JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) Q1 2019 Earnings CallApril 12, 2019 8:30 a.m. ET
Contents:
Continue Reading Below
- Prepared Remarks
- Questions and Answers
- Call Participants
Prepared Remarks:
Operator
Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to JPMorgan Chase’s first-quarter 2019 earnings call. This call is being recorded. [Operator instructions] At this time, I would like to turn the call over to JPMorgan Chase’s chairman and CEO, Jamie Dimon; and Chief Financial Officer Marianne Lake.
Ms. Lake, please go ahead.
Advertisement
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Thank you, operator. Good morning, everybody. I’m going to take you through the earnings presentation, which is available on our website. Please refer to the disclaimer at the back of the presentation.
Starting on Page 1. The firm reported record net income of $9.2 billion and EPS of $2.65, on record revenue of nearly $30 billion, with a return on tangible common equity of 19%. The results this quarter were strong and broad based. Highlights include core loan growth ex CIB of 5%, with loan trends continuing to progress as expected.
10 stocks we like better than JPMorgan ChaseWhen investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has quadrupled the market.*
David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks for investors to buy right now… and JPMorgan Chase wasn’t one of them! That’s right — they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.
*Stock Advisor returns as of March 1, 2019
Credit performance remained strong across businesses. We saw record client investment assets in Consumer of over $300 billion and record new money flows this quarter. And double-digit growth in both Card sales and merchant processing volumes, up 10% and 13%, respectively. We ranked No. 1 in Global IB fees and gained meaningful share, with share well above 9% this quarter. In the Commercial Bank, we had record growth IB revenue. In Asset & Wealth Management, record AUM and client assets. And the firm delivered another quarter of strong positive operating leverage.
Turning to Page 2, and talking into more detail about the first quarter. Revenue of $29.9 billion was up $1.3 million or 5% year on year driven by net interest income which was up $1.1 million or 8% on higher rates as well as balance sheet growth and mix. Noninterest revenue was up slightly as reported. But excluding fair value gains on the implementation of a new accounting standard last year, NIR would have been up 5%, reflecting Auto lease growth and strong Investment Banking fees, and while Markets revenue was lower, there were other items more than offsetting.
Expense of $16.4 billion was up 2%, relating to continued investments we’re making in technology, real estate, marketing, and front office, partially offset by a reduction in FDIC charges of a little over $200 million. Credit remained favorable across both Consumer and Wholesale. Credit costs of $1.5 billion were up $330 million year on year, driven by changes in Wholesale reserves. In Consumer, charge-offs were in line with expectations and there were no changes to reserve this quarter.
In Wholesale, we had about $180 million of credit costs, driven by reserve build on select C&I client downgrades and recall that there was a net release last year related to energy. Once again, these downgrades were idiosyncratic. It was a handful of names and across sectors. Net reserve builds of this order of magnitude are extremely modest given the size of our portfolios, and we are not seeing signs of deterioration.
Moving on to Page 3, and balance sheet and capital. We ended the quarter with a CET1 ratio of 12.1%, up modestly from last quarter, with the benefit of strong earnings and AOCI gains given rallying rates, being partially offset by slightly higher risk-weighted assets. RWA is up, primarily due to higher counterparty credit on trading activity, but notably this quarter being offset by lower loans across businesses on a spot basis. Quarter on quarter,, loans were down in Home Lending as a result of a loan sale transaction in the CIB and the result of a large syndication and in Card and Asset & Wealth Management seasoning.
Also in the page, total assets are up over $100 billion quarter on quarter, principally driven by higher CIB trading assets, in part, a normalization from lower levels at the end of the year given market conditions. Lower end-of-period loans are partially offset by Treasury balances, including higher securities. In the quarter, the firm distributed $7.4 billion of capital to shareholders, including $4.7 billion of share repurchases as pre-submitted our 2019 CCAR capital plan for the Federal Reserve. Moving to Consumer & Community Banking on Page 4.
CCB generated net income of $4 billion and an ROE of 30%, with consumers remaining strong and confident. Core loans were up 4% here year on year, driven by Home Lending and Cards, both up 6%, and Business Banking up 3%. Deposits grew 3%, in line with our expectations, and we believe we continue to outperform. Client investment assets were up 13%, driven by record new money flows reflecting growth across physical and digital channels, including You Invest.
We also announced plans to open 90 branches this year in new markets. Revenue of $13.8 billion was up 9%. Consumer & Business Banking revenue up 15% on higher deposit NII, driven by continued margin expansion. Home Lending revenue was down 11%, driven by net servicing revenue on both lower operating revenue and MSR.
But notably, while volumes are down, production revenue is up nicely year on year on disciplined pricing. And Cards, Merchant Services & Auto revenues was up 9%, driven by higher Card NII on loan growth, and margin expansion, and higher Auto lease volumes. Expense of $7.2 billion was up 4%, driven by investments in the business and Auto lease depreciation, partially offset by expense efficiencies and lower FDIC charges. On credit, net charge-offs were flat, as lower charge-offs in Home Lending and Auto were offset by higher charge-offs in Card on loan growth.
Charge-off rates were down year on year across lending portfolios. Now turning to Page 5 and the Corporate & Investment Bank. CIB reported net income of $3.3 billion and an ROE of 16% on strong revenue performance of nearly $10 billion. For the quarter, IB revenue of $1.7 billion was up 10% year on year.
And outside of an accounting nuance, all of advisory, DCM and total IB fees would have been records for a first quarter. Advisory fees were up 12% in a market that was down, benefiting from a number of large deals closing this quarter. We ranked No. 1 in announced dollar volumes and gained nearly 100 basis points of volume share.
Debt underwriting fees were up 21%, also outperforming a market that was down, driven by large acquisition financing deals and our continued strong lead-left positions in leveraged finance. We maintained our No. 1 rank and gained well over 100 basis points of share. And equity underwriting fees were down 23%, but in a market down more as the combination of the government shutdown, uncertainty around Brexit and residual impacts from December volatility weighed on issuance activity across the regions in the first quarter.
But already in the second quarter, we’ve seen a major recovery in U.S. IPO volumes back to normalized levels, and we are benefiting from our leadership in the technology and healthcare sectors which again dominate the calendar. Moving to Markets. Total revenue was $5.5 billion, down 17% reported or down 10% adjusted for the impact of the accounting standard last year that I referred to.
Big picture, on a year-on-year basis, we are challenged by a tough comparison. The backdrop in the first quarter of ’18 was supportive, clients were active and we saw broad-based strength in performance, with a clear record in Equities last year. In contrast, this quarter started relatively slowly and overhanging uncertainties kept clients on the sidelines despite a recovered and more favorable environment. So with that in mind, I would categorize results as solid and a little better than we thought at investor day just a few weeks ago largely due to a better second half of March.
And for all it’s worth so far, environment in April feels generally constructive, but it’s too early to draw any conclusions in terms of P&L. Fixed Income Markets revenue was down 8% adjusted, driven by lower activity, particularly in rates and in Currencies & Emerging Markets, which normalized following a strong prior year. However, we did see relative strength in Credit Trading on strong flow as well as in commodities. Equities revenue was down 13% adjusted, speaking more to the record prior-year quarter than this quarter’s performance which was still generally strong across products.
Although derivatives got off to a somewhat slower start, cash in particular nearly matched last year’s exceptional result. Treasury Services revenue was $1.1 billion, up 3% year on year, benefiting from higher balances and payments volume, being partially offset by deposit margin compression. Securities Services revenue was $1 billion, down 4%, as organic growth was more than offset by fee and deposit margin compression, lower market levels, and the impact of a business exit. Of note, deposit margin in both Treasury Services and Securities Services is impacted by funding basis compression rather than client basis, and at the firmwide level, was an offset.
Finally, expense of $5.5 billion was down 4%, driven by lower performance-based compensation and lower FDIC charges, partially offset by continued investments in the business. The cost of revenue ratio for the quarter was 30%. Moving to Commercial Banking on Page 6. A strong quarter for the Commercial Bank with net income of $1.1 billion and an ROE of 19%.
Revenue of $2.3 billion was up 8% year on year on strong Investment Banking performance and higher deposit NII. Record gross IB revenue of over $800 million was up more than 40% year on year due to several large transactions and the pipeline continues to feel robust and active. Deposit balances were down 5% year on year and 1% sequentially, as migration of nonoperating deposits to higher-yielding alternatives have decelerated and we believe is largely behind us. From here, we expect deposits to stabilize given the benign rate outlook.
Expense of $873 million was up 3% year on year, as we continue to invest in the business, in banker coverage and technology. Loans were up 2% year on year and flat sequentially. C&I loans were up 2% or up 5% adjusted for the conceded runoff in our tax-exempt portfolio. We continue to see solid growth across expansion market and specialized industries.
CRE loans were up 1%, as competition remains elevated and we continue to maintain discipline given where we are in the cycle. Finally, credit costs of $90 million were predominantly driven by higher reserves from select client downgrades, and net charge-offs were only two basis points on strong underlying performance. Before we move on, I want to address the perceived gap between our reported C&I growth statistics and those that we all see the Fed’s weekly data. If we look across all of our Wholesale businesses, we also show strong growth year on year at about 8%.
But there are three comments I would make: The first is that there can be reasonable noise in the Fed weekly data; second, CIB is a big contributor for us, and CIB loan growth this quarter was supported by robust acquisition financing and higher market loans; and third, as previously noted, the definition of C&I for the Fed does not include our tax-exempt portfolio which has seen significant year-on-year declines given tax reform. So while it’s true that the Fed data is showing strong growth year on year and apples-to-apples ROE, in the mainstream middle market landing space, we’re seeing good mid-single-digit demand in line with our expectations. Moving on to Asset & Wealth Management on Page 7. Asset & Wealth Management reported net income of $661 million, with a pre-tax margin of 24% and an ROE of 25%.
Revenue of $3.5 billion for the quarter was flat year on year, as lower management fees on average market levels as well as lower brokerage activity were offset by higher investment valuation gains. Expense of $2.6 billion was up 3% year on year, as continued investments in our business as well as other headcount-related expenses were partially offset by lower external fees. For the quarter, we saw net long-term inflows of $10 billion, with strength in Fixed Income partially offset by outflows from other asset classes. Additionally, we had net liquidity outflows of $5 billion.
AUM of $2.1 trillion and overall client assets of $2.9 trillion were both up 4%, driven by cumulative net inflows into liquidity and long-term products and with first-quarter market performance nearly offsetting fourth-quarter declines. Deposits were up 4% sequentially on seasonality and down 4% year on year, reflecting continued migration into investments, although decelerating, and we continue to capture the vast majority of these flows. Finally, we had record loan balances up 10%, with strength in both Wholesale and mortgage lending. Moving to Page 8 and corporate.
Corporate reported net income of $251 million, with net revenue of $425 million compared to a net loss of over $200 million last year. The improvement was driven by higher NII on higher rates as well as cash deployment opportunities in Treasury. And recall last year, we had nearly $250 million of net losses on security sales relative to a small net gain this quarter. Expense of $211 million is up year on year and includes the contribution to the foundation of $100 million this quarter.
Concluding on Page 9. To wrap up, this is the sort of quarter that really showcases the strength of the firm’s operating model, benefiting from diversification and scale, and our consistent investment agenda. We delivered record revenue and net income in a clean first-quarter performance despite some hangover from the fourth quarter. Underlying drivers across our businesses continue to propel us forward.
And in March and coming into April, the economic backdrop feels increasingly constructive. Client sentiment has recovered and recent global data shows encouraging momentum. Investor day is only six weeks behind us, so our guidance for the full year hasn’t changed. We do remain well-positioned and optimistic about the firm’s performance.
With that, operator, we’ll take questions.
Questions and Answers:
Operator
Your first question comes from the line of John McDonald with Autonomous.
John McDonald — Autonomous Research — Analyst
Hi. Good morning, Marianne. You had good expense control this quarter. In your — Jamie’s letter, you show goals of improving the efficiency ratio in each of the main business units for the next few years.
Just kind of wondering what’s driving that. Is there any kind of cresting of investment spend that’s going to occur in 2020? Or is this just kind of positive operating leverage carrying through?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. Hey, John. So I would say, just big picture, it’s the combination of both, obviously. We talked at investor day about the fact that we’re always going to make the net investment — the net incremental investment decision based on its own merits, but in total, with the amount we’re spending now and the amount of dollars that roll off every year that get repositioned for investment, we feel like we should see our net investment spend reach a reasonable plateau over the course of the next several years.
And so that is part of it. Obviously, a lot of the investments that we’ve been making in technology are also not only to do with customer service and risk management and revenue generation, but they’re also to do with operating efficiency, so we would also expect to start to see some of that drive operating leverage. But it’s also the case that we’re looking for revenue growth, too. So it’s a combination of both.
John McDonald — Autonomous Research — Analyst
OK. And then just on the NII outlook. It’s reassuring to be able to hold the investor day outlook of the $58 billion for this year even though the curve’s flattened, there were some concerns there. What are the dynamics that enable you to keep the guidance even with the change in curve that we’ve seen?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So I mean, the first thing I would say is that we talked — we’ve said this before, when we’ve seen these periods where you get kind of short-term fluctuations in the curve, is that it’s a bit dangerous to chase it up and down every month or so. And so in the big picture, we said $58-plus billion. Yes, it’s true that a persistent flatter curve would have a small net drag on carry, and we’re not immune to that.
So there is a little bit of pressure as a result of that if it is persistent at this level throughout the year. But we continue to grow our loans and our deposits. And against that, there’s a mixed bag of lower for longer. So while we may not have a tailwind of higher rates, we also may not have the same kinds of pressures that we would see on bases necessarily.
And while lower long-end rates may be a net small drag in the short term on earnings, they’re good for credit on the balance sheet. And you could argue a patient Fed and lower rates for longer may elongate the cycle. So net-net, there are pluses and minuses. I would say there may be some pressure as a result of that if it’s persistent, but it’s modest.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Mike Mayo with Wells Fargo.
Mike Mayo — Wells Fargo — Analyst
Hi. You mentioned Consumer deposit growth is outperforming where you get average Consumer deposits up over $20 billion year over year. So those are the numbers. I just — I was hoping for a little bit more on the why.
And to what degree does that reflect your buildout of branches? How is that deposit growth going? How much of this is related to digital banking? And then how much would be due to simply a perception that you have superior strength? I know that came up during the CEO hearings, the IMF study saying that you get a benefit due to a perception of being too big to fail. Thanks.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So look, I would say there’s lots of different opportunities for people to get insured deposit, so come back to the third point. But all of that plays a piece. So you’ll recall that we built a large number of branches following the financial crisis as we densified our position in new market, being California and Florida and Nevada and the like.
And so we do have a decent portion of our branches that are still in their maturation phase and so we’re definitely seeing some growth in deposits there. I also firmly believe, and we talked about it many, many times, that we’ve been investing consistently over the last decade in customer experience. Customer satisfaction in our Consumer bank is at an all-time high and continues to increase consecutively. Digital products, new products and services, value propositions to our customers, convenience, new markets, all of which I think are increasingly important to our customers as well as obviously a number of other factors.
So to me, it’s the combination of all of the above and less so at this point a perception of a flight to quality. The people have a lot of choices. Year over year, I would say we’re seeing deposit growth slow exactly in line with our expectations. But this year, the slowdown speaks a little bit more as far as we can see to higher consumer spend and a little bit less to do with deposit flows out to rate-seeking alternatives.
So customers are voting with their business, they’re bringing deposits to us, and I think it speaks to a combination of the investments we’re making and also including branches.
Mike Mayo — Wells Fargo — Analyst
So how much of the deposit growth is due to digital banking? Can you quantify that or give us a ballpark figure?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Well, I can tell you that — and so it’s not just our deposit growth as well. Remember, it’s also about investment assets and we talked about our digital offerings providing headwind there. So I don’t have a breakout for you. We can follow up.
It deepens — on our branch growth, the reason why we continue to believe in a physical and digital combined channel presence, both are important. But we can get back to you.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Glenn Schorr with Evercore ISI.
Glenn Schorr — Evercore ISI — Analyst
Hi. Thanks very much. On Sec Services, I heard you loud and clear about the funding basis compression being part of the answer on revs down. Could you talk about the business exit? I wasn’t aware of that and how big that it is.
And then flip to the better side, you also did mention about organic growth. We haven’t heard too much since the big $1 trillion win, but I know there’s stuff going on underneath the covers. Talk about what type of business you are winning there.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So on the business exit, this is — it’s the sort of feature we’re always talking about year over year that, to me, this feels like really old news. It was a U.S. broker-dealer exit that we talked about many quarters ago.
But obviously we’re still on a year-over-year basis, for another couple of quarters, going to see the impact of that on our revenues. It’s about 20 — just over a $20 million year-over-year revenue negative impact, but it’s relatively speaking, old news in terms of the exit took place last year. Lower market levels were about an equivalent drag on revenues. And then we are seeing solid underlying growth, but this is a very competitive environment.
And as we are growing our assets on — our custody assets and as we’re growing and winning new mandates, these are under competitive pressures, and it also depends on mixer. So there’s a bunch of factors going on. What we’re focused on is, for both of these businesses, that the long-term growth opportunities are very big and the organic growth in the underlying businesses are performing well. And even with these revenue pressures, we’re focused on continuing to drive efficiencies, and these are good ROE businesses above mid-teens.
Can I — I’m sorry, can I just make one more comment, Mike? I didn’t say this on the digital space, but I think it’s important as we think going forward, that as we think not just about our digital assets, but digital account opening, and that has been a feature of how we’re attracting new account, 25% of checking production, 40% of savings production, now able to be opened digitally. So increasingly, digital will be a driver but we will get back to you with the mixes. Sorry.
Glenn Schorr — Evercore ISI — Analyst
All right. Marianne, just one quick qualifier on the seven-hour marathon the other day in D.C. Besides finding out Jamie’s a capitalist, that’s shocking news, one of risks that I think the group talked about was, in the private credit markets and nonbank lending, and I just wanted to get a little qualifier of that. I’m pretty sure you didn’t mean the exposure JPMorgan has to those, it’s just more of risk being taken, but if you can just expand on that, that would be helpful.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So for sure, the comment is more about the overall risk in the environment and not about our risks to those sectors. And our risks are all the things that we’ve always told you about, which are: Relatively modest, relatively senior, well secured, well diversified. We look at not just under a variety of stress scenarios, are manageable.
The comments are really about the percentage of leveraged lending or the percentage of some of our businesses that have now been taken outside of the banking market. And while we wouldn’t say necessarily that that’s systemic. Being not systemic and suggesting that there won’t be problems are 2 different things. Not all nonbanks are situated similarly.
So there’s some healthy, thriving, well — capitalized well and responsibly run companies and there are some others who may not be standing at the end of another downturn. So the real question for all of his business that, if migrated outside of banks, is how much of it will be unable to be rolled over, refinanced on the same terms and with the same prices as it is now? So it’s not about us, but it’s about understanding that we would want to be able to be there to support and intermediate risk in these markets going forward. But for a variety of reasons, whether it’s structure, whether it’s capital liquidity pricing, that may not be as easy as it sounds in a downturn for portions of that market.
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Yes. Can I just add? So just take the big numbers put up, growing. So obviously, regulatory’s just keeping an eye on it. And we’re not particularly worried about it.
And just to give you some facts, the banks — there’s $2.3 trillion. The banks have the — generally, the senior piece at the A piece, about $800 billion or $900 billion. Then institutional investors, some of them are quite bright, these are life insurance companies, funds, etc., own the B piece which is about $900 billion. And there’s $500 million which they call direct.
Now think of these as large funds. Most of them are large funds. Some of them are very capable, very bright, they have long-term capital. And the institutional piece I mentioned, a lot of it is CLOs.
And I know that people worried about that. But if you actually look at the CLOs, there’s more equity in their CLOs, they’re more funded. And both the direct piece, the CLO piece is more capital — firmer in capital. And so this system is OK, just getting bigger as more outside of the regulated system.
And it should be something that should be watched, but it’s not a systemic issue at this point.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Betsy Graseck with Morgan Stanley.
Betsy Graseck — Morgan Stanley — Analyst
Hi. Good morning. I had a question for Jamie. Jamie, in the shareholder letter, you mentioned, because of some significant issues around mortgage, that you are intensely reviewing your role in origination servicing and holding mortgages, and the odds are increasing that we will need to materially change our mortgage strategy going forward.
Could you give us some color and context for that statement and what kind of things you’re thinking about there?
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Yes. So if you look at the business, I mean, it is costly. You have 3,000 federal and state origination and servicing requirements. It is litigious.
You just look at history, you can see that. And it’s becoming — huge nonbanks are becoming competitors, and they don’t have the same regulation, the same requirements on either servicing or production. So you’re having that issue. Servicing itself is a hard asset.
And so we just want to — we know it’s an important thing for a bank. We also want — and also, you can generalize capital since a lot of banks are constrained by generalized capital. It’s a capital pot far more than it should be if you look at it relative to the real risk of then holding mortgages. So we just want to have our eyes open, look at that, go through every piece and structure it in a way that we’re very happy going forward.
We don’t mind the volatility, we don’t mind staying in the business, but you’ve got a look at that and ask a lot of questions about whether banks should even be in it.
Betsy Graseck — Morgan Stanley — Analyst
OK. And then a separate topic, but just a question I wanted to ask because I’ve got a couple of questions on it yesterday. The whole group of CEOs was asked who do you think could succeed you? Would a woman or would a person of color succeed you? And I don’t think you raised your hand. And just wanted to understand why and just hear from you what — why you answered the question that way.
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Yes. So what I should have said, so we don’t comment on — or speculation on succession plan. That’s a board-level issue. It’s not something you do in Congress where you play your hand out in Congress.
But also, I was confused by the question likely without a timetable. But we have exceptional women and my successor may very well be a woman, but it may not. And it really depends on the circumstance at the time. And it might different if it’s one year from now versus five years from now.
So that’s all that was. I think a bunch of people were kind of confused and saying what does the word likely mean and all the stuff like that. So I mean, it’s just blown out of proportion, are there several people on the operating committee who can succeed me.
Betsy Graseck — Morgan Stanley — Analyst
Thanks. I appreciate that because that’s the answer I expected you were going to give, but wanted to hear it from you. So appreciate that. Thanks.
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
You’re welcome.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Steven Chubak with Wolfe Research.
Steven Chubak — Wolfe Research — Analyst
Just wanted to follow up on the remarks on the mortgage business. We did see a healthy decline in resi mortgage loans. And Marianne, I know you spoke at investor day of the balance sheet optimization strategy which could drive more growth in securities versus loans. Now I’m wondering, is that what’s really driving the slowdown that we saw on resi loan growth? And maybe more broadly, how we should think about core loan growth or the sustainable piece of core loan growth in 2019?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So mortgages in 2018, ’19 are the center of it for mortgage. So the market itself is smaller year on year, it’s about 15% smaller because notwithstanding all of the discussion about lower rates, they’re still higher year on year than they there were this time last year. So that obviously is having an impact.
And as we’ve been — and we’re down similarly. So we’ve added about $6 billion of core mortgage loans to our portfolio, but against that, as you saw last year, we did number of loan sales and we did another sale again in the first quarter, and that speaks to optimizing the balance sheet. We’re trying to take loans off of our balance sheet, core loans off our balance sheet and sell them if we can reinvest in agency MBS and nonresi assets that have better capital liquidity characteristics. So there’s going to be — it’s going to a little bit harder to look at a trend.
You’re going to need to look at things gross. So we are originated high-quality loans. We are adding a number of loans to our portfolio. We’re distributing based on better execution as that would go.
But we will continue to optimize our balance sheet.
Steven Chubak — Wolfe Research — Analyst
Very helpful. And just a follow-up for me on CCAR. The Federal released a document recently highlighting the changes to the loss models this year, including some higher Card and Auto losses in the upcoming year exam. I’m just wondering, how does that inform the way you’re thinking about capital return capacity? Are you still confident in that sustainability of 75% to 100% net payout as well as the 11% to 12% CET1 target?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. Sorry, I didn’t hear the second part of the question on losses, which losses were up this year that you were mentioning, but here’s what I would say — go.
Steven Chubak — Wolfe Research — Analyst
The Card and Auto losses.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So I would — I applaud transparency for sure. And we love to be able to get more detail as we think about the way that the Fed models losses for our portfolios. And we’ve been observing that over time.
Necessarily, it’s the case that the Federal Reserve model is typically less granular and less tied to our specific risks necessarily because they’re industrywide. Net-net, it doesn’t change our point of view that as we’re at 12.1% CET1 right now. So arguably, a little bit above the high end of our range and continuing to grow earnings, that we ought to be able to distribute a significant portion of earnings. But we’ll always invest in our businesses first.
So we are growing our businesses as responsibly as we can. We’re adding branches, we’re adding customers, we’re adding advisors across our businesses. But to the degree that we have excess earnings, we’ll continue to distribute them. And the ranges that we gave you at the end of February, nothing’s changed.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Brian Kleinhanzl with KBW.
Brian Kleinhanzl — KBW — Analyst
Good morning, Marianne. A quick question. I know you mentioned that the increase in NPLs within Wholesale was again idiosyncratic. But last quarter, there was also an increase and it was five credits last quarter.
Is there any way you can give more color as to specific drivers in there? And I know you said in the past that you expect it to normalize, that you’re off a low base, I got that. But I mean, just a little bit of additional color, perhaps?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So the color is there is really no color, which is to say if you were to go back over the course of the last eight quarters and take oil, gas, energy releases out, you would’ve seen quarters where reserve builds were close to home and other quarters where they’re $100 million and $50 million. So there’s always been the propensity for there to be one or two or three or four downgrades. The thing we look for is whether or not, as we look at the portfolio of facilities we have, whether we’re seeing pressure on corporate margins and free cash flow and whether we’re seeing that broadly across the sectors and companies we’re banking.
And we’re just not. So it’s not to say that we aren’t playing close attention to real estate given where we are in the cycle, it’s not to say we aren’t paying close attention to retail, but the color is there is no real color. That these are genuinely a handful of names across a handful of sectors as was true last quarter. And even if you look quarter over quarter over quarter, that there’s no trend to call out.
And it — we have a large Wholesale lending portfolio. These are extremely modest in the context of that. And remember, every quarter, like we talk about a few because it’s non-zero. But we downgrade and upgrade hundreds of facilities every quarter.
And it’s not just downgrades, it’s upgrades, and they’re approximately of equal measure. So we’re looking very carefully at it. We understand why people are questioning and concerned. And these are cyclical businesses and the cycle will turn, but we’re not seeing it yet.
Brian Kleinhanzl — KBW — Analyst
OK. And then a separate question in the mortgage banking. It looks like gain on sale margins were at a high point as — over the last five years this quarter. Was that something in the market, something with the rates, or was there a one-off impacting that number this quarter?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So you may recall that we did a mortgage loan sale last quarter and realized — and there’s geography. In the Home Lending business, when we do these mortgage loan sales, because we’re match-funded, net-net, there’s very little P&L. There’s — last quarter, there was a loss in NIR and in offset in rate funding in NIR. This quarter, there’s a gain.
So you’ve got a loss quarter, a gain this quarter, both small, but nevertheless, that’s driving the majority of the production margin going up. But in addition, if you just strip all that noise out, which is not material, but nevertheless significant quarter-over-quarter, we are seeing better revenue margins on better pricing.
Brian Kleinhanzl — KBW — Analyst
Thank you.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Gerard Cassidy with RBC.
Gerard Cassidy — RBC Capital Markets — Analyst
Good morning, Marianne. Can you share with us — obviously, you’ve got your de novo branching strategies moving forward. And what have you guys discovered? And how long does it take for the branches to reach breakeven and then eventually get to your desired return on investment numbers?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So we’re really, really excited to be able to open these branches in these markets and serve more customers across the United States. But when you talk about branches, you are talking about investment for the long term. And when I saw long term, multiple years, decades.
So with respect to the new markets that we’re entering, these are extremely nascent investments. The branches, in many cases, we haven’t even broken ground on. However, that said, early indications, it’s very, very early indications are strongly positive. We’re seeing a lot of excitement in the market.
We’re seeing new accounts in production a little better than we would have expected at this very early stage. On the whole, you see branches break even over several years and mature in terms of deposit and investments and relationships closer to 10 years or below that.
Gerard Cassidy — RBC Capital Markets — Analyst
Very good. And then following up on some comments you made at investor day and I believe touched on today about technology spending. If I recall correctly, next year, technology spending should be self-funding and stabilized at the level — just about where you are today. When you compare it to the past five years, what has changed with the growth trajectory of technology? Nominal dollars, has now kind of stabilized versus what it was like, again, in the past five years?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So I just want to reiterate something that I want to make sure you guys completely internalize, which is we believe given the level of spend and the continued efficiency we’re getting out of each dollar of spend, that overall, our net investment should be more flat going forward than they had in the past. But we will continue to look at every investment on its own merit. That said, we’ve been growing our technology spend. And in particular, we’ve been growing the portion of it that is invested in changing the bank.
And that runs the gamut from platform modernization and cloud to controls and security and customer experience and digital, R&D, the whole lot. It’s a large number, and each year, a lot of that, a lot of those dollars that we’ve been investing roll off and we get the ability to redecision and reinvest them. So this is not that we’re going to be doing anything other than continuing to invest very, very heavily in the agenda, and in particular, in the technology agenda. It’s just that each year, the [Inaudible] decisions.
And we’ll continue to make the right decisions. And we see that being flatter going forward than it has been. So we’re getting — and we’re getting more efficient. So in the past, the way that technology was delivered was very different.
And the more that we’re in our modern, virtualized, cloud-ready way with new technologies, each dollar of technology is more productive.
Gerard Cassidy — RBC Capital Markets — Analyst
Great. Thank you.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Al Alevizakos with HSBC.
Al Alevizakos — HSBC — Analyst
I’ve got a very quick question and a follow-up, basically. My question is on the Treasury Services, year on year, the growth going from double-digit, you just drove to 3%, where apparently, the volumes remained healthy but the margins started to deteriorate. I wonder how you feel going into the remaining of 2019, especially given that the trade talks are still ongoing and therefore volumes could actually be a bit more problematic. Do you still believe that we can go back to kind of double-digit growth year on year for the remaining quarters? And my follow-up question is you talked about change the bank versus run the bank for IT budget.
Can you give us a number just to get the indication of how much you’re spending on innovation?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. OK. So first point on Treasury Services. Last year, our revenue growth was in double digits, you’re right this quarter, we spent year on year.
I mentioned earlier that for both of our Wholesale businesses, we happened to have basis compression between the funding spread that we provide to the businesses and pricing declines. And so that, sort of just given where rates have moved, may be a headwind this year as the segment results are reported. But for the company, it’s obviously net zero. The more important point is that organic growth underlying all of that, balances and payments, is holding up very well and we do expect that to continue.
So you will see margins mainly compress on that. It’s not speaking to deposit flows. It’s not speaking to volumes and it’s not speaking to escalating payouts at this point. So we’ve been talking about the underlying organic growth of the business.
With respect to technology spend, you’ll recall last year, we were kind of 60-40 run the bank, change the bank. And it’s more 50-50 this year. So $11.5 billion of spend, about half and half. But remember, in the change the bank, it runs the whole gamut from platforms and controls to customer experience, digital, data, R&D.
So it’s the whole spectrum.
Operator
Your next question is from the line of Matt O’Connor with Deutsche Bank.
Matt O’Connor — Deutsche Bank — Analyst
Good morning. I just wanted to follow up on net interest income and it came in a lot better than expected this quarter. Is there anything that’s lumpy or onetime that you’d flag? Because if you annualize it, you’re already above the full-year target at $58 billion-plus. And obviously, there’s day count drag this quarter and really just puts and takes with rates and balance sheet growth.
But it seems like the guidance is conservative versus where you’re at right now.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
OK. So we were slightly better in the first quarter, two things driving in. One is small, but nevertheless, is arguably nonrecurring, which is we talked about the fact that, overall in the company, when we do these loan sales that net-net, there may be a small residual gain or loss. That resides in Treasury and it was a small gain in the first quarter in NII, call it, $50 million approximately.
And then in addition, we talked in the fourth quarter about the fact that we were seeing the opportunity to deploy cash in short-duration liquid investments that were higher-yielding than IOER. That continued into the first quarter, so we did benefit from that. And it may or may not continue but we’re not necessarily expecting that to continue all the way through. So I would say that day count was a drag.
As you look forward with some opportunities, obviously, the risk associated with the flat yield curve, not big, but nevertheless, net neutral to downward pressure or downward pressure if long-end rates stay lower for longer. As we don’t have the tailwind anymore from higher rates and we continue to process the December rate hike, you could see more rates paid due little bit more into second quarter. So there are risks and opportunities. We still think it’s a decent outlook, but I don’t think it’s conservative.
I think it’s $58 billion is straight down the middle at this point. The trouble with the yield curve is it can fluctuate dramatically over the short term, and we shouldn’t over-interpret it or over-chase it. At this point, I think it’s a decent estimate and we’ll continue to update you.
Matt O’Connor — Deutsche Bank — Analyst
OK. And then just on the repositioning of the balance sheet and the approach to adding securities. Are you thinking any differently going forward than maybe you were six weeks ago? You clearly seem more positive on the macro, and obviously, things can change there. But are you approaching the balance sheet management a little bit differently given maybe a more positive macro outlook?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Well — so I mean, we only spoke to it most recently about six weeks ago. So the sort of overall answer is, no, not really. We expected at that point that we would have a patient Fed. It turns out that the — all the central banks are pointing to being a little bit more dovish, which could generally be constructive for the environment and for credit risk on the balance sheet.
Obviously, the curve being flatter is not sort of a compelling situation to add more duration. But there’s natural risk in our balance sheet. So overall, very little. We feel good about credit.
The curve’s flat and we’ll continue to manage the overall environment and company as we see the economy unfold.
Matt O’Connor — Deutsche Bank — Analyst
OK. Thank you.
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Erika Najarian with Bank of America.
Erika Najarian — Bank of America Merrill Lynch — Analyst
Hi. Good morning. I just wanted to follow up, Marianne, on the comments. In the backdrop for lower rates for longer, could you give us a sense on how you’re thinking about your deposit strategy in retail and Wholesale? In other words, I know you discussed some dynamics on pricing for the first quarter, but when do you expect competition to taper off? And do banks have room to actually lower deposit cost if the rate curve stays this way for a prolonged period of time?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So I’ll just — look, the big contextual answer will always be the same, which is when we think about our strategy around deposits and deposit pricing, it is 100% driven by what we’re observing in our consumer behaviors and what we’re seeing in deposit flows. And so that’s the environment that we look at to determine what’s happening. And you’ve seen naturally over the course of the last couple of years as rates have been rising that we’ve seen flows of deposits to higher-yielding alternatives whether it’s investments or whether it’s more recently in CDs, and that may continue. We’ll continue to watch that.
It is our expectation that rates will be relatively stable from here in terms of the short end, and it’s the short end that predominantly drives the deposit pricing agenda. So even if the curve is flatter, as long as it’s — because the front end is stable, I don’t necessarily see deposit costs going down. But we’re going to continue to watch our customer behaviors and deposit flows and respond accordingly.
Erika Najarian — Bank of America Merrill Lynch — Analyst
Thank you. And my follow-up question is we heard you loud and clear during your prepared remarks that the increase in Wholesale nonaccruals was idiosyncratic. And I’m wondering as we look at a tick up in nonaccrual loans in the Corporate & Investment Bank for the past two quarters, are we just in the part of the cycle where we’re just growing from a low base? Or should we expect a step-down in the second quarter in nonaccruals similar to how we saw last year?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
There are a couple of situations that we would expect to maybe not be present in the second quarter, but I would say it’s a feature more of the extremely low base. And so from that, any movement whether up or down is somewhat exaggerated. But we would continue to call the credit environment benign.
Erika Najarian — Bank of America Merrill Lynch — Analyst
Great. Thank you.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Ken Usdin with Jefferies.
Ken Usdin — Jefferies — Analyst
Thanks. Marianne, just if I could ask you, you mentioned you had some signs that the economy is strengthening. And I wanted to just ask you to — can you split that between just what you’re seeing on the Consumer side versus the Wholesale corporate side in terms of — the spend numbers are obviously still double-digit year over year. Some others have talked about a little bit of a slowdown.
Yours are still staying quite good. And then there’s this unevenness about just capex and spending and corporate side. So just where are you — could you just kind of walk us through just where you’re seeing pockets of relative strength and improvement?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes, I mean, I think that as it relates to the U.S. and in particular looking at the U.S. consumer, you’ve got all up, jobs, more recently Auto, housing spend all generally encouraging and holding up well and robust. And whether it’s double digits or whether it’s not, we’re continuing to see the — and consumer confidence, by the way, which is still very high, and has recovered from any sort of hangover from the equity market actions over the fourth quarter.
So for us, U.S. Consumer has always been strong and confident. And even if we’re not at an all-time highs in confidence, it’s still very high. And generally, the beta is — and even some like housing and auto that hasn’t necessarily been super-strong is looking encouraging.
And then on the global front, it is a little harder but as you look at some of the areas that have been struggling a bit, and Europe would be a good example, we would think that in the first quarter sort of transitory factors around social unrest and politics and Brexit, and they seem to be fading a little, business confidence has recovered a little. Businesses are still spending on labor, so generally a good sign of underlying confidence notwithstanding any kind of sentiment numbers. And even there, there’s job growth, there’s wage growth that’s helped by dovish monetary policy and general financial conditions having improved the least. So I mean, I think generally, we feel optimistic across the Consumer and the rest of the sector, albeit it’s sort of green shoots on the Wholesale buy.
So it’s early, but it’s what we were expecting to see. And so long may it continue.
Ken Usdin — Jefferies — Analyst
Yes. And one follow-up just on the Investment Banking business. You had mentioned that the pipelines look good and obviously we’ve seen the reopening of the ECM market. What’s your general outlook just again on that global point about the — a bit of unevenness between U.S.
and global? Just how do you feel about the advisory backdrop? And obviously, some big deals on the tape again today. But had there been a little bit of an air pocket here partially probably because of the soft fourth quarter? But how’s that side of the business feeling and sounding from a backlog perspective?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So I would say that — a couple of things. Obviously, there were some deals that moved into the first quarter out of the second half of 2018, and so we did benefit from that. But just as a general market matter, M&A is still attractive in a low-growth environment.
Albeit a growth environment, in fact, it is still constructive. North America, which is by far the biggest market for M&A is still healthy. And so Europe was a big driver last year, and Europe has been a sharp drop-off in volumes and wallet. And so that may continue, although we have a pretty good position there.
So I would say that the pipeline is down, but still M&A is attractive and people are looking for synergistic growth.
Ken Usdin — Jefferies — Analyst
That makes sense. Thanks very much.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Jim Mitchell with Buckingham Research.
Jim Mitchell — Buckingham Research — Analyst
Hey, good morning. Maybe just a follow-up on the NII outlook. I mean, I think we’ve talked about a flat curve. What kind of levers do you have to pull if we were to see what some are speculating? It doesn’t sound like you’re in that camp, but if we were to get a rate cut, how do you manage that? How do you think the balance sheet reacts and NII reacts to potential for a rate cut over the next 12 months?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Right. So the market, which is usually more — I wouldn’t say pessimistic, but more in that camp, they are still only expecting an ease at the end of the year. So we are not, by the way, as you point out. So I think for 2019’s NII outlook, it’s not a clear and present danger that there will be an ease.
Obviously, we have, on the way up on rates, been overindexed to total end rates. And so clearly, if we were to have a ease, it would have an impact on our NII. If we felt generally that, that was the direction that the economy and rates were going in, then it might change our view on how we position the balance sheet. But right now, the Fed is on course.
Right now, that’s constructive to corporate deposit margins, constructive for credit and generally constructive for how we’re positioned on the balance sheet.
Jim Mitchell — Buckingham Research — Analyst
But you feel like you have room to, I guess, extend duration to kind of protect NII and NIM if that were to happen?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. Yes, we do.
Jim Mitchell — Buckingham Research — Analyst
OK. All right. Thank you very much.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Saul Martinez with UBS.
Saul Martinez — UBS — Analyst
Hi. Good morning. I wanted to follow up on Matt’s question on sort of idiosyncratic items in the quarter and lumpiness. This is obviously a pretty strong quarter from an earnings standpoint, earnings well ahead of my estimates and consensus, and especially in CCB, but there weren’t a lot of obvious noncore items really called out.
So Marianne, can you just comment on the sustainability of the results and whether there’s some idiosyncratic things that weren’t necessarily called out during the call? You mentioned corporate, cash deployment, revenues really high relative to historical levels there. So are there any sort of idiosyncratic items that call into question how sustainable the results are?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So first of all, just sort of big picture, really high, I think is a bit of an overstatement. Higher up, I think is fair. No, not really. If there were, we would have called them out.
There are a few little things, so I’m just going to call out a few of the things that we have mentioned. We contributed $100 million to a foundation this quarter. Net-net, legal was a very, very small, but nevertheless, positive this quarter. So there were a few little bits and pieces like that.
But if you look at revenue performance, we did a little better across the board than you all were expecting. We did better in IB fees and we’ve gained a lot of share. We did a little better in Markets. We did a little better in NII.
So just a little bit of a wind at our backs sort of phenomenon. Probably my best answer to you is as happy as we are with performance, and we are, gaining share and continuing to see our underlying drivers propel us forward and the momentum we’ve got in our businesses, we are not making material changes to our full-year outlook. So we’ll still see how market performs for the year. We do still expect, as Daniel mentioned at investor day, that while we feel great about our positioning in Investment Banking in the first quarter, Coalition is still expecting the wallet to be down between 5% and 10% year on year.
So we do expect to gain share to help offset that, but last year was a record. So we haven’t changed our full-year guidance at all yet. We’ll take a sort of very good downpayment for that. And if markets are constructive and wallet expands, we’ll benefit from that.
But we’re not leading it across and changing everything.
Saul Martinez — UBS — Analyst
That’s helpful. I’ll change gears a little bit. Any update on distressed capital buffer, what the Fed is thinking there and when you think we could see a little bit more details or a little bit more clarity on the proposal?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So as best I know, there is a chance but not necessarily a probability that there could be an SCB proposal for 2020 CCAR. So there a meet — a set of meetings or a meeting that’s coming up some time in the summer that I think might be an important moment. But we continue to work as constructively as we can to help understand in a better way to bridge growth capital together with point-in-time capital, but it’s complicated. So as we said, the most important thing is not to issue an SCB proposal that doesn’t deal with the entire landscape of capital and look at it cohesively.
So we’re talking about GSIB. We’re talking about minimums. We’re talking about Basel. We’re talking about SCB.
It’s complicated. I’d say there’s a chance but not a probability that we might have something in time for 2020 CCAR.
Saul Martinez — UBS — Analyst
Got it. Thanks a lot.
Operator
Your next question comes from the line of Marty Mosby with Vining Sparks.
Marty Mosby — Vining Sparks — Analyst
Thanks for taking the question. Hey, good morning. First, I want to ask is going to CCAR, now we’re getting into that season again, one of the things that I think has an impact is that what we had was a significant 30%-plus growth in earnings last year. So if you kind of look at the plan for your capital going forward and you think of holding payout ratios, so let’s say they were just constant, doesn’t that kind of presume that you have kind of some wind behind the sails just to increase fairly significant just off the increase in earnings last year?
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
I mean, yes. If you look at payout ratios obviously sort of described as a percentage, then we said over the longer term, we’d expect to pay out, in a benign environment, between 75% and 100%. And analysts have estimates of 90%-plus. And obviously, as earnings grow, that would be a bigger dollar number.
But again, we’ll always calibrate that relative to our opportunity to invest in our businesses and its capacity, not a promise. So we’ll continue to see how the whole environment unfolds. But you’re right. As earnings continue to grow, a strong payout ratio, we’re above our — the top end of our capital range, so we are starting at a robust level.
Would be a higher dollar number, yes.
Marty Mosby — Vining Sparks — Analyst
And then Jamie, I was just curious. I think one of the issues facing the industry, and just that we get pushed from the outside, is that the cycle is 10 years old. And my thought is that, that internal time clock is just off this time. And so if we look at it, I think there’s things that you’re seeing, or Marianne, that you see, inside the company that probably dispel that the recession is kind of on the horizon.
So just wanted to get your comment on that as well is my follow-up question.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So I do quite — sorry, go, Jamie.
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Yes. Some sort of number that’s out that Australia has had a growth for 28 years. And just off saying the notional, but do you have to have a recession? They’ve had a lot of back wind, there’s growth in Asia and stuff like that. But if you look at the American economy, the consumer’s in good shape.
The balance sheet’s in good shape. People are going back to the workforce. Companies have plenty of capital. And capital spending, in truth, is still up year over year, a little bit less this quarter than last quarter.
Capital is being retained in the United States. Business confidence and consumer confidence are both rather high. Not at all-time peaks, rather high. So you can just easily — it could go on for years.
There’s no law that says it has to stop. We do make risks and look at all the other things, geopolitical issues, lower liquidity. So there may be a confluence of events that somehow causes a recession, but it may not be in 2019, 2020, 2021. Obviously, at one point, though, it’ll probably — there will be something.
And yes, I think the bigger short-term risk would be something to go wrong with China, the trade issue with China. So I just wouldn’t count on there having to be a recession in the short run the next couple of years.
Marty Mosby — Vining Sparks — Analyst
I agree.
Operator
Question comes from the line of Andrew Lim with Societe Generale.
Andrew Lim — Societe Generale — Analyst
Hi. Morning. Thanks for taking my questions. So my first question is on the end-of-period loans.
So if we look across the board, it looks like there’s some contraction therewith the quarter-to-quarter basis of about 3% of 4%. So I was just wondering if you saw that as a 1-quarter issue relating to what happened in 4Q ’18. And if you can give some color maybe on the quarters ahead, speaking to companies here is whether you see growth trend emerging again.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Yes. So quarter on quarter, and I think I mentioned a couple of these things. But we, across our businesses for a variety of reasons on an end-of-period basis, loans are down. So like stepping through them, the first one that I would point out is mortgage, And we just talked about that, I think, earlier in the call, which is we continue to originate mortgage loans.
We continue to just really expand the portfolio. But we did do a loan sale which is part of the discussion that we’ve been having with you about optimizing our balance sheet. We did a sale at the end of the quarter. So that’s impacting our mortgage loans.
And the CIB and one of the reasons why we called out core loan growth ex the CIB is that because we don’t consider CIB loans as core because they are, just by their nature, oftentimes more episodic and lumpy. And so we did see a large funded syndicated loan at the end of last quarter which was fully syndicated into the first quarter. And then in our other businesses, in Asset Wealth Management, a bit of seasonality. A few pay-downs in Card seasonality.
So it’s a combination of factors, but obviously, two drivers, CIB and Home Lending, CIB on sort of that large syndication, Home Lending on the loan sale. Going forward, we’ll continue to optimize the loan versus security part of our balance sheet as best we can for cash and liquidity purposes. But just underlying core business demand for bank balance sheet lending, I look at the middle-market space and say we’re still seeing solid demand. It is in our investment areas and our expansion markets and specialized industries, but we’re still growing that portion of our loans in the mid-single digits year on year.
I’m sorry, Andrew. There are going to be other areas where we just won’t throttle up. I mean in Commercial Real Estate, you see loan growth is much lower. It’s very competitive.
Spreads have come down. We continue to provide financing and funding for our core loans, but we’re not going to chase it down, and similarly Auto.
Andrew Lim — Societe Generale — Analyst
OK. Thanks so much. So my follow-on question is on CLOs. So Japanese institutions are big buyers of U.S.
highly rated CLOs, but a few weeks ago, the Japanese FSA introduced some new rules saying that there had to be 5% risk retention by U.S. issuers in order for the Japanese institutions to buy them. So I’m just wondering if you’re seeing yet any change in demand from Japanese institutions. And likewise on the other side, if there’s any change in behavior from U.S.
CLO issuers in terms of trying to integrate 5% risk retention.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
So that is a great question. The answer I’m going to give you is not that I’m aware of at this point, but I’ll have to follow up with you. Jamie are you aware? No. Sorry, Andrew, we’ll come back to you.
Not that I’m aware of, but that — it’s a good, but nevertheless, quite detailed question.
Andrew Lim — Societe Generale — Analyst
OK. Thanks.
Operator
And there are no further questions at this time.
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
Thanks, everyone.
Operator
[Operator signoff]
Duration: 67 minutes
Call Participants:
Marianne Lake — Chief Financial Officer
John McDonald — Autonomous Research — Analyst
Mike Mayo — Wells Fargo — Analyst
Glenn Schorr — Evercore ISI — Analyst
Jamie Dimon — Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Betsy Graseck — Morgan Stanley — Analyst
Steven Chubak — Wolfe Research — Analyst
Brian Kleinhanzl — KBW — Analyst
Gerard Cassidy — RBC Capital Markets — Analyst
Al Alevizakos — HSBC — Analyst
Matt O’Connor — Deutsche Bank — Analyst
Erika Najarian — Bank of America Merrill Lynch — Analyst
Ken Usdin — Jefferies — Analyst
Jim Mitchell — Buckingham Research — Analyst
Saul Martinez — UBS — Analyst
Marty Mosby — Vining Sparks — Analyst
Andrew Lim — Societe Generale — Analyst
This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company’s SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.
10 stocks we like better than JPMorgan ChaseWhen investing geniuses David and Tom Gardner have a stock tip, it can pay to listen. After all, the newsletter they have run for over a decade, Motley Fool Stock Advisor, has quadrupled the market.*
David and Tom just revealed what they believe are the ten best stocks for investors to buy right now… and JPMorgan Chase wasn’t one of them! That’s right — they think these 10 stocks are even better buys.
*Stock Advisor returns as of March 1, 2019
Motley Fool Transcribing has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
