Good morning and welcome to the Fidelis Insurance Group's Q4 2024 earnings conference call. As a reminder, this call is being recorded for replay purposes. Following the conclusion of formal remarks, the management team will host a question-and-answer session, and instructions will be given at that time. With that, I will now turn the call over to Miranda Hunter, Head of Investor Relations. Ms. Hunter, please go ahead. Good morning and welcome to Fidelis Insurance Group's Q4 2024 earnings conference call. With me today are Dan Burrows, our CEO, Allan Decleir, our CFO, and Jonny Strickle, our Chief Actuarial Officer. Before we begin, I'd like to remind everyone that statements made during the call, including the question-and-answer section, may include forward-looking statements. These statements are based upon management's current assessments and assumptions and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties and emerging information developing over time. These risks and uncertainties are described in our press release filed with the SEC via Form 6-K on February 19, 2025, our Q4 Earnings press release, and our most recent annual report on Form 20-F filed with the SEC, as available on our website at fidelisinsurance.com. Although we believe that expectations reflected in forward-looking statements have a reasonable basis when made, we can give no assurance that these expectations will be achieved. Consequently, actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied. For more information, including on the risks and other factors that may affect performance, investors should review the safe harbor regarding forward-looking statements included in our press release filed with the SEC via Form 6-K on February 19, 2025, and our Q4 Earnings press release, both available on our website fidelisinsurance.com, as well as those periodic reports that are filed by us with the SEC from time to time. Management will also make reference to certain non-GAAP measures of financial performance. The reconciliation to US GAAP for each non-GAAP financial measure and our definition of RPI, which is our Renewal Pricing Index, can be found in our current report on Form 6-K furnished to the SEC yesterday, which contains our earnings press release and is available on our website at fidelisinsurance.com. With that, I'll turn the call over to Dan. Thanks, Miranda. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. I wanted to start by reflecting on the year as a whole, where we continued our focus on underwriting and capital management. In underwriting, we identified and seized on high-quality opportunities, expanding our diversified portfolio and delivering significant top-line growth. We remained disciplined in our approach to capital management, making strategic growth investments such as our investment in Lloyd's Syndicate 3123 and initiating our share repurchase and dividend programs, and we onboarded our first partner outside of our cornerstone relationship with The Fidelis Partnership, marking a pivotal step in our growth and diversification strategy. Now, taking a closer look at some of our headline numbers for the year, in 2024, we generated a combined ratio of 99.7%, operating net income of $137 million, and an operating return on average equity of 5.6%. These results clearly do not align with our through-the-cycle expectations and are inclusive of the net adverse prior-year development we announced last week. I'd now like to take a few minutes to address this announcement in more detail. During the Q4, we incurred $287 million in net prior-year development in our Aviation and Aerospace line of business. This relates to business underwritten in 2021 and 2022 that has been impacted by the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. As this litigation has continued to progress through the court system, we have taken opportunities to de-risk our overall exposure by judiciously settling certain claims. To date, we have successfully settled, or are in, various stages of settlement discussions for approximately two-thirds of our total exposure resulting from this unprecedented event. These prudent steps have meaningfully de-risked our exposure to the litigation and helped to provide increased certainty to shareholders. For the remaining one-third, we are reserved on the basis of a probabilistic model of potential court outcomes incorporating recent developments and updated information received. A significant portion of these claims relate to the English trial, which recently concluded, and a court judgment will be rendered in the coming months. Perhaps most importantly, regardless of these outcomes, our continued balance sheet strength will support our strategic growth and capital management initiatives. Turning back to our underwriting performance for 2024, excluding the net adverse prior-year development specific to Aviation and Aerospace, we would have exceeded our long-term return on average equity target. We delivered on our growth objectives with strong retention rates and continued diversification through new business. We grew gross premiums written 23% to $4.4 billion and achieved RPIs across our portfolio of 111% for the full year. Growth was primarily driven by our Direct Property, Marine, and Structured Credit insurance portfolios, as well as our Reinsurance book. Our Direct Property gross premiums written increased 30% as we continued to see opportunities to deploy targeted capacity and leverage our lead positioning. Reinsurance premiums grew 40% as we capitalized on favorable market conditions. Consistent with prior years, our portfolio split remains approximately 80% Specialty Insurance and 20% Reinsurance. These results underscore our ability to capitalize on strong opportunities across most of our key classes and secure preferential rates, terms, and conditions as a leader in a verticalized market. At the same time, we maintain a disciplined and nimble approach to underwriting. Where we've seen more competition in certain lines of business, we've held our discipline and will not support business that does not meet our underwriting hurdles. Moving to investments, we delivered net investment income of $191 million for the year, an increase of 59% from 2023. This was driven by an increase in investable assets and a higher earned yield on our fixed income portfolio and cash balances. The portfolio is well positioned as we enter 2025, and these results underscore our strategic focus on optimizing our investment portfolio within our risk appetite. Active capital management remains a cornerstone of our strategy, and Allan will go into more detail shortly. In 2024, we remained focused on deploying our capital when we see the most attractive risk-reward opportunities, and our strong capital position enabled us to opportunistically return excess capital to our shareholders. During the year, we returned $152 million of excess capital through our dividend and share buyback programs. Finally, before handing it over to Allan, I want to briefly discuss the impact of the recent California wildfires. First and foremost, I want to extend our thoughts and sympathies to everyone who's been impacted. The January wildfires, fueled by greater-than-average vegetation, dry conditions, and high winds, resulted in unprecedented industry losses for this peril. As announced last week, based on an insured industry loss estimate of $40 billion-$50 billion, we expect our catastrophe losses related to this event to be in the range of $160 million-$190 million, net of expected recoveries, reinstatement premiums, and net of tax. Events like this highlight the increasing impact of climate change. In 2024, natural catastrophe losses made it the sixth most costly year in insurance history. The escalating frequency of these natural disasters underscores the essential role of insurers and reinsurers and emphasizes the necessity for premium rates and coverage terms and conditions to accurately reflect the evolving risk landscape. In summary, we closed out 2024 with a resilient, diversified portfolio and strong capital position. Later in the call, I will offer more insights into January renewals and the opportunities we anticipate for 2025. However, first, I will turn it over to Allan, who will provide an overview of our financial performance. Thanks, Dan, and good morning, everyone. As you saw in our 2024 year-end earnings release, we are reporting our results under newly defined operating segments: Insurance and Reinsurance. This change ensures that our financial reporting is aligned with our internal management structure and decision-making process and aligns more closely with peer reporting. Our new Insurance segment includes our previously reported Bespoke and Specialty segments, both of which remain a critical component of our value proposition. Before going into our quarterly results in detail, I'd like to highlight our 2024 annual results. As Dan mentioned, we are pleased with the progress we made on executing our strategic objectives. Our operating net income for 2024 was $137 million, or $1.18 per diluted common share. We closed the year with a diluted book value per share, including AOCI, of $21.79, which increased by 5.3% from the end of 2023. Our total capital is $3 billion, while having returned $152 million to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Now, taking a closer look at our quarterly results, we continue to deliver excellent top-line growth with gross premiums written of $954 million in the quarter, an increase of 22% versus the same quarter last year. In the Insurance segment, gross premiums written increased by 19%, or $146 million in the quarter. We continue to see high retention levels across key classes and added significant new business. Meanwhile, in the Reinsurance segment, although Q4 is seasonally our lowest quarter for premiums written, market dynamics remained favorable, and we continued to find new opportunities to support our diversified portfolio. We grew gross premiums written to $32 million as market discipline around rates remained. In the Q4, our net premiums written decreased by $71 million versus 2023, primarily as a result of an increase in ceded premiums written of $145 million for our most recent multi-year Herbie Re catastrophe bond, which we publicly announced at the end of December. Our net premiums earned increased by 25% compared to the Q4 of 2023, driven by growth of our gross premiums written in the current and prior year periods. Turning to the combined ratio of 128% for the quarter, I'll break down the components in more detail. Our net adverse prior-year development was $270 million in the quarter compared to net favorable development of $15 million in the same period last year. As noted last week in our press release, the Insurance segment had adverse development in our Aviation and Aerospace line of business of $287 million, or 45.3 points of the loss ratio for the quarter. The remainder of the Insurance segment experienced net favorable development of $6 million. The Reinsurance segment had net favorable development of $11 million in the Q4, driven by benign prior-year attritional experience and positive development on catastrophe losses. Our net adverse prior-year development for the entirety of 2024 was $125 million. This included favorable prior-year development in nearly all lines of business, offset by the adverse prior-year development in Aviation and Aerospace. The Q4 catastrophe and large loss ratio of 21%, or $133 million of losses, compares to 19.9%, or $101 million in the prior-year period. Of the Q4 catastrophe and large losses, Insurance accounted for $83 million and Reinsurance $51 million, with the majority of the loss related to Hurricanes Milton and Helene. The Q4 was particularly benign in terms of attritional losses, and our attritional loss ratio improved to 17.3% in the quarter compared to 20.4% in the prior-year period. Continuing with trends we have seen in the year across both segments, our full-year attritional loss ratio improved to 23.2%, which compared to 25.8% in 2023. The improvement reflects our portfolio optimization over the last several years. Turning to expenses, policy acquisition expenses from third parties were 33.6 points of the combined ratio for the quarter compared to 23.7 points in the prior-year period. The increase was primarily driven by acquisition costs in our Insurance segment due to higher variable commissions in certain lines of business and changes in the mix of business written and ceded. Our full-year policy acquisition expenses were 31.8 points in Insurance and 23.6 points in Reinsurance. The acquisition costs for the year are more reflective of our expectations regarding how policy acquisition expenses should run for our current book of business. The Fidelis Partnership commissions accounted for 9.8 points of the combined ratio for the quarter. This is net of a reversal of all variable profit commissions that had been accrued for TFP through the Q3 of 2024. For 2024, there is no profit commission payable to The Fidelis Partnership as the underwriting profits, as defined in the framework agreement, did not meet the required hurdle. This reflects our alignment of interest with TFP and demonstrates that the framework agreement is operating as intended. Finally, our general and administrative expenses were $24 million versus $26 million in the Q4 of 2023. The decrease in expense was driven by lower variable compensation accruals in the current year. Our net investment income increased to $51 million for the Q4 of 2024 compared with $39 million in the prior-year period, reflecting a higher earned yield on our cash and fixed income portfolio, as well as an increase in investable assets compared to the prior-year period. During the quarter, we sold $600 million of securities with an average book yield of 4.2%, resulting in a realized loss of $5 million. We also reinvested $779 million into new fixed income securities in the quarter with an average purchase yield of approximately 4.8% as we continued to reposition our overall investment portfolio. We also invested $200 million into a diversified hedge fund portfolio. The hedge fund investment represents 4% of our total investable assets and is part of our ongoing strategy within our risk appetite to generate superior risk-adjusted diversified investment returns and enhanced shareholder value. At December 31, the average rating of fixed income securities remains very high at AA minus, with a book yield of 4.9%. Average duration is consistent with the Q3 at 2.8 years. Turning to tax, the Bermuda government has enacted a 15% corporate income tax starting in 2025. As a reminder, we are carrying a deferred tax asset valued at $90 million in respect of the Bermuda Economic Transition Adjustment, which is expected to be substantially utilized within 10 years as an offset against any Bermuda corporate income tax that is payable. Consistent with 2024, we remain committed to maintaining a strong balance sheet while returning excess capital to shareholders. Our outwards Reinsurance program is a very important tool in our capital management strategy. At January 1st, we renewed the majority of our outwards Reinsurance protection. Significantly, we have successfully renewed our 20% whole account quota share agreement with Travelers for the third consecutive year. As mentioned earlier, we issued a new tranche of our Herbie Re catastrophe bond, securing $375 million in collateralized Reinsurance protection for named storm and earthquake-covered events in the U.S. for a multi-year period. Finally, we have continued with our $0.10 quarterly common dividend in the Q1. We have $145 million remaining under our authorized repurchase plan. Our strong capital position will enable us to pursue accretive growth opportunities across our portfolio while continuing to take an opportunistic approach to share repurchases. In conclusion, we remain committed to our strategic initiatives and are confident in our ability to navigate the evolving market conditions. I will now turn it back to Dan for additional remarks. Thank you, Allan. Looking ahead, we continue to see areas of opportunity across our portfolio. We are focused on maintaining our disciplined, agile approach to underwriting and leveraging our scale, positioning, and deep relationships to strategically pursue the opportunities that align within our risk appetite. And importantly, as a leader in this versatile market, we are able to take a first look at business opportunities and achieve differentiated rates, terms, and conditions. Delving deeper into the dynamics within our underwriting segments, in Insurance, we continue to build on our established book of Specialty Business. In property, our lead position, coupled with our gross line size and underwriting approach, enables us to successfully navigate the market and capitalize on areas of opportunity. We continue to maintain rate discipline with an RPI of 107% for business bound at January 1st, and are still seeing strong retention levels in the book. We continue to differentiate ourselves through a diversified market, and the performance of this book demonstrates our selective approach to how we deploy capacity across this portfolio and manage catastrophe exposures. In Marine, we take a multi-class approach, leveraging our line across the portfolio to match underwriting appetite, taking advantage of the more attractive pricing in areas such as Marine War and Liability, while maintaining our discipline in Marine Hull where rating is under more pressure. We are continuing to see new business opportunities through geographic diversification and strong demand for capacity as fleet growth continues. In Aviation, we continue to see capacity-driven rate pressure and take a cautious approach. Our focus is on maintaining underwriting discipline and leveraging our line size and package offering to differentiate ourselves in the market. In Structured Credit, we continue to work with both repeats and new clients, and following a strong end to the year, our pipeline for the Q1 is tracking prior period. Turning to Reinsurance, our strategy remains consistent with prior years as we seek to take advantage of opportunities to optimize our portfolio in line with our risk appetite. At 1/1, where we renew approximately one-third of our book, we saw strong retention rates in our core clients and continue to capitalize on new diversifying business opportunities. We are able to achieve an RPI of 103% across the portfolio, maintaining the significant improvements to price, terms, and conditions, including attachment points achieved in the prior years. We continue to focus on higher-tier clients and to deploy capacity based on our view of risk. As we look ahead to 2025, we remain committed to pursuing accretive growth opportunities across our portfolio. Through our strong relationship with The Fidelis Partnership, we continue to identify and leverage new distribution channels and markets, leverage our lead positions, as well as create opportunities for cross-selling products. Additionally, as announced last quarter, we continue to explore opportunities to form new partnerships in highly accretive and profitable business segments that diversify our portfolio under capital efficient. Our objective is to evaluate and capitalize on new opportunities that provide long-term capacity for best-in-class underwriters, ultimately delivering value to our shareholders. Our first partnership, as noted earlier, is with Euclid Mortgage, where we will provide capacity on a Reinsurance basis. Effective January 1st, 2025, this partnership is estimated to generate approximately $35 million in gross premiums written in 2025. Today, we are pleased to announce that we added another component to our relationship with Travelers, taking a small capped quota share of their cyber book. While this quota share may not be material from a premium perspective, it exemplifies our ability to successfully onboard new partners. These partnerships are a testament to the effectiveness of our right of first offer and binder agreement processes with The Fidelis Partnership, which demonstrates that the relationship is working as intended. It is important to reemphasize that the hurdle for any new partnership is high and must reach through the cycle targets. Together with our partners, we anticipate achieving approximately 10% growth in gross premiums written across our portfolio in 2025. This growth target underscores our unwavering commitment to enhancing our market presence and expanding our reach through innovative and strategic collaborations. After years of compound rate improvement across most lines of business, we continue to see attractive opportunities for growth and excellent margin across our book. Our long-term through-the-cycle targets continue to aim for mid to high 80s combined ratio and target operating return on average equity of 13%-15% through the cycle. Our strategic initiatives and disciplined approach to underwriting and capital management are designed to support these objectives, ensuring that we remain competitive and resilient in the face of market fluctuations. With that, Operator, we will now open it for questions. Thank you. We will now begin the question and answer session. To ask a question, you may press star, then the number one on your telephone keypad. If you're using a speakerphone, please pick up your handset before pressing any keys. To withdraw your question, you may press a star, then the number two. Before we take your questions, I'd like to kindly ask everyone to please limit your questions to one primary question along with a single follow-up, and if you have any further questions, please rejoin the queue. With that, our first question comes from the line of Matt Carletti with Citizens JMP. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks. Good morning. Dan, I was hoping to ask you a question about, I know it's a Q1 event, but just about kind of the wildfires high level. Specifically, as you kind of assess the event, were there any lessons learned? I mean, the number looked like, quite frankly, smaller than we might expect for Fidelis at a tail event. So I'm not trying to imply it was a bad outcome, but just were there any lessons learned in that sort of tail event that you and the MGU might approach underwriting differently? Or is that the sort of outcome that we should expect for when you guys look to have exposure to what I think will be viewed as a tail wildfire event? Yeah, thanks, Matt. Thanks for dialing in. A great question. So obviously, the recent wildfires were a significant event for the industry, four times larger than the previous largest wildfire loss. And we think the estimated return period is somewhere around the 1 in 500. So of course, insurers and reinsurers should be paying that loss. That's what we're here for. When we look at the loss on a net basis, it's well within our overall cat budget for the year, and it's well within our expectations for an event of this magnitude. So when we think about the Reinsurance portfolio, it's performed incredibly well over the last two years. Loss ratios have been sub-20. I think, in fact, in 2023, it was 9%, and in 2024, it was 15%. So I think we're operating in a robust market. We've seen improvements in terms and conditions. We operate very much on a gross to net line size. So as I say, it's within expectations. We believe that this event will have a positive impact on pricing, on the trajectory of pricing. I was actually talking to one of our Direct Property underwriters earlier in the week, and on high net worth, he's seen an increase in base rates on some new deals from like $1 to $3.5. And we're seeing improvements in coverage, sub-limits for water and smoke damage. So the strength of our business is always to look at opportunities that come out of losses or events or circumstance, and we'll continue to do that throughout the year. I think what we learn from this is actually we're operating as intended. The gross to net line size through Reinsurance purchasing is working as intended. Okay, great. That's helpful. Thank you. And then if I could just a quick follow-up, Allan, you mentioned about, obviously, in the release, how kind of no performance fees for 2024 given the results. I know in certain circumstances, I think in certain circumstances under the framework agreement, there can be a kind of a deficit carry-forward mechanism for a few years if it reaches a certain level. I guess short question is, is there any carry-forward impact to 2025 or beyond from the 2024 results, or should we just expect it to be encapsulated in 2024? Yeah, Matt. Hi, it's Allan. Thanks for the question. Great question. As I said in my prepared remarks, the profit commission for the TFP for 2024 is zero, and the framework agreement is working as intended. Specifically, the binder agreement mentioned a deficit carry-forward. We had a 99.7% combined ratio for the year, so essentially there is no deficit to carry forward into future years. But we certainly, as we go through 2025, the wildfires and others will impact the profit commission. So again, we'll accrue that quarter to quarter based on underwriting results for that quarter. Okay, great. Thanks for the comment. [crosstalk] Sorry, to jump in, but I just think what it does do is demonstrate the alignment between us and the TFP that actually our results are very much aligned. So they're showing it as well. So I think that's, as Allan said, it shows it's working exactly as intended. Yeah, that makes perfect sense and agree. So thank you. Appreciate it. And your next question comes from the line of Meyer Shields with KBW. Please go ahead. Great. Thanks so much. I guess sticking with wildfires for a second, Dan, are you anticipating any subrogation recoveries either within or beyond the estimate that you put out? Yeah, I think, Meyer, it's too early to really go into any detail on that, but normally in this sort of event, you would expect to see that happening. So as and when we can update you, we will. Okay. No, that's perfect. The second question, and I don't know if this is significant or not, but it looks like net investment income was actually a little lower in the Q4 than the third. And I was wondering if you could talk through what drove that. Hi, Meyer. It's Allan. The net investment income that we're—the returns we're making are consistent with the Q3. And what you're seeing is that our amount of investable assets were relatively flat in Q4 versus Q3. Operating cash flows, there's obviously variability quarter to quarter. We hope to improve the amount of investable assets going forward, obviously. But in Q4, they were flat with Q3. So again, the returns are positive. We're pleased with our portfolio. We managed to reinvest some of the proceeds in some higher-yielding securities, so we expect going forward to have optimized that portfolio. Okay. So there's no unusual need for cash right now. I guess that's really the crux of the question. Sorry, Matt. No, there's nothing, sorry, Meyer. Nothing unusual in there. Of course, as we go through 2025, cash flows will be a prime consideration. Okay. Perfect. Thanks so much. Your next question comes from the line of Leon Cooperman with Omega Family Office. Please go ahead. Thank you. I need a little help here. I'm not an insurance expert, but it seems to me your stock is ridiculously mispriced because what you're saying is over a cycle you expect to do a 13%-15% ROE. So we use 14% applied to 31 to $21.79 book value. We're seeing over the cycle we're selling it around 4.4 times the rigs. I assume we're in a hard market now, so you expect to earn more than 12%-13%-14% on equity, 13%-15%. So I'm assuming we're selling at around less than 4 times earnings. Is that a reasonable guesstimate? Yeah, I think you are exactly right. I think we would absolutely agree that we see the business is undervalued. As soon as Russia-Ukraine last year, we would have exceeded our through-the-cycle plan. We did exceed our through-the-cycle plan in 2023. And while the industry has not had a great start to the year, we're very confident in our through-the-cycle target. So while the wildfire hasn't been the ideal start, we still think we can deliver on that, and it's entirely possible to exceed the through-the-cycle target. Yeah, we agree. [crosstalk] Sorry, Dan. What is the amount of excess capital we have currently, would you guess, roughly? Yeah, we don't advise that detail on these sorts of calls. Okay, so let me ask you this question. You have $145 million left on your repurchase. Would you be willing to spend it all on stock repurchase all this year if the opportunity arose and the stock was at this price? Yeah, I think regardless of the outcomes on the remaining exposures, we have a strong capital position, and we're able to do both things. We're able to profitably grow the underwriting portfolio as well as execute on our strategic capital objectives and that obviously includes a share repurchase so it's very accretive, and we'll do that as and when it's appropriate. Okay, well, let me just say this. From an outsider looking in and looking at your business and the environment, I think the best thing you could do with your shareholders' money is buy back your stock at a big discount to book. Thank you, Lee. We certainly agree that the company is undervalued. All the best. Thank you. Thank you, then. Your next question comes from the line of Robert Cox with Goldman Sachs. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks. Yeah, I just wanted to ask on the Aviation and Aerospace reserves. I'm curious how much did the outcomes of the cases where you're in the various stages of settlement discussions change your view on the remaining one-third of the exposure where you're not in those discussions? So I guess I'm just asking how much did the reserves increase on the remaining one-third? Yeah, thanks, Rob. It's a really important question, and quite right, we spend a bit of time on that now. So I'd just like to outline what we've actually done. Obviously, we made a press release last week and made further statements on the call a bit earlier. So reminding you of what we've done, we've meaningfully de-risked our overall exposure to the ongoing Russian aviation litigation. And we've actually settled or are in various stages of settlement for two-thirds of the total exposure. So as you mentioned, the one-third that's left, we're holding reserves on a probabilistic model, which is based on a range of possible court outcomes. Now, regardless of these outcomes, our continued balance sheet strength will support both our strategic growth and our capital management objectives for the year. As I said earlier, without Russia-Ukraine, we would have exceeded our long-term through the cycle target for 2024. But why now? What's actually happened? There's no single piece of information, but what we have seen in the legal process, litigation has progressed in the last quarter. We've seen summary judgments in the U.S. As we all know, the English trial wrapped up mid-February, and it's a judgment expected in the coming months. And then the Irish trial is also well progressed. So this new information has resulted in an opportunity for both sides to come to the table, and we certainly saw settlement activity accelerate over that period. Now, we have chosen to judiciously settle certain exposures, and that de-risk uncertainty around potential outcomes narrows those outcomes. And that's really inherent in complex litigation cases. We can't discuss quantum. Since we're still in live exposures going through litigation, we can't really give further comment on that. But I think what we would say is, we remind you, this is not a casualty exposure. It's a discrete set of cases which, once resolved, we won't need to come back to. So again, I'd just say, probably I'd point to, regardless of the core outcomes and the remaining third, we have a continued balance sheet strength that supports strategic growth and capital management objectives in 2025. Got it. Thank you. And just as a follow-up on growth, appreciate the guidance for 10% GPW growth in 2025. I think the net premium growth has been a little bit lighter as you guys have sort of increased the ceding ratio. How should we think about net growth in 2025? Hi, it's Allan. Thanks for the question, and it's a very good one. As we all know, there's a lag to earn versus written. And what we also have to be clear on is that the assumed business that we write sometimes is written on a different basis than the outwards Reinsurance that we purchase. As we've mentioned, outwards Reinsurance purchasing is an important part of our DNA, and the timing of when we purchase the outwards doesn't always match the assumed business, and a perfect example of how that happened this quarter in Q4, where we purchased a Herbie Re multi-year contract bond that covers up to four years for U.S. quake and named storm. So that is a four-year policy or up to four years in certain for the most part that we wrote in Q4 that will earn out over the next four years, whereas the assumed business is primarily one-year business. So another way to answer that is to say that when we look to 2025, our net premium earned because of the lag and when things are earned is going to grow approximately between 15% and 20%, whereas the written will grow 10%. Okay. Thank you. If I could sneak one more in. On the new Insurance segment, could you help us think about policy acquisition expense ratio, loss ratio? I think you guys had given us sort of guidelines for the other segments in the past, and I was hoping you could walk us through how to think about this segment. Thanks, Rob. It's Allan again. As we've stated in prior quarters, we are focused on Combined Ratio. And while the components are important, over the long-term targets for our Combined Ratio are mid- to high 80s%. If you look at the Insurance segment alone, the acquisition costs are, as I said in my remarks, in the low 30s%. Then we have to add in the loss ratio expectations on both an attritional and a CAT basis, as well as commissions to the TFP and G&A, which all add up to the mid- to low 80s%. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Mike Zaremski with BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead. Hey, thanks. Maybe just stepping back, kind of if you can kind of comment on the overall competitive environment in some of your larger businesses. I know there's been, I did hop on a few minutes later. I'm not sure if you talked about the RPI stats, but there's been a lot of talk about some deceleration, especially on the property side, from excellent pricing levels, obviously, but curious kind of what you all are seeing in your book, and then lastly, same topic, but on the Bespoke segment, I know there's, I don't know, maybe you can share how you think about pricing. Maybe it's kind of we should gauge credit spreads, just kind of corporate credit spreads to see kind of how pricing is, but any comments there would be helpful too since you're growing into that. Thanks. Thanks very much for the question. I'll take the first part and then pass it on. So yeah, look, I think the market is benefiting from better rate terms and conditions, which have all compounded year on year for the last five to six years. We were able to grow 19% in 2023, 23% this year. The drivers of that, really, when we look at the Direct Property, Reinsurance, and some other specialty lines, the RPIs for the year, overall for the full year across the whole portfolio, were 111%. And in Q4, that's about 106%. So as you know, we use our scale. We use Reinsurance to grow our growth line. That gives us leverage as a leader in a verticalized market. We have package offerings, so we'll tend to blend different lines of business within the major segments to make sure that we get the best terms and conditions that we see deals first. So I don't think we have necessarily the same outcome as others in the market because we are a leader and we are using leverage to get sort of better terms and conditions. When I think specifically about some of the drivers, Property D&F has grown a lot. It grew 30% last year, year -over -year, and the RPIs in that book for the quarter were 107%, and for the full year was 115%. And we're looking at the full year RPI for 2024, it was 117%, so not much difference for the full year. Obviously, these are all pre-wildfire. As I said earlier, we are seeing some pricing impact and coverage improvements since the wildfire events early in January. So we believe our growth targets are realistic in this market. I think there'll be more balance between some of the specialty lines. We write over 100 or just around 100 lines of business, and we see the best technical margin across the portfolio that we've seen in recent years. So we're optimistic, and we're still excited about the opportunities we see. I would think property directs will grow in the low to mid-teens across 2025. We'll see a lower number for Reinsurance, but the Reinsurance has performed incredibly well. I said earlier, the loss ratios are kind of sub-20, sub-15 for the last two years. So that's how we think about the pricing. It's in a good place, very strong technical margin across all lines of business. Hey, it's Jonny here. In terms of the bespoke pricing, I mean, that's really something we look at on a deal-by-deal basis, comparing the metrics of the deal against our long-term profitability hurdles. Just as a reminder there, it's really not just the risk transfer that the clients are getting. It's either giving some capital relief or facilitating a transaction as well. That helps to hold pricing up. Across those products over the last quarter or so, we're still seeing lots of attractive opportunities to deploy capital. Got it. Thank you. That's very helpful, and switching gears to Reinsurance a bit, curious if you feel the California events could kind of move the market a bit as the year progresses and maybe related. Are you hearing or seeing any primary insurers who have their Reinsurance towers impacted potentially looking to buy some additional coverage to kind of top off their Reinsurance towers that were utilized from the California devastating wildfires? Thanks. Yeah, great question. We believe this event will have a positive impact on the trajectory of pricing for the remainder of the year. As I said earlier, I said a couple of times, we have seen some improvement already on the direct side. As deals come to market, we think there will be a positive impact. I think it's as simple as that. It is a significant event for the industry, unprecedented, so that has to have an impact. Our Reinsurance book, as I said, has performed really, really well, so we'll look for opportunities, and we'll execute on those as and when they happen. We continue to strengthen our business ties with our core clients. We want to be relevant. So if they are coming to market with new demand, we're there for them, and as I say, we'll execute. Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Alex Scott with Barclays. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. First one I have for you is on the planes in Russia with the conflict ongoing. You sort of framed for us, I think, pretty well the potential risk still from some of the things that are ongoing around court cases. I'd be interested if you could frame what happens if there is a ceasefire, if the planes are returned. Could you walk us through the way that I guess it would be subrogation maybe? What would that look like? Yeah. Again, I think first and foremost, we'd all like to see an end to this conflict, a peaceful end with a satisfactory outcome for all parties. I think it's too early to think about what the absolute outcome will be. I would imagine if the sanctions are lifted, it would make salvage a bit easier to get your assets. But I'm afraid when we think about salvage, it is part of the ongoing settlement discussions. So we really can't go into detail on that. But I think overall, we'd like to see an end, and we think it would just give access to assets if the sanctions are lifted. I guess I appreciate you don't want to comment on the lawsuit specifically, but let's say not asking you to comment on what maybe a resolution could look like to that conflict. But if it did occur, if there was a resolution and the planes were available and you could do what you want with them, is it fair to say that you get pretty full recovery of the losses that you've booked at this point? I'm just trying to understand high level. If that's something that happens in the next few months, what could that look like for you? Separate from. Yeah. Unfortunately, as I said, we still have live exposure going through litigation, so we just can't comment on it. And salvage subrogation is part of those discussions, so we just can't comment any further. Got it. Okay. All right. So maybe going back to the California wildfire, can you help us think through maybe the split between Insurance, Reinsurance of the expected loss? And maybe as a separate piece of it, are there opportunities that you look to execute on on the other side of this as there's dislocation in this market? Yeah. I think the split of loss we'd say about three-quarters of it is Reinsurance, and the remainder is the direct book, which is what you'd expect in a loss of this size. Yeah. And as I said, we're certainly seeing some things come through on the direct side and the Reinsurance side, and we believe it will have a positive impact on the rest of the year. But it is what the Reinsurance market is here for. And I would say that our loss is well within our CAT budget for the year and well within our expectations for an event of this magnitude. The truth of the book has performed really, really well over the last couple of years, and there's been a significant increase in pricing, attachment points, and improvements in coverage terms and conditions. So that's been maintained. So we look forward to executing on opportunities. We see some flow, but this is very much within expectation for us. Got it. Okay. Thank you. Thanks for the question. Your next question comes from the line of Peter Knudsen with Evercore. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I hear you guys on the continued 13%-15% ROE through the cycle longer term. I think right in 2024, you guys had provided sort of a near-term outlook of 14%-16%. And so I'm just wondering, could you share maybe some thoughts on your expectations specifically for 2025 within that longer-term target and where you guys potentially see yourselves shaking out relative to that target? Thanks. Yeah. Thanks very much for the question. Look, it's still early in 2025, as you know. We're not even through the Q1 yet. So I think the wildfires not the ideal start for the industry, but we certainly have a manageable loss. We see plenty of opportunity for the rest of the year. And given the underwriting track record of the business, the pricing environment we're actually in, which is very positive, we find ourselves in a place where we have good opportunities and we can add profitable business. So we are confident in our through-the-cycle targets, very much so. That continues year on year. Okay. Great. Thanks, and then for my follow-up back to the Russia-Ukraine aviation situation, I'm just wondering, would you guys be able to share what sort of industry insured loss you guys are considering that's embedded in the reserves for that? Yeah. It's Jonny here. I think that's a really difficult question for this type of event. Obviously, it's not gone through to judgment, so we haven't had an outcome to base it on. And it's party-by-party reaching settlement with the underlying leasing companies. We don't know what value others have settled at. We don't know to what extent they've settled. It's a really difficult question to answer at the moment. Yeah. They're standing out. I'm not sure we ever will. So I think that's the best we can answer that question. Yeah. Understood. Thanks so much. Your next question comes from the line of Andrew Andersen with Jefferies. Please go ahead. Hey, good morning. You mentioned the operating ROE through the cycle, but could we maybe touch on the target combined ratio of mid to high 80s? It was higher in 2024. It feels like in 2025 with wildfires, it'll be elevated as well. If we think of the RPI is coming in a little bit, it just feels like that's becoming a little bit more challenging to hit. Is that still a target, and do you see yourself getting closer to that in 2026 and 2027? Yeah. I think the market is benefiting from a really good rates rating environment, good technical margin, all those compound increases, everything we've said. We're confident they're hitting our targets. That hasn't changed. Combined ratio kind of mid- to high 80s%. If we think about where we would have been ex-Russia-Ukraine this year, we would have exceeded that. So we were on plan last year. We'd have done well this year. So we've got a manageable loss for the wildfires. It's still early in the year, but we still think that we're confident through the cycle targets, which include obviously those combined ratios mid- to high 80s%. Thanks. And is there any reserve study seasonality in the first half of the year we should be thinking about? It's Jonny here. Just to give a bit of background about where most of our PYD comes from in terms of us being a short-tail buyer of business, it's really from the loss experience as it comes through rather than any change in underlying assumptions. So if you take Russia-Ukraine out last year, for example, we had favorable prior development overall and favorable prior development in almost every quarter. And that was really driven by a benign claims environment, i.e., we had fewer claims coming through than our assumptions made allowance for. I think that's quite different. So if you look at someone like a casualty player, where there typically it's the knock-on to changes in your reserving assumptions through those reviews that moves the reserves around, and that's not really as applicable to us. That being said, we do look at the assumptions once a year. We tend to look at them around Q3. When we did that last year, there was nothing really material coming out of that exercise. Okay. You mentioned Q3, but if I look at first half of 2024, there was quite a bit of PYD. I guess that's just related to weather activity that would have occurred in the second half of the year. So would it be fair to say if there's second-half weather events, you kind of look at them again in the first half of the subsequent year? Yeah. Although this year is favorable PYD, and it was more on the attritional side, so it was just a fewer claims being reported through that were smaller relating to the prior accident year than we'd made allowance for. It wasn't really driven by movements in the reserves we had for large events from the prior. Okay. Thank you. Once again, if you would like to ask a question, simply press the star followed by the number one on your telephone keypad. Your next question comes from the line of Pablo Singzon with JP Morgan. Please go ahead. Hi, good morning. I appreciate you can't say much about the aviation reserves, but would it be fair to assume that both higher probabilities and higher expected claim payouts under the various scenarios you're considering drove the reserve addition? And then as a follow-up, does the reserve addition cover the two-thirds being settled or already settled, as well as the one-third still being litigated? Hey, it's Jonny here. Thanks for the question. The majority of the PYD impact in the Q4 was through derisking, so it was through the settlement discussions and moving through that process. Obviously, as we get new information, as Dan alluded to, as the trials progressed over the period, we feed that into the model, so there was also an element of the model increasing on the other third, but the primary reason for the increase was derisking and looking to settle out exposures on the two-thirds. Okay. Gotcha. And then second question, the intellectual property book, I think that caused some issues maybe one or two quarters ago. Any notable development there, and are you fully off the risk at this point? Thank you. Hi, Pablo. It's Allan. There's no material development on our intellectual property book. As a reminder, there were a handful of treaties still out there on that book of business, but it's performing as we expect. But again, we're constantly monitoring that, and we look at the activity that's there. But right now, there's no material change. And when are you fully off the risk? Because those are in runoff, right? They're not being renewed. But when are you off the risk there, Allan? It's Jonny here. They run off up to around 2027, although there's always the possibility that a transaction would take us off risk earlier than that. Gotcha. Thank you. Yeah. It's Dan here, but there's a very limited number of deals outstanding, so less than a handful. Yeah, l ess than a handful, yeah. All right. Thank you. And that concludes today's question and answer session. So I'd like to turn it back to Dan Burrows for closing remarks. Thanks very much. I'd like to take a moment to thank our partners and our employees for their immense contributions. Our team is our greatest competitive advantage. And without them, our success would not be possible. So thank you to the Fidelis team. We appreciate everyone joining us today. And if there are any additional questions, we are here to take your calls. Thank you for your ongoing support. And I'll now turn it over to the operator to wrap up the call. Please enjoy the remainder of your day. Thank you. That concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating with me now.