Axis Bank Ltd (NSE: AXISBANK) Q1 2026 Earnings Call dated Jul. 17, 2025
Corporate Participants:
Unidentified Speaker
Amitabh Chaudhry — Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer
Puneet Sharma — Chief Financial Officer
Rajiv Anand — Deputy Managing Director
Analysts:
Unidentified Participant
Chintan Joshi — Analyst
Mahrukh Adajania — Analyst
Kunal Shah — Analyst
Param Subramanian — Analyst
Abhishek M — Analyst
Suraj Das — Analyst
M B Mahesh — Analyst
Jay Mundra — Analyst
Nitin Aggarwal — Analyst
Presentation:
operator
Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to the Axis bank conference call to discuss the bank’s financial results for the quarter ended 30 June 2025. Participation in the conference call is by invitation only. Access bank reserves the right to block access to any person to whom an invitation has not been sent. Unauthorized dissemination of the contents on the proceeding of the call is strictly prohibited and prior explicit permission and written approval of Axis bank is imperative. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen only mode and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions at the end of the briefing session.
Should you need assistance during the call, please signal the operator by pressing Star then zero on your touchstone four. Please note that this conference is being recorded on behalf of Axis Bank. I once again welcome all the participants to the conference call. On the call we have Mr. Amitabh Chowdhury, MD and CEO Mr. Rajiv Anand, Deputy Managing Director and Mr. Puneet Sharma, CFO. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Amitabh Choudhary, MD and CEO. Thank you. And over to you sir.
Amitabh Chaudhry — Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer
Thank you. Neo. Apart from Rajiv and Puneet, I also have Siddharth Bhanti, Ed, Munish, Arda Ed and other members of the leadership team on the call. This quarter we delivered steady operating performance aided by high non interest income and continued moderation operating expenses. Our focus has been on profitable and sustainable growth. The bank’s balance sheet is resilient and capital position continues to remain strong. Let me summarize the Quarter 1 Operating Performance Operating profit was up 14% year on year and 7% quarter on quarter. Non interest income grew 25% year on year and our fee to average assets continues to be the best amongst peer pirate banks.
On a year on year basis, total deposit growth rates are similar for both period end and quarterly average basis of 9% and 8% respectively. On a weighted basis, retail and small business deposits under the LCR framework grew 12% year on year. On the lending side, small business SME and mid corporate together grew at 18% year on year and 5% quarter on quarter and constituted 23% of the total bank loans. The bank remains well capitalized with a CET1 ratio of 14.68%. We stay focused on three core areas execution of our GPS strategy namely becoming a resilient all weather franchise, creating multiplicative forces to build competitive advantage and building for the future.
I will now discuss each one of these areas. We have significantly progressed towards building a resilient all weather franchise. There are four areas of focus as we navigate the current cycle deposit quality and growth, credit growth, retail asset quality and costs where we continue to work on sustainable outcomes on retail asset quality, the normalization cycle is in progress. As indicated in Last Call, we have prudently made changes to our technical recognition criteria which has impacted Quarter one asset quality numbers across gross slippages, net slippages, credit costs and interest reversals impacting NIMs. Puneet will provide details on each one of these later on credit we are focused on delivering better growth outcomes quarter one financial year 26 has been one of our strongest quarters in terms of quarter on quarter loan book growth in the last few years.
Wholesale banking growth was driven by sector specific demand, strong, strong refinancing activity and disciplined execution, not just rate tailwinds. On the cost side, our expense growth moderated to 2% year on year and declined 5% quarter on quarter. Let me move to Deposits now. The deposit journey for Access bank should be looked at from three aspects Quality, Cost and Growth. Please refer to Slide 17. On the first two parameters we delivered well and demonstrated consistency. We have improved the granularization of our deposits which possibly impacts the quality of NCR deposits. Consequently, the outflow ratio improved by 150 basis points over the last one year and is similar to larger peer banks. We have also demonstrated controlled increase in cost of funds over the last eight quarters. Our confidence in the franchise has allowed us to take early and proactive action on savings account rates and term deposits.
This has resulted in quarter on quarter decline, 11 basis points in cost of funds on growth year on year NEB QAB basis total deposits grew 9% and 8%, term deposits grew 12 and 12, current accounts grew 9 and 4 and sales accounts grew 3% and 1% respectively. The quality and strength of our deposit franchise continues to improve. Our acquisition engine expansion plans, product launches, salary credits and Burgundy variants remain healthy. In quarter one we made strong strides in acquiring quality new to bank customers as we executed the drill track NTB acquisition strategy that involves premium customer acquisition through curated propositions and acquisitions through high potential Personas like senior citizen, doctors, homemakers and women which has led to a notable jump of 58% year on year in average total savings due to the ATS and 25% year on year in savings deposits.
Moreover, the property of relationship managers has seen improvement of 25% in financial year 25 exit over financial year 24 and up 33% year on year in June 25. Transformation projects like SIP these PUCH are contributing to this change. The bank has also made focused interventions to ensure better engagements with its Sally customers and continues to see healthy trends with 18% year on year growth in salary uploads in the New to the bank salary book June 25 and 27% year on year growth in premium acquisitions in the New to the Bank Salary book as of June 25.
The revitalization of our franchise continues to progress well led by 6% quarter on quarter growth in Burgundy assets under management. As for the recently publication Private Banker India 2024 league table will remain the third position with the highest growth rate amongst the banks coming to our existing bank customers. Our strategy centers around deepening customer engagement, transforming passive accounts into active high value relationships. Through data driven segmentation, personal nudges and lifecycle campaigns, the bank is driving higher balances, product penetration and long term loyalty. This improved strategy has started showing results with improved average balance, steady penetration and positive deepening our industry leading new platforms along with customized solutions across liquidity management, payments and collections continue to drive higher transaction banking flows.
Please Refer to slide 31 for more details. Creating multiplicative forces to build competitive advantage as a full suite card and payments player, the bank continued to build on innovation led partnership models to tap newer customer segments and their evolving needs. It partnered with Flipkart Group, Supermoney and Rupay to launch a co branded credit card targeted at UPID users and an innovative wearable payment solution in partnership with Boat and MasterCard. The bank also became the first to implement a pioneering B2B collection solution for a Fortune 500 company on NBBL’s Bharat Connect. Leveraging the bank’s best in class corporate API stack building for the future is concerned digital banking performance continues to remain strong.
Providing fraud safe digital platform remains a key priority for the bank. In quarter one, the bank enhanced transaction monitoring and introduced fraud prevention related features such as mobile OTP, safety center and lock FD. In addition, the bank introduced enhanced features to MyMoney, the bank’s personal finance manager to provide customers a comprehensive view of the finances and to manage them better. On the corporate banking side, the bank continued the rollout and further enhancement of features on the new platform. In quarter one, the bank migrated 80% of eligible clients to the new platform. We continue to see meaningful increase in digital activation transactions and other relevant metrics.
Business clients already migrated. Our digital platforms are scaling rapidly. Albeit Genai powered Frontline assistant has seen 66% increase in usage. It helps employees deliver faster consistent resolutions at the frontline, enhancing productivity and reducing dependency on manual support. Bank wide programs to build distinctiveness to Bharat banking and SPARS is progressing well. The rural advances grew 5% year on year and deposits from Bharat branches were up 9% thereby aiding the PFL matrix. We expanded our multi product distribution architecture to now 2007 and telecom branches sparse 2. Our enhanced customer experience program simplifies attractions driving NPS automation and digitization with a focus on customer loyalty and business growth.
Our Retail Bank NP’s score has matured significantly rising to 159 from a baseline of 100 in the past three years. You will see that the score has been inching up regularly and slowly. Softer aspects like our brand conservation score has also improved over the past few years. In conclusion, we are optimistic as we step into financial year 26. We believe large well capitalized banks like Axis with strong digital capabilities, innovative product suites are best placed to capitalize on the India opportunity. Our platform will allow us to grow at rates faster this year than the industry and this thesis will continue to play in the medium term.
The supportive regulatory conditions and the operative landscape add to our confidence. We will continue to invest where necessary to remain differentiated and distinctive in our journey towards building an all weather institution. Before I hand over to Puneet on behalf of the bank, I would like to acknowledge Rajiv Anand’s exceptional 16 year journey with access Group. We thank him for his visionary leadership and invaluable contributions across all business segments of the bank that has created a lasting impact on banks growth and culture. Thank you Rajiv. I will now request Puneet to take over.
Puneet Sharma — Chief Financial Officer
Thank you Amitabh. Good evening everyone and thank you for joining us. We disclosed in our Q4 FY25 earnings call that we had reviewed the classification and upgrade criteria for certain types of loans that would impact the reported asset quality metrics. Accordingly, the prudent application of technical parameters for recognizing slippages and consequent upgrades has been implemented and has impacted the reported asset quality parameters including provisions and contingencies for the quarter ended 30th June. For reference purposes, let’s call this the technical impact. The technical impact is largely restricted to cash, credit and overdraft accounts and on accounts that have been given one time settlements.
Hence, due to the technical impact, the reported values of gross slippages, net slippages, credit costs, NPA ratios, ROI and ROE are not like for like comparable the previous quarter or previous year. I would request all of you to Please see slide 44 for quantification of the technical impact across the key variables that I have just discussed. Let’s Pick up gross lippages Reported gross lippages for the quarter were 8,200 crores. 2,709 crores of the gross lippages is attributable to technical impact representing 1.03% of gross slippages for the quarter. In value terms, gross slippages for the quarter adjusted for technical impact is 5,491 crores.
It’s important to note that this amount is flat to Q3FY25 slippages. The reason I’m referencing Q3FY25 slippages is you have agree in the first quarter and the third quarter. So either effectively flat to Q3FY25 gross slippages x of technical impact has increased by 13 basis points year on year and 20 basis points quarter on quarter. Reported gross lippage ratio annualized for Q1FY26 is 3.13%. Gross lippage ratio adjusted for technical impact is 2.10% increasing 13 basis points year on year 20 basis points Q on Q Gross lippages segmentally worth 7,500 crores in retail, 403 crores in our commercial banking business and 297 crores in our wholesale business.
The technical impact on gross slippages by segment is 2165 crores retail, 234 crores wholesale and 310 crores for our CBG business. Segmentally, the gross lippage ratio for our CBG and wholesale segments adjusted for technical impact declined quarter on quarter and year on year. For the quarter, 29% of our gross. Litigants other than technical impact are attributed to linked accounts of borrowers which were standard when classified or have been upgraded in the same quarter. 80% of individual contracts that slipped because of technical impact and that continue to remain NPA as at 30th of June 2025 are fully secured.
Hence, given the aforementioned security cover, we believe that the economic loss due to the technical impact will be minimal over the life of these contracts. Further, the current quarter represents impact on stock inflow. With the stock corrected, the flow is likely to be more muted as compared to the current quarter. In future quarters. Net slippages Reported net slippages in the quarter were 6,053 crores. 1861 crores of the net slippage is attributable to technical impact representing 0.71% of net slippages for the quarter. In value terms, net slippage for the quarter adjusted for Technical impact is 4192 crores reported net slippage ratio annualized for Q1 FY26 is 2.33%.
Net slippage ratio adjusted for technical impact stands at 1.62%. Net slippages segmentally were 5726 crores in retail, 137 crores in commercial banking and 190 crores in our wholesale business. Technical Net of technical impact by segment the slippages were 1,574 crore retail, 187 crores WPCG or wholesale and 100 crores for our CBG business. Segmentally, the net slippage ratio for CBG and wholesale segments adjusted for technical impact declined year on year. Recoveries from our return of accounts for the quarter was 904 crores increasing 53% worldwide and flat Q on Q. Net slippages for the quarter adjusted for recovery from written off accounts and Technical impact was 3288 crores.
The same number in Q1 was 2,700. Q1 of the previous year was 2,700 and Q4 was 1079. Segmentally retail was 3636 crores. Q1FY25 was 2,456 crores, Q4FY25 was 2200 crores. Commercial banking was minus 14 crores for the quarter Q1FY25 was 13 crores and Q4FY25 was 5 crores. Our WBCB segment was minus 334 crores for the quarter Q1 FY25 was 231 crores. Q4FY25 was minus 1223 crores. Reported GNP ratio is 1.57%. GNPA ratio adjusted for technical impact stands at 1.41% lower 13 basis points year on year. Reported net NPA ratio is 0.45%. NPA ratio adjusted for technical impact stands at 0.36%.
Increasing 2 basis points year on year and 3 basis points quarter on quarter. Reported margin is 3.8%. Interest reversal impact on interest reversal on technical impact adversely impacted margins by one basis point for the quarter. Credit costs Reported credit cost is 1.38%. Net credit cost adjusted for technical impact stands at 1.09% increasing 12 basis points year on year. PAT ROA ROE technical impact has adversely impacted PAT by 614 crore Indian rupees. ROE has been adversely impacted by 15 basis points and ROE has been adversely impacted by 1.4%. Moving to discuss the salient features for the Financial performance of the bank for Q1 FY26 across our operating performance parameters, capital and liquidity position, asset quality and restructuring is as follows.
The key metrics for Q1FY26 are NII at 13,560 crores, YoY growth of 1% net interest margin at 3.8%, fee at 5,746 crores, YoY growth of 10% granular fee is 91% of total fee expenses at 9,303 crores. YoY growth moderated to 2% and expenses declined Q1Q by 5%. We delivered a positive job both on operating revenue and core operating revenue. Cost to assets at 2.41%, declined 5 basis points Q1Q and 13 basis points. YoY core operating profit at 10,095 crores YoY growth of 5% net credit cost at 1.38% up 41 basis points YoY largely due to technical impact PAT at 5,806 crores GMPA 1.57 NMPA at 0.45 11 basis.5 y increase PCR stands at 71% and declined 300 dupes Q1Q this is largely due to the secured nature of the technical impact Standard Asset coverage ratio at 1.12%.
All provisions to GNPA at 138% consolidated ROA at 1.58% consolidated ROE at 13.57%. Subsidies contributed 4 basis points to consolidated ROE and 43 basis points to consolidated ROE. Bank CET1 including Q1 profit stands at 14.68%. We accreted net of consumption 1 basis points of CET capital Q1Q and 62 basis points of CET capital year on year. In addition, the bank has prudent other provisions aggregating to 5,012 crores to be largely utilized for ECL transition. This provision has not been reckoned in the capital competition and translates to a capital cushion of 36 basis points over and above our reported capital adequacy ratio.
The bank assesses its capital position on two pillars growth and protection. We reiterate we do not need equity capital for either pillar. Net interest margin for Q1FY26 was 3.8%. It declined 25 basis points year on year and 17 basis points. Y O Y1 basis points decline in NIM is attributable to technical impact and 3 basis points q 1 q decline in in LIN is attributable to seasonally higher agri slippages due to agricyclicality full quarter impact of 75 basis points of repo cut will play through on loan yields in Q2FY26 and will adversely impact margins in Q2FY26.
The bank however maintains its through cycle stance of average means of 380 cycle measured in terms of duration starting from the date of the last rate cut. Our progress on structural net interest margin drivers continues with improvements across all variables on a year on year basis. Improvement in balance sheet mix loans and investments comprised 89% of total assets at June 25, improving from 88% at June 24. INR denominated loans comprise 96.24% of total advances at June 25, improving 18bps year on year. Retail and CPG advances comprise 70% of global advances at June 25. Stable IOI low yielding rid of bonds declined by 13,519 crores year on year.
RIDs comprise 0.84% of our total assets at June 25 compared to 1.36% at June 24. Quality of liabilities measured by outflow rates improved by 150 basis points over the last year. QAB Casa deposits grew 2% QoQ QAB Casa ratio was flat QoQ at 38%. NVB Casa ratio at 40% declined 1% sequentially. Our fee performance was good reflected in A fee growth of 10% year on year. Our fee 2 assets improved by 3 basis points year on year to 1.45% in Q1 FY25. Total retail fees grew by 9% year on year. Total wholesale fee grew 13% year on year better than the growth in advances reflecting improvements in the franchise, trading profits and other income at 1512 crores grew 161% year on year mainly on account of realized gains across government securities and bonds.
Operating expenses for the quarter stood at 9303 crores growing 2% year on year declining 5% sequentially. The year on year increase in rupee crore expenses can be attributable to 46% linked to volume 27% to technology and growth related and the remaining BAU partly offset by new integration expenses for Q1 technology and digital expenses constituted 10% of our total operating expenses. Staff cost increased by 4% year on year. QOQ decline in operating expenses is largely attributable to reduction in other operating expenses. We had indicated we were taking bell typing measures. These are playing through our staff cost increased 10% QoQ mainly due to increments in gratuity provisions and contingencies for the quarter were 3,948 crores higher by 190% Q1Q 94%.
YoY cumulative non NPA provisions at 30 June 25 is rupees 11,760 crores comprising provision for potential expected credit loss of 5,012 crores, restructuring provision of 238 crores, standard asset provisions higher than regulatory rates of 2,119 crore and weak assets and other provisions of 4,391 crores coming to the performance of our subsidiaries, Detailed performance of our subsidies is set out on slides 50 to 57 of our investor presentation. In Q1 FY26 the domestic subsidies reported a net profit of 451 crores growing 4% year on year. Return on investment on domestic subsidiaries was 47%. Access Finance overall assets under finance grew 23% year on year.
Retail book constituted 47% of total loans. Q1FY26 Pact grew 23% year on year to 189 crores with a capital adequacy of 19.83%, strong asset quality with net NP of 0.35% and negligible restructuring Axis AMC overall quarterly average assets under management grew by 15% year on year to Rupees 3.35,607 crores. Q1 packed at 130 crores growing 12% year on year. Access securities revenues for Q1FY26 of Rupees 360 crores and Q1FY26 pads to let’s 89 crores Axis Capital pads to let’s 38 crores for the quarter and we executed six ECM deals in Q1FY26 asset quality provisioning and restructuring.
The slippage GNPA and NPA and PCR ratios for the bank and segmently for retail, CBD and Corporate are provided on slide 42 of our investor presentation. To summarize, Axis bank is progressing well to be a stronger and sustainable franchise in the medium term defined as a period of 3 to 5 years with FY26 as base year. We believe advances can grow 300 basis points faster than industry. We continue to closely monitor the current macro geopolitical environment, inflation, liquidity, cost of funds and its impact on our business. Thank you for your patience. We’d be very happy to take questions from you at the moment.
Questions and Answers:
operator
Thank you very much. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press Star and one on the Touchstone telephone if you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press STAR and two participants are requested to use handsets while asking questions. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question is from Chintan from Autonomous Investments. Please go ahead.
Chintan Joshi
Hi, thank you for taking my question. I have a question on asset quality and a question on NII on asset quality. You know, even after removing the technical impact, the credit costs are quite high this quarter. What is driving this elevated level and how should we think about this number going not just for FY26 but for FY27 as well? I don’t think you are calibrating your business model to this high level. What should we think about on that calibration and then on nii? The NIM compression that we have seen in this quarter seems to be a little bit more than what we were discussing in the previous earnings call.
Has anything surprised you positively or negatively in the expected trajectory of the NIM? And would you’re still comfortable with NIMs reverting back to the fourth quarter level given that last quarter you had said that the balance duration is tightly matched on an annual basis.
Puneet Sharma
Chetan, thank you for your question. I’d like to offer a couple of factual clarifications before I respond to them. I do not think we’ve ever alluded to the fact that assets and liabilities are tightly matched on an annual basis. We have consistently maintained that our assets and liabilities are tightly matched. However, the matching is in the 1518 month range. So I would just want to factually correct the 12 month anchoring that you provided in your question. Now let me answer parts of your question. If you take your slippages question, adjusted for the technical impact, the slippages are exactly equal to or near equal to the Q3 FY25 number which indicates the stabilization that we had previously called out as part of the Q4 commentary continues to be maintained in Q1.
Also the function of the actual P and L charge. Yes, if you’re comparing the 2185 loan loss provision that we had in Q3 versus is, we adjusted roughly 3000 crores of provision for loan loss that we have in Q1. That’s a function of certain aging provisions plus the composition of slippages for the quarter. So those numbers will play through. But the lead indicator of asset quality is slippages and adjusted for technical impact we are flat to Q3. The last part of your question was on the margin trajectory. I think you alluded to us having provided some form of guidance for quarterly margins.
Again, I’d like to reiterate, we do not provide quarterly margin guidance. Our stated position is we are confident that we can deliver a 3.8% margin on a true cycle basis. Cycle starting from last rate cut. We’ve offered duration of our assets and liabilities on this call. So if you’re willing to take the duration view of the balance sheet, you will see margins. We feel confident that margins will get back to the levels we’ve indicated over the period of duration. The shape of how the margin trajectory would work. I would request you to think of the margin trajectory as an inverted C.
Effectively you start with when the rate cuts are announced, you drop on the inverted C and then you start climbing back up towards the end of the duration period. So that’s how margins will behave. Let me also answer a question that we are likely to receive through this call. What is next quarter looking like? Margins for the current quarter have fully absorbed on a full book basis. Full quarter basis, 25 basis points of rate cut. The second 75 basis points of rate cut have been absorbed only for part of the quarter. So that 75 basis points of rate cut will flow through on a complete basis in the next quarter.
It will get offset by some deposit plus borrowing cost savings that will play through. But directionally you know that 70% plus of our book is floating. So you get a clear of how that margin direction should move. I hope I’ve been able to answer each of your questions, but happy to take subsequent questions.
Amitabh Chaudhry
So, Chesan Amitabh,
Chintan Joshi
just a clarification.
Amitabh Chaudhry
Let me just finish. You said that you know, does it reflect on our model and do we need to change our model? So you know, let me just clarify a couple of things here. One, are slippages are stabilizing. We have talked about in the last call, we’re talking about in this call we have openly talked about the fact that if you look at the new stock which we are booking as loans on the retail side and how it is performing, it is performing as well as what we saw during pre Covid times across some of the asset classes that we’ve had a problem.
So as the stock plays out at some stage it will start reflecting in our overall slippages also. That’s the hope because right now that’s what the data is showing to us. So yes, we are going through a cycle. Yes, we are seeing elevated slippages and elevated credit costs. But also at the same time and at the same breath, we’ve been sharing that the stock which is being booked based on the risk cuts which we have done is reflecting signs and I’ll ask Amit to add to it if he wants is very clearly showing to us that the quality is improving and improving quite rapidly.
So in that sense, within a defined time period. I don’t know what that defined time period is. We have not given any guidance. We will see the credit costs reverting to lower levels. Anad, do you want to add anything?
Rajiv Anand
Yeah, just to add to that. Amitabh, you’re right. All the key indicators that we’ve seen on, especially on the retail unsecured side, which is credit cards and personal loans primarily, whether it’s bounce rates, earnings delinquency or collection resolution rates have shown a clear improvement and that’s what provides us comfort. And all of this is within the risk guard.
Chintan Joshi
Thank you.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from Maruk Adajania from Nuvama. Please go ahead.
Mahrukh Adajania
Good evening. So I had a couple of questions firstly on this technical classification. So we have seen technical classifications earlier on corporate by many banks, right? Like just as late as last year there were PSUs who had slipped a central government account as technical. But what actually happens in all these technical accounts is that they get upgraded in the next or the next to next quarter. So usually technical accounts are such that, you know, there’s a nature or an element of their recoverability in the forthcoming quarters. So other technical upgrades that we are. Sorry, the technical downgrades that we have done recoverable immediately or they are recoverable through sale of collateral as in recovery.
Sorry, that’s the wrong way to put it. What I’m trying to ask is are these technical downgrades likely to be upgraded to standard or they’ll be recovered because 80% of them are secured. So which bucket or which classification do they fall into? So that’s my first question and my related question to that is that if, so if you, if these technical slippages would not have happened, of course I, I can understand that the stock has been recognized but if these technical slippages had not happened then would your flow of slippage on a run rate basis settle at lower than what you will see in the next few quarters and likewise for your credit cost.
And then thirdly, I mean we’ve usually seen technical slippage in corporate and most of your slippage is in retail. But you also called out OTF cash credit and working capital, right? So sorry, overdraft. So the, I’m assuming that cash credit and overdraft will be classified in Non retail and only AOTF gets classified in retail. These were my questions.
Puneet Sharma
Maru, thank you for your questions. Let me attempt to respond to them in parts. Let’s take your last question first. All banks in the country offer cash, credit, overdraft products even to retail customers. A classical example of that could be loans for Kisan Credit. So they are in a CCOD format. So please do not assume that CCOD is only in the wholesale segment. In fact, when you make technical corrections, the wholesale segment is the first to recover because they are more professionally managed and they are able to upgrade themselves much faster. Consequently, the impact that you’re seeing is in the current quarter is dominantly in the retail business.
As I called out as part of my opening discussion. You alluded to whether. We will recover and upgrade these accounts through security enforcement or through bau. The current intention is to recover this money and our expectation is parts of this money will get recovered in the normal course of business as customer behavior changes and they regularize themselves in the normal course. 80% of these accounts have 100% security cover and that helps us get comfort that if the customers do not rehabilitate them over a period of rehabilitate themselves over a period of time, there is enough security cover for us not to face an economic loss on this load. So these are running businesses.
You will work through the running businesses. Recoveries and upgrades would be the preferred means to recover on these loans. But if those efforts fail, we have security cover to minimize economic loss. I hope that that answers all your questions.
Mahrukh Adajania
Thank you.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from Kunal Shah from Citigroup. Please go ahead.
Kunal Shah
Yeah, hi. Thanks for taking the question. So firstly, if you can explain slightly in detail in terms of what has happened with the maybe with this policies and what actually led to this change, is it more of a prudent measure? Was it identified during any kind of regulatory inspections or audit and we had to do this and maybe within that. In terms of the slippages, I didn’t get if you clarified in the opening remarks, but were there few accounts, okay. Wherein the borrower wise classification would have led to higher slippages just because something getting classified due to this change in the upgrade policy.
So. So that’s the first question. Yeah.
Puneet Sharma
Kunal, thank you for the question. Effectively it is a recognition policy that has changed. The upgrade policies only got tightened. So we’ve tightened the recognition criteria which is why you see the dominant impact come through on cross slippages. You alluded to the fact on whether this was proactive or Reactive.
Kunal Shah
Sorry. If you can just give one example as to what has happened. Yeah, maybe one couple of examples would really help to clarify in terms of what is leading to like almost 2,900 crores of addition. Yeah.
Puneet Sharma
Happy to give you an example Kunal. I think. Let me complete the response to your earlier question on whether this was proactive or regulatory led. We can confirm to you that this was not regulatory led. So that should answer the question that you have raised as part of your first question. Now coming to an example of impact. I had said that this impacts cash, credit, overdraft and one time settlement accounts. I think very simplistically put asset classification happens on a days past due counter basis and asset classification can happen on qualitative parameters. Let’s take one example of a one time settlement to illustrate to you what could possibly happen.
Let’s assume Puneet has a personal loan. That personal loan is of 100 rupees and that’s five days past due. Our collections team figures out that Puneet should not Puneet may not be able to service his loan and consequently decides to enter into a one time settlement with Puneet. And the settlement amount is let’s say three installments of 30 rupees with a one month moratorium. So 100 rupee loan five days past due to be settled in three installments of 30 rupees with A. Sorry, three. Three installments of 30 rupees with a 90 day moratorium. What will happen is I will sign up to the settlement.
The DPD counter continues to move. So on the 85th day after the settlement or 90 days after the amount fell, first amount fell due, Puneet would get classified. All hundred rupees of Puneet’s loan will get classified on the because it’s a 90 day moratorium on the 95th day of DPD. Because 90 days after 5 days on the 95th day Puneet pays INR 30. The 30 rupees clears all past overdues and the DPD counter goes to zero. If you are recognizing classification only on a DPD basis, Puneet’s residual principal outstanding of 70 rupees would get fully upgraded because DPD counter has gone to zero.
One of the technical changes is we have stopped upgrading Puneet despite his DPD counter going to zero. Therefore it is a technical parameter that is classifying Puneet and not a DPD parameter that hopefully explains to you what we mean by technical parameters. These are non DPD led parameters that have been tightened resulting in higher slippages for the.
Kunal Shah
Got it. So These were more wherein it was not objectively defined. Maybe on DS positive but qualitative parameters were used in terms of like expectations from the otf. And maybe that’s what it was. That’s the reason it was not classified as npm. And now since we have stopped that, now it is getting on the entire back book. Now it is getting classified as gnpa.
Puneet Sharma
Let me clarify, there is no expectation here. The IRAC norms were DPD and therefore if the DDPD was not past 90 there was an upgrade. Right? Again what was. Please appreciate that. I just want to reiterate and re clarify. Our balance sheet was we have said recognition criteria has changed, provisioning has not changed. Provisioning remains as stringent as it was previously. So previously on Puneet’s loan, 10 rupees would have been provided when the settlement was entered into. So I was running zero risk even at that point in time. The incremental 90 rupee of provision which was coming through and being released because only DPD was being used and qualitative was not being used is now flowing through the PNs. So there is no subject objectivity here.
The simple point now is instead of reading a DPD counter, if a customer has an ots, a customer will not get upgraded till the last installment is received in its fullest form. Now this is one example. The criteria changes across multiple examples. You would not like to discuss all of them?
Kunal Shah
Yeah, yeah, no agree. The only thing is in the retail segment, would it be fair to say that the dominance would be of the credit card within this portfolio?
Puneet Sharma
No, that would not be factually correct.
Kunal Shah
How would it be spread across product segments? Broadly? If you can indicate like 2,200 odd crores in retail, which segments does it really impact?
Puneet Sharma
Kunal, I had indicated as part of my opening comments that the products impacted our ccod. So cash, credit, overdraft, product is impacted as a product one time settlements will impact across the board.
Kunal Shah
Got it. And lastly maybe any comments on PL&CC? Till last time you have been indicating that we have not yet called the peak on PL side and CC is stabilizing. So what would be the incremental comment on it? Now?
Rajiv Anand
So broadly we have seen stabilization and improvement across retail unsecured. Specifically we have seen improvement on the credit card side and stabilization in the personal loan side. We did mention the fact that all the key indicators, which includes bounce rates, early delinquency, collection, efficiencies have all shown an improving trend and that’s something that provides us comfort. But having said that, I think Puneet did mention in his opening remarks that we are monitoring these indicators for the quarter before we call out stabilization.
Kunal Shah
So pl, we can still say it’s stabilized or. No, not yet.
Rajiv Anand
It is improving for sure. And like I said, because we still want to call it out. We had mentioned in the last call as well that we want to watch and wait till end of quarter two, but clearly we’ve seen signs of improvement on PL as well.
Kunal Shah
Okay, got it. Thanks. Thanks. And all the best. Yeah.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from Param Subramanian from Investec. Please go ahead.
Param Subramanian
Thanks for taking my question. My first question again. So you clarified that it’s not regulatory driven, this technical recognition, but what exactly drove this? Is this a gap that you recognized versus peers, or is this access bank being more prudent in terms of recognition? If you could just call that out. Because one can’t understand why exactly we are doing this. Yeah, that’s question one.
Puneet Sharma
Thank you for the question. We follow a benchmarking exercise once a year on policies across the market space. It’s a practice that we’ve been following for multiple years. And if you go back back in our history, you would have seen, for example, we had meaningfully corrected our SME provisioning in 2122. So it’s an annual practice that the bank has. As part of the annual practice, we benchmark all of our policies wherever we find somebody more prudent, even on an individual parameter basis. We try and make sure that we get the vaccination level of prudence as an institution.
It keeps our balance sheet healthy and resilient. That’s the principal focus of the benchmarking or purpose of the benchmarking. Because we had completed the benchmarking when we announced quarter four results in April, we had called this impact out as part of our quarter four commentary that this impact is likely to come through. So it’s an annual feature. We called it out. The comfort I can provide is given where we stand both on recognition and provisioning. We do not expect any further changes to either criteria in the foreseeable future unless the regulation changes for the food industry as a whole.
Param Subramanian
Okay, got it. So would it be fair to say. Some of the other larger private banking peers are doing this already and this was a gap. I’m not sure if I, you know. If that was clear. And secondly, if you could call out how much is the impact on the back book versus the flow? Because you said there is a back book impact as well, you know, because from Q2 onwards, we’ll have to look at the flow impact. Right. So what is the number one should be working with?
Puneet Sharma
I’m not going to give you a stock versus flow impact. You will. You probably need to work that through. There is a full stop correction that’s happened in quarter one. Coming to the first part of your question on whether we were lagging some of the peer banks, I think that’s a comment the peer bank should offer basis. The benchmarking we do and the policy that we have as at 30th June 2020, 2025, I do not think there is a bank that’s more prudent than us on asset polling, asset classification or and upgrades combined on the street today.
So if you take classification and upgrade criteria on a combination basis, our benchmark leads us to believe that we are more prudent than banks on the street.
Param Subramanian
Okay, got it. Very clear. Puneet. One last question if I may again harping on this. Is this in preparation for say an ECL transition and if so, the bank is sitting on 5,000 crores of ECL buffer. And just to again extend this point, we are more conservative in terms of unsecured provisioning which we’ve called out in the past. There is an ECM buffer and now this technical recognition. This is all coming at the expense. Of book value per share as well. As ROE for the shareholders. So there’s something to consider. So you know, firstly, is this in preparation for ECL and secondly, your thoughts on the other part. Thank you.
Puneet Sharma
Thanks for your question. I think I have clarified previously and I’ll reiterate, unless there is a change in regulation, we do not think our recognition or provisioning policies need further change. So we are confirming that this would be the large last change that we are putting through. ECL is a function of provisioning on recognized numbers. We do pro forma preparations internally as we prepare for ECL implementation. This is the last pro forma we’ve prepared. We can confirm to you that on stage three assets we have adequate cover to meet ECL guidelines.
Param Subramanian
Thanks. Thanks.
operator
Thank you.
Puneet Sharma
Thank you.
operator
The next question is from Abhishek M from hsbc. Please go ahead.
Abhishek M
Yeah, hi everyone. Hope I’m audible. Hello. Am I audible right? So one question on loan growth. If I look at the movement, especially in the last two quarters, not only have we completely consolidated or slowed down growth in retail, but we have grown more in corporate and this sort of goes against the trend when we are trying to protect our margins and minimize the yield compression impact. This also sort of Coincides with commentary that stress in unsecured is stabilizing or it is coming under control. So at what point or what would trigger higher growth in retail? Maybe not unsecured, but at least secured retail because surely that would be more yield accretive compared to corporate.
Some comment and color here would be helpful.
Amitabh Chaudhry
I think we have quite demonstrated our ability to grow certain asset classes at the cost of the other asset classes and drive the right min through various kind of interest rate changes we have seen over the last three years or so. On one side you’re seeing our elevated retail risks. It was important to get a handle and ensure that the stock or the kind of flow which is coming is coming at a credit cost which is much lower than what we have seen in the past. So some of those areas that you are growing, obviously the growth has slowed down.
If you go through the disbursement growth in some of our retail asset classes you will see that has definitely picked up in comparison to what you saw in 2425. The area was not picked up because you are seeing repayment of loans but we do expect dispersals will start going through aum. You are seeing decent growth on the mortgage side in the industry between wholesale and mortgage we have grown wholesale side more and wholesale has not really been. One of the lower growth asset classes. For us for some time now.
We have an opportunity to grow and we are growing there. And we have always told you that when we want to grow wholesale we can grow. And we’re just demonstrating that as we speak we expect growth to come back up in some of the other asset classes also as time goes by. Very clearly in my opening remarks I made a statement that we expect we have the confidence to grow at rates faster than the industry in this year and in the medium term because our platform allows us to grow and give us due credit for being able to manage the portfolio mix in the right way so that we can drive the NIM in the right direction.
I mean I think that’s a call we take on a regular basis, on a continuous basis based on what the market are, what will drive right nims, what is the ldr, where are we getting the deposits, what kind of deposits we are getting and so on and so forth. It’s a combination of a lot of factors and I’m just saying that I think we’re demonstrating the ability to manage product mix and we are quite confident in manager will manage that as we move forward. Hope that answers the question.
Abhishek M
This was. This was important from as a historical. Look at you know, what you’ve done over the last 12 years. But now it’s become even more important to grow retail because you know NIM is going to take a bit of a knock from the repo repricing impact. So are you comfortable enough to grow retail now going forward? Let’s say 12 months from now since you said you know will grow at par with the industry so that catch.
Amitabh Chaudhry
Up should start happening. Retail accounts for 60% of our book. If we have to drive NIMs, Randy said we’ll have NIMs of 3.8% on a true cycle basis. Either we change the product mix to wholesale and get the NIM up there which is not easy or the retail has to grow. I think the answer is quite obvious, isn’t it?
Abhishek M
Right, right, yeah. Because most of the retail book is in complete consolidation mode for a few quarters. Great, thanks. So second question is on your ROA roe just trajectory over the next couple of years. So your 15 to 18 month trajectory. For you know that match duration of your balance sheet starting Feb when the first rate cut happened broadly indicates that by the end of this calendar we should see the deposit cuts starting to show up and utilizing the yield impact. Is that the right way to think about it? Let’s say by end of December we should start seeing enough accumulated benefit of the SAR and TD rate cuts that you have done so far.
Puneet Sharma
Look, I think we’ve said duration is 15 to 18 months from the last rate cut announced. So the last rate cut was post that. So you’ve got to measure it from the last rate cut date. Second is, let’s be clear that there is a market force at play on deposits given where and deposits will get priced basis competitive intensity. So yes, I would agree with your answer in a perfect market but competitive intensity changes over a period of time and you’ve got to bear that in mind when you think about repricing on a true cycle basis.
But directionally look at individual banks liability durations and you should see their deposits as well as borrowings repriced over that period.
operator
Thank you. Before we take the next question, a request to participants to please limit your questions to two per participant. Should you have a follow up question, we request you to rejoin the queue. We take the next question from Suraj Das from Sundaram Mutual fund. Please go ahead.
Suraj Das
Yeah hi sir, thanks for the opportunity again I mean harping on this technical thing. I mean just one simple question if I have understood correctly that now since your upgrade will only happen if they pay let us Say three ami. And since you have started this exercise from first quarter, would it be fair to assume that probably going into second half your recovery or upgrade number would be meaningfully higher versus the current levels? Because by that time probably what was the stock impact you have had in this quarter? Those would have paid, let us say 23 EMIs already and then hence probably your recovery upgrade number would be meaningfully higher.
So that is point one. Question one. Question two is sir, put it very simply that since last year, till last year you were following a different classification and now you are following a different, let us say policies. If everything, if I assume that everything is same last year versus this year, would it be fair to assume that your slippages number for second, third and fourth quarter would be higher this year versus yui? Because now you are not going to recognize those OTS number into the flow? And if I assume that everything is same, your incremental slippages are not coming down, hence your reported slippages should be higher.
Is that the understanding correct? These are my two questions.
Puneet Sharma
Thank you for your questions. I think without specifically commenting on recoveries and other upgrades versus what is going to be flow impact, I think the simplest way I would respond to your question directionally is Q2 Q3 Q4 will be more muted than Q1 simply because Q1 has corrected stock. Q2 Q3 Q4 will have slippages elevated because of the new criteria, but that will get offset by recoveries as you correctly pointed out. So I think the way we should look at this is on a net basis q2 q3 q4 will be more muted than q1 on both the slippage variable as well as the consequent interest consequent provision variable.
I think to your second part of your question on where will we directionally be on rupee cross slippages? Whether we’ll be higher or lower than prior quarters, we do not guide on slippages. So I do not want to start the practice of giving you quarterly indications on where slippages would be, but directionally more muted than quarter one for certain with a mix of better recoveries and upgrades and lower fresh flow slippages.
Suraj Das
Sure. And one last question if I may, Sir. Your PCR has come down this quarter directionally. Would it continue to come down or I mean how you are thinking about the PCR?
Puneet Sharma
Our provision cover ratio is down by about 300 basis points. I would request you to look at slide 44 of our presentation. If you look at slide 44 of our presentation, you will see that we made on the technical impact 821 crore provision roughly on 1861 crores of grass slippages. Net slippages, 1861 crores of net slippages. That translates roughly to a PCR of about 44 45%. So the way I would request you to think is X of the technical slippage. The PCR actually improved because our policies are prudent. The new slippages have attracted a lower provision cover.
And this goes back to a point I made earlier. 80% of the accounts have more than 100% security value. And because they have more than 100% security value, they will stand fully covered and therefore require less provision. So the PCR drop is a mix impact. Principally there is no dilution of provisioning standards insofar as the bank is concerned.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from MB Mahesh from Kotak Securities. Please go ahead.
M B Mahesh
Just again clarification on the technical one. Just trying to understand how was the bank kind of deciding as to who gets the benefit of this one time settlement offers on the DPD products and on PCOD products. Typically these are very interest only products and just a function of how much of in person, how much of interest needs to be paid. The customer is defaulting on this product. Just trying to understand how weak was the borrower in the first place. And when you call it as technical today, was it inherently much more weaker than what you otherwise think it to be?
Puneet Sharma
Sorry Mais, could you, could you help me with your questions Again, I couldn’t fully hear them. Please.
M B Mahesh
You kind of indicated that we were offering this benefit of this one time settlement to the borrowers on the EMI fast queue. We’re trying to understand on what business were you offering this as a scheme across your entire products because you have seen slippages in the other portfolios as well. When does a borrower get this benefit of one time settlement versus it gets classified immediately as a slippage in your books.
Puneet Sharma
Nice. Thanks for the question. So I think let’s go back to the Puneet example I gave at the start of the call. The fact on whether Puneet will get collected on or whether Puneet will be offered a settlement is pretty much a sort of a data science within us. Within our system criteria that could be used is let’s assume Puneet is not over leveraged but has a dpd. I may choose to collect on Puneet rather than offering a settlement. But let’s assume my bureau analysis shows that Puneet has multiple loans with other counterparties and he is probably likely to fail on those counterparties.
The first person out of the door is more likely to collect than the last person out of the door. So very simplistically put it will be specifics of the case wherein the collections team will decide evaluating all facts whether Puneet should be offered a settlement or Puneet should be continued to be collected on I hope that clarifies.
M B Mahesh
And when did you start this entire journey during the quarter in the sense that if you had started in the beginning of the quarter on the incremental flows as well as on the stock, ideally the borrower had nearly about 90 days to repay because there was a technical risk that the borrower was going to be declared as an npl. And yet when we look at the upgrades and recovery seen on the lower side, we are trying to understand why has the borrower not chosen to repay and you showing a higher recovery.
Puneet Sharma
So Maish, let me go back to the numeric example I gave that may help answer the question. So I was let’s say the 5 DPD on 1st of April, so I will slip somewhere towards the end of June the borrower the slippage will be for the full 100 rupees. But Puneet as a borrower has paid in only 30 rupees so the slippage will be for the full hundred. The recoupment for the first quarter would have been only 30 rupees in the example we discussed. So 70 rupees will still remain slipped the next 30 and the next 20 in my example will be recoveries which should come through in subsequent quarters.
But there may be another punit that slips on first of July. So which is why go back to the comment I made earlier for your consideration which is to say quarter two, quarter three, quarter four will be more muted than quarter one and the muting effect will be for two reasons. One, the stock has been corrected so there is no more stock to flow through in the subsequent quarters. And second, absolutely correct we should have recoveries from the stock that has flowed through in the current quarter in subsequent quarters.
M B Mahesh
Before I just get moved out of the call, the question which I’m asking is Puneet get classified in this quarter as an NPA which he ideally wouldn’t have done last year. So it is in Puneet’s interest to actually make the payment of 30 rupees from every possible choices of money that we can get outside. Yet he has chosen to default and not repay the loan. Just trying to understand why has the borrower not chosen to repay the amount which has resulted in this higher slippages. And these are all CCODE interest part.
Puneet Sharma
CCOD is a product set. So maish again I think let me we said that there was a set of technical factors that we have changed for classification. We were asked to provide one example of a technical factor that we’ve changed. So OTS was one of the examples of the changes that we have made. That is not the only change we have made. So that should help answer your question on why it is not solely OTS now coming to ots. Actually Puneet’s behavior has not changed at all. Puneet only had 30 rupees to pay earlier Puneet was not being classified while the bank waited for 30 rupees to come in.
And because Puneet was not being classified, bank was not carrying a 100% provision on Puneet. The only change now is Puneet is being classified. Bank is carrying a 100% provision on Puneet. If Puneet pays back the 90, the 90 rupees of provision will be released. So from a customer perspective, customers cash flows are mirrored. So on the 31st of March if I had offered the same structure to Puneet he would continue to remain classified AS standard. On the 1st of April when I offer the same structure to Puneet he gets classified to NPA and does not get upgraded.
So it’s not a differential customer cash flow, it’s a bank choice of classifying the customer. I hope that explains it detail to what you’re asking.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from YY Sai from eSpring. Please go ahead. We seem to have lost the line for Mississai. We move to the next question. Next question is from others from INAM Holdings. Please go ahead.
Unidentified Participant
Yeah hi, I’m Prabhu. The question is, you know eventually we put a net cost of about 800 crores on credit cost from this adjustment through the year we may have some recover some net net. Would it be possible for you to kind of on a ballpark basis estimate what the credit cost impact would be for the year and hopefully 27 will be normalized so that doesn’t recur next year.
Puneet Sharma
Yes. Others 27 would be normalized with effect in comparison to 26. That I would agree with. We have confirmed that there will be no other policy changes unless there is a change in regulation. So we have offered that confirmation. We continue to offer that confirmation. I others I wouldn’t want to guide on what the value of recoveries and upgrades versus fresh lippages on the criteria would be. This is the first quarter in which the criteria has been implemented. Let us get some more data and vintage data on this for us to come back. So for FY27 directionally I would agree with what you’ve said.
FY26 I would not want to comment on a quarter by quarter basis.
Unidentified Participant
Understood. And the second question was on the guidance on growth faster than system. Just want to understand driven by better deposit outlook or better system liquidity. You just want to understand what is anchoring our faster than system growth expectation this year. We kind of had a weak here last year.
Amitabh Chaudhry
We would not like to start giving guidance on specific areas where we believe where the growth is going to come from. I think we have demonstrated the ability to manage our portfolio mix. We have demonstrated the ability to grow some asset classes. Not grow some, cut down on some. We’ve shown the ability to manage our mins. Yes, obviously deposit has to be a driver. We expect deposit growth also the start feeding the system in the next one or two quarters. So it’s a combination of all those facts rather than getting into what exactly is the formula which will help it.
I think we will. Partly we have a certain strategy. Partly will also have to react to what is happening in the market. But we do believe that the growth engine is slowly, gradually coming back and we will be able to drive that growth in the system.
Unidentified Participant
And my last question is on OPEX if you can. You know, seems that things are coming in control. Some of the one offs we had are not happening now. So just the outlook on either cost, income, cost to assets over the next couple of years.
Puneet Sharma
Thanks for the question. I think look, we are fully cognizant of the fact that operating expenses is a variable that we will work on. We had dialed up operating expenses when the dew point permitted us to do so. We demonstrated over the last three quarters our ability to optimize expenses. We’ll continue to do that in the short term. Clearly the management is looking to deliver a positive job over the longer term. Cost to assess should improve from where we are today.
Unidentified Participant
Got it. Thanks a lot for the answers. All the best.
operator
Thank you. We’ll be able to take two more questions. We take the next question from Jay Mundra from ICICI Securities. Please go ahead.
Jay Mundra
Hi, good evening. Puneet. If you can give the breakup of this 6000 crores of net slippages. So 8200 minus 2100 crores. So 6053 crores of next litigious pickup. Between retail, wholesale and commercial.
Puneet Sharma
Sorry, I just want to clarify the number. It’s not 6000 crores of net slippage. Net slippage reported is 6, 053. Technical is impact is 1861. So apples to apples, net slippages is 4192. If you meet the breakup of the net slippages on a segment basis, the net slippages on a segment basis are set out on slide 54, on slide 44 on the bottom table, reported net slippage wholesale is 190. CDG is 100. Retail is 5726. If you adjust for technical impact, wholesale is absolute 3 crores which is close to zero. CBG is absolute 37 crores which is also close to zero.
And you’re left with retail which is 4152 crores. I hope that clarifies what you were asking for.
Jay Mundra
Sure. Your thanks.
operator
Thank you. The next question is from Nitin Agarwal from Motilal Oswal. Please go ahead.
Nitin Aggarwal
Hello. Am I audible?
Puneet Sharma
Yes please.
Nitin Aggarwal
Hi. So two questions. One is on the SAR deposits wherein we have cut like 50 basis points even for deposits above 50 lakh in line with some of the other large PO banks. So have we seen any outflows there? And what was the composition of SAR deposits above 50 lakh? If you can share. Because our deposit base has declined marginally. So any outflows because such deposits will naturally be a little more interest rate sensitive. So any color around that, that’s question. 1 and. 1.2% credit cost excluding technical impact is like materially higher versus peers almost like 3x. So when you say that FY27 will be more normalized, how should we look at that? Because earlier we used to give that. Long term average credit cost chart in the presentation. So just some ideas to what, what could be a more normalized number given. Where we are right now.
Amitabh Chaudhry
So on deposits after the rate cut, I don’t think we’ve seen any shift in the 50 lakh deposits et cetera. In fact for individual deposits we’ve seen slightly better momentum this quarter on deposits after the rate cut as well. And we’re seeing continue to see good. Momentum in our premium acquisition as well as in our ntb, you know, customer acquisition both on salary and non salary customers through the quarter.
Puneet Sharma
Nitin, we won’t give you specific guidance on what you’re asking for. I think you know us, you know our policy on guidance. I don’t want to be calling out numbers relative to competition or relative to a past reported number. Directionally we are very clear which is what we responded to as part of the earlier question. FY27 should be better than FY26.
Nitin Aggarwal
Right? Thanks so much and wish you all the best.
operator
Thank you very much.
Puneet Sharma
Thank you.
operator
We’ll take that as the last question. I would now like to hand the. Conference back to the management team for any closing comments.
Puneet Sharma
Thank you, Rayu. Thank you, everyone, for your time and patience this evening. If any questions remain unanswered, please reach out to the Industrial Relationship Team and we will try and pick that up and come back to you as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience and time. Have a good evening.
operator
Thank you very much on behalf of Axis Bank. That concludes the conference. Thank you for joining us, ladies and gentlemen. You may now disconnect your lines.