Ladies and gentlemen, good day and welcome to Niva Bupa Health Insurance Company Limited Q1 and FY2026 earnings conference call hosted by ICICI Securities. As a reminder, all participant lines will be in the listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity for you to ask questions after the presentation concludes. Should you need assistance during this conference call, please signal an operator by pressing star, then zero on your touch-tone phone. Please note that this conference is being recorded. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Ansuman Deb from ICICI Securities. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. On behalf of ICICI Securities, we invite you all to Q1 FY2026 results conference call of Niva Bupa Health Insurance. Without further ado, I'll now hand over the call to Mr. Krishnan Ramachandran, MD and CEO. Over to you, sir. Thank you, Ansuman, and thank you, everyone, for being on the call. And our apologies for the delay. Also, there are some technical glitches on the BSE side because of which the financials and presentation are not yet available, but it's available on NSE. With me are my colleagues, Vishwanath, CFO, Ankur, CBO, Dr. Bhabatosh, COO, Vikas Jain, the Deputy CFO and CIO, Himanshu, Head of Investor Relations, and Varun, the Financial Controller. As far as the industry is concerned, health insurance continues to be the largest segment within the non-life industry, and in Q1, it experienced a growth rate of 10%. One thing for all of you to be aware is that the reported numbers, because of the multi-year accounting change, will continue to have noise depending on the proportion of multi-years. One caveat in terms of the overall industry growth rates and why they appear to be suppressed relative to historical averages. From an industry standpoint, three very important initiatives that I feel I should give you an update on. One is the industry-wide awareness campaign with a focus on health and motor. As an industry, we've been talking about this for a while that awareness is one of the reasons why, at the industry level, volume growth has not been in keeping with the potential. We believe that the awareness campaign will be a game changer in terms of increasing not just awareness, but also urgency to purchase health insurance. And as a company, we do believe we'll be a direct beneficiary of this awareness campaign. This is a multi-year campaign. What hopefully some of you may have seen during IPL is only the start of a multi-year campaign that the industry has embarked on. The second important initiative, which we believe will fundamentally make insurance more and more affordable as we move along, is a common empanelment initiative, again, led by the General Insurance Council and enabled through the insurance regulations. And this initiative is well underway. And as we speak, actually, there are close to 1,500 applications that are making their way through various stages to get onto the industry panel. And just to remind all of you, the objective of this is to have common agreements as well as common tariff arrangements over time. Again, another very important industry initiative. And the third, again, which has been launched under the aegis of the General Insurance Council, is a movement towards more evidence-based practice of medicine. As you're all aware, post-monsoon, there is a spurt of infections across the country. So, as an industry, we have come together to define protocols for when is admission necessary, what is medically necessary. These have been friction points with customers historically. But now, with us as an insurance industry laying out standards, we believe that this will move towards better customer experience, but more importantly, it will, over time, eliminate unnecessary care. Now, coming to the company's performance for Q1, in Q1, and a lot of the numbers I'm going to state will be on a like-to-like basis so that there is comparison. Our growth overall as a company for quarter one was 28%. Again, this is without the 1/N impact. And within that, our retail health growth, our retail health business grew at 32%. Our IFRS PAT for the quarter was INR 70 crores, up from INR 36 crores same quarter last year, and our combined ratio, again, on an IFRS basis, improved from 103.9% to 103.2%. Our Indian GAAP financials will continue to have noise because of the 1/N accounting change, and this impact will take perhaps between two to three years to play out, but as we have consistently maintained, IFRS is a better reflection of our financials, and we continue to publish and report our numbers on an IFRS basis. Our retail share moved up same time last year from 9.9% to 10%, so that's broadly some highlights as far as the financial performance of the company is concerned. On product mix, broadly, it stays the same: 67% retail, about 31% group, and 2% travel and PA. On the product side, again, as we have mentioned in the past, at a portfolio level, specifically on mature products, we will execute high single-digit price revisions. In Q1, specifically on one of our flagship products, which is ReAssure 2.0, we did execute a 7% increase in Q1. Our ambition is to not just be a health insurer, but also to be a health partner to our customers. We deliver a host of what we refer to as ecosystem health services to our customers through our health app. We now have 12.3 million downloads and 5.7 lakh monthly active users on the app, which is a very robust indication of the value that customers see in our services. More than 50,000 health checkups get consummated through the health app every month, and more than 6,000 doctor consults, again, are fulfilled through the app every month. In Q1, we launched a very important new capability, which is a chronic condition management program. As you are all aware, India is the diabetes and cardiovascular capital of the world. And increasingly, obesity and metabolic syndrome is a big health problem with our country. So, with a view to, over time, bending the cost in claims on account of these conditions, we have launched this program. The objective is to manage these conditions through lifestyle management, through medication management, so that ultimately we avoid customers stay healthy and avoid hospitalization. So, this is an exciting new capability that went live in our app in Q1. As you know, we measure NPS across 35 touchpoints. Can I proceed? Okay. So, we measure NPS across 35 touchpoints, and our blended NPS score stands at 57 at the end of Q1. And on cashless claims discharge, we continue to have an NPS in the high 60s. Broadly, our distribution mix during the quarter remains unchanged. And we continue to invest in expansion, specifically in terms of sales headcount in Q1 as well as in the quarters leading up to Q3. We will continue to invest in expansion as the extent of intelligent automation continues to improve. Specifically, I'd like to call out maybe three capabilities that are in advanced stages of going live. One is we are upgrading our core system to an Oracle stack, Oracle Health, and we are hoping to go live with that sometime in Q2. This will be a significant transformation to our core technology stack. We are also at an advanced stage of implementing Sprinklr, which is a customer system infused with a lot of AI capabilities. And we have gone live with Convin, which, again, allows us, which is an AI technology that allows us to listen to every call and improve, whether on the tele-sales side or on the customer side, improve quality and consistency. So, while we have broadly improved on automation metrics, there is one metric that did go south in Q1, specifically on claims auto adjudication. On account of a bunch of information security assurance reviews, specifically with third parties, we did suspend the auto adjudication service, which did mean that our SLAs on claims were hit. You would have noticed that typically our cashless rate in 30 minutes is 90% of our cashless approvals are within 30 minutes, in the quarter that came down to 76%, as well as our overall SLAs took a hit in Q1, because of which we have also had a build-up in our outstanding claims in Q1. Having said that, the information security assurance reviews are complete, and we have gone back to being live in Q2 in the month of July itself. But that's one specific KPI I thought I'd call out, which did not go very well for us in Q1. In Q1, we expanded our PPN network to now 43 cities, and 17% of claims in these cities go through the PPN network, which is a combination of great customer experience, but more important or equally importantly, making sure that customers get high-quality treatment, but in a more affordable care setup. Also, specifically around claims for Q1, whether it's PCS or incidence rates, we don't observe any unusual patterns. They are consistent with the trends that we have seen historically. And the last statement from my side before I hand over to Vishwanath, our CFO, is that we retained our Great Places to Work ranking. We are amongst the top 100 places to work in the country across all organizations and in the top 25 in banking and financial services. We have always said that talent is critical to our ability to execute and compete in the marketplace. This ranking is a good external benchmark of the emphasis and importance and quality of our talent management practices. With that, over to you, Vishwanath. Thank you, sir. Some of the financial highlights for Q1 FY2026 are, as Mr. Krishnan mentioned, that GWP grew by 28% in first quarter. Against that 28% growth in GWP, Net and TM grew by only 20% under IGAP because of this change in accounting for multi-year policies. As a result of this change, most of the ratios are looking distorted under IGAP. As you all know, we have been publishing audited IFRS financials for the last three financial years. We also use them for consolidation into Bupa Health accounts. I'll be covering financial commentary basis IFRS only. The profit after tax under IFRS almost doubled from INR 36 crore last financial year Q1 to INR 70 crore this year, and combined ratio under IFRS has improved by 30 basis points to 103.2%. While there is increase in loss ratio by 2.9%, this has been more than offset by reduction in expense ratio by 3.6% under IFRS, resulting in this improvement in combined ratio. The retail ratio on 1/365 basis has increased in Q1 by around 2%, largely on account of strengthening of reserves. As Mr. Krishnan mentioned, that we had put on hold the claim auto adjudication rule engine due to information security assurance review across our third parties. This has resulted in altering the pattern of claim processing and increase in outstanding reserves as of 30 June 2025, so we are keeping higher reserves on current basis. We'll monitor this closely in next two quarters and action as warranted. The claim auto adjudication has restarted in quarter two. And we have not experienced any abnormal trend in either incidence rate or average claim size. There is a 4.8% improvement in Expenses of Management ratio to the tune of 4.8%, with quarter one EOM being 35.9% against last year of 40.7%, same quarter. This is mainly on account of a decrease in gross commission as a percentage of GWP due to change in mix, etc., cut down on some discretionary expenses in Q1, but most importantly, because of operating leverage, where expenses have gone up by low single digit, while GWP has gone up by 28%. And we are confident to bring down EOM ratio within regulatory limit in this current financial year. And we are almost there. There is a difference of 10 basis points in Q1 as per the light book submitted to IRDAI. Investment yield on annualized basis in Q1 is 7.3% with EOM of more than INR 8,100 crore. Solvency ratio is at a healthy level of 2.86 as of 30 June against regulatory minimum of 1.50. So, this was an overview of quarter one FY2026. Happy to take questions. Thank you very much. We will now begin with the question-and-answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question may press star and one on the touch-tone phone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question comes from the line of Prayesh Jain from Motilal Oswal. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Good evening, everyone. This is Prayesh Jain. Sir, firstly, on the IFRS numbers, when we look at the reconciliation that is given, the insurance contract IFRS 17, the adjustment is about INR 179 crore. This I would assume would take care of both the benefit and the benefit of expenses as well as the impact of 1/365. But it's still kind of a very big positive number. So, explain why is this such a big positive in this quarter? Actually, in this quarter, because we are looking at UPR 1/N basis, that's why it is looking on the higher side. That's the only reason. Okay. So, the deferred acquisition cost is consistent. Sorry, I'll take this offline. The other part is on the loss ratio. So, is it fair to assume that this incremental IBNR creation that you have done in this quarter, that should help you that should lead to lower loss ratios in the coming quarters? Most probably. We are confident that trend should stabilize by end of the year and will release as we experience lower incurrence. Okay. And could you break down your loss ratio or possibly even on IFRS basis between retail and group? Retail IFRS ratio is around 68%, and group would be around 61% broadly. And what was it last year Q1 FY2025? Last year, it was more like retail was around 66% and group was around 58%. So, there's an increase in both the sides? Yes. Yeah. And group is also to do with mixed change, more towards corporate than other B2B2C. Okay. Got it. I'll come back and look at that. Yeah. Thank you. Before we take the next question, I would like to remind participants, if you wish to ask a question, you may press star and one. A reminder to all participants, if you wish to ask a question, you may press star and one. The next question comes from the line of Shreya Shivani from CLSA. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thank you for the opportunity. I have two questions. First is not really related to the quarterly results, but something that we picked up from your overall public disclosure of the full year numbers. So, I was comparing the volume-wise claim rejection data that you have. It has been largely range bound for Niva Bupa. In FY2025 also, you were at about 7% or so. But for some of the other players in the industry, this number has significantly come down to under 5%. Do you think it is a range which is achievable for us, or do you think that the single digit 7%, 8%, 9% that you operate in is a far more logical place that you would end up being? My second question is on the claims ratio. Sorry, I'm probably not able to understand. The claim ratio becomes there's a huge difference between IFRS and IGAP, right? The one which is on your slide eight and the one which is on your last slide. Is it all of it is because of accounting? I mean, what is the I'm sorry, I'm not able to understand such a big gap between these two numbers. Maybe I can take second one, Shreya. If you're referring to this 77.9% claims ratio, this is on IGAP 1/N basis because earning has gone down, claims being same. That's why it's looking inflated. That should be the only reason, right? Even if you're making higher reserves, that should not get impacted by the 1/N accounting, right? The IBNR reserve and all. Okay. Just that NP smaller, so it is looking higher. That's the only logic, right? Exactly. Exactly. Okay. Yeah. And on the next one, on the first question, while there is no, so to say, perfect claim settlement ratio, it's largely a function of things like vintage mix, etc., and also how well insurer is performing in terms of avoiding unnecessarily non-payable claims. So, holistically, if you look at it, we've been very, very stable, consistent over more than eight quarters with robust trigger rate, hit rate on the fraud control side. Our mix also is largely towards retail. That's an important indicator. And book vintage also plays a role. So, while there is no specific number to target, we are confident that the number of 7% around or 92%, 93% of the settlement ratios that you observe consistently are likely to stay that way or further improve going forward in time. So, Shreya, I guess the other factor to keep in mind is typically higher settlement ratios are seen in corporate policies. So, depending on the I guess your point of some of the other players have stable ratios, but settlement rates have gone up. But broadly, with retail books, at least our experience is depending on the maturity, anything from 92%, 93%, 94% is what we have seen. We'll have to examine what is it that the others are doing to see if there's any area for improvement for us. Sure. Sure. Just one follow-up question that I had. You indicated that you've taken about 7% or 8% price hike in your flagship product this quarter. Had you taken any price hike in FY2025? And I'm asking you this question because your average ticket size per policy between 1Q2025 and 1Q2026, there's a drop. It could be just a function of you sold something different altogether in this quarter. But just trying to understand what was the price hike taken last year versus what has been taken this year. So, we had not taken for this particular product last year, we had not increased the pricing. This time only we have increased the price. And on the ticket size, you must be seeing this is similar to what it was last year as well. It does that some multi-year here and there mix would have changed. That's where there's a difference there. So, if you look at it on a like-to-like basis, it's there on page 10 of the presentation. There's not much change, Shreya. Oh, okay. Got it. Sorry. All right. Understood. So, that number is the 26,000 I was seeing is on 1/N. So, that's the long-term policy that is getting improved. That's correct. Got it. Okay. This is very useful. Thank you and all the best. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Prayesh Jain from Motilal Oswal. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi. Just to follow up on claims again. Is there anything that you can help us understand on how the fresh book versus the existing book loss ratios are evolving for you, say, in the last generally? I remember you mentioning in one of the calls that you want to maintain the loss ratio on the renewal book at 75%. So, any trajectory that there is this loss ratio on the renewal book? How is this shaping versus what are the loss ratios on the fresh book? This is particularly for the retail side. Broadly in line, Prayesh. I'd say range bound. As Vishwanath also mentioned, at least in Q1, we have not seen any pattern shifts in either ACS or incidence rates. And with respect to fresh versus new, broadly in line with what we've spoken about and the number you mentioned. Okay. What would be the mix between fresh and new for us in terms of premium on the retail side? Fresh and renewal, sorry. It would be 40/60, Prayesh. 40 new and balance renewal. Okay. Okay. And any strategy change with respect to you increasing the share of corporate versus corporate? Which strategy change there? Or how are you thinking about this? So, broadly, our strategy on corporate, there are two parts to it. One is, let me say, it's not a strategy, but just about being opportunistic. Wherever we feel our value proposition around integrated care management makes sense and we get adequate price. For example, early this year in January with two large multinational companies, we were able to win basis our proposition at an adequate price. But otherwise, the strategy continues to be focused on SME through all the distribution channels that we have, whether it's agents, banks, digital partners, or our own teams, including brokers. So, that's broadly our corporate strategy, right? And there's no change on that. So, this question was particularly because when we interacted with the competition, they hinted that the price aggregation and the group business, particularly employer-employee, still remains on the higher side. And winning the mandate at adequate pricing has been a challenge. So, what has been our right to win in this segment? So, broadly, one is, as I said, our focus is on the SME segment where the I mean, the price sensitivity is not the same. Not to say that it's not a price-sensitive segment, but because of the nature of how we distribute, right? For example, many of our banks are very large SME lenders. So, that's one big channel of distribution. Second is our own agent. So, I'd say on the SME segment, we have not seen shifts around price sensitivity. On the remainder, as I said, it's opportunistic. It's about being able to win accounts where on the basis of our proposition, where the pricing makes sense. You'd like to add, Ankur? No, I think you've made the point here. Yeah. That's it for my side. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Varun Palacharla from Kotak Securities. Please go ahead. Hi. Hope I'm audible. I had a couple of questions regarding the pre-1/N and the post-1/N accounting. So, the claims ratio on a like-to-like basis, that is, without 1/N accounting, if you compare it, is up about 800 basis points this quarter, year-on-year. Can you break this down into how much of this has flown from higher infectious diseases? How much is from the higher reserves you have built because of the adjudication issue? And how much of it is from product mix shift because of the group business or rather the employer-employee increasing? Because this would be helpful in us understanding where the actual normalized claims ratio would be for this year and how things are shaping up vis-à-vis peers and everywhere. The second question is with regard to the commissions. If you look at deferred commissions that create an impact on the net commission line item, that was about INR 27 crores in 3Q of last year. Now, it appears to have gone up to about INR 50 crores. Has the share of long-term policies increased, or is this just driven by volume overall going up? I did some calculations. Pre-1/1 PAT comes out to about - 36 or rather loss of INR 36 crores. Am I right, or am I in the ballpark over here? Can you just guide? Third one, ballpark, you are right. Because in our LODR, we have given what is the difference in GWP and commission. On loss ratio, your question is 64% going to 72.3%, Varun. Yes. Yeah. This is on account of majorly one thing. Like Mr. Krishnan mentioned that we have won two large accounts, MNCs, in last quarter of last financial year, let's say January 25. This is the accounting for UPR we use. 50% is earned in same quarter, and 50% of that will be earned in last quarter of this financial year, which is in this case without 1/N. 1/N will not have the impact on this because this is corporate one-year policy. That's the reason the EP is lower in this quarter because we don't have commensurate earned premium for these accounts. That's primarily the reason of increasing claims ratio. That's why it is better to look at the IFRS loss ratio, which will not have all these kind of noises. What was the second question? Commission, I could not understand completely. Can you repeat the second question again? So, when we look at commission that we get in pre-1/N and post-1/N, the difference largely is on account of deferred commission, right, on the long-term policies. Yes. So, that in 3Q last year was about 27 crores. Now, it has gone up to something like 50 crores. Last year, you are referring to. Thank you. And you are referring to which report? Or maybe we can take this offline? But what we can confirm is this commission we are deferring, and that's the only difference which we have captured in our LODR report. What is the deferment of commission on that basis. And one more thing. I have an analysis as well. Claims ratio is up about 300 basis points, right? Can you break it up into what are the components in that? Yeah. So, one is around 2%, as I mentioned, it is increase in retail loss ratio. That has to do with increase in outstanding, which I explained because of this halting auto adjudication rule engine. And around 3% increase in group loss ratio, which is on account of mainly mix change, big corporate which we have written compared to other B2B2C business in previous quarter of last year. Yeah. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Ananga Rana from A91 Partners. Please go ahead. Hi. I had two questions. One is, if I look at your average ticket size per policy, that has come down year-on-year. So, firstly, what's the reason for that? And secondly, roughly, what has that year-on-year growth been for the bank channel? Those are my two questions. On ticket size, if you look at page 10 of the presentation, on a like-for-like basis, there's not been much change. Yeah. If you're referring to page number 9, this is because of 1/N impact. Okay. Got it. Got it. Yeah. My bad. Yeah. Okay. And on the bank channel, what would the growth look like for bank? Our growth on the banker side is also strong. We're growing at a 20% plus on the banker side as well. Got it. And if I could fit in one more question, and it is too, EOM has remained constant quarter on quarter. Is there some business increase into this, or is it just a normal fluctuation? EOM? Was that your question? No, no. EOM is slow. EOM, yeah. Yeah. This is because of some reinsurance payment. There's annual settlement. We made some sizable reinsurance payment. That's why on quarter on quarter, you will see that it is stable. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Shobhit Sharma from HDFC Securities Limited. Please go ahead. Yeah. Hi, sir. Thank you for the opportunity, sir. I'm sorry to harp back again on the loss ratio question. So, I am not able to understand. If I look at H2FY2025 versus H2FY2024, the increase in loss ratio was around 4-5 odd percentage, considering the impact of the 1/N. But given in the current quarter, even after acknowledging the mixed change which has happened between in the retail portfolio or on the group side, the jump seems to be very huge. So, can you help us understand what has actually happened on that side? So, actually, it's a mix of two or three things. One is, as I mentioned in reply of previous question, even without 1/N, there is increase in loss ratio, moving 64% to 72.3%. That is explained by this large group which we have written, for which corresponding earning is not there in this method, while there are claims. So, that's one. And from there to 1/N loss ratio, this is sheer change in earned premium because of 1/N. Is it largely because of the large corporate deals which we have underwritten in Q4? Shobhit, let me repeat. It is not that large corporate deal was loss-making. That's why it has gone up. We use 50% method of UPR. What that means is 50% is earned in the quarter in which you write the business and 50% in the last quarter. That's the phasing impact of this earning. Okay. Okay. And the second is the 1/N change. Okay. Okay. And you mentioned that we have provided for some extra reserving. Can you quantify that? How much is that contributing to the overall increase in the loss ratio? So, this 2% increase, around 50 basis points would be change in mix, new renewal, and balance would be because of this increase in reserve, standing of reserve. One and a half to 2% approximately? Yeah. Correct. One and a half. Okay. Sir, another thing which I want to know from you is our approach on the long-term policies. We have seen your peer has been now very aggressive on capturing a higher market share on that side with the fronting of payouts. So, how are we protecting our business on that side? Are we losing any market share on that side? I just want to know your strategy on that. So, we are not losing our market share. In fact, you would have seen that we have now touched 10% market share on the retail business. But having said that, strategically, we are moving down our multi-year policy. It was in the late 20s earlier. Now, this year, it is in the early 20s. So, early 20s, you mean in terms of the fresh business we are writing in? Yeah. Multi-year. GWP. That's correct. GWP multi-year. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. These are my questions. Yeah. All the best. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Shreya Shivani from CLSA. Please go ahead. Yeah. Thank you. Just to follow up on the premium growth that you spoke about, 28% YoY or 32% YoY, can you also give how much of this growth has come from volume increase and how much is it? Would you be expecting similar trends in the year to come back for the year to come back? Yeah. Thank you for that question. This increase of almost 30% growth is largely on the volume growth and not the value growth because you would have seen the ticket size remaining same, which means our overall, all of this large part of this growth is volume growth only. Got it. So, I mean, okay, more than 80%-90% of it, then in that case, if I had to break it, almost 30% growth would be from volume only for the overall retail health premium to grow 32%. Yeah. Okay. This is very useful. Thank you so much. Correct. Hello. We are unable to hear you. Hello? Yeah. I'm done with it. Thank you so much. Thank you. The next question comes from the line of Ritika from Bandhan AMC. Please go ahead. Ladies and gentlemen, before we go towards the next question, I would like to remind participants you may press star and one to ask a question. The next question comes from the line of Ritika. Please go ahead. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm going to ask you to repeat the bridge you just mentioned to, I think, to Shobhit 's question on what was the impact on the loss ratio because of the group exposure and the accounting there. So, if you could give the bridge again when the loss ratio on the 1/N basis and without 1/N basis both. Sure, Ritika. Thank you. Yeah. So, first is, let's say without 1/N, 1/365 basis, there we have covered this that there's increase in retail loss ratio to the tune of 2%, mainly on account of reserve increase and 3% in group, mainly to do with mixed change. So, that's the 1/365 loss ratio, which has both claims and earned premium amortized on daily basis. So, that's the increase. Now, there are two more factors which are playing. One, if we move this 1/365 loss ratio to 50% loss ratio without 1/N, which is the accounting we were following previously. There what happens is because of this 50% method, if the premium is uniform, it hardly makes any difference on monthly basis. You are writing same premium and you are accounting 50% of that. We wrote one large account, two large accounts, two MNCs as of 1st January 2025. 50% of that was earned in last quarter of last financial year, and the balance 50% given the method will be earned in last quarter of this financial year. But there is a uniform claim payment. Optically, this number without 1/N, 50% loss ratio is looking on higher side. This is one impact, moving from 1/365 to 50%. Then there is impact of this 1/N where the earned premium is on lower side because of reduction in GWP and accordingly NWP and earned premium. And that's the walk from without 1/N, 50% to 1/N, 50%. And we can offline also discuss if you need more details. What you mentioned. Yeah. So. Groups are still profitably written. Yes. Large groups are profitable. Their combined ratio is 100% or below. Yeah. And also, these are multi-year contracts, so you will see this effect coming back in Q4 this year for us. Yeah. Multi-year contract. Yeah. So, you part answered my second question, which was obviously logically it should come back, like you just said, that part of this increase is because of the accounting should come back. And also, if you could repeat what you said also on the reserving with that, ideally that also should revert. And lastly, sir, have we shared any guidance for FY2026 or if you want to share a little longer also, whichever way is that's the second question. Yeah. Yeah. So, on the increase in reserve, so basically it has to do with change in pattern of claims. So, outstanding has gone up because of halting this auto adjudication. Now, one way was to we reduce IBNR to compensate because generally outstanding has some portion which is released when those claims are paid. But what we have done and we have yet to see whether there's an inherent change in pattern of reporting or processing. That's why we kept that outstanding same and IBNR. As a result, overall claims have gone up, which is incurred claim. We will monitor this another two quarters or so, and if we feel that there's case to reduce this reserve, we will do. Else we'll carry this on prudent basis. That's on loss issue. Or guidance? On guidance, it's early. I think probably after the infectious disease season is done, that's probably a better time for us to give specific guidance at this point. Thank you so much. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, a reminder to all participants, if you wish to ask a question, you may press star and one. The next question comes from the line of Rachna K. from SiMPL. Please go ahead. Hello. Hello. This is? Yes. Hello. I just wanted to understand your stance on pricing strategy. Are still some of our products are we still following the LTV approach or we are or we have planned to go for zonal-wise pricing? Hello? Yes. LTV we are following, and zonal-wise pricing is extension of LTV only, so charging more appropriate premium to risk pool. We are considering we already have products where we have three or four zones, and we are exploring if there is case to further increase number of zones. There is no moving away from LTV approach. It is extension of that only. So, are price hikes also considered under this? Price hike, sorry, you missed that. The price hike, the core objective is to negate inflation, the underlying medical inflation. The main objective is to negate that or. Understood. Thank you. Thank you. As there are no further questions from the participants, I would now like to hand the conference over to the management for closing comments. Thank you, and over to you, sir. Thank you very much for all your questions. Apologies once more for the delay. No further comments from our side. Thank you. On behalf of ICICI Securities, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your line. Thank you.