Record earnings, loans to the military, the battle for Gulliver. Interview with the head of Oschadbank
Interview
Oschadbank is the second largest state bank of Ukraine after PrivatBank. As of the beginning of September 2025, the assets of Oschad reached UAH 452.2 billion, which is 13% of the total assets of Ukrainian banks. In 2024, Oschad received UAH 18.6 billion in pre-tax profit, twice as much as in 2023.
As forecasted, according to the results of 2025, the indicator will be even higher—UAH 19 billion.
Since 2020, the institution has been headed by Serhiy Naumov, who was previously the chairman of the board of Piraeus Bank and earlier managed other international financial institutions in Ukraine. This year, the term of Naumov's contract with Oschad is coming to an end: on August 4, 2025, the supervisory board announced a competition for the position of the new chairman of the board.
The correspondent of LIGA.net spoke with Sergii Naumov about due to what Oschadbank managed to get a record profit, about loans to the military, about the further fate of the Gulliver shopping center, and about the bank's new strategy developed by McKinsey.
Where did the record income come from during the war
In 2024, Oschadbank made a record pre-tax profit of UAH 18.6 billion. This is twice as much as in 2023. What are the drivers?
The first driver is net interest income, which increased by 29%, or UAH 5.5 billion. We also take into account commission income, which increased by UAH 0.9 billion. Revaluation of financial instruments brought about 4 billion UAH, while in 2023, on the contrary, it was negative —2.8 billion UAH.
We also increased in profit by the disbandment of reserves, which the bank formed for possible losses. We saw that the quality of the loan portfolio is proper, and this gave UAH 2.3 billion according to the results of 2024.
The credit and investment portfolio still increased strongly by about UAH 76 billion, so we increased the volume of business in 2024. These are the main points that allowed us to have a record profit.
What share of the bank's income in 2025 was accounted for by the retail business?
According to the results of eight months of 2025, the retail business is half of the income structure. This is not visible in statistical reports, but in our management reports, its share exceeds 50%.
We develop all business segments in such a way that they are proportional to each other. Retail by its nature is a more commission-based business, while the corporate segment brings fewer commissions.
Small and medium-sized businesses occupy an intermediate position. Therefore, retail forms the largest share in the income structure. In terms of total revenue, the corporate business and the MSME segment hold the next positions
Banks are now cautious about lending to the military and lowering credit limits on cards for them. What is the policy of Oschadbank?
Our bank does not reduce limits. We provide funding to the military. This mostly applies to mortgages and car loans. We consider each request.
In this area, we are also implementing partnership programs with already nine regional military administrations (RMAs). This is our priority direction, within which regional administrations compensate the interest rate for veterans and military personnel participating in the "eOselia" preferential mortgage program.
We actively call on other RMAs to contact us; mainly the initiative comes from the bank.
Digitalization, credits, and artificial intelligence
You headed Oschadbank in 2020, during the pandemic, and in two years a full-scale invasion began. What are the bank's achievements during this time?
The bank made a breakthrough in five years, despite the pandemic and the war. We stopped being afraid to finance and lend to the business.
In the war, we did not become unprofitable; instead, every year we set a new record in profit, digitize, and lend, although according to world methods, we should, on the contrary, reduce risk appetite during the war.
We've done centralization and merged the bank, implemented two data centers, and we're completing another one in the cloud.
We also implemented artificial intelligence —currently in the field of consulting and customer support, where our "non-biological employees" work. And this is just the beginning: we plan to expand the application of AI in the future.
One of the not-easy and important achievements is the transformation of corporate culture. It is now based on performance; we have introduced a system of regular evaluation, 360-analysis, and eNPS (indicator of employee loyalty).
Among our notable achievements is winning the arbitration with Russia and taking ownership of the Gulliver Shopping Center.
What did you never manage to do?
We must be better at speeding up processes and procedures, scaling automation and using artificial intelligence, especially where the risk of human error is high. We continue to work on corporate culture and customer orientation.
To make up for these shortcomings, in 2024 we developed our own strategy for the development, despite the war, when state banks were allowed not to do so. For this purpose, we involved an international McKinsey consultant, and already in 2025, we started its implementation. The first year showed that this path is correct and successful.
What is the strategy?
All our weaknesses and challenges we are working on are concentrated in this strategy. Because we understand: after the end of the war, competition in the market will only intensify. Therefore, we are already preparing the bank for the future, making it more customer-oriented, automated, and digital. Our goal is to be better.
Today we are implementing nine key programs under which there are 120 initiatives. In the first half of 2025, 2% of the annual plan has already been implemented. I think, by the end of this year, the figure will be 100%; even if it is a little less, this is a very good figure.
Two years ago, you admitted that you were dissatisfied with the technological level of Oschadbank. What has changed since then?
Since then, I have been much more satisfied than I was. We have a new mobile application, and I think it is competitive and comfortable. I say this not as a bank chairman, but as a user of other mobile banks. Our mobile application is user-friendly; it has a clear logic and no incomprehensible and redundant functions.
Separately, we are developing the SAMO marketplace. This is a unique and popular idea for banks that works according to the "order-take" model.
We have made many changes for the retail business. In particular, remote customer identification has already been introduced, and already more than 350,000 people have used this opportunity without visiting the branch. Now you can also open an account online.
Our contact center currently processes 75% of requests automatically, without the involvement of an operator, and 72% of all transactions are carried out by clients through our mobile application. Even older customers are increasingly switching to digital services.
Competitive selection for the position of bank head is currently underway. Do you plan to participate in the competition for a new term?
Yes, I plan; my motivation is very simple. The first reason is that I live in Ukraine; here is my family, all my children study here, and I want to continue developing a bank equal to developing the country.
The second reason: I was the initiator of the bank's development strategy, and I want to bring it to completion. It's a matter of honor. I have more than 30 years of experience in banking, of which 20 are in management positions, mainly in international institutions. This allows me to bring the European management experience into the Ukrainian context.
Gulliver Shopping Center and the conflict with ARMA
In 2025, an unprecedented case took place: Oschadbank, as part of a consortium, received ownership of the Gulliver shopping center. The bank followed the path of out-of-court mortgage foreclosure, although there was an opportunity to go through an agreed restructuring plan or financial leasing, which in theory would be beneficial to financial institutions. Why did you choose this path?
The bank always proceeds from the principle of expediency and legality. The history of this loan lasted for years. At first, the construction was led by one developer; later, the project was transferred to Mr.Polishchuk (Viktor Polishchuk is the former owner of the Gulliver and Eldorado shopping centers, and he had connections with Russia. – Ed.). Due to the significant volume of the loan, in 2020, with the participation of international consultants KPMG and Rothschild, whom we involved, we carried out a restructuring. This decision was legally justified and beneficial for the bank.
When the debtor was subject to claims by the Tax Service, we went to meet him and provided an opportunity to meet the obligations of settlement with the budget. However, the agreements were not fulfilled, and the issue of taxes was not removed; on the contrary, the debtor stopped servicing the debt.
As a result, a consortium of banks (together with the state-owned Ukreximbank) came to the conclusion that the borrower actually refuses constructive cooperation. The only rational solution was the start of the debt collection procedure. The bank acted within the framework of the law and had every reason for this.
How do you justify the economic feasibility of collecting an asset whose market value is estimated at $130–137 million, while the total loan debt reached about $460 million?
Well, firstly, we all understand why this difference is: exchange rate fluctuations and the war. Secondly, as I said earlier, the debtor did not actually leave us a choice by terminating the cooperation. His subsequent statements were perceived exclusively as attempts to create legal risks and delay the process.
Thirdly, we have Mr. Polishchuk's personal sureties, one of which was made under English law. And this, I believe, is the greatest achievement of restructuring at that time.
Another achievement is that we were able to properly collect and compose all the collateral during the financial restructuring. So we don't have a problem with what we own and what we do not.
Thanks to this, we were able to take the object to the balance. The calculations are simple: either money now or money sometime in the future with an uncertain perspective. We chose the money now, and it was more profitable for the state bank than to listen to an extremely dubious promise when the debtor had already failed the bank. If the borrower does not make real arrangements, then this only means a delay in time and the absence of payment guarantees. So it was important for us to pick up the facility.
In addition, this problematic asset was almost 100% reserved. Thanks to gradual actions, we were able to receive UAH 4 billion from the disbandment of reserves, which increased our capital, and we can calmly continue to finance the defense industry, energy, and other sectors.
If someone tries to return the opposite now, it will harm the bank and, as a result, the state, which is in dire need of financing during the war.
Has the asset been revalued by auditors?
Yes, we audited the asset; it was a mandatory requirement. The evaluation was carried out by Deloitte. The results are only slightly different from those before. We cannot disclose them but confirm that the difference is minimal.
We know that on the night of Friday to Saturday (before the transfer was announced), the justice authorities carried out a registration action, as a result of which Gulliver was removed from the mention of the sanctioned ultimate beneficial owner (UBO), which gave you the opportunity to complete the agreement. Who initiated the withdrawal of the UBO: the bank or the debtor himself? How transparent was the procedure for registering rights?
The bank did everything according to current legislation. I have a counter question: were the manipulations with the register legal on the penultimate day? And why, for example, did the notary introduce a sanctioned person as the UBO? This should be clarified by lawyers and advocates. We will also find out after a certain time why it was done.
The owner of Gulliver was the Three O company, and it is not sanctioned, so there were no violations or manipulations here. Banks had all the rights to collect collateral, and we exercised these rights.
The bank cannot keep Gulliver to itself on a permanent basis; which scenario of further realization of the asset do you consider the most likely, and in which time frame?
In the short term, we do not consider selling Gulliver. Our task is to do everything that will be economically feasible for the bank. We are in no hurry to sell it to someone now. In any case, the potential sale should be public, with the involvement of powerful Ukrainian and preferably international investors, transparent, and at the highest possible price.
All contracts for water supply, electricity, and other services today are concluded directly with the bank. However, the former owner is obstructing, preventing us from gaining full access to the mall, despite his claims to the contrary. At the same time, we have already signed a number of new contracts with tenants directly with the bank. By law, after the transfer of ownership, all contracts must be renegotiated, and we encourage tenants to do so following the example of those companies that already cooperate with us.
Furthermore, we extended an invitation to a portion of the team of specialists who were previously employed at Gulliver to collaborate with us, and a few of them accepted. A full management team for this facility is now being formed.
I am sure that we will eventually remove all restrictions and completely take over the management of this facility. To do this, we have taken the lead in a group of banks to cut down on red tape and improve governance.
How does the bank plan to resolve the conflict of powers with ARMA, which has already held a competition for a manager, choosing Limex LLC as the winner?
As for ARMA, we have evidence that the selected management company has a connection with Mr. Polishchuk. I think they know about it.
I am convinced that all current disputes will be settled. The courts will make legal decisions, and the arrest will be lifted.
After receiving ownership of Gulliver, the balance of Three O's debt to banks amounts to more than $300 million. Is there already an understanding of how the bank will close the rest of the debt? Are you ready to declare part of the debt as bad?
No one will forgive this debt; we will continue to try to collect everything. We have brought actions in the London Court. We will do everything to collect it; this is a process, and it is ongoing.
Can we say that Gulliver became a lesson for the bank: how does Oschad now approach the issuance of large corporate loans secured by real estate?
The main problem with the loan at that time was that it was provided in foreign currency in the absence of foreign exchange earnings. Now, thank God, banks don't do that anymore.
This does not mean that the financing of real estate is permanently closed, but currently priority industries are those that help to survive, win, and continue to develop.
Interview
Oschadbank Press Center