Ubs AG 6-K, filed Oct 29, 2026
Ubs AG (AMUB)
6-K
2026-10-29
For: 2026-09-30
View Original
Added on
October 29, 2026
About this 6-K
Ubs AG filed this 6-K on October 29, 2026.
UBS AG reported third-quarter net profit of 2.7 billion and underlying pre-tax profit of 4.1 billion, up 14%, with a 16.7% return on CET1 capital. It expects around 13.7 billion cumulative gross cost savings. AI summary
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
_________________
FORM 6-K
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-16 OR 15d-16 UNDER
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date: October 29, 2026
UBS Group AG
(Registrant's Name)
Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland
(Address of principal executive office)
Commission File Number: 1-36764
UBS AG
(Registrant's Name)
Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland
Aeschenvorstadt 1, 4051 Basel, Switzerland
(Address of principal executive offices)
Commission File Number: 1-15060
Indicate by check mark whether the registrants file or will file annual reports under cover of Form
20-F or Form 40-
F.
Form 20-F
☒
☐
This Form 6-K consists of the transcripts of the of UBS Group 3Q26 Earnings call remarks and
Analyst Q&A, which appear immediately following this page.
1
Third quarter 2026 results
28 October 2026
Speeches by
Sergio P. Ermotti
, Group Chief Executive Officer, and
Todd Tuckner
,
Group Chief Financial Officer
Including analyst Q&A session
Transcript.
Numbers for slides refer to the third quarter 2026 results presentation. Materials and a webcast
replay are available at
www.ubs.com/investors
Sergio P. Ermotti
Slide 3 – Key messages
Thank you, Sarah and good morning, everyone.
In an increasingly complex market environment, our strong third-quarter performance once again demonstrated
the benefits of our diversified global business model and disciplined execution.
We remained focused on what we could control, deepening client relationships, prudently managing resources and
risks, and finalizing the integration of Credit Suisse while delivering on our related financial ambitions. With a year-
to-date return on CET1 capital of 17%, we are increasingly confident in our ability to outperform our 2026 exit-
rate return target. And we remain on track to achieve our exit rate cost/income ratio target of less than 70%.
Our global diversification remains a key source of strength and momentum. In APAC, our One Bank approach is
driving year-to-date pre-tax profit margins toward 50% and in the US, our strategic investments continue to
translate into consistently higher levels of profitability and growth. In Switzerland, the value clients place in our
local and global capabilities is increasingly evident in our results, and we granted or renewed around 40 billion
Swiss francs of loans to businesses and households. Meanwhile in EMEA, our enhanced scale is translating into
stronger operating leverage in the region.
More broadly, the breadth and depth of our offering allowed us to attract 55 billion of inflows in Global Wealth
Management. We also saw record demand for our Unified Global Alternatives strategies, further bolstering our
scale and growth momentum. In the Investment Bank, we improved on our already best-in-class efficiency, with
record third-quarter performance reflecting the strength of our Equities franchise and our ability to capture high-
return opportunities, particularly in Asia.
As we enter the fourth quarter, investor sentiment remains measured amid elevated macroeconomic volatility,
ongoing geopolitical tensions and political uncertainty, with consequential elections, including in the US. Against
this backdrop, we are staying close to clients to help them navigate market conditions and capture opportunities.
Our profitability and balance sheet for all seasons gives us the capacity to do this while also delivering on our capital
2
return plans. We have repurchased 4.8 billion dollars of shares and accrued 2.8 billion for our dividend year-to-
date. We have already achieved the ambition we set early in the integration journey for 2026 with total capital
returns to exceed pre-acquisition levels. Over the next three months, we intend to repurchase 1.2 billion dollars of
shares, completing our current program. As usual, we will outline our capital return plans for 2027 with our fourth
quarter results.
Turning to the integration of Credit Suisse. We are in the last mile, and the finish line is in sight. Nearly all legacy
applications are no longer in use, with 90% fully decommissioned and as said, we are close to achieving our related
financial ambitions. Of all we have accomplished over the last three years, I remain very proud of how our people
came together under a common culture and vision. Our recent employee survey results continue to exceed financial
services benchmarks across all comparable measures, with overall sentiment remaining strong and broadly
consistent across UBS and former Credit Suisse employees.
That sense of shared purpose has been a driving force behind our success. More importantly, it gives me confidence
that we can continue to evolve as a firm and unlock the growth opportunities that lie ahead. Increasingly,
technology and AI are amplifying the ability of our people to serve clients and operate as a more integrated firm.
Our progress was recently validated by the 2026 Evident AI Index, with UBS recognized as the global leader in
responsible AI and talent development in banking.
Of course, another defining factor for the future of UBS is the ongoing parliamentary process related to banking
regulation in Switzerland. I am convinced that, as was the case in March 2023, we are once again in a critical
juncture, where the course for the coming decades will be set for the Swiss financial center.
September’s outcome in the Upper House is very concerning. We have made every effort to engage and contribute
constructively to create a basis for a truly democratic process. Our goal has been, and remains, to reach a solution
that balances financial stability, taxpayer protection and competitiveness. Unfortunately, the latest proposal on the
table also fails to achieve that balance. It continues to disregard the serious concerns raised by the overwhelming
majority of respondents to the consultation, and would excessively tighten capital requirements that are already
among the most stringent globally. Just as troubling is the failure to consider the consequences for our shareholders,
who remain the first line of defense in periods of stress and whose critical financial support during the acquisition
helped protect Switzerland’s reputation and financial stability.
We will continue to engage constructively in the hope that Parliament will reach a solution that supports the
country’s financial stability without imposing undue costs on UBS’s shareholders, clients and employees, and
without impacting its long-term competitive position.
The ongoing debate is generating considerable attention, leading to a lot of speculation, opinions and requests for
clarifications from all of our stakeholders. We do not intend to address everything. But on one topic, we want to
be very clear. For UBS, the top priority is to protect the long-term interests of our shareholders, clients and
employees around the world. In a very competitive environment, it is essential to be able to continue to grow
sustainably while remaining strategically committed to our diversified business model and our global and regional
footprint, which allows us to create value for all of our stakeholders.
After more than three years of disciplined execution, we are on track to complete the integration by year-end and
have strong momentum across our businesses.
With that, let me hand over to Todd.
3
Todd Tuckner
Slide 5 – PBT +14% on revenue growth and positive operating leverage
Thank you Sergio, and good morning everyone.
In the third quarter, we delivered reported net profit of 2.7 billion and earnings per share of 85 cents. On an
underlying basis, our pre-tax profit was 4.1 billion, up 14%, with a return on CET1 capital of 16.7% and a
cost/income ratio of 68.7%. Total revenues increased 10%, outpacing expense growth. Within our core franchises,
excluding litigation, we delivered 4 points of positive operating leverage on 3% higher revenues and lower costs.
Slide 6 – Net profit 2.7bn driven by PBT growth across our businesses
Moving to slide 6. This quarter’s strong performance was underpinned by year-on-year profit growth in each of our
businesses, alongside continued progress on the integration, now in its final stages.
Reported results included integration costs of 452 million and a charge of 346 million from the repurchase of
around 10 billion of high-cost Credit Suisse liabilities. The debt repurchase accelerates the reduction of the funding
drag in Non-core and Legacy, while also supporting net interest income in GWM and P&C going forward.
The effective tax rate in the quarter was 24.7%, slightly elevated as the legal provisions recorded in NCL are not
expected to result in a tax benefit.
Slide 7 – Additional efficiencies identified, ~13.7bn cumulative gross cost saves expected
Turning to our cost update on slide 7. With 13.2 billion of gross cost reductions already delivered, including 0.6
billion in the third quarter, we expect to deliver 0.5 billion more in the fourth quarter, bringing the total to around
13.7 billion – above our 13 and a half billion ambition. Accelerated delivery of integration milestones has enabled
us to identify additional synergies, supporting this expected outperformance.
Capturing these opportunities entails additional costs. As we complete the program at year-end, we expect around
0.5 billion of integration-related expenses in the fourth quarter, bringing the final cost-to-achieve multiple to around
1.1 times at historical FX rates – in line with guidance and a strong outcome given the integration’s scale and
complexity.
Total headcount at quarter-end was 110 thousand, 2% lower sequentially and 30% below our 2022 baseline.
Similarly, over the same period, we’ve reduced the Group’s operating expenses by almost 30% when excluding
litigation, variable compensation and currency effects.
As the integration program concludes, our focus shifts from capturing related synergies to sustaining both a
structurally efficient cost base and disciplined resource allocation. Together, these generate capacity for growth
and attractive capital returns to shareholders.
Slide 8 – Our balance sheet for all seasons is a key pillar of our strategy
Turning to slide 8. As of the end of September, our balance sheet for all seasons consisted of 1.7 trillion in total
assets. Loan balances and deposits were down 1% sequentially, as positive net new lending and deposit flows
across GWM and P&C were more than offset by FX translation.
Credit-impaired exposures remained at 1%, while Group credit loss expense was 114 million, corresponding to an
annualized cost of risk of 7 basis points, unchanged from the prior quarter. Tangible book value per share increased
slightly sequentially, as profit in the quarter was largely offset by net charges in OCI and share repurchases.
4
Overall, we continue to maintain a strong and resilient balance sheet with total loss-absorbing capacity of
187 billion, a net stable funding ratio of 115% and an LCR of 179%.
Slide 9 – Strong capital generation and discipline while funding capital return ambitions
Turning to slide 9. Our CET1 capital ratio at the end of September was 14.7% and our CET1 leverage ratio was
4.6%. Our common equity tier 1 capital increased by 0.7 billion in the quarter, as earnings generation was partly
offset by dividend accruals, reserves for share-award hedges and currency effects. Risk-weighted assets and leverage
exposure decreased sequentially by 8 billion and 59 billion, respectively, reflecting lower asset levels and FX
translation.
Looking ahead, we expect to end 2026 with a CET1 capital ratio at or very close to our target of around 14%,
including a potential accrual for the initial portion of intended 2027 share buybacks. As Sergio mentioned, next
quarter we’ll update our capital return ambitions for 2027 as part of our strategic update.
UBS AG’s standalone fully applied CET1 capital ratio at quarter-end increased modestly to 14.5%, as 3Q earnings
and the effect of lower RWA were largely offset by a dividend accrual of 1.8 billion.
Slide 10 – Global Wealth Management
Turning to our business divisions, and starting on slide 10 with Global Wealth Management. GWM delivered a pre-
tax profit of 2 billion, up 11%. Excluding nearly 200 million of litigation-related releases that benefited the prior-
year quarter, pre -tax profit increased by 25%, with double-digit growth across all regions.
Clients are increasingly turning to UBS for our advice and global capabilities – and entrusting us with more of their
wealth. Net new assets were 55 billion, representing a 4.5% growth rate and bringing year-to-date NNA to 128
billion. Momentum was broad-based across regions, led by APAC and the Americas. Invested assets increased 1%
sequentially, as flow performance was offset by FX translation. At the same time, demand for our CIO-led solutions
remained strong, driving 13 billion of net new fee-generating assets in the quarter, with momentum across our My
Way discretionary mandates, US Advisory, and alternatives. Client activity also supported 6 billion of net new loans
in the quarter, driven by securities-based lending. We attracted 2 billion of net new deposits, with inflows into
fixed-term instruments more than offsetting outflows from current accounts.
Moving to our regions. In the Americas, we continued to execute with discipline against our strategic priorities,
delivering further improvements in profitability and growth. Pre -tax profit increased by 28%, with a profit margin
of 16%, up more than 2 percentage points, supported by record revenues. During the quarter, we added 17 billion
of net new assets, driven by strong same-store performance. Net new loans were 4 billion, reflecting investments
to strengthen our banking capabilities and extending the region's run of positive quarterly lending growth.
In Asia Pacific, we delivered pre-tax profit growth of 19% and a profit margin of 45%, while expanding our client
advisor team and investing in capabilities across priority markets and client segments. Net new assets and net new
fee-generating assets grew at annualized rates of 9% and 8%, respectively. Over 20 billion of NNFGA over the past
12 months drove a 20% increase in recurring revenues. These results demonstrate how deeper mandate
penetration, stronger portfolio construction and a broader offering are improving client outcomes and further
strengthening the durability of our revenues – across GWM, and particularly in Asia Pacific.
Excluding litigation, EMEA increased pre-tax profit by 39%, benefiting from 13 percentage points of positive
operating leverage and delivering a profit margin of 37%. The region also generated 9 billion of net new assets,
reflecting solid underlying business momentum and the growing benefits of our fully integrated platform following
the completion of the client account migration earlier this year.
5
The benefits of the Swiss platform migration are particularly evident in our wealth franchise in Switzerland, where
pre-tax profit excluding litigation increased 34%, reflecting broad-based growth across revenue lines and
disciplined cost management. The Swiss team also maintained strong momentum in attracting client assets,
generating 12 billion of NNA in the quarter, equivalent to 5% annualized growth.
Turning to divisional revenues, which increased by 8%. Recurring net fee income grew by 9% to 3.8 billion, on
positive market performance and over 70 billion of net new fee-generating assets over the past 12 months.
Transaction -based income increased by 4% to 1.3 billion, supported by demand for structured products and wealth
planning. In the Americas, transactional revenues were 11% higher, reflecting strong client engagement and
continued collaboration with the Investment Bank, while APAC delivered 2% growth against an exceptional prior-
year quarter.
Net interest income of 1.8 billion rose 8% year-over-year and was modestly up over the prior quarter. Sequentially,
higher deposit margins and loan volumes were broadly offset by current account shifts into fixed-term deposits.
For the fourth quarter, we expect higher rates and lending growth to support a low single-digit sequential increase
in GWM net interest income, also accounting for modest deposit mix effects.
Operating expenses rose by 6%. When excluding variable compensation, litigation and currency effects, costs
declined by 4%.
Slide 11 – Personal & Corporate Banking (CHF)
Turning to Personal and Corporate Banking on slide 11. P&C delivered its strongest quarter since the acquisition,
with pre-tax profit of 813 million Swiss francs, up 22%, and an underlying pre-tax return on equity above 18%.
With all clients now on a single platform and substantial progress in retiring legacy infrastructure, we are capturing
meaningful cost efficiencies. The completion of client migrations earlier this year has also freed-up capacity for P&C
to deepen client relationships and capture market share. As a result, we saw strong momentum across the franchise.
We attracted net new clients, grew both loans and deposits, and generated annualized net new investment product
growth of 7%.
This supported a 4% increase in revenues, while disciplined execution converted that momentum into 9 points of
positive operating leverage. Despite the continued zero-interest-rate environment, net interest income was 2%
higher year-on-year and 3% higher sequentially, driven by strong lending momentum. For the fourth quarter, we
expect P&C net interest income in Swiss franc terms to increase slightly, supported by continued balance -sheet
growth.
Non-interest revenues increased 5%, driven by Personal Banking, which benefited from higher custody, mandate
and card fees. In Corporate & Institutional Clients, strength in payments and trade finance offset softer syndicated
finance activity, although the pipeline remains strong.
Net credit loss expense was 27 million Swiss francs, as charges on non-performing loans were partly offset by model
releases on the performing portfolio, reflecting the resilience of our Swiss corporate loan book amid macroeconomic
uncertainty. For the fourth quarter, assuming the Swiss credit outlook remains constructive, we expect further
model releases to partly offset seasonally higher Stage 3 charges.
Operating expenses declined 5%, driven by continued synergy realization.
Slide 12 – Asset Management
Turning to slide 12. Asset Management delivered pre-tax profit of 300 million, up 6%, and a cost/income ratio of
62%, reflecting improved operating efficiency and continued growth in our priority initiatives.
Excluding the O’Connor exit, total revenues and management fees were broadly stable.
6
Net new money was negative 5 billion, reflecting Money Market outflows and institutional portfolio rebalancing
following the recent completion of our custody platform consolidation. This was partly offset by positive flows into
ETFs, SMAs and Unified Global Alternatives. Within UGA, we attracted a record 12 and a half billion of quarterly
new commitments across GWM and Asset Management, bringing invested assets to 371 billion and demonstrating
the strength of our integrated distribution model.
Operating expenses declined 14%, or 11% excluding O’Connor, reflecting continued benefits from our platform
investments. We expect the exit to have a broadly similar impact on the 4Q revenue and cost comparison, with
limited effects thereafter.
Slide 13 – Investment Bank
Onto slide 13. The Investment Bank delivered pre-tax profit of 854 million, up 9%, and a pre-tax return on equity
of 18%, combining strong earnings growth with disciplined use of capital.
Global Banking revenues were 670 million, down 21% against a record third quarter last year. Capital Markets
revenues declined 6%, outperforming the fee pool. A 44% increase in ECM was more than offset by lower LCM
revenues, reflecting lower sponsor activity. The growth in ECM, spanning all regions, reflects continued momentum
in one of our core strategic priorities and strengthens our broader Equities franchise. Advisory revenues declined
44% from a record prior-year quarter, also reflecting transaction timing. This came amid a fee pool that remains
concentrated in mega-cap transactions, where balance sheet commitment plays a more prominent role.
Looking ahead, client engagement and origination remain strong across Advisory and Capital Markets, supporting
a robust pipeline. Assuming constructive market conditions, we expect this to translate into sequential growth in
Global Banking revenues in the fourth quarter.
Global Markets revenues rose 17% to a third-quarter record of 2.5 billion, with 3Q-highs across APAC, the Americas
and Switzerland, and led by broad-based strength in Equities. Equities grew 22%, with strong performance across
Financing, Cash and Derivatives, supported by higher client balances, market share gains and healthy client activity.
FRC was 1% higher, with growth in FX and Credit and a gain on a strategic investment partly offset by lower Rates
revenues.
For the fourth quarter, we expect a more typical sequential seasonal moderation in transaction volumes. In addition,
a strong prior-year period, which included a gain on disposal, may weigh on the year-on-year comparison.
Operating expenses increased by 5%, driven by higher non-personnel costs.
Slide 14 – NCL wind-down almost complete
On slide 14, Non-core and Legacy generated third-quarter pre-tax profit of 360 million. This largely reflected
continued progress in addressing legacy cases, with net income from the settlement of certain legal matters more
than offsetting 275 million of litigation charges.
Operating expenses excluding litigation declined 69% to 91 million, bringing cumulative cost reductions against
the 2022 baseline above 90%. Building on this progress, we now expect to exit the year with around 300 million
of annualized operating expenses, excluding litigation, with further reductions thereafter.
Risk-weighted assets declined 0.4 billion sequentially, driven by further reductions in the credit and macro portfolios.
Both costs and RWA are already below our year-end ambitions.
7
Slide 15 – Group Items
A brief word on Group Items on slide 15. The reported pre-tax loss of 740 million primarily reflects the liability
management transaction discussed earlier and 265 million of own credit and hedging losses on accrual-accounted
positions, mainly due to the sharp rise in US dollar interest rates. Excluding the temporary P&L volatility from these
own credit and hedging positions, the underlying pre-tax loss was 138 million, largely related to DTA funding.
Slide 16 – Well positioned to outperform our 2026 exit rate underlying RoCET1 target of ~15% and achieve <70%
underlying cost / income ratio
To conclude, strong revenues and disciplined cost management drove a return on CET1 capital of 17% and a
cost/income ratio of 70% over the first nine months, positioning us well to achieve our 2026 exit ambitions. As the
integration concludes, we’re focused on building on this progress, investing in our strongest growth opportunities,
and sustaining earnings growth and attractive returns for our shareholders.
With that, let’s open for questions.
8
Analyst Q&A (CEO and CFO)
Antonio Reale, Bank of America
Hi. Good morning everyone. It's Antonio from Bank of America. I have a couple of questions if I may, please.
The first one is on your latest thoughts on the capital proposal that's being currently discussed by Parliament. Of
course I've heard Sergio's remarks. There was a WAK-N meeting yesterday and the day before. There seems to be
a few scenarios on the table based on what we read on the press, at least. I think you've been very clear in your
views on both 90% CET1 backing and the 50/50 option. Now, what would a 75% scenario mean for UBS? I
guess the capital costs of higher requirements goes well beyond the mere billion dollar charge. But I'm keen to
hear your thoughts on this. And related to that, how do you and the Board of UBS view the cost of any
contingency actions here, versus the potential long-term implications that higher capital requirements may have
on your ability to compete as a global business? So that would be my first question.
And then, if I may relate it to net new asset growth in the US, we've seen a positive surprise this quarter. So what
do you see as the key driver of US growth now that you have a banking license? And we are through what seems
to be the worst part of FA departures from here? Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Hey Antonio. Let me start with the second question. So look, we're continuing to see the benefits of our
investments in the US in advisors, our platform and capabilities, and the client experience, as evidenced by – as I
mentioned in my comments – strong same-store flows and improving advisor productivity, as well as continued
accretion in our banking KPls and normalized net recruiting metrics.
Regarding the latter, as mentioned previously, there is a time lag in reported flows, headcount and production
from FA movement that could have an, albeit tapering, effect in our metrics. But we see recruited joiners and
announced leavers returning to more typical levels at UBS, including relative to the broader industry. So all of
these things are helping to drive the improved NNA that we saw this quarter and making the Americas a
meaningful contributor to full year 2026 NNA for the division overall.
Sergio P. Ermotti
So on the capital proposal, I think that it's clear that the ongoing process now with the lower house is leading
into a new round of coverage and speculations about potential other changes to the 90% proposal made in the
upper house. I mean, to be honest, I don't think that it's appropriate for us to go into discussing every single
number that is thrown out. You make a reference to one of those numbers and one that we publicly, myself and
our Chairman, commented on was the 50/50 proposal, which, while being still a very expensive outcome
considering our current capital position and the true lessons learned of what happened with Credit Suisse, we felt
that the 50/50 proposal was balancing the needs of financial stability and reinforcing the current regulatory
requirements while allowing us to preserve a competitive position going forward. So I will not comment any
further on any numbers, as I mentioned. In respect of contingency plans, listen, we're not going to engage into
debating internally and externally about what to do until things are finally approved and actually determined. It is
clear that there is no rush for us to act or to take actions that are not in the interest of shareholders and clients,
because it's going to take time to implement this new regulation. But of course we're going to, and we will
assess, and we are assessing, what are the long term consequences for our ability to compete out of Switzerland,
because it's very clear that for our clients, they do appreciate Swissness like we do, and, like us, believe we
contribute to the Swiss system. But a passport is not enough nowadays. People are expecting also quality of
products, competitive pricing, and an ability to serve them globally, as we do. Therefore, I think that it's
premature for us to really think about the long term consequences of what will happen.
9
Antonio Reale, Bank of America
Thank you.
Anke Reingen, RBC
Thank you very much for taking my questions. The first is just on the costs, I just wondered if you can confirm [or]
give us some indication about what to expect for Q4, as I guess Q3 was relatively strong. We should have a good
cost control in Q4; we have additional cost savings coming in, but also seasonality. So the -1%, is there anything
you would highlight that we should be a bit more cautious on the Q4 trends?
And then I just wondered, in terms of client engagement, obviously in Q4 the strategy has been very different
versus Q3, and I was wondering if you can talk a bit more about the client engagement you are seeing in your
wealth management operation, aside from the seasonality. Thank you very much.
Todd Tuckner
Hi Anke, thanks for the questions. So first on costs, as you say – I think you summarized, actually, the 4Q outlook
pretty well. On the one hand, we'll continue to see the benefits of the integration, just given the integration costs
we have been incurring, and therefore the saves that will become evident through our OpEx as we've been
demonstrating each quarter. We've always said that we'll run through the tape on 2026 and continue the work
until the very end. That's still the plan, so we should still see some of those efficiencies and synergies coming
through in 4Q. And as you said as well, 4Q does have some seasonality aspects in them. The bank levy is one
example, but also just often we see some uptick in costs sequentially. So nothing I would call out. But you would
expect that those trends of continued cost efficiency, offset perhaps by some uptick in seasonality, will inform the
performance in 4Q on costs.
On clients, look it's fair to say that the 4Q market environment thus far for investors has been mixed. When you
look at, say, things like rising correlations, deterioration in credit conditions, higher bond yields and renewed
inflation concerns – you just take a few factors – they're leading to more defensive positioning among our clients.
And geopolitical developments, including elections, are adding to this more measured sentiment. So we still see
opportunities to help clients diversify, manage risk, and put money to work selectively, including in more
attractive fixed income yields. So we'll stay close to clients and capitalize on the opportunities that present
themselves in this environment at present.
Anke Reingen, RBC
Thank you.
Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs
Good morning, everybody, and thank you for taking my questions. First, a quick one just on the US. When should
10
we expect the national bank charter to begin to translate into a broader US product offering and perhaps sort of
meaningful deposit growth? I think I've just sort of lost track on timings on that topic.
And then second, to come back to the domicile point. There is an interesting tension within the Group, because
on the one hand, businesses such as the IB are relatively capital-intensive, where the Swiss domicile may be less
strategically important, while on the other hand you've got more capital-light businesses such as GWM which
arguably derive significant value from that Swiss brand. So how do you weigh those competing considerations,
and I guess also the strategic value of the interlinkages between those two distinct types of businesses, when
you're assessing whether Switzerland does remain the optimal domicile for the Group, as you said earlier, from
the perspective of shareholders, clients and also other stakeholders? Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Chris, on the banking charter. So with the license in hand, we are now in implementation mode and do expect
that we'll be rolling out the first incremental array of capabilities as part of what the banking license allows and
supports in our US bank during 2027. So we'll start from the beginning of the year piloting things, and we expect
to ramp up over the course of 2027. And we expect that we'll leverage, really what we've been demonstrating, I
think, over the last many quarters, which is improved NII from improved banking capabilities within the current
legal construct that we operate within today. So we're really encouraged by having now the national bank
charter to support an expanded offering, and what that could mean in enhancing NII and accreting pre-tax
margins.
Sergio P. Ermotti
Well, thanks, Chris. I think that kind of thematic has been discussed, I guess, over the last 15 years, in respect of
that tradeoff between having a pure wealth management business versus having an IB. Let me remind you that
we are also using a lot of financial resources to serve our households, and corporate clients, SME clients in
Switzerland – which, by the way, also highly benefit from having an in-house investment bank that helps them in
managing all the aspects when it goes into raising capital, funding, doing FX transactions at a very competitive
level. As you know, we are one of the top FX traders, we are a leading house in equities, in capital markets. And
in that sense, we add value to that.
In respect of wealth management, I mean, it's quite clear. And I guess you know well that the correlation
between IPOs and disposal of stakes, hedging of stakes that are going through the engines of the Investment
Bank, are critical elements in helping us to gather assets, not only in terms of [the] net new money and net new
assets you see every quarter. If you look at the amount of assets we have in custody that are not yet free to be
traded, they are another example of how the Investment Bank not only delivers services and capabilities that
differentiate ourselves from pure wealth management players, more than justifying this selective, vertical look
into each single business as I mentioned.
In the last ten, fifteen years, we have been demonstrating that we can compete in the Investment Bank if we
focus on what we are good at, and this is our way to go. I don't think it has anything to do with the passport or
where we are based, providing that regulatory requirements stay intact. So I don't think it's an option for us. And
if you look at the current proposed regulation, what in fact they are doing, they are not even penalizing business
segments. They are penalizing global reach. And if this is all about a way to look at shrinking ourselves into being
only a Swiss bank, well, I don't really see our flows of assets being only directed to Switzerland. Actually, we are
capturing flows in the US, you saw it this quarter. We capture big flows in Asia for the last ten, fifteen years. So
being a bank that has a DNA of Swissness, that is rooted in Switzerland is a big advantage, but it's not the reason
why our clients are banking with us.
And by the way, Swissness was also the case in 2023. Let's remind of that. So we have been helping restoring
11
that Swissness over the last few years with clear and concrete contributions.
Chris Hallam, Goldman Sachs
Very clear. Thank you very much.
Andrew Coombs, Citi
Morning. One follow up and one fresh question. I appreciate that you really don’t want to debate the plans on
the new capital rules until it's confirmed. And it's perhaps slightly premature today, but given that you're going
into the 2027 planning cycle already – when you're thinking about how you allocate capital, and how you
allocate investments across the business, how are you taking into account the new potential capital rules, given
what it might mean for marginal returns in some of those segments?
And the second question, just a more specific question on OpEx. A lot of the savings at the back end of the
integration plan were always due to come through in P&C. We can see that now – big improvement in the OpEx
base down 50 million to 950 million Swiss francs in Q3. Should we expect it to now level out around that level? Is
that a new run rate, or is there room for further improvement in Q4 as those integration savings come through?
Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Andrew, hi. On OpEx, so in terms of synergies realized in the Swiss business, I would expect that we'll continue to
see some more room for crystallization of synergies in the fourth quarter as all the integration investments that
we've made on the platform crystallize and come through. And so I would expect that there's still upside to see in
4Q on a true underlying basis, which will reflect in our exit rate and as we move into 2027. So that's always been
the plan. It's good that you observe that that benefit is hitting through now, and I would expect that the
dynamics that have informed that outcome in 3Q are still in play for 4Q before we fully sunset integration at the
end of the year.
Sergio P. Ermotti
Yeah. Andrew, on the 2027-29 cycle, first of all as you know, the ordinance will be coming into effect, and start
to affect our capital, as of January 1st, 2029. And in respect of the new potential regulation that will affect the
foreign subsidiaries, [that] will come into force over, I would suspect, probably earliest in the very late part of ‘27
or in 2028, and will be implemented over the years. That's the reason why, as we mentioned before, we are not
under any pressure to change anything in our current successful business model. We need to really assess exactly
what it is before we take actions that may be then regret moves. So I think that you will see us presenting, at the
beginning of the year, our refreshed medium-term plans which will embed the 2028-2029 outlook, considering
that, broadly speaking, the current regulation, other than the ordinance, as I said as of January 1st, 2029, will be
the one that is applicable. And we're not going to go into frontrunning any regulation for sure.
12
And by the way, as Todd mentioned, we are now also able, at the end of this integration process, to free up the
buffer on capital that we kept over the minimum requirements which was meant, number one, to help us to
navigate the integration and any unexpected delays in implementation, and a potential new regulation coming in.
So we have been very sensitive to that topic. But from January 1st, 2027, we're going to go into business as
usual.
Andrew Coombs, Citi
Thank you.
Jeremy Sigee, BNP Paribas
Morning. Thanks very much. Two questions please. Firstly, on the US wealth management, you talked about the
lag effect, and you see that normalizing. Advisor numbers are shrinking again a little bit, which I assume is part of
that lag effect. When would you see advisor numbers normalizing? And what does normal look like, would that
be stable numbers or would it be slight growth, slight shrinkage? That would be interesting to know.
And then second question, unrelated. Is there any visibility on the litigation from Credit Suisse AT1 holders? Is
there any visibility on when you get the decisions on that appeal? Well, the government is appealing, but
obviously with implications for the bank as well.
Todd Tuckner
Thanks, Jeremy. Let me just take the second one quickly. No, no change there. As far as we know, decision not
before Q1 of 2027.
On the first one, you asked about the headcount dynamics in the wealth US business. So, quarter-on-quarter in
terms of reported headcount down slightly, under 1%. Again, as I mentioned, the lag effect is important because
that's really reflecting decisions and moves that were decided several months ago. We are seeing, as I mentioned
in my response to an earlier question I believe to Antonio, that we are seeing announced leavers and recruited
advisors normalizing in our book, in terms of historic trends. So we're seeing that already on an announced, or
effectively, trade date basis, we're already seeing that.
What does normal look like? I think it's fair to say that in the environment, there is still a move to independent
advisor shops and I think that you're seeing that across the industry. So I think a degree of net attrition is
probably the industry norm that you see, as opposed to it being net flat, I'd say as a general premise over the
long term. So for us, it would be kind of normal net attrition levels that we've seen historically in our book and
that we believe are aligned to industry levels. That to us is what normal looks like.
Jeremy Sigee, BNP Paribas
That's really helpful. Thanks very much.
13
Giulia Aurora Miotto, Morgan Stanley
Good morning. Thank you for taking my questions. I have two on wealth management. So Asia: are you seeing
any impact from the recent changes in Chinese tax guidance? And in particular, could you disclose how big is
Hong Kong, as a percentage of total AUM or P&L, and how big is the trusts business for UBS?
And then the second question on the Americas. So PBT margin was already 16% this quarter, and I believe 16%
is the target for UBS for next year. And then your longer term target is high-teens, yet the benefit from the
banking license is yet to flow through. So could we expect that actually a 20% PBT margin is probably something
more achievable than you previously guided for? Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Thanks Giulia. So look on the second one, we were focused, obviously, on delivering on our current ambitions. As
you mentioned, we're ahead of schedule. We have still an 18% ambition for 2028 that we described to you
earlier this year. When we provide the update next quarter, we can consider how we look at the outlook. But we
were pleased with the development, where we are. But we're focused on delivering against our strategic
priorities in the Americas business.
In terms of the impact on some of recent regulatory developments in China – first, on the offshore direct
investments, we saw the final consultation paper was issued last week. We've been through that. We view the
changes as offering us strategic upside in the wealth business, considering that we see there the prospect of a
formal pathway for Chinese individuals to invest onshore wealth, and offshore direct and private market
opportunities. So while these changes are obviously subject to implementation and ongoing consultation, and
there are key questions relating to scope and application, it's too early to quantify, but we do see the ODI broadly
as strategically promising for our business. On what I can comment, in terms of the offshore trusts taxation
matter, as you were alluding to, last week was the close of the 90-day transition period for settling specified
historical offshore trust tax liabilities without late payment charges for Chinese investors. We expect the effect in
our book to be immaterial, and the 4Q impact on flows to be small.
Giulia Aurora Miotto, Morgan Stanley
That’s clear, thank you.
Kian Abouhossein, JP Morgan
Yes, thanks for taking my questions. The first one is on capital. I think you mentioned looking ahead, the CET1
ratio could come in around 14% by 2027, sorry by year-end. And what you're seeing is clearly a lot of capital
build. And I just wanted to understand the main delta here of the 70 basis point decrease, is that mainly the
buyback in 2027, or what should be the drivers in that respect?
And then the second question I have is related to Asia. Clearly, we have seen slowdowns in transaction volumes
when we look at exchange data, and we know the client base generally is a little bit more market oriented – or
short term market oriented, I should say. How should we think about the impact of market conditions, in
particular on Asia, and in particular on transactions?
14
Todd Tuckner
Thanks, Kian. So just to reiterate my comments, so we expect the capital ratio delivered with our 4Q results to be
at or very close to 14%. How's that? So that will, as I mentioned, [include] an accrual for capital returns at the
end of the year. That will inform where we are relative to how we perform in 4Q. So we're not specifically
guiding on the level of the accrual, but we are saying that, when thinking and seeing the current environment
and the outlook in 2027, and our plans and considering our intentions in 2027, at least in part, the portion of
capital returns we can commit to, or intend to commit to, in the fourth quarter will drive down the capital ratio to
around 14% by the fourth quarter.
I think you were asking about the APAC business and what we're seeing. Certainly first, if you're looking year-on-
year as one aspect – because I commented a little bit on the quarter-on-quarter, but year-on-year for sure – last
year's 3Q was benefiting from a strong rally in China and Hong Kong equities, clearly supported by enthusiasm
around AI and improving investor confidence. And this 3Q, sentiment was more selective, and this by the way
can explain your sequential question as well. If you were asking about sort of 3Q/2Q, this 3Q, sentiment was
more selective and market momentum less sustained, as we saw sharper reversals and greater divergence across
Asian markets. So I think just uniformly, 3Q25, 2Q26 probably had more uniform enthusiasm, you saw the
indices were broad based and strong, became a bit patchier in 3Q. And also the quarter itself was a bit of a tale
of two cities. I think you recognize there were periods in the third quarter where some of the sentiment became
either risk-off or at least much more measured. So I think that's contributing to the performance both quarter-on-
quarter and year-on-year. And then as we look forward into 4Q, I commented, I think in response to Anke’s
question about how we see the market, so that all said we are seeing that the structural improvement in the
business is there. So this is informing, the market, obviously with the beta factor, will inform some degree of
transactional activity. But we think that the structural gains that we've made will mean that we'll still, on a
relative basis, outperform in our APAC business.
Kian Abouhossein, JP Morgan
Thank you.
Amit Goel, Mediobanca
Hi. Thank you. So two questions from me. The first, actually just coming back on – I appreciate [you] don't
comment too much on contingency planning, but I'm just trying to understand really, if you had to move the
Group's domicile out of Switzerland, how to think about some of the costs. Just thinking in terms of tax, whether
something like 3 to 5 billion of exit tax on hidden reserves is the right kind of order of magnitude, and whether
that's something you could mitigate. And then also on clients, would it be fair to assume about 6 to 800 billion
of Swiss-booked invested assets belonging to clients not domiciled in Switzerland? And what kind of margin do
those clients earn?
And then the second question, just in terms of net new money, I saw obviously very strong net new assets,
although fee generating assets [were] a little bit lower. Just curious of the other 42 billion, how sticky it is and
how much of that you expect to convert into mandates or fee-generating assets over time. Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Hey Amit. Yeah. So let me take your second question first. So absolutely, pointing out the delta between NNA
15
and NNFGA for this quarter, let me tell you how I've been looking at this. So we clearly have seen IPO and other
liquidity events that are supporting flows, for sure, across our book. And I'd say the scale of IPO activity globally
this year, including major US listings and strong issuance across Asia, is creating significant opportunities to
deepen client relationships and capture these wealth flows over time. And we're already benefiting from sizable
inflows associated with these large liquidity events.
And that's what's contributing to the roughly 40 billion, by which, as you point out, NNA exceeded NNFGA this
quarter. And as Sergio mentioned as well, we have about 10% of our AUM, or about 500 billion, in other client
assets, or non-contracted or custodied assets as well. So all of these assets represent substantial potential to grow
recurring fees and advisory and transaction revenues, as we help clients diversify and invest over time. So a lot of
dry powder. So I would really look at that delta as more a function of the NNFGA itself is reflecting its good
growth, reflecting the strong mandate penetration, and the improvement in the top-line margin support. But I
would also look at the NNA gross, and that delta as representing significant dry powder.
Sergio P. Ermotti
Well, Amit, I have nothing else to add to what I mentioned before. We are not really commenting on speculations
or assumptions or opinions on any of these matters related to a contingency plan, and it's totally inappropriate.
Everybody can come up with their own opinions, but we will not comment on that.
Amit Goel, Mediobanca
Okay. Thank you.
Benjamin Goy, Deutsche Bank
Yes, hi. Good morning. Two questions please. First on the Investment Bank, Equities up and another strong Prime
Brokerage quarter it seems like. But just wondering, with your capital resources being either flat or only modestly
up year-on-year, how you balance incremental investments there on the capital side, as compared to the
opportunity? One is Q3 backward-looking, and the other is where we have seen a change in trends in October in
terms of deleveraging of clients.
The second point is on the US wealth management. We haven't really spoken about the workplace channel in
quite a while, so I was wondering in light of recent IPOs and the potential pipeline, how important it is, how well
connected you are, and the conversion of that? Thank you very much.
Todd Tuckner
Hey Benjamin. So on the Investment Bank, you're right to point out that if you look at resources, RWA and LRD
year-on-year broadly flat, despite the business growth, and that comes from disciplined resource management
and portfolio optimization, focusing on transactions and intermediation. So less about extending balance sheet
per se, or at least balance sheet that is consuming RWA, and being more focused on generating transaction
revenues in the business. That is where our focus has been, and that's how we have been able to generate
attractive revenues despite the lack of consumption of financial resource to it. You look at our client balances in
Prime Brokerage year-on-year are up 33%, and revenues are up 32% year-over-year. And again, we're doing that
while we see the balances increasing, we're doing that with very thoughtful and disciplined financial resource
growth.
16
On the second question on workplace wealth, that continues to be a priority for us to build that up. It is a funnel
that we will continue to develop. It's been, as we've said in the past, a strategic priority that we’ll continue to
make progress on. It's part of the build out that the team is undertaking and one of our strategic priorities, and
we would expect in the future to update on the progress that that we're making.
Benjamin Goy, Deutsche Bank
Thank you.
Nicolas Payen, Kepler Cheuvreux
Yes. Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I have two, please. The first one would be on the IB and the
Equities trading performance. I think you're up 21% year-on-year versus your peers up 40+ percent. So just
wanted to know what could explain the gap, is it a geographic mix or product mix that [could] explain the gap?
That would be the first question.
And then the second question would be on Wealth NII, I just wanted to understand what explained the near-flat
third quarter NII after guidance for modest growth, and how much of the fourth quarter increase [will] come
from lending or deposit margin or the mix, please? Thank you.
Todd Tuckner
Hi, Nicolas. So look on IB Equities, not going to comment on the relative performance, but we're really pleased
with the performance of our Equities franchise. Generated 2 billion of revenues in the quarter, up substantially
year-on-year. And we do that, as I just mentioned in response to Benjamin's question, we do that with very
disciplined resource deployment. You see in FRC we were up year-on-year, and that was despite Rates being
down, also just given strong FX performance. So our Investment Bank is excelling in the areas where it's focused
and it's doing that with a very disciplined approach to balance sheet.
On Wealth NII, as I mentioned in my comments, we do expect sequentially, growth mainly from higher US dollar
rates that is partially offset by mix, which is marginal, but we're factoring at least some mix effects given the
move up in dollar rates. Although the move up this quarter, it wasn't the dollar that impacted on mix in 3Q
relative to 2Q, but actually more Swiss franc and Euro. But we are pricing in some of that in our outlook, that is
[up] low-single-digits in the quarter, 4Q [versus] 3Q. If we look beyond that, and I'll come back next quarter with
a view on full year ’27, but we expect the higher dollar rate environment, coupled with net interest margin
support from the rollover of our replication portfolios at higher yields, to generate similar NII annual growth
trends in 2027 as we were seeing in 2026. So I'll come back and firm that up as we continue to model and do
the work, but that should give you a perspective on the outlook for Wealth NII.
Nicolas Payen, Kepler Cheuvreux
Thank you.
17
Stefan Stalmann, Autonomous Research
Morning, and thank you very much for taking my question. I actually have only one follow up question, please, to
something that you said earlier. Sergio, you said “We can now free up capital buffers held for integration, and
from 2027 we will go into business as usual.” Are you basically just describing the fact that you're running the
14.7% CET1 down to the target of 14[%] again? Or are you maybe hinting at a lower target than 14% in the
next business plan? Thank you very much.
Sergio P. Ermotti
So what we are clearly guiding is the fact that not only that we're going to be at or very close to the 14% at the
end of the year, what we are guiding on is – the reasons why we had an excess capital buffer during the last
three years was due to, as I mentioned before, the uncertainty around the timing and the effects of, and the
potential volatility on capital going through the integration, and the uncertainty over the last two years of the
ongoing regulatory debate. The first item is out at the end of the year, so there is no reason for us to keep excess
capital for that reason. So we're not going to keep any of that.
And in respect of the future capital requirements, as I mentioned before, we have plenty of time to build up
capital that, if and when requirements are coming into effect, we have the earning capacity to do it. And we're
not going to just carry unnecessary capital for the next few years. So we are not hinting at anything that is going
to be then addressed with our Q4 results in respect of the future targets.
Stefan Stalmann, Autonomous Research
Thank you.
Sergio P. Ermotti
So, looks like there are no more questions. Operator, can you confirm?
Silence means agreement. Therefore, I look forward to updating you on our medium-term plans and targets with
our strategic update with our Q4 results in February. Thank you, and have a nice day.
18
Cautionary statement regarding forward-looking statements |
but not limited to management’s outlook for UBS’s financial performance, statements relating to the anticipated effect of transactions and strategic initiatives
on UBS’s business and future development and goals. While these forward-looking statements represent UBS’s judgments, expectations and objectives concerning
the matters described, a number of risks, uncertainties and other important factors could cause actual developments and results to differ materially from UBS’s
expectations. In particular, the global economy may suffer significant adverse effects from increasing political tensions between world powers, changes to
international trade policies, including those related to tariffs and trade barriers, and evolving armed conflicts. UBS’s acquisition of the Credit Suisse Group
materially changed its outlook and strategic direction and introduced new operational challenges. The integration of the Credit Suisse entities into the UBS
structure is expected to continue through 2026 and presents significant operational and execution risk, including the risks that UBS may be unable to achieve
the cost reductions and business benefits contemplated by the transaction, that it may incur higher costs to execute the integration of Credit Suisse and that the
acquired business may have greater risks or liabilities, including those related to litigation, than expected. In response to the failure of Credit Suisse, Switzerland
has amended its Capital Adequacy Ordinance and is considering changes to its Banking Act, which, if enacted as proposed, would substantially increase capital
requirements for UBS in relation to its foreign subsidiaries. These factors create greater uncertainty about forward-looking statements. Other factors that may
affect UBS’s performance and ability to achieve its plans, outlook and other objectives also include, but are not limited to: (i) the degree to which UBS is successful
in the execution of its strategic plans, including its cost reduction and efficiency initiatives and its ability to manage its levels of risk-weighted assets (RWA) and
leverage ratio denominator (LRD), liquidity coverage ratio and other financial resources, including changes in RWA assets and liabilities arising from higher market
volatility and the size of the combined Group; (ii) the degree to which UBS is successful in implementing changes to its businesses to meet changing market,
regulatory and other conditions, including any potential changes to banking examination and oversight practices and standards as a result of executive branch
orders or staff interpretations of law in the US; (iii) inflation and interest rate volatility in major markets; (iv) developments in the macroeconomic climate and in
the markets in which UBS operates or to which it is exposed, including movements in securities prices or liquidity, credit spreads, currency exchange rates,
residential and commercial real estate markets, general economic conditions, and changes to national trade policies on the financial position or creditworthiness
of UBS’s clients and counterparties, as well as on client sentiment and levels of activity; (v) changes in the availability of capital and funding, including any adverse
changes in UBS’s credit spreads and credit ratings of UBS, as well as availability and cost of funding, including as affected by the marketability of additional tier
one debt instruments, to meet requirements for debt eligible for total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC); (vi) changes in and potential divergence between central
bank policies or the implementation of financial legislation and regulation in Switzerland, the US, the UK, the EU and other financial centers that have imposed,
or resulted in, or may do so in the future, more stringent or entity-specific capital, TLAC, leverage ratio, net stable funding ratio, liquidity and funding
requirements, heightened operational resilience requirements, incremental tax requirements, additional levies, limitations on permitted activities, constraints on
remuneration, constraints on transfers of capital and liquidity and sharing of operational costs across the Group or other measures, and the effect these will or
would have on UBS’s business activities; (vii) UBS’s ability to successfully implement resolvability and related regulatory requirements and the potential need to
make further changes to the legal structure or booking model of UBS in response to legal and regulatory requirements including heightened requirements and
expectations due to its acquisition of the Credit Suisse Group; (viii) UBS’s ability to maintain and improve its systems and controls for complying with sanctions
in a timely manner and for the detection and prevention of money laundering to meet evolving regulatory requirements and expectations, in particular in the
current geopolitical turmoil; (ix) the uncertainty arising from domestic stresses in certain major economies; (x) changes in UBS’s competitive position, including
whether differences in regulat ory capital and other requirements among the major financial centers adversely affect UBS’s ability to compete in certain lines of
business; (xi) changes in the standards of conduct applicable to its businesses that may result from new regulations or new enforcement of existing standards,
including measures to impose new and enhanced duties when interacting with customers and in the execution and handling of customer transactions; (xii) the
liability to which UBS may be exposed, or possible constraints or sanctions that regulatory authorities might impose on UBS, due to litigation, including litigation
it has inherited by virtue of the acquisition of the Credit Suisse Group, contractual claims and regulatory investigations, including the potential for disqualification
from certain businesses, potentially large fines or monetary penalties, or the loss of licenses or privileges as a result of regulatory or other governmental sanctions,
as well as the effect that litigation, regulatory and similar matters have on the operational risk component of its RWA; (xiii) UBS’s ability to retain and attract the
employees necessary to generate revenues and to manage, support and control its businesses, which may be affected by competitive factors; (xiv) changes in
accounting or tax standards or policies, and determinations or interpretations affecting the recognition of gain or loss, the valuation of goodwill, the recognition
of deferred tax assets and other matters; (xv) UBS’s ability to implement new technologies and business methods, including digital services, artificial intelligence
and other technologies, and ability to successfully compete with both existing and new financial service providers, some of which may not be regulated to the
same extent; (xvi) limitations on the effectiveness of UBS’s internal processes for risk management, risk control, measurement and modeling, and of financial
models generally; (xvii) the occurrence of operational failures, such as fraud, misconduct, unauthorized trading, financial crime, cyberattacks, data leakage and
systems failures, the risk of which is increased with persistently high levels of cyberattack threats; (xviii) restrictions on the ability of UBS Group AG, UBS AG and
regulated subsidiaries of UBS AG to make payments or distributions, including due to restrictions on the ability of its subsidiaries to make loans or distributions,
directly or indirectly, or, in the case of financial difficulties, due to the exercise by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) or the regulators of
UBS’s operations in other countries of their broad statutory powers in relation to protective measures, restructuring and liquidation proceedings; (xix) the degree
to which changes in regulation, capital or legal structure, financial results or other factors may affect UBS’s ability to maintain its stated capital return objective;
(xx) uncertainty over the scope of actions that may be required by UBS, governments and others for UBS to achieve goals relating to climate, environmental and
social matters, as well as the evolving nature of underlying science and industry and the increasing divergence among regulatory regimes; (xxi) the ability of UBS
to access capital markets; (xxii) the ability of UBS to successfully recover from a disaster or other business continuity problem due to a hurricane, flood, earthquake,
terrorist attack, war, conflict, pandemic, security breach, cyberattack, power loss, telecommunications failure or other natural or man-made event; and (xxiii) the
effect that these or other factors or unanticipated events, including media reports and speculations, may have on its reputation and the additional consequences
that this may have on its business and performance. The sequence in which the factors above are presented is not indicative of their likelihood of occurrence or
the potential magnitude of their consequences. UBS’s business and financial performance could be affected by other factors identified in its past and future
filings and reports, including those filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). More detailed information about those factors is set forth
in documents furnished by UBS and filings made by UBS with the SEC, including the UBS Group AG and UBS AG Annual Reports on Form 20-F for the year
ended 31 December 2025. UBS is not under any obligation to (and expressly disclaims any obligation to) update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether
as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
© UBS 2026. The key symbol and UBS are among the registered and unregistered trademarks of UBS. All rights reserved.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrants have duly
caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
UBS Group AG
By: /s/ David Kelly
_
Name: David Kelly
Title: Managing Director
By: /s/ Ella Copetti-Campi
_
Name: Ella Copetti-Campi
Title: Executive Director
UBS AG
By: /s/ David Kelly
_
Name: David Kelly
Title: Managing Director
By: /s/ Ella Copetti-Campi
_
Name: Ella Copetti-Campi
Title: Executive Director
Date: October 29, 2026