Go Digit General Insurance Limited analyst Q&A

Thank you very much. We will now begin the question -and-answer session. The first question is from the line of Mahek from Emkay Global. Please go ahead.

So, my first question would be on the net retention ratio. So, I just wanted to understand why is there a dip in the net retention ratio. And the second thing was can you just repeat what commentary you gave on the reserve release?

Comment on the reserve release. So, actually this year, I will not be able to share details. You will have to excuse me for that. If you have seen our miscellaneous portfolio and in some help we have started working on some new product lines and in some n ew product lines, we have two or some major partners. We have actually opened up a re-insurance line so that we can develop these products in line with our partnership with our re-insurance for the longer period. But here again I would say if you look at our overall retention, it continues to be significantly higher than everyone else in the multi-line sector. Now on the reserve release, what I mentioned was that if you look at last year in terms of our TP claim reserve release, we basically said if you are releasing Rs. 100 in a year, it is not 25 -25-25% each quarter last year. Last year in Quarter 2, we released 37% of our reserves which means more than if 25 or 23 was normalized, we released almost 1.5x the reserves. So, the total because of that Q2 actually became an outlier and because of this the TP loss ratio this year seems higher. If we normalize the reserve release, then actually on the TP claims, it is not that our portfolio inherently has a higher loss ratio. It is just because of this outlier very high reserve release in Quarter 2 of last year. This is what I meant by reserve release.

So, sir, in H2, are you expecting any reserve release in H2 for the motor TP reserves?

No, as I said, we don't want to give guidance, but every quarter if you see, we have been having reserve release. What I mentioned was that in the last two quarters, whatever trend we have seen, we have no reason to believe that this trend will not contin ue for the next two quarters and TP release, but since by principle we don't give guidance. Sitting here as of now, those reserve release will continue until less suddenly more accidents start coming in or something which we don't expect. So, that trend should continue for the next two quarters.

The next question is from the line of Supratim Datta from Ambit Capital. Please go ahead.

My first question is on the health insurance side. So, sir, what I was asking is on the health insurance side, firstly, I wanted to understand within the group health business, what proportion of your group health business is now attachment products versus employer-employee products, if you could give us the breakdown this quarter versus what it was last year similar quarter, that will help us understand how things have moved here. And the question over here is that, you know, which are the banks or partners that you are selling this product through? And is it an attachment with a loan or attachment with credit cards? Because currently what we are seeing is on the lending side, there is a slow down, things are slowing down. So, just wanted to understand how things can play out or if you have added newer partners here, if you could give us some clarity on how we should think about growth in this product going forward, that would be helpful. Now, moving to the motor side of the business, now, if you look at the commentary from peers who have reported or some of the auto OEMs, it suggests that second half, the volumes are going to be muted. Now, in this scenario, how do you look at growth in t he second half or how you are thinking of or what steps you are taking to drive growth in the second half, if you could give some color on that. And then what happens to this glide part, if OEM, the auto demand remains weak? Then despite that, could we sti ll get to our EOM target within the timeframe given or we would have to revisit that? If you could give some color on these three points, that would be very helpful.

So, thanks, Supratim. So, on the attachment products, I think this corporate agency information is public. I obviously don't want to share names of the companies, etc., simply because this can only harm us rather than help. Some of the biggest banks we have started working with, we sell it with loans, we also sell it with credit cards. Now, again, in terms of without giving an exact proportion, our employer -employee business de- grew by 3.3% in this quarter, while the growth in attachment business was 110%. So, you can actually see that this business is growing nicely. Now, if the group health pricing, employer -employee pricing, improves, then this mix can again change, but it will come at a price for us, employer-employee, where we should not be making big losses. At least we should try and achieve a break -even. But this growth which we are seeing in non-employer-employees continues will continue, and it will continue for two reasons. This year, the first half has been a bit difficult on personal loan segments, on micro -finance, etc. We do a lot of business with them. Now things are getting normalized and our chances that H2 will be very good or better, significantly better than what a lot of these partners have in H1. We are also launching some new partnerships. So, the proportion can change because we might end up writing more employer -employee business if pricing corrects. So, instead of looking at proportion, I would say that the growth rate in non -employer-employee attachment products will continue to be strong. Now when we look at the motor business, I think I explained in detail on the TP side as to what the basis for last year and how we have started seeing increase in our market share on TP. In H2, our last year base is only 6% market share. We are actually f inishing H1 this year with a market share of 6.6. For TP, all things being equal where the market is, we definitely should grow in the second half. But again, as I am saying, all things being equal as to where we are. On the OD side, the new vehicle sales were muted and that is why if you look at, we grew in motor OD by 14% in Q2 and industry grew by 6%. So, our growth rate in OD is in quarter as well as in the first half has been 2x of the industry. Now we obviously also have a very good base in the old vehicles or renewals coming in from last year. So, if new vehicles continue to be sluggish, the sales, again, I think there is no guidance, but you can see that we have been growing faster than the industry on the OD side. So, TP and OD put together, you can actually then see what could happen on the motor. Now on EOM as I explained, we had a 3 -year glide path. I gave the date lines from December. After submitting the updated business plan and updating the H1 performance in '23-'24, we haven't heard anything from regulators. They obviously have no visibility to what has happened with us on the expenses on '24-'25. Last year we did slightly better than the glide path we had shown. Based on where we are today, we feel that we will be able to achieve the glide path over 3 years. And as I also said, please do look at the expense ratio, EOM of some of the larger compani es. Their EOMs are going up, our EOMs are actually reducing. I had also said in the past that EOM is more a function of the line of business mix rather than actual EOM because for each product line, the expense ratios are more or less similar for everyone. Now as we know that this year especially, the way accounts are prepared for commissions and management expenses have become a lot more transparent. If you look at quarter 1 at 7.5%, our admin expense ratios are industry's best. So, you can actually very w ell see that when it comes to our own expenses, despite being new and despite having lesser scale, these are the best in class in terms of our admin expense ratio. Our EOM is actually coming in from a product mix. It is not due to our inefficiency. In efficiency, we are already the best in class despite having a lower scale. So, this is maybe an additional point I can add about EOM in terms of our admin expenses.

Now I have just one follow up. So, given you are one of the best and on the OPEX side, it can be seen that despite your scale, you are better than some of the larger players. But then the question is that, can this improve further, or has it come to a lev el where it will remain at a similar place? So, if you could give some color on that, that would be helpful.

Everything can be improved. So, first time I used to sleep 7 hours, 4 years back. Nowadays I sleep 9 hours a day. So, I never used to go to gym before. I at least pass by it now, even if I don't go inside. Everything can improve. I am saying this intentionally because I don't want to give any sort of guidance, but if you keep looking at our admin expense ratio, they are coming down each year. But on a serious note, I may add, I have seen this across having the benefit or the disadvantage of working in different countries, that because of expenses, companies stop investing in tech. And then over a period of 2, 3, 4 years, then it catches up wit h you. And then you have to over invest in technology. We at Digit have been over investing in technology. We have seen a massive benefit. API is just one of those examples. Now transparency on admin expenses is a clear example of what it can do. So, I think all of us are here very, very conscious of the fact that in trying to save 0.25% of the management expenses, we would never under -invest in technology. So, that is what I wanted to say from a philosophy person. But as I said earlier, we don't give this sort of a guidance, not because we don't want to, it's just that we don't know what will happen. TP market share is a great example that last year we significantly reduced our market share because we didn't see the profit. From 7.2% in Q2 of last year, in 4th Quarter, we had gone down to 5.7 and now it is way back. Market conditions change, things ch ange, and we want to keep that flexibility open with us. We never say we will never do this. We never say we will always do this. But if we see an opportunity, we act and if we have to do lesser business or cut something, we will cut it. In such a difficult market when industry grew by 2%, you can actually see we grew by 14%. If you had asked me this in say July that in Quarter 2 industry would only grow by 2% and you will grow 14%, I would have said chances are, first, I don't know that industry will only grow by 2% and secondly, to me it looked very high. But as things developed, I think it developed in a decent way I would say for us.

The next question is from the line of Uday Pai from Investec India. Please go ahead.

I just had a couple of questions. Firstly, so over the last four, five quarters, your share, total absolute amount of reinsurance accepted has increased. So, I just wanted some color on what kind of mix is that within that book and some color on profitability of that book if you could share. And secondly, since we are seeing some kind of mix change due to various factors such as motor TP pricing, etc., how do you envisage the steady -state book mix and profitability of the book, if you could give some color on that?

So, let me answer the motor question first. So, basically, if you see when we felt that profitability is under stress in case of TP business, we kept on reducing market share. But at the same time, we started working more and more granular selection, if we could steer the TP portfolio according to what we thought the opportunity is. We obviously never say if anybody, I would say, we never consciously do any loss-making business, but because there was no TP hike, we have to do this. So, based on what we have done, you can see that we felt comfortable now that the market share has increased from Q4 to Q1 and then Q1 to Q2. And as I said, simply because last year's base in H1 is only 6% and this year H2 and this year H1 we have finished at 6.6. All things being equal, we should actually see some growth. On the reinsurance side, I think I would say there are two things. One is that the cedents we work with over a period of time now five, six years, we have developed a decent relationship. And we have also started exploring both on the direct side and at times on the facultative inward side reinsurance. And there is one particular line of business which we have started this year which we didn't have earlier. Just due to confidentiality reasons, I don't really want to get into that level of details. Overall, our underwriting philosophy, whether we write by way of inward facultative or directly, that philosophy stays same. And I may maybe add here that facultative basically means we are writing it for each individual risk. So, facultative inward reinsurance or your direct business from an underwriting pricing perspective, there is actually no difference. You see every risk and then you accept it or you don't accept it. While another type of reinsurance which is much bigger is CTs, where you basically give a capacity within certain guidelines and the insurance company can within that framework keep giving you the business. So, facultative, we see every single risk. So, our underwriting philosophy, whether it is direct or inward facultative, it actually stays the same.

The next question is from the line of Sanketh Godha from Avendus Spark. Please go ahead.

Kamesh sir, given we need to improve or combine to ultimately deliver mid-teen ROI… I was just asking to improve our ROIs to mid-teens in the current accounting, that is IGAAP accounting, we need to improve our combined ratio maybe compared to the last yea r also by maybe 400 basis points. So, just wanted to understand that given we are already best in class in loss ratio, we are already best in class in the other OPEX ratio. So, the only lever left over is the commission cost. So, naturally, then is it fair to say that the next leg of grow th will predominantly come from the segments where the commission cost is meaningfully very low and probably through the same loss ratio what you have today, and that will be the next leg of the growth and that will be the trajectory of improving the combined overall? And then if that is the case, then what is the thought process what you have to achieve that thing? That is my first question. Second question was that, maybe the previous participant asked that question, just if you can give the mix, because the fire segment in the reinsurance, overall in GWP has declined, whether it has come more from non -fire business in the inward facultative reinsurance, whether it is crop or government health or just If you can give a better understanding of the business will be helpful, whether it is practical and you believe that it will be sustainable going ahead also? And lastly, this benefit -based business what you have done, just want to understand this nature whether it is long -term or short -term in nature? If it is long -term in nature, given the regulatory recognition is going to change with respect to long-term benefit-based plan, whether it will have a negative impact on EOM or not? These are the three questions I have.

Thank you, Sanketh. So, let me start with the last question. When we look at attachment business, as a percentage of GWP, this would actually be the lowest for us. So, I think if there is a negative impact of this, our sense is that companies which drive substantial business from their captive banks, which captive basically means the promoter banks, they would actually suffer the most. So, this is something which from a competitive perspective could actually improve our position. So, that is I think the first point I wanted to make. The second I think is, if we look at the reinsurance questions you asked, as I mentioned earlier that we have started a new line of business. Even on property, we have not, without getting into too much detail, because I don't honestly know this also, I d on't have the numbers in front of me, our reinsurance business on, inward facultative business on property is also grown in the first half and also in the second quarter. So, we feel that with the sort of market pressure in the pricing market is seen, in April the reinsurance will have to act on the pricing. Otherwise, they will end up with a lot of losses. And here again, I think we might not have grown in the inward rein surance business as much as we wanted, but we are still growing over last year and we have a new line of business. That is the second point. On the third actually, Sanketh, and I think you would know this better than I do, that the combined ratio definition as per IRDAI actually has no direct reflection on the profitability, because profitability is more driven around net earned premium, net expense ratio and net claims ratio. Now on the net earned premium basis, even in Quarter 2, our combined ratio despite whatever I said on TP and what I said on Nat Cat claims, despite that our net earned premium combined ratio has actually improved over last year. So, this combined ratio, unfortunately, the way it is presented has no direct correlation with profitability. And I think that is something which is a bit strange. And second also as I said is in a lot of cases, companies which have lower retention and this is visible in their quarterly accounts, they book a lot of upfront commission, reinsurance commission, especially long more than 2 years, 3 years kind of products which gives them that slight advantage on the net basis, which is not visible which will not happen in case of IFRS results. So, did I answer your question, Sanketh?

Kamesh, you mostly answered, but my only simple point was that whether you are at the 1 -0, maybe 1-0-8 kind of a combined for the half, just wondering given the kind of expense and loss we have, whether the commission cost is the only place where we see t his, even if I look it from the underwriting point of view, or NEP basis point of view, a big trigger to improve the overall profitability of the company, from underwriting, not from the investment.

Understood. So, Sanketh, I will say two things here. One is, if you see in H1, without annualizing, our ROE has been 6%. On Indian accounting, on the entire year, if we have a ROE which is slightly more than 10, and I am just giving arithmetic equation, n o guidance, we actually will hit a profit of about 400 crores. So, the idea is, and this is what actually shows, even in a combined of 108.7, arithmetically, if we hit an ROE of slightly more than 10, say 10.4, and I am doing a rough calculation here, we will actually hit a profitability of 400 crores. Combined ratio, the way the definition is in this, it is not a right way to drive profitability. Otherwise, our combined ratio has increased, and as I said, by 3.5%, and our profit has gone up 3x, while our investment income has not gone up 3x. So, this is a misleading number. Personally, if you ask me, I don't look at this number at all, because neither in IFRS, this combined ratio, I have not seen in any country, and I have had the benefit of working in about 26 countries, this definition of the combined ratio, because it doe s not reflect the true accounting or true profitability of a company.

And lastly, your leverage is at 4.7x, which naturally came off because of the capital raise. So, what is a comfortable investment leverage you will always prefer to work at?

So, here again, I think, Sanketh, because we are not generating profit every quarter, my sense is by end of, say, 31st March '26, so next financial year, I think the leverage should increase to something like 5x. Now, the way we look at it is not from a leverage perspective, we will look at it from a solvency perspective. So, the idea is that we would want to keep our solvency margins, say, at around 210%. I am giving you an ideal scenario. Take the equity allocation to 10% of the assets, so that in a down market also, the solvency ratio is above 175%. So, that is how we will look at it. Secondly, if you look at, now our net worth in IGAAP is also about 3,800 crores. I think regulations allow you to raise TA2 capital up to 25% of the net worth. Now, if I just roll forward this by 2 years, and again, no guidance, under normal circumstances , we suppose our net worth hits 5,000 crores, and we have today 350 crores of tier 1 bonds, we can actually raise another 900 crores of tier 1 bonds to basically enhance our solvency. So, from a capital perspective, I think we are in a very decent place. We have all the space to grow the business, to also change our asset allocation, and even after 2 years or 3 years, if we need capital, we can actually always raise a decent amount of capital through NCD, because we have not done this previously. Obviously, there are other things which we can also do for better capital efficiency, but as of now, we don't really have to artificially do anything to either enhance our leverage or reduce our leverage or increase our solvency and things like that. We have all valid tools in place to focus on growing the business as much as we can.

The next question is from the line of Dipanjan Ghosh from Citi Bank. Please go ahead.

Just a few questions. First, going back to the group employer -employee business, just wanted to get some color on how the business mix is shifting, let's say, between larger corporates and smaller corporate. And in line with that, if you can give a qualit ative understanding on how the claims ratios have been behaving in each of these two buckets, Y -o-Y or 1H, and the next is, what is the sourcing channel, or how does the sourcing channel differ, let's say, between when you source large corpo rates, which I would believe would be more direct, versus, let's say, the smaller corporates, and how does the profitability really shape up in these two segments? The second question is more on the motor business. This is a data -keeping question. If you can give the split between two-wheelers, CVs and PVs, and also how that has changed, let's say, Y-o- Y? And lastly, going back to one question which has been asked q uite a few times in the call on your strategy regarding inward reinsurance, so we know the numbers for 2Q and 1H. Just wanted to get some color on whether you plan to increase that going ahead over the next, let's say, 12 to 18 months. And if so, you have already mentioned there are a few products, new products segment of partnerships that you have kind of got in place. Are there more in the pipeline and how does that entire strategy really shape up?

So, thanks, Dipanjan, for the questions. Let me start on the inward facultative reinsurance, because as I said earlier and explained that it is a case-to-case. So, very difficult for us to say that how the business is, because it also depends upon what other reinsurers who write facultative business are doing. And there are other now direct companies also in India which have started writing inward facultative business, and we are seeing companies wanting to write that. So, very difficult for m e to give a number or answer directionally. I think this will be more visible on a quarter -by-quarter basis only. In April, I think if the reinsurers substantially change their TPs, then this opportunity for all direct companies to write and collaborate with each other for inward facultative business would substantially increase. I may also add that the Government of India as well as the IRDAI Chairman are very keen that India reinsurance capacity should actually increase, and more business should be done. And they are also wanting to encourage companies to retain more and more bu siness within India. So, hopefully, directionally, I think with the support from IRDAI and also from the Government of India, we feel that opportunity to do this business on the inward facultative side should actually increase. I think on the employer-employee, our mix is slowly changing towards smaller groups, financing smaller groups, means groups with employees less than 5,000 or 2,500. But in H1, as you know, that in April, we have a lot of big renewals of large companies. S o, H1 is always skewed. But if you compare this H1 with the last year's H1, we are actually seeing that our mix is moving more towards smaller groups rather than the bigger groups. Smaller groups actually come from retail brokers and agents, while big grou ps are more focused either direct or they come through large focus. So, that is what it is. I would say in terms of profitability this year, if I speak about specifically, what we have seen is that especially in the first half, a competition was actually, first quarter, competition was seen around price on the larger groups and our quote conversi on ratios was much lower on the larger groups compared to the smaller groups. But these things can change because this was written in April, May, for large groups, the loss ratios will actually start showing by already, but by November it will become like a trend. And then people, companies when they will see that the losses are increasing on large groups, then in January where we see again good renewals of large companies, things could actually change. So, Dipanjan, this is, I would say, significantly more dynamic, but I personally feel that if you look at fire, you look at motor, you look at group health, if the pricing competition is really increasing, group health is the first one where the loss starts emerging and the trend starts emerging very, very fast. So we have started seeing some very early trend wherein if you look at in August and September, lot of companies, private companies, which actually were quite growing very aggressively, suddenly we have seen in September that the growth rate has come down, and this is really visible in the segment wise numbers which are published. In motor, I would again say based on our new car sales, how our market share is moving in TP etc., this again moves a bit dynamically, but all three are in the 30s for us, and the private car, I think since last year, this is our now biggest segment within motor. So, this is what, D ipanjan, I can say so to answer your question.

The next question is from the line of Jayant Kharote from Jefferies group. Please go ahead.

Thank you for the opportunity and congrats, guys, on the claims side performance on the health side as well. Slightly broader question, little Go Digit but larger industry issue. We are hearing the show cause notices going out to a lot of players, maybe i n double digits it seems. And correct me if I am wrong, if EOMs are supposed to be brought down and the timelines are like next, the two options that we have, one is of course doing more writing or more retention, and second is doing a bit more on the group or low commission origination whether it was group health or some of the other commercial lines. The problem or probably what I want to hear from you is now probably cannot (Inaudible) going to go off similar lines of business. We are seeing the same pattern like in group health, we have been seeing for the past six months. So, how do you solve this puzzle, Kamesh, because even if we were to wait a bit to get the pricing right, the irrationality might continue because everybody is trying to end before the fin ishing line in six quarters? I don't know if I am putting the question correctly, but just trying to understand how do you think that it will play out eventually.

So, basically, Jayant, your voice was cracking, but let me say that you are saying that in EOM, if every company is trying to meet the EOM guidelines and because of that, they start writing business which is not that profitable, how will this play out eventually? Is that your question?

Yes, and the fact that we have only six quarters, right, to complete the EOM, so there would be a rush or this high competitive intensity for the next six quarters.

So, I think, Jayant, I would say that there are two ways to look at it. So, this year if you look at, the industry's growth rate has not been good, which basically means that EOM for almost every single player will actually go up. I already said earlier that larger companies, amongst the largest, they have actually seen an increase in EOM this quarter, this half, despite a slightly better than industry growth. Others who have seen lesser growth, they would have seen even further increase in EOM. Now companies which have become aggressive, say in group health, employer-employee business to make up for the EOM, they will actually see a very bad outcome on the loss ratio, so the profitability will suffer. So, eventually, all of this has to balance itself out. Secondly, my sense is that regulators will realize, and that is my sense, that after EOM has come, the expense ratios have actually gone up rather than going down. And this is happening because instead of having, this is my personal opinion, not Digit's, this is happening because everyone is trying to develop business in low commission, which is group health, government health, crop, and trying to write more of that business and increasing commission on the retail side. Now this is leading to a situation where growth rate has gone down and expense ratios are going up. So I personally feel that this is something which regulators, because they are very serious about it, they will look at the results of '24 -'25 and they will think about as to what is to be done. Sanketh had spoken about a change which is happening from 1s t of October. If actually that happens, any company which has even 10% of the premium coming in from attachment or even 5% coming in from overall attachment business, their expense ratio are going through the roof. So, with these guidelines, I have a sense, and I have not done a calculation, but I have a sense that almost every company, barring maybe one or two, would actually see EOM limit being reached. So, we have to really see how this year plays out and then what the regulator intends to do. However, from a Digit side, last year we were on a decent path, on our glide path. This year we have reduced our expense ratios compared to first half of last year and we are hopeful that we will continue on this trend even on the second half. So, our aim is to stick to the glide path and we will be able to give you better idea to everyone, maybe after third quarter, but as of now we feel that we should be able to stick to the glide path this year also.

Thank you, Kamesh, that was very elaborate. If I could just add one last question, as an industry, are there any representations being made to the regulator for extending the EOM timelines?

Honestly, Jayant, I don't know about that and my sense is, regulator at this stage wouldn't really do this. They would want to see what is happening this year and what each company is doing. So, my sense is, this again is an assessment, that they are look ing at more company by company, but as of now we haven't seen. I think it is what I have heard. And again, I have no inside knowledge. I have heard that on this accounting change from 1st of October, there are some companies which have pushed hard. I think standalone health insurance companies, some multi-line companies have requested IRDAI to postpone the date. I think this is what I heard from the industry sources, but I have no internal information, Jayant, on this.

Thank you, Kamesh, as always for your insights on this and congrats on the claims, especially again on the health, great job over there.

We can take one more question because I have another call starting in five minutes.

The last question is from the line of Nischint Chawathe from Kotak Institutional Equities. Please go ahead.

You know, this is actually on the IFRS part, on the discounting aspect, impact in IFRS, as and when it gets implemented, how do you think the industry takes it? Does it get translated into higher payouts or does it get translated into tariffs or how does it play out?

So, Nischint, I actually can’t really talk about the industry because the challenge we have is that even very established companies are not publishing IFRS results, and what we hear is that most of them want this IFRS implementation date to be postponed, and I think we hear that it has been postponed by a year already. So, very difficult for me to comment on what we will do because I don't know their IFRS results. My sense is for a lot of companies, IFRS results will be worse than Indian Accounting results simply because lot of them are taking upfront lot of credit for their insurance commission in their case and that is why my sense is they don't want to publish IFRS results. I can definitely speak about Digit that this discounting of results, we will not be seeing this from a perspective of increasing commission. So, I think philosophically, that is definitely I can see it, my CEO is sitting next to me and she is nodding and saying absolutely.

Because if you are going to price a product, I mean very, very conceptually based on an ROE basis and then probably there is some release that happens. Competitive dynamics will kind of mean that it goes on to either the distributor or the customer.

My sense is, Nischint, it will not. Simply because, as I said, IFRS results for most companies will be worse than Indian Accounting. So, when the results look worse, how do you increase the commission? And I would say that, and I will be very transparent here. When we were in the IPO and I was meeting one of like very reputed mutual fund in India, and I think the person asked me about IFRS results and this that will you publish the IFRS results after listing. So, actually I can say it again now, ICICI Securities also has organized the call, they and Morgan Stanley were lead bankers. We have proposed to SEBI to include both IFRS and Indian Accounting results in the DRHP. I think they said, "No, it will confuse the retail investors." But as soon as we got listed and we published our last year results, you can actually see that in May, it was late May because IPO, we got listed on 23rd May if I remember and our results came in the first quarter of June or second q uarter of June. We have actually published audited IFRS results and after that, every quarter we are giving IFRR results. From next quarter, we will start giving quarter -on- quarter. My request in a way for people like you, Nischint, and I think we have some of the most educated insurance analysts on this call, is to ask insurance companies who publish IFRS results, even if unaudited. We will publish your audited result, but please push them so that, I think, if I can speak in Hindi “sher aya, sher aya aur sher aya nahi”. So, on a lighter note, I just wanted to say this. It is Friday evening. Our office is actually on a lane which has all the pubs. So, I think we can't even speak too seriously on a Friday. Thanks everyone for joining. Nischint, I hope I have answered your question.

Yes, thank you very much, And Happy Diwali to you.

Thanks a lot, Nischint. So, Happy Diwali to everyone, and thanks a lot for joining. Have a good weekend. Have a great Diwali season, and we will connect again in January. Thank you so much.

Thank you so much, sir. That's it for the closing comments. On behalf of ICICI Securities, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.