Société Générale Société anonyme (GLE) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

[indiscernible] this session. I'm very pleased to welcome Mr. Slawomir Krupa, CEO of Société Générale, today to our financial conference. You've been appointed CEO SocGén in May last year, and you also hold the strategic plan presented almost last year at the same time.

So a year ago, I remember at this same stage, we've discussed your plan, which was perceived as quite downbeat. And we discussed whether it was just a kind of a reset to then surprise positively the market or actually it was a proper work and a lot of work to do. So I think given the tough year you've been through and maybe you shall, maybe you didn't feel it this way, but that's, I think, market sentiment. It's clear that you've been dealt a bad hand. Can you briefly first go through the progress made in this first year of you as CEO and in your plan? And then we'll go into -- deeper into different topics [indiscernible].

Thank you, Tarik. Thank you for having me. Thanks for joining us for this session. Well, first of all, I think that's probably what I told you last year here. It was a plan based on an honest assessment of the situation. So clearly, not downbeat, so you beat the expectation, something which was honest in the assessment and designed to be realistic and ambitious within the framework of being realistic. And -- I mean, you may remember, I'm sure you do and maybe some of your guests here as well, the idea was, first, that we had to operate this bank with the right level of foundation, so to speak, with the strong foundations and, in particular, capital. And so one of the cornerstone decisions, the first one, to some extent, was to say, we're going to operate this at 13% CET1 ratio post Basel IV. And this implied a number of other decisions, right, which were, I think, tough decisions, but the right ones for the company and for the long-term value creation for shareholders. And this piece was based on slower organic growth, very limited and focused on 2 businesses, Ayvens and Boursorama, for the first part and then, over time, on work, right, again, hard work, rational work, strategic work on the business portfolio, which we believed was probably too wide, too diversified and not matching all of the criterias that we wanted to have for the strategic management of our portfolio. So namely, in simple terms, a set of disposals to simplify the business model while working on costs, obviously, because in the end, improving the reported. And that was another important feature, no more underlying in the way we talk about performance, but on the reported basis and ROE, which was basically in our assumptions and projections, going to basically double, if I oversimplify, on a reported basis from the recent past to something closer to 10%. And so short answer to your question, although I have already been a little long, but short answer is, we are doing exactly what we said we would, right? That's the cornerstone of what we're trying to achieve here. Be honest in our assessment, be realistic in the plans that we design and present and then do what we said we would do. And that's what we're doing. And actually, the prints, be it on capital or ahead of the trajectory that we showed last year. The disposal effort, so to speak, is well underway, 9 disposals in Africa, of which Morocco, which was a significant entity, were signed and equipment finance as well and 2 entities in international private banking. So I would say we're making good progress there and all on very decent, if not very good terms, in terms of the transaction. So capital disposals well underway. The cost work, structural, deep, important, continuing executing on Ayvens on the merger of the French networks, but also adding another layer. It's mostly head office weight, so to speak, in the structural cost, reducing it and also further work on the technology. This is progressing. Our last print, in terms of cost to income, as you know, was 68% and the ROE last quarter, above 7%, and so well into what we're trying to achieve and on the trajectory that we designed. Doing what we said we would is our motto every day.

I mean -- very good. I mean, let's now dig into details on all these aspects you've described, and maybe the first one is on the French retail. And maybe this is the area where markets felt a bit more disappointment there, and you had to walk away from your net interest income guidance in Q2. And can you tell us what has been a surprise for you to actually see lower NII than initially expected? And do you think the market's focus on this line is disproportionate? Or is it fair?

Listen, I mean, the market focusing on one of our important businesses, such as French retail, which is the historic one and an important one in terms of the features, right, of the nature of the income that is generated there, is only fair, right? So that's the first comment. Now if you allow me to step back for a second, I think it's very important, when we speak about this topic, to establish a few elements of baseline, right? And so first of all, if you look at the figures of last quarter in the market and ours -- versus ours, we were basically up 10%. The market in France was down 2%. I mean, it's important to have the facts straight, right? Now if I extend this range, considered range to Q2 '22, because, of course, there were different dynamics during these years but Q2 '22 is a decent starting point, we are down 8%, and the market is down 20%, right? So we need to understand that, right? That doesn't address questions about the market itself, obviously, because at the same time, you may say or you may counter with, yes, basically most of the other European countries were sharply up, true. But within the market, we had actually the best performance on both, let's say, ranges of time that I addressed here. So that's one. Second, it's important to also understand that it stemmed from, clearly, an underestimation of the trend, continued trend of shifting from site deposits at the customer behavior level, from site deposits to interest-bearing deposits. For one, this is an important impact. And in France, not only -- and you have studies, including by McKinsey, about deposit beta in Europe, which shows that there's a material difference in France versus the rest of Europe with much higher deposit beta as a market feature. But -- so not only this, but also basically, it took French customers basically more than 2 years to continue adapting to the major shift in rates regime. And I think there, while we were highlighting the sensitivity constantly in our presentations, in our simulations of the future and our projections, we underestimated this effect. That's basically, if I oversimplify, half of the downgrade of the guidance. And the second half was us being more bullish, basically, on loan origination in our projection. But faced with a market in '24, which was, one, slightly less conducive to investment, slightly more wait-and-see mode on the corporate side, in particular, but also very strong competitive dynamics and levels of margins, right, which for long-term books, like the books of French retail, didn't seem strategically sound to us, we lowered the intensity of loan origination. And that's basically the other half, if I simplify. Well, last comment on the phone, where we were the only ones to have a guidance, so we were the only ones to have to downgrade it.

That's clear. But if I can come back on the deposit migration, one of the areas mentioned by Banque de France and Bercy is that the consumption coming from still a high level of savings in France is one of the drags to the growth, and the level of savings in France is still above pre-COVID levels.So do you think this deposit migration was stabilizing from here? Or given the uncertainty domestically and maybe, can even call it, globally, that trend of combination of uncertainty on the macro, but also high savings, will still drive that deposit migration that hurts you this year?

Well, I would say 2 answers here. I would say, first of all, from more like a mechanical side of things, so existing, so to speak, deposits -- existing structure of the deposit base in France, I think -- let me put it this way where we don't comment on intra-quarter performance, but let me put it this way, the assumptions that we made in Q2 are consistent with what's happening, right, if that makes sense. Meaning, we see something of, let's say, a stabilizing trend, the rates going lower, right, and the anticipation of lower rates is going to help. There's no talk anymore of the [indiscernible] going up. And theoretically, you could expect the opposite trend happening, which is also going to, let's say, put pressure towards stabilization of behaviors in terms of the mechanical structural shift in the deposit base. Now from a macro perspective, well, I mean, it's some of the basics. People in the end, if you want higher consumption, you need a general level of higher confidence in the future and in how the economy looks to you as a consumer or -- and through the companies as well and the entire sentiment of the market. And there, it's difficult to deny that there are some uncertainties. And so part of that, let's say, propensity to save is probably going to stay there. But frankly, I think the French banks and us as well, we were more sensitive to the mechanical shifts than to the macro trend.

And on -- promise, last question on deposit migration. The -- I mean, the impact has been felt as well at other French banks, but proportion of French retail is much, much lower. Do you -- can you clearly answer, there is no deposit franchise issue with SocGén as such in terms of deposit transfer? And also, how do you think about the idea of avoiding some clients to move into [indiscernible], for example, rather going into some off-balance sheet products that will generate you fees and so on? Something that actually has been less and less in your revenue mix over the last few years. How do you tackle that aspects of higher revenues from [indiscernible]?

So a few layers here. First layer, we -- if you look simply at the market share on deposits per market segment at the Banque de France, our market share is stable, stable on individuals, both on site and term, and it's stable and corporate, both on site and term, for roughly 1 year, 1.5 years. So from that perspective, I think the figures speak for themselves. In absolute terms, we are at EUR 300 billion, basically stable as well. So these are like the figures, right? If you dig into the why, why we believe that we have actually a very sound franchise, is, one, on the individual side, our client base is significantly tilted towards the wealthier segments of the individual market in France, significantly. It's a historical strength of SocGén, and we still focus on these segments in particular. Second, we do have a very strong franchise in corporate on the retail side, on the SMEs, which also helps with the gathering of deposits, operation deposits, et cetera, et cetera. So from this perspective, we feel very, very comfortable. To the second part of your question, we are actually, today, the leader on the life insurance side in terms of fundraising. So to your very point, this is also what happens. I didn't want to use it in my previous answer because it's of a magnitude -- in effect of a magnitude, lower than the shift inside deposits, inventories, et cetera, et cetera. But part of the story is exactly that. When you have a wealthier client base, you will, in the end in France, fundraise more and gather more deposits that end up in the life insurance wrapper than your more universal, let's say, retail bank. So on the contrary, we're focusing on this because, in the end, it's also for the good of the clients, right? For the good of the clients, it's a more rational decision in many instances, not all, in many instances to go life insurance, both Euro fund but also unit-linked investments.

And then on lending growth, you mentioned that was a combination of obviously lower demand, given higher rates, but also a bit of cautiousness from your side, given the margins and the economic perspectives. Now given the economic backdrop and political backdrop in France and globally, are you now willing to -- and the margins are slightly improving, are you willing to open a bit more the growth pipes or is still on the conservative side?

No, we are. We are also because as rates lower, the ability to, in the end, extract margins from the system, so to speak, grows, right? And the room we have between the various features of the French market, again, cost of our liabilities on the savings side, on the regulated savings side, the ability to price the loans better, I'm talking about all segments here, both individual and corporate, improves, right? And our concern was more again from an ALM perspective, right, making sure that in a market which tends to have you book long-term exposure, right, which is not very maneuverable from a rates perspective as the French system showed in the last few years. We were also with a view that the rates were going down, willing to make sure that we optimize basically the level of return that we embed in our balance sheet for a certain duration, right? So from this perspective, every day, basically, is a better environment from that perspective, for the French retail. Which allows me to make another point, if you allow me, is French banks have obviously not benefited at all in the same way than our European peers from what happened on a -- in terms of the rates regime. But long term with a slow pace, well -- I mean, French NII is poised to grow, right, because the slow repricing of long-dated balance sheet is happening, right? It's happening every day, but at a pace which is slow. Of course, in our case, and I guess in some of our peers case, some of the short-term hedging impact basically goes away right now. And I mean, we're done with that and 2025 is going to be without any drag from this perspective. So the long-term perspective for French NII is a positive one, right, albeit a slow one, and we saw this year with some bumps. But as rates go down and some of that behavior again stabilizes, it is a positive for the French banks and us as well.

Very good. Still on France in terms of costs, so you've now working into the actual integration of SG network and Crédit du Nord. Can you update us on where are you in the process on the migration and when can we start to see the actual cost savings feeding through?

So as you know -- so we've been talking about this for a while now because this was announced, I think, late 2020. And so what is very, very important is to understand that the merger -- and it was a merger of 2 different companies, right, I mean, it's serious stuff, different head office, different culture, different setup, different approach of some clients. So it's a real merger of 2 different companies that we're carrying out. And the peak activity, in terms of merging entities, et cetera, point of sales and all the teams, was 2024, spring 2024. So this is now, right? So that's also very important to keep in mind. So just -- I guess points of sales are a good reference of where we are. We had to close 600 point of sales, and we're already closed 400, right, and again, peak activity earlier this year. We have 200 to go, of which, let's say, roughly 2/3 is going to be done by the end of the year. So from that perspective, this indicator shows you that we will be done operationally up to 90% by the end of the year with some further things to happen next year. There's a little time lag in terms of the synergies, but we already have more than half that were affected. We are in the process of decommissioning the entire system of the Credit du Nord because this was one of the key assumptions, to get entirely rid of one of the systems. So full effect of the synergies, the growth synergies next year basically and 100% in '26. But the bulk of it next year, and this is where we are, so very good progress. Now again, because it's a real merger of real companies, the entire dynamic and the entire upside of, let's say, all the updates to the relationship model that were made, to the, let's say, impact on clients -- positive impact on clients from better efficiency, better quality, this is also something which is work in progress and I believe will give -- bear fruits next year mostly.

And in terms of cost to achieve, majority has been booked this year.

Yes.

It is really -- I mean, it's small next year, but you are confident that there won't be overspending on that, no?

Yes. No, I am, I am, definitely. Definitely, the CTA for the merger is 90% behind us.

Good. Last point on French retail, asset quality. I know it's less concern to the market as it was probably couple of years ago. But we've seen some flare-ups in the French retail. You guys like to call them files, but it's...

French term, actually.

But actually, it's actual losses. So can you comment? Is it just some specific cases? Or are we seeing some small trend there?

So no, definitely specific cases. It's a handful, if you take both quarters, and maybe it's 4, 5 different cases, not filed, which were generating losses. Definitely, you're putting it the right way. And if you exclude these -- not that they didn't happen, right, and not that we were not learning lessons from every single occurrence of something that didn't go exactly the way we planned. But if you remove these, the underlying cost of risk -- so with that, if I remember well, the average of H1 was 35 basis points for the French retail in terms of cost of risk. If you remove them, it would be 26. So this shows you what's the underlying trend. And to be honest, these 4 cases, I mean, are not -- most of them are not entirely macro-driven. So in the sense, they are specific, and in the sense, there's no reason to believe that there's anything of a pattern there that hit these companies first before hitting others. They were all very specific cases and mostly not linked to macro, but more issues that were idiosyncratic to the companies. If we look at the trends underneath, we have something which is very sound. Obviously, some of the cost of risk is normalizing after a period where basically nothing was happening, if I may say so. And it's the usual suspects of what you see in the macro, right, in the construction sector and in the nonfood retail and things like that. But nothing that would be outside of this normalization trend at this stage, right, at this stage.

Very good. I will take, first, opportunity to open questions to the floor, if there are any. One in the front here, please.

I have 2 for you. First of all is on capital. So over the past 12 months, you did a very good job on CET1. So -- I mean, how are you now your vis-à-vis the ECB, et cetera, so the supervisors? So do they now accept the fact that you have done a good job and that there is no more problem going inside? The second question is on the French budget, which is, at the moment, noisy, I would say, on the French banking sector. So what do you expect the normal increase in income tax and the banking tax? Or what can you say about that?

Okay. Thank you very much. So first of all -- and I do believe I said this last year, but it's an important question, so thank you for giving me the opportunity to comment. The 13% CET1 ratio was never, right, and I'm saying this on the record, was never a regulatory pushed target, right? It was really our own assessment of the idea, a very simple idea, that if we all more or less accept that banks, let's say, in our peer group are somewhere between 12% and 12.5% in the current circumstances, between the regulatory environment that we have in Europe and the nature of our business, the more buffer you can put on top of what seems to be the acceptable market level, the better off you are, including for shareholders, right, because you're protecting them from a number of events that could lead to dilution events in all shapes or forms. And this is really the key piece of our reasoning, right? So leading to answering more directly your question, well, obviously, I'm not here to speak on their behalf, and I'm sure they would like that. But let me put it this way, the 13% level is the right level, and to your point, I think we've been making a very good progress towards this target. And so I guess, everybody's happy from this perspective. In terms of the French budget, so basically -- you said it, right? There's a set of measures that are being talked about, all kinds of ways around the income tax, maybe an exceptional contribution, higher contribution for bigger companies, not specifically banks, bigger companies. Again, I can't really comment for the authorities here. But well, my opinion is that this seems likely, right? I mean, the way this is all talked about, the way it could be more of one-off measure, helping with resetting some of the, let's say, current fiscal situation, showing some form of compromise from a political standpoint without being structural in any way, shape or form, looks like compromise to me. And this is a big word today in France, how do we compromise in a positive sense, right, not in -- because in English, I think it's maybe not exactly the same. It's very positive in France, right? We agree on something, I guess, this is the point. So that seems likely. Super profits, if you allow me that little sarcasm, there's none, right, in the French banking sector. So I don't see how that could be a topic, right? And then more broadly, I think this idea of finding some form of a very fine line, walking a very fine line between not touching really anything structural, the structural reforms that were enacted or partly enacted in the last few years, I think seems to be an objective and making sure that, on the other hand, this is not done completely at the expense of some of what voters voiced in the election. I think right now, that's how I interpret the situation. This is the goal, right? Let's make sure that the structural reforms stay in place, and let's find ways to -- not only to show, but to actually find some pockets where we can show understanding of the message of the voters. So they take pensions, maybe tweaking something very in the details, right, of this particular case or long careers, as we say in France, or some other things, but not really touching the pension reform. So from that perspective, and I'll stop there, the situation is, in my view, as good as it gets, right? Let's hope that it's stable.

There's another question here.

So you are selling assets, as planned. But on the opposite, you have your competitors adding scale, capabilities. So in a way, you are a bit like at [Foreign Language]. How do you make sure that you protect your franchise and stay relevant going forward, please?

Thank you, very, very important question. So again, what we sold 9 countries in Africa, of which Morocco, equipment finance and the 2 subsidiaries in private banking while some of these decisions are real decisions, right? Some of the countries in Africa, we have been there for 100 years, right? So believe me, as a steward of the company, with my team, we don't take these decisions lightly, neither for the clients that are there. And again, some of them have been our clients for 100 years or the staff. But at the same time -- let me put it this way. The combination of all these cells, so these 12 cells, don't affect the scale of Société Générale in a material way. It's important to understand that, right, especially in terms of net income. And if you add a view of the embedded tail risk or some structural issues as far as our shareholding of these companies was concerned, right, other people may do better than we did. It's a very rational decision that has actually limited impact on our scale. So that's one. And second, at the same time, we are building the, by far, leader in fleet management and mobility in the world. We are investing in Boursorama. We are investing in an ability to structurally operate our global banking business differently with the Brookfield JV. We have invested in the Bernstein JV to also catalyze even further our equity business and generate a better value chain for the primary equity and the fee business on the investment banking side. We are in KB, for instance. We don't talk about this too much, but -- because it's at a lower level of investment, but we are investing. We've been investing for the last few years in the entire revamp of the technology of that bank, together with a pretty significant restructuring of the headcount and the structure of the company, et cetera, et cetera. So meaning, we are at the same time investing in core businesses to grow them and to grow the ones that have actually higher returns, higher returns than cost of equity, limited tail risk and strong positions in their respective markets, which is the core of our strategic grid.

On capital, you've raised your guidance within Q2 to above 13% by the full year. How confident you are to deliver that target, given the still uncertainties around -- been talked to a lot of the markets about this on-site inspections, the tail of TRIM? And also, what's your take on FRTB? If you have to make a bet, is that something that will disappear or just keep postponed?

So on the capital trajectory target and in the context of what you said, regulatory headwinds, I think what we're saying, and that's extremely important, is that, logically, because of everything I said last year, this year, et cetera, capital at 13% post Basel IV is the cornerstone of the strategy, the cornerstone of our priorities. So I guess, what we're saying is there's no compromise above the 13%, and we will do whatever the circumstance is, whatever it takes to meet these targets by year end the way we set it, but also next year and in 2026, meaning that we have lots of levers. And we've got better at this, as you can see in the trajectory that we have in terms of playing with organic growth, all kinds of SRT technology, distribution, venues that we have and, again, including more structural through partnerships, et cetera, et cetera, that we will basically deliver on this most important objective of ours. So yes, 2024 will be delivered according to plan, and any impact that may come from anywhere will be manageable.

And then I mean, if -- I mean, you seem confident to be above 13% Basel III at the year-end.

Sorry, I forgot the second part of the question.

Yes. I mean, I will include it to my followup please. And then let's assume FRTB is pushed with some confidence that this is something could be potentially canceled or not happening. One or 2 small disposals, and you can all be already pro forma Basel IV CET1 ratio by Q1, Q2 next year. Given your capital-light strategy, would you be confident to actually go into capital [indiscernible] in a sense will lock in at 13% our CET1 because now we control our business, it's derisked, capital regulatory is behind us and do some share buybacks as extra distribution above 13% and, obviously, back to 50% payout as well? Or is it too premature and you want to see longer period of stability and capital build before going into that investment case?

Well, obviously, very important questions. So one, our objective is 13%, right, Basel -- post Basel IV, not more, right? So that's the first part of the answer. So if we were in the situation that you described, the answer is very simple, right? Anything above that from -- like in a reasonably sustainable way, in the way we see the immediate future, would be up for being proactively managed, right. And proactively managed means what, right? When you run company, when you run bank, and you know this very well, you have either the option of growing organically. And we definitely have businesses which have extremely high marginal returns, right, and that's obviously one option. Return to shareholders is obviously an option which has to be considered extremely seriously and will be considered in the case that you described extremely seriously because, again, there needs to be an equilibrium between the various options. And returning money to shareholders in the form of buybacks, especially in the context of low valuation, low metrics from that perspective, is a very compelling financial decision, right? It's too early to tell you what that decision could be or would be because it needs to be, obviously, evaluated in the context. But what I'm saying is the trajectory is to be a 13% post Basel IV. Anything that would be above would be an excess level of capital, which will be managed proactively. And all of what you implied would be valid options, considered immediately in the context that you described.

So it's encouraging to start to hear the word excess from your...

Say it again.

It's encouraging to start to hear the word excess from -- we have 4 minutes. I'm aware it's very short, but I would like to hear you very quickly on 2 topics quickly. First, on Ayvens. Are we close to the trough from used car sales value and so we start to see now a gradual growth again in revenues? That's question one. And secondly, on Boursorama. Are you still in the trajectory into client acquisition versus back to profitability there? I know it's a short time to answer those, but...

I'll try to meet the challenge. So on Ayvens, the answer is no, right? We believe that today, actually, the used car sales, which are, let's say, to simplify, in the 1,500, are higher than what we were expecting. And in the plan for 2026, where we have a 13% to 15% ROE target for Ayvens, our assumption on the UCS is much lower than what we see in the market today, so closer, right, in our trajectory to, let's say, what was happening before COVID, right? Before COVID, it was 400, like the long-term average, right? So our assumption is slightly higher than that, but much closer to this than to 1,500. So we're not close to the trough on the used car sales in our view, and this has been factored into our trajectory. Now where is the upside going to come from a top line perspective? One, improving margins, right? And we've already done some good work, up 13 -- 30 basis points in the recent quarters, and we're working very hard on this. It's all kinds of very minute things in terms of how you sell, to whom you sell, the usual, right, but making sure that you do a good job. You're not only obsessed with gross growth, right, of the number of cars that you have in your fleet, but more like we're doing in banks, so to speak, now that Ayvens is a bank, a regulated entity, making sure that you have a very fine allocation of capital and client management strategy so that you optimize your returns. Then obviously, the synergies, right? There are substantial synergies at Ayvens, both on cost and procurement, on IT costs. And also from a revenue standpoint, we do believe that we can make better money and more money as we are extracting the value of the leadership that we're creating there. So in the middle of the restructuring, 2025 will be the peak restructuring there, and the full benefit of all that to be expected in 2026. But that's the story about the revenue, so downward pressure through the UCS, upward pressure through everything I described. And quickly on Boursorama. Boursorama is a growth asset. I mean, it's an amazing tool that we have to acquire high-quality clients in a bank that has the full suite of products that can be offered to customers, not just some basic banking or flow management tools, but a real bank that has 6.5 million customers, average deposits a little south of EUR 10,000, EUR 40 billion balance sheet, 1 in 5 French person a client of Boursorama, 1 in 4, if you look at the wealthier segments, et cetera. It's an absolutely extraordinary tool to acquire clients, operate them at a very high level of efficiency. Less than 1,000 people are operating the 6.5 million banking clients and making the first spot in terms of client feedback, client quality ranking in France. I mean, take all these pieces together, and you can sense how important this asset and this opportunity for us is including, ultimately, with the ultimate disruption of the French market because starting from a very high level of efficiency and a high level of positive client feedback. Now, we are on the path of extracting the profitability from this asset. We promised a certain level of profitability for 2026. We will be there, and making sure that we manage the costs of that growth in an effective way for our shareholders and for the company is important. And this is what we've been doing, right? So right now, we're steering the level of acquisition in a much more precise way. And for instance, last quarter -- I mean, I'm not saying this will be exactly the same path every single quarter. But last quarter, Boursorama had a positive contribution, right? So we're doing it already to make sure that we optimize the path of acquiring these clients while giving this unique asset the opportunity to expand.

Fantastic. Thank you very much, Slawomir. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Thank you.