we're in countries, in France, Belgium, that have fixed rate loans. When rates rise, the time that is reflected in the P&L can take time on average. It's normally the average maturity of a loan, which is usually 7 years. We could have planned that when rates went from 0% to positive rates, we should have seen an improvement over that period. What you can see here in this is the trend over time from 2022 to now, and what you saw at the beginning is there was a contraction in revenue. Why? Because there was inflation, an increase in interest rates that was very sudden and sharp and also commercial activities that ensured that trend.

Now we're in a situation where inflation is aiming towards between 2% and 3%. We have a positive effect that is working year after year for us. And now we're aiming at that and for the remainder of the term of this year, at least until the end of the decade, we'll have on average a trend of plus 5% that we could see in the fourth quarter of 2025 and was confirmed in the first quarter of 2026. That's the turnaround you can see in CPBS.

And if you look at the third division, IPS, you can see on the bottom left, trends for each activity, insurance, asset management and all these factors. You can see these are variants around the theme of a very sound performance. Another very important factor in this activity is assets under management. And as you can see, these columns, there is an increase. We've risen from just under EUR 1.4 billion to slightly over EUR 2.4 billion. That increase comes from net new business and from the markets, of course, but also the integration of AXA IM. And if we look at AXA IM, that you can see at the bottom there, at EUR 1.6 billion, it's in the top 3 asset managers in Europe and, in fact, even is #1 when we're talking about long-term savings.

Now that we've looked at the top parts of the P&L. Let's look at the cost of risk. As you see, if I exclude 2020, which was a year where we had a COVID provision that we've recovered, but every other year, we were in line with our objective of 40 basis points. As I said at the beginning, there is no region, no division that has dominated. So diversification is really working well. On the right, what you can see is what we call private debt or private credit, which is intrinsically, if it's public or private credit, it's intrinsically an approach which is entirely the same. And to give you an idea, it accounts for 3% of our outstanding loans in total.

Moving on to the financial structure that we've ended the year at 12.6%. In the first quarter of this year, we're at 12.8%. And our target is 13%. When you look at that dynamic on the left-hand side, the columns, we ended the year at 12.9%. But over the night, from the 31st of December to the 1st of January, there was a new regulation in force. It's called CRR3. It's the translation of the Basel agreements in European law. That took out 40 basis points of our ratios. So we would from 12.9% to 12.5%. That dynamic means that we've got the generation of results, the EUR 12.2 billion. we take account of the fact that the balance sheet will increase, but that will generate the equivalent of 140 basis points on the ratio. And then a 60% of that, which is a return to you. Those are the 90 basis points that you can see in distribution.

And then last year, we finalized the acquisition of AXA IM. That took up 40 basis points. With that dynamic, we're 12.6%, and that growth dynamic will take us to 13%. If we also look at the bottom left, you can see the other indicators are doing well. And on the right, just to give you some extra information, we manage capital, on the one hand, but also we manage trends in weighted assets. When we loan, we lend, we increase our balance sheet. And sometimes, we can put some of these things on the market. This is what we do through what we call TSRs. These are transfers of significant risks, and that has an impact of 80 basis points on the ratio. That's the financial structure.

And if I conclude with the distribution and the return therefore to you. As I mentioned, the result, 50% is returned in dividend and 10% in share buybacks. If we look for 2025, dividends therefore were EUR 5.16. We've had an interim of EUR 2.59 on the 31st of December of 2025. Balance of EUR 2.57 million will be paid out on the 20th of May this year. And there are also share buybacks amounting to EUR 1.15 billion finalized on the 19th of December 2025. And just to conclude, when you look at the progress, in fact, you can see this in these columns. these are over 20 years where we see dividend per share. And between 2008 and now, it has multiplied by fivefold. That's the returns we're offering.

With that said, I'm going to conclude my 2025 presentation, and I'll ask Jean-Laurent to take the floor.

Thank you, Lars. Good morning, everybody. Lars presented to you to the sound results for the financial year 2025. This makes it possible therefore for us to confirm the results and the targets for 2026. You'll recall in 2024, we reset targets for '24-'26: an ROTE of 12%, a net profit or CAGR of at least 7% over the 2 years and 8% of EPS with drivers to achieve this revenue up by 5% per year at least and a jaws effect of at least 1.5% on average with a cost of risk of below 40 basis points. That year, as you know, was a good start for 2026 with the sound results in the last quarters and the first quarter 2026 that make us very confident that we will achieve the results in 2026.

'26 is almost over for the company that we are, even though there are many months left and geopolitics and global scenario are not necessarily easy to define, but it's now interesting to look at the remainder of the year. We look at the annual results, and we revised our objectives for 2025. For ROTE, we are into more than 13%. We added -- at 13%, we wanted to be over 30%. The operating margin that we set at 58%, we wanted to be under 56%. And our net profit for 2025 to 2028 with an annual growth of over 10%. And the Tier 1 ratio post FRTB, we know that very probably that will be deferred to 2030. Well, for 2027 and 2028, we want that ratio at 13%. That's how we see 2028.

To achieve these objectives, we have launched a number of plans. Somebody have recently announced for commercial banking and for personal finance. Others are known for Belgium, CBC, Arval, Asset Management. These plans will each contribute to a return on equity, in that graph. So BCF, that's Commercial Banking in France, will ensure on its own, so to speak, will improve the ROTE over the period by 2028 by 0.4%; Belgium, by 0.3%; Personal Finance, 2.5%. We can see that the group, in fact, is already on the right footing since 2025 with the announcement of a number of plans concerning 1 or 2 essential business lines. It's already on track for the following [ year ]. Here you have all the details. All we have to do is add CIB and insurance and B&L, all of which will be done progressively.

Now for that, going from 11.6% to over 13% on paper looks quite easy. You can imagine that all this requires investment, work and discipline in large quantities and a lot of business development. ROTE, that's revenue and an awful lot of efficiency and cost control and control of the processes to have a more efficient bank. In the past, for 2022 to 2025, that will take effect in 2026, we have, on average, generated EUR 700 million in recurring savings every year. In other words, efficiency has been improved in operating costs and improved by EUR 700 million every year over the previous years. And for 2026, for the entire thing, the entire trend, that will amount to EUR 3.5 billion. Nothing new under the sun. This was announced at the beginning of the plan. But at the beginning of the plan, we planned EUR 600 million. EUR 700 million is a bit more than EUR 600 million. So in total, that objective that was included in the 2022-2026 plan to achieve this operating efficiency approach, all of which has been achieved.

Now what is the future? That's a factor that will contribute to the ROTE exceeding 13% by 2028. You can see in the first period, the operating efficiency -- the cost to income ratio had improved by 6 points, in other words, 1.5 points per year. And in the period that's opening, by the end of 2025, that operating cost-to-income ratio will actually drop by 2% from 61.2% to under 56% by 2028, all of which will be done by accelerating the processes in the bank, by pooling and simplifying a number of infrastructures, by aligning a lot of our organizational models within the group and with the intent of using AI more intensively that should be done carefully and in a measured way. It's not a technology that is devoid of risks. We have now to use it and to manipulate it correctly with a certain learning curve and then progress, all of which will be to benefit our clients that will reinforce the quality of service.

We'll continue to personalize digital offerings and also for our staff members so we can concentrate the effort of everyone on more added value tasks and also for shareholders because that means a structural contraction in costs, and therefore, greater profitability for the company as a whole.

I gave you some numbers by 2028. So you can see how things are proceeding. '24-'26, a growth of 7% of net income on average per year, 2025-'28, growth of net income is 10% with an accelerated trend. And the same for earnings per share because we go from growth rate of over 8% for '24-'26 to a double-digit growth rate for '25-'28. So the payout policy by 2026, which will remain to be clarified and confirmed in 2027 in the context of the new '27-2030 strategic plan earmarks a minimum of 50% interim, minimum 50% dividend payout with 10% buyback, which is a rate of return of 60% for shareholders. What we know for fiscal '27 is that this minimum 60% return rate will be maintained, and we'll see how this can be improved.

Now the core Tier 1 ratio now. You have here our goal, i.e., 13% as at the 31st of December 2027 over the period of growing under the improvement of results, which is partially consumed by the risk-weighted asset, i.e., the development of the bank's balance sheet and the assumption of dividend payout, shareholder return, the FRTB possibly if it is being implemented before 2027, knowing that the conversations at the European Commission level means and shows that it will be postponed. All this gives us 13% of return by 2027, which will be maintained for 2028 and beyond. Since the Q1 results were published, the ratio is already 12.8%, which gives us the possibility and even probability that this 13% is reached even by late 2026, which is a key information because growing the bank's core Tier 1 ratio is not an easy task. And late last year and early this year has made it possible to accelerate this 13% growth trajectory.

Now back to the strategic plan 2027-2030. This was already guided when we disclosed our annual number. We've been repeating this regularly. The efficiency of our current programs makes it possible for us to generate some EUR 700 million per year. We are going to bring this EUR 700 million mark to a higher level. And one of these drivers will be on the back of artificial intelligence solutions. You can see how this will sketch out and pan out. Until now, AI was used to grow revenues, not so much with respect to optimizing efficiency. But by 2030, things will balance out with AI contributing to both revenue and efficiency, meaning that the AI solutions will enter second phase with more intensity, more contribution to the optimization of processes.

You have here a few examples of use cases for AI. Once again, AI technology has a lot of upside to improve sales development, business development, customer advice, efficiency, revenue. It also holds its risk, and proper implementation will involve and require that we improve and significantly grow all cyber security setup because AI-driven universe is a universe which moves faster, which is more open to the outside world, which has its host of difficulty. So the bank needs to be stronger and more efficient.

So much for my presentation. I believe that the BNP Paribas Group is a good marching order. '25 showed this. The early part of 2026 is confirming this. 2026 will be ending very shortly. We already are preparing for the 2027-2030 plan with respect to focusing on operating efficiency with the interest rate scenario favorable. The bank is a global diversified bank, which alludes into many fields and areas to keep developing, growing. And on this basis and until we review the 2027-2030 plan in some more granularity shortly, I believe that fiscal 2026 should hold fine promises.

Over to Laurence Pessez now.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent. Hello, everyone. I will now be reviewing the highlights of our CSR strategy and walk you through some achievements in 2025. Remember that our CSR strategy was drawn up some years back and support our growth, technology and sustainability strategic plan, which is currently in place.

Let's start with how our strategy and achievements are being perceived by those assessing us, i.e., the nonfinancial rating agencies. These nonfinancial rating agencies have been benchmarking companies and banks. And this year, again, BNP Paribas Group is ranking above its peers across the various rankings. Tangibly, CDP is ranking us just on climate transitioning with A- versus a B rating for all the banks. MSCI gives us the best possible ranking of AAA, and it is the most used agency by investors to screen companies to invest into. And our best rating, unprecedented rating is with Sustainalytics, which is the only agency to rate nonfinancial risk for our bank. Now with a rating of 12.3% versus an average of 25%, we rank in the top quartile of this category.

Now let me say that for this agency, Sustainalytics, the best rating is 0 because the least risk you have, the better you fare. Thanks to its continuous investment, BNP Paribas ranks first in sustainable finance for the third year in a row with $69 billion invested in 2025. Here again, based on external sources, i.e., Dealogic, where we get our data. This amount covers sustainable, green and social bonds and assets. This leadership position, which has been confirmed over time, is a sense of pride for the teams. Now the Corporate Knights Magazine ranks us and has been ranking us for 12 years in the 100 Most Sustainable Companies. And IFR has been ranking us as 2025 Sustainable Finance House for the third year in a row, so a leadership position, which has yet again been confirmed this year.

Now with respect to our CSR strategy, it is unchanged, and we continued delivery across the pillars. We've defined as priorities in the context of the GT strategic plan: energy transitioning, protecting biodiversity, circular economics, financial inclusion and sustainable investment. So you have here some key facts and numbers which summarize what we've achieved in fiscal '25. First, the amount of the funding of energy transitioning to support our clients transforming to a low-carbon economy, reached EUR 252 billion over 4 years between 2022 and late 2025. And we've exceeded the goal we had set for ourselves, which was EUR 200 billion. We wanted to reach EUR 200 billion by 2025. So this amount covers such financing of individuals for electric vehicles as well as home renovation and energy renovation work in houses as well as large renewable generation projects in Europe and elsewhere in the world as well as sustainable bond issuances by governments and states wanting to implement energy transition infrastructure like in Asia.

With respect to transactions, protecting land and marine biodiversity, we set for ourselves a goal to reach EUR 4 billion by late 2025. You can see that we reached EUR 6 billion, which means that we've exceeded this target. And among significant achievements, we've arranged blue bonds, EUR 430 billion, for development banks to protect and restore coastal ecosystems in South America. By reaching EUR 347 billion in assets under management by late 2025, which are characterized as "sustainable" by the European economy, BNP Paribas Asset Management is among the European asset managers which has the most extensive sustainable funds.

As an example of funds managed by BNP Paribas Asset Management, the BNP Paribas Solar Impulse Venture Fund has been investing into start-ups, which are innovative and high potential in sustainability, like two French startups: Axioma, which aims at accelerating environmental transitioning or farming with biosolutions; and Fairly Made, which has developed a platform to optimize the tracking and tracing of the supply chain of the textile and garment industry.

With respect to generation of energy, by late 2025, 82% of our credit exposure was directed at low-carbon energy sources, mostly renewables as a majority and also nuclear power energy, which ranks us favorably to reach above 90% by 2030. On the social and society level, we reached 5.5 million beneficiaries of products and services, fostering our financial inclusion goal with the nickel account being operating in 5 European countries with more than 520,000 micro credit clients by way of our micro credit business. So with these very large amounts, you can see that we've done very tangible achievements in fiscal 2025.

Now let's review our human capital strategy, the support and service we provide to our people, which is at the heart of our strategic plan. And the people strategy pillar is of great importance to the bank. What needs to be underlined in 2025 is, first, that with 41% of women in the senior management community, we've exceeded the ambitious goal of having 40% women by late 2025 that we had set for ourselves. This was back in early 2022. This gender balance goal has been reached with 53% of women across all the population of hired talents for the group. The employee engagement in NGOs and community organizations has improved in 2024 and 2025 with the goal of volunteer work, which was 1 million hours. And we've exceeded 1.3 million hours, including skills, donation hours for firefighters in the group as well as initiatives to community organizations during work time. And almost all group employees have psychological support and listening mechanisms that can help them in situations of crisis and when they need it.

And finally, training and development of employees remain a key challenge and a key goal for the group with almost all employees of the group which have undergone at least 4 training sessions in 2025, including 73,000 having undergone at least 1 of the tech academy training sessions in the field of technology and AI. And again, some 160,000 employees have been trained at least once in sustainable finance by the Sustainability Academy, which was launched in late 2022, i.e., some 71,000 employees were trained in 2025. All this has meant that the engagement index was 81%, which is a very high level.

Finally, patronage and sponsorship with close to EUR 180 million. The sponsorship and patronage budget for the group is set at a very high level across its three areas of activity: solidarity, culture and the environment. A bit more than 25% of its budget has been devoted to a so-called skills and expertise patronage. 75% have been devoted to repetitive initiatives, most of them, 75% for solidarity actions, part of it being for France. In 2025, 2 new foundations were created in Portugal and the Netherlands, meaning that there are 15 foundations and allowance, trust created by Paribas around the world.

In the current context of difficulty by the NGO world with declining funding and membership, the BNP Paribas Foundation in France demonstrated it was able to act innovatively while committing to long-term action, combating food, precariousness, helping refugees in the context of a program initiated by the group some 11 years ago. The disenfranchised suburban areas in France, the so-called disenfranchised suburb program was launched 2 years ago, civic-minded initiatives like Community Living, the protection of Republican values combating this information and memorial transmission access to culture with a 5-year program with a middle school students visiting Villa Medicis in Rome, which is a high place for culture, and the support to 60 artist institutions and festivals.

Finally, the bank's foundation has been active in the field of environmental protection. This year, it allocated EUR 7 million to 11 research programs over a 3-year period. in the climate and biodiversity initiative program, working on such initiatives like the future of fisheries and marine ecosystems and to promote biodiversity of plankton in North Atlantic and European coastline. 2025 was a very dense and busy year across all fronts with very fine achievements as I have just reviewed.

Thank you again for your attention. and I will turn over to our Chair, Mr. Jean Lemierre, who will tell you about the governance mechanisms in place in your bank.

Thank you, Laurence. Now I think that through the figures, the facts, the programs, the commitments of the bank, you can see in 2025 what your bank has done, has attempted to do and what it intends to do. It's now up to me to talk to you about governance. I'll do it in two parts. The first part concerns the Board of Directors and another part concerning compensation.

Firstly, the Board of Directors. Following the AGM last year, the number of members at the Board was risen to 16. We're normally at about 14. Why? Because you accepted it. We hired in advance some Board members. Alas, 2 of those are leaving. It was planned. Monique Cohen and Daniela Schwarzer, having served the Board for 12 years. And in front of you, I'd like to thank them most hardly for their work. 12 Years of work at the Board of Directors of BNP Paribas. For you, it's a wonderful experience. It's a wonderful, very good contribution, both to the Board and in the committees. Monique Cohen has chaired quite a few, the latest one being the Risk Committee, which is a very important committee. So thank you, both of you for the work you have done.

With that said, the position of the Board is now to go back to 14 members. There are a few modifications, but there are 2 submitted to you for your approval. It's not arrivals but renewals. The first one, I'll be very brief, is mine, my term of office. I will comment on the context afterwards. The second one is the term of mas, who you know. He's in front of me. He's a very experienced Board member, an industrialist with an extensive experience. He chairs the Governance, Ethics and Appointments Committee of the bank, and that's extremely important work.

These 2 proposals to renew our terms of office are done in the context of decisions that you approved last year, raising the age limits of the Managing Director and Chairman of the Board with the rationale of preparing for succession plans. This is neither the place now the right way of talking about this in detail. But just to say that what we said last year, we haven't forgotten, Jacques is also very attentive to this, that all of this be very present in the work of the Compensation and Nomination, Appointments Committee and to prepare succession plans. So I wanted to mention this point because it's a continuation of your deliberations from last year.

If you approve these 2 renewals, here are some factors about the composition of the Board. It's highly diversified in skill sets, in genders, of course. We're fully comply with legislative requirements. It is highly diversified in skills. Your Board has renewed its skill sets extensively, and I'd like to thank you for that support to extend in a context that I mentioned, that Jean-Laurent mentioned, that is highly diverse in terms of risks, financing and technology. And I believe that the Board of BNP Paribas today is based on a composition that is highly diversified, very broad-based and that can shoulder the responsibility that you have entrusted us with.

Once again, if you approve the 2 renewals that I mentioned, this would be the composition of the 4 committees: accounts, risks, governance and compensation with 1 or 2 significant changes. I mentioned them. Monique Cohen will hand over the chair of the Risk Committee to Bertrand de Mazieres. Other than that, the chairs will remain unchanged. I have mentioned this, it's very important on more than one level. We spent a lot of time looking at this in the Board to ensure that the skills and experience and seniority in the Board are there and that people can attend the various committees. The committees of the Board is where the basic work of the Board of Directors is carried out. So that said for the composition part of the Board.

Now let's talk about compensation or remuneration. This table basically is the most important one. For 2025, it shows compensation and remuneration for 2025. As per the principles you drew up in approving the ex-ante policies and the comparison with 2024. As concerns me, it's quite stable. The President, the Chair, there is only a fixed rate, not a variable rate. For the Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officers, there are 3 components in their compensation scales, There's a fixed part drawn up last year; a variable annual part, I'll go back to the details of that; and a long-term part, what we call the PRLT. And here, you have an overview of 2025 compared to 2024 for the executive company officers.

Now let's look at the details and look at annual variable remuneration for 2025. This presentation gives you the criterion, the weight of each criterion and the results of 2025. You can see that the criteria have all been met or just about or, in some cases, far exceeded. These are unchanging criteria. We apply them consistently. It's EPS. It's EBIT and a criterion worth 15% for CSR factors and the Board's appreciation of the way the strategy has been implemented by the Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officers. You've got the results for the Chief Executive. And in the following slide, you have the same breakdown for the 2 Deputy Chief Executives or Chief Operating Officers. These have been, in fact, adapted to the ex-ante policies that you voted for their respective responsibilities. There is a cap anyway at 120% of their fixed compensation. They did good results there.

There, you can see an overview of the breakdown of the annual bonuses for the Chief Executive and the Deputy Chief Executive and Chief Operating Officers with the ratio awarded against the target, where they all exceeded slightly 100% and very comparable to what was done last year, which shows the good results of the bank, the full application of remuneration criteria and the fact that the criteria had been achieved.

A last important slide, which is the slide about the long-term incentive scheme. Now a word about this because the long-term scheme depends on conditional payments done after 5 years that are dependent on two important criteria. The first is the intrinsic performance of the BNP Paribas share price, and the second is a comparison against performance, of course, with the EURO STOXX Banks index, in other words, comparison of the share price with the share price of other banks, to put things simply. These are two criteria that are difficult given the economic context and the fact that economies and banks, in fact, are not done generally in the same way in Europe. So that means these criteria would have been very demanding, very difficult, and they have not been changed. You've got this PRLT that's awarded. You know how it's done for the Chief Executive and the Deputy Chief Executives or Chief Operating Officers. And as you know, all of this is capped in relation to their fixed rate compensation. That's it for the long term.

This presentation is important. We do it every year. You know it well. It's done. And we talk about remuneration multiples. It shows how the compensation of company officers, mine and the executive company officers, change in relation to group employees. The gap is tightening as far as I'm concerned. For the Chief Executive, it has slightly widened because the fixed rate part was updated last year. And for the others, a bit more or less the same situation. But for those who are used to these ratios, these figures are low and the gaps are much smaller than in many other companies. For 2026, 1 or 2 amendments submitted to you approval in the resolutions, and there, I will be very brief because I'm concerned by this. I'll be as factual as possible, and any question you may have will be addressed by Marie-Christine Lombard, who chairs the Compensation Committee, sitting of opposite me, and she will answer any questions you may have.

The Compensation Committee, with the Board, with me present, considered that my fixed rate having been the same since 2014 when I was appointed Chairman of the bank, it would be legitimate, suitable, decent, I don't know what word I'd like to use, to ensure an increase. If I've understood, the committee looked at two major indicators. Inflation over the period would have led to 24.7% increase. Trends in group employee compensation at the SA entity, the increase would have been 39%. And in total, the committee considered and the Board have decided on a 15% increase, so significantly less than inflation and trends in employee compensation. So I wouldn't say anything else. Any other question you may have will be for Marie-Christine.

Now three modifications that I would consider to be technical for the variable part for the company officers, for the CEO and COO. Three points that are not completely technical, but if I use the word technical, it means it amends the organization over time and in the distribution of the breakdown of the compensation. But it doesn't change the overall amount. All of this falls within to the cap of [ 2:1 ] for -- so as we're not changing that and we're not changing the fixed rate compensation, you can see the characteristics. The general ones are the same.

With that said, there are three modifications proposed to you basically to align with market practice and the practice of other banks. The first is to set the annual variable remuneration at 120% of fixed rate remuneration, which raises the ceiling to 124%, a little close to the median of other banks. Secondly, to introduce a backstop, which could apply to the criteria of EBIT. So it goes opposite. It's more strict than the current approach. Currently, we have a linear approach, not 100%. So therefore, 0. Here, we're talking about tranches or sections above 70%, there will be no payment made. All of this is in line with market practice. The third criterion is to take account of the PRLT and the annual variable remuneration to set this at 60%. And to make this simpler or much simple, in fact, is to amend the rule to award the long-term bonus scheme over time and to plan ahead for this.

In fact, what we're doing, it's a market practice. You've got an application that's rather strict. So therefore, three technical modifications: a ceiling at 140%, a backstop and a different breakdown of payments of variable compensation over the long term. These three measures will not affect the total. We're talking about a breakdown. We're still in the two-point platform, which is, again, the legal ceiling for compensation of company officers. These 3 amendments, therefore, are proposed to you. And I hope they can improve and implement -- and sometimes it's a bit more favorable, sometimes it's a little less the compensation conditions in relation to other banks.

There we have the various amendments that I wish to present to you. You can see that in terms of compensation, there's no major modification which we see every 3 years. When we look at the compensation package for the chief executive officers, these are relatively technical points and they have some importance. So please take them into account. I have presented the questions concerning governance. Of course, I'll answer any questions you may have.

But then I'll hand over to the statutory auditors.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ladies and gentlemen, shareholders, on behalf of the statutory auditors, I'm going to present the findings of our various reports for 2025. The consolidated accounts were drawn up by the Board of Directors on the 4th of February 2026. And to remind you, we do our work all throughout the year and review the quarterly situations, the half yearly accounts and the annual accounts. Our work concerns the significant entities included in the scope of consolidation of the group, the bank itself, subsidiaries in France and internationally. The objective of our mission is to ensure a fair and sincere and regular view of the accounts and on the fact that there should not be any significant anomalies. Our reports include a description of various of risk of significant domains, which, in our professional opinion, are more important for the statements.

With regard to consolidated financial statements, the key points of the audit, there are four of them. They cover the assessment of the credit risk and the assessment of depreciation, the valuation of financial instruments, general IT controls and assessment of liabilities in pensions and retirement schemes. For each one, we've got identified risks and the reports given by the statutory auditors. The extent of our works and our findings are presented in a report submitted to the Accounts Committee. During our verifications and these key points, we have a without reserve opinion on the financial accounts. In accordance with the transposition into French law of the CSR European directive, we've had the requisite sustainability report. We drew up a limited assurance report on these aspects with 3 separate conclusions. All of us are without reserves about the compliance of the bank with this.

We have three observations: one on the process of assessment for the dual materiality and its results, which are annually reviewed and may change in future years; an observation on financial assets excluded from the scope of calculations for greenhouse gas calculation emissions and also for third-party points and for retail clients; and finally, an observation on the transition plan that exposes the scope of the financial assets and the limits relating to the availability and quality of data as well as the difficulty of projecting trajectories for decarbonization. With regard to our other reports, in the company accounts, we have a certification without reserves with a point [indiscernible] about the change in accounting method and the application of new regulations for accounting standards and also in terms of payment.

Information on regulated agreements, we have no new regulated or commitment to be submitted to the approval of the shareholder meeting this year. And as for the noncompetition agreement between Mr. Jean-Laurent Bonnafe and BNP Paribas, it was authorized by the AGM 2016. As for the Extraordinary General Meeting, we have specific reports concerning the resolutions 18, 19, 20 and 24 concerning the issue of shares and negotiable securities, also on the realization of operations reserved for corporate savings plans and resolution 26 concerning the reduction of company capital by the cancellation of shares.

We have no observations to make of all these reports. Thank you for your attention.

Thank you, Statutory Auditor. And we now have the highly awaited moment, which is the time for questions. I'm going to mention the fact that there are written questions that we have received and for which a response has been made. They are published on the bank's website. And I ask each and every one of you to read the questions and read the answers.

These questions, for your information, were written up by 5 different people: the first series of questions from [indiscernible] and this more concerns for ESG ethics, AI and resource engineering resources; the second series of questions by Reclaim Finance with 5 questions concerning the environment; a third series of questions worded by Mirova, also about environmental issues; a fourth series of questions by [ EPAC ], again, about environmental issues; and the fifth series of questions, by [indiscernible], again, about the environment.

Once again, I recommend that you read the questions and the answers. They are important for our discussion.

I will now open up the session of questions and answers given that, thank you, I've received several written questions. And I will take both all the oral questions and those written down. And I will try to ensure that as many questions as possible can be answered in the allotted time with a quick discussion as concerns may be highly varied. To make a speedy discussion possible, we have planned an indication of the time and land.

But just to remind you, without mentioning the duration, just so that everyone can understand that every speaker is taking up time, all of this not to limit your ability to take the floor, but to ensure as many people as possible can do so. And again, not to limit the questions, but to go to the crux of the matter and try and have a dialogue, you asking us questions or having comments and general management or the Board of Directors with me here can respond to your comments. Once again, it is very important for us to have a sustained and a detailed discussion as possible.

I will hand over the floor for question. If there are none, but I'm sure they will be, I have these written ones. I'm going to alternate.

Number three.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm an individual shareholder representing APAI, association pour le patrimoine et l'Actionnariat individuel. This year, we probably won't go into substance because this is an ending plan and there will be a new plan next year. So the questions will be relevant but not so much on substance.

My first question, knowing that we're here to vote for resolutions, let's speak about 19th resolution. I don't like the word you've used. Resolution #19 is to suppress the subscription rights. It said that in the text. And I mentioned the Shareholders' Meeting delegate the power to the Board the capacity to provide for a priority period for the issuance. Now knowing that BNP Paribas has been a leader, instead of having this very precise wording that like other company that you provide for an obligation of having a subscription period for individual shareholders. Now what prevents you from delisting the participatory share of the BNP Paribas?

And also last year, Mr. Bonnafe, you stated that transnational mergers were not generating value. You are not the only one to say that. Other bank leaders said the same. But I was somewhat surprised when I heard a few days ago in the press that Unicredit launched a hostile takeover bid against Commerzbank. Now what, according to you, is there a new aspect in the banking paradigm, which mean that what you said last year is not so relevant anymore? Or would you disagree?

Last point, which is more of a comment. So the offers and discounts given to us in the [Foreign Language] here for the French Tennis Open. And really, these are not great terms.

Thank you for these very specific questions. We'll try and answer your questions as specific and as precise manner. Lars, can you answer the first two questions of this gentleman.

Yes. Now with respect to rights, looking at the concept for preferential subscription rights for existing shareholders, the concept will be using basically are those which are basically in line with the industry. But we'll take note of your point, and we'll keep exploring options with respect to these preferential subscription rights for existing shareholders.

All right. Are you happy with the answer? Thank you, Lars. So you've basically addressed the two questions, right?

Yes, I did that in a summary manner.

So we are considerably improving in being precise. Let's put it in other words. There are lengthy answers, which are a technical nature. I will take note of your two questions. The Board of Directors will look into it and we'll answer you, Jean-Laurent?

About UniCredit, there are cross-border transactions and so-called transborder transaction. There's nothing new in this transaction because the UniCredit Group holds HVB, which is a German domestic bank. The project is to merge it with Commerzbank. So it is a domestic consolidation project with a generation of added value. Now whether this transaction will fly or not is another story. But this is a principle of a domestic merger. The problem with a cross-border mergers with respect to domestic banking operations has a number of issues, IT systems, local payment services, local regulations. And we are well positioned to know that. When you own several domestic banks, you need to keep and maintain them, which means that you pile up legacy processes and systems and you find it difficult to generate synergy. So nothing much has happened since last year, really.

And yes, banks are similar, but yes, different. Let me emphasize one point here. It's not up to us to comment upon transactions carried out by our peers. But in the transactions that you mentioned, sir, the combination is between 2 German banks. Not so much in the holding mechanism, but the physical merger process is being carried out between 2 German domestic bank.

[Foreign Language], the shareholder circle. I've taken note of your point. I wasn't aware that there was only 1 day devoted to the French Open. But you're right to ask this and raise this issue. We'll try and do better.

Question number 4?

My name is Lucie Pinson. I'm the Founder and Director of Reclaim Finance], an NGO. I'm extremely happy to be here with you today after a few years where I was not able to attend. Personally this year, I'm attending your meeting in a very tense context with the risk of an economic and financial crisis, with an energy crisis which is already well entrenched. In such a context, BNP Paribas are defining choices in the last few years. We hailed the efforts made by BNP retrenching from companies exploring new oil and gas field. To us, this retrenchment by BNP Paribas shows the fact that BNP Paribas wants to protect its clients and shareholders as well as societies at large.

Having said that, there's a dark spot, i.e., the fact that BNP Paribas has been supporting some gas projects, including LNG terminal projects and gas-fired power plants now. We know that the energy prices have been skyrocketing with very tangible impact for most of your clients, be they individual clients and businesses. And this impact and the associated risk add up to the impact of gas on climate and general health. 17% of lung cancers in Europe are associated with electricity being generated from gas.

In such context, it seems important that BNP Paribas pursues with its effort by adopting two new measures: to terminate its funding of fossil fuel projects and gas projects by taking action now against any new infrastructure. My question is simple. Will you continue in this direction by adopting new measures against the development of new LNG terminals and gas-fired power plants?

Thank you for coming back, madam, and thank you for supporting the energy transitioning policies which have been implemented by the BNP Paribas Group. Now with respect to the future, Jean-Laurent, will you answer the question?

Yes, indeed. Thank you for emphasizing the fact that we've made progress and that we've made commitments. With respect to energy transitioning, our bank has had an impeccable journey. Nothing is perfect, but we've had a very significant journey as we benchmark favorably against all those. We've had precise and robust activity. I will tell you about the mix of funding fossil fuel projects versus renewables over the last 15 year period. It's been remarkable. We were at 90% fossil funding versus 10% renewables. We've reversed the trend.

Funding gas projects takes a very special place. Gas is being called the transitioning energy. Transitioning energy means that this energy is not desirable over time. But gas energy can replace more negative types of energy like coal or lignite, gas being preferable. And the situation of Europe does not objectively make it possible, as was the case in the past with a nuclear power generation. I know that a number or countries have tried to do away with nuclear power generation, but they didn't do so well because it's a key aspect of European transition. And gas yet is a necessary evil. It can be deployed, but it's a fact.

The tensions you're mentioning with respect to the price of gas is connected with the fact that we lack the right infrastructure. Gas is not transmitted so easily. And when you don't have enough infrastructure, you can be trapped with prices which are higher than what would be desirable if transmission was easier and more fluid. We are a European bank for a large part of our operations, for a majority part of our operations. So our aim and desire is to keep supporting the development and expansion of European economies. The recommendations you are fielding, we hear them. But they are not accessible now because it would mean depriving ourselves within the next 10 years from an energy source which today is indispensable for the European continent.

I'm doing this with some degree of regret, but we have to look at the hard facts. So it's better to have some investments in this field, which will be replacing infrastructure, which is more negative rather than not doing anything and remaining entrenched in the old system, knowing that at the end of the day, electricity will be replacing it all. But Europe was not able to accelerate at the right pace in a uniform, homogeneous and determined manner towards electricity because it got bogged down by the choice between nuclear power and not nuclear power.

So we understand your question. We hear your voice. We hear your recommendation. But being the largest Eurozone bank on the European continent, we cannot decide to eliminate investments today which may prove essential. Well, at the time being, they are indispensable investments. We're not doing it a lot. We are doing this on on a time-specific basis. And we do not prohibit this because if you prohibit an activity, we have to stick to our guns and you can't revert course. Strategies in these aspects are strategies which need to stay the course over time, and this is what we try and do.

I hope I have addressed this question, which is a tough question because, indeed, if 20 years back, our economies and our politicians had looked at the situation a bit harder, we would have been more advanced towards electrification. But this is the reality. We need to keep advancing. and the European economy is not strong enough today for us to do without a source of energy, which is today indispensable.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent, for your answer. In line and to pick up on your question because it's a similar question. I have a question in writing on whether BNP Paribas has a specific strategy being prepared for nuclear fusion.

Do I need to answer the question?

Well, yes. You could try.

Well, we are not there yet. There is still work needed for a number of years, whether it is a few years or dozens of years, but it's not immediately accessible as technology, and it's not a technology which can be used for the current energy transition. So it's a more long-term technology even though progress is being made every year. Technology in simple terms is less risky and more straightforward and simple than the current nuclear power technology for self-evident reasons with respect to side effects and disposal waste. So it's a very different type of technology.

So when the time comes, if the technology is ripe, we will prepare and build up procedures and policies to make sure that they are processes in place to to do business and not prohibit such business. But this technology, which this technology as it emerges and fleshed out appears simpler in a strictly banking sense rather than nuclear power generation. To answer your question now, when the technology is more better known at a more granular level, we'll see how we'll build up procedures and processes because sometimes in some situations, when you advance and make progress, things end up being more complicated than at the start of the process.

Yes, questions here.

CEO, Chairman, I have a technical question, which can help one of your subsidiaries, Uptevia, earn more money. As an individual shareholder, I noted that it was easier for me to use the digital format for better shares than individually registered administered shares. For individually registered administered shares, you have to have a specific account for every company with Uptevia. Versus bearer shares, I just have to open my digital securities account, I only have to click a button and all the trades and everything can be done very quickly and very easily.

My suggestion is that you offer the same technical solutions when you have bearer shares and individually administered registered shares so that you can access the options directly with your securities account. The regulations will force you to go the digital way, but shareholders would interact more with you with digital. And for bearer shares and for individual registered administered, you have the same custody fees. So I do not believe that banks would be reluctant to go this way. I'm sure you won't answer me upfront, but at least, I would ask you to investigate this option.

Lars, you wanted to make a comment?

Yes, I do take note of your comments, sir. As you know, the Uptevia platform will keep changing. So I do take a good note of your suggestion. Thank you. And it will help improve things going forward.

Question number five at the back?

My name is [ Alexandre ]. I work with Oxfam France, an NGO which issued a court action in 2023 for climate change. Since then, in 2024, you stated that you wouldn't facilitate new bond issues for companies developing new upstream gas and oil projects. But you've kept helping these companies, supporting these companies by providing loans. You provided a EUR 9 billion revolving credit facility to a major oil company. Why having this double standard in your climate change policy and why not stopping funding to such companies?

Well, my answer will be very straightforward. In banking, you have the drawn loans and credits and financing and then you have the off balance sheet side of things, which basically cover all trading and market activities, including bond issuance. Basically, we help the company to get funded by landing such companies directly or by supporting them in the bond markets, as you said so. And this is not because litigation was commenced against us, but because it was a result of our development and process we de facto stopped the funding of such projects in the areas you mentioned. So this is done.

And then you have all the financing being held the balance sheet of the bank. And we take an interest in the mix of what we're funding. Out of EUR 40 billion of funding energy sources and energy generation projects back in 2012, some 90% of those were to fund the lignite coal and fossil fuel, 10% was for renewables, including water hydro and nuclear, We decided to revert the trend and upend the trend by 2030. This is how we guide our balance sheet operations. And this is why we are not working on a case by case and by bank prohibition by prohibition. This is how we've proceeded. There were very few renewables projects, lots of carbon, 90/10. And we now have 10/90, i.e., we've upended the situation within less than 20 years, 2010 to 2030, and we are very much advancing this trajectory currently. This is what we've been doing. And it's quite an easy option.

If you close the off balance sheet and if you squeeze out the on-balance sheet transactions, you address your issue over time because, once again, we are talking about transitioning. We are not talking about piling up prohibitions. Transitioning is about supporting companies towards a new universe, which will be better for them tomorrow and better for us or tomorrow. And this company is very much advanced in the nuclear business technology, which will probably be the next-generation business model. And we've invested massively in the U.S.

Thank you, Jean. As a continuation, it's a bit interesting, in fact, it's a written question about deforestation. Perhaps, Laurence, it might be for you. The written question came from [ Ms. Velasquez ]. You have a commitment for Cerrado and Amazonia, but not for other regions where deforestation issues may occur. And the question also mentions Bolivia, Paraguay and Argentina.

Well, yes. In 2021, we took measures that are very serious to counter deforestation in Brazil by asking all our clients present and working in agribusiness in Brazil to have a zero deforestation strategy implemented by the end of 2025. Why Brazil and not Bolivia, Paraguay or others that also have some of the other part of the Amazonian rainforest in their territories? Because we have a presence in Brazil. We have a subsidiary there and clients in agriculture. So we can talk to them. We have influence over them, and therefore, we have an impact. That's what directs our actions. We choose our fights according to the impact we can have. We have no presence in Bolivia or in Paraguay, and we have no clients active in those fields there. Simple answer.

Thank you, Laurence. I'm looking at -- right at the end. Okay, number 2. You really found somebody who could help you.

So I am going to talk directly. I came last year. A year ago, I asked the same question, so I'm going to ask it again. I'd like Mr. [indiscernible] to talk about this because he's now joined the Board. You cannot come into the room with a computer. It's a shame. There's an annual report. It's a little shorter. Last year it was 1.8 kilos. It's unreadable. You cannot turn up with your bag. You've got women turning up with large handbags coming into the room. If you're doing this at a low cost and you have -- like a low-cost airline and everyone has the same rules and no gender discrimination.

So that's my first question. Can we can ask because, in fact, last year, I was told it was security for PCs. I don't see which one. When I leave my computer in the closed room, I'm more worried that it will be hacked than things here. So that's why I have questions. That's my first one. Why can't I have my PC with me? Why is it so security obsessed? And if I have to carry a 1.8 kilo annual report, I will do so. I won't throw away my computer. I could do, though. Anyway, that's my first question.

My second question, what are you doing about financial sovereignty in Europe? You have an action with that consortium, Wero. Are you taking other measures? I have a question about distance remote banking. Are you happy with Hello bank! results and the trend of Hello bank? I didn't see a lot of information about this. Again, it's 916 pages. Without a computer, I can't do a find a quick find via Ctrl F.

And then I have the thing about stock options on Page 107 of what you call the PRLTs, are these are the equivalent of BNP shares? What's the quantity issued because there's 916 million in IFRS standard and 2.3 million calculated. And then these performance shares are in relation to the share price of BNP and a basket of other European shares. Can you give us the metrics for this on the basis 100 of the day when these payout will be issued because it's quite nebulous and not very clear? It's on Page 107 of the annual report. I had those 3 questions for you.

Well, at the risk disappointing you or creating a feeling that there is a communication issue, it's a question of security. It's an object that can be thrown. I'm sorry. So you listen to me, I listen to you, I'd like you to listen to me. We have security services here. They make sure that we have them. There's over 1,000 people in this room. There are rules that are applied, You can dispute them. You can disagree with them. I'm obliged -- as the person responsible for the security of these things, I have to apply a certain number of rules. You may disagree, but this issue here is based on that kind of conversation. You made that observation last year. You had an answer. You were fully informed therefore.

Now I know that you experience this as a difficulty, as an inconvenience Others, I hope, will consider it as a means of protection. We could have a long discussion about this, but we'll get out of this fairly quickly. You see that it's not completely abnormal to take measures, ensuring the security of this meeting. That is my point.

Hello bank!, Jean-Laurent?

On financial sovereignty, we're not sovereign. We're a company, a trading company, and we have a rationale of an overall economy and starting with the European one, And we are, therefore, if we look at the things that make us stand out the most compared to the European banking sector, we are among the #1 leading banks, investment banks if you look at CIB. If you look at EMEA, Europe, including the U.K., all of Europe and Middle East and Africa, we are in the top 3 investment banks on the market. That's a sovereignty aspect in that we ensure access to a very large number of actors, economic actors. The second and the fourth and fifth are American banks. That gives you a position of the bank on the issues as critical as our access to market financing, which in a global market is very important and in the future will be even more so. That's an example.

And I will give you -- another example I could give you that the peak of COVID in 2020, therefore, there was a quarter where practically everything has stopped. A bank had EUR 400 billion originations between bond issues and financing, when I say did I meant originate and then distributed and that was BNP Paribas. I think we were 60% of the European market because a lot of banks including the American ones had withdrawn. So having people at home, so to speak, establishments that had that ability to implement and grant financing of all kinds at that level, that's a mark of what we could call our contribution to European financial sovereignty. Again, we are not sovereign. It just gives you an idea of the power of our platform in a good sense of the word, not in the sense of trying to dominate somebody.

Now Hello bank! was a project that started off many years ago that goes with our domestic banks. If you look at the position of commercial banking in France, most of the assets in the information system, BCF and Hello bank! is the same. Hello bank!, basically, these are clients that have an exclusive online approach, whereas in commercial banking, you've also got access to advisers and a network of branches. It's not completely a pure digital bank. It is one that is part of an overall system aligned with that commercial bank, that idea of advisers with the branches and added value, services.

Are we happy with them? Well, Hello bank! is progressing at a regular rate in Europe because it's in multiple countries. We've exceeded 3 million clients. The approach or this approach varies from one country to the other, depending on our position as a domestic bank in Belgium and compared to France, for example. The quality as perceived in the scores awarded by clients looking for this type of banking are high. It's very competitive. A lot of our players turn up. Sometimes they turn up and they offer innovations. So it's not for me to mention their names because they are well known. I'm not going to add more, But there innovations every day. That competition in digital approaches remains very weak. We have to make sure the OS and the apps change quickly, fluidly and efficiently.

You asked about this. We often hear that Europe does not control its destiny in terms of payments because the main providers, either [indiscernible] and PayPal, are U.S. providers. And there's this idea that all of this should come to an end and be replaced by something that's more European and for, let's say, security reasons. And that's not untrue. There's an issue that European should be aware of at the end of the day, is that whatever the means of payments developed in Europe, very often this technology, the information system, that is American. So the response of sovereignty, it means a payment is -- that there are information and the ability to become an important continent or a leader in this issues in information systems.

Well, it will start off with artificial intelligence, which is the latest arrival in these families of information. So we're in a cycle where there are other projects emerging, European banks, well, some of them in Netherlands, Belgium, France, tried to develop a European means of payment. It led to -- with a number of episodes, which I wouldn't mention here, but it led to something called Wero, which is quite modern, which meant instant payment. I think now it's used by 50 million to 60 million Europeans and is being propagated. Other countries, other banks will be joining. And then in Italy and also in the Iberian Peninsula, there are 2 other schemes, infrastructure, shall we say, that were recently that we're currently working on the interconnection or the connection of these different infrastructures. So it's quite probable that within the foreseeable future, 3, 4 years, they'll be a Wero or an equivalent will be taken as a whole. It will be interconnected and will enable the European consumer to pay or do peer-to-peer payments, things that are a genuine alternative to what we could call cards or PayPal.

Banks, in particular in France and Benelux, that hadn't lost sight of the importance of means of payment, was not always the case in every country, have started to get -- and Italian banks, Spanish banks, I'm saying that with all of this, we are collectively taking over that means of payments and also in terms of the economy and performance and in price value for money. That's another example. It's not perfect. Wero doesn't do everything. But it is a possibility. It's an innovation. We have not had for a very long time an innovation of that quality and extent, I'd say the last time was some 20 years ago was a contact free card. That was a major development. We went from contact free. That was about 15 years ago. Now we've got something that's even that's different and completely digital.

So I'm giving you some examples. I could add the new asset manager that BNP Paribas have created with BNP Paribas and AXA IM, a European leader that will make it possible for any investors to have new high-performance, interesting products that will be able to finance a number of projects. BNP PAM and AXA IM, our platform, are working on how to finance projects that are required for AI, for data centers and so on and so forth. That type of player has a position which is to help not only today's world but tomorrow as well. Those are just a few examples. Now of course, we don't know how to do everything at BNP Paribas. We all have our limits. But it gives you some examples of our commitment to the European economy as a whole.

Yes, I want to echo what's been said and to stress the importance of the actions and role of BNP Paribas in our European sovereignty, which is normal. It won't be aggressive. But it's very important. And hence, the very important point made by Jean-Laurent with regard to what we call the level playing field, in other words, having positive conditions and especially with regard to our transatlantic trends, for states, for companies, for financial infrastructure, in financing, long-term savings, customer service. It's one aspect of European sovereignty. That's absolutely true.

A final question, you asked about the PRLT. Unless Lars wants to answer it, but it's really to do with accounting questions. But there are two ways of expressing the PRLT. It's one that's awarded and the accounting rule that wants a fair value. So you've got two figures. One is the awarded figure. The other is the fair value, which takes account of the probability the or the likelihood of payment of a specific amount.

No, it's exactly that. You're referring to the annual report, which is a regulated document and where regulations requires us thus to give the fair value and the nominal.

To be clear about the semantics of this, BNP Paribas does not have a performance or stock option share. We talk about the PRLT, which is a representation of the share. I don't want to go into too technical details. But your question was perfectly legitimate. And the difference can be explained by the obligation in accounting terms to provide a fair value.

In terms of the themes that have been mentioned, multiple written questions have been submitted, and I'd like to share. One is about cyber risk, fraud, phishing. What are the actions or what are decisions taken by BNP Paribas to limit or even avoid that kind of risk? Everything to do with cyber fraud.

I can see Guillaume Poupard looking at me now with a great interest in his world. This risk, I wouldn't say did not exist 10 years ago, but it was much lower than it is today. So today, there is some EUR 500 million, which year in, year out are allocated to addressing cyber security aspect. So cyber security has become a central part of IT systems. You don't have any appropriate IT system without cyber security. It is totally intertwined with any and all IT aspects, and the cyber security budgets keep increasing because the mass of systems and the mass of data are being processed skyrocketing. And you have breakthrough technology. You keep hearing about new models emerging like the Anthropic model, which might make it easier to hack IT systems.

But the answer is always the same. It is a question of continually investigating and screening your systems, ensuring that you have a rating review, correction, patching mechanisms always in place as soon -- as a leak and as a weakness and vulnerability is identified, then you need to patch it extremely quickly. When vulnerability is identified, you have to patch it extremely quickly. Having said that, there might be many such vulnerabilities because the new devices and technology solutions are far from being perfect. And since they are continually being upgraded and renewed and replaced, you always have a new vulnerability and issues coming up. So cyber security involves lots of great talent, efforts, investments, monitoring and discipline. And it also involves being in touch with and in conversation with the best players in this universe. You have lots of pure players, but you have discipline.

Discipline must be at the core of our IT systems, the way we develop IT systems and the way you interact with third parties because we don't all build it in-house. So you need to metabolize the devices and systems from the outside. So much for my answer. So EUR 500 million of expenses is quite a high amount, accounting for 8% of IT system expenditures. When you benchmark, it is very comparable with the large American banks' budget on cyber security, and it is quite higher than the percentage of our European peers. But it's not abnormal given that we are highly exposed to the international arena, to trading systems, which require that you respond in an intraday manner.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent. Now in our conversation, I want to now pick up on some written questions, which you asked about the Sudanese case, the Sudanese litigation. There are different types of questions here. [ Mr. Matrice ] is asking us about the real tangible risk for the bank compared with other situations that we have experienced in the past, which I won't mention, but which you have in mind. What is the real tangible risk that the French court looks into this case?

The second question asked by [ Mr. Panotte ] on the same topics. Why didn't you book any provision for that? And the third question is being asked by [ Mr. Mirable ] on where we stand and what is the timeline about this Sudan case. Jean Laurent, would you like me to answer? Or will you answer?

Okay. Well, first, these are facts dating back to early 2000, which have nothing to do with what we are today as a bank. It is a civil set of proceedings as Jean mentioned that we are dealing with. We have appealed first ruling, which was very partial because, basically, this ruling was handed down to cover 3 individual situations. In fact, our appeal was executed very quickly. Some had doubted that. Like all appeal proceedings, they are lengthy and complex governance mechanisms and processes.

By May, we will file our plea, and we are convinced that our argument is very strong, knowing that there's no causal track between what was mentioned, i.e., operations conducted by Swiss subsidiary and the very egregious event, which took place in Sudan, very egregious because Swiss law is applicable law was recognized by such in the U.S.A. And we've had a concurring advice that according to Swiss law, there's no causality. So there can't be any penalty. So our plea, our argument will be put forward in late May. The plaintiff via their counsels will counter our appeal plea within 91 days, being precise. So this will be in September. The judges will be appointed. There will be hearings. And a then ruling will take place. So the proceeding is underway.

So it's no longer public, people's popular court who will hand down the decision, but there will be professional judges who will decide knowing that there are principles of secondary liability in the U.S. So we have a strong argument. Some legal journals have commented upon our case, which seem to support our case, a very high level, legal journal. So the proceedings are underway, and we are contributing to them. We haven't booked any provision because we believe we don't need to book a provision given our analysis of the situation and how the events have unfolded. This is my straightforward answer, what can be said now, knowing that this is a complex situation, which obviously didn't do good for facts that we are invoking that -- for which our liability is being invoked.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent. Let me again repeat something I've said. These are sensitive yet very important cases based on very old facts and events. Since then, the governance mechanisms and the policies of the banks were strengthened. And basically, these mechanisms before that situation are the ones which are being challenged.

I have a forward-looking question. On the competitor, the competition from online banking organizations. I won't mention it because your CEO didn't want me to mention it. So EUR 5.2 billion in revenue last year of net income was posted by this online bank, i.e., a factor of 1 for 10 compared with BNP. But with respect to its growth pace, it grew 45% -- grew its revenue 45% year-on-year, and it grew its net income by 65%. So there's a ratio of 1:4 or 1:5.

So this is a bank which wanted to disrupt and liberalize the likes of Moneygram and Western Union. But they are penetrating now the French market, and they seem to be wanting to disrupt the retail banking operations and possibly even the private banking operations.

I know that it is a venture capital firm, which is a different story. I believe the market value was $75 billion last year, possibly reaching $100 billion this year engaging in the secondary market. So what is your take on such threat? I said that my question was a forward-looking question. But I believe that 5 years down the road, it won't be forward-looking anymore, but a very real situation with such an online bank becoming institutionalized 5 years down the road, knowing that these online banks are borderless.

You mentioned that Hello bank! and Borse Bank are posting very honorable results. But this is a disruptive start-up which you do not see many of. I would like to know how you perceive this threat and whether you believe that this neo bank -- I remember, WeWork, which was a real estate boutique, which wanted to be perceived as a high-technology bank. It is a bit both. It is putting itself forward as a technology bank.

It's a very valid point and question, sir. We are discussing it at the Board level.

Well, indeed, this is platform which was really innovative, has been so for many years, has been investing massive capital. This is the situation when you have a venture capitalist backing the firm, with those venture capitalists investing over many years without necessarily aiming at quick returns. So we remember Number26 and all the platforms, well, this platform has met with some degree of success. It is a global platform reaching out to many countries with its revenues being generated differently according to countries, some operations that they are conducting we won't, we wouldn't.

Lots of payment solutions across currencies and across countries are being carried out, to simplify things, which we wouldn't do in a market like France or Belgium or Italy, those markets we operate in. The only possible defense is to be well equipped with our own better performing online bank with a better performing app and portal with very good capabilities for daily retail banking. We need to be on par. We need to be abreast of these banks. And we spend a lot of time, effort and energy, but it's about massifying the capacity, and it's about the depth of market, which has been quite limited. They don't sell all banking products. They don't sell any saving products. I wouldn't call that a superficial palette of business, but it has its own narrow breadth and very different from the palette of banking solutions like the ones we are offering in France, Belgium or Italy.

Now things may change and it is difficult, I think, to maintain a single platform. You maintain a single platform when you carry out a single type of uniform business. But when you penetrate domestic markets, due to regulations and warranty rights, the specificities and regulations are local. A mortgage loan is a very different product in France and in Belgium. So this possibly is the platform which made its initial project success. Many failed and many have changed into a smaller object. But it is up to each domestic banks now to to offer a fluid, high-quality digital services, which are on par with those, which pulls competition and innovation forward and driving the entire system to offer higher-quality, cheaper, more fluid, faster products. And all the better for the clients and for the industry

You had low-cost carriers in airlines. You mentioned Uber. You have industries where new entrants with novel practices will disrupt the incumbents in existing situations. But the most agile operators will survive such situations well because things tend to balance out. Because they cannot digest everything everywhere. So we need to be on our toes. We need to keep investing. And the strategic plan by 2030 has lots of digital building blocks. But every day, you need to have high-quality apps and irreproachable service quality standards.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent. I can tell you that the Board of Directors has been very attentive to such issues associated with competitors with the need to adapt, and it's part of our discussions.

Lars, I do have a question for you, Lars, which is a very precise question on the liquidity ratio trajectory. So this question basically notes that the liquidity trajectory in fiscal 2025 was somewhat different and special from the other years. The [ answer ] (sic) [ question ] is why have you addressed any alerts and how this lowering of the liquidity ratio, dividend policy and share buyback programs intersect.

There are several things here. You've mentioned an indicator called LCR, liquidity coverage ratio, which is 125%, which must be in excess of 100%. But it's not a very telling proxy. I'd rather use a proxy called liquidity reserve. And it stands at EUR 464 billion, which is the equivalent in cash at hand of the GDP of a 10 million inhabitant country. So yes, it is slightly down compared with the situation by year-end prior year because in the last quarter, we had changes in the economy which was [ noted ] by the bank where the demand for loans was higher than deposits. And in late 2025, with respect to trading operations, it's usually a low point in business. So this was the situation.

Going back to this LCR ratio standing at 125%, down from 134% by year-end 2025, and I told you about the EUR 470 billion liquidity. The indicator we use is EUR 360 billion, i.e., lower than that. So you have liquidity, which you may release, which is not accounted for in this metric. So basically, this metric accounts for 30 points of LCR. If you crystallize it, it would add an additional 30 points. And also, we do lots of stress tests where we can see that the liquidity level is appropriate and sufficient. And also, every year, we issue securities. We already are in May, and we've already met 60% of demand. So things are going well in this respect now.

With respect to the connection with the dividend policy, I told you about the stock of liquidity of EUR 160 billion. Now buying back shares, we are talking about a buyback program of EUR 1 billion. Now in relative terms, it's hard to compare. So there's no impact on liquidity levels.

Thank you, Lars. Next question, question number 6.

Mr. Lemierre, Mr. Bonnafe, I have a question for you. As a grandparent, what would you say to your grandchildren when they ask you, grandad, what did you do with all the power you had in your position to preserve the habitability of the planet for us and our future generations?

You're asking me, I can tell you. I worked at BNP Paribas. The Board is very attentive to that, and we do everything we can. It is one place. It is a location where these questions have an operational meaning in a bank. It's in the bank and it's in the Board of Directors. We take decisions. Those decisions have consequences, sometimes adverse, sometimes positive. I talk with general management, and I'd like to pay tribute to Jean-Laurent and his staff members for the work they do. We allocate budgets. We hire engineers who know about it, who work with clients that implement transition policies.

So yes, yes, money is our concern. Your deposits are our concern. They're ours. It's very important. Now you could say we can go faster. I'm the first to think so. But we're doing it. But make no mistake, I have children who ask me this. I'm used to that question. And I'm used to using that question in my thinking. And very frankly, when you listen to Laurence Pessez and you listen to our reports, it's not perfect. It's not enough. We all agree. But we do something. An action is fundamental. I won't stress this anymore. Energy transition, well, dealing with the climate is a matter of action. It has to be done in concrete operational terms day after day by taking risks. Now I sincerely believe that the bank is doing that. So that's what I would say to my grandchildren. Are you as comfortable as I am, Jean Laurent?

Yes.

Number 8 -- sorry to interrupt you, your bank's figures, it's ratios, it's techniques, it's also commitments and a bit of passion. We believe in what we do. I'm sorry to add this. Because sometimes a shareholder meeting, there's a lot of figures, a lot of data, and we're not very used to expressing ourselves. But there are some issues, such as the one you mentioned, where we can go beyond the figures.

Number 8, please.

Well, as you know, financial institutions are increasingly surveilled concerning their links with the transfers of weapons and zones of conflict. BNP is no exception. Multiple reports as well as a court case highlighting BNP Paribas investments in Israeli colonies and in arms manufacturers, providing Israel with weapons since the beginning of the genocide in Gaza. But the opinion of the International Court of Justice in July 2024 forbids any support including financial support for the legal occupation of Palestinian territories after the genocide and avoid any involvement in the trade of weapons that may undermine international law.

However, BNP continues to do this and includes companies such as BAE Systems, Leonardo, Rheinmetall that are all highly involved in the export of weapons to contract zones that are active such as Gaza. My question is, therefore, how do you guarantee shareholders that the bank is not exposed to a possible full case for being an accomplice to war crimes?

You also asked the written question about the same theme? Okay. [ Ms. Larbie ] asked the same more or less the same question. So that's for the answer. And I think that you'll be answering multiple questions. So I'd like to remind you, first of all, that we work in strict compliance with the laws and regulations in effect. Those can be national or international treaties. There's no doubt about that.

There's a big confusion in these discussions. And if I take the alleged investment that we do in occupied territories, in fact, these are analysts that start off with the idea that European companies or non-European companies working in that way to export material that ends up in these territories, these companies somewhere or very often globally are financed by BNP Paribas. The analysts add up everything that's financed by BNP Paribas in any company, and then they come up with a figure and they say, okay, that's your investment.

None of that is very serious as an approach. These analyses, these "studies", so to speak, we have to put speech marks around that because there's a lot of communication, there's a lot of publication and I didn't even go as far as saying is calling it propaganda. I'll stop there. We are not committed in these issues. We're not people that would do the things that are not compliant. We work in full compliance with European and international laws and regulations. That's the duty of the bank. And that's the situation. Now there's no doubt that what happens in Gaza is absolutely awful. It's a human crisis. What's going on in the occupied territories is unfortunately, and you're still talking the same vein, the conflict we can see in Lebanon, any conflict, Ukraine, all these situations are awful. It's a human drama. We're talking about families that are destroyed, that disappear.

We can question the reasons for that folly the world had known for quite a few years. So such episodes that are so brutal, so violent, we have to ask ourselves about that. But the bank is not responsible for that situation. And it's not because the bank finances a company somewhere in Europe and that company sees at one point or another some of its work or equipment in a specific location that does make us responsible for that. I think we have to be reasonable and have some objectivity in that kind of assertion. I don't think the propagation of that kind of assertion will help the matter. I don't think it's like that, that we should go about things. I'm not a politician. As I said, we are not sovereign. We are a company. And I can tell you that every day, we pay attention significantly, very significantly and increasingly so in an increasingly complicated world to avoid any issues for the tomorrow's shareholders, but even today's, things that would be regrettable in the field. That's what I can say globally about these various issues.

Lars, I have a written question for you. And the question is as follows from [ Mr. Messier ]. What is the significance of the upturn in long-term rates for fixed rate real estate? That may look paradoxical since there's no impact on that fixed rates. But perhaps you could explain the effect of long-term rates.

It all depends on which country you are. In a country like France or Belgium, mortgages are at a fixed rate. So when a bank sets a loan at a fixed rate, it doesn't mean they enjoy it but we're required to. So they had to hedge of the duration of that. It's usually for about 20 years. It can be amortized. Sometimes it's reimbursed early. As it is, it's not always 20 years. But just to do things simply for clients of BNP Paribas that have a statistical faculty to reimburse earlier than the average, the average rate, the term is 7 years. So when you give a issue of mortgage, the money has to be available over 7 years. The bank has been covered for this.

When the mortgage was granted, fixed rates rise on the next day, but nothing happens. It's a huge service that we give to families and the economy because, basically, a household or family gets a service that they know from the beginning with a monthly amount, which is an amortization that will reimburse the principal and the interest. It's protection. It's not applied like this in every country. So it's a risk for the bank because in fact sometimes when rates rise, part of the deposits will be invested in other vehicles than what we could call liquid savings. These are longer term, and that makes it harder for the bank to ensure its liquidity at a lower cost.

Now when rates rise, for those with mortgages, there's an insurance, which says nothing happens to you. But it's a bit harder for the bank if it hasn't managed its balance sheet. Now for new mortgages, it goes without saying that the cost of money is rising. So in fact, it's quite transparent that anyone can understand. It's different from variable rate interest loans.

Now there are markets that are structured like that, you take out a variable rate. You have some flexibility. But if it's -- if it rises, it goes very quickly, upwards. We saw this after Russia invaded Ukraine, the amount paid by a family can be doubled practically. It goes very quickly. And that can be very complicated because we know the purchase of property, it's 30% to 35% of the family's monthly income when that doubles for example, it won't help afterwards, it will relax. It wouldn't be for the whole term of the mortgage, but it is another system for the bank.

When we look at the major trend for banks like ours that are very focused on private banking affluent that have financial savings that are more extensive than the average with fixed rates, high fixed rates and long rates rather is more profitable, are more profitable because some of those deposits are transformed over time. So it's more profitable for them.

But it has to be said quickly, because it also depends on the trend because if they had actually trended too fast, then there can be other phenomenon in the company's profit segment. What's important to understand, and we saw this in recent times, for example, in Belgium and in France, the fixed rate system in for mortgages is a genuine guarantee for families, for households, for borrowers, but it has a cost for the banking system because it will actually expose the banking system to major drawbacks, but the income of French commercial banks and Belgium ones, 2, 3 years, either they were flat or they were actually contracting, whereas business was actually the same as before. We went from 3%, 4% up to less than 1%. So the bank is paying out. But somewhere, the service made more tendered to the economy, it means other people have some kind of readability and the ability to carry on paying, reimbursing their mortgages because when there is the kind of prices and rates, well, the economy is never normally behaving so well. So it can also mean that maybe other employment, may be rare or whatever.

So I'm spending some time on this because there are 2 ways of looking at it. There's the service we offer the client, which is very good quality for the fixed rate system. And customers remember this, on average, as to follow the long-term investment, but sometimes it's a practice that is complex, expensive and heavy for a bank to carry. Managing a fixed rate is difficult for a bank in a world where rates are very often shook up by geopolitical approaches that are external, so to speak, to the country where we operate.

For example, potentially, there is tension that has to do with today's geopolitics has nothing to do with the local economic situation. If I can just add something for the shareholder, from that point of view, for the shareholder, if short-term rates remain between 2% and 3%, and the slope is still steep, so going up over time, we can plan to see an increase of 5% each year up to the end of that decade. That's the dynamic, so to speak, of deposits.

I have a final written question, a written one, at least as far as I'm concerned. It's a suggestion actually that I will forward to the teams organizing is to offer some coffee at reception and ask a question in a formal suggestion. Why not a quarterly interim payment for the dividend?

Well, quite simply, the bank introduced a half-yearly interim payment, some 2 years ago. That's quite recent. We did cautiously for reasons to do with the stock market share. A quarterly interim payment, it does exist. I do know something, they're very rare. It would have consequences that might not be favorable, in terms of the appreciation of the share price, but let's remain, at this point, let's at half-yearly payment. But I've taken note of the idea. Perhaps things will change, the market will change. But thank you, in any case, for that suggestion.

I'm looking at the end of the room, is there other questions? I don't see any other speakers at the end either, therefore, we're going to go to the vote. But the discussion, I know it was great that we took your questions and had long and detailed responses. Thank you for your attention and your patience.

The quorum is 805,149,430 shares or 73.18% of shares that have voting rights. So we can validly vote. Guylaine, as most of you have already -- you've been in the system. I'll just explain this very briefly. You have a tablet with 13 things. The only thing you should use are the yellow, green and red buttons, as you can see on the keyboard. Green is for, yellow to abstain, and red is the vote against.

For each resolution presented to you, you can choose -- you have to press hard on one single key, for, abstain, against, the vote takes place after each resolution has been read out. you'll be asked to vote and say the voting is open. You'll see a timer as well in about 12 seconds, which allows you to do this once the timer has come to an end. The President will say voting is closed, and you will no longer be able to vote. There will be results on the screen a few moments after the accounting has finished. And to avoid any interference please switch off your telephones during the voting process. Thank you, Guylaine.

Shall we go? I'll give you the reading of the approval of the parent company for the financial statements of 2025. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. At 99.61% voted for. Approved.

Second resolution, approval of the consolidated financial statements for 2025. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.68% voted for. Approved.

Third resolution, appropriation of net income and determination of the dividend for the year ending 31 December 2025. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.96% voted for. Approved.

Fourth resolution, special report of the statutory auditors on related party agreements and commitments falling within the scope of Articles L225-38 of the French Commercial Code. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 98.98% voted for. Approved.

Fifth resolution, authorization for BNP Paribas to buy back its own shares. Voting is open.

[Voting]

99.08%, therefore, approved.

Sixth resolution, renewal of the term of office of Mr. Jean Lemierre as a Director. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting has ended. Approved by 94.58%. Thank you.

Seventh resolution, renewal of the term of office of Mr. Jacques Aschenbroich as a member of the Board. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting has ended, 96.96%. Congratulations, Jacques. Approved.

Eighth resolution, vote on the components of the compensation policy attributable to directors. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.29% adopted.

Ninth resolution, vote on the components of the compensation policy attributable to the Chairman of the Board. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed, 96.08% approved. Thank you.

Tenth resolution, vote on the components of the compensation policy attributable to the Chief Executive Officer. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed, 91.01% approved. Thank you.

Eleventh resolution, vote on the components of the compensation policy attributable to the Chief Operating Officers. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 91.01% approved. Thank you.

12th resolution, vote on disclosures relating to compensation paid in 2025 awarded in respect of the same year to all directors and corporate officers. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 97.44% approved.

13th resolution, vote on the components of the compensation paid in 2025 awarded in respect of the same year to Mr. Jean Lemierre, Chairman of the Board. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 97.37% approved. Thank you.

14th resolution, vote on the components of the compensation paid in 2025 awarded in respect of the same year to Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Chief Executive Officer. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 94.26% approved. Thank you.

15th resolution, vote on the components of the compensation paid in 2025 awarded in respect of the same year. Mr. Yann Gérardin, Chief Operating Officer. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 95.04% approved.

16th resolution, vote on the components of the compensation paid in 2025 awarded in respect of the same year to Mr. Thierry Laborde, Chief Operating Officer. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 95.18% approved.

17th resolution, the advisory vote on the overall amount of compensation of any kind paid during 2025 to executive officers and certain categories of personnel. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.26% approved.

Moving on to the extraordinary part of the meeting. 18th resolution, share capital increase, maintaining preferential subscription rights. Voting is open.

[Voting]

94.57% for the extraordinary part of the meeting, the music is different, right?

19th resolution, share capital increase with the removal of preferential subscription rights. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 96.08% approved.

20th resolution share capital increase without preferential subscription rights for existing shareholders through the issue of ordinary shares up to 10% of the share capital. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 96% approved.

21st resolution, overall limit on authorization to issue shares with the removal of all without preferential subscription rights. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed, 99.24% approved. Thank you.

22nd resolution, share capital increase by capitalization of reserves or earnings, share premiums or additional paid in capital. The voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.05% -- 99.55% approved.

23rd, approval, limits -- overall limits on authorization to issue shares. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 96.59% approved.

24th resolution, share capital increase with cancellation of preferential subscription rights by issuance of bonds, which would only be converted into shares if the CET1 ratio would fall below a threshold of 5.125%. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 96.71%.

25th resolution, authorization to be granted to the Board to conduct transactions reserved to the members of the company savings plans with the removal of preferential subscription rights. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.69%.

26th resolution authorization to be granted to the Board to reduce the share capital by canceling shares. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.72% approved.

27th resolution, amendment of the Articles of Association relating to the director representing employee shareholders in order to take into account the legal provisions transposing the Women on Board Directive. Voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.98% approved.

28th resolution authority to complete legal formalities. The voting is open.

[Voting]

Voting is closed. 99.99% approved. Thank you.

This vote is the last item on the agenda. We'd like to thank you for your attendance. I would like to thank you for being here today and for supporting us throughout the year for your trust and for the trust you put in the Board of Directors.

I would like to thank all those who helped organize this meeting and who worked hard. It is very important for all of us, this shareholders' meeting, which is at the core of the life and governance mechanism at the BNP Paribas Group.

I would like to warmly thank the senior management team as well as all the employees of the group for their hard, high-quality work, the results and performance being generated and the attention paid to short, medium and long-term issues, strategic challenges and the big changes in society, which impacts us and you need to onboard them as you rightly say so. Thank you for the diversity in our discussion, very important for all of us. Thank you, and enjoy the rest of the day. Goodbye.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the presentation of the BNP Paribas First Quarter 2026 Results with Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer; and Lars Machenil, Group Chief Financial Officer. For your information, this conference call is being recorded. Supporting slides are available on BNP Paribas IR website. [Operator Instructions] I would like to now hand the call over to Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We are pleased to present a strong first quarter, which confirms we are well on track for our previously announced '26 and '28 trajectories. Our presentation will be short because it seems that today is a busy day.

So on Slide 4. As you can see, our first quarter results continued the sharply positive trend we showed in the previous quarter. Revenue rose at a very strong rate of 8.5%. Jaws effect was at high 3 points, and our cost/income ratio improved 2 points compared to the first quarter '25. As a result, our gross operating income was up a significant 13.7% this quarter. Cost of risk reached 39 bps within our trajectory of less than 40 bps through the cycle.

All in all, our net profit was up 9%, confirming our very positive momentum. Our CET1 reached 12.8%, up 20 basis points this quarter, and we're getting very close to our CET1 target of 13% for '27.

Let me also remind you that our final '25 dividend of EUR 2.57 would be paid on 20th May. If we focus on our revenues, they are up 8.5% with well-balanced growth between the businesses. CIB revenues were broadly stable but were impacted by unfavorable FX impact, a high base effect and perhaps a slightly less favorable geographical mix than our U.S. peers. The base for the second quarter is a lot more favorable.

CPBS revenues sustained a strong upward trend, confirming the pivot we described in the fourth quarter last year. And finally, IPS generated double-digit organic growth, but also benefited from the AXA IM integration, leading to a transformational 33% increase in revenues.

Slide 5 now. The first quarter built on an already strong end to '25 with revenues up 7.3%. This very strong top line growth reflects the strong momentum we expected and shared with you last year. It also translates into a sharp increase in profitability. You will have noticed that our Eurozone commercial banks grew their pretax profit by a strong 19% and Personal Finance 23%. Our deposit mix remains stable, which enables the reinvestment of our non-remunerated site deposits on the mid- to long end of the curve.

Given the current economic outlook, we expect this positive environment to continue well into the next strategic plan, which will take us to 2030. CPBS profitability will also improve substantially, thanks to the strategic plans that are already well underway, demonstrating our ability to execute transformative change programs at pace. New plans for Belgium, Italy and Arval as well will be launched by year-end.

This is well illustrated on Slide 6. After a strong first quarter, we reconfirm both our '26 and '28 trajectories. We expect more than 10% earnings growth CAGR over '25, '28, and this will be amplified at EPS level by our share buybacks. We expect our return on tangible equity to exceed 30% in '28, and this will be driven by strong revenue momentum, very well illustrated in the first quarter, but also tight cost control. We will discuss the costs later.

You see on the right that we are well underway with our strategic plans. We've already presented the plans for Personal Finance, CPBF in France, Bank Polska and Asset Management. Next will be CPBB in Belgium, followed in the second half by Arval and BNL. These plans cover most of CPBS and half of the group's risk-weighted assets. They have in common a very ambitious cost/income ratio improvement trajectory as well as tight risk weight control.

Overall, we expect our cost-income ratio to fall below 56% in '28 with more improvement to come by 2030. Finally, our CET1 at 12.8% shows that we are well on track to achieve our trajectory at 16% by end '27, with excess capital to be considered for distribution on an annual basis.

Moving on to Slide 7. Let me remind me about our thought process regarding the transformation plan for our support functions. We are strengthening our foundations ahead of our '27-2030 plan and the comprehensive review of our support functions will pull and streamline our application portfolio, amplify the use of AI and simplify organization, reducing silos. The support functions account for about half of our cost base, and we expect that our action will help accelerate our cost savings for about 700 million per year over '22-'26 to close to EUR 1 billion per year over '27-'30. All divisions, geographies and functions will be impacted by our actions.

Let me now hand over to Lars, who will present our first quarter results.

Thank you, Jean-Laurent. Good afternoon, everybody. It's a busy day for you all, so I will focus on the key points. I will not spend much time on Slide 10, but I wanted to highlight that there are a few exceptional items this quarter, which together accounted for EUR 109 million, very close to the level we saw last year and accounting for 3% of our earnings. This suggests that reported and underlying growth are aligned.

In particular, the exceptional elements this quarter are booked mostly in the Corporate Center, whereas last year, they were included for half in the business line. So in the comparison, you have to take that into account. If I highlight some of them this quarter, there is a EUR 372 million gain on Allfunds coming from the reclassification of our stake following the loss of significant influence in the company.

Secondly, there is the pretax income charge of EUR 219 million from U.K. Motor Finance, which is reduced to EUR 98 million after tax, given also minority interest. And finally, there is EUR 262 million restructuring charges, reflecting, in particular, the acceleration of the AXA IM integration, as we mentioned before.

Let me now move to Slide 12, where you see that our revenues are up 8.5% or 8.1% at constant scope and exchange rates. The 2 main elements this quarter are the strong impact of ForEx, notably the U.S. dollar and the integration of AXA IM impacting the year-on-year comparison as it was not part of the group a year ago.

Let me comment on CIB first. The revenues are reported stable, but are up 3.1% at constant exchange rates. And our underlying performance in the U.S. is particularly strong and similar to what you saw with U.S. local banks. When looking at our CIB, you will see that our market shares and rankings underscore a solid quarter even against a strong first quarter of '25 and also the ForEx impact that I mentioned and European markets that were slower compared to the U.S.

If you now look at the subparts of CIB, starting with Global Banking, there was a high base effect given the first quarter of '25. And we saw this quarter the impact of lower rates and ForEx, but the business had strong momentum, as you can see in the market share and the ranking gains. And particularly, if you look at EMEA, we maintained our leadership amongst European banks with a 5.1% market share.

If we look at Global Markets, where we saw that Equity and Prime Services were up strongly, 9.3% at constant FX. The business benefited from high volumes, higher market levels and very strong client engagement.

Next to EPS, if we look at FICC, it was more balanced, up 3.9% at constant ForEx with particularly strong commodities and currencies, so the 2 Cs of FICC and local markets as well, but less favorable rates and primary activities.

If with this, we move to the second division, CPBS. And as Jean-Laurent explained earlier, the Eurozone Commercial Banks are enjoying very strong top line growth on the back of favorable interest rate environment favorable for BNP Paribas. On the other hand, the specialized businesses benefited from strong organic growth, for example, at Arval before used car sales and also higher volumes and improved margins at Personal Finance.

If with this, we move to the third division, IPS, they reported, I don't know how to qualify, but a whopping 33% revenue growth, which, of course, reflects the integration of AXA IM compared to a year ago. But the division, even if you look through the AXA IM, it's up 10% in organic growth at constant scope, thanks to the strong business momentum in each of the 3 subdivisions, Insurance, Asset Management, Wealth Management.

If with this, you can follow me to Slide 13, and let's take a look at the costs. At the bottom left, you can see that our costs grew 5.5%, but only 2% when you look at constant scope and constant ForEx. Our divisions posted positive jaws of 1.5 points and the group 3 points. So we are on track for substantial cost income improvements to below 56% in 2028, laying a firm foundation for our next strategic plan that will ramp up to 2030.

So this will be enabled in large part by the review of our support functions as outlined by Jean-Laurent earlier. These functions represent approximately half of our total cost base and providing a significant opportunity for optimization and efficiency gains.

Moreover, as you see from the bottom right this time, a significant portion of the restructuring charges for AXA IM integration will be booked this year in total, EUR 400 million, roughly half have already been taken in the first quarter. And so these are booked in the Corporate Center together with our traditional adaptation costs.

If with this, we can look at our asset quality, and this you can see on Slides 4 to 16. If we start with 14. So during the quarter, our cost of risk reached 39 basis points over outstanding within the guidance of below 40 basis points for the year. In the first quarter of '26, the increase in the cost of risk is primarily driven by Stage 3 provisions. Stage 1 and Stage 2 provisions remain stable as the forward-looking provisions related to the geopolitical environment are booked in the Corporate Center for around EUR 60 million and broadly offset the releases we have in the business as usual to accompany the Stage 3 provisions.

Moreover, note on that same page that our NPL ratio stays at a low level of 1.6% and that the group cost of risk has been managed to remain in a narrow range throughout the cycle. And here, it is important to highlight that we are diversified and not much reliant on the French economy. You know that less than 10% of our pretax profit that is in France. And moreover, what you saw is France showed a somewhat mixed performance in the first quarter given the late budget and also related to investments related to the elections.

If we now go on to Slide 15, we provide you with an overview of our strong risk through the cycle. So you see that our portfolio offers significant sectoral diversification and a high exposure to investment-grade counterparties. This enables us to reduce the volatility of our cost of risk. You can also see our selective approach to private credit, which accounts for around 3% of our loan book with 90% of that senior portfolio financing. We have no NPLs on the segment, which is built through moderate loan to values, high diversification and exposure to the strongest private credit players.

And if we now look at the cost of risk by business line, which is on Slide 16. And if we set aside Personal Finance, you can see that the increase in provision on mostly from Global Banking from a low base and a normalization in Belgium. You can also see B&L reaching an impressive level of 13 basis points, helping its profitability to lift to 17% pretax return this quarter.

If we now we end on the capital on Slide 17. Our common equity Tier 1 reached 12.8%, up 20 basis points during the quarter. So what drove this improvement? 30 basis points of capital generation, net of RWE growth, 20 basis points return to investors to distribution and the other elements for 10 basis points. Just under half is the deconsolidation off. Moreover, you know that this week, the Ageas transaction closed earlier this week. It will generate EUR 840 million of gain that will be booked in the second quarter.

Moreover, this deal next to bringing all of the commercial relationship, it also will generate more P&L as well as capital. Moreover, as you saw yesterday, we are accelerating our disposals with the signing of BMCE. We are on track to deliver 30 to 50 basis points of disposals. You will also have noted that our SREP requirement decreased by 10 basis points at the beginning of the year and that the ECB decided to increase our O2I buffer required to 2% by the 1st of January 2028 based on our score under its updated framework that was released earlier this week. This decision is consistent with our new trajectory of 13% by '27 and '28. So we do not expect material acquisitions in the medium term.

And for reference, we remind you on this page the history of the redeployment of the capital released from the disposal of Bank of the West we sold at the right moment at a very attractive price. And if I look at it in total, I remind you, there was 170 basis points of capital that have been redeployed in 3 waves of similar magnitude with each wave delivering a higher ROIC than the previous one, while progressively preparing the group for the next growth cycle. So wave 1 was an immediate EUR 4 billion share buyback, generating a 4% yield after funding cost.

Wave 2 involves targeted redeployment of capital over the years '23, '24. So on one hand, selective organic investments, in particular in CIB, which reinforced the franchise you know today as well as targeted acquisitions in IPS and CPDS with limited integration risk. Overall, this wave delivered a roughly 17% yield in 2026, in line with what we communicated in '24, meaning above 16%. And then the third wave of redeployment of another 55 basis points of capital with an expected return of 21% by '29 is mainly driven by AXA IM, Alon and HSBC Wealth Management in Germany.

So that is a bit the synthesis of where we stand. And I'll now hand it back to Jean-Laurent, who will offer some final remarks and conclude our presentation.

Thank you, Lars. To conclude, our first quarter '26 results are a very clear illustration of our equity story in action. We are delivering strong, balanced and resilient earnings growth. Group revenues grew by 8.5% with good momentum across all businesses. Costs remain tightly controlled, generating a strong positive jaws effect and driving a nearly 14% increase in gross operating income and 9% increase in net profit. The performance is not exceptional or cyclical. It reflects execution.

In CIB, we continue to gain market share and rankings. In CPBS, Eurozone Commercial Banks benefit structurally from the rate environment, while Personal Finance and Arval delivered strong organic growth. In IPS, the AXA IM integration is already translating into scale, momentum and value creation, while our core Tier 1 ratio reached 12.8%.

The geopolitical situation will inevitably have an impact on our economies with likely divergence across countries. While the duration of the conflict remains difficult to predict, it is precisely in this type of uncertain and volatile environment that BNP Paribas can demonstrate its full value that it has consistently done in the past. We entered this new cycle with growth levers already in place. We will present our '27, 2030 trajectory next year, but we have not waited. Most of the group's risk weights are already covered by strategic plans currently in execution.

Our priority over the coming quarters will be to execute our road map with discipline in line with our announcements. I've set 2 clear priorities: first, accelerating operating -- operational efficiency on our transformation agenda, notably through AI. Second, reaching our CET1 target of 13% as early as possible.

This concludes our presentation, and we are now happy to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions] Question is from Delphine Lee, JPMorgan.

So first of all, if I could ask on Eurozone retail, where we can see that the NII is progressing nicely. I'm just wondering just more big picture, if the potential increase in short-term rates could derail a little bit that in terms of changing the mix and create a bit of lag versus peers in Europe, which are maybe a little bit more sensitive to short-term rates. Just thinking a little bit about the impacts we have seen in the past and sort of what has changed. My second question is on disposals. Considering the uncertainty in macro and because of the war, just wondering if we should expect a little bit of a delay in the delivery of that 30 to 50 basis points of disposals impact that you're still expecting?

Thank you for that. Yes, you are right asking for that question about short-term rates. Lars will answer that point.

Yes, Delphine. So indeed, as a reminder, what we are operating in both in Belgium and in France is in one hand that we have mortgages that have a fixed rate. And at the same time, we have site deposits nonremunerated that we redeploy over that same period. And so that's why we've guided that as long as there is a steepening of the curve and the short end is, let's say, between 2% and 3%, that basically generates a lift of around 5% every quarter.

So every quarter, when you compare it to the year before, that's going to be 5% and that's going to continue, let's say, until the end of the decade. So that's the situation where we stand. So as long as the short end, let's say, remains between 2% and 3%, we feel comfortable with that outlook.

About disposals, looking at what happened recently, we are rather accelerating the I would say, the exit. And we are screening a number of different options. We do not see or we do not feel so far anything new in terms of values of the assets that could be potentially considered in that program. So, so far, so good.

Next question is from Tarik El Mejjad, Bank of America.

Just following up on the first question about the impact on rates environment on your revenue growth targets. I mean, thanks for the indication on the short end of the rates -- I mean, short rates impact on margins. But what about the volumes and the growth and sentiment? I mean, you -- I'm sure you are working now in middle of your long-term plan and what kind of assumptions or view you think of the different components of impact on growth and how that will feature within your overall expectations?

And then second question is on the OSII disclosure, I think it was yesterday or day before. Did the 50 basis points came as a surprise and the fact that actually it came higher than the G-SIB and in the future, managing your balance sheet and size and versus the incremental capital buffers to charge? Is there any more optimization that should come as you bid for the G-SIB in the past?

On the first point, looking at commercial banks, typically in that kind of an environment when growth is slightly down, at least in the countries in which we are operating, France, Belgium, Italy, so on, there's a tendency to see additional savings. So -- and in those markets, volumes in savings are the key dimensions. So we do not believe this will have an impact looking at the volumes within the commercial banks.

Looking at Personal Finance, it's slightly different because when short-term rates are slightly higher, we tend to adapt the risk approach. And doing so, we refrain a little bit the growth. So I would say, to make it simple, as of today, looking ahead, considering, I would say, reasonable scenarios, we do not see much impact knowing that at Personal Finance, this is slightly different because one day, you can have to opt for something slightly more stringent in terms of risk policy. And then you are restricting a little bit volumes.

On the second question, to some extent, there is nothing new because as you know, the 13% is not the target. The new target is not the result of the regulation or the supervision. This is a fact we ultimately considered that was, I would say, looked at by investors markets, and we were supposed to be at 13%, and we decided to be at 13%. That was a kind of new normal, I don't know, but this was a request, let's say, in the financial markets coming from financial investors. So this is the 13%.

Then you have the regulation. One way or the other, the global CF buffer that is today at 150 bps would have reached looking at the growth of CIB, 200 bps. So the 13% target is something that is valid starting end of '27 down to 2030. And in that trajectory, one way or the other, you will have seen the CF buffer moving from 150 up to 200 bps. So at the end of the day, the OC buffer, the one coming from DCB, not the SSM typically, but the ECB is just something that is coming in advance.

And what is important for us is you take the maximum of the 2. You do not add the 2 buffers. It's the highest that you take into account when you do the computation for the request at group level. So away from the OC announcement or adaptation, in any case, we would have reached 300 bps through the global CFI buffer. So the certain percent is a given factor, I would say, no choice. This is the market. And the other is a kind of double mechanism, one being the European one, one being the global one. And in any case, at the end of the day, you are 200. And the 30%, again, are valid for the next plan, and they are covering, as you can see, this add-on of 50 bps.

Next question is from Giulia Miotto, Morgan Stanley.

And one more on capital, please. So CET1 is at 12.8% and BNP generates capital every quarter, plus you've got the disposals. So I would think -- so when we see on the Slide 6, 13% in end of '27, '28, why is that not also end of '26? Is there any headwind coming? Or we can just assume that you will hit 13% sooner than what's planned there? And then secondly, I noticed in the appendices on Arval that basically you call out a marked deterioration in used car results in March. And I was wondering if that continues into Q2, if we should have any special impact in mind for Arval?

So on the 13% target, we set the target for end of '27, away from any exceptional items, looking at the situation as of today, we could, I would say, reach the 13% by year-end. This is the normal trajectory. So we said end of '27, 30%. Looking at the good, I would say, trajectory in the second part of last year, the last quarter of last year and the first quarter of this year, we can say 13% by year-end. This is typically a target we will try to deliver away from any, of course, exceptional events.

But the fact that we said end of '27 was very much linked to the, I would say, the fact that we had to start the process. The process started last year and it's progressing well. And if you look at the trajectory, we should reach the 13%. And in any case, we're doing everything we can to release the 13% by year-end. So this is the story.

And just as a complement, remember when we gave our guidance, we took a conservative stance that there could be 10 basis points coming from regulatory and supervisory, which so far we haven't seen. On your other question on the retail value of secondhand cars at Arval. So what indeed, what you saw in March is given the environment probably in the Middle East, you saw a pickup in demand for electrical vehicles and a lower demand for thermal vehicles. So that is a bit what you see. We have, at this stage, a more internal combustion vehicles than electric vehicles. And here, the interesting point is that with the integration to come of Atlon, which has a higher fraction of electrical vehicles, that trend will become even better. So that is the situation, Guilia, on Arval.

Next question is from Andrew Coombs, Citi.

Just one follow-on, please, and then a fresh question. So on the capital point, I mean to allude to the previous question, it looks like you're going to hit the 13% a year early potentially. If that does prove to be the case, given you said no material acquisitions, only 2% organic RWA growth per annum, would you consider revising the 60% payout policy at year-end if you hit that target earlier than expected?

And then second question, just on Asset Management. Since you did the integration, the quarterly numbers have moved around a little bit, big increase in Q4, decrease in Q1 back to Q3 levels. absent the market moves, is there anything to call out on performance fees? Is there a case that there's more performance fees booked in Q4? Anything you'd like to say there?

I'll take your question on -- first on asset management. So within the divisions -- within the division of IPS, what you have, we have recalibrated it. So we had in the past, we had Wealth and Asset Management as one. And now we have separated those. And then we have rephrased that because the real estate removed it from the other. So it's basically the basis that is driving that difference.

So on your capital, so indeed, we are on track, as you mentioned, to get to 13% as soon as we can related to the RWA, we are at this stage at a 60% yield. And we said that as of the moment, we are at 13%. We will see what we do with the excess capital.

And just to revert on the former question, thank you for reminding me about the real estate shift. I mean if I look at it, that explains the asset management, but I'll move on.

Next question is from Pierre Chedeville, CIC Market Solutions.

I want a precision regarding what you said in your conclusion saying that the bank was well positioned to benefit from geopolitical situation. I do not really understand what you mean. You mean in absolute terms or you mean in relative terms compared to your peers? Because at the end of the day, this geopolitical situation seems not good for everybody. So it's not very clear your comment there.

And regarding the insurance business, you mentioned a very good performance in P&C. Could you elaborate a little bit on that? Is this due to an increase in equipment rate in your networks? Is this due to a better combined ratio? And also, what do you expect or should we forecast in terms of revenues with your Ageas partnerships in Belgium?

Looking at the insurance business, typically, so in the transaction with A, of course, there is the capital gain, EUR 140 million, an add-on of 5 bps in the core equity Tier 1, an additional EUR 40 million every year in net result post tax compared to the previous situation. But operationally, looking at the business in Belgium, this will go also with a strong investment plan.

Altogether, the bank in Belgium and the insurance company in Belgium, AG Insurance, will invest close to EUR 80 million, EUR 100 million to grow the business within Belgium. AGI is the leader in Belgium already, but this plan encompasses also a number of investments, customer journey, digitalization, AI and so on and so on. So it's a kind of not only a renewal of the long-term contract in between the bank and the insurance business, but it's more a new cycle with additional development. This will be illustrated within the deep dive of the Belgium bank in the second part of that year or first part, 1st of June to be precise.

Then about the geopolitical situation, the point was about resilience and diversification. The group is very well diversified. If you look at the story of the company, probably this is one of the banking group that offered a good level of resilience. So this was basically the comment. In that context, probably a platform like BNP Paribas that is so diversified is offering a strong level of resilience compared maybe to some other models that are more, I would say, concentrated or less diversified.

Pierre, I mean, it's not that we are protecting and everything. Look at the extra cost of risk that we provisioned on the macro aspect. And then on your question on insurance. So on P&C, the main thing what has been performing well is all our joint ventures and activities in Latin America. Whereas in France, it's rather stable. It's even the combined ratio isn't that deteriorating. So it is LatAm who is the -- all the activities we put in place that is driving it.

Next question is from Matt Clark, Mediobanca.

It's a question on the 10 basis points benefit from model updates and others to CET1 this quarter. Is there any reason to think that, that wouldn't be permanent? Do you see that as just kind of like happened, I guess, in the third quarter last year, it's just a favorable outcome that's here to stay and will stick? Or should we see it as part of volatility and you stick to your expectation of a 10 basis point headwind over the course of the full year and so some normalization of that benefit and then maybe a bit more of headwind to come?

No, Matthew, these 10 basis points are here to stay. A small part is what you've done, what we've seen with all funds, but then there are indeed model updates and the like. But that's here to stay. What I mentioned is we took a conservative view initially and we said, listen, there could be. So this is permanent, but there could be other elements that are regulatory or supervisory driven that we put -- we labeled in for 10 basis points. But those we see not coming, we have not had it. But those 10, they are tangible, they are here to stay.

Next question is from Anke Reingen, RBC.

I just wondered in terms of your corporate customer behavior, I guess, in the first quarter, you might see some different trends. And I just wondered how Q1 sort of like ended in terms of corporate customer engagement? Are the sort of like more wait and see or kind of active in hedging just in terms of overall trends? And then in terms of one numbers question on the Corporate Center, the Q1 performance, there -- is there any reason to assume that should reverse in the course of the year?

So if you look at the corporate bank at CIB, year-on-year, the evolution is very much penalized because you have, first of all, the U.S. dollar effect. Second, you have a rate effect, anything that is cash management deposit at the bank is penalized. And ultimately, last year, we were having a very high level. And this was slightly different starting in the second quarter of the first tariff announcements. So if you look ahead, starting in the second quarter, we do not have any more the rate effect. That was about short term. So this is down. You do not have the U.S. dollar effect and you do not have the base effect. So the Corporate Bank in the second quarter will have a much more favorable trend. And looking at what we are having already in our hands, meaning number of transactions, situations, there is a lot coming much more than in the first quarter. So this is the situation looking at the corporate bank within CIB as of today.

Anke, I'll take your corporate center, and I understand your question. So I take it you're guiding to the top line. The top line that we said we guided to be around 0 for the year, and you see that it is higher than this. So the thing is I have to remind you that in it, the elements are quite volatile, yes. So there is, for example, DVA, which I remind you was negative last year. Then there is the liquidity charge, Same thing. It was negative last year. It's positive this year. Also in there is the effect of all. Now let me be fair. The guidance of 0 was conservative. And so this is how you should see it. Do keep in mind that there are volatile elements, but the guidance of 0 was very conservative.

Next question is from Sharath Kumar, Deutsche Bank.

Belgium, I know you have a deep dive coming up shortly. But if I look at consensus, pretax ROE is around 18% versus your 20% target. So what is, in your view, underestimated? Also, if you can comment on the competitive positioning and sustainability of current NII strength, it would be helpful. Second, going back to Arval and Leasing Solutions, if you can decompose the moving parts in revenues, surprised to see a 12% revenue decline despite a strong organic growth of 10% in Arval. So if you can comment if there is any significant weakness in leasing or any notable FX weakness or any negative contribution from used car sales, it would be helpful.

I think you should rephrase at the end to your question on Belgium. I'm not sure I grasped it. But I'll start with Arval and Leasing. So indeed, what we publish is the segment Arval and Leasing. And indeed, you see a drop in the top line, which is like around EUR 100 million. If you look at what it is, first of all, as we said, last year and particularly in Arval, there was a contribution, a positive contribution of the retail value of cars. So that's one thing.

And the second thing, if you look at leasing, even if we don't publish separately the leasing P&L, but you see the outstandings and you see the outstandings going down a bit. So you can also assume that there is some of that impact in there. So therefore, you can assume that there is an impact of the resale value of the car, which is a couple of tens of million, not EUR 100 million. And on those, that's what I said earlier, in March, you saw a pickup in the demand for EVs and a lowering of ICE.

As at this stage, we have more ICE. This is a bit wide weighed on it. And as I mentioned, going forward with the integration of Atlan, which is coming, that balance will shift more towards EVs. So that's my answer on Agvaleni. Could you rephrase your question on Belgium?

Yes. I know you have a deep dive coming up shortly. But if I look at consensus pretax return on normative equity, it is around 18% for the future years, whereas you have a 20% target. So I wanted to understand what is underestimated by consensus. Also, if you can comment on the competitive positioning and sustainability of current NII growth?

Yes. So if you look, there's a couple of things. To read the pretax of our Belgian activities, you always have to be "careful" and particularly, if you look at the first quarter, the pretax income is gravitating around 0. But you should not interpret this in whatever way. It is because in Belgium, next to the European banking taxes, there is also a local banking tax, which if you look at it at the level of BNP Paribas is half of the total that we pay. And so that is why the profit in the first quarter is always gravitating at such a low level because of those taxes.

If you look at the other elements you see that we are positioned very well. So you know that we are a full-scale bank, providing all of the services. And so if we look at the market shares, we are basically #1. This is where we stay. And if you look at our profitability, if you look at the first quarter and in what we've guided, the profitability is up. And so one of the other elements is there is what we said earlier.

So given the fact that we operate at fixed rates and in size deposits, the pickup took time to realize. And so we realized it at the end of the year. We saw it again in the first quarter. And therefore, we are comfortable with the trend in Belgium, and we will highlight it on June 1.

Next question is from Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs.

Yes, I just have one question left again on capital build. So if you're well on track to hit 13% by year-end, would you consider once again doing the buyback element of 2026 distribution early like you did in 2025 because that would then give you the space to apply for excess capital distribution with Q4 results, and it shouldn't impact your in-year CET1 ratio because it's already accrued for?

So far, we have not considered this, but maybe this is an option. So thank you for the idea.

We have no more questions registered at this time.

So thank you so much. So once again, we believe those results are strong, very much in line with our trajectory, not only for '26, but for '28. We are preparing very actively the next plan, particularly in the efficiency dimension. We know as question showed it again that there is something around capital distribution, return to shareholders.

If we are good, I would say, reaching the 13% by year-end, clearly, the possibility in the next plan to, I would say, increase one way or the other, the level of return to shareholders is becoming more, I would say, a reality every day than just a probability. And we're also focusing on this dimension. But this is also going to be the result of good momentum at the top line and additional cost efficiency, of course. These are the 2 major, I would say, drivers on top, obviously, of anything that would be potentially investments within the portfolio of the company.

So thank you very much again for your time and see you soon in the -- at the end of the second quarter. All the best.

Thank you very much.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the call of BNP Paribas First Quarter 2026 Results. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the presentation of the BNP Paribas Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 results with Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer; and Lars Machenil, Group Chief Financial Officer. For your information, this conference call is being recorded. Supporting slides are available on BNP Paribas IR website, invest.bnpparibas.com.

[Operator Instructions] I would like now to hand the call over to Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. We are pleased to present today our strong fourth quarter results, and we'll provide some elements on our '28 trajectory, which we are revising upwards given the strong revenue momentum at the launch of a transformation plan of our support functions.

I will start with our results on Slide 4. So our fourth quarter results confirmed the sharp acceleration we had expected. Revenues posted a strong 8% growth. Jaws effect was higher at 2.9 points and even reached 3.9 points when excluding AXA IM. Cost of fees stayed low at 34 bps well within our trajectory of below 40 bps. And this led to a very strong 28% increase in net profit, approaching EUR 3 billion, which is a record for our fourth quarter.

Our CET1 reached 12.6%, up 10 bps this quarter, and we remain committed to delivering on our target of 13%. For '25, we will have paid a total dividend per share of EUR 5.16 including the final dividend of EUR 2.57 to be paid in May.

If we focus on our revenues, they are up 8% with well-balanced growth between the businesses. CIB revenues posted a strong performance up 1% from a high base or up 4.8% at constant exchange rate. CPBS revenues accelerated sharply as expected and were up 5.5%. Q4 is a pilot quarter, largely helped by the rate trajectory and acceleration at Arval, thanks to the end of the base effect related to used car prices.

Finally, IPS generated double-digit organic growth, but also benefited from the AXA IM integration, which led to a transformational 40% increase in revenues.

Now moving to Slide 5. The fourth quarter showed sharp acceleration of revenues at CPBS, up 5.5%. Within CPBS, we show here the revenue trajectory of the business, not sensitive to the interest rate scenarios namely our Eurozone Commercial Banks and Personal Finance. The trajectory is expected to remain favorable throughout much of our next strategic plan.

For Personal Finance, margin improvement is driven by the natural runoff of loans originated in '22-'23, which were impacted by higher funding costs. In contrast, new business generates a margin in excess of 5%. This supports an outlook of more than 5% revenue growth per annum over '24-'28.

For our Eurozone Commercial Banks, the deposit mix that has been stabilizing since '24 has enabled to continue the reinvesting of low cost deposits at the longer end of the yield curve, aligning with the maturity of the assets. This will continue well into the next plan, providing a supportive environment for revenue growth.

CPBS will also be supported by strategic plans that are already underway or to be launched, aiming at increasing profitability on 80% of its risk weight.

Moving on to Slide 6. Let me focus now on our '26 targets. Of our strong end to '25, we reconfirm our '24-'26 trajectory. We expect above 7% earnings and 8% EPS CAGR over '24-'26. This will lead to a return on tangible equity of 12% in '26, a first step towards our target of more than 13% in '28.

Our strong Q4 reinforces our positive revenue outlook and we will deliver our jaws effect of 1.5 points. Cost of risk is expected to remain below 40 bps. We are making good progress towards our CET1 target of 13%.

Let me now summarize the '28 trajectory on Slide 7. We have increased our '28 return on tangible equity target from 13% to above 13%. One of the key levers is an improved cost-income ratio outlook from around 58% to below 56%. This will be achieved, thanks to the launch of our new structural transformation plan for support functions. This will be a complete overall.

I'll come back to this later. This initiative will lead to more than 10% net income, an EPS CAGR of '25-'28, a new target with a sharp acceleration when compared with our previous plan. It goes without saying, we obviously reconfirm our CET1 target of 13% and the distribution in excess of that level will be decided finally.

Moving to Slide 8. Let me elaborate on the key bricks behind this increased return on tangible equity target. As you can see on the left side, we have many strategic plans ongoing, notably within CPBS, to achieve levels of profitability in line with the group targets. As you can see on the right chart, these plans alone will help us bridge the profitability gap to 13%, which means that the growth from the other businesses, including CIB, will enable the group to exceed 13%. 13% is only a first step in our profitability improvement.

By '28, we will be well on track for 2030 targets which will be discussed at our Capital Market Day in early '27. We have presented plans to improve the pretax return of CPBF and Personal Finance to above 17% in '28. We have also presented the BNP Paribas Bank Polska plan, which is already a very profitable entity. With this plan, we are looking to raise the profitability to the highest standards amongst Polish banks at 20% return on tangible equity in 2030.

In the next few months, we'll present the strategic vision for Asset Management with the AXA IM integration plan. We intend to generate 20% return on equity in '29, which is the equivalent of over EUR 600 million of additional net earnings.

CPBB, will present its strategy plan targeting 20% pretax return in '28. Subject to successful acquisition of Athlon, we will also present the integration plan with a target return on equity of 18% in '28, adding about EUR 200 million to group earnings.

Finally, we will present the strategic vision for the next chapter at BNL, which has significantly improved its profitability already, thanks to well management costs and a low cost of risk.

I'd like now to discuss our cost income trajectory on Slide 9. We have now set out to lower our cost-to-income ratio from 58% to less than 56% in '28. Obviously, part of this journey will come from the strong revenue trajectory described earlier but we will also be even more disciplined on costs.

At the end of '26, we will have completed our EUR 3.5 billion cost savings program, contributing to the sharp reduction of 6 points in cost-to-income ratio we have seen since '21. These savings have allowed us to develop our platforms at marginal costs and are well balanced between divisions.

We will continue to generate incremental savings going forward but we want to go one step further. Today, we are announcing a new structural transformation plan for support functions, which I will discuss on the next slide.

Why a new plan now? We are nearing the end of our GTS plan, and we are positioned to build on its momentum. Recent acquisitions have expanded our scale and created opportunities for optimization. Reregulation, which brought in layers of complexity and costs is now coming to an end freeing up resources. And finally, many of our businesses are or will present transformation plans and are ready for the next step.

What is the guiding principle of our plan? The plan will rely on mutualizing and standardization as well as on new industrialization opportunities enabled by the widespread strategic development of AI in the group. The plan will cover all entities and all geographies.

Efficiency gains would be greater in activities most affected by the regulatory wave of recent years, such as compliance and risk, as well as in IT that constitutes the largest proportion of the identified cost base. It will also include a transversal approach across the group through operational functions, HR, finance, procurement, communication and facilities. You will probably ask what this new plan to overall our support functions means for the P&L.

We will provide details at our CMD in early '27, but I can make the following comments: The initiative will optimize spendings on about half of our cost base or EUR 15 billion. First benefits will start in '27 and will be amplified as the plan progresses. In contrast, the benefits are anticipated to be negligible in '26. We look to invest regularly throughout the plan as the initiatives are medium term, ensuring that the investments are covered by the savings from inceptions.

Ultimately, the plan will also help revenues and it will improve customer experience and refocus our employees on value-added tasks. Some, but obviously, not all the savings will be reinvested to support our future growth. This initiative will transform BNP Paribas into a more agile, efficient and value-driven organization, better equipped to deliver long-term success and sustainable growth.

Moving now to Slide 11. Our transformation plan will be assisted by AI, but will also facilitate its use, including generative AI. Indeed, having more standardized and mutualized platforms will facilitate its implementation with speed and scale. The value created by AI was focused so far on revenues for the most part, but now it will increasingly benefit costs and risks, including operational risk.

We've already quantified benefits at approximately EUR 600 million to date, and we anticipate reaching EUR 750 million by '26. According to the Evident AI Index, BNP Paribas has emerged as the leading Eurozone bank in AI.

I will now explain what this all means for our shareholders on Slide 12. We enter '26 in good shape with ambitious targets. We expect to generate more than 10% earnings growth CAGR over '25-'28, an acceleration from the previous plan largely helped by much stronger revenue growth than cost growth, as explained earlier. EPS will obviously grow faster than earnings given the buybacks.

Our current distribution policies confirm at 60% for '26. And for the planned '27-'30, we will announce a new policy at our CMD, but it will not be less than 60%.

Let's now focus on our capital path on Slide 13. We are progressing fast towards our new CET1 target of 13%. We've already announced disposal for 13 bps net of the proposed Athlon acquisition. We'll continue to reassess our portfolio with a view to release at a total of 30, 50 bps. Organic capital generation will benefit from accelerated earnings and control risk weight growth at 2%, including securitization and credit insurance.

Finally, we expect the reregulation cycle to end with the FRTB implementation. We're hopeful that the European regulators will ensure a level playing field with banks in other jurisdictions, and we believe there are encouraging signs of possible watering down or delayed implementation which would neutralize some of the impact. For now, we still factor 30 bps impact in the trajectory, but it then to reach 13% by the end of '27 after FRTB and the distribution of the excess above 13% will be decided only starting in '27.

Let me now hand over to Lars, who will present our Q4 results from Slide 17. Lars?

Thanks, Jean-Laurent. Before presenting our pivotal fourth quarter results and 2028 trajectory, I just wanted to make a very short statement regarding our Sudan litigation.

As a reminder, in its decision made public on January 8, 2026, the court granted BNP Paribas' request to proceed with its appeal. We welcome the court's decision and announced yesterday that appeal will be filed by February 9. The proceedings are therefore, progressing as expected and we are thoroughly prepared and confident in the strength of our arguments.

Let's now move to Slide 17 on the solid and pivotal results. So on Slide 17, you can see our revenue growth during the quarter. As you know, our business model is based on solid platforms, that have a strong focus on cross-selling between these platforms and that accounting to -- those cross-sells are accounting for about 1/3 of group revenues.

So if you look at CIB revenues, they were up 1% or almost 5% at constant scope, given the USD evolution. And so this is a very good performance, given a high base a year ago in the fourth quarter '24 that included a capital gain in FICC for almost EUR 80 million, which we mentioned at that time. It's nothing new. I just reminded.

So of course, Global Banking was impacted by lower margins in Transaction Banking due to lower rates, but we had strong capital markets activities, particularly in the Americas. We also had very strong performance of global markets, both FICC and Equity & Prime Services as well as Securities Services. We remained the #1 European investment bank in EMEA in 2025 in a very competitive market. So that's CIB.

If you now look at the second division, CPBS, posted a sharp 5.5% revenue growth helped on one hand by the strong performance of the Eurozone Commercial Banks and the margin improvements at Personal Finance. And all this consistent with the acceleration we had guided for last year in our deep dives.

Next to those, there is also Arval, which is growing, thanks to the now negligible headwinds from car sales results, which means that in 2026, the strong organic growth will become fully visible than it was compared to 2025. Moreover, as Jean-Laurent mentioned, it will be amplified if we successfully acquire Arval. So that's the second.

So if I end up thirdly with IPS, we generated a very high 11% revenue growth, and this is excluding AXA IM. And so if I include it -- well, it is included, it reached almost 40% of growth.

Now we will present the asset management trajectory in more detail at our March deep dive, but the integration, I can already give you the heads-up, is fully on track with the anticipated timeline.

In IPS, all businesses posted top line growth around the 10% mark to give high fee level, they saw good inflow, and they saw very good market activity and levels. We also consolidated HSBC Wealth Management in Germany.

So having looked at these strong revenues, let me now look on Slide 18 on the costs. You see basically that all divisions have positive jaws. That's what you see at the top left. If you look at the bottom left, you can see that our growth grew with 5.2% in the last quarter, which you might consider high. But if you look through it and you basically look at the cost evolution, excluding AXA IM, you see, it is 0.9%. So the difference restructuring costs, which should phase out over time.

Now this will be further accelerated through the review of our support functions, as outlined by Jean-Laurent earlier. These functions represent approximately half of our total cost base, and therefore, provide a significant opportunity for optimization and efficiency gains. Let's remind, I mean, coming out of a period of a lot of integrations, it is time to do this end of review. We've done that in 2012 as well, and so this is a similar exercise.

Now if I look since 2021, we have generated EUR 2.9 billion of cost savings, equivalent to about 10% of our cost base and helping our cost-to-income ratio for 6 points over the period. Our three operating divisions posted positive jaws effects during the quarter, as I mentioned before. And for the second half of 2025, we generated 2.7 points of jaws, exceeding the 2.5 points target we had shared with you.

So we enter 2026 with confidence about our ability to grow revenues and improve the cost-to-income ratio despite the integration efforts and costs at AXA IM.

Well we had that, let's look at Slide 19 and look at the asset quality. So we saw that during the quarter, cost of risk remained low at 34 basis points over outstanding, well within the guidance of being below 40 basis points. And this, despite lower releases of Stage 1 and Stage 2 provisions compared to the fourth quarter of '24.

So we recorded lower Stage 3 provisions than the fourth quarter of '24, which had been burdened by a one-off specific file, but we remain confident that our cost of risk will stay amply below the 40 basis points threshold this year. You can see the breakdown by division on Slide 20, but that's all basically variations on the theme of low or normalized levels.

So in a synthesis, our portfolio is well positioned in the current environment. So having looked at the elements of the P&L, let's now look at capital on Slide 21. So, we reached 12.6% compared to what we announced at the beginning of '25 to 12.3%. And so this 12.6% is up 10 basis points during the quarter -- last quarter of '25. And this, after the fact that during that quarter, we set aside 20 basis points for distribution to shareholders.

So Q4 confirms the trajectory we had indicated that regulatory impacts are receding and organic RWA growth net of SRT is very well contained. Note that our CET is not sensitive to the U.S. dollar weakness as it impacts both the numerator and the denominator of this ratio. As you can see at the bottom, we continue to make good use of SRTs with a cumulative CET1 ratio benefit of 80 basis points built over the years.

Moreover, in 2025, we set up 42 transactions for EUR 27 billion of gross savings and most of our businesses were active, which highlights a significant expertise and discipline. So a payout of at least 60% is confirmed. So in synthesis, you see that we generate free capital and are on track of stepping up our Common Equity Tier 1 ratio.

Finally, let me take you through the Corporate Center on Slide 22. And in particular, given that the Corporate Center performance was below expectations in the second half of '25, in particularly in the third quarter, as we mentioned. We wanted to provide a more nuanced understanding of the factors at play and offer guidance for 2026, just to ensure to have a clear view of our prospects.

As a quick reminder, the Corporate Center is basically made up of two parts. The first part, which you see on the top of the page, pertains to restatements related to insurance activities with basically revenues and costs broadly offsetting each other, and therefore, the gross operating income should be close to 0 annually. That's the first thing.

The second part, which you see at the bottom, it basically pertains to restructuring costs, what we call central shareholders costs that cannot be allocated and that involves then also liquidity costs and other volatile elements like the DVA. So we expect revenues to be around 0 every year.

In 2025, the outcome was a little worse, but we have taken measures to return towards the 0 mark in 2026. So that's the top line. If you then look at the cost line, the first part is the restructuring charges, that should amount to EUR 800 million in 2026 after EUR 600 million in 2025. I remind you that, on average, we have been having EUR 400 million restructuring and they are impacted both in '25 to get to EUR 600 million in '26 to get to EUR 800 million through the AXA IM integration costs. And then there is the last part of the so-called central cost that -- well, shareholder costs that cannot, for tax reasons, be allocated, are expected to be around EUR 600 million in 2026.

So in a nutshell, we forecast a gross operating loss of approximately EUR 1.4 billion in 2026. And this is already factored in into our overall expectation, and we remain comfortable with your current consensus forecast for gross operating income at group level.

Now this is the gross operating income line. If we look below that, we tend to book in that line in the Corporate Center, the revaluation of stakes, which are intended to offset to a significant effect, the restructuring charges. For 2026, we anticipate recognizing an EUR 800 million gain from the AGI transaction and in 2027, not in 2026, the EUR 400 million gain from Allfunds.

So if I can sum up my intervention with what you see on Slide 27, where you see that BNP Paribas is driven by three powerful engines that are integrated as well. And so on one hand, you see a high return CID, which we will continue to grow; on the other hand, you see at the bottom, a capital-light and scalable IPS, which will be transformed, thanks to AXA IM; and thirdly, an accelerating CPBS which where you saw the pivot and the step-up in the fourth quarter.

Together, these businesses give the group visibility, resilience and upside to deliver our targets.

So having said that, I'll now hand it back to Jean-Laurent who will offer some final remarks and conclude our presentation.

Thank you, Lars. To conclude, our fourth quarter '25 was a pivotal moment for the group. And we are now entering our most attractive value creation cycle in more than a decade. Having built platforms that drove particle costs, we will accelerate our progress through a comprehensive review of our support functions. This will enable us to implement AI on a larger scale, driving benefits for our clients, employees and shareholders alike, while laying the groundwork for our '27-2030 plan, with the aim of building an even more efficient and value-creating group. By doing so, we will be well positioned to capitalize on emerging opportunities and drive long-term success.

This concludes our presentation, and we are now happy to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions] First question is from Tarik El Mejjad, Bank of America.

A couple of questions from my side, please. First, on your revenue guidance for the CPBS. I would like to understand a bit more the dynamics, because you focus a lot on the better rate environment with steep curve and higher rates, which is the more fits better your business model. No mention on the volume growth actually in these geographies. I mean you've seen in Q4, your loans have been still stable or even down a bit in France, where there is some dynamic of recovery.

Can you just maybe explain a bit this guidance? If there is an upside from higher lending growth or this is not something that you aim to push and you rather focus on a good margin more contained balance sheet expansion?

Second question was on capital build. In December, you started very strong with some management actions to generate capital quickly. And I think there is still more room to do more. I mean, from -- you already mentioned that Europe made some assets there, some JVs and private equity stakes and so on. Should we still expect you actively looking to get capital faster? I mean, you reiterate 2017 for 13%, but clearly, I think you have more ambitions to do it faster.

And this is -- last one is just a very technical one on the DPS. Given the capital gains you'll have in '26 and '27, how should we think about the DPS you use? Should we -- are you distributing the capital gains as well? Or are you assuming the investments will offset the capital gains and then we just assume DPS on reported? Just want to hear you on that.

So on the DPS, it's very simple. I mean anything that is contributing to the net profit result is going to pay 60% return to shareholders. There is nothing that can be, I would say, hand away from the bottom line. So if you look at the AGI, Ageas for example, capital gain, as said by Lars, half of it to some extent is basically contributed to the guidance because year-after-year, we have a kind of EUR 400 million capital gain. The other EUR 400 million are on top.

And including those one, we are paying 60%. And it goes the same way for, I would say, the Allfunds capital gain, for example. So nothing can escape, let's say, the return to shareholders. So this is the DPS capital build. This is a very high priority at BNP Paribas. We are moving as fast as we can. Any time we can find an opportunity, we move the right way.

You can see that in '25, as you said, we prefer margins to volumes, but all the business are not just the same. So if it's a French mortgage, we don't need that many volumes. If it's Personal Finance, it's a very different story. So it's difficult to give a kind of aggregate number. Lars will give more color on that. But we, in any case, favor profitability against volumes.

And when it comes to disposal, disposal can take some time. So we have a number of situations. You have to negotiate, you have to sign, you have to close and so we can take some. So disposal cannot be accelerated that much if you want to get the right price. So we move as fast as we can for the CET1 and all, I would say, revenues, profits are paying a dividend. So this is the simple approach.

Tarik, and I'll give some further color. So indeed, we are not growing volumes at any cost, yes? We are growing it at a profitable way. And so indeed, if you take France, we are growing our loans by 1%. So it is not that 1% loan growth that generates 5% growth in the top line. What generates the 5% on the top line is basically the redeployment of our deposits.

So we have those non-remunerated deposits which we redeploy on average 5 to 7 years, which basically means each year of the next 5 years, there will be EUR 20 billion to EUR 30 billion of non-remunerated deposits that we will reinvest on the longer end of the term. And that is basically the one that is generating the 5% and why we feel comfortable to say that it's going to be that lift over the longer duration.

Next question is from Delphine Lee, JPMorgan.

Just two questions for me. So the first one is just a follow-up on Tarik's question on volumes, please. So on deposit trends, I get you questions on loans. On deposit trends, we are seeing some very encouraging signs on -- in Belgium, but are you seeing anything, sort of, more positive in France and Italy, which could sort of accelerate the top line trends on top of, sort of, the dynamics on the swaps and new investments that you just mentioned?

My second question is just on your plan on support functions. It is very encouraging to see you focus on optimizing your cost base further from here. I'm just wondering a little bit, sort of, what are you doing a little bit differently compared to the past? And where is that acceleration coming from? You've had EUR 3.5 billion already over '22 and '26. It doesn't look like AI, looking at the chart that you have, is contributing necessarily that much. So just wondering what are you doing differently this time to really generate those additional cost savings?

Delphine, thank you for your question. So now when you're talking about the volumes on the other side of the balance sheet. I mean, as you know, if you look at our liquidity ratios and whatever, you see we have a very solid liquidity ratio. So again, here also on the deposit, margin is key, not the volumes. And in particular, therefore, if there is a focus, it's on the non-remunerated ones. And so in the base that we took, we assumed that there would be stable non-remunerated.

What we see at the moment that actually it's in the core countries where we are, it's even picking up. So we are getting more non-remunerated. So we don't go for the price, as the liquidity we don't need it, but we are attracting an even higher-than-anticipated volumes, which we then can redeploy, as I mentioned just before.

On the cost, Jean-Laurent?

So if we go back to Page 9 -- this is Page 9. So, as you mentioned, we are having currently a trend that is basically in terms of efficiency, EUR 700 million per year. You have the split between the different businesses. If we were to go for a more detailed split, you would see that central functions, group level amounts to more than 20%. And within the remaining part directly within the businesses you would have something roughly around 13% to 15% that belongs to the local business-by-business support functions.

So in total, out of the EUR 700 million per year, you have roughly 1/3, slightly more, meaning EUR 250 million, EUR 300 million of efficiency coming already from support functions either at group level or within the businesses. The rest is very much, I would say, delivered by the businesses itself, especially in the layer that is directly servicing the counterpart, the clients.

So if you look at group functions, if you look at the support functions, group level or within the businesses, as of today, we are very much looking at all that on a stand-alone basis. So one after one. All that, I will say, improvement comes from, I would say, a long list of improvements coming from any function, any platform.

And we will continue that game. But on top of that, we are going to move to a second level, meaning we can consider to have, I would say, either joint ventures in between those support functions or a different approach in between those support functions and the businesses or we could have even potentially the possibility to merge some of those support functions.

So, we are moving from an approach that is being efficient function-by-function to an approach that is redesigning the whole setup. So this is a very different approach. Doing so, we can double what's coming from the support functions. We did that in a number of occasions, the moment of merging BNP and Paribas. We did that when we integrated BNL, the Fortis and a number of other, I would say, situations.

We are doing that basically merging BNP Paribas Asset Management and AXA Investment Managers. So this will represent another layer that is going to be roughly of the same magnitude we're extracting year-after-year from the current situation around support functions. So the support functions will provide not only the EUR 250 million, but an additional typically EUR 250 million. So this is EUR 500 million.

EUR 250 million is basically 0.5 percentage point -- 0.5 point of cost-to-income to be very simple. So we are moving from a trajectory where the cost-to-income was going down 1.5 points every year to 2 points. This is the story.

Said it in another word, instead of delivering EUR 3.5 billion in 5 years, we are going to deliver something close to EUR 4 billion in 4 years, and you can see that on the Page 10.

Page 10, you can see that cumulatively, we delivered EUR 3.5 billion in 5 years, and the next phase is going to be the same momentum plus the add-on, and this is roughly EUR 700 million plus EUR 250 million, then EUR 950 million, close to EUR 1 billion. So this is roughly EUR 4 billion over a 4-year period. So this is the situation.

And we have already enough programs, enough initiatives to deliver the '28 program, the below 56 cost-to-income ratio. We have already this in our pocket to some extent. And this will continue beyond. And probably, we are not going to extract the 100% potential in 4 years. There will be something on top of that the plan after 2030 because you cannot change everything at the same moment.

So the difference again is that not only we are going to improve the efficiency of any individual piece that we are going to combine those different pieces so we can extract additional efficiency with the target probably change to some extent, the design and the perimeters of those different support functions.

And to do that, yes, AI is one of the technology we will leverage, but this is not the only one. A bunch of that is just regular synergies and regular cost cutting because doing that, you are having -- you are identifying overlaps and king those overlaps, you are extracting additional efficiency. So it's something we did already, it's something we already delivered in certain occasions. And this is the right moment to move. Why?

Because of the regulations, reportings, the digitalization, we pursued looking at the past 7, 8 years, we were very much focused on looking and servicing customers and answering anything that was reporting to the supervisors. We did a lot towards customers. We did a lot towards supervisors. And now we have some, I would say, ability to refocus on the, I would say, the measure, the key basis of the company, and this is going to be the focus.

So it's an opportunity. It's a new phase. This will accelerate the efficiency program. And as you can understand, the cost-to-income will decrease slightly faster because of that. The goal of that program is not only to gain additional efficiency, meaning having a better, I would say, return, but it's also a way to have better data within the group. Doing so, you're having more, I would say, integrated processes.

So the internal service, the internal value chain, the way you serve customers is being improved. The way you can, I would say, manage, leverage that as to originate new services is also, I would say, improved. So to some extent, you improve the quality of service towards clients and also innovation. And also you can refocus the teams, colleagues to what can be considered value-added tasks. And this is also very important to attract, I would say, the new colleagues and the younger generation.

So this is what is being said in a very simple way on the right part of the slide. It's not only about efficiency, it's also about servicing better clients, giving a better prospect to colleagues and ultimately giving additional, I would say, return to shareholders. So this is the spirit, and this is the way it goes.

Next question is from Giulia Miotto, Morgan Stanley.

I have two. I'll start with one on the payout mix on Slide 12. I think you say that you will communicate the new distribution policy basically at the next CMD, and I was wondering if perhaps rebalancing away from cash into buybacks is one of the options you're looking at. In the past, you weren't really open to this. Just wondering if that could change?

And then secondly, in the quarter, asset quality was basically non-eventful. But other -- we're seeing other banks in France perhaps having slightly higher cost of risk and mentioning some industries that are impacted or uncertainty is not helpful. What are you seeing on the ground? And do you expect a pickup in cost of risk, most notably with the French corporates?

So on the first question, we have different options. We can change the mix in between the cash dividend and the buyback; we can increase the 60% to, I don't know, 70%; we can opt for a different approach, keeping 60% and giving back everything above 13% Core Tier 1 ratio. So this is part of the next plan. It's too early to say. But clearly, the group becoming more profitable, something will be changed the best interest of the shareholders, obviously. So this is the first point.

Looking at the asset quality, I mean, we are basically a European bank, the French part is a piece of the total. This is not typically BNP Paribas anymore. So France is contribute to the total, but this is not on average BNP Paribas. BNP Paribas is much more a European platform. I've always said that we are focusing the company and the businesses on the best part of the market, meaning the best, I would say, counterparty in terms of risk profile, we are very focused on that.

Doesn't mean that from time-to-time, we cannot bump into a certain situation. But on average, we are very focused on that. And if you take away Personal Finance, that is a slightly different type of business because in consumer lending, you always structurally a higher cost of risk. Away from that, the cost of risk at BNP Paribas is below 20 bps in terms of provisioning compared to outstanding.

So it's a low level and it will stay that way just because we focus and this is correct from time-to-time, I should say, every day. We are giving up some revenues just to protect that approach when we believe a certain situation is not relevant or it's not, I would say, aligned with our strategy. So looking at us, looking at our business model, we're not seeing currently any deterioration.

And looking at the portfolio we are having, we do not forecast any deterioration. So in that respect, yes, it's a confirmation of the quality of the balance sheet, but there is nothing new in that respect.

Next question is from Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs.

Just two for me. So first on cost. For 2026, specifically, you used to have a 61% cost-to-income ratio target which I guess has now, sort of, been replaced by that 3-year walk towards 56% in '28. We have the 5% revenue CAGR and the 1.5 points of jaws per year. But I guess, just specifically, how should we think about the outlook for costs year-over-year in 2026?

And then secondly, how should we think about the EUR 635 million and the EUR 750 million of AI value creation on Slide 11? Is that telling us that if AI like wasn't the thing, the pretax profit for BNP Paribas would have been EUR 635 million lower in '25? And I don't know if that's a net or a gross figure, i.e., whether the CapEx and OpEx spend on AI products and services is embedded in those numbers.

For '26, we didn't put that in writing, but the cost-to-income for '26 is 60%, 6-0. We said 61% in November. But obviously, improving the curve. We're also improving '26. So '26 is going to be 60%.

On your second question, I will ask Lars to answer.

Yes. If you look at the chart that you see, so we basically say with all the elements that we put in motion, let's say, in the run-of-the-mill activities. And if we identify the ones that we have on AI. If we look at what we have been doing in the last couple of years, the main effect that we have been doing, which was like to say more the machine learning AI effect, the main impact was in the light green, light blue, whatever you want to call it, was on the revenue.

So it was stimulating the revenues, it was identifying the products for our customer and the likes. What we see now in the work that we have been doing, the testing that we have been doing and the end-to-end process that we identified is that we see that the next wave of these kind of using AI in our day-to-day improvements will also have a very material impact and a stepped-up impact when it comes to cost and cost of risk, yes?

So we will be able to be reducing the cost to serve. But also, whenever it comes to risk activities, be it KYC, so that you will see that in the cost. But it can also be in the workout with elements of cost of risk, where by the use of AI, we have more data available, and therefore, the impact of the total will be positive on the cost of risk. So that's the kind of thing. So we do the investments in our run-of-the-mill. This is kind of the synergies that, that aspect generates and how we intend to evolve it going forward.

Next question is from Jacques-Henri Gaulard, Kepler Cheuvreux.

So two questions. The first one, coming back to the cost-to-income ratio. The one thing which is really spectacular is that we started from target objective of 60%, 61%. Then in November, we get to 58%, and now 2 months later, we get to 56%. So it's been really quite brutal in terms of effectively, I would say, evolution of mindset.

What was there? And what changed really? Was it really the transformation plan for support function that got you okay. We're going to do that 2% more and more the revenue evolution where you feel it's a bit better?

And linked to that, how much is it going to cost you? Will it be part of the -- this transformation plan? Will it be part of the minus EUR 1.4 billion that is in the Corporate Center? That's the first question.

And the second one, which is natural. If we get from that target of 61%, 58%, 56% and then why is the RoTE only moving from 13% to more than 13%? I guess, the more than 13% is, is it 13.1%, is it 14%, is it 15%?

So to be very simple. We started -- so the program, the transformational program, we are, I would say, presenting today is something that will be up and running beginning of '27. We decided to start, I would say, the early, I would say, work in September '25. So we started the first, I would say, working group in September. So in November, we were not, I would say, confident enough. I mean, there was something on top of the targets we were kind of corresponding to the natural, I would say, evolution. So we were not having already in your hands, I would say, a representation of what could that represent in '28.

So now we are much, much more advanced. We know better the program. And ultimately, we will give you the target for 2030, because this is a program that is for '27, 2030 and '28 level is just a kind of interim, I would say, projections. So 2030 is going to be much better, obviously. So this is the reason why in November, we were not prudent but communicating around, I would say, the regular trajectory, meaning kind of '21-'26 program continuing the same way.

And now we are much more confident on the impact of the new program. So this is basically the situation. The program is going to be funded by the company in one way or the other, and probably because this is the way we booked the transformational costs when we are having transformational cost is group level. So this is part of the EUR 1.4 billion, and we have no intention to grow that amount. It's probably something we'll try to diminish rather to increase. So -- but in any case, everything is factored in the projection.

And it's what a part of the EUR 600 million because the other part is the restructuring cost. So that's what it is. So we will run it within that. And then when it comes to the RoTE, yes, we stepped it up over 13%, and that's basically it. So you know we are always a bit prudent in what we share. So it is above 13%.

Next question is from Andrew Coombs, Citi.

If I could just have one follow-up on the cost-to-income and then I ask a separate one as well. On the cost-to-income, just going through the math that you outlined earlier, you talked about how you're currently doing about EUR 700 million of sales a year, and that's contributing to the 1.5 points jaws each year and that by effectively now realizing an additional EUR 250 million on top in each of '27 and '28 that would get you to 2 points per year, which takes you from the 60% to the 56%. Just backing into that, implicitly, you're assuming similar revenue growth, therefore, in '27 and '28 as you have had over '24, '25 and '26 in that case. Is that a fair assumption?

And then second question, and I appreciate you are going to give a deep dive on this later in the year. But perhaps you could just touch on the rationale for Athlon, the EUR 200 million net benefit to earnings, do you expect what to assume within that in terms of synergies and the underlying business trends?

So you're correct, basically because the cost-to-income is based upon the evolution of the cost base and as well the evolution of the top line to go through that competition, basically, yes, we're assuming, I would say, the revenues are going the same way, knowing that in the previous plan, we were, to some extent, handicapped by the rate effect. So, on a stand-alone basis, the next plan should be stronger.

But in the last plan, also, we had some external growth. So it's fair to say that for that computation, we're taking basically the same kind of, I would say, top line evolution. And in fact, the difference is very much the one you underline. I mean, EUR 250-plus million cost reduction a year is 0.5 point of cost-to-income. So this is as simple as that. So you are going down by 1.5 per year, and then it becomes 2 points per year. So this is exactly the math.

And if we can do a better job, we will do a better job. But again, the '28 target we are giving is just kind of interim target. This is not the representation of the strength and the power of the new initiative. 2030 will have to be better, clearly.

On Athlon, we're having a very strong leader with Arval in car fleet leasing throughout Europe. In terms of market share, it's the second player behind events. Roughly, if you concentrate on the real car fleet leasing, which is the piece that is profitable, because managed fleet -- management of fleet is a very different story. I mean the revenues are absolutely not of the same kind.

So if you concentrate on the core business, that is the real car fleet leasing. Arval is growing by net 100,000 vehicles per year and progressively the gap in between the leader and Arval is diminishing. And the platform is strong enough to deliver a bolt-on, that is not that huge. This is not a merger of equals. This is something that is proportionate, quite easy to deliver and a very good complement in terms of geographies.

Doing so and considering that Arval is the fast-growing platform within Europe, probably in the years to come, the new platform, I would say, based upon the aggregation of Arval and Athlon will be at par with the leader. And in that business, volumes and size are relevant. Because it gives you a certain, I would say, traction in your conversations with car manufacturers.

So it's important, and it makes a difference to be at 2 million or to be at 2.5 million per year. So this is the goal of that move to become a core leader, to complement geographies, to deliver additional efficiency. And very -- in a very simple way, I mean, we are going to integrate Athlon platform within the one of Arval. So we will extract a lot of cost synergies.

And these cost synergies will, I would say, produce this additional efficiency and return. So it's in terms of size, a very reasonable move, quite easy to integrate, no disruption, fast-growing project. Ultimately, you are building the co-leader at par. And again, size is of essence in that business. So this is the strategy that is behind this move.

So basically leading to a 27% pretax return.

Next question is from Flora Bocahut, Barclays.

The first question, I'd like to go back to the cost, but to discuss a little more the potential for restructuring costs. Because you have the deep dive, you're going to do in H1 on Belgium. You have the one you're going to do in H2 on the P&L. Obviously, the Athlon acquisition you just mentioned, the situation at HSBC Wealth business you acquired in Germany. So you've guided on the restructuring cost for '26, especially from the AXA IM situation. But should we expect potentially more restructuring costs coming in, in '26-'27 from what I just mentioned or is that already embedded in the cost-to-income ratio that you present?

And the second question is on the capital. Basically on capital, the question would be the CET1 target of 13% is for by the end of '27. I just wanted to understand what are the odds? How high are the chances that you can achieve that already in '26? And actually, regarding that, what would be your expectation from today's standpoint on FRTB specifically?

So in terms of costs, everything is covered. Nothing is being hidden somewhere. Everything is covered in our trajectory, including, I would say, restructuring costs that could come from, I would say, aggregation, external growth or internal programs. Again, everything is being covered, nothing on top or on the side.

On equity, you never know. We do the -- I would say, we go as fast as we can to some extent. We were supposed to deliver 12.3% this year, we are delivering 12.6%. So we saw some kind of acceleration. But I don't believe that 13% by year-end '26 is reasonable. If it's a necessity, we can deliver that, but I don't believe this is reasonable.

For the FRTB, not what we believe, but what we hear and what we understand that there are a couple of initiatives that could end up ultimately with a kind either of postponement of the FRTB for a certain number of years or a process that would implement FRTB while neutralizing the impact. This is basically the two voices we are hearing.

Why? Because, obviously, the U.S. universe is not moving, implementing the FRTB so fast. So it's a question of global competition for the banking system in Europe, in the Eurozone. So there's a certain probability that ultimately the impact is not going to be 30 bps, but you don't know. And in any case, we are prepared to deliver the implementation of the FRTB because there is an operational dimension, so we are, I would say, full speed on that dimension.

So we will deliver, in any case, the implementation, and we are preparing the trajectory in terms of CET1 to be able to absorb that potential 30 bps headwinds. So, I don't know how to say that. So yes, there are scenarios. It's very difficult to give a probability, let's say, 50% chance that ultimately this could be watered down. But in any case, we are prepared, I would say, to deliver those 30 bps, and we're prepared to operationally implement the FRTB.

Yes. And maybe, Flora, to put a number on it. So as we said, for the restructuring, we basically have foreseen that's what we announced, EUR 800 million for '26, and that will basically go down to EUR 550 million the year thereafter. And that is the cost base within which we will deliver the things that we mentioned.

Okay. Can I just follow up with a very quick one on the timing on FRTB? Do you think we will know in H1 this year?

What we hear is that -- so the European Commission is having the hand on this. So whatever Jean-Laurent said, that they are looking at options, it's basically the commission. And so therefore, if the commission once or cannot postpone it, but needs to implement something with an effect which is neutral, then it has to be ready by '27. And so that is why they are working on it now. And so yes, it's not impossible that we will have a view by the summer.

Next question is from Sharath Kumar, Deutsche Bank.

I have two questions, one on capital and one on Arval. Looking at your capital buildup, I hear you when you say disposals cannot be accelerated that much in the near term if you want to get the right price. But given what you've seen happened to your share price with the faster buildup of CET1, would you be open to exploring a minority stake sale perhaps through an IPO for more scaled assets like your asset management business or Arval to achieve a faster route to 13% CET1? That's the first one.

Second, on Arval, again, would it be a fair conclusion to say that consensus underestimates your strength by factoring in only 5% revenue growth for 2026, given your organic revenues grew by 11% in the fourth quarter? Your fleet is growing very well and you would face extremely negligible impacts from used car revenues for 2027, in that context, can you also confirm that you'll continue to grow fleet around 5% in 2026?

Listen, on capital, as you know, we are intrinsically generating capital. As I mentioned earlier, you'll see that with the 10 basis points that we generated in the fourth quarter, on average, on a year, we generate 30 basis points. We assume that there could be some supervisory regulatory overhang, so we generate 20 basis points. So we're already at 12.6%. So that's the speed at which we go and then some sales will further step it up.

So we're really on track. And so having a setup with joint ventures with those key activities like Arval and Asset Management that we consider key in the cross-sell and in the integration that we do, that is an option we do not consider. So we consider -- we have very fast organic growth and then we will dispose things, which are the fast track on which we go.

And so, with respect to the rest on Arval, yes, we have guided the growth that we have on the fleet. And whatever we see at this stage is that growth we are having. If you look at -- so the overall growth we see that and we also confirm the non-effect of the resale value of the cars. If you see the prices of both the EVs and the ICE, they basically don't deteriorate. So also that assumption is clocking in. And so that's why we feel comfortable with the outlook.

Next question is from Pierre Chedeville, CIC Market Solutions.

One remark question, I would say, on Slide 8 regarding BNL because I noticed that for every business above, you mentioned RoNE and precise deadline, I would say. But not for BNL, we have nothing, and I was wondering why this uncertainty in BNL, that you don't feel for Belgium or Arval, for instance?

And more globally, I think we all have seen clearly your new trajectory for 2030. But at the end of the day, if we take one of your best peer in Italy, and I know that you know very well is banking market. You remain, I would say, 20 points above in cost-to-income and more than 10 points below in terms of profitability. And I was wondering, in the past, we could say it was because of the high interest rates, variable rates, et cetera. But this is normalizing. And I don't understand this gap remains so high with this type of peers. And I was wondering if, I would say, will we miss something in France in terms of IT, I don't know something which is not very clear for me?

And my second question, in your trajectory, we also see that many players are pushing very hard in their retail businesses, on the digitalization, not only AI, but also digitalization with online banks, things like that. And I was wondering in your cost-to-income improvement, what do you see -- which could be the part of the digitalization, for instance, Hello bank! development, et cetera, but not only in France, but more generally in your CPBS business?

On that second question, I mean, if you look at the efficiency program, we talked about support functions, but you have all the rest that is much more, I would say, the part that is servicing directly customers. So it could be commercial banks, it could be CIB, it could be insurance, all the good progress we are delivering are coming from, to some extent, digitalization. So this will continue.

And if you look closely at the plan we already communicated that Personal Finance or CPBF France, and you will see just the same with Belgium and again with BNL, digitalization is of essence in that part when it comes to improving the efficiency of a business platform, and the layer that is directly servicing customers is moving that way. So it's something that started in the previous plan that expanded in the current plan, and that will continue to expand in the next plan.

Because remember that you have the new program, but anything that is optimizing the efficiency of the businesses will stay. This is very important. And again, part of it is the digitalization, which ultimately has good strong impact in terms of FTEs efficiency, quality of service and so on and so on.

For your first question, on BNL. BNL, they're going to deliver the plan. We have a good vision of the plan as of today. Obviously, this will be communicated in the second part of '26. And remember that those plans, they are for the '27-2030 plan, so nobody is late. On the contrary, you have a bunch of businesses that are moving ahead of the plan and BLN will communicate in due time and there is no specific, I would say, complexity with BNL. It's a different market, it's a different positioning and you will see the result.

And then comparing our group to, I would say, more domestic players, let's say, that are operating in one market where margins on loans are much higher than in Belgium or France because this is a reality and that are having the floating rate, I would say, type of balance sheet.

It creates a large gap in terms of return on asset. Because the situation we are in today we are back to a normal growth, let's say, more than 5% in those commercial banks we are having at BNP Paribas. But this is the beginning. When you have a floating rate balance sheet, I would say, the -- what took place in '22-'23 with the rates was all of the sudden violent, very rapid increase of the intrinsic margin of the whole book. As this will be much more progressive.

And in any case, in some countries, you are having for certain asset, a better margin. This is linked to a number of local factors. This is not linked to the business model of the bank in the country. So again, we are progressing well. Return on tangible equity used to be at 10% in '21, will be at 12% in '26. We're going to be at more than 13% in '28. And clearly, we will be at a much higher level in 2030. This is the situation.

And again, that business model is very diversified. And in terms of risk profile over the cycle, not short-term period, but the cycle the long way, is an excellent, I would say, dimension of the company, and it gives, I would say, additional security to something that is much more concentrated on a certain market that could be at a certain moment in the cycle in a different position because of a different level of diversification.

So this is our business model. And again, can be compared just that way towards the domestic bank that, to some extent, a much more mass market compared to the type of, I would say, franchise we're having in our different commercial banks.

Next question is from Anke Reingen, RBC.

The first is just on the below 56% cost-to-income ratio. And listening to the call, you obviously see much more -- I mean, not confident, but it seems more visibility on getting to the 56% and below. I just want to confirm, is that because you think you basically have more visibility on the cost levers and the revenues is more underpinned on -- because of the trends in the retail operations on the NII benefit?

And when you think about the below 56%, do you think where you stand now, are you potentially even doing better on costs than you're currently envisaging? Or is it, basically, a revenue function?

And then secondly, on the corporate and investment bank on your Slide 8, where you show us the different moving parts, see above 13% RoTE. And I guess if FRTB wouldn't be coming in, then you could free up the capital and we have 30 basis points more. But also in terms of like operational trends, 2025 was quite a good year, how do you think about the different revenue drivers to keep that profitability outside of FRTB at around the same level or potentially even higher?

So the cost-to-income evolution is very much -- if you compare the target we are giving to them the one we gave in November, the difference is basically just the level of cost. It has nothing to do with the revenue trajectory. So this is one.

If you imagine that for the entirety of the '27-2030 program, if you go down by 2 points of cost-to-income again in '29 and '30, you are down to 52%. And then you are still left with some marginal cost growth model. And so you are becoming quite close to the 50% level. So let us see what will be the result of the '27-2030 plan, but we are probably in 2030, quite close to 50% in terms of cost-to-income. '28 is just the beginning of the program.

For CIB, CIB will continue to grow at marginal cost. It has an excellent trajectory. This year, CIB was, to some extent, a bit handicapped by, let's say, the corporate bank. I mean we saw because of geopolitical issues, lack of momentum in Europe, globally, not because of BNP Paribas, we saw a number of, I would say, programs, investments, aggregation, M&A have been postponed.

So well, the corporate bank was just stable, resilient, but didn't grow. So that was the situation in '25. We have good reasons to believe that this will be rebalanced rapidly looking ahead. In any case, again, the CIB platform will continue to grow at a marginal cost. So this will contribute to the increase of the return on tangible equity.

Looking at the FRTB or not the FRTB, it's too early to discuss this. We'll see probably in the coming months, maybe before summer or autumn end of that year, we'll probably have a, I would say, position at the European level. And based on this, we will consider which direction is the right one for the company.

I mean, we have to be very careful. We have to be very sure that the new, I would say, the new regulation, if it's a new regulation is stable or not stable. You never know. You have to be very cautious in that type of situation. We are prepared to deliver those 30 bps on top. We prefer, obviously, not to have to deliver those 30 bps on top because simple, but we have to be very cautious about that. So the day we know we can comment in a more precise way.

But to give some color, right, the way what we hear is that Europe wants to align with what other authorities are doing. So imagine that those other authorities are taking a decision in a couple of years. It might be that there is a relief from FRTB for a couple of years, but then it will come. So that's why, I mean, we prepare to be ready for it.

Next question is from Matthew Clark, Mediobanca.

A couple of questions. Firstly, you used to have, I think, a 20 basis point placeholder regulatory headwind penciled in for 2026. I just wanted to check whether that's still the case? It looks, I think, on a chart may be a bit smaller, but that could just be I'm reading it wrong.

And then second question or 2.5 question is on Belgian NII and Arval revenues in the fourth quarter versus the third quarter. There was quite a strong increase for both those line items. Just wondering whether the fourth quarter was clean or there were any lumpy items? We've seen disposals or dividends or revaluation of stakes, et cetera. Muddy the waters there in the past. So just to check of our revenues and Belgian NII, were they clean in the fourth quarter?

Matthew, just to clarify on the capital. So what we assumed, as I said, take the 10 basis points that you saw of capital increase in the fourth quarter is like around 7%, which basically means that on a yearly basis, we generate 30 basis points. And then we've guided that we assumed that there would be 10 basis points next year of the regulatory supervisory overhang. And so that leads to the 20 basis points that you had, and that's why the 12.6% should become 12.8% at year-end.

Then on the pickups that you said. So both, if we start with Belgium. Belgium, the pickup that you saw in the fourth quarter is the one we announced also for France a quarter earlier. So it is the mechanical effect, as I mentioned, of having all the windfalls being bizarre product in the Belgium environment, which is basically gone. And therefore, the fact that we redeploy those non-remunerated deposits at the longer end. So that is the pickup that you saw, and it's the pivot that we announced.

And when you look at Arval compared to the third quarter that in the third quarter, we still had some revaluation effects that were present that you basically do not have in this quarter comparison. So the comparison quarter -- on the fourth quarter did -- was not impacted by the residual car value, which the third quarter still was. So that is the intrinsic read of what you see is indeed the intrinsic growth.

Just to check there on that, what was the negative revaluation used car sales results or how have you described it in the third quarter? Because I thought it was 0-ish for both third quarter and fourth quarter?

No, no, no. It's 0 in the -- yes, so the effect was 0 in the fourth quarter of '25, right? And it was 9 in the third quarter in that. But let's not forget that indeed, Arval intrinsically, independent of that, has a kind of seasonal effect in the fourth quarter.

No more questions?

No more questions registered at this time, sir.

Okay. So you can very much count on us, we'll deliver. Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you so much. Have a good day.

Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the call of BNP Paribas Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Results. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.

Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the presentation of the BNP Paribas Third Quarter 2025 Results with Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer; and Lars Machenil, Group Chief Financial Officer; Sandro Pierri, CEO of BNP Paribas Asset Management and AXA IM will present the AXA IM strategic integration within the group.

For your information, this conference call is being recorded. Supporting slides are available on BNP Paribas IR website, invest.bnpparibas.com. [Operator Instructions]

I would like now to hand the call over to Jean-Laurent Bonnafe, Group Chief Executive Officer. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. So good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Before we move on to the quarter's results, I would like to just take a moment to share some context related to the decision issued by the civil court in the U.S. case and how we see things moving forward.

So this morning, first, we made a public statement, which explain our position on this matter. This verdict is in connection with very old facts relating to banking services that BNP Paribas provided more than 15 years ago. We are highly confident that our planned appeal will demonstrate that this judgment was incorrect. U.S. law has allowed and the court has decided to apply Swiss law to this case. And evidence of such Swiss law has not been allowed to be presented. This application of Swiss law has been confirmed by the Swiss government itself. The applicable laws don't lead to liability acquisition in this case.

The banking services that the bank provided didn't cause plaintiffs prejudice and no evidence has been brought to prove that it did. Because the verdict is fundamentally flawed, the bank will pursue its appeal and is confident that the verdict will ultimately be overturned. The appeal case will be reviewed by a panel of 3 professional judges.

Now we're aware that this case has prompted some speculation about the precedent it might set. So let me be very clear on this point. The damages awarded were specific to 3 individuals, extrapolation is not permitted. The court has very clearly indicated that any future claims will be assessed on an individual basis. So given the ongoing nature of the litigation, we will not be commenting further on this topic today. BNP Paribas once again is confident in its legal arguments and that the verdict will be overturned on appeal. We look forward to focusing on our discussion today on this quarter's results.

So if we move on to Slide 4. Our third quarter results are solid and allow us to confirm our target of over EUR 12.2 billion of net profit for '25. Our revenues are up 5.3% this quarter. Revenues of our operating divisions, excluding AXA IM are up 3.5% and a strong 4.9% at constant exchange rates. CIB revenues posted another record year with 4.5% growth, plus 7% at constant exchange rates, driven by Global Markets and Security Services. Global Banking was resilient despite a more challenging context than last year.

CPBS revenues have accelerated and are up 3.1%, thanks to the strong performance of our Eurozone commercial banks with acceleration in net interest income, up 4.5% and an improvement in specialized businesses. Personal Finance is delivering on the strategic plan we detailed in June, and Arval's organic growth is an elevated 9.3%.

Finally, IPS consolidated AXA IM for the first time, and I will comment on this later. IPS recorded 2.9% organic revenue growth with a robust performance for Wealth Management, Insurance and Asset Management, also mitigated somewhat by Real Estate and IPS Invest. We remain committed to cost control and we have already implemented most of our targeted EUR 600 million cost savings measures for this year. This results in a two-point jaws effect for operating divisions, excluding AXA IM. At 39 bps, our cost of risk remains within our guidance of less than 40 bps despite a more challenging environment. Lars will elaborate on this later.

All in all, our net profit was up 6.1%, meaning we are on track to achieve our target of more than EUR 12.2 billion this year.

Moving on to our CET1 ratio at a very solid 12.5%. We have fully absorbed the impact of the AXA IM acquisition of 35 bps. This strong quarterly performance, which Lars will elaborate on shortly, enables us to deliver beyond our pre-FRTB target of 12.3%. Let me pause briefly on this point.

We're now concluding a full year regulatory and supervisory cycle, characterized by the finalization of Basel and significant model updates, cycle, which has been particularly heavy for BNP Paribas. This cycle has represented around 160 basis points or EUR 12 billion, equivalent to EUR 3 billion per year. We are now entering a new cycle where risk-weighted growth will primarily be driven by organic momentum estimated at less than 2% per year based on recent historical trends. This is an important and positive message as it naturally opens up new perspectives in terms of capital generation.

Moving to Slide 5. Our third quarter performance demonstrates acceleration across our operating division as well as the first time integration of AXA IM. Despite a particularly high FX impact this quarter, our operating divisions generated 2 percentage points jaws effect, excluding AXA IM and posted an increase of profit before tax of 7.5%. The third quarter reaffirms our confidence that the growth trajectory we embarked on is delivering.

Moving now to Slide 6. First, our scaled CIB platform is a strong engine of growth, reaching excellent level of efficiency and profitability as illustrated by its strong of 22.2%. We expect it to continue gaining market share while maintaining its proven capital discipline. Second, IPS already benefits from a high room 23.7%, which is expected to improve even further. We also maintained that IPS is set to reach 20% of the group's pretax profit in the coming years. We are creating a European leader in asset management at the core of our integrated model, the impact of the AXA IM acquisition will be substantial. It will add more than 50 basis points to our group return on tangible equity as early as '28, and I will come back to this in a few minutes.

Beyond Asset Management, while developing our European Wealth Management platform and IPS will also benefit from both external and organic growth at BNP Paribas Cardif as well as from its strategic partnerships.

Finally, CPBS. The Eurozone commercial banks are starting to benefit from a supportive interest rate environment as evidenced by this quarter's performance and we're improving the profitability of each business line where needed. Today, we're announcing a deep dive in the first half of '26 to present the financial trajectory of CPBB in Belgium. We intend to improve the ROTE from 13% in '24 to 20% in '28 and 23% in '30. Together with the plans we have already presented for CPBF and Personal Finance, this means we will improve profitability from 10% drawn to about 18% on 1/3 of the risk weight or 2/3 of CPBS risk weight. BNP Paribas Bank Polska will also host a Capital Market Day on the 11th December. The plan that is coming to an end this year enabled us to implement BNP Paribas model in Poland and the new 2030 plan will bring Bank Polska profitability to the best standards of Polish banks.

At Arval, the strong organic growth, plus 9.3% in third quarter '25 will no longer suffer from the buzz effect linked to used car prices. Overall, we will raise group return on tangible equity to 13% as early as '28 and reached a core equity Tier 1 of 12.5% post FRTB in '27. This marked the first 2 steps in the rollout of the future '27 strategic plan.

Let me now outline on Slide 7, the significant positive impact of the AXA IM acquisition on our financial trajectory. We expect to generate EUR 550 million of revenues and cost synergies by '29. Thanks to AXA IM, IPS will see its contribution to group earnings rise to about 20% in the midterm, and we expect our return on tangible equity to see an improvement of more than 40 basis points from this acquisition at group level. We expect as well our return on the EUR 2.8 billion of invested capital to reach 18% in '28 and 20% in '29. This is post-tax. This is equivalent to more than EUR 600 million of additional net earnings. We reaffirm on Slide 8, our '26 trajectory, leading to an acceleration in shareholders' returns.

I will now hand over to Sandro Pierri, CEO of BNP Paribas Asset Management, to discuss the AXA IM project.

So thank you, Jean-Laurent and good afternoon to everyone. Maybe just a quick intro. I'm Sandro Pierri, I've been the CEO of BNP Paribas Asset Management since September '21, but I spent all of my career, which is now 35 years in asset management before joining BNP, I've been 13 years at Pioneer Investment, where the last 3 years, I've been the CEO.

So as we approach the AXA IM integration, and I think we can go to the Slide 10. It's very important because this acquisition enabled us to reach scale in asset management, notably in long-term savings. It strengthened the growth momentum on our IPS franchise but also gives us the critical mass and ambition to become a leading player. We will be, in fact, the third largest European asset manager with EUR 1.6 trillion of AUM and if we focus on long-term savings, we are the leader in European long-term savings with EUR 850 billion AUM. We'll also be the leader in alternative assets in Europe by a significant margin with EUR 300 billion of AUM, which we believe is going to be a very powerful differentiating factor offering significant growth potential, underpinned by our highly skilled and renowned teams.

Clearly, the new scope of our asset management platform, combined with the strength of our integrated model, will unlock significant synergies and operational efficiency. By the end of 2029, as Jean-Laurent has indicated, we expect EUR 550 million of profit before taxes from revenue and cost synergies across the entire group. And AXA IM is clearly a catalyst for our long-term growth ambitions, bringing many tangible benefits.

First, clearly, we will rely more strongly on internal capabilities of services, leveraging our internal expertise. A good example would be the CIB Security Services. Secondly, clearly, we'll capitalize on the development of new partnership with insurers and pension funds. Thirdly, the acceleration of cross-selling within the group business. Fourthly, the expansion of the group originate-to-distribute model, which will connect our asset manager with asset origination business within CIB and CPBS. And finally, the strong acceleration of our alternative asset distribution, both internally and externally.

Now if we move on to the next slide, which is Slide 11. These transactions is not only about scale, but it's clearly about growth. We believe we are very well positioned to capture growth opportunities in Asset Management, thanks to a number of distinctive competitive advantages.

First, we have an unmatched breadth of offering in Europe at scale from ETF, money market, active, medium, long term and alternative. The second element is that our group integrated model provides exclusive access to permanent capital with the partnership we also have with Cardif. Origination in partnership with our CIB franchise and strong distribution capabilities, CPBS and wealth. So the ability to leverage our One Bank model is clearly a key differentiating features.

From a business perspective, the combined AUM seems to be very balanced, as you can see in one of this chart, both across asset classes but also across distribution network. With both AXA and BNP Paribas channel, but also external distribution and external institutional clients and also a very strong footprint with our joint ventures, mostly in Asia.

And lastly, in terms of competitive advantages, we need to flag our leading position in sustainability, which will contribute to long-term investment performance and will also help to better meet client expectations.

So if we go into the next slide is really once we have elaborated on the key distinctive competitive advantages, we put -- we laid down a plan, which we think is very clear, and we have a commitment to executing as fast as we can. And the strategy is, in a way, quite simple. On one side, we want to maximize the potential of the 2 investment platforms, the alternative one and the liquid. In alternative assets, our growth potential builds on a solid and very consistent track record. On the size of our blockbuster funds, a full range in coverage, which spans from real estate, alternative credit, infrastructure, private equity, which also includes secondary markets and also on the prerequisite of having a full alignment of interest between AXA, Cardif and third party.

On the liquid side, the combination of scale, strong performance culture and results in active strategy, both equity and fixed income, as well as the renewed ambitions for our ETF platform, which year-to-date has been the fastest-growing player in Europe on a relative basis, reaffirms our confidence that we are very well equipped to deliver on our growth ambitions. We have a very clear client focus to ensure that we provide the best-in-class products and services.

So the strategy then from a distribution perspective is really focused on institution and retail and wealth. As far as the institutional clients are concerned, we -- our goal is to be the go-to platform for insurers and pension funds, leveraging on our strategic partnership with AXA and BNP Paribas Cardif. In Retail and Wealth Management, we're unlocking the potential of alternatives, the so-called democratization of private assets. And we also aim to expand distribution partnership through innovative digital solutions.

So that's as much as I can share at this stage on a very exciting project, and I look forward to seeing you at our deep dive in the first half of 2026, where we'll share more on our strategy, a unique positioning among European asset manager to offer solutions across the full spectrum from liquid to illiquid thus leveraging scale, expertise and innovation to serve all client segments.

With that, let me now hand over to Lars, who will walk us through some of the key figures. Lars on to you.

Thank you, Sandro. Let's move to Slide 13 with respect to the numbers underlying this transaction. And as mentioned, by Jean-Laurent, this acquisition will generate over 50 bps to the group's RoTE in 2028. Now the transaction itself will have a return on invested capital of over 18% in '28 and 22% by 2029. How do we get to this return? First, by maintaining strong discipline and efficiency in building this combined asset management platform at scale, as mentioned by Sandro. So we will generate EUR 400 million of cost savings, representing approximately 18% of the combined cost base. These cost savings will be generated as we merge the 3 asset management platforms. So AXA IM, BNP Paribas Asset Management and BNP Paribas REIM with a streamlined product offering, a single front-to-back system and a unified workforce. We'll, of course, optimize our organization, our real estate footprint and our external spending and is leveraging the size of the group and the scale that we can reach. So we expect to achieve full realization of the synergies by 2029 with 2/3 by the end of '27. So that's on the cost.

Secondly, we are committed to unlocking the full potential of revenue synergies. We will generate EUR 150 million of these top line synergies and they come in 2 types. First of all, there is the internalization of operations. For example, with the broader use of CIB, Security Services for custodian services across the platform or by leveraging the new asset management platform to better serve internal group clients like Cardif and wealth management and support their growth. Secondly, on the revenues through an accelerated commercial development, thanks to our competitive offering as detailed also by Sandro. Of those revenue synergies, 50%, 50% will be activated by 2027 with a full run at 2029. A few additional elements to understand this full impact. We expect to have EUR 690 million of integration charges and the majority of this will be booked in 2025 and in particular, 2026, with a more limited part in '27 and '28.

Finally, as you know, a significant portion of the purchase price comes from the value of the partnership and this generates an annual amortization of the so-called prepaid expense of around EUR 100 million booked in AXA IM. This integration is a catalyst for our strategic ambitions and a turning point for IPS creating a powerful investment platform for the future. So this is the complementary insights on AXA IM, and let's now go back to the group results, and let me take you through the operating efficiency that you can see on Slide 17.

You will note that our costs are up a limited of 1% if you exclude the impact of AXA IM. Our operating divisions generated positive jaws of 2 points with CIB and IPS generating over 3 points in jaws and CBPS 0.7 as a result of, on one hand, accelerating NBI, as we mentioned before; and secondly, reducing the drag from car sales revenues at Arval.

If with this, I can ask you to go to Slide 18, where we show our regular improvement in the cost-income ratio as we expect to maintain our trajectory in the years to come. So this was the cost. Let's now turn to the cost of risk, and let's turn to Slide 19 and 20. So on Slide 19, our cost of risk this quarter reached 39 basis points, in line with our guidance to be below the 40 basis points, which is the average of the cycle, and we maintain our guidance for the full year. Compared with last year, there were fewer releases in the so-called Stage 1 and Stage 2 provisions. So the cost of risk at group level, excluding these write-backs is stable. If you look at Slide 20, you'll see by division that cost of risk is stable or down, including a Personal Finance in line with our trajectory.

Europe Mediterranean is the exception with the normalization from a low level of cost of risk last year due to the higher cost of risk in Turkey on households in the context of high inflation. Cost of risk, they are also stable at CIB with Global Banking close to 0, and we have increased our provisions in Global Markets because of a specific file, which happens every so many years and should not be considered to be recurring. In particular, as it is to be considered as a fraud case. And moreover, it has nothing to do with the private credit environment.

So before I move on to capital, let me say a word on the Corporate Center. The quarter, the revenues were impacted by 2 elements. On one hand, the impact of DVA generating a negative EUR 110 million swing. And I don't have to remind you that DVA should be 0 over the life cycle of the derivatives, but can be volatile from 1 quarter to another. There are also -- the lower rates also weighed on the returns of our own equity being redeployed. So with this, let me now conclude on the capital with Slide 21.

We are pleased to confirm our stable common equity Tier 1 at a solid 12.5% this quarter, highlighting our capacity to absorb the 35 basis points impact of the AXA IM acquisition thanks to our capital generation. We also benefited this quarter from a positive modeling impact. As mentioned by Jean-Laurent, and as you can see in the bottom left, in the last 4 years, we have been significantly impacted by prudential and supervisory requirements equivalent to 160 basis points over the period of 4 years or 40 basis points, EUR 3 billion per year. So what drives this impact? As mentioned, it's the regulatory and supervisory inflation.

Let me shed some light on this by giving an example. As a reminder, I mean, monitoring risk at BNP Paribas is done in a very detailed manner, and it is core to our setup. Doing so allows us to you to have all the data available to use advanced models to successfully track evolutions and reflect this in the related risk-weighted assets. I don't need to remind you that this advanced modeling is the factor constraint by the new regulation. Whilst we cannot predict precisely the impact going forward, we expect our capital generation to be much less constrained in the future, therefore, providing us with a lot more flexibility, as you can see, with like 10 basis points organic capital creation in a quarter, which is the typical run we have on a quarterly basis.

From now on, one can assume that the growth of our RWAs will be primarily driven by organic RWA growth, so estimated to be around 2% per year based on recent historical trends. So we will obviously continue to contain this organic RWA growth as we did in the past. So this is the strong point, so that the inflation is behind us. We generate 10 basis points per quarter.

And let me illustrate the case of CIB, which is particularly telling. So as you know, we've successfully grown the platform at twice the pace of the market and we've done so at marginal cost. So notably by reducing our cost income from 72% to 60%. At the same time, we've kept organic RWA growth very well contained averaging to around 0.4% per year over the period 2016 to 2024. So overall, we are comfortably on track to reach our common equity Tier 1 target of 12.5% post FRTB in 2027.

For here on, I'll let you read for yourself Slide 25 to 30 on the key elements of the quarter as well as the growth drivers of our 3 operating divisions. With this, I'll hand it back to Jean-Laurent.

Thank you, Lars. So to conclude on Slide 32. Our third quarter performance, driven by the acceleration of our operating divisions is fully in line with our trajectory. Our priority remains the successful execution of the AXA IM integration, which represents a strategic transformation level for the group, thanks to its integrated model. While our growth drivers are firmly established within CIB and IPS, while pursuing disciplined actions to improve the profitability of each business line when needed within CPBS. This year, we started with CPBF and Personal Finance, and we are now continuing with CPBB and Polska. Finally, our core equity Tier 1 ratio of 12.5%, provides us with additional flexibility and the new phase we're entering paves the way for enhanced capital generation.

This concludes our presentation. We would now be happy to take your questions.

[Operator Instructions] First question is from Tarik El Mejjad, Bank of America.

It's unfortunate we can't ask a question about Sudan because I think we all wanted to hear how you can frame your potential loss and we are still in the billions kind of area in terms of settlements. But I respect your decision. So two questions from my side. First on the capital, which is very important here for you. I think it's the -- your main kind of way to reassure the market of your capital absorption in the context of the Sudan related litigation. You had a good quarter build -- capital build in the quarter,12.5%. First, I want to understand what is structural there when it's one-off. And I was wondering why you don't change your medium term or your at least '25 target of 12.3%. I noticed that you don't mention that anymore, but so do you expect to end the year at a higher level?

And if you do the -- to Jean-Laurent, your comments about 10 bps per quarter, if I take 9 quarters until end of '27, and adjust for the 40 bps for FRTB, I'm already at 13%. So what am I missing there what could be the headwind that will set you back to 12.5%. And then the second question is on the -- so still rates on the capital is what other actions you can do to actually fast track the capital build beyond organically? And if you would consider some nonorganic footprint optimization or something to reassure the markets on your capital absorption?

And then the question on the jaws, in Slide 5 in Q2, you were very specific about your jaws in the second half. And in your plan, you target more than 1.5 percentage points for every year of the plan. Do you still stick to this guidance? And how are you comfortable to reach this jaws level with the AXA IM integration in the coming years?

Okay. Thank you for your question. So if you look precisely at what took place since the beginning of the year. So we said at the end of '24, commenting the yearly result of '24. We said that in '25, we will generate roughly 30 bps of capital, and we will suffer, let's say, 10 bps in terms of supervision. So the net would have been 20 bps plus 20 bps. So capital generation, we delivered 10 bps in the first quarter. We delivered additional 10 bps in the second quarter through SRT. Once again, we delivered 10 bps this quarter. So all in all, as of today, we have already delivered the 30 bps. Then if you look at the supervisory, I would say, dimension. We lost 10 bps in the first quarter. We lost 10 bps in the second quarter. And then we got plus 25 in the third quarter.

In the third quarter, that 25 is, I would say, based upon 2 very different, I would say, dimensions. One is a kind of, I would say, regular evolution, it can be considered as a normal evolution. The other one that is in the range of 15 bps, 15, is more, I would say, an exceptional evolution. This is the end of a long story of rebasing a quite important model. So these 15 bps, are an exceptional. They're back, they're given to us and the shareholders, and that's it.

So now if you look at the -- since the beginning of the year, so we lost 10 in the first. We lost an additional 10 in the second. We're having plus 10 in the second -- in the third. So if you look at the supervises side, I would say, the regular one was minus 10 at the end of the third quarter. So again, since the beginning of the year, we built up 30 bps in terms of capital generation. We suffered 10 bps of supervisory, I would say, burden and we got a positive 15 bps one-off, this one-off is done. This is over.

And looking ahead at the fourth quarter, we're not expecting anything significant. So again, since the beginning of the year, we built every quarter, 10 bps in terms of capital generation, one way or the other. We suffered 10 bps of, let's say, supervisory burden, and we got a positive one-off of plus 15 in the supervisory dimension. So this explains why we are already at 2.5% after having absorbed AXA IM and while having 20 bps above the 12.3% pre-FRTB target that was supposed to be the target by year-end. So we are very much, I would say, confident that, that 2.5% is the level we will deliver by year-end. So it's not a question of changing the target for year-end, but we are already at 12.5%, and we do not see anything that would push us down to 12.3%.

What we have to understand about the FRTB is that it was supposed to take place beginning of '25. It was postponed 1 year, beginning of '26, and now it's postponed again the second year beginning of '27. And you know, and probably you know, that there are conversations at the level of the European Commission just to neutralize this FRTB for probably a period of 3 years. This is not done, but there is a certain probability, probably more than 50%, that one way or the other, that FRTB is going to be neutralized for a certain period of time. But for the time being, we consider we have to be prepared. This is why we keep those 30 bps.

Looking ahead, we said recently, it was in September, I guess, in the Bank of America conference, we said that mechanically, considering the, I would say, the additional profitability of the group by '27, the CET1 post FRTB will reach naturally mechanically 2.5%. So this is again what we said in the presentation. The reality, as you said, is that we're going to exit '25 at a high level, this is a fact. Not only the return on tangible equity of the company is moving up. So we are generating more rapidly equity capital but on top of that, as Lars mentioned it. We're exiting a cycle, a phase that has been very, I would say, negative for BNP Paribas.

Once again, we paid over the last 4 years, a tribute of 160 bps. If you add the completion of Basel and supervisory, I would say, approach basically model updates. This is 2.5x, I would say, average I would say, benchmark. So the peer group was on average in the range of 60 bps, and we were at around 160 bps. And on top of that, we are going to pay potentially for that FRTB. In total, what to build up EUR 15 billion in those 4 years.

And now if you look closely, at the evolution of the risk weight at BNP Paribas over the past 4 years, we're only at 2% average by year. So in fact, the model is not extremely high in terms of risk weight consumption. And looking at because we're exiting that very adverse, I would say, cycle, considering the situation of BNP Paribas looking up, now the risk weight will, I would say, progress very much in line with the operational risk weights, which is comparing to the last period at a much lower level. And once again, what we suffered is not linked because we had poor models or an approach that was not relevant. It's just because the new supervision, the new regulation was a very adverse to advance modeling. So this is one very important point.

So we're exiting '25 with, I would say, an additional 20 bps compared to the 12.3% by '27, we'll be at 12.5% because of the company generating more, I would say, profits. On top of that, we are exiting a cycle that was quite negative or adverse to BNP Paribas. And the future is going to be very much along the operational risk weight, I would say, evolution. All in all, you are telling us 13 bps -- 13%, why not? I mean this is just a rapid computation. But this is the situation, not only the company is going faster in terms of profits, but we're exiting a cycle that was very negative. And on top of that, we're exiting '25 at a high level. And to be confirmed, CET1 consumption for AXA IM is 35 bps full stop, which also give some, I would say, additional good news. So this is the equity. To some extent, capital absorption.

Looking at the jaws, you noticed that we suffered in the third quarter of the FX 1.3% in terms of total revenue and the swing in the DVA, plus 16% last year, minus 55% this year. So this is a swing of roughly 0.9%. So in total, we suffered 2.2%. 2.2% and 2.4% are 4.6%. So this is very much what makes the difference in between the consensus that was at around 4.1%. We said the top line we provided only 2.4%, but because of two headwinds, one was the FX. One was the DVA.

So looking ahead, probably in the last quarter, we will suffer the same, I would say, FX headwind. Why? Because this is the result of the U.S. dollar on the yearly evolution. And second, the Turkish lira basically in the third quarter. So half, that was the result of these two evolutions. Looking ahead, in the fourth quarter, it's going to be very much the same but we are not going to suffer the DVA in the fourth quarter. Normally, it's going to be close to null and the bad effect used to be negative. So it's very different from the situation in the third quarter. And then ultimately, in the fourth quarter, we have not anymore any base effect based upon the Arval used car business. So this is in the range of EUR 100 billion. So if you get rid of 0.9% that are the DVA in the fourth -- the third quarter. And if you get rid of the base effect in the fourth quarter, you get an additional 0.8%. So in the fourth quarter, rising 1.7%, that is going to more than rebalance the FX effect. So this is why the fourth quarter ultimately to some extent is going to be slightly easier than the third quarter.

Looking at the jaws effect, if you look precisely at the operational division, which are basically, I would say, the dimension that is providing the group with the jaws effect, we are during the third quarter at 2%. So we are moving up comparing this jaws effect to the first half of that year. And this is very much linked to the acceleration you are seeing within CPBS, especially Domestic Market and Personal Finance. And this is going to continue. So you will see in the fourth quarter an additional, I would say evolution in the positive direction. So at the end of the day, the 2.5% for the second half is our target and it remains our target. But again, the fourth quarter and the third quarter in terms of, I would say, impacts to some extent, external impact, impacts that are not linked to the operational division. They are very different. The third one is quite negative, and the fourth one is quite neutral. So this is my answer for the jaws.

Next question is from Giulia Miotto, Morgan Stanley.

I have two. The first one is on AXA IM. So how will the structure work? Will BNP Asset Management be consolidated within Cardif then? Yes. Because I thought AXA IM was being bought by Cardif, but then it's getting consolidated into BNP Asset Management. So I would be interested to understand that structure. And then separately, I have a question on your Stage 3 coverage ratio, which is going down from 70% to 66.6%. 70% it was in March. Should we read anything into that? And perhaps to expand on the question, what are you seeing in terms of asset quality deterioration in France? Is there any early warning?

So on the first point, I would say, Cardif bought AXA IM and BNP Paribas was merged into Cardif. So in fact, the merger in between BNP Paribas Asset Management and AXA IM is done under the Cardif umbrella. So the new asset management platform belongs to the insurance company.

And on the second question, when it comes to the doubtful loans over the gross outstanding and/or your Stage 3 coverage ratio, so it evolved from 68% to 66.6%. The main thing what you see here is that there are new entries has happened so often, which have low provisioning level given the high collateralization. So that's the kind of elements that you see. You can see it's the same in the doubtful loans versus the gross outstanding. But that is the typical evolution that you have. And then when these things are worked out, there is compensation when it moves into the -- has the effect of Stage 1 and 2. So intrinsically, that's how you should see it.

Next question is from Delphine Lee, JPMorgan.

The first one is, just to understand on the revenue side, because if we look at in retail in Eurozone, CPB in Eurozone, I think your guidance is more than 3%. But so far, I think the trend is trending a little bit close to 2%. So what are you expecting in Q4? And where is the kind of acceleration coming from? Doesn't seem to be BNL, but is there something in Belgium? Or do you see at the moment an improvement in France, which could lead to that more than 3% for the whole year?

And then my second question is just a very quick clarification. I don't know if you can say anything on sort of the provisions and the, let's say, the one-off elements that you took this quarter, whether that's the provisions in Global Markets or the day you had in BNL what was that related to? Or in the Corporate Center, just to explain a little bit more kind of like outside of the DVA impact, what was the impact from rates and funding cost of AXA? Just want to understand a little bit like how to forecast for future years.

On the revenue side, for the Domestic Bank within the Eurozone, we set a target of 3% for '25 and we keep that target. So for 2025, we very much believe we are going to deliver those 3%. And if you look at the profile of those divisions altogether, moving up, in particular because Belgium and France are accelerating. So yes, we stick to the 3% target for '25 for those Eurozone commercial banks.

On the Global Market provision, this is a specific situation. This has nothing to do with any other situation that occurred recently in the U.S. with regional banks, private credit and so on, this is totally different. It happens unfortunately from time to time. We tend to say BNP Paribas every 4, 5 years, you would get something at the Global Market. If you take that out of the third quarter, our third quarter is very much aligned with the first half of 2025. So basically, in the third quarter at BNP Paribas away from that very specific situation. Nothing happened compared to the first half of '25.

And Delphine, on your two other questions. So with respect to BNL, what we have is basically a revaluation of the participation. And as you know, we, from time to time, have these things, and it basically helps us to compensate in the bottom line, the impact of restructuring. We typically said we have like EUR 400 million kind of restructuring costs, and we aim to have capital gains realized or revaluations in order to compensate that. So that's basically this.

And then when you talk about the general account where you have a question, if you look at the general accounts, specifically in the third quarter, so as mentioned, there is the DVA, which is EUR 50 million negative, whereas it was EUR 50 million positive over last year. Then if you look at AXA IM, there is like the EUR 60 million of restructuring costs which was basically 0 last year. And then you also had the impact of own funds which the redeployment happens in lower rates. So that's a bit of those kind of effects.

Let me remind you our overall guidance on the Corporate Center over the full year. So intrinsically, we say that over the year, our NBI is 0. When I mean 0, that means it can be between minus 100 and plus 100. And you basically see that's where we are in particularly what we guided that in the fourth quarter, we think it will gravitate around 0. When you look at cost, the run of the mill cost Corporate Center, are basically EUR 400 million. And on top of that, comes the restructuring costs. In a normal situation, basically that we'll also be gravitating around EUR 400 million. What we now basically say is that also given the overall restructuring we have with AXA IM, it's going to be around EUR 600 million in '25, and it's going to be around EUR 800 million in '26. And then it should taper back to where it was before. So that's basically Delphine on the general account.

Next question is from Stefan Stalmann of Autonomous Research.

I would like to come back to the credit quality issue in Global Markets and the increase in stage or actually in doubtful loans as you label them. You had this increase of almost EUR 1.5 billion in doubtful loans during the quarter. And it happened at a time when you actually describe the credit quality situation in basically all of your operating businesses is very stable. So is it fair to assume that this increase largely relates to Global Markets and largely relates to this one case that created the provisions? And is it then fair to assume that you have basically provisioned a fairly large lumpy exposure at around 10% to 15%.

And if that's all correct, roughly, I think you hinted in an interview that there may be some context with payments or payment companies or payment counterparties. I'm struggling a bit to see how that would fit into a Global Markets context. Is there anything else that you can add in terms of color about the counterparty here that will be great? And then the second question on AXA Investment Management. I'm curious whether you could maybe give us the share of passive and ETF AUM in the EUR 1.6 trillion.

I'll take it Stefan, I'll take your question on credit quality. So indeed, part of the impact that you see is indeed related to that file. But generically, it's the evolution that in the current environment the new entries that we have seen, which are collateralized have low collateralization. So when it comes to the file, we don't give names and the likes, but what we said, it is not the usual suspect. And the field in which you should basically see it, which is a Global Market field is in the domain of receivables financing. So that is the domain, that is why it is part of Global Markets. And that is the domain. But we leave it to this, Stefan. I'm not going to give you more insights on that.

What was the question on ETF, sorry, if you can say it again?

I was just curious, roughly what proportion of the EUR 1.6 trillion is actually in passive and ETFs.

Sure. So today, ETF and index is approximately EUR 55 billion. So the percentage is close to 7%, more or less -- sorry, to 3.5%. Clearly, it was a bigger percentage on a BNP PAM stand-alone because AXA IM, they only recently started an active ETF business. So clearly, the percentage has been diluted by the acquisition. But I can also confirm that as part of the plan, ETF is a renewed ambition. We clearly have significant ambitions which we will be happy to detail more in the deep dive in the first half of next year to, as a minimum, bring it back to the percentage that we have before the dilution coming from the AXA IM transaction.

Next question is from Sharath Kumar, Deutsche Bank.

I have two. Firstly, a clarification on the 2025 revenue guidance. I noticed that you achieved only 2% in the third quarter versus your guidance of plus 5% for the second half which is excluding the contribution from AXA IM? I acknowledge bulk of the mix was driven by Corporate Center, but can you reconfirm this guidance? That's the first one. And the second one is on Arval. How can we draw comfort on the residual value risk for Arval. I asked this in the context of the i.e. organic growth seen in Arval in the last several quarters versus a more cautious approach by your main competitor. Related to this, can you give an indication of the current EV mix within your fleet?

Listen, I think we guided on the revenues, Jean-Laurent has broken it down. What is the impact of why the deal fill divisions, it is at that lower it's basically the impact of ForEx and the impact of DVA. So I'm not going to come back to that is what you see. On Arval, so on Arval there has been the impact when you compare the results with last year of the residual value of the car. So there was a lift that was still available in the first 9 months, and that's basically coming to an end. The remaining contribution in the fourth quarter year ago was EUR 50 million. So it's basically a nonmaterial on that. For the rest, the growth in the fleet that we continue to see, again, which is balanced between on one hand, EV and ICE that growth that we see is the intrinsic demand we see in the market, and we feel comfortable with it.

Next question is from Andrew Coombs, Citi.

If I could follow up on actual AXA IM and then perhaps touch upon banking. So in AXA IM, you talked in depth about the cost synergies, the revenue synergies. Could you just touch upon whether there are any dis-synergies anywhere across the combination of the businesses? And separate to that can you just provide the phasing of the EUR 690 million restructuring costs. Separate to that, on banking down 4% Q-on-Q, down 3% year-on-year. I appreciate that transaction banking is included within that and you're going to be impacted by rates and FX, but it looks like your Capital Market activity was perhaps slightly light compared to U.S. peers. I think you talked about adviser being flat year-on-year. So anything you can say on why you might have underperformed than peers. Is it just a regional bias? Anything you can add?

Maybe I'll take the first one on the synergies. If I understood well, the questions on the AXA IM, it's a pretty quick answer. We don't foresee any dis-synergies out of the transaction.

Yes. And when it comes to global banking. So there is the effect of the tariff, there is the effect of the rate and there is the effect of ForEx. And so that's what you see. So if you look through the ForEx, it's basically stable. And then there is indeed a different dynamic. There is the dynamic which continued to grow in the U.S. dollar, and there is a wait-and-see attitude in Europe. So the pipeline is there, but there is a wait and see how these things will crystallize. So that's basically how to read Global Banking.

Just to give, let's say, some additional color. I mean, if you look at Global Banking platform and if you isolate the U.S. part at BNP Paribas, this one is up by 21%, which is very much in line with the U.S. banking platforms. Unfortunately, in EMEA and Continental Europe, we are not having that some kind of evolution. So it's very much linked to the in between situation in Europe. A lot of company are postponing transactions. And the pipe is there, again, but still to be seen. So this is the only business if you look closely at BNP Paribas that third quarter that is below expectation, slightly below expectation instead of being plus 4%, 5%. It's below minus 2.6%. So this is the only one that is slightly I would say, behind the curve for obvious reasons. And again, it's not a question of competitiveness throughout the platform.

That's very helpful color. It's just the regional mix, which is what I thought it might be. And Just following up on the EUR 690 million restructuring charge phasing.

Can you repeat the question, sorry, because I lost it.

Yes. Of course, sorry, you flagged EUR 690 million of restructuring charges to deliver the synergies in AXA IM. Could you just provide the phasing of the restructuring charges, you provided a split of the timing of the synergies, but not the restructuring charges as far as I can see.

No. Listen, we cannot give the total detail but the big chunk will be this year and next year. That's what you should assume. And the biggest part will be next year. And why we basically said, if you want to roughly the cost, they will fall, how they fall, but you could assume there is like EUR 100 million this year, EUR 400 million the year thereafter and then EUR 100 million the year thereafter. So that is roughly how you should see it.

Next question is from Jacques-Henri Gaulard, Kepler Cheuvreux.

Two questions for me. You've announced such a very interesting partnership with UniCredit on Security Services, I think, in the course of the quarter to have a little bit of off color on that would be great. And UniCredit just announced as we speak that they were taking off all the money from Amundi by mid-2027, would you be interested in that new investment management concept to effectively pitch for that? That's the first question.

And the second question is on Slide 7 where you've announced when you bring back your increase in ROTE. I think it's the first time I saw the Belgium and Polska plans. Is it something that you've added afterwards to enable you to actually get to that 13% ROTE '28 or is it on the other hand, something that could enable you to increase further that 13%, 2028 and 2030?

So about UniCredit, yes, we won the RFP for the Security Services business of UniCredit, both in Italy and in Germany with HVB. There is some time to implement. We see the effect in '27. That is 1 year to go to say it very, very simply. Looking at the situation again with UniCredit. Of course, we are open to any kind of partnership with any kind of platforms, commercial bank, private bank platform that would need I would say, highly quality assets, asset management, I would say it's a normal game. And obviously, we can provide UniCredit potentially with all products that would be, I would say, efficient of interest, that's it. So clearly and I do not know again how UniCredit will move. I mean they have recently, if I understand well, we built in-house some capacity within the Asset Management space. But for sure, there will be some room for new partners I don't believe for a number of reasons, they potentially, but I don't know that they would consider, I would say, another global partner for everything.

But probably there is room for some asset classes and probably our new platform, looking at the alternative universe could be very well positioned. So yes, we're interested and probably will compete and probably having a good relationship. We might have someone but this is a normal business situation, nothing more, nothing less.

On the -- on your question on Slide 7 on the plans. So indeed, in that 13% ROTE that we've given by 2028. The evolution, of course, of Belgium, Polska and AXA IM are included. But these plants, they will continue well beyond and that's basically the update that we will provide. And I understand that I didn't answer the question on the Arval organic growth. So this is 10% that we have. That's two questions back. Would there be any remaining questions?

Next question is from Anke Reingen from RBC.

Two small questions, please. Firstly, on the capital. You said that the regulatory headwinds are now coming to an end. I think previously you guided to a potential 20 basis points headwind in 2026. Is it fair to assume at this stage that this will no longer be hitting your core Tier 1 ratio? And then secondly, on Belgium, I would have expected NII to see a bit more of an uptick in Q3 or is it basically the benefit of the stronger recovery you only expect to start from Q4 onwards on NII in Belgium.

Yes. So if I take on the net interest income, indeed, the net interest income, as you mentioned, we said there would be a phasing in pickup, yes. So we announced that in France, it would happen in the second quarter. You will see it happening and that the pivot would be start to be visible in Belgium. So that's what we have. And so the impact will continue and in particularly also in the fourth quarter on those 2 entities. So when it comes to the headwinds, so we basically said the majority of the headwinds are behind us. And when we give a guidance going forward, we have like a kind of a placeholder, so we will wait and see. That is what we assumed that would happen. But here, what we do see is we see these headwinds tailing off. And so it's rather a placeholder more than anything.

Next question is from Pierre Chedeville, CIC Market Solutions.

I had a question of methodology regarding the objective of ROTE at 12% in 2026 because you don't say around 12% or above 12%. But in the meantime, you mentioned that your return on invested capital was increased by 4 points. You also mentioned that Personal Finance and the French retail will have an impact on the ROTE above 0.5 point. You also mentioned that we will have a deep dive and Belgium and Polska, and we hope that you will announce probably that you try to better than a post-tax run below 10% and the cost of equity. So I was wondering that if you have all these intermediaries objectives that are improving, why the global objective, the global group ROTE remains at a fixed 12%.

And another question, which is related to that is regarding AXA IM. Regarding the synergies that you plan and the fact that probably BNP Paribas Real Estate will improve when they are another for you. What would be, in your opinion, a decent cost income ratio regarding the size and the mix of this new entity.

So look, I'm going to take the questions on the cost income, a reasonable level of cost income for that platform. Look, if I -- if I look at the business mix, including the fact that the starting point of BNP Paribas Asset Management, there's a larger share of external distribution, which clearly comes with a higher cost. We plug all the different elements. I think the 60% cost income is, I would say, on average year in year out would be, I think, a realistic target to have in mind.

And with respect to the impact of the improvements, several of the improvement that we mentioned you have to see the effect is being like in '28. So for example, when you look at Personal Finance and BCF, basically by '26, it will be 0.5 point is the impact. The same is true for AXA. The impact comes over time by '28. So that is -- it's -- you should see the phasing of the impact over time by '26 and by '28, and then you get to those numbers.

So we have no -- but to improve the 12% in 2026.

You can have hope in banking, of course, but the reality is that the trajectory and the commitment is to deliver 12% return on tangible equity in '26. Again, Personal Finance and the French Domestic Bank, we provide 50 bps in between '25 and '26 and again, an additional 50 bps in '27 and '28. Then AXA IM, because of the, I would say, restrict cost in '26 basically is not going to improve the return on tangible equity. '27 is going to be still a bit shy and you will see full speed in '28 and even more in '29 and are probably more looking at '30. So this is progressive. The Belgium Bank started this year will accelerate next year, but this is '27, '28 and Polska remember that we have to pay next year a level of tax that is slightly higher than this year. I mean, they pushed up the rate that was around 30-something from [ 18 ].

Yes. So next year, we're going to pay EUR 50 million to EUR 100 million more in Polska, it will...

So all these levers are in place. 12% is the target from '26. If we can deliver a better target, we'll try. We'll do our best, but 12% is the target. '28 we're having 13%. This is the target. And '30 so probably is going to be at 14% because as you -- as you remember, I mean, we're moving the group up by 2 percentage points of return on tangible equity every midterm plan. This one is from 10% to 12%. The previous one used to be from 8% to 10%, and the previous one was to be from 6% to 8%. And probably, the next one is going to be about 12% to 14%...

But you have to come back in '27.

Gentlemen, we have no more questions registered at this time.

So thank you, and we'll deliver. Thank you so much. Take care.

Thank you. Bye.

Thank you so much and have a good day.

Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for joining. This concludes the call of BNP Paribas Third Quarter 2025 Results. You may now disconnect.