6-K 1 investorpresotext1q25.htm investorpresot1q25
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
_________________
FORM 6-K
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE
 
ISSUER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 UNDER
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date: April 30, 2025
UBS Group AG
(Registrant's Name)
Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland
(Address of principal executive office)
Commission File Number: 1-36764
UBS AG
(Registrant's Name)
Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland
Aeschenvorstadt 1, 4051 Basel, Switzerland
 
(Address of principal executive offices)
Commission File Number: 1-15060
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants file or will file annual
 
reports under cover of Form
20-F or Form 40-
F.
Form 20-F
 
 
Form 40-F
 
This Form 6-K consists of the transcripts of the 1Q25 Earnings call remarks
 
and Analyst Q&A, which
appear immediately following this page.
 
1
First quarter 2025 results
 
30 April 2025
Speeches by
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
, Group Chief Executive Officer,
 
and
Todd
 
Tuckner
,
Group Chief Financial
 
Officer
Including analyst
 
Q&A session
Transcript.
Numbers for slides refer to the
 
first quarter 2025 results presentation. Materials and a
 
webcast
replay are available at
 
www.ubs.com/investors
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Slide 3 – Key messages
 
Thank you, Sarah and good morning,
 
everyone.
 
Our strong
 
results in
 
the first
 
quarter demonstrate
 
once again
 
our ability
 
to deliver
 
for stakeholders
 
in different
market conditions.
 
The
 
quarter
 
was
 
characterized
 
by
 
a
 
substantial
 
shift
 
in
 
investor
 
sentiment
 
and
 
growth
 
expectations,
 
alongside
periods of
 
significant market volatility.
 
This dampened the
 
positive seasonal effect
 
we typically
 
experience at the
start of
 
the year,
 
and tempered
 
the bullish
 
outlook the
 
market had
 
coming out
 
of 2024,
 
and into
 
the first
 
few
weeks of January.
Against this backdrop, these results reflect the power
 
and scale of our diversified global
 
franchise, our unwavering
commitment to
 
clients, disciplined
 
cost management
 
and the
 
substantial
 
progress made
 
in integrating
 
Credit Suisse.
All this is underpinned by a balance sheet for all
 
seasons.
First-quarter net profit reached
 
1.7 billion, and our underlying
 
return on CET1 capital stood
 
at 11.3%, supported
by positive operating leverage in our core businesses.
 
Net new
 
inflows onto our
 
asset-gathering platform were
 
robust, including
 
32 billion
 
in net
 
new assets in
 
Global
Wealth
 
Management
 
and
 
7
 
billion
 
net
 
new
 
money
 
in
 
Asset
 
Management.
 
Although
 
we
 
haven’t
 
seen
 
a
 
major
strategic shift in asset allocation,
 
the breadth and depth of
 
our advice and global
 
capabilities helped clients protect
their wealth and navigate the market volatility.
 
We saw significant
 
demand for mandate solutions, structured
 
products and Alternatives, including new offerings
within
 
our
 
Unified
 
Global
 
Alternatives
 
unit,
 
where
 
total
 
assets
 
reached
 
nearly
 
300
 
billion.
 
For
 
our
 
clients
 
in
Switzerland, we
 
kept delivering
 
on our
 
commitment to
 
be a
 
reliable partner.
 
During the
 
quarter,
 
we granted
 
or
renewed 40 billion Swiss francs of loans.
 
In the
 
Investment Bank,
 
we continue
 
to execute
 
on our
 
capital-light strategy. The
 
investments we
 
made in
 
our areas
of strategic importance
 
allowed us
 
to win further
 
market share. Global
 
Markets achieved
 
its best quarter
 
on record.
In Global Banking, we outperformed
 
the fee pools in M&A and
 
ECM, despite a challenging
 
market backdrop. I am
also pleased to see that we are building on our
 
already-healthy pipeline.
2
As the
 
second quarter
 
kicked off,
 
the unveiling
 
of significant
 
changes to
 
tariffs on
 
trading partners
 
by the
 
U.S.
administration
 
increased
 
uncertainty and
 
market
 
volatility,
 
while
 
in
 
some
 
days,
 
trading
 
volumes
 
exceeded
 
their
Covid-era peak by around 30%.
I am
 
especially pleased by
 
the way
 
our colleagues were
 
able to
 
intensify their engagement with
 
institutional and
private clients during this period. The investments we’ve made to
 
reinforce our infrastructure are
 
paying off, with
our operations proving stable and resilient as we facilitate
 
client activity across asset classes.
Looking ahead,
 
the economic
 
path forward
 
is particularly
 
unpredictable, and
 
the range
 
of possible
 
outcomes is
wide. The prospect of
 
higher tariffs on global
 
trade presents a material risk
 
to global growth and
 
inflation. While
we are encouraged that negotiations are ongoing, a prolonged period of discussions
 
and speculation will come at
a cost. Uncertainty is
 
likely to affect
 
sentiment and lead businesses
 
and investors to delay
 
important decisions on
strategy, capital allocation and investment.
In
 
this
 
environment,
 
we
 
expect
 
financial
 
markets
 
to
 
remain
 
sensitive
 
to
 
new
 
developments,
 
both
 
positive
 
and
negative, which
 
are likely
 
to lead
 
to further
 
spikes in
 
volatility.
 
In light
 
of this,
 
we are
 
unwavering in
 
serving our
clients, executing on our growth strategy and following
 
through on our integration plans.
 
On that, over the
 
course of the first
 
quarter, we finalized our preparations to migrate
 
more than one million
 
clients
in Switzerland onto UBS
 
platforms and continued
 
to integrate 95 petabytes
 
of data. We moved a
 
small pilot group
of clients at the start of April and we are on track to complete the first
 
main wave of migrations by the end of the
second quarter.
We are
 
pleased with
 
our progress
 
in Non-core
 
and Legacy
 
as we
 
continue to
 
reduce the
 
complexity of
 
our operations
through
 
book closures
 
and the
 
decommissioning of
 
applications. Moreover,
 
our active
 
wind-down efforts
 
have
proven so
 
effective that
 
we have
 
been able
 
to upgrade
 
our credit
 
and market
 
risk-weighted asset
 
ambitions for
2025 and 2026.
Our CET1 capital ratio
 
stands in line with
 
our guidance at
 
14.3%. This, combined
 
with the substantial de-risking
 
of
the acquisition and our highly capital-generative strategy, gives us confidence in our ability to deliver on our 2025
capital return
 
objectives. These
 
remain
 
contingent on
 
maintaining a
 
CET1 capital
 
ratio
 
of around
 
14% and
 
the
absence of material,
 
immediate changes
 
to the current
 
capital regime. Our
 
capital strength also
 
supports our
 
ability
to deploy investments that reinforce our leadership across the globe
 
and position UBS for the future.
 
We are working to further enhance our client offering and capabilities to improve profitability in the Americas. At
the same time, we are building on our status as the number-one wealth manager in APAC by scaling our offering
in the
 
fastest growing
 
markets
 
across the
 
region, while
 
reinforcing our
 
leadership position
 
in EMEA
 
and Switzerland.
As
 
highlighted
 
in
 
February,
 
technology
 
investments
 
are
 
a
 
key
 
enabler
 
for
 
growth.
 
We
 
are
 
encouraged
 
by
 
our
development
 
and
 
adoption
 
of
 
generative
 
A.I.
 
solutions
 
as
 
we
 
empower
 
our
 
colleagues
 
with
 
tools
 
to
 
improve
productivity and deliver tailored solutions to clients.
In closing,
 
we are
 
pleased with
 
our strong
 
performance this
 
quarter and
 
continue to
 
operate from
 
a position
 
of
strength. But
 
we are
 
not complacent,
 
as we
 
are only
 
around two-thirds
 
of the
 
way to
 
restoring UBS’s
 
pre-acquisition
levels of profitability.
 
In that sense, the
 
next phase of the
 
integration is especially important to
 
harvesting the full
benefits
 
of
 
the
 
acquisition
 
for
 
our
 
clients
 
and
 
shareholders,
 
and
 
delivering
 
on
 
our
 
long-term
 
ambitions.
 
In
 
the
meantime, we are staying focused on
 
what we can control: serving our
 
clients, delivering on our financial targets
and continuing to act as an engine of economic
 
growth in the communities we serve.
With that, I hand over to Todd.
 
 
 
 
3
Todd
 
Tuckner
Slide 5 – 1Q25 profitability driven by positive operating
 
leverage in core business divisions
Thank you Sergio, and good morning
 
everyone.
 
Throughout my remarks, I’ll refer
 
to underlying results in US
 
dollars and make year-over-year
 
comparisons, unless
stated otherwise.
During the
 
first quarter of
 
2025 our core
 
businesses grew their
 
combined pre-tax profitability
 
by 15% on
 
strong
positive operating
 
leverage. Overall,
 
our Group
 
profit before
 
tax was
 
2.6 billion,
 
down 1%
 
year-on-year.
 
Group
revenues were broadly flat
 
at 12 billion and
 
up 6% across
 
our core franchises. Operating
 
expenses were also
 
stable
at 9.2 billion,
 
as we continued
 
to successfully reduce
 
our non-production-related costs
 
across the Group, offsetting
higher financial advisor and variable compensation
 
accruals in the quarter.
 
Our EPS was 51 cents and we delivered an 11.3%
 
return on CET1 capital and a cost/income
 
ratio of 77.4%.
Slide 6 – 1Q25 demonstrates the strength of our diversified
 
business model
As
 
illustrated on
 
slide 6,
 
this
 
quarter’s underlying
 
performance demonstrates
 
the
 
strength
 
of
 
our
 
franchise and
diversified business model, particularly in challenging
 
and complex markets.
 
By supporting
 
clients in
 
ways that
 
differentiate UBS,
 
while maintaining
 
a sharp
 
focus on
 
cost and
 
resource efficiency,
each of Global
 
Wealth Management, Asset Management
 
and the Investment Bank
 
achieved double-digit pre-tax
growth,
 
absorbing
 
net
 
interest
 
income
 
headwinds
 
that
 
in
 
particular
 
weighed
 
on
 
our
 
Personal
 
and
 
Corporate
Banking business. Our Non-core and Legacy
 
unit delivered a strong first quarter, although short of the exceptional
results of last year’s 1Q.
On a reported basis, our pre-tax profit of 2.1 billion included
 
700 million of revenue adjustments from acquisition-
related effects and 1.1 billion of integration expenses.
 
Our effective tax rate in
 
the quarter was 20%.
 
For 2Q, we expect a
 
tax rate of around zero
 
due to a capital-neutral
tax
 
credit
 
from
 
further
 
legal
 
entity
 
streamlining
 
in
 
the
 
US
 
and
 
from
 
other
 
planning
 
measures
 
related
 
to
 
the
integration. We continue to expect our full-year 2025 effective tax rate to be around 20%, with a second-half tax
rate of around 30% influenced by NCL’s reported pre-tax performance.
Slide 7 – Achieved 65% of gross cost save ambition, on
 
track to ~13bn by year-end 2026
Turning to our cost update on slide 7.
 
In the first three months of 2025, we achieved an additional 900 million in gross run-rate cost saves, bringing the
cumulative total since the end of 2022 to
 
8.4 billion, or around 65% of our total gross cost save ambition.
 
By quarter-end,
 
we had
 
nominally decreased
 
our overall
 
cost base
 
by around
 
10% from
 
our 2022
 
baseline. Yet
looking-through variable compensation and litigation, and neutralizing for
 
currency effects, we delivered
 
an even
greater net reduction in underlying
 
expenses, exceeding 20%.
 
As a result, more than
 
50% of our cumulative
 
gross
cost saves have translated into net saves
 
that benefit our run-rate.
The overall employee
 
count fell sequentially
 
by 2%, to
 
126 thousand, and
 
by around 20%
 
from our 2022
 
baseline.
 
4
As
 
I’ve
 
highlighted in
 
the past,
 
one
 
of the
 
keys to
 
meeting our
 
target cost-income
 
ratio
 
by
 
the end
 
of 2026
 
is
shutting down legacy Credit Suisse technology applications and
 
infrastructure. To
 
date, we’ve retired over a
 
third
each of
 
these applications,
 
computer servers
 
and data
 
centers that
 
are
 
targeted in
 
our plans
 
for decommission.
These actions have
 
generated more than
 
700 million in technology
 
cost saves, with
 
Non-core and Legacy’s balance
sheet reduction a key driver of this progress.
We expect that most of the remaining 4.5 billion in gross saves required to achieve our 13 billion target will come
from
 
reductions
 
in
 
technology,
 
staffing
 
and
 
vendor
 
costs. As
 
an
 
example of
 
what’s to
 
come
 
in
 
the
 
technology
context is
 
a run-rate
 
cost save
 
of 800
 
million related
 
to Credit
 
Suisse’s legacy
 
applications in
 
the Swiss
 
booking
center, which we’ll decommission after the completion of the client account migration
 
in 2026.
Slide 8 – Our balance sheet for all seasons
 
is a key pillar of our strategy
Turning
 
to slide
 
8. As
 
of the
 
end of
 
the first
 
quarter,
 
our balance
 
sheet for
 
all seasons
 
consisted of
 
1-and-a-half
trillion in total assets, with around 615 billion in loan balances, 745 billion in
 
deposits, and a loan-to-deposit ratio
of 80%.
The strength of our balance sheet is not just an essential component of our strategy, but a competitive advantage
and source of confidence for our clients, especially during
 
times of uncertainty.
 
A
 
fundamental
 
driver
 
of
 
our
 
balance
 
sheet
 
strength
 
is
 
our
 
credit
 
book.
 
93%
 
of
 
our
 
lending
 
positions
 
are
collateralized, with 57% of the total balance
 
consisting of mortgages where the average LTV is 50%.
At
 
the
 
end
 
of
 
March,
 
our
 
lending
 
book
 
reflected
 
credit-impaired
 
exposures
 
of
 
1%,
 
unchanged
 
from
 
the
 
prior
quarter.
 
The cost
 
of risk
 
decreased
 
to 7
 
basis points
 
as we
 
recorded
 
Group
 
credit
 
loss expenses
 
of 100
 
million,
reflecting
 
121
 
million
 
of
 
net
 
charges
 
on
 
credit-impaired
 
positions
 
and
 
21
 
million
 
of
 
net
 
releases
 
across
 
our
performing
 
portfolio.
 
The
 
net
 
releases
 
were
 
due
 
to
 
our
 
recalibration
 
of
 
the
 
expected
 
credit
 
loss
 
scenarios
 
and
rebalancing of the factor weights.
Onto liquidity
 
and funding.
 
In the
 
quarter,
 
we made
 
strong
 
progress
 
on our
 
2025 funding
 
plan, already
 
having
completed
 
our
 
AT1
 
issuances intended
 
in
 
2025,
 
in
 
addition
 
to
 
having issued
 
3
 
billion
 
in
 
HoldCo
 
debt.
 
I
 
would
highlight that our
 
funding stability is
 
underscored by the
 
balanced currency
 
mix across
 
our assets and
 
diversified
sources of long-term funding and deposits.
 
Our average LCR was 181%, and remained around this level throughout
 
April’s volatile markets.
 
 
 
5
Slide 9 – Maintaining a strong capital position with
 
CET1 capital ratio at 14.3%
Turning to capital on slide 9. Our CET1 capital ratio at the end of March was 14.3%.
 
As a result
 
of our continued progress
 
with the integration, coupled
 
with strong financial
 
performance in the first
quarter,
 
it
 
is
 
now our
 
intention to
 
execute on
 
all
 
of
 
our
 
2025
 
capital return
 
ambitions announced
 
in
 
February.
Consequently,
 
our CET1 capital not only accounts
 
for the 500 million in
 
shares repurchased during the
 
first three
months of the year, but it also reflects the
 
accrual of the remaining 2
 
and a half billion
 
share buyback we intend
 
to
execute through the rest of 2025, of which 500 million
 
in the second quarter.
 
Risk-weighted assets fell by 15
 
billion sequentially,
 
driven by lower asset size
 
and the implementation of the
 
final
Basel III standards, which ultimately resulted in a net reduction of
 
9 billion in RWA.
 
This revised amount
 
reflects further infrastructure
 
and data quality improvements
 
finalized during the
 
quarter,
 
as
well as the effects
 
of additional mitigation and de-risking actions we
 
took across various credit,
 
counterparty and
market risk categories.
 
After receiving regulatory
 
approval, the final
 
operational risk-weighted
 
asset level also
 
came
in around 2 billion lower
 
than our February estimate. Netted within the
 
overall reduction, FRTB led to an
 
increase
of 6 billion, mainly related to the Investment Bank.
At the same
 
time, despite
 
the offsetting
 
effects of mitigating
 
actions, our
 
leverage ratio
 
denominator was
 
42 billion
higher sequentially, resulting in a CET1 leverage ratio of 4.4%.
The uplift
 
in LRD
 
was driven
 
by an
 
increase of
 
29 billion
 
from derivatives
 
exposures now
 
calculated under
 
the revised
Basel
 
III
 
standardized
 
approach
 
for
 
counterparty credit
 
risk.
 
With FX
 
accounting for
 
a
 
27
 
billion
 
increase
 
in
 
the
quarter, these factors more than offset asset size reductions of 13 billion.
A word on parent capital
 
and Group equity
 
double leverage.
 
As of the
 
end of March, our
 
parent bank’s standalone
CET1 capital
 
ratio on
 
a fully
 
applied basis
 
is expected
 
to be
 
12.9%, within
 
our target
 
range. The
 
sequential reduction
reflects
 
an
 
accrual
 
for
 
dividends
 
intended
 
to
 
be
 
paid
 
in
 
2026.
 
Over
 
the
 
next
 
few
 
quarters,
 
the
 
parent
 
bank’s
dividend-paying capacity is
 
expected to be supported
 
by both dividends and capital
 
repatriations from subsidiaries.
In addition, earlier
 
this month, as
 
expected UBS AG
 
paid a 6.5
 
billion ordinary dividend to
 
our holding company.
Taking
 
into account capital returns
 
to shareholders completed
 
or anticipated during the
 
first half of
 
the year,
 
we
expect the
 
Group’s equity
 
double leverage
 
ratio to
 
improve to
 
around 110%
 
by the
 
time we
 
publish our
 
Group
stand-alone accounts at the end of the second
 
quarter.
These actions
 
are consistent
 
with our
 
intention to
 
restore the
 
Group’s equity
 
double leverage
 
ratio towards
 
pre-
acquisition levels over the next several quarters.
Slide 10 – Global Wealth Management
Turning to our business divisions, and starting with Global Wealth Management on
 
slide 10.
GWM’s
 
pre-tax
 
profit
 
was
 
1.5
 
billion,
 
up
 
21%
 
year-over-year
 
as
 
revenue
 
growth
 
outpaced
 
expenses
 
by
 
5
percentage
 
points.
 
This
 
translated
 
to
 
a
 
year-over-year
 
improvement
 
in
 
GWM’s
 
cost-income
 
ratio
 
of
 
over
 
3
percentage points to 75%.
6
In
 
Asia,
 
with
 
our
 
integration
 
efforts
 
now
 
largely
 
complete,
 
we’re
 
well-positioned
 
to
 
deliver
 
our
 
full
 
range
 
of
capabilities to
 
our clients.
 
Notably, our APAC franchise drove excellent
 
PBT growth of
 
36%, on 14
 
points of
 
positive
operating jaws and a
 
pre-tax margin of over
 
40%. In the Americas,
 
where we’re executing on
 
our growth plans,
we delivered
 
PBT growth
 
of more
 
than 40%
 
and a
 
pre-tax margin
 
of 12%. In
 
addition, each
 
of our
 
Switzerland
and EMEA regions grew profits by 7% in the quarter.
You
 
can find
 
additional regional
 
details, including
 
a breakdown
 
of revenue
 
lines, credit
 
loss
 
expenses, net
 
new
deposits,
 
and
 
customer deposit
 
balances, as
 
well
 
as comparatives
 
across
 
our
 
four
 
wealth regions,
 
in
 
our
 
newly
enhanced disclosure in the quarterly report and on page
 
22 in the appendix to this presentation.
Onto flows. GWM invested assets increased by 1%
 
sequentially with favorable currency effects and positive asset
flows offsetting negative
 
market performance.
 
Net new assets
 
in the quarter
 
reached 32 billion,
 
representing a 3%
annualized growth
 
rate with
 
growth
 
in
 
all
 
regions, led
 
by
 
the Americas,
 
where
 
strong
 
same store
 
performance
supported NNA of
 
20 billion. Our
 
flow performance again
 
this quarter reflects
 
the actions I’ve
 
highlighted in the
past regarding
 
balance sheet optimization
 
that support higher
 
pre-tax margins
 
and returns
 
on attributed
 
equity,
but at times come at the expense of net new
 
assets.
 
For example,
 
we again
 
successfully managed
 
the roll-off
 
of preferential
 
fixed term
 
deposits associated
 
with our
2023 win-back campaign.
 
Of the
 
54 billion
 
in deposits maturing
 
in 1Q,
 
as in
 
prior periods we
 
converted around
85% into more profitable liquidity and investment solutions. But some less profitable flows left
 
the platform. You
can see
 
the clear
 
improvement we’ve
 
achieved in
 
enhancing profitability
 
from these
 
balance sheet
 
actions in
 
GWM’s
revenue over RWA ratio, which has grown 2 points year over year, and has reattained pre-acquisition levels.
 
Further evidence of clients seeking our market-leading advice and solutions and helping drive sustainable revenue
growth
 
is
 
underscored
 
by
 
our
 
net
 
new
 
fee
 
generating
 
asset
 
performance
 
of
 
27
 
billion
 
in
 
the
 
quarter,
 
a
 
6%
annualized growth rate. We
 
saw continued momentum in discretionary mandates, including SMAs
 
in the US and
our signature
 
MyWay
 
solution, delivered
 
through our
 
Swiss and
 
international platforms. MyWay
 
mandates have
grown to 20 billion, up almost 80% from the prior year
 
quarter.
NNFGA growth was especially strong in our
 
APAC franchise at an
 
annualized growth rate of 10%, with mandate
penetration at its highest level on record.
Looking ahead to the second quarter,
 
while maturing fixed-term deposits are becoming a
 
less material headwind
to flows,
 
seasonal US tax-related
 
outflows in the
 
high single-digit billion
 
range, elevated as
 
a result
 
of last year’s
strong market performance, are expected to weigh on GWM’s
 
2Q net new assets.
 
I would also
 
highlight that
 
we saw a
 
modest pick-up
 
in lending across
 
the wealth
 
business, with
 
client re-leveraging
supported by a lower rate environment. Net new
 
loans were 2.2 billion, driven by Lombard lending in
 
APAC.
Turning
 
to revenues. GWM’s
 
top line increased
 
by 6%, driven
 
by elevated client engagement, increased
 
solution
take-up by clients seeking diversification across geographies
 
and asset classes, and higher average-asset
 
levels.
 
Recurring net fee income increased
 
by 8% to 3.3
 
billion from positive
 
market performance and over 70
 
billion in
net new
 
fee-generating
 
assets over
 
the past
 
12 months.
 
Margins continued
 
to hold
 
up sequentially
 
and are
 
expected
to
 
remain
 
around
 
these
 
levels, especially
 
as
 
recently
 
migrated clients
 
and
 
those remaining
 
on
 
the Credit
 
Suisse
platform now have access to the full breadth of our
 
CIO value chain-led capabilities and solutions.
 
7
Transaction-based income increased
 
by 15%
 
to 1.4
 
billion, in
 
a market
 
environment where
 
our franchise’s
 
enduring
advantages set us
 
apart. Without a major
 
shift in asset
 
allocation during the
 
quarter,
 
clients nevertheless actively
repositioned portfolios,
 
benefitting from
 
our investments in
 
capabilities, solutions, and
 
unified teams.
 
This drove
double-digit growth across Structured Products and Cash Equities, with Wealth Planning and Life Insurance up by
more
 
than 50%.
 
Alternatives were
 
up 40%,
 
fueled by
 
the joint
 
Unified Global
 
Alternatives initiative
 
with Asset
Management.
Regionally,
 
we saw
 
a continuation
 
of transactional
 
growth spanning
 
the wealth
 
franchise, led
 
by APAC
 
and the
Americas, where transactional revenues increased by 28% and
 
16%, respectively.
 
Net interest income at 1.5 billion was
 
down 4% year-over-year
 
and 7% quarter-over-quarter,
 
with the sequential
trend reflecting a lower day count
 
and headwinds from declining rates in Swiss
 
franc and euro, partially offset by
ongoing balance sheet optimization efforts.
 
Of the
 
sequential decline,
 
1 percentage
 
point reflects
 
a change
 
to our
 
client segmentation
 
approach between
 
GWM
and P&C
 
that we
 
implemented in
 
February,
 
but was
 
not included
 
in our
 
guidance. This
 
change led
 
to a
 
shift of
some affluent clients from GWM to
 
P&C, including loan balances
 
of 8 billion. Despite the
 
modest effect on NII, we
ultimately decided
 
to not
 
restate our
 
accounts for
 
this transfer,
 
given the
 
immaterial impact
 
to the
 
P&L of
 
both
divisions overall.
 
Now
 
to
 
our
 
NII
 
outlook.
 
For
 
the
 
second
 
quarter
 
of
 
2025,
 
we
 
expect
 
GWM’s
 
net
 
interest
 
income
 
to
 
decrease
sequentially by a low-single
 
digit percentage, despite day
 
count helping, primarily
 
from lower Swiss franc and
 
euro
rates after the March cuts. We also expect a seasonal decline in client
 
deposits following April tax payments in the
US,
 
although
 
there
 
could
 
be
 
upside
 
should
 
clients
 
maintain
 
a
 
more
 
defensive
 
posture
 
amid
 
ongoing
 
market
uncertainty, driving higher sweep and account balances.
For full year 2025, we continue to expect
 
GWM’s net interest income to decrease by a low single-digit
 
percentage
compared to 2024.
Underlying operating expenses were up
 
by 1%, with lower
 
personnel and support costs offset
 
by higher variable
compensation tied to
 
revenues. Looking through variable
 
compensation, litigation
 
and currency effects, costs
 
were
down 5% year-over-year.
Slide 11 – Personal & Corporate Banking (CHF)
Turning to Personal & Corporate Banking on slide 11, where my comments will
 
refer to Swiss francs.
P&C delivered first
 
quarter pre-tax profit of
 
597 million, down
 
23% as lower
 
interest rates led
 
to an 18%
 
reduction
in net interest income.
Recurring net fee income increased
 
by 3% driven by record
 
volumes of investment products in
 
Personal Banking,
supported by strong
 
sales momentum,
 
including a 12%
 
annualized growth rate
 
in net new
 
investment flows
 
in the
first quarter.
 
Transaction-based
 
revenues decreased by
 
2% as strong
 
performance in Personal Banking was
 
more
than offset by the effect of lower corporate finance activity
 
amid softer economic conditions.
 
Sequentially,
 
NII decreased by 7%
 
largely reflecting the effects
 
of the SNB’s 50-basis
 
point rate cut announced in
December and a lower
 
day count, partly offset
 
by the effect
 
of the client
 
segmentation shift between GWM and
P&C that I
 
mentioned earlier,
 
which provided a
 
1-percentage-point quarter-on-quarter uplift to
 
P&C. To
 
mitigate
the effects
 
of lower
 
rates, we adjusted
 
deposit pricing on
 
select products
 
and continued optimizing
 
our banking
book.
 
 
8
Looking to the second quarter, we see a sequential
 
decrease in the low single-digit percentage
 
range for P&C’s NII
in Swiss francs, which translates to
 
a sequential mid single-digit percentage increase
 
in US dollar terms, based on
current FX rates. The outlook is driven by last month’s SNB 25-basis point
 
rate cut, despite day count helping, and
the latest change to the SNB’s threshold factor
 
for remunerating sight deposits.
For full year 2025, we continue to expect an NII decline
 
of around 10% versus 2024 in Swiss francs, translating to
a more modest reduction on a US dollar basis.
Credit loss
 
expense was 48
 
million, an 8
 
basis point cost
 
of risk
 
on an
 
average loan
 
portfolio of 245
 
billion. This
included Stage 3 charges of 54 million, again
 
predominantly from Credit Suisse exposures.
 
Reflecting on
 
developing macroeconomic
 
events, we
 
currently
 
assess that
 
exposures
 
to our
 
more
 
tariff-exposed
corporate clients within our Swiss credit book are well-contained. On this basis, for
 
full-year 2025, we continue to
expect P&C’s CLE to be around 350 million.
This said, we’re closely monitoring US trade policy developments and their first- and second-order impacts on
 
our
Swiss
 
loan
 
exposures,
 
thereby
 
intending
 
to
 
update
 
our
 
credit
 
loss
 
expectations
 
and
 
allowances
 
as
 
and
 
when
appropriate.
 
P&C’s operating expenses in the quarter were 1.1 billion,
 
down 4%.
Slide 12 – Asset Management
Moving to slide
 
12. Asset
 
Management drove a
 
pre-tax profit of
 
208 million,
 
up 15% year-on-year, with
 
disciplined
cost management more than compensating for lower
 
revenues.
 
Net management
 
fees declined
 
by 4%,
 
as the
 
effect of
 
higher average
 
invested assets
 
was more
 
than offset
 
by
margin compression from
 
clients having rotated
 
into lower-margin
 
products over recent
 
periods. This said,
 
we’re
gaining traction
 
in delivering
 
differentiated and higher
 
margin products,
 
including in
 
our Credit Investments
 
Group,
and in UGA, which saw strong net new commitments
 
in the quarter and invested asset growth of
 
13% compared
to a year ago.
 
Performance fees were 30
 
million, in line with
 
the prior year, and with higher revenues
 
from our credit capabilities.
Net
 
new
 
money
 
was
 
positive
 
7
 
billion,
 
with
 
strong
 
flows
 
in
 
money
 
market and
 
active
 
fixed
 
income, as
 
well
 
as
sustained demand for SMAs, which saw
 
inflows of 4.5 billion this quarter.
Operating expenses
 
were
 
10%
 
lower as
 
Asset
 
Management re
 
-tools for
 
growth
 
by
 
continuing
 
to
 
make strong
progress in streamlining its infrastructure and operating model.
 
 
 
9
Slide 13 – Investment Bank
On to slide 13 and the Investment Bank.
 
In the IB
 
we delivered pre-tax
 
profit of 696
 
million, up 72%,
 
and a return
 
on attributed equity
 
of 16%, all
 
while
absorbing incremental RWA from the implementation of the final Basel
 
III FRTB rules.
 
Revenues increased by 24% to 3 billion, driven by
 
Global Markets, which posted its best quarter
 
on record.
 
Banking revenues decreased
 
by 4% to
 
564 million, broadly
 
in line with
 
the fee pool.
 
While the market
 
environment
weighed
 
on
 
our
 
Banking
 
results
 
across
 
products
 
and
 
regions,
 
and
 
despite
 
growing
 
economic
 
uncertainty,
 
our
pipeline
 
continues
 
to
 
build.
 
We
 
remained
 
top
 
10
 
in
 
announced
 
M&A
 
and
 
saw
 
continued
 
momentum
 
in
 
our
mandated deal book.
In
 
Advisory,
 
top-line growth
 
was
 
17%,
 
while Capital
 
Markets
 
revenues
 
declined by
 
13%,
 
mainly
 
due
 
to
 
softer
sponsor
 
activity.
 
In
 
the
 
Americas,
 
the
 
mix
 
within
 
the
 
LCM
 
fee
 
pool
 
shifted
 
towards
 
corporates
 
and
 
away
 
from
sponsors, where we’re
 
more concentrated.
 
In ECM, although
 
the 1% revenue
 
decrease outperformed
 
the fee
 
pool,
we remain focused on our pipeline build, which is expected
 
to yield meaningful returns over the medium-term.
Regionally, APAC
 
grew its overall Banking revenues
 
by over 70% compared to
 
the prior year quarter and
 
delivered
its best first quarter on record in M&A.
 
Revenues in Markets increased by 32% to 2.5 billion. Against a market backdrop of elevated activity and volatility
in Equities and FX,
 
where our IB is
 
more concentrated, we capitalized on the
 
enhanced capabilities acquired with
Credit Suisse and our multi-year investments in technology.
 
We saw increases across all regions, with the Americas, APAC and Switzerland each delivering their best quarterly
performance on record.
 
Equities revenues reached a new
 
high, driven by Equity
 
Derivatives, with increases across all
 
regions and supported
by Cash Equities and Prime Brokerage. FRC increased by 27%,
 
primarily driven by FX.
 
Operating expenses rose by 14%, largely reflecting increases in personnel
 
expenses.
Slide 14 – Non-core and Legacy
On slide 14, Non-core and Legacy’s pre-tax loss was 200 million
 
with 284 million in revenues.
 
Funding costs
 
of around
 
130 million
 
were more
 
than offset
 
by revenues
 
from position
 
exits, particularly
 
in structured
products.
 
This
 
included
 
the
 
expected
 
gain
 
of
 
around
 
100
 
million
 
from
 
closing
 
the
 
sale
 
of
 
Credit
 
Suisse’s
 
US
mortgage servicing company announced last year,
 
which also eliminates run rate
 
costs of around 100
 
million per
annum.
 
Operating
 
expenses
 
were
 
down
 
38%
 
year-on-year
 
and
 
12%
 
sequentially,
 
as
 
NCL
 
continues
 
to
 
make
 
excellent
progress in driving out costs.
 
 
10
For the remainder
 
of the
 
year, we expect NCL
 
to generate
 
an underlying
 
pre-tax loss, excluding
 
litigation, of
 
around
1.7 billion,
 
including revenues
 
of around
 
negative 300
 
million, mainly
 
from funding
 
costs. Revenues
 
from carry,
continued
 
exits
 
and
 
remaining
 
fair
 
value
 
positions
 
are
 
expected
 
to
 
net
 
around
 
zero,
 
and
 
underlying
 
operating
expenses should average around 450 million per
 
quarter.
 
While the
 
current environment
 
may slow
 
the pace
 
of exits,
 
it is
 
unlikely to
 
materially affect
 
the financial
 
performance
of our
 
NCL portfolio.
 
As examples,
 
hedges in
 
the macro
 
book, and
 
the nature of
 
our now
 
much smaller
 
credit book,
render the valuation of both portfolios less susceptible
 
to market volatility.
Slide 15 – NCL run down continuing at pace
Now onto Slide
 
15. Since the
 
second quarter of
 
2023, Non-core and
 
Legacy has freed
 
up almost 7
 
billion of capital,
reduced its cost base by over 60% and closed 74%
 
of the 14 thousand books they started
 
with.
 
As of the end of March, risk-weighted
 
assets in NCL were 7
 
billion lower than in the
 
prior quarter, as position exits
across securitized
 
products, credit
 
and macro
 
more than
 
offset the
 
inflationary effects
 
of the
 
final Basel
 
III standards.
 
Again this quarter, the
 
skillful expertise of the NCL team has kept us well ahead of our de-risking schedule. Given
this accelerated progress, we’re upgrading our ambitions and now aim to drive NCL’s credit and market risk RWA
below 8 billion by the end of 2025, and to around
 
4 billion by the end of 2026.
 
While
 
we
 
expect
 
the
 
reduction
 
in
 
balance
 
sheet
 
to
 
continue
 
to
 
contribute
 
to
 
NCL’s
 
cost
 
performance,
 
as
 
I’ve
highlighted in the
 
past, further savings
 
from technology,
 
real estate
 
and resolving ongoing
 
litigation matters will
take longer to achieve. This underpins our 2026
 
exit-rate cost guidance I offered last quarter.
With that, let’s open for questions.
11
Analyst Q&A (CEO
 
and CFO)
Jeremy Sigee, Exane BNP Paribas
Good morning. Thanks very much.
 
Firstly, just a basic one. The fact that you're accruing the whole of the 2025
share buyback suggests that you intend to do that
 
almost regardless of what the draft rules look like when
they’re published in June. Is that a fair interpretation?
And then my second question is a bit broader. Could you talk about how your wealth
 
management clients in
different regions are reacting in April post the tariffs in the US? Are they doing more with the bank or less
 
with
the bank? What are their risk appetites? If you could
 
talk about that, that would be great. Thank you.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Thank you, Jeremy. No, it is not a fair representation considering what I said, that our language hasn't
 
changed
and we said, very clearly that we are accruing based
 
on what we know and we see today, based on our strong
performance, based on our strong capital position.
 
That, of course, all of this is subject to
 
us continuing to
develop, well, in terms of financial targets,
 
the integration, and as we pointed out,
 
any material and immediate
change in the regulatory regime.
So, in respect of the activity in April, I can only say that
 
of course, we had a, as I mentioned in my remarks,
 
we
saw a huge spike in client activity and volatility
 
in the first couple of weeks in the first
 
few days of April. So,
even achieving a 30% increase compared to the peak
 
of COVID times, which is quite exceptional.
 
But it's fair
to say that if you look at the last 10 days or
 
so, there is a fatigue coming in. You'd see it also in financial
markets. I think that markets are stabilizing around current levels across many
 
asset classes and it's much more
of a wait-and-see attitude and so in that sense
 
it's a more normalized environment.
Jeremy Sigee, Exane BNP Paribas
Thank you.
Giulia Aurora Miotto, Morgan Stanley
Yes. Hi. Good morning and thank you for taking my question. So, the first one,
 
I was surprised to hear that
there is re-leveraging in Asia. That's quite a positive development.
 
And I was wondering if that has carried
through also in April or was it only a Q1 phenomenon,
 
and then got shutdown by the tariff discussion.
And then the second question instead, of course,
 
I have to ask on capital, and May is the
 
next catalyst there, or
at least we will learn something there. Is there any development
 
that you can share with us in terms of what
 
to
expect, and what will go under government
 
ordinance, what will be put to parliament, yeah,
 
any updated
thoughts would be helpful. Thank you.
12
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Let me pick up the second one, and Todd will pick up the first question. There are no developments other
 
than
the updated timeline for the announcement
 
of the proposal that are now seen, are going to come in during
the first week
[edit: weeks]
 
of June. So, we don't know what's the
 
content of this proposal in terms of – also, if
there is any split between ordinance or legislative process. So, we
 
are in a wait-and-see and we will see like
everybody in five to six weeks' time.
Todd
 
Tuckner
And Giulia, I'd say it's helpful to step back
 
and look at the bigger picture here, on the lending question.
 
I mean,
clearly for GWM, one of our strategic imperatives
 
is to grow lending, albeit selectively and profitably. And as a
driver of enhanced relationship revenues for clients, so
 
we're pleased with the developments that we saw
 
in
1Q. I mean, we can't speculate on where things
 
are going to move given the current environment for sure. But
we're pleased with the 1Q performance, and that
 
still remains a strategic focus for us.
Giulia Aurora Miotto, Morgan Stanley
Thank you.
Kian Abouhossein, JPMorgan
Yes. Thanks for taking my questions. I wanted to come back to US wealth management.
 
If you could maybe
run – you clearly have done some strategic changes
 
around the US wealth management business, both
 
on
compensation, but also incentives, et cetera.
 
And if I look on a year-end basis versus
 
now, you have reductions
in advisers. I just wanted to see where should we
 
think adviser numbers to go to in US wealth.
 
And how should
we think around the net new flows but also impact
 
in that respect because you made some statements
 
in the
last quarter that could be a deterioration, but
 
also in terms of improvement in pre-tax margin. So, a bit
 
more of
a holistic approach around the changes that you have
 
done and the impact.
And then secondly, just coming back to the Federal Council report, can you just take
 
a step back and just give
your current views around your positioning against other
 
banks, but also potential offsets that you can think
about in order to offset some kind of additional capital requirement, even
 
in big picture terms, if you could talk
about that?
Todd
 
Tuckner
Hi, Kian. So, on the wealth one, let's zoom out
 
a bit and just reiterate that we're executing at pace on our
plans and our strategy. You
 
know, clearly,
 
quarter-on-quarter, we could see volatility. But this said, we're
looking at our ambition to achieve, as you know, a structural mid-teen
 
pre-tax margin. And we look at that as
a two to three-year journey.
As we zoom in, the question on really our platforms
 
and advisers, first, I'd say our platform is stable.
 
There's
been a broad support for our strategy, which is intended to better align advisor incentives
 
with the strategic
goals of the firm. That's evidenced by the very
 
strong same-store net new money we've seen, perhaps
 
the
strongest net new money we've seen over many
 
quarters in the first quarter.
13
In terms of the head count, I would just say
 
that our recruiting pipeline is robust. There is some attrition
 
that
one can expect. And in fact, we're observing across the
 
industry, given the market dynamics of 2024 versus the
beginning of 2025 and the outlook that would
 
create some movement across the industry in terms
 
of advisory
repositioning. But nothing I would highlight in
 
our own platform.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Kian, before I answer the question, can you specify
 
what do you mean by positioning versus
 
other banks?
Kian Abouhossein, JPMorgan
Yes, Sergio. I left it open on purpose, just to see, leaving the floor open to some
 
extent.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Okay.
Kian Abouhossein, JPMorgan
To
 
see what – yeah, what you can tell us and
 
your thoughts about it, because it is clearly a
 
very open question.
It's very difficult for us to look through as well.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
But you know, Kian, the call is scheduled to and at 10:30, so I'm
 
not so sure I have so much time to go through
that. So, but so the issue is very clear that,
 
when I look at the regulatory framework in Switzerland,
 
it's one of
the most demanding. And particularly after
 
we fully implemented Basel III, I think that
 
in terms of relative
game, that we are comfortable at, that we have a strong
 
and demanding regime. That capital and strength is
one of our key pillars.
Having said that, we all know that there is a point
 
in time in which too much is not necessarily
 
positive. And
therefore that's the only consideration I can say when
 
we speak about relative terms. So, because at the
 
end of
the day, as we always say,
 
we are not only competing in terms of return on capital,
 
but we are also competing
for capital. And therefore, having an attractive, sustainable
 
business that also delivers appropriate return is
 
a
key element on judging and balancing any
 
regulatory regime. That's
 
what I can say.
So, in respect of set of measures, the set of measures can only be decided
 
and analyzed when you know what
is the outcome. And so, we will need to assess
 
exactly what the proposal is in terms of
 
impact and timing.
Kian Abouhossein, JPMorgan
 
And Sergio, just very quickly, do you expect enough clarity to assess with that report?
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
I hope, I don't expect.
Kian Abouhossein, JPMorgan Securities
Okay. Thank you.
14
Stefan Stalmann, Bernstein Autonomous
Hi. Good morning. Thank you very
 
much for taking my questions. I have two on
 
capital, please. The first one
on the parent bank, the fully loaded CET1 ratio was I think
 
down by about 60 basis points during
 
the quarter.
Was there anything particular to highlight that happened during the
 
quarter?
And the second one, a bit more, let's say, strategic. The risk density in the group has actually come
 
down quite
a bit. And it's now a bit below 31%. And
 
I think the hope was always in a way that
 
Basel IV would kind of lift
this risk density towards 35%, where it doesn't matter
 
anymore whether leverage or risk-weighted assets drive
your capital requirement. But now it's 31%, it looks like
 
you're quite deeply constrained by leverage, not risk
weighted-assets going forward. Do you expect this to
 
change at all from what you can see? And if not, does
 
it
have any impact on the way that you run
 
your capital management going forward?
Todd
 
Tuckner
Thanks. Thanks, Stefan, for those questions.
 
I appreciate you bringing those up. So, first on the
 
capital, the
parent bank quarter-on-quarter reduction, as I mentioned in my comments
 
comes from the accrual of a
dividend that we expect to pay in 2026
 
in relation to 2025, overall earnings of the
 
parent bank. So, it's a
dividend accrual that effectively drove the capital ratio
 
within our guidance.
On the second one, it's a very good spot
 
on your point about risk density coming
 
in. You know,
 
I would say,
you're also right where I would say more constrained by leverage than
 
risk weighting. But remember that we
set our CET1 capital ratio on a risk-weighted
 
basis as our key target. So, in that sense,
 
that becomes for us
binding unless truly leverage becomes binding.
But to answer your question about what you
 
can do about it or what the cause was or
 
is I would say that, you
see how we've been able to really drive down RWA because of the technical
 
nature of it, in the way we've
been able to manage down work…also work
 
to get approvals on models, on methodology, on data quality, on
all the issues, the coverage of external
 
ratings, all the things that have helped
 
us drive down.
I think the leverage ratio, unfortunately, is just more simple, less fertile ground for optimization.
 
And so, you
saw, as I commented that we had the SACCR increase, whereas on RWA we had a more fertile ground to
optimize. So, I think your observation is correct, but I
 
don't see it this time given we intend to
 
operate with a
CET1 capital ratio of around 14%, which for us is binding,
 
even though you're right, leverage is – we have
 
less
cushion on the leverage side than we do
 
on the risk-weighted side going....
 
Nothing is changing as we move
forward. That's the way we're thinking about it.
Stefan Stalmann, Bernstein Autonomous
Okay. Thank you very much.
Benjamin Goy, Deutsche Bank
Yes. Hi. Good morning. Two
 
questions, please, from my side. First on your India
 
partnership, maybe you can
comment a bit more broader on the onshore, offshore dynamics we should expect
 
in emerging markets going
forward, even in a large market like India, you have to
 
do a partnership.
15
And then secondly, markets are now pricing in again, negative rates in Switzerland. Just
 
wondering, short-
term, any impact or, below zero, if there's not much like an incremental negative impact. The longer-term
question is the 50% cost to income ratio target
 
in your Swiss business was, I assume done or
 
based on a more
positive interest rate outlook and how do you intend
 
to achieve that or is more due to come out on
 
the cost
side? The longer-term question is the 50% cost to income ratio target
 
in your Swiss business was, I assume
done or based on a more positive interest rate outlook
 
and how do you intend to achieve that or
 
more due to
come out on the cost side? Thank you.
Todd
 
Tuckner
Yeah. Hi Benjamin, let me address the second question. So, on your observation regarding the market pricing
and negative rates, as we indicate in our interest rate
 
sensitivity and as I've commented before, we certainly
 
see
convexity in the movement of rates either
 
down or up, in the sense that whether rates
 
move into negative
territory or move up, that would be accretive to our
 
net interest income in our P&C business. So, in that
 
sense
to the extent that is priced in and to the extent
 
that actually happens, we see upside in our
 
NII.
You asked about the expectation on the cost/income ratio targets that we have
 
by the end of 2026. I would
say it's we continue to execute against that
 
expectation. That is our expectation at
 
this stage. Not changing
that given interest rate expectations at this point in time.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
So, on India I think that we see a secular trend developing
 
for the Indian market domestically and but
 
also at
the same time, we see also an opportunity
 
for India residents booking business outside.
 
And looking at our
current setup, we saw that, we decided that the best
 
way to pursue the next phase of growth and growth
opportunities in India for us was to partner
 
with the only fully independent asset
 
gatherer in India. And so
through that, through the combination of us buying a
 
stake, but also bringing our current business into 360,
we can now leverage for the future.
So, we see very good prospects across the board in terms of
 
not only sharing our best practice globally, but
also learning on the domestic markets.
 
And we'll take it from there. So, I think that we are very optimistic
about the long-term potential growth in India.
Benjamin Goy, Deutsche Bank
 
Thank you.
Amit Goel, Mediobanca
 
Hi. Thank you. And maybe just more of a follow-up
 
question, but just the remarks earlier about the equity
double leverage and kind of looking to get
 
down to the 110% at Q2. And then continue
 
to bring it back to
pre-acquisition levels in the quarters after. I'm still kind of curious, why? What drives the
 
pace of that, and kind
of, what's the cost or what's the consequence
 
if you were to stay at 110%? Because let's say
 
if the group were
to have less leverage at the parent bank level, what
 
would stop the group having a bit more leverage at the
group? And what would be the consequence, or what
 
is the benefit of bringing that down from 110% to say
105% or 100%? So, that's the question there.
16
And then just on the PCB business, again
 
I appreciate the response on if rates, for example, if they
 
were to go
negative, et cetera, the convexity. I'm just wondering what you're thinking about volumes
 
there given the
exchange rate movement. Any color would be
 
helpful. Thank you.
Todd
 
Tuckner
Thanks, Amit. So, on the first, your question
 
in terms of the consequence of a higher one or
 
the benefit of the
lower one for sure, the way we look at it is a lower
 
one, which is to say our pre-acquisition levels, the
 
way
we've historically operated. One is more prudent.
 
It's aligned with our strategy. And third, it just offers far more
flexibility. So, if you operate at a higher level and then you hit any stress, then you've effectively sold
 
your
buffer,
 
and so that's the reason why it's prudent to operate
 
at the levels that Sergio and I have been
highlighting over the last quarter or two, since
 
I raised the topic last quarter.
In terms of P&C volumes. As we look, we look
 
forward, I would say, at this point, the outlook on lending is
flattish for now in terms of volumes and ways
 
that if that is a mitigant for sure, the balance sheet
 
optimization
that they've done, that the business has done on
 
the asset side, has driven profitability, return on attributed
equity, revenue over RWA, accretion, appreciation. So, I would say that's the main focus on the lending side.
Deposit outlook is also relatively flattish, maybe some
 
short-term moderate down a bit in a very competitive
market and we're not chasing where we're seeing competitors buying
 
deposits at much higher rates to protect
their loan books. So, our deposit outlook is stable,
 
I would say. But again, there we have adjusted deposit
pricing on select products to help. But at the end
 
of the day, as I've said before, certainly the biggest help
would be rates either moving down or up
 
from a sort of a zero perimeter as that would really be the most
accretive from a NII perspective in the P&C business.
Amit Goel, Mediobanca
 
Thank you.
Andrew Coombs, Citigroup
 
Hi. Good morning. I have two follow-ups,
 
please. One on capital and one on GWM
 
NII. On capital, coming all
the way back to Jeremy's first question, you've taken
 
a change in approach. You've fully accrued for the
buyback rather than taking the capital impact
 
as and when you execute. And can I just
 
ask what was the
rationale for doing this? And is this something
 
you envisage doing going forward, as well?
And the second question on GWM NII, and I think
 
at the full year results, you talked about Q1 being
 
down
low- to mid-single digits sequentially. You've ended up down 7%. And you said that 1 percentage point of that
was due to the re-segmentation. But nonetheless, it looks
 
a little bit worse than your original guidance.
 
So,
perhaps you could explain why it came in
 
slightly worse than you initially expected?
And then more broadly, your full year guidance for GWM NII is unchanged. But it was previously predicated
 
on
the second half being flattish versus the first
 
half. Are you now seeing a slight recovery in the second
 
half?
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
So, thank you, Andrew. So, on capital, again, I think that's, the main driver
 
here is to also manage our ratio in
respect of our guidance. And by doing the accruals,
 
we basically take it closer to our “around 14%.” But
 
most
importantly, I think that's the real factor that has changed is that we moved from having an ambition
 
to having
an intention to.
17
I mean, this is all still subject to the conditions
 
we always set in terms of financial performance.
 
And also, no
material and immediate change in the regulatory framework.
 
But it's clear that now we have – because of
 
the
results and the progress we are making in the integration, and everything
 
that we can control, we feel
comfortable that this is the way to go.
So, you can always expect that as soon as we
 
feel that there is a change between ambition and intention,
 
also,
from a accounting standpoint of view, we will accrue in a prudent manner
 
which we believe is also more
prudent – that kind of reserve, then in order to then execute
 
on capital return plans.
Todd
 
Tuckner
And Andrew, on the second question. Yeah, the reason I gave some color on the segmentation change is, is
just to explain a bit of the delta. But with
 
that explained, you kind of get into the
 
mid-single-digit range, which
is where we've guided into 1Q sequentially from 4Q.
In terms of the outlook, going forward, you're right. I mean,
 
I'm reaffirming the full year NII guidance for
GWM. I see the loan outlook to be, again,
 
dependent on the rate environment, but the loan
 
outlook to be
positive, also dependent on the macroeconomic environment.
 
But that right now, until we see any drastic
change, the loan outlook has been accretive on the
 
NII in terms of the rest of the year for GWM.
And also, the deposit outlook is helping as well,
 
again, subject to macroeconomic developments.
 
But we also
see some of the preferential FTD headwinds tapering.
 
And so ultimately this is contributing as well to
 
deposit
margins increasing. So, for those reasons, I've kept the
 
guidance stable for the full year. And as I said, offered
the explain to sort of move into the Q1
 
guidance range.
Andrew Coombs, Citigroup
 
That's great. Thank you, both.
Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs
 
Yeah. Good morning, everybody. Thank you for taking my questions. You
 
mentioned in the prepared remarks
the LCM fee pool shifted towards corporates and away
 
from sponsors. Any insights you can share on your
discussions with the sponsor community more broadly, how do you expect them to act in the coming quarters
based on the operating backdrop we see today? And
 
maybe at what point would you consider reassessing
 
the
banking revenue ambition for 2026? I guess, in light
 
of the slower activity levels year to date?
And then second, I just want to come back on
 
this risk of an immediate and material change
 
to the regulatory
regime. So, I appreciate the processes is maybe less clear than it
 
was, the range of outcomes has probably
widened, but has the risk of immediacy also
 
increased? It feels as though, if anything stuff is being pushed
 
to
the right a little bit, and obviously there hopefully would
 
be still some kind of phase in period, one
 
would
assume, so just any thoughts on that.
 
Thank you.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Well, look, I think that generally speaking it's… On
 
a year-on-year basis, the drop in the sponsor-related activity
was more important, but I would say that in general, the
 
sponsors are also like everybody on a wait and see
attitude. A lot of transactions are on hold. They are not
 
necessarily being canceled. Of course, if you look
 
at, to
some extent the view levels of funding and spreads
 
and credit markets may put some transaction at,
 
in
question. But, generally speaking the sense
 
is that people are waiting to see if the situation clarifies
 
in the next
couple of months and then they're going to go
 
into executing on plans for either
 
add-on acquisitions or
disposals, IPOs. So, I think that the most
 
important issue that we see right now is
 
that the pipeline of potential
transaction is still healthy and building up. So,
 
we don't see a stop on that.
18
So, coming to your question, I think that when
 
we would change our outlook for the
 
over-the-cycle and
ambitions on the top line is going to be
 
when, if, we have a material change
 
in the market conditions and in
the prospect for the growth of banking businesses in the industry. Our intention to be a relative winner out
 
of
it by gaining share of wallet remains unchanged. So, if
 
we have to change our revenue assumptions, we're
definitely not going to change our market
 
share ambitions to improve and monetize on the investments
 
we did
on the platform in the last 24 months.
In respect of the second one, I mean, look, it's
 
just prudent – we are not in control of this process. We don't
know what's coming out. And so, we can't
 
rule out anything in terms of the materiality
 
of the change, and the
timing. Therefore, you have to interpret this language more as a prudent way
 
to highlight that we are – that
that's a possibility, that doesn't necessarily reflect what we expect or don't expect.
Chris Hallam,
 
Goldman Sachs
 
Okay. Thanks, Sergio.
Piers Brown, HSBC
Yeah. Good morning. I've got two. One on FRC, so up 27% year-on-year. It's much stronger print than a lot of
your peers. And I'm just wondering, is that
 
business mix related? You've mentioned the strength of FX, or do
you feel that you're still winning back market share in
 
that business?
And then the second question, sorry to come
 
back on capital again, but you did say
 
in the fourth quarter that
you had further subsidiary repatriations potentially
 
in the pipeline. I think you mentioned $5 billion
 
from CSI
and maybe something more coming out of the IHC.
 
Can you give an update on progress on both of those
fronts? Thanks.
Todd
 
Tuckner
Hi, Piers. So, on the first question, yeah, the
 
pickup in FRC year-on-year was driven by FX where we're strong,
concentrated. You know we had… it was a difficult quarter, I think for those that are more in rates and credit.
And we're, as you know, under concentrated there, so we didn't have that impact,
 
so we benefited from
where we were well indexed in the FRC segment.
On the capital question, in terms of
 
an update, yes, you recall correctly that there remains additional capital
 
to
be repatriated out of some of the foreign subs, in particular
 
the UK one. And a bit more as well in the US.
We're going through the normal process with the regulators to approve the release of their capital,
 
which is to
say that we continue to work down the portfolios,
 
largely non-core and legacy portfolios, in those
 
entities. And
as we continue to make progress and that capital is indeed excess,
 
including from a supervisory standpoint,
under their conservative lens, they'll give us
 
the – they’ll signal the okay and then we'll repatriate
 
that, over the
course of the next several quarters.
Piers Brown, HSBC
All right. That's great. Thank you.
Sergio P.
 
Ermotti
Thank you. So, there are no more questions. So, thank you for calling
 
in and for your questions. And the IR
team is at your disposal for any follow-ups.
 
So have a nice day. Thank you.
 
19
Cautionary statement
 
regarding forward-looking statements
 
|
This document contains
 
statements that
 
constitute “forward-looking
 
statements”, including
but not limited to management’s outlook for
 
UBS’s financial performance, statements relating to the anticipated effect
 
of transactions and strategic initiatives
on UBS’s
 
business and future
 
development and goals
 
or intentions to
 
achieve climate, sustainability
 
and other social
 
objectives. While these
 
forward-looking
statements represent
 
UBS’s judgments,
 
expectations and
 
objectives concerning the
 
matters described,
 
a number
 
of risks,
 
uncertainties and
 
other important
factors could cause actual
 
developments and results to
 
differ materially from UBS’s expectations.
 
In particular, the global economy may suffer
 
significant adverse
effects from increasing political tensions between world
 
powers, changes to international
 
trade policies, including those related
 
to tariffs and trade barriers, and
ongoing conflicts
 
in the Middle
 
East, as well
 
as the continuing
 
Russia–Ukraine war. UBS’s
 
acquisition of the
 
Credit Suisse
 
Group has materially
 
changed its
 
outlook
and strategic direction and introduced
 
new operational challenges. The integration of the
 
Credit Suisse entities into the
 
UBS structure is expected to
 
continue
through 2026 and presents significant
 
operational and execution risk, including the
 
risks that UBS may be
 
unable to achieve the cost
 
reductions and business
benefits contemplated by
 
the transaction, that
 
it may incur
 
higher costs to
 
execute the integration
 
of Credit Suisse
 
and that the
 
acquired business may
 
have
greater risks
 
or liabilities
 
than expected.
 
Following the
 
failure of
 
Credit Suisse,
 
Switzerland is
 
considering significant
 
changes to
 
its capital,
 
resolution and
 
regulatory
regime, which,
 
if proposed
 
and adopted,
 
may significantly
 
increase our
 
capital requirements
 
or impose
 
other costs
 
on UBS.
 
These factors
 
create greater
 
uncertainty
about forward-looking statements. Other factors that may affect UBS’s
 
performance and ability to achieve its plans, outlook and
 
other objectives also include,
but are not limited to: (i) the degree to which UBS
 
is successful in the execution of its
 
strategic plans, including its cost reduction
 
and efficiency initiatives and its
ability to manage its levels of risk-weighted assets (RWA) and leverage ratio denominator (LRD), liquidity coverage ratio and other financial resources, including
changes in
 
RWA assets
 
and liabilities arising
 
from higher
 
market volatility and
 
the size
 
of the
 
combined Group;
 
(ii) the
 
degree to
 
which UBS
 
is successful
 
in
implementing changes to its businesses to meet changing market, regulatory and other conditions; (iii) inflation
 
and interest rate volatility in major markets; (iv)
developments in the macroeconomic climate
 
and in the
 
markets in which UBS
 
operates or to
 
which it is exposed,
 
including movements in securities prices
 
or
liquidity, credit
 
spreads, currency exchange rates,
 
residential and commercial real
 
estate markets, general economic conditions, and
 
changes to national trade
policies on the financial position or creditworthiness of
 
UBS’s clients and counterparties, as well as on client
 
sentiment and levels of activity; (v) changes in
 
the
availability of capital and funding, including any adverse changes in UBS’s credit spreads and credit ratings of UBS, as well as availability and cost of funding to
meet requirements for debt
 
eligible for total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC);
 
(vi) changes in central
 
bank policies or the implementation of
 
financial legislation
and regulation in Switzerland, the US, the UK, the EU and other financial centers that have
 
imposed, or resulted in, or may do so in the
 
future, more stringent
or entity-specific
 
capital, TLAC,
 
leverage ratio,
 
net stable
 
funding ratio,
 
liquidity and
 
funding requirements,
 
heightened operational
 
resilience requirements,
incremental tax requirements, additional levies, limitations on
 
permitted activities, constraints on remuneration, constraints on transfers of capital and
 
liquidity
and sharing of operational costs across
 
the Group or other measures,
 
and the effect these will
 
or would have on UBS’s
 
business activities; (vii) UBS’s ability to
successfully implement resolvability
 
and related regulatory requirements and
 
the potential need to
 
make further changes to
 
the legal structure or booking
 
model
of UBS in
 
response to legal
 
and regulatory requirements
 
and any additional
 
requirements due to
 
its acquisition
 
of the Credit
 
Suisse Group, or
 
other developments;
(viii) UBS’s ability
 
to maintain and
 
improve its systems
 
and controls for
 
complying with sanctions
 
in a
 
timely manner and
 
for the detection
 
and prevention of
money laundering to meet evolving regulatory requirements
 
and expectations, in particular in the
 
current geopolitical turmoil; (ix) the uncertainty arising
 
from
domestic stresses
 
in certain
 
major economies;
 
(x) changes
 
in UBS’s
 
competitive position,
 
including whether
 
differences in
 
regulatory capital
 
and other
 
requirements
among the major financial centers adversely affect UBS’s
 
ability to compete in certain lines of business; (xi) changes
 
in the standards of conduct applicable to its
businesses that
 
may result
 
from new
 
regulations or
 
new enforcement
 
of existing
 
standards, including
 
measures to
 
impose new
 
and enhanced
 
duties when
interacting with customers and in
 
the execution and handling of
 
customer transactions; (xii) the
 
liability to which UBS may
 
be exposed, or possible constraints
 
or
sanctions
 
that
 
regulatory
 
authorities
 
might
 
impose
 
on
 
UBS,
 
due
 
to
 
litigation,
 
contractual
 
claims
 
and
 
regulatory
 
investigations,
 
including
 
the
 
potential
 
for
disqualification from
 
certain businesses,
 
potentially large
 
fines or
 
monetary penalties,
 
or the
 
loss of
 
licenses or
 
privileges as
 
a
 
result of
 
regulatory or
 
other
governmental sanctions, as well
 
as the effect that litigation, regulatory
 
and similar matters have on
 
the operational risk component
 
of its RWA; (xiii) UBS’s ability
to retain and attract the
 
employees necessary to generate revenues and to manage,
 
support and control its businesses, which may
 
be affected by competitive
factors; (xiv) changes in accounting or tax standards or policies, and determinations or interpretations affecting the recognition of gain or loss, the valuation of
goodwill, the recognition
 
of deferred tax
 
assets and other
 
matters; (xv) UBS’s
 
ability to
 
implement new technologies and
 
business methods, including
 
digital
services, artificial intelligence and other technologies, and ability to successfully compete with both existing and new financial service providers, some of which
may not be regulated to the same extent; (xvi) limitations on the effectiveness of UBS’s internal processes for risk management, risk control, measurement and
modeling, and
 
of
 
financial models
 
generally; (xvii)
 
the occurrence
 
of operational
 
failures, such
 
as fraud,
 
misconduct, unauthorized
 
trading, financial
 
crime,
cyberattacks, data leakage and systems failures, the risk of which is increased with persistently high levels of cyberattack
 
threats; (xviii) restrictions on the ability
of UBS Group AG, UBS AG and regulated
 
subsidiaries of UBS AG to make
 
payments or distributions, including
 
due to restrictions on the ability of
 
its subsidiaries
to make loans or distributions, directly or indirectly, or, in the case of financial difficulties, due to the exercise by FINMA or the regulators of UBS’s operations in
other countries of their broad statutory powers in relation to protective measures, restructuring and liquidation proceedings; (xix) the degree to which changes
in regulation, capital or
 
legal structure, financial results
 
or other factors may
 
affect UBS’s ability to
 
maintain its stated capital
 
return objective; (xx) uncertainty
over the scope of actions that may be required by UBS, governments and others for UBS to achieve goals relating to climate, environmental and social matters,
as well as the
 
evolving nature of
 
underlying science
 
and industry and
 
the possibility of
 
conflict between different
 
governmental standards
 
and regulatory regimes;
(xxi) the ability
 
of UBS to
 
access capital markets;
 
(xxii) the ability
 
of UBS to
 
successfully recover from
 
a disaster or
 
other business continuity problem
 
due to a
hurricane, flood, earthquake, terrorist attack, war,
 
conflict, pandemic, security breach, cyberattack, power loss, telecommunications failure or
 
other natural or
man-made event; and (xxiii) the effect that these or other factors or unanticipated
 
events, including media reports and speculations, may have on its reputation
and the additional consequences
 
that this may have on
 
its business and performance.
 
The sequence in which the factors
 
above are presented is not indicative
 
of
their likelihood of occurrence
 
or the potential magnitude
 
of their consequences. UBS’s
 
business and financial performance could
 
be affected by
 
other factors
identified in its past and future filings and reports, including those filed with the US
 
Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). More detailed information
about those factors is set forth in
 
documents furnished by
 
UBS and filings made by UBS
 
with the SEC, including the
 
UBS Group AG and UBS AG Annual
 
Reports
on Form 20-F for the year ended 31 December 2024. UBS is not under any obligation to (and expressly disclaims any obligation to) update or alter its forward-
looking statements, whether as a result of new information,
 
future events, or otherwise.
© UBS 2025. The key symbol and UBS are among
 
the registered and unregistered trademarks of UBS. All rights
 
reserved
 
 
 
 
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
 
registrants have duly
caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
 
duly authorized.
UBS Group AG
By:
 
/s/ David Kelly
 
_
Name:
 
David Kelly
Title:
 
Managing Director
 
By:
 
/s/ Ella Copetti-Campi
 
_
Name:
 
Ella Copetti-Campi
Title:
 
Executive Director
UBS AG
By:
 
/s/ David Kelly
 
_
Name:
 
David Kelly
Title:
 
Managing Director
 
By:
 
/s/ Ella Copetti-Campi
 
_
Name:
 
Ella Copetti-Campi
Title:
 
Executive Director
Date:
 
April 30, 2025