Stifel Financial Corp. (SF) 2026 Q1 法說會逐字稿

Please stand by. Good day and welcome to the Stifel Financial Q1 '26 financial results conference call. Today's conference is being recorded.

請稍候。各位早安，歡迎參加 Stifel Financial 2026 會計年度第一季財務結果電話會議。今天的會議將進行錄音。

At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Joel Jeffrey, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

此刻，我想將會議交給投資人關係主管 Joel Jeffrey。請開始。

Thank you, operator. Good morning and welcome to Stifel's first-quarter 2026 earnings call. On behalf of Stifel Financial Corp., I will begin the call with the following information and disclaimers. This call is being recorded. During today's presentation, we will refer to our earnings release and financial supplement, copies of which are available at stifel.com.

謝謝，接線員。各位早安，歡迎參加 Stifel 2026 會計年度第一季財報電話會議。我將代表 Stifel Financial Corp. 以以下資訊與聲明開始本次會議。本通話將進行錄音。在今天的簡報中，我們將引用我們的新聞稿與財務補充資料，其副本可於 stifel.com 取得。

Today's presentation may include forward-looking statements that are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially. Stifel Financial Corp. does not undertake to update the forward-looking statements in this discussion. Please refer to our notices regarding forward-looking statements and non-GAAP measures that appear in the earnings release.

今天的簡報可能包含前瞻性陳述，該等陳述受風險與不確定性影響，可能導致實際結果出現重大差異。Stifel Financial Corp. 不承諾更新本討論中的前瞻性陳述。請參閱財報新聞稿中關於前瞻性陳述與非 GAAP 衡量指標的相關聲明。

I will now turn the call over to our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Ron Kruszewski.

現在我將把電話會議交給我們的董事長兼執行長 Ron Kruszewski。

Thanks, Joel. Good morning, and thanks to everyone for joining us. In the first quarter, we delivered very strong performance. Net revenues of $1.48 billion were up 18% from a year ago. That includes a non-recurring gain from the sale of Stifel Independent Advisors, which closed in February, which was partially offset by interest on a legal judgment. We've excluded both from our core results. Excluding the SIA gain, revenue grew 15%.

謝謝，Joel。各位早安，也感謝大家加入我們。第一季我們交出非常強勁的表現。淨營收 14.8 億美元，較去年同期成長 18%。其中包含 2 月完成交割之 Stifel Independent Advisors 出售案帶來的一次性收益，但部分被一項法律判決的利息所抵銷。我們已將兩者自核心結果中排除。排除 SIA 出售收益後，營收成長 15%。

Either way, it was a record first quarter. And regardless, it's a growth rate comparable to the best firms on the street. Earnings per share were $1.48 on a GAAP basis and $1.45 on a non-GAAP basis compared to $0.33 last year. That's a significant improvement. So I want to be transparent.

不論如何，這都是創紀錄的第一季。而且無論怎麼看，這樣的成長率都可與華爾街表現最好的同業相提並論。每股盈餘（EPS）按 GAAP 為 1.48 美元、按非 GAAP 為 1.45 美元，去年為 0.33 美元。這是顯著的改善。因此我想保持透明。

Last year's results were impacted by $180 million legal accrual, which was unusual to say the least. Adjusting for that, EPS was up 32% on a comparable basis. Our annualized return on tangible equity was nearly 25%. We expect 2026 to be a good year, and the first quarter reflects that. Yet the environment has become more uncertain.

去年的結果受到 1.8 億美元法律準備金影響，這至少可以說是非常不尋常。若就此調整，在可比基礎上 EPS 成長 32%。我們的年化有形股東權益報酬率接近 25%。我們預期 2026 年會是好的一年，而第一季反映了這一點。然而，環境已變得更不確定。

Against a backdrop of escalating geopolitical risk, energy prices have risen, credit spreads have widened and interest rate uncertainty has increased. The wildcard remains the conflict in Iran and its potential impact on energy prices, inflation and ultimately growth. But I'd like to note that unlike some of our larger peers, Stifel's business model isn't built around trading volatility. We have a trading business, but it's client-driven and relationship-oriented, not structured to capitalize on market dislocations. Delivering these results in a volatile quarter tells you something important about the durability and diversification of what we've built.

在地緣政治風險升高的背景下，能源價格上升、信用利差擴大，利率不確定性也增加。變數仍是伊朗衝突及其對能源價格、通膨，最終對成長的潛在影響。但我想指出，與一些更大型的同業不同，Stifel 的商業模式並非建立在交易波動之上。我們確實有交易業務，但它是以客戶需求驅動、以關係為導向，並非為了在市場失衡時獲利而設計。在波動的一季仍能交出這樣的成果，說明我們所打造的業務具備重要的韌性與多元化。

Our growth was broad-based. Global Wealth Management delivered record first quarter net revenue, driven by record asset management revenues and growing adviser productivity. We also generated record first quarter investment banking revenue, producing a record first quarter for our institutional business.

我們的成長是全面性的。全球財富管理（Global Wealth Management）第一季淨營收創新高，主要由創紀錄的資產管理收入與顧問生產力提升所帶動。我們也創下第一季投資銀行收入新高，帶動機構業務第一季同創新高。

Our firm-wide pretax margin was more than 22%, reflecting continued robust wealth management margins, coupled with an institutional pretax margin of nearly 20%. It is noteworthy that this metric improved nearly 1,300 basis points from last year, benefiting from both revenue growth and our international equities restructuring. Jim will provide more detail on that. Look, at the risk I cite remain within a range of market expectations, we are confident in a strong 2026. That confidence is grounded in something more than 1 quarter.

全公司稅前利潤率超過 22%，反映財富管理利潤率持續強勁，並且機構業務稅前利潤率接近 20%。值得注意的是，該指標較去年提升近 1,300 個基點，受惠於營收成長以及我們對國際股票業務的重整。Jim 會就此提供更多細節。你看，只要我提到的風險仍落在市場預期範圍內，我們對 2026 年的強勁表現充滿信心。這份信心並非只建立在單一季度之上。

Let me put these results in the longer context. Stifel is a company that both grows and understands the concept of return on invested capital. We've scaled revenue from about $100 million in 1996 to roughly $6 billion today, and we're targeting $10 billion in revenue and $1 trillion in client assets. We grow and we grow the right way. That long-term philosophy also informs how I think about some of the questions dominating every earnings call so far this season.

讓我把這些結果放在更長期的脈絡中。Stifel 是一家既能成長、也理解投入資本報酬（ROIC）概念的公司。我們已將營收從 1996 年約 1 億美元擴大到如今約 60 億美元，並以 100 億美元營收與 1 兆美元客戶資產為目標。我們成長，而且以正確的方式成長。這樣的長期哲學，也影響我如何看待本季迄今每場法說會都在討論的一些問題。

For each one, I want to tell you what Stifel is doing and share my observations about what I'm seeing in the market around us. The first is AI. Across Stifel, we're seeing real benefit from our AI -- the technology enables our advisers, our investment bankers, our commercial lenders and support teams to work faster and smarter.

針對每一項，我想告訴各位 Stifel 正在做什麼，並分享我對周遭市場動態的觀察。第一個是 AI。在 Stifel 各部門，我們正看到 AI 帶來的實質效益——這項技術讓我們的理財顧問、投資銀行家、商業放款團隊與支援團隊能更快、更聰明地工作。

In every case, we're working to enhance client relationships with AI, keeping our professionals at the center of the value proposition. The opportunity here is significant. We are in the early process of linking our data to these new tools, and there is a lot of work ahead, but the early results give me confidence that we're on the right path. But I'd be less than candid if I didn't raise a concern about frontier models like Mythos that are becoming an entirely new category of technology. As recently as a few weeks ago, I'm not sure any of us really fully understood what Mythos was, possibly even those that created it.

在每一種情況下，我們都致力於運用 AI 強化客戶關係，同時讓我們的專業人員仍是價值主張的核心。這裡的機會相當可觀。我們正處於將自身資料與這些新工具串接的早期階段，後續仍有大量工作要做，但初步成果讓我有信心我們走在正確的道路上。不過，如果我不提出一項擔憂，就不夠坦率：像 Mythos 這類前沿模型正成為一個全新的科技類別。就在幾週前，我不確定我們之中是否有人真正完全理解 Mythos 是什麼，甚至可能包括創造它的人。

And the next version, as I understand it, is already in development. Models this powerful increase capability on both sides of the table for those defending and for those who would do harm. And if you ask me what our industry needs to get right before anything else, the answer is cyber, not just for Wall Street. This requires a national response. I have consistently said that this is an issue of national security. The second is credit.

而據我了解，下一個版本已在開發中。如此強大的模型，會讓桌子兩端的能力同時提升——無論是防禦者，或是意圖作惡者。如果你問我，在其他事情之前我們這個產業最需要做對的是什麼，答案是資安（cyber），而且不只是華爾街的資安。這需要國家層級的回應。我一再強調，這是國家安全議題。第二個是信用。

At Stifel, our lending philosophy has never been built around chasing yield. We treat lending as a relationship-oriented business, not a volume-driven growth engine. The headlines this season involved specific credit situations. First brands, Tricolor, Medallia, where aggressive structures, weak collateral monitoring and in some cases, fraud drove the losses. Stifel had essentially 0 exposure to any of them.

在 Stifel，我們的放款理念從來不是建立在追逐收益率之上。我們把放款視為以關係為導向的業務，而不是以規模驅動的成長引擎。本季媒體焦點集中在特定的信用事件。First Brands、Tricolor、Medallia 等案例中，激進的交易結構、薄弱的擔保品監控，以及在某些情況下的詐欺，導致了損失。Stifel 對其中任何一案基本上是零曝險。

As an aside, the more recent concern has been about liquidity in private credit vehicles. Some funds are limiting withdrawals, and we're seeing secondary market participants offering liquidity at significant discounts to NAV. It reminds me of the scene and it's a Wonderful Life where Potter is trying to buy bailey billing and loan shares at $0.50 on the dollar during a run in the bank. The underlying assets haven't changed. But when everyone rushes for the exit at once, the gates come down.

順帶一提，近期更令人擔憂的是私募信貸載具的流動性。有些基金正在限制贖回，而我們也看到次級市場參與者以相對於淨值（NAV）大幅折價的價格提供流動性。這讓我想起《風雲人物》（It's a Wonderful Life）中的一幕：銀行挤兑時，Potter 試圖以每 1 美元只出 0.50 美元的價格買下 Bailey Building and Loan 的股份。底層資產並沒有改變。但當所有人同時衝向出口時，閘門就會落下。

That's a structural issue. The third consistent question surround software loans. I've read the predictions that every software loan is essentially worthless given AI disruption.

那是一個結構性問題。第三個一再被問到的問題，圍繞在軟體貸款。我讀到一些預測，認為在 AI 顛覆之下，每一筆軟體貸款基本上都一文不值。

To put some numbers to Stifel, our software loan exposure is approximately $500 million on a $43 billion balance sheet, not a material number. But the more important point is that we have reviewed our software exposure carefully. And while there are always normal pockets of stress, we don't see the broad credit issues that the headlines suggest. The fourth is legislation and market structure. Two questions are dominating this debate right now, stablecoin yield and tokenized equities.

為了用一些數字來說明 Stifel，我們的軟體貸款曝險約為 5 億美元，在 430 億美元的資產負債表上並非重大數字。但更重要的一點是，我們已仔細審視我們的軟體曝險。而且，雖然總會有一些正常的壓力區塊，我們並未看到新聞標題所暗示的廣泛信用問題。第四個議題是立法與市場結構。目前主導這場辯論的兩個問題是：穩定幣收益與代幣化股票。

Let me tell you where Stifel stands on both. On stablecoins, we will offer them. But in my opinion, if a stablecoin pays yield, that's a deposit, subject to capital requirements, AML, BSA and the full framework of bank regulation. or if the yield comes from investing in the underlying fund, then it's a money market fund. Follow those rules.

我來告訴各位 Stifel 在這兩者上的立場。就穩定幣而言，我們會提供。但依我看，如果穩定幣支付收益，那就是存款，需受資本要求、AML、BSA 以及完整的銀行監管框架約束。或者，如果收益來自投資於底層基金，那它就是貨幣市場基金。就遵循那些規則。

Legislation should not create a third option that avoids both. On tokenized equities, we will build the capability to offer, settle and trade them. But in my opinion, the regulatory framework should follow the underlying asset. A tokenized Apple share is still Apple stock. Every rule that applies to that stock, disclosure, best execution, settlement finality, investor recourse applies to the token. The technology changes the delivery.

立法不應創造一個同時規避兩者的第三種選項。至於代幣化股票，我們將建立提供、結算與交易它們的能力。但依我看，監管框架應跟隨底層資產。一股代幣化的蘋果股票仍然是蘋果股票。所有適用於該股票的規則——資訊揭露、最佳執行、結算終局性、投資人救濟——同樣適用於該代幣。技術改變的是交付方式。

It doesn't change the obligation. And for those who say this is about protecting the incumbents, if that was true, we wouldn't be building the capability at all, but we are building this capability. The principle is simple. A deposit is a deposit, a security is a security, custody is custody. Nearly a century of investor protection wasn't built to apply only to some participants.

它不會改變義務。而對於那些說這是在保護既有業者的人，如果真是如此，我們根本不會去建立這項能力，但我們正在建立這項能力。原則很簡單。存款就是存款，證券就是證券，託管就是託管。近一個世紀的投資人保護並不是為了只適用於部分參與者而建立的。

The technology doesn't change that. I've discussed AI and software disruption, credit markets and legislation and market structure. In each case, I wanted you to understand both where Stifel stands and my observation about what's happening around us. Over the last 30 years, we have shown a consistent ability to adjust to economic and technology change. Global Wealth Management is growing.

技術不會改變這一點。我已討論了 AI 與軟體顛覆、信用市場，以及立法與市場結構。在每一個議題上，我都希望各位了解 Stifel 的立場，以及我對我們周遭正在發生之事的觀察。過去 30 年來，我們展現了持續調整以因應經濟與科技變化的能力。全球財富管理正在成長。

Our institutional pipelines are strong and our investments in the innovation economy through venture lending and deposit generation are paying dividends. Bottom line, what I see is a firm that is very well positioned. So Jim, please take us through the numbers.

我們的機構業務案源管線強勁，而我們透過創新經濟（包含創投放貸與存款導入）所做的投資正在帶來回報。總而言之，我所看到的是一家定位非常良好的公司。所以 Jim，請帶我們看一下數字。

Thanks, Ron, and good morning, everyone. Before I jump into the financial results, I'll remind everyone that the EPS numbers are reported on a split-adjusted basis following our 3-for-2 stock split that was effective in late February of this year.

謝謝你，Ron，各位早安。在我開始說明財務結果之前，先提醒大家，我們的 EPS 數字是在今年 2 月下旬生效的 3 換 2 股票分割後，以分割調整後基礎呈報。

Turning to the results, total non-GAAP revenues of $1.44 billion was right in line with consensus estimates. Investment banking was the primary upside driver, exceeding expectations by $8 million or 2% as a number of transactions closed late in the quarter.

接著看結果，非 GAAP 總營收 14.4 億美元，與市場共識預估一致。投資銀行業務是主要的超預期驅動因素，由於多筆交易在季度末完成，較預期高出 800 萬美元或 2%。

Advisory revenue was the primary driver of the beat. Transactional revenue came in 1% below expectations, but increased 7% from the prior year. I'll cover the components in more detail when we get to the Institutional segment. Asset Management revenue was modestly above consensus and increased 12% from the prior year and was driven by market appreciation and net new asset growth.

顧問收入是超預期的主要驅動因素。交易性收入較預期低 1%，但較去年同期成長 7%。等我們談到機構業務部門時，我會更詳細說明各項組成。資產管理收入略高於共識，較去年同期成長 12%，主要受市場上漲與淨新增資產成長帶動。

Net interest income came in at the lower end of our guidance and $3 million below consensus. I'll cover the details and the second quarter guidance when we get to the Global Wealth Management section, but to highlight the miss to consensus expectations was driven by lower corporate or non-bank net interest income. Expenses were well controlled and benefited from the strategic actions Ron referenced earlier. Both our comp ratio and non-comp expenses came in below consensus. The effective tax rate was roughly 23%, slightly below both guidance and consensus due to improved profitability from our non-US operations.

淨利息收入落在我們指引區間的低端，且較共識低 300 萬美元。等到全球財富管理部分我會說明細節與第二季指引；先強調一下，未達共識主要是因為企業端或非銀行的淨利息收入較低所致。費用控管良好，並受益於 Ron 先前提到的策略性措施。我們的薪酬比率與非薪酬費用均低於共識。有效稅率約 23%，因非美國業務獲利能力改善，略低於指引與共識。

Turning to slide 4, Global Wealth Management generated $932 million in net revenue, the strongest first quarter in our history and essentially in line with last quarter's record. Results were driven by record asset management revenue and growth in net interest income. These results are particularly strong given the sale of SIA reduced our transactional and asset management run rate for two months during the quarter.

接著看第 4 張投影片，全球財富管理創造 9.32 億美元淨營收，為我們史上最強的第一季，且基本上與上季的歷史新高相當。結果主要由創紀錄的資產管理收入與淨利息收入成長所帶動。考量到出售 SIA 使我們在本季有兩個月的交易性與資產管理營收運行水準（run rate）下降，這些結果尤其強勁。

We ended the quarter with total client assets of $539 billion and fee-based assets of $220 billion. Excluding the SIA impact, total client assets and fee-based assets were essentially flat sequentially despite the equity market decline as net new asset growth was in the low single digits and was offset by market depreciation. Our recruiting pipeline remains robust, though activity is episodic and dependent on changing competitive and market dynamics.

本季末，我們的客戶資產總額為 5,390 億美元，收費型資產為 2,200 億美元。排除 SIA 影響後，儘管股市下跌，由於淨新增資產成長為低個位數並被市場下跌所抵銷，客戶資產總額與收費型資產較前一季基本持平。我們的招募案源管線仍然強勁，但活動具有間歇性，並取決於競爭與市場動態的變化。

Over the last 12 months, we've recruited trailing 12-month production totaling approximately $80 million, which does not include the impact that recruiting has on net interest income. Our client-driven balance sheet continues to enhance both earnings consistency and client engagement.

過去 12 個月，我們招募的過去 12 個月（trailing 12-month）產能合計約 8,000 萬美元，這還不包含招募對淨利息收入的影響。我們以客戶為驅動的資產負債表持續提升獲利的一致性與客戶黏著度。

As I mentioned, net interest income came in at the lower end of our guidance due to slower loan growth as market volatility impacted fund banking late in the quarter, more than offsetting growth in residential mortgages, securities-based lending and C&I loans. Non-bank interest income, particularly within corporate interest and securities lending, was approximately $3 million lower than originally forecast.

如我所提，淨利息收入落在指引低端，原因是市場波動在季度末影響基金銀行業務，導致放款成長較慢，且其影響超過住宅房貸、以證券為擔保的放款以及商業與工業（C&I）貸款的成長。非銀行利息收入，特別是企業利息與證券借貸部分，約比原先預估低 300 萬美元。

For the second quarter, we expect net interest income in the range of $280 million to $290 Client cash balances increased meaningfully during the quarter. Sweep balances increased by more than $670 million, while non-wealth client funding increased by nearly $1.2 billion, reflecting strong momentum from our venture group. Third-party money fund balances increased by nearly $200 million. We have significant funding to grow our loan book. While loan growth in the first quarter was slower than originally forecast, we've already seen fund banking activity pick up in April, and we are maintaining our full year guide of up to $4 billion in asset growth.

對第二季而言，我們預期淨利息收入介於 2.80 億至 2.90 億美元。客戶現金餘額在本季顯著增加。歸集（sweep）餘額增加超過 6.7 億美元，而非財富管理客戶資金增加近 12 億美元，反映我們創投團隊的強勁動能。第三方貨幣市場基金餘額增加近 2 億美元。我們有充足資金可用於擴大放款規模。雖然第一季放款成長較原先預估慢，但我們已在 4 月看到基金銀行業務活動回升，並維持全年指引：資產成長最高可達 40 億美元。

Turning to slide 5, our Institutional Group posted its strongest first quarter in our history. Revenue was $495 million, up 29% year over year, driven by record first quarter investment banking. Investment banking revenue totaled $341 million, up 44% year-over-year, coming in slightly above our recent guidance due to a number of transactions closing late in the quarter with a particularly meaningful contribution from our new partners at Bryan Garnier. Advisory revenues increased 59% to $218 million with continued strength in financials, industrials, consumers and health care.

接著看第 5 張投影片，我們的機構業務集團繳出史上最強第一季。營收為 4.95 億美元，年增 29%，主要由創紀錄的第一季投資銀行業務帶動。投資銀行收入合計 3.41 億美元，年增 44%，由於多筆交易在季度末完成，且我們在 Bryan Garnier 的新合作夥伴帶來特別顯著的貢獻，因此略高於我們近期指引。顧問收入成長 59% 至 2.18 億美元，金融、工業、消費與醫療保健持續強勁。

Equity capital raising was $67 million, our second strongest first quarter result with increased issuer engagement led by health care, industrials and energy. Fixed income underwriting of $50 million was up 9% year over year, driven by increased public finance activity and higher corporate issuance. We remain the number-one negotiated issue manager in public finance by deal count with nearly 15% market share and are also seeing increased success in larger par value transactions. Investment banking and advisory pipelines remain very strong. That said, the pace of realization will depend on the geopolitical and economic factors that Ron mentioned earlier, including energy prices, credit spreads and interest rate uncertainty.

股權資本募集為 6,700 萬美元，為我們第二強的第一季表現；在醫療保健、工業與能源帶動下，發行人互動增加。固定收益承銷 5,000 萬美元，年增 9%，主要受公共融資活動增加與企業發行量上升所帶動。以交易件數計算，我們仍是公共融資中協議承銷（negotiated）發行的第一大主辦承銷商，市占率接近 15%，同時也在面額更大的交易上看到更多成功。投資銀行與顧問業務案源管線仍然非常強勁。不過，實現的節奏將取決於 Ron 先前提到的地緣政治與經濟因素，包括能源價格、信用利差與利率不確定性。

We continue to anticipate a strong 2026. Transactional revenue increased 4% year-over-year, driven by a 12% increase in fixed income revenue, reflecting increased client activity from market volatility. Equity transactional revenue was down 7%, entirely reflecting the European restructuring. Excluding that impact of a $9 million year-over-year decline due to those restructuring efforts, our core equity transactional business grew by 10%. This was also the primary driver of the nearly 1,300 basis point improvement in our institutional pretax margins year over year.

我們仍然預期 2026 年將表現強勁。交易收入年增 4%，主要由固定收益收入年增 12% 所帶動，反映市場波動提高了客戶活動。股票交易收入下滑 7%，完全反映歐洲重組的影響。若排除因重組措施導致年減 900 萬美元的影響，我們核心股票交易業務成長 10%。這也是我們機構業務稅前利潤率年對年改善近 1,300 個基點的主要驅動因素。

While we made significant progress in our non-US operations, the first quarter benefited from some larger advisory fees and results will not be linear over the remainder of the year. Moving on to expenses. Our comp ratio of 57.5% was at the high end of our full year guidance and down from 58% a year ago. We are certainly conservative in our comp accruals early in the year, and we'll continue to look for leverage as the year progresses.

儘管我們在美國以外的營運取得顯著進展，但第一季受惠於一些較大的顧問費收入，因此今年剩餘期間的結果不會呈線性走勢。接著談費用。我們的薪酬比率為 57.5%，位於全年指引的高端，且較一年前的 58% 下降。我們在年初對薪酬提列一向較為保守，並將隨著年度推進持續尋求槓桿效益。

Non-compensation expenses totaled $293 million, up 8% year over year after excluding the legal accrual from the first quarter of 2025. Our operating non-comp ratio was 19% and was at the midpoint of our full-year guidance. The declines in our comp and non-comp ratios benefited from the strategic actions referenced earlier, and we remain confident in our full-year guidance.

非薪酬費用合計 2.93 億美元；若排除 2025 年第一季的法律提列，年增 8%。我們的營運非薪酬比率為 19%，位於全年指引的中點。薪酬與非薪酬比率的下降受惠於先前提及的策略性行動，我們對全年指引仍具信心。

Turning to slide 7, our capital position remains strong and provides meaningful strategic flexibility. The Tier 1 leverage ratio increased to 11.4% and the Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio rose to 18.7%. Based on a 10% Tier 1 leverage target, we ended the quarter with nearly $560 million of excess capital.

轉到第 7 張投影片，我們的資本部位仍然強勁，並提供實質的策略彈性。第一類資本槓桿比率上升至 11.4%，第一類風險基礎資本比率升至 18.7%。以第一類資本槓桿目標 10% 計算，本季末我們擁有接近 5.6 億美元的超額資本。

I'd also highlight that we have thoroughly reviewed the new proposed capital rules. Based on our review, Stifel would obtain some relief across risk-based capital requirements, but these rules would have no material impact on our Tier 1 leverage capital. Finally, we repurchased 2.8 million shares during the quarter and have 10.2 million shares remaining under the current authorization. Assuming no additional repurchases and a stable stock price, our fully diluted share count for the second quarter is expected to be approximately 163.1 million shares. And with that, Ron, back to you.

我也要強調，我們已徹底檢視新提出的資本規則。根據我們的檢視，Stifel 在風險基礎資本要求方面將獲得一些緩解，但這些規則對我們的第一類資本槓桿資本不會造成重大影響。最後，我們在本季回購 280 萬股，目前授權下仍剩餘 1,020 萬股可回購。假設不再進一步回購且股價維持穩定，我們預期第二季完全稀釋後股數約為 1.631 億股。那麼，Ron，交還給你。

Thanks, Jim. I want to close by saying that I'm generally excited about where Stifel is headed. We have a strong business, an experienced team and a model that has proven itself in good times and in challenging ones. The environment is uncertain. I said that at the outset, and I mean it, but uncertainty has always been the context in which Stifel has grown. Look, Global Wealth Management is growing. Our institutional pipelines are strong, and I look forward to reporting our future progress.

謝謝，Jim。我想在結尾說，我整體而言對 Stifel 的發展方向感到振奮。我們擁有強健的業務、經驗豐富的團隊，以及一個在景氣好與具挑戰的時期都已證明有效的模式。環境仍不確定。我在一開始就說過，而且我是認真的；但不確定性一直是 Stifel 成長的背景。你看，全球財富管理正在成長。我們的機構業務案源管線很強，我也期待未來向各位報告我們的進展。

So with that, operator, please open the lines for questions.

那麼，接線員，請開放電話線供提問。

(Operator Instructions) Devin Ryan, Citizens Bank.

(接線員指示) Devin Ryan，Citizens Bank。

Question on AI. Ron, I appreciate the context you gave in the script. But a couple of questions we're getting. Obviously, as the technology gets stronger and stronger and potentially agents are automating more and even transacting, do fewer people seek out financial advisers, or does that impact pricing that advisers charge?

關於 AI 的問題。Ron，我很感謝你在講稿中提供的背景。但我們收到幾個問題。顯然，隨著技術越來越強，且可能由代理（agents）自動化更多流程甚至進行交易，是否會有更少的人尋求理財顧問？或者這是否會影響顧問收取的定價？

And then the more pointed question that we're getting is just around kind of tools that automate kind of customer cash sweep. And just does that drive balances even lower? And so that's a revenue stream that firms have to think about. Love your thoughts on both of those.

另外，我們收到更直接的問題是，關於一些可自動化客戶現金歸集（cash sweep）的工具。這是否會讓餘額進一步降低？因此這是一條公司必須考量的收入來源。想聽聽你對這兩點的看法。

Well, look, the technology is powerful to your first question. And it just really helps adviser productivity. I believe, as I've said in many of things I've talked about, that today, at least, the models are mathematically driven and they're great at summarizing, organizing, putting -- helping you solve math. I said it's like chess. There's a finite board, and it's very good at that.

嗯，先談第一個問題，技術確實很強大。而且它確實能提升顧問的生產力。我相信，正如我在許多談話中所說，至少在今天，這些模型是以數學驅動，擅長摘要、整理、以及協助你解決數學問題。我說過，這就像下棋。棋盤是有限的，而它在這方面非常擅長。

When you move to judgment, which is what our advisers do, is just really isn't that good. And I'm not really comfortable thinking that we're going to serve our clients with some consensus building mathematical AI, to be honest with you. And we can debate whether or not human judgment will matter. But investing in markets are not a finite game. It's constantly changing.

但當你進入判斷（judgment）層面——也就是我們顧問所做的事——它其實就沒那麼好。坦白說，我並不太放心認為我們會用某種以共識建構的數學式 AI 來服務客戶。我們可以辯論人類判斷是否重要。但市場投資不是一個有限的遊戲。它是不斷變動的。

Every second it changes, the participants change. They're their outcomes change their risk tolerances change. And so that's an ever-moving target. So to answer your question, what will happen, I believe, at least on the adviser side, is that this will make our advisers more productive. It will unearth potentially and it will more opportunities, more ideas, more things on tax savings idea, more on state, more things that will help our advisers do what they do, which is generally be the financial adviser to not only individuals but to families.

每一秒都在變，參與者在變。他們的結果在變、風險承受度在變。因此那是一個不斷移動的目標。所以回答你的問題，我認為至少在顧問端，這會讓我們的顧問更有效率。它可能會挖掘出更多機會、更多想法、更多節稅點子、更多關於州稅的內容，以及更多能幫助我們顧問做他們所做之事的工具——也就是作為財務顧問，不僅服務個人，也服務家庭。

So I see this as a tailwind to advice, not a headwind. And it's a more sophisticated version. We've seen it in the past with robo-advisers and a number of things. This technology will be better, but again, I'm going to say it's a tailwind to the advice business. As it relates to agentic-type models and the cash optimization, look, we've been through that, Devin.

所以我把這視為對顧問建議業務的順風，而不是逆風。而且它會是一個更精密的版本。過去我們在機器人理財顧問（robo-advisers）以及許多事情上都見過類似情況。這項技術會更好，但我仍要說，這是對建議業務的順風。至於代理型（agentic）模型與現金最佳化，Devin，你看，我們也經歷過那種情況。

I mean we have about -- I'm going to say this, I think when I look at it overall, we have about $60 billion of our AUM that I would say is allocated to short-term cash between sweep deposits, smart rate, money market funds, short-term treasuries, is about $60 billion, which is frankly, about consistent, a little 11%, 12% of our AUM toward that portion. And of that, when you get right down to it after you take out adviser cash, we have about $7 billion that is, if you would be unsorted. I love that industry term. And look, it's transactional cash. It's -- I look at my own accounts.

我的意思是，我們大約——我這樣說吧，我認為整體來看，我們約有 600 億美元的資產管理規模（AUM）配置在短期現金上，包括歸集存款（sweep deposits）、smart rate、貨幣市場基金、短期國庫券，合計約 600 億美元；坦白說，這大致一致，約占我們 AUM 的 11%、12%。而其中，當你真正拆開來看、扣除顧問現金之後，我們大約有 70 億美元是——如果你要說——未分類（unsorted）的。我很喜歡這個產業用語。而且你看，那是交易性現金。我也看看我自己的帳戶。

I have transactional cash because I have cash and I have needs and I'm paying bills or I'm doing things or I'm getting a dividend, I'm reinvesting it. So will some technology come that will help optimize that? I think so. But at what cost, it's not free and what kind of movement and what kind of transactional things are going to happen. Listen, I think it will happen, but do I lose sleep over that?

我有交易性現金，因為我有現金與需求，我要付帳單、或做一些事情、或收到股利再投入。所以是否會出現一些技術來協助最佳化？我想會的。但代價是什麼？它不是免費的；而且會有什麼樣的資金移動、會發生什麼樣的交易性行為？聽著，我認為它會發生，但我會因此睡不著嗎？

No, okay? This is a business model question. And I'm hearing a lot of things, well, you just replace it with fees and things like that. And I think, well, look, if we could do that, we do it anyway. We're not going to do it just because of this. So not overly concerned about the second, very optimistic about the first part of your question.

不會，好嗎？這是商業模式的問題。我聽到很多說法，例如「那就用費用來取代」之類的。我會想，嗯，你看，如果我們能那樣做，我們本來就會做。我們不會只是因為這件事才去做。所以對第二點我不太擔心；對你問題的第一部分我非常樂觀。

Maybe add a little bit of detail there to support what Ron was saying is of the $60 billion as of the end of the first quarter, $12 billion was in sweep. So roughly 1/3 of that is in advisory cash accounts. And so that's not subject to the same type of sorting dynamics that we're talking about here. So that's how you get to that $7 billion or $8 billion that's remaining. And I'd just say, as Ron reiterated, we've been out in front of this topic, minimizing our exposure to this.

也許可以再補充一點細節來支持 Ron 所說的：截至第一季末的 600 億美元中，有 120 億美元是在 sweep（自動歸集）裡。所以大約三分之一是在顧問現金帳戶中。因此，這部分不會受到我們在這裡討論的同類型資金重新配置（sorting）動態影響。所以你才會得到剩下約 70 億或 80 億美元的數字。另外我想說，正如 Ron 重申的，我們一直走在這個議題前面，盡量降低我們對此的曝險。

We've adjusted our balance sheet, both on the asset side and the liability side to give clients the yield-seeking products they want on the liability side and having a flexible balance sheet on the asset side to earn an acceptable return.

我們已經調整了資產負債表，在資產端與負債端兩邊都做了調整：在負債端提供客戶想要的追求收益產品，同時在資產端維持彈性的資產負債表，以賺取可接受的報酬。

So do we have some exposure here? -- everyone has some exposure, but you're never going to see, as Ron said, transactional cash go to zero . So I think on a relative basis, this general topic is less impactful to Stifel than to a lot of other players. If you think back 10 years ago, we funded our bank balance sheet 100% with sweep accounts. Today, that's 12 of a much bigger number. So we've diversified and have already seen the sorting occur to a material extent.

所以我們在這裡有一些曝險嗎？——每個人都有一些曝險，但你永遠不會看到，如 Ron 所說，交易性現金降到零。因此我認為相對而言，這個一般性議題對 Stifel 的影響小於許多其他同業。如果回想 10 年前，我們的銀行資產負債表 100% 由 sweep 帳戶提供資金。今天，這個數字是 12（十億），而且是在一個更大的總量之中。所以我們已經多元化，並且也已經看到資金重新配置在相當程度上發生了。

Yes. And not -- and I answered the question, I tell you it's not that big of an issue. I'm giving a lot of oxygen to it. But I do think about these things. And I think for Stifel, really is not a big issue.

是的。而且不是——我已經回答了這個問題，我告訴你這不是那麼大的問題。我卻給了它很多篇幅。但我確實會思考這些事情。而我認為對 Stifel 來說，真的不是什麼大問題。

I mean look at the numbers. But you can take it to the broader financial system and zero-based interest in many banks and stuff, and you wonder what will happen there. And my viewpoint is that the market will adjust. If rates go up, so our loan banks earn their spread. and return on capital. So enough said, that's a lot of oxygen to something that I'm not thinking that much about.

我的意思是看看這些數字。但你也可以把它放到更廣泛的金融體系來看，很多銀行的零利率（或接近零的利率）以及諸如此類的情況，你會想那裡會發生什麼。而我的觀點是市場會自行調整。如果利率上升，那麼我們的放款銀行就能賺取利差與資本報酬。就說到這裡吧，我對一件我其實沒有那麼在意的事給了太多篇幅。

I appreciate it to both of you. And it's a question that we're, I think, all getting quite a bit. So just addressing it. I appreciate it. I'll ask a quick follow-up just on investment banking.

我很感謝你們兩位。而且我想這也是我們大家最近被問得很多的一個問題。所以就把它說清楚。謝謝。我再快速追問一個關於投資銀行的問題。

Obviously, a very good start to the year. It sounds like backlogs are at a pretty healthy level as well. When you drill into that, can you just talk about the depository side, like just the expectations for more activity there and how that's kind of feeding into, I think, maybe the announced backlog or even preannounced backlog? And then with sponsors, are middle market sponsors reengaged right now, or do we need to see them ramp up and that as the year progresses?

顯然今年開局非常好。聽起來待辦案量（backlog）也處在相當健康的水準。當你深入看這些內容時，能否談談存款機構（depository）這一端，例如對那邊活動增加的預期，以及這如何反映到我想可能是已公告的 backlog，甚至是尚未公告但已在進行中的 backlog？另外在贊助方（sponsors）方面，中型市場的贊助方現在是否已重新投入，還是需要等到今年進行到後段他們才會加速？

Yes. Look, on the depository side, I was talking with Tom Michelle a little bit about this. And what I would say is that -- in fact, it crossed M&A, not just on the depository side, but specifically on the depository side, there's a lot of uncertainty. And this uncertainty is impacting buyers. You talk -- reading the press saying about $150 oil and interest rates may be rising and what happens to credit spreads, et cetera, et cetera.

是的。你看，在存款機構這一端，我剛才也和 Tom Michelle 稍微聊了一下。我想說的是——其實這也影響到併購（M&A），不只是存款機構端，但特別是在存款機構端，不確定性很高。而這種不確定性正在影響買方。你看——讀新聞會看到說油價可能到 150 美元、利率可能上升、信用利差會怎麼走，等等等等。

And I think that, that is a pause. There's some market concerns about have the deals been done with enough of a premium. So there's a little bit of combine all this, and I think making people think about it. But the overriding question as depositories is that this administration and just compared to the last administration is fostering and encouraging bank M&A, and that's not going to change. And as we get closer to an election, not the midterms per se, but the 2028 elections, the potential and what's going to happen is going to happen, right, people are incented to do that.

我認為這會讓市場暫停一下。市場也有一些擔憂：交易是否以足夠的溢價完成。所以把這些因素綜合起來，我認為會讓大家更謹慎思考。但就存款機構而言，最核心的問題是：本屆政府相較於上一屆政府，更在促進並鼓勵銀行併購（M&A），而這不會改變。而且當我們越接近選舉——不是期中選舉本身，而是 2028 年大選——潛在變化與可能發生的事終究會發生，對吧，人們會有動機去做這些事。

It's not linear, which is what we're seeing now. And that's -- and you need the same thing as it relates to 2026. deals got to be announced in the next couple of months. Otherwise, the 2027 deals. But that's what I would say. And overall M&A, look, we're seeing a lot of activity. But my sense is that if we didn't have the economic uncertainty that we have out there, we'd be seeing even more.

這不是線性的，這就是我們現在看到的情況。而且——就 2026 年而言也是一樣：交易必須在接下來幾個月內宣布。否則就會變成 2027 年的交易。但這就是我想說的。至於整體 M&A，你看，我們看到很多活動。但我的感覺是，如果沒有外部的經濟不確定性，我們會看到更多。

Specific to sponsor, we're seeing a lot of activity and growth in backlog across a number of verticals. The one area I would call out that has been a little bit weaker is technology. And that's not as big of a vertical for us, but that is certainly an area that has been slower.

就贊助方（sponsor）而言，我們在多個垂直領域看到大量活動，待辦案量也在成長。我唯一要點名的是，有一個領域相對弱一些，就是科技。這對我們來說不是最大的垂直領域，但那確實是進展較慢的區塊。

Software.

軟體。

Software specifically.

特別是軟體。

Mike Brown, UBS.

UBS 的 Mike Brown。

So Ron, you're allocating more capital to recruitment in 2026 and some good organic growth in the first quarter. Maybe can you just expand on how the recruitment and productivity efforts are faring relative to your expectations? Maybe what specific profile adviser are you kind of more aggressively targeting and having success recruiting? And then how is the competitive space from the wirehouses or some of your other peers? How is that been impacting recruitment and maybe cost of recruitment?

所以 Ron，你們在 2026 年會把更多資本配置到招募上，而且第一季也有不錯的內生成長。能否請你再延伸談談，招募與生產力提升的努力，相對於你們的預期表現如何？你們目前更積極鎖定、且招募成效較好的顧問（adviser）具體輪廓是什麼？另外，來自大型券商（wirehouses）或其他同業的競爭態勢如何？這對招募以及招募成本有什麼影響？

Well, I'll take your second part first. The competitive environment, a number -- a couple of the large firms, you may know some of them yourself, have really, really ramped some of these -- the competitive aspects of transitional pay, the so-called deals. And that has -- that's been interesting. But the quarter across the industry was slower for, I think, the same reasons that we're talking about M&A and everything else. It's just some uncertain times.

好，我先回答你第二部分。競爭環境方面，有幾家大型公司——你可能也知道其中一些——在所謂的轉職補償（transitional pay）、也就是所謂的「deal」上，真的大幅加碼了競爭條件。這點——很有意思。但整個產業這一季的節奏比較慢，我認為原因和我們剛才談 M&A 以及其他事情一樣。就是處在一些不確定的時期。

As it relates to us, our strategy hasn't changed. We continue to be disciplined. As I said earlier in my remarks, that we grow and we've grown through acquisition for a number of years and recruitment and our return on tangible equity is 25%. You don't do that by making investments with an RO -- return on invested capital of 5%. It just doesn't work.

至於我們，我們的策略沒有改變。我們持續保持紀律。如我先前在談話中提到的，我們多年來透過併購與招募來成長，而我們的有形股東權益報酬率（ROTE）是 25%。你不可能靠做投資資本報酬率（ROIC）只有 5% 的投資來達成這點。那行不通。

So I'm very confident. What I'm mostly pleased about is our ability to compete, attract and recruit large teams, which is relatively been in the last, say, 10 years, new to Stifel and that we have that, and we're talking to a number of large teams. And that, to me, is encouraging. Sorel you get this every quarter, same question. My answer seems to be the same every quarter.

所以我非常有信心。我最滿意的是我們的競爭能力——能夠與大型團隊競爭、吸引並招募大型團隊；這在過去大概 10 年來，對 Stifel 而言相對是新的能力，而我們現在具備了，而且我們也正在與多個大型團隊洽談。這對我來說是令人鼓舞的。Sorel，你每一季都會問同樣的問題。而我的回答似乎每一季也都一樣。

I appreciate the color there, Ron.

Ron，謝謝你提供這些補充說明。

Yes. I mean it's -- no big news there in terms of -- we're still -- we're number one in JD Power. We're number one in adviser. We have a great culture.

是的。我的意思是——在這方面沒有什麼重大新消息——我們仍然是 JD Power 的第一名。我們在顧問方面也是第一名。我們有很棒的文化。

We have things -- if anything, what we're trying to do, and we've talked about this, it takes a little bit longer. We're just trying to get our name out there. I get discouraged sometimes when I'll talk to people and they say, oh, I didn't really know -- I didn't know that much about Stifel.

我們有一些事情——如果要說的話，我們正在努力做的事，而且我們也談過，這需要多一點時間。我們只是想把我們的名聲打出去。有時候我跟人聊，他們說，喔，我其實不太知道——我對 Stifel 了解不多，這會讓我有點沮喪。

And we're really trying to fix that. We've done that with a lot of our brand advertising and a lot of things we're trying to get out there. But that's still an area that we can improve, we will improve, and then that will improve our results.

而我們真的在努力改善這點。我們透過很多品牌廣告，以及很多我們想推向市場的事情，已經在做了。但這仍然是我們可以改進、也會改進的領域，而那也會改善我們的成果。

Great. That makes sense. And just as a follow-up, I appreciate the color on the advisory side. I wanted to ask about the IPO window, which has certainly had some stops and starts in 2025 and in 2026. And we've had the Middle East volatility this year that seems to have contributed to some delays. But what's your read on maybe the ECM calendar specifically as we think about the back half of 2026 for Stifel and the industry here?

很好。這很合理。另外作為追問，我很感謝你在顧問業務那邊提供的補充說明。我想問 IPO 的窗口期，2025 年和 2026 年確實是時開時停。而今年我們也有中東地區的波動，似乎導致了一些延後。但你怎麼看 ECM 的排程，特別是我們在思考 2026 年下半年對 Stifel 以及整個產業的情況時？

Look, I think it's good. I was talking to our desk. This might be dated by a week or so. But what I said was what's happening. And often when deals get delayed, they just get pulled and they'll get pulled maybe for the next set of numbers.

你看，我覺得是好的。我剛跟我們的交易台聊過。這個看法可能一週左右就會過時。但我當時問的是現在發生了什麼。而通常當交易被延後時，它們不會消失，只是被往後挪，可能是等下一組數據出來。

And we've seen delays that are a week or two. So people are -- what that told me at the time was that people -- clients or issuers and buyers are just concerned about volatility. And the volatility has always impacted ECM, and I think that's the case now.

而我們看到的延後大概是一到兩週。所以人們——這在當時告訴我的是，人們——客戶或發行人以及買方——只是擔心波動。而波動一直都會影響 ECM，我認為現在也是如此。

But when I layer that with the fact that things are just being delayed maybe for the next news that comes out of the Middle East or something or next comment. But it's healthy, I think. And now the environment changes in a nanosecond, as you know. But as I sit here today, I would say that, that's a healthy market.

但當我再把這點跟「事情只是延後」這個事實疊加起來看——可能是等中東那邊下一則新聞或什麼、或下一個評論出來。但我認為這是健康的。當然你也知道，環境可能在一瞬間就改變。但以我今天坐在這裡的觀察，我會說，這是一個健康的市場。

Steven Chubak, Wolfe Research.

Steven Chubak，Wolfe Research。

So wanted to double-click, Ron, into some of the comments that you made around Agentic AI. I know you gave it quite a bit of airplay and you might argue too much airplay during at least at the start of Q&A. But this is perceived to be a pretty meaningful potential source of pressure eventually on idle sweep Cash, whether it's Agentic AI, tokenization, lots of technology that's in the nascent stages of development.

Ron，我想針對你提到的 Agentic AI 的一些評論再深入追問一下。我知道你給了它相當多的篇幅，你甚至可能會說在 Q&A 一開始給了太多篇幅。但市場認為，這可能最終會對閒置的 Sweep Cash（自動歸集現金）形成相當有意義的壓力來源，不論是 Agentic AI、代幣化，或許多仍處於早期發展階段的技術。

And I was hoping you could simply speak to the levers you might consider if headwinds to Sweep Cash do, in fact, materialize? And how does your pricing model differ from some of your competitors just in terms of account fees, platform fees that could serve eventually as potential offsets down the road?

我希望你能簡單談談：如果 Sweep Cash 的逆風確實開始具體化，你們可能會考慮哪些調整槓桿？另外，就帳戶費、平台費等可能在未來作為抵消因素的費用而言，你們的定價模式與一些競爭對手有何不同？

Yes. Well, I read your report this morning, and so well thought out, I would tell you that. And the -- but again, when I put it down, yes, I didn't go oh my gosh, we got an issue here at Stifel because we don't. But as it relates -- Stephen, I don't -- I do think that there will be changes, okay? And there were changes on 0 rate commissions.

是的。嗯，我今天早上讀了你的報告，寫得很周全，我會這麼告訴你。不過——但同樣地，當我把報告放下時，我並沒有想說「天啊，Stifel 這裡有問題」，因為我們沒有。但就這件事而言——Stephen，我確實認為會有變化，好嗎？就像當年零佣金交易也帶來了變化。

And one of the leading consultants at the time said there wouldn't be another commission trade done by 2004. And the robo advisers we're going to do this, and we're going to do that. And it's a business model. And the business model will adjust. And so if, in fact, gen can come in and be more efficient at sweeping cash.

當時有一位頂尖顧問說，到 2004 年就不會再有任何一筆佣金交易了。而機器人投顧會做到這個、做到那個。但這是一種商業模式。而商業模式會調整。所以如果 AI（gen）真的能在現金歸集上變得更有效率——

I don't really see how it's going to be that much more efficient, myself with all of the things that you would have to do. You'd have to actually give something -- access to everything, not only your recurring expenses, but your non-recurring and you're clearing checks and your -- all your credit cards, not just your one single account. And that's not going to be done for free. And so you're going to sit there and tell me that because of transactional cash is -- has a lower yield that someone is going to do and pay for that and give all that information, maybe, but it's a ways away, in my opinion. And if it does happen, there's a lot of things that you can do.

我自己其實不太看得出它能有效率到哪裡去，因為你必須做的事情很多。你得實際把某些東西——對所有事情的存取權——交出去，不只是你的經常性支出，還包括非經常性支出、你在清算支票、以及——你所有的信用卡，不只是你單一的一個帳戶。而這不可能免費完成。所以你要我相信，因為交易性現金——收益率較低——就會有人願意去做、願意付費，並交出所有那些資訊？也許吧，但依我看還有一段距離。而如果真的發生了，有很多事情可以做。

Many banks will raise the yield in general, there's a competitive thing just to make sure that the NIM remains. And as it relates to platform fees, which I know you referred to in your report and you just did in your question, platform fees and account fees and inactive account fees, those are all levers. We don't have an account fee at Stifel. We don't have an inactive account fee. So those levers are actually unpulled at Stifel today, while many of our competitors do do that.

很多銀行會整體提高收益率，這是一種競爭手段，確保淨利差（NIM）得以維持。至於平台費——我知道你在報告裡提到、你在問題裡也提到——平台費、帳戶費、以及不活躍帳戶費，這些都是可以調整的槓桿。Stifel 沒有帳戶費。我們也沒有不活躍帳戶費。所以這些槓桿在 Stifel 目前其實都還沒被拉動，但我們許多競爭對手確實有這麼做。

And so a fair question to me would be, well, why don't you do it? And my answer is it's not that easy, okay? It just -- I'm reminded of a commercial we did years ago where the person says, hey, what are all these fees? Well, I don't -- I have an idea, why don't we charge a fee on a fee. And the guy, that's a good idea.

所以你問我一個公平的問題會是：那你們為什麼不做？我的答案是：這沒那麼容易，好嗎？這讓我想起我們多年前拍的一支廣告，裡面有人說，嘿，這些費用都是什麼？然後有人說，我有個主意，何不對費用再收一個費用。那個人說，這是個好主意。

It's just as difficult to do. And I'll be watching. And if the market -- if the cost of advice across the industry begins to be consistently with platform fees and done for firms that are trying -- that have bigger issues with cash sorting than we do. And you know that, Stephen. We're probably at the low end of your issue of firms that are going to impact it on this.

但做起來就是同樣困難。而我會持續觀察。如果市場——如果整個產業的建議成本開始一貫地以平台費的形式呈現，而且這是那些——在現金分流/排序（cash sorting）方面問題比我們更大的公司——所採行的做法。而你也知道這點，Stephen。就這個議題而言，我們大概是在你所關注、可能受影響的公司裡面，問題相對較小的一端。

I think that's what your report said. So look, we have a lot of levers. We have dealt with changing economics in this business for as long as I've been in the business, and we will continue to do so.

我想你的報告就是這麼說的。所以你看，我們有很多槓桿可以用。我在這個行業這麼多年以來，我們一直在應對商業經濟條件的變化，而且我們也會繼續這麼做。

The other thing you have to think about here is the impact on the client and higher interest income is not just a complete wash based upon the fee when you think about the tax effect of those things because the higher interest income is taxable while the fee that they're paying is not tax deductible. So you have to consider that overall impact on the client as well when you're doing your overall thesis here.

另外你還必須考慮的是，對客戶的影響：當你考慮稅務效果時，更高的利息收入並不只是因為費用而完全相互抵消，因為更高的利息收入是要課稅的，而他們支付的費用則不能抵稅。所以在你做整體論點時，也必須把對客戶的整體影響納入考量。

Yes. I'd be interested when you get your feedback as to the number of firms that will say, oh, yes, it would be easy to institute these fees because I would take the other side of that.

是的。我也很想知道你回饋的結果：到底有多少家公司會說，喔，是的，要導入這些費用很容易，因為我會站在相反的立場。

We'll certainly keep you in the loop, and I appreciate that perspective. my follow-up just on the restructuring within Europe. I was hoping that you could quantify the benefit to the margins that we're expecting in the coming year just shuttering some of the businesses. And I was also hoping to get longer perspective on how this informs at least your ambitions or appetite to expand outside the US and tying that with your M&A appetite in general, at least in the current environment what remains a heightened level of uncertainty.

我們一定會讓你掌握最新情況，也很感謝這個觀點。接著我想追問的是歐洲內部重整。我希望你能量化一下：在未來一年，關閉部分業務預期能為利潤率帶來多少改善。另外我也希望從更長期的角度了解，這如何影響你們至少在美國以外擴張的企圖或意願，並把這點與你們整體的併購（M&A）意願連結起來——尤其在目前仍處於高度不確定性的環境之下。

That's a fair question. I'm going to let Jim -- I don't think we can really talk nor do we disclose margin improvement in that segment. I'll lateral to Jim and let him decide answer in a moment. So you can think about that, Jim. As it relates to our strategy and what we have seen margin improvement, what we did and something that we sort of unwound was the fact that we invested in sales trading and capital markets within Europe and thinking we'll either be on the London Exchange or the Nordics, and we would do IPOs and we do sales trading and research over there.

這是個合理的問題。我先讓 Jim 回答——我認為我們其實無法談、也不會揭露該分部的利潤率改善。我把問題轉給 Jim，讓他稍後決定怎麼回答。所以你可以先想一下，Jim。就我們的策略以及我們看到的利潤率改善而言，我們做過、也算是後來逐步撤回的一件事，是我們曾在歐洲投資於銷售交易與資本市場，當時的想法是我們要不是在倫敦交易所、就是在北歐市場，去做 IPO，也做銷售交易與研究。

And what we found was that, that market because of MiFID and what they've done raised to themselves is that, that business, even at scale, I'm not sure you make any really money, but you certainly were not making -- we weren't making any money at the size that we were. But just as importantly was that when I would visit clients in Europe, and I would ask them what their objectives were, was interesting. Most of them -- and this is a credit to the United States, their dream was to list on NASDAQ or the New York Stock Exchange. And I -- and we started -- and we've seen this. We just did a large transaction, European-based.

而我們發現的是，那個市場因為 MiFID 以及他們對自身所做的調整，使得那門生意即便做到規模，我也不確定能不能真正賺到錢；但可以肯定的是，以我們當時的規模——我們是賺不到錢的。但同樣重要的是，當我去拜訪歐洲客戶、問他們的目標是什麼時，很有意思。他們大多數——這也算是對美國的一種肯定——他們的夢想是到 NASDAQ 或紐約證券交易所上市。而我——我們開始——而且我們也看到了這個趨勢。我們剛完成一筆大型交易，是以歐洲為基地的。

We listed it on the US, Jim referred to it. And so what we decided to do strategically, and it frames or you can frame my thoughts about this is to lead our US capabilities into Europe through advice, our advisory platform. And then we -- and then when we have an equity capital markets transaction, for the most part, they're coming back to the US, especially in health care and in areas where we have some expertise.

我們把它在美國上市，Jim 也提到過。因此我們在策略上決定——這也構成、或你可以用來理解我對此的想法——是透過建議（advice）、也就是我們的顧問平台，把我們在美國的能力帶進歐洲。然後——當我們有股權資本市場交易時，多數情況下他們會回到美國，特別是在醫療保健以及我們具備一些專業的領域。

So I feel that this was maybe you can criticize the way we started, but where we're ending up is where we want to be. We're a global firm. We have global capabilities. I just don't think we needed to do market-making sales trading in local markets to achieve our ultimate goal. And frankly, many of the clients' ultimate goal, which is to access the US capital markets. Jim, I don't know.

所以我覺得，或許你可以批評我們一開始的做法，但我們最後走到的方向正是我們想要的。我們是一家全球性公司。我們具備全球能力。我只是不認為為了達成最終目標，我們需要在當地市場做造市、做銷售交易。而且坦白說，許多客戶的最終目標也是進入美國資本市場。Jim，我不知道。

So in terms of some numbers to support the question you're asking here is as we've talked about this in prior quarters, we frame this up with a combination of not just the European restructuring, but also the sale of SAA. And we've told you in the past, that's about $100 million of revenue, probably roughly half and half between the two groups, the SAA as well as the European equities business. you think about it, that was probably somewhere between 70% and 80% comp margin that we're going to save off of.

就一些支持你所問問題的數字而言：如同我們在前幾季談過的，我們把這件事框定為不只是歐洲重組，也包括出售 SAA。我們過去也告訴過各位，這大約是 1 億美元的營收，兩個部分大概各占一半：SAA 以及歐洲股票業務。你想想看，那部分我們大概可以省下 70% 到 80% 的薪酬（comp）利潤率。

And then we talked about $20 million to $25 million of non-comp expenses gets you roughly to around a breakeven number of pulling those revenues out, and that's a good way to think about it. As we look at the non-comp expenses and what actually occurred, we were able to pull out about $6 million here in the first quarter, which is relatively consistent to what our guide was or what we talked about as we kind of framed this up last quarter.

然後我們也談到，非薪酬（non-comp）費用大約可減少 2,000 萬到 2,500 萬美元，這樣在把那些營收抽掉之後，大致可以到損益兩平，這是一個很好的理解方式。就非薪酬費用以及實際發生的情況來看，我們在第一季大約拉出了 600 萬美元的成本，這與我們的指引、或我們上季在框定這件事時所談的內容相對一致。

And so all of those things are fairly consistent. As we look forward, there's still more costs to be taken out of some of our European operations post restructuring. Think of some of the longer-term contracts like leases, think of subscription agreements and things like that. So more to come.

所以這些都相當一致。往前看，在重組之後，我們在部分歐洲營運上仍有更多成本可以移除。例如一些較長期的合約，像是租約；也包括訂閱協議之類的。所以後續還會有更多。

But as we sit here today, we'll just caveat that this is a pretty good quarter for the international or the non-US business. given some of the larger fees Eran talked about, it won't necessarily be linear, but it gives you a sense of kind of the overall financial benefit we'll receive over this entire year.

但就我們今天所處的位置，我們也要提醒一下：這一季對國際、或非美國業務而言是相當不錯的一季，考量到 Eran 提到的一些較大筆費用收入；它不一定會線性發展，但能讓你大致了解我們在今年整體將獲得的財務效益。

And look, you see it in our margins. Our margins in institutional when I was getting questioned about that when it was sub-10% and now it's nearly 20%. That's a combination of both productivity and revenue plus the restructuring that we did. So I mean, it's a good thing.

而且你看，我們的利潤率就反映出來了。我之前被問到機構業務利潤率時，它還不到 10%，現在接近 20%。這是生產力與營收提升，再加上我們所做的重組共同作用的結果。所以我的意思是，這是件好事。

Brennan Hawken, BMO Capital Markets.

BMO Capital Markets 的 Brennan Hawken。

So I wanted to touch on NII. You touched a little bit on the headwinds in the quarter. You mentioned corp and securities-based loan headwinds. But maybe could you provide a little bit more texture around what caused that versus your prior expectations? And then in the context of the $282 million to $290 million expected for next quarter, good to see your expectations for that to uplift. But maybe could you provide a little bit more texture around what's going to drive that?

我想談一下 NII（淨利息收入）。你稍微提到本季的一些逆風。你提到公司端以及以證券作擔保貸款的逆風。但你是否能更具體說明一下，造成這些情況的原因，相較於你們先前的預期差異在哪？另外，在你們預期下季為 2.82 億到 2.90 億美元的背景下，很高興看到你們預期會回升。但你是否也能更具體說明一下，將由哪些因素來推動？

I love giving NII and margin questions to Jim, and that's -- I'm not -- I'm going to do that right now. So Jim.

我很喜歡把 NII 和利差問題交給 Jim，這——我不是——我現在就這麼做。所以 Jim。

Right. So in terms of this quarter, obviously, the non-bank NII is the main piece there. If you look at kind of the consolidated NII numbers and back off what you see in Global Wealth Management, you can compare 1Q year-over-year, and you can see the non-bank is down about $3 million. So it's consistent. That delta is consistent with what we described there.

好的。就本季而言，顯然非銀行端的 NII 是主要部分。如果你看合併口徑的 NII 數字，並扣除你在全球財富管理（Global Wealth Management）看到的部分，你可以比較第一季的年對年變化，會看到非銀行端大約下降 300 萬美元。所以是一致的。那個差異與我們剛才描述的內容一致。

Most of that -- some of it is corporate interest. It wasn't securities-based lending. It was kind of stock -- securities lending, stock lending, if you will. That's opportunistic based upon individual hard to borrowers in your box. That number can move around from period to period.

其中大部分——有一部分是公司利息。不是以證券作擔保的放款（securities-based lending）。而比較像是證券借貸、股票借貸（stock lending），如果你願意這麼說。那是基於你手上個別難以借到的標的（hard-to-borrow）所產生的機會型業務。那個數字會隨期間而波動。

It was just somewhat slower in this individual quarter. We do view that kind of getting back to its normalized run rate. But the bigger piece of the $280 million to $290 million NII guide is going to go back to asset growth within the bank. And we said on the call that we still feel comfortable we have up to $4 billion of asset growth. We're seeing things like fund banking pick back up in April.

只是這一季相對慢了一些。我們認為它會回到正常化的運行水準。但 2.80 億到 2.90 億美元 NII 指引中更大的部分，會回到銀行內的資產成長。我們在電話會議上也說過，我們仍然有信心資產成長可達到最多 40 億美元。我們看到像基金銀行（fund banking）在 4 月開始回升。

There was a number of paydowns kind of late in the quarter specific to fund banking that kind of caused the period-over-period end-of-period balances to decline. So as we look forward, we feel comfortable. Our original NII guide is $1.1 billion to $1.2 billion. We're already annualizing the low end of that, and we think there's a fair amount of growth that can occur in the second through fourth quarter that can help support getting higher in that range. So we feel pretty good about where we're at.

本季末在基金銀行方面有一些還款（paydowns）發生在較晚的時間點，導致期末餘額相較前一期下降。因此往前看，我們感到有信心。我們原先的 NII 指引是 11 億到 12 億美元。我們目前已經把該區間下緣年化了，而且我們認為第二到第四季仍有相當程度的成長可發生，能支撐我們往區間較高端走。所以我們對目前的位置感覺相當不錯。

Yes. And it's not necessarily NIM expansion. It's just growing -- it's just growth. And we've never growth is always there in banking. That's not the issue.

是的。而且不一定是 NIM（淨利差）擴張。就是成長——就是成長。而我們從來——銀行業務一直都有成長。那不是問題。

The issue is prudent growth, and that's what we're doing. But we see a lot of opportunities. I've always -- I am still optimistic about what we're building in venture and for the innovation economy, and that is -- that's got nice growth written all over it.

問題在於審慎的成長，而這正是我們在做的。但我們看到很多機會。我一直——我仍然對我們在創投以及創新經濟所打造的東西感到樂觀，而那——那上面寫滿了很不錯的成長潛力。

Great. And then you touched on this a little bit, Ron, in your prepared remarks about concerns around the software loans and whatnot. But curious to hear your -- what you're seeing in the CLO portfolio. So we see spreads widen out in the levered loan market, equity and lower-rated layers of CLOs have been under some pressure recently. So totally appreciate that you're in the higher layers, which have been fine. But what underlying trends are you seeing?

很好。然後你在事先準備的發言中也稍微提到了一點，Ron，關於軟體貸款之類的疑慮。但我也想聽聽你——你在CLO投資組合裡看到的是什麼。我們看到槓桿貸款市場利差擴大，CLO的股權與較低評級層級最近承受了一些壓力。所以我完全理解你們是在較高層級，那些一直都還好。但你們看到的底層趨勢是什麼？

Yes, Tim.

是的，Tim。

Yes. So our CLO book at the end of the quarter sat right around $6.8 billion. I'd say a little over 60% or 62% of those holdings are AAA rated with the rest AA rated. What we're seeing in terms of credit enhancement has remained consistent with what we've said in prior periods. On a blended basis, that's around 32%.

是的。所以我們在本季末的CLO部位大約是68億美元。我會說其中略高於60%或62%的持有部位是AAA評級，其餘為AA評級。就信用增強而言，我們看到的情況與我們在先前期間所說的一致。以加權綜合來看，大約是32%。

You can see AAA classes, 36% and north of there in terms of credit enhancement, AA class is around 24%. The underlying collateral here is very well diversified. There's no particular concentrations over, call it, 11%, 12%, 13% of the underlying portfolio. Our portfolio is spread out over nearly 100 CLO managers. And I think the key here is that what we see in our stress testing has not changed.

你可以看到AAA級別的信用增強為36%及以上，AA級別大約是24%。這裡的底層抵押品分散度非常好。沒有任何特定集中度超過大約11%、12%、13%的底層投資組合。我們的投資組合分散在將近100位CLO管理人之間。我認為關鍵在於，我們在壓力測試中看到的結果沒有改變。

We're not seeing any new issues. We're seeing consistent levels of the ability to withstand stress that are multiples of the great financial crisis and not break the underlying structure. So we feel very comfortable with the overall credit exposure in terms of CLOs.

我們沒有看到任何新的問題。我們看到其承受壓力的能力維持在一致水準，且是全球金融危機時期的數倍，並不會破壞底層結構。因此，就CLO而言，我們對整體信用曝險感到非常安心。

Yes. And look, I've always said that, Bren, what people are talking about is the lower rated tranches. That's really what they're talking about as you would expect. But as it relates to diversification, I don't think there's any class that's more than 10%. I think they can't go more than 15%.

是的。而且你看，我一直都說，Bren，大家在談的是較低評級的分層。如你所預期，那才是他們真正談論的。但就分散度而言，我不認為有任何一個類別超過10%。我想它們也不能超過15%。

And every time I look at it, which I think I did in the first quarter, I just put it down. It's not an issue for us when we look at -- we look at it individual loan by individual loan across CLOs and look at it consolidated and individually. Our team does a really good job. But at the AAA, where we are at the top and what happens when it gets stressed, actually, the subordination gets higher as stress occurs because you divert cash flow. So what I sometimes ask myself is that is the yield give up worth the subordination -- sometimes we got a lot of subordination.

而且每次我去看它——我想我在第一季看過——我就把它放下。當我們去看時，這對我們不是問題——我們會在各個CLO中逐筆貸款逐筆貸款地看，並以合併與個別兩種角度來看。我們的團隊做得非常好。但在AAA這一層，我們位於最上層，而當壓力出現時，實際上次順位保護會提高，因為你會把現金流導向別處。所以我有時會問自己，為了次順位保護而放棄的殖利率是否值得——有時我們有很多次順位保護。

Remember, we don't get the full yield. We get the AAA yield. And thus far, over 10 years, risk weighting, risk-based capital, the way that it's allowed us to sort cash because a variable rate asset, it's been a great asset class for us, and I don't really see any stress in what we own.

記住，我們拿不到全部的殖利率。我們拿的是AAA的殖利率。而到目前為止，過去10年，在風險加權、風險基礎資本，以及它讓我們能夠配置資金的方式上，因為它是浮動利率資產，這一直是對我們很棒的資產類別，而我真的沒有看到我們所持有資產有任何壓力。

Alex Blostein, Goldman Sachs.

Alex Blostein，高盛。

I got almost as enthusiastic of response as you gave to Steve, so I appreciate that. So I wanted to ask you guys a question around the bank growth and loan growth and kind of how that comes together. Obviously, that's a priority for the firm for some time. I'm curious how you're thinking about funding that? Because if we look at the sweep deposit balances, they've been basically in a range of, I don't know, $10 billion, $11 billion for quite some time, a couple of years, even holding the whole AI sweep cash issue aside, -- as you think about the forward loan growth and without a whole lot of balance sheet sweep options, how do you sort of think about the funding mix here over time?

我得到的回應幾乎跟你給Steve的一樣熱情，所以我很感謝。我想問你們一個關於銀行成長與放款成長，以及兩者如何結合的問題。顯然，這一直是公司一段時間以來的優先事項。我很好奇你們如何思考為此提供資金？因為如果我們看掃入存款（sweep deposit）餘額，它們基本上在大約100億到110億美元的區間內維持了相當長一段時間，幾年了；即便先把整個AI sweep現金的議題放一邊——當你們思考未來的放款成長、而資產負債表上又沒有太多掃入的選項時，你們長期來看會如何思考這裡的資金來源組合？

Is that more institutional? Is it more sort of high-yield savings? I'm just trying to think about the funding of the bank on the forward.

會更偏機構端嗎？還是更偏高收益儲蓄？我只是想理解未來銀行的資金來源。

Well, both, but I would have -- Alex, I thought you might have complemented us on our deposit growth, okay, relative to our muted loan growth, okay, in terms of -- I think our deposit growth was $2 billion. And what we're seeing is much of our loan growth and the potential we see is not only self-funded, if you will, by deposit generation, but self-funded in a multiple of the loans outstanding. So some of those deposits are not sweep.

嗯，兩者都有，但我本來以為——Alex——你可能會稱讚我們的存款成長，好嗎，相對於我們較為溫和的放款成長，好嗎；就——我想我們的存款成長是20億美元。而我們看到的是，我們的放款成長以及我們看到的潛力，不僅可以說是由存款生成自我挹注（self-funded），而且自我挹注的規模是現有放款餘額的數倍。所以其中一些存款並不是掃入存款。

So if you're focusing on sweep, then we got to go all the way back around the barn and come back and say, transactional cash and clients isn't going to get that much higher for all the reasons that we've been talking about. But in terms of our smart rate and our venture deposits and our sort of non-wealth deposits, that growth has been very strong. And that's -- to then answer your question, that's how we're funding that growth.

所以如果你聚焦在掃入存款，那我們就得繞一大圈再回來說，基於我們一直在談的各種原因，交易性現金與客戶資金不會再高出太多。但就我們的smart rate、我們的創投存款，以及我們所謂的非財富管理存款而言，那些成長非常強勁。而那——回到你的問題——就是我們為那個成長提供資金的方式。

Right. If you look at the supplement and you look at page 10, the bottom of page 10 has a disclosure of third-party deposits available to Stifel Bancorp. There's $6.2 billion of excess deposits that are off balance sheet today that we can use to fund that growth. Obviously, a good portion of that is going to be in that third-party commercial treasury deposit line. So that's $5.7 billion of it.

對。如果你看補充資料並看第10頁，第10頁底部揭露了可供Stifel Bancorp使用的第三方存款。目前有62億美元的超額存款在表外，我們可以用來為成長提供資金。顯然，其中相當一部分會在第三方商業財資存款那一行。所以其中有57億美元。

the vast majority of that's going to be obviously venture and fund banking. And as you think about that, that grew $1.2 billion in the first quarter. And if you look at that as kind of a mark-to-market of where we're at through, I don't know, as of yesterday, that's up another $700 million. So that's a significant source of funding capacity growth that continues to occur that's been fairly consistent and gives us a lot of flexibility if we're talking about up to $4 billion of asset growth.

其中絕大多數顯然會是創投與基金銀行業務。而當你這樣思考時，第一季它成長了12億美元。如果你把它視為我們目前的即時狀況（mark-to-market），我不知道，截止到昨天為止，又增加了7億美元。所以這是一個相當可觀、且持續發生的資金能力成長來源，表現相當一致；如果我們談的是最多40億美元的資產成長，它給了我們很大的彈性。

Yes. And I'll end by saying, as I've said before, in this segment of what we're doing, we're really in the early innings of some of the things that we can do as we've been adding, frankly, technology capabilities to our treasury platform, international settlements. So there's a lot of work that we're doing to have a very competitive platform. And I see the potential. It's a great question.

是的。最後我想說，正如我之前說過的，在我們正在做的這個領域裡，坦白說，隨著我們持續把科技能力加入到我們的財資平台、國際結算等，我們其實還在早期階段。所以我們正在做很多工作，以打造一個非常有競爭力的平台。而我看得到這個潛力。這是個很好的問題。

But again, we've said that it's almost self-funding what we're doing.

但再說一次，我們已經說過，我們在做的事情幾乎是自我挹注的。

That's really helpful. Question on the buyback. Really nice to see pickup. I know you guys tend to do a little more in the first quarter than typically over the course of the year. So as you think about your share repurchase plans from here on through the rest of the year, any thoughts you'd share would be helpful.

這真的很有幫助。關於庫藏股回購的問題。很高興看到回購加速。我知道你們通常第一季會做得比一年其他時間多一些。所以當你們思考從現在到今年剩餘時間的股票回購計畫時，有沒有什麼想法可以分享？會很有幫助。

Capital allocation, capital utilization, return on invested capital, all of those are the inputs to the model that will -- we're always buying back shares. The pace of -- that math changes daily as well as to what is. That's why we don't just sit there and say, we'll buy x number per day. We look at it. We balance that against M&A, other opportunities.

資本配置、資本運用、投入資本報酬率，這些都是模型的輸入項目——我們一直都在回購股票。回購的速度——那套數學也會每天變動，以及取決於當下的情況。這就是為什麼我們不會只是坐在那裡說，我們每天會買回x股。我們會去看。我們也會把它與併購（M&A）及其他機會做權衡。

But we've been more consistent because we felt that relative to our growth, our stock has been undervalued. So you see us buying back our stock.

但我們一直更為一致，因為我們認為相對於我們的成長，我們的股票一直被低估。所以你會看到我們回購自家股票。

Ron touched on the strategy and how we think about it in terms of capacity, we had $560 million of excess capital at the end of the quarter. If you think about what we've talked with the balance sheet growth expectation about the $4 billion, say we do the full $4 billion. That's only about 70% of the current excess before retained earnings. So we certainly have a fairly material amount of capacity if the strategic rationale that Ron talked about, if that math works, we can buy back a lot of stock if we're so inclined.

Ron 提到了策略，以及我們如何從資本容量的角度來思考；我們在本季末有 5.6 億美元的超額資本。如果你回想我們談到的資產負債表成長預期約 40 億美元，假設我們把 40 億美元全部做滿。在未計入留存盈餘之前，那也只約占目前超額資本的 70%。因此，如果 Ron 所談的策略理由成立、數學算得通，我們確實有相當可觀的容量；若我們有此意願，可以回購很多股票。

Bill Katz, TD Cowen.

Bill Katz，TD Cowen。

Most of my big picture questions have been asked already. So maybe just thinking tactically, update us on sort of what's been happening in April just in terms of maybe client engagement, whether it be on the advisory side or on the institutional side and what the sort of cash levels look like just net of maybe billings and/or seasonal tax payments?

我大方向的問題大多已經有人問過了。所以也許從戰術層面來看，請更新一下 4 月份目前的情況：就客戶互動而言，不論是顧問端或機構端；以及在扣除可能的開票與／或季節性稅款支付之後，現金水位大概是什麼樣子？

Yes. Look, I said client engagement remains strong. It certainly hasn't -- I just said that, Bill, and that wasn't through the quarter, I guess, my comments were through this call. And it is. I have to caution though, because from where I sit, the level of uncertainty, which we're not seeing right now, but the things that can change pretty quick whether it would be on the technology, this Methosthropic thing is concerning.

是的。你看，我說過客戶互動仍然強勁。它當然沒有——我剛才這麼說了，Bill，而那不只是截至本季；我想我剛才的評論是延伸到這通電話為止。而確實如此。不過我必須提醒，因為就我所處的位置來看，不確定性的程度——我們現在還沒看到反映出來——但有些事情可能很快就會改變，不管是在科技方面，這個 Methosthropic 的事情就令人擔憂。

There's a number of things that can change investor sentiment and perspective very quickly. And this is one of those environments where it just feels like there's a lot of uncertainty. But today, things are good. Engagement is strong. Jim, I don't know if you comment on cash.

有很多事情都可能非常迅速地改變投資人的情緒與觀點。而這就是那種環境之一，感覺不確定性很多。但就今天而言，情況不錯。互動很強。Jim，我不知道你要不要談談現金。

Right. So if you kind of go bucket by bucket, sweep is down since quarter end. Smart Rate is down since quarter end, while treasury deposits are up. And to provide some detail, you're down probably $1.4 billion in sweep, so call it about $10.6 billion. You're down about $400 million in Smart rate. And then again, you're seeing a $700 million increase offsetting some of that in the other treasury deposits.

好的。所以如果你按類別一個一個看，從季末以來，sweep（掃入存款）是下降的。Smart Rate 從季末以來也下降，而國庫存款（treasury deposits）則上升。提供一些細節：sweep 大概下降了 14 億美元，約為 106 億美元。Smart Rate 大概下降了 4 億美元。然後同時，你看到其他國庫存款增加了 7 億美元，抵消了其中一部分。

Yes. But you know what, I would just say that yes, this is so seasonal. -- right around. I wonder if we've ever had an increase in April, okay, ever. is an outflow for -- and it's a lot of taxes.

是的。但你知道，我只想說，對，這非常季節性——就在這個時間點左右。我在想我們是否曾在 4 月出現過增加，好嗎，曾經有過嗎？這段期間就是淨流出——而且有很多是繳稅。

That's just what happens. And that's across the street, Bill. So that's -- I don't want those comments to be taken as some trend. It's April.

事情就是這樣發生的。而且整條街（同業）都是如此，Bill。所以——我不希望這些評論被解讀成某種趨勢。這就是 4 月。

Of course. And then as a follow-up, I'm just sort of curious, you mentioned on the banking side, a very good pipeline, but it also seems like a lot of this conversation is about just sort of the ebbs and flows around uncertainty and certainly appreciate one day to next with the headlines coming out of Middle East is the confounding for everything. Should we be assuming that a little bit of a deceleration here in terms of activity from a revenue perspective, given your comments that if some things don't get sort of booked in the next couple of months, it's more about 2027, just as we think about the pacing for this year versus next for the advisory side of investment banking?

當然。接著追問一下，我有點好奇：你提到銀行端有非常好的 pipeline（案源／交易儲備），但這段對話似乎也有不少是在談不確定性下的起伏；而且也確實理解，隨著中東新聞標題每天變化，這讓一切都更難判斷。基於你提到如果有些事情在接下來幾個月沒有完成入帳，就更偏向 2027 年；那麼就投資銀行顧問業務而言，在思考今年相對於明年的節奏時，我們是否應該假設從營收角度看，活動量會有些許放緩？

Look, I think our banking is overall strong. We're seeing real pockets and our at least what our guys tell me is it's strong. I think we caution a little bit on depositor. We're big in depositories. And so that feels like it's a low a little bit, but that can change quickly, too.

你看，我認為我們的銀行業務整體是強勁的。我們看到一些真正的亮點；至少我們的人告訴我情況很強。我想我們對存款機構（depositor）方面會稍微保守一點。我們在存款機構領域占比很大。所以那邊感覺有點偏弱一些，但那也可能很快改變。

And software and the technology side, which we haven't been as big at, but we can see when we look at numbers, that appears to be more muted relative to what else is going on. But overall, as I've said, if the risks land within the range of market expectations, we see the business improving. It's -- if some of these things get resolved, it could really improve. It's not just all downside from here. The business especially in ECM can really pick up here if we take some of the volatility out of this and uncertainty out of this market.

至於軟體與科技端，我們過去涉入沒那麼深，但當我們看數據時，那一塊相較於其他正在發生的事情，看起來更為平淡。但整體而言，正如我所說，如果風險落在市場預期的範圍內，我們看到業務在改善。如果其中一些事情得到解決，改善幅度可能會很明顯。不會從現在開始就只有下行風險。特別是 ECM（股權資本市場）業務，如果我們能把波動與不確定性從市場中拿掉一些，這裡確實可能大幅回升。

There's always volatility. There's always uncertainty. It's just heightened, and we all know this. I'm not telling you anyone on this call anything that news from my desk.

波動永遠存在。不確定性也永遠存在。只是現在更為升高，而我們都知道這點。我並不是在這通電話上告訴各位任何你們在我桌上新聞看不到的事情。

There are no further questions at this time. I will turn the conference back to Mr. Kruszewski for any additional or closing remarks.

目前沒有進一步的問題。我將把會議交回給 Kruszewski 先生，請他做任何補充或結語。

Well, I would just want to compliment all the questions, actually was very robust questions, and we like being able to engage and give you our best answers, and I appreciate that. I appreciate everyone's time, and I look forward to talking to you in July. I would just say who knows what's going to happen between now and July, but we'll -- many of you will be talking before then. But to our investors that are on the call, thank you for calling in, and have a great day.

嗯，我只想稱讚大家的提問；其實問題非常扎實，我們也很喜歡能夠互動並給各位我們最好的回答，對此我很感謝。感謝大家撥冗，我期待在 7 月再與各位交流。我只能說，誰知道從現在到 7 月之間會發生什麼，但我們——你們當中很多人在那之前就會先聊到。另外，對於在電話上的投資人，感謝你們撥入，祝各位有美好的一天。

Thank you.

謝謝。

This concludes today's call. Thank you for your participation. You may now disconnect.

今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝各位的參與。您現在可以掛線。