Thanks Firoza, and all my analyst friend, a very good evening to all of you. I think you are a busy day today because three banks announced their financial today, thank you so much for joining.

Just to introduce the management team, I am D. Chand, MD and CEO, Bank of Baroda.

With me, Mr. Lalit Tyagi, he's the Executive Director.

He looks after the corporate credit, the international banking, and more importantly the treasury with him. We have Mr.

Sanjay Mudaliar, he's the Executive Director. He looks after the IT function of the bank and including the retail assets which is again a large book as on today apart from couple of other platform functions.

Then we have Mr. Lal Singh, he's Executive Director, he looks after the SAMB vertical which is a stressed asset management vertical, including HR and also the MSME department also a part of his portfolio.

We have Madam Beena Vaheed, she looks after the operation of the bank, the CCO reports to her, including the risk management, many of the platform function, including the compliance and control, audit, and also the retail liability which is again a large franchise for the bank. We have the CFO, Mr.

I. V.

L. Sridhar.

He has been there for couple of quarters interacting with all of you. With this, I hand it over to you, Firoza.

Sorry. Good evening, everyone.

It's my privilege to present before you the financial highlights of Bank of Baroda for the quarter and financial year ended 31st March 2026. As at the end of 2026, the bank's global business volume has crossed milestone of ₹30 lakh crore and stands at ₹30.78 lakh crore, registering a Y-o-Y growth of 13.9%.

Our global advances have grown by 16.2% Y-o-Y, with domestic advances growing at 14.5% and international at 24.4%. Within the advances book, the bank has continued to focus on RAM advances.

Our organic retail book grew by 17.9%, agriculture by 20.7%, and organic MSME by 15.6%. Corporate loans have grown by 11.2% Y-o-Y.

Within the retail segment, we have seen smart growth across the portfolio, with auto loan by 20.6%, mortgage loans by 19.3%, home loans by 14.6%, and education loans by 10.9%, and personal loans by 8.7% Y-o-Y. In terms of deposit growth, our total deposits have grown by 12%, with international deposits growing by 7.5% and domestic deposits by 12.8%.

The domestic CASA deposits have grown by 9.8%, and term deposits have registered a growth of 14.8% Y-o-Y. As of 31st March 2026, the bank's domestic credit-deposit ratio stands at 83.4%.

The CASA ratio stands at 38.9%, up by 45 bps quarter-on-quarter. With regard to our quarterly profit metrics, our operating profit for the quarter stands at ₹9,069 crore, registering a growth of 11.5% Y-o-Y.

The bank has adopted new mortality tables for arriving at the AS 15 liability, which led to an increase in the employee cost by ₹520 crore. Our net profit for Q4 2026 stands at ₹5,616 crore, registering a growth of 11.2% Y-o-Y, which is the highest-ever quarterly net profit.

Return on assets remain consistently above 1% at 1.15% in Q4 2026. Return on equity stands at 17.27% for the quarter.

For the full financial year FY 2026, our operating profit stands at ₹32,259 crore. Our net profit for FY 2026 stands at ₹20,021 crore, which is the highest-ever net profit.

Return on assets remain above 1% at 1.06% in FY 2026. Return on equity stands at 15.39% for FY 2026.

With regard to key ratios, our yield on advances stands at 7.44% for the quarter and 7.71% for FY 2026. Bank's cost of deposits for the quarter stands at 4.78%.

It stands at 4.87% for FY 2026 as against 5.10% in FY 2025. With regard to our net interest margin, it stands at 2.89% for the quarter, registering a sequential improvement of 10 bps.

It stands at 2.89% for the whole FY 2026. Now we come to our asset quality, which continues to remain robust.

Our GNPA ratio has improved by 37 bps Y-o-Y and stands at 1.89%. Our net NPA ratio is below 1% at 0.45%, an improvement of 13 bps Y-o-Y.

Our provision coverage ratio, including TWO, is comfortable at 93.94%. Our slippage ratio for Q4 2026 has reduced by 11 bps Y-o-Y and stands at 0.89%.

Slippage ratio for FY 2026 also reduced by 6 bps Y-o-Y to 0.72%. Credit cost for Q4 FY 2026 has increased to 0.76% as against 0.44% in Q4 FY 2025 due to the prudential floating provision of ₹1,500 crore made by the bank during the quarter.

Credit cost excluding the floating provision would have been 0.32% for the quarter. Credit cost for the full financial year stands at 0.46%.

Again, the credit cost excluding floating provision would have been 0.34% for the full year. Coming to our SMA and collection efficiency, our clean SMA 1 and 2 as a percentage of our standard advances reduced to 0.18% as of March 2026 as against 0.33% for March 2025.

Our collection efficiency excluding agriculture remains robust at 98.9%. In terms of our capital adequacy, our capital position continues to be strong, with CET1 at 13.16%, Tier 1 at 13.64%, and overall CRAR at 15.82%.

Our quarterly average LCR remains healthy at approximately 127%. Bank has declared a dividend of ₹8.5 per share, subject to requisite approvals.

Thank you.

Thanks, Sridhar sahab, and to all my analyst friend, now let me make a couple of qualitative comments on the financial that you have announced for this year and also for the quarter. I think we have a very strong growth, both on the balance sheet and also on the profit and loss.

A couple of numbers that we see on the balance sheet: this year we crossed the league of ₹30 lakh plus kind of a business, and the business stands at ₹30.78 lakh crore of business as on 31st March. At the same time, a couple of other milestones that we see on the financial is that we cross ₹20,000 crore of net profit for the standalone entity.

The profit becomes ₹20,021 crore for the financial year. The profit for this quarter, 5,600, possibly is the highest in any quarter for the bank for many years, maybe for the decades.

On the advances side, although our guidance was 11% to 13%, but in terms of the percentage that we have announced is advance global advance growth of 16.2%, and the domestic advance growth of 14.5%. At the same time, the deposit side, we have seen one of the best quarter, which again couple of quarters we seen deposit not catching up to the growth in advances.

The deposit growth is almost 12% full global deposit, with the CASA at 9.8% and the saving growth at 9.1%. I think these are the numbers which maps very well with regard to our focus on low-cost deposit and our focus to grow on the CASA because we for last many years were focusing on the CASA deposit and we have improved on the services side, product side, bundling of products so as to improve on the CASA front.

Both the growth of advances and deposit, if I see, this is the best quarter in last 10 quarters. We have seen the journey of banks, journey of the industry for last 10 quarters in terms of growth percentage, but the percentage growth in this quarter has been the best in last 10 quarters.

On the profitability front, the NII growth has been positive, and you would have seen a number saying that the increase in interest income has been higher than the interest expenses. That's something in earlier quarter slightly it was going negative in terms of the interest income not growing up to the extent of the growth in interest expenses.

This quarter the trend is different. The interest income growth has been higher than the interest expenses.

Consequently the NII is at ₹12,494 crore, which is a growth of 8.7%. The NIM domestic at 3.04% and the globally at 2.89%.

This NIM percentage is also higher than that of last quarter. As the CFO said, on the employee front, because of the hardening of the yield, the obligation under AS 15 has gone down, but at the same time, the bank decided to migrate to the new mortality table where there is a additional liability requirement of ₹520 crore, which you have provided for.

The employee cost that you would have seen, including AS 15, the trend is in line with the system what other banks also would have announced. A couple of numbers in terms of the operating profit of more than ₹7,000 crore, we're announcing this more than ₹7,000 crore of operating profit for last 14 quarters.

This quarter it is ₹9,069 crore. Net profit, we're announcing more than ₹4,000 crore for last 13 consecutive quarters.

Similarly, the ROA of more than 1%, that is one of the guidance number we have, that you are having more than 1% for last 15 consecutive quarters. The accretion to the book value, which is again one of the fundamental factors in terms of what you look as an investor, it has improved from ₹148.8 from March '23 to ₹251.7 in March 2026, a increase or incremental addition of book value to the extent of ₹102.90.

Asset quality has been one of the best as far as the numbers are concerned. GNPA at 1.89%, the net NPA at 0.45%, both in terms of the slippage ratio and also the credit cost, the credit cost full year is 0.46% as compared to 0.47%, both well within our guidance range.

I think the asset quality, even in terms of the pre-slippage data in terms of SMA 1 and 2 more than ₹5 crore also, it has gone down from almost from 0.36% to 0.18%. With this, I think the asset quality has been one of the good as far as we are concerned.

Secondly, couple of initiatives that I want to highlight before you is that the bank recently raised ₹10,000 crore of green infra bond. This is the first in India to raise a green infra bond.

The response was 3x of the amount that we wanted to mobilize. We have a outstanding green deposit as on today to the extent of ₹1,899 crore, and I think by far is the highest deposit in the system.

We've also announced this time that we're going to raise capital in the form of AT1 and Tier 2 to the extent of ₹6,000 crore in this financial year. Also remind you a earlier announcement wherein we announced that the bank would be keen to raise ₹8,500 crore of equity capital over a medium term, that is up to FY '28.

In terms of capital raise, it's almost like we have the what you can say, not pipeline, but a room to raise ₹14,500 crore, consisting of ₹8,500 crore pure equity and ₹6,000 crore of AT1 and Tier 2 for this year, '26, '27. Let me reiterate couple of guidances normally we give.

The loan guidance we are upsizing from the earlier guidance of 11% to 13% to 12% to 14%, considering our performance, subject the global headwinds doesn't impact big time to the Indian market. On the deposit growth is from 9% to 11% earlier, it has been upsized to 10% to 12%.

The NIM, we achieved 2.89% this quarter, but we are slightly looking at a probable repricing of asset liability, we're projecting a 2.75% to 2.95% for the full year. The ROA continue to have more than 1%, that is what we had earlier guidance also, continue to have the same guidance.

The slippage ratio also we still keep it at the same level of 1% to 1.25%, and the credit cost below 0.60%. These are couple of guidance I think important for you.

With this, I'm done with my opening remarks, we will open for question and answer.

Hi, good evening, sir. Thanks for the opportunity.

Just two questions. First one, on your reported global yields on advance and cost of deposits, both have moved down, and the cost of deposits have gone up, but the margins are higher.

Presumably, that's due to some interest on IT refund. While I do acknowledge that you've called that to be core in the past, but if you could just quantify the amount of the same, that's number one.

Second question is specifically on cost of deposits. If the global as well as domestic cost of deposits have marginally gone up in this quarter versus the last quarter, how's the outlook on the same?

Fair to say that the TD repricing is already done for us completely, and how only the cost of deposits move? The third and the final question, sir, is on the opex.

Two moving parts as you pointed out. Now with this mortality rate change, how should I think about the ongoing opex going ahead, employee expenses specifically?

Okay. Thanks, Rikin.

Coming on the margin, and particularly the yield on advances and the cost of deposit, I think the denominator for both the things are different, right? Whereas the NIM takes care of the full on the asset side.

The spread and margin are different, we should not compare the spread and margin, because that would give a different picture. At the same time, I do agree there is a line item with regard to the IT refund.

Earlier also I said, because since we have a large the provision on the IT, we keep on getting this as a normal flow. It can be higher or lower in a particular year, and precisely for that reason, although we had a 2.89% NIM for this quarter, we projected a 2.75% to 2.95%.

That accounts for any volatility that may be because of the IT refund. For me, the NIM is one, that's a core NIM, and what we announce, the NIM is the core NIM.

That is with regard to, we should not get confused with the spread and margin, because margin computation is different than the spread.

Fair enough. Would you like to quantify, sir, the interest on IT refund in this quarter?

I think last quarter it was about ₹300 or ₹400 crore.

No, actually, we don't have a number. I don't have a number.

You can offline, can I get a number? Again, on the same thing I reiterate, because there are refunds, significant refunds coming every year that we have seen.

The amount can be higher and lower, and precisely for that reason, actually I've given a guidance, lower guidance at 2.75%.

Got it, sir.

The whatever amount, that's very insignificant to the overall. I have a income base of almost ₹1,26,000 crore, in that way, that's not very significant to impact on the margin.

Cost of deposit, you are right. I think it's getting sticky at this point of time.

If I compare March over December, although the cost of deposit for as far as we are concerned is one of the lowest in the market, right? At 4.78%, I think we are one of the lowest in the market on cost of deposit.

Going by the liquidity scenario prevailing, because suddenly in the March quarter the geopolitical issue came big time and which is still persisting. In that way, my sense is that the cost of deposit is going to sticky.

Maybe there is a scope of realigning on the asset side, but as on today, I don't see a cost of deposit further going down at the current scenario if the liquidity continue to be the same like it is as on today. In that way, slightly mindful of the repricing effect on the asset rather than the deposit, because deposit, whatever has been fully repriced as on today based on the current level.

On the mortality, I think the CFO would be the right person. Before that, Madam Beena, anything you want to say on the cost of deposit?

No, sir. Because I think it is likely to remain at the same levels, because it'll be elevated.

March quarter we saw a slight increase in the cost of deposits, and it is likely to continue for this quarter as well. Because we don't see coming down in anytime, at least for the next 3 months.

Mr. CFO, can you just address the mortality table and what is the

Yeah. Sir, actually the one-time impact that we have taken due to movement in the mortality is ₹520 crore.

This is one-time. Going forward, the recurring impact will be very negligible, sir.

Got it, sir. Perfect.

Thank you. Sir, if I can just add on one more question.

In the SBI call just prior to our call, they were alluding to some scope to improve the yields on advance as the corporate borrowing moves from the T-bill to the MCLR. Is this something that we can also possibly do, or is that a likelihood or a positive kicker on yields on loan going ahead?

That's why I said, actually, when I said the deposit is sticky, that means the only scope for us to realign the asset pricing, right? When the rates were really low, many MCLR-linked loan got repriced with the external benchmark, more particularly T-bill.

With the elevated rate structure which is prevailing because of the geopolitical issue, I think there is a scope for realigning that portfolio, and that is what actually our strategy to look into those pricing very closely.

Got it, sir. Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity, sir. My question is on the ECL guidelines that have come through.

You have been in the past transparent about the impact. I think you've called out around 18 bps sort of a steady-state impact.

Is the final guideline to your earlier calculation tallying with it? Is it better than that, or could it be higher than that?

That's the first question.

Thank you very much for that. Actually, earlier it was a draft guideline, it was possible to estimate or guestimate that those impact, right?

Now there is a final guideline. What is our stance is that unless and until we compute fully on that, it's not proper to quantify that at this stage.

My sense is that whatever guidance we had given earlier, It would be aligned to those numbers. I'm not expecting any significant change vis-à-vis the earlier, although that was a more of a tentative calculation in that manner.

We want to see the real impact and then possibly articulate better, and that would be a proper to articulate rather than giving any number at this stage. That's what actually I said in the media meet also, and I'm saying it to you also.

Understood. Sir, second question is on the trajectory of margins.

While I understand your full-year guidance is in that 2.75% range, is it fair to assume it will first move down and then move up in the second half, given the near-term pressure on deposits and given the asset repricing strategy that you're trying may take a while before it shows up on yields?

You're right. One thing that we are assuming for this quarter at least that the cost structure is going to be sticky.

As I said, the cost of deposit further moderation going by the current scenario we're not looking at. The only way the NIM we can manage with regard to realigning the asset pricing, and that would be one of the key focus as far as our management work is concerned.

At the same time, why slightly we give a conservative number, because this IT refund is a flow which is although a continuous one, but it can go up and down in every quarter. That depends upon the refund order that we get.

Keeping everything in mind, we have given a slightly conservative guidance on the lower side. Not necessarily it would happen in the Q1, maybe at the later quarter, but that all depend upon how do you do all this, what you can say, math together so as to protect the margin.

I assume, sir, the 2.75% is the lowest number ex of IT refund. That's why you kept that at that lower For

all four quarters together, I think we should not be breaching this lower threshold of 2.75%.

Even with zero IT refund, that's why you're confident.

It won't be zero. I never said zero.

No, no, I'm saying that's why you're trying to very conservative guidance No,

we have some estimate of the IT refund for the full year based on the orders and the seasonal whatever the past trend. Based on that, this is the guidance.

Understood. Sir, lastly on the incremental opex, is there any revision on employee wage because of the yield movement that you have taken in this quarter?

No, the AS 15 impact already articulated by CFO. I think CFO, can you just go ahead with your AS 15 impact?

That is the only opex that maybe slightly you may be interested to know.

Yeah. Actually, the mortality tables which we have adopted of the latest tables, with that the one-time increment in the AS 15 obligation is around ₹520 crore that we have fully absorbed in this quarter.

Going forward, the recurring impact will be negligible. Regarding your question, I think it pertains to the wage settlement, which is still not yet due.

Thank you very much, and all the best for the year.

Thank you.

Yeah. Hi, am I audible?

You're audible, Kunal. Please go ahead.

Yeah. Thanks for taking the question.

Firstly, when we look at it the increase in the bulk deposits which have been there, and I think the earlier question on cost of deposits, I think it would be also the factor of bulk deposits getting raised, which was almost say 14% quarter-on-quarter and 25%-26% year-on-year. Maybe few quarters back, we had seen an incident wherein all of a sudden we reduced both the bulk deposits as well as the wholesale portfolio at one point in time and we saw significant reduction in the balance sheet size.

At any point in time, would again we be pursuing that in terms of the margin management or a ROA management exercise if you can just clarify that? That's the first question.

Second question is on floating provisions, ₹1,500-odd crore. This would be towards ECL transitioning, I believe.

How much more do we plan to create it further? Obviously, credit cost was much higher during the quarter including this floating, but would we see that continuing for couple of more quarters?

On recoveries from written-off, again compared to our guidance of ₹750-₹850-odd crore, we saw a substantial increase. That seems to be some one-off account out there.

Otherwise, in terms of the guidance for FY '27, do we continue to maintain ₹750-₹850 crore? You alluded to most of the other parameters in guidance, but this time you had not given it for recoveries, just would want to reconfirm that as well.

Thanks, Kunal. You said right with regard to we said earlier, maybe 2-3 years back, that we want to reduce the dependency on bulk deposit.

When I said dependency, at that time bulk used to be almost I'm talking about the total deposit as a percentage was almost 23%-24%. We went down to almost a level of 17% at some point of time, maybe 2-3 quarters prior to this.

Having said so, because of bulk deposit dependency, the balance sheet continue to grow strong. The strategy was to replace the bulk with the low-cost deposit.

There we have been doing consistently well for last many quarters. In this quarter also, you would have seen our saving growth is 9.1%, and you can compare with many banks who have declared and what is the growth they do have.

The strategy has really worked in terms of focusing on the saving, and that's why we have one of the highest CASA percentage within the peer banks. Currently also it is almost at 39%, and you have the comparison available so you can make it out how the strategy worked.

On the balance sheet, we have grown significantly, but in the same time, we could able to change the bulk percentage from bulk to the low-cost side. For the March quarter particularly, the geopolitical what has happened, there was a liquidity possibly the loan growth has been very at 16.2%.

You need to be there in terms of managing both your liquidity, at the same time maybe you need to mobilize a bit of a deposit both from the bulk and CD together. We have a component of CD in the bulk, the number that you see, ₹3,20,000 or ₹3,21,000.

CD, these are again slightly the duration less with a cost also lower than that of bulk deposit, because typically bulk deposit is a 1-year deposit. In that way, the bank is managing the liability profile in a manner which is again optimal in terms of liquidity, optimal in terms of pricing, optimal in terms of margin.

That we have been doing since long, and I think that's something a positive trajectory of the bank for last many quarters and years now. On the floating provision, the provision has been created typically to buffer the balance sheet for any extraordinary scenario, not for tagging with any ECL provision per se.

Reason being this floating provision cannot be touched unless and until there is a regulatory approval for that. It's basically buffering the balance sheet strength to create floating provision rather than tagging with any particular ECL impact.

If ECL impact is to be taken in the books directly, we'll take it on the books directly without touching the floating provision. These two are not linked with that.

Obviously, yes, any headwinds that can create both globally, also any such headwinds, because of the geopolitical issue, we are mindful of buffering the balance sheet in terms of creating balance sheet strength. Third, with regard to you said right, the TWO this time has been higher as compared to because normally we give a normalized guidance of around ₹750-₹800 crore.

This time obviously March quarter is always a productive quarter in terms of slightly making your efforts more in terms of recovery, and that has resulted into a higher recovery, particularly from TWO. I will continue to have the same normalized guidance of ₹750 to ₹800 crore.

Mind it, my TWO book is almost ₹62,000 crore. Estimating any such recovery quarter-to-quarter is I think a appropriate and rational one.

These are couple of Yeah.

Would there be chunky account of ₹500-₹700 crore in recoveries this quarter?

There are many, actually. It all depends upon when the resolution happened and when do you recover money.

There are legal processes, NCLT processes, multiple such things. Purely pinpointing that it can happen in a quarter, it's not possible.

Then we are hopeful, because the kitty is quite ₹62,000 is quite a large number. No,

no. I'm saying in Q4 was there any chunky account of ₹500-₹700 crore?

Not any chunky one. Some of the exposure which are mid-sized, maybe ₹200-₹250 crore, couple of such accounts there.

Okay. Got it.

Perfect. Yeah.

Thank you. Thanks and all the best.

Yeah.

Thanks, Kunal.

Yeah. Hi, sir.

Sir, what was the LCR as of the March end?

It is 127%.

Okay. Of this recovery from TWO of ₹1,400 crore, has some amount gone to the interest income line item?

It is so, yeah.

Accounts

in the interest income and also on the recovery on that.

Roughly

around ₹100 crore went into interest income in this.

Sorry, sir, I missed the amount.

₹100 crore has gone to the interest income part.

Sir. Sir.

Thanks a lot.

Okay.

Yeah. Thank you for the opportunity.

My first question is on the growth and deposit growth guidance. Still we are expecting loan growth to continue to outpace deposit growth going ahead.

Given that now how much buffer do we have on the LCR front now? What would be the comfortable LCR that we would like to maintain?

My second question is again on the interest on IT refund. While you call out it as core contribution to core NIMs, but this number is very volatile.

Do you expect this to sustain perpetually? Because somewhere this have to come down, right?

Because in our calculation, I think it is contributing round about 10 to 15 bps towards your ROA. How long your interest on IT refund can continue?

Okay. First thing, you talked about LCR, I answered.

Secondly, on the IT refund, on growth outpacing deposit. Look, a sustained basis, you have the capital, right?

You have a lot of other alternative resources where you can take refinance, you can raise bonds. We as a bank clearly focus on creating a stable resource base, I'll not say deposit base.

While maintaining even you would have seen the CD ratio almost at domestic around 83 point something on that. We have improved vis-à-vis last quarter anyway on the CD ratio.

The growth percentage, the base of deposit is a larger base as compared to the base of advances, that is point one. Secondly, in a scenario where banks are holding like a bank like us holding more excess SLR, any deposit we raise need not be put that into SLR, because the entire money can go to deposit, and that is what a scenario we're seeing in many last couple of years where because you're holding excess SLR, the incremental deposit we are raising is straight going into the advances.

In that way, I think this gap of 2.5%, 3% is sustainable one in terms of growth of advances and growth of deposit. That covers the advances outpacing deposit.

At the same time, obviously bank would like to augment the resource base and we want to grow higher on deposit. Interest on IT refund, earlier also I said, yes, it's a line item which is as per the clearly as per the accounting, but can be volatile, yes.

I do not estimate with regard to what is the year this year, what is going to be year next year, these are all based on the actual tax refund. That's why accounting for a estimate, we give a margin guidance.

That's why having achieved 2.89%, also I'm giving a guidance of 2.75% to 2.95% accounting for the same amount of money which we got this year possibly may or may not be in the next year based on the available what is the refund that we expect. That your issue is covered in the margin guidance.

We typically don't get into quantifying, because it's a line item always there in the income as per the normal accounting norms. Then why should I segregate that amount as a different amount?

Yes, it is volatile, I do agree. Then we account this estimate in terms of how much we get in this year in the margin guidance.

Okay.

Lastly, how long this can continue? Like 1 year, 2 year, 3 year, 4 year, whatever you can say.

I'll give you a guidance next year again. As far as this year guidance, I'm very clear that there is going to be a good amount coming, right?

Next year suppose I see there won't be any money, then I possibly won't account this and give a different guidance. My guidance for tax refund is based on this only 1 year.

Perpetuity will discuss maybe in the next year.

Okay. Sir, lastly on the ECL front, I think I missed out on the answer of yours there.

Any quantification on what could be the impact and how could our credit cost run rate move on implementation of ECL?

That is what we said earlier, actually. Look, when the draft guidelines was there, actually it was able to estimate or guestimate with regard to the likely impact.

That we articulated in terms of actual absolute number also in terms of percentage, both on the CRAR and also on the credit cost. Having issued the final guidelines, it won't be proper without really running computation transaction-wise, difficult to say with regard to any quantification.

We'll do that, but we'll do it slightly once we implement and then have a number, possibly one-quarter number coming very clear on that. I'm not articulating any number, but my sense as on today when I look into the final guidelines and the draft guidelines will not be off-track from the number that we estimated earlier.

It would be aligned to those numbers. Once we slightly implement at transaction level and get a clear picture at least for one quarter, we'll be in a position to quantify everything on the ECL impact.

Sir, last quarter, did you guide that the credit cost run rate could increase by 18 bps if I'm able to recollect correctly?

Possibly you have to recollect, right? I can't recollect.

Whatever we said, I think my sense is that it's not going to overshoot significantly.

Got it. Thank you for answering my questions.

Hey, thanks for taking my follow-on question. Sir, this is relating to the SLR, right?

We do disclose the domestic SLR, which is about ₹3 trillion on our balance sheet right now, which is just not changed in the last 3-4 years. As a proportion of the NDTL, it has come off very sharply and it's about 17% right now, because I have only the total NDTL, not the domestic NDTL.

My question to here is that how much excess SLR is still left on the balance sheet for us to keep optimizing? That's number one.

The number two is until now we were able to bring down the excess SLR via surrendering a lot of the securities in the OMO or the switches. The likelihood of the same is probably low going ahead.

Even in the event if there is no OMO, would you be willing to liquidate it in the market? Thirdly, just as a philosophical level, isn't it a better idea to lock in bonds at the higher yields right now, sir, rather than lending to the corporates and home loans at the similar rates, where of course there will be some amount of capital charged and the credit risk also involved?

See,

you're right. The treasury management, the bank is running one of the largest book, actually.

We are amongst the top three or four in terms of holding. At some point of time, the SLR holding was almost 26%-27%, but subsequently as on today, it is around 22.5% or 23%, it goes on floating.

While managing this SLR, it is not one way that we sell or we put that on OMO. We keep on buying at different level as per the market condition.

Whenever we feel the levels are elevated, we get into the market. It's a churn happening.

Maybe 1%-2% on the SLR is a continuous churn that happening in terms of buying and selling. In that way, it's always an optimization game rather than a single selling that SLR and make profit.

In that way, I think we are managing treasury well in that way, and I think that's something is part of the treasury management, because the trading profit comes out of all this churn. It's not necessarily you sell only your book and make profit.

You have to buy and sell, and then only you can make profit. Our strategy on that would continue.

In terms of a comfort range you want, because see, the advantage of excess SLR is that it generate liquidity, right? That's a very potent or important purpose of running excess SLR.

That helps in liquidity, right? That's very clear.

Bank would like to now as against 18%, you are at 22%, that means you are almost running 4.5% excess SLR. We'd like to operate at a threshold of maybe 3%-3.5% at all point of time.

Because the purpose is not only on an investment in terms of generating profit, the purpose is also generate liquidity at the right time in case we require to. I think that would be one of the strategy as far as the bank is concerned.

Mr. Tyagi, anything you want to add on this?

Yeah.

Sir, actually, apart from this, we also wish to have a comfortable LCR, and that's where the excess SLR also helps us in maintaining our comfortable LCR posturing.

Right.

Sir, the choice between locking in the long-term bond yields at reasonably decent rates right now versus growing aggressively in the home loan, corporate, and auto loan, where the risk-adjusted NIMs or, more importantly, one adjusted for the capital, RWAs, how do you think about it?

Mr. Tyagi, you answer this.

Thank you very much. Sir, actually, Rikin, both instruments or both markets are different.

Investment yield, investment holding achieve different objectives, and remaining in in the loan market, whether it is home loan, whether it is corporate book, whether it is MSME, they are different. Loan books give gives us loan customers gives us deposits also, other cross-sell opportunities also.

It's not straight through interest rate we look upon when we land in home loan, car loan, or corporate segment. We also look at the holistic relationship, and also we expand the bank's various product profile.

Different liability profile meets these different asset book objectives.

Perfect. Thank you, Tyagi sir and Chand sir.

Thank you.

Hi, good evening, sir, and congratulations on your term extension. Sir, I wanted to check on your capital raising plans.

Is that on track, and how soon can this be done?

Thanks, Jai. Thank you very much.

The capital, already we have announced actually AT1 and Tier 2 for this year. I'm talking about '26-'27.

We have announced that we'll be raising ₹6,000 crore, but in case we don't raise, then it can also go to the subsequent year, because we have used a word 'if expedient' on that. Earlier we announced a equity raise of almost ₹8,500 crore to be as a enabling provision to raise by FY 2028.

We can raise that money in any year up to '28. Almost ₹14,500 crore is the plan raise of capital, both from the equity and also on the AT1, Tier 2, which is slightly, it can be on the this year or subsequent year, we have taken a medium-term plan of FY '28.

Beyond this capital also, we normally keep raising infra bond and other, those are also part of the resources where we have to announce to the exchange. If there is a requirement to do that, because sometimes we look at the duration of your liability book as a whole, and somewhere we find that, because we compute the duration of asset also and the gap between duration of asset full book, I'm not talking about only investment.

In case we want to tweak something as a asset-liability management purpose, we keep raising long-term resources also. It's all the ALM management that would decide whether we need to raise long-term resources in the form of infra bond and other bond.

Then we'll announce to the market at that point of time. Is already announced, approved by the board is enabling ₹8,500 equity and ₹6,000 AT1 and Tier 2.

Right, sure, sir. Sorry, just the capital raise plan of ₹8,500 crore, that is also on track, right?

You have a decent, very strong CET1, but still, despite that, that plan is on, right?

Yes, it is on. It is always on table.

It would depend upon the time at which we really want to tap it, actually, based on the market conditions and the requirement of capital for the bank for any scenario going forward, maybe a geopolitical or anything. If there is a need, we'll raise it immediately.

Then it's an enabling that is applicable till FY '28.

Right, sure. Sir, do you have a number for blended bulk deposit cost for last quarter, because I believe bulk deposit rate would have started to cool off, or qualitatively if you can comment, how much, let's say, the blended bulk deposit rate would have come down for you?

I don't have a real data on this. In case you want, we can offline provide you.

The issue is that actually I was just giving a context in one of the earlier conversation wherein in 2-3 years back, we had a larger percentage of bulk as a percentage of total deposit. Mind the denominator, because people compute in different way, then get confused on this.

It was almost 24%-25% at some time, and we reduced that to 17% of total deposit couple of quarters back. Now, as the liquidity scenario in March quarter is always a different scenario because of the geopolitical inducing bit of a liquidity tightness.

Then from 17%, it went to 19%, but still below 20%, which is my very normal, what you can say, the guidance with regard to bulk deposit. We'll continue to optimize based on the need for liquidity, need for the growth on the asset.

At the same time, the pricing impact also we'll be mindful while doing this. It's overall concept of liquidity management, money management that decide how much bulk we need to have or go forward on this.

Right, sir. Sir, do you suspect any increase in the retail term deposit rate in the near term, because I think a few banks have started to increase retail TD rate.

What is your sense on that?

See, I'm not predicting any increase in deposit rate, but one thing I have said that the cost of deposit, which we are one of the lowest in the system, if you look at the numbers of 4.78%, that's going to be sticky in the Q1. Sticky in the sense I'm not expecting that to go down further.

Right.

Sir, I think that number may not be very comparable because we have a 20% plus share of overseas, which is

No, no, I'm talking about the domestic.

Domestic is at

4.99%, right?

Sure.

That's still below 5%, not many banks below 5%.

Right, sure. Sir Sure, sir, please complete.

In that way, sticky means I'm not expecting to go down, actually. Going up would depend upon the liquidity scenario in the market.

All right. Sir, have you made any PLI provision for this year and the quantum of that?

The performance-linked incentive.

PLI, I'll check, just 1 second. We have made provision for that, actually.

We have made provision.

Sorry, sir, how much is the quantum?

You follow the Roughly around ₹500 crore on this.

I'm sorry, sir, if I could get the quantum for PLI

for this FY? ₹500 crore.

₹500 crore. ₹500 cr.

Okay. Sure.

Sir, where is it? Is it in staff cost or this is in some other provisions, because I think this still under litigation, right?

It is under staff cost.

Thanks a lot, Chand sir, and all the best.

Thanks. Thanks for the follow-up.

Particularly on the overseas exposure, almost ₹2,60,000-odd crore of a book, maybe if you can just clarify in terms of the profile, particularly two aspects: one is directly Middle East exposure, and second is how much is trade-related and there have been trade disruptions which have been there. Any risk, because today it's almost 0% NPA in overseas exposure.

Do we see any risk of the NPA coming up over 2 to 3-odd quarters?

Look, overseas, the trade is normally up to 20%, because we don't allow trade book to significantly go up, because the trade has a fine pricing, no, because that's also impacts your NIM. I think on a percentage basis, the trade is below 20%.

Exactly if a number I can give you, because that's what we prescribe for overseas to while continue doing business. The remaining exposure are mostly on a local syndication that particularly some of the markets are very big over there, like US, even GIFT City is a big market, and these are all global syndication where we participate with high street bank in terms of taking those exposure.

Big books in US, Australia, Singapore for the matter, and all those. I think as on today, there is no impact in terms of their asset quality on this.

Particularly Middle East, yes, we do have exposure, because Middle East we have a large retail operation over there. Then the outstanding can be in the range of around ₹50,000-₹60,000 as on today, but that's again spread over multiple countries, which are again some of the countries are A-rated as on today.

All those country, right, the regulator also, they have announced some kind of measures like the ECLGS we have done in India, to sustain their operations. Real impact will not get to know unless and until we'll just see, but as on today, there is no concern with regard to asset quality, because these are the corporates having quite a strong balance sheet.

Our large percentage of exposure are local syndication, which are global local syndication where we're market names in the book and they are very big, some of them are Fortune 500, I don't think any challenge as on today with regard to the global international book. Yes, particularly Middle East operation, we need to be slightly watchful for a couple of quarters.

Sure. How much ECLGS 5.0 withdrawal are we expecting?

Maybe the drawdown benefit which we might take up. We participated last time also quite actively.

I think our book is ₹1,60,000 is the MSME book, and roughly 55%-60% is the working capital. Taking almost like everybody won't go up to 20%, maybe on a 15% scale, I think ₹12,000-plus would be the amount that will be disbursing under ECLGS.

Got it. One last question.

If you look at auto loan, the growth is quite strong. We are seeing many of the PSU banks offering a very longer-tenor product, 7 years, 9 years, and that too at a very competitive rate, okay?

Do we see some risk coming up, because obviously there is a depreciation which happens, after 4-5 years, there would hardly be any value left out there. Why so much of aggression from PSUs on auto, and same with home loan in terms of competitive rates?

When do we see PSUs lowering the aggression in these two segments on the rate side?

See, I don't see a PSU outlook here, but as far as the bank is concerned, we'll continue to grow on auto loan, reason being, look, auto loan is not a productive asset to generate revenue. It based on the cash flow a person is having from which he pays the money.

Our selection of borrower in terms of auto loans are mostly looking into cash flows, salaried class, where we have done a bulk transaction, means bulk tie-ups. I think in that way, the growth has been good, and as on today, whether I track the stress book or the GNPA percentage, I think these are all benign and very, very small at this point of time, because possibly the ability of the cash flow to support the payout is still continuing the same way.

Going forward, in case there is anything that we see at a elevated level of risk over there, actually we do portfolio review every quarterly on all the books. These are all being done at a very senior level, board-level committee and all, anything we see a incipientness in this sector, which I don't see as on today, then possibly we'll have a look.

As on today, my guidance will continue the same way like we're continuing on auto loans.

Okay. Thanks for patiently answering all the questions.

Thank you and all the best. Yeah.

Thanks, Kunal. Thank you,

I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to all of you for joining us today for the announcement and discussion of our financial results. Should you have any further question, please feel to reach us to me or to our investor relation team.

Thank you once again for your time and continued support. Have a great evening ahead.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. Thanks.

Thanks, all of you.