Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to this conference call on Sampo Group's 2020 results. I'm Jarmo Salonen, Head of Investor Relations, and I have with me here our Group CEO, Torbjörn Magnusson, and Ricard Wennerklint, Chief of Strategy for the Group, Group CFO, Knut Arne Alsaker, Morten Thorsrud, CEO of If, and Toby van der Meer, who's CEO of Hastings. I hope I did not forget any names. We're here to discuss the full year results, and you're more than welcome to join us in a couple of weeks time, 24th of February, to discuss more strategy and that sort of issues at the Capital Market Day. We'll start, as always, with a presentation from Torbjörn, and after that, we'll take your questions. Let me remind you that you can follow this transmission on sampo.com/results, and a recorded version of the call will later be available at that same address. Now I'll hand over to Torbjörn. Torbjörn, please. Thanks, Jarmo. I'm very pleased indeed to present a set of extremely strong numbers for 2020, which was, at the same time, also a year of intense activity to develop our group. First and foremost, of course, the operational performance of our biggest division, If P&C, didn't leave much to wish for, I think. The lowest combined ratio ever, very strong indeed compared to peers, and even at the lower end of our outlook from Q3. This combined with further improvements in efficiency and good growth, again, especially in the digital channels. I'm sure that the momentum in If P&C has never been stronger and better, and as you know, I have a rather long history with that company. Today, some attention is also given to the extraordinary accounting step to reduce the book value of Nordea at Sampo. However, this has nothing to do with Nordea's business. As you will have seen, Nordea is progressing impressively well towards their targets. Our confidence in this is unperturbed. A brief remark on Mandatum Life. It's encouraging to see that the high guarantee liabilities have never run off faster than this year. This, of course, reduces risk and releases capital in this solvency- intense segment. When it comes to our preparations for the future, I think our actions from the last year are well -known. Suffice it to say now that with hindsight, the timing for the acquisition of Hastings and the date for the Nordea sell -down seem to have been well-chosen or at least done with good timing. For If P&C, let's begin with a few remarks on the combined ratio. As a large motor insurer, it was certainly helped by COVID effects. On the other hand, large losses came in quite a bit above normal, except for Q4, so the net effect of those two effects is not huge. The starting point for the coming years is thus very strong, and we give an outlook of below 85% for the year, not a range as we usually do, as estimating COVID effects is uncertain to say the least. Growth continued to be distinctly higher than the GDP, and this is despite a negative premium effect in excess of 1% due to the low new car sales. As many of you are aware, car dealers is a channel in which we have excelled for many years and continue to do so as several of the largest agreements were renewed last year, in all cases, for long time periods, long contract time periods. All in all, underwriting profits continued to grow, and the Nordic markets seem to be on the way to even more consolidation, thanks to Tryg and RSA. Hastings. For the first time, we have Toby van der Meer, CEO of Hastings Group, on the call, so a special welcome to you, Toby. We have now had the chance to work together for a couple of months, so let me give you some impressions on Hastings as it is now a new part of our group. It's been exciting to start to work together. The corporate cultures are definitely so similar that we should have done this a long time ago. Toby and his team are hands-on, thrifty insurance professionals with high long-term ambitions, all characteristics we value at Sampo. When we looked at the company last year, we became convinced that we did not share the doubts about the company that the market seemed to have, and consequently, we looked more positively at valuations. 2020 ended well for Hastings, in line with their previous plans on growth and loss ratio, and we were also able to strengthen the balance sheet of Hastings at the year-end so that it holds the same standards we are used to at Sampo, and all this combined with a strong 76.5% loss ratio. We have also designed a structured process for synergy development that started in January, which I have planned to discuss more in detail with you at our Capital Markets Day in two weeks' time. Turning finally to the dividend. You could consider Sampo to be in a transition phase in some respects, as we're moving towards a more focused, more simply structured insurance group. For this reason, it is natural to look to the insurance operations to supply the means for the dividend, and this slide details the numbers. We will work on increasing the insurance dividends as a reflection of the underwriting profits as a solid basis for our group dividends. Volatility in underwriting profits is certainly much lower than other lines that are more exposed to the investment markets. The present market situation supports our ambitions better than in many years, and our insurance operations are better equipped than I can remember to win in these increasingly digital markets. Now we look forward to your questions. Operator. Thank you, Torbjörn. Operator, we are now ready for the questions. Please. As a reminder, if you do wish to ask a question, please press zero one on your telephone keypad now. Our first question comes from Youdish Chicooree from Autonomous Research. Please go ahead, your line is now open. Good afternoon, everyone. I've got two questions, please. The first one is on dividends. I was wondering if restrictions on bank dividends are lifted later this year and Nordea is able to pay a further EUR 0.72 per share. I was wondering whether Sampo will then distribute that dividend income as a special dividend, well, later this year or maybe next year. That's my first question. Secondly, in terms of pricing in P&C, can you give us a sense of the price increases you have managed to achieve on the January 1st renewals in your Industrial and Commercial lines, please? Thank you. Morten, if you answer the price increases, I'll take the dividend after that. Yeah, sure. Price increases at the first of first renewals, I think the general statement would be that they are fairly high seen in a historical perspective, in particular in the large corporate segment, so i.e. our Industrial book of business. Also fairly substantial in the Commercial book of business, in particular still in Norway, which is a situation that we've seen now for quite a while. All in all, price increases well above what is assumed sort of inflation. That kind of situation continues also on the first renewal. Are they as strong as last year or better? On the Industrial side, I would say it's perhaps slightly stronger, and then Commercial in line with last year, in general. Great. Thank you very much. On the dividend, if the recommendation or ban on dividends was to be lifted in the autumn, we would potentially then get a dividend from Nordea, hopefully, I trust. The timing of that would not be too different from when we receive normally the dividend from If P&C. We have a policy that's in excess of 70% of earnings. There's no ceiling to that, and we don't have any M&A agenda except possibly if possibilities will occur for bolt-ons in the Nordics. That is probably as much as I can give as an answer. All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from Jon Denham from Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead. Your line is now open. Good afternoon. Thanks very much for taking my questions. Firstly, on If. You flagged, I think it's a 4-point benefit to the combined ratio from COVID. Are you or your competitors passing any of the benefit onto consumers via lower pricing yet, or still no? I think you said less than 85% instead of a range because it was hard to estimate the COVID effects. Just wondering what would that range be before assuming any impact from COVID? I guess take the opportunity, as Toby's here, what's driving the acceleration in policy count at Hastings? What kind of rate changes are you putting through versus the market? Just finally, I think you mentioned that you strengthened Hastings' balance sheet at year-end. What kind of benefit do you think COVID had on Hastings' loss ratio in 2020? On the range first, we have typically given a range of 4 percentage points at the beginning of the year, which is the uncertainty that we've held had in our normal planning. That's what history indicates. Morten, If and COVID. Yes, as you say, we estimate 4% COVID effect in the fourth quarter. I think one should bear in mind that it's of course extremely difficult to really estimate that effect. It's hard to really understand what's better, what's more normal frequency development, and what's specifically COVID -related. It's a very rough estimate. Similarly, we have a very rough estimate of a 3% effect on the full -year level. We are not passing that benefit back to the customers, mainly because most customers place a number of products with us. Again, we see beneficial development on motor insurance due to low frequencies. Of course, we have other lines of businesses where we see a more negative development. That's I think the situation on the COVID and whether we pass it on to the customers. Toby, the last one. Hi, Jon. Thanks for the question. On your first question related to Hastings on policy count growth, then I guess there's a couple of moving parts to the 8% policy count growth that we've seen for the full year 2020. The first is that we saw continued strong retention rates throughout the year. Very pleased with all of the work the teams have done to continue what is now pretty close to market-leading levels of customer retention. Secondly, throughout the year, we've been able to deliver a series of enhancements to our pricing models that have helped our new business volumes. I increased our share of price comparison website sales during the year, and that was particularly true during the second quarter and the third quarter, where we were able to continue running the business without too much interruption from COVID. At a time when some of our competitors had to retrench as they dealt with operational or systems issues, we were able to keep forging ahead. On your second question on the impact of COVID on the loss ratio, you'll have seen in the numbers that Torbjörn talked about a 6-point or so improvement in the loss ratio. Embedded in that, although we haven't quantified the effect of COVID, embedded in that is of course the benefits of lower frequencies, particularly in the second quarter. Very limited driving then saw driving behavior increase during the third quarter and the beginning of the fourth quarter, then tail off again, of course, when the third national lockdown hit in the U.K. towards the end of the year. As Torbjörn has also said, overall, we have delivered a good loss ratio with that 6-point improvement, but also strengthened our reserving position. I guess when you bring all of that together, then when we think about 2021, it leaves us in a very confident position to be able to say that the combination of the current accident year performance and the development patterns for prior years will leave us in a position where we can say that it should be expected to improve. Thanks very much. Is it possible just to get the magnitude of reserve strengthening? We don't normally comment on that as there are so many moving parts in that statement. Okay. Thanks very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Blair Stewart from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Thank you and good afternoon. I have a few questions. Firstly, just with regards to the Hastings underlying performance in the year, it's very difficult to get much from the six-week period that you've reported. Perhaps not today, but I wonder if that's something you'll talk about more at the Capital Markets Day so we can have an idea of what to expect from Hastings going forwards. Secondly. That's a yes. On the reserve strengthening, you're clearly not going to comment on the number, was that done just internally from Hastings? There was no need to transfer anything from Sampo Group into Hastings. I'm assuming that was just done internally. That's another yes. Also on Hastings, I wonder if you'd just take the opportunity to ask management what the expected impact of the FCA pricing review and changes will be on the company and its competitive position. My final question, I'm sorry to ask so many, but they're all quite simple ones. The dividend from If P&C was only EUR 600 million against, I think, over EUR 700 million last year. Is that really just a balancing item in terms of what you need to fund the external dividend, or is there something else going on there? Thanks very much. On the first two, we will speak more about Hastings performance in the Capital Markets Day, and Toby will be there and have a separate session on Hastings. On the reserving, yes, it's been done within Hastings Resources. Then, yes, the next one was for you, Toby. Yeah. Great. Just to comment briefly on the FCA pricing practices work and its impact on us, and we will talk more about this at the Capital Markets Day in a couple of weeks' time as well. At a headline level, for today's purposes, I would just say that the FCA has identified, as you'll be aware, that a large number of players in the industry have been making disproportionate returns and profits from renewing customers through practices such as price walking. As you can imagine, that has been most prevalent in the businesses that have been around for the longest, have the most outstanding customer bases. For a company like ourselves that attracts customers mainly from price comparison websites and mainly over the last, say, four or five years, you can imagine that we don't have the sorts of customers who would let us do price walking to that extent. We do charge customers a little bit more today on renewal than for new business, but for us, that's a negligible amount, and therefore, I guess as we look ahead and we would expect the FCA's changes to have an impact on those sorts of profits, then it is largely irrelevant for us, but may have a big impact on some of our competitors. The second dynamic then is how it will change shopping around behavior in the longer term, and will it have an impact on price comparison websites as a distribution channel? I know some of our competitors are hoping that customers will all of a sudden become a lot more loyal, love their brands, and start shopping around directly a lot more. I guess we're not sure about that. We suspect that customers across the U.K. have been told and educated to shop around, like using price comparison websites to do so, and will continue to do so in the future. I think we're relatively optimistic about the impact of all of the changes that the FCA will bring, are supportive of them. Of course, we'll monitor them very closely as they start to have an effect on the market, depending on the timing of the final FCA expectations, but much likely towards the end of the year. Finally, Knut, have you emptied the coffers of If P&C? No, Torbjörn. That's one of the things, of course, we have not done. The dividend from If P&C was based on the earnings in 2019, but also on a view that it was reasonable to leave If P&C with a little bit extra strong solvency ratio at the end of the year, which they have, given the uncertainties that we still have around us. Okay, great. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Jakob Brink from Nordea. Please go ahead. Thank you. Good afternoon from my side as well. I guess the first question is on the leverage in Sampo Group after the write-down, which was announced this morning of roughly EUR 900 million. Could you just talk us through what will be the impact on the financial leverage in Sampo Group and what that might have of consequences or might not have of consequences? That was my first question. Secondly, a bit more broader question, I don't know if you can or will answer it, but I see there's a change to the board composition where your main owner is, as far as I can read, no longer going to be represented in the board of Sampo. Can I read anything into this? Lastly, why exactly did you choose to write down the Nordea value now? Anything specifically happened that made you do the change now? Thank you. Knut, will you talk about leverage and Nordea timing? Sure. Good afternoon, Jakob. Leverage in Sampo at the end of the year based on our booked equity was just below 29%. If you would calculate it based on the market value of Nordea, would be just above 29%. The impairment as such, which had an impact on our equity of EUR 900 million, as you know, impacted the leverage ratio based on booked equity by around 1.5 percentage points. Obviously, no change on the ratio based on Nordea at market value. This is an adequate level for us. It has no impact on any considerations for us in terms of ratings and obviously not solvency. When it comes to the timing, we of course have had a market value of Nordea that has been below our book value for some time. We have done impairment testing on a regular basis every quarter according to accounting regulation. What has changed during 2020 and also in the fourth quarter is, of course, that Nordea have made good profit, and we have consolidated our part of it, which is increasing the book value. Different than in historical years, there's been very little and no dividend payments, and that has not adjusted the book value downwards. The book value is a mechanical exercise of the acquisition price plus all the accumulated profit less dividend. That brought the book value up to a level which we're about to exceed what we had as the value in use in our model, and it was needed to do an impairment. That basically happened now when Nordea announced their fourth quarter and also announced their plans to postpone the dividend further to the fourth quarter of this year. The timing is basically due to the fact that Nordea is doing very well and not the changed view from our side on Nordea and not because the Nordea profitability is not in line with what we expect. On board representation, Antti Mäkinen is not available for another season. Remember that Jannica Fagerholm, our Deputy Chairman, is actually also on the board of Solidium. I don't know. You shouldn't read anything into this, as far as I am aware. Okay. Thank you very much. Over to you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Per Grønborg from SEB. Please go ahead. Your line is now open. Yes, thank you. Per Grønborg from SEB. A couple of questions from my side as well. First of all, why EUR 7.5 and not down to EUR 7 as the current market value roughly is on the Nordea impairment? Knut. I couldn't hear the question, Per. Can you repeat it? I- Why EUR 7.5 and not EUR 7, the market price? You are impairing Nordea down to EUR 7.5. Why not impairing it down to the market value? What's the rationale behind that? We make an accounting consideration according to accounting rules. We use a model which is based on requirements under accounting regulations. We use assumptions which are market-based, particular based on what we observed were cost of equities at the time when we sold Nordea stakes, the 4% in Nordea in November. It's not based on the actual market value. If we were to impair it down to the exact market value, which there are no reasons to do based on our view of Nordea, that would more be an indication of a change in accounting principle, going mark- to- market on Nordea, and that's not what we do. We still account it as an associate company and not as an available-for-sale asset. And maybe. How far should your owner stake in Nordea drop before you couldn't account for it as an associate any longer? Yeah. There is no such exact limit. It used to be more clear before, but there is no such an exact limit. That consideration is based, of course, on the size of the ownership versus other shareholders, our board representation, the fact that Torbjörn is the chairman, et cetera. I cannot give you an exact limit, but it is lower than where we are today, obviously. All right. Not everything in the world is exact. At least that tells us where we are. My second question, back to what is important, the P&C underwriting. If I should make a very rough switch from your 2020 results until an after-COVID situation, you have 3 percentage point in COVID impact that will reverse. You don't report run-off, but if I look at a peer like Tryg, they are guiding for run-off being approximately 1 percentage point better than 2020. In a normally, I doubt your numbers are that different. You have the large claims that are a couple of percentage points above your normal 1 percentage point rate. This imply that after COVID, we should look for a combined ratio or claims ratio that is approximately 2 percentage point worse than it was last year, plus minus, of course, the improvements you will do to the business in between. Per, I think we have probably discussed this before, you and I. Let me give you an indication of what I think, and then Morten will correct me. We, of course, do planning, and the factors that you mentioned are two of the more important ones, but also going into these calculations are, of course, the price increases, the rate increases that we've done during the year and the exact timing of those, as well as the weather influence on our results. It is a little bit more comprehensive than what you have described. Morten, what do you think? Yeah, I think when we do our calculation, we do reach to quite a fair underlying improvement, if I may. Large claims, 1.9% higher this year than last year. Run-off result, more or less in line with last year. COVID is a very rough estimate, rounding up to 3% on the full year. Net of those being about 1% on the full year. Weather and event, for us, it's quite a similar 2020 as 2019. When we look at weather and also events, of course, in that bearing in mind, the tragic landslide claim in Norway at the very end of the year. All in all, this leaves us with the improvement in the combined ratio of 2020 versus 2019 of somewhere between 1% and 2%. I think the way we see it is a good underlying improvement as a result of underwriting improvements, but also pricing being above inflation now for a time period. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Derald Goh from Citigroup. Please go ahead. Hi, good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. The first set of questions I have relate to the P&C. Firstly, in terms of the large losses, which I think for the first three quarters and even for the fourth quarter, have exceeded budget or expectations, are there any specific trends that you've observed? Were there specific lines of businesses or regions where the large losses have recurred? Morten? Yeah. No particular trend. Of course, large claims in the Industrial segment will be a bit volatile, and you need to go really far back in time to find a negative deviation on the level that we had in 2020. It's typically normal property claims, no specific geography, clients that's been with us for a long time period, typically. We look upon this as being the normal volatility that you will have in the Industrial market. Yeah. Yeah. Thanks. My next question is just on the run-off trends. It's roughly stable year-over-year. Can you maybe talk about the sources of the run-offs and maybe the outlook for them, given that some peers have been commenting on a more moderated level going forward? Morten? Yeah. It will be, unfortunately, repeating a little bit what we said before, but the main source of the run-off profits still is from the motor business in Sweden, which is one of the most long-tailed businesses in all of Europe, actually. Again, the driver is that we've seen over the last 10 years, a more benign development on bodily injury claims than what was assumed in the reserving models. We typically, of course, do not try to predict too much about the future. Of course, at a certain point in time, this development is leveling out. Of course, we continue to have strong reserves. Again, the development has been positive and constant over the last 10 years when it comes to motor bodily injury claims payments. Yep. Thanks. Just one more on If P&C, please. Just looking at the underlying trends between the four segments, it's quite hard to assess from the outside, but could you maybe give some comments on the 2020 performance relative to 2019? Which were the main segments of improvements and what were the main drivers, if you like? Yeah. I think the Private Business Area being the largest one continued to perform really well. It had a great performance in 2019 and continued to have very strong performance in 2020. The larger positive COVID-19 effects, of course, will be visible in the Business Area Private result as a result of the motor business that they have there. Commercial show an improvement in combined ratio compared to 2019. Large claims more or less on plan, good pricing momentum throughout 2020. I think, again, that represent an improvement in the underlying performance for Commercial. Industrial, very high combined ratio that can be fully attributed to the large claims outcome. When you adjust for that, we do have a good profitability also in the Industrial Business Area. One could also bear in mind that we reduced the discount rate for Finnish workers' comp or Finnish annuities impacting Commercial and Industrial to a fair extent, in 2020. That's what we talk about on the third quarter. Finally, Baltics continued to have a stellar performance, 86.6% combined ratio for 2020 on the same level as they had in 2019. I think all in all, good profitability throughout all business segments and all geographies. Thanks so much, Morten. Just one last question on debt leverage, please. What is the main metric that you look at, and is it dictated by the rating agency? Is it IFRS equity? Is it tangible equity? Is it Solvency II? What might be the ideal level that you want to operate at, please? Thank you. Could you repeat that? I didn't get the first part of the question, sorry. Yeah. I'm talking about debt leverage. Yeah. Knut Arne. Yeah. Hi, Derald, we'll elaborate a bit more on that at our Capital Markets Day. Obviously rating agency is one such consideration, to have leverage levels which is in line with the rating that we have from S&P and Moody's. Obviously also to have a leverage which is in line with our balance sheet, and our balance sheet as a P&C Insurance Group. I'll talk more about this in two weeks time. Yep, appreciate it. Thank you all. Thank you. Our next question comes from Ashik Musaddi from JPMorgan. Please go ahead. Your line's now open. Yeah. Hi. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. Just a simple couple of questions. I'm pretty sure this must have been asked in past as well. How do we think about leverage in case you were to exit Nordea completely? What would be the end leverage profile that you would want the insurance company to have? That would be my first question. The second question is for on Hastings, basically. Now, clearly, as you suggested that there are participants in the market who are suggesting that loyalty will improve post the FCA move. Basically, loyalty is going to improve or not, that's not the way you are thinking about. According to you, there will be more volumes that will come on your way. Given that Hastings is making profit in the current pricing model, how do we think about the volume versus profitability focus of Hastings if FCA review goes through? Lastly, Hastings never have strong reserve, basically not much buffers are typically there in Hastings back books. How would you think about creating buffers in Hastings back book at the moment? Thank you. The first one, end leverage, we will discuss capital management more in detail in the Capital Markets Day. Welcome to that. I had a little bit of trouble hearing exactly what you said. I don't know if you heard more, Toby. Yes, I think I've got the gist. Thank you for the question. In terms of the FCA's work, I guess our base case expectation is that if other firms are no longer able to make money from renewal pricing, and at the moment they're often discounting new business prices, assuming that they'll get the money back in the second year, then they will no longer be able to afford to do so. Because of that, you could imagine that new business prices might go up in the future. We'll see whether that happens, but that would be our base case expectation as we sit here today. I guess Hastings then, because we don't rely on that price walking, and we're already are in a position where we can price customers effectively in their first year and make a profit from that, we will, I guess then be in a position where we can choose to take as the market prices go up, whether we also increase our prices and therefore increase our margin for new business customers, or whether we take it as additional volume. That is a series of trade-offs that we have models in place for at an aggregate level, but more importantly at an individual customer level. In other words, we would ask the underwriting team in our business to continue to be very disciplined in hitting a target loss ratio and improving that over time, and that our retail trading team would maintain the algorithms that look at the trade-off between volume and long-term value at an individual customer and segment level. If there are parts of the market where we think it's more effective in terms of long-term value creation to put our prices up, rather than take it as volume, then we'll do that. If there are other parts of the market where we think there are higher value customers that we should be writing more of, then we may choose to take it as volume. We'll trade in it through the models in the way we always do, rather than taking an ivory tower decision by the executive team. We prefer to let the models do the talking. In terms of the buffer, I guess firstly to say is we're not explicitly trying to create a buffer. We just have a very strong reserving position at the end of 2020, and we're happy with that reserving position. No particular objective to increase it further as we sit here today, nor to create any other sort of buffers. I guess that means that as we improve the loss ratio, as we build more customers, generate more profits and more free cash, then we should be in a position to release that to shareholders and make it available for dividends. That's very clear. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Michael Huttner from Berenberg. Please go ahead. I'm afraid one of my question is going to be a repeat and one, because I didn't understand the answer. Combined ratio for the year 2020 is 82%. There was 3 points of COVID benefits. Adjusting for that, 85%. The large claims were, I think, 1.9% higher than expected, so arrived back at 83%. I'm rounding here. Your new guidance is below 85%, and I'm just wondering, normally you improve your guidance every year, but it doesn't feel like you're improving it. I'm sure you kind of discussed it, and I completely missed it, but I would wonder if you could kind of say if your new guidance is an improvement or you're kind of staying flat this year. The other question is a really stupid one. You're going to say, "Oh my God." If I look at the banner you have, which is the leading financials group in the Nordic region? What are you going to do when you can no longer use that banner? If you sell Nordea or if Tryg completes its licensing and does all these things, you won't be there. What are you going to say to investors when they say, "Well should I buy Tryg or Nordea or Sampo?" Whereas until now it's been very clear. The clarity is no longer there. Maybe I'm wrong. I think the guidance that we've given early in the year, last year, Jarmo, that was 84% - 87%. The upper end 85% rather than 87% at the beginning of the year signifies an improvement. As far as I can tell, after 19 years with If P&C, we've missed our guidance one quarter when we had the worst winter in 30 years. Leading Nordic, I'm not sure how often you use that, but whatever. When and if Tryg has completed its transaction with RSA, we will still be the biggest Nordic insurer if we necessarily want to compete on that, but we obviously compete on being the best insurer, not necessarily the biggest one. We will remain the biggest one in the Nordics, even if they could keep Codan, which is not obvious to me that they will. That's very clear. May I just ask one more, which is really just as a completion. In Mandatum, where did you get, and this is more a really positive question, you added EUR 77 million to reserves, but the results were exactly in line with what I'd expect in line of the funds you'd add to reserves. Where did that money come from? Knut. The money came from a good result in Mandatum during 2020, and also during the fourth quarter. It was a really good fourth quarter on the investment side, and it was better than last year at risk and expense result. It basically came from the result. If you would add back that EUR 77 million, you would have the result for 2020 pre that additional reserving. It's a fairly straightforward answer. Maybe I missed your point there. There's nothing funny. No, I was just wondering if there'd been an underlying improvement. I missed the investment income. That's lovely. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from Steven Haywood from HSBC. Please go ahead. Thank you very much. I don't know if I'm jumping the gun here, but, I believe Hastings tends to give policy targets and loss ratio targets for the year ahead. Can you provide these, or will they be coming at the Capital Markets Day? Can I defer strategy questions to the Capital Markets Day, if I may? No problem at all. Sorry about that one. I don't know if this is strategy or if this is M&A -related, but obviously with the upcoming deal that Tryg is doing, do you see potentially some sort of business coming to If P&C or to Denmark because of potential dislocations in the market, as a consequence of their integration of Codan? They will be rather busy for a couple of years with all the synergies that they have promised the market. Out in the line organizations, there's a lot of activity to take business from them, but there's no transaction or any interest from us in Codan in Denmark or anything. Okay, that's clear. Sorry. Talking about current restrictions in the Nordic markets, can you sort of give us an update who are not based in the Nordic markets on what the restrictions are in the countries and how long they may be expected to occur? Knut, do you want to try? Was it dividend restrictions? Was that the question, Steven? I think it's more on the lockdown. Yeah, lockdown, economic restrictions. Yeah, I think I could try to comment that a bit. I think there are still quite strong restrictions in all Nordic countries, which means that employees are mostly working from home, which means that there is very limited traveling in the countries and between the Nordic countries. Of course, highly uncertain to know how long this is going to last. The current restrictions, it varies a bit from country to country, but I think most countries talk about that they at least have restrictions into March, and then we will see whether those will be prolonged again. I guess it's an uncertain situation for us, as it is for most other countries. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Our next question comes from Jan Erik from ABG. Please go ahead. Thank you. I have some couple of questions left. The first one is on the cost ratio, which seems to be ever down every year, of course, but it has jumped a little bit in the Q4 numbers. Is it so that you have been able to take out some cost in Q4, or was it some catch-up effect from the Q3, which was very benign? If we can start with that. Sure. Yes, as you say, cost ratio is down 30 basis points, which is a bit more than we see in an average year, I guess typically being around 20 basis points year-on-year. Good underlying cost development. In Q4, it's a bit up compared to Q4 last year. The cost occurs a bit different from year to year, some of the cost items. This year in particular, we had a number of cost and smaller, what do you say, kind of investments that were postponed from Q2 into Q3 and Q4. Of course, in Q2 when the current pandemic started, we put some project at a halt, and they were started again then in Q3. You see an effect of that in Q4. I think the important thing is to focus on the full -year development at 21.5% compared to the 21.8%. Absolutely agree. I understand the development between the quarters because it looks a little bit odd, but of course, COVID-19 has been around the whole year, or at least since March. Secondly, on the Life, which one of the other guys could probably touch upon, is it only because you had very strong return that you came with the strong return on the Life side, or is it also what you would have done anyway, so to speak? Could you repeat that? You said that if it's on the reserving side? On the Life side. Mandatum. In Mandatum. The strengthening in the reserve. Knut. Let's put Knut on it. Yeah. Hi, Jan Erik. It's not only because we have a strong result. It was a strong result for Mandatum. Mandatum have had strong results also historically, so to speak. There's nothing special in terms of the way we think around making prudent reserve strengthening in Mandatum. They obviously have a interest rate guarantee on a back book which, of course, is running off in fast pace, and we want to maintain a buffer to meet those guarantees also going forward from a reported profit perspective. The discount rate reserve of Mandatum with the EUR 77 million we made this year is about unchanged compared to the end of 2019, so to speak. Having said that, of course, the important factor, maybe even more important factor from Mandatum's dividend paying capacity going forward is their solvency strength, which actually this discount rate reserving has very little to do with, nothing really because it's market based and Solvency II ratio of Mandatum is really strong at the end of the year and consequently, a dividend from Mandatum of EUR 200 million is expected. It is to make sure that we, also from an accounting perspective, allocate the investment return we are generating to the discount rate we have to meet going forward from a reported profit basis. Okay, perfect. I see that you have an adjusted EPS of EUR 0.65 in your report. If you could give us some details on that later tonight or later this week about how you reached that level, that would be great because it's hard to get all of the small and nitty-gritty stuff underlying for an analyst looking through your report. That will be great. I'm looking forward to your [audio distortion]. Thanks a lot. Thank you. Thank you. Our next question comes from Blair Stewart from Bank of America. Please go ahead. Your line is now open. Yeah. Thanks very much. Firstly, I wonder if you could give us some insight on the trajectory of the private equity businesses. Obviously, you sold the stake in Intrum last year. I think Nets has had a merger. What happens post that? That's the first question. The second question is a slightly awkward one to phrase, but I guess it's well known in the market that there's some pressure from investors on you to exit Nordea quickly. As ever, the market wants to know when you're going to sell, what you're going to do with the money, et cetera. Difficult questions for you to answer. Just wonder how is it possible for you to square that circle? What level of disclosures can you give around that? Will it just be a case of investors being frustrated until such times as the final actions occur? I know you'll probably talk about that more at the Capital Markets Day, but I thought I'd pose the question in any case. Okay. Thank you, Blair. The trajectory for PE, there's not a lot to say. They will run their course together with our co-investors. Nets is obviously doing something interesting, but that deal isn't even closed yet. Pressure to exit Nordea, what would you do with the money? Well, the one thing that I can comment already is, of course, that I think I mentioned earlier, we don't have any M&A agenda apart from possibly if there's a good opportunity for a bolt-on in the Nordics. We will not be looking for other investments around the world. I guess just on the Nordea question, it's more complicated. It's not a simple investment because you do have the chair at the company. Is that a hindrance to your ability to do anything quickly with Nordea? No, that doesn't have anything to do with that. For the long term, of course, we are looking to allocate more capital to P&C. Okay, great. I look forward to a bit more color around that in a couple of weeks. Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you. We have a follow-up question from Michael Huttner from Berenberg. Please go ahead. Your line is now open. Thank you very much. It was a very simple question. The Mandatum, so the EUR 200 million dividend now, is that the new annual run-off rate we should expect? What do you think, Knut? Yeah. No, Michael, I would call that higher than an annual run rate. It's a reflection also that we canceled the dividend last year, and left Mandatum with a prudent balance sheet given the uncertainty we had in March 2020. Now, the profitability in Mandatum, as you also alluded to earlier, has been really good for the remainder of the year, which left Mandatum with a very strong solvency base at the end of 2020. We then felt we could take out a little extra, if you like, compared to an annual run rate. I would say an annual run rate for Mandatum is more to the tune of EUR 150. Yes. That's very clear. Thank you. Thank you. We have a final question from Jan Erik from ABG. Please go ahead. Your line is now open. Thank you. Just one follow-up on the Life side, as you said you would like to invest more money into the non-life industry. Is Life in business also one of your exit businesses? No, it's not. I wouldn't call any of our businesses exit businesses. That's not a good phrase. On strategy, welcome to our Capital Markets Day, and that's probably a good. Thank you once again. Final remark here, Jarmo, isn't it? Indeed. Thank you all for your attention, and have a very good evening.