Thank you, Renju. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Q3 FY26 earnings conference call of Bajaj Finserv Limited.

First, I would like to thank the management of Bajaj Finserv for giving us the opportunity to host this call. As always, we will have opening comments from the management team, post which we will open the floor for Q&A.

On the management side today, we have: Mr. S.

Sreenivasan, President - Insurance and Special Projects, Bajaj Finserv Limited; Mr. Ramandeep Singh Sahni, CFO, Bajaj Finserv Limited; Mr.

Tapan Singhel, MD and CEO, Bajaj General Insurance Limited; Mr. Tarun Chugh, MD and CEO, Bajaj Life Insurance; Mr.

Avesh Karmali, CFO, Bajaj General Insurance; Mr. Vipin Bansal, CFO, Bajaj Life Insurance; Mr.

Ashish Panchal, MD and CEO, Bajaj Finserv Direct; Mr. Devang Mody, MD and CEO, Bajaj Finserv Health; and Mr.

Ganesh Mohan, MD, Bajaj Finserv Asset Management Limited. With this, I would hand over the floor to Ramandeep sir for his opening comments.

Thanks, and over to you, sir.

Thank you. Good morning, everybody.

We welcome you to the conference call to discuss the results of Bajaj Finserv Limited, BFS, for quarter three FY26. As before, in this call, we will largely be concentrating on the consolidated results of BFS, the results of our insurance operations through Bajaj General Insurance Limited and Bajaj Life Insurance Limited, our emerging companies which include Bajaj Finserv Health, Bajaj Finserv Direct, and Bajaj Finserv Asset Management Company, and lastly, where material, the stand-alone results of BFS.

Bajaj Finance, BFL, and Bajaj Housing Finance, BHFL, other major subsidiaries of ours, have already had their conference calls, and hence, we would pursue only very high-level questions on BFL and BHFL. To start with a few hygiene points as usual, as a word of caution, we affirm that any statements that may look forward-looking statements are just estimates and do not constitute an assurance or indication of any future performance result.

Let me also give you an update on the basis of accounting which we follow across the group. As required by the regulations, Bajaj Finserv prepares its financials in compliance with Indian Accounting Standards, Ind AS.

The insurance companies, however, are not covered under Ind AS. They prepare Ind AS financials only for the purpose of consolidation.

Accordingly, for Bajaj General and Bajaj Life, stand-alone numbers reported are based on non-Ind AS accounting standard, referred to as Indian GAAP, as applicable to insurance companies. I'll start by giving you an update on our joint venture with Allianz.

I am happy to confirm that on 8th January 2026, Bajaj Finserv Limited, along with its promoter group companies, namely Bajaj Holdings and Investment Limited and Jamnalal Sons Private Limited, successfully completed the acquisition of 23% equity stake held by Allianz SE in the two insurance subsidiaries. Consequent to this transaction, Bajaj Group collectively holds 97% equity stake in each of the two insurance subsidiaries, and the JV between us and Allianz SE stands terminated.

As regards the remaining 3% equity stake held by Allianz SE in each of the insurance companies, the boards of the respective companies have approved to offer a buyback to its shareholders, subject to applicable law and necessary approvals. This buyback, on one hand, will conclude the buyout of Allianz stake, and on the other hand, will also strengthen the ROE and ROEV of both our insurance subsidiaries going forward.

Post the buyback, the holding of the insurance subsidiaries by the Bajaj Group is expected to be as follows: 77.33% by Bajaj Finserv, 18.1% by Bajaj Holdings, and the remaining 4.57% by Jamnalal Sons Private Limited. I will now jump into the high-level update on the consolidated results for the quarter, the same has also been put in our press release dated 4th February 2026.

Before we get into the results, we would like to call out on two exceptional items which color the results for the quarter. The first one being the one-time impact of the new Labour Code, which impacts the bottom line by close to about 380 crores at a gross level across all our companies.

However, this has a net consolidated PAT impact for BFS of about 167 crores. The second one-off is the accelerated ECL provision made by Bajaj Finance during the quarter to enhance its balance sheet resilience by implementing a minimum LGD floor across all its businesses.

This has an impact of about 1,406 crores on BFL's results on gross basis, with a net consolidated PAT impact of about 540 crores for Bajaj Finserv. As for the results now, the consolidated total income grew 24% to about 39,708 crores versus 32,042 crores for the same quarter last year.

The consolidated profit after tax, before accelerated ECL provision of BFL and the one-time charge of new Labour Code, grew by 32% to about 2,936 crores versus 2,231 crores for the same quarter last year. The consolidated profit after tax before the accelerated ECL provision, the one-time charge of the new Labour Code, excluding the MTM gains and losses, and including the realized equity gain booked under OCI by the insurance companies, the PAT grew by 13%.

Let me now deep dive and give you further texture on the performance of each of our subsidiaries. To start with Bajaj General, for the quarter, Bajaj General ranked first amongst private players on GDPI basis while maintaining its market share.

The GWP for the quarter three increased by 11.5% to about 7,389 crores versus 6,626 crores for the same quarter last year. Excluding the bulky tender-driven crop and government health businesses, the GWP increased by 17.2%.

In terms of GDPI growth, the growth was a healthy 17.7%, largely in line with the industry growth. The growth is largely attributable to the motor and health segments, partially offset by de-growth in crop insurance, largely arising from pricing pressures, which we've discussed in the past.

The underwriting loss for the quarter was at about 137 crores versus a loss of 43 crores for the same period last year, largely impacted by the one-off impact of labour wage code of 42 crores and higher acquisition cost during the period attributable to focus on preferred business segments being written by the company. The combined ratio stood at a very, very healthy 97.9% for the quarter as against 101.1% for the same quarter last year.

We believe that this combined ratio for Bajaj General will be amongst the lowest in the multiline market with a ROE reasonably above 22%, excluding the surplus capital at 200% solvency. The adjusted PAT before the impact of new Labour Code for the quarter stood at 430 crores versus 400 crores for the same period last year, a growth of about 8%.

AUM for BAGIC stood at about 36,417 crores versus 32,633 crores for the same period last year, an increase of almost 12%. In summary, these operating results, including combined ratio and ROE, underscore Bajaj General's disciplined focus on delivering balanced and profitable growth, supported by strong risk selections, robust distribution capabilities, prudent underwriting, and a continued emphasis on exceptional customer service.

I'll now move to Bajaj Life. Bajaj Life 2.0 was initiated in the second half of last year with a focus on sustainable and profitable growth.

Happy to confirm that the financial outcomes are as planned in the course of Bajaj Life's 2.0. The impact of change in strategy is now reflected in the third quarter results wherein Bajaj Life registered the highest ever value of new business and the new business margins on YTD basis over the last decade.

The retail weighted received premium growth has now been reinstated with a growth of 19.9% from 1,549 crores last year for the quarter to about 1,856 crores, largely in line with the industry growth. This was backed by a retail protection contributing to 9% of the overall retail business with a growth of 47% for the quarter.

Group protection has also registered a healthy growth of about 29%. The VNB for the quarter grew at a healthy 59%, up from 254 crores for the same quarter last year to about 405 crores during the quarter.

The new business margin, NBM, is up at 19% for the quarter as against 15.1% for the same quarter last year. On the back of continued strong renewal premium growth of 20.9%, Bajaj Life's GWP grew 23.5% during the quarter.

Persistency dips were however observed across a few cohorts in line with the industry, which are being worked upon by the company. On overall retail weighted received premium basis, the product mix for the quarter was well-balanced and stood as follows: par was at 23%, non-par savings at 14%, term at 9%, annuities at 11%, and ULIPs at 44%.

The profit after tax was impacted during the quarter largely by the new Labour Code to the tune of 43 crores and the loss of input tax credit from the GST change which we saw during the last quarter. Bajaj Life ended the quarter with a AUM of 1,38,000 crores, up at about 13% from the same period last year.

The company is also in the process of setting up a pensions fund management business and a branch in the GIFT City for which a process of regulatory approvals has been initiated. Overall, the quarter for Bajaj Life is in line with the expectations and on the right trajectory of sustainable and profitable growth.

Finally, both the insurance companies are financially amongst the most solvent in the industry, Bajaj Life with 333% solvency and Bajaj General with about 344%, and hence are well-poised to weather any external adversity. We must however reiterate that insurance is a long-term business, and we remain steadfast in our commitment to drive profitable growth, create sustainable value, and always prioritize the interest of our policyholders.

I'll now move to our lending businesses, Bajaj Finance and Bajaj Housing Finance. To start with Bajaj Finance, the core performance remained robust across business volumes, AUM, opex, credit cost, and profitability.

Number of new loans booked during the quarter was at about 1.39 crores as against 1.2 crores in the same period last year, a growth of 15%. The company's diversified business model has enabled its AUM to grow at a strong 22.1% at about 4,85,883 crores.

The net total income grew by about 19% to 13,817 crores as against 11,673 crores for the same quarter last year. The profit after tax before the impact of the new Labour Codes and the accelerated ECL provision grew by a very healthy 23.3% during the quarter from about 4,246 crores to 5,227 crores.

The opex to net total income improved to 32.8% as against 33.1% for the same period last year. The net loan losses and provisions for the quarter before the accelerated ECL provision of 1,406 crores was at about 2,219 crores in the quarter as against 2,043 crores for the same quarter last year, an increase of only about 9%.

In quarter three, net decrease in stage two and three assets were at about 93 crores, reflecting significant improvement in portfolio quality and a positive outlook on credit cost year-on-year. The GNPA and NNPA stood at 1.2% and 0.5% respectively as of the December end, as against 1.2% and about 0.48% for the same period last year.

Capital adequacy remained strong at 21.4% as at 31st December with a Tier 1 capital of about 20.6%. Moving now to Bajaj Housing Finance Limited, the mortgage subsidiary of BFL, it was a stable quarter with AUM growth of 23.2%, driven by good momentum and disbursements amidst higher portfolio attrition.

Growth was very well distributed across all the business segments. The home loans AUM grew 18%, loan against property grew 32%, lease rental discounting grew 39%, and developer finance by 18%.

Net interest income grew 19% to 1,153 crores as against 933 crores for the same quarter last year. Operating efficiencies continued with opex to net total income at healthy 19% as against 19.8% for the same quarter last year.

Healthy asset quality was maintained with a GNPA and NNPA at about 0.27% and 0.11% as of December 31st. PAT before impact of new Labour Codes grew 23.2% to a healthy 675 crores for the quarter.

Capital adequacy ratio stood at 23.15% as at December end with a Tier 1 capital of 22.69%. In summary, another very strong quarter for both our lending companies, BFL and BHFL.

Now I'll quickly give you an update on our emerging companies. To start with Bajaj Finserv Health, in quarter three carried out about 6.2 million healthcare transactions as against 2.1 million transactions for the same quarter last year.

Bajaj Finserv Health continued to expand its provider network, which includes about 1,34,000 doctors, about 16,000 hospitals, and upwards of 6,300 lab touchpoints. Utilizing this network strength and its tech platform, Bajaj Health is able to offer integrated OPD, IPD, and wellness experience to both retail as well as corporate customers.

During the quarter, the revenue from operations of Bajaj Finserv Health grew at a healthy 22%. Moving to Bajaj Markets, during the quarter, the lending in the BFSI space in the form of disbursements stood at about 1,800 crores for the quarter as against 1,549 crores for the preceding quarter, which was quarter two of FY26.

The company ended with a total unique partner count of 101. Top line for the company was impacted during the last few quarters and was down from about 156 crores for the same quarter last year to about 94 crores in the current quarter.

This was due to a planned transition of a software where we are moving to SFDC for front-line sales. Now with the migration likely behind us during the quarter three, we are likely to see the growth resume year-on-year, and from quarter four onwards, we are hopeful that the revenue growth should get reinstated.

There has been no capital infusion however in the company since March of '22, showing capital efficiency of the company. Moving to Bajaj Finserv Asset Management Company Limited, the AMC company continued its good run, recording a AUM of upwards of 30,000 crores as of 31st December, and moving to the 26th spot amongst all the mutual fund companies in India in terms of AUM.

We believe that Bajaj Finserv AMC is the fastest to cross the 30,000 crores mark in about two and a half years of operations. The equity mix of the AUM stands at about 56%, and the non-group share of AUM constitutes about 87% of the total AUM.

This summarizes the performance on all our companies. That's from my side on the performance.

Before we open for the questions, considering the paucity of time, I would request the audience to keep their questions brief so that we can cover more queries during this call. With this, I invite questions from the audience.

Hi. Thanks for taking my questions.

Just maybe to begin with on the life side, there has been a fairly strong and impressive growth in the institutional business. If you could give some color and texture in terms of which are these partners or is it addition of new partners, is it faster growth in the existing one which has contributed to this growth?

Secondly, I think on the agency side, after multiple quarters, we are able to see some positive growth there, is it fair to say that now we have bottomed out? I have some more questions, but this is on the life side.

Thanks, Nishant.

You track us too closely, man. Institutional, specific questions, specific answers.

I'd say that the growth in institutional is widespread. It is not necessarily coming from the big partners.

We were possibly the first ones to experiment with a bevy of smaller partners, and that strategy is paying off. It's worked really well for them and us.

I must say that the couple of new partnerships that we've got, significant size, medium significant if you may say, and which is largely AU, Fed, and YES, I think there is a lot more yet to be seen. Those should give more than the median, much more than the median that you will see in terms of growth for various partnerships.

For agency, yeah, while the growth has been good, I think the one thing I'd like to point out to all the analysts on this call is that we've seen something even better in agency. We've seen a doubling of their VNB in this nine-month period.

As you all know that we took some significant calls on agency in terms of commissions, in terms of efficiencies, in terms of tweaking on the models, in terms of cost, in terms of the air hierarchy cost, a lot many things that we've been doing there, in terms of how we add our branches and all of that. We are deeply encouraged, and we may not necessarily focus just on growth on agency.

The strategy is getting cooked as we go. As agency is a very involving and very training-intensive, relationship-intensive business.

We will continue to work on the bottom line more than the top line. Hence, the growth on agency is not necessarily something I shall be saying will just buckle up and start popping up from next quarters.

It is really a little bit more number of quarters as we continue to work on some more parameters on agency to set it right directionally on VNB once and for all. We don't want to do this too often in your history with an agency channel.

Hence, top-line growth is not going to be the key thing. The bottom-line growth is what is going to be the key thing in agency.

I hope I've answered you, Nishant.

That's perfect. Just extending from here, in terms of product mix, is it fair to say that agency will probably be more traditional and protection-heavy and the institutions will be banca-heavy?

I think that's a trend we have seen in some of your other peers.

No, not necessarily. Our agency is unique.

I've said this earlier as well, when we moved from a mass to a mass affluent base of customers in the last 6, 7 years, we used ULIP products significantly. The ULIPs we used to sell earlier weren't necessarily very profitable.

Now our ULIPs themselves are looking quite healthy, and that is what the agency team has done brilliantly, I would say. The pickup of term has been wholesome, systematic, and I'd say something that can only just give us more and more confidence in the future.

Par remains a healthy mix for agency as well. As far as institutional is concerned, it really is bank by bank, and every bank is uniquely positioned.

I always say that we are possibly amongst the top five, six companies, the only one which is truly diversified. That remains core of our strategy.

It's been a consistent method you've possibly been hearing from us last 3 years. We drive business based on what is good for our partner and for us.

Hence that may still yes be in line with what you see for other bancassurance businesses. Only thing, please account for the fact that we don't have one bank which would take 50% of our business, and that ratio would hence not be akin to the ratio you see with other bancassurance-led companies.

Got it. Got it.

Then, I got it. Just quickly on VNB margins, if you would want to kind of re-highlight your guidance, because I think mathematically, as I see it here, VNB margin would have been closer to around 23%, but for the sorry, 21%, but for the GST hit.

A, how do we see this going forward? Probably the GST hit continues or neutralizes, and hence, where do the margins settle?

Yeah. I guess you are asking for more details, but I'll just answer, give you a top-line message and ask Vipin to continue with a little bit more details so that we can be transparent to everybody because I know the GST bit is something that everybody worries about.

I must say that this is a reset of the VNB and the NBM margin from earlier, something we weren't very proud of, but I think now you see the trajectory is positive. This one has been more a huge bump-up.

I don't think this kind of bump-up is going to be there in the future. Yes, the trajectory will be positive because as a company, we, as I said, moved on this journey of efficiencies, cost corrections, tailor-making products, tailor-making our commission rates way before anybody else because being a multi-distribution company, we are sensitive to these matters, and we have to get more and more efficient far sooner than others.

On the GST bit, I'll just pass it on to Vipin so that he can transparently answer.

Sure. Hi, Nishant.

You would recall that last quarter when we spoke, our estimation was that we'll have around about 4.5%, 450 bps impact of GST. I think that number largely holds good.

What is reflected in this quarter's P&L is a mitigation of about 1.75%. What we know today, what we have executed decisions taken, I think as we exit next quarter, on aggregate basis, we would have mitigated by about 325 bps, 3.25%, as we exit March against 450 that we had.

I think thereafter, we believe that delta of 125 is a reset first year till new year. I think that will be part of our base, and we continue to work on that.

I think that's how we look at it. In terms of guidance, I think while we don't give guidance, but Tarun called out, I'll reiterate.

Last four quarters, quarter four last year and first three quarters this year, we have seen margin expansion of 4% to 6.5% consistently, VNB growth on an average of about 50%. I think having done that in a year, the base effect does start kicking in.

Obviously, the kind of margin expansions and VNB growth will definitely taper down from here on. I think that's the way to look at it.

Having said that, our strategy on 2.0 is still WIP. We continue to execute that, and I think GST just moved that back by about two to three quarters, I must say.

Had that not been there, to the point you made, yes, the numbers would have been a bit different. I think that's a reality.

I think it's a pushback of two to three quarters, but I think we are confident that we will be on track to execute in line with the strategy that we had called out. Got it.

Got it. Thank you.

Just one tiny question on the general insurance business. If I look at motor OD loss ratio, it remains sort of elevated this quarter as well.

Now in this backdrop, why really grow at 21%? Avais, you want to take it?

Sure. Overall, if you look at the situation, the elevated loss ratio is not something that is just experienced by our organization.

It is something that is experienced by across the industry. Now this can be broken down into multiple parts, but one of the, I would say, leading indicators is the pricing pressure, and of course, due to GST, there's been a certain impact as well on the IDVs.

The pricing pressure is something that is being corrected, and we continue to do so as our daily operations. Within this backdrop, we continue to grow with our long-term view, which is sustainable growth, and hence, we see that is something that we endeavor to do going forward as well.

Fair to say that in this environment, you might just mellow down a bit given the way the loss ratios are trending? For the industry, not for you, I'm saying.

See, if you look at it now in terms of how the loss ratios are trending, it always corrects in its own way, the point you said, no? The industry also react to it, and it corrects as it progresses.

This is in a general insurance business, it's always cyclic. If you look back now 25 years for us there, you'll never find that it remains the same forever, no?

It moves up for the whole industry like Avais mentioned. If you now look at motor OD loss ratios, I think for everybody, it's sort of moved up, no?

Then I think correction happens, it comes down on its own. These are part of our business model.

This is something that we have been doing for so many years and we'll do that. You'll see that how it balances out as it progresses.

Perfect. Thank you very much.

All the best.

Thank you.

Hi. Thank you for the opportunity.

Just on Bajaj General, wanted to get a sense on how competition is actually playing out in motor and both the group and retail health segments. Second, could you please help us with your retail health loss ratios for 3Q versus 3Q last year?

The last one, how has motor TP release been this year versus last year, and how has the experience been? Thank you.

Okay. I'll just give you first thing.

We don't talk of competition, no? We respect all our competitors, and I believe they're all doing very good.

We don't get into how, no? We can talk of the industry as a whole.

Industry as a whole, if I look at it, it is intense right now. The combined ratio for the industry actually has moved up if you look at for the third quarter.

If I just pick up the multiline insurance companies, both public and private, it'll be touching close to 128%. Now in that combined ratio, if you look at the performance of Bajaj General, no, it has a combined ratio which is close to 100.

It's a phenomenal performance in terms of delta to the industry, and still, as Ramandeep mentioned in the call in the beginning, we are the largest private player in terms of total volume business for this quarter. I think that is what the industry perspective is.

That is why I was so confident when I mentioned earlier that this sustainable level of this combined ratio for industry is not there. The industry would, no, move to a correction mechanism to bring it down.

Bajaj General in that context continues its philosophy of a combined ratio which is much better than industry, and this time, it's true, about 20, no, upward of 20% better in terms of being there, also not losing market share, and being there. That is the industry perspective.

Second, on the retail health perspective, we don't give exact loss ratios, but we'll tell you that it is better, no, compared to what was in the same period last year. It has improved on that basis.

On the TP bit, I think we give the triangle, and it is in line with the reserving and the way it has progressed. Avais, you want to add something to this?

No, I think you've covered it primarily structurally. If there's any other detailed questions, I'm happy to take it.

No, no. That covers it.

Thank you so much, and congrats on a good set. Thank you.

Thank you for taking my question. A couple of questions on the general insurance side.

First, if I look at your motor TP loss ratios, they are been on for the first three quarters, it is comparatively very low compared to the last year same three quarters. Is there any impact of reserve releases, or this is the normalized loss ratio for motor TP going forward?

That's the first question. The second question is on the underwriting profit.

While our combined ratio has improved both on a Y-o-Y and a Q-o-Q basis, but our underwriting losses have actually increased, and I believe that is because our NEP growth is slower. Is that the correct understanding, first of all?

How do we think about the absolute underwriting losses going forward? These are the two questions from me.

Okay. Now if you look at TP, and I think this question keeps on coming, the way to look at TP business is what is the release for claim settlement, I think, no?

Let us say when you do reserving, it is based on all the current judgments which is happening, and on that, you reserve on the past record also. When the claims get settled, and if the settlement happens much better than what the claims were reserved, there's a release which happens.

It's a continuous process, no? The TP release is not something that would happen, but the quantum of it varies in terms of how the claim trends is happening, how the settlement is happening, because it's a long book.

That is why this happens. If let us say if you start seeing strengthening of reserves, then there's a worry because that means that the claim reserves which were kept was at a lower pace, and the settlement happened at a much higher pace.

As long as release is happening, it's a good sign. That means the company has been adequately reserved in terms of the claim which would be there.

That's why you'd see that, no, on a continuous basis happening. Let us say if there's sudden judgment which comes in, in which it changes the way the court decides a TP claim, and we have had this judgment in the Sarla Verma, we have a lot of judgments, when that decision changes, then strengthening will happen based on all the past records, based on what the judgment, no, comes into a picture.

This is how TP would move going forward. In terms of your NEP, it is because we have a whole account treaty, no, and I think if you want details, Avais can take it offline and explain to you.

Because of that, the NEP looks lower. It is not about any structural issue.

It's about a reinsurance treaty that we have on that basis. For the combined ratio, as I said, we always maintain that we would be close to 100, no, is our ambition, and that is what we have been doing for so many years while maintaining or growing the market share.

That is how we have organically grown. That is a point I always mention that Bajaj General from that perspective, look at for, no, compared to some of our peers, is a complete organic-grown company, built brick-by-brick over time, and we continue to do that structurally what we have been doing for so many years.

Avais, you want to add something to this?

No, I think you got it as well. The point on the underwriting profit, I could just add one point, is that the company has experienced quite a bit of market share increase on motor side, specifically on the two-wheeler side, and therefore, as you know that business comes with a certain amount of acquisition costs, and therefore, you would see the underwriting profit as at the level that it is.

Overall, we still believe, and you continue to believe, as you mentioned earlier, this business is good from a long-term perspective and sweet to it. That's the only thing I would like to add.

Thank you.

Also, the underwriting loss for the quarter will have an impact of the labour wage code one-time hit of about 42 crores. That's also adding to the loss.

Sure, sir. In all, if you actually see the underwriting loss moving up, I'll just summarize from what Tapan and Avesh said.

One is the impact of the new Labour Code, 42 crores, it coming from there. The other is also we are writing more and more of fresh two-wheeler and four-wheeler business, which is the new cars.

There, if you see, our market share both for the quarter and nine months has moved up significantly in new motor sales. Like Avesh said, there the commissions are up-fronted for 3-year and 5-year, and hence, it gives a big hit on the underwriting result, but on combined ratio basis, it evens out.

That's the way we look at it. The other issue also is that for the quarter, the NEP is looking a little depressed is because there was a change in the ceding percentage on the government health business, which we did last year for the same period versus this year same period.

If we actually exclude the impact of that, the NEP growth actually improves for the quarter to about 5%, 6% is what I recall. There are few of these elements which are leading to reflecting a higher underwriting loss, but the combined ratio is operating at a very healthy level.

Sure, sir. That's helpful.

Thank you.

Yeah. Hi, sir.

Thanks for the opportunity. Congrats to the life team on a phenomenal set of numbers.

Hi, sir, first question is on your product mix. This quarter, we have seen a very sudden spike on the annuity mix.

What has led to this? Have we done some product interventions on this side?

Like your peers have seen a significant growth on the retail protection side, but we have seen this growth has been kind of muted, or I would say 18%, 19% for you for this quarter. What has led to that moderation?

Lastly, on the channel and product mix, if you can help us understand what's our product and channel-specific strategy to understand on that? I had one question on BAGIC side, I will ask later.

Thanks for that question. I think on the product mix, I would say if you look at our mix for last five to six quarters, it's largely stable.

Obviously, there'll be some noise depending on the quarter that you are looking at, but it's largely stable, and that is something we also called out as part of our 2.0 strategy, and I think we are directionally heading there. Yes, you would see annuity going up.

That was the case even last year last quarter as well. I think what we need to understand is we were the one who started deferred annuities about 4, 5 years back.

This market tends to be intensely competitive, and when the pricing was not right, we actually retreated back, and then hence, our annuity would hover around 4% to 5%. Last quarter, we actually changed our product proposition on annuity, brought in newer products, and that actually increased annuity mix to about 9% to 10% is what you're seeing now.

I think on your question on annuity, reflected in last quarter and it continues this quarter. In respect of retail protection, I think there is a small difference.

Look, GST has helped everybody. It helps us also because retail protection does become cheaper.

In our case, as part of our strategy, we had been actually focusing on retail protection for almost last 2 years. If you go back last 2 years, every quarter, our retails growth on protection has been significantly high.

Now obviously, once the base kicks in, the growth will obviously come down, and I think that's where it is reflected at. Does that answer your question?

Sure. Vipin, on channel and product-specific strategy, if you want to highlight anything on that?

I mentioned that, Shobhit, in the first answer that agency has got a fair good mix now. They've got term in a up and center now.

ULIPs, which are profitable, help us with the very high HNIs, wealth customers. We are present in the mid segment and Tier 2, Tier 3 cities a lot more than our peers.

In agency, I think 600 branches, and still, our top 10 cities would not be the same top 10 cities of the, let's say, the top five companies in the life sector largely because of our agency spread. That makes it more pertinent for having par plans.

There are some states we are particularly big, so that it's a lot more strategy if you get the whiff of the direction I'm going. It's largely driven by the market as well which we operate, and hence, the customer segment in the case in agency.

Proprietary sales it remains ULIP-heavy. It is ULIP-heavy, but a profitable ULIP-heavy now.

Selling a far higher premium-paying term now, which is exceedingly helpful, is going to be transitioning more to term and riders as we go ahead. Overall, as a company, our enhanced risk cover, term and riders put together, contributes to between 44%, 47% of our customer base, depending on [Operator: Operator request has been initiated.

If you'd like to cancel this request, please press "*", "0" again.] a huge transition that we've made.

As far as the institutional business is concerned, I answered the first one that Nishant had asked, where we are largely tailor-made to the partnership because we want it to be mutually beneficial to both players, and the customer segment for each of these partners is extremely difficult and different, I would say. Different is the word, and hence, to be able to predict difficult, but largely, as you see where we are today, you should consider this on aggregate settled as a product mix because we've got everybody to the right percentage of contribution which we wanted, and the diversification is now kind of stabilized.

What you see is what you have, and that's how it will remain in institutional business. Did I answer that?

Sure, sir. Sure, sir.

Thank you. Now coming to BAGIC, sir.

Sir, on motor OD loss ratio now, if I see, you mentioned that for the peers also, motor OD loss ratio has been rising. Is there a industry-wide phenomena or is there something which has changed all across the industry which has contributed to this spike, and should we expect this to be a new normal now?

Is it primarily because of the pricing environment which is there on the OD side?

I think Avais mentioned it earlier. If you look at with the GST corrections, IDV dropped, no?

Motor OD is calculated as a percentage to IDV, no? That drop happens, obviously, no, that leads to lower premium realization for the same vehicle which would have been there earlier, no?

Also with inflation, the cost of, no, repairs goes up. The only difference this year has been, compared to previous year, has been the drop in IDV because of third GST.

The value of car, no, comes down, and because the premium is a percentage to the value of car, so that obviously has a lesser realization coming to it. As I mentioned, that the industry would, no, look at correcting it as it progresses.

Is pricing is the only matrix because of which we will be able to correct this, sir?

See, let us look at a loss ratio. What exactly defines a loss ratio?

You have premium collection and your claim outgo, no? That is loss ratio.

It's as simple as that. If the premium collection goes low, your loss ratio will go up.

Second, if your claim outgo is more, your loss ratio will go up. Claim outgo, as I mentioned, which happens because of inflation, the repair cost, the spare part cost, that moves up.

When that move up, then the claim ratio will go up, or if the premium drops. When two both have happened simultaneously, no, at a point of time, then the loss ratio moves up.

That's why it moves up for the industry, no, which has happened. Now if you have to correct loss ratio, what you do?

There are only three steps: one, I increase premium; two, no, negotiate better on claim outgo; and three, start making your underwriting, no, mix stronger to get in that range, which is what companies would, no, be doing. It is this process which corrects the loss ratio going forward.

It's not very complicated. It's very similar to this, but the reason that you asked me why did the industry move up, it is because of this reason.

Sir. Got it.

Thank you and all the best.

Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Hi.

Thanks for the opportunity. I had one question on the general insurance side.

What does the pricing intensity look like on the fire and the other commercial lines of business, and how is it expected to be going ahead? Just wanted to get a better understanding on that.

India is a free market, minus motor third-party price, which is regulated by the government, no? Every other pricing is dependent on the company's underwriting understanding, and they would calculate that.

Then the movement of, no, price, which goes up. In a price free market, the movement will happen.

Sometimes price gets stiffer, loss ratio goes up, then the price again starts correcting itself. I said this is nature of the general insurance business, P&C business globally.

You'll hear this word, market softens, market hardens, no? It's cyclic in nature.

This is, as I said earlier also, this is part of our business. Right now, to answer your question specifically, on the fire portfolio, the price has softened, no, which should be there.

Because again, if you look at the results earlier, the commercial line businesses had a better loss ratio. If you look at this year, there has not been a major NatCat event, and not been something which has led to, no, huge losses for the industry.

When the loss ratio comes down, the prices come down. As I explain you in motor, as the loss ratio goes up, prices, no, starts moving up.

It moves in sync, no, is how the industry is moving. Because of good loss ratios and no major catastrophe event this year, obviously the prices are right now, no, moving down.

As they move down, the loss ratio starts moving up, and then the price starts correcting. When you look at this scenario, you should also see this is cyclic in nature.

It will happen. It's a continuous process.

Right now, if you look at the good loss ratios, it means that the pricing starts, no, correcting. If the loss ratio goes bad, the prices are correcting in the reverse side.

Right now, for fire, the loss ratios have been good, the price has, no, come down, to answer your question specifically.

Sure. Thank you.

Hi, sir. Thanks for taking my question.

I had a couple of questions. First, on the general insurance side.

Our opex to NWP has materially cooled off as compared to all the peers, these are estimates and my and street estimates. Do we think of it as maybe you are going slow on the new business and focusing more on the older business?

Because we have also seen on the motor side, the OD loss ratio go up. How do we see this trend,

the opex getting controlled with quite the claims ratio are pretty elevated? Now if you look at the issue for the industry broadly has been most companies not complying with the regulations, no, in terms of that 30% cap.

Bajaj General has been complying with it very well, and it has managed its cost. I think it's one of the lowest costs, no, in terms of the companies put together in the private space consistently for quite some time.

Growth, business, and cost are the two, three levers that is there, and we have been managing that very very well, and we have been in compliance with the regulations comfortably, no, compared to most other players in the private space. Also, just to answer the question you indicated, see on new versus existing business, we've been growing heavily on the new sales both on retail health and motor.

Motor, I already articulated that on two-wheeler and four-wheeler, we have indeed gained market share for the quarter and nine months both, and even on retail health, our new sales have been very, very healthy growth compared to last year. That's not the reason.

I think the real reason is what Tapan articulated. We've been conscious on controlling costs, and that's why our opex ratios look better than the others in the market.

The commissions have gone up for us as well in line with the peers?

Again if you look at it, why do we look at commission? The regulation, I would say, is a very progressive regulation which came in, in which it said that we don't worry on commission.

Our expenses put together, you should be below 30. Now why it is progressive?

Because let's say earlier times, the model of doing business was one: agency-dependent, direct you open branches, everybody had the same model, fixed commission made sense. In today's time, you can decide whether you want to be high variable or you want to do businesses also with low cost, no, or you want to, no, go direct.

This fungibility allows people to, no, experiment with the business models. What should be seen is the total number, not, no, stand-alone that commission moved up or come down and, no, expenses come down.

This fungibility allows business models to be created, and that's why I always mention that it has been a very progressive regulation. Globally, the number is around this number, no, expense and commission put together.

If you Google search and just put this that, no, for US market, how much does it come to, you'll be surprised. I think I saw in the media these kind of, no, questions coming up.

The question is that you have to put the two together to see, no, where does it stand, and then you'll see globally where does it stand. If it is close to the global benchmarks, then I think the industry and the regulations are being in the right place.

Okay. Thanks for this, sir.

I had just a final question on the AMC piece. Now that we are at a scale of around 30,000 crore AUM, are we still looking to be focused on the mutual fund space, or are we looking at alternates, PMS, and all of these asset classes to grow incrementally?

Yeah. For us, in the last couple of years, we've actually been focused on building out the mutual fund product suite, and we still have a little bit more work to do over there in terms of additional products that we launch.

We'll be certainly continuing on that path, but there's also additional opportunities that come up, particularly with regard to SIFs, PMS, as well as GIFT City. These are on our plan for this coming financial year, and you'll see us active on these fronts as well.

If I can add to that, I'm Sreeni here. We have also now set up Bajaj Alts as a separate company, and that company now has been staffed.

We will be looking sometime towards the end of FY27, subject to, of course, regulatory approvals, to start off a set of one or two alternative funds and possibly a PMS operation targeting that segment of the market which is where the minimum required for an AIF is 1 crore and above. It is currently under plan, and we hope that it will commence by end of FY27.

Got it. It's separate from the mutual fund because mutual fund will handle the retail market and the higher end of the retail market through their distribution channels, and this will be a separate alt

entity. Thanks, Sreeni.

Thank you for your time, everybody. Thank you.