Okay. All right. Thanks for joining us here today. With us today, we have Clover Health. On stage is CFO Peter Kuipers. I believe he's going to start off with the presentation. Thank you, Jonathan. Great to be here. Thanks for having us. At Clover Health, our vision is to empower every physician with advanced technology to earlier identify, manage, and treat chronic diseases and drive better health outcomes at also lower total cost of care. How are we doing that? We are led by technology, and we're proving the technology out in Medicare Advantage. We are a Medicare Advantage insurance plan led by technology. We have developed over seven, eight years' large machine learning models and now also powered by AI over the last couple of years. Technology that can be used by physicians and is increasingly used by physicians to earlier identify, treat, and manage chronic diseases. Medicare Advantage is a large market. It's growing. 35 million seniors in the U.S. are in that market. We operate our main insurance plan in an open network or a PPO network, mostly focused in our priority markets in New Jersey and Georgia. We are expecting to grow at a similar rate as the last AEP this year. In addition, we are now bringing this technology also to market for third-party payers and risk-bearing providers. On the payer side, this includes national payers that are in the pipeline and also regional payers. For this year, our current outlook is that we're growing over 30%, so 33% growth on membership while maintaining profitability from an EBITDA perspective. Let's spend a minute and talk about our differentiated business model. We are different than the large players in Medicare Advantage. First of all, we are patient-facing from a clinical perspective. Our Clover Assistant technology is AI-enabled and is used at the point of care, at the time of care by physicians. In contrast, the large players operate mostly insurance tech, so back office and delayed administration. We'll show a real screenshot of the technology in a bit here, but we believe our technology is elegant. It integrates insights and proposes care management proactively instead of in a delayed, reactive manner at the large players. We're able to do this also in a large network where our insurance members have free choice of their physician as opposed to a narrow HMO approach. We're not focused on risk delegation in the traditional sense. It means that the P&L you see, our results are pure from an economic perspective. It also means that over time, the upside from a P&L perspective is also reflected in the P&L. The Clover Assistant technology integrates essentially all available medical records from EHRs to pharma to claims to labs. What it actually means is that we can also use this for our highest acuity members where our Clover physicians become the main physician, and we can manage their care. From a financial performance, our BER is roughly 89% expected this year while growing 35% in membership, which we think is exceptional. If you compare it to the industry, they're running roughly at high 80s, low 90s percentage on the BER ratio, but that is with essentially a flat membership. Some of the players are decreasing membership. If you normalize that, you'll likely end up much higher on the BER for the large players. Now, this is a screenshot of the actual technology called Clover Assistant. On the top right, you see that the technology integrates real-time, essentially all medical data from EHR systems. For it's the all labs, all pharmacy data, and almost all claims as well. It's not just data aggregation because that's just a bunch of data. The machine learning and AI-powered algorithms synthesize and capture this data to the most important pieces of information for the PCP to use in a visit with his or her patient. During the visit, can add additional data points, and the AI-powered solution suggests care management solutions and helps identify chronic diseases earlier so that they can be treated earlier as well, resulting in, we believe, better health outcomes at lower total cost of care. Very elegant and fast, real-time solution. The UI is elegant, so we see our users, the PCPs wanted to use this. We got very good feedback from a user perspective. The user base is growing at a really healthy rate as well. Now, I want to point out that the physician him or herself is in the end responsible for the care management and clinical choices. This tool, this software stack, helps the physician operate at the top of their license. We have grown this over time at scale, so many insights are incorporated in here. The physician can essentially get a second opinion, a third opinion, a thousand opinions, or many, many different opinions, right? All filtered in here. We believe that leads to better health outcomes. We have also published a number of clinical white papers. Now that we are at scale and are growing 33% in membership this year, and we estimate a similar growth rate next year, we can compare results. We are clinically at scale as well, where the white papers that we've published provide some really good evidence on the effectiveness of our software platform. You see here six different white papers that we've published over the last two years or so. Main themes, I would point out really two main themes. Earlier diagnoses of chronic diseases. You see diabetes, when the technology is used, is generally diagnosed three years early on average. What that means is that diabetes can be treated earlier, of course, is better health outcomes as well. Also, if a disease is treated at an earlier stage, the cost of that treatment generally is also lower. Financially, that model works also from that perspective. I would also point out significantly lower hospital admissions and lower hospital readmissions. Very, very significant, not only for quality of care for care management, but also, of course, from a financial perspective. Lastly, I want to point out that from a HEDIS perspective, which is the quality measure within Stars, for the second consecutive year here, we are ranked number one in the nation for PPO plans on clinical quality. Earlier, I talked a little bit about that we're offering the same software solution that now is proven at scale for a number of years, also to third-party payers and at-risk risk-bearing providers. Again, these payers and providers enjoy the same benefits for their plans themselves and also, of course, for their members. Again, earlier identification, earlier and better management of chronic diseases and better health outcomes. We're offering this outside of our core markets that I discussed earlier as well as at the lower startup cost. We see the momentum. We see a very strong product-market fit that is proven now. We are scaling. The momentum is growing. We've hired some really deep experience and talented leadership as well that you can see in some of the announcements that we did. From a commercial perspective, the HEDIS quality score that I talked about earlier, that is what draws these third parties in to really engage and start deploying this technology. We have high conviction that from a financial perspective, over time, we can help improve, if you look at the payer side, the financial performance by over 1,000 basis points. If you look at the performance year to date for Clover, we have grown membership 35% year-over-year. Revenue is up close to 40%. While absorbing new members that come at higher cost and generally are loss-making on a gross profit perspective, we have achieved $45 million of year-to-date EBITDA, which we think is exceptional. We've also lowered the SG&A as a percentage of revenue, so we have leverage there as we scale. That said, we have higher utilization than we expected originally, driven mostly by new members. We have new members at higher utilization than returning members, for his expectation. We'd also say that we have more new members, just an absolute number, than expected, specifically here in the second year. All that said, all in, while growing 40% of revenue, 35% of membership with more new members than expected, the underlying medical cost trend, excluding pharmacy on an incurred basis, is around 44%. That is significantly lower than industry average. Now, that said, we had expected to be somewhat better than that, if you will, so we're definitely working on that. That said, the new members, the more new members that we have this year will be beneficial for next year's financial performance. If we look at the increase in members, so 33% membership growth, we have a large new membership cohort this year, so around 26% year to date. Our new members joining Clover, they're generally loss-making in year one from a financial perspective, but they will improve profitability over time as they return and come under Clover Assistant technology management. Year to date, these new members, more than half of these new members are already seeing a PCP using the technology. From a financial perspective, if we look at our business model, it is based on cohort management. If we look at the MCR differential from essentially year one, which is the baseline, which is essentially a new member, the MCR and then the BER improves by 700 basis points going from year one to year two and another 700 basis points from year two to year three. Now, in the last earnings call, we gave a couple of additional data points from an economic perspective. We have disclosed now contribution profits per member per month for new members versus the returning member cohorts. And we define that as revenue, PMPM, so per member per month, minus medic, so medical cost per member per month, also minus customer acquisition cost, which includes sales and marketing and also broker commission, so the full loaded cost of the channel. What we have disclosed is that for new members this year, year to date, the contribution profit is $110 negative or a loss, if you will. In year one, you see that the returning cohorts are around $217 of a contribution profit. You can see the ratio there. As new members mature into a returning member, it is somewhere in between that, just on an everything being equal perspective. However, 2026 will be different. 2026 will be different from a perspective that we expect specific tailwinds for Clover, and there are also, of course, tailwinds in the industry itself. Talking about these specific tailwinds going into 2026, we have a very strong voluntary retention rate. We believe it is industry-leading. The voluntary retention rate we disclosed is above 90% this year, so very, very strong. We also expect, of course, a larger returning member cohort and absolute member numbers next year. We are going from a three-and-a-half-star payment year this year to a four-star payment year next year. That adds roughly 5% to the top line. Of course, we are continuing to see further increased usage of the technology by PCPs, more PCPs, also more patients that these PCPs are seeing. We continue to invest strongly in the technology, adding capabilities to have further impact as well on better healthcare, better health outcomes. We believe we can manage the new members also better. We have plans in place for that as well. From an industry perspective, the Part C CMS final rate notice came out a couple of months ago. I think it's around 5.5%-6% on the top line. The Part D direct subsidy is increasing about 40% next year. Of course, we see further growth opportunity also as other plans retreat. We continue to optimize SG&A. We're renegotiating and have renegotiated already a number of main contracts with all of our vendors. Given that we are now for the foreseeable multiple years ahead, are a strong grower and a winner, if you will, in the Medicare Advantage market. Now we have more leverage as well and make sure we get appropriate rates. We're doing the same on some of the variable costs as well in medics, so more to come there. Some impact already is included in the third quarter and fourth quarter, but not annualized yet, so they will be annualized next year. We believe we're well positioned to both achieve GAAP net income positivity next year in fiscal 2026 and also the increased adjusted EBITDA number. With that, over to you, Jonathan. Okay, great. That was a nice overview of everything. I guess starting with the results, to your point, the third quarter results did see elevated utilization trends broadly across the book, but obviously geared a little bit more towards the newer cohorts. Can you talk about the utilization that you saw, and was it accelerating throughout the quarter? Yeah, so generally from a utilization perspective, we saw most elevated utilization in inpatient and outpatient. From an inpatient perspective, that was mostly on the surgery and the vascular side. Outpatient was mostly oncology. If we click down and look at the metrics and how we drive those and monitor those, the new members had a bigger proportion of the drive in the increase in utilization. Now, of course, we are learning the behaviors and the trends with this new member population as well. We believe we can better manage that go forward as we go forward into next year with, again, a fairly large new membership group joining our plan. Okay. I guess one of the items I was curious about is that Clover Assistant typically improves the BER. Where would you say it kind of missed in terms of bending the trend and kind of where's the opportunity for improvement on CA, kind of looking ahead, moving forward? Yes, I would say from a, first of all, from a commercial perspective, we think we can improve on unit cost, which is the equation, of course, as well from a financial perspective. We are expanding, of course, capabilities on the roadmap for Clover Assistant as well. I would say from a utilization perspective, again, it's mostly the new members. I would also say that we've seen some trends or abnormalities in DME and dental where we think from a payment integrity perspective and recovery perspective, we can improve the governance and potentially some recoveries there also. Lastly, I think for us and probably for others as well, given the IRA and Part D being new this year as far as the risk corridors on top, there's optimization to be had as well with our PBM. We're working with our PBM not only from a Medicare Advantage perspective, from a Stars perspective, but also from a financial perspective, right? Think about increased network management on kind of Part C and rates, if you will, more insights in utilization management for Part C. Part D, I would say, more dollarized and unit cost efficiencies there also. Then optimizing, of course, dental and DME. I think it's across the board that we're doing that. Okay. I guess when we think about your bid and approach for 2026, you likely made an assumption on trend and how much you could bend the trend. To the extent that you can talk about, did you price under the premise that trend would be similar to this year and you could bend it downwards? Just what's your view there? Yeah, I think that's a great question. I mean, I think in general, we used industry-wide cost assumptions and cost trend assumptions for the bid. Okay. And then to the slides that you just had, they're very helpful about the 2025 cohort, how the older cohorts look in profitability and where they could be in 2026. With that, the newest cohort, at least based on the slides, still seems to imply that it is unprofitable, at least based on the slide. Is that accurate? What's inhibiting the improvement year-over-year from, say, being unprofitable this year to at least break even next? Yeah, so from an illustrative perspective on the slide, we're depicting there that we expect a significant step up for new members. Part of that are the drivers that are Clover specific that we talked about, and then industry-wide as well. Of course, part of the Clover specifics are that we're looking, of course, at member experience, looking at onboarding, make sure we have complete data of new members so they can come on the Clover care, etc. We have a number of initiatives there too, just from a practical onboarding perspective. Okay. In the quarter, you recognize a $10 million mark-to-market equity investment in the quarter. I guess what's that investment that saw a substantial pickup? Was it an ownership stake in a company or something else? Yeah, there was an equity stake we have in Biochar Science. They specialize in precision medicine. So they had another financing round, and we updated the market valuation for that. Okay. There was new news out of the administration that Medicare could theoretically cover GLP-1s for weight loss at a reduced price. Obviously, there are a lot of details that are currently unknown right now. Can you talk about how you're thinking about this if you would have to cover GLP-1s for weight loss? Do you have visibility into your membership that would indicate that a member would be eligible? Yes, I would say we have. We have those insights, of course, because we have the full medical records if a member is covered by Clover Assistant. As we have disclosed previously, around 70% or slightly higher percentage of our membership base is covered by Clover Assistant. Therefore, we have the medical records, if you will. We have those insights. That said, there is a lot of unclarity quite yet on GLP-1 guidelines. It looks like it mostly will be, or most likely it will be applicable for 2027. We will make sure we include that appropriately in the bid. Okay, great. Can you talk about how AEP is trending for you thus far? You kind of mentioned similar growth trend to what you experienced this year. How's the mix between switchers and new to MA? Yeah, so we haven't given a lot of detail, if you will, because we're around the middle of AEP. What we said on the earnings call is that we see significant growth roughly on our same ZIP code as we experienced last year during AEP. I would also say very similar to last year, the split between switchers and kind of new is roughly the same. And last year was roughly 80% switchers. Okay. Going to the Stars, obviously, you took a bit of a step back in Stars for payment year 2027. Can you talk about the specifics of what went wrong and what specific steps you're taking to remediate this to ideally get back to four Stars? Yeah, our aspiration, of course, is to, and the strategy is to be scored at four Stars. We have initiatives in place just in general on Stars, but very specifically on pharmacy. That is where we saw a decline. Now, parts of that are, of course, not fully in our hands because we have a PBM. We are working with the PBM as well, of course, to drive Stars performance there. That said, I want to point back to the prepared remarks at earnings. I think also in August, we did a press release on Stars as well. We believe the current Stars framework has some inconsistencies that we are engaging on with CMS, specifically in some of the measures that really do not drive, in our view, clinical outcomes. A number of those are in the pharmacy area. Okay. To a point about pharmacy, since that seems to be the culprit, maybe worth a minute talking about how the specific scoring works for that metric and what exactly you're trying to do to remediate it. Yeah, there could be some. If you look at kind of prescribing, if you will, and kind of the med adherence, it's really the, is a medication picked up. I think it's in a 90-day window, if you will. Some of those measures don't get corrected if a medication gets de-prescribed. If your PCP determines, if your Medicare Advantage member, that you don't need to use that medication anymore, the plan actually gets dinged for that. There are some inconsistencies there as well. Gotcha. And then conceptually, given you would be influencing the PBM dynamic, how do you think about this theoretically impacting drug trend? Are you putting additional checks or measures in place to get ahead of any issues? Yeah, so a couple of things there. First, of course, there's formulary optimization. We're working on that. We're working on pricing and unit cost as well and net cost with the PBM. Also, of course, we can further integrate, of course, med management and medical costs from a Part D perspective, also in our Clover Assistant technology stack. Okay. And then when thinking about Clover Assistant within the contract of pharmacy, is this something you're considering bringing to life within the organization? How quickly can something like this be stood up and any incremental costs, etc., related to it? From a product roadmap perspective. Yep. Yeah, of course. Some of those initiatives are already on the product roadmap. I would say we're continuing to invest in pure R&D. Actually, I want to point out that we're probably pretty unique in the MCO space of actually being technology-focused. We have a very talented and experienced software engineering team, which is quite exceptional to have that combined with the insurance business. That is on the roadmap. I would say it's part of the investment, and it's baked into our outlook for 2026, where we believe that we can be, that we will be net income GAAP, net income positive for 2026. Okay. So despite the Stars hiccup, the company is poised for strong growth in 2026, given the pullback from nationals and your relative positioning. How are you thinking about the level of growth where you're okay versus you've just taken on too much? How do you think about that breakpoint? Yeah, I would say we haven't given a kind of a number there. From a percentage growth perspective, what I would say, though, is that we are focused very specifically on what we call priority markets. What is a priority market? We define a priority market as it could be a county or cluster of counties where we already have membership or strong membership, where we have PCPs, physicians, and health systems using Clover Assistant technology, and also where we have in-home care to treat our highest acuity members. We are focusing our efforts from a go-to-market perspective, broker engagement, member engagement in those geographical areas, right? To some extent, we can manage the level of the growth, but it's also what type of growth we want as well. It's a very, very precise approach. Okay. As we think about G&A savings that you think you can achieve by recontracting with the scale you have now compared to previously, should we think of the savings as similar magnitude in terms of dollars, in terms of what we've seen, or how should we think about this dynamic? Yeah, there's really three categories in SG&A from a cost perspective. The first category of cost is what we call growth cost or growth SG&A, which includes sales and marketing and also broker commissions. Of course, we are fine-tuning broker commissions as well and increase the long-term value there and decrease the payback period. We definitely see benefits there. We're also making sure that we have the right quality and metrics around how these brokers perform. Doesn't necessarily mean that that's an efficiency, but we get more return for every dollar spent in that category. From a variable SG&A perspective, which is mostly servicing kind of the back office side of the insurance plan mechanics, of course, because we now have more scale and our growth outlook for the next number of years shows really healthy growth, right? It's a different discussion as far as the leverage we have there. Expect to see quite a bit of leverage there on the unit cost perspective. The third category of SG&A is fixed SG&A. Think about that as fixed infrastructure. It could be vendor or partner-based, or it could also be kind of in-house headcount-based. We definitely see from a vendor perspective more negotiation power from our perspective also. We see vendors in that cost category also using AI. We see some AI efficiencies there as well. Internally also, we are more and more deploying also AI with an AI strategy outside the clinical and outside the software platform to really not only for efficiency, drive cost, and drive leverage. We also believe that it also improves really the employee engagement, right? It makes the jobs better by really automating using AI for the more manual tasks. We really believe that's really valuable for our employee and our team as well. Okay. When you think about the growth plans, growth that are in your plans, should we think about the recontracting that you're taking as more of a kind of last bolus of G&A reductions and then we move towards a more stable but constrained type of growth moving forward? How would you frame it? From a top-line perspective or cost perspective? Cost perspective. Cost, yeah. Yeah, I would say, again, those three categories. I think there's more optimization to be had on the growth SG&A as we continue to refine that. Variable SG&A, I think that will continue as well. The biggest impact will be on the fixed SG&A. I think it'll be continuous. I think we had quite a bit of progress, I would say, in the last couple of months. We'll continue to have that in the next couple of months. See it as a step function or improvement across those three. At the same time, I would say we'll continue to work and optimize SG&A, of course. Okay. Turning to Counterpart, I guess the company has made a few announcements related to Counterpart in terms of customers, but can you give an update on how things are progressing with your clients? Are these full expansions now, or are we still in more of a pilot phase, I guess? Yeah. So again, like I said in earlier remarks, we believe product-market fit is proven very, very strongly. There is strong external interest, specifically for payers that also operate a wide network where it's difficult to manage from a quality and care management perspective and also cost perspective. If you think about kind of large players in general, it's difficult to roll out technology. We've talked about this earlier as well publicly. Clover Assistant, let's say it's used by a Counterpart using payer, can ask the PCPs that are in their network or not in their network, mostly in their network, actually, to use the software. The software actually requires a training of one hour. It's a fairly straightforward implementation. We also have seen the speed or the velocity from initial start and then rollout, if you will. It's probably two to three times faster than somewhat similar tech-enabled tools. Again, going back to your question, strong product-market fit, strong interest. You've seen that we have hired additional talent and leaders as well. You can see that. Now we're focused on scaling. Both from a leadership perspective, from an infrastructure perspective, implementation team perspective, customer care perspective. We're scaling over time. We're not in a rinse and repeat phase yet where we would have the typical metrics around SaaS and tech-enabled services that you see in healthcare and other industries as far as AR, car, etc., on a cohort basis. We definitely have that internally. At some point, we'll be in a rinse and repeat phase to start publishing that as well. Okay. You released a few white papers on the benefits to HEDIS scores from CA. Is there any proof points for your clients in terms of the benefit that they've seen so far in terms of the pilot phase, or is it kind of really still within the Clover MA products where we would theoretically see this? No, we see similar proof points from a clinical perspective and economic perspective already. Okay. And then last 30 seconds here. You added an AI scribe to the offering. Given AI scribing has been growing and perhaps more ubiquitous today than it has ever been, I guess, why did the company add this function as a doctor presumably has this, and how does this interact with current scribing technology and the EHR? Yeah, I think the important point we think is the full integration. What we looked at earlier, the screenshot of the technology. Scribing is fully integrated there. It's not a separate tool or a separate feed. It helps the PCP not only from an admin perspective, but really real-time being able to interact with the patient and not be distracted. We also believe it's not only efficiency, but in the context of Clover Assistant technology, we believe it actually also contributes to better quality of care. Okay. Great. With that, we're out of time. Thanks for joining us, Peter. Thanks, Jonathan. Great. Great.