Okay. All right, we'll go ahead and get started. First I'd like to just welcome Michel Khalaf, CEO and President of MetLife, and John McCallion, CFO of MetLife. Thanks very much for being with us today. The first question I wanted to start with is more of a broad update on the strategy. It's been a little while since you updated on the Next Horizon strategy. I'd just be interested to hear some of the successes that you've had in that strategy and what, if anything, changes as we think about more uncertain economic environment. Sure. Well, first of all, it's great to be here. Thanks for having us. I guess it was a year ago when we were here and things were sort of starting to get into a semblance of normalcy. It's good to be back a year on and see how far we've come. I think it was also a year ago that we talked about Next Horizon being an all-weather strategy. Certainly with the backdrop of all the uncertainty that we faced this year, I think our strategy has proven to be quite all weather, so we're pleased with that. We hold ourselves accountable and we measure progress based on the commitments we made back in 2019 as part of the strategy rollout. If we look at those, we committed to an adjusted ROE of 12%-14%, and we're achieving that. We committed to $20 billion over 5 years in distributable cash, and I would say we're ahead of schedule on that front. We are also well within our 65 to 75 three-year average free cash flow. Third, we committed to freeing up additional capacity of $1 billion over the 5-year period, to invest in growth. On that front, again, I think we are well on track, if not to achieve, if not to overachieve on that. All in all, pleased with the progress. As we think about the environment in which we are operating and we conduct an annual exercise with our board of directors where we pressure test every aspect of the strategy. There are a few things that I think are going to be important, especially with the expectation that the uncertainty that we're seeing will persist. I would start with the foundation, which is a strong capital position, not only allowing us to meet our commitments and obligations, but also providing us with the financial flexibility to seize certain opportunities that may present themselves also in this environment. We pointed at the end of the third quarter to our cash and liquidity at the holding companies being at $5.2 billion, well above our $3 billion-$4 billion target range. Over time, we're still comfortable with the $3 billion-$4 billion, and we'll get back to that, but I think being well above it, given the environment, again, gives us that added financial flexibility. Another area that I think has been important, will continue to be very important, is sort of the relentless focus on execution. And I think we've built a track record there. In an uncertain environment, it comes down to how well can we control the things that we can control. Execution is critical from that perspective. I think we've also worked hard on building an efficiency mindset that is now, I believe, part of the DNA of the organization. That's also important in a challenging environment. I think the fact that we're able, this year in the face of significant inflationary pressures, to come in at an even under the 12.3% direct expense ratio, I think speaks to this efficiency mindset that we've built in the organization. We're also pleased with the diversification that we have in terms of our business mix. This provide us with a lot of natural offsets, and we believe allows us to perform across a variety of economic environments. Last but not least, I would also point to capital deployment, where I think we have a clear strategy and have built a track record in terms of how we deploy capital to its best and highest use. I think we are one of the few companies, maybe the only one, that publishes its VNB figures. We see there that we are supporting new business that is generating mid-teen IRR, six to seven-year paybacks. Very healthy returns and paybacks. We're also clear in terms of when we don't see opportunities to deploy capital at hurdle-clearing, risk-adjusted returns, we will return capital to shareholders. Again, I think we have a track record there. Far, I think this is what you get with Next Horizon. You get the sum of what I just described, that's why we continue to feel good about how we're positioned and that Next Horizon is the right strategy for us in the current environment. Before we talk more about the businesses themselves, I wanted to ask a question on capital. It's been a hot topic in the industry recently, I was hoping you could just describe how higher interest rates impact your statutory capital levels, whether it's in the U.S. or in Japan. Sure. I just want to echo Michel's comments, Alex, thanks for having us here, and great to see everyone. Look, I think the first thing to start with is higher interest rates are economically a positive for the firm, and I think that certainly goes with no exception to the U.S. and the Japan entities. But the statutory frameworks they do create other challenges that we have to work through and I think actively work through. I think in the U.S. we're constantly reevaluating our positions, making sure that we can work through a variety of scenarios, not just up rates, but down rates. I think the team's done a very good job of that over the course of this year and in a new environment, if you will. So I think active management here in the U.S. is critical. Even if those metrics are slightly different than what you would think economically, nonetheless, you can't ignore them. In Japan, I would say the situation's a little more extreme in terms of the divergence from what's economic and what's the statutory framework, partly because there's this asymmetrical accounting that occurs in the statutory framework. You see higher rates, and particularly in our business because in the higher rates being U.S. rates, we have a heavy weighting towards U.S. dollar products. So our entity in Japan has a higher exposure to U.S. dollar rates shifting. And so that rise in rates has depressed assets, and yet the liabilities are more on an accrual method. So you just see that temporary headwind on the SMR. But as I said before, economically the value of that entity is improving. Nonetheless, you can't ignore it, right? We've been doing a number of things to evaluate. We have internal tools. I mentioned this on the earnings call. I mentioned that our second quarter SMR was 617%, and if you follow closely and have done some homework, you can see that it's actually below 500 now since between second quarter and third quarter, and that was just recently published. So that rise in rates did depress the SMR. But we mentioned we have a number of internal tools we could use and actually we just executed on an internal reinsurance transaction that will materially boost that ratio. So a couple things. One, interest rates since third quarter, probably down 30 basis points. That probably gives us another 50 to 60 points off the, I think the third quarter number was 457%. And then the reinsurance transaction probably gives us another 200-plus points. It kind of gets us back to a range from a reporting perspective that kind of removes that challenge. And quite honestly, we didn't ever really had concern with capital generation. It was more just a reporting metric, created a bit of a temporary headwind. So all in all we would report a much stronger SMR come the fourth quarter. Just a quick follow-up on that. I know there's also this concept of economic solvency ratio in Japan. I mean, is the same dynamic there, or does that actually capture a benefit from interest rates? Yeah, it's a great point. In a few years' time the economic solvency regime will come into play, and that will really much more eliminate this divergence in kind of economic and statutory framework and in a rising rate environment, that would look better, actually. This is really, when I say temporary, I'd say for the next few years until that framework comes into play. Got it. Let's move over to group benefits. You've had pretty strong top-line growth. Could you talk about the degree to which the macro tailwinds around employment have been helping that versus some of the idiosyncratic execution that you've done there? To what degree do you feel like you can keep the growth going, even if employment levels are working a little bit against you in 2023? Yeah. I would say that clearly the strong jobs market is a tailwind. I would sort of attribute the growth that we've seen over the last few years, I mean, we've grown this business from $18 billion in 2019 to $23 billion this year. This includes Versant. I would attribute it primarily to our strategy and our execution. From a strategic perspective, we've continued to invest in adding product and capability to what was already sort of the widest product portfolio in the industry. We've continued also to invest in making sure that we are seamlessly connected to employers' ecosystem when it comes to benefits. All of those investments as well as investing in digitizing our business are bearing fruit. The other aspect also where I think is important is on the execution front, where I think the discipline that we have consistently had when it comes to our underwriting, our focus on continuously improving our service proposition. Those are resulting in very strong persistency in this business and also enabling us to get the rate increases that we deem appropriate and necessary. All in all, really pleased with the growth that we've seen in that business. We think that that growth trajectory is sustainable at mid-single digits. One of the reasons why we are confident in that is that this year, in a year that comes on the back of what was a record jumbo sales year in 2021, and a year where we added Versant to the mix, we're able to still grow at mid-single digits, at 5%. We feel good about our growth prospects in that business. Got it. Maybe sticking on group benefits for a minute. What are you seeing in terms of competition, pricing, as you look at the end of your process that goes on? Yeah, it's a competitive market. I think there are some things that bode well for the industry, broadly speaking. I mentioned the strong jobs market, the wage inflation. I think the war for talent as well are all sort of tailwinds, generally speaking. I think employers are also more aware of the importance of some of the voluntary benefits in particular that are being offered. I think, this is a short-term business, so I think even when you see some irrational behavior, it tends to correct itself fairly quickly. I think the other aspect here that is maybe more unique to us and the benefits MetLife, is the fact that scale matters in this business because this is a business where you have to make significant investments and keeping up with customer expectations, with employer expectations. This is precisely what we've been doing, and that's why we feel good about our position. Yes, it's a competitive market. From time to time, you might see some irrationality in a specific product line. All in all, and that's sort of reflected in our persistency, we're able to get the renewal action that we deem necessary and also continue to win our fair share. On voluntary benefits, I think increased take-up by consumers is really driven pretty nice growth in that product. Are you still seeing that as a trend, as we look forward to next year? Are you seeing any evidence that maybe in inflationary pressures on the consumer are changing that at all? No, actually, what we're seeing is, we've consistently been achieving a double-digit growth in terms of our voluntary, which is a focus area for us. We're continuing to see that play out. I think some of it is attributed to, one, the sort of increased awareness as to the importance of some of those products. I think there are also a few areas that lead us to believe that this trajectory is sustainable. One, I think if you look at the under 1,000 market, very few employers offer any type of benefits in that market. There's a lot of white space there that potentially can grow the size of the pie overall. We're focused on trying to capture that by bringing a lot of our voluntary product suite down market. Second, even at the higher end of the market, penetration rates are in the low teens, I would say. Again, a good opportunity there in growing that, and we've been investing significantly in our enrollment and re-enrollment capabilities, and we think that's going to also help us achieve greater penetration. Last but not least, I think adding product is important and we've added significant product with Versant, with pet insurance, with digital wills, with Identity Theft. We think that's, again, another factor, and we're seeing a lot of growth actually come from existing customers on the voluntary front. All in all, we think that the growth trajectory that we've been seeing is sustainable. If I move over to the spread business, you've recently had some success in pension risk transfers. I'd just be interested in any commentary you could provide on how you see that pipeline headed into the end of this year and if 2023 can sustain the pretty nice growth levels for the industry. Yeah. This will be a record year for us on the PRT front. I think this year the pipeline was front-ended and we pointed to the fact that, at the end of the third quarter, we were at $12 billion in PFOs, which is a record year for us. This included the IBM deal. What we've seen over the last couple of years is that this market has grown. We think that that's likely to continue. We see a healthy pipeline into the future. Funding levels are healthy, are strong, above 100% in, for most plans or a lot of plans, I would say, which would point to a continued strong pipeline. Just as a reminder, we focus on the jumbo end of the market, the $1 billion plus, and we only bid on retiree-only cases. Focusing on that sort of end of the market, I think, where you have fewer competitors, where the strength of our balance sheet, our investment underwriting, admin capabilities can be differentiated for MetLife. We feel good about our ability to win there. We treat every PRT deal in exactly the same manner as an M&A transaction. It's the same discipline that we apply there. We expect every deal to achieve our return objectives of 12%-14%. That's the sort of approach and philosophy when it comes to PRT. We think we see a healthy pipeline going forward to 2023 and beyond. Got it. Outside of PRT in the spread business, I think over time you've talked about LIBOR and how that kind of funnels into the crediting rate and so forth. At times it's been a headwind, the idea of LIBOR going up. I think recently you actually talked about some caps being in place for once it gets over 2%, it actually begins to be a tailwind. I was hoping maybe you could unpack that a little bit for us and help us think through the current state of your LIBOR sensitivity. Yeah. We try to give sensitivities every year, and they typically change the next day. We do our best though, right? A lot has to do with your shape of curve and where things have gone. Certainly I think interest rates have moved in a direction that we're different than where we forecasted. Having said that, we typically use environments. Think back in maybe the 2020 timeframe when low LIBOR was a benefit. We typically use those opportunities to protect against a different scenario, like a sharp rise in LIBOR that would otherwise be a headwind. We put on a number of interest rate caps during kind of several years back as a result of the way the curve is shaped and how the Fed has acted. You've seen a sharp rise in LIBOR and like you said, above 2%, you start to shift from a headwind to a tailwind. We are seeing some very strong spreads as a result of that in our RAS segment, particularly a good chunk of that being from the short end of the curve being so high. We'll have to see, I think. It's been pretty resilient as I mentioned on the last few calls. We think that will maintain its kind of trajectory, and then we'll have to see where LIBOR goes in 2023. 2023 would be another kind of, I'd say, strong year if the curve were to stay where it is right now. When I think about yields more broadly for MetLife, could you update us on where the portfolio yield is relative to new money yields and runoff yields and what we can expect there from just for the broad organization NII yield? Yeah. Certainly, we have, I think the industry overall has been kind of battling a headwind for over a decade. In the early part of this year, we started to see that inflection point or things shift, right? We saw kind of parity in the early part of the year, then we started to see our new money yields exceed our roll-off rates. I think we're a little above 20 basis points in the second quarter. We're close to 80 basis points positive spread in the third quarter. That can fluctuate from quarter to quarter. It depends on what is rolling off and what type of assets. We have a pretty diverse global portfolio. I think it's directionally constructive to kind of incremental value to the firm. Rising rates, as we've talked about, is a net positive. It's probably a modest net positive to our firm because we have a variety of different tools. Some tools and capabilities perform very well in low rate environments, and some perform better in higher rate environments. There's a balance there. Net for the firm that is kind of a positive aspect of where we are today. If we move over to Asia, can you talk about the growth outlook there and how COVID-19 is still impacting, if at all, the sales environment? I would say we're really pleased with the momentum that we're seeing in Asia. We are at the high end from a sales perspective of the range that we had provided in our outlook calls. We're close to 10% year-on-year. I attribute this to a few factors. One, very strong execution on the ground by our team. I would say the introduction of some digital tools and capabilities have been very helpful to us. Two, I think we are well diversified in Asia from a geography, so Japan, ex-Japan, and from a product perspective, and channel perspective, and that's been helpful to us as well. New products have played a role in helping us also drive sales, especially this year in Japan. Last but not least, the higher dollar interest rates are helping our FX product sales in Japan in particular. For all these reasons, we're seeing really good momentum. Clearly, COVID has played out differently in different parts of Asia. Again, I would point to this diversification that we've had that's allowed us really to perform well regardless of how COVID has played out in the region. Shifting gears over to LATAM, the growth rate's been very strong there. I was hoping that you could talk about what are some of the things that have been driving that, particularly in Mexico. How sustainable do you see those kind of growth rates being in 2023? Sure. I think during the pandemic we had pointed to the fact that business fundamentals in LATAM remained very strong. We said that we did not believe that the pandemic years would be lost years. I think that's really been the case here. We expect our PFOs to be $1 billion above the level they were at in 2019, and I think that speaks to the progress we've continued to make despite the pandemic. Obviously, Mexico is a big driver of that, we're on track this year to have a record sales year in Mexico. The work site government business is our flagship business there. We're not only defending that business, I think we're enhancing our value and service proposition there, which is helping us achieve really good persistency. We're also transferring the knowhow and our capabilities into the private work site segment where we see good growth potential. What we're also seeing in Mexico, a couple of things. One, much heightened awareness as to the importance of some of the products and services that we offer, the industry offers really. Two, a flight to quality. I think companies that were there for their customers, at the time when people really needed us to be there. We paid, in LATAM, close to $1 billion in COVID claims, mostly in Mexico. I think customers are rewarding companies that were there, that continued to serve them well and to pay claims. We're seeing the benefit of that in our employee benefits business. The strength of our brand is helping us grow our bancassurance and direct-to-consumer business as well. We're really well-diversified in Mexico from a channel perspective. Again, our flagship business continues to be very strong. That's why we feel good about our growth trajectory going into next year. The fundamentals are really solid there. Next one I have for you is on MetLife Holdings. Have we gotten to a point where cash conversion is improving and it's actually generating more cash than earnings as you're getting capital release from that business? I'd be interested in any commentary on that. Then also, if you have any comments on just the closed block, risk transfer market and the latest on your views there. On the first question, we do have certain products that are still kind of growing in terms of liability, so they have not reached peak. Think like long-term care, even some of our USG and maybe some of our BAs, not all of them. I'd say there's a balance. We're still close to 100%, I'd say, of earnings in terms of free cash flow from that business. It's not quite exceeding yet because of that. On the risk transfer front, I think we've been very transparent around our views here. One is, it's a well-diversified number of natural offsets, well-managed. We have expertise here, and it's been performing very well. I think the team's done a tremendous job. At the same time, we've always taken a third-party view, have had communications with external parties in light of the, I'd say, that growing risk transfer market that has evolved over time, and that's also made us better. It's also given us some insight as to, is there an opportunity for us to potentially appropriately accelerate, I'll say, the release of capital and reserves in some products? There's no burning platform for us, but we recognize that to the extent that we could find something that's value creative, gives us a chance to reallocate capital maybe to some other growing business. Overall, we're very pleased with the performance. Team's done a tremendous job, and I think we're going to maintain our balanced approach to this. The next one I had for you is on the ROE of the overall business. If I go back far enough, I think there was a time that MetLife even talked about ROE targets in the context of where interest rates were. So I wanted to see if there is still some level of connection there. As interest rates go higher potentially, or even just stay elevated where they are, does that change your thinking on cost of capital and where you'd want to hit in terms of ROE? Yeah. I think we've changed the risk profile of the company since probably when we made those comments, which is a good thing, I believe. Look, interest rates are a factor and I think as John mentioned earlier, sort of helpful on a certain extent. I think I would point to a few other things that are also important here as we think about ROE expansion. One, I think clearly the discipline that we've had on the expense front, the efficiency mindset that I described, extremely important in terms of helping us over time when it comes to our ROE targets. I think the other aspect here that is important is our capital deployment. Again, we've been deploying capital in support of new business at high teen IRRs. Which again, MetLife is a big ship, so to speak, so it takes time to move us. Over time, this is also quite helpful. I think those are some of the things that give us confidence, not only in terms of the range, but also I think over time in our ability to move that in a positive direction. I don't know, John, if you- Yeah. I'd just add that, I think as Michel said, interest rates do have an upward bias towards that. Certainly higher end of the range, we'll say. I think there's a number of different factors that could go into kind of growth in ROE. As Michel mentioned, we've been shifting our business mix for quite some time to be less exposed to interest rates, too. It is a modest positive. We still have benefits of that, but we also have a number of businesses that are less. I'll just give you one other metric, just think, our variable annuity book, which is in MetLife Holdings. Well, a component is not an overwhelming component. It's down probably 40% in terms of policy count since 2016. There's a natural runoff of those capital intensive businesses. I think over time as we continue to shift, there is a kind of a pull towards higher ROEs for a number of reasons, not just interest rates, but it's a gradual shift. Understood. Could you remind us on the capital management priorities, how you all view that? Is there anything interesting you see in the M&A pipeline? We think of M&A as a strategic capability. We tend to be opportunistic, but we also are very disciplined in terms of looking at strategic fit at accretive deals that potentially can enhance or accelerate revenue growth. We compare uses of capital in terms of M&A versus other potential uses of capital. That discipline is there. It's a globally sort of standard approach to how we look at deals. We have pointed in the past to sort of certain areas where we might consider adding to what we have, potentially a capability that can help us accelerate growth. We talked about group, and we did the Versant deal, whereas we don't see any major gaps in terms of our product offering. It's a business that we like. Given the right opportunity, we would certainly consider that. We had talked also about asset management, and whereas we're really pleased with the growth trajectory of our asset management business. MIM celebrated its 10th anniversary this year. We're at $160 billion, $170 billion in terms of third-party assets under management. We see a good sort of trajectory to continuing to grow that business organically. If we can accelerate that inorganically, given the right opportunity, it's something we would consider. We recently announced the acquisition of Affirmative Investment Management, which is an ESG really focused asset manager. We think this adds an important capability, a growth opportunity for our asset management business. Those are some of the things. We increased our shareholding in our India JV to 47% this year as well. It's a market that we like. We think long-term prospects are really good for us in India. Again, I think from a capital deployment philosophy perspective, in which consistently said, and I think we've shown and proven that, in the absence of accretive hurdle or risk-adjusted hurdle cleating M&A opportunities, we will return capital to shareholders. I think that philosophy, that approach are unchanged. Got it. Maybe if I could sneak one last one in. On the investment portfolio broadly for MetLife, could you talk about the durability of that portfolio, the durability of your capital ratios, need to expect if we do sort of go down the path of a stress scenario here? I think for us, I suspect for the industry as well, we've learned a lot over the years, the one, I'd say, benefit over the last decade plus has been, the stress testing people do, including us, is pretty robust. We feel comfortable about our position. We always look at different scenarios. We've moved away from predictions or projections to scenarios and how we manage the firm, that's a key capability. From an investment portfolio broadly, just generally speaking, since pre-pandemic, we have been moving out of certain asset classes. We probably repositioned about $5 billion and during the pandemic, a number of 3-ish. We've never really gone back down in quality or up in risk. We've been staying up in quality during that time, that kind of puts us in a position where we feel comfortable about where we are today. Obviously, have to see where things go from here, but overall, we feel good about our capital position. Got it. Okay. We're at time, I'll stop it there. Thank you very much for joining us. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, Alex.