摩根大通 (JPM) 2022 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to JPMorgan Chase's First Quarter 2022 Earnings Call. This call is being recorded. (Operator Instructions) We will now go live to the presentation. Please stand by. At this time, I would like to turn the call over to JPMorgan Chase's Chairman and CEO, Jamie Dimon; and Chief Financial Officer, Jeremy Barnum.

早上好，女士們，先生們。歡迎參加摩根大通 2022 年第一季度財報電話會議。正在錄製此通話。 （操作員說明）我們現在將進行演示。請待命。在這個時候，我想把電話轉給摩根大通的董事長兼首席執行官傑米戴蒙；和首席財務官傑里米·巴納姆。

Mr. Barnum, please go ahead.

巴納姆先生，請繼續。

Thanks, operator. Good morning, everyone. The presentation is available on our website, and please refer to the disclaimer in the back.

謝謝，接線員。大家，早安。該演示文稿可在我們的網站上找到，請參閱後面的免責聲明。

Starting on Page 1. The firm reported net income of $8.3 billion, EPS of $2.63 on revenue of $31.6 billion and delivered an ROTCE of 16%. These results include approximately $900 million of credit reserve builds, which I'll cover in more detail shortly, as well as $500 million of losses in Credit Adjustments & Other and CIB.

從第 1 頁開始。該公司報告淨收入為 83 億美元，每股收益為 2.63 美元，收入為 316 億美元，ROTCE 為 16%。這些結果包括大約 9 億美元的信貸準備金，我將在稍後更詳細地介紹，以及信貸調整及其他和 CIB 的 5 億美元損失。

Regarding loan growth, we're continuing to see positive trends with loans up 8% year-on-year and 1% quarter-on-quarter ex PPP with the sequential growth driven by a continued pickup in demand in our Wholesale businesses, including ongoing strength in AWM.

關於貸款增長，我們繼續看到積極的趨勢，貸款同比增長 8%，環比增長 1%，這主要是由於我們的批發業務需求持續回升，包括持續的AWM的實力。

On Page 2, we have some more detail on our results. Revenue of $31.6 billion was down $1.5 billion or 5% year-on-year. NII ex Markets was up $1 billion or 9% on balance sheet growth and higher rates, partially offset by lower NII from PPP loans. NIR ex Markets was down $2.2 billion or 17% predominantly driven by lower IB fees, lower Home Lending production revenue, losses in Credit Adjustments & Other and CIB as well as investment securities losses in corporate. End markets revenue was down $300 million or 3% against a record first quarter last year.

在第 2 頁，我們有更多關於結果的詳細信息。收入為 316 億美元，同比下降 15 億美元或 5%。 NII ex Markets 因資產負債表增長和利率上升而增長 10 億美元或 9%，部分被 PPP 貸款的 NII 降低所抵消。 NIR ex Markets 下降 22 億美元或 17%，主要是由於 IB 費用下降、房屋貸款生產收入下降、信用調整和其他和 CIB 損失以及企業投資證券損失。終端市場收入與去年第一季度的創紀錄水平相比下降了 3 億美元或 3%。

Expenses of $19.2 billion were up approximately $500 million or 2% predominantly on higher investments and structural expenses, largely offset by lower volume and revenue-related expenses. Credit costs were $1.5 billion for the quarter. We built $902 million in reserves driven by increasing the probability of downside risks due to high inflation and the war in Ukraine as well as builds for Russia-associated exposures in CIB and AWM.

192 億美元的支出增加了約 5 億美元或 2%，主要是由於較高的投資和結構性支出，很大程度上被較低的數量和與收入相關的支出所抵消。本季度的信貸成本為 15 億美元。我們建立了 9.02 億美元的準備金，這是由於高通脹和烏克蘭戰爭導致下行風險的可能性增加，以及在 CIB 和 AWM 中建立與俄羅斯相關的風險敞口。

Net charge-offs of $582 million were down year-on-year and comparable to last quarter and remain historically low across our portfolios.

5.82 億美元的淨沖銷同比下降，與上一季度相當，在我們的投資組合中仍處於歷史低位。

On to balance sheet and capital on Page 3. Our CET1 ratio ended at 11.9%, down 120 basis points from the prior quarter. As a reminder, we exited the fourth quarter with an elevated buffer to absorb anticipated changes this quarter, the largest being SA-CCR adoption as well as some pickup in seasonal activity.

關於第 3 頁的資產負債表和資本。我們的 CET1 比率為 11.9%，比上一季度下降 120 個基點。提醒一下，我們在第四季度結束時增加了緩衝以吸收本季度預期的變化，最大的是 SA-CCR 的採用以及季節性活動的一些回升。

In addition to those anticipated items, there were a couple of other drivers. The rate sell-off led to AOCI drawdowns in our AFS portfolio. But keep in mind, all else equal, these mark-to-market losses accrete back to capital through time and as securities mature. And price increases across commodities resulted in higher counterparty credit and market risk RWA.

除了那些預期的項目，還有其他幾個司機。利率拋售導致我們的 AFS 投資組合中的 AOCI 下降。但請記住，在其他條件相同的情況下，這些按市值計價的損失會隨著時間的推移和證券的成熟而累積回資本。大宗商品價格上漲導致交易對手信用和市場風險風險加權資產增加。

While, of course, the environment is uncertain, many of these effects are now in the rearview mirror. And as a result, we believe that our current capital and future earnings profile position us well to continue supporting business growth while meeting increasing capital requirements as we look ahead.

當然，雖然環境是不確定的，但許多這些影響現在都在後視鏡中。因此，我們相信我們目前的資本和未來的收益狀況使我們能夠繼續支持業務增長，同時滿足我們展望未來不斷增長的資本需求。

With that, let's go to our businesses, starting with Consumer & Community Banking on Page 4. CCB reported net income of $2.9 billion on revenue of $12.2 billion, which was down 2% year-on-year. In Consumer & Business Banking, revenue was up 8% predominantly driven by growth in deposit balances and client investment assets, partially offset by deposit margin compression.

有了這個，讓我們來看看我們的業務，從第 4 頁的消費者和社區銀行業務開始。建行報告淨收入為 29 億美元，收入為 122 億美元，同比下降 2%。在消費者和商業銀行業務中，收入增長 8%，主要受存款餘額和客戶投資資產增長的推動，部分被存款保證金壓縮所抵消。

Deposits were up 18% year-on-year and 4% quarter-on-quarter, consistent with last quarter. And client investment assets were up 9% year-on-year largely driven by flows in addition to market performance.

存款按年上升 18%，按季上升 4%，與上季一致。除市場表現外，客戶投資資產同比增長 9%，主要受資金流驅動。

In Home Lending, revenue was down 20% year-on-year on lower production revenue from both lower margins and volumes against a very strong quarter last year, largely offset by higher net servicing revenue. Originations of $24.7 billion declined 37% with the rise in rates. And as a result, mortgage loans were down 3%.

在房屋貸款方面，收入同比下降 20%，原因是利潤率和銷量下降導致生產收入下降，而去年的季度表現非常強勁，這在很大程度上被淨服務收入的增加所抵消。隨著利率的上升，247 億美元的資金來源下降了 37%。結果，抵押貸款下降了 3%。

Moving to Card & Auto. Revenue was down 8% year-on-year primarily on strong new card account originations leading to higher acquisition costs. Card outstandings were up 11%, and revolving balances have continued to grow, ending the quarter above the first quarter of '21 levels. And in Auto, originations were $8.4 billion, down 25% due to the lack of vehicle supply, while loans were up 3%.

轉向卡片和汽車。收入同比下降 8%，主要是由於強勁的新卡賬戶發起導致更高的購置成本。信用卡未償餘額增長了 11%，循環餘額繼續增長，本季度結束時高於 21 年第一季度的水平。在汽車領域，由於缺乏汽車供應，貸款額為 84 億美元，下降了 25%，而貸款增長了 3%。

Touching on consumer spend. Combined credit and debit spend was up 21% year-on-year with growth stronger in credit as we see a continued pickup in travel and dining. And as the quarter progressed, we saw a robust reacceleration of T&E spend, up 64%. Expenses of $7.7 billion were up 7% year-on-year driven by higher investments and structural expenses, partially offset by lower volume and revenue-related expenses.

觸及消費者支出。信用卡和借記卡消費總額同比增長 21%，信貸增長強勁，因為我們看到旅行和餐飲持續回升。隨著本季度的進展，我們看到 T&E 支出強勁地重新加速，增長了 64%。由於投資和結構性支出增加，77 億美元的支出同比增長 7%，但部分被數量和收入相關支出的減少所抵消。

Next, the CIB on Page 5. CIB reported net income of $4.4 billion on revenue of $13.5 billion for the first quarter. Investment Banking revenue of $2.1 billion was down 28% versus the prior year. IB fees were down 31% year-on-year. We maintained our #1 rank with a wallet share of 8%. In advisory, fees were up 18%, and it was the best first quarter ever, benefiting from the closing of deals announced in 2021.

接下來是第 5 頁的 CIB。CIB 報告第一季度的收入為 135 億美元，淨收入為 44 億美元。投資銀行業務收入為 21 億美元，較上年下降 28%。 IB費用同比下降31%。我們以 8% 的錢包份額保持了我們的第一名。在諮詢方面，費用增長了 18%，這是有史以來最好的第一季度，受益於 2021 年宣布的交易完成。

Debt underwriting fees were down 20% primarily driven by leverage finance as issuers contended with market volatility. And in equity underwriting, fees were down 76% on lower issuance activity, particularly in North America and EMEA.

由於發行人應對市場波動，債務承銷費下降了 20%，主要受槓桿融資的推動。在股票承銷方面，由於發行活動減少，費用下降了 76%，尤其是在北美和歐洲、中東和非洲地區。

Moving to Markets. Total revenue was $8.8 billion, down 3% against a record first quarter last year. Fixed income was relatively flat driven by a decline in securitized products, where rising rates have slowed down the pace of mortgage production, largely offset by growth in currencies and emerging markets and commodities on elevated client activity in a volatile market.

轉移到市場。總收入為 88 億美元，與去年第一季度的創紀錄水平相比下降了 3%。由於證券化產品下降，固定收益相對持平，利率上升減緩了抵押貸款生產的步伐，這在很大程度上被貨幣和新興市場以及商品在動盪市場中客戶活動增加的增長所抵消。

Equity markets were down 7% against an all-time record quarter last year. This quarter, however, was our second best with robust client activity across both derivatives and cash. And prime continued to perform well with client balances hovering around all-time highs.

與去年創紀錄的季度相比，股市下跌了 7%。然而，本季度是我們第二好的季度，在衍生品和現金方面都有強勁的客戶活動。 Prime 繼續表現良好，客戶餘額徘徊在歷史高位附近。

Credit Adjustments & Other was a loss of $524 million driven by funding spread widening as well as credit valuation adjustments relating to both increases in commodities exposures and markdowns of derivatives receivables from Russia-associated counterparties.

信用調整及其他損失 5.24 億美元，原因是資金利差擴大以及與商品風險增加和俄羅斯相關交易對手應收衍生品減價相關的信用估值調整。

Let me take a second here to address the widely reported situation in the nickel market as it relates to our results this quarter. We were hedging positions for clients closely linked to nickel producers, who generally sell forward a portion of the coming year's production. The extreme price movements created margin calls, which we and other banks are helping to address.

讓我在這里花點時間談談廣泛報導的鎳市場情況，因為它與我們本季度的業績有關。我們為與鎳生產商密切相關的客戶對沖頭寸，他們通常會遠期賣出部分來年的產量。極端的價格變動催生了追加保證金通知，我們和其他銀行正在幫助解決這個問題。

Because this is counterparty related, not trading, it appears in the Credit Adjustments & Other line, where it contributed about $120 million to the reported loss I just mentioned. It also drove approximately half of the increase in market risk RWA that I noted on the capital slide and was a driver of higher reported VAR, which will also be elevated in our upcoming filings.

因為這是交易對手相關的，而不是交易，它出現在信用調整和其他行中，它為我剛才提到的報告損失貢獻了大約 1.2 億美元。它還推動了我在資本下滑中註意到的市場風險 RWA 增長的大約一半，並且是報告的 VAR 更高的驅動因素，這也將在我們即將提交的文件中得到提升。

Payments revenue was $1.9 billion, up 33% year-on-year or up 9% excluding net gains on equity investments driven by continued growth in fees, deposit balances and higher rates. Securities Services revenue of $1.1 billion was up 2% year-on-year driven by higher rates and growth in fees. Expenses of $7.3 billion were up 3% year-on-year mostly due to higher structural expenses and investments, largely offset by lower volume and revenue-related expenses.

支付收入為 19 億美元，同比增長 33% 或增長 9%，其中不包括費用、存款餘額和利率持續增長推動的股權投資淨收益。受利率上升和費用增長的推動，證券服務收入為 11 億美元，同比增長 2%。 73 億美元的支出同比增長 3%，主要是由於結構性支出和投資增加，但很大程度上被銷量和收入相關支出的減少所抵消。

Moving to Commercial Banking on Page 6. Commercial Banking reported net income of $850 million and an ROE of 13%. Revenue of $2.4 billion was flat year-on-year with higher payments revenue and deposit balances, offset by lower Investment Banking revenue. Gross Investment Banking revenue of $729 million was down 35% driven by both fewer large deals and less flow activity.

在第 6 頁轉到商業銀行。商業銀行報告的淨收入為 8.5 億美元，ROE 為 13%。收入為 24 億美元，與去年同期持平，支付收入和存款餘額增加，但被投資銀行業務收入減少所抵消。由於大宗交易減少和流量活動減少，投資銀行業務總收入為 7.29 億美元，下降了 35%。

Expenses of $1.1 billion were up 17% year-on-year largely driven by investments in volume and revenue-related expenses. Deposits were down 2% quarter-on-quarter as client balances are seasonally highest at year-end. Loans were up 5% year-on-year and up 3% quarter-on-quarter, excluding PPP.

11 億美元的支出同比增長 17%，主要是由於對數量和與收入相關的支出的投資。由於客戶餘額在年底達到季節性最高水平，存款環比下降 2%。不包括購買力平價，貸款同比增長 5%，環比增長 3%。

C&I loans were up 3% sequentially ex PPP, reflecting higher revolver utilization and originations across Middle Market and Corporate Client Banking. CRE loans were up 3% driven by strong loan originations and funding across the portfolio.

C&I 貸款在 PPP 前環比增長 3%，反映了中間市場和企業客戶銀行業務的左輪手槍利用率和來源增加。受整個投資組合強勁的貸款發放和資金推動，CRE 貸款增長了 3%。

And then to complete our lines of business, AWM on Page 7. Asset & Wealth Management reported net income of $1 billion with a pretax margin of 30%. Revenue of $4.3 billion was up 6% year-on-year as growth in deposits and loans and higher management fees and performance fees and alternative investments were partially offset by deposit margin compression and the absence of [net] valuation gains from the prior year.

然後，為了完成我們的業務，AWM 在第 7 頁。資產和財富管理報告的淨收入為 10 億美元，稅前利潤率為 30%。 43 億美元的收入同比增長 6%，原因是存款和貸款的增長以及更高的管理費和績效費以及另類投資被存款利潤率壓縮和沒有上一年的[淨]估值收益部分抵消。

Expenses of $2.9 billion were up 11% year-on-year predominantly driven by higher structural expenses and investments as well as higher volume and revenue-related expenses. For the quarter, net long-term inflows of $19 billion were positive across all channels with strength in equities, multi-asset and alternatives.

費用為 29 億美元，同比增長 11%，主要受結構性費用和投資增加以及數量和收入相關費用增加的推動。本季度，所有渠道的 190 億美元長期淨流入為正數，股票、多元資產和另類資產表現強勁。

And in liquidity, we saw net outflows of $52 billion. AUM of $3 trillion and overall client assets of $4.1 trillion, up 4% and 8% year-on-year, respectively, were driven by strong net inflows. And finally, loans were up 3% quarter-on-quarter with continued strength in mortgages and securities-based lending, while deposits were up 9%.

在流動性方面，我們看到了 520 億美元的淨流出。強勁的淨流入推動了 3 萬億美元的資產管理規模和 4.1 萬億美元的整體客戶資產，同比分別增長 4% 和 8%。最後，貸款環比增長 3%，抵押貸款和證券貸款持續強勁，而存款增長 9%。

Turning to Corporate on Page 8. Corporate reported a net loss of $856 million. Revenue was a loss of $881 million, down $408 million year-on-year. NII was up $319 million due to the impact of higher rates, and NIR was down $727 million due to losses on legacy equity investments versus gains last year as well as approximately $400 million of net realized losses on investment securities this quarter. Expenses of $184 million were lower by $692 million year-on-year primarily due to the contribution to the firm's foundation in the prior year.

轉到第 8 頁的企業。企業報告淨虧損 8.56 億美元。收入虧損 8.81 億美元，同比減少 4.08 億美元。由於利率上升的影響，NII 增加了 3.19 億美元，NIR 減少了 7.27 億美元，原因是遺留股權投資的損失與去年的收益相比，以及本季度投資證券的已實現淨損失約 4 億美元。 1.84 億美元的費用同比減少 6.92 億美元，主要是由於上一年對公司基金會的貢獻。

Next, the outlook on Page 9. We still expect NII ex Markets to be in excess of $53 billion and adjusted expenses to be approximately $77 billion. And we'll update these and give you more color at Investor Day next month.

接下來是第 9 頁的展望。我們仍然預計 NII ex Markets 將超過 530 億美元，調整後的費用約為 770 億美元。我們將在下個月的投資者日更新這些內容並為您提供更多色彩。

So to wrap up, once again, this quarter, the company's performance was strong in a particularly volatile and challenging environment. We helped our clients navigate very difficult markets, provided support to relief efforts and implemented economic sanctions of unprecedented complexity with multiple directives from governments around the world. And of course, our thoughts remain with everyone, including our employees affected by Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

因此，再次總結本季度，該公司在一個特別動盪和充滿挑戰的環境中表現強勁。我們幫助我們的客戶駕馭非常困難的市場，為救援工作提供支持，並根據世界各國政府的多項指令實施前所未有的複雜經濟制裁。當然，我們的想法仍然存在於每個人身上，包括我們受俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭影響的員工。

Looking ahead, the U.S. economy remains robust, but we're watching high inflation, the reversal of QE and rising rates as well as the ongoing effects of the war on the global economy.

展望未來，美國經濟依然強勁，但我們正在關注高通脹、量化寬鬆政策的逆轉和利率上升，以及戰爭對全球經濟的持續影響。

With that, operator, please open the line for Q&A.

有了這個，接線員，請打開問答線路。

And our first question is coming from John McDonald from Autonomous Research.

我們的第一個問題來自 Autonomous Research 的 John McDonald。

I was wondering about the net interest income outlook. I know it sounds like we'll get more at Investor Day, but it's very similar to what you gave in mid-February. And obviously, rate expectations have advanced since then.

我想知道淨利息收入前景。我知道聽起來我們會在投資者日獲得更多，但這與你在 2 月中旬給出的非常相似。顯然，自那時以來，利率預期有所提高。

Could you give us a little bit of color on what kind of assumptions are underlying the net interest income ex Markets outlook?

您能否就除市場前景外的淨利息收入背後的假設提供一些顏色嗎？

Yes. John, good question. And yes, look, obviously, given what's happened in terms of Fed hike expectations and what's getting priced into the front of the curve, we would actually expect the access part of in excess of $53 billion to be bigger than it was at Credit Suisse. So to size that, probably a couple million dollars.

是的。約翰，好問題。是的，顯然，鑑於美聯儲加息預期的情況以及曲線前端的定價，我們實際上預計超過 530 億美元的准入部分將比瑞士信貸更大。因此，按規模計算，可能需要幾百萬美元。

But we don't want to get too precise at this point. We want to run our bottoms-up process. We -- there have been very big moves, and we want to get it right. And so we'll give more detail about that at Investor Day.

但在這一點上，我們不想太精確。我們想要運行我們的自下而上的過程。我們 - 已經採取了非常大的舉措，我們希望把它做好。因此，我們將在投資者日提供更多詳細信息。

Okay. And as my follow-up, could you give us some thoughts about the Markets-related NII? What things should we think about there, whether it's seasonality or how it's affected by rising rates?

好的。作為我的後續，您能否給我們一些關於與市場相關的 NII 的想法？我們應該在那裡考慮什麼，無論是季節性還是受利率上升的影響？

Yes. I guess I would direct you to my comments, I think, 1 or 2 quarters ago on this. But generally speaking, that number is pretty correlated to the short-term rate.

是的。我想我會在 1 或 2 個季度前將您引向我的評論。但一般來說，這個數字與短期利率非常相關。

So all else equal, you'll see a headwind in there as the Fed hikes come through, which, in general, in the geography, we would tend to expect that to be offset in NIR. But it's noisy. It can shift as a function of obscure balance sheet composition issues, as I've mentioned in the past. And so that's why we don't focus too much on that number.

因此，在其他條件相同的情況下，隨著美聯儲加息的到來，你會看到逆風，總的來說，在地理上，我們傾向於預計這會在 NIR 中被抵消。但是很吵。正如我過去所提到的，它可能會隨著模糊的資產負債表構成問題而發生變化。這就是為什麼我們沒有過多關注這個數字的原因。

The next question is coming from Ken Usdin from Jefferies.

下一個問題來自 Jefferies 的 Ken Usdin。

Jeremy, I just wanted to follow up on your comments about capital and being able to provide room for organic growth. With a 5 2% SLR, 11.9% CET1 versus your longer-term targets, can you talk about what that means in terms of the buyback potential from here? And do any of the RWA inflation items come back off that you just saw in the first quarter?

傑里米，我只是想跟進你關於資本和能夠為有機增長提供空間的評論。與您的長期目標相比，SLR 為 5 2%，CET1 為 11.9%，您能談談這對回購潛力的意義嗎？您剛剛在第一季度看到的任何 RWA 通脹項目是否會反彈？

Yes, thanks. So let me just give some high-level comments about the CET1 trajectory and so on. So as you know, we went into the quarter with elevated buffers, knowing that we would have denominator growth as a result of the adoption of SA-CCR. And so of course, that happened. And we would have expected roughly to be 12.5% right in the middle of the range this quarter.

是啊謝謝。因此，讓我就 CET1 軌蹟等進行一些高級別的評論。如您所知，我們進入本季度時緩衝增加，知道由於採用 SA-CCR，我們將實現分母增長。當然，這發生了。我們原本預計本季度大約為 12.5%。

Of course, it was an unusual quarter in a number of ways. And so we saw RWA inflation from market risk, which we've talked about and the AOCI drawdown and a number of other slightly smaller factors producing the 11.9%.

當然，從很多方面來說，這是一個不同尋常的季度。因此，我們看到了市場風險導致的 RWA 通脹，我們已經討論過這一點，以及 AOCI 下降和其他一些稍微較小的因素導致了 11.9%。

From where we sit here, to your point, a number of these items are, in fact, going to bleed back in relatively quickly, some faster than others. So we would expect a significant portion of the RWA inflation to bleed out, obviously, to decay out.

從我們坐在這裡的角度來看，事實上，其中一些項目會相對較快地回流，有些比其他項目更快。因此，我們預計 RWA 通脹的很大一部分會流失，顯然會衰減。

The AOCI drawdown will obviously come back over time. And probably most importantly, to the prior question, the higher rate outlook is improving the revenue outlook, which will, of course, accrete to capital. So then if you line that up against the sort of rising minimums, of course, we have the increase in the G-SIB requirement in the first quarter of '23 coming in.

AOCI 回撤顯然會隨著時間的推移而恢復。對於上一個問題，可能最重要的是，更高的利率前景正在改善收入前景，這當然會增加資本。因此，如果您將其與不斷上升的最低要求相匹配，當然，我們會在 23 年第一季度增加 G-SIB 要求。

And then there's a question of SCB, where we don't know, obviously, but given the countercyclical nature of the stress and the fact that the unemployment launch point is a lot lower and that the unemployment rate is floored in the Fed scenario, you might expect SCB to be a little bit higher when it's published in June, effective in the fourth quarter. But that gives us time to make any adjustments that we need to make.

然後是 SCB 的問題，顯然我們不知道，但考慮到壓力的反週期性質以及失業率啟動點要低得多以及在美聯儲情景下失業率已經下降的事實，你可能預計 SCB 在 6 月發佈時會略高一些，從第四季度開始生效。但這讓我們有時間做出我們需要做出的任何調整。

So I guess to summarize, when we put all this together, between improved income generation, some of the denominator to [KFx] and the various levers that we have available to pull across the dimension of time as soon information comes into play, we really feel quite good about our capital position from here and the trajectory as we look forward and minimums evolve.

所以我想總結一下，當我們把所有這些放在一起時，在提高收入產生、[KFx] 的一些分母以及我們可以在信息開始發揮作用時跨越時間維度的各種槓桿之間，我們真的從這裡開始，我們對我們的資本狀況以及我們向前看和最低限度演變的軌跡感覺非常好。

And just a follow-up there, too. Is there anything you need to consider structurally in terms of like adding preferreds to help bridge the gap? Or is it just going to be enough to organically build back with possibly just utilizing less buyback to allow things to just grow back?

也只是一個後續行動。在添加偏好以幫助彌合差距方面，您是否需要在結構上考慮什麼？或者它是否足以有機地重建，可能只是利用更少的回購來讓事情重新增長？

Yes. I think the -- our -- I guess, in general, we haven't wanted to say a lot publicly about our preferred actions. As you know, some of these instruments are callable. And we have choices to make about whether or not we call them to adjust to different situations.

是的。我認為 - 我們的 - 我想，總的來說，我們不想公開談論我們的首選行動。如您所知，其中一些工具是可調用的。我們可以選擇是否調用他們以適應不同的情況。

So I think that's an example of the types of levers that we have available to pull as the environment evolves. But from where we sit today with the numbers that I'm looking at, we have a pretty clean trajectory to get to where we want to be.

因此，我認為這是隨著環境的發展我們可以拉動的槓桿類型的一個例子。但是從我們今天看到的數字來看，我們有一條非常清晰的軌跡可以到達我們想要的位置。

The next one is coming from Betsy Graseck from Morgan Stanley.

下一個來自摩根士丹利的 Betsy Graseck。

I had a question for Jamie. In your annual letter, you mentioned how you expect to achieve double-digit market share over time in payments. And what I wanted to understand is if you could unpack that a little bit because when I look at payments, you've got a lot of different sleeves.

我有一個問題要問傑米。在您的年度信函中，您提到了您希望如何隨著時間的推移在支付領域實現兩位數的市場份額。我想了解的是，您是否可以將其打開一點，因為當我查看付款時，您有很多不同的袖子。

For example, in consumer credit card, you're at 20%, 25%. In treasury, I think you're at 7%. So could you give us a sense as to where you think you are in this total payments category you're talking about, what you're expecting in terms of drivers to get to double digit and what kind of time frame you're thinking about there?

例如，在消費信用卡中，您是 20%、25%。在財政部，我認為你的比例是 7%。那麼，您能否告訴我們您認為自己在您所說的總支付類別中的位置，您對司機達到兩位數的期望以及您正在考慮的時間範圍那裡？

Yes. So yes, Betsy, so that number, the double-digit relating just to Wholesale Payments, not to consumer payments, which obviously, we already have a fairly significant share. And we've gone from 4.5% to something a little bit north of 7% over the last 5 years.

是的。所以是的，Betsy，這個數字是與批發支付相關的兩位數，與消費者支付無關，顯然，我們已經佔有相當大的份額。在過去的 5 年裡，我們已經從 4.5% 上升到了 7% 以上。

And we're just building out. And I gave some examples when I give a lot and then you have Investor Day coming up, we're building all the things we need, real-time payments, certain blockchain-type things. While it's a couple of acquisitions, they're building out our Wholesale capabilities to do a far better job for clients globally around the world and supported by what I'd say it's a very good cyber and risk control, which clients really need too, by the way. So it's kind of across the board. It's nothing mystical about it, but it's an area we want to win in.

我們只是在擴建。當我給出很多東西時，我舉了一些例子，然後投資者日即將到來，我們正在構建我們需要的所有東西，實時支付，某些區塊鏈類型的東西。雖然這是幾次收購，但他們正在建立我們的批發能力，以便為全球客戶做得更好，並得到客戶真正需要的非常好的網絡和風險控制的支持，順便一提。所以它有點全面。這並不神秘，但這是我們想要取勝的領域。

Okay. And getting to double digits is over the same kind of time frame with the same pace going from 4% to 7%? Or do you think you can accelerate that? Because I see what...

好的。達到兩位數是在相同的時間範圍內以相同的速度從 4% 到 7%？或者你認為你可以加速嗎？因為我看到了什麼...

I wasn't meaning to put a time frame on it, but I would say 5 years. You'll get more update on this at Investor Day.

我並不想給它設定一個時間框架，但我會說 5 年。您將在投資者日獲得更多更新。

Okay. And then just a follow-up here is on the NII outlook, where you indicated the curve suggests the plus side and is it a couple of billion. And I guess the question I have is historically, you've been looking to reinvest that benefit from rising rates. You did that last cycle as well. What I hear -- what I'm hearing is that maybe you don't want to size it for us right now today because you plan on investing it and explaining that at Investor Day. Is that a fair takeaway?

好的。然後這裡只是對 NII 前景的跟進，您指出曲線表明有利的一面，是幾十億嗎？而且我想我的問題是從歷史上看，您一直在尋求將利率上升帶來的收益進行再投資。你也做了最後一個循環。我聽到的——我聽到的是，也許你現在不想為我們確定它的規模，因為你計劃投資它並在投資者日解釋這一點。這是一個公平的外賣嗎？

No, no, no. We don't look at that way like we're reinvesting NII. We -- the investing stuff, we look at all the time we're investing, and we're investing a lot of money for the future kind of across the board. But that's not what you're saying...

不不不。我們不會像在再投資 NII 那樣看待這種方式。我們 - 投資的東西，我們一直在關注我們投資的時間，我們正在為未來的全面投入大量資金。不過你說的不是這個...

I mean, I think fundamentally, we have had confidence in delivering our 17% ROTCE through the cycle. We talked a little bit over the last couple of quarters about at the time, some short-term headwinds to that, mostly as a function of the rate environment and a couple of other things.

我的意思是，我認為從根本上說，我們有信心在整個週期中實現 17% 的 ROTCE。在過去的幾個季度裡，我們談到了當時的一些短期不利因素，主要是利率環境和其他一些因素的影響。

The investment plan is a strategic plan that recognizes that sort of confidence in the 17%. The fact that, that moment may be getting pulled forward as a result of the Fed's reaction to the economy has no impact on how we think about spending.

投資計劃是一項戰略計劃，承認對 17% 的這種信心。由於美聯儲對經濟的反應，這一時刻可能會提前，這一事實不會影響我們對支出的看法。

The next question is coming from Steve Chubak from Wolfe Research.

下一個問題來自 Wolfe Research 的 Steve Chubak。

So wanted to start off with a question on QT. In the past, you've spoken about the linkage between Fed balance sheet reduction and deposit outflow expectation for yourselves in the industry. And with the Fed just outlining a more aggressive glide path per balance sheet reduction, how should we be thinking about deposit outflow risk? Any views on how betas may differ versus last cycle, given a more aggressive pace of Fed timing?

所以想從一個關於 QT 的問題開始。過去，您曾談到美聯儲縮表與業內存款流出預期之間的聯繫。美聯儲剛剛概述了每次縮減資產負債表的更激進的下滑路徑，我們應該如何考慮存款外流風險？鑑於美聯儲的時間安排更加激進，對貝塔係數與上個週期有何不同有何看法？

Steve, so this is a fun question. So let's nerd out a little bit. I'm sure Jamie will jump in.

史蒂夫，所以這是一個有趣的問題。所以讓我們有點書呆子。我相信傑米會加入的。

And then I can...

然後我可以...

Yes, exactly. Okay. So look, I think we've talked a little bit about what happened in the prior cycle, right? So you had QE, and then you had big expansion in bank deposits, system-wide expansion. And at the tail end of that cycle, you had RRP come in, and then RRP has gotten sort of quite big as QE finished.

對，就是這樣。好的。所以看，我想我們已經討論了一些關於上一個週期發生的事情，對吧？所以你有量化寬鬆，然後你有銀行存款的大幅擴張，系統範圍的擴張。在那個週期的尾聲，你有 RRP 進來，然後隨著 QE 的結束，RRP 變得相當大。

And so now as you look at potentially kind of running that whole thing in reverse, you might actually expect that the first thing that would happen is that RFP would get drained and only later would bank deposits start to shrink. But I think you correctly point out some of the nuances in the Fed minutes.

因此，現在當您考慮可能會反向運行整個事情時，您實際上可能會期望發生的第一件事是 RFP 會被耗盡，然後銀行存款才會開始縮減。但我認為你正確地指出了美聯儲會議記錄中的一些細微差別。

And when you sort of combine all the effects together, you realize that there's a lot of interacting forces here and is really, I think, very intelligent people differ on their predictions about what's going to happen here. And just to outline a couple of those.

當你把所有的影響結合在一起時，你會意識到這裡有很多相互作用的力量，我認為，非常聰明的人對這裡將會發生的事情的預測是不同的。只是概述其中的幾個。

So it's worth noting for starters, that, in general, industry-wide loan growth outlook is quite robust, and that should be a tailwind for system-wide deposit growth. So as you noted, yes, QT will start in May in all likelihood for the minutes headwind. Then you just have to look at what's going to happen in the front end of the curve, particularly in bills.

因此，首先值得注意的是，總體而言，全行業的貸款增長前景相當強勁，這應該是全系統存款增長的順風。因此，正如您所指出的，是的，QT 很可能會在 5 月開始，因為分鐘逆風。然後你只需要看看曲線前端會發生什麼，特別是在票據方面。

So the treasury has to make decisions about weighted average maturity and what makes sense there. There's obviously a little bit of shortage of short-dated collateral in the market right now. So that might argue for wanting more supply there.

因此，財政部必須就加權平均期限以及其中的意義做出決定。目前市場上的短期抵押品顯然有點短缺。因此，這可能會支持那裡想要更多的供應。

The Fed has to make decisions about portfolio management. They talked in the minutes about using bill maturities to fill in gaps and so on and so forth. And so those things are going to interact in various ways.

美聯儲必須就投資組合管理做出決定。他們在會議記錄中談到了使用票據到期來填補空白等等。所以這些東西將以各種方式相互作用。

I think one thing that's worth noting, though, is that if you wind up in the state of the world where bank deposits drain sooner than people might have otherwise thought, in all likelihood, that's going to be the lower value nonoperating-type deposits. So in any case, we'll see.

不過，我認為值得注意的一件事是，如果你最終處於銀行存款比人們想像的更快耗盡的世界狀態，那麼很可能這將是價值較低的非經營性存款。所以無論如何，我們拭目以待。

But to simplify it for a second, our base case remains modest growth in deposits for us as a company. And just pivoting away for a second from the system to us, from a share perspective, we've taken share in retail deposits, and we feel great about that. And in Wholesale, we've had some nice wins and a nice pipeline of deals there. So that's the current thinking on that topic.

但為了簡化一下，我們的基本情況仍然是我們作為一家公司的存款適度增長。只是從系統轉向我們，從份額的角度來看，我們已經分享了零售存款，我們對此感覺很好。在 Wholesale 中，我們已經取得了一些不錯的勝利和一系列不錯的交易。這就是當前關於該主題的想法。

So the answer is we don't know, okay? And you guys should read Economist reports, but the fact is initially probably won't come out of deposits. Over time, it will come out of Wholesale and then maybe consumer. We're prepared for that. It doesn't actually mean that much to us in the short run.

所以答案是我們不知道，好嗎？你們應該閱讀經濟學人的報告，但事實是最初可能不會來自存款。隨著時間的推移，它將來自批發，然後可能是消費者。我們為此做好了準備。在短期內，這實際上對我們來說意義不大。

And the beta effectively, we don't expect to be that different than was in the past. There are a lot of pluses and minuses. You can argue a whole bunch of different ways, but the fact it won't be that much different, at least the first 100 basis point increase.

實際上，我們預計測試版不會與過去有那麼大的不同。有很多優點和缺點。你可以用一大堆不同的方式爭論，但事實不會有太大的不同，至少在前 100 個基點增加。

No, that's really helpful color. Just one more topic or a follow-up, I should say. Jamie, just in the shareholder letter, you had spoken about how the market is underestimating the number of Fed hikes that might be needed to curb inflation. And what's your expectation around the level of Fed tightening?

不，那是非常有用的顏色。我應該說，只是一個話題或後續行動。傑米，就在股東信中，你談到了市場如何低估了美聯儲為抑制通脹而可能需要加息的次數。您對美聯儲的緊縮水平有何預期？

I know it's difficult to make such predictions, but maybe if you could just help us understand given your own rate outlook, how that's informing how you're managing excess liquidity, given the significant capacity that you have to redeploy some of those proceeds into higher-yielding securities?

我知道很難做出這樣的預測，但如果你能幫助我們了解你自己的利率前景，考慮到你必須將其中一些收益重新部署到更高的地方的巨大能力，這將如何告知你如何管理過剩的流動性- 收益證券？

Yes. So I think the implied curve now is like 2.5% at the end of the year and maybe 3% at the end of 2023. And look, no one knows. And obviously, everyone does their forecast. I think it's going to be more than that, okay?

是的。所以我認為現在隱含的曲線在今年年底是 2.5%，到 2023 年底可能是 3%。看，沒有人知道。顯然，每個人都會做他們的預測。我想它會不止於此，好嗎？

I give you a million different reasons why because of inflation and just about deposits. And we've never been through ever QT like this. So this is a new thing for the world and I think is more substantially important than other people think because the huge change of flows of funds is going to create as people change their investment portfolio.

我給你一百萬個不同的理由，原因是通貨膨脹和存款。我們從未經歷過這樣的 QT。所以這對世界來說是一個新事物，我認為比其他人認為的更重要，因為隨著人們改變他們的投資組合，資金流動將發生巨大變化。

So we're going to be fine because we're going to certainly help our customers and gain share. So what does it do for JPMorgan Chase? JPMorgan Chase, we'll be fine. We got plenty of capital, plenty all great margins. We already have the returns we want and all things like that.

所以我們會很好，因為我們肯定會幫助我們的客戶並獲得份額。那麼它對摩根大通有什麼作用呢？摩根大通，我們會沒事的。我們有充足的資金，充足的利潤。我們已經獲得了我們想要的回報以及所有類似的東西。

So I just -- I would just be cautious. I think what you should expect is volatile markets. Again, that's okay for us. And the Fed -- we think the Fed needs to do, they need to do to try to manage this economy and try to get to a soft landing, if possible.

所以我只是 - 我會謹慎行事。我認為你應該期待的是動蕩的市場。再說一次，這對我們來說沒問題。還有美聯儲——我們認為美聯儲需要這樣做，如果可能的話，他們需要這樣做來嘗試管理經濟並嘗試實現軟著陸。

And any appetite to deploy the excess liquidity?

是否有部署過剩流動性的意願？

No, don't expect that.

不，不要指望那樣。

The next question is coming from Glenn Schorr from Evercore ISI.

下一個問題來自 Evercore ISI 的 Glenn Schorr。

I wonder if you could talk through the changes in the macro assumptions to capture that downside risk in CECL assumptions, just because what I want to get to is where we came from, where we're at now and then we can impose our thoughts on each quarter.

我想知道你是否可以通過宏觀假設的變化來捕捉 CECL 假設中的下行風險，只是因為我想要了解的是我們來自哪裡，我們現在在哪裡，然後我們可以將我們的想法強加於每個季度。

I don't want to spend a lot of time on CECL, okay? I think it's a complete waste of time. Basically, all we said is the chance of an adverse or severe adverse event is 10% higher than it was before. That's all we did, very basic. And that led to a big...

我不想在CECL上花太多時間，好嗎？我認為這完全是浪費時間。基本上，我們所說的只是發生不良或嚴重不良事件的機率比以前高 10%。這就是我們所做的一切，非常基礎。這導致了一個大...

It really is that some...

確實是有些...

We don't know, and it's a guess. It's probability weighted, hypothetical, multiyear scenarios that -- we do the best we can, but to spend a lot of time on earnings calls about CECL swings is a waste of time. It's got nothing to do with the underlying business.

我們不知道，這是一個猜測。這是概率加權的、假設的、多年的情景——我們盡我們所能，但花大量時間在關於 CECL 波動的收益電話會議上是浪費時間。它與底層業務無關。

Charge-offs are extraordinarily good. As a matter of fact, way better than they should be. I mean, middle market, 1 basis point, credit card 1.5. We would have told you in the past that the best it'll ever be is 2.5. So credit is very good. That will get worse. NII is going to get much better. Things are going to normalize. We're still earning 16% or 17% on tangible equity. And obviously, you have -- yes.

沖銷非常好。事實上，比他們應該做的要好得多。我的意思是，中間市場，1個基點，信用卡1.5。我們過去會告訴你，最好的版本是 2.5。所以信用非常好。那會變得更糟。 NII 會變得更好。事情會正常化。我們仍然在有形資產上賺取 16% 或 17% 的收益。顯然，你有 - 是的。

The 10% is what I wanted because your guess is better than my guess. So I appreciate that.

10% 是我想要的，因為你的猜測比我的猜測要好。所以我很感激。

I don't -- Glenn, with all due respect, I do not believe it is.

我不——格倫，恕我直言，我不相信它是。

Okay. So I think you might have just answered it, but I want to make sure I ask it explicitly. The follow-up I have on credit, and I know it's in much better shape, and it depends on the go forward. But are you seeing any stresses in the levered parts of the debt markets, meaning leveraged loan, high-yield, CLO, private credit, anything in there that makes you like turn a side eye?

好的。所以我想你可能剛剛回答了它，但我想確保我明確地問它。我對信用的後續行動，我知道它的狀態要好得多，這取決於前進的方向。但是你是否看到債務市場的槓桿部分有任何壓力，這意味著槓桿貸款、高收益、CLO、私人信貸，以及任何讓你喜歡轉眼的東西？

Just spread widening, a little bit less liquidity.

只是點差擴大，流動性少了一點。

That doesn't sound so bad. And...

這聽起來不是那麼糟糕。和...

I mean, Glenn, I think, look, we -- no one likes to be complacent about this type of stuff. And obviously, in this environment, everyone's looking very closely everywhere for any risks and trying to see around the corner. But as of right now, we're really not seeing anything of concern in the kind of spot metrics, so to speak.

我的意思是，格倫，我想，看，我們——沒有人喜歡對這類事情自滿。顯然，在這種環境下，每個人都在密切關注任何地方的風險，並試圖看到即將到來的拐角處。但就目前而言，可以這麼說，我們真的沒有在現場指標中看到任何值得關注的問題。

Maybe the last quickie on credit is just with everybody having a job and there's wage inflation and excess cash, are there any buckets of income that you're seeing early stage delinquencies picking up?

也許最後一個快速的信貸是每個人都有工作，工資膨脹和現金過剩，你是否看到早期拖欠率上升的任何收入桶？

In short, no. It is an interesting question as you look across our customer base, particularly in card and you sort of -- that heavily debated question of real income growth and gas prices and what's that doing to consumer balance sheets. And so we're watching that, especially in the kind of LMI segment of our customer base. But right now, we're not actually seeing anything that gives us reason to worry.

簡而言之，沒有。當您查看我們的客戶群時，這是一個有趣的問題，特別是在信用卡和您之類的 - 實際收入增長和汽油價格以及這對消費者資產負債表有什麼影響的爭論激烈的問題。因此，我們正在關注這一點，尤其是在我們客戶群的 LMI 細分市場中。但現在，我們實際上並沒有看到任何讓我們有理由擔心的事情。

The next one is coming from Gerard Cassidy from RBC Capital Markets.

下一位來自加拿大皇家銀行資本市場的 Gerard Cassidy。

Jeremy, can we follow up on your comments about building up the reserves? I think you said it was $902 million that you guys built up and was due to high inflation and the war in the Ukraine. How much was it due to inflation?

傑里米，我們可以跟進你關於建立儲備的意見嗎？我想你說你們積累了 9.02 億美元，是由於高通脹和烏克蘭戰爭造成的。多少是因為通貨膨脹？

And when you made that comment, is it because you're concerned about the lower-end consumer spending more money for fuel and food that might lead to greater delinquencies down the road? And how much was it due to the Ukraine situation?

當你發表這個評論時，是不是因為你擔心低端消費者在燃料和食品上花費更多的錢可能會導致更多的拖欠？烏克蘭局勢造成的損失有多大？

Yes, Glenn (sic) [Gerard], it's really a lot more general than that. So just to repeat, $900 million build, $300 million name specific, primarily related to Russia-associated individual names. The other $600 million is portfolio level. And as Jamie just said, it simply reflects increasing the probability from a very low probability to a slightly higher probability of a -- you might call it, Volcker-style, Fed-induced recession in response to the current inflationary environment, which obviously is in part driven by commodity price increases, which are in part driven by the war in Ukraine.

是的，格倫（原文如此）[杰拉德]，它確實比這更籠統。再說一遍，9 億美元的建設，3 億美元的特定名稱，主要與俄羅斯相關的個人名稱有關。另外 6 億美元是投資組合水平。正如傑米剛才所說，它只是反映了將概率從非常低的概率增加到略高的概率——你可以稱之為沃爾克式的，美聯儲引發的衰退，以應對當前的通脹環境，這顯然是部分原因是商品價格上漲，部分原因是烏克蘭戰爭。

So -- but it's not a super micro portfolio level thing, except to the extent that our models handle that. It's a top-down modification of the probabilistic ways.

所以 - 但這不是超微型投資組合級別的事情，除非我們的模型可以處理它。這是對概率方式的自上而下的修改。

One of the things I hated when CECL came out is that we spend a lot of time in every call yapping about CECL. I just think it's a huge mistake for all of us to spend too much time on it.

當 CECL 出現時，我討厭的一件事是，我們在每個電話中都花費大量時間對 CECL 大喊大叫。我只是認為我們所有人都花太多時間在上面是一個巨大的錯誤。

Understood. And then as a follow-up, Jeremy, if we look at the AOCI number that you gave us, and you were very clear about it's going to accrete back into the capital as those securities mature.

明白了。然後作為後續行動，傑里米，如果我們看看你給我們的 AOCI 數字，你很清楚隨著這些證券的成熟，它會重新回到資本中。

Two things. Is there anything you can do, assuming if the long end of the curve continues to rise and probably giving you maybe a bigger hit on AOCI as we go forward, is there anything you can do to mitigate that, whether to shrink that -- the available-for-sale portfolio, which looks like it was $313 billion at the end of this period? Or do you just have to grow the revenue, as you pointed out, there is another way of growing your capital?

兩件事情。你有什麼可以做的嗎，假設如果曲線的長端繼續上升，並且在我們前進的過程中可能會給你 AOCI 帶來更大的打擊，你有什麼可以做的來緩解這種情況，是否縮小它 -可供出售的投資組合，在此期間結束時看起來像是 3130 億美元？還是您只需要增加收入，正如您所指出的，還有另一種增加資本的方式？

Yes. I mean, I think that, obviously, we always try to grow revenue sort of independently of anything else. I think the large point here is, yes, there are some things that can be done to mitigate this.

是的。我的意思是，我認為，顯然，我們總是試圖獨立於其他任何事情來增加收入。我認為這裡的重點是，是的，可以採取一些措施來緩解這種情況。

But the big picture is that the central case path is one that gets us to where we want to be when we need to be there in terms of CET1 and leverage. And if things don't play out as along the lines of the central case, we have tools and levers available to adjust across a range of dimensions. So.

但總體而言，中心案例路徑是讓我們在 CET1 和槓桿率方面需要到達我們想要到達的地方的路徑。如果事情沒有按照中央錶殼的方式進行，我們有工具和槓桿可用於在一系列尺寸範圍內進行調整。所以。

The next one is coming from Mike Mayo from Wells Fargo Securities.

下一位來自 Wells Fargo Securities 的 Mike Mayo。

I have a question for both Jeremy and Jamie. Jeremy, I guess the SLR 5.2% close to the minimum, you explained that. But since quarter end, AOCI probably has gotten worse. And I'm guessing your SLR might be very even close to that minimum. So I understand your central case, it's fine. Your outlook is good.

我有一個問題要問傑里米和傑米。傑里米，我猜 SLR 5.2% 接近最小值，你解釋過。但自季度末以來，AOCI 可能變得更糟。我猜你的 SLR 可能非常接近這個最小值。所以我理解你的中心情況，沒關係。你的前景很好。

But at what point do you say you stop buybacks? Or do you think you'll buy back maybe half of the $30 billion authorization? Or does JPMorgan even put on asset caps, given just the amazing asset growth over the last 3 months? So that's my question for Jeremy.

但是你說你在什麼時候停止回購？或者你認為你會回購 300 億美元授權中的一半？或者，考慮到過去 3 個月驚人的資產增長，摩根大通甚至設置了資產上限？這就是我要問傑里米的問題。

But the bigger picture is for you, Jamie, your CEO letter. The takeaway was in the eye of the beholder, like Jamie is really worried about a recession this year. Now he's not. So the first question certainly ties into the second. So Jeremy, plan for buybacks, stopping at asset cap? And then, Jamie, your view of the broader economies and that feeds into your expectations for capital growth.

但大局是給你的，傑米，你的 CEO 信。外賣是在旁觀者的眼中，就像傑米真的擔心今年的經濟衰退一樣。現在他不是了。所以第一個問題肯定與第二個問題有關。那麼傑里米，計劃回購，止步於資產上限？然後，傑米，你對更廣泛的經濟體的看法，這反映了你對資本增長的期望。

Okay, Mike. So let me take this capital one. So first, let's not talk about asset caps. That's just not a meaningful thing. I think that's a distraction, and the terminology is unhelpful.

好的，邁克。所以讓我拿這個大寫的。所以首先，我們不要談論資產上限。那隻是沒有意義的事情。我認為這是一種分心，術語是無用的。

Then in terms of the leverage ratio, just remember that the denominator of that number is so big that it actually takes like pretty big moves to move the ratio. So 5.20% is actually still pretty far away from 5%. And of course, there are relatively easy to use tools to address that as well as was alluded to earlier.

然後就槓桿率而言，請記住，該數字的分母是如此之大，以至於實際上需要相當大的動作才能改變該比率。所以 5.20% 實際上離 5% 還很遠。當然，有一些相對容易使用的工具來解決這個問題，就像之前提到的那樣。

In addition, I do think it's worth just reminding everyone of how the ERI restrictions work now relative to how they were at the beginning of the crisis. Just briefly, just to remember that based on the redefinition, if you drop into the regulatory buffer zone, you're subject to a 60% restriction, which based on our recent historical net income generation still gives us like ample, ample capacity to pay the dividend and so on.

此外，我確實認為值得提醒大家，相對於危機開始時的情況，ERI 限制現在是如何運作的。簡而言之，請記住，根據重新定義，如果您進入監管緩衝區，您將受到 60% 的限制，根據我們最近的歷史淨收入，這仍然為我們提供了充足、充足的支付能力股息等等。

So it's obviously not part of the plan, but it's just worth remembering that the cliff effects that we had in there at the beginning of the pandemic are no longer there. And then in terms of buybacks, just a reminder that the $30 billion authorization is a non time-bounded SEC requirement. It's not the old CCAR standard. So it's just a signal that we want to have that capacity and that flexibility. But it doesn't really say that much about how much we're actually planning to do in the near term.

因此，這顯然不是計劃的一部分，但值得記住的是，我們在大流行開始時所產生的懸崖效應已不復存在。然後在回購方面，只是提醒一下，300 億美元的授權是美國證券交易委員會的無時間限制的要求。這不是舊的 CCAR 標準。所以這只是一個信號，表明我們希望擁有這種能力和靈活性。但它並沒有真正說明我們在短期內實際計劃做多少。

Are you allowed to say what you're planning to do in the near term? Like just -- like if you're kind of like half the level last year, do you think you can keep that? Or does this slow down? Or you're not giving guidance?

你能說出你近期的計劃嗎？就像 - 就像如果你的水平是去年的一半，你認為你能保持這種水平嗎？或者這會減慢速度？還是你不指導？

Yes, let's talk about buybacks for a second. So in the kind of post-SCB world, we haven't been guiding a lot on the pace of buybacks mainly because, as you know, they're at the bottom of our capital stack. So we're focused on investing in the business, providing capital to support growing RWA, acquisitions when they make sense, et cetera, et cetera. And buybacks are an output.

是的，讓我們先談談回購。因此，在那種後 SCB 世界中，我們並沒有對回購的步伐進行太多指導，主要是因為，如你所知，它們處於我們資本堆棧的底部。因此，我們專注於投資業務，提供資金以支持不斷增長的 RWA，在有意義的情況下進行收購等等。回購是一種產出。

As we've discussed, in the current environment, the rate of buybacks is clearly going to be less than it was in the 2021 period as a result of the interaction of all those effects. And that's a good thing. It means that we have better uses for the capital. And if things evolve one way or the other, then the rate of buybacks will be an output, but it's one of the tools in the toolkit.

正如我們所討論的，在當前環境下，由於所有這些影響的相互作用，回購率顯然會低於 2021 年期間的水平。這是一件好事。這意味著我們可以更好地利用資本。如果事情以某種方式發展，那麼回購率將是一種輸出，但它是工具包中的工具之一。

Mike, I would just add, if you look at liquidity and capital, it's extraordinary. And we don't want to have buffers on top of buffers. So we're going to manage this pretty tightly over time. And obviously, when you have AOCI and earnings and CECL, all that, but being conscious of all of that, we can manage through that.

邁克，我想補充一下，如果你看看流動性和資本，這是非同尋常的。而且我們不希望在緩衝區之上有緩衝區。因此，隨著時間的推移，我們將非常嚴格地管理這一點。顯然，當您擁有 AOCI 和收益以及 CECL 時，所有這些，但意識到所有這些，我們可以通過這些來管理。

And we've done some acquisitions this year. And so -- and plus, we are adding -- we're planning to have more capital for the increase in G-SIFI down the road, which reduced stock buyback and -- but the amount -- I look at the amount of liquidity, the earnings, the capital, that's the stuff that really matters.

今年我們進行了一些收購。所以——另外，我們正在補充——我們計劃為未來增加 G-SIFI 提供更多資金，這減少了股票回購，而且——但數量——我看流動性的數量，收入，資本，這才是真正重要的東西。

And at the end of the day, it's driving customers. We serve customers, which is why we're here. We don't serve managing SLR. That's kind of an output of stuff we do. And so -- and then your question about -- I think it was about recession basically. Yes, do you want to repeat the question?

歸根結底，它正在推動客戶。我們為客戶服務，這就是我們在這裡的原因。我們不提供管理 SLR。這是我們所做的事情的一種輸出。所以——然後是你的問題——我認為這基本上是關於衰退的。是的，你想重複這個問題嗎？

Yes. No, I mean, if you read your CEO letter, and that's great. You're the Chief Worry Officer. You're the Chief Risk Manager. You're bringing up all the things that keep you up at night, which is great. But you can read it one way and say, "Hey, Jamie and JPMorgan thinks there's going to be a recession this year." And you can read it in other way, saying, "Hey, things are fine, but these are some tail risk."

是的。不，我的意思是，如果你讀了你的 CEO 信，那就太好了。你是首席憂慮官。你是首席風險經理。你提出了所有讓你徹夜難眠的事情，這很棒。但你可以換一種方式解讀它，“嘿，傑米和摩根大通認為今年會出現衰退。”你可以用其他方式閱讀它，說：“嘿，一切都很好，但這些都是尾部風險。”

So do you think -- and I'll repeat what Glenn said. Your view is better than mine, and I'm not going to accept anything else. You have a lot of people, a lot of resources. Do you think the U.S. is going to have a recession this year based on everything you know?

你也這麼認為——我會重複格倫所說的話。你的觀點比我的好，其他的我不會接受。你有很多人，很多資源。根據你所知道的一切，你認為美國今年會出現衰退嗎？

Yes, I don't. But I just want to question this. First of all, I can't forecast the future any more than anyone else. And the Fed forecasted and everyone forecasted, and everyone's wrong all the time, and I guess it's a mistake.

是的，我沒有。但我只想質疑這一點。首先，我比任何人都無法預測未來。美聯儲預測，每個人都預測，每個人一直都錯了，我想這是個錯誤。

We run the company to serve clients through thick and thin. That's what we do. We know there will be ups. We know there will be down. We know the weather is going to change and all that stuff like that.

我們經營公司是為了服務客戶，風雨同舟。這就是我們所做的。我們知道會有起伏。我們知道會有下降。我們知道天氣會發生變化以及所有類似的事情。

But I have pointed out in my letter is very strong underlying growth right now, which will go on. It's not stoppable. The consumer has money. They pay down credit card debt. Confidence isn't high, but the fact that they have money, they're spending their money. They have $2 trillion still in their savings and checking accounts. Business are in good shape. Home prices were up. Credit is extraordinarily good.

但我在信中指出，目前的潛在增長非常強勁，而且還會繼續。這是不可阻擋的。消費者有錢。他們償還信用卡債務。信心不高，但事實上他們有錢，他們在花錢。他們的儲蓄和支票賬戶中仍有 2 萬億美元。業務狀況良好。房價上漲了。信用特別好。

So you have this -- that's one factor. That's going to continue in the second quarter, third quarter. And I -- after that, it's hard to predict. You've got 2 other very large countervailing factors, which you guys are all completely aware. One is inflation/QE/QT. You've never seen that before.

所以你有這個 - 這是一個因素。這將在第二季度，第三季度繼續。而我——在那之後，很難預測。你們還有另外兩個非常大的抵消因素，你們都完全清楚。一是通脹/QE/QT。你以前從未見過。

I'm simply pointing out that we've -- those are storm clouds on the horizon that may disappear, they may not. That's a fact. And I'm quite conscious of that fact, and I do expect that alone will create volatility and concerns and endless printing and endless headlines and stuff like that.

我只是指出我們已經 - 那些是地平線上可能會消失的暴風雲，他們可能不會。這是事實。而且我很清楚這一事實，我確實希望僅此一項就會造成波動和擔憂以及無休止的印刷和無休止的頭條新聞之類的東西。

And the second is war in Ukraine. I pointed out in my letter that war in Ukraine. Usually wars don't necessarily affect the global economy in the short run. But there are exceptions to that. This may very well be one of them.

第二個是烏克蘭的戰爭。我在信中指出了烏克蘭的戰爭。通常，戰爭不一定會在短期內影響全球經濟。但也有例外。這很可能就是其中之一。

I don't -- I'm not looking at this on a static basis, okay? So you're looking at this war in Ukraine and sanctions stay with us. Things are unpredictable. Wars are unpredictable. Wars have unpredictable outcome. You've already seen in oil markets. The oil markets are precarious, okay?

我不——我不是在靜態的基礎上看這個，好嗎？因此，您正在關注烏克蘭的這場戰爭，制裁與我們同在。事情是不可預測的。戰爭是不可預測的。戰爭有不可預測的結果。你已經在石油市場上看到過。石油市場岌岌可危，好嗎？

So I pointed that out over and over that people don't understand that those things can change dramatically for either physical reasons, cyber reasons or just supply/demand. And so that's another huge cloud in the horizon, and I -- we're prepared for it. We understand it.

所以我一遍又一遍地指出，人們不明白這些事情會因為物理原因、網絡原因或僅僅是供需而發生巨大變化。所以那是地平線上的另一朵巨大的雲，我——我們已經做好了準備。我們理解它。

We're just -- I can't tell you the outcome of it. I hope those things all disappear and go away. We have a soft landing, and the war is resolved, okay? I just wouldn't bet on all that. I just -- and of course, being a risk manager, we're going to get through all that. We're going to serve our clients, and we're going to gain share. We're going to come to that earning tremendous returns on capital like we have in the past.

我們只是——我不能告訴你它的結果。我希望那些東西都消失並消失。我們軟著陸了，戰爭解決了，好嗎？我只是不會打賭這一切。我只是 - 當然，作為一名風險經理，我們將度過所有這些。我們將為我們的客戶服務，我們將獲得份額。我們將像過去一樣獲得巨大的資本回報。

Next one is from Matthew O'Connor from Deutsche Bank.

下一位來自德意志銀行的 Matthew O'Connor。

I was hoping you guys could comment on the -- there are some articles on the nickel exposure and how the losses could have been significant if the trades hadn't been canceled and from the actions that were taken and just as a follow up you guys are talking about kind of looking at that business and reevaluating how you think about some of the outpriced risk, and maybe you can update us on that process.

我希望你們可以評論——有一些關於鎳敞口的文章，以及如果交易沒有被取消以及所採取的行動以及作為後續行動，損失可能會如何巨大正在談論如何看待該業務並重新評估您對某些高估風險的看法，也許您可以向我們更新該流程。

We've already told you, we're helping our clients get through this. We had a little bit loss this quarter and we've managed through it. We'll do postmortems on both what we think we did wrong and what the LME could do differently later. We're not going to do it now.

我們已經告訴過您，我們正在幫助我們的客戶度過難關。本季度我們有一點損失，我們已經度過了難關。我們將對我們認為我們做錯了什麼以及 LME 以後可以採取哪些不同的做法進行事後分析。我們現在不打算這樣做。

And then I guess, I mean, more broadly speaking, given what we just saw where it was probably a several standard deviation event and kind of, as you mentioned, markets might do more of these unusual things. Like does it make you step back and look at other portfolios, other businesses and try to...

然後我想，我的意思是，更廣泛地說，鑑於我們剛剛看到的可能是幾個標準偏差事件，並且就像你提到的那樣，市場可能會做更多這些不尋常的事情。就像它會讓你退後一步，看看其他投資組合，其他業務並嘗試...

In my life, I've seen so many ten standard deviations events that would be shock. So obviously, we're aware of that all the time in everything we do.

在我的生活中，我見過太多令人震驚的十個標準差事件。很明顯，我們在所做的每一件事中都始終意識到這一點。

And I would take it one step further. I think the whole paradigm of saying it's a ten standard deviations event is naive, right? We know the returns are not normally distributed. We know that. Regulators know that. The capital framework recognizes that in a broad variety of ways, including things like stress for.

我會更進一步。我認為說這是一個十個標準差事件的整個範式是幼稚的，對吧？我們知道回報不是正態分佈的。我們知道。監管者知道這一點。資本框架以多種方式認識到這一點，包括壓力等。

So I don't think -- of course, you can't predict where and in which asset class and in which particular moment you're going to see these types of fat tail events. But the framework recognizes in a range of ways that, that's the case. And that's how we manage risk, and that's how we're...

所以我不認為——當然，你無法預測你會在哪裡、在哪個資產類別以及在哪個特定時刻看到這些類型的肥尾事件。但該框架以多種方式認識到，情況就是如此。這就是我們管理風險的方式，這就是我們...

So we do CCAR once a year, as you guys see. But we actually run 100 different various stress tests every week with extreme movements and things. And that's what we do. And we're always -- you're always going to be a little surprise somewhere, but we're pretty conscious of those risks.

所以我們每年做一次 CCAR，正如你們所看到的。但我們實際上每週都會進行 100 次不同的壓力測試，包括極端的運動和事情。這就是我們所做的。而且我們總是 - 你總是會在某個地方感到有點驚訝，但我們非常清楚這些風險。

And all events like this, we always look at -- but it doesn't have to happen to us. It can happen to someone else. We still analyze everything that maybe we were on the wrong side of something too. But at the end of the day, in all of our businesses, we are here to serve clients all the time. That means taking rational, thoughtful, disciplined risk to do that.

像這樣的所有事件，我們總是關注——但它不必發生在我們身上。它可能發生在其他人身上。我們仍然會分析一切，也許我們也站在錯誤的一邊。但歸根結底，在我們所有的業務中，我們一直在這里為客戶服務。這意味著要承擔理性、深思熟慮、有紀律的風險來做到這一點。

And then just separately, you had mentioned earlier that you weren't looking to deploy large amounts of your liquidity. And I guess the question is, you might get the rate benefit just from Fed funds going up, but is there an opportunity to accelerate that benefit just by moving some cash into shorter-term treasuries? We've also seen a big move in...

然後單獨地，您之前提到過您不希望部署大量流動性。我想問題是，你可能會從聯邦基金的上漲中獲得利率收益，但是否有機會通過將一些現金轉移到短期國債來加速這種收益？我們也看到了一個大動作...

Guys, we're just talking about interest rates going up maybe more than 3%. Convexity is going up. AOCI is going up, all these -- there are all these various reasons not to do that. We're not going to do it just to give you a little bit more NII next quarter.

伙計們，我們只是在談論利率上升可能超過 3%。凸度正在上升。 AOCI 正在上升，所有這些 - 有所有這些不同的理由不這樣做。我們不會只是為了在下個季度給你更多的 NII。

Yes. And Steve (sic) [Matthew], just to just go one level deeper there for a second, right? So you talk about deployment. Of course, as Jamie says, we're always going to take relative value opportunities in the portfolio. Mortgage spreads have widened, there's interesting stuff to do.

是的。還有史蒂夫（原文如此）[馬修]，只是為了更深一層，對吧？所以你談論部署。當然，正如傑米所說，我們總是會在投資組合中抓住相對價值的機會。抵押貸款利差擴大了，有一些有趣的事情要做。

So in that sense, yes, deployment out of cash into various sorts of spread product that looks more interesting, we do that all the time. The high-level simple question of buying duration as Jamie says, balance sheets extended a little bit. That was never -- we were never planning to do that much of that anyway. And frankly, given the timing and expected speed of the rate hikes, increasingly, it just kind of doesn't matter that much. And yes, so I think it's helpful to keep that in mind.

所以從這個意義上說，是的，將現金部署到看起來更有趣的各種傳播產品中，我們一直這樣做。正如傑米所說，購買期限的高級簡單問題，資產負債表稍微擴大了一點。那從來沒有——無論如何，我們從來沒有打算做那麼多。坦率地說，考慮到加息的時間和預期速度，越來越多地，它只是有點無關緊要。是的，所以我認為記住這一點很有幫助。

The next question is coming from Jim Mitchell from Seaport Global Securities.

下一個問題來自 Seaport Global Securities 的 Jim Mitchell。

Maybe you could just talk about how you're thinking about the trajectory of loan growth from here, where you're seeing the biggest pockets of strength? And specifically in Cards, is the significant year-over-year growth driven more by slowing paydowns? Or is that increasing demand or a combination of both?

也許你可以談談你是如何看待從這裡開始的貸款增長軌蹟的，你在哪裡看到了最大的實力？特別是在卡片領域，顯著的同比增長更多地是由支付放緩推動的嗎？還是需求增加或兩者兼而有之？

Yes, sure. So you'll remember in the fourth quarter that we talked about the outlook based on sort of high single-digit loan growth for the year. And this quarter, we've roughly seen that. Interestingly, it's a little bit more driven by Wholesale this quarter, which sort of brings us to your question of Card.

是的，當然。所以你會記得，我們在第四季度談到了基於今年高個位數貸款增長的前景。而本季度，我們已經大致看到了這一點。有趣的是，本季度批發業務對它的推動作用更大，這讓我們想到了您的卡片問題。

So overall Card loan growth is reasonably robust when you adjust for seasonality and so on. And that's really primarily driven by spend, which, as you know, is very robust.

因此，當您根據季節性等因素進行調整時，整體信用卡貸款增長相當強勁。這實際上主要是由支出驅動的，正如您所知，支出非常強勁。

The question inside of that is then what's going on with revolve. And I think our core revolve thesis of getting back to the pre-pandemic levels of revolving balances by the end of the year is still in place to a good approximation.

裡面的問題是，revolve 發生了什麼。而且我認為我們的核心主題是在今年年底前將循環餘額恢復到大流行前的水平，這仍然是一個很好的近似值。

At the margin, we probably saw the like takeoff moment delayed by 6 weeks or so because of Omicron. But some of that's reaccelerating now. We see that in some of the March numbers. So we'll see how it goes.

在邊際，我們可能看到類似的起飛時刻因為 Omicron 而推遲了 6 週左右。但其中一些現在正在重新加速。我們在 3 月份的一些數據中看到了這一點。所以我們會看看它是怎麼回事。

But also just a reminder that there's a very, very close linkage between what we see in revolve and what we see in charge-offs. And so in the moments where revolve is lagging potentially, certainly that was true throughout the pandemic period relative to what we thought. We also saw exceptionally low charge-offs.

但也只是提醒我們，我們在旋轉中看到的內容與我們在沖銷中看到的內容之間存在非常非常密切的聯繫。因此，在 revolve 可能滯後的時刻，相對於我們的想法，在整個大流行期間肯定是這樣。我們還看到了極低的沖銷。

So on a bottom line basis, the run rate performance, there's significant offset there. But the core thesis is still there. Spend is robust. We are seeing spend down some of the cash buffers in the customer segment that tends to revolve. So more or less as anticipated, I would say.

所以在底線的基礎上，運行率表現，那裡有很大的抵消。但核心論點仍然存在。支出強勁。我們看到在趨向於旋轉的客戶群中花費了一些現金緩衝。所以或多或少如預期的那樣，我會說。

Okay. And then maybe just on -- skipping over to trading. Clearly, a stronger quarter, must have finished off strongly in March. So any confirmation of that? And how do we -- if you're expecting more volatility around Fed in QT, is it -- should we be thinking that this could be a better than normalization year? How are you thinking about trading, I guess, going forward?

好的。然後也許就開始了——跳到交易。顯然，強勁的季度一定會在 3 月份強勢結束。那麼對此有任何確認嗎？我們如何——如果你預計美聯儲在 QT 中會有更多波動，是嗎——我們是否應該認為這可能是一個比正常化年更好的年份？我猜你對交易的看法如何？

Yes. I mean, you know that we're going to be reluctant to like predict the next 3 quarters of trading performance.

是的。我的意思是，你知道我們將不願意像預測未來 3 個季度的交易表現一樣。

I could try.

我可以試試。

Yes, obviously, yes. But just to your point about normalization, right? We've been saying that, of course, we expect some normalization. The question is, if you define normalization as a return to kind of like 2019-type trading run rate levels, we never expected that because there's been a bunch of organic growth in the background, some share gains.

是的，顯然，是的。但就你關於標準化的觀點而言，對吧？我們一直在說，當然，我們期望一些正常化。問題是，如果您將正常化定義為恢復到類似於 2019 年類型的交易運行率水平，我們從未預料到，因為背景中有大量有機增長，一些股票收益。

And we had said that as we emerge from the pandemic and monetary policy normalized, that was going to add volatility to the markets and that with any luck and good risk management, that would net-net help a little bit mitigate what we might otherwise expect in terms of the drop from the very elevated levels that we saw during the pandemic.

我們曾說過，隨著我們擺脫大流行和貨幣政策正常化，這將增加市場的波動性，如果運氣好，風險管理良好，這將有助於減輕我們原本預期的情況就我們在大流行期間看到的非常高的水平下降而言。

So obviously, there are some particular things that played out this quarter, but one of those was more volatile rate market, and that helps a little bit. So yes, all else equal, the much more dynamic environment right now would mute the normalization you would see otherwise. But our core case is still that the pandemic year period market's performance was -- is not repeatable.

很明顯，本季度發生了一些特別的事情，但其中之一是利率市場波動更大，這有點幫助。所以是的，在其他條件相同的情況下，現在更具動態性的環境會抑制您在其他情況下看到的規範化。但我們的核心案例仍然是，大流行年期間市場的表現是不可重複的。

And I'll just add to that. I cannot foresee any scenario at all where you're not going to have a lot of volatility in markets going forward. We've already spoken about the enormous strength of the economy, QT, inflation, war, commodity prices, there's almost no chance that you want to have volatile markets. That could be good or bad for trading, but some of -- no change won't happen. And I think people should be prepared for that.

我會補充一點。我根本無法預見未來市場不會出現很大波動的情況。我們已經談到了經濟的巨大力量、QT、通貨膨脹、戰爭、大宗商品價格，你幾乎不可能想要有波動的市場。這對交易可能是好是壞，但其中一些 - 不會發生任何變化。我認為人們應該為此做好準備。

The next one is from Ebrahim Poonawala from Bank of America Merrill Lynch.

下一位來自美銀美林的 Ebrahim Poonawala。

I guess just one more question on the macro outlook. I guess we can debate whether or not we get into a recession over the next year. But Jamie, would love to hear your thoughts around as we think about just the medium term, do you see a better CapEx cycle for the U.S. economy? We've heard a lot about reshoring, labor productivity, how companies are dealing with it.

我想只是關於宏觀前景的另一個問題。我想我們可以討論明年是否會陷入衰退。但是傑米，很想听聽你的想法，因為我們只考慮中期，你認為美國經濟的資本支出週期會更好嗎？我們聽說過很多關於回流、勞動生產率以及公司如何處理它的事情。

Just given the lens you have in terms of large corporate, middle market customers, do you see some pent-up demand for CapEx spending that's going to be a big driver of growth, maybe not for the next 6 months, but as we think about the medium term, next few years?

考慮到您對大型企業、中型市場客戶的看法，您是否看到對資本支出支出的一些被壓抑的需求將成為增長的重要推動力，可能不會在未來 6 個月內出現，但正如我們所想的那樣中期，未來幾年？

Yes, in general because as people are spending money and you need to produce more goods and all that, yes, and generally see CapEx going up. And I forgot the exact number. You're better off looking at our great accounting forecast rather than asking me. And we see in the borrowing a little bit.

是的，一般來說，因為人們在花錢，你需要生產更多的商品等等，是的，而且通常會看到資本支出上升。我忘記了確切的數字。你最好看看我們出色的會計預測而不是問我。我們在藉貸中看到了一點。

Yes, we do see pretty nice loan growth in the Commercial Bank. I mean, there's a bunch of different factors there could be some inventory effects and so on, but we'll see. But yes.

是的，我們確實看到商業銀行的貸款增長相當不錯。我的意思是，有很多不同的因素可能會產生一些庫存影響等等，但我們會拭目以待。但是，是的。

And just on that front, like have you seen any improvement in supply chains? And how big a setback was the Russia war to supply chain improvements?

就在這方面，您是否看到供應鏈有任何改善？俄羅斯戰爭對供應鏈改進造成了多大的挫折？

It's very hard to tell. There was some improvement and then there was Ukraine. And now it's all mixed again. So it's hard to tell.

這很難說。有一些改進，然後是烏克蘭。而現在這一切又混在一起了。所以很難說。

Got it. And just one follow-up around you launched the U.K. digital bank last month. Any early wins in terms of how that's playing out? Any perspective on what the markets are as we think about how that strategy plays out? I'm sure you're going to talk about that at Investor Day, but just wondering any early thoughts.

知道了。上個月，你身邊的一個後續行動推出了英國數字銀行。就其表現而言，有任何早期的勝利嗎？當我們考慮該策略如何發揮作用時，對市場有何看法？我相信你會在投資者日談論這個，但只是想知道任何早期的想法。

We'll leave that to Investor Day.

我們將把它留給投資者日。

And the next question is coming from Erika Najarian from UBS.

下一個問題來自瑞銀的 Erika Najarian。

My questions have been asked and answered. I'll see you guys at Investor Day.

我的問題已被提出並得到回答。我們投資者日見。

All right. Thanks, Erika.

好的。謝謝，埃里卡。

And there are no further questions in the queue.

隊列中沒有其他問題。

Well, thank you very much.

好的，謝謝。

Thanks very much.

非常感謝。

See you, I guess, at Investor Day.

我猜，在投資者日見。

May 23.

5月23日。

Okay. Goodbye.

好的。再見。

Thank you so much, everyone. That marks the end of your conference call for today. You may now disconnect. Thank you for joining, and you enjoy the rest of your day.

謝謝大家！謝謝。這標誌著你今天的電話會議結束。您現在可以斷開連接。感謝您的加入，您將享受剩下的一天。