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

Thanks for the opportunity. My first question is on the retail claim loss ratio. So, the retail claim loss ratio has been broadly stable at around 67% despite the very strong growth in new business. Just wanted to understand why is that, because typically new business would have a lower loss ratio? So, just wanted to understand, is ther e any other offsetting factor that is going into this, which we should be aware about ? That's one. Second thing on the growth side, there has been GST tailwinds, your ReAssure 3.0 product has seen very significant traction as well. But are you seeing these GST tailwinds continue into January as well? And, is that traction continuing? Or should we think of it as more of a structural tailwind as compared to one -off impact that would have played out for three months? And I just wanted to understand, how the tr ends there are playing out? And then, lastly, Vishwanath, on your commentary around, the regulation bit. Just wanted to understand that there are multiple initiatives, you are right, being taken by the General Insurance Council. But when it comes to medica l inflation or commissions, we are not seeing any improvement at an overall industry level. So, when should we start seeing these initiatives, which either the General Insurance Council or companies are taking really flow down to and resulting in the industry profitability improve? How far are we from that point? And what really needs to change for that to happen? If you could throw some light there. Thank you.

Supratim, I will just start with loss ratio. So, loss ratio is stable around 67% and see, this is based on earned premium and all the business growth. Of course, we have been consistently growing. But the one which Ankur mentioned, the supernormal growth in last quarter, the earned premium of this will take time. So, the mix change we have to see not only in terms of GWP, but more like earned premium. It will reflect over a period of time. So, in that sense, if we look at our planning, our modeling, etc., this loss ratio being stable itself is, I mean, looking pretty g ood to us.

And on your next question in terms of GST tailwinds to sustain, from October to November and to December, the December growth was even better. And January also looks very healthy to us, which to me looks like it's not a one-time benefit which we have got. Looks like a sustained one to us.

And Supratim, in terms of your question on broadly the two sets of initiatives, right, or three sets of initiatives. Let me take the one on acquisition cost first. I would say as an industry, and we updated last time as well, that the GST impact on commissions would be passed through. That is evident in our data, right? If I look at gross commission ratio for H1, it was 23%. For Q3, it is 21%. So, there is a 2 percentage point fall. And largely this is on account of GST. That's one example. Also, as you may be aware, on senior trail, the commission rates have been dropped to for many, many participants, 10% including GST. So, that's another. And, the senio r book is between 15 % and 20% of several companies ; several large platforms. So, that's another significant development, which is actually operating at the industry level. So, clearly there is action happening, and that action is also evident in the data, at least in terms of what I just told you. With respect to, look, the other point is the awareness campaign, where GST has certainly been an important tailwind. But more broadly, I think the overall spend on awareness should play out. I am sure there is some impact of that in terms of the business growth numbers that Ankur alluded to. But these are things that take time to play out with any such campaign. This is a multi-year impact item, not something that you can expect to see results for in a quarter or two. That's generally how sustained brand building and awareness works. Now, to t he point on what is happening on the hospital side. Look, there are close to a thousand hospitals that are empanelled with common rates with the industry today. Again, and these are at rates of the industry with its collective bargaining power has empanelled these hospitals. So, for sure, the impact of this and this number will go to 5,000 in the next 6 to 9 months. So, the impact of this will also play out. But let me also add, it's not just tariffs. I would say tariffs is only one part of what the industr y initiative on, with respect to hospitals about. It's also about standardi zation. So, last time I mentioned that, we have standardized protocols for seven medical conditions. We have also standardized protocols for seven treatments. This is also having an impact. We are not yet in a position to quantify it for you. But for sure, this will have an impact on claims cost and therefore ongoing affordability of health insurance.

Got it. Just one follow up question there, Krishnan. On the senior citizen plan, it has come down from 15 to 10. I just wanted to understand can this be extended to the other products as well? Because not a lot of effort is really required to drive renewal business. And the renewal commissions actually goes as the person ages as well, because the premium goes up. So, I wanted to understand if this could be extended for the entire renewal piece as well.

Supratim, it's always about keeping a balance. And it's about taking a measu red approach, because as I mentioned last time, we want to make sure that as we do this, of course, there is a win for the customer, distribution and us. So, it is about finding the balance over time. So, could it be done? The answer is yes. But, it's about having a balanced approach and measured approach to do some of these things. But the point really is in the last 12 months, there has been some fairly serious action.

Got it. Understood. And just one data keeping question. What is the IFRS loss ratio in 3Q FY'26? And if you could also mention the gross-earned, the insurance revenue from IFRS, those two could be helpful.

So, Supratim, on IFRS result, this time we are publishing all the results, including with limited review by statutory auditor. So, they should be there in Stock Exchange's website. Maybe in an hour or so. So, you will get everything. But we can talk about, you wanted to know, quarter three IFRS loss ratios overall? This is 64.4%.

Okay, that's helpful.

And you will get all insurance revenue, etc., everything.

Okay, that would be very helpful. Thank you, Vishwanath.

Thank you. The next question is from the line on Sanket h Godha from Avendus Spark. Please go ahead.

Thank you for the opportunity. Vishwanath, can you spell out your group claims ratio for 9 months, current year, and last year? Just to understand, because overall loss ratio is lower than the retail. So, naturally, the group is better. So, just if you can give the color, how the number is and how it has changed from last year.

Yes, Sanket h So, group loss ratio last year was around 57%. This year is 62%. That's the increase. And that has to do mainly with mix change. And you can see the drop in expenses , I mean, this is one of the factors.

Understood. And just related to that point, maybe I don't know the corporate plans, if they have helped to reduce your EoM or accelerate the compliance of your EoM. Just wanted to understand whether the behavior in that business has been in line with your expectations? So, when it comes to the 4th Quarter renewal, you will continue to do it? Or any thoughts on those lines? Or how the contracts are behaving? Suppose you want to withdraw any compliance burden with respect to EoM?

So, Sanketh, as we have always maintained, we write this business wherever we believe it makes economic sense for us. So, in terms of writing corporate business, it is not about EoM. It is about doing it for entirely business reasons. In fact, this portfolio has actually grown slower for us. It's grown at 12% this year, just to give you a sense. So, we write this business when the pricing is supportive for us, and also when our value proposition is resonating. So, compared to last year, this business is only growing at 12%. So, materially slower than the Company's overall growth rate.

Understood, Krishnan. So, actually, that was my next question, that if your group growth is 12, and if the corporate part also has grown by 12, then your banca business has meaningfully slowed down. Maybe I am asking this question very similar to the previous quarter, whether this is market share loss, or in general, disbursements being weak, is leading to that slowdown?

No. So, on the banca side, as I mentioned, Sanket h, our growth is 27.5% in Quarter 3, banca NBFC. And YTD, we are almost at 20% growth on the banca side. It's not slowing down overall. The 12%, which Mr. Krishnan mentioned, was on the B2B side, employer-employee side.

Okay, understood. Okay, maybe I was looking at the wrong number. Sorry, my bad there. So, understood that point. And which means, eventually, means that your mix in the favor of benefit- based products improved. So, which should be boding well for overall loss ratios in group business to improve going ahead compared to 62, what you reported now?

Yes, in future, you are right. So, when we look at this next year, because this is basis earning, the weights of earning, and that's why we are here, yes.

Understood. And lastly, two questions. One is, can you spell out contribution of your long-term policies in the fresh business you are doing? You said that the growth is on fresh 47, if I got the number right. So, how much was the contribution of long -term in the current 3rd Quarter or 9 months? And how was it in 3rd Quarter last year and 9 months of the last year? And the second question is on solvency. See, our solvency was 300 plus, now has dipped to 249, maybe because of 1/N accounting thing. Assume profit pools remain slow and the growth remains as strong as it is in the IG AAP numbers, the solvency is based on IG AAP numbers. So, do you think these numbers will see a challenge or you will go for a sub-debt? I know it's too early to ask, but I just wanted to understand when the convergence in the profits will happen and therefore it might not trigger solvency to fall below 200?

So, let me take the first one. Sanketh, our overall multi-year policies has been stable since last year. There has been not very significant change over last year to this year. This is hovering around 20%-21% even in last year and this year as well. Neither the quarter wise there is any change which I should highlight here.

Sir, this 20%-21% is on total premium, including renewals. If I consider only new -new, then also the number is same?

Around some change, but not very significant here. I don't have immediate handy number, but not very significant is what I will tell you.

Understood, Thanks.

Yes, on solvency, Sanketh. So, as you know, there is a seasonality in IGAAP profit and Quarter 4 is always heavy in terms of results, so we don't see that to be challenge. 2.5 should only go up. So, I mean, it is as per our plan when we raise this capital. So, we are good with that.

Understood. Perfect, those were my questions.

The growth on banca that Ankur mentioned is the channel growth. It doesn't necessarily translate into, channel has both retail as well as group. So, just keep that in mind, as you think through how it will play out over time.

Yes, I understood, Krishnan. Thanks for the clarification.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Pr ayesh Jain from Motilal Oswal Financial Services. Please go ahead.

Thanks for the opportunity. Firstly, you mentioned about seven surgeries or something, which is kind of agreed rates. So, is it with the entire hospital network or how is it? And what would be the contribution of these, say, in your 9 months claims?

Thank you, Pr ayesh. It's not on rate, what Mr. Krishnan refe rred to is, as an industry, most players have come to an agreement to apply evidence-based medicine, driven standard protocols for hospitalization in seven common, seven most common infectious diseases. Now, the same is also available, ratified by and thus is available on General Insurance Council's website as well. Now, all the insurers, one of the challenges that we used to, as insurers face is ambiguity about admission criteria in infections mostly. Now, these guidelines, as I said, very evidence -driven guidelines were created. These were circulated and discussed with more than 10,000 -15,000 providers and consequent to their input, a nd with their input, these have been agreed and have been put on General Insurance Council's website. That removes any ambig uity whether a hospitalization was necessary or not. This is about standard treatment protocols and guidelines and not about the cost.

Maybe you should stick with the ICMR standard treatment workflows.

Yes. So, as you would have heard, as many of you know, ICMR also has come up with standard treatment workflows or call it care pathways or guidelines for a range of more than 100 health conditions and diagnosis and procedures. Industry is at actively an d at advanced s tage of adopting this premier institution's very scientific body of work on creating these guidelines under the aegis of General Insurance Council. That is, as I said, at a fairly advanced level. This removes ambiguity and awards a lot of clarity even to consumers. Based on very clearly when is the admission required and whether the treatment is appropriate or not.

Whole point, Prayesh, is we tend to talk a lot about tariffs, but actually the larger impact of how medicine plays out is on admissions, is about over care, it's about unnecessary care, right? So, the whole drive from an industry standpoint, in addition to, of course, common empanelment is on standardization, right? And the idea is, look, when we have standards on when is an admission necessary, what is the appropriate standard of care for a particular presenting diagnosis, right? And these are all, medicine is science. So, the idea is to, as an industry, of course, in collaboration, in consultation with hospitals , do this so that we have a handshake that is great from a consumer standpoint, both from an experience as well as from a cost angle.

And if I may add, Prayesh, there the common empanelment, which Mr. Krishnan referred to earlier, again, driven through General Insurance Council, where already thousand hospitals have, we have achieved closure and sooner than later, likely to go to 5 ,000 is a combination of both standard tariffs with them and the simultaneous activity, standa rd treatment protocols, guidelines, what is already live and through the ICMR in combination addresses both the components, which is appropriate care, right admission at right cost.

And do visit the council website to get a flavor of what these protocols are about. They are displayed on the General Insurance Council website.

I will do that. Just more color on it. So, obviously you would have been, you would have a better understanding on this with respect to what has been the average claim sizes on these diseases and current tariffs or whatever savings. Do you think that those are significantly or materially lower than what we are looking at average claim size on these diseases right now?

As I mentioned, the standard protocols primarily are about admitting the patient when admission is required based on clinical condition and parameters.

There could be number of reasons it can go wrong?

That's correct. So, in our, for example, post -monsoon, we have historically witnessed a significantly high level of admissions, for example, for dengue fever. Now there is a protocol on when an admission is warranted. And by the application of this protoco l consistently as an industry, we are in a position to say, hey, all of the signs and symptoms and presenting diagnosis does not warrant an admission. And an unwarranted admission is actually harmful to the customer. So, that, it will lower admissions , completely eliminating the claim as opposed to dealing with average claim size.

And very important to note these two points, if I may add. One is because we had circulated to all providers, all hospitals and have taken their input and t hen only finalized. That means customer is not inconvenienced. Hospitals also know the protocol that is applied. So, unnecessary admissions are avoided, and consumers are not inconvenienced in that. Otherwise, once somebody unnecessarily admitted at the claim stage, only if you apply, maybe you are doing the right thing, still possibly customer may face some hardship that is also eliminated by providing clarity and removing ambiguity.

Got that. Thanks for that detailed explanation. Last que stion, just on the commission bit again, there has been a very strong fresh growth in this quarter. And the commission ratios have come down. And with respect to passing on GST, is that a concluded agreement with all your partners or there are still negotiations going on and possibly some impact of it could come in the later quarters? Is there anything on that sorts?

We have closed all discussions, and we have passed it on to our distributors. And as I mentioned earlier, they've also seen the results of this GST. Their overall income is not getting impacted. They're all very happy that overall, business is going up. If you look at all th e distributor businesses, overall business is going up. That's a very good news. Yes, there is an impact, but overall income impact is not there. Percentage impact may be there.

And isn't this fresh growth and in spite of that lower commissions, could you explain that?

The growth numbers are much higher, which means the overall business has gone up for them. The ticket size has gone up for them.

My question is on your IGAAP commission ratio. In spite of the fact that we had such a strong fresh growth, the ratio has come down. What explains that?

There is 2 percentage point , around 1.67 percentage point drop in commission ratio. Prayesh, that accounts for both new re newal mix, which would take it upward and passing on this 18% GST. So, whatever commission we are paying on retail book, so it is divided by 1.18. So, if you just, let's just take a 70% retail book, if there is no change in this, so it should go down by 12.6%, just to give you mathematics. So, 21 divided by 1.126. So, it should have been lower, but it's not lower because of this change in mix where we have higher new business.

I will take this offline. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Shobhit Sharma from HDFC Securities Limited. Please go ahead.

Hi, sir. Thanks for the opportunity. So, my first question is on the recent letter, which we have received from the IRDAI on the EoM. So, though the letter mentioned about the revised methodology for calculating EoM, but why I am asking this question is because there is a lot of noise and there is a lot of statements made by the government and the regulator around the higher distribution cost. So, do you expect that the overall EoM for the industry should be brought, would be brought down by the IRDAI and how prepared are we on that? Secondly, interestingly, you have given a slide on the claims ratio on the IGA AP side, how it has moved. So, I just wanted to understand, last year, you mentioned that there was a favorable impact of 1/N accounting. So, can you help us understand that? And on H1, you mentioned that the 1/N impact was around 5.2%, somewhere close to that. This at the end of 9-month, this has gone up. So, I just want to understand why this has happened, because during the quarter, you would have received the second installment of the long term premiums underwritten last year. So, that's it. And lastly, on the loss ratio, usually Q3 on a seasonal basis should have a lower loss ratio, but it seems it has gone up as compared to the last quarter. So, have we inched up our reserving? So, these are my questions.

Sure. On EoM and commission, there has been a lot of discussion in the media, but in terms of what the position is, whether something is happening, if something is happening, how will it happen? To be honest, nobody has an answer to that. I would be just guessing, even if I told you anything on that. So, that's really where things are as far as both these topics are concerned. As of now, I guess the topic, as far as we are concerned, is what happens with respect to our own EOM, with respect to our glide path and compliance. And the re Vishwanath has already confirmed that with respect to what is the regulation of the day, we are well on track to comply. On the IGAAP and loss ratio, I will ask Vishwanath.

So, loss ratio has not gone up, it has gone down. If you compare H1 to Q3 on retail side, group, of course, is a function of many things, including mix. So, retail loss ratio has gone down. And now your question on IGAAP. So, IGAAP, we mentioned that there is a one-time impact of one large group, which will get normalized in next quarter because the renewal is due on 1st January and that has been renewed. So, just to address that. And impact of 1/N accounting, maybe we can take offline. It is not very straightforward ; that there is impact of business which was deferred last year, that plus what we are deferring now. So, net of, if you do, so that's the impact we have shown of 1/N, 5.9%.

Okay. Vishwa, just one more thing, because of the claims, so because of the GST rationalization on the consumable side, on the claims side. So, have you experienced any kind of reduction in the claim size or claims cost? So, that's one. And on the expenses side, anything else other than the commission rationalization we have done?

Yes, I can take both the questions and bot h are quite related also. So, we have done analysis in depth, looking at claims, what was the, let's say medicine cost, individual medicine cost, pre - GST and post-GST. So, we have seen there is certainly reduction in those. And if I can just share with you, for this, the impact is around 50 basis point on combined operating ratio. Of course, on loss claims is higher. Second part on GST, non -availability of input tax credit on other expenses. So, we have done 2-3 things. One, of course, we rationalized our e xpenses. We negotiated with some of the vendors. All those things have helped, but still there is impact on account of that, which is reflected in Q3 results, which incidentally is closer to that 50 basis point as far as COR is concerned. So, they almost nullify each other.

Okay. So, Vishwa, so you mentioned the 50 basis impact, this is on the 9-month number or for the quarter number?

It is for the quarter. The 9 months would be because H1 there was nothing. So, it is, you can see on underwriting basis.

Okay. Got it. Thank you. All the best.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Avnish Tiwari from Va ikarya Change LLP. Please go ahead.

On the positive things you mention ed about industry -wise efforts to control the claims, how much they would have benefited in terms of 9 months? Because the reported number shows sort of a flattish kind when I look at IFRS numbers. And if you look at a cohort -wise, because you have a mix o f new, which helps you here, but if you can internally look at the cohort -wise to make a quantitative assessment, how much of impact, positive impact, these industry -wide efforts would have taken?

Look, I just want to emphasize that the industry -wise efforts are again, like the awareness campaign, on the claim side, these are multi -year efforts, right? It's not that there is one action that fills, that you will start to see results in one quarter. So, these are multi-year efforts. And also, the fact of the matter is, with these efforts as well, there will be an inflation that will operate. And the fact that claims ratio is flat last year to this year, in spite of an aging book, and Vishwanath also mentioned with respect to earnings, I would say that means that effectively inflation has been at some level negated, right? So, that also gives you a sense of overall what is happening in our portfolio. As far as the retail cohorts are concerned, I would say it's in line with our expectation, as well as planning.

Okay, so you also give this claims cost index, which is showing a not too much increase so far in this 9 months, right? Is that representation of all these efforts you are making? Is it fair to sort of draw a quantitative inference?

It's a reasonable proxy for you to look at.

Got it. And your cohort seasoning impact of the claims ratios, is being nullified by the new fresh mix ingredient. That is also a fair assessment. I think if, let's say, you didn't have this, what is going on in terms of seasoning and the new offsetting it, then you would have seen slightly improved ratio on the claims. Is that fair to think?

You are right.

Okay. Another question I had on this one, if I had to look at the claims ratio you report in IFRS versus the claims ratio you report in the 1/N basis, there is about 8% gap. Can you help me in this accounting wise, what causes this much gap?

Yes, sure. So, IFRS, the claims ratio is on 1/365 method. So, which is in a way, true reflection of underlying claims and earnings. So, this is consistent. On IGAAP, there are two impacts which are playing. One, because under IGAAP, we don't have DAC. So, we know that that issue is there. In terms of claims, the claims ratio is calculated on 50% earning. So, we set off 50% of NWP as UPR. So, in that sense, there is a seasonality impact. Also, seasonality is accentua ted because there was 1 or 2 large groups which were written on 1st January, which will get renewed on 1st January this year, which are already renewed. And next year, next quarter, when you see for whole year, that will be more normalized. And also on top of this, there is a 1/N impact also, because some of the business of multi-year is now deferred, which was not the case historically. So, there is a lot of noise.

Yes, I would just add, and we have said this consistently, and I think all of you agree that the right way to look at our financials is on an IFRS basis. The Indian G AAP Accounting has a lot of noise, as Vishwanath mentioned. Also, because of the change in accounting that was introduced last year. Also, the r egulator has also indicated that IFRS will become the local standard of accounting April 1, 2027, onwards. So, we will have to bear with this noise for this quarter as well as four quarters next year. But after that, it should hopefully be all IFRS.

Got it. And the last piece on this, that the pricing increase, which is being taken by the industry- wide, including yourself, is that, if you look at 9-month '26, is it sufficient or more than sufficient to cover the medical cost inflation, all of those factors and problems in the industry? Or is this still what you probably will need to come to a profitable level for the industry?

I am not sure I understood the question.

I meant to say that the price increase you take on your products, right?

Yes.

The pricing increase, you talked about a few things in the call, but are these price increases enough, given that you have made some controlling effort towards the cost inflation side on the medical cost and industry? But now, are we meeting, matching that criteria where prices and costs are converging to each other, or still the cost inflation is ahead of price increase?

I think we have consistently maintained that our approach to pricing is to do it annually and to do it high single digit. That approach or strategy does not change. What that high single digit is, is a function of what is the underlying inflation that we are seeing. And as you pointed out, 9 months this year has been relatively all right, benign.

Great, thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from the line of Sucrit D. Patil from Eyesight Fintrade. Please go ahead.

Good evening to the team. I have two questions, both forward looking. My first question to Mr. Krishnan is, with rising healthcare inflation and increasing penetration of retail health insurance, how is Niva Bupa refining its product design, underwriti ng framework and distribution mix to drive sustainable growth? In this context, how do you balance expansion into your customer category with maintaining long -term claim discipline, customer experience and the existing portfolio quality? That's the first question. I will ask the second question after this. Thank you.

Sure, look, I will reiterate what we have consistently maintained as our approach to building a sustainable portfolio, is our underwriting approach of, which is basis, lifetime value. This is a fairly sophisticated and mature algorithm that we have been working on for the last, close to 6 years now, which is about matching the product, the sum insured , with the economics that we part with to distribution, geography, channel, age, etc, etc. And we are in a position to therefore then indicate, predict when we underwrite a particular risk, is it going to be sustainable over the long term, specifically with respect to how the cohorts behave. So, I think this approach has stood us in good stead. And this is fundamentally the approach that we use to select risk. Now, in terms of building a sustainable portfolio, this is the most powerful lever. But there are other levers that we have mentioned in the past, and I will reiterate some of them. One is, a discipline around inflation-driven price increase every year. We believe that it's better to do single -digit price increase annually as opposed to bunching it up over 2-3 years, where it ends up being a sticker shock and results in selective lapse. So, this is the other pricing discipline that we have maintained. There is a lot of work that we are doing on the claims side, both from a cost management and coincidentally, also improving customer experience. Dr. Bhabatosh referred to the preferred provider network. There is a bunch of industry initiatives that I spoke about, including medical protocol s, etc, et c. So, I think that is the other lever that we use to build a sustainable portfolio. And also, on the renewal book, there is continuous opportunities to upgrade customers to more appropriate products, more appropriate sum insured. So, there is a, steady cross-sell, up-sell rhythm. And nearly one in five of eligible customers do get cross-sold or up-sold at the time of renewal. So, it's taken together. This is what we call our approach to portfolio management that delivers what we believe will be sustainable over time.

Thank you. I have just one question to Mr. Vishwanath. Again, it's a forward -looking one, just want to understand your vision on this. Given the constant volatility in claims ratio and the ever- evolving regulatory com pliance, how are you thinking about margin sustainability and profit normalization over the short to medium term? Additionally, can you elaborate on how capital allocation, investment tactics, and operating efficiency initiatives are being aligned to suppo rt growth while strengthening return metrics and keeping the balance sheet strong?

Yes, sure. See, our medium -term target is to get to ROE of high teens, let's say in next two financial years. And we are on IF RS basis, and we are very much there in that trajectory. So, and for that, of course, like Mr. Krishnan mentioned, underwriting , claims, growth in business, all those are levers which we are using. But if you see our trajectory of profits and ROE in last three years, and all those numbers are available in public domain on IFRS audited accounts, you will realize all those things, in cluding maintaining loss ratios and operating leverage and economies of scale are helping us to achieve the target of high teens ROE in next two years' time.

Thank you, and best of luck for the next quarter.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, everyone. Appreciate the questions and your patient listening.

Thank you. Due to time constraint, as that was the last question, I will hand the conference over to Mr. Krishnan for closing comments. Over to you, sir.

I already said my thank you. Thank you to everyone for being with us on the call, your questions and very patient hearing.

Thank you. On behalf of ICICI Securities Limited, that concludes this conference. Thank you for joining us and you may now disconnect your lines. Thank you.