Good morning, everyone. From the senior management, we have with us Mr.

Anand Roy, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer; Mr. Amitabh Jain, Chief Operating Officer; Mr.

Himanshu Walia, Chief Marketing Officer; Mr. Nilesh Kambli, Chief Financial Officer; Mr.

Aneesh Srivastava, Chief Investment Officer; Mr. Aditya Biyani, Chief Strategy and Investor Relations Officer; and Mr.

Sombik Bhattacharya, Head Investor Relations. Before we begin the conference call, I would like to mention that some of the statements made during the course of today's call may be forward-looking in nature, including those related to the future financial and operational performances, benefits and synergies of the company's strategies, future opportunities, and growth of the market of the company's services.

Further, I would like to mention that some of the statements made in today's call may involve risks and uncertainties. Thank you, and over to you, Mr.

Roy.

Thank you very much, and a very good morning to all of you, and thank you for joining Star Health's earnings call for the third quarter of FY26. I know we are late in January, but I would take this opportunity to wish you and your loved ones a very happy New Year '26.

Let me set the context. India's insurance industry is moving beyond penetration catch-up zone to a phase of sustained compounding, reinforcing its role in the core pillar of economic infrastructure.

We welcome the recent Sabka Bima Sabki Raksha, that is the amendment of the Insurance Laws Bill 2025, and we believe it is a significant policy milestone towards further deepening of insurance penetration. The bill institutionalizes trust through the establishment of Policyholders Education and Protection Fund, strengthening the foundations for sustainable, trust-led development.

We believe that health insurance in India is entering a structurally advantaged phase, with policy tailwinds and rising consumer intent, translating into sustained demand growth. Health insurance is already the largest and the fastest growing segment within the non-life industry.

Within this, retail health is the most consequential value pool voluntarily purchased by families across the country to protect their household balance sheets from medical shocks. IRDAI's annual report for FY24-25 reinforces this momentum, with the lives covered under retail health has grown at 7.7% year-on-year versus 5.6% year-on-year in FY23-24.

The number of lives covered exceeded 6 crores by March 31st, 2025. On the policy front, the recent landmark GST exemption on retail health has been a structural catalyst, lowering the all-in insurance cost for households.

This is already visible in the category growth. While overall non-life insurance grew at 11.5% in Quarter 3 FY26, retail health insurance grew 33.6%, that is three times more over the same period.

Amidst this conducive backdrop, I think Star Health remains focused on maintaining its leadership in retail health and compounding a durable, value-accretive franchise anchored on our four pillars, which is a risk-first approach, a consistent focus on RoE, customer-centric execution, and a digital-first mindset. With this, let me come to the quarterly performance highlights of our company.

Before I share the updates on our quarterly performance, I would just like to kindly remind you that we continue to take all our business and investment decisions based on the Ind AS accounting, which is aligned with the IFRS principles. IFRS is the design to capture the value creation over the policy lifetime rather than a short-term accounting outcome, and we have been following the IFRS-aligned reporting structure consistently.

Now coming to the headline statements for Quarter 3 FY26. In Quarter 3 FY26, our top line, that is the GWP on N basis, increased by 23% year-on-year to ₹5,047 crores.

We ensured full pass-on of GST benefits to our customers, with very strong distribution alignment on the revised economics and absorption of the input tax credit impact. On the Ind AS PAT for the third quarter increased from ₹87 crores for Quarter 3 FY25 to ₹449 crores for Quarter 3 FY26.

We reported Ind AS underwriting profit of ₹46 crores in Quarter 3 FY26 as compared to an underwriting loss of ₹79 crores in Quarter 3 FY25. This was driven by improvement in the combined ratio by almost 320 basis points, from 102.1 in Quarter 3 FY25 to 98.9 in Quarter 3 FY26.

As in the previous quarters, we have demonstrated loss ratio decline continuously in successive quarters, with a 301 basis points decrease from 71.8 in Quarter 3 FY25 to 68.8 in Quarter 3 FY26. The retail loss ratios also have decreased by 103 basis points year-on-year to 68.4% in this quarter.

Also, as in the previous quarters, our expense ratio declined further by 16 basis points from 30.3 in the last year to 30.1 in Quarter 3 FY26. The headline statements for 9-month FY26, I would like to mention here.

On YTD basis, our top line, the GWP, increased by 16% year-on-year to ₹13,856 crores. Our Ind AS PAT increased 87% year-on-year from ₹516 crores during 9-month FY25 to ₹966 crores for 9-month FY26.

We reported Ind AS underwriting profit of ₹20 crores in 9-month FY26 as compared to a loss of ₹227 crores in 9-month '25. This was driven by significant improvement in combined ratio by 222 basis points from 102.1 in 9-month FY25 to 99.8 in our current 9-month FY26.

The improvement in combined ratio was driven as mix of both expense and loss ratio. Our loss ratios improved by 124 basis points to 70%, and our expense ratio also improved by close to 100 basis points to 29.8% for the 9-month period.

Our PAT growth was driven by both operating profit and investment income. We registered an investment yield of 9.6% for 9-month FY26, supported by a diversified profile of assets.

As on 31st December 2025, 18.7% of our book was in high-yielding assets such as equities, ETFs, REITs, and InvITs. We believe our Quarter 3 and 9-month performance reflects our disciplined execution and the positive impact of the corrective actions that we have been taking both on the underwriting and the claims management side.

Now coming to the business details. Operationally, we continue to build a very diversified and granular retail franchise while maintaining the category leadership.

Our market share in retail health segment was 31.3% for 9-month FY26. As the market leader, we view insurance penetration augmentation as both an opportunity and a responsibility.

Continuing with N basis on the business metrics during the quarter, our gross premium increased 23% year-on-year, by fresh business growth of 45% and the renewal premium growth of 17%. On the 9-month basis, our GWP growth stood at 16%, with fresh premium growing at 18% and renewal premium growing at 16%.

We remain focused on certain preferred geographies, certain demographics, and products and channels that maintain and meet our defined RoE thresholds. Our preferred segments are growing faster at 1.3 times than the company's average on the overall fresh business.

Coming to the details of our distribution channels. Let me start with agency, which is the backbone of our business, with 83% business contribution coming from our agency force.

Our GWP in agency channel grew 19% year-on-year during 9-month FY26. Our fresh business in agency channel grew 35% year-on-year in the 9-month basis.

We registered an accelerated growth of almost more than 66% in Quarter 3 of FY26, which was supported by both a very robust 16% growth in fresh policies, in the number of policies growth. Our granular market reach continues to convert consumer demand into growth, with 60% fresh business emerging from semi-urban and rural markets.

Star Health is, as we know, very strong in the semi-urban and rural markets as well, and we continue to invest in the agency channel, with overall agent count exceeding 8 lakhs by December 31st, 2025. Coming next to our digital distribution channel, which continues to grow from strength to strength.

Digital business is structurally our most profitable channel, with digital D2C operating at industry-leading scale. In the terms of mix, 77% of our digital business emanates from our in-house digital channel, D2C channel, while the remaining business comes from our strong digital partners.

Digital channel contributed 9% of our overall business and 20% of the fresh business for 9-month FY26. Our GWP from digital channel grew 35% year-on-year basis for 9-month, driven by a strong fresh premium growth of more than 46%.

Coming next to our bancassurance channel. Banca contributed 7% of our overall GWP and 5% growth on a year-on-year basis.

We have deliberately upgraded the mix of our bancassurance products towards certain preferred products, which is now making almost 94% of our fresh premium contribution in 9-month FY26, which used to be 76% in last year 9-month. We continue to expand our base of banca partnerships.

We have added six new banca partners during the current fiscal. Our corrective action on certain loss-making accounts in this channel will fully reflect in our profitability during the coming quarters.

On the corporate distribution, corporate contributed 1% of our overall GWP, owing to our recalibrated channel strategy as we have articulated earlier. In this space, we are focusing on the higher-quality SME segment, with 73% of the corporate business coming from the SME segment during this 9-month compared to 44% in the previous year.

Our corporate group loss ratios have significantly improved from 94.6 in 9-month FY25 to 83.5 in 9-month FY26. This is a result of our recalibration on this group distribution, which we have mentioned before as well.

Coming to the overall portfolio maintenance and calibration. We have implemented diligent measures towards qualitative recalibration of our portfolio and ensuring delivery of sustainable RoE outcomes.

On the YTD basis, our retail to group business mix was 95 to 5 as against 91 to 9 for 9-month FY25. So 95% of our business now comes from retail across all the channels mentioned earlier.

Our claims ratio for the retail book declined further to 69.4% in 9-month FY26 as a result of our targeted underwriting, pricing, and associated corrective strategies being implemented since the last year. We continue to invest towards enhancement of our vigilance and reduction of FWA, which is fraud, waste, and abuse, as a core operational priority.

Medical inflation in India continues to be at a very elevated levels. Various studies conducted by leading firms like Aon and Willis Towers Watson expects medical inflation in India to be higher than 12% to 13% in 2026.

Unless there is a structural cost moderation through government interventions, price increases by insurance companies would be essential to preserve sustainability. Star Health continues to serve our customers with utmost fairness, with outcomes demonstrated in the consumer behavior.

We have settled more than 2 million claims amounting to ₹8,900 crores during 9-month FY26. These numbers will give you an idea about the operational rigor and the efficiencies of this organization.

Our claim settlement ratio consolidated at 90% for 9-month FY26. Our grievance ratios per 10,000 policies reduced from 22 in 9-month FY25 to 20 for 9-month FY26.

Our renewal retention trends, which is also an indicator of the consumer satisfaction, were robust during 9-month FY26 with 99.2% persistency, value-wise. Our claims NPS improved to 63 at December 2024.

More importantly, our cashless claims NPS improved to 72 from 63 during the same period last year. Our cashless claims NPS probably is the industry-leading right now with 72 points.

Our overall company-level NPS improved from 55 at December '24 to 64 at December 2025. This continued lift in persistency and NPS, coupled with the reduction in incidence of grievances, are validated of improved customer experience and strengthens our resolves to compound this momentum with more disciplined execution.

Coming finally to our digital initiatives on the both service side and the sales side. As we have been making significant investments in technology.

Probably we are the largest investor in technology in the health insurance business. We are able to deliver tangible progress on both productivity and service outcomes.

Digital is now embedded across the value chain through our modernization of legacy platforms, our workflow automation, and enablement of multiple straight-through journeys at scale. Let me give you some numbers.

Starting with the streamlining of acquisition, 94% of our new policies are now originating digitally. 76% of the premiums were collected through the digital route during the year.

In Quarter 3, our distribution app, which is Atom, facilitated 85% of the fresh policy acquisitions, indicating very high digital adoption amongst our distribution partners as well. On the claims and wellness side, our AI-powered claims platform continues to scale and has now enabled migration of around 57% of our claims traffic, translating to better productivity outcomes and also reduction in FWA.

We expanded our home healthcare services to more than 300 locations from around 250 at the close of last quarter. Expansion of doctors and specialties has driven 73% growth in our telemedicine numbers, indicating strong adoption of our wellness initiatives by our consumers.

On our customer app, we're happy to let you know that with the enhanced features and increased adoption, our customer app downloads have crossed 13 million by December '25, and our monthly active users have also scaled more than 1.5 million mark. This is becoming more and more important in the way we are servicing our customers.

We have observed that desirable levels of self-service adoption, with 60,000-plus claims have been submitted on our customer app. There is a absolute digital experience on claims submission on the customer app, which is actually more than double of what we did last in the last year 9-month.

More than 3 lakh policies are renewed through the app now. Stitching together everything, as we enter into the last quarter of the current fiscal, our priorities remain very clear: to deliver value-driven growth, disciplined underwriting, very strong fraud analytics, deeper partnership with our hospital partners and distributors, and sharper customer engagement across the life cycle touch points.

We remain steadfast in our mission to deliver responsible, resilient, and customer-centric health insurance. I again thank you very much for your continued trust in Star Health, and with that, now we open the floor for Q&A.

Before we go into Q&A, I would also like take this opportunity to introduce Sombik, who has joined us as the head of investor relations, and he'll be interacting with all of you. I would like to also take this opportunity to thank Aditya, who has been your face of the company, meeting all of you.

He will continue to be with Star Health to play a very important role on the business side of things. All of us are always available to all of you for any questions you may have about the business.

Thank you so much. Look forward to your questions.

Hi, sirs. Good morning.

Thank you for the opportunity and congrats on a good set of numbers. I have three questions.

I just wanted to understand the trajectory of earned premium growth because I think last year from 3Q onwards, you had started increasing the price across products, and by Jan, you had repriced 65% of the portfolio. However, I think on an earned premium basis, the growth is still lower than what our top-line growth is.

Just wanted to understand when do we see that playing out, that last year's price hike in the earned premium growth? That's the first one.

Second is on the fresh business growth and I think commendable numbers, sir. I just wanted to understand the commissions for this fresh business, how it would be placed vis-a-vis renewal business?

What I also notice is that net commissions have remained stable despite the fresh growth. DAC has come off in the IFRS P&L.

I just wanted to understand how should I read this or whether we are doing a lesser proportion of long-term products now, if you could throw some light? Thirdly, in terms of agency, I think, sir, you have mentioned that fresh NOP growth Hello, am I audible?

Yeah. Please go ahead.

Yeah. In terms of agency, I think you have reported 6% fresh NOP growth while premium growth is 35%.

Is this led by higher ticket size products? What is happening, if you can throw some light on this?

Yes, sir, these will be my questions.

Thanks a lot for those questions and thanks for your good wishes. See, the NEP growth is a factor of multiple things.

One is on the group side, as we have recalibrated our business strategy and that is also reflecting on the NEP growth. On the retail side of things, while we are on a conservative 1/365 accounting and as a result of which the NEP growth flows into the books over a period of time.

If you look at the way the growth is coming in terms of top line and also our renewal retention, NEP growth will improve in the coming quarters and I am sure that will be demonstrated. On the commission side on fresh, we are paying commissions.

Our long-term business has increased and we have spoken in the past. Customers are preferring long-term plans and which we are quite happy to offer for the simple reason I believe it's a win-win for all stakeholders.

Commissions are paid to agents and distributors on long-term plans, depending on certain business outcomes that they have to deliver. As you have rightly mentioned, despite significant growth in business, our net commissions have remained stable.

Under the IFRS accounting, the deferred acquisition cost is one of the main contributors which helps us to achieve this. Finally, on the 6% NOP growth, I think we have been focusing on profitable growth.

The growth with profit has been our agenda. Certain markets, we have taken some calibration.

This is on a YTD basis. If you look at our growth for Quarter 3, it is significantly higher.

I think we are delivering more than 16% growth in volume in Quarter 3. Things are improving on the NOP as well.

Sir. Got it.

Very useful. Just one last follow-up.

In the presentation, the sum assured number which you have provided, average sum assured, last quarter it was around 17 lakh, that has come down to around 12 lakh for 9-month. This is because we are now excluding group from the calculation, would my understanding be correct?

Yes, Swarnabha. The group is excluded.

Correct.

Understood. Yeah.

Okay. Thank you so much, sir, and all the best.

Yeah. Hi, good morning, everyone.

Congrats on a great set of numbers. Firstly, on the loss ratio, how much of the improvement would you attribute to the fact that we have a very strong fresh growth and probably that kind of comes in the impact or probably the loss ratio on that kind of increases going right?

What I'm basically trying to figure out is how is the loss ratio panning out in the renewal book, what's the trajectory there because the fresh contribution has gone up and that would have played its part in reducing the loss ratio. Is the loss ratio kind of coming down also on the renewal book is my question.

Yeah. Hi, Prayesh.

Yes, the impact of price changes last year is clearly showing and we are seeing a reduction in the loss ratio of our renewal book as well. Of course, increasing of fresh will also have a role in terms of bringing down the loss ratio, but that will play out over a period of time because the fresh growth has gone up significantly in this quarter.

On the earned premium, it will show up with some

time. Could you give some numbers on your, say a three-year loss three-year book loss ratio?

What would be the three-year loss ratio compared to, say, a year back and today?

Prayesh, I think these things we can have it offline. You can come and meet us and

we'll

yeah.

Okay. Got that.

Second question was extension to what Swarnabha asked earlier on the commission bit. There is a stark improvement in the commission ratios, given that fresh growth was so strong.

What really kind of played into it to bring down the commission ratios to that quantum?

Prayesh, when you talk about commission ratio, what you are looking at I-GAAP numbers? The gross commission to GWP?

Yeah. Okay.

If you see, for Quarter 2, it is 17.1%. For Quarter 3 also, it is 17%.

It is consistent, the reductions that we had done on the senior citizen, that is playing out, vis-a-vis which is getting offset with the long-term business that we're writing. Long-term business, a large part of it still is on one-by-n basis.

It doesn't impact the commission ratio as well.

Okay. The last question is on again, the regulations where now there's so much discussion on commission bit that commissions have to be brought down in the system, and the other part is the healthcare system, right?

What are the developments on both the fronts with respect to negotiations with hospitals or anything that you can share on what are the developments both on the commission front, as well as what are the regulators talking about commission front, as well as the healthcare regulator front?

Yeah. See, Prayesh, that's a good question on both on the commission front and on the expenses of management.

I think we expect that the regulator may be reviewing this. This is what we have been also hearing.

We await for some final clarity on that. At a macro level, I think in the larger interest of the consumers, expenses of management have to be adhered to and we believe that it has to be implemented very, very strictly.

This is something that is definitely desirable for the industry performance on a sustainable basis. If any reduction in expenses of management is articulated by the regulator, obviously we will be prepared for it.

As far as the hospital negotiations are concerned, this is an ongoing process. We are seeing good interaction with hospitals with multiple partners like AHPI and all of that.

We are talking to all of them. We are meeting them.

We are also able to see some acceptance from their side to find a solution which is win-win for all of them. There is lot of work going on at the GI Council level, as in terms of common empanelment of hospitals and so on.

I think in the next few months and years, we should see some good movement in this area.

Got that. Thank you so much, and wish you all the best.

Thank you.

Hi. Good morning.

Thanks for the opportunity. Good set of numbers.

Anand, I will stick to one, particularly on the claims ratio side. Certainly, there is an improvement if you see sequentially or a YoY basis, but if you look at more on the 9-month basis and the retail claims ratio because a significant portion of improvement has come from group.

Now on the retail side, versus 69.6% of last 9-month to this 9-month 69.4%. The improvement is there, but it's kind of a minimal and it is on the back of also the price hike has been taken, a lot of remedial actions have been taken.

The question is that, okay, if we were to look say over maybe two, three years kind of a thing, where maybe a desirable number for you on the claims side would be even lower from here. How do you see this panning out, given that apparently medical inflation has started to bit of a cool down in recent quarters, you have taken price hike and remedial action, yet you also have a very, very impressive fresh growth and overall growth.

Yet, the claims ratio improvement over this 9 months YoY basis on retail side is still 20 basis points. How do you see this journey over next two, three years?

Where would you see or you desire to settle this claims ratio piece? Thank

you. Thanks, Avinash.

See, I think on the retail claim ratio, obviously, you understand equally well, the price revisions that we have taken and all the underwriting changes that we have made, these things to flow into the loss ratio and the earned premium takes 18 to 24 months, we're still not even 12 months done. I think, more importantly, you have to look at the Quarter 3 claim ratio of retail.

If you see the trends of the Quarter 3, there is a 103 basis point improvement over last year. On the trend side, we are seeing encouraging signs.

On the YoY, yes, the decrease may not be that sharp, but we believe that this will trend downwards going forward. Now as I've told, we are not targeting any specific loss ratio as such.

We are hoping to deliver a mid-teens RoE business, and that is what we are focusing on. This will be a blend of both loss ratio and combined ratio so that we are able to meet those objectives.

Got it. Thank you.

Hi, thanks for taking my question. This is essentially on the acquisition ratio.

This ratio has gone up to around 26.9 versus 23 in the second quarter or probably even 23 in the third quarter last year. How should one think about this?

Nischint, on the IFRS side, the fresh growth that we had in the current quarter had some impact in terms of the DAC ratio. It will keep on normalizing as the growth comes like this.

And It's

based on

DAC numbers. At a cohort level, has the acquisition expense ratio gone up?

Not really. Yes, the fresh cohort for this quarter will have a higher acquisition cost which will pan out over a period of time.

Right,

that's because the fresh commissions would be higher.

Correct.

Okay.

It will keep on normalizing.

Sure. In terms of GST impact?

As we have mentioned, we have passed on the GST to our intermediaries. There is no impact of GST in this.

All the commissions that we have paid are inclusive of GST.

Got it. Thank you very much.

Thank you for the opportunity. My first question is again on the loss ratio for the third quarter.

See, we have a reserve release of ₹142 crores, and that played a significant role for delta improvement in the loss ratio. If I ignore the reserve release, then your loss ratios probably are very similar to what you reported in second quarter.

Just wanted to understand this release, how sustainable it is and from which product you have seen this release? Because the release clearly benefited on the loss ratio is my view.

The second question is that even if the improvement has happened in loss ratio, any role was played by the GST cut with respect to consumables on the bills, which I believe is around 20%, 25% of every bill on an average? The GST cut of around 7% change had any additional benefit on the overall loss ratio what you reported in the third quarter?

That's my first question on loss ratio.

Yeah. Sanketh, the outstanding claims is a function of the claims reported during the period because 85% of the claims are cashless.

While the customer is discharged, the hospital payment happens with the lag of one month. Whatever we have paid in the current quarter is the claim outstanding as on 30th September.

Whenever the claim ratio goes down, it's automatically the outstanding claims also goes down because the claim outstanding or the claims reported during the quarter are lower and hence the outstanding claim is lower and the paid is for the last period. There is no impact of the reserve release or the outstanding claims reduction on the loss ratio.

In fact, we have been strengthening our IBNR quarter-on-quarter to take care of any volatilities. On the GST side

On the GST side, we have seen some impact of that coming on the bills, but see the overall ratio of that vis-a-vis our overall spends on claims is a very insignificant amount. It will have some role in offsetting some of our other GST outgo in the areas where services GST, etc., we'll have some extra cost.

To that extent, the loss ratio improvements are more structural in nature in terms of our pricing improvements, our continuous work on improving our loss cost in terms of managing our book better.

Understood. Maybe that part might be getting reflected in the OpEx side.

Only on the claims, whether you had 20, 30 basis 40-odd basis point positive rub-off because of the GST benefit?

No. Not because of GST benefit.

Understood. Other two questions are basically given your growth has been very strong in the new business, just wanted to understand the color of the mix in the new business, how much it's long-term compared to previous quarter or even maybe 3Q to 3Q and 9 months to 9 months, how much delta has been driven by increase in the contribution of long-term plans?

That's one thing I wanted to understand. Second thing is on investment book side, in the IFRS, ₹413 crores of fair value change what you have reported, it is largely related to equity or it includes fair value change meaningfully coming from bonds too?

Let me answer the long-term proportion answer first. We are definitely seeing an uptick in our long-term policies.

Such policies are beneficial for both consumers and the company because the consumers are protected against the price hike for the tenure that they have opted for, and there is continuity which is intact, and their health is secured. Additionally, we are able to lock in the customer early, especially at R1, R2 stage where generally the retention rates are better.

Further, long-term policies also improve our capital efficiency as the customers pay upfront. From a business standpoint, our approach is very clear.

We go for businesses which meets our RoE thresholds. Now coming to specific numbers of long-term policies, on the fresh side, it has contributed to about 23% versus 14% in terms of NOP.

In terms of GWP, it is at 51% versus 34% on 9-month basis.

Sorry. Can you repeat on GWP basis?

Sorry. Is

On GWP basis, it is 51% versus 34% of 9-month last year.

Understood. On that investment book side, on IFRS, ₹413 crores of fair value change?

Yeah. Aneesh, can you take that?

Yeah. Sanketh, our fixed income book is held to maturity in IFRS.

Any mark-to-market change in equities, REITs, InvITs, and AIF flows through profit and loss. This is how the accounting of IFRS done.

Okay. In simple words, what you're trying to say is that entire ₹413 crores is only related to equity market, nothing to do with bonds?

Equities, AIFs, and REITs, InvITs.

Understood. Both the proxy equity side, I mean to say.

Okay. Understood.

Thanks, that's it from my side.

Thank you.

Yeah. Hi, sir.

Thanks for the opportunity. Sir, my first question is on the GWP side.

If you can give some color around the RI acceptance which we have done during the quarter, does this relate to group business? If it pertains to group business, what is the nature of that business?

Is this employer-employee or non-employer-employee? Now second coming to the commission ratio, it has improved drastically if you look at.

What is driving that? Is this because of the first installment of the long-term premium which we have received this year or is this something else because we have not written major group business during the quarter?

Just want to understand that. On the expenses side, it seems to have elevated a lot during the quarter.

Can you give some light on that because there is some impact of the labor code also there, and there seems to be some ESOP cost which has been accounted for. If you can help us understand that.

Lastly, on your slide number 13, you have mentioned number of claims which has been paid during the first 9 months. If I compare that with the full FY25 number of claims, that seems to be significantly lower, almost 50% of what you had paid in FY25.

Can you help us understand that as well? These are my questions.

Thank you.

On the reinsurance inward side, for the quarter, the number reported is 22 lakh. We had some treaty treaty done in the last year.

There is, some adjustment because this treaty will get over on 31st July. There is no new treaty that is written.

It's hardly 22 lakh number that has got reported in the current quarter. In terms of labor code, the impact for the quarter one-time impact for the quarter is 16.5 crores, which is reported in OpEx.

That's again, which is a 0.4 impact on the expense ratio for the quarter. In terms of number of claims reported in the investor PPT for 9-month 9-month, there is a typo.

I think it's only the IPD claims. Including OPD, we'll just revise it.

It it is higher for 9-month period. While the last year numbers are including OPD and PA claims.

What's the ESOP cost which has been accounted during the quarter, sir?

Nilesh, can you take that?

ESOP cost

gets accounted under IFRS.

In the

I-GAAP, there is no impact of ESOP cost on I-GAAP. It's always a reporting only if you have issued the ESOP less than the market value, there is an impact in I-GAAP numbers.

We have not been doing that. In the past, I think it's hardly again 5 to 10 lakh rupees when there was a timing difference.

That impact is coming, but nothing substantial.

Okay. Sir, on the claims ratio, it has improved now on the retail side as well.

What kind of loss ratio if you look at on a sustainable basis would you be looking at? Would it be the mid-60s kind of a range or would it stay at the current levels only?

I am talking from a next two, three years' point of view, not on a short-term basis.

No. See, this is what we don't want to give any numbers and be guided for that.

We are looking at running this business at a little combined ratio which is viable and mid-teens RoE, that is our targets that we are focusing on. To achieve that, claim ratio and expense ratio both will play a role.

I don't want to give any number on that. Yeah.

Sir. Thank you, and all the best.

Thank you.

Hi. Good morning, sir.

Few questions from my side. First, obviously, you took the last round of price hike somewhere from October '24 to maybe March '25.

Now we are almost 12 months down the road. In terms of your incremental price hike strategy on the back book and what can we expect out there, maybe blended price hike, claimant versus non-claimant portion, a portion of the book that will see a price hike?

Second question is a data keeping question. In terms of your new business mix within the net earned premium, how would that look like from 3Q to 3Q and 9M to 9M?

Third question is, we're already 12 months out in terms of repricing of FHO based on claimant and non-claimant. Just early indicators on persistency and claims ratio of the book?

On pricing, we took up the last year in Q4, and we'll be following the annual price cycle as it is. As far as the quad-based pricing approach that we took for FHO, that has given us very good results.

We are clearly seeing a good lift in terms of the non-claimants and the risks that are healthy, giving us better retentions. That's clearly playing out, and we will follow this approach going forward as well.

In terms of new business earned premium, the growth in business does not get reflected in the earned premium immediately. If we see, it will gradually keep on growing.

The proportion is in the range of around 20% 20% fresh NEP and 80% renewal NEP. That ratio has been in a similar range, because whenever we take a price increase in renewal business, that also leads to higher earned premium on renewal business.

As long as it's a healthy mix and the loss ratios are coming down, we are happy to maintain that mix.

Got it. Sir, just one follow-up.

Could you quantify the price hike anticipated in this calendar year?

No, Dipanjan, the guidance is that 10% senior citizen is a number that has been guided by the regulator. You can assume that that will be the number for almost all the products in that range, maybe slightly higher or lower depending on the product portfolio.

Got it. Thank you, and all the best.

Thank you.

Yeah. Hi.

Thanks for the opportunity. My question is on the mix of long-term as well as the mix of high-yielding assets on the AUM.

Long-term is now, as you said, around 23%, and high-yielding assets are around 19%. From a balancing act, there would be a certain limit to these two numbers because otherwise, at some point, we might have some other related issues.

I was just wondering, is there any limit which we are working on these two fronts?

Aneesh, can you take that? Anshuman, high-yielding assets as of now, we consider equities, REITs, InvITs, and AIF as high-yielding assets.

For equities, currently we have kept this cap of 15%, and obviously, it would be a function of opportunities. That is one.

As far as REITs and InvITs are concerned, there's a regulatory cap of 3%. We are currently operating close to 3%, and that book has covered approximately 21% duration at this point of time.

On AIFs, we have started investing. Drawdowns are small, but we do have intent to scale up the book slowly.

REIT and InvITs capped at say 3%, AIFs we have started just the activities, equities capped at 15%. This is where we stand today.

Broadly only in exceptional situations we would take any aggressive step on equities from here on.

On the IFRS, some MTM losses on equity can happen in Q4. It will continue as it is.

On a steady state basis, ideally non-equity mix should yield around 6.5%, whereas the rest will be a function of equity. Is that a right understanding?

Not exactly. Non-equity has two components.

One is a core fixed income and another one is the liquidity that we maintain for day-to-day operations. As far as core fixed income is concerned, we are currently operating at 7.71%.

Okay. Any rate which you can tell us in terms of the non-equity portfolio?

See, linearly we would not like to give any comment on this because it's a function of opportunity. Say for example, as you are seeing today in market that there is a run-off in the G-Secs, long end of the bond curve or long end of the yield curve of G-Sec is extremely attractive.

Maybe if I build up my book there, you would find that there would be some pressure, and then maybe that yield should marginally decline from 7.71%, but that would give me an opportunity tomorrow when credit spreads expand, at that time I would ramp up my credit book. It's a function of opportunity.

It would not be very linear, but as and when opportunities are there, we'll try to tap those segments so that 7.71% is sustained. Now, it's also a function of maturing book.

Maturing book may have a higher-yielding assets. If we are in position to replace those assets with equally or a higher-yielding assets, then it would sustain.

Broadly, our endeavor is to maintain it to 7.71% or take it higher, but there may be time gaps and mismatches here and there.

7.71% you're saying you will try to maintain that on the non-equity, or maybe it will go up also?

Depending upon the opportunities, yes, absolutely. Yeah.

Okay. On the long-term mix, any limit here?

See, on the long-term business, we don't work on any limits. As mentioned earlier, the decisions are made on IFRS basis, and we go behind businesses which meets our RoE thresholds, and we believe that long-term business is delivering mid-teen RoEs.

Okay. Thank you.

That will be all.

Thank you for the opportunity and congrats on a good set of results. Just a couple of bookkeeping questions from my end.

Firstly, on the share of long-term policy mix in 3Q and what was it in 2Q and what was it last year, if you could help with? The second one on how much of advance premiums are we carrying now versus 1H and last year?

That'll be it for mine.

Can we take this separately with you offline?

Sure. No problem.

Thank you.

Yeah. Hi.

Good morning, sir. Congrats on a good quarter.

Just wanted to understand the 140-odd crores which was released from the outstanding claims. How do we look at this number going forward in terms of is it that we have paid a lot of the claims which were outstanding from earlier or is it a function of say the TAT for the company itself reducing?

Going forward, should the total IBNR number as a percentage of say the net earned premiums be lower than the 8%, 9% where we have traditionally operated?

Yeah. Nilesh, you want to take it?

See, outstanding claims is a function of seasonality. Q2 where the claims ratio is higher, the claims get reported and they stay in the books till the time it is paid.

30th September, there is an outstanding which gets paid in October. As the loss ratio reduces, there is an impact on the outstanding.

It's also a function of the business volume. As we keep on growing the business and earned premium grows and number of claims grow, this will keep on increasing.

There is no value to it. It's a function of quarterly claims reporting that happens and the payment of claims that happen in a period.

We believe it should be in that range of 8.5% to 9.5%, 10%. It should operate in that range.

We track it on a trailing 12 months basis also, which is the right metrics for this.

Sir. Thanks.

Just one more. Have we seen a meaningful reduction in the TAT which should reduce this number sustainably?

See, there are two things. One is the cashless claims continues to be 85% of our book.

The customer gets discharged from the hospital, the claim payment to the hospital happens within the defined time limits on the contract with the hospital. It can be 15 days, it can be 30 days also.

That happens subsequently the customer is discharged. The TAT and claim payment is independent because of the cashless and the payment to the hospital.

Sir. Got it.

Thanks a lot.

Thanks for the opportunity. Sir, first question, if you can share the break-up of investment book in terms of government securities, central government securities, state government securities, corporate bonds, and equity?

That would be useful.

Aneesh? Nidhesh.

It's like this that as on 31st December, central government securities would be approximately 22% of the book. Basically IRDA defines it that minimum central government has to be 20%, we are keeping minimum 22% and so as of now 22.

marginally higher, 22. something.

On central government and state government put together, IRDA says that should be 30%. We would be somewhere around 33%.

Rest is all corporate bonds. Equity, as you know that, it's around 14.9%, and REITs, InvITs, AIF another 4.7%, total sorry, 3.8%, total is 18.5%.

This is how the break-up of book is.

Sir, what are the plans to take up the equity share higher? Is there a plan to further increase the share of equity and REITs, InvITs in the book?

REITs and InvITs cannot be because regulation says that we can be up to 33% sorry, up to 3%, we are there. Regulator has talked about increasing this up to 6%, but we are waiting for the final regulations on this.

REITs and InvITs as of now at the upper cap. As far as equities is concerned, we have some internal models where we do risk appetite testing, and based on which we ultimately take a call that how much of equity exposures that we would take.

There would be a possibility that, yes, we can increase equities by some quantum. It's a function of the solvency of the company and the capital requirement of the business.

Broadly, these are the factors which determine that how much of risky assets that we can take in the book. This is where we stand as of now, the regulator cap at 15%.

Sure, sir. Secondly, on the long-term policy, is the share of long-term policy at 51% of GWP today in Q3 or?

Yes, of fresh.

Of fresh is 51%?

Yes.

Sir, in the IFRS accounting, because acquisition cost getting deferred, but let's say I'm assuming that most of these will be three-year long-term policies, the loss ratios will keep on increasing. In IFRS, does it give a true picture of the profitability of long-term policies or it overstate the profitability in the first year and then second, third year, we will see slightly lower profitability on these policies because loss ratios may increase in year two, year three?

See, there are two things. One is the deferment happens over the policy period, but the operating cost is very high in the first year itself, which is in the P&L in the first year.

On a combined ratio basis, it is still in a similar range. While the commission ratio remains stable, loss ratio increases.

There is no OpEx in the second and third year, which is there only in the first year.

Sure, sir. The last question is on IFRS.

Thanks for the detailed disclosure on IFRS Ind AS financial. Sir, two, three questions.

One is that how should we look at the investment income? Should we remove the let's say mark-to-market gains and then look at the profitability or we should look at the reported profitability?

That is number one. Second is what is the difference between insurance revenue and NEP?

I thought that insurance revenue and NEP would be similar in case of IFRS.

I'll answer the second question first. Insurance revenue is typically the gross earned premium.

The NEP is net of reinsurance. In IFRS, if you see, net results of reinsurance is a single line.

Okay.

The claims reported is gross claims. The acquisition cost is the commission paid deferred over a period of time.

The RI seeding, the RI claims, the RI recovery on claims and the RI commission is as a single line item as net results of reinsurance, basically. That's the difference between earned premium and insurance revenue.

On the investment income, what I would suggest is, while there'll be volatility, we have been talking about, to take zero is not the correct thing. We have a ₹3,000 crores of equity portfolio.

One can take an average return of 10% and calculate a stable revenue or the profit over a period of time. That's how one can look at it, which is also quite strong.

Nidhesh, see, we have to understand this that equity markets would remain volatile. What we have realized that over a longer period of time, equity returns are largely related and very closely correlated to nominal GDP growth.

On an average, you can assume that 10% to 11% kind of nominal growth would be there, and hence that would get translated into equity returns as well. Quarter-over-quarter, there would be a volatility.

That's the problem of IFRS that P&L accounts would become volatile. That does not mean that we should stay away from high-yielding assets, especially when we are long-term investors in the market.

That's what our approach is that we look at this asset class as and from 7% moving to say 11% kind of asset class, that makes perfect sense for long-term investors. This is what we're trying to do.

We are reasonably hopeful that over a longer period of time, this 15% or 19% of book would deliver reasonably good returns much higher than what the fixed income book would deliver.

Sure, sir. Very useful.

Thank you, sir.

We have experienced a strong quarter in terms of top-line growth and an improvement in our operating results, both from reduction of loss ratio and expense ratio. We are focused on execution to maintain consistency of performance.

Thank you, everyone, for joining the call.