Thank you, Ranju. Good morning to all the participants on the call and thank you for joining Q1 FY '27 earnings call for General Insurance Corporation of India.

Please note that we have mailed out the press release and presentation to everyone and now you can see the results on our website, and it has been uploaded on the stock exchange as well. In case you've not received the same, you can write to us and we'll be happy to send it over to you.

Before we proceed with the call, let me remind you that the discussion may contain forward-looking statements that may involve known or unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors. It must be viewed in conjunction with our businesses that could cause future results, performances, or achievement to differ significantly from what is expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.

To take us through the results for the quarter and answer our questions, we have with us Mr. Hitesh Joshi, Chairman and Managing Director, and other top members of the management at GIC.

We will be starting the call with a brief overview of the quarter gone by, which will then be followed by the Q&A session. With that said, I'll now hand over the call to Mr.

Joshi. Over to you, sir.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you for joining us for GIC Re's earnings call covering the first quarter FY '27. As we begin FY '27, the global reinsurance industry continues to demonstrate resilience, supported by strong capitalization and sustained demand for risk transfer solutions.

While abundant market capacity has resulted in increased competition across certain segments, particularly within property catastrophe reinsurance segment, underlying industry fundamentals remain supportive and continue to provide opportunities for profitable growth. In this environment, portfolio quality and prudent risk allocation remain key determinants of performance.

Reinsurers continue to focus on maintaining risk-adjusted returns through selective underwriting and active portfolio management, while investment income remains a meaningful contributor to overall profitability. Against this backdrop, GIC Re remains well positioned to navigate evolving market conditions, supported by its diversified business profile and strong financial foundation.

We continue to focus on delivering profitable growth while creating long-term value for our stakeholders. We now look at some of the key highlights of our financial performance.

Gross premium income for Q1 FY '27 stood at ₹13,475.36 crore compared to ₹12,388.01 crore in the corresponding period of the previous year. Investment income for the quarter stood at ₹3,265.51 crore vis-a-vis ₹3,313.74 crore in the corresponding period last year.

Incurred claim ratio for the quarter was 85.04 as against 90.42 in the corresponding quarter of the previous year. Combined ratio for the quarter stood at 104.88% compared to 106.94% in the corresponding period last year.

Profit before tax stood at ₹2,490.25 crore for Q1 FY '27. Profit after tax was ₹1,922.04 crore for the quarter.

Solvency ratio improved to 4.32 as on 30th June 2026 as compared to 3.85 as on 30th June 2025. The quarter delivered a marked improvement across key underwriting metrics.

Lower claims experience and an improved combined ratio contributed to a meaningful reduction in underwriting losses. The improvement in operating performance reflects the continued benefits of portfolio actions undertaken over recent years and demonstrates the resilience of our business across market cycles.

As we progress through FY '27, our priorities remain centered on maintaining portfolio quality, prudent deployment of capital, and disciplined risk selection. While competitive intensity has increased across certain markets, we remain focused on opportunities that meet our return expectations and support sustainable value creation over the long term.

With a healthy solvency position, diversified portfolio, and strong financial foundation, we believe GIC Re is well positioned to deliver consistent performance while continuing to support the risk protection requirements of clients across domestic and international markets. Thank you.

With that, we now open the floor for questions and answers.

Hi. Good morning, sir.

Thanks for the opportunity. One question on domestic Indian reinsurance market.

What we have seen on the fire or on the commercial side, there has been in the primary market there has been a steep price decline. The cause of this of course is a reinsurance support capacity and the kind of prices available are far, far lower.

Now can you comment on the prevailing market condition if we were to segregate the reinsurance players, say, like GIC Re, and then you have many of the foreign global reinsurer branches, and third maybe offshore and the new shops in GIFT City. Which of these players have been very, very aggressive that has led to this situation?

Secondly on that, if the experience in terms of the natural or man-made catastrophe continues to be benign that has been the case for last 1-2 years that has led to this pricing, do you expect this pricing condition to further deteriorate? Second, if you can provide some updates, a rough assessment kind of a, are the losses from the recent flooding activity, particularly in the state like Gujarat and all, that is going to be material to cause kind of a losses to some of the reinsurers or so what will be your assessment of this recent flood-related losses in some of the states?

Thank you.

Starting with your market segmentation in terms of, say, Indian reinsurers, the foreign reinsurer branches, maybe the GIFT City players and the cross-border reinsurers. Given that the global capacity is ample and fairly surplus, the aggressive stance of the reinsurer is all around.

There may be some nuance to a particular reinsurer's approach, but overall almost all players have displayed competitive behavior. That is the first question you put.

Second question is that what we expect in terms of the price deterioration or competitiveness. We believe that to the extent the players in the GIFT City will try to scale up their operations, their competitive behavior may continue.

As you also pointed out that there are flood losses, we have to see how soon the figures come in, how the claims develop, and what will be the experience of the players all around and whether they react to the claims experience, whether the claims quantum is enough to influence their behavior. I think these are the levers which we need to watch before we conclude anything.

Coming to the third point regarding the quantum of flood losses, as we usually tell you that it takes a bit of a time before the figures travel to us. In terms of our experience, it has been our stance that whatever might be the market losses, our losses from cat events tend to be around 30 to 40%.

If there is any estimate available with anyone for any flood event, we could be having a participation of 30 to 40%. Avinash, does it help?

Thanks. One follow-up, if I may.

Now if I see in this quarter, you have kind of grown and retained life reinsurance piece meaningfully. Now historically, you have been typically more of a general insurance-side reinsurer than life.

Last 5-6 years, you have been growing in life as well. Overall experience on the life side, including that unfortunate COVID year, COVID Delta wave, the life side you have not been kind of making much kind of a profit.

Now in this backdrop, what has led to this kind of growing so much in life? Has the pricing environment been supportive or is that, okay, in order to gain market share you have gone a bit aggressive here?

If you can help us understand your strategy around life.

I agree with you that, for us, life is a focus area and will continue to grow. Coming to the performance and results, I think it is probably too short a period to judge on this portfolio.

We have during various earnings call and also other interactions have indicated the reasons, particularly the reserve strengthening carried out. I would suggest that life portfolio needs to be watched over a period of couple of years because ultimately it continues to remain competitive and one has to watch a particular segment over a cycle rather than a couple of years.

Sir. Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity, sir. Sir, my first question is on overseas combined ratio.

Probably from I have seen for many years, for the first time probably you reported an underwriting profit with a 95 combined. I see bulk of the improvement happened in fire segment, which is a dominant piece in your overseas business.

Just wanted to understand what materially changed in overseas business which led to this improvement in the overseas segment, whether this is structural, transient? Given you even alluded to the point that pricing competition or the market is still soft in the international market, still we improved the number.

Just wanted to understand color here, sir. Hello?

Hello. This is Sanjay Mokashi, Chief Underwriting Officer.

Yes, sir. Yeah.

Yes, on foreign portfolio, our focus has been specific more because it has not produced desired results in the past. We are looking at our portfolio class by class.

We are also looking at our underwriting guidelines, our underwriting approach, if anything needs to be changed in terms of our past experience. Having said that, I would add that quarter result may not be an indication of the entire efforts that we are putting in improvement of the portfolio.

Let us wait...

Sorry for that interruption. I'm not sure where we lost the line, but just to recap quickly, as I mentioned that our focus has been on foreign portfolio, which has not performed to our expectation and we are looking at every portfolio carefully and taking necessary action.

Having said that, I would suggest that one-quarter result may not give an entire picture of what has changed in the portfolio. There is some amount of seasonality in foreign portfolio, and I would suggest that let us wait for further quarters to develop to look at exactly how the portfolio is developing in terms of our expectation.

Understood, sir. Sir, but just a follow-up, sir.

Given we were at 120% in last year in foreign portfolio, and given we started at - 95, is it fair to say that there could be at least 10-15% improvement in the combined ratio? Even first quarter is not a true representative compared to what we experienced last year?

Although we have taken measures on both property and motor, which are our significant portfolios, even aviation, although it is not a significant portion of our foreign portfolio, we are looking at it very closely and taking necessary action in terms of how we can improve the quality of the portfolio. I would still say that the first quarter may also involve some accounting entries as well that may not be exactly resulting in the outcome that we expect.

We expect the foreign portfolio to increase significantly. At this stage, we would refrain from putting a number to it, although over 3 to 5 years we have set goals for ourselves.

Understood, sir. Sir, but given the prudence probably is largely the reason why overseas business did not grow the current year, because there was an expectation that with rating upgrade, probably your foreign business will do well in the current year.

In the quarter, we have declined by 6%. Anything to read there?

Yes, it is a reflection of how we are looking at our portfolio. I had mentioned this in the previous quarter results also that, particularly in motor, we have taken corrective measures in respect of contracts which were not developing in the desired way.

We have taken some hard decision in motor. We are also streamlining our aviation portfolio.

We are having a close look at our overseas cargo portfolio. Having said that, property having the maximum share in the portfolio, that is also a focus area.

Yes, we will improve our portfolio, but I would suggest that we wait for further quarters.

Understood, sir. Sir, just want to understand that domestic means clearly there is a softness in the fire market.

I'm hoping I'm assuming that it would have declined for us too in in domestic business. We still reported 12.3% growth for the quarter, and it seems to be driven by largely health.

When I see the combined ratio also, to some extent it seems to have deteriorated either because of motor or health in the domestic piece. Just wanted to understand here your your strategy, whether whether health what exactly businesses you are writing, whether you think profitability will be there in this line of business?

Consequently, if you can even give me a color what kind of combined would be there in the in domestic business from a full-year perspective, given it has deteriorated in quarter on sequentially year-on-year basis, sorry?

Yes, you have rightly observed that health, we have grown in other than property segment. Property being the way on the direct side, there is heavy competition in the property segment.

In other segment, too, there are competitive pressure, but our focus has been in growing other than property segment in this particular year. As far as health is concerned, our focus is more on the retail health segment rather than the corporate or group health segment where we believe the profitability lies.

The nature of health portfolio is such that there is a significant portion of obligatory there, obligatory portion will reflect the market growth. The non-obligatory portion gets influenced by certain major contracts.

If we win those contracts, you will see spike in our health portfolio. If we don't win that contract, you might see a dip in that particular portfolio.

Health, we have been able to write certain contracts which show the growth segment. As I mentioned that we have been focusing on the retail health area.

In motor, yes, there has been deterioration in domestic motor. It is largely from the treaties that we have written in the past.

There are competitive pressures on the motor segment, but it is developing to the extent to our expectations.

Understood, sir. Just last two points.

One, given today morning IRDAI gave a advisory to reinsurance market that you can't view such huge discounts like 99% to the benchmark rate. Given there is an advisory from regulator in the morning in their website, is it fair to say that some bit of discipline probably in domestic fire market or property market can come back a bit?

Yes, IRDAI has issued a directive on 22nd July as well in property segment where they have flagged the rates being quoted on the direct side. We are in touch with the insurers, and we are having conversation with them as to what measures they are taking in response to IRDAI directive.

It is only a guidance, let us see how the impact will be over next 2 to 3 quarters.

Understood, sir. Lastly, you just did not answer this question on domestic.

We reported in the quarter 107.5 combined. How do you see full year to play out, it to be better than the last year or you think it could be similar, given you have cat events and also motor is generally deteriorating for the industry as a whole and you have a pressure in fire segment too?

The major renewals in the domestic segment are on 1st 1st April, and we have used whatever handles, reinsurance tools we have whereby we support the domestic insurers as well as we protect the interest of all our stakeholders. Yes, on one hand there are competitive pressures in the market, on the other hand we have we have taken certain measures on the reinsurance side and let us see how the results pan out.

Understood, sir. That's it from my side.

Thank you very much for your answers.

Hi. Thank you for the opportunity.

Good morning. I have a couple of questions related to growth.

What's the growth that we're expecting for the domestic and international, now considering the fact, the lot of portfolio pruning and all that you're doing? Next question is, see, we are continuously seeing losses in life.

When are we going to see a turnaround in that portfolio?

Karthik, Sanjay Mokashi here, Chief Underwriting Officer. In terms of growth, we have set a target of, say, roughly about 10 10%.

It varies for domestic and foreign. In foreign, we would expect a more pronounced growth than the domestic market.

That is about growth, but we will also be managing the cycle. There are soft cycle and taking a review mid-year this year as to whether growth target needs to be relooked, needs to be revised based on our experience mid-year.

In terms of losses in life, as our CMD sir in his opening remark mentioned, or in one of the answers to one of the questions he mentioned, that life Re results need to be seen over a cycle rather than for a short period of time. Okay.

I mean...

Our stand remains what we have earlier advised that in domestic market, despite the competitive pressure, our goal will be to maintain our market share. On foreign side, to the extent we have got our rating back and we are in touch with all the cedants and markets where we lost our business, which we had prior to rating downgrade, we'll be trying to inch up on all those aspects.

At the same time, the pruning will continue and our guidance on overall underwriting performance improvement remains.

I completely understand on the foreign part. See, at one point of time we had almost ₹18,000 crores of premium coming from foreign portfolio.

Is it possible to reach that in maybe in couple of years? Maybe in next two years?

Maybe not in a couple of years because of the significant softening trends, the same exposure is coming at a lesser premium. Maybe not in 2 years, maybe 3 or 4 years.

Then while we have the broader targets and goals and direction, we are not really keen on pursuing those targets at the cost of overall risk-return optimization. We are very much focused on return on equity and shareholder value creation.

All these targets will be directional, but not driving our decision-making.

Got it. Sir, see, the credit rating upgrade to A, any timelines you have in mind?

That is difficult to say because there are very very many factors in terms of the business model, the global softening trends, and where we end up in terms of our financial and business competitive position. Also, there are two major developments which are in the offing, the IFRS and the RBC.

It is not really possible to give any timeline, but if things go all right, probably one can expect in a period of, say, something like 4 to 5 years.

Okay. You had mentioned in some interviews, say, company has to focus on specialty insurance rather than going for, say, fire or property in the international market.

How big is an opportunity, the specialty part? Can you elaborate on that part?

See, if, as a global reinsurer, I think the entire global markets are available. It is basically approaching those markets and picking and choosing one's risk selection, one's path and building a risk portfolio which is so very material.

Because if you look at, say, GIC Re's market share globally, it'll be fairly small because this market is essentially dominated by, say, Europe and US. Given the market share that GIC has on the international book, the scope is tremendous.

All the classes, specialty classes, casualty, but it also requires a different level of skill set. We have to have a calibrated approach and that is what we are planning to pursue.

Okay. One final question.

The presentation whatever is put in the website, right, the investment slide is showing the March data rather than the June end data. We'll

correct it if there is a mistake. We'll take a look at it.

That's fine, but I just want to know what's the current investment book like from debt, equity, and money market and all the rest part. What's the current size of the book by end of June?

This is Radhika Ravishekar, the CIO. Hello.

Yeah. I'm able to hear you.

73.4% is in the fixed income securities plus.

Okay.

Around 17% in equity and around 8.67% or something in money market instruments.

What's the quantum of the book? It was ₹1,17,000 crore on the end of March.

₹1,20,000 and odd crores

on book value basis.

Market value is ₹1,52,000, 57.

₹1,57,000 crore. Essentially the share of debt in our book on book value basis doesn't fluctuate much because it is a fairly stable book.

We are not planning to reduce our equity share in a very major way, which continues to be around 17%.

Got it. Thank you and that's all I have.

All the best.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sir. Thank you very much for the opportunity.

I have a few questions. One first is with regard to the the Gujarat flood basically.

You mentioned that there could be the numbers are still coming. Is there anything which is provided right now in the numbers in the Q1 Q1 results?

That is first question. Second is it a bit on the growth and the profitability.

You're trying to balance both of it, but it seems like, a couple of years for last couple of years, you've been setting the target specially on the how the business mix looks like in terms of an international, you aspire to be 50-50, but it looks like we are we are still on the downhill path of on at least on the international side and there are headwinds to go up in that number. Profitability obviously, it's been the the job has been much better than expected and I appreciate I congratulate on that.

Looking at this current environment, your aspiration to reduce that combined ratio by 1 percentage point every year, how feasible that looks like in this year and the next year for the profitability to to perform in the in the business? The third is on the obligatory part.

I've seen this quarter the obligatory portion has been around 33% of the domestic book. Is it the new norm that we are looking at that the obligatory side of the book is going to see a lower contribution, although I have also observed that that has come with a little bit of a higher higher combined ratio?

On the domestic side usually you have been around 102-103. This this time it's been 107.

If you can give a little understanding about these three aspects, how how are these going to shape up in this year and maybe next couple of years for you in this aspect? Thank you, sir.

To start with Gujarat flood, our provisioning is ₹400 crore

plus. ₹440 crore.

₹440 crore. That is the provision we have made in the Q1.

Thank you for recognizing that there are better profitability trends than your expectation. 50-50 that we talk about domestic versus international is fairly a long-term goal given that the domestic market continues to be the growth driver globally in comparison to the other global markets.

As you rightly recognized and we agree fully that it is an uphill task. So 50-50 is absolutely long-term goal.

What we are presently targeting with a medium term in view is 60-40. Again, our goal will be 60-40, but as I said that domestic market outgrows the global market, it will be a tough job.

We continue to try to optimize risk-return balance and that is where our entire energy is devoted. As I said that these targets are just targets.

They can't drive the decision-making beyond a point. Now coming to the 1% improvement, we have further drilled down and we are now differentiating between domestic book and foreign book, and we would like to have, say, a combined ratio target for domestic book at something like 103 and foreign book at 95 in line with the global markets.

That is what we should be targeting. That is the global trend in terms of the reinsurance market profitability.

Is there any timeline to it?

Timeline, I think we are fairly close to 103. 95, again, we feel that probably in a span of 2 to 3 years.

Okay. Yeah.

Again, coming to the third question that I think you are right that it is our effort to grow our non-obligatory book, and I think that is partly getting obvious from the figures.

Is it going to come at the cost of the profitability? I'm saying other speakers also mentioned that life insurance is the new area and that's where the losses are still coming in and your experience is very new to it.

Is that an experiment which we are doing to mitigate the effect of the obligatory side of the business then?

We will be mindful of the profitability and I would not at all agree that we are experimenting. Our book in life has been fairly stable at around 20% market share.

Now that we are going to focus, it will grow, but it is certainly not an experiment. It is backed by actuarial analysis and all the analysis that is usually available to a reinsurer.

Okay. Lastly, I think, that's a observation.

We've been following this company for last 3 years and have seen consistent improvement in the performance of the company, although the growth rates have been far a bit slower than what I've expected. In terms of the shareholder returns, it's nowhere near the expectation.

You've also, recently the government has reduced its stake, but it looks like the market is not recognizing the kind of performance which you've been delivering. Is there any thoughts around, and of course the one one part which I've also mentioned about is the capital.

I think the capital is far more, the solvency ratio which you're falling is far more higher, and with the kind of performance that you have, it will keep ballooning. Your return on equity is absolutely online, but I'm saying what is lacking here is a growth.

I think the profitability is already you've achieved, but the growth is still lacking and that's one reason why probably it looks like to me that the market is not recognizing. Maybe on two parts.

One, on your call on the market, is there anything which the management is mindful about having, the kind of valuation it's been trading in the market? The second is about the capital.

What's your plan on capital because it keeps increasing very fast in the absence of growth?

Our rising solvency at 4.3 has to be seen in the context of the improving performance, the conservative approach that we have followed because we have come out of a rating downgrade and we are aspiring for now the next level, which is A from A-. At the same time, we also have to keep in mind that we are in the face of implementation of IFRS and RBC.

Any growth globally in terms of reclaiming our business that we had as a A- reinsurer, getting that business back takes time. That is why this entire focus on rebalancing the catastrophe exposures on property side as well as growth in casualty on the international side.

We are very much mindful, but I think we will have to be a little patient and our focus will continue to be on more on profitability versus growth, on specialty and global book. Maybe solvency will come down gradually.

We don't want to grow at the cost of profitability.

Okay. Any thoughts on the shareholder value creation, sir?

Thank you.

I think we'll continue to be focused on our return on equity, and you can expect some improvement. I think when we are talking about 1% overall improvement in combined ratio, or say, domestic getting targeted at 103 combined ratio and foreign at 95 over a period of, say, something like next 2 to 3 years, that should give you some idea as to what will be the improvement in return on equity.

Okay. Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you for the opportunity. I had two data keeping questions.

First was what is the split of your investment book by market value in terms of equity and debt? Also, second question was if your investment book on the market value basis incorporates your markup for NSE, like your share of investment in NSE?

Thank you.

This is Radhika Ravishekar again, the CIO. Market value, as told, is ₹1,57,800 crores.

That includes only equity, which is around ₹58,000 crores, because debt is kept at cost only in ours, as it is held to maturity.

Okay. Thank you.

Your second question regarding NSE, it includes NSE's also.

Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

Yes, thank you, ma'am.

Thank you for the opportunity. I had a few questions.

The first one, I was seeing the investor presentation and in that the slide which explains the net worth excluding fair value change, in Q1 it has fallen from ₹51,000 to ₹45,000 crores despite us reporting a profit. Can you please explain why has this fallen, the net worth?

I think our net worth has only increased. We'll recheck the figures, because excluding fair value, there is no reason for the net worth to drop.

Exactly, yeah, because there's a significant drop of almost ₹6,000 crores from March to June, I was not sure why it's dropping.

We'll check and we can come back if you can share your contact details or maybe contact us.

Sure. That's the first question.

Second one, I'm seeing the net worth including fair value change from FY '24 to FY '26 and that's largely been flat from ₹81,000 to ₹84,000 crores. That's been the range, whereas our profits have been almost ₹7,000 to ₹8,000 crores on a yearly basis.

Can you help me understand why the net worth including fair value change has been flat despite profits? If this is the IFRS-linked net worth, then does that mean our ROE at a IFRS level would be broadly 0 to 2% range?

We are yet to get into IFRS regime for the corporation and whatever is the change in fair value is entirely because of the reduction in fair value.

This is fine, I understand it could be because of your equity market value changes in investments which we do, but then why is the net worth been flat between that 80 to 84,000 levels for the last 3 years despite good profitability? Is it good to assume that the profits which we've reported has been offset by, let's say, reduction in the fair market value of the equity investments?

That has to be the only answer.

There is a small reduction...

Yes, I agree. What you say is correct.

Because that's

a significant number, net worth is flat for the last 3 years.

Mr. Shubham, are you there?

Yes.

What you say is correct. I think almost entire change on the net worth including fair value is on account of essentially market value changes.

You are right in including the profit or whatever is the financial performance changing the net worth. The only variable which is moving this is market value, fair value.

Which also is largely be from equity because the other fixed income instruments would not really have a fall in value.

No, we only mark to market and consider fair value for equity, not for debt. The entire explanation has to come from fair value,

equity. It's quite a significant number, it would be good to understand maybe next time the details around that, why has the fair value reduced so much.

Sure. Sure, sure.

Last,

our Q1 performance in terms of consolidated profitability, that came lower than the standalone profit. I maybe missed the first part of the transcript call, can you explain which subsidiary is causing the loss and what was the loss reason?

This is Rajesh Laheri, CFO. There is no loss per se, but the profit has decreased basically.

For AICL, this has decreased by almost 50-60% decrease is there in their profit for this quarter. Actually, this is very first quarter, it's not the real indicator for the full year.

Other associate companies, we have seen some losses also. For similarly for other subsidiary companies, there are some changes actually happening in the very first quarter.

That's why this figure is a little lower.

Okay. The guidance for the entire year at a consolidated level would still be

good

in terms of profitability?

If you want to know subsidiary company-wise, South Africa we have shown ₹287 crore loss during this quarter, and Moscow some ₹29 crore loss from the subsidiary. That has resulted into the lower figure compared to last year in consolidated operating profit.

Okay. Yeah.

Hello, team. Thank you for taking all the questions and thank you for this opportunity.

My question is just a very vain one on the business. As we could see from the financials and annual reports that the company has been growing share in its health insurance segment.

If we speak very macroeconomically, obviously, the medical costs here in India are rising, and that is one reason, the predominant reason why we see the health insurance sector to be like riding a lot of premiums, and yeah. My question is, an increased business in health insurance can bring a lot of reinsurance business for the company, but doesn't it mean also a lot of claims could be settled, a lot of claims can actually come in, and while the focus is on improving the combined ratio, doesn't the growing business in health insurance means a lot of claims could come in and then that could affect the profitability?

Anushree. This is Sanjay Mokashi, Chief Underwriting Officer.

Your observations are right that health insurance is growing because of medical costs, but health insurance is also growing because lot many new buyers are buying health insurance. With regard to your specific question whether the portfolio growth can bring more losses, the answer is on reinsurance side, we are focusing more on the retail segment rather than the corporate or group health segment.

Our observation, our analysis shows us that it is this segment which is more loss-prone, and retail is a better performing segment. With this measured and calibrated approach, we hope that whatever happens on the direct side, we get protected on the reinsurance side.

Hope that answers.

Thank you.

Thank you all for joining in. As we have explained and we have elaborated on our philosophy towards the business that profitability will be the driving factor as compared to the growth, and we have now further subdivided our targets for domestic underwriting combined ratio and foreign combined ratio.

We hope to do a much better job going forward in line with what we have been doing. Thank you for engaging.

Have a good day.