Good day, and welcome to the Cincinnati Financial Corporation Fourth Quarter and Full-Year 2022 Earnings Conference Call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Please note that this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Dennis McDaniel, Investor Relations Officer. Please go ahead.

Hello. This is Dennis McDaniel at Cincinnati Financial. Thank you for joining us for our fourth quarter and full year 2022 earnings conference call. Late yesterday, we issued a news release on our results, along with our supplemental financial package, including our year-end investment portfolio. To find copies of any of these documents, please visit our investor website, cinfin.com/investors. The shortest route to the information is the quarterly results link in the navigation menu on the far left. On this call, you'll first hear from Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Steve Johnston; and then from Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mike Sewell. After their prepared remarks, investors participating on the call may ask questions. At that time, some responses may be made by others in the room with us, including President, Steve Spray, Chief Investment Officer, Steve Solaria, Chief Claims Officer, Mark Schambow, and Senior Vice President of Corporate Finance, Theresa Hoffer. First, please note that some of the matters to be discussed today are forward-looking. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties. With respect to these risks and uncertainties, we direct your attention to our news release and to our various filings with the SEC. Also, a reconciliation of non-GAAP measures was provided with the news release. Statutory accounting data is prepared in accordance with statutory accounting rules and therefore is not reconciled to GAAP. Now I'll turn over the call to Steve.

Good morning, and thank you for joining us today to hear more about our results. We see positive momentum in several areas and are bullish about our future prospects despite 2022 financial results that were somewhat below our expectations. Challenges during the year included elevated inflation and higher losses from natural catastrophe events for us and the property casualty industry, in addition to the market volatility affecting the valuation of investment portfolios. Our experience in managing adversity, coupled with the company's financial strength, allows us to maintain a long-term view and supports our confidence as we execute our plans. Net income for the fourth quarter of 2022 was just over $1 billion, that's 31% or $457 million less than last year's outstanding fourth quarter, largely due to $307 million less benefit on an after-tax basis in the fair value of securities held in our equity portfolio. Non-GAAP operating income of $202 million for the fourth quarter was down $118 million from a year ago, including catastrophe losses that were $66 million higher on an after-tax basis. Our 94.9% fourth quarter property casualty combined ratio was 10.7 percentage points higher than the 84.2% for the fourth quarter of last year, which was amongst the best combined ratios we've ever recorded. We think longer-term comparisons are also important. On a current accident year basis, excluding catastrophe losses, our 90.2% combined ratio compares favorably with each of the five years prior to 2020 and was 1.5 percentage points better than the average for that period with each accident year measured as of the respective year-end. On a calendar year basis, our 2022 combined ratio experienced a larger negative impact from catastrophe losses than in 2021, as they increased 4.2 percentage points for the fourth quarter and 1.2 points for the year. Inflation also pressured our combined ratio throughout 2022, contributing to less favorable results for both the current accident year and for reserve development on prior accident years as we have increased reserves for estimated ultimate losses. We've responded with actions to improve underwriting selection and pricing, including premium rate increases and increased expectations by underwriters as they factor inflationary trends into areas such as risk selection criteria, pricing of policies, and adjusting premium factors for changes in exposure. We believe we can successfully balance prudent underwriting and business growth to improve results next year with a 2023 GAAP combined ratio in the low to mid-90% range. We also believe our 2023 property casualty premium growth rate can be 8% or more. We recognize that weather and significant changes in industry market conditions that influence insurance policy pricing trends or some of the variables that will affect the property casualty results we ultimately report. In recent quarters, we've noted that commercial umbrella loss experience has been elevated. Although still elevated in the fourth quarter, it was to a lesser degree than earlier in 2022. While recent profitability for our commercial umbrella business is not as strong as we previously estimated after strengthening reserves during 2020. The average combined ratio for the years 2018 through 2022 is still good, below 85% on a calendar year basis and below 90% on an accident year basis with development through year-end 2022. Overall premium growth was very good and continues to incorporate pricing segmentation. Our underwriters work to retain and write more profitable accounts while also addressing ones that we determine have inadequate pricing. They do an excellent job serving Cincinnati Insurance appointed agencies that are outstanding at producing business for us. Consolidated property casualty net written premiums rose 10% for the fourth quarter and 13% for the full year 2022, that includes a 13% increase in fourth quarter renewal written premiums with a significant portion from higher levels of insured exposures as we factor in elevated inflation. In addition to exposure increases, our Commercial Lines Insurance segment continued to experience estimated average renewal price increases in the mid-single digit percentage range, higher than the third quarter. Our Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance segment continued in the high-single digit range. Personal lines average renewal price increases were at the high end of the low-single digits with both auto and homeowner higher than in the third quarter. As we previously disclosed, we expect premium rates for our personal auto line of business will continue to rise. Based on our rate filings that have averaged low double-digit rate increases for policies effective beginning January 1, 2023, we expect the full year 2023 personal auto written premium effect will be an average premium rate increase of approximately 10%. Policy retention rates improved from year-end 2021 with our Commercial Lines segment moving higher in the upper 80% range. In our Personal Lines segment, rising to the low to mid-90% range. Moving on to highlight premium growth and profitability by Insurance segment. The Commercial Lines segment grew both fourth quarter and full year 2022 net written premiums 9%. Its combined ratio for both the quarter and full year 2022 was approximately 99%. That's above where we aim for and reflects elevated inflation effects and catastrophe losses that were higher than a year ago. For our personal lines segment, net written premium grew 16% for the quarter and 15% for the full year 2022, as we continued our planned expansion of high net worth business produced by our agencies. Its full year combined ratio was approximately 99% and reflected elevated inflation effects and is likewise above our near-term profit target. We have confidence that our proven long-term strategy and near-term actions we have taken will blend to improve results for both commercial and personal lines. Our Excess and Surplus Line segment finished the year with a 90.4% combined ratio, a good result, combined with 2022 net written premium growing 18%. Cincinnati Re and Cincinnati Global each had another year of healthy growth. Cincinnati Re grew full year 2022 net written premiums by 27% with a combined ratio of 97.4%. Cincinnati Global had a 2022 combined ratio of 88.9% with net written premiums growing 23%. Our life insurance subsidiary continued its good performance with full year 2022 net income of $66 million, up 50% from a year ago and term life insurance earned premiums grew by 5%. On January 1 of this year, we again renewed each of our primary property casualty treaties that transfer part of our risk to reinsurers. Our strong capital supports retaining additional risk and managing the cost of rising reinsurance ceded premiums. For our per risk treaties, terms, and conditions for 2023 are fairly similar to 2022, other than premium rate increases that averaged approximately 13%. The primary objective of our property casualty treaty catastrophe treaty is to protect our balance sheet. The treaty's main change this year is retaining a greater share of losses for layers of coverage than what was effective for 2022, while adding $92 million of coverage in a new layer between $900 million and $1.1 billion. In 2023, we'll retain all of the first $200 million of losses and the share of the next $900 million for a catastrophe event compared with 2022 when we retained the first $100 million and the share of the next $800 million. Should we experience a 2023 catastrophe event totaling $1.1 billion in losses, we'll retain $542 million compared with $499 million in 2022 for an event of that magnitude. We expect 2023 ceded premiums for these treaties in total to be approximately $130 million, approximately $16 million or 14% higher than the actual $114 million of ceded premiums for these treaties in 2022. Our investment department continued to perform very well, and Mike will provide some details. Investments is another area where we like to keep an eye on longer-term trends. For example, for the five years ended in 2022, our equity portfolio compound annual total shareholder return was 11.1%, 170 basis points better than the S&P 500 Index. I'll conclude with the value creation ratio, our primary measure of long-term financial performance. Net income before investment gains or losses contributed favorably to VCR at 2.1% for the fourth quarter and 5.2% for the full year 2022. The contribution from valuation of our investment portfolio was mixed, 10.5% favorable for the quarter, but unfavorable by 19.4% for the year due to challenges for both the stock and bond markets. A positive VCR of 12.8% for the quarter improved our 2022 full year VCR to negative 14.6%. Although that's below our expectations for a typical year, the 11.2% annual average over the past five years is within our annual average target range of 10% to 13%. Now our Chief Financial Officer, Mike Sewell, will add comments about several other important points for evaluating our financial performance.

Thank you, Steve, and thanks to all of you for joining us today. Investment income continued to grow at an outstanding pace, up 12% for the fourth quarter and 9% for full year 2022 compared with the same periods of last year. Dividend income rose 7% for the quarter. Net equity securities purchased during 2022 totaled $36 million. Bond interest income was up 11% in the fourth quarter. The pretax average yield of 4.16% for the fixed maturity portfolio was 17 basis points higher than a year ago. The average pretax yield for the total of purchased taxable and tax-exempt bonds continues to rise to 5.01% during full year 2022. We continue to emphasize investing in fixed maturity securities with net purchases during the year totaling $788 million. Valuation changes for our investment portfolio during the fourth quarter of 2022 were favorable in aggregate for both our stock and bond holdings. The overall net gain for the quarter was nearly $1.3 billion before tax effects, including an additional $230 million of unrealized gains in our bond portfolio. At the end of 2022, total investment portfolio net appreciated value was approximately $4.7 billion. The equity portfolio was in a net gain position of $5.5 billion, while the fixed maturity portfolio was in a net loss position of $847 million. Cash flow, in addition to rising bond yields, contributed to the 7% increase in interest income we reported for the year. Cash flow from operating activities for full year 2022 generated almost $2.1 billion, a record high amount, up 4% from a year ago. For the fourth quarter of this year, it rose 36%. Turning to expense management. Our objective is to appropriately balance expense control with continuing to make strategic investments in our business. The full year 2022 property casualty underwriting expense ratio was 0.2 percentage points lower than last year reflecting lower accruals for agency profit-sharing commissions. Regarding loss reserves, our approach remains consistent and target net amounts in the upper half of the actuarially estimated range of net loss and loss expense reserves. We have now had $34 million of net favorable development on prior accident years. As we do each quarter, we consider new information such as paid losses and case reserves and then updated estimated ultimate losses and loss expenses by accident year and line of business. During 2022, our net increase in the property casualty loss and loss expense reserves was $1.029 billion, a 15% increase from the net reserve balance at year end 2021. The IBNR portion of that reserve addition was $765 million, a further indication of the quality of our balance sheet. For full year 2022, we experienced $159 million of property casualty net favorable reserve development on prior accident years that benefited the combined ratio by 2.3 percentage points. Of that $159 million in net favorable development, $25 million of the net unfavorable amount from our commercial casualty lines of business, including an unfavorable $41 million for commercial umbrella and a net favorable $16 million for other coverage included in commercial casualty. On an all-lines basis by accident year, net reserve development for the full year 2022 included favorable $96 million for 2021, favorable $124 million for 2020, unfavorable $72 million for 2019, and a favorable $11 million in aggregate for accident years prior to 2019. Our approach to capital management also remains consistent, and we repurchased shares that include maintenance intended to offset shares issued through equity compensation plans. We still believe we have plenty of flexibility and also believe that our financial strength is in great shape. During the fourth quarter of 2022, we repurchased just over 101,000 shares at an average price per share of $109.55. As in the past, I'll conclude with a summary of the fourth quarter contributions to book value per share. They represent the main drivers of our value creation ratio. Property casualty underwriting increased book value by $0.47. Life insurance operations increased book value by $0.10. Investment income, other than life insurance and net of non-insurance items added $0.83. Net investment gains and losses for the fixed income portfolio increased book value per share by $1.14. Net investment gains and losses for the equity portfolio increased book value by $5.15. And we declared $0.69 per share in dividends to shareholders. The net effect was a book value increase of $7 per share during the fourth quarter to $67.01 per share. Now I'll turn the call back over to Steve.

Thanks, Mike. We faced a number of challenges in 2022 and still recorded an underwriting profit for our insurance business. That result bolsters our belief that we'll see future benefits from our efforts to continually refine pricing precision and segmentation and our efforts to expand our geographic footprint and produce product offerings. When you consider our financial strength, our experienced service-oriented associates, and our Premier Agency force, I'm confident we'll be able to continue delivering shareholder value far into the future. Our Board of Directors shares that confidence and expressed it by increasing our quarterly cash dividend 9% last month, setting the stage for a 63rd year of rising dividend payments. So that's not just paying the dividend for 63 straight years. That sets the stage for increasing the dividend for the 63rd consecutive year. We believe that's a record that can only be matched by seven other publicly traded U.S. companies. As a reminder, with Mike and me today are Steve Spray, Steve Soloria, Mark Schambow, and Theresa Hoffer. Cole, please open the call for questions.

Thank you. And we will now begin the question-and-answer session. Our first question today will come from Paul Newsome with Piper Sandler. Please go ahead. Hello, Paul. Perhaps your line is muted.

Good morning.

Good morning, Paul. No worries.

Congratulations on the year and the quarter.

Thank you.

I was hoping you could give us a little bit more color on investment income, which given the higher interest rates, your view on how much the portfolio yield could improve over the course of the year? And any thoughts on changing or different the allocation that you've had the last many years here in terms of buys versus equities and what you're doing within those fixed incomes as well?

Paul, this is Steve Soloria here. Just in terms of moving forward, the allocation will remain virtually the same. We've taken advantage of the increase in rates over the course of the year to our benefit. We'll continue to do so, but we'll try and maintain an even keel and stay disciplined in our allocation moving forward. In terms of last year, as mentioned previously, the aggregates or kind of blended rate for the year was about 5%. Comparing that year-over-year, a year ago, we were at about 3.5%. So we picked up about 150 basis points on purchases over the year. Looking forward, as the Fed begins to hopefully slow down the rate increases, we'll probably see a bit of a pullback in the purchase yield moving forward, but we think we've booked some pretty nice yields over the course of the year, which will benefit us for the next eight to 10 years.

Maybe as a second question, can you give us some further thoughts on claims inflation for the commercial line side of the house? Obviously, social inflation is top of mind for everyone in the business. And do you think the uptick in what you're doing with pricing is sufficient to overcome what you perceive as the prospective inflation improvements?

Yeah. Thanks, Paul. This is Steve. And we do see the inflation. As we just mentioned, have had our reserves developed favorably now for 34 years. And as a part of that, we try to be very prospective as we set our reserves and our pricing and be very prudent about it. And we do think that we are in a position for our rates to keep pace and exceed inflation. And I think that comes from a combination of the pure net rates that our net rate increases I went over in my fixed part of the call here and also exposure increases that we're getting both in personal and commercial lines.

So do you think the underlying claims inflation is essentially less than the combination of the exposure benefit plus the pure rate, or do you think it's actually even lower than the pure rate at this point?

I think the combination of the two, they're both kind of intertwined in terms of the overall premium that we're able to charge. And the exposure base does contemplate to a certain degree, the inflation and building costs and so forth.

Thank you. Always appreciate the help, guys.

Thank you, Paul.

And our next question will come from Mike Zaremski with BMO. Please go ahead.

Thank you for the update on the reinsurance renewals. I need to take some time to analyze the information further. Reflecting on the historical guidance you provided regarding the catastrophe load, back in 2018, you mentioned it was around 6 to 7 points. In recent years, it seems to be closer to 10, though I might not have the math completely accurate. Given the increased retentions you've just discussed, should we expect to separate these figures and consider that the new norm in reinsurance will place the catastrophe load somewhere between the historical guidance and the levels observed in recent years? Any clarification on this would be appreciated.

Sure, Mike. This is Steve again. Our main focus is on the loss ratio points. Over the past decade or so, we have modeled all of our losses, allowing us to reduce our accident year ex-catastrophe losses over the years. Additionally, we have significantly grown our balance sheet, which puts us in an enviable position as reinsurance rates increase. We are assessing what we consider to be price adequacy in our portfolio while also ensuring the protection of our balance sheet through our catastrophe program. Although we do not provide guidance on a catastrophe loss ratio, we believe we are in a strong position regarding the management of both our accident year ex-catastrophe losses, which have shown 34 years of favorable reserve development, and our catastrophe exposure across the organization.

You've previously mentioned a combined ratio target in the low to mid-90s, as well as a range of 95 to 100. Can you clarify if there is a distinction between short-term and long-term targets, or if anything has changed due to increases in insurance costs or possibly higher investment income affecting your perspective on the combined ratio?

You're right. Nothing has changed. The 95 to 100 is a longer-term target through all cycles. The low to mid-90s is what we're looking for in the shorter term for 2023.

Okay, understood. Moving to the commercial side of the portfolio, it seems like you're adjusting your exposure in commercial properties and are working to increase rates in that area to address inflation trends. You've mentioned that the situation with commercial umbrella insurance remains elevated, but not as much as in previous quarters when you adjusted your loss estimates. Have you gained any insights in the last three months regarding the commercial umbrella aspect of the business that might suggest a need to realign the portfolio, or are there any specific issues unique to CINCI that differ from the broader industry's challenges with social inflation?

Yes, Mike, that's a great question. I believe the main issue is the high inflation effects we are currently experiencing. As I've mentioned before, we analyze every significant loss to identify any trends, but it appears quite random within the umbrella excess line. As we noted last quarter, we need to respond to this situation. We are adjusting rates across the board to account for inflation. Each risk is evaluated based on its individual merits. Most of the umbrella or excess policies we write also include the underlying policies, so we understand the associated risks. We assess each risk, including the pricing and conditions, while considering specific venues and fleets to decide how much capacity we want to allocate. It’s a detailed risk-by-risk approach, but it's clear that the portfolio requires adjustments in rates.

Okay. And maybe lastly on growth and maybe sticking with commercial lines, thinking about the growth outlook you laid out in the prepared remarks. Is there anything incremental that's coming from any initiatives that you would want to call out? I believe there's about a small commercial BOP initiative or I'm sure there's other initiatives too or is it really just mostly pushing exposure adjustments and maybe some pricing power through '23?

I think it's a combination of factors. Our exposure is improving, and we are seeing an increase in rates. Our retention rates remain strong, and the rollout of our small business platform, Synergy, is progressing very well based on feedback from our agents. Although it's still early, the rollout is happening quickly, and we are very pleased with the results. We see plenty of positive prospects ahead. Our E&S company is consistently achieving impressive profits and substantial growth. The personal lines sector is also experiencing significant growth, particularly in both the high net worth and middle market segments. We feel confident in our position in personal lines and believe we are strong contenders in both markets, with high net worth making up approximately 51% of our total premium. The growth trajectory in that segment has also been remarkable.

Okay. Exciting things. Thank you for the answers.

Thanks, Mike.

And our next question will come from Mark Dwelle with RBC. Please go ahead.

Good morning. I have a couple of questions. First, this is a numbers-related question. The amount of dividend income within total investment income increased slightly this quarter and for the whole year. Is there anything specific driving that, aside from the fact that I don't believe average corporate dividend increases have been as high as 12%, although they might be?

Mark, this is Steve Solaria. We did have a couple of unique factors over the course of the year. We did have two companies pay special dividends. LyondellBasell paid on early in the year, which was about $5 million. And then in December, CME usually pays a special dividend, but the dividend that they paid this year was well in excess of what we had expected. So those two special dividends really factored into the increase in dividend income year-over-year.

Thank you for that. Regarding the second question, I would like to clarify something I believe Steven mentioned about the reinsurance treaty. If I understood correctly, on a total loss of $1 billion, the new treaty exposes us to $542 million compared to $499 million. Is that based on aggregate losses or does it refer to a loss from a single event?

Yeah. No, good question, and I will clarify that a bit. So I wanted to make sure to kind of put things on an apples-to-apples comparison. So this year's program 2023 goes up to $1.1 billion. And so we have moved up a bit as our equity has grown, our GAAP equity has grown, our premium has grown, we feel we are in a position to move the program up a bit, but we wanted to buy more at the top end. So to put it kind of on an apples-to-apples basis, I used a hypothetical $1.1 billion loss for both years 2023 and 2022. And you're right on for the 2023 year, we would have $542 million of exposure. So that would include the $200 million up to the attachment point plus co-participations, and that compares with $499 million for the 2022 program.

And then, again, just to clarify, that's on an aggregate basis for the full year or that's on a per event loss?

Per event.

Got it. So if there were $2 billion storms, your two storms that cost Cincinnati Financial $1 billion in a year would result in double each of those respective figures, just for comparison.

Right. We have reinstatement provisions in the contracts.

Can you remind me what proportion of Cincinnati Re's business is focused on property and property catastrophe compared to specialty or liability lines?

Yes. I have it. And you know it's interesting. We don't necessarily target a given percentage, but our 2022 full year in our inception to date are really pretty close. And for property, both from 2022 and inception to date, it's a little over 30% of the premium. For casualty, it's right in that 55% range. And for specialty, it's a little over 15% for the year in a little bit lower than that for the year-to-date, probably about 13%. So across time, it's been very consistent in that 30 plus range for property, 53-ish for casualty, and 15% or so for Specialty.

Any outlook you'd like to share on how your January 1 renewals might skew those percentages?

No. I think it's a little early on the January 1's, but it's one nice thing as buyers of reinsurance, we're seeing the cost go up. It's almost like a little bit of a hedge in that we have Cincinnati Re, we've got very talented people there, very experienced people, and you see that shining through in a market like this. And they are benefiting from the firming rates and firming terms and conditions that you read about.

Okay. Appreciate that. Thanks for the answers.

Thank you, Mark.

Our next question will come from Greg Carter with Bank of America. Please go ahead.

Hi, everyone.

Good morning, Grace.

Good morning. I'm thinking about the guidance for 8% plus premium growth in 2023. Like we keep hearing about potential for a macro slowdown. I was just wondering if you could go over the macro assumptions that underpin that guidance.

Yeah. That's a good point. At 13% for this year, that's the highest percentage growth in net rent premium we've had since 2001. And so we do recognize that there could be a slowdown. We're not predicting that necessarily or giving guidance on it, but it's possible as you point out, we want to be disciplined in our underwriting. Profit always comes first with us. And so our guidance is for a little bit less than what it was this year, but we are still very optimistic across all of our business areas in terms of the growth that we're seeing, the relationship we have with our agents, the technology we have, the models that we have, we feel very bullish about growth, but we did temper back a little bit from where we are for the full year, just to be cognizant of the points that you bring up, even though I wouldn't say that we're predicting it for sure.

Thank you. And looking at the attritional loss ratios for commercial property and homeowners in the quarter, they were a bit improved versus the first nine months of the year. So I was just wondering, if there is any sort of change in trend regarding frequency or severity that you've observed for those lines or if this is just kind of normal variability just given the volatility of those lines can see?

Grace, I'm sure there is some of that volatility that you can see, but I also know there's a lot of hard work that's been going on in addressing property. And it predates our addressing and say umbrella, for example. And it's nice to see the hard work of our underwriters and really everybody throughout the company chipping in here in terms of underwriting, loss control, pricing. And I do think it's paying off.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And our next question will come from Mike Zaremski with BMO. Please go ahead. Hello, Mike. Perhaps your line is muted.

Sorry. Thanks for seeking me in. So I’m just going back to thinking about the combined ratio goals for the company. Are there specific lines of business you'd like to call out and maybe they're obvious, maybe it's commercial casualty and commercial property both. But were there kind of the most wood to chop when we're thinking about improving the combined ratio in outer years? I guess when we look at the pricing disclosure that you offer us the mid-single digit plus numbers. The pricing, I guess, isn't at levels that are, I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, are like extremely high levels relative to inflationary levels. So just kind of curious where you feel you have the most wood to chop over the coming couple of years.

Yeah. We haven't provided that any lower than at the company-wide level. And it's really because it's a big team effort. Every one of our operating areas is focused on profit improvement, and we're seeing it across the board from underwriting to claims to loss control in the pricing and underwriting part of it. We are reflecting on the property in the exposure, the increase in inflation. We are trying to reflect that. And we're also getting a pure net rate on top of that and really feel that with our accident year ex-cat wood is and the underwriting that we're doing in terms of cat exposure and geographic diversification that we're in a good spot to hit the numbers that we gave in the comments.

Okay. As we consider the potential for improvement, should we keep in mind that there may be some impact from multiyear policies in the portfolio, or that comparisons may be getting easier, or perhaps that there are fewer multiyear policies now than in the past? Are there any details we should be aware of? Thank you.

Yeah, Mike, Steve Spray. And it kind of goes to your prior question, too, is those averages for us, the net rate change just doesn't tell the full story and the underwriters are working with our agents in segmenting the book, the tools that they have in front of them to really focus on getting rate and terms, conditions on those policies, but we feel we are probably least adequate. And then also focusing on retention of the business that's so adequately priced. That's where the rubber is really meeting the road, and that segmentation is really helping drive those results.

Got it. That’s helpful. Thank you.

And our next question will come from Meyer Shields with KBW. Please go ahead.

Thanks. I'm going to try Mark's question from a slightly different perspective, if that's okay. Historically, Cincinnati has been a very methodical company. And I'm wondering now that you've got reinsurance and Lloyd's capabilities, is it reasonable to expect maybe faster reaction to take advantage of temporary opportunities like property cat seems to be this year?

Yes, Meyer. That is an excellent point. And I think in both areas, I think particularly in Cincinnati Re, as they have been looking at these policies, both quantitatively and qualitatively on a one-by-one basis and are in a position to react quickly to these types of opportunities, and that was part of the strategic decision at the beginning.

Hey, Meyer. This is Steve Spray. That's a great question, and I appreciate it. Since founding our E&S company, CSU, back in 2008, we've gained a lot of flexibility for our agents. We've learned a great deal as we've grown, and now we're issuing homeowner business on an E&S basis, offering our agents and their policyholders increased flexibility, capacity, and solutions. I believe we will continue to enhance this for our agents, providing them with more effective access to Lloyd's. Everything we develop focuses on our strategy with agencies, so we plan to provide agents with greater flexibility and capabilities both now and in the future.

Okay. Perfect. That's very helpful. Related question with regard to the agencies. One of the theories that's been banding around is that a lot of, let's say, regional or mutual companies don't necessarily have the capital seeing the property-related volatility that the reinsurance market is kind of forcing back to the primary carriers. And I was wondering, based on your conversations with agents, is that like a phenomenon that they're seeing? And is that underlie some of the growth expectations for '23?

I think it's a bit early to determine how the 1/1, 4/1, and 6/1 renewals will affect carriers. Insurance is a local business for us, and we face competition from many strong regional mutual companies. We are considering this issue, but we haven't received much feedback yet. Anecdotally, there have been a few cases where the lack of reinsurance or its costs have pressured some regional carriers, but it's too soon to assess the overall impact. It's definitely an important question that we're monitoring.

Okay. Fantastic. And one last question, if I can. I was just looking for a little more color on the reserve development, specifically within excess and surplus lines.

Yeah. Great, Meyer. This is Mike Sewell. And let me start off, we're really proud of our 34 years of consecutive years of net favorable development. So I'm going to open up with that. But related to E&S, were you thinking about on a year-to-date basis or on a quarter basis, are you looking?

So mostly, I guess, there's a lot of volatility, and that's reflected in the quarterly numbers.

On that, so for the E&S business, let's say, for the quarter, we saw a $4 million of reserve strengthening. But on a year-to-date basis, it was $9 million of favorable development. Thinking about it on the year-to-date basis, it was really favorable for all the accident years except the more recent accident year '21. And so we did see favorable development for 2020, 2019, 2019 and before. What I would say is, we follow a consistent approach. I wouldn't look at one quarter, two quarters as a trend. So you'll see some things move. But we've got the same actuarial professionals that are doing the work. They're looking at how the case reserves develop, the paid losses and other factors. And so we really just follow the great work that our actuaries do. And I think it's a pretty consistent approach. So I wouldn't necessarily look at it on a quarter-to-quarter basis and say that that is some sort of a trend.

Okay. That’s perfect. Thank you so much.

Thank you for the question.

And this will conclude our question-and-answer session. I'd like to turn the call back over to Steve Johnston for any closing remarks.

Thank you, Cole. Excellent job, and thank you all for joining us today. We look forward to speaking with you again on our first quarter 2023 call. Have a great day.

The conference has now concluded. Thank you for attending today's presentation. You may now disconnect your lines at this time.