Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Today I have the pleasure and the honor to open today's conference regarding our financial performance as of the end of third quarter of 2026.

If I can ask you to turn to page number 2. Moneta generated net profit of 5.5 billion.

This represents an improvement of 12.7% against the previous year. The result comes on the basis of growth in the operating income of the bank that came in at 11.2 billion.

We also enjoy a steady cost base of the bank. We incurred 4.2 billion in operating expenditures.

Lastly, we have under control cost of risk that came in at 492 92 million. With respect to balance sheet development, our funding base reached 4 476 billion.

This represents growth of 3.8%, and we've enjoyed strong lending activity reflected in the growth of loan portfolio, reaching 318 billion, growing at 10.4%. Overall, the balance sheet grew to a level of 524 billion since beginning of the year, representing growth of 5 5%.

With respect to capital, we remain well capitalized at 19%. The CET1 ratio is at 13.1 1%, Tier 1 ratio is at around 15, and we comfortably fulfilled the MREL requirement at 27.4%.

When we look at risk-weighted assets, the risk-weighted assets reached a level of 181 billion, growing at 9% in line with the loan portfolio growth. The profitability translated into returns.

With respect to return on tangible equity, we are near 24%, 23.9% to be specific. We have strong liquidity position reflected in the coverage ratio, LCR, of 282%.

Based on the results year to date, and particularly of the third quarter, which is the highest in history of the bank, we feel comfortable to increase the minimum net profit target for 2026 to a level of 7.1 billion crowns. This would be 500 million better than what we originally at the beginning of this year communicated to the market.

The improved guidance of the minimum net profit is driven by better-than-expected operating income. We believe that we will reach 15 billion, steady cost base or stable cost base, and cost of risk range we tighten to 20 to 30 basis points.

The year-to-date cost of risk translates into 20 22 22 basis points. Should we reach this result, the minimum net profit, the earnings per share would then be 13.9 crowns per share.

If we turn a page, there are a couple of important points that we would like to get across. With respect to the lending growth, we expect to end the year in the range of 8.5 to 10.5%.

This is on the basis of significant improvement in the lending activities compared to the year 2000 2025. With respect to deposit growth, we expect a growth rate of 2.5 to 3.5% range.

This relates to our I would call it very careful repricing policy, as we would like to keep the cost of funds under control for the full year. The average cost of funds we expect in the range of 210 to 215 basis points, and this is supported by the fact that so far for the three quarters we stood at 2.1%, which again represents stability in that metric.

With respect to net interest margin, we would like to land in the range of 210 to 215 basis points. Far, we have put on the books 77 billion of new lending.

This is an increase compared to 2025 of third of 39 of 39%. The new volume year to date carries yield, contractual yield of 5.6%.

If we look at the third week, three weeks of the fourth quarter, we are actually increasing this yield by nearly 100 basis points based on repricing that we initiated at the end of third quarter. Lastly, the performance is reflected in the overall legacy portfolio yield, which has increased by 20 20 basis points.

With respect to wealth management franchise and the third-party distribution, here I would like to stress that we are continuing successfully in expanding this franchise. We expect the administered portfolio to land somewhere between 92.5 to 95 billion at the end of the year, and we would like to reach the full-year target of 20 22 billion in sales.

Far, this year to date, we have done 16.3 billion, the target is relatively ambitious, but let's hope that we will get it. On the following page, we have messages related to operating income, cost management, risk management, and net profit performance.

I would like maybe comment on cost of risk, where my expectation is that we should be in the middle of this range, and let's hope that that materializes. The rest of it, I pretty much covered in the opening remarks.

Now let's turn to macroeconomic environment, to the operating environment. If you look at Czech Republic, we have, I would say, so far resilient performance.

Nonetheless, the GDP for this year is estimated at 2.2% growth, which is slower than what was initially expected at this time last year. It's clear that the year-on-year change in the GDP, we see declining trend for the last two quarters.

With respect to state budget deficit, this is projected to come in at 3.4% of the GDP. Currently, the debate regarding the budget deficit for 2027 is at around 390 390 billion.

Clearly, the pressure on government finance is increasing, and this is also visible from the slowly creeping up of the country's indebtedness. The good news is on unemployment.

It remains benign, and even though it's slightly increased if you look at the last five quarters. If you look at inflation, the year-on-year change is at 2%, the latest published number was at 2.

2.5%, and if you look at the contribution to inflation is pretty much across all of the categories except for clothing and food, where we see some contraction. The inflation remains worry, namely due to the imported inflation which comes out of the conflict in the Middle East.

With respect to the yield curve, the yield curve is steepening. It's remarkable how the situation has changed during past 12 months.

As I said, we try to reflect into our pricing on the asset side, and we also try to control the marginal increase of cost of funds through very careful strategy, how we keep the funding base both from volume perspective and from price perspective. Now let me turn to the development in our business model, namely the operating platform.

We continue to have nascent growth in the customer base. This is slowed down by the pricing reality on deposits, where we have taken the posture of seeking profitability rather than customer growth.

With respect to branch network, we have closed four branches this year. We have a plan to close additional two units by the year-end.

In parallel with that, we are reviewing 10 additional locations, and we seek to build a very bespoke plan how to cover the country for next three years. This is due to the fact that, as you will see on the next page, the footfall in the branches continues to decrease, and we will have to react to that.

The Alliance ATM network remains stable. You will see some internal changes in the structure of the network.

I'll come to that in 2 minutes. Total employment of the bank stable, slightly decreasing.

We see relatively rapid decrease of the front office positions. This impacts namely the branch network and the contact center, and we see an increase in other parts of the bank, I would say in back offices where we face increased volumes and higher number of transactions, also within the IT and digital perimeters, as the bank is more and more relying on digital channels.

This reflects itself, and in some other parts of the bank we also need more staff, and this is pretty much related to regulatory requirements and also to cybersecurity requirements, which are dynamically, let's say, becoming more and more challenging. On digital platform, we have 3% growth in active digital platform users, which is in line with our expectations.

What's quite important here is that we have lent 31.8 billion of loan volumes through the digital platform. This is nearly 56% increase against last year, and the main factor here was played by our mortgage campaign running in the second quarter and translating into volumes throughout third quarter.

This is a very good result from our perspective. Also reflected in the nearly 400,000 sales transactions, which grew 9.3% by the end of the quarter.

We also are pleased by increased intermediation, 64 million transactions, nearly 64 million transactions and 9% growth in that category. What is quite important is significant growth in the service transactions, which grew 13.7%, and this takes pressure away from staffing in various parts of the bank.

Looking at the branch network, we experienced steady decrease in the footfall, and this will lead to a change of strategy how we conceive the physical coverage of the country. Nonetheless, the branches continue to play very significant role, accounting for 55 or 56% of loan volumes, and the loan volumes in the network also increased by nearly 30%, reaching level of 45 45 billion.

The last important factor I will mention here is the client satisfaction. The branch network is appreciated.

We have net promoter score of more than 90. This testifies to high quality of the staff, where we also have you will see later on in the presentation various professional certifications which help us to succeed in life insurance, in all insurance products, and in the growth of wealth management franchise.

Turning page to the contact center, here we are also performing, I would say, 360-degree review to make certain improvements. Inbound traffic remains stable.

We have decreased the staff by more than 5%, and we successfully decreased the email traffic, and this is related to better conception of servicing, which is available through either the digital platform or through the ATM network. The client satisfaction has improved quite significantly, 5 points.

We consider this success taking in account everything else. Here we would like to deploy more artificial intelligence.

We have done it successfully on processing of emails, and now we are seeking ways how to make the contact center more efficient, specifically are looking for root causes of the inbound calls and would like to eliminate them through improvement in processes and how we do things in the bank. I think we might see the first results of that either in the middle of '27 or at the third quarter, at the end of third quarter of '27.

Lastly, the ATM network, as I already said, stable. What is changing is the structure of the Alliance network, where more than 40% is now enabled for deposits.

There is significant demand for cash deposits. We can see it from the growth numbers.

We are also experiencing decline in withdrawals. Henceforth, we will, as we have relatively old network on average age of the machines, we will review the size of our own network in line with the commitments that we've made to the Alliance.

Lastly, if you look at the service transactions, this is also a important factor in our ability to service customers. I will end my opening remarks here.

I think the main message is this year we move the net profit target at minimum to 7.1 billion crowns, and perhaps the second message is that the third quarter was the most successful of Moneta Money Bank since we are a publicly traded company. I thank you for your attention and patience with me, and I'll turn over to Jan Friček.

Thank you, Tomáš. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.

I am now on page 17, and it's my pleasure to walk you through the profit and loss statement section. Let me repeat the key financials.

In the first 9 months, Moneta delivered net profit of 5.5 billion, up by 12.7% year on year, with earnings per share of 10.8 crowns, and return on tangible equity of 23.9%. Improved profitability was delivered on the back of operating income growth at 8.2%, reaching 11.2 billion.

This is a combination of higher net interest income, year on year up by 9.7%, reaching nearly 8 billion. Then this was driven by continuing lending growth, together with ongoing repricing of the mortgage book.

Also, net fee and commission income line shows an increase year on year by 6. 6.1%, stemming from the ongoing solid performance in the distribution of wealth management products.

On the cost line, we report a stable development year on year, which, together with the operating income growth, resulted in the cost-to-income ratio reduction to 37.4%. On the credit cost line, we report 492 million, or 22 basis points of the average loan portfolio, which is at the lower end of our guided range for the credit cost for the full year.

Moving forward, on page 18, we provide a detailed view on the net interest income development. As Tomáš mentioned, we had very strong third quarter, delivering year-on-year growth of 12.1% and 5.5% increase against the second quarter, which indicates strong acceleration during the last two quarters.

In line with that, net interest margin went up by 20 basis points, reaching 220 basis points for the average of the third quarter. Drivers of the development are reported on the right side.

Most importantly, interest income from lending is up by 16.5%, which is a function of the accelerated lending growth, as well as repricing within the mortgage book. Treasury income is up year on year by 3.6%, supported by higher two-week repo rate.

On the other hand, interest expense on customer deposits went up by 14.5%, which is a function of the deposit base expansion, together with gradual increase of the cost of funds in relative terms. Moving forward, on page 19, we provide a similar view on the net fee and commission income.

In the third quarter, we delivered year-on-year growth of 5.8% and stable development against the second quarter. Here, I would like to mention that in the third in the third quarter and fourth quarter last year, we obtained extraordinary bonuses of 50 million in each quarter.

If adjusted for that, we would report an recurring income growth of 12.8% year on year. Drivers of the development are reported on the right.

Firstly, third-party commission income went up by nearly 100 million, which is a combination of the commission income from the wealth management products up by 29.4%, and commission income from insurance products up by 10.2%. In the second category, fee income, we report only marginal growth of 13 million, which is attributable to higher transactional activity of our customers.

Lastly, the growth of the fee expense category is attributable to the one-off bonuses obtained last year, and the gradually increasing transactional activity of our customers. Moving forward, on page 20, we report more detail about the performance in the wealth management products distribution franchise.

This year, we report year-on-year growth of the commission income by nearly 32% on the back of the outstanding amount of distributed wealth management products of 24.9%. The commission income growth is a function of the opening fee income expansion by 11.9% and the trailer fee growth of 43.7%.

Here, I would like also to emphasize that current year profitability improvement is also attributable to higher volume of distributed investment certificates and structured investment products, generating upfront one-off commission income. Moving forward, on page 21, we report on the insurance products distribution franchise.

After the slowdown reported in the first quarter, I'm glad to comment that we improved the performance. For the first three quarters, our commission income is up by 5.3%, if compared against the last year.

Also, that we distributed higher number of insurance products sold this year. On the right-hand side, you can see that the improved performance was mostly supported by payment protection insurance, as well as pension insurance, while in life insurance product distribution, we are slightly behind.

Moving forward, on page 22, we can continue with the cost base. As mentioned before, we managed the cost base stable year on year, and in two out of four categories, we report inflation offset in other two categories.

Namely, the main personal pressure persist in personnel costs category, up by 5.7%, and this I will comment in more detail on the following page, while we achieved savings in the administrative also depreciation and amortization after the extension of useful life of the main fixed assets in the first quarter this year. Moving forward, on page 23, let me comment on the personal costs in more detail.

In the third quarter, we report the costs of 643 million, which is a stable comparing to the third quarter last year. If we look into the composition, we achieved marginal saving on the recurring costs, which is a combination of average salary increase more than offset by reduction in number of FTEs.

In the one-off category, we report in the third quarter evaluation of deferred managerial bonuses reflecting share price development in amount of 19 million. We conclude this section on page 24 with the administrative costs development.

In the third quarter, we achieved 1.8% reduction year on year, and this is attributable to three out of four reported categories. Most importantly, we achieved savings in IT category as a result of completion of the cloud migration last year, and also in facilities, we had lesser repairs and lower intensity of maintenance.

On the other hand, marketing costs are up in the third quarter due to mortgage and current account campaigns running in parallel. That's all from myself for this moment, and I will now hand over to my colleague Andrew Gerber, who will continue with the balance sheet development.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Jan, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Moving to page 26, we take a look at some highlights of the balance sheet development.

Starting with the loan portfolio, you can see the loan portfolio grew 10.4% year-over-year, reaching 317.6 billion, whilst the loan portfolio yield increased 26 basis points, reaching 511 basis points. This is driven by strong new business performance across both segments, with the yield driven by a combination of repricing of the mortgage portfolio as it continued to move through refixation, as well as higher rates on new lending.

On the funding side, you see the funding base grew 3.8% year-over-year, reaching 475.6 billion, whilst the cost of funds increased 19 basis points, reaching 227 basis points. As Tomáš said earlier, this reflects our strategy of maintaining and marginally growing the portfolio whilst trying to keep a lid on the cost of funds.

Moving to page 27, we take a more detailed look at the balance sheet. You can see that on the asset side, the growth was driven by net customer loans, which were up 10.4% year-over-year, with investment securities up 3.1%, and the liquidity at the central bank decreasing 13% year-over-year.

On the liability side, you can see all the growth is driven by the growth in the customer deposit base, up 4.5% year-over-year. Moving to page 28, we take a look at the new lending performance of the bank.

Overall new lending activity was up 39.2% year-to-date, reaching 76.6 billion. This reflects strong growth in retail, up 34.5%, driven by successful mortgage campaign that we ran in the second quarter, but also solid growth in consumer loans.

On the commercial side, you see growth of 46.4% year-over-year, and this is driven equally across the SME and small business segments, up 48.5 and 40.5% respectively. Moving to page 29, we look at the segment view of the balance sheet, in terms of loan balances.

Overall, the loan balance grew 10.4% year-over-year, as I said, with retail up 5.1%, and commercial growing strongly, with small business up 31.7% and SME up 17.5%. On page 30, we take a more detailed look at the retail loan portfolio, which grew 5.1%, as I said earlier.

This was driven predominantly by mortgages, up 5.2% year-over-year, as I said, as a consequence of the strong campaign that we ran in the second quarter, but also strong contribution from consumer lending, which is up 9.9% year-over-year. The other loans category continues to decline, down 14% year-over-year.

As I said in previous quarters, this is effectively a run-off portfolio, which is why we continue to see the decline there. Similarly, looking at the commercial loan portfolio on page 31, you see the overall portfolio grew 20.3%, with strong contributions from investment loan portfolio, up 24.8%, and the small business loan portfolio, up 31.7%, driven by strong performance in new lending, as we said earlier.

On page 32, we take a look at the yield development on the loan portfolio. Overall, the loan portfolio yield increased 26 basis points, reaching 511 basis points, with the retail portfolio up 30 basis points, as I said, driven predominantly by mortgages.

We've had approximately 30 billion that's moved through refixation this year, and that will continue into the fourth quarter. Plus 10 basis points on the commercial side, as I said, driven predominantly by new lending activity.

Moving to page 33, we look at the funding base of the bank. Overall, you can see that the funding base grew 3.8%, with retail deposits up 2.5% and commercial deposits up 10.7%.

On page 34, we take a slightly different view of the retail franchise by combining retail customer deposits with wealth management. You see that the combined segment grew 6.6% year-over-year, driven by very strong performance in wealth management, up 24.9%.

The reason we look at this view is that 65% of the growth in the wealth management franchise is driven by moving of deposits from the deposit base into the wealth management, which is a strategy which we've pursued quite successfully, and allows us to grow the fee income on the wealth management business, which Jan alluded to earlier. Moving to page 35, we take a more conventional view of the retail portfolio.

As I said before, the retail deposit portfolio grew 2.5%, and you see the growth is driven predominantly by the savings and term deposits, up 2.9%, with the current accounts essentially flat. This reflects the very competitive nature of the market right now, where there are a lot of competitors offering very attractive rates to bring deposits in.

As Tomáš said earlier, we've tried to manage this very carefully to keep some growth whilst keeping a lid on the cost of funding. I think we've done this quite successfully.

Similarly, on page 36, we look at the commercial deposit portfolio, where you can see the growth is a little bit more balanced between the savings and term deposits, up 11.9%, and the current accounts, up 9.5%. Finally for this section, on page 37, we take a look at the cost of funding development.

Overall, the cost of funding increased 19 basis points, reaching 227 basis points, driven obviously by the growth in customer deposit costs, which was up 20 basis points, with retail up 17 and commercial up 29. As I say, this reflects our strategy of trying to manage very carefully the pricing of our deposit base whilst maintaining some level of growth in a very competitive market.

I think overall it's been successful first three quarters of the year for us. Strong performance in lending, particularly driven by the third quarter, but we're running a mortgage campaign at present, which I think will perhaps not reach the heights of the second quarter campaign, but will contribute to production in the fourth quarter.

The commercial franchise continues to go well. On the deposit side, we continue to manage the deposit base very carefully.

I think this will come into sharp focus over the coming months as the Czech National Bank moves into a kind of tightening cycle. We expect a reasonably high probability of first hike as soon as 5th of November when they next meet.

This will certainly have an impact on the competition in the deposit market. I think we're well placed to defend our position there.

That concludes the balance sheet section, and with that, I will hand over to Norman who will take you through the risk metrics and asset quality. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Andrew, and good morning to you.

We continue with the risk section on page 39 with a summary of key risk metrics for the first 9 months of this year compared to '25. Let me start on the top left of the chart.

As you can see, cost of risk came in at 22 basis points, which is a 6 basis point increase compared to the same period last year. The increase is largely driven by higher than planned new loan originations, and as well as one single commercial default which we reported out to you already during the Q2 earnings release.

When it comes to loan loss provisioning coverage, here we saw a drop, which is largely driven by the releases of management overlays, which we did in the first 6 months of this year, and also the update of our macro variables within the IFRS 9 reserving model, which led to a drop to 1.11%. Total nonperforming loan coverage was largely flat year over year, landing at 120.4%.

Last but not least, the NPL ratio on the bottom left landed on an all-time low, driven by strong core performance as well as debt sales. This takes us to page 40, where we have a more granular view on the cost of risk for the last seven quarters.

In absolute amounts, cost of risk came in at 492 million or 22 basis points, which is well within the updated guidance of 20 to 30 bps. Apart from the benefits from the releases of provisions from the management overlays and the macro updates, we also got support from gains on NPL sales in the amount of 65 millions in the first 9 months.

Continuing on the next page, page 41, here we have five data points each of the loan portfolio balances, coverages, and NPLs. If you look at the gross loan portfolio balances, these grew by almost 30 billion or 10.2%, whilst at the same time balances on provisions dropped by 8% or around 300 million.

Again, this is largely driven by the releases of the management overlays. Loan loss provision coverage and total NPL coverage we covered before.

If you look at the NPL balances, those dropped by 250 million or 7.3%, and landed a tick shy of 3 billion at the end of Q3. The next page, page 42, here we have an overview of NPL in- and outflows, just focusing on the third quarter.

Here the NPL inflow was slightly below the Q2 level, and the ending balances is 60 million higher compared to June '26. That is largely driven by the fact that we had lower debt sales in the third quarter, which we have every year compared to the second quarter, otherwise, I think the balances would have remained flat as well.

The last page of the risk section, page 43, here we have delinquency ratios for the last 6 years. In a nutshell, we observed stable development across delinquency buckets, which developed in a stable corridor within plus minus 5 to 10 basis points.

Summarizing the risk section, I think overall we had a solid credit performance with the 22 basis points of cost of risk, well within the guidance for '26. Overall, we benefited clearly from the gains of NPL sales, management overlay releases, and the macro updates.

Overall going forward beyond '26, we expect that cost of risks will slightly increase to a more normalized level, which is reflected also in our midterm guidance of 25 to 45 basis points. With that, I hand over back to Jan Friček, who will be sharing with you more details on the liquidity.

Thank you.

Thank you, Norman. Ladies and gentlemen, let me now turn your attention on page 45, where we report on our liquidity position.

Also in the third quarter, Moneta maintained strong liquidity position. However, as a result of the loan portfolio growth exceeding the funding base expansion, the volume of free liquidity slightly decreased, which is visible across liquidity ratios on the screen.

Loan-to-deposit ratio went up from 66 to 70%, and share of high-quality liquid assets in customer deposits went down from 40 to 35%. Below that, we report on regulatory ratios, both are well above 100% regulatory limit, namely net stable funding ratio decreased from 177% to 165%, and liquidity coverage ratio went down from 335% to 282%.

If you turn the page, we report on the high-quality liquid assets development. You can see that the position went down year on year by 6.5%, landing at 160.3 billion.

The reduction or the decline is attributable to the accelerated lending growth, slower deposit base expansion, and also repayment of Tier 2 bond in September this year. Now please let me continue with the capital management, starting on page 48.

We start with the capital management on consolidated basis. Here the regulatory capital went up from 30.8 billion to 34.5 billion at the end of September, supported by the successful AT1 issuance.

This position corresponds to capital adequacy ratio of 19.03%, with an excess of 3.53% above the capital management target. Out of that, the CET1 excess stood at 2.45% or at 4.4 billion crowns in absolute amount, which corresponds to 8.70 crowns per share.

Moving forward, on page 49, we provide more detail to the capital position on consolidated level. If I start with the chart in the top-left corner, it shows the CET1 excess capital development during the first three quarters.

We started at 2.7 billion at the end of last year, and it went up to 4.4 billion at the end of September. The growth is a combination of AT1 issuance, also current-year net profit, the retained portion, and this was offset by RWA growth, reflecting the loan portfolio expansion.

You can see that at the end of September, the available capital stood at 9.4 billion, which is a sum of the dividend accrual, representing 90% of the net profit in an amount of nearly 5 billion, and the excess CET1 capital reported at the end. This corresponds to 18.4 crowns per share of a distributable capital.

In the chart below, we report risk-weighted assets, the position. The total position went up to 181.2% as a result of the lending growth, loan portfolio expansion, and the RWA density increased by 1.6% since the beginning of the year as a result of the lending growth utilizing free liquidity.

If we look on page 50, I can comment on the capital position on individual level. Here the regulatory capital, together with MREL instrument, reached 49 billion against 44.4 billion reported at the end of 2025.

This position corresponds to MREL adequacy ratio of 27.4%, which is by 5.1% above the capital management target. Here I'd like to comment on the management buffer.

The 125 basis points management buffer contains 25 basis points as an anticipatory buffer, reflecting countercyclical buffer increase announced, effectively from the 1st of July next year. On the other hand, in the capital management target, we haven't reflected the recently announced reduction of the SREP requirement by 20 basis points, from 200 basis to 180 basis points, effectively from the 1st of January next year.

That was my last comment, and I will now hand over to Tomáš Spurný, who will continue with the guidance and final remarks. Thank you.

We've covered it. We increased the guidance to 7.1 billion.

I would like to stress that this is the minimum net profit target. Let's hope that we get there.

Thank you very much for your attention, for your participation, and for your patience with us. Now I would like to turn it to Q&A.

Thank you.

Yes, hello, and congratulations on the strong results, and thank you for taking my questions again. Firstly, maybe you can give us something on the outlook for 2027.

You've raised the guidance now, profit guidance for 2026. It's above the currently valid target for '27.

I understand that this will be updated with the release of the '26 results, but can we expect an upward revision for those as well, and the 2027 guidance, given the NIM development and the strong loan growth that you see now? Next on the net interest margin increase now in Q3, again on the repricing of the mortgage book, how much further repricing potential remains in the existing loan book?

Do you expect the current NIM level to be sustainable in 2027, given potentially rising deposit costs and the higher policy rates in the Czech Republic? Then thirdly, more sensitive topic, potential bank taxes, given the recent political statements.

How do you assess the risk of additional bank taxes being introduced in the Czech Republic? Then, if I may, a last one.

You've decided against an extraordinary dividend this year, despite remaining in excess capital. What would need to change for management to reconsider extraordinary distributions in 2027?

What are the key constraints? Is it asset growth, capital, or the broader macroeconomic development?

Thank you.

Okay. Do we start with number one or we go to number five?

Let's start with number one. The answer on revision of the guidance of the minimum net profit, the answer is yes.

We will upgrade it, and there is a 99% probability that it will go up and 1% probability that it stays the same, unless something fundamental changes. On repricing of mortgages, we have in 2027 15

28 billion.

Yeah.

There is still some room for the upside in yield. The majority of the upside were already consumed in last 2 years.

However, going forward, we project still about 100 basis points, 90 to 110 basis points upside in that repricing.

So 20 28 billion in 2027. Do you know how much we have till the end of the year?

30, 37

and a half, no?

9 9 to go this year, total

for this year. 9 to go this year.

Yeah.

The letters are out already pretty much, with the rate, and we have retention rate on the mortgages north of 85% on the repriced mortgages. The third question?

Bank tax.

Bank tax. I will not say anything sort of revealing, but if you look at the rhetoric, the risk is very high.

High risk is anything with a probability of 60%. I would comment it like that.

We might get lucky with respect to the parliamentary process, because it might not be so easy to get it in for '27, and they cannot backdate it, it cannot be retroactive, we might get lucky. I think there are several factors impacting that decision.

The state budget deficit for 2027, projected at a level of 386 billion, and Linda will correct me if I'm right, this is under the debate. If that happens, the pressure increases.

Second, it is political program promises of the ANO movement, where they have said that they will make mortgages more accessible and less expensive. This is not delivered from the nominal point of view.

I would argue that if you index it for the yield curve, then they would see actually that the mortgages are slightly cheaper. In my discussions, I also advise that they should regulate brokers, which we don't use, but brokers make the mortgages more expensive because you have to amortize the commissions which are north of 2% into the price of the mortgage, we have a price point advantage against the large banks.

What else is there? I think there is also if you talk to some of the elected officials, dismay over the fact that the rate differential between euro rates and Czech crown is in their view too high, and it should be tightened.

That's the other argument. The last argument is that banks make too much money.

The Czech banking sector, as far as I know, produces around 15% return on equity, between 14 and 15%, is that too high? Depends on vantage point, doesn't it?

I would say the risk is fairly high this time. The fourth part of the question, extraordinary dividend.

The adjective, is it an adjective, extraordinary, describes the nature of the action we have taken in last 2 years. I think it's well summarized in my letter to shareholders, where I cite the obvious.

Liquidity is becoming dear. Number one exogenous reason is the government seeks to diversify funding of the government deficit through offer of government bonds online effectively.

If you buy a government bond, you don't pay the withholding tax on interest, we are under pressure, the entire banking sector will be under continuous pressure from this effort. Number two, the central bank offers municipalities now a rate of 3.7%, which is pretty much at the level of the repo rate.

Out there in the system, there are 800 billion of deposits, it's about 10% of the deposit base of Czech Republic which are related to municipalities. If municipalities are woken up and transfer these funds to the central bank, then the competition for liquidity will be higher.

Third reason is we have had strong growth in the loan book, we have to deploy the capital beneath that. The fourth reason is that if you look at the 16.3 billion of wealth management sales, this is 65% funded through conversion of our deposits.

There is the ever-present pressure from the challenge of banks. All in all, we are seeking to preserve liquidity, that's the first reason.

I don't want to also forget the fact that in January 2027, we intend to call Tier 2 bond with a nominal value of 2.6 billion in order to decrease the cost of funding, and the bond is ineffective for us, we will have this liquidity outlay. Henceforth, we have decided not to pay the extraordinary dividend, which is again extraordinary.

It's really interesting to me how something which is extraordinary turns into regular in minds of people. We see headwinds coming, and we are trying to mitigate those headwinds by being prudent with respect to the liquidity.

Second reason quite frankly is that we've had SREP review. The SREP review yielded in our case decrease of the Pillar 2 by 20 basis points, from 2 we went to 1.8.

This gives us a bit more free capital. Nonetheless, there is a trade-off with the central bank.

The central bank likes us as long as we are capitalized at the current level, and we don't want to be in the situation that our reputational capital with the central bank is spent on decreasing the level of capitalization of the bank, because we have worked for last 3 years very hard to get the SREP down, and there's evidence of being successful in that respect. We have worked for last 11 or 10 years to build reputational capital with the regulator, and we are aiming to become the Czech champion of banking.

That's the other reason why we want to maintain the capitalization level for the moment. This is with respect to the decision taken now.

Now going forward, we fairly well understand that the dividend yield is significant component in the valuation of the bank, and we will behave accordingly, taking into account the realities of the operating environment and the tax regime of the Czech Republic. That's another pressure, potential pressure on liquidity if they decide to collect money from us through the sector tax.

We are just being careful, and I would like to again underline that the importance of dividend is very clear to us. All right.

Is there anything else? Okay.

That's Okay.

Thank you, and we hope you will revise, by the way, the view on Moneta, because it's relatively antique.

Yes, I've updated it, but thank you very much for the answers. Highly appreciate it.

Thank you.

Thank you. We have no additional questions, do we?

Excellent.

I would like to thank the management team for having patience with me. With that, I truly hope that when we get together again on what is it, February 2nd, that we will bring good news to the table, which is meeting or potentially exceeding the minimum net profit target.

As I said, we will make strong consideration, we understand the importance of dividend with respect to Moneta shareholders. With that, we wish you pleasant weekend, and we truly hope that we will deliver the guidance.

Thank you very much for your participation.