Good morning. My name is Kelly and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the RenaissanceRe First Quarter 2018 Financial Results Conference Call. All lines have been placed on mute to prevent any background noise. After the speaker’s remarks, there will be a question-and-answer session. [Operator Instructions] Thank you. And I will now turn the call over to Mr. Peter Hill. Mr. Hill you may begin your conference.

Thanks Kelly. Good morning and thank you all for joining our first quarter 2018 financial results conference call. Yesterday, after the market closed, we issued our quarterly release. If you didn’t get a copy, please call me at (212)-521-4800 and we’ll make sure to provide you with one. There will be an audio replay of the call available from about 1:00 p.m. Eastern Time today through midnight on June 2nd. The replay can be accessed by dialing (855)-859-2056 or +1-(404)-537-3406. The passcode you will need for both numbers is 18690171. Today’s call is available through the Investor Information section of www.renre.com and will be archived on RenaissanceRe’s website through midnight on June 2nd. Before we begin, I am obliged to caution that today’s discussion may contain forward-looking statements and actual results may differ materially from those discussed. Additional information regarding the factors shaping these outcomes can be found in RenaissanceRe’s SEC filings to which we direct you. With us to discuss today’s results are Kevin O'Donnell, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Bob Qutub, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. I would now like to turn the call over to Kevin. Kevin?

Thanks Peter. Good morning and thank you for joining today’s call. I’ll open the call with an overview of our performance for the quarter, Bob will then go over the financial results and finally I’ll come back on to speak more about the segments and take your questions. Last night we released our first quarter earnings, I’m pleased to report that we had a strong quarter. We executed well into an expanding market and we’re able to grow our book materially. What we accomplished was not easy but rather was the culmination of years of preparation, creating new platforms, developing gross to net partnerships, sharpening our tools and relentlessly focusing on the three superiors. This preparation facilitated access to desirable risk across our Property and Casualty and Specialty businesses. Our team understood this strategy and pursued it aggressively. For the first quarter, we reported growth in book value per share of 0.6% and growth intangible book value per share plus accumulated evidence of 0.8%. We also reported an annualized return on average common equity to 5.7% and an annualized operating return on top and equity up 13.5%. The solid results we reported for the quarter were driven by a low level of cat activity during the quarter, higher net earned premium following the successful January 1 renewal where we targeted key announced and executed well and prior year favorable development. We had strong renewals at both January 1st and April 1st and are heading into the June and July renewals with a clear strategy. I will discuss the renewals in greater depth after Bob updates you on the financials. I’m confident however that we’ve constructed and improved portfolio that can generate shareholder value over the long-term. Consistent with our approach following the 2017 catastrophe events, we did not repurchase any…

Thanks, Kevin, and good morning everyone. As Kevin noted, we are pleased with our performance this quarter and the portfolio risk we dealt at the January and April renewals and remained confident in our strategy given current market based dynamics. We believe our investment portfolio is well positioned given the widening interest rate environment in a short duration. Our balance sheet both owned and managed, are well capitalized, allowing us to take advantage of underwriting and other business opportunities. And finally, we continue to demonstrate our ability to leverage our well managed expense based. At this time, I’d like to take you through an overview of our financial performance for the quarter. I’ll then discuss our segment results, investment portfolio and capital activities. For the quarter ended March 31, 2018, we reported net income of $57 million or $1.42 per common -- per diluted common share and operating income of $135 million or $3.40 per diluted common share. Our annualized ROE for the quarter was 5.7% and our annualized operating ROE was 13.5%. During the quarter, our book value per share increased 0.6% and our tangible book value per share including accumulated dividends increased by 0.8%. Underwriting income for the quarter was $130 million and we reported a combined ratio of 71%. For additional details on our quarterly results, I would refer you to our earnings release and financial supplement, which we issued last night and can be found on our website. Let me now shift to our segment results beginning with the Property segment followed by Casualty segment. During the first quarter of 2018, our Property segment gross premiums written were up $186 million compared to the first quarter of 2017, a meaningful portion of our catastrophe line of business renewed in the first quarter and we saw good…

Thanks Bob. I’ll define my comments between Property segment and the Casualty segment. Starting with Property, overall we grew gross property written in our property segment 36% over the comparable quarter last year. Property cat grew 42% with the substantial portion of this quarter in our Upsilon joint venture. As we discussed, we raised capital in Upsilon late last year in order to take advantage of opportunities at January 1st, where customers chose to grow with us. The remainder of the growth came from a mix of better rate and new business. The growth at January 1st was possible due to our strategy and flexible approach to capital. When we see a good opportunity, we’re able to execute quickly. Our diverse capital sources including the ILS capital deployed through Fibonacci, Upsilon and Medici provided great assessments and maximizing our performance and the ability to leverage into the market. Gross written premiums in other property also grew by 10% over the comparable quarter primarily from our European platform. This growth was also the result of a combination of rate increases and new business. As previously noted, we experienced solid rate increases at January 1st albeit at the lower end of our expectations. As I discussed on the call last quarter, loss affected retro was up the most averaging between 10% and 25% with non-loss effective programs flat to up 10%. On loss affected U.S. cat business, rates were up between 10% and 20% and rates on other U.S. cat programs were flat to up 5%, while rates on other property were up 5% to 10%. Rates in international property market were flat to up 5%. Japan was a major focus at April 1st. The Japanese both continues to an important component of the international portfolio. Although demand increased this year, there…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Kai Pan from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

First, my question is on the June 1 renewals. Your guided single-digit rate increases. My understanding is that there’ll be more loss impacted account in Florida at June 1 renewals. So which implied the weighted average price increase should be better than the January 1, but it seems like you see differently?

I think in one looking at how we were thinking about constructing our portfolio for 2018, we have the expectation that the greatest rate change would be at 1/1, which is one of the reasons we leverage them too the opportunity at the point in time. Right now, we’re working on the Florida renewal, so there is still more price discovery that will take place. But at the end of the day, we've constructed at the portfolio based on the way we think the market will shape out. We think there is a lot of supply looking for Florida risk right now, which is the reason we have a muted view of rate change in Florida compared to what we saw on 1/1.

And then back to your first quarter premium growth in probably cat. So, if I think simplistically and the rate increase in single digit on Jan 1, and last two years rate have been declining probably mid to high single-digit then effectively your rate only back to where they were two years ago 2016. At that time, you actually act to reporting back front probably cat underwriting because you don’t feel this which was attractive. What is different now given the pricing maybe just going back to that level?

So, I think it is common to think about what level pricing return to from a gross perspective, but the way we look at building this portfolio is on the net basis, and one of the larger components of growth we had at 1:1 was in the retro market both within our portfolio and using the Upsilon vehicle where rate changes were greatest. So, I think it’s thinking about what macro comments people made about what the market is and kind of what year that equates back to is certainly one way to look at it. But we look at it is really how to construct the portfolio on a net basis knowing that different lines of business and different layers within programs little differently.

You don’t disclose your PMLs, so given sort of premium increases. If 2017 were to repeat, will you have more or less like net losses?

So, I think that’s a better conversation to have as we get closer to wind season. When we have really gone through, what is likely to occur to our book with the renewals for the Florida and also as we complete the next construction of our portfolio. So rather than think about what 2017-2018, we look like 2017. So I would say, it’s too early to tell. Because we have a meaningful Florida renewal coming up and we’re still working on structuring the way our new portfolios will be positioned.

And your next question comes from the line of Elyse Greenspan from Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

My first question, I also wanted to get a little bit more color and how you’re thinking about the midyear renewals. I guess a couple of questions here. On your last quarter call, you guys had mentioned that you had some multiyear cover. Is that came up for renewal midyear that could potentially lead to stronger rate? Is that still the case or I guess just based on what you see the market you just think the rates won’t be there? And then my second question is I mean we’re still a little bit of away from the midyear renewals. Given the amount of capital that come back since last year as well as the fact that 1/1 fell short of expectations. Would you be surprised, if rates were actually down at the midyear renewals?

So, couple of questions here. Let me start with the multiyear cover and then I’m kind of move through them. So the multiyear covers are kind of spread, often there three-year deals and they are staggered each year. With the rate level changes, I’ve highlighted in my comments for the June and July renewals. I would say ’17 is kind of look a lot like ’18 and ’18 is kind of look a lot like ’17 from that perspective just as to how much is renewing and we’ll have rate change and what renewals, but it’s not going to having multiyear deals or not. It’s not going to be a meaningful move for our profitability. With regard to price, I think, there might be elements or there might be layers within Florida that have a risk adjusted reduction, it’s not my main thesis is to how the our market will ultimately renew. But I do think the amount of capacity seeking to be deployed in Florida will outstrip demand, which will definitely mute the level of price increase that’s achievable.

And then in terms of capital you guys -- conserved capital following the losses to take advantage of a stronger 1/1. As we think about the midyear renewals potentially being weaker than January 1st. You guys are sitting on a strong capital position now. How do you think about M&A? At one point, does that more into the equation you know its rates to continue to fall short and midyear and then depending upon the loss level maybe even go lower at next January?

Sure. I think the one thing to be clear is rates are not below our expectations. Rates in the lower end of what we expected. So, they within the range of expectations that we had, but I think your comments are probably more that they were below what the market expected. And so, I think we’re in a unique position to have great data over many years and our ability to build performance portfolios continues to become more precise each year. With regard to access capital, I think we were pleased at as our first objective is to pull the capital into a market where we’re getting good returns. We were able to do that so far this year, as we finish with the Florida renewals and the structuring of our net portfolios, we will make combination as to whether we want more capital or risk unless going into this wind season. With regard to how that forms M&A, I think from our perspective we feel like we’re in a great spot and if there are opportunities for us to deploy capital organically, we'll absolutely do that. And if there is inorganic opportunities to deploy capital that further our strategy in an financial viable, we'll absolutely take a look at those as well.

And your next question comes from the line of Amit Kumar from Buckingham Research Group. Your line is open.

Few questions, the first question goes back to the comments you made on the mortgage reinsurance business. And I wasn't clear what you were trying to suggest. Were you trying to suggest that based on your position, gaining pricing decline to the market still do not impact you to that extend? Maybe just expand on that a bit more?

Sure. So, we like the mortgage portfolio that we've written, I mean, earned premium in our mortgage book, much of it was originated in 2013 to 2017, which obviously had a good profile of risk. The pressure on pricing that we’re seeing now it was something that we expected and we think it’s normal within any insurance or financial market, but there could be that sort of cyclical move between access rate and not. We think the mortgage business is really no different than that, and although rates are down for the first quarter that we’ve observed in 2018, we still think, there is good adequacy and the rates that we’re seeing. But more importantly than rate what we’re spending a lot of time looking at is other risk metric. FICO score LTV, DDI, large and making sure that the layering of these factors is being reflected in the price that we’re getting and start making sure that we’re structuring caps against those metrics.

The other question I had was going back to the previous discussion on capital. Obviously, you’ve made an investment in Catalina and there is Langhorne. Is that how we should view further I guess investments? Or how you would view the market as I guess more opportunistic versus during the old schools that of consolidation?

I don’t see Catalina or Langhorne is anything different than what we’ve historically done in our ventures group. With Catalina, we have right to reinsurance programs and there is also opportunities for us to partner with them where there is live book in conjunction with an acquisition of a runoff book. So, that sort of partnership is something that we done for many years, it might be a little bit different approach to it with them being a runoff company. Langhorne, again we partner with lots of people over the years and partnering with the leader and Life Re, against our ability to find capital into build unique structures. I think again that is something that we’ve done for many years. So, I wouldn’t see there is any shift in the way we’re deploying capital. It's just those two opportunities happened to come together at the same time. So it may have looked more like a shift, but it’s a normal process for us.

And just the final question. Going back to the discussion, I guess Kai or someone else question on pricing and the growth. Is it fair to say that your retro vehicle such as Upsilon et cetera, do they position you just more favorably to take benefit of pockets or marketplace versus other competitors? And hence we should view this profile as different from any other traditional reinsurance. Or is that I guess because everyone is trying to figure out the growth numbers here versus the market pricing discussion?

Yes, I think we are unique in several ways. One is our ability to use the data that we have to forecast where we think the market is going to be. And as I mentioned, we’re constantly working on buying tuning and adding more precision to the pro forma portfolios that we’re building and then writing into those. I think the excess to third-party capital and the ability for us to deploy that were where we think this good opportunity for that capital to need the return objectives is unique. And then our ability to figure out what capital goes to, what risk goes to, what capital. And then how the structure the net portfolios is something that the tools and experience we have is typical to replicate. So I feel like, we’re in a unique position to build industry leading cat portfolios and I think what you said at this 1/1 is, are leveraging into that.

And your next question comes from the line of Brian Meredith of UBS. Your line is open.

Couple of quick questions here. First one, I know you've talked about growing kind of your expense base a little bit here investing in the business. And I noticed that G&A expenses factoring corporate about 9% in the quarter year-over-year. How should we think about that here going forward?

Brian, a couple of things that I’ve pointed out in my comments is, we continue to try and leverage the growth of the platform to keeping focus on operating expenses. We have seen some reductions that’s in the percentage, but that’s generally through a lot of the leverage we have out there. We did have some overwrite, but going forward we expect to continue to invest in the platform. But it's a balance between the profitability and maintaining that leverage as how we see it going forward.

So the down 9%, there was anything unusual on that number?

Down 9%, we did have an increase in overwrite in the operational side, which did bring it down some. The core operating costs were down slightly just as we continue to focus on it. And we did do a revaluation or reevaluation of what goes in the corporate versus the segments. And you can see that the corporate site went up just a little bit. But you’ll continue to see some growth over the course of the year like I said balancing that growth between managing the platforms and leveraging that growth.

And then next question, just looking at kind of your book yield on your investment portfolio. I would have thought, I mean, I saw in the short-term investments kind of talked nicely. Should we see that kind of move up on your general fixed income portfolio given what’s happened with deals in the marketplace?

As I said in the comments, that’s right Brian. The short term did go up, obviously, we see more movement in the shorter end of the curve that's been out there. We expect the shorter term rates to continue to go up with what fed has been saying. With the duration of 2.4 years, we expect to be able to move with that overtime. So, we feel we’re in a good position, it’s been reflected. You’ve seen the yield go up slightly 2.9%, which is the new money yield. So, as the fed continues to rate on a shorter end given the duration of our portfolio, we should see some advances that.

And your next question comes from the line of Meyer Shields from KBW. Your line is open.

Kevin, I want to back to your comments -- sorry. Hi, about how you’re anticipating sort of the pressure that we’re seeing from access capacity. Longer-term, if feels like five years, how much worse can aggregate return than Property catastrophe get compared to where they are now? Kevin O’Donnell: So, I think you’re talking about my comments with regard to Florida. So, I’ll put in our perspective, Florida is about 5% of our premium now. We recognized that when you look at where third party capital is most likely looking to deploy and is going to be we believe in the land of risk and obviously in Florida market. So, our ability to construct a portfolio where Atlanta Hurricane is still on a peak risk, but to have diversified the way we’re building our portfolio in Florida, I think it does exercise us a bit from the strong appetite third party capital as from domestic water market.

Okay. And second question again taking a few year outlook, what should we expect in terms of alternative capital preferring not catastrophe and non catastrophe line? Kevin O’Donnell: I think fewer to have this conversion with us 10 years ago, we would have thought that third party capital would have looked more of horizontally across different lines of business and entered found ways to come into Casualty and other lines. And I think on the pure sense we’ve seen third party capital drill down and try to get closer to our insurance risk. There are other vehicles associated with the hedge front type approach where there is Casualty business that one can argue is move to the third party capital model. But the long-term nature of this security concerns all of that stuff is at the substantial optical for that capital to come into other lines. I do think there is, opportunities for us to come in, but it will take longer for those structures to be developed.

Your next question comes from the line of Kai Pan from Morgan Stanley. Your line is open.

Thank you for the follow up. I have a question on the Casualty and Specialty business. The combined ratio, the underlying combined ratio improved 10 points year-over-year, but it's still above 100%. So, I just wonder what’s your desired level for probability for that business as that business now matures and how long will it take to get there?

As I mentioned, we believe that that there are greenfields within the casualty market. We're seeing rates moving up particularly in some of the more hazardous classes. I think it’s a question is to whether as to stay ahead at some of the underlying trends. I think of that book over 10 years and where we are now, the book does need some rate enhancement for what I think of as a sustainable return for over 10 year period. I think the way we constructed the book, it's poised to leverage into a better market where we can restructure some ceded, and we have -- over the years, we’ve built great access to the risk there. So, I wouldn’t say that what we’re seeing today is what I would want to see for a 10-year average. But to be in that business, you're going to have to manage the book through times where there is some degree of rate pressure knowing that, it’s going to move back to greater rate adequacy overtime.

And there are no further questions at this time. I'll turn the call back over to Mr. O'Donnell for closing remarks.

Thank you all for participating in today’s call. And we look forward to our call in a couple months time. Thanks again.

And this concludes today’s conference call. You may now disconnect.