Assicurazioni Generli Adr

Good afternoon. This is the Chorus Call Conference operator. Welcome and thank you for joining the Generali Group first quarter 2024 results presentation. As a reminder, all participants are in listen-only mode. After the presentation, there will be an opportunity to ask questions. Should anyone need assistance during the conference call, let me signal an operator by pressing star and zero on their telephone. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Mr. Fabio Cleva, Head of Investor and Rating Agencies Relations of Generali Group. Please go ahead, sir.

Thank you. Hello, everyone, and welcome to Generali First Quarter 2024 Results Call. Here with us today, we have the Group General Manager, Marco Cesana, the CEO of Insurance, Giulio Terzarioli, and the Group CFO, Cristiano Borean. Before opening the Q&A session, let me hand it over to Marco and Cristiano for some opening comments. Marco, the floor is yours. Thank you.

So, good morning, everyone. Our first quarter result confirmed the group delivery and the positive effect of commercial action implemented in 2023 to address the macro context challenges. In life, we are very pleased by the return to positive net inflow. The first quarter figures confirm what we told you throughout the second half of 2023, that the situation was under control. It also demonstrates our ability to meet customer demand for protection and unit-linked products. Protection net inflows reached €1.5 billion, while unit-linked net flows were close to €1 billion. Protection continues to generate over 40% of our new business value. Outflows from saving were limited, a significant improvement compared to last year, and were very much related to low-value products. In fact, the commercial action implemented since 2023 underpinned the strong production seen in life overall. Our business units have adapted to meet changing customer appetite and preserve market competitiveness by continuing to update existing products and launch new products that are more attractive in this new market condition. The strong live production also reflects positive seasonality in the first quarter, especially in China. As such, we expect some moderation in the coming quarters. We maintain our strong focus on new business underwriting discipline for protection and health businesses and on capital live products announced by protection riders. The share of capital life products has remained stable, while the average guarantee of the European life business has continued to decline. In line with our planned ambition, our strategy will continue to be oriented to bundle solutions that address multiple customer needs within a single product. As overall market conditions continue to normalize and improve, we plan to gradually scale back some of the commercial incentives introduced last year to support production. This is expected to have a beneficial effect on margins. Moving now to P&C. So P&C business growth in the first quarter confirmed the trend seen in 2023 with gross return premium growing around 11% or over 6% when excluding the impact of hyperinflation in Argentina. At the full year 2023 presentation, we disclosed an increase in the average premium in our retail and SME book of 6.1%. At the end of the first quarter 2024, the average premium was up 6.3% compared to the same period of the last year, with growth supported in particular by the motor segment. Tariff strengthening above market inflation remain a key management focus, especially in Germany, Spain, and Italy. We are also continuing to implement technical measures aimed at pursuing profitable growth, especially in terms of portfolio enhancing and claims management. The strategy on pricing and technical excellence is bearing fruit, with the first quarter attritional current year undiscounted combined ratio confirming the positive trends already visible in the fourth quarter. We are also seeing a stabilization in frequency and a moderation of claims inflation, which serve well the trend in technical profitability. Let me, however, flag that at the start of the second quarter, we had a specific man-made accident in the GCNC book with a preliminary estimate in the range of 25-30 million. Returning to the first quarter, we saw the consolidation of the Liberty Seguro into our number, and integrating Liberty in an efficient and effective way will further strengthen our platform as we enter into a new strategic cycle in 2025. Asset management saw its recurring revenues increase by 3% year-on-year thanks to the higher average asset under management. These numbers do not yet reflect the consolidation of conning since the closing of the transaction took place in April. In the press release, we have provided some element to assist the comparison to the first quarter 2023 from an operating and net result basis, given the difference in timing in the booking of variable cost, cost related to conning transaction, as well as tax payments. When you neutralize for this effect, the operating result was basically at the same level of the last year, and the net result reduction would be between 4% and 5%. Moving now to investment. So our investment yield remained very good versus the enforced book at around 3.7% in LIFE and 3.5% in PNC. Looking at the different asset classes, on listed equity, we maintain a prudent approach. In credit, we confirm our conservative approach with low exposure to more cyclical sector and high leverage company. We experience negligible rating downgrades in the portfolio. On private debt, we have been more selective in terms of new commitment, balancing attractive opportunity, especially in private debt valuation with ILM constraints. In conclusion, our first quarter results confirm the group's continued ability to deliver solid growth and execute on our strategic plan, in line with our lifetime partner purpose. As we move forward through the last year of this strategic cycle, we are very confident about the direction of the group. Now, Cristiano, over to you.

Thank you, Marco, and hello, everyone. Let me provide you some additional color on our first quarter 2024 financial results to complement the business perspective. The numbers we released today show a strong and resilient performance. The operating result has increased by 5.5%, with positive contribution from all segments. The adjusted net result increased by 8% once we exclude the 193 million net capital gain realized in the first quarter of last year from the disposal of a building in London. Remittance has flown to the parent company in a very satisfactory way. As of today, we have already received around $4 billion of remittance from subsidiaries, which is roughly 90% of the total amount expected for this year. The capital position is solid. The Solvency II ratio is today estimated at 216%, including the impact of the LTI buyback announced this morning. Please note that we will deduct the 500 million share buyback from the Solvency II ratio once we receive the approval from the regulator, which should come before we report our half-year results. Let me share with you some specific color on life and P&C to complement what already reported in the press release. On the life side, the comparison of the new business margin versus last year reflects some peculiar factors. I think that the best way to look at it is to divide it in three components. One, there is a pure accounting component. Two, there is a business mix component. And three, there is a market effect. As already explained in the press release, there is an optical negative impact of around 90 bps stemming from the IFRS 17 accounting of the French collective protection business. This business, with relatively low profitability, generally allows for a one-year coverage from January 1st until December 31st, with the contracts being issued in December of the previous year. The major part of the contracts issued in 2022 was deemed as onerous and was therefore recognized in the fourth quarter of 2022, as required by the accounting standards. This implies that the first quarter 2023 new business margin at the group level was higher because of the lower volume of the French collective potential business. Conversely, the contract issued in December 2023 were considered profitable, albeit with a low profitability, and hence are entirely recognized in first quarter 2024. The high volumes and low margin of this business explained around 90 basis points of the difference between Q1 2023 and Q1 2024 new business margin. Such accounting effect will gradually decline as the year progresses. Let me now focus on the mix component and on the market effects. The commercial actions implemented in Italy to attract customers have been particularly successful at Genertel Life, which was where the vast majority of the Italian lapses took place last year. The rebound in new production at Genertel Life has been very strong in the first quarter of 2024. The share of the Italian PVNBP attributable to Genertel Life has increased from around 12% to last year, to around 21% this year, driven by the saving business. Since general life has an average new business margin, but it is roughly half the average of country Italy, this different mix also affected the group's new business margin. Please also consider that starting from the second quarter of 2023, we have implemented commercial actions in order to support the volume growth, which resulted in a lower new business margin. The effect of these commercial actions is still present in 2024 new production, making the first quarter of 2023 a tough comparison. On top of this, as alighted by Marco, the first quarter volumes in China have been exceptionally strong in anticipation of the regulatory changes which came into effect in April. As a matter of fact, the PVMVP in China has more than doubled year on year on China's weight in the group PVMVP. And that weight has increased from around 5% to over 8%. This was led entirely by the saving business, which has a new business margin below the group's average, also because of the current market condition in China. The combination of these effects together explain around 60 basis points of the contraction in the new business margin between Q1 2023 and Q1 2024. Furthermore, the change in the financial market variables, in particular the decline in interest rates, has reduced the group new business margin in the first quarter of this year by around 30 basis points compared to the same period of 2023. To sum up, the 179 basis point contraction in the new business margin reflected 90 basis point pure accounting impact from the French protection business, 60 basis points from mix with more savings and more China, and 30 basis points from market variables. Looking ahead, most of these factors will normalize, and I expect the new business margin to increase in a visible way already in the second quarter of 2024. Moving to P&C, this was the first time we consolidated the Liberty Seguros, specifically for two months in the quarter. Liberty has contributed to the top line with 219 million premiums and to the operating result for almost 220 million euros. Liberty has increased our first quarter combined ratio by around 0.1 percentage points. At our half-year results, I will provide you an updated guidance on our undiscounted combined ratio on the current year discounting and on the insurance finance expenses for the full year 2024, also embedding the consolidation of Liberty Seguros. This is also because we need to wait for the final purchase price allocation exercise on insurance assets and liabilities of liberty to be completed in accordance to IFRS 3 before providing a new guidance. Sticking to P&C, in our P&C combined ratio, prior year development has been broadly in line with our two percentage points indication. As you have seen, our first quarter prior year development at 1.8% has not been impacted by late claims or revised claims costs from the 2023 Italian haystorms. This reflects the conservative initial loss peaks that I mentioned to you at our full year results. Finally, besides the impacts on the top line highlighted in the press release, the moves in the Argentinian peso and the inflation are reflected in higher insurance finance expenses and an increase in the investment income. The insurance finance expenses were minus $213 million at Q1 2024, increasing by $123 million year-on-year. In particular, the increase in the pure unwinding component of the liability for in-card claims has been around $80 million. This is in line with our guidance of a 250 million increase for the full year 2024 compared to the 149 million recorded in 2023. However, there are other EFI components that are more volatile. We have always mentioned that those related to IAS 29 hyperinflation accounting being potentially the most relevant. In fact, they have impacted EFI by around 60 million in the first quarter of 2024, increasing by 40 million versus the same period of last year. However, this is also mirrored in the higher investment income that completely offsets the higher insurance finance expenses. In the first quarter, the PNC operating investment income increased by €124 million year-on-year, with around €50 million of this increase coming from Argentina. I hope that these elements were helpful to better understand the trends of our first quarter figures. As already mentioned, we are very happy with these strong and resilient numbers. Thanks for your attention, and operator, now we are ready to take the questions.

Thank you. This is the Coruscall Conference operator. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and 1. On the touch-tone telephone, to remove yourself from the question queue, please press star and two. Please pick up the receiver when asking questions. Anyone who has a question may press star and one at this time. The first question is from Will Hartcastle with UBS. Please go ahead.

Thanks for taking the questions. First of all, within Motar, ex-Argentina, the premium growth looks to be 5.5%. I guess this strikes me as maybe either at or below average price increases being achieved. Is that right? And I guess in which geographies are you growing volumes versus contracting? And are any of those particular geographies experiencing significant pickup in competition? And just coming back to the new business margin versus the volume growth, really helpful explanations there. I think what you're saying, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that Whilst it won't immediately revert back to a more normalized type level of growth and margin in Q2, it'll be pretty close. And then from the second half, you'd expect it to be operating at a more historical level. Is that correct, or may it drag on a little bit longer? Thanks.

Thank you, Will. Giulio, the first question is for you, while the second question is for Cristiano.

Hi, Will. This is Giulio. Yes, starting from the motor growth is exactly, as you said, 5.5% if you exclude Argentina. Now, in reality, what we see, we see a nice increase in the effective price change, and we see a nice increase basically across all our markets. Just to give you an idea, in Germany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, we are in the high single digit, and then there are other markets where we are more in the middle digit. From a risk-enforce point of view, usually we're pretty flat. There is one country where we are down a little bit, which is Germany. But when you put it all together, I would say it's a very strong picture. What is also important, you know, we are looking at the effective price change, and we are comparing that to the lost trend, which is basically the combination of frequency and severity. And we can see that the effective price change is well ahead of the lost trend. And this is basically across all the geographies. So from that point of view, we have... Really a nice development on the motor side, and considering also that we are going to see somehow the net premiums going up because of the injected rates, we are going to see also a further positive development of the combined ratio motor, assuming that clearly frequency and severity stay at the level that we saw so far. So all in all, I would say good on the growth side coming from price changes and also effective price changes north of the loss trend and north also by, I would say, a few percentage points.

Yeah, Will, yeah, what I wanted to say, I add a little bit of color out to that. If you just take out the protection and group protection France point, basically the new business margin of the quarter would be 4.7, slightly more than 4.7 percent, which is telling you that notwithstanding the higher production in China, we are running at that level of marginality in this quarter with lower interest rate. And so you have for sure no more the effect of dilution. Or if you just look in isolation of the quarter, this will not impact. It will be averaged out throughout the year. So divided it in a certain – it will be only one-fourth the full yearly effect. The less weight expected on China because, as you understood or you may know, the rush for this sale was related to some cap in the broker channel commission where clearly accelerated some sale before the 1st of April. So we don't think this is something will happen again and the projections are for a slowdown on that part. On the other side, there is another positive effect of slightly higher interest increase which stays together with the negative effect of the commercial action on the margin. While I recall we didn't comment, maybe, but I want to highlight the new business value overall went up 5% broadly. Last information, the market sensitivity to the new business margin in this kind of mix for 50 basis point is about 25 bips of sensitivity up and down with the sign where clearly up, go up, down, go down. And on the pure saving business, this sensitivity, is the double on the margin okay so for 50 bps you have 50 bps new business margin effect so there is an embedded slightly lower due to market economic consideration something of the order of 25 bps but you can project next question please the next question is from Peter Elliot with Kepler Shiver please go ahead thank you very much three from me if I may

First of all, are you able to say anything on the flows and operating variances that you've seen in Q2 to date? Just wondering how that trend is continuing. The second one was looking at asset management. You make the point on the timing differences. Can we assume that the Q2 cost-income ratio should be a few points better than normal and that the net results should also be a higher proportion of the operating than normal? Just to understand that should normalize. And then the final one, Julia, you mentioned the earned premiums to increase from the injected rate from here. I'm just wondering how much more is still to come on that journey, given, I mean, I think quite a lot was done in Italy early last year. So I'm just wondering if you can sort of update us or remind us how far through that journey we are. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Peter. Cristiano, the first and second question are for you, while the third one, Giulio, is for you.

Hi, Peter. So regarding the operating variances, I would like to highlight that I think part of them are mainly explained by the effect that we have observed in Italy on some exit of product value, which is on average, you know, the marginality in Italy is higher than the average of the group, plus some one-off effect of some risk margin adjustment overall the operating variances accounted for slightly less than 200 million euro 170 of which one fourth is a one-off effect the rest has been a pure negative lapse experience going forward i think that part of this trend could could slightly continue. We had some adjustment in the projected full average surrender rate over the whole runoff. So clearly this is on the present value making the right assumption, but can be a little bit bumpy quarter over quarter, year over year. Having said that, I think that this is it for the operating variances. For the asset management side, we first need to embed one information. We need to full embed from the second quarter the integration of conning and clearly conning there are some integration costs which should be projected in. Overall, in the discussion with the business unit, we have the confirmation that if you look at the full 2024, you should confirm and see a cost-income ratio guidance of 60% confirmed with all these effects.

Okay, so your question regarding how far we can go, it always is an answer market by market. I would say where we are pushing still on rate increases as we go into the second part of the year is in Germany. So on that geography, you're going to see an additional improvement. And we're already running right now at a good combined ratio. In Italy, I would say there is still some room, but I would say that's relatively lower compared to Germany. And then another geography where we definitely are pushing rate increases is Spain. So all in all, I would say when you look at the portfolio, there is still some room to go. And then clearly, we're going to react also to The trend that we see, as I was saying before, we see a positive difference between effective rate changes and the loss trend. Especially we see frequency going down. That's more or less across the portfolio. And then on the severity side, I would say this is below 5% in general. So we are more at 3%, 4%. And also we see that on spare parts there is a deceleration of inflation. So clearly we are going to react to what we see, but we feel pretty good about the actions that we are taking. But also on this one, Marco can add his point of view.

Yes, Peter. So Marco Cesana here. And just wanted to add that really at group level, we are pushing this year for additional increase. So as long as we will see a risk premium going up, we will make sure that every business unit of the group will price in an additional rate increase. This is very important. What we are seeing, as Giulio was saying, what we are seeing now is the work we have done in 2023, and we will push also this year because as we are entering into a new cycle, especially for motor, it's very important that we move ahead and we don't lay back just waiting for the new development of the cycle. So we will push for rate increase all of this year, and then we will see, as Giulio said, the market conditions.

Right. Thank you very much. And also to echo Will's comment that the opening comments were very helpful. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Peter. Next question, please.

The next question is from Michael Hutner with Berenberg. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Thank you very much. So cash, large loss, and more cash. So on the cash, thank you very much, Cristiano. I take it so 4 billion divided by... 90% would give me 4.4%. And I think last year was 3.6%. Is that about right? Am I thinking right numbers for cash remittances? In which case, it's extraordinary. You're working. This is a number I had for 2025. So we're one year early. And maybe you can, if any comment on this or where it's coming or whether they're one-offs, anything would be very helpful. The second is, if I remember correctly, When you did the announced Liberty Mutual deal, there was a bit of excess capital. And I wondered whether you'd already upstreamed that or you plan to upstream it. And also, have you got more precise ideas about the business which doesn't quite fit, which is Italy? And then the last point, you mentioned man-made, a large loss in April or maybe May, I don't know. Maybe you could comment and give us a feeling on the combined ratio both for Q1 and Q2 in terms of man-made. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much, Peter. I would say that all the three questions are for you, Cristiano.

So thank you, Peter. Perfect calculation of maths. Yes, this is the expected number for the year. Don't forget that this year was a specific year where we are cashing in 400 million euro about from we already cashed in. 400 million euro from the integration of Cattolica, and now this has been already paid to us, which is a kind of one-off from the capital synergies exploited. Then there is a one-off of Austria of around 200 million euro and 100 million euro from the Central Eastern Europe balance. better longer-term profitability and capital position. So these, I would not immediately project them as a fully recurring element. As I already commented, I would treat more, especially the Austrian one, as an over-the-cycle excess capital capability over a three-year cycle. Second point related to cash again, you asked me, on Liberty. Is the excess capital coming to the parent company? You can bet on it for sure. And clearly, we did some anticipation in the form of bridging already this year, which, as I told you, at the investor day end of January, is embedded in the final acquisition cost also to buy the Liberty part. The rest of the timing... But we will do it next year. And if it is needed, a further year, depending on the speed acceleration that can be taken. But potentially, this should be available starting from next year. On Italy, I think I already asked you, I already answered you about the Cattolica event. The Catholic part, for sure we are continuing, as you heard, to put capital in a more fungible way, also according to what we announced yesterday with the merger of Generate Life into Alleanza, which, as you know, is a very, very capitalized company. And this is fostering and enhancing more for the next cycle, further consideration on capital fungibility for Mama. Regarding large losses, the experience, I think that Mark already told you that in the second quarter we are experiencing something in the order of up to 25, 30 million. The accident, I think it is the NL1. And related to the effect we had this year in the first quarter, 54 million euro of man-made claims compared to the 100 million euro we had in the first quarter, 23. So basically, this is the positive upside versus this quarter. Super helpful. Thank you so much.

Thanks to you, Michael. Next question, please.

The next question is from William Hawkins with KBW. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thank you very much. First of all, you've danced around this a bit already, but I wondered if we could just be a bit more precise about your view that the underscouted combined ratio should be below 96% at the full year stage. If I take the first quarter and add back like nat cats, the figure seems to be almost exactly 96%. So I'm just wondering from your point of view, does that make me more bullish on the target because you've got all those rate increases still coming through? Or should I temper my enthusiasm because you've had the tailwind of man-made and maybe there could be more Liberty Seguro stuff to come? So if you just talk about the low 96% target, please. And then secondly, thanks for all the color, but can I just be simple and ask, what was the PVNBP for China and this French collective protection business in the first quarter, please? Thank you.

Thank you very much William. Both questions are for Cristiano.

Hi, William. So I think that we are broadly bang in line to this guidance. But if you just make the math and you take the 93.7 and you normalize for the expected 2.7 percentage point of not cut budget for 2024 and you have 0.2 lower prior year, you end up at 95.8. But don't forget, this number embeds liberty. The guidance was done before, and the impact of liberty is a 0.1 percentage point. Having said that, I want to recall that, again, we maintain a very prudent initial loss picks as a position also in this quarter. Then moving into what is the PVMVP of China and the French protection business. So the French protection business PVMVP on the first quarter is 3.14 billion euro of PVMVP, while on China we have 1.4 billion euro of PVMVP accounted this year, this quarter.

Very helpful. Very helpful. Thank you.

Thanks to you, William. Next question, please.

The next question is from Ian Pierce with Exxon P&B Paribas. Please go ahead.

Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one was just on non-life, and I'm really just trying to understand why you haven't been looking to deploy more capital, particularly growing the risk exposure, given where rates are and the positivity you're talking about on rate increases versus lost cost trends. And if you could separate that out between Germany and non-Germany, particularly thinking shrinking Germany, I mean, looking at your combined ratios for Germany over the last couple of years, they look pretty strong. So just trying to understand why there's not more growth in risk exposure in non-life. And then the second one is on the French protection business. Would you normally expect that that would be onerous at inception, or was there something specific about last year that made that onerous and that going forward we should assume that this is included in our margin assumptions? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ian. The first question is for Julian. The second one is for Cristiano.

Yeah, so I would say, first of all, clearly PNC is an area where we're deploying capital. Then I wouldn't say that you can look at that on a quarterly basis. And also, as you know, there are certain dynamics regarding inflation, so we need to take action on the pricing side. And we have been very, very firm on taking action to make sure that we don't have surprises because now we see that severity is stabilizing. We see, not in Germany, but otherwise we see also frequency going down, but we don't have a crystal ball. So from that point of view, we are taking action in order to make sure that we have a very profitable business. The combined ratio in Moto is indeed improving. As Marco was saying before, we are going to be anyway cautious to make sure that we have a very healthy book. And then the trajectory on the long term is clearly to grow the business. P&C business where I would also say that part of the strategy is anyway to grow, not necessarily motor, but also in non-motor. So no change in the direction, but clearly we need to make choices and we need to be on the conscious side because it happened. to some companies last year that they got surprised by the change in frequency or severity, so I think at this point in time we want to avoid any kind of surprises. That's on the light side. And for the French business, I think I can say something if you want, Cristiano, because I had a similar experience in my previous life on the profitability of this book. That's a book that can be marginally profitable, so that's not something specific now to us, but that's a something which is relevant for the market. I would say that if you are capable to push the combined ratio to a level of 98%, considering the marginality of the capital requirement and also considering that in reality, you know, this business is also covering for overhead, if you can push 98% the combined ratio, you get into a situation where you can make even a double-digit ROE. In our case, in 2022, I understand there was a borderline, and so that's the reason why we had this kind of accounting noise. But now, as you see, we are basically operating at a level which allows to get to this profitability. And as you can imagine, we are going to do our best to make sure that we keep this level of profitability. But, Cristiano, if you want to add anything.

Just to factor in the model going forward, I think that this has always been there. This is a business we are always doing. And as Giulio was telling you, it's just a matter of this technical combined ratio plus the risk adjustment that you have to put, which if you just move slightly higher from the 98 to the 99, you become onerous or vice versa. So this was always there, was always there in every year, so there is no change in the way we are seeing and in the economic value creation and capability of the group. Nothing changed. It is just this technicality of the accounting moment when you do it, because if it is done... this 3.14 billion of PV and BP. In the first quarter, they are very much into weighting it, altering, in the end, the new business margin. But on an yearly view, it is always there. It has always been there, and that is the future.

Thank you. Next question, please.

The next question is from Farouk Hanif with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.

Hi, everybody. Thanks very much. I'd like to just return to Liberty Seguros. So you're saying there's a 0.1% impact on the combined ratio just for two months this quarter. That doesn't seem a lot given the commentary you made at the last Investor Day about the lack of profitability in Spain. Can you just tell us what the combined ratio is for Liberty and whether this is actually going to make a very big difference to your combined ratio given pricing actions in Spain. Just wondered whether you've been a little bit bearish in your guidance around that. If you could talk about that, that would be helpful. And then secondly, could you talk about why you're giving up margin to grow Genital so much? I mean, it doesn't seem like – it seems like a type of contract that is very – open to lapses, you know, it's hot money, it's lower margin. Just kind of wondering whether the issue is that you weren't able to deploy capital in other growth areas. Just wondered kind of what the strategy was around Genital. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Farouk. The first question is for Cristiano, while Marco will take the second one.

Okay, Farouk, so basically the 0.1, it is not so much. It is actually 13 basis points, so if you put it in basis points, and it is two months. So two months, 13 basis points means 20 bps, so 0.2 on a, let's say, run rate basis, which is exactly what we were telling you at the investor day in January. For sure, regarding the... future combined ratio calculation, I again recall you that one thing is the underlying economic point. The other thing is the effect of the PPA. The PPA rule under IFRS 17 are particularly counterintuitive in the way you need to treat the acquired premium because there is a shift between, let's say, loss ratio and expense ratio. So overall, looking at the underlying profitability, I ask you to wait for the half-year result to give you the full view with the PPA effect and with the real underlying giving you the guidance. So far, the first quarter, the first two months, we had a positive contribution in the combined ratio, both on the total discounted one and in the undiscounted. Both of them were below the 100% part. of which the combined ratio of discounted one was 97 and the other one was 99.4.

So, hi, good morning. On general tell-life, I think... If we look back at what happened last year with the increase in interest rates, we have seen that really the portion of the portfolio where we suffered lapses was really the... So the banking and I would say these type of clients that are like private or upper affluence, so where there is a more tactical view of the, you know, getting some point better on the yield. So we have seen that trend. In particular, in Italy, that was the portfolio that suffered from lapses, the bank assurance portfolio. So we thought it was important to maintain asset under management into the segregated fund. And so in that particular portfolio, you remember we introduced several new products and several new products. product feature that help the client to stay there giving up few margins. So as we said and I said during the opening point, we're going to see how much that is needed going forward. So we're going to evaluate quarter by quarter how much that is needed to help us into the segregated fund maintenance, into the asset under management maintenance. we will look at how much we can take back on the profitability, take back for us, and we will see. So we thought at this moment it was interesting to keep asset under management to those portfolios. Thank you very much.

Next question, please.

The next question is from Andrea Lisi with Equita. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you for taking my questions. The first one is on performance fees, if you can provide us an indication of performance fees in the asset management division in the quarter. And the second one is if you can provide us a breakdown of the combined ratio in motor and no motor. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Andrea. The first question and also the second question are both for Cristiano.

Okay, Andrea, the asset management division itself got €3 million of performance fees, while the wealth management division of Banca Generali got €54 million of performance fees. For what regards the asset management, I would like to recall you that it is a little bit different from the system of accounting of wealth management. So the performance fees are mainly booked in the fourth quarter. So you should expect an asymmetry throughout the year for the way the part is built. The breakdown of combined ratio motor versus non-motor. Combined ratio, total accounting combined ratio motor is 96.2% and the undiscounted is 99.5%. But I recall you that this has a 2.9 percentage point improvement in the current tier and discounted component without natural catastrophe and embeds also very prudent prior year development, as I told you before. On non-motor, the combined ratio is 88.1%, the accounting one, decreasing 0.4 percentage point for the first quarter of 2023, and the undiscounted one is 90.4%, decreasing by 1 percentage point versus 2023 first quarter. So, again, the numbers are there, are strong, the margins are improving, and the expected trajectory and result is very well under control. Thank you.

Next question, please.

The next question is from Stephen Highwood with HSBC. Please go ahead.

Thank you very much. Two little questions for you just on some of the numbers, please. On your first quarter non-operating profit, can you give us a number that came through on the non-operating side of the profit for the group and then indicate if you know, what the percentage of minorities are and also the tax rate percentage is coming off so that we can see where this sort of things are going to get to the net adjusted result. That would be very helpful. And then secondly, can you just disclose the Solvency Owned Funds and SCR on nominal amounts at the end of the first quarter? Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much, Stephen. Both questions are for Cristiano.

Okay. Thank you, Stephen. So I give you the two visions. One is the pure accounting net result, so the 1.26 billion euro net result effect, where you have minorities impacting 114 million euro, and the tax rate all in is 28.4% on this part. If you just concentrate on the adjusted net result, which is the one where we are focusing our earning per share accretion target, this has a €113 million adjusted minorities effect, and the tax rate is 28.4%. There is a slight difference between the adjusted view and the net result view because clearly there is the effect of... the sale of two assicurazioni and also the effect of the last year sale of the London real estate which was a kind of participation exemption capital gain. Last point on solvency on funds. On funds, €49.2 billion first quarter 2024, while solvency capital requirement €22.9 billion for 215% of solvency ratio.

Thank you very much.

The next question is from Farquhar Murray with Autonomous Research. Please go ahead.

Afternoon all. Just two questions, if I may. Firstly, you've mentioned conservative loss picks. Can you give us a sense of what the detail is behind those loss picks, where you think you're being conservative, and what gives you some confidence around that? And then more generally, how will you approach that for the remainder of the year? And then secondly, just coming back to life production and the kind of reduction in the new business margins, Obviously, you've mentioned product incentives to restore net inflows. Could you maybe give us a sense of how large those trade-offs are in terms of IRR outcomes being achieved as distinct from margin? And were there elements of production where Generali was accepting kind of below cost of capital or negative margin production to support inflow? Thanks.

So, Cristiano, the first question is for you, and if you want us to comment on the second one, which clearly can be complemented by both Giulio and Marco.

Okay, hi for Carl. So the conservative initial loss picks accounting, I think it is demonstrated starting from the point that we were not having any negative deviation in a very complex estimation of, for example, the large loss in natural catastrophe experienced last year in Italy. And I think this is, if you... I mean, compared to the market development, you can see that this is a very clear point of how this is developed. On the other side, the first quarter being very benign on the natural catastrophe, there is always an important prudence in the way both you account for the existing or you account for the prior year. This is what I meant by saying conservativeness in the initial law speaks. And this has been applied, I would say, quite across the board in the different business unit. For what regard the trade-off and the IRR, I would start with an important reasoning, which I think we were already starting sharing earlier. With many investors, the commercial action which were done starting already from 2023 to stop the inflow are meant to have a double effect. The first effect is, first of all, to recover and bring new asset to be invested to allow for a faster recovery. increase of the return of the segregated fund, which is value-accretive on one side, and on the other side, this is helping maintaining commercial dynamics, which is positive. On IRR, give up When I let Giulio integrate on that, on the IRR give up, I think that you should not look in isolation only the new business margin component and the profitability, but you should look at the overall effect and allowing for, I take just the last case, for example, as in France, the more you produce, the less you are in the use of the so-called PPE, which is allowing you to have more prudence in the balance sheet. Giulio.

Yeah, to your question, when we accept IRR below cost of capital, I would say almost never. So from that point of view, that would be an extreme situation. And especially this is not the situation right now. So just take Italy. We are running a 5% new business margin, and we know that what we are selling is capital light. So by definition, the IRR in reality should be very high. But there is a simple answer to your question. IRR below cost of capital is something that doesn't, Sounds a good idea. But Marco, I think you can share the same. No, I agree.

I agree on your comment. I just want to add that we do have a process, a group level that look every single product that we put on the market. So it's a product approval governance. So we look at every product that is available. that we decide to put on the market, and we look at the profitability, we look at the use of capital, we look at the type of guarantees, we look at the structure. So I would say if we will make any decision on accepting an IRR which is below the cost of capital, it's going to be a very specific one and a very cautious one. It's not something that is coming just from... somewhere for for the sake of volume and as julio said in this case i think we are i don't see any big issue a big market you know producing under the cost of capital so there is not not that case at the moment okay then just to summarize that i mean is it fair to say the trade-off on margin is much bigger than what's actually happening in ira terms from the sound of it yeah i agree

Next question, please.

The next question is from Elena Perini with Intesa San Paolo. Please go ahead.

Yes. Good morning, and thank you for taking my questions. The first one is on the combined ratio. So you basically confirmed your guidance of below 96% and discounted. I was wondering about potential guidance on the discounting impact, considering that the 2.7 percentage points are in the first quarter, which is usually the highest one in terms of seasonality throughout the year. And then the second question is on your tax rate. You mentioned the tax rate of 28.4% in the first quarter, also impacted by the capital gain on TUA. Can you provide us more or less with the guidance for the full year? Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Elena. Both questions are for you, Cristiano.

Yes. Hello, Elena. So I would say that, first of all, on the discounting side, you need to understand that when we make a guidance or an estimation for the year going forward, we need to make an assumption on the behavior of the interest rate. All else equal, with this kind of level of interest rate, our guidance over the 650 million euro discounting or slightly higher depending on the interest rate is confirmed. So there is no change around that for different combination that we are getting there. For sure, an even more precise one will be given, including the full effect of liberty, as I told you, in the health care result. But this is the broad figure. The 28.4, the guidance for final year 24, clearly this quarter had some specificities of some positive effect. We need to await also throughout the year to unfold the full effect introduction of the global minimum tax which is imposing at minimum 15% tax rate and for example we have operation I just make an example in Bulgaria or some specific agreement in Luxembourg which could bring further impact and we already guided for something in the order of a 50 million net result impact coming from the application of this in 2024 which confirms our range unchanged to 30 to 33 i would be in any case more looking on the lower end of this range according to the to the actual situation thank you very much next question please the next question is a follow-up from michael hutner with berenberg please go ahead thank you so much i i

I'm very lucky. So the first one is on operating capital generation, which 6% times 4 is 24%. And I think last year you were somewhere around 21%. So maybe any comment on this, it's a fantastic figure. And then the second one is a much broader figure. All of you are obviously a little bit experienced. I mean that because I'm older than anybody here. But how long can this cycle where you're producing, I mean, these are quite astounding numbers in terms of, you know, whatever you can think of, IR, combined ratio, ROE, whatever, whichever metric you look at, these are amazing figures. Is there no competition left in the market? Is nobody coming in and saying, oh, this is nice, we'll do some of that? Thank you.

Thank you very much, Michael. The first question is for Cristiano, while Giulio and Marco will comment on the second one.

Yes. So, Michael, I would not exactly multiply by four. We confirmed the guidance of the 21%, 22% number. Don't forget that going forward, all this new change we have in the long-term incentive plan being part of Both of our operating results impact. It is part also of the capital generation effect, so affecting it, slightly dragging it down compared to the past, because in the past we were mainly doing capital increase. Now we are using the cash, so there is this small adjustment of one point. But in any case, that is the range. And it is mainly driven by life because of, for sure, the unwinding and the value of new production together with the real world versus risk-neutral result helped also by a little bit of positive effect from the market on one side. But on the other side, there is also the non-life growing. So, going above of the six point, slightly more than 2.5 percentage point are coming from the non-life. And don't forget that there is also the financial segment which is brought by our activity in the asset management and wealth management together with the normal cost of the holding which is a deduction. I would say that this 21% to 22% range could be the best projection you can make.

Thank you. Yeah, so I would – so your second question is really a broad question, so I would probably give you a very short answer and then we can – probably deep dive in other occasion. But I would say on life, the type of work that we have done transforming our business, making it capitalized, including, you know, protection, including hybrid products, so making it really resilient to different conditions, I think, give us the confidence that, you know, clearly we are as every insurer we are working in this environment with this financial contest and everything. But I think the resilience of the margin of our business, I think it's very strong. On PNC, I would differentiate the cycle. between motor and non-motor. Clearly, motor, as we have seen, you're right, so historically there has been cycle. For non-motor, cycle has been less pronounced, and I would say it's more a matter of our development of the book. On motor, anyway, I would say that as long as we look at our exposure, meaning the risk premium, so inflation and frequency development, and we price according to this type of development, I think it's something that we will continue to do because this is the way to protect our profitability, and we care more for profitability than to top line. So we really care of bringing home profitability and pricing according to the development. So... Overall, as we always said, so we have a portfolio that is mainly done by retail and SMEs, so small risk, price according to the different exposure, capital life with protection. So overall, I think we have a very solid portfolio that is resilient to risk. very different condition externally. So I would give you some confidence on how we can carry on in the next months. Too powerful. Thank you.

Mr. Kaleva, gentlemen, there are no more questions registered at this time.

So thanks very much for everyone for dialing into the call. Should you need any further assistance, please reach out to the IR team and we wish you a pleasant rest of the day. Goodbye.

And gentlemen, thank you for joining the conference. It's now over. You may disconnect your telephones.