Thank you, Satish, and good morning, everybody, and thank you once again for joining us. As you would know, earlier, the Board approved the proposal, which will go to shareholders at our AGM on the 8th of September, under which I will cease to hold the exe cutive office in this company and will continue as your Non-Executive Chairman. Some of you, you would be aware that Satish has run this business as Chief Executive Officer since 2018. He joined us back in 2013 and the leadership around him has been in place for years. It is important that I stress that nothing about who runs Medi Assist changes on the 8th of September. As a company, we operate at scale increasingly across markets where the question that gets asked in the boardroom have to be genuinely hard ones. Our strategy is unchanged. Our domestic and international growth agenda is unchanged. But most importantly, sponsoring that agenda at the Board level continues to expressly be part of my responsibility as Chairman. I did want to make sure that I share with you that I am not going anywhere. I am changing what I do. Thank you once again. Satish, over to you.

Thank you, Dr. Chhatwal. Back to the Chorus Call team. We may open up for Q&A now. Thank you.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question-and-answer session. We take the first question from the line of Sucrit D. Patil from Eyesight Fintrade Private Limited.

I have 2 questions. The first question to Mr. Satish is, I just want to understand b eyond the regular outlook, what are the top 2 to 3 execution priorities you are focusing on in the next few quarters? And alongside that, what do you see as the biggest risk in patient demand shifts, regulatory changes or competitive pressures? And how are you preparing to manage them by strengthening Medi Assist's position in the health care administration and claims management space? That's my first question. I'll have my second question after this.

No, I think that sounded like a lot of questions. Thank you. So I'll do my best to give you a quick answer. Maybe it's best to start from the second one than the first one. We have a unique privilege as Medi Assist in this country to operate at the intersection of all the stakeholders' needs, like it is not how most companies are usually set up. Today, we operate at an unprecedented scale at the intersection of solutions that are delivering to the needs of patients, the members and then their employers and families, the providers, the

caregivers who are actually delivering the service and originating the cost of health care and the payers who are actually financing the health care costs according to the plans and the benefits that people have signed up for. Today, we have a very unique vantage point as Medi Assist to understand all the aspects at scale. And what has been fascinating for me and given my tech background is how the AI -led technology build out is allowing us to solve these problems with a very fresh perspective and very seamlessly orche strating agentic workflows across the 3 stakeholder types and solve problems that really matter to the world. Just as one example of how we've deployed technology is today, the hospitals need 3 to 4 hours to generate a bill once the patient is ready for di scharge. Our prediction models predict on the day of admission what the out -of-pocket would be for that individual and allow the individual to pay estimated out of pocket and walk out of the hospital and leaving the entire cashless process to be a conversation between payer, TPA and the provider, and then actually leave the consumer out of the equation. And this goes straight into how the regulatory intent is around policyholder protection and policyholder experience. For example, the IRDAI says the patient should be able to get out of the hospital as quickly as possible from the time they are cleared medically, right? It's not about documentation. It's not about the process. It's not about claims and adjudication and technology. It's about the patient and the experience. So in a lot of ways, if you look at our approach to technology and our approach to how we build out the business, it is to deliver on the underlying regulatory intent, which is fundamentally centered around policyholder protection, but at the same time, enabling all stakeholders to contribute to it, not just take on the burden only in a ba ck-end process, right? That continues to be our process, and we see this working exceptionally well in markets even outside India. So that sort of brings us to your first question on what our execution priorities are. I think we've been very clear and consistent. One is how do we transform our India TPA business to be leaner, more efficient and deploy more technology and truly be a digital self -help company. We published many of our metrics on our website, and I would request and encourage, if you have a moment, to check out the Insights section on our website where we present our turnaround times in real time today. The second priority is the technology business. We are in a very exciting phase with a very substantial pipeline of insurers, brokers, corporates in India and outside India. And it is about converting this into a pure execution engine and also contributing to growth and margins of the company. The third is the international business. Again, we have a very interesting pipeline of capabilities beyond the traditional IPMI, which is the international private medical insurance space that we played in, which is subject to the vagaries of people traveling, not traveling, employers sending employees abroad.

We are building very long-term moats in our international business, again, predominantly based on our tech and network capabilities. We have just created the leadership team. We are doubling down on the work that we will do on the international business. So these 3 remain our execution priorities for the foreseeable future.

My second question to Mr. Daga is, from a financial point of view, I just want to understand what key risks or challenges do you anticipate in the coming quarters? And what specific measures have been taken to manage margins, cash flow and balance sheet strength, especially in areas like cost pressures, receivables and compliances?

Thank you for your question. Our first priority at this point of time is to completely integrate the dilution, which came around Q2 of last year when we acquired Paramount. Consistently, during the last 4 quarters, you have seen that we have gradually moved the Paramount part of the business into the full technology stack of Medi Assist, which has given us 330 bps improvement during the last 4 quarters. A very insignificant part of that deployment is still pending, and we expect that to get completed in the next one quarter or so. From the balance sheet perspective, our key focus happens to be on reducing the receivables by increasing our collections faster than the previous historical trends. And you will see from the debtors' perspective, we have consistently reduced our DSOs on a quarterly basis and compare the same from the same trend line last year. Like for the quarter ending June, we had seen a 4.5 percentage improvement in the DSOs versus similar trend of last year and that too on a higher base of receivables. So at this point of time, the focus is only to bring in efficiency and productivity by deploying the technolog y stack into our operational framework and squeezing every single opportunity which exists for us. Thank you.

We take the next question from the line of Prakash Kapadia from Kapadia Financial Services.

A couple of questions from my end. Government business is the fastest-growing segment in our pie, and it's around 12% of revenue. So how does working capital behave in this segment? And do we want to cap revenues from this segment as cash flows could get impacted because here, I would assume the receivable cycle would be slightly longer? And second question is, what will it take to get back to 23% EBITDA margins given what we've seen in Q1 and given that we are a debt -free company and a net cash company, is it fair to say FY27 will be a record profit for the company?

Thank you, Prakash. Satish here. I'll attempt to answer some of your questions. We've been a significant player in the government business. We have a fair set of standards within each line of business on the quality of revenue, right, as a bar, right? I think just to give you that sense. So we have a fairly stringent quality of revenue bar in every line of business, including our group business where we have substantial market share. So the government busin ess coming together, especially with the acquisitions over a period of time and giving us the opportunity to participate in 16 states. And we continuously evaluate the

schemes for their contribution, the growth and the margin characteristics. So government is margin accretive. The collections are the safest because they come from the state government and the central government. And over the last few years, the schemes have significantly become performance - driven in the sense that there are measurable KPIs, there are measurable asks, there are measurable performance and predictable payments. So this is a space that we continue to watch like any other line of business. So nothing unusual in the government business growth from a growth and contribution percent age perspective. At this point, it's purely a matter of the mix of the revenues in this quarter. There's nothing very specific that we are doing or not doing in the government business.

Okay, okay. So it doesn't lead to a very elongated working capital cycle or cash flow strain is what I was trying to understand, Satish.

No, it does not. And our DSOs that Sandeep just answered in the previous question are for the consolidated business, which includes the government business.

Okay, okay.

And to come back to your question on the margin improvement, we were historically the IPO were 23% in the margin business and last year, Q1 before Paramount integration, we reported a 22% margin. So our immedi ate order of the day is to finish the remaining activities in the Paramount integrations and get back to that through FY27 towards the end of FY27. I think that's our immediate order of the day. And we don't currently break out the margin profiles by line of business. But at the same time, we don't provide adjusted EBITDA margins that account for our investments in some of our growth businesses, right? So some of these expenses are also funded by our own cash flows and the performance.

And Satish, just a directional question. With technology and investments, when do we see some of these translating to operating leverage or getting to a stage where costs grow lesser? Obviously, we are doing a lot of investments, a lot of new things and some of these are, I understand, outcome-based products. So at what scale or percentage do we see some of these levers coming in terms of higher margins or operating leverage? I'm not looking at a specific number, but I'm looking at the direction or what will i t take to get some of these technology investments monetized. Obviously, it's too early days for us, but directionally, if you can throw some color, that will be very helpful.

Absolutely. I think technology plays a very pivotal role in how w e have built this business. Clearly, it is the reason why we are able to today process as many claims and with as much volumes and actually scale this business to this level.

So fundamentally, the scale of the business itself is fully supported by the technology and the investments that we have made, right? And you see the historical EBITDA margins of the companies that we've acquired, single TPA. We operate at a far greater EBITDA margin. So that's the base case. So directionally, I see the technology playing a role in all 3 lines of business. One in the TPA business where we bring in more and more technology and self-help, our membership being able to access everything in real time and through digital channels will be a lever. Second is the technology itself is a revenue and a growth contributor and possibly on track to deliver margins that are probably double the usual margins, right, in pure technology contracts. And third is, I think for the first time, we have a contract outside India using technolo gies that are developed in India and tested in India at this scale. And it's been very fulfilling experience and also the funnel is very promising. And it is allowing us to deploy all these stacks, which is the patient side, the payer side and the provider side stacks in markets outside India. And those yields and the margins and especially their ability to pay for outcomes is far superior compared to how this market operates. So I expect technology to play a central role in that as well. I think broadly, t hese are the directional cues, right, for where technology will generate value.

We take the next question from the line of Navid Virani from Bastion Research.

So my first question is on the retail business, sir. So I just want to understand how are we now looking at the retail business because what I am able to see is that the traditional TPA business is kind of plateaued or something. But at the same time, the technology piece is quite encouraging and growing really fast. So how s hould one interpret the trajectory of the retail business going forward? That's my first question, sir.

Thank you, Navid. It's not that the traditional model is necessarily going away. It's partly also to do with how we report. Today, the TPA model in very simple words means that the insurer has introduced their policyholder to Medi Assist and henceforth, Medi Assist will take care of all of your needs, right, from onboarding to customer support to cashless to reimbursement claims and so on. It's the introduction, right? That's a third party. Outside the introduction, all of the work that the insurer does, whether it's using Medi Assist or on their own remains absolutely the same, right? It's identical. So today, we choose to break out how we report our numbers. So today, in our retail TPA numbers, we only report those where on the policy contract, our name is written and we've been formally introduced to the policyholder. It doesn't mean that we are not participating in retail. It is likely that, for example, as an insurer, they could have their own digital interface that they would like their customers to use but we could still be running all of the back end. And publishing through technology integrations, updates in their digital interface. So the customer still deals with the insurer that all the work is

actually being done. Today, we don't necessarily present all of those numbers as a TPA model, right? So I think it is best going forward to look at the total retail market that we are able to access, be it in the traditional TPA model or as a platform model. And secondly, the technology revenues will be a sign of how much of the work are we able to influence using our technology, right? Are we able to, one, do the back end; two, deliver networ k and other services; three, deliver fraud, waste and abuse as a set of core services; four, deliver some digital technologies where the members can actually access and so on, right? So I think this, as you look at retail plus technology revenues should be a reasonable understanding of how our own retail market share is improving.

That's helpful. Sir, second one is on the overall business growth. So now we are already a very substantial part of the group TPA business. The Paramount business ha s also been settled into the base completely now. Technology is something which is encouragingly building well, but it will take time to scale is what I understand. So how should one think about overall business growth? Or how are you guys thinking about business growth as a management team? Are you guys thinking about at least mid-teens kind of a growth or something like that is the last question that I want to ask.

On the core business, we've always said we'll grow at par or faster than the market in the group and retail segments, which I think will continue to hold to that. Directionally, government is an opportunistic play in the sense that there are schemes that we are able to execute. There's things that we may or may not want to, but the government will continue to be a meaningful contributor from a size, scale and a revenue perspective. But more importantly, you will see, I think, much faster growth rates, both in the technology business that we've already demonstrated since last year b ecause we started publishing technology revenues as a part of our consolidated revenues in Q1 last year, even before Paramount came in, knowing fully well that the TPA business will substantially grow. Now on the consolidated business, technology is at 3.3 %. So that should give you a sense of how some of these investments and growth are panning out. Next is the international business. International business Q1 is not a reflection of what the international business is capable of. Today, we have technology contracts in place in Thailand, for example. We have contracts with Indian traditional in -house retail insurers in place, giving us access to over 50% of the travel premiums that are placed in India. Today, as Mayfair, we can deliver cashless in 180 countries, right? So we have some of those capabilities that are built out. And we are very excited about what the international business will bring to the growth, especially considering that the yields in the international business are often multiple times the yields in the Indian business.

We take the next question from the line of Manjeet from Saamya Advisors.

Yes, Manjeet, you are. Thank you.

Satish, I was just curious still on our old group TPA business, if you could help me with the organic growth there in some sense. And I know we have now merged Paramount, so it's a bit tough, but I'll still try this. In Q1 FY26, the group revenue, which we reported, was about INR134 crores, right? Now I understand there have been certain culling of customers on the Paramount side where it doesn't make sense. But on this INR134 crores, if you could give some sense on how much you would have grown because this was the business we had done last year organically i n our base sort of. So that's question one. Question two is, you mentioned that we have signed the first outcome -based contract and congratulations on that. And I appreciate you can't give much details. But if you could just give some sense directionally on how do these outcomes work? Is it in terms of savings you generate over and above what was already happening, or it's the entire savings you are generating? And what amount of claims -- or percentage claims sort of will run on your system for this?

Thank you, Manjeet. Like you said, it's a little bit of a complex math for us to put out the Medi Assist and Paramount separately considering it's a little over 4 quarters. And of course, the base also has the trailing revenues, some of thos e accounts that were not already in the book when we acquired. So I think directionally, we've always presented 3, 4 metrics in the past, right, which is our retention rates, our same -store growth, right? So retention rates are 90% this year on the consolidated book, partly the portfolio rationalization, partly some of the challenges in onboarding. It's a large book where there is some attrition and more also a slightly higher base effect of what was there in Q1. But I think that's the retention number. Obviously, we've been historically 93%, 94% retention business. And one of the important things for us to track is how do we sort of get back there. And secondly, I think from a same-store growth perspective, I think I've said this in practically every quarterly or every call from the very highs of 20% just after COVID, I think last year ended was close to about 7%, 8% blended the same-store growth of the retained customers. We are still seeing similar same-store growth in the group business, slightly lower o n the large IT companies, but slightly higher on all of the others outside IT. So averaging out to about 7%, 8% same-store growth. And we continue to add a substantial amount of new business. And we also benefited previous year because we added a lot of ne w business in Q1. And our business is best seen over, say, trailing 4 quarters or on an annual basis because if we add a lot of new business in a particular year, say, in October or in December, not all the revenues are in that year, right?

So I think thes e are the 3 effects because of which you probably have those questions. But to summarize, our retention is at about 90%-odd for the reasons I stated. Same-store growth is still holding at around 8 %-odd, similar to what it was end of last year. IT companies are slightly slower. The rest is much faster. We are still adding a lot of new business, but the new business has its own seasonality. So some of these numbers are best seen over 4 trailing quarters. I hope that helps you Manjeet.

Satish, just one follow-up here. Assuming there were no new business additions, when you say same-store growth of 8%, does this 8% translate also into revenue growth? Or is the same-store growth of volume terms and then revenue growth maybe higher or lower than that? Just a basic question there.

No, same-store growth, it improves the underlying base premium, right? If you have a corporate that was paying INR1 crores of premium, same -store growth of 7% basically means they are paying INR1.07 crores this year as a premium. Obviously, revenue is a function of the yield on the premium contract.

Got it. And the second question on the outcome-based contract...

Manjeet, can I ask you to please join back the queue for follow-up questions.

Sure.

We take the next question from the line of Dhiraj Aaswan from Incred Equities.

Congratulations on great set of results. I just wanted to know about the industry that we are mostly catering to the group part of the insurance TPA and also like mostly it is from the PSU side. And I've been seeing that a lot of the 4 PSUs are trying like to get a change to HITPA, which they have created a different entity for handling TPA in-house. So can you shed some light on it, like what is it? And is it like an issue for us that there can be a shift of premiums from PSUs, which we are handling most o f them being the biggest TPA. Is there a risk that premiums will migrate to that segment?

Thank you for your question, Dhiraj. I think we've been operating in the same market landscape for more than a decade now. While I don't want to comment specifically on any one TPA, every insurer today has some amount of work happening in -house and some amount of work happening in with TPAs, the distribution changes by product or by line of business, whether it is group, retail or government, right? So that's an industry dynamic of how we work. I think what we should probably look at as the good proxies are our group retention rates and more importantly, the regulatory provision that allows the policyholder to request for a choice of their TPA from an insurer as long as the insurer has a working relationship with that TPA.

I think we're fundamentally living in a world and living in a business where we deliver what we have to deliver well and deliver better than everybody else, and we absolutely have the ri ght to win. And I don't think it's about any one specific arrangement that anybody has. And today, in fact, we spent much part of this call explaining how even insurance companies that have only in -house operations in retail are benefiting from some of the components and technologies that we have built. So we will always find a way to meaningfully contribute to this industry and to every insurer and of course may generate revenues out of it.

Okay. And I also wanted to understand that our retention for the group segment is showing that 90% this quarter. Is that due to the Paramount thing or...

It's like we said, it's mostly in our mixed portfolio given that it's almost 4 quarters. And the way this business works, given most of the contracts are annual contracts. From the time we onboard as a TPA, retention becomes our responsibility. So in the combined business between a couple of challenges in onboarding such large book plus the higher base that we had last year, plus some amount of rationalization of the portfolio itself is why we are at a 90%. And...

What would be this number if you can...

It's a little hard for us to break that out today.

Okay, sure, sir. Just one last thing. Can you like break down like what is the bifurcation of depreciation in our books because we haven't done the annual report of '26, so if you can do that?

So could we take this question offline with our team? Would that be okay because we have few more people waiting in the queue. Thank you.

We take the next question from the line of Sandeep Kothari from East Lane Capital.

Satish, just a quick question on this NPS Swasthya, which you have reported in your numbers. What is this? What is the potential? And what is our relationship? What is the kind of work we will do there? If you could throw some light, that would be very helpful.

That's a great question, Sandeep. Thank you. And NPS Swasthya. I mean, we are aware of NPS, the pension scheme. There are millions of subscribers of NPS. Historically, NPS has been an annuity only kind of model. So today, NPS Swasthya allows the subscribers to allocate a portion of their corpus towards health expenses. And wh en they have a health expense need or when they they have out -of-pocket expense, they're able to draw down in real time from their pension accounts that are set aside for this purpose and pay a portion of their health care expenses and then automatically t rigger other insurance policies that have a high deductible or a certain kind of deductible and aggregate this whole funding across NPS account, their cash and the insurer payouts into paying for hospitalization expenses, right?

So the scheme was created t o support subscribers from high out -of-pocket expenses. And secondly, using their accruals rather than just one -off expenses to pay for these out -of-pocket expenses. Our role in this scheme is NPS as a definition of health benefits administrator, as a tech nology platform that connects the members, the recordkeeping agencies, the CRAs and the pension funds, the insurance companies, network and payments all into one single platform , eventually for the entire membership to benefit from a scheme like this. So that's the role that we play as a technology platform or a network aggregator. Does it answer your question, Sandeep?

What's the potential for us? So we are the interface for the customer for this entire benefit delivery, if I could say that. So what's the potential long term for something like this for us?

The potential long term is obviously for the platform, certain revenues and where we work with the insurance companies through Medi Assist TPA, the incremental revenues, right? And today, it's in the initial stages, but we hope that the scheme will extend to a substantial part of the NPS membership, and it's been formally notified as a product and offering.

Understood. If I may ask one more question. What is the pushback you get from the insurers when you are trying to sell your technology platform to them? What is the big pushback? Because logically, it makes sense. So what takes it to get the sale process done?

I don't put this as a pushback, Sandeep. I think finally, every insurance company is different. Every product is different. Everybody has a different workflow, different ethos and claims management process. It's been very encouraging today. We probably have conversations, contracts, POC s running with half of the insurers today. So those have been very encouraging. And I think the slightly longer duration of cycle which I mean is fundamentally to understand how, into their existing process, our technology can seamlessly integrate because not everybody is in a position to change their core systems overnight. For those who are adopting our core system MAtrix, everything is completely seamless. For those who are unable to move out of their core systems, there is some little bit of additional effort and understanding on how we plug into their workflows, but we now have contracts with all of the mixes where they're deploying MAtrix. We're also deploying these capabilities without the underlying MAtrix platform into their existing core platform. So we have proofs of concepts and validations for both types of contracts.

We take the next question from the line of Vikas Sharda from NT Asset Management.

One question on the data point which you report for the group segment that the PUM growth for PSUs is 28.9% for you, which is 30% higher than the industry. So does it imply that the PSU group health business basically for the industry was down Y-o-Y?

And what would be the overall group health insurance industry growth, let's say, for this quarter?

About 14%.

14% for the industry, but you're saying within the PSUs were down Y-o-Y?

Yes, negative 1.5%. And again, what industry reports is group premiums is not just employer - employee. It also includes other group products. We don't have a public breakdown of the entire employee versus the others. But considering it's predominantly employer -employee, I think it's fair to look at it as we have improved our share of wallet.

Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, with that, we conclude the question -and-answer session. I now hand the conference over to Mr. Cyril Paul from E&Y for closing comments.

Thank you, everyone, for your active participation in the call. We are available offline to address any further queries you may have regarding the business a nd the financials. Please feel free to write to us at investor.relations@mediassist.in , that is, investor.relations@mediassist.in to be added on our mailing list. We look forward to staying in touch with you and further interactions. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, everyone.

Thank you.

On behalf of Medi Assist Healthcare Services Limited, that concludes this conference call. Thank you for joining us, and you may now disconnect your lines.

This transcript has been edited for clarity and readability, and should not be relied on as a verbatim representation o f the discussion. For an exact account of the proceedings, kind refer the official audio recording of the call published on the stock exchange.