Deutsche Bank AG (DB) 2025 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the Q1 2025 fixed income conference call and live webcast. I would like to remind you that all participants will be in listen-only mode and the conference is being recorded. (Operator Instructions) The conference must not be recorded for publication or broadcast.

At this time, it's my pleasure to hand over to Philip Teuchner, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Good afternoon or good morning and thank you all for joining us today. On the call, our Group Treasurer, Richard Stewart, will take us through some fixed incomes specific topics.

For the subsequent Q&A session, we also have our CFO, James von Moltke, with us to answer your questions. The slides that accompany the topics are available for download from our website at db.com. After the presentation, we will be happy to take your questions.

Before we get started, I just want to remind you that the presentation may contain forward-looking statements which may not develop as we currently expect. Therefore, please take note of the precautionary warning at the end of our materials.

With that, let me hand over to Richard.

Thank you, Philip, and welcome from me. Before we turn to our performance, I want to offer my perspective on recent events. The geopolitical landscape is rapidly evolving, and the uncertainty and volatility are likely to stay elevated for the time being. We still believe globalization will persist, but we expect to see a substantial reordering of trade corridors and supply chains, and this may accelerate some of the long-term trends we have spoken about for some time.

Let's turn to our resilient operating performance on slide 2. We delivered pre-provision profit of EUR3.3 billion, up 34% year on year. Revenue momentum combined with cost discipline resulted in a strong operating leverage of 11%, with each division delivering positive operating jaws. The reported post-tax return on tangible equity of 11.9% in the quarter underpins the bank's ambition to deliver sustainable returns of greater than 10% in 2025 and beyond.

Our revenue quality is strong, with 71% from more predictable streams in the corporate bank, private bank, asset management, and fixed financing. Net commission and fee income increased by 5% year on year, in line with our goals and reflecting our strategic investments.

Net interest income in key banking book segments and other funding also remain resilient year on year. Non-interest expenses declined 2% year on year to EUR5.2 billion as non-operating costs normalize as expected. Our progress on operational efficiencies enabled us both to deliver adjusted costs in line of plan and continue to self-finance investments.

Turning to slide 3, let's now look at the progress of our 2025 delivery. Turning first to revenue growth. Since 2021, we've achieved a compound annual growth rate of 6.1% within our target range of 5.5% to 6.5%. Double-digit first-quarter revenue growth versus the prior year quarter contributed EUR700 million towards our target of EUR2 billion incremental revenues in 2025.

Second, in respect of operational efficiencies, we have reached 85% of our EUR2.5 billion target. Third, we made further progress with our capital efficiency measures, with EUR4 billion of RWA reductions delivered this quarter through a combination of data and process improvements and a securitization transaction. This brings our cumulative RWA benefit to EUR28 billion at the high end of the bank's target range of EUR25 billion to EUR30 billion by the end of this year.

With 2025 targets in sight, let me now spend a few words on how we are well positioned to help navigate clients to the dynamic environment on slide 4. In Germany and across Europe, we see fresh commitment to support growth, boost competitiveness, and accelerate reform. We believe Germany's loosening of the debt break will unlock considerable investment opportunities, and the proposed pension reforms are expected to boost activity in the capital markets.

At the European level, we see commitments to invest in defense and infrastructure and a much-needed embrace of structural reforms. For example, the savings and Investment Union, and measures to develop the securitization of markets. Globally, trading patterns are shifting, supply chains are being rewired, and new partnerships and alliances are emerging. All of this plays to our strengths. Clients need to partner with the expertise, financial strength, product breadth, and global and local network to help them navigate this changing environment.

Let us now turn to quarterly developments, starting with our loan book on slide 5. During the first quarter, we have seen loan growth of EUR4 billion adjusted for FX effects. In the investment bank, we continue to deliver against the strategic objective to grow FIC financing, supported by the acquisition of a secured loan portfolio. In both the corporate and private bank, loans remained essentially flat during the quarter as macroeconomic headwinds continued to weigh on client demand.

We are pleased with the underlying quality of the loan book, with around two-third originated from clients located in Germany and Europe, underlying our aspiration to become the European champion and the first choice for our clients.

Moving now to deposits on slide 6. We continue to manage a well-diversified portfolio which further grew by EUR6 billion during the first quarter, adjusted for FX effect. Quality of the portfolio remains strong across client segments and products with a significant share of insured retail deposits.

Let us now look at the underlying trends within our segments. In the corporate bank, the deposit portfolio has grown during the quarter, adjusted for FX effects driven by high engagement with our corporate clients. Serving our client needs and maintaining strong relationships remains our key priority. Private bank balances remain broadly stable, with underlying momentum from our deposit campaigns in the German retail segment. For the remainder of the year, we see further opportunities to modestly grow our deposit book while closely observing developments in the broader economic environment.

Turning now to net interest income on slide 7. NII across key banking books segments and other funding was EUR3.3 billion, broadly stable quarter on quarter. As in prior quarters, the private bank continues to deliver strong NII supported by our structural hedge portfolio, while thick financing continues to grow the lending book. The corporate bank is slightly down compared to the prior quarter, principally due to care accounting reclassification effects in loan NII which are offset in remaining income. Deposit NII was broadly flat as hedge benefits offset a reduction in policy rates and portfolio growth remains strong.

With respect to the full year in line with prior guidance, we continue to expect a material NII tailwind versus 2024 for the key banking book businesses, which is principally driven by the hedge rollover and deposit growth.

Looking at page 8, based on the market implied forward curves as per the end of March, we can see that our hedge portfolio positions us well in an uncertain rate environment. The shaded area shows a rollover benefit, indicating the annual volumes we replaced as most of our hedges are 10-year swaps. Compared to year-end 2024, higher long-term rate expectations, specifically in euros, increased the expected benefits of our hedge portfolio in the outer years.

Looking at 2025, the income from our hedge portfolio represents an increase of approximately EUR300 million year on year, with more than 90% of the income secured through existing positions.

On slide 9, we highlight the development of our key liquidity metrics. The liquidity coverage ratio at the end of Q1 increased by about 3 percentage points to 134%, which is mainly driven by strong deposit inflows in our corporate bank. With the net cash outflows being materially unchanged quarter over quarter, the stock of EUR231 billion of HQLA and the surplus above 100% increased by about EUR5 billion. We continue to maintain a high-quality liquidity buffer and hold about 95% of HQLA in cash and Level 1 securities.

Our funding profile remains strong across maturity tenors and currencies. The net stable funding ratio at 119% reflects a stable funding base with more than two-thirds of the group's stable funding sources coming from our global deposit franchise. The surplus above regulatory requirements decreased to EUR99 billion.

Turning to capital on slide 10. Our first-quarter common equity Tier 1 ratio remains strong at 13.8%. The CRR3 go-live impact was 1 basis point, since the reduction in credit risk-weighted assets was largely offset by reductions in capital supply and an increase in operational risk RWA. Aside from the CRR3 go-live impact, risk-weighted assets increased, principally reflecting a normalization of market risk RWA as previously guided.

This increase was partly offset by a reduction in credit risk RWA as higher business growth was more than offset by capital efficiency measures, including a securitization transaction during the quarter. CET1 capital increased as a strong first-quarter net income, net of AT1, and dividend reductions was offset by equity compensation, the FX impact on account of the AT1 call, and other capital changes.

Our capital ratios remain well above regulatory requirements, as shown on slide 11. The CET1 MDA buffer now stands at 252 basis points, or EUR9 billion of CET1 capital. 11 basis points quarter-on-quarter reduction reflects our 14 basis points higher CET1 Pillar 2 requirement applicable since January 1, the slightly lower CET1 ratio at quarter end, and a reduction of the systemic risk in countercyclical capital buffer requirements.

The buffer to the total capital requirement reduced by 13 basis points and now stands at 318 basis points. This reduction principally reflects the movements in our CET1 ratio buffer. EUR1.5 billion AT1 issuance in March more than offsets the AT1 call we announced for April and almost neutralizes the 11 basis points higher Pillar 2 requirement related to AT1 and Tier 2 capital.

Moving to slide 12, at the end of the first quarter, our leverage ratio was 4.6%, up by 1 basis point, as higher trading inventory and growth in high-quality liquid assets were offset by higher Tier 1 capital alongside beneficial FX and CRR3 effects.

We continue to operate with a significant loss absorbing capacity, well above all requirements as shown on slide 13. The MREL surplus, our most binding constraint, stands at EUR22 billion at the end of the quarter. The reduction of EUR1 billion compared to the prior quarter reflects lower MREL supply from total capital and a net reduction in eligible liabilities. Our surplus thus remains at a comfortable level, which continues to provide us with the flexibility to pause issuing new eligible liability issuance for at least one year.

Moving now to our issuance plan on slide 14. We reaffirm our previous guidance to issue EUR15 billion to EUR20 billion to meet our 2025 funding requirements. Since the last fixed income call, we issued a total of EUR4.3 billion mainly driven by higher beta, senior non-preferred, and AT1 issuances. Our recent EUR1.5 billion AT1 security attracted an order book in excess of EUR10 billion, allowing pricing at the tightest spread for Deutsche Bank Euro AT1 since 2021.

Looking at total year-to-date issuance volume versus the midpoint of our guidance, we have already completed more than a third of our issuance plan. This gives us flexibility regarding the timing of further issuance, which is particularly helpful in times of elevated macro uncertainty. After our [core] non-core announcement on March 21, our focus is now on the third US dollar denominated AT1 security, with an upcoming call date in October 2025.

I would note that there is a small positive revaluation impact on this instrument at current FX rates, and the coupon would reset to roughly 8.5% based upon current markets. We will take a decision on this security close to the call date on October 30, after considering several factors, including capital demand, refinancing levels versus reset, FXs effects impacting the CET1, as well as market expectations.

Before going to your questions, let me conclude with a summary on slide 15. Our outlook remains largely unchanged. We are on course to deliver our full-year targets for 2025. Our strong revenue performance in the first quarter provides a step up to deliver this year's revenue goal of around EUR32 billion with our complementary businesses all performing well. We remain committed to rigorous cost management, while not compromising on controls and investments, as we continue to benefit from ongoing delivery of our cost efficiency initiatives.

Our asset quality remains solid, but we continue to expect Stage 3 provisions to normalize this year. We are maintaining our full-year guidance for provision for credit losses, but the macroeconomic and geopolitical environment may continue to impact model-based Stage 1 and 2 provisions. We remain comfortable with our trajectory to deliver RoTE of above 10% and a cost-come ratio of below 65% in 2025, with strong operating leverage and balance sheet efficiency remaining the levers to also deliver further improved profitability beyond 2025.

Together with our robust capital position and strong earnings momentum, we believe that we are well equipped to continue to support our clients globally and to provide advice and solutions as they navigate this time of uncertainty.

With that, let us turn to your questions.

(Operator Instructions) Daniel David, Autonomous.

Congratulations on the results. I've got three questions, please. The first is just on the recently announced reduction in the systemic residential real estate buffer from BaFin. Could you just maybe provide some guidance on the impact of your capital ratios and the timing there?

The second one's a broader one on NII. I think you reiterated EUR13.6 billion guidance, but given the headwinds from FX and lower ECB rates, this looks quite challenging. Can you just give us a view on how you hit that NII target and across the divisions?

And the third, just relates to SRT, so I note your comments on some RWA optimization in the quarter. I'm interested in what total SRT benefit you recognize in your capital ratios. So put it a different way, if you couldn't roll the SRT outstanding at the moment, what impact would that have on your capital ratios and what are you planning to hit longer term? Thanks.

Thanks, Dan, and, welcome to the call. So may I sort of take the order in sequence, and I do hope, by the way, I guess on the recording, that it came across as clearly as it should have done. It was a little bit noisy internally, but, if it wasn't particularly clear, then it will be available on the transcript on the website a bit later. But, first and foremost, I guess like you said, there was a -- announcement which came out a little bit earlier this morning on the sectoral buffer with regard to German retail mortgages, so the impact to our MDA will be just under 10 basis points for us, so to give you an idea about the order of magnitude.

So I think it's very welcome and helpful, particularly to support lending to the real economy. And I guess as we mentioned on our previous call, we do sort of feel that there are various things on the horizon. Obviously we're subject to regulator's thinking that's where we kind of feel we've reached a high watermark in terms of our MDA.

In terms of, net interest income, as we said on the call yesterday, so we -- and I guess what we kind of reiterate on our guidance we kind of gave last quarter, which is this EUR13.6 billion is the kind of right number for our banking book and other funding NII. And that's sort of an increase sequentially of around EUR400 million from 2024, and that benefit will come from primarily the private bank, but also supported by the growth, which we have been talking about for a while strategically in our FIC financing business.

As you would have seen, the corporate bank is still expected to be kind of flat for the year, and that's despite a revenue neutral accounting reclassification offset that we made, where NII is a little bit lower and remaining income is a little bit higher. So net-net, it's flat, but on a total revenue basis, but from a NII perspective, the corporate bank is still expected to maintain its mentoring and be unchanged year on year from '25 to '24. These outlook measures are as of the end of Q1 FX. While there is some sensitivity to NII from a dollar rates, as you would expect, the impact on our ratios is going to be pretty close to home for us just because we have costs and equity which is denominated in dollars. So in terms of the RoTE target, then that's something which is particularly FX sensitive.

And then in terms of the SRT benefits, so the way we think about that is, A, the real driver of the platforms that we've had, we've been operating for the last 20 years, have been to manage our credit concentration risks, and so that's kind of the primary benefit we have. Obviously, there is an RWA benefit for that, but the idea of suddenly stopping is not something we would do if we were abundant in capital just because we would want to always manage our credit risks prudently.

But if you want to sort out a number, then as of the year end of '24, you're probably looking at a sort of $15 billion or so RWA number.

Thanks. And is that EUR15 billion kind of where you're going to be longer term or is that looking to grow over time?

So I think, like you say, I think in the last -- our sort of RWA benefit in the last few years has been very stable as we kind of generally manage the sort of tall trees credit concentration exposures. We have had a more move to sort of seeing this further RWA-efficient and capital-efficient structures that we can do, and hence why it's been kind of growing in the last couple of quarters. We kind of think that there's some modest room for growth over the next few years.

[Lee Street].

Just following up on the NII point, I guess. When you think about your balance sheet, what's more important for the bank in terms of future revenue growth? Is it the absolute level of ECB policy rates, or is it the shape of the yield curve? I ask because obviously the shape of yield curve is becoming more important as we talk more and more about the structural hedge. So what's more important? Base rates or the shape of the yield curve. First question.

Secondly, on risk-weighted assets, these are sort of moved to a EUR350 billion to EUR360 billion range for a few years now. So given the fiscal package and the other measures you highlight, should we be expecting Deutsche Bank to materially grow and sort of materially break out of this range as we look ahead?

And then just finally a point of detail, obviously on the [4.789, the 80-point] wasn't called, I believe it was set tonight, but what's your -- where will that currently set based on your current numbers? That'd be helpful to know. That'd be my three questions. Thank you.

Thanks, Lee. So I will take each question in order. So in terms of yield curve absolute or not, from a hedging perspective, then for us the sensitivity is much more to long end rates. As you will see, we're generally well hedged for short end rate moves. And generally what really drives our hedge income essentially is the rollover to longer dated swap tenors. And so it's really that absolute level of tenure is what becomes relevant for hedge.

And as you can see in our sensitivity slides, we're kind of part of our overall strategy of ensuring a stable NII through the cycle, then we're pretty well hedged for the next couple of years with 90% of our exposure hedged. What that kind of means is, that's for local moves. Obviously, if you had a very severe move down in rates, we would end up in what we call margin compression territory where it becomes harder to pass on rates to clients or pass on the policy rates to clients just because you hit a natural floor.

And from a risk management perspective, we have downside protection on our books right now to protect against that scenario. So the answer to your question very simplistically is long-end rates is really the thing to be looking at.

And then in terms of growing of RWA, so yes, you're right, we have been around that sort of level. But going forward, you should be expecting us to grow RWA as we continue to develop our business. Obviously, we're looking to -- we see plenty of opportunities coming through, as Chris was alluding to on the call yesterday, particularly in Germany but also around trade corridors just because of the unique setup we have with the house bank strategy, so we are in a position to lend and we have the capital to do so.

And again, how we're thinking about that is, again, we alluded on the call, is ensuring that we can do that in a way which is adding value to shareholders. So it will be done in a targeted manner and will be done from a risk management perspective in conjunction with ensuring risk appetite. And if we have to put on appropriate hedges, we will do that through SRTs, as we discussed. But generally, yeah, short answer is, we're open for growth subject to those constraints.

And I guess I kind of missed the last question that you had, actually. Could you just repeat it for me?

It was just on the additional Tier 1 security that wasn't called the 4.789. Where do you expect the coupon to reset to just when it sets out?

Where do we expect the 4.789 to reset to? We already reset. You mean the call we have due coming in October, is that the one you're talking about?

Just the one that you -- that claims call which wasn't called for the second time, just, where the coupon will reset (inaudible)

Actually, I just think about the question. I think it's about [80] or something like that.

(Operator Instructions) Robert Smalley, Verition.

I've got a few, a couple from yesterday's call. First, you were asked about any kind of adverse RWA change, around changes in VAR and volatility in the market. My question on that is really, as we went through some market volatility recently, was there anything out of pattern that came out of that? How did you feel that risk management went? Were there any risk management-driven requests for additional liquidity? That's my first question.

Secondly, you talked about the net stable funding ratio a little bit on the equity call, and I think you wanted to elaborate on EBA and the matching. If you wouldn't, I'd appreciate that. And then third, in terms of exposure to non-depository financial institutions, going through the call report, it seems that you've got a very small exposure there. If you could elaborate on that and where it is. Is it more BDCs? Is it more secured securitization, is it private equity. Could you give us a flavor of what your exposures are there? Thanks.

So Robert, it's James. I'll jump in on the first question and ask Richard to do the second two. Look, as I mentioned on the call yesterday to that question, we think at least as things stand right now, the market risk RWA impacts of the unsettled markets in the first couple of weeks in April likely will wash out by the end of the quarter, so we don't necessarily see an uptick driven by that alone, although it very much depends on how the markets evolve from here. If there's another sort of bout of turbulence, obviously it can have an impact.

I think the second thing just to point to is the stressed VAR is one of three features that drives the market risk RWA, and sort of each quarter we have to retest what the stress scenario window is. And as it happens, we moved to the COVID window in Q2, which is a sort of a credit heavier window, and that did cause an NSFR spike in the early part of the quarter, which again we've mitigated now through hedging and portfolio actions which I think will wash out on the averaging by the end of the end of the quarter or more or less mostly will have washed out.

But that was an interesting feature of our risk management in the early days. Interestingly, we'd gone in relatively risk flat, so that was helpful for us. And so it was in part the answer to your third part of the question, it was an unsettled time for sure.

There were correlations breaking down, there'd be basis risk that moved out, but nothing that we see in our trading outcomes that fall outside of our risk appetite. And I think we were pleased, as I think I mentioned yesterday, that our desks, kind of stood in, provided liquidity and pricing, and we managed through that period of volatility quite well. From a liquidity perspective and actually also margin calls and what have you, there was nothing at all unusual that we saw in the environment in those days.

So unlike some of the stresses that we've gone through in the markets over the past several years, it looked to us to be quite orderly in terms of margin call activity, liquidity conditions in the marketplace, despite what was sort of headline grabbing around the US Treasury market and what have you. So all in all, I think that period of unsettled markets we were able to travel through, and I think the industry as well reasonably well.

So I guess you're referring to the EBA NSFR paper which kind of came out in early April, I guess. So we sort of sort of tipped our hat to it. I think you'll see it on page 17 of this fixed presentation where we kind of point to the fact that 90% of our assets are funded with native -- dollar assets are funded with our dollar liabilities.

And that's more really to sort of put across the fact that for us, we don't feel currency NSFR is a particularly meaningful, useful kind of piece of information or way to think about risk or the shape of the balance sheet, and so we kind of felt it was easier to sort of put that sort of 90% number out there to sort of give a flavor and a sort of confidence around the fact that we're not concerned at all about our dollar liquidity position.

And we have a reason why we think that and why we believe that is, one, that our balance sheet in the US is a little bit different from the rest of the group in the sense that the asset side is much more liquid in terms of, A, the type of assets we have now typically tends to be securities or SFTs as well as cash. And then on top of that, the tenor of that is much shorter than our longer-dated native liabilities.

So in terms of how you think about that through an NSFR prism, you should take some comfort from that. Likewise, as James said, yes, lowest deposit ratio there is higher in the US than it is at group. And then when I think about our stress testing framework and obviously the -- this is something which has been tried and tested over a number of years. Our dollar stress testing framework is very rigorous. And how we think about things from an internal stress testing perspective just gives us plenty of comfort in terms of our balance sheets there.

And so we haven't -- it's not something we talk about in terms of currency NSFRs. We just don't find it useful. But hopefully that gives you a little bit more flavor as to why we're very comfortable. In terms of, for example, the remaining balance, it's funded through cross currency swaps, but those have a tenor-weighted average life well excess of one year, which obviously was included in the NSFR calculation, which is one of the currency NSFR calculation that would be -- if it was included, then you'd have numbers which are well in excess of 100%. So we're very comfortable with that dollar position.

And I guess your third piece was around -- I think it was around what's the sort of the private capital equity exposure. Is that right?

Right. The non-depository financial institutions disclosure.

Maybe I'll jump in for a second on it. Go ahead, Robert.

Oh no, just BDCs, private equity, et cetera, in terms of exposure that you have there.

Yeah. Look, to be honest, the public disclosure of that isn't very helpful, and we've had actually inbounds from time to time on NBFI exposures and how you can understand from our Pillar 3 reporting what is really there. And to be honest, it's not very helpful, our external reporting on that. I will say one thing. We have a lot of financial institution and also clearinghouse exposures that get caught in that reporting, so it looks like big numbers, but that's just a function of the business that we're in and not a good representation of what I call credit risk real exposure.

We have been, because it's an industry topic and also a regulatory topic, naturally, as have our peers, been looking at the broader exposures that we have to, what I'll call, alternative asset managers. I think it's a good question. And again, publicly available data isn't very good to help investors get a sense of that exposure, an absolute sense for an individual institution or comparatively across the industry. It sort of doesn't exist.

But there, I think we feel very comfortable with the exposures that we do have. I mean, they tend to be highly collateralized. They tend to be in structures that we lend to sponsored by the alternative asset managers. Also, sometimes NAV financing, subscription financing, other types of financing that we engage in, again, very relatively speaking, low risk, highly collateralized, good quality obligors standing behind those.

But there's not much more I can really point to in terms of public disclosure to help you get a sense of that, Rob, I'm afraid.

No, that's very helpful. It's definitely a work in progress for the industry as a whole, so I appreciate your comments. Thank you.

Ladies and gentlemen, that was the last question. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Philip Teuchner for any closing remarks.

Thank you, Sasha. And just to finish up, thank you all for joining us today. You know where the IR team sits if you have any further questions. And we look forward to talking to you soon again. Goodbye.

Ladies and gentlemen, the conference is now over. You may now disconnect your lines. Goodbye.