Issuer Name National Australia Bank Limited Security Name NAB Subordinated Notes 2 Security Recommendation Subscribe Security Risk Lower Medium Issuer Outlook Improving Stable Deteriorating Key Characteristics Product Type Structured Note Issue Size* [$750,000,000.00] Par Value $100.00 Fixed/Floating Payment Frequency Current Distribution** Issue Margin / Coupon**** Franking Credits Incl. ASX Listed Convertible GICS Sector Floating Quarterly [3.97-4.07%] [2.20-2.30%] No Yes (Prospective ASX Code: NABPE) No Banks Report Created on 8 February 2017 Last Price $100.00 Accrued $0.00 Capital Price $100.00 Running Yield** [3.97-4.07%] Yield to Maturity*** [4.92-5.02%] Trading Margin - Optional Call Date Legal Final Maturity Next Ex-Date Next Payment Date Research Report Next Cash Distribution**** [20 September 2023 (6.5Y)] [20 September 2028 (11.5Y)] [20 June 2017] $1.00 *Issue size is expected to be [$750 million] **Based on prospective issue margin below plus 90-Day BBSW of ~[1.770%]. ***Based on prospective issue margin of [2.20-2.30%] & interpolated swap rate to the call of [2.724%]. ****Actual cash amount based on $100 face value. Summary On 8 th February 2017, National Australia Bank (NAB) announced a new transaction, NAB Subordinated Notes 2 (ASX Code: NABPE). The purpose of this transaction is to provide Regulatory Capital for the group but more specifically, it will be treated as Tier 2 capital. The indicative size of the offer is [$750 million] but NAB retain the ability to change the issue size. The notes will be offered to eligible holders of NAB Subordinated Notes (ASX: NABHB) to reinvest their capital, security holders, brokers and institutional investors. These securities are structured as direct, subordinated and unsecured notes. Distributions are non-discretionary, floating rate, unfranked and cumulative but subject to the solvency test. Distributions will be paid on a quarterly basis based on a calculation equal to 90-Day BBSW plus a margin. The margin will be set at book build with the current guidance being [2.20-2.30%]. NAB has the right (but not the obligation) to redeem some or all of the notes at the first optional redemption date [20 September 2023] or on any interest payment date thereafter but it is legally obliged to call the notes at the legal final maturity date [20 September 2028]. Early redemption is also possible following a tax or regulatory event (subject to APRA approval). Upon the occurrence of a Non-Viability Trigger Event, these notes will automatically be converted into NAB ordinary shares without the protection of the conversion conditions. For the purposes of the conversion calculation the maximum conversion number will set at the issue date in respect to mandatory conversion. If conversion cannot occur for any reason (within 5 business days) the notes will be written off and all holder rights terminated. Figure 1: Capital Structure 1 Figure 2: Relative Value 2 0.0% Tax Liabilites 59.1% Deposits 5.7% 15.3% 11.2% 1.2% 1.0% 6.6% Commercial Paper Senior Unsecured Other liabilities Tier 2 Regulated Capital Tier 1 Regulated Capital Common Equity 8 February 2017 Page 1
Security Recommendation - Subscribe as at 31 January 2017 This is the second listed Tier 2 security offered by National Australia Bank but the first to qualify as a Basel III compliant Tier 2 Capital. NAB Subordinated Notes (ASX: NABHB) was issued on the 18 June 2012 at an issue margin of 2.75% over BBSW but with different terms to NAB Subordinated Notes 2 (ASX Code: NABPE). This security has performed well since inception with low capital volatility. Tier 2 securities issued by the major banks remains one of the best risk adjusted capital investments for investors due to its capital structure position, non-discretionary interest payments and event of default terminology. NABPE has similar credit risks to the other major bank Tier 2 securities but from a structural perspective is most comparable to WBCHB. Basel III compliant securities are now common place and we expect this security to trade in line with the market (on a trading margin basis) but with low capital volatility over the duration of its life. Our valuation assumptions for this security are based on the security being redeemed (in full) on the optional call date [20 September 2023] or [6.5 years] and all interest payments being made in a timely manner. If the security is not called on this date (extension risk) the price of the security may fall. From a valuation perspective, there are a number of comparable securities in our universe which give us confidence in our valuation and our analysis suggests this security is being offered to investors at a margin which is fair and commensurate with its risk. On this basis, we recommend investors Subscribe. In our opinion the changing regulatory landscape is a credit positive for all Tier 2 instruments. Increasing capital requirements, lending constraints and higher risk weights is a positive outcome for holders of debt and hybrid instruments issued by banks. While these changes may not be welcomed by shareholders they should reduce inherent credit risks if deployed in an orderly manner. In the short term, credit risk (that is uncertainty surrounding the stability of the credit profile) is fairly limited and is unlikely to be impacted by small changes in NAB's earnings capacity. Any significant change to the capital price will be driven by larger prudential and economic changes such as potential changes to the regulatory framework as advised in the financial system inquiry. Risk of events such as a Non-Viability Trigger Event are inherent in all modern Tier 2 securities. We consider the probability of such an event for NAB to be remote in the current environment. Investors should note these terms make the return profile asymmetric (unlimited downside but limited upside) and in all likelihood its performance will have a higher correlation to equities than a traditional fixed income instrument during a period of stress. The most likely scenario for a breach of these triggers would be either (or a combination of) a sharp and substantial deterioration in the asset quality of the residential or business loan book (which would impact all banks) or a failure of risk management within an institution that would lead to significant losses. If these events are triggered they are likely to cause a significant capital loss to the investor. All of these factors have been considered in our recommendation. Positive / Negative Risk Factors What factors would change the Recommendation UP Payments of principal and interest are not deferrable or discretionary (unless the issuer is insolvent); This transaction includes "Event of Default" terminology which protects investors rights for payments and recovery of amount due and payable; The domestic regulator (APRA) continues to implement strict controls over domestic banks. The Liquidity Coverage Ratio became enforceable on 1 January 2015 and the Net Stable Funding ratio with an implementation date of 1 January 2018. These ratios will significantly improve the transparency of risks (other than capital risk) to investors; The recommendations of the financial services inquiry are becoming a reality. APRA announced a change to capital adequacy requirements in the form of increasing the average risk weights for residential mortgages from ~16% to at least 25%. Although this was at the low end of the recommendation (25-30%) it should be viewed as an interim change while APRA awaits the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) review of risk weighted assets in general. As of 1st July 2016 the major banks have complied with this rule. This decision was a positive for all holders of bank capital instruments as it increases the amount of core equity capital required to be held, thereby reducing the common equity leverage. The increase in nominal capital held increases the buffer against unexpected losses in mortgage portfolios and in APRAs mind improves financial stability of the system. These changes (with more to come) will improve the standalone credit profile of the banks and their individual securities; In July 2016 APRA provided an update to the study comparing capital levels of the major banks on an internationally comparable capital level basis. The findings of this study were simply that Australian banks remained strongly capitalized and were on track to be in the top quartile of banks globally when measured by capital ratio. This improvement was largely due to the capital initiatives undertaken by NAB including a $5.5 billion rights offer, divestment of Clydesdale Bank and 80% sale of the MLC Life Insurance unit. As at 30 September 2016 NAB s internationally Comparable Common Equity Tier 1 Ratio was 14.00%; NAB has a significant loss absorption cushion through earnings, capital and provisioning which are the primary defences of the bank to loan and security impairments. This is likely to increase further through the introduction of the above capital adequacy requirements. What factors would change the Recommendation DOWN APRA's standards on the non-capital components (capital components still in discussion) of the supervision of conglomerate groups (Level 3 framework) will be effective from 1 July 2017. While this means that over time the capital benefit the Group currently gains from issuing debt on the National Wealth Management Holdings Limited balance sheet will be removed, this is not expected to have a material impact (as per page 30 of the full year results announcement which mentions APRA's quantitative impact analysis suggests no potential Level 3 Group would be required to raise additional capital as a result of the implementation). 8 February 2017 Page 2
This security includes the Non-Viability Trigger Event terminology. If breached, investors are at risk of substantial capital losses. The most likely scenario for a breach of these triggers would be either (or a combination of) a sharp and substantial deterioration in the asset quality of the residential or business loan book, which could adversely affect the loss absorption cushion of the group and result in an event whereby conversion (or write down) is triggered. This is an unlikely but possible event. Downwards pressure on credit rating. Rising property prices and increased household debt to GDP led to S&P warning Australian banks that any further deterioration would lead to a potential downgrade of their stand alone credit rating. The market for NAB Subordinated Notes 2 (and most other Tier 2 instruments) may be relatively less liquid than the market for Ordinary Shares or comparable securities issued by NAB or other entities, or there may be no liquid market for NAB Subordinated Notes 2. Holders who wish to sell their NAB Subordinated Notes 2 may be unable to do so at an acceptable price, or at all, if insufficient liquidity exists in the market for NAB Subordinated Notes 2. Issuer Outlook - Stable as at 31 January 2017 Earnings National Australia Bank (NAB) reported a Full Year 2016 (FY16) statutory Net Profit after Tax (NPAT) of $352 million. The main drivers of this result were the UK Clydesdale Bank (CYBG) demerger and 80% sale of the Wealth life insurance business to Nippon Life (excluding discontinued operations, NPAT decreased by 5.6% to $6.42 billion). Group cash earnings increased by 4.2% over the prior corresponding period (pcp) to $6.48 billion. This was at the lower end of market consensus expectations which confirms our view that the economic cycle has peaked and as the sector absorbs regulatory change it will affect volumes and return on equity. Although cash earnings are still strong (despite increased competition on loan pricing) margins are expected to get some relief as the marginal cost of new funding represents a tailwind rather than a headwind. Cash earnings within the wealth business were satisfactory at $356 million (up 12.7% over FY15). Net operating income increased by 2.52% $17.4 billion. Operating expenses were up 2.20% reflecting investment in the group s priority customer segments and increased technology and personnel costs. As a result, NAB s cost to income ratio fell slightly to 41.2%. NAB s Net interest margin (NIM) fell by 0.02% to 1.88% driven by higher funding costs. NIM stabilised over the first quarter of 2017. NAB announced an unchanged final dividend with no dividend reinvestment plan discount and no participation limit (a payout ratio of 80.78%). Although NAB management remain comfortable with this high payout ratio, pressure to reduce the dividend payout ratio during FY17 due to increased regulatory capital is expected to increase. On 6 February 2017, NAB announced Q1 17 results, which remain soft. Revenue rose marginally (1%) over the quarter, but was offset by a significant growth in expenses (staff pay rises and redundancy costs) thus driving the (unaudited) earnings down 1% to $1.6 billion. Capital Efficient capital management remains one of the key priorities within NAB due to significant balance sheet adjustments, asset sales, regulatory change and moving capital targets. The reported common equity Tier 1 ratio (CET1) as at 31 December 2016 was 9.50%, a decrease increase of 0.27% over the previous quarter, mainly reflecting the impact of the final dividend payment. This ratio is still above NAB s 8.75%-9.25% target range and regulatory minimum of 8%. Over FY16, NAB s organic capital generation (post dividend) to risk weighted asset growth added a net 0.25% to CET1 and an additional 0.45% of CET1 capital was generated from the 80% sale of the MLC life insurance business. This was offset by the mortgage risk weight changes that decreased CET1 by 0.69%. This means earnings are no longer contributing to capital and if the capital intensity of the balance sheet increases then capital ratios are likely to fall unless dividend payout ratios fall. On an internationally comparable basis the ratio (Level 1) increased by 0.98% to 14.00% (September 2016), an improvement of 1.0% over the half. According to the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority s (APRA) a Tier 1 ratio of 14.8% is positioned in the top quartile as compared to the third quartile as at June 2014. The risk remains that regulators force the banks to raise additional capital to meet international standards, as was the experience during 2015. The Leverage Ratio fell by 0.30% in the first quarter to 5.4% on an APRA reported basis, above the minimum requirements set out by some international regulators (i.e. Switzerland set at 5%). Last late year, both the Federal Reserve and Financial Stability Boards formally adopted rules for Total Loss Absorbing Capital (TLAC). While APRA is yet to adopt this framework, we expect there has been preliminary discussions between the banks and regulator surrounding this new framework and this is the reason why we have had no clear definition of unquestionably strong as proposed in the Financial System Inquiry. In our opinion, they are likely to adopt an altered legislative framework and the TLAC measure in 2018/9 and have a ~3-year implementation timeline. Any capital shortfall is likely to be funded through senior non-preferred bonds (or Tier 3 capital). The key mitigant to this is that political change in the US is repealing a number of reforms and this could have a knock-on effect to any efforts the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) has made. In January 2017, this same committee announced that it required more time to finalise changes to Basel III reforms which is likely to impact APRA s comparable implementation timelines. Funding and Liquidity NAB s funding composition has remained fairly stable over the past year, but with the marginal cost of new funding now below the average cost of funding, most of the major banks are utilising wholesale debt markets to fund asset growth (term funding over FY16 was $31.8 billion, with $25.2 billion of this being senior unsecured, $5.0 billion secured comprising both covered bonds and Residential Mortgage Backed Securities (RMBS) and $1.6 billion of Tier 2 subordinated debt, with an overall weighted average maturity of approximately 5.4 years to the first call date). Bank of New Zealand raised $4.6 billion during FY16. The maturity profile of the outstanding debt is well balanced with a clear objective to push out near term maturities that may impact the liquidity coverage and net stable funding ratio objectives. Customer deposits continue to increase (54% of total 8 February 2017 Page 3
funding) but the funding gap prevails within the banking system. Liquid assets continue to grow with management stating the liquidity coverage ratio was 124% as at 31 December 2016 (up from 121% as at 30 September 2016 and 119% as at 31 December 2015). It is difficult to assess the impact of the SEC decision on NAB s funding metrics but in the short term it is likely to have a small effect. NAB s High Quality Liquid Assets & CLF Eligible securities were down by $1 billion to $147 billion over FY16. In September 2016 APRA released the findings from the industry consultation paper on the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR), and a ratio of at least 100% is proposed for regulatory purposes from 1 January 2018. NAB is making considerable progress towards satisfying NSFR requirements (e.g. increasing the stability of the Group s funding profile over recent years) and stated that the NSFR was over 100% as at 30 September 2016 based upon draft APRA rules. This resulted in NAB (along with the other major banks) issuing (cheap) one year debt in September to tide funding requirements over. This was a short term fix with the aim of issuing longer-dated (more expensive) debt to maximise the benefit from an NSFR ratio point of view (as debt begins to lose effectiveness with less than one year to maturity). A secondary reason for doing this was due to the US money-market fund change that came into effect on 14 October 2016, effectively closing this market to the major banks as a source of finding. Although the Australian banks have ~$90 billion of funding tied to this source this will be replaced gradually as maturities occur. Asset Quality & Provisions The improvement in asset quality has been a key highlight for NAB over the past few reporting periods. Bad and doubtful debts versus Gross Loans and Acceptances (GLA s) was a very modest 0.15% as at 30 September 2016, the lowest of the majors. Nonetheless, new impaired assets increased from $570 million to $1 billion over FY16. This included $300 million in NZ dairy exposures, which was lower than the $522 million reported as at 30 March 2016. Whilst dairy prices remain far from strong, they have rebounded from recent lows and as a result Fonterra have increased its forecast of the 2016/17 farm gate milk price by $1 to $5.25 per kg of milk solids (slightly above break-even for most dairy farmers). Total NZ dairy exposure was $8 billion, representing ~1.5% of total exposures, NAB has reported that it does not expect to generate a loss given these exposures are held against secured assets. Resource exposures fell by 13.2% over FY16 to $10.5 billion, and now represent <1% of group exposures. NAB s exposure to residential property developers increased by $400 million over the half to $4.2 billion ($2.2 billion for land), or 6.83% of total Commercial Real Estate (CRE) exposures ($61.5 billion, or 11.27% of GLA s). Looking at the residential mortgage portfolio, WA and QLD exposures total 10% and 17% of the total housing exposures respectively. Property values in mining areas within these states have fallen 15% 60% (CoreLogic), and NAB s exposure to these mining towns is ~1% of the total housing book. The portfolio s exposure to commercial and industrial real estate (reported to be ~13% at 30 September 2016) remains a concern. The impaired loans ratio within CRE fell by 0.04% to 0.25% over FY16. Total provisions for bad and doubtful debts (B&DD) increased by $21 million to $3.5 billion during FY16. This was a result of a $264 million increase in specific provisions being partially offset by collective provisions falling by $243 million. According to the NAB this reflects an improving credit quality in the broader business lending portfolio that was partly offset by higher specific charges arising from a small number of large single name impairments. Outlook Operating conditions for NAB, and banks in general, are expected to remain challenging over the next 12 months. We have seen all four major banks respond to the regulators demands regarding tighter lending criteria and demonstrate the assessment process for new residential mortgages is beyond reproach for owner occupiers and investors alike. The combined requirement for lower LTV caps, higher average risk weights and the 10% growth cap on investor lending will constrain loan growth while increasing minimum capital requirements. NAB s smaller market share in the residential mortgage market means it is less sensitive to macroeconomic changes (i.e. unemployment) than the CBA and Westpac, but we will continue to carefully monitor arrears rates on unsecured lending for signs of deterioration. Given the low interest rate environment and quality of the loan book we do not expect a significant deterioration in asset quality for the foreseeable future. We also expect NAB to continue to focus on the regulatory changes that are still within the consultation stages (refer to Positive/Negative Risk Factors). We are comfortable with the CEO s (Andrew Thornburn) strategy of shifting towards a capital light business model and demonstrating that the leadership team are also pro-actively addressing the issues of the business in a way which to date have been creditor friendly (a positive for debt and hybrid investors). With the NAB completing the divestment of the UK business and the sale of 80% of the capital intensive MLC life business unit to Nippon Life, NAB are in a position to take advantage of strategic initiatives without being distracted by underperforming business units. Next Events: NAB First Half 2017 results on 4th May 2017 8 February 2017 Page 4
Figure 3: Credit Curve (Comparable Securities) 2 [2.20-2.30%] Figure 4: Historical Trading Margins of Comparable Securities 1 The balance sheet structure diagram represents a measure of liabilities and captial in order of seniority of the overall cash balance sheet. 2 Pricing as at close of business 31 January 2017 Source: BondAdviser 8 February 2017 Page 5
Tier 2 Capital Market Commentary While the size of the retail (listed) Tier 2 market increased post-gfc, there was uncertainty among investors in the wholesale (over-the-counter) market regarding the premium associated with the Non- Viability Trigger clause introduced by APRA (September 2011). As a result, the wholesale market saw limited issuance between 2011-13. However, in recent years, there has been a change in sentiment by institutional investors and in turn, many banks have elected the wholesale market as their primary Tier 2 capital funding channel. We do not expect this trend to change in the near future and believe that listed Tier 2 instruments (like NABPE) will carry a scarcity value, as majority of issuance will be made in the OTC market. Figure A: Major Bank Tier 2 Issuance $4.0bn Wholesale Retail $3.5bn $3.0bn 2.85 2.70 2.75 $2.5bn 2.08 $2.0bn 1.51 1.70 $1.5bn $1.0bn 0.93 $0.5bn $0.0bn 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: Bond Adviser Figure B shows how the average trading margin for listed Tier 2 issued by Australian banks have moved over the past 5 years. The trading margin has generally remained within the tight trading range of 1.50% - 2.50%. Although the current valuations seem to suggest that these securities are trading below average, this is also because most Tier 2 securities issued by major banks are approaching maturity/call date. Figure B: Average Major Bank Tier 2 Trading Margin 3.20% 2.80% 2.40% 2.00% NABPE, [2.20% - 2.30%] 1.60% 1.20% 0.80% 0.40% 0.00% Source: Bond Adviser, as of 31st January 2017 Over the same time horizon, the wholesale market followed a similar pattern to the retail market. The biggest sell-off in recent years was seen in first quarter of 2016 as a result of weak market sentiment across the banking sector. 8 February 2017 Page 6
Figure C: Major bank credit curves across the capital structure Trading Margin 4.50% Tier 2 Credit Curve Tier 1 Credit Curve 3.50% Snr FRN's Credit Curve 2.50% Westpac Wholesale Subordinated Notes 3, 1.98% NABPE, [2.20-2.30%] 1.50% NABHB, 1.37% WBCHA, 1.05% WBCHB, 2.02% Westpac Wholesale Subordinated Notes 2, 1.67% NAB Wholesale Subordinated Notes 2, 1.85% ANZ Wholesale Subordinated Notes 4, 1.98% 0.50% ANZHA, 0.84% NAB Wholesale Subordinated Notes, 0.96% Term -0.50% 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Source: Bond Adviser, as of 31st January 2017 Credit curves across the capital structure have flattened over the course of 2016. While there is limited term premium associated with longer-term instruments, Tier 2 instruments continue to remain a solid investment option across the capital structure. With the RBA reducing the official cash rate twice last year to the current 1.50%, the reference 90-day bank bill swap rate (BBSW) is ~1.770%. The NAB Subordinated Notes 2 margin (2.20% -2.30%) implies an initial Yield to Call (YTC) of [4.92% - 5.02%]. Figure D below shows the YTC of NAB Subordinated Notes 2 relative to listed Tier 2 instruments. Figure D: Historical YTC for Tier 2 Instruments 7.00% Grossed Up YTC 6.50% 6.00% 5.50% 5.00% NABPE, [4.92-5.02%] 4.50% 4.00% 4.12% 3.50% 3.00% 2.50% NABHB WBCHA ANZHA WBCHB 3.24% 3.05% 2.72% Source: Bond Adviser, as of 31st January 2017 8 February 2017 Page 7
National Australia Bank Limited: Financial Summary National Australia Bank Limited: Financial Summary Recommendation Summary Subscribe 8 February 2017 Profit and loss 2016 2015 2014 2013 Asset Quality & Provisions 2016 2015 2014 2013 Net Interest Income ($m) 12,930.0 12,462.0 13,755.0 13,407.0 Fee Income ($m) 2,093.0 2,090.0 2,505.0 2,495.0 Trading Income ($m) 945.0 764.0 892.0 1,094.0 Wealth Management ($m) 801.0 755.0 1,440.0 1,370.0 Other Income ($m) 1,353.0 2,366.0 301.0 197.0 Total Revenue ($m) 18,122.0 18,437.0 18,913.0 18,563.0 Growth (%) -1.7 2.0 1.9 1.6 Total Expenses ($m) -8,331.0-8,189.0-10,180.0-8,410.0 Growth (%) 1.7-2.8 21.0 7.4 Pre-Provision Profit ($m) 9,791.0 10,248.0 8,733.0 10,153.0 Growth (%) -4.5 7.6-14.0-2.8 Provisioning Expense ($m) -813.0-733.0-877.0-1,934.0 Taxation ($m) -2,553.0-2,709.0-2,492.0-2,284.0 Minority Interest and Pref -5.0-54.0-180.0-188.0 Adjustments ($m) -6,068.0-414.0-69.0-580.0 Group Statutory Earnings ($m) 6,425.0 6,806.0 5,115.0 5,167.0 Capital Adequecy 2016 2015 2014 2013 Core Equity Tier 1 (%) 9.77 10.24 8.63 8.43 Tier 1 Capital (%) 12.19 12.44 10.81 10.35 Tier 2 Capital (%) 2.00 1.70 1.35 1.45 Total Risk Weighted Capital 14.14 14.15 12.16 11.80 Credit ($m) 331,510.0 344,326.0 318,374.0 314,674.0 Market ($m) 7,299.0 5,793.0 4,923.0 5,191.0 Operational ($m) 37,500.0 40,000.0 36,534.0 34,749.0 IRRBB ($m) 12,136.0 9,639.0 7,821.0 7,464.0 Total Risk Weighted Assets 388,445.0 399,758.0 367,652.0 362,078.0 Dividend Payout Ratio (%) 80.80 79.50 90.10 77.60 Annual Provision Charge/Gross Loans Individually Assessed (%) 0.13 0.09 0.24 0.40 Collective (%) 0.52 0.59-0.08-0.03 Total Charge (%) 0.65 0.67 0.16 0.37 Gross Non-Accruals ($m) 2,642.0 2,050.0 4,122.0 6,347.0 Loans Past 90 Days Due ($m) 1,975.0 2,122.0 2,342.0 2,463.0 Annualised Provisional Charge/Risk Individually Assessed (%) 0.18 0.12 0.36 0.58 Collective (%) 0.72 0.84-0.12-0.05 Total Charge (%) 0.91 0.97 0.24 0.53 Provisioning Coverage Specific Provision/Impaired Assets (%) 38.30 30.30 32.90 29.00 Collective Provision/Credit Risk 0.85 0.99 0.55 0.69 Funding & Liquidity 2016 2015 2014 2013 Stable Funding Index (%) 91.00 92.30 90.40 89.20 Customer Funding Index (%) 69.00 71.50 70.40 69.40 Term Funding Index (%) 22.00 20.80 20.00 20.00 Liquid Assets excl contingent liquidity 118.0 112.0 117.2 106.7 Balance Sheet 2016 2015 2014 2013 Loans ($m) 555,281.0 583,729.0 532,517.0 505,008.0 Liquids ($m) 30,630.0 30,934.0 179,077.0 156,515.0 Goodwill ($m) 5,302.0 7,347.0 7,720.0 7,641.0 Trading Assets ($m) 89,102.0 121,321.0 101,601.0 72,210.0 Other ($m) 97,307.0 212,071.0 41,069.0 60,890.0 Total Assets ($m) 777,622.0 955,052.0 861,984.0 802,263.0 Deposits ($m) 436,497.0 459,128.0 421,877.0 397,656.0 Wholesale Debt ($m) 127,942.0 130,518.0 213,711.0 192,372.0 Other ($m) 161,868.0 309,893.0 179,567.0 167,993.0 Total Liabilities ($m) 726,307.0 899,539.0 815,165.0 758,021.0 Source: Company data, BondAdviser estimates. 8 February 2017 Page 8
Research Methodology Every research report prepared by BondAdviser includes a clear recommendation - Buy, Hold or Sell - on the security. This recommendation framework is designed to help investors navigate different investment opportunities by identifying the market price, yield, term to maturity, liquidity, volatility and risk. The guide below may help you understand our research opinions. For further information on our research approach, you can refer to our RG79 statement by clicking here. Research Opinions key Buy - Over the next 12 months, the analyst expects the security to outperform the current yield due to credit spread tightening or favourable movements in the underlying yield curve. Hold - Over the next 12 months, the analyst expects the security to provide stable returns broadly inline with the current yield but with little credit spread tightening. Sell - Over the next 12 months, the analyst expects the security to underperform the current yield due to credit spread widening or adverse movements in the underlying yield curve. Suspended - The recommendation has been suspended temporarily due to the disclosure of new information or market events that may have a significant impact on our recommendation. This also includes situations where we have been given non-public information and we need to temporarily suspend our coverage in order to comply with applicable regulations and/or internal policies. Not Rated - A security that has not been assigned a formal recommendation. Analyst Nicholas Yaxley Credit Research nicholas.yaxley@bondadviser.com.au About BondAdviser BondAdviser is an independent research company that specialises in bonds and fixed income securities. We provide investors, advisers, brokers and institutions with research, data, education and tools to help them invest intelligently. Our service is delivered online via an easy-to-use portal. BondAdviser has the broadest coverage of retail-accessible ASX-listed and over-the-counter securities, including primary and secondary issues. Our expert credit team draws on its extensive experience and robust research process to deliver unbiased insight backed by detailed analysis. At BondAdviser, our goal is to lift the lid on the fixed income market so that more investors have the opportunity to invest in the asset class directly. Learn more To learn more about the fixed income market visit our website Important Information The web application, the Content and the Reports are not intended to provide financial product advice and must not be relied upon as such. The Content and the Reports are not and shall not be construed as financial product advice. The statements and/or recommendations on this web application, the Content and/or the Reports are our opinions only. We do not express any opinion on the future or expected value of any Security and do not explicitly or implicitly recommend or suggest an investment strategy of any kind. The Content and the Reports provided at this web application have been prepared based on available data to which we have access. Neither the accuracy of that data nor the research_methodology used to produce the Content and Reports can be guaranteed or warranted. Some of the research used to create the Content is based on past performance. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance. We have taken all reasonable steps to ensure that any opinion or recommendation in the Content or the Reports is based on reasonable grounds. The data generated by the research in the Content or the Reports is based on research_methodology that has limitations; and some of the information in the Content or the Reports is based on information from third parties. We do not guarantee the currency of the Content or the Reports. If you would like to assess the currency, you should compare the Content of the Content or the Reports with more recent characteristics and performance of the assets mentioned within it. You acknowledge that investment can give rise to substantial risk and a product mentioned in the Content or the Reports may not be suitable to you. You should obtain independent advice specific to your particular circumstances, make your own enquiries and satisfy yourself before you make any investment decisions or use the Content or the Reports for any purpose. This web application and the Content and the Reports provide general information only. There has been no regard whatsoever to your own personal or business needs, your individual circumstances, your own financial position or investment objectives in preparing the information and Reports available at this web application. We do not accept responsibility for any loss or damage, however caused (including through negligence), which you may directly or indirectly suffer in connection with your use of this web application or the Reports, nor do we accept any responsibility for any such loss arising out of your use of, or reliance on, information contained on or accessed through this web application, the Content or the Reports. 8 February 2017 Page 9