Thank you. Good morning, and thank you for joining us on our conference call.

As usual, I have with me today our CFO, Andreas Ruben Madsen, and the head of our IR team, Mads Thinggaard. This morning, we published our interim report for the fourth quarter, and as usual, I will walk you through the operating highlights, and then Andreas will comment on the financials.

Let us move to slide two. Overall, 2025 ended better than expected with an insurance service result of 1.91 billion, significantly up from 1.44 billion last year.

Large claims of 5.2% and weather-related claims of 3.2% in '25 were both below the new normal levels we expect, while the undiscounted underlying loss ratio improved by 3.1 percentage points compared to '24 driven by our repricing and synergies. We had a strong growth of 9.7% in our Personal lines in '25, while also ending the year with a quarterly growth rate of almost 10%.

Thanks to our strong partnership with local banks as well as countrywide banks, we're taking market shares in Personal lines. We view growth in Commercial lines as decent in '25 with just below 3%.

On the cost side, we improved the cost percentage to 17% in '25 as planned. This is a satisfactory 1.3 percentage point reduction from 2024.

Combined with a very satisfactory investment result for '25 of above 0.3 billion, the profit before special cost and tax reached 2.12 billion. Our proposed dividend of 0.66 crowns per share and total ordinary buybacks of 500 million represent a record-high normal distribution of a total of 1.4 billion and a payout ratio of 98% for 2025.

This is on top of the 1 billion extraordinary buyback we expect to do in 2026 related to the approval of our partial internal model, as well as an extraordinary steady increase in our CSR coverage in Q4. Now I turn to slide three with our highlights for Q4.

Q4 was supported by an improvement in the underlying undiscounted claims ratio of 3 percentage points related to our repricing and harvesting of synergies. Synergies have also supported a further drop in our cost ratio.

As mentioned on the slide before, growth in Personal lines was strong at almost 10 percentage year-on-year in Q4, while growth in Commercial lines was a bit negative due to the built-in volatility in repricing our largest corporate customers. Furthermore, a technicality in Q4 last year gave a small headwind for the quarter as well.

Please turn to slide four with our financial highlights for Q4. The insurance service result for Q4 '25 of 521 million was an improvement from 440 million last year, mainly driven by lower underlying claims, but also with support from the strong growth in Personal lines.

The investment result of 73 million in Q4 was satisfactory and on par with last year, and we ended 2025 at a very satisfactory level for the investment result of 337 million. Special cost of 39 million is somewhat lower than last year due to lower costs for the integration of Codan and realization of synergies, as well as special costs for announced redundancies booked in Q4 last year.

On slide five, you can see the payout ratio and EPS for 2025. The payout ratio was 98%, and earnings per share ended at 1 Danish krone.

The payout ratio is achieved as the net profit after tax with some adjustment related to the Codan integration, amortization of intangible assets, and profit of the discontinued activities from Energy and Marine business. In 2025, we are close to 100% payout as we have been in all recent years.

This reflects our strong underlying capacity for distribution. Earnings per share came to 1 Danish krone for 2025 based on adjusted profit after tax and the average number of shares.

This serves as the baseline for the 2026 to '28 EPS CAGR target of 10%. Adding together the upcoming share buyback program of 1.5 billion and the dividend of 0.66 crowns to be paid in April, we expect to make a total of 2.4 billion in distributions in 2026.

Let's go into the details with the insurance service result on segments on slide seven. Personal lines increased the insurance service result significantly to 314 million in Q4.

The improvement in Personal lines was driven by a double-digit premium growth, 2 percentage point improvement in the underlying undiscounted claims ratio, and higher run-off gains than the year before. The drop in the cost ratio followed the plan and thus helped as well.

Commercial lines did a bit under last year with an insurance service result of 207 million compared to 238 million in Q4 last year. The main driver for the lower result was major claims doubling to 8% in Commercial lines, although this is still below the normal level in Commercial lines of around 10%.

In addition, Commercial lines were impacted negatively by a run-off loss of 2.8 percentage points primarily related to liability insurance. We are, however, very satisfied with the massive improvement in the undiscounted underlying claims in Commercial lines this quarter.

Now please turn to slide eight. Insurance revenue grew by 4.6% in the quarter thanks to continued strong growth in Personal lines of almost 10%.

In Personal lines, we are still taking market shares due to our strong bank partnerships, while repricing related to high motor claims helped as well. The last effect is expected to dissipate in the coming quarters.

Commercial lines are switching to negative premium growth in the quarter, but the growth is slightly positive when adjusting for a technicality in Q4 last year that carries a headwind of 1% to Commercial lines growth in 20 in this quarter. Our work with increasing profitability on our largest customers does lead to some volatility from quarter to quarter in Commercial lines depending on the acceptance of individual price increases.

Q4 20 Q4 this year, premium growth was impacted negatively by this. Moving on to slide nine and the claims ratio.

The Q4 claims ratio was down 1.2 percentage points year-on-year mostly due to a drop in underlying claims of 2.4 percentage points, while it was negatively impacted by the run-off loss in Q4. The 2.4 percentage point improvement in the underlying claims ratio was driven by repricing and harvested synergy gains, while discounting was less of a help in Q4 this year due to a one-off, which led to a temporary 0.6 percentage point drop in the overall help from discounting in this quarter.

On an undiscounted basis, the underlying loss ratio improved by 3 percentage points. Personal lines had an improvement of 2.1 percentage points, while the improvement in Commercial lines reached 3.7 percentage points.

Now please turn to slide 10 and Personal lines. The claims ratio is down a massive 5 percentage points driven by underlying improvements and higher run-off gains compared to last year.

On top of this, the cost ratio still improves. This quarter quarter it is reduced with 0.6 0.7 percentage points to 18.9%.

Please turn to slide 11 and Commercial lines. The total claims experience worsened in Commercial lines, which was driven by an increase in major claims to 8% compared to a very low level of just 4% last year.

However, I note that this year is still below the normal level of 10%. An atypical run-off loss of 2.8 percentage points in Commercial lines was also a factor behind an increase in the claims ratio of about 3 percentage points.

However, I'm still very pleased with the undiscounted underlying claims in Commercial lines improving 3.7 percentage points year-on-year. Our expense ratio in Commercial lines in Q4 improved by 1.3 percentage points year-on-year as well.

With these comments, I will now hand over the words to Andreas, who will walk us through the financials.

Thank you, Rasmus. Now please turn to slide 13 for a final update on our synergies.

Synergies in Q4 '25 of 164 million is up by 26 million compared to Q4 last year, and thus we end '25 with 618 million in realized synergies. This underlines our successful takeover of Codan, as this is above the target of 600 million per year.

We actually finished the synergy program with a run rate of 650 million by the end of 2025, just to highlight how much we have won by acquiring Codan. The improvement in harvested synergies in Q4 '25 of 26 million from 138 million in Q4 '24 implies an improvement in our underlying claims ratio of 0.5 percentage points and our cost ratio by 0.4 percentage points year-on-year.

This will be the ending of our synergy accounting. Now I move to slide 14 and the investment result.

The investment result was a profit of 73 million driven by a positive return from our free portfolio and a positive return from our match portfolio as well. Overall, I'm quite pleased with the investment result for 20 '25 of 337 million, which ended well above the 200 million guidance we started with at the beginning of the year.

Even though we focus much more on the insurance service result than the investment result, it is clear that a positive investment outcome, like the one we had in '25, is a nice add-on to our distributions for the year. Now, finally, please turn to slide 16 for the outlook for 2025, initially stated January 21st.

Our guidance includes a technical result, excluding one-offs, of 1.65 to 1.85 billion. The guidance reflects positive effects from our new strategy initiatives presented at the CMD in November last year.

The cost ratio is expected to be unchanged at 17% in '26, and the combined ratio, excluding one-offs, result is expected to be 84.5 to 86.5. We expect an investment result of 200 million in '26 based on the current returns for the free portfolio and a zero result for the match portfolio.

Consequently, group profit, excluding other income and expenses, is expected to be 1.85 to 2.05 billion before tax, excluding run-off gains for '26. As you may have noticed, this is a bit different from how we used to guide.

We're now limiting ourselves to just one line with other income and expenses consisting of group costs, spent for education and development, and amortization of intangible assets. We guide at 0.5 billion net expenses for this single line below the line in 2026.

Andreas Ruben Madsen (CFO): With this, I conclude our presentation and hand over the word to our moderator. Thank you.

Thank you very much, and congratulations on a strong finish to the year. If I may start by looking a bit into the year we have started now, if you maybe could share a few details on what we should expect in terms of top-line development, and especially related to how much pricing you have done already in January.

I know one of your peers is saying the same in Norway, maybe you could share a bit of details on that as well. Then also in connection to this, maybe a bit on claims inflations expectations for the year as well.

Yeah. Hi, Mathias.

Andreas here. Try to talk you through that.

We started November '24 of doing the repricing, which was mainly related to the uptick we had seen structurally in motor frequency up until that point. That has been sort of the main driver for the significant premium increases we've had running during the last year also.

Going into '26, we will expect that to dissipate, we don't have the same sort of structural support from repricing anymore, logically so. Luckily also, we have seen motor claims, at least in terms of frequency, moderate somewhat, and so even though we see some tendencies for spare parts still increasing and thereby also average claims, we don't see, as we stand, need for major structural increases in prices from motor anymore.

If we're looking at, just to give you a rough sort of indication, we would be thinking something along the lines of 1% to 2%—sorry, 2% to 3% indexation for '26 on average across the different lines we have. On top of that, we still expect to be able to take some market shares and maintain some of the momentum we've had in private lines.

Our guidance of, let's say—and it's not a guidance, just to be clear, as you probably remember, we don't guide for top line, but let's say a rough indication where our starting point is around 3% and maybe with some, let's say, in some likelihood, probably a bit above that, that's where we would imagine the group being.

Sure.

Is

there any— Then I think you had a—

Yeah, sorry.

Sure. Is there any difference between Commercial and Private lines on the pricing going into '26?

Sorry for the details, but

just to

say a bit on that. Yeah.

No, that's fine, Mathias. No major differences.

We do still have, I would say, we're more sort of back to normal mode in both segments. We still maintain for Commercial lines a focus on especially having the right price for the larger corporates, and we're still, I would say, see some repricing needs within select lines, for instance, within larger workers' compensation, we have seen.

We've also been doing quite a bit of that already this year. No major sort of differences there.

As I maybe also adhered to before, most of the market share we would expect to get would be as we've seen in Private lines. Then I think you also asked a bit about claims and claims inflation.

I've sort of softly touched upon it within motor. I think the overall read is that we do see claims inflation, let's say, moderate, but as I mentioned before, for motor, at least, we're still a bit sort of, let's say, observant about the development there, but for now we feel we're at a sort of stable development.

Thank you. Then maybe a last question before I jump back in the queue.

Q4 was obviously a quite benign quarter in terms of weather and how everything looked in Denmark doing the quarter. How should we think about the start of '26?

Is this on par with what you have in your normal assumption, or is it slightly worse due to all the snow and cold weather that we have had in January so far? How should we think about what is actually a normal assumption for you?

Yeah. Overall, Mathias, we would say we are more or less on par with what we would expect for a January so far.

Thanks a lot.

Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions.

If I may come back to the previous question on the premium growth. If I take your mid-range of your guidance, the 80 80.5 and a half on the combined ratio, and then I use your insurance service result mid-range guidance to sort of calculate backwards to see your premium growth assumptions, it seems to be more like in the tune of 2% for the growth for '26.

Just was wondering if there is something here, especially I guess on the corporate side, something we should be aware of that will continue to be a drag, pruning on the portfolio, because I guess with the price initiatives, the indexation you are carrying through in Private and with the continued growth in Privatsikring, I guess we should expect Private lines to be perhaps above that in growth for '26.

Yeah. Thank you, Asbjørn.

I'll start out, and maybe Mads can help me out also. I think I heard you say 2% implicit top line.

I'm closer to 3%, and I also I between the combined and insurance service result factor. I would say that you shouldn't read too much into that.

I think that, as I said before, our overall expectation is something like 2% to 3% for indexation and then a continued momentum, especially in Private lines. A 3% as a starting point and in all likelihood maybe a bit more than that.

Asbjørn, it's Mads here. I didn't hear if you kind of put in normal run-offs into your calculation here, then you get to a bit different level when you do that.

And—

No, but I just literally took your 85.5% mid-range and your 1,750 insurance service result mid-range. I guess that implies a insurance margin of 14.5%,

taking

1,750 divided by 14.5% gives me 11, 12 billion and 70 million in premium.

Yeah. The thing is these calculations, they are very, very sensitive to what combined ratio level you put in when you do the implicit calculation.

If you try to do the kind of the calculation on 83.5%, which would be the case with a normal run-off of 2%, I think you would end at a bit different level. We get it to around 3%, but then again, remember, if you were to move the combined ratio just a little bit in the guidance given that we are guiding in brackets of 0.5%, then you can actually get to quite different implicit premium growth level.

It's very sensitive. I think, listening to Andreas, it is a bit about starting at 3%, and then we could perhaps have a little plus to that.

That is how we see it without guiding.

Okay. Fair enough.

Then on your underlying claims ratio improvement, the 300 basis points undiscounted for the group, then if I read your slide correctly, you say that it's primarily driven by the corporate business. I guess there's a few one-offs in Q4, or at least year-over-year comparison a few one-offs on the corporate side.

If I do this sort of the development in the underlying that you do report for the corporate business, it seems to be more like in the tune of 2.5% underlying, but obviously that's not discounted. Just wondering if we do sort of adjust for the various components, how do you see the underlying improvement in corporate in Q4, and how should we expect that to develop in '26 given that you continue to prune the portfolio?

Yeah. I can start, and hopefully give some flavor to it.

When we look at on an undiscounted basis and keep in mind that the one-off we have is related almost entirely for corporate lines, the one relating to to the discounting effect, which is from a model change this quarter regarding workers' compensation, and therefore also almost entirely relevant for corporate lines, that means that that on an undiscounted basis, we see a a a year-on-year improvement of 3.7 percentage points. Actually, because of the, if I just to add an an extra factor which is not in that number, we also have the indexation from legislations we mentioned in regards to the premium in Commercial lines where we had a we had 15 million more premiums in Q4 last year than we actually, to say, normally would have because we had two quarters coming in for one quarter in Q4 with a premium regulation there.

If you account for that also, then then in in in in corporate lines, we would we would get even higher for for the underlying year-on-year growth at least, or sorry, yeah, change in underlying loss ratio. I think in all actuality, we are quite happy with the improvements we see.

Just back to your question, when we look at the broad lines, and that was true both of Commercial and of Private lines, motor has been the major factor which we have needed on a broad sense to do repricing for, we would also expect for underlying loss ratio in Commercial that to start dissipating, that momentum we've had from repricing. Going forwards, and maybe that's a relevant starting point for that, I guess other people would be interested in this on the call, if we look at what do we expect for underlying loss ratios in '25, well, maybe doing it sort of simple terms, we have a net insurance service result improvement on a normalized basis of 150 million with the guidance we put forth.

We have a cost ratio which is guided more or less at the same rate as before. If you split that, we would say at least two-thirds of it would be coming roughly from underlying loss ratios, and then we have a slight also a positive impact from some growth on top of that.

Looking at something stylized along the line for the full year of a improvement of around 100 basis points in underlying loss ratios. The factors there would be we realize we do have some tailwind, we have a bit of synergy hangover, maybe a slight bit of pricing, especially maybe in the beginning of the year, and then that would add some support.

Then actually, we also have some improvements from our reinsurance coming in. We're somewhere maybe, let's say, 50 to 75 basis points coming from that.

Then we also have the initiatives we'll start to get effect from our improvements we're doing in the strategy, especially towards the end of the year. In sort of rough indication would be something along the lines of 100 basis points for the year.

For the combined group.

That was for the combined group. Yes.

Good question. Yes.

For the combined group. All right.

Hi. Morning.

Thanks for taking my questions. I have three from my side.

The first one is if you could provide the split of premium growth by price and volume for the group, and if possible, Private and Commercial. The second question is regarding the share buyback you announced last week.

The 500 million recurring share buyback, should we look at it as the base for next years, or should we consider it as recurring at 500? Then last question, which is more long-term, strategic, is on the autonomous vehicles.

What do you see and what do you expect to see in Denmark in the medium to long term? Thank you very much.

Yeah. Thank you.

I can start at least with starting with premiums. We sort of touched upon that earlier.

If I heard you correctly, it would be regarding the '26 expectations for premiums, or is it regarded to the Q4 we see, just to be clear?

For the Q4, and then obviously, you already talked about—

Starting with the Q4, yeah. Thanks just for just for thanks for clarifying that.

We still what we see in in Q4 is that we have the continued momentum being very strong in Private lines. We have just around just below 10 percentage points year-on-year premium growth for Private lines.

Looking at that, we would say that we have something like 3 percentage points coming from indexation. Sorry, yeah, 3% from indexation, then we have around roughly 4 percentage points coming from repricing, which is now, as I mentioned before, towards the end of that, but but we still have some strong support from from that.

Then the the net gained business, much of that coming from our banking partnerships, would be around 3 percentage points support for the premium growth. That's sort of stylized, rough levels for that.

Then if you look at Commercial lines, we have actually the headline is sort of negative for premiums, and I can try to do the same bridge for Commercial lines. We would start with something around 3 percentage points coming from indexation, positive, and then a positive support also from repricing of around 2 percentage points.

Then there's the one-off effect I mentioned earlier from workers' compensation premiums regulation last year, which would be a headwind of 1 percentage point. Then implicitly, you could say that something along the lines of 5 percentage points negative is from premiums going out due to the repricing strategy we continue to have coming from our strong focus on profitability, especially in the larger corporate segments where just one or two of the larger, let's say, customer engagements can add some volatility into our quarterly earnings.

There's nothing sort of out of the ordinary, but obviously it is a blip in the quarter here, but actually following the strategy we've had for some time now. Then I think just going into briefly recapping on what we expect for the next year, we would see most of the repricing we've been doing is now fully in the books.

We don't have that much coming, and we don't see the need for structural repricing anymore. That means that with the sort of an indication, and again, not a guidance because we do not guide for top-line growth, we need to have flexibility to cater for the focus on profitability first, then we would be talking something along a starting point of around 3 percentage points where 2% to 3% coming from indexation and also with a support from our market shares being captured in Private lines.

That would be what we expect for '26. Then you asked about the share buyback.

The Well, I think the maybe I think the best way to explain the 500 we have coming in, which we term sort of regarding the the ordinary net earnings we've had this year, we have a payout of 98% for the year, and so coming from, let's say, the ordinary our our dividends and and the buyback of 500. The thinking we have is that we try to cater for a stable increase in dividends per share, something along the lines of 10% every year.

That's also very closely linked to our our EPS target for the coming years. We like to see that come up stably, something along the lines of 10%.

When we did that this year, that meant that we we we ended with a total payout of 933 million, and then the rest is placed in an ordinary buyback. This time, we had we were we were able to to pay out all of it, to say, coming very close to a payout of 100%.

The 500 is that's how the 500 come around. I think, more or less, you could say that that makes it makes it, all else equal, probably something along the lines of a of a of a rough starting point for where we would be next year.

We would have more earnings in an in an sort of in an expected they on an expected basis at least, and then we would need to cater for dividends per share also coming up a bit. That's that's sort of how you should think about it.

Then as I heard the last question—

I can take it. It was the report from US on self-driving cars, as I understood it.

We of course noticed the report. We know about the issue for long.

It's been discussed. It's also a matter of when will this happen in Europe, when will the legislation be in place and all that.

For the moment being, we are quite confident that it will not have a huge effect or any effect in this strategy period. Of course, we are very, very well aware of the issue and follow it quite closely.

Alessia, are you there?

Thank you so much. It's just a couple of small questions from my side.

I guess in relation to the jumbo share buyback you just announced, you also commented on reinsurance coverage. What has changed in that respect?

That would be my first question.

Andreas here. There we've had some I would say some tailwind in general on reinsurance in this placing.

Actually, as I mentioned before, we do see some improvements in terms of like-for-like premiums. On top of that, we've actually also been able to, especially I would say, or actually within our cat program, we've been able to, in this placing, get better terms, meaning that we have been able to achieve prepaid reinstatements for some of the higher lines in the programs where we have the severe losses.

That means that, in actuality, our risk in a very severe catastrophe event has come down quite a bit, and that's what's the major factor within the insurance risk driving down the SCR this quarter. I hope that makes—

Because so if you take let's call this extra half a billion a top-up, right? If you take that top-up, how's that split between reduced market risk, better reinsurance coverage, and a higher profit margin?

If you look at maybe looking in in a in a bit of a different way, the if you if we look at the the SCR part of the capital change coming from from the quarter from Q3, I'm just looking just a minute, Martin, just to find it here. We have an SCR now of 1.999 billion roughly, 1,914 million, and we're coming down from from 2,085.

That's a total decrease in SCR of 172. If you look at that number, roughly around 200 is coming from the reinsurance including latest exposure updates.

That is sort of the the main driver behind our total decrease. We have a few other moving parts in the other parts of the SCR, but that is the major driver of of of the of the SCR coming down.

Then, on top of that, you also have that the own funds sees quite a favorable movement, especially from the development in our profit margin from Q3 to Q4. That is more or less as would be expected in a normal cycle over the year, but those are the major explanations for our change in solvency coverage from Q3 to Q4.

Okay. I guess over the past many years Alm.

Brand has been sort of a story of excess capital distributions, and you have managed to, over and over again, to find sort of new top-ups to your ordinary distributions. With your sort of CFO eyes, Andreas, do you think that Alm.

Brand is now a fully optimized company in terms of solvency ratio, or do you still see that there is more belly fat to dig into?

I think we are quite optimized now. We have a full internal model.

That was the major change in this strategy period. We got that in '25 in the last strategy period.

We just got that through. I think further optimization could, at some point, be relevant within reinsurance, as I just mentioned, but, again, that would be very dependent on us seeing a continued general improvement of the market conditions.

I'm not saying it's ruled out, but we have already gotten quite, I would say, good benefits there. Then I would mention that the strong driver behind the favorable overall solvency regime or capital requirements for a non-life P&C companies is that, more or less, when you have internal models, the first shield in your defense is the earnings you structurally make.

As we expect to structurally make more money in insurance service result in coming years, that would also factor into lower solvency.

Okay. All right.

Very clear. Then perhaps just the last question from my side.

Could you please share a few words on the arbitration case?

Yeah. Do you want to

start? I can take that.

It was a case that got filled here's the beginning of 2026. Of course, just to be clear, we dispute the case, and it's regards the principle applied for valuation of the divestment and how that was in line with our historical principles of assessing assets and liabilities.

These principles are fully in line with how we have made the financial accounts, and it's been reviewed by our external accountants. We actually sincerely doubt that this case would have any significant financial impact for our group in the future.

What do you think the timeline is?

Normally the timeline for these arbitration cases are, I would say, one to two years.

Okay. All right.

Very clear. Thanks.

Thank you very much. Just a quick follow-up, it's not because it's a major one, but it's also the first time that we meet after your CMD and your new strategy.

I thought it would also be interesting to hear what is the pushback you get from the organization on the strategy? Are people in general happy?

Are some of them concerned about the need to make more money, and they need to be a bit more aggressive on pricing, and so on? What is the pushback you are getting from internally?

I think that could be interesting to hear given that it's the first time after you launched it.

It's actually a very good question, Mathias. We've put quite an effort in starting with having the management team, full management team, on board when we did the strategy, of course together with our board.

That means a lot of people were involved in creating the strategy, and of course that gives us followers. That was one thing.

Then the time after, two months have passed, and we had a, just an example, we had a big management conference two weeks ago where we put additional efforts into discussing and finding out how to proceed with the strategy. I would say the follow for the organization is very good, and it's good to the reason that now we will work with even more with our processes with our thinking about how to improve the work with policies, with setting prices, and all that.

The very best thing is that we all agree that now it's time, even more time, to be there for our customers. It should be easy to be customers.

It should be easy to write the insurance contracts, but also to fill in claims and all that. On that note, it's taken very positively for our people.

Thank you very much. That was all for my side.

As usual, thank you very much for participating, and thank you for your questions. Thank you.