Andrew Lim: I’d like to drill down a bit more into Wealth Management Americas and discuss that, as the others have done. So I mean relative to other regions, as we’ve seen in Slide 31, that decline of 20% in PBT seems quite disappointing compared to the other regions. So I was wondering if you could give a bit more color on whether they’re suffering a bit more on the deposit beta or migration side there and whether that represents a sea change going forward in the profit trajectory. And then perhaps you could — maybe you could talk a bit more specifically about that structural difference in the Americas versus peers in the U.S. They didn’t suffer such a big decline in PBT in the fourth quarter. It was rather flat or up. And then if you look at the cost/income ratio, your sort of 86%, it’s still a good 60 percentage points higher than peers. So what are the differences here in UBS Americas versus U.S. peers? And what can you do here to really improve that?
Ralph Hamers: Thank you. So if you compare us with the peers in the Americas is that the peers that we compete with have a local banking business and which is very stable in terms of what — if it comes to production of their business, of new clients as well as the stickiness of the money and the — and with that, where they may need to price in order to manage the shift in the mix of the business. We’re very much a wealth manager. That’s what we do. And they are a combination of a wealth manager and some have a larger exposure to the local business, which generally comes with a bigger scale in that local business and with that, therefore, also a lower cost/income ratio. But Sarah, anything to add?
Sarah Youngwood: No, we — just obviously, this is also reflecting the level of investments that we are making in the region. And so as you see us addressing both the revenue as well as the expense, both in the investment side wallet share as well as the banking wallet share, and on the cost side, both our strategic and tactical, we certainly plan to improve. But it will take some time for the mix to start becoming more in line with what you are seeing in some of the peers that you’re comparing to.
Operator: The next question is from Benjamin Goy from Deutsche Bank.
Benjamin Goy: Just one major question left from my side. We had 95% payout in 2022. I was wondering whether we should think about just below full payout as well for this year and this is the main determining factor on how large the buyback can be.
Ralph Hamers: Thank you, Benjamin. Thank you for trying again as well. But as you know, we have a very capital-generative model. Certainly, in an uncertain environment for us, the first priority is to have a strong balance sheet. And the second priority is that where we see growth that we can actually support that growth using capital as well. The third priority is that we have a dividend that we want to increase progressively in order to have a good mix between dividends and also share buyback. But since we feel we are undervalued, we find the buyback even more important, and therefore, we came out with this guidance that we have given. And again, I can’t give you more than what we have given, which is the over $5 billion that we’re confident with. And clearly, as the year progresses and there is further progress on it and we can update you on it as to where we are we think where this is going, we will certainly do so.
