Good morning, everyone, and welcome to Swiss Re's media conference on the results of the first half year 2025. My name is Jan Müller, Head of Group Communications. On the podium this morning, our Group CEO, Andreas Berger, and our Group CFO, Anders Malmström. We will begin with a presentation of the results for the half year, and we look forward to answering your questions. With that, I hand over to our Group CEO, Andreas Berger. Thank you, Jan, and good morning or good afternoon to all of you, and thanks for joining us today. Today is a good day for our clients, namely insurance companies, corporates, and the public sector. Why? Because we need a strong reinsurance industry and a strong Swiss Re to fulfill our role in the industry also for our clients. Now, I will provide a brief overview of our results for the first half of 2025. I will put them into context also and elaborate on the main developments for each business unit. I would also like to talk a bit about the June and July renewals and their outcome. Key messages. To begin with, let me take a step back and provide an overview of the first half year results and the numbers that come with it. Today, we're pleased to report a strong net income of $2.6 billion for the first half of 2025, resulting in an annualized Return on Equity of 23%. We delivered this result while supporting our clients through peak risks, particularly in the first quarter, as you can all imagine, with not only the LA wildfires but also with the LA wildfires. All of our three business units delivered their fair share to the results, and we also benefited from a solid contribution from our investment portfolio. Our asset management teams contributed nicely. The main driver of the results has been the strong underwriting discipline and the contribution of the underwriting in our P&C businesses. Here, we've benefited from a relatively quiet second quarter. We benefited from a low net cat or almost absent net cat after a tough start of the year, but we also could see some large losses, man-made losses. After a very active first quarter, driven primarily, as I said, by the devastating wildfires in LA, large losses in the second quarter were low across P&C and Corporate Solutions, coming in at just below $150 million, driven entirely by the man-made clients or events. We also allocated a reserve for current year losses. They may not have been reported to us by the time we closed the quarter, thereby adding an increased level of resilience to our P&C units for the second half of the year. As you know, Q3 is the hurricane season, so we're well prepared for what will come towards us. Life and Health Re also produced a solid first half year result with robust in-force margins supported by the investment results. Swiss Re achieved a Return on Investment of 4.1%, and we can say that the delivering of $2 billion of recurring income over the period was a very good result as well. We estimate the group Swiss Solvency Test (SST) ratio at 264% at the end of the first half year. That's 7% points higher from where we were at the start of the year. Looking at the results in more detail, we can see that all businesses have delivered and they are delivering in the first half of the year, and we remain well positioned to meet the 2025 full-year targets. Property and Casualty Reinsurance's Combined Ratio of 81.1% for the first half of the year is well below the 85% that we targeted for the full year. It strongly, obviously, was helped by a very good result of 76.3% for the second quarter. Of course, we're only halfway through the year, and an important part of the wind season is actually still ahead. I mentioned the Q3 hurricane season, but not only a Q3 hurricane season. Corporate Solutions, 88.2% in the first half year Combined Ratio, compares to a target of less than 95% for the full year. Clearly a good position for which to take on the second half of the year. For Life and Health Re, the net income of $839 million is just above the pro rata $800 million share of our $1.6 billion year-end target. Given these contributions, we're confident, but we have to remain vigilant as we look ahead. Going a bit more into detail, we can see that the insurance revenue for the group amounted to $20.9 billion. You can see that on the left part of the slide. The decline relative to the same period in 2024 was largely due to pruning actions in US Casualty and increased revenue seasonality between the first and the second half of the year, both affecting our Property and Casualty Reinsurance businesses as well as the termination of an External Retrocession Transaction in Life and Health Re and the non-renewal of the Irish Medics business in Corporate Solutions, which is an accident and health business in Ireland. If we move to the next column, the middle one, it shows the new business Contractual Service Margin or CSM. That indicates the expected future profit of our new business, written, which will be earned over the coverage period. In the first half of 2025, we achieved a new business Contractual Service Margin of $3.1 billion. This result was driven by resilient new business generation across our Property and Casualty businesses and robust contribution from Life and Health Re. Moving on to the column on the right-hand side, you can see Swiss Re's net income for the first half of 2025 split by the key result drivers. As mentioned, this reflects strong underwriting, strong underwriting margins in both P&C businesses, but also supported by a higher investment result. The group benefited from a favorable tax rate during the first half of 2025, driven by non-recurring effects in the first quarter. Now, let's have a closer look at our latest property and casualty reinsurance renewals and investment results trends. I'm happy with the outcome of the renewals. This was a solid, a good outcome. The teams have done a great job in negotiating the January, April, but also the June, July renewals. Market participants largely maintained discipline on terms and conditions. Overall pricing is still attractive, with the picture across lines being more nuanced given the different stages in the cycles they're in. This is important. It's important because as not all lines of businesses are correlated, we cannot talk about one single cycle. There are many cycles, and that's how we manage our portfolio. In property, despite a decline in risk-adjusted pricing, we achieved attractive margins, particularly relating to Natural Catastrophes. It's important to note that current reductions are occurring from healthy levels, which puts the reserve pricing pressure into perspective. In casualty, we saw nominal price increases in the mid-single to double-digit ranges, which were largely offset by our prudent loss assumptions. In specialty, we successfully defended our attractive margins in the renewals. The outcome of mid-year renewals was consistent with those in January and April, reflecting a continued focus on underwriting discipline and prioritization of margins over top line. We increased volumes in our property and specialty lines by 5%, while further significantly reducing our casualty volumes by 27%, and that's US Casualty, as we always stated. We achieved nominal price increases of 2.3% on our overall portfolio in the mid-year renewals, or negative 2.4% on a net basis, meaning post the impact of higher costing loss picks that we have taken. Year to date, we have achieved 3% volume growth, while the net price change of a modest negative 1.8% is supportive of our 2025 targets and again reflects the overall discipline that we continue to maintain. Looking at the growth by line of business, you can see that growth is stemming from property and specialty, while the volume reduction in casualty reflects our continued cautious stance on US Casualty. No change in portfolio strategy compared to previous years. From a regional perspective, the volume increase was driven primarily by growth in EMEA, Europe, Middle East, and Africa. We're pleased with the outcome and the discipline being maintained in the market. The investment result continues to be a key contributor to the group, benefiting from high, stable, Recurring Income Yields. In the first half of 2025, we generated a Return on Investment of 4.1%. In the second quarter, we achieved a Reinvestment Yield of 4.3%, and over the first six months of the year, delivered a Recurring Income Yield of 4.1%. With that, I'd like to hand over to Anders Malmström, our Group CFO. He will provide a bit more color to the results of the first half year of 2025. Thank you very much. Thank you, Andreas. Good morning, everybody. Here's the overview of our full-year financial results by business segment. Let's begin by taking a closer look at the P&C results. P&C Re reported an insurance revenue of $8.9 billion for the first half of 2025. The decline compared to the same period in 2024 is due to the pruning actions that Andreas was already talking about, taken in the casualty and increased revenue seasonality between the first and second half of the year. You will hear us continuing to stress earnings are what matter, and we continue to see good resilience here. P&C Re's new business CSM for the period stood at $2.2 billion. The net price changes at renewals in the first half of 2025 were offset by volume growth. Moving to the right-hand side of the slide, you see the underwriting results. The insurance service result of $1.6 billion increased year on year, but includes reduced CSM release driven by the earned through of prudent initial loss picks, including the impact of the New Business Uncertainty Allowance. Overall, while the first quarter saw large Natural Catastrophe losses of $556 million, almost entirely driven by the LA wildfires, activity in the second quarter was low. In addition, the business unit had favorable prior year reserve development. This was partly offset by reserves for current year attritional losses and higher than expected man-made loss activity. Our Property and Casualty Reinsurance business has made a strong start to 2025 and is well positioned to achieve its full-year Combined Ratio target of less than 85%. Of course, to echo Andreas's earlier comment, we still have much of the wind season ahead, and as such, remain vigilant and take nothing for granted. Moving to Corporate Solutions, which continues its record of delivering strong underwriting results. Corporate Solutions reported an insurance revenue for the first half of 2025 of $3.7 billion, broadly in line with the same period in 2024. Risk-adjusted rates decreased by approximately 4% in the first half of 2025. However, we see resilient new business generation in this segment despite the more challenging pricing environment reflected in an increased new business CSM of $262 million. On the right-hand side, you can see that the business unit reported an insurance service result of $515 million, in line with the prior year period. The increase in CSM release was driven by higher in-force margins, and the insurance service result was further supported by a favorable underwriting performance. Corporate Solutions is well positioned to achieve its full-year Combined Ratio target of less than 91% for the full year. Now, moving to Life and Health. Starting with the first column on the left, you can see that Life and Health Re achieved an insurance revenue of $8.0 billion in the first half of 2025. The decline relative to the same period in 2024 was mainly driven by the termination of an External Retrocession Transaction in the first half of 2024, which positively affected that period. Looking at the new business CSM generation, it is in line with the prior year period, driven primarily by US mortality and supported by health and longevity in EMEA. The insurance service result for the period was $900 million. After accounting for positive out-of-period adjustments in the first half of 2024, this is in line with the prior year figure. CSM release declines due to the assumption review carried out at the end of 2024, partly offset by reduced experience variance. Moving to the right-hand column, net income was further supported by the investment in the result. Life and Health Re is well positioned to achieve its full-year net income target of approximately $1.6 billion. The Life and Health Re insurance CSM balance, which reflects the expected profit to be earned in future periods, rose to $17.8 billion at the end of the first half of 2025. If you look at the key components of the CSM development, you see that we added new business CSM of $569 million in the first half of 2025. This is the future profit of the business written in the year. It shows that Life and Health Re was able to maintain solid margins on new business. Overall, taking factors including CSM release and currency translation impacts into account, the CSM balance increased by $410 million over the period. Finally, a few words on investments, which again made a significant contribution to our group result. The Return on Investments rose slightly from 4.0% in the first half of 2024 to 4.1% in the first half of the current year. This was driven by higher recurring income and realized gains from the sale of a minority equity position in the first quarter of 2025. The Reinvestment Yield for the second quarter stood at 4.3%. From an asset allocation perspective, changes are primarily driven by US dollar weakening, as well as net purchases of government bonds and the impact of lower US interest rates. With that, I would like to hand back to Jan. Thank you very much, Anders. We're going to start the Q&A session now. If you have a question, as this is a Teams call, please use the raise your hand functionality on Teams. I will then call on you one by one. It would be great if you could turn on your camera and introduce yourself when asking your question. With that, we open the floor. The first question goes to Nathalie Olof-Örs from Agence France-Presse. Hi. I would like to come back to your comment on a Bloomberg interview this morning about tariffs. Could you explain to us how the tariffs are going to impact insurance? Yes, thank you for the question. Tariffs don't have a direct impact on our industry, but we're observing the situation because it could have an indirect impact. Just imagine when there are losses, the repair cost might go up. That's something that we're observing, and obviously, that is an impact to our industry. It's not a direct one. It's an indirect one. We apply, as I always say, strategic patience. Don't overreact because we need to really look at the numbers. What is real and what is a narrative? That's what we do at the moment. You can see that it's a pretty fluid, volatile, and dynamic environment. That's what I can say to this question. Thank you. Next question comes from Rico Kucha from Mullen. Thank you very much. I have three small questions. The first one is Corporate Solutions. Do you see any concerns of your customers that this business becomes so successful? Normally, when it's unprofitable, the primary insurers are happy if the reinsurers take it, but now it becomes so, over a longer period, profitable. Do you see any problems with this? That's the first question. The second one is, Swiss Re changed recently the dividend payments from Swiss franc to the US dollar. Is there any chance to come back with this, or do the investors have to cover the devaluation of the US dollar with the dividends? The third one is cyber insurance. Can you see your point on this business? It's becoming more and more and more popular. It becomes more and more and more like with damages, like a lot of claims. Is it going in the direction to D&O, where the insurance industry lost a lot of money making this boom of D&O insurance, or what is different this time? Yeah. Let me take the first and the third question, and I would pass the second one to Anders around the dividend payments. Corporate Solutions, if it's a concern for our customers that a commercial insurance company is profitable, I can say no, because I said in the beginning in my opening remark, it's a good day for our clients because the clients need profitable and solid insurance and reinsurance companies. Why? Because we have a long-term commitment for claims paying abilities. They have to rely on the balance sheets, strong balance sheets of our industry. That's why the solvency ratios are also so important for us, which stands at 264%, which is very strong. That's the logic behind that for reinsurance clients, but also for commercial clients, corporates, because they have to have certainty over a longer period of time. The feedback we get from the customers, and we measure the feedback continuously, is increasingly positive because what do they expect from us? They expect from us technical excellence. They expect from us clarity, speed of decision-making, and consistency. This is what we continuously deliver towards reinsurance clients, but also towards corporate clients. The public sector, obviously, is also a customer base. That's the answer to question one. I'll go to question three, the cyber insurance. Cyber insurance is, the cyber exposures, the risk, an increasing concern and topic for most of the clients. The insurance industry sees that the cyber premium pool is increasing. You can see also that the limits that are being provided by the insurance industry are pretty limited. What we have to do is to invest more time and effort into modeling properly the cyber exposures. It's not easy because if we have better modeling capabilities and understand the underlying exposures much better, then obviously the industry can ultimately maybe provide even more limits, more capacity for this type of exposure. We are providing capacity as a reinsurance company, but we're also cautious because, as I said, the modeling needs to further improve over time. Dividend payment? Okay, maybe quickly on dividends. Before I go on dividends specifically, I think, as we know, a few years back, we changed the whole reporting from Swiss franc to US dollars. I think this really reflects where we play and where we make business. About 50% of our business is written out of the United States in US dollars, and then the remaining 50% is around the world, where actually Swiss franc exposure is very, very limited. We decided to report in US dollars, and based on that, we also then decide to declare the dividend in US dollars. That's directly reflective of the results we have, and then translate that dividend at the payment, obviously, in Swiss franc. I think it's important to highlight also, you see that, yes, we see a decline in US dollars, but we actually benefit also through our hedging. We have gains of about $150 million just from how we hedge. We benefit indirectly by actually having a higher US dollar result, which then also leads to a higher US dollar dividend, which then, obviously, in the end, also then benefits the Swiss investors. I think we always need to be cognizant that we are exposed to mostly US dollar business and then also the rest of the world, not in Swiss franc. Thank you very much. Very well. The next question is to Rachel Dalton from Insurance Insider. Morning. Thank you for taking my question. I have two, actually, if that's okay. The first one on the US Casualty book. Obviously, this is a long-term project to remediate the book. Can you give us an idea of how much more pruning you think you might need to do? That's one. The second question, I noticed that you said in the results that there had been some favorable prior year development in the P&C, but can you give us any color on that, please? Thank you. Yeah. Okay. We allocate again. The question one, I will take. Question two, Anders, I will take then accordingly. US Casualty book, you remember we have taken drastic actions on US Casualty and US liability in particular in 2024 and Q3 with the significant reserve increase. We have also decided to scale back our book. We have had a peak market share of 17%, and we've reduced it now down to around 5%. I think we're now in a position where we feel much more comfortable. We shouldn't expect further pruning per se. We are obviously managing the exposures, but also importantly, we have to manage the costing and then pricing to achieve rate adequacy in the market to write new business. Should we not get the rate adequacy, we will obviously stay away from it. We're quite happy with where we are at the moment. You can see that the underlying portfolio is healthy. You could see in the top line development that the reduction of the US Casualty book has an impact, obviously, on the overall revenue line. That's something that's part of our cautious approach and the pruning. The team has done a great job. We are very granular in the understanding of the exposures on the US Casualty side, and we are applying prudency and a cautious approach to the design of business. Okay. Maybe quickly to the reserve development. I think, as we mentioned in the call, we obviously had positive experience coming from the NATCAT experience. That was positive in Q2. In addition, we also had a positive development of the prior year reserving of about $100 million just for Q2. I think that was a very positive development that we saw in Q2. Thank you. Lovely. Let's come to Jonathan Progin from Finanz und Wirtschaft. Yes, hi. Thank you for taking my question. Actually, I have many questions. I'll just start. Maybe give some more color on the pricing premiums. What's the main difference in this planning cycle when we compare it to other cycles? I mean, we see that markets that attract margins and the demand or like plans to want to have reinsurance contracts. What's the main difference between this cycle and last cycles? Maybe even some short answers to the following questions. Can you say something about the landslide in Bloodton? Are you affected? Also, what about the flood in Texas in July? Do you expect some major loss from this event? I guess the man-made events in the first half year of this year was mainly airplane losses or related to airplane disasters, I guess. The last question, more general question. When we look at your casualty book, we see you don't renew a lot of business and also in other parts of your portfolio. Maybe you can give us some idea who is going to take this business. Is it more like your peers or like Bermuda reinsurance companies or maybe Cat Bond Market? Or is this business just they don't take it? Their clients don't have any new contracts they have. They can. Maybe you can give some color on that. Thank you. Yeah. Let me start with the price changes or cycle management discussion and what the difference is towards the last cycle. We have been operating now for quite some time in a very healthy and constructive market environment. I think this is the new norm. This needs to be the new norm because the reinsurance companies have to also earn their cost of capital. That's the main difference to the previous period where we had a prolonged soft market cycle where we haven't earned our cost of capital. This is not sustainable. As I said before, we need a strong reinsurance industry to play the role as a shock absorber to back the insurance industry. Ultimately, the insurance industry is backing society, the ultimate end customer, the householders, policyholders. We also have to acknowledge that we're not talking about one cycle. Each product area, a line of business has a different cycle. Now it's important that you look at the composition of your portfolio in which part of the cycle is each line of business sitting, and how do the individual lines of businesses correlate to each other? That's what we call cycle management. That's our job, the proper portfolio management, and to find a good diversification in our portfolio. That's why our clients buy reinsurance, because they want to benefit from the diversification benefit that we have as a reinsurance industry. I don't want to compare it to the last cycle where we had a long soft market cycle with a strong amplitude, and this I don't think will be happening again if we keep the discipline in the market. Price is only one aspect. The more important aspect that people should also look at is terms and conditions and where are the attachment points where reinsurance is being triggered. There's a lot of discipline there. There are healthy structures there. Now I come to the third question because of the casualty question you asked. Who's actually then picking up those exposures that we are not continuing to underwrite on the reinsurance side? Let's see. I mean, we have seen markets picking this up, yes. It's also about the primary insurance companies to manage this exposure. We have to play our role in the reinsurance industry to be the shock absorber. If you pass on the issues towards the back end, towards the reinsurance company, and then they change the terms and conditions for renewals because it wasn't sustainable, obviously one has to address it at the original point where the risk sits. We can provide all our data analytics, the understanding to increase the prevention and mitigation because you have to always see where is the ownership of the risk. The ownership of a risk is always with the end customer, and we can help the end customer through pruning to see how investments, prevention, mitigation can actually help to increase resilience. This brings me to your second question around Bloodton. Bloodton was a horrible event. The pictures look horrible. Yes, we had one casualty also there. We had an overall loss of CHF 320 million, I guess $400 million. I think 150 structures, houses were impacted. The good news here is with all the negative impact it had, the good news was that society was prepared. The evacuations worked very well. The preparedness was extraordinarily well organized here in Switzerland. That means also that people were anticipating events like this. This is what we try to foster in all regions of the world where there are Natural Catastrophes. This is exactly what also happened here in Bloodton. This is not a question that one party alone can answer. This is a public-private partnership approach, and everybody has to contribute here. That's what happened here in Switzerland, in Bloodton in particular. The exposures like Bloodton are exposures that normally are covered by underneath the retention levels because these are frequency events, and the reinsurance industry is there for the shock absorber for the peak risks. What we have to acknowledge is that the scientists say we will have to face and anticipate an increased number of these kinds of events in the future. What we can say is, let's get ready. Let's prepare ourselves. We can play a strong role also to not only provide the balance sheet, but also provide knowledge, data analytics, modeling, and scenario planning projections into the future. Were there two questions on floods, taxes, and man-made airplane crashes? Yes. I think we had a very quiet Natural Catastrophe second quarter. We had man-made losses. Yes, you mentioned the air crash. These events for us are our business. They're not extraordinary. They're not beyond any expectations that we have. That's what we're there for. Claims management, claims payment is the moment of truth. So far, we get very good feedback how we do handle these kinds of situations. I think on Texas, it's too early. We don't expect anything big for the reinsurance, but it's too early to give numbers in. Okay, as I'm trying to manage the queue here, maybe if you could limit yourself to two questions each, that would be helpful as you can rejoin the queue. Next up is Maximilian Falls from Plato Brief. Hello. Thank you for taking my question. There are two. A main question and a niche question. The big question is, how have reinsurance prices developed on the German insurance market in 2025, and what developments do you anticipate? Maybe you can give one or two sentences, how is business in Germany generally performing? The niche question is, there is a deal incoming between the Nürnberger Versicherung and the Vienna Insurance Group. The small investor, Seven Square Group, decides a deal in saying it would disincentivize small shareholders. The big companies, the big insurance company shareholders would shrink their responsibility instead of preventing the deal. You are, for my information, in the Nürnberger with 5%, around 5%. I would be interested, what is your opinion on this deal? Thank you very much. Yeah. Let me take the first question. First, the German insurance market 2025. Swiss Re has had a very good development in the German insurance markets. Our market share is growing. The rate developments are pretty similar to what we commented before. There are a lot of interesting structural discussions in Germany, in particular when it comes to Natural Catastrophes. In Germany, you call it the Elementar Schäden und Versicherung. That's something where we actively contribute to the discussion around mandatory insurance, yes or no. It's too early to say because it's still ongoing. I'm very happy with the development of the premium. We developed very nicely in the German market, and I'm also very happy with the profitability development of the German market. Very constructive. We have a close relationship to our clients, and I think we should continue on that trajectory. On the second question, yes, we are a small shareholder in Nürnberger Versicherung, but we're not commenting on any speculations on deals that are happening at the moment. Thank you very much. Good. Let's move over to Friederike Krieger from Versicherungsmonitor. Hello. I have a question concerning cyber. You said that if you understand the risk better through better modeling, you may provide bigger capacities. How big is your capacity at the moment? How big are your limits? Yes. This obviously depends on the individual underwriting risk. On the reinsurance side, we're one of the large capacity providers in the industry. In the primary insurance space, we are very cautious. We're concentrating our cyber knowledge in a center of expertise that sits under the reinsurance leadership because that's the bigger portfolio that we have. Should we have large corporates, in particular in their captive environments where they need the addition of cyber to some multi-line deals, we will provide these kinds of covers. We provide also limits to corporates, but we are not big in this space. We do it with selected client relationships where the quality of the book is understood, where the exposure is understood by the client with all the limitations that I just mentioned before. That's where we can then engage ourselves. How much capacity or what limits we're offering is dependent really on the individual cases. Thank you. Thank you very much. Next question comes from Noel Elion from Bloomberg EMEA. Morning. I have two quick questions from my side. Firstly, on the exchange rate, you have a significant cost base in Swiss francs. Would you consider moving some of that? Would you consider nearshoring or offshoring or moving some of that outside of Switzerland? Secondly, you announced in December that you're working to reduce the run rate expenses by $300 million and by 2027. How much of that will come from headcount reduction? Okay. Let me start with the FX. Look, I think overall, I mentioned that before. I think we're managing FX two ways. First of all, from an asset liability matching, we want to match the assets with the liabilities in the same currency. Now, you mentioned one point. I think on Swiss francs, we're obviously short because we don't have that much business, but we have an expense exposure in Switzerland. This will continue to be the case. I think this might change in small changes, but this will not change. I think it's roughly CHF 1 billion expense exposure, and I think this is our headquarter where we have most of our people, and this will not change. This maybe leads me then to the second question. I think overall, we have announced the CHF 300 million reduction in expenses over the three years. I think we're well on track to achieve that. This goes in many directions. I think Andreas mentioned that before. It's focusing on the core. I think that the vestige of EPTQ is a big driver of that. I think becoming more efficient overall. Some of it will be on the personnel side. Some of it will be on other aspects. I don't think we can provide the split, but it's where we can become more efficient. The key point here is that it's not about cost per se. It's about delivering what we really have to deliver in the most effective and efficient way. I think that's where we work on trying to be closer to customers and then have the underlying result as needed here. Thank you. Thank you. Let's come to Ben Dyson from S&P. Hi. Good morning. I just had a question about the SST ratio. It's been above the target rate for a little while, and it did further increase in the first half there. I was just wondering how that's affecting your thinking about the issue of excess capital and what your plans are there, or if this is something that you plan to, or if you plan to stay above your target rate just because of the amount of uncertainty at the moment. Thank you. Yeah. First of all, I think very pleased, obviously, with the SST ratio development. It's pretty much what you would expect over the year. I think you generate earnings, you accrue for dividends, but it should still go up. When it comes to the capital management, I think that's always something you do at the end of the year, and then you decide how much you give back to shareholders, how much you reinvest back into the business. We'll come back at the end of the year. Obviously, we have a dividend guidance, but overall, this is an end-of-the-year discussion and not a mid-of-the-year discussion. Okay, thank you. Right. Second round for Rachel Dalton from Insurance Insider. Hello again. Quick question on earlier this year, you did a kind of optimization process for deciding whether or not to write business in the specialty division on the reinsurance side or the primary side after the decision that was taken about how to write aviation business. You told us to expect a bit more of that. Can you give us any updates on how that process is going? Yeah. No. First of all, the rationale for this decision was the following. We continuously look at all our portfolios and look at where do we stand with our portfolios. In certain cases, we've seen that in aviation, that's an interesting market as an example, where Corporate Solutions had a subcritical size. The same type of risk we also underwrote on the reinsurance side as part of our treaty business. Here, we have decided that we will collapse. We will consolidate everything under the reinsurance responsibility. That doesn't mean that we're not underwriting those businesses on the prime insurance side because mostly there are captives involved. Technically, it is a reinsurance contract. We can then also consolidate it in reinsurance. There are also examples where it went the other way. On the credit insurance side, for instance, we decided to bring all those credit insurance businesses under one leadership. That is the Corporate Solutions leadership because it is about deploying capacity. Yeah. How do we optimally deploy capacity? Is it towards Corporate Solutions, towards a reinsurance business? How do we manage basically the risk appetite and the risk limits, etc.? That has all been done in this case more optimally on the Corporate Solutions side. I could give you now a whole list. Agriculture, for instance, we've also brought to the reinsurance side. We're very happy with this. We're leveraging the strength of the group. We write the business where it's best written and best managed. Clearly, there's a Chinese wall between the reinsurance business and the prime insurance business. This is very important from a governance perspective. From a steering perspective, portfolio and company steering perspectives, that's where we can leverage the strength of the group. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much, Rachel. Next round for Jonathan Progin from Finanz und Wirtschaft. Yes, thanks again. Sorry, it's just too interesting, so I cannot leave it just like that. Maybe a second question to Bloodton. I didn't really get that. I mean, to my understanding, there's an attachment point for the Elementar Schaden Pool in Switzerland that started at CHF 550 million per year, and this shouldn't be over. It shouldn't be touched by Bloodton. I just want to know if Swiss Re is affected within the broader reinsurance pool that covers the Elementar Schaden Pool in Switzerland. Maybe a further question to dividends. You have a 7% per year increase target for dividends in US dollars, but the dollar is more than 10% down this year to the Swiss franc. I know it's not the end of the year yet, but if you're running into the danger that maybe the dividend in francs will be lower than last year for 2025, would you be able to just leave it like that, or would you maybe increase the dividend a bit more than 7% per year in dollars? Thanks. Let me take the first question, and then Anders can take the second again. I explained the mechanics of a case like Bloodton, and we don't comment on specific claims cases, how much involvement we have, and what limits, etc., structures are being touched. The mechanics should give you an idea of how the overall situation of Bloodton can be qualified. I think on the dividends, obviously, as we say, I mean, we declared that at the end of the year. We had clear guidance. We're exposed to the US dollar. We managed through the US dollar. I think, as I said, I think we also benefited in a sense that we were able to get some FX gains through that. At the end of the year, we see where the results are. We see where the capital position is. Based on that, we then make a decision. I probably have to leave it by that. That's the decision then. Okay. Maybe just to add one detail, the figure regarding the Bloodton exposure that Andreas mentioned was an industry figure, for the whole of the insurance industry, not for Swiss Re. Thank you. Thank you. Good. It looks like there are no further questions at this time. Thank you all for participating in today's media conference. Just a quick reminder, we'll be holding a Q&A session for analysts and investors at 2:00 P.M. Zurich time. You as journalists can follow this session in a listen-only mode. Thank you very much for joining today. Have a great day. God.