TheChek News Flow

DAX:

MDAX:

SDAX:

Outside-in escalation document released independently from the voluntary tender offer. Three-act argument: (1) CBK has operationally underperformed SX7E and UCG in 2021-24 and 2025, with 2025 cost miss (~200m) masked by low LLPs, low integration costs, replica NII (+500m vs plan) and intl loan growth (+24% ex-DE/PL vs +1% DE); (2) Momentum FY28 extrapolates this — ~50% of FY24-28 rev growth is replica-driven, zero integration costs 2026-28, negligible buffers; (3) CBK has re-rated +20pp vs sector since Sept-24 UCG stake, not justified by fundamentals (P/E 2yr-fwd 8.2x = SX7E, premium to UCG 7.8x).

Alt plan = Unlocked standalone + Combination with HVB: incremental +2.0bn pre-tax GOP (0.8 Unlocked + 1.1 Combination 2030+), +1.2bn incr. NP / +25% vs Momentum FY28, +c.10pp RoTE. Rebuts 15k DE job cuts → 7k (2k in combo), and rebuts loss-of-DE-independence → DE becomes Group's #1 country, c.95% local decisions.

UCG/CBK — "A NEW CHAPTER" | 33-pg roadshow deck 20-Apr

- UCG: CBK "Momentum" = more of the same; lagged SX7E/UCG 21-24 & 25 across Net Rev/RWA, C/I, RoTE
- 2025: ~200m cost miss hidden by lower LLPs (~130m) + lower integration (~100m) + replica NII (+200m) + intl loans +24% vs DE +1%
- Valuation stretched: CBK P/E 2yr-fwd 8.2x = SX7E, premium to UCG 7.8x; +20pp re-rating vs sector since Sept-24 stake — UCG says not fundamentals-backed
- "UNLOCKED" standalone FY28: NetRev/RWA c.8.9 (+1.3pp) / C/I c.40 (-7pp) / RoTE >19 (+5pp) / NP c.5.1bn (+0.6 vs cons)
- "COMBINATION" (HVB+CBK) FY30 Group: NP c.21bn / RoTE >25 / C/I c.30 / Net Rev c.45bn; DE: NP c.8.5bn / RoAC >30 / C/I c.32
- Value creation: +2.0bn pre-tax GOP (0.8 Unlocked + 1.1 Combo 2030+); +1.2bn incr NP / +25% vs Momentum; 3.4bn invest + 0.5bn upfront coverage
- Myth vs Reality: 15k DE jobs → UCG 7k (2k combo); 60% savings non-HR/non-core intl; DE = Group #1 country, c.95% local decisions
- Execution: CBK standalone until 2028; UCG track >100 integrations (Alpha RO <9m)
- Any CBK guidance upgrade on tailwinds shifts BOTH Unlocked & Combination outputs up in parallel — doesn't close the structural gap
- Takeaway: pressure on CBK Board to engage / upgrade Momentum; watch offer document for terms. CBK premium hard to defend if 2026 tailwinds fade

SUBJECT: UCG/CBK — "A New Chapter" (20-Apr-26): UCG frames alt plan vs Momentum ahead of tender

UniCredit published today a 33-slide outside-in deck titled "A New Chapter", independently from and ahead of its voluntary tender offer on all Commerzbank ordinary shares. Disclaimer: not an MAR-compliant investment recommendation nor an offering document. Below the main elements for the recipient.

1/ DIAGNOSIS — Operating underperformance, overvalued
- CBK lagged SX7E and UCG across Net Rev/RWA, C/I, RoTE in 2021-24 and 2025, with Germany as key drag
- FY24 vs plan: 1.2bn cost miss (25%), 200m fees miss, NII beat from rate tailwinds — i.e. delivery sustained by macro, not transformation
- FY25 vs Momentum: ~200m cost miss offset by ~130m lower LLPs, ~100m lower integration costs (net of tax), intl loan growth +24% vs DE +1%, replica NII +200m vs Momentum (total NII beat ~500m)
- Valuation: P/E 2yr-fwd at 8.2x = SX7E, premium vs UCG 7.8x; +20pp re-rating vs sector since 10-Sept-24 stake disclosure — UCG: not fundamentals-driven

2/ MOMENTUM (consensus FY28)
Net Rev 14.0bn / Costs 7.0bn / NP 4.5bn / C/I 47 / RoTE 15 / Net Rev/RWA 7.6
UCG flags: ~50% of FY24-28 rev growth from replica; zero integration cost 2026-28; marginal overlays (150m as of 4Q25); no further invest planned

3/ COMMERZBANK UNLOCKED (standalone)
FY28: Net Rev/RWA c.8.9 (+1.3pp) / C/I c.40 (-7pp) / RoTE >19 (+5pp) / Net Rev c.13.6bn / Costs c.5.7bn / NP c.5.1bn (+0.6)
FY30 dir.: Net Rev >15bn / Costs <6bn / NP c.6.0bn / C/I c.37 / RoTE c.23
+0.8bn pre-tax GOP / 1.7bn investments (IT, channels, pre-pensioning, reskilling) / 0.5bn upfront coverage
Six levers: Refocus DE-Mittelstand-PL / Redesign intl network / Invest+efficiencies / Capital discipline / Client journey upgrade / Tech-AI transformation

4/ COMBINATION (HVB + CBK)
FY30 DE: Net Rev/RWA >9 / C/I c.32 / RoAC >30 / Net Rev >18bn / Costs <6bn / NP c.8.5bn
FY30 Group: Net Rev/RWA >9 / C/I c.30 / RoTE >25 / Net Rev c.45bn / Costs <14.5bn / NP c.21bn
Incremental: +1.1bn annual pre-tax value 2030+ / 1.6bn addl invest
Perimeter: >600 branches, c.8% DE loan mkt share, 14+1 federated banks, >35m clients, >130bn mcap

5/ MYTH vs REALITY — UCG rebuttals
- "15,000 DE job losses" (Werning, 17-Mar) → c.7k FTE reduction DE, 2k in combo case; 60% savings from non-HR/non-core intl network, 40% non-business central functions
- "No value creation" (CFO Schmitt, 15-Apr) → +1.2bn incr NP / +25% vs Momentum, +c.10pp RoTE
- "Loss of DE independence" → DE = Group's #1 country by NP, c.95% local decisions, open governance
- "Execution risk" → CBK standalone until 2028; UCG track >100 integrations, Alpha RO <9 months
- "Intl network can't be improved" → UCG 2021-25: -64% costs, +16% rev, -29% avg RWA; 2x CBK trade finance with leaner footprint; only c.15% of DE flows route via CBK's Africa/LatAm presence

6/ TRADE / POSITIONING
- Escalation toolkit ahead of tender — CBK Board under pressure to engage or upgrade Momentum
- Important mechanics: any CBK guidance upgrade on tailwinds shifts BOTH Unlocked and Combination outputs up in parallel — does not close UCG's structural-gap argument
- CBK premium vs SX7E/UCG increasingly exposed if 2026 delivery disappoints on replica / intl growth
- Watch: offer document for terms & exchange ratio, CBK response, BaFin/ECB positioning, German political reaction

World’s fourth-largest independent crude trader says markets may be ‘very choppy’ between April and June

Oil markets are facing more turbulence as tensions in the Middle East collide with a seasonal slowdown in demand, raising the prospect of further sharp and unpredictable swings in crude prices, the head of trading house Gunvor warned. 

Gary Pedersen, who took over the world’s fourth-largest independent oil trader following a management buyout in December, said markets could become even more volatile during April to June, when demand dips between winter and the summer driving season. 

“It is a little bit of a more challenging, softer period that we need to be careful of. Frankly, it could be very choppy,” he said in an interview with the FT, with prices potentially driven more by headlines than underlying supply and demand. 

The International Energy Agency has forecast that demand will drop by 1.5mn barrels a day (b/d) in the second quarter, the biggest drop since the Covid-19 pandemic. Opec, the group of oil producers, is forecasting a more modest 500,000 b/d fall. 

Gunvor said last week it had already generated more than $1.6bn in gross profits in the first three months of this year, matching the figure for the whole of 2025. 

Pedersen said the company had prepared for the Iran conflict by drawing on lessons from recent crises, when it was caught out by price rises and forced to shut down trading positions, exposing weaknesses in its risk management. 

“We leveraged a lot of experience from the team that was here in 2022,” he said, referring to the period after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine sent gas prices soaring. 

Gunvor reviewed all of its positions and risk exposures ahead of the war and has traded throughout the conflict, including buying significant volumes released from the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve. “We have not had any liquidity constraints whatsoever. We have been able to trade, stay liquid and focus on all the arbitrage movements.”

A key part of that strategy has been a focus on moving physical oil rather than on oil derivatives. Pedersen said he wanted traders to minimise what he called “stress risk”, or the danger of being caught out by extreme and unpredictable price moves. “Stress is what turns the lights out, so we want to make sure we’re constantly measuring stress risk every day,” he said. 

While oil futures have regularly sold off sharply — which Pedersen attributed in part to a “masterclass” in political messaging from US President Donald Trump — he said physical crude remained tight as buyers sought to replace disrupted supplies from the Gulf.

Gunvor is emerging from a turbulent period, in which tensions with Washington — which described the group as a “Kremlin puppet” and blocked it from acquiring overseas assets from Russia’s Lukoil — triggered a crisis that culminated in the departure of its owner Torbjörn Törnqvist and the subsequent management buyout.

The US, where the company now has more than $4bn of assets, is the main focus and accounts for roughly a third of Gunvor’s trading. “We are focused on how we are going to grow our US footprint. We still very much like [US] gas and crude,” said Pedersen. 

He also signalled interest in acquiring refining assets, arguing that years of capacity closures in western markets had created an opportunity. “With demand growth coming, refining looks very positive,” he said.

Pedersen is seeking to reshape Gunvor into a more data-driven trading organisation, drawing on his experience at hedge fund Millennium. “I come from a much more analytical background,” he said. “I like to measure as many things as we can.”

The buyout left Pedersen and his partners owing several billion dollars to Törnqvist, given his 86 per cent stake in the $6bn company at the time of his exit, to be repaid over the next decade.

Executives insisted the arrangement left the former owner with no influence over the company. “There is zero provision in any agreements which would allow him to step in,” said Gia Mai, Gunvor’s chief operating officer. 

“Obviously, if we had the ability to have paid him out in full from day one, we would have done,” said Jeff Webster, the company’s chief financial officer. “But he set it up in a way that it cuts him out of the business entirely, but also gives us the best chance to repay what is owed in a way the company can prosper at the same time,” he added. 

Pedersen said his priority was to ensure Gunvor performed consistently across market cycles. “We want to make money in good and bad markets,” he said.

Funding to autonomous vehicle startups has seen a massive resurgence in 2026, more than tripling so far this year compared to all of 2025 globally, Crunchbase data shows.

Several multibillion-dollar megadeals drove the spike in first-quarter investment. That signals investors aren’t just paying for research anymore, but betting on companies that are ready to scale up and put their AI technology into actual cars people can buy or hail.

So far in 2026, we’ve seen a shift to a small number of autonomous vehicle companies capturing a disproportionate share of global capital, with a handful of giants, including Waymo, Shield AI and Wayve, getting the lion’s share of funding.

The broad trend: It appears that investors are no longer spreading small bets across dozens of startups. Instead, they are pouring billions into the three or four players they believe will own the market. And while North America remains the largest hub for overall funding volume, the Asia-Pacific region — specifically China — is seeing the fastest growth in deployment. Chinese startups are also raising some of the largest rounds in the space.

The numbers: Autonomous vehicle startups raised a record $21.4 billion across 34 deals through April 15, per Crunchbase data. That’s up a staggering 262.17% compared to the $5.9 billion raised across 99 investments globally in all of 2025. It’s also about 77% higher than the $12.1 billion raised across 127 deals in 2024.

Exactly three-fourths of the $21.4 billion raised in 2026 thus far is attributable to Mountain View, California-based Waymo’s $16 billion Series D raised in February. Alphabet, Dragoneer Investment Group, DST Global and Sequoia Capital co-led the financing, which was raised at a staggering $126 billion valuation.

But it wasn’t the only outsized round.

San Diego-based Shield AI landed a $2 billion Series G round co-led by Advent International and JP Morgan Chase. Its valuation jumped to $12.7 billion.

And London-based Wayve raised a $1.3 billion Series D round co-led by Balderton Capital, Eclipse and SoftBank Vision Fund, achieving an $8.6 billion valuation.

Interestingly in 2025, three of the four largest autonomous vehicle rounds were raised by Chinese companies: an $897.7 million Series C by DeepBlue Auto; a $600 million Series D by Neolix, and $527.8 million by Zhuoyu Technology.

We didn’t see any IPOs in the space in 2025, but some are on the horizon for this year.

Beijing-based Momenta confidentially filed for a Hong Kong IPO in March. Backed by General Motors, Tencent and Mercedes-Benz, it is seeking a valuation above $14 billion.

Autonomous A2Z secured $24.7 million in pre-IPO funding in March and is expected to list later this year as it expands its AI-led logistics projects.

Because Waymo is a subsidiary of Alphabet (Google), it doesn’t need to go public for cash, but industry observers are increasingly discussing a potential spinoff. With a $126 billion valuation, it would instantly become one of the most valuable transportation companies in the world if it hit the public market.

Transportation and biotech were leading themes among this week’s largest U.S. funding recipients. This includes the week’s largest round, a $650 million financing for electric pickup truck maker Slate Auto. Other sizable investments went to spaces including drug development, autonomous public transit and software engineering.

1. Slate Auto, $650M, electric vehicles: Troy, Michigan-based Slate Auto, a developer of lower-cost electric pickup trucks that can be customized as SUVs, raised $650 million in Series C funding led by TWG Global. The Jeff Bezos-backed company said it plans to deliver its first vehicles to customers later this year.

2. Beeline Medicines, $300M, biotech: Beeline Medicines, a Boston-based developer of precision therapies for autoimmune and inflammatory diseases, emerged from stealth with $300 million in Series A funding led by Bain Capital. The company’s initial portfolio includes five programs licensed from Bristol Myers Squibb.

3. Glydways, $170M, autonomous transportation: Glydways, a developer of personal autonomous pods designed to operate on dedicated lanes, closed on $170 million in Series C funding. Suzuki Motor, ACS Group and Khosla Ventures led the financing for the San Francisco-based company, which is launching operational pilots in three cities this year.

4. Factory, $150M, AI software development: Factory, a startup focused on bringing autonomy to software engineering, secured $150 million in a Series C round led by Khosla Ventures. The financing set a $1.5 billion valuation for the 3-year-old, San Francisco-based company.

5. Terremoto Biosciences, $108M, biotech: South San Francisco, California-based Terremoto Biosciences, a developer of small molecule medicines for cancer and rare diseases, raised $108 million in Series C funding from backers including RA Capital Management, Deep Track Capital, Osage University Partners and BeOne Medicines.

6. (tied) Zum, $100M, student transportation: Zum, a provider of a platform for optimizing K-12 student transportation, secured $100 million in new funding from TPG. Founded in 2015, Redwood City, California-based Zum has raised about $500 million in known funding to date, per Crunchbase data.

6. (tied) Neomorph, $100M, biotech: Neomorph, a developer of cancer therapeutics, closed on $100 million in Series B funding to support clinical trials. Deerfield led the financing for the San Diego-based company.

6. (tied) Slash, $100M, fintech: San Francisco-based Slash, a business banking platform, picked up $100 million in a Series C round led by Ribbit Capital, Khosla Ventures and Goodwater Capital. The financing set a $1.4 billion valuation for the company, which said it surpassed $250 million in annualized revenue in 2025.

9. nEye, $80M, semiconductors: nEye, a developer of integrated optical interconnects for data center connectivity, raised $80 million in Series C financing led by Sutter Hill Ventures. Founded in 2020, Silicon Valley-based nEye has raised $152 million in funding to date.

10. Turion Space, $75M, space tech: Irvine, California-based Turion Space, a provider of an orbital intelligence and operations platform, secured over $75 million in a Series B round led by Washington Harbour Partners.

As the table above demonstrates, more than half of the Chinese chip firms are publicly traded companies, ranging from Cambricon Technologies to Moore Threads to MetaX. Others—such as T-Head and Kunlunxin, owned by Chinese tech giants Alibaba and Baidu, respectively—are planning to go public.

None of these firms is trying to beat Nvidia by developing chips technically on a par with those of the U.S. giant for training AI models, according to their latest chip road map. Instead, their aim is to develop chips of comparable quality for the AI inference process, in which models answer questions, generate content and power applications.

Even there, Chinese models lag behind Nvidia’s in individual chip performance. But the Chinese firms are trying to compensate for that by putting more chips into clusters and relying on networking technology to handle millions of inference requests reliably and cheaply. On that measure, the distance between China’s chips and Nvidia’s is a lot shorter than it appears.

All the companies have had to overcome two hurdles. One is a shortage of local chip manufacturing capacity. The second is the need to improve their software so it can run smoothly on the code AI developers created for Nvidia’s CUDA software platform, as most of them still write for CUDA.

The companies have tackled the manufacturing problem in different ways. Cambricon and Hygon Information Technology locked in domestic chipmaking capacity early enough to secure a production pipeline latecomers are now scrambling to match, according to two people familiar with the production plan. Beijing has stepped in to work with chipmakers on coordinating allocation of chipmaking capacity, according to two other people familiar with the situation.

In contrast, Shanghai-based chip designer Iluvatar CoreX makes its chips at Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co., according to two people familiar with their production arrangement. Baidu’s chip unit, Kunlunxin, used to make chips at Samsung.

But both TSMC and Samsung use equipment that relies on U.S. technology, which means they’re subject to U.S. export controls capping the power of chips made for the Chinese market. As a result, Kunlunxin has been in talks with Chinese chipmakers to produce their chips, according to two people with direct knowledge of the talks.

On the software side, companies like Cambricon and Iluvatar have made it a priority for their chips to run code originally written for Nvidia so developers can switch with less rewriting.

The chip designers tied to cloud giants have a deeper structural edge. Alibaba’s T-Head and Baidu’s Kunlunxin design chips aimed to meet their parent companies’ most demanding workloads, tuning hardware, compilers and software together from the start. Since early 2025, both companies have been using their own chips to train some AI models in-house.

Chinese AI chip companies are also trying to better understand what developers actually need in a chip. Huawei’s Ascend 950PR, launched this year, for instance, comes in several versions, each emphasizing different capabilities depending on the workload, showing that the company is listening to customers closely enough to build in options, according to two people familiar with the situation.

The growth of local AI chip development is also rippling through the Chinese chip supply chain, long considered an underdog. For instance, Chinese chipmakers have long lacked access to the most advanced high-bandwidth memory, the specialized memory used in AI chips. U.S. export controls banned sales of advanced HBM to Chinese buyers in 2024.

But Chinese firms are now designing and making their own HBM. Chinese chip designers such as Huawei and Iluvatar are now testing locally produced advanced memory, HBM3, pairing it with their own AI processors, according to three people familiar with the situation.

Locally made AI chips are beginning to have an impact on the market. Huawei tunes its Ascend 950PR specifically for inference workloads, and Chinese AI developer DeepSeek worked directly with the company to ensure the latest DeepSeek models ran on Huawei hardware from launch day.

Most leading Chinese chips now match or outperform the H20, the neutered chip Nvidia engineered specifically for the Chinese market under U.S. export controls. Newly listed chip designers Iluvatar and Biren Technology are working on processors designed to rival the H200, the most powerful chip Washington currently permits Nvidia to sell to Chinese buyers.