Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Q2 2023 Skyward Specialty Earnings Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question-and-answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to press star one one on your telephone. You will hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. To withdraw your question, please press star one one again. Please be advised that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker today, Natalie Schoolcraft, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead. Thank you, Gigi. Good morning, everyone, and welcome to our Second Quarter 2023 Earnings Conference Call. Today, I am joined by our Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Robinson, and Chief Financial Officer, Mark Haushild. We will begin the call today with our prepared remarks, and then we will open the lines for questions. Our comments today may include forward-looking statements, which by their nature, involve a number of risk factors and uncertainties, which may affect future financial performance. Such risk factors may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in our projections or forward-looking statements. These types of factors are discussed in our press release, as well as in our 10-K that was previously filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Financial schedules containing reconciliations of certain non-GAAP measures, along with other supplemental financial information, are included as part of our press release and available on our website, skywardinsurance.com, under the Investors section. I will turn the call over to Skyward's CEO, Andrew Robinson. Andrew? Thank you, Natalie. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. Q2 was another excellent quarter. We continue to execute our Rule Our Niche strategy and to deliver solid financial performance. We reported strong underwriting results in the face of a high level of industry-wide cat losses in the quarter. Specifically, gross written premiums grew approximately 29% in the quarter. The quality and breadth of our growth is a testament to the high level of execution across our underwriting divisions. We continue to benefit from broadly favorable market conditions, as 60% of our writings in the quarter were in Excess in Surplus and non-admitted lines, and 58% were short-tail lines of business. Our combined ratio of 92% for the quarter included only three and a half points of cat losses, despite industry-incurred record convective storm losses. Our pure rate increased to double digits this quarter and continues to be materially above our loss cost inflation estimates. New business pricing remains in line with our in-force book. Our ongoing investments in talent acquisition and development has been instrumental in driving our success. We continue to add A-plus talent across the organization, including new teams and products in our Surety, Professional Lines, and Captives divisions. With that, I'll turn the call over to Mark to discuss our financial results in greater detail. Mark? Thank you, Andrew. For the quarter, we reported net income of $19.5 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, compared to $5.1 million, or $0.16 per diluted share, for the same period a year ago. On an adjusted operating basis, we reported net income of $16 million or $0.42 per diluted share, compared to $16.4 million or $0.50 per diluted share, the same period a year ago. In the quarter, gross written premiums grew by approximately 29%. Every underwriting division grew in the quarter. Transactional E&S, Global Property & Agriculture, Professional Lines, Sureties, and Captives were each up over 20%. Net written premiums grew approximately 13% to approximately $214 million in the quarter, compared to $189 million in the second quarter of 2022. Second quarter of 2023, net retention was approximately 51% versus 58% second quarter of 2022. The decrease in the net retention was driven by our mix of business and considerable growth in Global Property & Agriculture, where we have a lower retention. As a reminder, we expect our net premium retention to be lower in the first half of the year and higher in the second half of the year. For the full year, we anticipate that our retention will be slightly higher compared to 2022. The second quarter adjusted combined ratio of 92.2% includes an improved accident year non-cat loss ratio and an improved expense ratio compared to the second quarter of 2022. The 2.1 point improvement in the current accident year non-cat loss ratio to 60.7% was driven by the changing mix of business and runoff of higher loss ratio exited business. We had no prior accident year loss development in the quarter. During the quarter, catastrophe losses were $6.8 million and accounted for 3.5 points on the combined ratio, resulting from three large convective storm losses in the South and our Global Property and Transactional E&S divisions, compared to the second quarter of 2022, which was not impacted by cat losses. The expense ratio improved one point compared to the second quarter of 2022, driven by a higher earned premium base. We continue to invest in the business and expect a higher run rate in the back half of the year. Partially offsetting the operating expense ratio improvement were slightly higher acquisition costs, driven by our change in business mix. Turning to our investment results. Net investment income was $8.6 million in the quarter, down $1.9 million compared to the same period in 2022. Our investment strategy, initiated in 2022 to deploy all free cash flow to core fixed income, is truly paying off. We continue to deploy cash to this portfolio, given the attractive yield environment. The net investment income from our core fixed income portfolio more than doubled to $7 million, from $3.3 million in the prior year quarter, driven by improving portfolio yield and a significant increase in the invested asset base. Our core fixed income portfolio now stands at $820 million, up from $673 million at March 31, 2023. During the quarter, we invested approximately $116 million in the portfolio at 5.2% without increasing duration, and our embedded yield on the portfolio is now above 4%. The decrease in net investment income in the quarter was driven by our opportunistic fixed income portfolio. Both Second Quarter 2023 and 2022 were significantly impacted by the equity mark-to-market adjustments. During this past quarter, the marks were negative compared to the positive marks in the second quarter of 2022. Despite the volatility we have experienced over the last three quarters, the inception to date return for this portfolio is approximately 7.3%. This portion of our portfolio continues to decrease as we deploy cash flow to core fixed income. At June 30th, we had approximately $190 million in short-term and money market investments, resulting from strong operating cash flow of over $100 million. During the quarter, our yield on short-term investments was north of 5%, we continue to deploy this liquidity into our core fixed income. Lastly, during the quarter, we executed a successful secondary offering of approximately 4.4 million shares of common stock. The offering was primarily a sale of West Ames Holdings, which now stands at approximately 28%. We continue to see incredibly strong interest from our existing and new shareholders, we appreciate their support for our company and our strategy. With that, I'll turn the call back over to Andrew for concluding remarks. Andrew? Thank you, Mark. Q2 was a truly terrific quarter, and the metrics bear this out. The breadth of our 29% growth is notable, with five of eight underwriting divisions growing at 20% or more and all eight divisions growing over the prior year quarter. The quality of our growth is equally notable, as our new business pricing continues to be in line with our in-force book. Our underlying underwriting profitability was again strong, with an 88.7% combined ratio, excluding the deferred benefit of the loss portfolio transfer and the 3.5 points that Kat's referenced earlier. We continue to maintain our focus on being a consistent top quartile underwriter. Each division is delivering at or above our minimum target returns on capital, and as visible in our results, some of our divisions are seeing outstanding market opportunities to grow both top line and margins. Our pricing is the strongest it has been since I joined over three years ago. In this quarter, we delivered double-digit pure rate, with all divisions consistent or above the prior quarter, complemented by a significant increase in overall rate being driven by Global Property. Given the pricing along with the mix of business we are driving, we believe that the new business coming onto the books will further fuel margin expansion in line with the margin expansion we are observing on renewals. Retention was similarly strong, increasing from the high 70s in the prior quarter to the low 80s this quarter. Exposure growth continues to be in the low to mid-single digits. Operationally, all indicators are green, as submission counts were up around 20% from the prior year. Our in-force unit count is up 14% year-over-year and 3% from the prior quarter. While all the metrics I just referenced directly reflect the progress we're making in growing a highly profitable book of business, we have equally impressive progress in other critical areas. These include claims, where we're reserving potential losses earlier, closing claims faster, and achieving more optimal outcomes. In our technology, pricing, and data science efforts, we continue to deliver predictive analytics capabilities that amplify the strong technical skills of our underwriters and our claims professionals. Altogether, I could not be more pleased with the superb execution of our 470 colleagues. We believe we are very well positioned to continue our strong execution and take advantage of the favorable market backdrop. I'd now like to turn the call back over to the operator to open it up for Q&A. Operator? As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to press star 11 on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. To withdraw your question, please press star 11 again. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. Our first question comes from the line of Mark Hughes from Truist Securities. Yeah, thanks. Good morning, Andrew. Good morning, Mark. Good morning, Mark. Natalie. It sounds like the growth environment is pretty good. I'm not hearing you say anything that makes me think there's any sort of slowdown. Is, is the environment in Q3 as good as you saw in 2Q from a top-line perspective? Yeah, thanks, Mark. This is Andrew. Yeah, look, I think that, that I, I would just go back to the fact that we, you know, we have a well-diversified business that allows us to see opportunities in maybe different ways than, than some others. So, while it's not certainly equal across all eight underwriting divisions, by and large, it is a, I, I describe a, a pretty darn favorable environment for the, for the, for the parts of the market that we're focused on. Obviously, you know, we're, we're, we're sort of just a little way into the, into the current quarter. July continued to be a, you know, a positive market backdrop for us. So, we're certainly, we're certainly hopeful that it'll continue to be. One thing I can say is that, you know, our growth, our 29% growth, is driven by a combination of the market backdrop and our execution. Our execution is excellent. I think our execution will allow us to, you know, to outgrow a, a cross-section of, of peer companies. You know, and then, the market backdrop, you know, makes the numbers like 29% that we delivered in this last quarter, you know, that makes that possible. I, I think a big part of it is our execution as well, Mark. Very good. Appreciate that. Mark, any early view on the opportunistic fixed income, how that'll shape up for the third quarter? What, what are your early thoughts on it? Mark, the short answer is no, not really any early indications, on that. That can move day to day and month to month. The short answer is no. Mark, I would add to Mark's comment. You know, the volatility that we experienced in this past quarter, you know, same thing we've spoken to you about. It is a very small number of equity positions, you know, that we actively follow. Again, we think it certainly does not provide any indication as to the ultimate performance. It's really, from our vantage point, of just a bit of a distraction here as that volatility occurs, but nothing that we're concerned about. Understood. Thank you very much. Thanks, Mark. Thank you. Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Matt Carletti from JMP. Hey, good morning. Good morning, Matt. Hey, Matt. Andrew, you, you've touched on it briefly in your opening comments, and, and we've seen, you know, certainly press releases kind of since, since the last call around some of the advances or investments you're making in, in captives, in expanded surety capabilities, you know, around cyber tech NO and, and partnership with Cowbell. Can you just talk a little bit about kind of what, what's happening there and your outlooks for those areas? Maybe even next step, you know, what are some other areas that we might see you, you know, investing in, you know, in the business? Thanks, Matt. Great question, and appreciate sort of acknowledging the, the things that we've been doing there. Look, I, what I would just generally say is that we're strategically oriented, so we are actively pursuing talent and very selectively partnerships in places that include those that we're already in. I'll note for you that in Surety, in this past quarter, you know, that included two focused expansions, right? So, so which we highlighted. We brought on two teams that really created an adjacency for what we do. I think that you're gonna see that continue here in this quarter. I don't want to speak explicitly to potential new divisions or new categories that we're entering into or could potentially enter into. We're certainly focused on a couple of areas that have been squarely in our focus here for a number of quarters. As you, as you know, Matt, you know, we start with, you know, with targeting the people who we believe can lead, you know, those divisions. When we ultimately get to them, we're patient, right? We will wait until we get to the right, you know, person or persons. It's hard to sort of say timing. I, and, and, and not to be, you know, not to be opaque, I just- it's probably not helpful for us to sort of say, "Well, here are specific categories." I can say, in this quarter, you will see some, some, notable talent additions that, that, that sort of are of the same quality and, and, and help to sort of grow and develop our business, consistent with the kind of things that you saw in the last quarter and the quarter before. That, that's perfect. Thank you. One quick follow-up, just on your commentary around, you know, kind of the pure pricing in the quarter. I think I caught you say kind of double digits, and if I recall, Q1 was kind of high single digits. The question is: How should we think about that? Are there areas of the business that are seeing an acceleration in pricing, or is it more of just a, a mix of business, different areas seeing different growth or, you know, different policies renewing in the quarter? No, great, great question. Yeah, I, I, I did try to connect that in the prepared remarks. Maybe just for clarity, every underwriting division was at or above where it was last quarter. First thing is we didn't see a backup. You know, I'll remind you that we've been consistent in kind of right around the high single digits. There's been, I think, one or two quarters in the past where we were very low double digits. Been very consistent in it, and the background of that is, as I've mentioned to you, we weren't really in the categories that saw, you know, the massive increases, right? You know, what happened in public D&O or in cyber or the period where, you know, excess was getting 30, 40, 50 points that skewed a lot of numbers. We've just been ticking along. In this particular quarter, every single underwriting division was at or above its pricing for the last quarter. Then we saw a very big step up in Global Property, which when you sort of, you know, average that all out, put us into sort of the highest pure rate that we've seen since I've joined the organization. Importantly, you know, we believe that our loss cost inflation average across our book is probably about, you know, between 5% and 6%, with some areas, you know, particularly, you know, personal injury, exposed classes being, you know, high single digits. What that would tell you is that, is that, you know, we're not reflecting that in our picks. Time will tell whether that conservativism that we're assuming, the gap between our pure pricing and loss cost inflation, but this quarter, in theory, should produce, you know, some of the highest margin spread, you know, that we've seen, since I joined the organization. It was, it was a really positive quarter for us, overall on pricing. That's great. Thanks, Andrew, and congrats on a nice quarter. Thank you. Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes on the line of Meyer Shields from KBW. Great. Thanks so much. Good morning, everyone. Good morning. Let me start with a question for Mark, if I can. When you were talking about the accident year non-cat loss ratio improvements, you talked about business mix and the runoff of other lines, and didn't talk about rate increase above earned rate increases above trend. I think that's pretty consistent with conservative booking so far, but I was hoping you could dig into it a little bit just because it sounds like the earned rate increases are accelerating and trend is holding steady. I mean, Meyer, what I, I would echo exactly what Andrew really just said. The, the incremental earnings, or the, the rate above loss costs, we're, we're not reflecting that in, in our picks, and have not for, you know, for, for quite some time. Does that answer your question? It does, yeah. I guess I was looking for a number, but I don't know how realistic that is. Yeah, well, I think, Meyer, this is Andrew. You know, we, like probably any other carrier, have a point of view, right? We, we say it all along, we're, we're, we are absolutely intentionally trying to be conservative, and time will tell whether those, those views on conservativism crystallize. Certainly, our indications would suggest that is the case. But as Mark always says, we are, we are fast to react to bad news and slow to react to good news, and that includes just how it is that we're allowing price in excess of our loss cost inflation to flow through to our picks. We just aren't reflecting that, and that's really the remixing and the runoff that Mark referenced is singularly the driver that you're seeing play through in our accident year results. Okay. That's helpful. I'm more than happy to wait. I know the weather across the industry was absolutely horrific in the second quarter, but I'm wondering whether there's any change in your appetite for more explicitly catastrophe-exposed property risk? Yes, this is Andrew. I'm assuming when you ask that question, or just, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're probably talking about, you know, hurricane, North Atlantic hurricanes specifically, or quake, as opposed to what we're seeing is kind of a lot of kitty cats of convective storms all over that are, you know, a lot tougher to model and, you know, and have a sort of a very different profile. I mean, is that a fair assumption, what you're asking about? Yeah, that's exactly right. Just given the market dislocation there. Yeah, here's what I would say. You know, again, our, our notion about our strategy is about building really highly durable positions. By the way, we have great respect for some of our, our peers and our competitors who look at the cat market and see it as a terrific opportunity, a good risk trade. I, I won't, I won't say that we don't have some coming into our books, but it is not our focus. We, you know, we believe that, certainly, it, it appears to be a very attractive time to write true North Atlantic hurricane cat. You know, there will be a point in our view where the tide goes out on that, and, and, you know, what we're trying to do in our business is not have that kind of revenue, and, and quite honestly, margin volatility, as sort of a core part of what we do. I, I guess probably that's a long-winded way, Meyer, to say that it's really not a principal focus for us as a company. Okay. No, that's tremendously helpful. Final question, if I can. I know you addressed the second half expenses likely going up. Is 30% still the right bogey, or given overall growth, should we start taking that down a little? Well, that's a great question. It's a, it's a great question because, you know, we've obviously, we've been adding costs, right? If you just, you know, if you, if you look at, if you look at the number of high-quality underwriters that we've been public about, clearly we're adding costs. We've had the benefit of the growth translating to net earned premium coming through, which is, you know, which has been helpful in, in keeping kind of the ratio-based view of things, you know, in check. I, I think Mark's guidance has always been that we are aiming to be sub-30, and we still think that that's the right number. You know, we are getting the benefit of, of earned premium, you know, running through our, our, our books. We're, we're continuing in a very material way to invest in talent in advance of, you know, sort of the full production benefit of that, you know, coming through. Which is, which is good for future quarters. It seems like our formula right now is working, right? We invest in talent, we're seeing great growth. It allows us to invest more in talent, and, and overall, the financial results that we're producing are in line with, you know, with, with the kind of expectations that we set with you. All that would say 30% and under is kind of the target that we, we really believe is appropriate for us as a company. Okay, fantastic. Thank you so much. Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Paul Newsome from Piper Sandler. Good morning. Congrats on the quarter. Thanks, Paul. Good morning. A couple of, well, essentially follow-up call, questions. I heard what you said to, to, to Mark, and you are growing the property book in general, right? I was wondering if that has any effect on the overall cat load, as and prospectively, as we think about the company. Yeah, no, I, I, I absolutely can understand the question. Well, let me just point to. There's two principal places where we are materially growing our, our, our property exposure. One is in Transactional E&S. I'll just remind you that we really steer clear of, of, you know, kind of tier one cat or, or let's just call it, you know, North Atlantic hurricane. You know, fire is the principal peril that we're, we're, we're targeting there. And so inevitably, you know, you pick up some, some cat load, but cat really is not the principal exposure. We're not writing cat. Then Global Property, just given the very nature of that, right, that is a, that is, that is made up of, of, of risks and exposures that are highly diversified, that include, technical risks as well as cat risks. We will grow, our, our cat exposure, as we grow Global Property, and that has been the case. I, I define that differently than targeting cat, right? We'll pick up some cat exposure, but that's part of a larger risk that we're writing. Again, you know, we grew it not inconsiderably last year, and you saw what happened in terms of our placement, right? We went from a placement that, you know, we modestly increased our attachment point, very modestly, and we added a few million dollars of cover up top and still, you know, maintained a posture that was well in excess of one and 250 kind of loss event cover. So that should give you an indication that, yeah, it's growing, but it's, again, it's not a principal focus for us. It's not, it's not a key area that we're targeting for the reasons I mentioned earlier. Okay, that, that makes sense. Then, maybe some general thoughts on cost of talent. You know, I don't know if it's getting more or less expensive given the craziness in the industry itself at the moment, but you're obviously out there looking for people and, and, paying them. Is it getting less, more or less expensive to, to find the good talent? That's also a great question. I, I think that there was certainly a period where I, I, I personally viewed the cost of talent as being really, there were points where it was irrational. You know, what I'd say is we're not kind of in the spot market part of the talent. You know, people are coming to us because of the full package of what we have to offer. Certainly it's a cultural thing, an environmental thing. We certainly, we, we, we provide people attractive compensations, and, you know, to the extent that they participate in equity, you know, that's an attractive feature for them. You know, we, we also are believers that our underwriters need to be, you know, compensated for long-term, consistent, excellent underwriting performance they do. That's a chance to over-earn. We've not found it to be a barrier, is what I'd say. People who are coming to us, are coming to us for the right reasons. They are, they're world-class professional underwriters, you know, who want to be in an environment where underwriters can underwrite, and they should be rewarded appropriately. We've, we've got that constructed in a way that seems to be working. I, I just I would put the quality, and the relative number of people, given the size of our organization, of talent acquisition, that have come to our company over the course of the last couple of years, I'd put it up against any other organization. It's been, probably the most a compelling feature, our ability to attract what I would, what I would consider to be the A talent in our industry. That makes sense. My, my question a little bit stems from the fact that it seemed like two years ago, there was a lot of private equity going after the formation of a lot of MGAs and pulling a lot of talent out with big numbers, and I don't know if that's really changed, given, you know, the change in the interest rate environment? Yeah, no, I. pull back into. Paul, I do think it's calmed down, but I would also say to you that it would be very unusual for us to be competing against private equity-backed MGAs for talent. We have found in almost all cases, that the people who wanna come to our organization, are, are interested in having, be part of something that directly controls the balance sheet, be directly connected to the, to the, the underwriting contribution. That may or may not be a bright line for the industry. It's certainly a bright line for the people who come, come join our organization. Makes sense. Thanks for the help, as always. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Michael Zaremski from BMO. Hey, Greg, good morning. I guess just back to the cat load discussion, you know, just cognizant that, you know, your cat levels, you know, weren't on an absolute level, you know, that high. You know, any context around, you know, how abnormal this cat load was versus kind of quote, unquote, "normal expectations? Well, here, I mean, the sort of the texture and the color of it, Mike, is, is really simple. We had 3 large losses. One was a tornado that landed on the top of a very high-value building. A second was a location where it was a relatively large surface area roof, hail with a lot of HVAC equipment. We constructed the cover in a way that was appropriate to the exposure. Then the third was also a hail loss, and the three made up the lion's share of what came through. You know, I don't know how to characterize it, other than, you know, there was just a lot of convective storm, tornado, straight-line wind, and hail in the second quarter. You know, we have a good distribution of risk, and it just so happened we picked up a bit more than otherwise we would have expected in the second quarter. I don't think it says anything about our risk management or aggregation management. It, it, it is, it's a number that is, in our view, an entirely acceptable number in the context of, of the kind of industry losses we saw. I, I don't read into it, nor does it change our thinking or our behavior in any way. I think it's just, it's, it's more a byproduct of, you know, spread of risk and the kind of storms that happened in the second quarter. Okay. That's, that's good color. I guess my follow-up's on the expense ratio. I, I know you've given some, some color already, but, you know, the expense ratio overall seems like it's, it's been coming down a little bit more than expected. Is that, is that mostly just due to kind of operating leverage? So if growth continues, we should, we should kind of keep that in mind at a, at a heightened pace. Also just curious if there's any higher reinsurance costs, flowing through the expense ratio, too? Thanks. Again, thanks for the question. I'll try to pick them off in order, and Mark, maybe will have something to add. On the, on the first item, to, to be, direct, we're, we're, we are now sort of spending on new resource, new talent, consistent with our plan. What's ahead of plan for us is the net earned premium that's running through, which is, which is making the ratios, you know, look pretty good for us. I, I think that, that, that might explain, like, if you were to look at absolute numbers versus, a ratio basis, there's, there's two different things going on. The growth has certainly helped us. On the second question, we, we did cover this on the March 1st call, and then after the 1st quarter call. You know, we've had very good placement on our reinsurance. Everything that was placed was consistent with expectations. Unsurprisingly, there was a little bit higher cost on our cat placement, and I do mean a little. Remember, our, you can sort of do the math, right? Our cat tower is not that big. You can do an average rate. It just, you know, a little bit of change does not mean a lot for us. Most of our placements have been very consistent, orderly, you know, terms and conditions we're happy with. That's really not having an impact in any way in what you're seeing in our financial results. That's right. Okay. I just lastly, that's helpful, and I do see, see the commentary from last quarter. You know, kind of just on the overall marketplace pricing environment, maybe you can give a little more context. You know, I think you, you added some color on, on the property side, but, you know, you know, are, are you seeing competitive the market become less competitive? Because you, you're mentioning the strongest pricing in three years. Are, are you, are you surprised at all by kind of the competitive environment easing up, maybe easing a bit? I don't want to put words in your mouth. Any other context there on this, the marketplace would be great. No, I don't- I wouldn't- I don't know if I'd characterize it as easing. What I, what I'd say is that, you know, some of this is just, it's just math. like, in that, in that, you know, if we, if we, if we're at or above on, you know, sort of every area except for Global Property, and Global Property takes a big step up, and you kind of, you know, you weight average that all together. It just happened to produce a number that on a pure rate basis, was the best that we've achieved. Look, I think the thing that we're constantly looking at is, the combination of pure rate. We obviously pay attention to exposure. There may be a little bit of margin in exposure that, you know, is, is, is rate-like. We look at our retention, and we look at our new business pricing, and it's kind of that, that, that trinity of things that we're constantly checking against to sort of gauge our own view about where the market is. What I would say is that the market is, is, is orderly in the parts of the, in the, you know, the parts of the market where we compete. It's very attractive on the property side, and it's the kind of market where a well-executing organization like ours with, with really great underwriting chops, this is the place where we accelerate and win. I would say that you can see that in our, you know, in what's happening in our results. This is. I think orderly is generally good, right? For a company like ours. You know, it may very well be that with some of the disruption that's happening in other parts of the market, that, that is, by and large, helpful. Tightening of reinsurance, in my view, is by and large, helpful. You know, so in that, in that sense, it's probably a positive, but I would characterize, outside of property for the places we compete, orderly and really supportive of our ability to, to more than win our fair share. Very helpful. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. One moment for our next question. Our next question comes from the line of Tracy Benguigui from Barclays. Hey, good morning. Some of my questions were already asked, maybe I'll just ask for more specifics. At your prop cat treaty renewal at 5/1, what were the specific changes? I think the prior was $25 million in excess of $10 million retention. I think you also mentioned that the pricing increases were modest, if you could add more context to that. Yeah, for sure. Thanks, Tracy. Our attachment point at expiring, I'm doing this off of the top of my head, so I hope I'll get this all right, was $10 million in our prior treaty year. We moved it to $12 million. I think our exhaustion in the prior treaty year was, was $36 million. We moved it to $40 million. You know, our, our, our, our attachment point on a modeled basis went down a little bit. We were a little bit above a one in 10 return period, and this is sort of an average across, you know, quake and, and hurricane. It's down below one in 10, so we, we slightly reduced the modeled attachment point, even though it went up a couple million dollars. Our risk-adjusted rate, it was in the order of between 15%-20% increase. Again, you know, if you're buying as we are, you know, $28 million of cover, you can kind of just put an average rate across the tower and know that that's a, you know, in the grand scheme of an organization our size, a de minimis amount. I will tell you as well, on the second and third event, the cover drops down. We, the way to think about that is that, is that we have a bit more protection, if there's a series or a frequency of severity. I think by and large, we were really happy with our, our placement. We thought it was, we thought it was a great outcome, you know, given the backdrop of what everybody was saying. I, I think lastly, one thing to highlight is we, we moved, we've been consistently trying to move our treaty forward, a month over the each of the last two years to get greater distance from the big Florida placement. We're set up for next year to have the, the, the placement, I believe now on 4/1, if I, if I'm correct. You know, which allows us to sort of have a, maybe a, a more attention to the market without, you know, the, the sort of the, all the, the stuff that goes on regarding the Florida placements. Got it. I think you said 15%-20% risk-adjusted pricing? Yeah. I mean, how much of that are you able to pass down in your global- Oh! property pricing? Yeah. Oh, my God, we are, we are... First off, remember, cat is a, you think about it, just sort of you, if you, if you talk about the cat pricing on any account, it's a small portion of the overall pricing between Transactional E&S, Global Property and other lines. We are passing that plus some for the cat exposure alone. Then, and then obviously, we're capturing a lot of pure rate on Xcat, you know, fire and other, obviously, as you see in the results I just spoke to you about. Yeah, we're not-- it's not diminishing. If your question is, are cat margins kind of being diminished? The answer is no, not at all. Excellent. Hey, you know, given the news on Vesttoo, have you used this opportunity to review the quality of your LOCs and collateral provided by your reinsurance partners? Yeah, for sure. I mean, we're, we're watching our, our collateral all the time to the extent we have them. To be practical, Tracy, without sort of overdoing it, there's really only two sort of core places we have it. One is, is on our, our, our loss portfolio transfer. We're fully collateralized. That's, you know, a long-standing relationship. Obviously, was a, was a principal area of focus that we made sure that, you know, the investor community understood during, during our IPO process. The other is, is captives, and, and, you know, we, we are constantly working with the same set of banks, and quite honestly, the, the principally the same set of captive managers. We do have a process to, you know, you know, we do have a process to make sure that, you know, not only are they high quality, for sure, that we can take full credit for them, statutorily, but importantly, you know, in this particular case, you know, there's, there's fraud and, and you always want to make sure that your controls protect, protect against fraud. I think, you know, I think everybody's paying attention to that for sure, and, and we are as well. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I would now like to turn the conference back over to Natalie for closing remarks. Thanks, Gigi, and thank you everyone for your questions, for participating in our conference call, and for your continued interest in and support of Skyward Specialty. I am available after the call to answer any additional questions that you may have. We look forward to speaking with you again on our third quarter earnings call. Thank you and have a wonderful day. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.