Thank you, Mark. Now turning to Slide 4. As Mark discussed, our economic model is the cornerstone of our prudent risk management protecting our balance sheet from declines in interest rates and equity markets, and this quarter perfectly demonstrated why managing to an economic framework is so critical. Those who follow us have seen elements of this page before. As this slide shows reversion to mean interest rate assumptions under U.S.GAAP and statutory framework vary across the industry and provide a false sense of security in terms of reserving requirements. Our economic balance sheet is protected from interest rates as we use the forward curve and risk neutral scenarios including negative rates and do not make predictions about future interest rates. We are fully hedged and duration matched ensuring our economic assets match our economic liabilities protecting our balance sheet and future cash flows. Risk GAAP and statutory frameworks both currently rely on reversion to mean assumptions to calculate reserves with some insurers still using long-term rates as high as 5%. This is completely disconnected from the reality of current rates. The truth is we simply do not know where interest rates are headed and we do not believe it is prudent for clients or shareholders to take a position here and expose our balance sheet to unnecessary risk. As you can see on the slide, had do we managed to our liabilities under GAAP or stat we would have been under hedged to our true economic liability by approximately $7 billion and $2 billion respectively. Our U.S. GAAP financial results perfectly highlight this disconnect between the accounting treatment and the actual movement of our underlying assets and liabilities. Since we hedged our economic liabilities, the outright hedge gains we realized this quarter are not in fact real gains but instead reflect an increase in our economic assets to match our economic liabilities. We believe it is important to move away from reversion to mean standards and we are strongly advocating for the reforms that move GAAP accounting and statutory basis closer to economic framework. We are pleased that FASB target improvements largely address if the uneconomic accounting mismatch of assets and liabilities and believe implementation will help to make GAAP accounting more transparent for investors and more relevant for the insurance sector. Moving on to Slide 5. Our balance sheet strength and continued resilience is the result of intentional prudent management actions that has taken place over the past decade. In the midst of last financial crisis we successfully shifted to risk profile of our in force and new business. Notably we were one of the first in the industry to develop our own proprietary volatility managed funds. Through a series of fund actions that increased the passivity and volatility management coverage of our guaranteed assets and eliminated unhedgeable asset classes we reduced basis risk by between 85% and 90%. Had we not taken these actions, losses would have accrued in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Over the past quarter, our volatility management tools not only protected our balance sheet, they also protected client assets from the severe market declines. As volatility spiked our volatility managed funds triggered helping to preserve clients' assets. Similarly our asset transfer program also initiated moving guaranteed assets under management and to fixed income allocation funds. The prudent risk management is not a zero sum game. Challenging times also present opportunities to innovate and emerge stronger as our history demonstrates. Following the last financial crisis, we launched the industry's first floating rate variable annuity retirement cornerstone. That does comprise of 100% passive and 100% volatility managed funds enabling 100% hedgeabilty. In 2010 we also designed the industry's first buffered annuity, structured capital strategies. In introducing SCS we have steadily built diversified distribution partnerships that have proven difficult to replicate. As a result, we continue to have the leading position in the buffered annuity market despite increased competition. As evidenced from the actions outlined above, our prudent risk culture has been in place long before our IPO that has served as the foundation for our economic model. We took additional measures to strengthen our balance sheet prior to the IPO including securing an injection of $2.3 billion from AXA Group and establishing CTE98 as our variable annuity capital standard. It requires time, fortitude and conviction to achieve this level of organizational transformation. However, we recognize that we are stewards of the business and have the responsibility to deliver on our promises to clients and to optimize value for shareholders. Thanks to the prudent management actions taken over the last decade, we have the utmost confidence in our ability to continue delivering on these promises for the long term. On Slide 6, I'll just provide a brief summary of our first quarter operating performance. Additional detail on the segment and total company basis can be found in the appendix and in our press release. Overall, we are pleased with how the business performed in the first quarter with non-GAAP operating earnings of $510 million translated into $1.08 per common share, an increase of 10% versus the first quarter of 2019. Net income was $5.4 billion in the quarter driven primarily by significant hedge gains, which I will review in deeper detail on the following page. We maintained solid momentum in each of our segments even as we faced headwinds through the latter part of the quarter. Operating earnings were up at AV and in our Retirement segment, primarily driven by higher fee type revenues and new business activity across the business were solid. SCS sales improved 11% year-over-year. Group Retirement increased inflows by 20% driven by growth in both, first year and renewal premiums. AB had its strongest retail gross sales quarter every with over $24 billion. And in Protection Solutions we continued to drive gross premium growth in our employee benefit business. All-in-all it was another strong quarter for Equitable and while the current social and economic environment will certainly present challenges going forward, we are navigating the uncertainty on strong footing thanks to the resilience of our balance sheet and business model. Turning now to Slide 7. I would like to review the walk from net income to non-GAAP operating earnings. This slide perfectly illustrates the disconnect between the accounting treatment of insurance assets and liabilities under U.S. GAAP. As I previously mentioned, the hedge gains of $12 billion simply reflects an increase in our economic assets to cover our economic liability and should not be considered excess cash. Included in the first quarter net income results of $5.4 billion were significant noneconomic items related to VA product interest driven by GMxB hedging, realigned interest rate assumptions and nonperformance risk. In light of the decline in interest rates this quarter, we realigned our long-term GAAP interest-rate assumptions to rates from the current spot rate to 2.25% over 10 years following the five-year historical average for the 10-year treasury. This change resulted in unfavorable impact to net income of $1.9 billion more than offset by year-to-date economic interest rate hedge gains of $4.4 billion, resulting in a net impact of approximately $2.4 billion post tax this quarter. And reflecting the interest rate accounting impact today, our GAAP financial results move closer to FASB targeted improvement implementation and importantly more closely aligned with our economic model. Additionally, we saw a significant impact this quarter related to nonperformance risk due to widening credit spreads. This measure which considers our credit risk impacts the calculation of the estimated fair value of liabilities. For additional context, should credit spreads narrow, we would expect the opposite impact. To reiterate, this impact during the quarter helps to illustrate precisely why we believe operating earnings is the best proxy for analyzing our performance. As equities sharply declined and interest rates fell in the first quarter, our adjustment was positive in line with our expectations and previously communicated guidance. Finally, all the adjustments to net income this quarter primarily include impacts related to the realignment of GAAP interest rate assumptions in our Protection Solutions and Group Retirement segments and taxes. I would now like to highlight our capital and liquidity position outlined on Slide 8. As Mark mentioned earlier, the challenging economic environment this quarter has truly allowed us to demonstrate the strength and resiliency of our balance sheet. Last quarter, we announced our new minimum capitalization target of 375% to 400% RBC. This quarter, despite the S&P falling 20% and U.S. Treasury rates reaching historic lows, we closed the quarter with an RBC ratio of 450% to 475% continuing to remain well in excess of our minimum target, including CTE98 for VAs. Our hedging target is the economic liability, which is used to forward curve for interest rates compared to the statutory framework, which relies on a 3.5% reversion to mean assumption. Because we are fully hedged on interest rates, we are over-hedged on a statutory basis. This does not imply that we have more excess capital. Rather, the increase in assets matched to movements in our economic liabilities. As a result, the interest rate hedge gains protected our RBC during this highly volatile quarter. In terms of liquidity, our well diversified sources helped to further fortify our balance sheet. As of the end of the first quarter, cash and liquid assets were approximately $1 billion at the holding company above our $500 million minimum target. At our insurance company, cash and liquid assets are nearly $7 billion as the result of hedging to our economic liabilities. This is not distributable capital, as it is backing our economic liabilities. Between ongoing quarterly distributions from AllianceBernstein and the annual life company dividend, we anticipate mid-year, we are well-positioned to continue generating strong cash flow from our operating entities. Our strong position is further enhanced by the additional liquidity levers we already have in place, including $4.4 billion of credit lines, and $1 billion in contingent capital to figures [ph]. In the first quarter, we returned $274 million to shareholders, including $69 million to quarterly cash dividends, and $205 million of share buybacks. In addition, we intend to increase our quarterly dividends by $0.02 and $0.17 cents per share payable in the second quarter. As a result of our financial strength and cash flow generation, our capital management program remains on target. Furthermore, if equity markets are sustained at current levels through year-end, we expect to continue to deliver on the 50% to 60% target payout ratio. Moving to our investment portfolio on Page 9, I want to continue to illustrate how our risk management framework has placed us in a strong position to withstand a wide range of adverse and severe credit scenarios, while still maintaining a robust capital position. We take a conservative approach to managing our channel account, actively managing risk, and investing in a diversified mix of high quality assets. As of quarter-end, over 70% of our portfolio was invested in Corporates and Treasuries, and 98% of our fixed maturities were investment grade with an average portfolio rating of A2. Our corporate bond portfolio has an average credit rating of A3 and is well diversified across geography and industry, leaving us with limited exposure to challenged sectors such as energy and transportation. Our commercial mortgage loans or characterized by high quality collateral, located in major metro areas, with well-capitalized borrowers, representing approximately 11% of our overall portfolio. We also have limited exposure to alternative at approximately 2% of our investment portfolio, which are highly diversified across strategies, geographies, and vintages. Finally, we have limited investment in structured securities, including approximately 1.5% of CLO exposure, and 0% in CMBS. And while we can't know the full depth, magnitude or duration of impact, the current crisis represents, we can say that looking at the portfolio through the lens of historical [indiscernible], we feel confident that we are well prepared. To illustrate this point, we show here two stress scenarios run on our investment portfolio reflecting default rates and ratings migration observed during the 2008 financial crisis. Leveraging two different methodologies, our analysis estimates the default losses in a 2008 type scenario, assuming no offsetting management actions would result in up to $150 million in losses in the first year, and up to $430 million over three years. By most industry scenarios assume 2008 stress levels, we thought it prudent to evaluate a deep stress scenario that assumes impacts that are two times more severe than 2008. Under this deep stressed scenario, potential losses would be $300 million in the first year and up to $860 million over three years. While these figures are not insignificant, it's important to contextualize them with respect to the company's balance sheet, cash flow and earnings power. Evaluating the impact of both default and migration on required capital, we estimate the cumulative three-year 77 point impact to our RBC ratio under the stress scenario, and $144.3 year impact under the deep stress scenario. Even assuming no equity market recovery from April levels, we would still expect the business to generate cash flows translating to 60 RBC points in year two and three, totaling an additional 120 RBC points before the dividend to the hold co. Given our current RBC ratio of approximately 450% to 475%, this implies a pro forma RBC of approximately 390% to 520% under this total range of stress scenarios, maintaining our dividend capability and capitalization in excess of the company's 375% to 400% minimum RBC target. Also, as a reminder, we were an early adopter of the NAIC VA reform, which utilizes a more conservative RBC calculation referenced here versus those who have not adopted. When we recognize that no two crisis or shocks are the same, and that you're certainly not immune to losses, we are defensively positioned, strongly capitalized and well prepared to both protect our balance sheet and capitalize on unique investment opportunities within our risk framework. I will now hand the call over to Nick to shed more light on how the business is operating in the current landscape.