The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (GS) Earnings Call Transcript & Summary

Put up the first ARS question that we've been asking everyone, I'm very pleased to have Goldman Sachs with us continuing this afternoon's presentations. From the company, Chairman and CEO, David Solomon. David, thank you for being here.

Maybe the best place to start is just level macro overview. I thought your comments in the July earnings call were more constructive, and you've kind of been on more bear side before that. So just maybe kind of what's your latest view on the macro backdrop and operating environment?

Sure. First of all, thank you for having me. I'm delighted to be here. It's kind of an annual rite of passage in the fall. I think we are constructive. The environment's definitely gotten better. And it's interesting. You said I was kind of on the bear side. If we were sitting here a year ago and we were looking at where inflation was, what the Fed was clearly saying it was going to do, we were 6 months into the war in Ukraine. It was kind of hard to be optimistic. And candidly, as I talk to clients, I talked to CEOs, I talked to investors, there was tremendous cautiousness because we're really changing the environment materially. Now I actually think the economy has been more resilient over the course of the last 12 months than we expected. I think government spending obviously has been a huge tailwind, which has helped in that context to some degree. Market's a bit more resilient. But I think the chances of a soft landing now are materially higher. And certainly, we've got inflation to a better place. I'm definitely in the camp that inflation might still be a little bit sticky, and we've got more work to do and maybe kind of stickier, higher rates longer, but we're in a much, much better position. And the capital markets are also starting to open up and react a little bit more positively. So I think it's a more constructive tone going forward, but it's still an uncertain time because we haven't navigate a way through this. And so as an organization, we stay focused on risk management. We stay focused on optimization.

So continue to see evidence of capital markets activity -- and I guess are you continuing to see evidence of capital markets activity and strategic dialogue picking up? Maybe how are client engagements and the prospect of resurging activity levels trending? And then any comments on quarter-to-date trading activity now that you've kind of opened that floor up last quarter?

Sure. A couple of thoughts. First of all, there's no question that the environment for capital markets activity is improving. It's still way, way off what I'll call cycle averages, but definitely improving. Just before I came up here, I met with the ARM management. It's the middle of their IPO. From everything I hear, that's going well. We have a handful of other very significant IPOs in the market. It's been quite a while since I could say to you we have a handful of very significant IPOs in the market. That's an improvement. But I do believe that if these go well and it feels at the moment like they're progressing nicely, it kind of creates a virtuous cycle of bringing more of the pent-up backlog to market. So I definitely think we're seeing capital markets improvement, more confidence in the capital market. And by the way, this is not surprising, Jason, when you step back. I've said when you have a reset in capital markets like this, history tells you it takes about 6 quarters to get things to kind of re-sort and get things to reopen. What do you know? We're kind of 6 quarters. So I think things are improving but we're still ways away from normalized levels with respect to capital markets. But I think that trend, if the macro environment -- if we're correct on the macro environment, I think that will continue to improve through the rest of the year and into 2024. And we'll get back to a more normalized environment for capital markets. M&A is -- it's a longer lead time. And so you don't decide you want to do something strategic on Tuesday and do it a week later. Last summer, M&A activity shut down because there was enormous skepticism and concern about the economic environment. There's no question CEOs feel a lot better right now, much more leaning toward good prospects for soft landing. So it wouldn't surprise you inside our shop is more strategic dialogue going on with companies. And I do think you'll see an acceleration of that. It's just that will lag the capital markets pick-up for sure. In addition, I'd just say financial sponsors have really been closed. The private equity guys and the financial sponsors for the last 12 months, they haven't been selling things, they haven't been buying things. The way their business models work, and by the way, this is a huge part of investment banking activity, hard for them to make money when they don't sell anything, hard for them to make money when they don't buy anything. And so you just kind of know that's not going to continue forever. And as that ecosystem opens up, and I think you're starting to see signs of life there, too, that puts another tailwind to capital markets activity and then ultimately M&A activity. With respect to trading, what I would say is the activity levels have been good this quarter, but I think you're aware that we're coming off a relatively tough comp versus the third quarter last year. I'd also highlight that you should look -- you got a -- September is important because of the seasonal slowdown. And so obviously, we have a few weeks to go, and we'll see where we come out.

Got it. Maybe remind us of your key areas of focus and execution priorities, and has anything changed?

No. Nothing has changed. I mean, our key areas of focus, first and foremost, we're focused on continuing to grow our wallet share in our financial business, our global banking and markets franchise. Franchise is performing very well so we're really good about where the client franchise is, feel very, very good about our leading banking franchise and our kind of top position with what we see as 1 other in the trading businesses broadly and strong returns across that business through the cycle. Second, in asset wealth management. We have 2 key priorities: growing management fees, which we've obviously made a lot of progress on and also continuing to reduce the historical principal investment balance sheet, and we're continuing to make progress on that. And then obviously -- and the platforms continuing to bring the remaining businesses that we have in platforms to profitability. And so we're executing and feel good about where we are.

Maybe we can kind of delve into each of those segments maybe a bit more specifically. But on Global Banking & Markets, it uses roughly 2/3 of the firm's capital. You have materially improved the return profile in recent years. Maybe what are some of the key opportunities going forward? And how will you be able to maintain your market share gains?

Yes, we feel very good about the market share gains and a lot of data on the market share gains and the work we've done. Obviously, quarter-to-quarter, there can be movement around that, but we think they're broadly sustainable, and there's more room to continue to make progress. We took our top 100 focus, and we moved it to top 150, and we continue to make progress against the top 150 clients. And there's upside there that can lead to additional wallet share for us. The financing business continues to grow, and we think we -- it's a little bit like a virtuous cycle because you finance your clients more, you wind up with a bigger share of wallet. And I just think we're positioned, given the scale we've driven across this business, to be a leader there, and that creates more of a tailwind for us. So we feel good. The returns through the cycle we believe are mid-teens. I think we've shown that we see returns on this business through the cycle, and we continue to be confident that we can deliver on those prospects as we move forward.

And then in Asset & Wealth Management, clearly, a business you've emphasized more in recent years. Maybe just talk through how your business is differentiated and what gives you confidence in your ability to continue to grow and hit those targets you talked about. And maybe what opportunities you see as most impactful?

Sure. And we had 5 asset management businesses and a wealth business we put together. Whenever you do that, there's a process around that. We've made a lot of progress, particularly in the last 12 months on the process of getting that organized. We think it's a super unique platform. We're one of the top asset managers in the world, the [ 5th or 6th largest ] active asset manager of the world. We supervise $2.7 trillion of assets. We have $1 trillion of wealth assets on the platform from our -- predominantly our ultra-high net worth business. We have about $450 billion of alternatives. I think one of the things that makes the platform unique is the scale and global nature of it and the fact that we have really strong positions across the whole ecosystem of both public markets and private markets. So a leading liquidity platform, a very, very top fixed income platform, a top 10 active equity platform and a top 5 alternatives platform. And our ability to tailor solutions for clients broadly in a way that's differentiated, given the breadth and the scope of what we have, we think, is very compelling. And we're hearing that from clients. We recently won and we announced a very, very significant OCIO mandate that was quite significant. We're pitching for others. We think we're a leader in that business. We think there's opportunity there. On our fundraising target that we had set out a few years ago, we're at $204 billion of alternatives and continuing to make progress on that. That doesn't stop when we hit our $225 billion target, but we're getting there. And we continue to grow our management fees. I look back over the course of the last 5 years and see a real move in the growth of our management fees. Obviously, that won't stop there. At our Investor Day, Marc Nachmann laid out a growth trajectory for that business. He set a margin target. We continue to make progress on that margin target. We said at the time, that wasn't an aspirational margin target, but we thought it was a good place to start. And of course, we think we've had the right strategy in reducing the legacy balance sheet. We get that -- those historical principal investments down to $15 billion by the end of '24 and then generally 0 by the end of '26. I think we're on track and we'll continue to report. We're actively trying to continue to sell those assets. It's a complicated environment. With respect to the commercial real estate and stuff we have, I think again this quarter, you will see some impairments and marks in commercial real estate but to a lesser degree than you saw in the second quarter.

Okay. A lot in there. You talked about selling down the historical principal investments. It's up $15 billion by the end of next year. If you look, I think your SCB came down 80 basis points and the most recent CCAR coming into effect October 1. I suspect that contributed to it. You're going to hit -- you've kind of reaffirmed your target despite the fact the environment is probably more challenging to sell assets. Could you maybe talk to the ability and kind of when you think you can get to kind of 0 and just how does that drive the lower SCB?

Well, there's no question that our performance around the SCB was impacted by the actions we've taken. This was clearly the right strategic decision for the firm going back 4-plus years when we started wrestling with this. I do think if you think about the firm and the firm's balance sheet and the firm continued on the strategy, which by the way, with the regulatory world, was not the right strategy. If you've been sitting on the strategy and had the size balance sheet we had kind of coming out of the last decade, we'd be in a very different position than we are today. So we've diligently worked on selling stuff down. We believe that we have a responsibility to make the right prudent decisions from a value perspective, but also releasing capital is very, very important in this. So we're moving with haste. We've made a lot of progress. We'll give you an update at the next earnings call, as we do every quarter, but we feel very good about what we set out that we can be down to $15 billion at the end of '24 and generally negligible by the end of '26. And as we do that, it's going to be a more capital in that context.

And then you headed off on the other questions, but I was going to ask about the mid-20s kind of margin for AWM, does seem a little bit low relative to kind of the other asset managers. Ultimately, where do you think you can drive that business towards?

Well, I think it was appropriate, given where we were and where we were starting to set that margin. But we were very, very thoughtful in the language you used to say, that's not our aspiration. As we make progress and we're making a lot of progress on that, we'll give you an update as to what you can expect. But at this point, I'm not going further to what Marc said publicly.

And then I guess, where are you in terms of putting all those businesses together? Are they...

We've made a lot of progress. I mean, these businesses are now organized on a platform. I think we've got the right leadership. Yes, there's been some people movement around that. It's been the appropriate thing to do. Some of it has been in our direction, a good amount of it. Some of it's been in our direction. And so we needed -- whenever you put businesses together, there's going to be disruption and there's going to be volatility. And I just highlight the firm has done this. If you go back, and you're still in the Goldman Sachs, when Goldman Sachs put fixed income and J. Aron together in the 1990s, there was all volatility around getting that together, some leadership leaving, some leadership elevate, when Hank Paulson -- as Lloyd Blankfein to put thicken equities together in the early 2000s, there was a lot of agitating. There are some very important partners that decided they didn't have the right seat at the table. They decided to move on this. This is the path we've been down before. And here, we were putting 5 businesses the other. So there was some movement, but we've done that hard work over the last 3 years. We're in a really good place with it, and we're extremely excited about the prospects for this platform. It's a powerful platform. We think we're well positioned. And one of the things that gives us such confidence is the feedback from our clients about our offering, the mandates we're competing for and winning, gives us a lot of comfort that we have something unique that can be powerful and can grow over time. And we're very focused on that. We think it strengthens Goldman Sachs. We think it's something we're good at. We've had good performance in our asset management business over a long period of time. We believe we have a performance culture. We're going to continue to invest in that performance culture, and we'll also continue to invest in a culture of client service in that business. And I think if you perform and have a great client experience, you do well in those businesses.

And maybe lastly on AWM. I think it was maybe a couple of weeks ago, you announced the sale of Personal Financial Management to Creative Planning. Just maybe how does this kind of fit in the overall AWM strategy?

So we made a decision, when we looked at the high net worth strategy that we were better to take the investment that would be necessary to continue to do that and reallocate it to continuing to grow our ultra-high net worth. Our PWM ultra-high net worth strategy has been growing rapidly. It's a big business. We're clearly -- there's room for us to continue to grow around the world. And one of our themes just on our strategy over the last 18 months is simplification and focus. And this was an opportunity to simplify that strategy and focus so we decided that was the appropriate decision. When the deal closes sometime this fall, we'll book a gain. And we'll then focus our resources and our attention to growing the ultra-high net worth business. Now we have an ability to access high net worth through our relationships with RIAs. We continue to service RIAs very broadly across a broad platform, and we do think that's an opportunity to bring more assets into our asset management business. We also think this is pure for us to have our ultra-high net worth business, and with the RIAs to have no conflicts of having our own RIA platform inside. And so we think this is the right strategic move, and it creates more focus for us on ultra-high net worth.

Got it. And maybe shifting gears to the consumer side of the house. You've clearly been narrowing your ambitions over the last few quarters. Just maybe any update you provide us in terms of how that process is going. GreenSky, you're obviously taking a look at and just maybe your consumer strategy more broadly, particularly in credit cards.

Yes. So with respect to GreenSky, we've transmitted to the market that we're running a process on that. I don't have anything other to report other than when we reach a conclusion, we'll report it. But we feel good about where we are in that process and more to come on that. Our goal, as I stated, is to bring these -- to bring the rest of the platform to profitability. We're making progress. We've narrowed the focus. We've executed on a bunch of things to narrow the focus. So we're operating the card platforms. You probably saw we made an important hire with a lot of experience gentlemen and Bill Johnson to help us continue to drive the focus to profitability on those, and we'll continue to evaluate as we go forward, but that focus has gotten a lot narrower and a lot more specific. We feel good about the progress we've made.

And I think you were talking about pretax breakeven by 2025 was the...

We'll continue to drive to profitability as quickly as we can on those platforms.

Got it. Positive end game, obviously occupied a lot of our summer reading. Maybe if you could kind of -- we'll put up the next ARS question. But can you maybe just talk about your thought of the proposal impact on Goldman? What are you doing to prepare?

Yes. So I mean, it's a big rule proposal. I'd say the most significant change to the regulatory rules since the financial crisis and Dodd-Frank. If you go back to Dodd-Frank, I think it's important to recognize that coming out of Dodd-Frank, the largest financial institutions materially increased their capital, I think, 2x plus, materially increased their liquidity, materially decreased their leverage. The largest financial institutions go through a rigorous stress test every year. The largest financial institutions also have been through some real-world stress tests over the course of the last 5 years, and have performed well and have really been very stable and very constructive at difficult times. And so I think the large financial institutions are in very good shape. So you have to -- I think when you look at this, you have to ask the question, what are we trying to do? What are we trying to accomplish? And if the answer to that is to make the system more safe and sound, it's not clear that more capital is the best answer to that. And there are trade-offs. And so is this the best way to do it, I think, is a reasonable question. And so I think you've got to step back and say, okay, that's a complex question to answer, but what do we know based on looking at the proposal? Well, there are 3 things that I believe based on the proposal, that would absolutely be true, if it went into place, the first is the cost of credit would go up for big companies all the way down to small businesses. The second is that the U.S. competitiveness and capital markets would decrease. And the third is that more activity would be pushed out of the regulated part of the banking system into the unregulated or shadow system. And so if you look at that, our view is these capital rules go too far. Of course, we believe and want a safe and sound system, but you have to ask, is this doing more damage to the system than providing benefit? And so we do not think this proposal, as put forward, is good for economic growth and competitiveness in the United States. We'll comment during the comment period, and we'll see how this progresses. I know a number of other people here have commented on impact. As put forward for us these rules, if they wouldn't in place, is put forward, would increase our capital by slightly more than 25%.

Capital or RWA?

Capital.

By -- so you said, 25%?

Probably more than 25%. But I'd also highlight, as you know, we were actually talking before, the industry has been very nimble at adapting to the rule set. And so as the rule set comes forward, as it evolves, the industry will adapt and the markets will adapt. I think the question we really have to answer is, is this good for the system? Is this good for U.S. competitiveness? Are we doing the right thing? Is this enhancing safety and soundness? More capital does not necessarily enhance safety and soundness versus creating other friction.

I guess in a hypothetical world, if the proposal goes through as is, what does Goldman do? I imagine sitting still is an option? Do you see kind of some of the benefits from either? Is it shrinking RWAs? Is it exiting businesses? Is it charging more? Just how do you go about managing that?

Yes, we adapt. I mean, it's just, you and I were talking before. We are pretty good at adapting to whatever the rule set is. And there have been other rules that have been put forward where people have flipped out, the industry adapts, and it comes at all different forms. You do certain things differently or you don't do certain things or you charge it to certain services. There are certain parts of this that I think can migrate stuff to parts of the unregulated system. By the way, we participate as an asset manager in parts of the unregulated system. We have a huge private credit platform so we can benefit from some of the that, too. But on the other hand, there are also certain parts of it that are hard to push into the unregulated system. Prime is a very, very important part of the economic engine that provides liquidity to markets. And that's not easy to push someplace else. So there'll be an adaptation. There will be changes. There'll be changes in pricing. But for the moment, I'm more focused. We're obviously doing all the work that you would expect us to do. On top of it, we're all over it. But I'm more focused on, at the moment, for a comment period. I don't think these rules make sense. We need to comment. We need to see what we can do to make these sense.

I guess out of curiosity, where do you see maybe the greatest chance of having success in...

I'm not going to offer a point of view on the record on that. I think there's a lot here that needs to be discussed. And by the way, you're hearing out of Washington. There are lots of different points of view. There are different points of view on the Fed. We just saw Bill Dudley yesterday, the former Chair of the New York Fed, put out an opinion piece stating his, lots of different points of view on this. So I think this is going to be an interesting process, and it's speculating as to how this all plays out. We have to be prepared. We're doing what we're supposed to do, but it's early to speculate.

That's fair. Why don't we put up the next ARS question in the -- is that the next one? I had a different one. But as the audience answers that, I'll continue. With the proposal, I guess, how is your thinking -- how does it influence your thinking about capital return and maybe through the cycle capital -- through the recycle return targets?

Yes. So with respect to capital, we view ourselves as stewards of the capital that's granted to us at all times. And through this transition, we certainly feel we have an enormous responsibility to continue to steward that capital. We've been very committed to capital return and making capital return more consistent. It's one of the reasons why we've tripled our dividend over the course of the period of time from 2019 to now, and we just raised our dividend by another 10%. So we continue to be committed to that consistent capital return. Obviously, at this moment in time, we said at the end of the second quarter and the third quarter, we would increase our buybacks from second quarter levels. As we move forward from here, we will continue to do buybacks, but at a lower level, given the uncertainty, and we'll obviously evaluate and be nimble and flexible and see as we learn more as we go forward from here.

And I guess 1 more on that topic. Let's go to the ARS question. But I'll just stick with that, just what can Goldman do to most improve its valuation? Building consistent revenue synergies is kind of what you talked about a lot of. Maybe put up the next 1, thoughts on through-the-cycle target.

You asked about targets. It's too early to talk about targets given where the rule is. So at a point in time, we have more clarity. If something needs to change, we'll certainly talk about it. But as we sit today, we really believe the 2 primary businesses that are driving the firm are mid-teens through-the-cycle. Obviously, the asset management, Asset & Wealth Management business will be mid-teens very, very consistently with less volatility when we get the balance sheet down. The markets business will be a volatile business, but we think we've really upgraded the returns, and we believe in the current construct, pre the world but mid-teens through the cycle. And so it's too early to comment on what the implications of this will be but we'll watch it, and we'll obviously communicate at the appropriate time, if there is a change, not clear there would be.

Fair enough. There's been obviously a lot of headlines on Goldman Sachs of late. Some of them you addressed last week in an interview so I'm not going to rehash that. But there's certainly been also outside media attention around several kind of senior-level departures. Maybe just kind of from your seat, how would you describe the firm's culture, talent? Maybe talk to the attrition about...

Sure. And I'd certainly agree there's been a lot of headlines. There's been a lot of noise. Sometimes I'm amazed at the attention that we get from a media perspective, but there are a couple of things that I'd certainly offer. First of all, the culture of the firm is incredibly important, and the partnership with the culture, I think, is a real differentiator. It's unique to Goldman Sachs. It served the firm well. It allows us to serve our clients well. It allows us to attract and retain really extraordinary people. It's unique. It's different but I wouldn't have it any other way. I'm glad we have it, and I think it's a huge beneficiary to the firm. There's nothing that's going on in the context of partner transitions that's different than any other cycle. We said at Investor Day back in February that the last 2-year cycle was the lowest partner transition cycle over the course of the last decade, if go back to 2014 to have a higher transition than what we had in the 2020-2022 period. And if you look we're out at the beginning of the cycle because we made partners last fall, the cycle is tracking within the band of what normal is. We run a partnership with certain size. We want to elect 80 partners every 2 years. That means 80 partners have to leave every 2 years. And then obviously, every time a partner leaves, we get press articles of attention, but there's nothing that's happening that's different than what we'd expect. And part of the rejuvenation of the talent pool is people want opportunities to step up. This is part of the life cycle of Goldman Sachs.

And then I guess when I look at Goldman's valuation, I think it's [ 11x ] book, 9x earnings. What do you think needs to happen to trigger rerating? And what gives you confidence you'll get there?

Well, we're going to continue to simplify the story. We're going to continue to execute on what we said that we're going to do around our core businesses. As we make progress in the asset management business, that will grow, that will give more ballast and more consistently. Hopefully, that will help. As people continue to see that our markets and banking -- that our banking and markets business can perform through the cycle, hopefully, that will help. But I'd highlight that we've grown the earnings materially. We've grown the book value materially. And we've grown the dividend materially. We're going to continue to do that. We've done that in a lot of different environments over long periods of time. And so do I wish the multiple is higher? Yes. Do I think if we continue to execute on a simpler core story with multiple at some point go higher? I'd like to think so, but it's really not my job to guess someone in the multiple moves. It's my job to execute and do what's right for shareholders with our broad leadership team. We're very focused on that. We're going to continue to execute. And we think we're making a lot of progress, and we feel very good about where we are. Now one of the things that would help that, obviously, is a better operating environment. And certainly, this has not been a great operating environment for the last 12 months. I mean, it's not surprising that an institution that's heavily relying on M&A, capital markets trading and has a bunch even though we're reducing of private equity, growth equity, real state, balance sheet has had some earnings headwinds in this environment. But the environment is getting better. That's not the normal through-the-cycle environment. And I think if we continue to execute on the core things I've highlighted, as we've been sitting here, we'll make progress. And over time, investors will award us as they see a footprint.

Right. I guess, I mean, is it safe to kind of view 2023 as a kind of maybe a transition year to kind of get to some of those good things you've talked about? Clearly, you found like the investment banking environment is getting better. It sounds like the consumer business would be left for drag. In commercial real estate, it sounds like a lot of the markdowns will be done this year. As you kind of think about 2024, it feels like moving closer-ish to a mid-teens type of operating environment.

Yes. I mean, I think 2024 should be a better year for sure. I think there are 2 things going on in 2023. One is we made a strategic pivot with a part of our business, and we've been executing on it. This is the narrowing of the consumer, and there's some friction with that, and we're working through that. And we've made a lot of progress this year. I think we've executed now on what we're doing. We continue to have more work to do more executing. But the second part is not a transition. The second part is it's a pretty lousy environment for our business. And that had a greater impact on the performance of the firm over the course of the last year than the consumer business. And so we're going to continue to execute on the transition, as we said, in the consumer business, and we're going to continue to execute on our core strategy. And the environment will get better as the environment gets better, and we will benefit from that. We definitely are correlated to an improving environment.

And just as a point of follow-up on commercial real estate impairments, I guess, there are $400-ish million last quarter, should be less this quarter?

Yes, you -- I mean, I'll just repeat what I said because my words were purposeful. We're still going to have some markdowns, and some impairment from commercial real estate, but it will be less than last quarter.

All right. And I guess, where -- I guess with kind of traditional bank lending, you kind of booked the reserves and a lot recognize over time in a mark-to-market world. You recognize these losses obviously sooner. Kind of where do you think you are in terms of marking the CRE book?

You tell me what the environment is going to be. If we're right about the soft landing, we've come a long way. If we're wrong and we wind up in a recession for anybody that still owns -- that owns commercial is they probably more headwinds. However, we'll highlight we're continuing to reduce what we have actively and so we continue to make progress on it.

And maybe help with the audience is...

This is all -- you understand, this is all -- this is mostly -- what we're talking about here is legacy alternative investments, many of which have been made over the last decade that we're now moving out of the historical principal investment bucket and reducing that strategy.

Right, right. You mentioned before about the ability to kind of adapt and if it's going -- I think we did it when SLR first came out when -- everything going to predate first. And then the firm management. Maybe just talk to kind of how you go about kind of tackling these new proposals and maybe think about it kind of once you're finalized, just kind of what are some levers you have to do?

I think we run a pretty nimble organization. We've got a lot of really, really smart people and they're zealously focused on our clients, but we also have a lot of people in the organization that is zealously focused on optimizing and helping us run Goldman Sachs as efficiently as we can. I think one of the things about our business is you've got variables that you can't control like the environment. And then as rules or are there things that you can control and make choices on, you adapt, you adjust and you evolve. And so I think we're pretty good at that. It doesn't happen instantaneously, but we've got a long track record of doing it with all sorts of change, all sorts of rules and all sorts of evolution. And the firm continues to manage to grow, to grow its earnings, to grow its position. And so very confident that no matter what's thrown at us in this context, we'll continue to evolve and adapt and we'll do what we have to do to make the right decisions for our shareholders. We're very shareholder-focused and continue to do what's right for our shareholders.

And 1 piece I always ask questions about, in your -- kind of looking at GreenSky, you're committed to deposit-taking franchise with Marcus, I'd imagine. Where does kind of credit card fit in?

Well, remember, and I think I've said this publicly, these credit card platforms are partnerships that are longer-term contracts with our clients. At the moment, we're in those contracts. We're executing. We're making it better. There's a broader strategic question about the long-term fit. We haven't said a lot about that, but we clearly don't have an at-scale business. We're operating what we have efficiently. We've said we're not going to add to it. We're going to try to operate it more efficiently to improve it, and we'll continue to communicate around the decision about it.

David, thank you for your time.

Thank you. My pleasure. Thank you for having me.

Please join me in thanking David.

Thank you.