Robert Qutub
Analyst · Wells Fargo
Thanks, Kevin, and good morning, everyone. This quarter we continued to demonstrate the power of our platform reporting operating income of a $152 million and an annualized operating return on average, common equity of 10.8%. We had underwriting income of $200 million generating profits across both segments and a very attractive quarter. Looking forward to the end of 2022, we expect improvements in each of our three drivers of profit, which should increasingly benefit our financial results as the year progresses, making them more resilient to natural catastrophe volatility. First, we expect our net investment income to benefit from rising interest rates and increased investment leverage. Our retained investment leverage, defined as the ratio of our retained fixed maturity and short-term investments portfolio to common equity is about 2.3 times. This means that 100 basis point increase in our retained yield will generate about 230 basis points of incremental operating return on equity over time. As long as rates continue to rise, we anticipate that investment earnings will be a greater contributor to operating ROE. Second, the Casualty and Specialty business continues to improve and we believe that it can produce a mid-90s combined ratio on a growing premium base. Finally, we expect the income to improve over the course of the year and anticipate we should be earning in the range of $45 million per quarter by year-end, absent any large losses. This improvement reflects capital -- and normalization of performance fees in DaVinci and the launch of our new vehicle, Fontana. With these tailwinds, you can understand why I'm so confident about the strategic decisions that we have made and the earnings power of our business. Today, I'll cover these points in more detail in addition to our capital management activities and expenses. I will also provide an update on our engagement with S&P and their proposed model changes. Starting with capital management, we remain in a strong capital position with excess capital in the upper end of our targeted range. As I've discussed in the past, we target an excess capital buffer that supports our ability to execute our strategy, allowing us to take advantage of underwriting and investment opportunities. In supporting of this, during the quarter, we repurchased 577,000 shares for $93 million at an average share price of a $162. With a long history of being good stewards of capital and we'll remain consistent in our approach to capital management, our first priority is to deploy capital into the business and second, to return the excess to shareholders. We anticipate having the ability to do both in the second quarter. I'll now shift to our three drivers of profit starting with underwriting income where this quarter we grew gross premiums written by 11% and net written premiums by 19%. This growth was driven by the Casualty segment as property reduced on both a gross and a net basis. Our combined ratio of 87% included 7% points from the weather-related large losses and 2% points from the Russia - Ukraine war. For our property segment specifically, we reported a combined ratio of 70%, which included 17% points from weather-related large losses. Gross premiums written declined by $273 million or 17%, while net premiums written declined by $118 million or 12%. As Kevin mentioned last quarter, we reduced Upsilon, our aggregate retro vehicle significantly at January 1st. Decrease in the size of Upsilon drove almost 2/3 of the decline in overall property gross premiums written. with the remainder of related to lower reinstatement premiums and a reduction in other property. This reduction to Upsilon and lower reinstatement premiums mostly impacted property CAT with a cumulative decrease of $255 million in gross premiums rate [Indiscernible] these two items, property -- property CAT gross written premiums increased by about $10 million, as a reminder, we only retain about 15% of Upsilon's premiums to the reduction in Upsilon do not have a significant impact on net premiums rate, property catastrophe net premiums written were down $58 million, but this included $69 million decline in net reinstatement premiums and a decrease of $21 billion for our portion of Upsilon. Adjusting for these items, net premiums written were up. Both gross and net premiums written for other property were down this quarter. As Kevin discussed two years ago, we have been re-underwriting the attritional part of the other property book. The decline in the quarter came from the non-renewal of quarter share deals that were below our return hurdles. Last quarter, most of our growth in other property came from CAT exposed [Indiscernible]. We find this business attractive and are continuing to see double-digit rate increases on our existing book. The other property current asset year loss ratio of 51% included losses of $15 million or four percentage points from the weather-related margin. The Attritional portion of this book continues to improve due to our underwriting actions. Attritional losses have been running below 50% for the last five quarters, which is consistent with our expectations for this business. While the property did have three points of adverse development, it was primarily driven by late reported losses on the severe convective storms that occurred in December 2021. Finally, the overall property acquisition expense ratio increased by two percentage points to 20.5%, primarily related to a decrease in reinstatement premiums, excluding an impact of reinstatement premiums with property acquisition expense ratio was flat to the comparable quarter. And moving on to our casualty results, where we had another great quarter. Both gross and net premiums written were up over 50% of the $564 million in growth in gross premiums written. About 40% came from new deals and 34% came from growth in existing deals from expanded share or better-than-expected premiums. As I discussed last quarter, going forward, we believe the casualty book should produce a mid-90s combined ratio absent significant loss events. While the combined ratio for casualty was 98% this quarter, this included 3.1 percentage points or $27 million related to the war. We undertook a robust process to assess the potential direct and indirect impact of the war in our business. Kevin will discuss more about this from an underwriting perspective in his comments. On the investment side, we have no direct exposure to Russia or Ukraine with only minimal exposure to Eastern Europe. And moving on to our second driver of profit, fee income. As Kevin mentioned, we launched the new casualty and specialty joint venture, Fontana in April. Fontana assumes a whole account quota share of our global casualty and specialty business and is a long-term strategic vehicle for us, providing another flexible farm of capital to enhance our gross to net strategy while extending the suite of offerings available to our third-party capital partners. We launched Fontana with $475 million of capital committed, including $150 million from RenaissanceRe with the opportunity to raise additional capital and increase in scale over time. Fontana will be reported in our Q2 results and will be fully consolidated. It has both a management fee based on net premiums earned and a performance fee based on the underwriting performance of our casualty and specialty business, both of which will be recognized through non-controlling interests. Now moving onto our fee income for the quarter, which was $28 million, and performance fees continue to be negatively impacted by CAT events in 2021. Absent large loss events. We expect that it will take another quarter or two to recover the losses in DaVinci. And if that occurs, anticipate performance fees will normalize by the fourth quarter. Our most stable management fees were slightly lower than the comparative quarter, driven by a reduction in Upsilon construction reinsurance products, partially offset by an increase in the size of DaVinci Overall this quarter, we shared $12 million of losses with partners in our joint ventures as reflected in our redeemable non-controlling interest. This result was primarily driven by $92 million of market-to-market and foreign exchange losses, which was mostly offset by strong operating income in our joint venture. Turning now to our third driver of profit investment income. This quarter, financial markets experienced historic increases in U.S. interest rates, which resulted in $673 million in mark-to-market losses in our investment portfolio. $585 million of which were retained and impacted our net income. These losses stem from our fixed maturity portfolio and drove the difference between our net and operating income, as well as the decline in our tangible book value per common share. While these increasing interest rates had a short-term negative impact on our results. As I mentioned in the beginning of my comments, we believe that we will benefit meaningfully. From increased yields and net investment income due to our relatively low duration portfolio. In March, we added some investment-grade corporate credit and public equity exposure to our portfolio and reduced duration slightly. We remain very comfortable with the composition of our investment portfolio and believe that it provides a liquidity that we need to support our underwriting business. Turning briefly now to our expenses where our direct expense ratio, which is the sum of our operational and corporate expenses divided by net premiums earned was 5.4%, which is slightly better than the comparable quarter. On an absolute basis, operational expenses were up in the quarter, but the operational expense ratio stayed largely flat at 4.6%. Then turning to an update on the S&P proposed model changes, our teams have been working closely evaluating the proposed criteria since it was first announced back in December. We have been engaging with our peers, industry trade groups, and S&P directly to understand the new model changes and also to provide constructive feedback as part of the comment process. Without a detailed model, it's difficult to quantify the impact of the proposed changes as certain aspects of the current proposal could benefit us and others could have a negative effect. Regardless of the final model, I'm comfortable with our position because we have a very strong balance sheet with low leverage. We also do not consider debt as underwriting capital and have many flexible forms of capital to managing our own balance sheet. Additionally, model changes in the past have actually created opportunities to sell more reinsurance CAT cover in particular. We continue to monitor this as well. So, in conclusion, I want to close with we are in a strong capital position with excess capital at the upper end of our targeted range, we generated profits in both our underwriting segments and a CAT exposed quarter. And looking forward, all three drivers of profit are poised to benefit from improving conditions. We expect net investment income to increased due to rising interest rates, our casualty business should generally produce a combined ratio of mid 90s on average, and our fee business continues to expand with Fontana and growth in DaVinci. In short, we believe our financial results should be increasingly attractive and resilient to natural catastrophe volatility. With that, I'll turn the call back over to Kevin.
Kevin O’Donnell: Thanks, Bob. As usual, I'll divide my comments between our Property and Casualty segments. And starting with Property, after January one, the first quarter of the year tends to be quiet for our property portfolio, marked by the for one renewal, which were orderly, as well as preparation for mid-year renewals. In the U.S., our other property business continues to do well, underlining rate momentum persists as insurance continue to withdraw capacity from the property E&S market. We have multiple competitive advantages in this space, including long term relationships and advanced pricing system and rated paper. At the January renewal, we continue to -- our focus on the insurance component of the other property portfolio. If you recall, two years ago, I spoke about our strategic shift to increasingly focusing this book on Property CAT risk from insurance E&S markets. This quarter, that ongoing shift resulted in a reduction of gross premiums written as we non-renewed less profitable Attritional business. In property tax, we continue to see double-digit rate increases in advance of the midyear renewals. With respect to Forida, even with these rate increases, we are unlikely to increase offered limits at the June 1st renewal. Forida has a social inflation problem that can't be solved by rate because it is ultimately impossible to know how much to charge to cover fraud. It now also has a capacity problem due to reduced third-party capital appetite, limited retro availability, and severe financial distress at many domestic Forida insurers. We know this market well, and could be substantially more interested in taking additional risks if Florida's long-term structural problems were addressed. That said, over the last several years, we have steadily reduced our exposure to the Florida domestic homeowners’ market and it now represents about 2.5% of our gross written premium. Consequently, the ultimate outcome of the Forida renewal is if diminishing consequence to us relative to several years ago. Moving now to a quick summary of the quarter's events. In Europe, Windstorm Eunice brought major hurricane force wind gusts. Initial industry loss estimates are in the $2.2 billion to $3.3 billion range, likely making it one of the Top 5 costliest European windstorms. In Australia, series of slow-moving low-pressure systems reduced long intense rainfall and significant flooding in both Brisbane and Sydney. Initial industry loss estimates are around $2.5 billion to $3.3 billion, which is the largest flood loss on record in Australia. The quarter also saw events in Japan and the U.S. While neither of these events materially impacted our financial results, they contributed to the overall growing perception of natural catastrophe risk that continues to drive reinsurance pricing. Moving now to Casualty and Specialty, overall, this segment continues to demonstrate healthy underlying profitability. We expect this profitability to continue to grow in part due to ongoing rate increases driven by concerns over inflation. Our Casualty and Specialty strategy and where we take risk is constantly adapting to anticipated future conditions. Our underwriting tools give us the ability to determine where the best opportunities lie and grow individual lines or whole segments accordingly. Over the past few years, aided by the TMR acquisition, we grew general casualty and professional lines significantly as rate outpaced trend. As of 2021 progressed, our focus increasingly shifted towards other specialty as market conditions began to improve considerably in these lines. This year, we expect specialty will continue to experience an increased rate in part due to the Russia - Ukraine war. We also believe that we will find many opportunities to grow in financial lines. With respect to the Russia - Ukraine war, as Bob discussed, we booked about $27 million in IBR -- IBNR for the quarter as the result of a robust process to assess the potential impact on our underwriting results. Our initial conclusion is that we have relatively minimal exposure to the war. To begin with, we do not expect material exposure in our property segment in part due to widespread applicability of war exclusions. Additionally, exposure in traditional Casualty business also is likely not material. The most likely sources of exposure would be in our specialty and credit portfolios. Of course, this is an ongoing event and our reserve is subject to change. We will continue to work with our customers and brokers to monitor the impact. Thanks, and with that, I'll open it up for questions.