Flora Bocahut: The first question I wanted to ask you is regarding the cost/income target, which you have reiterated today for the midterm on 70% to 73%. It’s been now — when we look at the underlying profit level, so ex any one-offs, it’s been 3 quarters that you’ve been outside that range. So what makes you think you can get back towards the range? And how quickly can we expect that you will get back towards that level of cost/income ratio already in the next few quarters? And the second question is just coming back to the net new money in APAC. I mean, obviously, you had a stronger-than-usual run rate in Switzerland, in Europe, but then not so much in APAC. You’re talking about the wait-and-see approach. Would it be fair to say that some of the outflows that have been seen elsewhere may not yet have been transferred to one of the competitors and could be waiting to be picked up? Is that a fair assumption?
Ralph Hamers: So I will start with the second one and then Sarah can take you through the first one there. So on the flows in Asia, actually, we saw healthy flows in Asia throughout the year really in net new fee-generating assets and also in the fourth quarter at $3.4 billion. So that was actually more a continuation of flows coming through, very solid client relationships. If your question is to which stand is some of these flows related to the status of other financial institutions, we can only say that our growth is — that is not the primary source of our growth at all. You should know and you do know that we’re the #1 wealth manager in Asia. We have a very clear position around how we deal with our clients and also what our risk appetite is with clients. And therefore, it is more because of what we represent and what we do that we attract these flows than the other way around. Sarah?
Sarah Youngwood: In terms of the cost/income ratio underlying, when you’re looking at what’s coming ahead, first of all, you have the benefit of rate. And so NII is continuing to be a strong contribution to our results. Second of all, you’ve got the contribution from the floats that we are continuing to generate. And after that, in terms of the equity market, obviously, there are different ranges of scenarios and everybody can make their assumptions there. In terms of the cost side, you’re seeing us to be very rigorous there. And so the expense guidance that we gave you, 2% to 3%, ex FX and litigation, is of course reflected in our cost/income ratio guidance.
Operator: Your next question is from Andrew Coombs from Citi.
Andrew Coombs: One on capital return and then one on FX. If I look at capital return, you’ve guided greater than $5 billion for the buybacks. I know it’d be greater than the comment. I guess my question would be why did you not feel comfortable coming out with guidance that was more similar to full year ’22, so the $5.6 billion that you executed? I know you flagged the CMT tax change in the U.S. But just trying to understand your rationale for why it’d be greater than $5 billion, which is obviously less than what you’ve achieved last year. And then my second question, just on FX. I know your cost guidance for the growth in 2023 is ex FX movements. Obviously, the FX move overall should be a tailwind this year for you in terms of profitability, but potentially a headwind to your cost line. So perhaps you could give us an idea of what you think the magnitude on revenues and costs would be based on current FX rates versus the ’22 average.
