Raff Sadun
Analyst · RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open
Thanks Tim. I'll start on slide 9 with our consolidated results. For the second quarter, we generated $358 million of revenue and $130 million of adjusted EBITDA. Revenue grew 103% and adjusted EBITDA grew 88%. As we discussed last quarter, the investments we made in the first quarter in hiring and training paid off in the second quarter as we had a very successful AEP season. We'll discuss the performance of the divisions in more detail on the next few slides, but the revenue growth was driven by our Senior segments and by our investment in final expense policies within our Life segment. Our consolidated margins were down a little consistent with our stated strategy of growing faster and producing more absolute revenue and EBITDA at slightly lower margins. Turning to slide 10 and our Senior division. As you can see, we had a very strong AEP season, generating revenue of $316 million and adjusted EBITDA of $135 million during the second quarter. This represents year-over-year revenue growth of 127% and adjusted EBITDA growth of 98%. It also represents the fourth quarter in a row that we have grown revenue over 100%. Adjusted EBITDA margins were down a little from 49% to 43% consistent with our stated strategy of growing faster and producing more absolute revenue and EBITDA at slightly lower but still highly attractive margins. To expand on that point, for the second quarter last year when we had margins of 49%, we grew revenue 62% year-over-year and added $23 million of adjusted EBITDA. This year with margins at 43%, we grew revenue 127% and added $66 million of adjusted EBITDA, almost three times more EBITDA year-over-year. We believe this was absolutely the right tradeoff and again consistent with what we said we were going to do with the proceeds of the IPO. Moving on to slide 11. For the second quarter, we had approximately 1,300 total average productive agents, up roughly 70% year-over-year. Average agent productivity was up 32% with both core and flex agent productivity improving. This is really remarkable when you take into consideration that all hiring, onboarding, training, licensing and selling was done virtually. Multiple factors contributed to the improvement in agent productivity including, recruiting nationally, which on average allowed us to bring in higher-quality candidates with a bigger pool to select from; SelectQuote University, which allowed us to train our agents more efficiently and more consistently than before; our improvements to our doctor and drug matching and other technology changes that allowed agents to be more productive; and lastly, continued refinement of our operational workflows, both on the front-end and the back-end, which allowed us to increase conversion rates and speed up the overall sales process. This increased agent headcount combined with the increase in average agent productivity, drove significant growth during the quarter. Total submitted policies were up 108% and total approved policies 117%. The largest driver of this growth was MA policies, where we grew our MA submitted policies 128% and approved policies 132%. Moving on to LTVs. For the quarter, LTV of an MA policy was flat year-over-year, which was slightly above our internal expectations. As a reminder, we use a 36-month weighted average of persistency assumptions and the lower persistency we experienced last year now represents around 90% of the weighted average calculation. I think one important thing to highlight is that the percent of our revenue, which is driven by first year commission and production bonus versus renewal revenue, where the cash will come in over time, has gone up significantly. Last year, 34% of our second quarter Senior revenue was from year one cash items. This year 45% of our revenue is from year one cash items. This improved cash flow and reduces the amount of revenue that is at risk from renewals. This was driven by restructured deals with our carrier partners with more emphasis on first year revenue versus renewal revenue and the advertising revenue generated by Inside Response, which is all upfront. It's too early to have concrete data on MA persistency based on the renewals that happened in January. It usually takes several months to validate policy statuses with data that we get from the carriers, in part due to rapid disenrollments. These figures will continue to bake through the end of March. Having said that, we do have an early read based on what we know so far and first-term persistency looked to be roughly in line with what it was last year. I will also remind you of comments we've made previously that while there can always be short-term swings in LTV, we continue to think there are more long-term tailwinds to the drivers that impact LTV than headwinds, including commission rates, carrier mix, operational improvements that can improve persistency and/or lapse rates and other fees for additional services that we can provide to carriers. Lastly, from a cost perspective, with the improvement in agent productivity, we saw our sales and fulfillment costs as a percent of revenue become more efficient with a 16% improvement. As Tim alluded to earlier, our lead-gen marketing costs as a percent of revenue were up. This was expected with our strategy to lean into the growth more heavily with some higher marketing spend, especially during periods where we can drive significant volume. Roughly half of this increase was driven by the fact that our exchange platform grew faster than some of our carrier direct relationships, where carriers provide us leads and then reduce our commissions when we sell a policy on their behalf. So those carrier direct relationships represented a lower mix of our volume this year. Some of the other increase was driven by marketing spend towards the end of AEP, that generated leads that we didn't have enough capacity to handle and therefore monetize through our lead-gen business but at lower margin. We are always testing new ideas and we will take some of the learnings from this year with us as we plan for next year, which also won't have an election during AEP. If we turn to slide 12, our Life division grew revenue 26% to $36 million while adjusted EBITDA was up slightly. Revenue was driven by growth in our final expense revenue. As a reminder, we did flex over a significant amount of our LHA agents that sell final expense into senior to sell during AEP and OEP. And halfway through the quarter, we flexed over additional agents to help with enrollment, given the strength of our AEP. This impacted the sequential growth of the final expense premium, which was down sequentially but still up 229% year-over-year. It also impacted EBITDA and EBITDA margins as we incurred expense to hire and train some of these agents but didn't fully realize the benefit of revenue within our Life business for the quarter as they flexed into the Senior business. As we hire more new LHA agents and some of the flex LHA agents come back to Life at the end of OEP, we expect to significantly grow premium both sequentially and year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA was also impacted by lower profitability on our term life business, where we continue to see headwinds due to COVID and a delay in consumers getting their blood work done and completing the process to get their policies in force. Some of the carriers have also instituted waiting periods and other restrictions around COVID, which is temporarily having a negative impact on the business. We do expect these conversion rates to trend back to normal levels. However, the next several quarters may still be impacted by the lingering effects of COVID. Turning to Auto & Home on Slide 13. Revenue declined 15% to $7 million and adjusted EBITDA increased 42% to $2 million. As discussed in prior quarters, the decision to reallocate agents from our Auto & Home business to our Senior division and final expense efforts has had an impact on the Auto & Home revenue. While we didn't write as much premium and revenue was down, our adjusted EBITDA was actually up again year-over-year. This was primarily driven by the fact that the agents we did have in our Auto & Home business were more tenured agents and therefore more productive, which meant on a relative basis we could generate more EBITDA with fewer agents and with more efficient marketing, as tenured agent close rates are also higher. Just to hammer home this point, average productive agents were down 31% but revenue was only down 15%. Turning to Slide 14. We've updated this slide from our December investor deck that shows how we have been able to grow revenue and adjusted EBITDA faster than our internal expectations since the IPO using significantly less cash. Normally when we grow faster it requires more capital upfront but we've been able to operate more efficiently than our original expectations, driven by our operational efficiencies, agent productivity and growth in our final expense business. For the three quarters, since our IPO, we have generated 29% more revenue and 69% more adjusted EBITDA compared to internal expectations, while using 25% less cash from operations. Turning to Slide 15. For the quarter specifically, we used $94 million in cash from operations as we grew our Senior business 127% during AEP. In addition, we used about $5 million in cash for general CapEx. We ended the quarter with $246 million in cash and cash equivalents, $325 million of term loan debt and zero drawn on our $75 million revolver. We also ended the quarter with $879 million of accounts receivable and short- and long-term commissions receivable balances. Lastly, as you may remember, as part of the Inside Response acquisition, there was an earn-out component that enabled them to earn up to an additional $32.3 million payment if certain metrics were met. The acquisition has exceeded our expectations and we expect to pay the full earn-out. We had the ability to pay this earn-out 65% in cash and 35% in stock. Given where our stock has been trading, we have opted to make 100% of the payment in cash and expect that to happen this quarter. Turning to guidance on Slide 16. Given the performance of the second quarter, which was above our internal expectations, we are raising our guidance for our full fiscal year 2021. We currently expect consolidated revenue to be in the range of $920 million to $940 million. This would imply consolidated revenue growth of between 73% and 77% year-over-year. We expect adjusted EBITDA to be in the range of $230 million to $240 million, which would imply consolidated adjusted EBITDA growth of between 49% and 56% year-over-year. Lastly, we expect net income to be in the range of $138 million to $146 million. The increase in guidance is primarily driven by the outperformance of the business in our second quarter. In addition, there are several investments we are making in our fourth quarter that are embedded in our forecast. Our key investments are threefold. One, we plan to hire several classes of new core agents into our, Senior business in the fourth quarter, as we get ready for next year's AEP. We believe this will position us for an even better AEP next year, and gives us better visibility into flex hiring needs. Two, we are ramping up some investment dollars and enhancing our offering in our value-based care initiatives, and we believe will have long-term benefits to our business customers and carrier partner. And finally, three, we are spending more in technology development resources, specifically to support the value-based care initiatives. As we think about the cadence of the rest of the year, the third quarter should represent in the high 20% of total annual fiscal year revenue, with margins in the mid-20s. And the fourth quarter should represent about 20% of total annual fiscal year revenue, with margins in the mid-teens. And with that, let me now turn the call back to the Operator, for your questions.