
Gross carrying amount per IFRS 9 stage and rating class (*)1
in EUR million		12-month ECL (Stage 1)				Lifetime ECL not credit impaired (Stage 2)				Lifetime ECL credit impaired (Stage 3)				Total
Rating class		Gross carrying amount		Provisions		Gross carrying amount		Provisions		Gross carrying amount		Provisions		Gross carrying amount		Provisions
		30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025	30 June 2026	31 December 2025
Investment grade	1 (AAA)	97,210	79,938	2	2	580	126							97,790	80,064	2	2
	2-4 (AA)	147,104	146,878	12	11	1,310	1,437	1	1					148,414	148,315	13	13
	5-7 (A)	332,702	299,699	47	39	8,561	5,394	8	6					341,263	305,093	54	45
	8-10 (BBB)	345,826	334,845	85	77	22,779	19,168	53	43					368,606	354,012	138	119
Non-investment grade	11-13 (BB)	158,122	156,373	170	165	18,793	17,217	99	89					176,915	173,589	268	254
	14-16 (B)	28,251	26,187	141	147	23,844	22,668	404	357					52,095	48,855	545	504
	17 (CCC)	503	412	5	5	4,427	4,682	232	224					4,929	5,094	237	228
Performing Restructuring	18 (CC)					3,802	4,349	206	262					3,802	4,349	206	262
Performing Restructuring	19 (C)					1,918	2,447	183	198					1,918	2,447	183	198
Non-performing loans	20-22 (D)									14,207	13,590	4,568	4,476	14,207	13,590	4,568	4,476
Total		1,109,717	1,044,332	462	446	86,015	77,487	1,184	1,179	14,207	13,590	4,568	4,476	1,209,939	1,135,409	6,214	6,101

1Stage 3 lifetime credit impaired provision includes €25 million (31 December 2025: €29 million) on purchased or originated credit impaired.

Changes in gross carrying amounts and loan loss provisions (*)

The table below provides a reconciliation by stage of the gross carrying

amount and allowances for loans and advances to banks and customers,

including loan commitments and financial guarantees. The transfers of

financial instruments represent the impact of stage transfers upon the

gross carrying/nominal amount and associated allowance for ECL. This

includes the net-remeasurement of ECL arising from stage transfers, for

example, moving from a 12-month (Stage 1) to a lifetime (Stage 2) ECL

measurement basis.

The net-remeasurement line represents the changes in provisions for

facilities that remain in the same stage.

Please note the following comments with respect to the movements

observed in the table below:

•Stage 3 gross carrying amount increased by €0.6 billion to €14.2 billion

as at 30 June 2026 (31 December 2025: €13.6 billion), mainly as a result

of €2.5 billion net inflow into NPL (credit impaired) in 2026, which is

offset by €1.1 billion derecognitions and repayments and €0.7 billion

write-offs and disposals during the period.

Stage 3 provisions increased by €92.0 million to €4.6 billion as of 30 June

2026.

§Stage 2 gross carrying amounts increased by €8.5 billion to €86.0 billion

as at 30 June 2026 (31 December 2025: €77.5 billion), largely driven by

€19.5 billion net transfers from Stage 1 into Stage 2, including the impact

of changes in risk drivers (including updated macro-economic forecasts),

model redevelopments, and new Stage 2 overlays. This was offset by a

decrease of exposure by €9.5 billion due to derecognised financial assets

(including sales and repayments) and €1.5 billion net exposure moving

to Stage 3. Stage 2 provisions increased by €5.3 million to €1.2 billion as

of 30 June 2026.


Changes in gross carrying amounts and loan loss provisions (*)1, 2
in EUR million	12-month ECL (Stage 1)		Lifetime ECL not credit impaired (Stage 2)		Lifetime ECL credit impaired (Stage 3)		Total		12-month ECL (Stage 1)		Lifetime ECL not credit impaired (Stage 2)		Lifetime ECL credit impaired (Stage 3)		Total
	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions	Gross carrying amount	Provisions
	30 June 2026								31 December 2025
Opening balance as at 1 January	1,044,332	446	77,487	1,179	13,590	4,476	1,135,409	6,101	954,943	409	79,888	1,130	13,742	4,509	1,048,574	6,049
Transfer into 12-month ECL (Stage 1)	14,038	18	-13,947	-141	-91	-12		-135	21,773	21	-21,555	-199	-218	-35		-212
Transfer into lifetime ECL not credit impaired (Stage 2)	-33,493	-39	34,234	353	-741	-61		253	-37,208	-50	38,174	533	-966	-115		368
Transfer into lifetime ECL credit impaired (Stage 3)	-1,072	-6	-2,247	-175	3,319	754		572	-2,534	-14	-2,172	-138	4,705	1,259		1,108
Net remeasurement of loan loss provisions		13		62		137		212		7		-53		349		302
New financial assets originated or purchased	150,628	110				1	150,628	111	263,371	189			22	2	263,393	191
Financial assets that have been derecognised	-75,360	-43	-6,342	-79	-862	-260	-82,564	-382	-119,098	-78	-12,295	-147	-1,422	-240	-132,814	-465
Net drawdowns and repayments	11,160		-3,143		-274		7,743		-57,493		-5,739		-853		-64,085
Changes in models/risk parameters		-14		-3		10		-7		-33		71		-35		3
Increase in loan loss provisions		39		16		569		624		43		68		1,185		1,296
Write-offs					-414	-408	-414	-408					-937	-937	-937	-937
Disposals	-510		-28	-2	-320	-145	-858	-147	-666	-3	-84	-3	-564	-286	-1,314	-291
Recoveries of amounts previously written off						29		29						58		58
Foreign exchange and other movements	-6	-23	1	-9		47	-5	16	21,242	-4	1,269	-16	80	-53	22,591	-73
Closing balance	1,109,717	462	86,015	1,184	14,207	4,568	1,209,939	6,214	1,044,332	446	77,487	1,179	13,590	4,476	1,135,409	6,101

1 Stage 3 lifetime credit impaired provision includes €25 million (31 December 2025:€29 million) on purchased or originated credit impaired.

2 The addition to the loan provision (in the consolidated statement of profit or loss) amounts to €625 million (31 December 2025: €1,304 million) of which €628 million (31 December 2025: €1,301 million) related to IFRS 9 eligible financial assets, €-4 million (31 December 2025: €-5 million) related to non-credit

replacement guarantees and €1 million (31 December 2025: €8 million) to modification gains and losses on restructured financial assets.

Macroeconomic scenarios and sensitivity analysis of key sources of

estimation uncertainty (*)

Methodology (*)

We continue to follow the methodology in generating our probability-

weighted ECL, with consideration of alternative scenarios and

management adjustments supplementing this ECL where, in

management's opinion, the consensus forecast does not fully capture the

extent of recent credit or economic events.

As a baseline for IFRS 9, ING has adopted a market-neutral view combining

consensus forecasts for economic variables (GDP, unemployment) with

market forwards (for interest rates, exchange rates and oil prices). Input

from a leading third-party service provider is used to complement the

consensus with consistent projections for variables for which there are no

consensus estimates available (most notably house prices and – for some

countries – unemployment), to generate alternative scenarios, to convert

annual consensus information to a quarterly frequency and to ensure

general consistency of the scenarios. As the baseline scenario is consistent

with the consensus view, it can be considered as free from any bias.

Two alternative scenarios are taken into account: an upside and a

downside scenario. The alternative scenarios have statistical

characteristics as they are based on the forecast deviations of the leading

third-party service provider. The applicable percentiles of the distribution of

the forecast deviations imply a 20 percent probability for each alternative

scenario. Consequently, the baseline scenario has a 60 percent probability

weighting. Please note that, given their technical nature, the downside and

upside scenarios are not based on an explicit specific narrative.

Baseline macroeconomic scenarios applied (*)

The macroeconomic scenarios applied in the calculation of loan loss

provisions are based on the consensus forecasts.

The general picture that the consensus conveys is that global economic

growth is expected to continue being shaped by geopolitics, such as the

knock-on effects of the energy shock resulting from the war in the Middle

East. Higher oil prices are expected to feed into inflation in the coming

quarters, which will keep inflation above target, before it starts to come

down in 2027 and reach a near target in 2028 for most major countries.

However, this shock is not expected to push inflation as high as it was in

2022. For the housing market, continued price growth is expected for

almost all main markets.

The June 2026 consensus expects global output (as measured by the

weighted average GDP growth rate of ING’s 25 main markets) to remain

steady at 2.4 percent in 2026 and 2027 before increasing marginally to

2.5 percent in 2028.

The US has had a weak start to the year due to poor weather and the

fallout from the war with Iran. Higher prices at the pump weigh on

consumer spending. Although AI adoption rates are low, they are rising –

suggesting that it could emerge as a productivity driver. Job numbers,

however, are still muted, but elevated inflation due to energy prices make

the task of the Fed trickier and markets expect a hold in interest rates. The

consensus expects the US economy to grow at 2.1 percent in 2026, 2.0

percent in 2027 and 2.1 percent again in 2028.

The eurozone economy is also expected to soften given the current

geopolitical backdrop and softer incoming macroeconomic data. Higher

energy prices are weighing on consumption through a real income shock,

aside from weaker sentiment and precautionary savings. Announced

government measures might not be enough to mitigate the shock. The

external environment continues to be plagued by weakening export

competitiveness and increasing competition from China. Expectations of a

pickup in growth are likely tied to stronger public investment – think of

defence spending or German infrastructure investment – but that will only

gradually start to positively impact economic growth. Given the elevated

inflation outlook, markets expect rates to stay higher. Consensus expects

the eurozone to grow by only 0.8 percent in 2026, before recovering

slightly to 1.2 percent and 1.3 percent in 2027 and 2028 respectively.

Elsewhere in Europe, the outlook is mixed. In Poland, solid growth in

domestic demand is expected amidst a pickup in EU-funded public

investment. External demand will also support manufacturing. The

economy is expected to grow by 3.4 percent in 2026, before slowing to 3.2

percent in 2027 and 3.0 percent in 2028. In Türkiye, while domestic

demand - despite a clear loss of momentum - has continued to serve as

the primary driver of economic activity, the contribution of net exports

that shows weakening in the external position, has shifted further into

negative territory, exerting a more pronounced drag on growth. Recent

leading indicators point to a continued softening in growth dynamics. In

this environment, inflation, reflecting the impact of geopolitics, remains

elevated, although it is expected to gradually moderate. The consensus

expectation for Türkiye is to see growth pick up, but be below potential,

from 3.0 percent in 2026 to 3.7 percent and 3.6 percent in 2027 and 2028

respectively

When compared to the December 2025 consensus forecast, the June 2026

forecast has not seen major changes in expectations for global growth in

2026 and 2027. Global GDP is expected to increase by 2.4 percent in 2026

and 2027 (same as the 2.4 percent assumed before). On one hand, the

situation in the Middle East has influenced growth and inflation

expectations through energy prices, but on the other, we also see less

trade uncertainty than we did last year, and some Asian countries have

seen some positive adjustment to the outlook based on stronger incoming

data and resilient exports.

Analysis on sensitivity (*)

The table below presents the analysis on the sensitivity of key forward-

looking macroeconomic inputs used in the ECL collective-assessment

modelling process and the probability weights applied to each of the three

scenarios. The countries included in the analysis are the most significant

geographic regions in ING, and for Wholesale Banking the US is the most

significant in terms of both gross contribution to reportable ECL and

sensitivity of ECL to forward-looking macroeconomics. Accordingly, ING

considers these portfolios to present the most significant risk of resulting in

a material adjustment to the carrying amount of financial assets within

the next financial year.

The purpose of the sensitivity analysis is to enable the reader to

understand the extent of the impact from the upside and downside

scenario on model-based reportable ECL.

In the table below, the real GDP is presented in percentage year-on-year

change, the unemployment in percentage of total labour force and the

house price index (HPI) in percentage year-on-year change.


Sensitivity analysis as at 30 June 2026 (*)
		2026	2027	2028	Unweighted ECL (€ mln)	Probability -weighting	Reportable ECL (€ mln)1
Netherlands Upside scenario	Real GDP	1.5	2.9	2.5	297	20%	410
	Unemployment	3.8	3.6	3.5
	HPI	3.8	8.4	7.2
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	1.0	1.2	1.5	381	60%
	Unemployment	4.2	4.3	4.4
	HPI	2.7	2.6	2.7
Downside scenario	Real GDP	0.2	-1.8	-0.3	608	20%
	Unemployment	4.9	6.3	7.2
	HPI	1.2	-5.2	-4.8
Germany Upside scenario	Real GDP	1.3	3.2	2.2	541	20%	589
	Unemployment	3.3	2.8	2.3
	HPI	2.8	9.1	10.0
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	0.7	1.2	1.2	582	60%
	Unemployment	3.8	3.6	3.4
	HPI	1.6	4.9	6.4
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-0.2	-2.2	-0.5	660	20%
	Unemployment	4.2	5.3	5.5
	HPI	0.3	-0.5	1.8
Belgium Upside scenario	Real GDP	1.3	2.6	2.1	551	20%	604
	Unemployment	5.6	5.1	4.9
	HPI	4.8	5.0	4.9
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	0.7	1.1	1.6	593	60%
	Unemployment	6.3	6.3	6.0
	HPI	4.2	3.8	4.2
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-0.2	-1.6	1.2	692	20%
	Unemployment	6.9	7.7	8.2
	HPI	3.5	1.7	2.7
United States Upside scenario	Real GDP	2.5	3.2	2.9	67	20%	98
	Unemployment	3.9	2.9	2.6
	HPI	3.3	7.9	11.2
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	2.1	2.0	2.1	89	60%
	Unemployment	4.6	4.4	4.2
	HPI	2.3	2.6	3.5
Downside scenario	Real GDP	1.2	-1.0	0.7	159	20%
	Unemployment	6.2	7.1	7.5
	HPI	0.4	-7.6	-6.1
1Excluding management adjustments.


Sensitivity analysis as at 31 December 2025 (*)
		2026	2027	2028	Unweighted ECL (€ mln)	Probability -weighting	Reportable ECL (€ mln)1
Netherlands Upside scenario	Real GDP	2.6	2.9	2.3	288	20%	389
	Unemployment	3.5	3.2	3.2
	HPI	8.2	8.5	7.0
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	1.1	1.4	1.5	364	60%
	Unemployment	4.0	3.9	4.1
	HPI	4.4	3.0	2.9
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-1.2	-0.9	0.2	566	20%
	Unemployment	5.5	6.5	7.4
	HPI	-0.8	-5.1	-5.1
Germany Upside scenario	Real GDP	2.8	3.0	1.8	584	20%	633
	Unemployment	3.0	2.4	2.2
	HPI	8.2	9.8	9.4
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	1.1	1.5	1.3	623	60%
	Unemployment	3.5	3.2	3.1
	HPI	5.0	6.2	6.3
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-1.7	-1.1	0.4	713	20%
	Unemployment	4.7	5.3	5.6
	HPI	0.9	0.4	2.7
Belgium Upside scenario	Real GDP	2.7	2.3	1.9	544	20%	596
	Unemployment	5.1	4.6	4.5
	HPI	5.2	4.9	5.4
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	1.1	1.4	1.6	585	60%
	Unemployment	5.9	5.6	5.5
	HPI	3.7	4.2	4.4
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-1.5	0.1	1.4	682	20%
	Unemployment	7.0	7.7	7.9
	HPI	1.8	2.6	2.6
United States Upside scenario	Real GDP	3.2	2.9	2.7	64	20%	105
	Unemployment	3.2	2.5	2.6
	HPI	4.8	9.4	10.9
Baseline scenario	Real GDP	2.0	2.0	2.0	92	60%
	Unemployment	4.3	4.1	4.1
	HPI	1.4	2.7	3.6
Downside scenario	Real GDP	-0.4	-0.1	0.8	184	20%
	Unemployment	6.7	7.2	7.5
	HPI	-5.1	-7.9	-5.5
1 Excluding management adjustments.

On a total ING level, the unweighted ECL for all collectively provisioned

clients in the upside scenario was €2,914 million, in the baseline scenario

€3,213 million and in the downside scenario €3,975 million compared to

€3,306 million reportable collective provisions as at 30 June 20261.

Management adjustments applied this reporting period (*)

In times of volatility and uncertainty, where portfolio quality and the

economic environment can change rapidly, models alone may not be able

to accurately predict losses. In these cases, management adjustments can

be applied to appropriately reflect ECL. Management adjustments can also

be applied where the impact of the updated macroeconomic scenarios is

over- or under-estimated by the IFRS9 models, or to account for model

redevelopment, recalibration, and periodic assessment procedures that

have not yet been incorporated into the IFRS9 models.

ING has an internal governance framework and controls in place to assess

the appropriateness of all management adjustments.


Management adjustments to ECL models (*)
in EUR million	30 June 2026	31 December 20251
Economic sector / portfolio based adjustments	102	27
Mortgage portfolio adjustments	70	121
Climate transition risk	41	47
Other Post Model Adjustments	-27	-12
Total management adjustments	185	183

1 ING changed the presentation of Management Adjustment types as of 2026. The comparative

figure for 2025 have been updated accordingly. The reclassifications do not affect the total amount of

Management Adjustments.

As of 30 June 2026, the economic sector / portfolio-based adjustments

increased to €102 million (31 December 2025: €27 million), primarily

driven by the introduction of a novel-risk overlay of €74 million to address

uncertainties arising from the Middle East conflict and related sector-

specific risks not fully captured by modelled provisions. This adjustment

affects portfolios in energy intensive sectors in Wholesale Banking (€54

million) and Business Banking (€20 million). In addition, overlays are

recognised within the Mortgage portfolio in Australia (€28 million), to cover

for emerging risks associated with sustained interest rate increases and

cost-of-living pressures.

The Mortgage portfolio adjustment decreased to €70 million as of 30 June

2026 (31 December 2025: €121 million), reflecting a comprehensive

reassessment of the management adjustment in Stage 2 for the risk

segmentation model that captures affordability, repayment and

refinancing risk on performing mortgage customers with a bullet loan in

the Netherlands.

As of 30 June 2026, the adjustment of €41 million (31 December 2025: €47

million) accounts for the impact of climate transition risk in both

Wholesale Banking (€21 million) and Business Banking (€20 million).

Climate transition risk is expected to lead to a structural change in credit

risk, which means specific business activities will become structurally

riskier due to environmental policies, technological progress or changes in

market sentiment and preferences. The current IFRS 9 models do not

directly capture this novel risk. The management adjustment to ECL

models for business clients was made to specifically cover for the medium-

to long-term transition risk on high greenhouse gas-emitting sectors and is

reported in Stage 2. The sectors within the scope of the overlay account for

approximately 13% of performing exposure across Wholesale Banking and

Business Banking, while the overlay results in a 24% increase in the

performing ECL of those sectors.

Other post model adjustments mainly relate to the impact of model

redevelopment or recalibration and periodic model assessment

procedures that have not been incorporated in the ECL models yet. The

impact on total ECL can be positive or negative. These adjustments will be

removed once updates to the specific models have been implemented.

The decrease in the balance compared to the previous reporting date is

due to released adjustments because of model updates that have been

implemented and the recognition of new negative adjustments related to

model updates.

Criteria for identifying a significant increase in credit risk (SICR) (*)

All assets and off-balance-sheet items that are in scope of IFRS 9

impairment and which are subject to collective ECL assessment are

allocated a 12-month ECL if deemed to belong in Stage 1, or a lifetime ECL

if deemed to belong in Stages 2 or 3. An asset belongs in Stage 2 if it is

considered to have experienced a significant increase in credit risk (SICR)

since initial origination or purchase.

The main determinant of SICR is a quantitative test, whereby the lifetime

probability of default (PD) of an asset at each reporting date is compared

against its lifetime PD determined at the date of initial recognition. If either

a threshold for absolute change in lifetime PD or a threshold for relative

change in lifetime PD is reached, the asset is considered to have

experienced a SICR (for more details on absolute and relative thresholds,

see the following sections). Furthermore, any facility which shows an

increase of 200 percent between the PD at the date of initial recognition

and the lifetime PD at the reporting date (i.e. threefold increase in PD)

must be classified as Stage 2. This is considered a backstop within the

quantitative assessment of SICR.

Average threshold ratio

In the table below the average increase in PD at origination needed to be

classified in Stage 2 is reported, taking into account the PD at origination of

the facilities included in each combination of asset class and rating quality.

In terms of rating quality, assets are divided into 'investment grade' and

'non-investment grade' facilities. Rating 18 and 19 are not included in the

table, since facilities are not originated in these ratings and they constitute

a staging trigger of their own (i.e. if a facility is ever to reach rating 18 or

19 at reporting date, it is classified in Stage 2). In the table, values are

weighted by IFRS 9 exposure and shown for both year-end 2025 and June

2026.

To represent the thresholds as a ratio (i.e. how much should the PD at

origination increase in relative terms to trigger Stage 2 classification), the

absolute threshold is recalculated as a relative threshold for disclosure

purposes. Since breaching only relative or absolute threshold triggers