Operator: The next question is from Anke Reingen from Royal Bank of Canada.
Anke Reingen: I just wanted to ask on costs again. I mean given we commonly adjust for FX rates, I mean I understand you don’t want to give any more guidance, but can you give us maybe like the FX mix on costs? Or if we think about the cost/income ratio, should FX effects basically be neutral for the cost/income ratio? And then in terms of the Investment Banking, you said 2022 is a good revenue year, but the cost/income ratio is 78%. Is that sort of like where you think on the cost/income ratio should be? Or do you think it should be trending down lower in the Investment Bank?
Ralph Hamers: Okay. So I’ll start with the second question and Sarah will take the first one, Anke. So on the second one, basically, the way we look at our Investment Bank, as you know, is an Investment Bank that is — has to return its cost of capital. And there is a combination here of the use of capital and it is a capital-light Investment Bank, as you know, and with that, therefore, also the consequences for the cost/income ratio. So since we are capital-light on the Investment Bank, we are best practice in the return on risk-weighted assets. The cost/income ratio may not be as competitively seen because we invest heavily in technology as well because that’s the way we play in the Investment Bank. And therefore, the return in the Investment Bank, and we had the last 3 years a very good return, all 3 years good returns and also returning more than cost of capital, that is more for us the indicator that we manage the Investment Banking on than per se the cost/income ratio.
Because in the markets that we play in, we need to continue to invest in technology and artificial intelligence because that’s the game we play in the Investment Bank. So that, I hope, explains you as to how we look at the Investment Bank.
Sarah Youngwood: And in terms of the cost/income ratio, you mentioned it and it’s a great way to think about it, it is really very neutral in terms of how it’s affected by FX. So the best way to think about it is that all of our guidance is standing regardless of the FX because on the cost/income ratio, both the numerator and the denominator of FX are affected in opposite directions.
Operator: The next question is from Adam Terelak from Mediobanca.
Adam Terelak: I’ve got another one on costs and then one on capital. On expenses, I’m actually a little bit surprised on the cost guide, 2% to 3%, given that previously, you’ve spoken ex variable compensation, but now you seem to bake that into the guide. Can you give us a bit of color about kind of base case for revenues opposite that, particularly in GWM, which is clearly comp is very much linked to the fee line there? So just a feel from your base cases on planning and why a switching guidance from kind of an underlying inflation figure to — which excluded variable comp to one that’s now all in. And then secondly, it’s a bit of a technical question around Basel IV. I appreciate the slide in the appendix. Can you just give us a bit of a color about how the short-term inflation to your risk weight is front loading some of that Basel IV impact, so the relation between kind of the 2022 to 2023 inflation and what that’s done to your 2025 Basel IV impact?
And can you split that out a little bit between credit risk and operational risk? And how we should be thinking about the short term versus the longer term there and the interaction between the 2?
