Good morning, and welcome to Mandatum's Q4 2025 results audiocast. My name is Lotta Borgström from Investor Relations, and I am pleased to open today's call.

I am joined today by our CEO Petri Niemisvirta and our CFO Matti Ahokas, who will take you through the highlights and key developments of the quarter. We will begin with the management presentation, after which we will move on to the Q&A session, and as always, you can participate either by dialing in or by submitting your questions through the chat.

We will review the chat questions once the dial-in Q&A has concluded. Before we get started, a brief reminder that the materials for today's calls are available on our website.

With these remarks, I will hand things over to Petri. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Lotta. Let me now walk you through Mandatum's fourth quarter and full-year performance.

In the fourth quarter, Mandatum delivered another period of continued progress across our core businesses and operational efficiency. The results demonstrate the strength of our capital-light model, our operational discipline, and the trust our clients place in us.

For the October-December period, profit before taxes decreased by 14% to €13.3 million due to the lower net finance result and other result. However, our capital-light profit before taxes increased by 28% to €27 million, and its most significant income item, the fee result, rose by 18% year-on-year.

This shows that our strategy focus is in the right areas, with profitable growth driven particularly by asset and private wealth management, as well as our corporate business. The strong growth also highlights the continued improvement in the quality of the group's earnings.

Client assets under management reached a new billion-euro milestone at year-end, increasing 10% from the previous year to €15.3 billion. Quarterly net flows was lower than the strong comparison period, as a few larger client distribution in alternative investment weighed on the total despite strong underlying sales.

The net finance result decreased from the last year to €19 million, but it is important to keep in mind that the comparison period included a €16 million dividend from Saxo Bank. Matti will later walk you through the composition of the net finance result in more detail.

For the full year 2025, profit before taxes decreased to €182 million, while capital-light profit before taxes for the year increased by 5% to €92 million. It is good to note that the result for the comparison period included more than €10 million related to the insurance portfolio sold to If in 2024.

Once again, the fee business performance remains resilient, and the underlying client activity remains strong throughout the year, which for us is a top priority. Mandatum's Board of Directors proposed to the Annual General Meeting a dividend of €0.85 per share, reflecting our strong capital position.

At our Capital Markets Day in June, we introduced our long-term financial targets, including a cumulative shareholder payout exceeding €1 billion over the 2025 to 2028 strategy period. We are well on our way toward this goal, and we place strong emphasis on having the capacity to pay out attractive dividends, both now and the years ahead.

The solvency ratio at 169% was once again very strong. It is good to bear in mind that the figure includes the foreseen dividend based on the Board of Directors' proposal, and that it will bounce back to higher levels after the closing of the sale of Saxo Bank.

Client activity remained solid throughout the year. Assets under management reached a new billion-euro milestone and increased to €15.3 billion, supported by both positive net flow and a favorable market environment.

Net flow for the quarter was €141 million, and for the full year of €723 million, which is more than 5% of the client assets under management. The institutional wealth management flow decreased from last year.

The main reason was a few large client distribution related to alternative investments, which offset the impact of otherwise very strong new sales. It is also worth noting that the comparison period was very strong.

Corporate net flow, on the other hand, increased significantly from last year. In our corporate business, we maintained our market-leading position: supplementary pensions and personnel funds.

Sales of risk life insurance stayed strong, although they fell short of ambitious targets we have set for ourselves. In the retail business area, sales of risk life insurances developed particularly well, supported by the strong start of our cooperation with Pohjantähti Mutual Insurance Company.

The role of key distribution partnership is significant in the retail customer business. One of last year's highlights was the great performance of our wealth management business.

Sales of discretionary mandates were notably strong, and overall assets under management in private wealth management grew by 19% from the previous year. This strong growth also expanded Mandatum's market share.

It is great to see our investments in private wealth management paying off, as it is a central part of our growth strategy. During the year, we made strong progress in advancing our asset and wealth management business.

The expansion of our international operation was one of the highlights of 2025, and I'm very pleased with what we have achieved. Growth remained strong, especially in Sweden, and we also gained new clients across Central Europe.

Our quality investment products received multiple awards last year, highlighting strong investment performance across several asset classes and fund categories. This shows both the international appeal of our products and Mandatum's ability to build a credible presence outside the Finnish market.

Operational efficiency continued to improve, driven by rising income and lower costs. The cost-to-income ratio dropped by 9 percentage points to 49% over the trailing 12 months.

As we have said before, our business is scalable, and we have made the main IT investments already, costs should grow less than income going forward. At the same time, we have continued to invest in our future.

Last year, we hired new salespeople to accelerate growth in both the institutional wealth management and the corporate business areas. Fee margin stood at 1.13%, slightly lower year-on-year due to mix effects as institutional wealth management volumes increased, while standalone product margin remains stable.

Mandatum was once again awarded the Great Place to Work certification, highlighting the strength of our culture and the commitment of our employees. Retaining good people is especially important in our industry.

The certification is a clear sign that we have succeeded in creating work environment built on trust and well-being. In November, Mandatum was ranked Finland's best private banking provider in Kantar Prospera Private Banking 2025 Finland customer study.

Our very high customer satisfaction scores tell the same story. The Net Promoter Score for our wealth management business was very high last year at 80.

Our corporate clients were even more satisfied, with the Net Promoter Score reaching 85. Both figures are exceptionally high by any standard of comparison.

The exceptional commitment of our people and our strong customer satisfaction are evident in everything we do. Finally, a quick look at our financial targets, which were presented at last summer's Capital Markets Day.

Although we are only eight months into the new strategy period, we are already well on track toward all of our targets. As we look ahead, our strategy direction remains clear.

We continue to focus on growing in our target segments and improving operational efficiency for long-term value creation. Thank you.

I will now hand over to Matti, who will go through the financials in more detail.

Thank you, Petri. Let's now take a closer look at the fourth quarter result components.

As mentioned, our fee result was up 18% year-on-year, with assets under management up by 10%. If we compare to Q3, our AuM was up by some 3% or €410 million to €15.3 billion.

The client fee margins were unchanged in the quarter when looking on a 12-month rolling basis. More importantly, I think the product-specific margins were largely flat during the quarter.

As Petri mentioned, the cost-to-income ratio of our client AuM continued to decrease according to plan and was below 50 for the first time in our history. Overall, we saw a decline in our costs during 2025, mainly due to lower IT costs.

At the same time, income was up, as you know. The Q4 net finance result came in at €19 million, and as all of our investment portfolio is mainly in credit instruments, and returns were lower than normal during the quarter as rates increased.

In addition, the movements of the IFRS discounting rate components impacted our net finance result during the quarter. I'll talk a bit more about this later on.

The result related to risk policies at €4 million in Q4 was back to more normalized levels and up significantly compared to the previous year. On the other result line, there was a negative impact by some €5 million due to updated actuarial assumptions, mainly in the with-profit portfolios.

Capital generation is a key success factor to any financial company, and we still continue to consistently generate capital. Organic capital generation was €60 million in Q4 or €0.12 per share, and the main positive driver here again was the increase in own funds.

Return on equity was 8.6% in the quarter. As you know and as Petri mentioned, one of our key financial targets is to grow the capital-light profit before taxes by more than 10% annually by 2028 compared to 2024.

If we look at 2025, the reported profit before taxes was €92 million, up 5% compared to '24. I think it's important to note that in the first six months of '25, the result was impacted by the turbulent financial markets, the US dollar FX headwinds, and lower sales, but the second half was definitely a step change in profitability in the capital-light business.

All segments within capital-light increased their profits sequentially in Q4. The quarterly level of €27 million is up by 28% compared to a year ago, and suggests the overall run rate in line with our long-term growth target.

Also worth noting again is that the '24 comparison figure included the €11 million one-off gain from the transfer of the If portfolios. Then let's take a closer look at the group net finance result.

As mentioned, it was €19 million in Q4, and somewhat lower than the historical average. The with-profit investment return in the quarter at 0.7% was above last year, but slightly below the expected return of our portfolio.

Fixed income credit makes up 76% of our own investment portfolio. In Q4, the return was negatively impacted by mark-to-market adjustments from higher rates and spreads.

At the same time, the portfolio mark-to-market yield was up by 30 basis points in the quarter, up to 4.5%, and this is naturally significantly above the cost of liabilities. Our private credit portfolio has continued a positive trend and had a very good quarterly return in Q4.

Also private equity returns were good at 3% in the quarter. The real estate returns were impacted by the Morgan Stanley joint venture transaction writedown.

If we then turn to the other part of the net finance result, or discounting and the cost of liabilities. As you all who follow the market saw that swap rates increased significantly in Q4.

However, the IFRS rates that we use for discounting increased clearly less in the quarter, and this was the result of a 15 to 25 basis point lower illiquidity premium in the long IFRS rates that we use. The lower illiquidity premium had a €15 million negative P&L impact in the quarter, and this largely offset the positive discounting gains from higher swap rates.

The with-profit portfolio interest rate hedging ratio remained at a high level in Q4. However, you shouldn't read too much into this figure, as it varies depending on the tactical view of the fixed income market.

Also, remember that the hedging ratio is a relative figure, and the interest rate risk is low in absolute euros, only a few millions as you can see from our material. Of course, the main target is naturally to generate financial profit on this line as well.

Finally, it's worth noting again that the IFRS discount rate mark-to-market changes have no impact on the actual contract cash flows, nor our dividend-paying capacity. We continue to consistently generate capital.

Organic capital generation was €60 million, as I mentioned, and again significantly higher than the reported IFRS net result. In 2025, we generated capital organically by €301 million net of taxes, or 60 cents per share.

This figure was 44 cents in '24, and also supports the higher dividend proposal from the Board. Our own funds generation increased the solvency margin by 5 percentage points in the quarter, and 31 percentage points during the full year.

Actually, Q4 was the first quarter in the history of Mandatum when the SCR from the with-profit business was smaller than the capital-light SCR. I think this is also yet another indication of our transformation journey towards a high-ROE capital-light group.

The fully loaded solvency ratio stood at 169% for the group. Although this number is down, remember that now we take away the impact of the transitional measures of around 15 percentage points.

The decrease from Q3 is also due to the larger dividend deduction based on the actual dividend proposal, and this reduced the solvency ratio by 18 percentage points. Worth noting is that the comparable like-for-like solvency ratio was unchanged in the quarter.

However, also worth noting here is that the announced sale of the Saxo Bank shares is expected to increase the solvency margin by around 28 percentage points once the transaction is finalized, as you can see from our material. In addition, the strategic asset de-risking we announced in the June Capital Markets Day of the with-profit portfolio is expected to further support the capital release going forward in the coming years.

Then briefly on the outlook for '26. Not too much to mention here.

Our fee result is expected to grow, and the with-profit portfolio is expected to decrease compared to '25. There is one extra thing worth noting that the unwinding rate for '26 is 2.0%, down from 2.4% in 2025, which means around €40 million annual unwinding costs compared to over €50 million in 2025.

All for me. Back to you, Lotta.

Thank you, Matti, and now let's move on to the Q&A.

Hi, good morning. Thank you for the opportunity.

I have two questions, please. One is on the net finance result, and here I appreciate in 2025 we've had a lot of moving pieces, because obviously you no longer have Saxo, you've sold some of the real estate portfolio, and then again you have some changes in your unwinding.

Just trying to sort of get a sense of when we look forward, what should be a normalized run rate for the net finance results that we should be basing our sort of estimates off? Any color on that would be quite helpful.

Then the second question is actually on your cost-to-income ratio. Fully appreciate it has been improving, but as I believe Matti pointed out, it was related a little bit to the IT costs, but I would assume those cost benefits no longer come through in '26.

As a result, should we expect the cost-to-income ratio to remain thereabouts, or is there further improvement that we can see over there?

Thanks. Hi Vash.

Regarding your first question on the run rate for the net finance result, it's a task impossible, but if we kind of break down the different components, obviously we've given you very clear indication of what the structure of our investment portfolio is, plus also the ambition how it would look towards 2028. I think that is something that you can measure.

The mark-to-market yield of the credit portfolio, the fixed income portfolio is now 4.5%. Then of course you should assume something on the alternative part, the private equity, the private credit, and the small real estate and equity portfolios.

With that, I think you can get to a kind of reasonable expectation on how the investment return develops. Then on the other part, the discounting, we've given you the unwinding rate, and if rates don't change, that is basically the cost of the liabilities.

As we all know, the rates are very likely to change going forward, and this of course means that there will be some quarterly volatility over time. Regardless of this, if we look at the overall development in the net finance result on a yearly basis and year-to-date basis, I think the moves kind of tend to smooth out.

As said, if rates go up, it's usually bad for the investment return, but good for the discounting. Then you do have these kind of special items like the illiquidity premium, and we fully understand that it's creating a bit of confusion, and it's not what we like either.

As we've said, it comes from Moody's, but we're looking into this if we can kind of potentially do something about it in the future. I think that's all I can point out to, and if rates stay at constant level, it should be pretty constant, but unfortunately they never do, but they tend to even out over time.

Hello, it's Petri here. Thank you for your question about the cost-to-income ratio and IT costs related to that and overall.

It's true that we have gained a lot of cost savings from IT side, but it's still room go lower. For example, we are one of the first players who will get rid of the mainframe in May, and that's really big thing for us.

After that, there's no mainframe cost anymore to us. Of course we see also the license costs going up every year and so on.

We still see that there's a room to be more effective in our processes, streamline operations. How we have forecast this is if we can keep and we are forecasting keep our cost base during this strategy period more or less the same than they were in 2025, which is really big thing to do.

In order to improve our cost-to-income ratio, I think the biggest thing, going forward, will be the growing the earnings, and that will improve the rate. Having said that, 49% is already quite good, having in mind that we are also investing to growth, especially outside of Finland, they might be some room to improve, but we are quite a low levels already now, having in mind that we are growing quite fast outside of our normal territories as well.

That's very clear. Thank you so much.

Yes, good morning and thanks for taking my question. Just quickly, first I had a follow-up question that came up on your answer there, Petri, on the mainframe that you're getting rid of in May.

Can you just quantify what sort of cost savings that will give you in 2026? That's the first one.

Then I have two other questions. One is on the net flow development this quarter.

Could you just explain a little bit sort of financial effect or the nominal effect of the few larger client distributions, what exactly that is, and maybe a little bit also how we should think about the underlying development then in Q4? Then my second question is on the dividend proposal today.

Previously you sort of split it out into an ordinary and an extraordinary part. Was this year, it's sort of all coupled into one.

Is there kind of an ordinary and an extraordinary portion to this one? Also relating to that, maybe, Matti, if you could just explain a little bit around sort of liquidity versus capital and how we should think about that in terms of funding the dividend into 2026?

Hi Hans. If I start with the dividend, and Petri will continue with the first two ones.

The extra and ordinary discussion was basically kind of concluded at the Capital Markets Day, where we said that we have the over €1 billion target, and that is kind of including everything. We don't look at it from an ordinary, extraordinary perspective anymore.

The over €1 billion is the number you should be kind of focusing on. What we also said is that it's most likely going to be a bit front-loaded, and now €427 million is the proposal.

If we look at the liquidity, it's a very relevant question, and something that is definitely having an impact. Around €300 million was the dividend from Mandatum Life, and around €35 million from the asset management company, and then we had some gains also from the Enento sale.

Basically the proposal is almost, or actually more than the internal dividends, and pretty much the liquidity that we have available, also leaving something for working capital. Of course, since the Saxo deal hasn't closed, this represent pretty much the liquidity we have at the moment to pay out.

Those were my three questions. Thank you for questions.

About the IT cost, we don't have exact number to give you what is the benefit of that, but it's part of our budgeting, and it's substantial. Of course, at the same time, we have other license costs and so on.

All in all, our IT costs are decreasing, as we have already seen in the past two years. This getting rid of the mainframe will help us, we will get the full benefit of getting rid of the mainframe.

When it comes to net flow, yeah, it's net flow in Q4. First, the sales was really good.

It was a strong sales quarter, especially the December. At the same time, I guess I would not say unfortunately, they are certain in this business, it's good if our customers get distribution from the private equity and private debt investments and big ones, they are happy customers because of that, and that happened in quarter four.

In the profit, I would say that it's no big changes. The sales at the same times, we got maybe even a little bit more higher-margin products that we distributed out.

Let's say so that it wasn't a big thing really for us.

Got it. Just on the new fund that you announced in January is of around €200 million, I guess you said it was, is that included in sort of December figures, or is that be included in Q1 figures?

I think you're referring to Mandatum Opportunistic Credit Fund II. That's not in Q4 numbers, and you can't calculate as a whole to quarter one numbers, because it's called based, the customers pay fees once we call it, and it will come month by month once we call the customers' money in.

Okay. Got it.

Thank you very much for the answers. That's all from my side.

Thank you.

Hi. It's Antti here.

Part of my questions already been answered, but I'd to ask you that do you believe that you're able to achieve your net inflow target, the 5% of assets under management in 2026?

Thank you, Antti, for your question. As in our financial target, we don't have net flow target anymore, neither it's 5% or something else.

Of course we are doing our best, but of course, as the bigger you get, of course your assets under managements are growing as well. Natural outflow in every player in the market is certain percent of your assets under management.

You have to run faster, and that's why we are hiring more salespeople, and of course we are increasing the existing salespeople's targets for this year in order to keep the momentum what we have seen in the past two years. I'm confident that our sales is really going well, both in Finland and outside of Finland, especially in Sweden.

Let's see.

Regarding Q4 sales, you said that it was strong, excluding a few large outflows. What's the sales if we talk about new sales, not net sales?

Was the new sales in line with the strong level of Q3?

Yeah.

Thanks. Then one more technical question.

Your tax expense was pretty close to zero on Q4. I wonder what's behind that.

Yes, you're absolutely correct, and for the full year, the tax rate was kind of unusually low. We got some tax benefits, and we were able to utilize some previous year tax loss carryforwards.

You shouldn't read too much into this item altogether. Over time it should be around 20% or the corporate tax rate in Finland.

As you all know, there's a proposal that it would be lowered in '27. Let's see.

Of course we try to kind of use all ways to kind of make sure that we pay the right taxes, but this was unusually low in the fourth quarter.

Okay. Thanks, that's all from my side.

Thank you for taking the questions. I'll start with a clarification on the remittance or upstreaming.

You said €300 million from Mandatum Life. Has that been remitted already, or will it be?

I'm not actually sure, hi Ulrik, I don't know what you mean by remitted, but that money has been paid from the subsidiary to the holding company, it's on the bank account as cash. If that answers your question.

It does, cuz I'm just wondering about the reported assets in the with-profit segment, just wondering if there will be a drop once you pay it, or if it's already paid.

It's already taken, and we usually do it towards the end of the year. It's already taken, and we usually do it towards the end of the year.

Yeah. I also think you said that dividend was funded that you don't need to use the Saxo proceeds for this.

Was that correct?

That is correct. We have not got the money, and of course it was also I'm pretty sure impacted the board's decision.

This is what we have, and the proposal for '25.

Could it go higher then once you get the proceeds, because that will likely be before the annual meeting, or?

I think since the deal hasn't closed, I think the board has been quite clear that this is the proposal for '25, and it's not a huge issue altogether. We still believe the deal will close during the first half, but the proposal is based on the current situation.

That is clear. Then just thinking on the general dividend level here, because you have an RoE target for '28 and you measure RoE on average equity.

Just a simple calculation of roughly flat-ish earnings, it seems like this is actually a level you should maintain the two next years to reach the RoE target, or is something I'm forgetting?

I think you just should keep in mind that we have the over €1 billion target and the 20% RoE target, and there's multiple ways to kind of achieve the 20% target. The over €1 billion is the number you should be looking at.

We don't and we cannot guide for anything more specific, but those two targets will be met by '28.

It just seems you have an RoE target, it just seems like you can also go the way to just look at what your equity base would need to be, but I guess That's

one component there, definitely.

Yeah. Then, because you had actually a very, very strong development in fee versus capital-light AuM, not only this year, but last year as well.

The ratio was quite stable. Should we expect somewhat of a downtick the next years, or can you sort of maintain this at let's say normal returns in the market?

Our target is the capital-light profit grows, and that should be over 10%. We had 5% in last year, of course accelerating clearly above that on the second half of the year.

I think that's what we're aiming at and what we're targeting, and there's of course the income and the cost and fee and AuM play a role in both of those items.

The last one, just technical one, just on the other results. I was just wondering what the run rate would be roughly on the other results once you do the Saxo Bank deleveraging or pay back that loan.

That cost is just below €10 million per annum, and then of course as mentioned, we had the change in actuarial assumptions mainly due to kind of higher cost assumptions, and for the next 50 years, for a €2 billion portfolio that €5 million is not a lot. Of course over time, that should be kind of closer to zero if we're adequately reserving, which we believe we are.

I think those are the items there, and then you have some of the LTI cost there as well, difficult to say how those will develop depending on our share price development, plus then the general group overhead. I think those are the items you should be looking, but clearly obviously lower than what was in '25.

Maybe €20 million to €25 million or?

Probably closer to €25 million, I think is a good estimate.

Okay. Thank you so much.

That's all from me.

Hi, Jaakko here from SEB. Thanks for having me as well.

Most of my questions have already been asked, but if I may, I would like to continue on the cost-income topic and the scale of the capital-light business. Is it fair to assume fairly stable cost base, underlying cost base, from the levels we saw in the second half of '25 going forward?

Just trying to understand the upcoming leverage.

Thanks. Jaakko, it's Petri here.

That's something you can assume. Our budgeting and forecast is based on that our cost base will increase just a little bit going forward.

How we can do that is that we are streamlining our operations and processes, and at the same times, we get quite a lot of room also growth in sales side and product side. Overall, we will keep our cost base quite much the same.

Good, thanks. Then more detailed question on the AuM development during the quarter.

The international AuM was rather muted during the quarter. What's the slowness there because of the outflows, or was there particularly lower inflows during the quarter?

Any further commentary on the current activity level in the international business would be nice. Thank you.

Yes, thank thank you. The first one, it was the the distribution of of profits in in it was it was especially in in in our international side, and the things we have sold in the past, and they are distributing the profits now.

The same time, the sales was really strong. That's that's explains that assets under management were remained stable, at the same level.

Other things, I would say that Sweden is growing really strong, as it has already done two years and and and still improving. All other places like Central Europe, we are a little bit like just investing to to in order to grow the business.

We have seen the same inflows what we have seen in the past doing that from the let's say from Helsinki only. Now we have put a lot of activity to our Luxembourg sales office, and and my my way things are that we will we should see some new tickets and new new new let's say new some kind of jump in our business in Central Europe during this year, because we have a lot of activity now.

Also we have to remember that we really started in September last year.

Maybe also worth commenting, Jaakko, is the fact that as you know that our international AuM is largely tilted towards the credit market, and the increase in rates during the quarter obviously meant that the market growth was lower than what could normally be assumed, so that also had an impact on the AuM.

Right. Excellent, thank you.

All from my side.

Thank you.

Hi, Petri and Matti. Thanks for taking my questions.

I just have two more. Maybe starting with the net flows still, how do you think about the kind of money you're paying out?

Would you normally consider that returns to Mandatum as well, or how should we think about these flows in general?

Okay. Thank you for your question.

Petri here. With the large institutions what we are here talking about is it's once you distribute some profits back from like PE or PD investments, they don't immediately give it back to you.

Of course, the relationship is strong, and we have worked with those customers a long period of time. Of course we are having negotiation that at least some part of that money will come back.

That's very normal with institutions, that it's not like a okay, money is coming to your account, let's put it somewhere. It's a little bit different type of investment process in those large institutions.

That's good to hear. Then on the maybe corporate side, you mentioned that personnel funds was liquidated.

How is that market in general developing in your view?

It's really strong market. There's a lot of customers demand, and it's growing, and we're establishing a lot of new personal funds in last year as well, a little bit less than 2024, but they were bigger ones last year than a year before.

There's a, let's say, really big customer demand on that side, I'm very confident that market will continue to grow.

Sounds good. Then a final question on the mainframe discussion.

Maybe following up on that, is that purely an exercise in cutting IT costs, or does it allow you to do something else, improve the efficiency of operations in general, or do new products, or is this visible outside the company somehow?

You're right, and that's really the big question. Yes, it's once you get rid of, let's say, more legacy type of things, and you don't consume so much spending to those, it gives you room for developing new things and new software, and new products, and streamline your processes.

You can increase in your IT budget, you can increase your development side, and that's basically what is happening with us.

Sounds good. That's all for me.

Thank you.

There seems to be one question about the mainframe in the chat, but I think we have covered the topic already. This concludes today's audiocast.

Thank you for your good questions and for taking the time to join us today. If you have any additional questions after the call, please feel free to reach out to Investor Relations at any time.

We appreciate your continued interest in Mandatum. Have a great day, and goodbye.