Operator: The next question is from Piers Brown from HSBC. Please go ahead.
Piers Brown : Just two for me. Just coming back on the cost issue and the cost takeout in the quarter in the NCL unit. I mean it’s quite impressive. You’re down 26% quarter-on-quarter. And the cost takeout seems to be tracking more or less in line with the asset reduction. Just — I mean, the question is, should we expect that sort of linear relationship to continue? Or was there something in particular in terms of front-loading cost takeout in the first quarter in NCL? And then the second question is back to regulation. Not on capital, but just wondering if there’s anything in any of the remarks, comments, reports published by the Competition Commission that we need to be mindful of just in terms of the domestic market shares of the new group. Thanks.
Todd Tuckner: Piers, in terms of the first question on the NCL cost takeout. There isn’t a linear relationship. I would say it could be — the relationship really doesn’t have to flow linearly. And that’s because the cost takeout will often come as a result of taking out a portfolio that sits on a given system or supported by a given infrastructure or application that we’re able to shut down. But there is, of course, a relationship between the asset takeout and the cost takeout. I wouldn’t say it’s linear because you can have — you could be taking out portions of the portfolio that still needs at least a large share of the headcount supporting that, whether it’s the front office or mid or back that’s still supporting the broader portfolio.
And if you’re not really able to decommission the associated technology, you may not get the saves there. So not linear. But for sure, it’s something we watch very carefully, and we’re pleased to see that it is moving with a reasonably high degree of correlation.
Sergio Ermotti: Now on the competitive position, let’s forget for a second, that we have a crystal-clear agreement on that topic. Even if you go down to the substance, which is, I think, is relevant for us, for consumers, for clients or everybody to understand. When you look at facts, it’s quite clear that we have no dominant position in Switzerland in banking. So, I think that’s no matter if you look at deposits, at loans or mortgages, you look at branch, number of branches in any dimension, UBS is not the largest bank in Switzerland in that sense. I think we are the leading bank in Switzerland because of our capabilities, but that should not be confused with market share and size. So, in that sense, we are fairly comfortable that both the agreements and the facts support our position that our plan is the right one to pursue.
Operator: The next question is from Tom Hallett from KBW. Please go ahead.
Tom Hallett : Good morning. So just a quick one on Wealth Management NII. I think you were baking in 3 U.S. rate cuts for this year in your guidance. If that was zero, what was that? Or how would that alter your guidance? And then secondly, on the treatment of software intangibles, I suppose it’s fair to say and get a bit more of a benefit relative to your European peers. I mean if you were to align the rules with Europe, what sort of impact would that have on your capital? Thank you.
Sergio Ermotti: So, on the second question, as I said before, we are not speculating on any change in our regulatory framework. The only thing I can say is that both in absolute global terms but also vis-a-vis the European peers, we have a pretty strong capital position, not only in absolute terms, but also the quality of our capital base.
Todd Tuckner: Tom, on GWM NII, yes, we modeled in mentioned 3 U.S. dollar rate cuts. If there were fewer than those like Sergio, even commented earlier that there is some upside. But of course, in our NII. But of course, that depends on client behavior. It depends on how the balance sheet behaves. So statically, yes, that would be corrected to be upside. If there were no rate cuts, you probably have some uptick of a point or two on the NII. But of course, we need to consider the dynamic relationship between client behavior and our balance sheet. So, it’s difficult to — difficult to predict. But yes, I would just take away that likely to be some degree of upside, all other things equal.
Sarah Mackey : Thank you. I think there are no further questions. So, with that, we can close the call and thank you, Sergio, and Todd for joining us today. We look forward to speaking with everyone again with our 2Q results.
Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, the webcast and Q&A session for analysts and investors is over. You may disconnect your lines. we’ll now take a short break and continue with the media Q&A session at 10:45 CET.
