Good morning, and thank you for joining Hiscox's Q3 2022 trading update. I'm Paul Cooper, the Group CFO. I'll start with brief opening remarks focusing on four key topics, growth, large loss experience, investment results, and refinancing. Following which we will open the floor for Q&A. Let me start with some comments on trading momentum and growth. The group gross written premiums are up 9.3% in constant currency. Key drivers have been the ongoing momentum in retail due to the very strong growth across Europe and sustained momentum in US DPD, in line with expectations and strong performance in our reinsurance division, which crossed the $1 billion GWP milestone in the third quarter. Let me provide more color on business divisions starting with retail. GWP grew 6.1% in constant currency. This reflects excellent constant currency growth of nearly 15% in Europe and a resilient performance in the U.K. Also, improvement in the U.S. growth from half year levels as the impact from the U.S. broker channel corrective actions that were completed in May reduces. Excluding this, the go-forward retail business grew around 8% in constant currency. Most pleasing is the growth in our retail commercial business, up around 10% in constant currency on a go-forward basis. With a focus on small micro and nano businesses, our U.S. DPD business delivered 9.8% growth as the business continues to make good progress in platform migration. All direct new business customers have been live on the new platform since June, and we are seeing some early positive signs of success. Quick turnaround time is faster, conversion rates are up, and there are early indications that the new customer journey is driving a higher proportion of bundled purchases. Migration of partners commenced in September, and we plan to substantially complete this process by the end of the year. As such, US DPD remains on track to deliver the previously communicated guidance of GBWP growth in the middle of the 5%-15% range in 2022, before accelerating to in excess of 15% in 2023. London Market growth is somewhat disguised by the impact of the re-underwriting actions we have been undertaking to drive better portfolio profitability in the household and commercial property binder books and also Russian sanctions. Together, these two factors have taken 5.2 percentage points from the division's top-line growth. In London Market property, we concentrate on deploying aggregate where we retain control, either on the open market or via our Hiscox Plus platform. The rating environment surpassed our expectations as we achieved an average rate increase of 7%, which is cumulative rate increases of 72% since 2017. In line with our strategy, our portfolios are balanced, rate adequate, and with healthy margins and good growth in attractive areas. This gives us confidence in a robust outlook for the full year. Hiscox Re & ILS GWP grew by 32.3% as we benefited from hardening market conditions. The business achieved an average risk-adjusted rate increase of 12.5%, which is cumulative rate increases of 52% since 2017. Net flows into the ILS funds have been close to nil in the quarter, following over $500 million of net inflows during the first half. Future ILS flows are somewhat more uncertain as the attractions of materially increased rates are counterbalanced by investor sentiment impacted by Hurricane Ian losses and investors rebalancing portfolios due to the volatility in financial markets. Hiscox Re & ILS generated over $40 million of fee income from ILS and quota share partners year- to- date. The reinsurance book is largely written for 2022, so our attention now turns to the upcoming January 2023 renewals. We are expecting further and potentially material rate hardening as capital withdrawal combined with elevated demand creates an exciting opportunity for the reinsurance market. In the event of material rate hardening, we would expect to deploy more of our own capital and increase retained premiums. Moving on to loss experience. I'm proud to be able to say that we are delivering what we said we would. Firstly, in retail, as the loss ratios across all three of our U.K., U.S., and European retail businesses improved on the prior year period. The business remains on track to return to within a 90%-95% combined ratio range in 2023. This is the combined effect of good progress in operational changes, portfolio remediation, and a supportive rate environment. Secondly, Hiscox's natural catastrophe losses in the quarter are consistent with expectations, given the estimates of insured losses. The group reserved $135 million net of reinsurance, including reinstatement premiums for Hurricane Ian, based on an insured market loss of $55 billion. The majority of our exposure is in big ticket lines, $40 million net in London Market and $90 million net in Re & ILS. Estimated net losses for the retail portfolio are modest at $5 million. Finally, while the conflict in Ukraine sadly continues to be a live event, Hiscox's estimated ultimate loss from all risks in Ukraine and Russia remains unchanged at $48 million net of reinsurance. It would, of course, be remiss of me not to mention inflation. While the economic inflationary pressures continues to increase across our markets, we have various elements of inflation loaded in our loss ratio picks and pricing models, alongside reflecting appropriate indexation in our rated exposures. Premium growth trends remain positive and ahead of our claims inflation assumptions. Next, some thoughts on the investment result. Central banks tightened policy aggressively during the third quarter as inflation proved more persistent than expected. This resulted in further increases in risk-free rates. The group booked an investment loss of $294 million in the period, mainly due to mark-to-market losses on our bond portfolio, which are expected to unwind as the bonds mature. It's important to remember that these mark-to-market adjustments are non-cash and non-economic in nature. Under the new IFRS 17 accounting standard effective from next year, such unrealized losses would be somewhat offset as changes to discount rates would also be applied to the valuation of our liabilities. For now, on a positive note, the yield on the bond portfolio has increased significantly to 4.8% as at 30th of September 2022. In fact, as at the end of October, it is 5%. This is up from 3.4% at the end of June and 1% at the end of December 2021. The short-dated nature of our portfolio means that increases in risk-free rates leads to improvements to our portfolio yield in short order, a much improved prospects for investment returns in 2023 and beyond. Lastly, in case you've missed it, in September, the group issued GBP 250 million of five-year unsubordinated unsecured notes. The issuance of the notes coincides with the upcoming redemption of GBP 275 million of unsubordinated debt in December 2022. The funds raised are for liquidity and will go towards the redemption of the expiring note, allowing the group to continue to conduct its general corporate purposes while remaining appropriately leveraged. Personally, I'm really pleased that we managed to successfully execute our refinancing plan in what turned out to be an incredibly turbulent and challenging month for debt capital markets. The transaction was in excess of 3x oversubscribed, demonstrating strong sentiment and market confidence in the group. Given the market conditions, the coupon on the new notes is 6%. Please don't forget to update your assumptions regarding finance costs next year and beyond. To conclude, the group has performed well in a complex underwriting environment. Our retail business is on track with platform migration going well, and we look forward to an acceleration of growth in 2023. The performance of our big-ticket businesses remains robust after the impact of Hurricane Ian, and improving conditions are presenting new opportunities. We continue to position the business for attractive and sustainable returns through reducing exposures where we believe risks are underpriced. The group remains strongly capitalized with liquid resources sufficient to pay claims, dividends, and execute our growth strategy. I will now hand over to the operator to open the floor for Q&A. Thank you. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question today, please press star followed by one on the telephone keypad now. When preparing to ask a question, please ensure your headset is fully plugged in and unmuted locally. That's star followed by one to ask a question. Our first question today comes from Will Hardcastle from UBS. Will, please go ahead. Your line is open. Hey. Morning, everyone. Just running through that investment math, if that's okay. If 75% of your investment portfolio is fixed income, and that's yielding, as you say, 5% today, assuming anything from equities and cash would get us to 4%+ all-in yield for 2023, is that math correct? And was there any re-risking taken in the quarter, or was that just capital market moves effectively? Secondly, your messaging on the growth opportunities, probably far more forthcoming than a number of companies have been to this point. I guess, what would be the binding constraint on your growth on reinsurance? Is it credit rating agency capital? And actually, you used to use the sort of 160 or below BSCR as a sort of proxy to maintain that credit rating. Does that still stand today? Thanks. Yeah. Thanks, Will. In terms of the investment performance, clearly, you know, rates have gone up, and you're seeing central banks sort of respond. I think the way to think about it is if you look at our SAA at the half year, that's pretty consistent as of now. You know, we've said that as of October, you'll get 5% on that bond portfolio. You know, we've got a healthy amount of cash for liquidity, and we're starting to see certainly into 2023 that we'll get returns on that cash. You'll get a bit there. In terms of the overall sort of with risk aspects, we're not actually taking more risks. You know, what we are seeing is our investment managers sort of on the bond portfolio is, you know, I'd say do two things in broad brush terms. One is be positioned slightly more defensively in anticipation of the macroeconomic conditions. I think the other aspect is that they are positioning themselves to take advantage of the higher yields on offer. I think that's a positive. I think the other aspect is, you know, in a zero rate inflation, a zero interest rate environment, you know, there is the incentive to pursue and look into different asset classes to, you know, top up yield. When you're in an environment of 5%, we just don't have to sort of go down that sort of reach for yield path. I think that's the sort of investment question. In terms of growth, I think you know the reinsurance market is becoming very interesting and very exciting. Rates were going up prior to Ian. There is an imbalance between growing demand for reinsurance capacity, and that's counterbalanced by some withdrawal from a supply perspective. You'll know that you know our business model offers you know a lot of flexibility either to write on a, you know, ILS fund balance sheet, so third-party capital balance sheet on our own or on our own balance sheet. In terms of you know binding constraints, we're very well capitalized from a balance sheet perspective. You're right, the sort of binding constraints are the sort of rating agency aspect. Really just as a sort of rough guide, you know, at the half year, we were around 200% BSCR. You'll know that, the sort of rating starts to come under a bit of pressure from a rating agency perspective when we're at around 155%-165%. The important thing is that, you know, we will be looking to ensure that we've got a balanced portfolio, and that's just across reinsurance, but also across the sort of London Market business. That's what we've been focused on from a sort of strategic perspective. That's great. Thanks. The next question comes from Andrew Ritchie of Autonomous. Andrew, please go ahead. Your line is open. Oh, hi there. First question, I just wanted to explore a bit more the visibility on that growth pickup, the plus ahead of in excess of 15% in DPD in 2023. I guess the reason I'm asking is you make it clear that the direct customers are on the new platform, but I think a lot of the partners are still to migrate. It strikes me that could be harder, or maybe if you just update us on, I don't know, pipeline or the path of bringing those partners on over the rest of the year and any hiccups or anything that could generate. I'm just interested overall is the visibility on that growth pickup. The second question is related to Will's question on sort of flexibility to grow the reinsurance book in the event that you can't place as much retro or ILS. Would you be happy to grow your net cat exposure, I guess, you know, measured by P&Ls? Or is it a case of probably you keep that the same, possibly with a different balancing gross and net, and you're just looking to get paid more for the same exposure? That's what I'm interested in, if you see what I mean. Grow the exposure or keep the exposure and just hope to get paid more. Those are my two questions. Thanks. No, I get it. Look, if we deal with DPD first, you know, I think that we're pleased with the progress of the re-platforming. That's come through in terms of the DPD growth of nearly 10% at Q3 year- to- date. I think the important things around it are, you know, firstly, we're pleased with the way that the platform's going from a direct- to- consumer perspective. You'll know that there is a societal shift as consumers, customers buy more online. In terms of that re-platforming, we're selling direct- to- consumer in all 50 states, and that was as of June. The conditions of that have been very promising, although early days, so conversion is up back to where it was prior to re-platforming. The buying process. It's encouraging that we're seeing signs that customers are much more interested in buying on a bundled product basis. If they're coming onto the site to buy, let's say an E&O product, they might be interested in buying BOP also. I think that's testament to the way that the sort of customer journey has been designed into the new platform. That's the sort of direct to consumer. That's promising, although, as I said, it's early days. In terms of the partners, as of October, we've got 122 partners on the platform. That's a substantial number already converted, so we can drive new business for those partners that we temporarily suspended. The rump will be complete by the end of the year. Andrew, the way to think about it is from 2023 on. We've got a healthy pipeline of partnerships, and we'll start putting those onto the new platform. I think all of that in the round, if you take where we are as of Q3 and then project onto 2023, shows us that, you know, we're encouraged by that and have confidence in the guidance of the 15%+ that we've previously mentioned. I think the second question around, you know, how we're thinking about growing the net cat bet, I think that there's. Again, thinking about the flexibility of the model, I think that, you know, if you take the Re & ILS business, first of all, of course, we've got the optionality between writing on third-party capital or on our own balance sheet. I think, you know, again, the rating environment, certainly post the end is strong and, as I said, exciting. I think what that leads us to is, you know, in very broad brush terms, I think if rates are up, you know, let's say around 10% going into 1-1, I think you could see us, you know, maintaining exposure rather than driving exposure higher on our own balance sheet. You know, there's been mention of rates going, you know, 20%, 30%+ going into one month. If that's the case, I think we'd see no problem increasing more exposure on our own balance sheet. That's sort of the way that we think about it. The other aspect to consider that I'd put in there is, you know, we've been very focused on capital allocation and the London Market Property business that is cat exposed. We have dialed back the exposure. You know, we think we're being paid more and that the rating environment is much more attractive at the moment on the reinsurance side for that cat exposed business than as opposed to London Market. As a consequence of that's where we've chosen to play. We have said that, you know, if we had the same exposure as we had several years ago on the London Market, the year-end loss would be, you know, much, much bigger. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. The next question comes from Freya Kong from Bank of America. Freya, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. Two questions, please. Firstly, you've guided for US DPD growth in excess of 15% next year. How should we think about this in terms of overall retail growth within that medium-term 5%-15% range you've previously guided for? Second question is on London Market. The property book has been going through a number of years of re-underwriting. Is this an ongoing project that we should expect to continue? Thanks. Yes. DPD, I touched on, as I said in response to Andrew's question, that, from a DPD perspective going into 2023, we remain confident of meeting that guidance as in excess of 15%. I think the overall retail portfolio, if you look on a go-forward basis, is around 8% as at Q3. We've said around the 5%-15% range is our guidance on overall retail growth. I think we're making sort of good strides towards that. You know, if you look at Europe in particular, you know, that 15%, that performance is very encouraging. We see a good positive runway. I think overall, the direction of the sort of middle of the 5%-15% range stands based on the performance and the momentum that we're seeing across the business. One encouraging sign, as I said, is it's not just the replatforming and how well that's going, but also the U.S. broker business return to growth in Q3 versus Q3 last year. I think in terms of London Market Property, it's important to note that, and we've signposted this, that we've been re-underwriting that account for three-four years, and we will continue to do so going into next year. At the moment, we've determined that we're not getting sufficient returns on the London Market Property business. We're not getting paid sufficiently for taking that risk. It's. We are a very big writer of London Market property. We are, I would say, experts in that field. We have our own view of risk. As a consequence of that, I think, you know, if you look back, we've achieved something like 60% rate increases over the past four-five years. That, in our view, remains insufficient for where we want to get to. I think as a consequence of that, you know, you'll see going into 2023, still some re-underwriting of that portfolio. I think you've got to take that in the context, I think, of two things. One is, you know, the more attractive rates on offer in reinsurance. I've talked about that earlier. I think the other aspect is we're seeing, you know, across London Market some really good signs of growth in other classes of business. We're up more than double-digit in classes such as D&O, terrorism, marine and energy, personal accidents. I think there are other classes and that offer very attractive returns and that we shouldn't just get hung up, I think, on what's going on in London Market Property. Okay, thank you. The next question comes from Tryfonas Spyrou from Berenberg. Tryfonas, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. I just have two quick questions. The first one is you mentioned, Paul, sort of $40 million fee income from Re & ILS. Could you maybe give us some color on how much of that is split into sort of profit commissions and how much is sort of a stable run rate, in terms of the fees? The second one is the one you just commented on D&O growing double-digit. At the same time, we're now seeing D&O rates coming down since last two quarters. How should we think about your view on where the overall rate environment sits in terms of the D&O? Are you happy to grow exposures, given how much rates have come, although the delta has been sort of decreasing year-on-year in Q2 and Q3? Thank you. Yes. Great. Thank you. Look, the first question, you know, we haven't split out sort of profit commission and sort of ongoing steady fees. The $40 million, I think, is a good increase on the $23 million that we achieved and disclosed at half-year. You know, that's good, a good trajectory in terms of that capitalized fee income. I think, again, it reflects the strength of the ILS and ecosystem that we have in the sort of Re & ILS business unit and our ability to match risk to capital. I think that's a positive on that side. In terms of D&O, I think it's important to bear in mind, you're right. Rates have come off, you know, slightly modestly in 2023. They're off about 5% year- to- date. That's against a backdrop of increases of about 250% or more across five years. The D&O business is, I think, very well rated. I think that, you know, again, it falls within that overall strategy of writing a balanced portfolio and seeking to grow in classes of business where we see the rating environment as attractive. That's what we've done, and D&O is a good example of that. Okay, thank you. The next question comes from Iain Pearce of Credit Suisse. Iain, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi. Thanks for taking my questions. The first one was just around the London Market growth opportunity for next year. You sort of flagged some challenges around profitability in the London Market property book. Just thinking about how the other lines of business are performing and if sort of all those business lines of business are meeting return on capital thresholds, and if we're expecting those to grow into next year. The second one is just on the replatforming. I was just wondering if you could provide a little bit more color around some of the expected benefits you expect from the replatforming and how that will impact the financials, whether this should add further growth, greater efficiency, greater retention, just some of those key customer metrics. On the conversion rates, you sort of said that conversion rates are back to pre-replatforming levels. Would we not be expecting those to be better than the pre-platforming period? Thank you. Yeah, sure. Look, I think if I look at the first question, the important point that we've said is strategically, the London Market business doesn't have a top line growth target. That's in aggregate. What we are interested in is getting a balanced portfolio that delivers sustainable returns. I think you've got to look at, you know, not just London Market, but, you know, the other classes within that. You've seen and what I've mentioned earlier on with those other classes where we are getting double-digit growth, that we are selective and, you know, we will make sure and assess each of the classes on their own merits around the returns that they can deliver. That's what I'd say on London Market. Then in terms of the replatforming, I think there's several considerations. Your immediate point, Ian, around conversion and, you know, the fact that it's back up to where it was previously. You know, it's early signs, so we remain optimistic around the trajectory and the direction of that from a conversion perspective. Also the financial dynamics, as I mentioned, around customers buying bundled purchases. I think the other element is, you know, from a sort of operating leverage, which I think is the sort of backdrop to the point that you were making is that we would expect, and we've, you know, part of the reason we've made that investment is to drive growth, but to drive it at scale. I think that's the sort of emphasis on that. A good example would be as the customer journey is enhanced, what you should expect is fewer customers going onto the call center to complete the customer journey. As a consequence of that, naturally you'd get operating leverage. All of that means that we are reaffirming our guidance and committed to the guidance of being within that 90%-95% range of next year. The next question comes from Andreas van Embden from Peel Hunt. Andreas, your line is open. Please go ahead. Andreas- Andreas, we can't hear you. As we have no audio from Andreas, we'll move on. The next question comes from Derald Goh from RBC. Derald, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi there. Morning, Paul. Hope you're well. Two questions, please. The first one is just on your underlying combined ratio. I wonder if you can offer any comments on, specifically your attritional loss ratio as well as any reserve developments, please. The second one is just going back to US DPD. I think at the start of the year, Aki alluded to the profitability of the book, you know, it being at an underwriting profit, i.e., below 100% combined ratio. But has that outlook changed? I mean, given the replatforming, potentially increased IT spend, et cetera. Any comments at all there, please? Thank you. Yeah. Look, so, can you just repeat? Was the first question around attritional for the group, or was it around just retail or what? Could you explain that? Yeah. I mean, if you could split it between retail and big ticket as well, that'd be great, please. Thank you. Look, I think, you know, I mentioned if I start with London Market, you know, the loss expectations are or the losses are better than expectation. From a Re & ILS perspective through the year, what we've seen is we've had some exposure to Australian floods, and we talked about that at half year and some other small losses. In terms of the retail book, what we're seeing is, as I've mentioned in the IMS, that our loss ratios have improved across U.K., Europe, and U.S. year-on-year. You'll know that we have taken sort of extensive underwriting action in terms of that U.S. broker book, for example. The attritional trend is improving overall for retail. If you add on rate increases, you can see that the attritional trend is positive. Anything on the reserve development? No. Nothing that we're seeing. The next question comes from Faizan Lakhani from HSBC. Faizan, your line is open. Please go ahead. Good morning. This is Faizan Lakhani from HSBC. My first question is coming back to DPD growth next year. Could you help me break out how much of that growth has stemmed from rate increases, the onboarding of new platforms, and then just the ones that are already onboard, and how much natural growth is there as well? The second question is on third-party capital. Of the ILS funds that you raised earlier in the year, how much of that has already been deployed? And is there any issues around sort of trapped capital that we need to sort of think about when it comes to the fees and growth in that line of business? And my final question is just on coming back to the London Market property business. In terms of just kind of structurally, why is that so much less profitable than the Re & ILS property business? Thank you. Yeah. The first one in terms of breaking out the DPD growth, we just don't do that. I talked about the promising conditions and environment and the actions that we've taken that give us confidence to maintain guidance of that 15%+ in 2023. In terms of third-party capital on the Re & ILS, we've deployed all of that. The additional inflows that have come in that were very meaningful in the first half of the year. Of course, with Ian, there is some trapped capital and obviously that attracts fees on that capital. London Market, again, you know, I think it is important to emphasize that, you know, what we're seeing is we have our view of risk and we're updating that constantly. It is a big book, that London Market business. We know what we're doing in that space. I'll repeat, you know, we have been getting rates, so, you know, in excess of 60% over the four-five years. We are about 10% up at least, in 2022. I think it's just more our view of risk is increasing in that area, and we continue to re-underwrite that book. It just so happens, and you can see, you know, from rate charts, that the rating environment for reinsurance is much stronger for reinsurance than the London Market. I think the important thing to bear in mind is just stepping back a level and looking at Re & ILS versus London Market. You know, these are different portfolios. They have different characteristics. You know, they're related, but they're just not the same. You know, I think that sort of helps to explain not only that, let's say from a sector perspective, why you're seeing stronger rate increases in Re versus London Market, but also just that the individual portfolios are manifestly different when you compare and contrast Re & ILS versus London Market. Okay. Thank you very much. The next question comes from Kamran Hossain from JP Morgan. Kamran, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi. Morning. First question is just on reinsurance. I mean, obviously, you know, you flagged that you're intending to grow the reinsurance book, assuming that prices go up, which I think we all hope they do. What's the impact on your own reinsurance protection? Clearly, you know, you've reduced, you know, kind of reduced exposures. Last few years, you've been more focused on retail. What do you expect the impact to be on your own purchasing for 2023? The second question is on retail. I'm really pleased to see your reiteration of 90%-95% guidance. Slight kind of, I think, I guess you've added some words onto the end of it. You know, you were saying, despite the tough economic backdrop. Now, I... When I think about economic backdrop, I tend to think a little bit more about top line and the revenue outlook. What kind of pressures are you kind of concerned about on the 90%-95% target for retail, given that you've kind of called it out in the statement? Thank you. Yeah. So look, let's deal with reinsurance first. I think the thing to bear in mind is almost that, you know, we write a lot of inwards reinsurance, as you've highlighted. Therefore, as rates rise, if you think about the sort of quota share and ILS partners, literally, the rates that are increasing will just be literally passed through onto our ILS quota share partners, and therefore we should pick up additional, capital light fee income. In terms of the sort of remaining book, we are a net beneficiary overall of the sort of inwards versus outwards. Of course the greater share is, you know, where there is increases, it's more on property cat. The sort of non-property cat, we're expecting rates to be, you know, less. Overall, from a reinsurance perspective, we would expect to be a beneficiary from a rising rate environment. I think the other thing, Kamran, to bear in mind is, you know, as reinsurance becomes more expensive and as rates go up, what we're seeing is a reinsurance-led hardening market. That would translate into, or it should translate into increased rates in the primary end of things. You'll know that, you know, we have achieved good rate increases across the portfolio for, you know, four-five years now. I think my expectations around that are that the cycle would be extended. Does that make sense? Kind of. I would have seen with your more than, you know, half of that being retail and that probably going up, that it would be difficult to argue that you're a net beneficiary, but that's fine. I'm sure it makes sense for the numbers. [crosstalk] We've run the numbers. We're a net beneficiary on reinsurance. The second component. Look, I think it is important to highlight in terms of retail and the retail core. You know, we've affirmed with business remains on track. You know, if you look year-over-year, the loss ratios are improving. We remain confident in our guidance. I think the comment just realizes and I said is, you know, the economic changes, conditions are changeable. We're not seeing anything of concern at present. You know, clearly, you know, we're in interesting times, you know. That was really a reference that it's sort of almost remiss not to acknowledge that, you know, things are changing. Got it. Okay. That makes sense. I'll kind of think about it a bit more in terms of top line, but no, it makes sense. Thanks. Thanks, Paul. Thank you. The next question comes from Abid Hussain from Panmure Gordon. Abid, your line is open. Please go ahead. Oh, hi there. Morning, all. Thanks for taking my questions. Just two questions from me, please. Just following on from the last question on the potential economic pressures, I wonder if inflation is part of the equation. Just on inflation, can you tell us what's your long term inflation assumption across the reserve book? And how does that compare with the current experience by segment, if that's possible? My second question is on rates. Clearly the positive outlook into 1-1 renewals, I'm just wondering which particular lines are you particularly pleased with or it looks pleasing in terms of going into the 1-1 renewals? I know the D&O you're happy with despite the rates coming off there, but just a little bit more color on that would be helpful in terms of line by line, please. Look, so inflation. You'll know from our half-year presentation, we've spent a lot of time looking at this. I think what's important to note, and we've noted, is that from an underwriting perspective, you know, if you look at the sort of claims inflation assumptions that we put in, you know, we have doubled those assumptions and in some classes of business, doubled them again. Our pricing remains ahead of, and the rates that we're actually getting remain ahead of those claims inflation assumptions. I think that's the point to note on inflation from a sort of forward-looking perspective. On a backward-looking perspective, we don't put out sort of long-term assumptions we're making. What we have said is, you'll know firstly that we put up a $55 million net precautionary reserve at half year. As I said, that was precautionary. We have a pretty cautious and prudent reserving practice overall. We have a significant margin on top of that. It's around 11% over best estimate at the half year. Of course, the other aspect of the loss portfolio transfers, the reinsurance protection on those reserves that cover about 20% of the 2019 and prior reserves have added protection should the specter of inflation come through. The other two dynamics that are important to bear in mind on inflation is, one, that our average duration of reserves is only something like 1.9 years. There just isn't a sort of compounding exposure that one might get on a longer tail book of business. The other aspect, of course, is that I think is easy to sort of overlook, but on the investment portfolio next year we're looking at sort of yields of 5% on the bond portfolio. There is an added benefit on the asset side that I think could be overlooked or there's a tendency to overlook. That's sort of inflation. Then in terms of rates, we don't comment in terms of you know outlook on individual classes of business. You know, in terms of sort of broad brush terms, what I would say is Re & ILS, we've commented that, you know, rates were going up pretty healthily prior to Ian. Therefore, sort of going into the 1-1 renewal season post Ian, that rating environment is very attractive. I think that has caused us pause to see, you know, depending on how the rate environment is at 1-1, whether to write much more business on our own balance sheet. Then I think the other aspect more generally is, you know, and maybe a nod back to the comment around the macroeconomic factors is we're in an environment, a pretty uncertain environment, be it geopolitical, and be it macro. I think as a consequence of that, we're seeing that, you know, people want and will require, you know, insurance. As a consequence of that, I think the, you know, the cycle is, as a consequence, you know, going to extend and remain healthy. That's great. Thanks. The next question comes from Ivan Bokhmat from Barclays. Ivan, your line is open. Please go ahead. Hi. Good morning. Thank you very much. I've got one question. It's regarding the margins. You guys were talking in the past on the large- ticket books. I mean, specifically at the first half, I think we were talking about 80% combined ratio in Re and 85% in London Market in a normalized year. I mean, now that the expectations for rate increases, particularly in reinsurance, are quite substantial, you mentioned 20%-30% in certain scenarios. I'm just wondering to what, if such, you know, if such scenario comes to pass, should we assume, you know, a clear pass-through to the bottom line, i.e., that 85% going to potentially kind of high 50s? Is that a plausible scenario in your view? The change in the view of risk, the cat budgets that you would, you know, allocate, would take some of that off, maybe. Any thoughts on the forward margins, considering the market outlook would be very helpful. Thank you. Yeah, look, it's a good point. Just as a reminder, we said that, London Market in a normal year would be around 85%, and in a normal year, Re & ILS would be around 80% combined. I you know, I think, look, we're going into a period where rates are, you know, rates are moving, but we just don't know the velocity or where they'll end up. I think, you know, let's get through Q1 and get to the year-end results, and then we can update you there on our outlook. Okay, thanks. The next question comes from Ben Cohen from Investec. Ben, your line is open. Please go ahead. Oh, hi there. Good morning. Yeah, just following up from Ivan's question, actually, and I guess you said what you saw in a normal year. I just wondered if you could put the Ian loss into the context of the 85% and the 80% target for those two different divisions. Thank you. Yeah, look, I think— thanks for that, Ben. Look, I think the important thing is we've got still a quarter to go. You know, you've got the half- year performance. You know, we've said 80%-85% in a normal year. You know, with Ian, you could imagine that would track above that. Specifically for London Market, I guess it sounds like you're saying that's probably tracking better than normal, ex Ian, and you're saying Ian is a sort of relatively manageable loss there. Would that be a fair interpretation? That is absolutely a fair assessment. Okay. Not the same on the reinsurance side, which is obviously more geared to the catastrophe losses. Yeah, absolutely. Ben, the important thing to realize on the Re & ILS again is that we've got the, you know, we've got the capital-light income as well. That's the $40 million. You shouldn't lose sight of that. Right. Okay, fine. Thank you. As a reminder, if you'd like to ask a question today, please press star followed by one on your telephone keypad now. The next question comes from Darius Satkauskas from KBW. Darius, your line is open. Please go ahead. Thank you for taking my questions. I was disconnected, so I'm sorry if my questions have already been asked. The first question, you reiterated your combined ratio guidance for the retail combined ratio. Considering that you issued this guidance when inflation was very different, can you help us understand where your confidence comes from? I mean, is it to do with the business mix that you're now more direct- to- consumer and that benefits sort of the loss ratio? Is it price increases? You know, any color would be helpful. Second question. Any color on the aviation renewals, and if the potential aviation losses from Russia-Ukraine will lead to material rate momentum, even if reported losses remain limited, and would you consider growing here? Thank you. Look, yeah, taking the second question first around Ukraine and aviation. You know, the important thing is that we came out of that business in 2017 or 2018. I think from that perspective, you know, we were happy with that decision then. We don't have exposure to aviation from a Ukraine perspective, and there isn't an appetite at the moment to go back into that. That's that aspect. Then, you know, in terms of the core, you know, we sort of reaffirmed that guidance. As you said, I think the two things that you've got to bear in mind is, one, you know, the pricing environment, so we've continued to gain rate over the period. You know, not just for 2022, but also the years prior to that. We're sort of, I think, cumulatively up to the mid-teens. Then I think from an underwriting perspective, you'll see that we have been constantly focused on underwriting the retail portfolio, and that's borne fruit. Thank you. We have no further questions at this time. As a final reminder, that's star one to ask a question. As we have no further questions, I'll hand back to Paul for any concluding remarks. No, we'll just thank you for your time and attention, for this morning. Thanks everyone.