Lemonade Inc (LMND) 2023 Q2 法說會逐字稿

Hello, welcome to the Lemonade Q2 2023 Earnings Call. My name is Alex. I'll be ordinating the call today. (Operator Instructions) I'll now hand it over to your host, Yael Wissner-Levy from Lemonade. Please go ahead.

您好，歡迎參加 Lemonade 2023 年第二季度收益電話會議。我的名字叫亞歷克斯。我今天將安排電話會議。 （操作員指示）我現在將其交給主持人，來自 Lemonade 的 Yael Wissner-Levy。請繼續。

Good morning, and welcome to Lemonade's Second Quarter 2023 Earnings Call. My name is Yael Wissner-Levy, and I am the VP of Communications at Lemonade. Joining me today to discuss our results are Daniel Schreiber, Co-CEO and Co-Founder; Shai Wininger, Co-CEO and Co-Founder; and Tim Bixby, our Chief Financial Officer.

早上好，歡迎參加 Lemonade 2023 年第二季度收益電話會議。我叫 Yael Wissner-Levy，是 Lemonade 的傳播副總裁。今天與我一起討論我們的結果的是聯合首席執行官兼聯合創始人 Daniel Schreiber； Shai Wininger，聯合首席執行官兼聯合創始人；以及我們的首席財務官蒂姆·比克斯比 (Tim Bixby)。

A letter to shareholders covering the company's second quarter 2023 financial results is available on our Investor Relations website, investor.lemonade.com. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that management's remarks on this call may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

有關公司 2023 年第二季度財務業績的致股東信，請訪問我們的投資者關係網站 Investor.lemonade.com。在我們開始之前，我想提醒您，管理層在本次電話會議上的言論可能包含 1995 年《私人證券訴訟改革法案》含義內的前瞻性陳述。

Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors, including those discussed in the Risk Factors section of our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 3, 2023, our Form 10-Q filed with the SEC on May 5, 2023, and our other filings with the SEC.

由於各種重要因素的影響，實際結果可能與這些前瞻性陳述所示的結果存在重大差異，包括我們於2023 年3 月3 日向SEC 提交的表格10-K 的風險因素部分中討論的因素，我們的表格10- Q 於 2023 年 5 月 5 日向 SEC 提交了文件，以及我們向 SEC 提交的其他文件。

Any forward-looking statements made on this call represent our views only as of today, and we undertake no obligation to update them. We will be referring to certain non-GAAP financial measures on today's call, such as adjusted EBITDA and adjusted gross profit, which we believe may be important to investors to assess our operating performance.

本次電話會議中所做的任何前瞻性陳述僅代表我們今天的觀點，我們不承擔更新這些陳述的義務。我們將在今天的電話會議上提及某些非公認會計準則財務指標，例如調整後的 EBITDA 和調整後的毛利潤，我們認為這對於投資者評估我們的經營業績可能很重要。

Reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures are included in our letter to shareholders. Our letter to shareholders also includes information about our key performance indicators, including customers, in-force premiums, premium per customer, annual dollar retention, gross earned premium, gross loss ratio, gross loss ratio ex CAT and net loss ratio, and a definition of each metric, why each is useful to investors and how we use each to monitor and manage our business.

我們致股東的信中包含了這些非公認會計原則財務指標與最直接可比的公認會計原則財務指標的調節表。我們致股東的信還包括有關我們關鍵績效指標的信息，包括客戶、有效保費、每位客戶的保費、年度保留金額、毛收入保費、毛損失率、除CAT 外的毛損失率和淨損失率，以及定義每個指標的詳細信息，為什麼每個指標對投資者有用，以及我們如何使用每個指標來監控和管理我們的業務。

With that, I'll turn the call over to Daniel for some opening remarks. Daniel?

接下來，我將把電話轉給丹尼爾做一些開場白。丹尼爾？

Good morning, and thank you for joining us to discuss Lemonade's Q2 results and our updated outlook for the year. The second quarter bested our expectations on both top and bottom lines despite the outsized weather events, which dampened results across the entire industry.

早上好，感謝您與我們一起討論 Lemonade 第二季度的業績以及我們今年的最新展望。儘管特大天氣事件影響了整個行業的業績，但第二季度的營收和利潤都超出了我們的預期。

Tim will provide all the details shortly, though. The headline is that our in-force premium grew 50% year-on-year, while our operating expense grew only 9% and our net loss decreased. Premium is growing more than 5x faster than expenses, highlights the scalability of our business. As we continue to grow, we expect this dynamic to drive our progress towards profitability.

不過，蒂姆很快就會提供所有細節。標題是我們的有效保費同比增長 50%，而我們的運營費用僅增長 9%，淨虧損減少。保費增長速度比費用增長快 5 倍以上，凸顯了我們業務的可擴展性。隨著我們的不斷發展，我們預計這種動力將推動我們實現盈利。

The importance of achieving scale was the driving force behind a major piece of news in Q2, the launch of our Synthetic Agents program with a long-time investor General Catalyst. We believe this program is something of a game changer and I have written about it at length on our blog, and we cover its mechanics in the back of the shareholder letter published yesterday.

實現規模化的重要性是第二季度一則重大新聞背後的驅動力，即我們與長期投資者 General Catalyst 共同推出的合成藥物計劃。我們相信這個程序會改變遊戲規則，我已經在我們的博客上詳細介紹了它，並且我們在昨天發布的股東信的後面介紹了它的機制。

I do encourage you to study this program as it is not quite like anything we've seen before, and we believe its impact on our business will be material in 2024 and beyond. Let me explain it briefly. To date, our direct-to-consumer business model has served us extremely well and with no plans to change it, but it does have one downside, customer acquisition costs, known by the acronym CAC, are borne upfront, and it takes us about 24 months to recoup that initial outlay.

我確實鼓勵您研究這個計劃，因為它與我們以前見過的任何計劃都不一樣，我們相信它對我們業務的影響將在 2024 年及以後產生重大影響。讓我簡單解釋一下。迄今為止，我們的直接面向消費者的業務模式為我們提供了非常好的服務，並且沒有計劃改變它，但它確實有一個缺點，即客戶獲取成本（縮寫為CAC）是預先承擔的，這需要我們大約24 個月即可收回初始支出。

To be clear, our expenditure on CAC is money well spent because over their lifetime with us, our customers typically repay their CAC 3x over even accounting for the time value of money. But because it takes time to recoup the initial outlay, rapid growth is typically cash flow negative.

需要明確的是，我們在 CAC 上的支出是值得的，因為在我們的客戶一生中，即使考慮到金錢的時間價值，我們的客戶通常也會償還他們的 CAC 3 倍。但由於收回初始支出需要時間，快速增長通常會帶來負現金流。

If we spend $100 million on CAC in year 1, for example, and $200 million in year 2 and $300 million in we could expect that $600 million of CAC investment to yield about $2 billion in gross profit over time, which is a very compelling ROI. But before we saw that return, our bank account would see a dramatic dip in its balance, not a sustainable approach at higher growth rates.

例如，如果我們在第一年在CAC 上花費1 億美元，在第二年花費2 億美元，在第二年花費3 億美元，我們可以預期，隨著時間的推移，6 億美元的CAC 投資將產生約20 億美元的毛利潤，這是非常引人注目的投資回報率。但在我們看到這種回報之前，我們的銀行賬戶餘額將急劇下降，這在較高的增長率下不是一個可持續的方法。

Without this Synthetic Agents program, long-term profitability comes at the expense of near-term cash reserves. This trade-off limits our pace of growth, particularly while the cost of capital is elevated, slowing growth, preserves cash, which is good, but it also caps the amount of gross profit we can generate, slowing our path to profitability and lowering our terminal value.

如果沒有這個綜合代理計劃，長期盈利能力將以犧牲近期現金儲備為代價。這種權衡限制了我們的增長速度，特別是在資本成本升高、增長放緩、保留現金的情況下，這很好，但它也限制了我們可以產生的毛利潤，減緩了我們的盈利之路，降低了我們的盈利能力。終值。

Now insurance companies that sell through independent agents don't have this issue. The agent finances the CAC and the insurance company can grow without depleting cash reserves. But while we do partner with agents to some extent, we prefer not to let this become our primary distribution model.

現在通過獨立代理人銷售的保險公司不存在這個問題。代理人為 CAC 提供資金，保險公司可以在不耗盡現金儲備的情況下發展。但是，雖然我們確實在某種程度上與代理商合作，但我們不希望讓它成為我們的主要分銷模式。

For one, the agent mediated business replaces the magical Lemonade experience with the agent's own interface, commoditizing our brand and watering down the data we collect. For another, the agent [signs] off match as half of the gross profit of the customer over the life of the customer, greatly reducing the lifetime value or LTV.

其一，代理中介業務用代理自己的界面取代了神奇的檸檬水體驗，使我們的品牌商品化並淡化了我們收集的數據。另一方面，代理商在客戶生命週期中將匹配作為客戶毛利潤的一半，從而大大降低了終生價值或LTV。

So while agents do solve the cash flow gap, their costs in terms of gross profit, brand, data and customer relationship are significant, which is where Synthetic Agents come in. Synthetic Agents were designed to provide the cash flow benefits of independent agents without what we perceive to be their biggest downside.

因此，雖然代理商確實解決了現金流缺口，但他們在毛利潤、品牌、數據和客戶關係方面的成本是巨大的，這就是綜合代理商的用武之地。綜合代理商旨在提供獨立代理商的現金流收益，而無需任何費用。我們認為這是他們最大的缺點。

How? Synthetic Agents finance our CAC or up to 80% of it to be precise, and they get the equivalent of a 16% commission from those cohorts they helped finance. They have no other recourse whatsoever, just a right to a portion of the premiums that wouldn't have existed if it wasn't for their funding. That is broadly similar to independent agents.

如何？綜合代理為我們的 CAC 提供資金，準確地說，高達 80%，他們從他們幫助資助的群體中獲得相當於 16% 的佣金。他們沒有任何其他追索權，只能獲得一部分保費，如果沒有他們的資助，這些保費就不會存在。這與獨立代理人大致相似。

But unlike independent agents, payments to Synthetic Agents aren't for the lifetime of the customer, far from it. They stop after 2 to 3 years and Lemonade owns 100% of the LTV thereafter. That's a huge difference. Secondly, Synthetic Agents are just financial partners, and therefore, they don't intermediate the relationship between us and our customers. Our model remains direct-to-consumer, and we own the customer relationship, the customer experience and the customer data, another huge difference.

但與獨立代理不同的是，向綜合代理支付的費用並不是終身有效的，遠非如此。他們會在 2 到 3 年後停止，此後 Lemonade 擁有 100% 的 LTV。這是一個巨大的差異。其次，綜合代理只是財務合作夥伴，因此，他們不會調解我們和客戶之間的關係。我們的模式仍然是直接面向消費者，我們擁有客戶關係、客戶體驗和客戶數據，這是另一個巨大的區別。

The upshot is that our Synthetic Agents program enables rapid growth without forgoing the customer relationship, without foregoing much LTV, without depleting our cash reserves and without selling equity to finance our growth.

結果是，我們的合成代理計劃能夠實現快速增長，而不會放棄客戶關係，不會放棄太多生命週期價值，不會耗盡我們的現金儲備，也不會出售股權來為我們的增長提供資金。

Synthetic Agents have paved the way to a larger business and more profit sooner and with more cash in the bank, and hopefully, you see why we believe this program is something of a game changer. Same with the theme of making the most of our capital in addition to announcing our Synthetic Agents program, this quarter also saw the renewal of our reinsurance program, notwithstanding one of the hardest reinsurance markets in these many, many years.

合成代理為擴大業務、更快獲得更多利潤以及銀行里有更多現金鋪平了道路，希望您明白為什麼我們相信這個計劃會改變遊戲規則。除了宣布我們的綜合代理計劃之外，與充分利用我們的資本的主題相同，本季度還更新了我們的再保險計劃，儘管這是多年來最困難的再保險市場之一。

The (inaudible) program is for the same 55% seed as we had previously to the same top-tier reinsurers yielding similar capital efficiency. There are some changes to the renewed program, particularly around the treatment of CAT events, named hurricanes are excluded, for example, and there's a $5 million per event cap. Yet these are risks we can comfortably bear in our newly formed captive structures while maintaining our target capital efficiency.

該（聽不清）計劃的目標是與我們之前為相同的頂級再保險公司提供的相同的 55% 種子，產生類似的資本效率。更新後的計劃有一些變化，特別是在 CAT 事件的處理方面，例如，排除了颶風，並且每個事件的上限為 500 萬美元。然而，我們可以在新成立的自保結構中輕鬆承擔這些風險，同時保持我們的目標資本效率。

Taken together, the impact of our reinsurance program and synthetic agents program is significant. In that elemental state, the capital burdens of insurance, both regulatory capital and working capital, would weigh up down slowing growth, idling cash and delaying profitability. That's why our Q2 agreement are so material.

總而言之，我們的再保險計劃和綜合代理計劃的影響是巨大的。在這種基本狀態下，保險的資本負擔，包括監管資本和營運資本，將拖累經濟增長放緩、現金閒置和盈利能力延遲。這就是為什麼我們的第二季度協議如此重要。

Our reinsurance partners relieve our regulatory capital burden through our quota share program and general catalyst relieves our working capital burden through our Synthetic Agents program. At least from a capital perspective, therefore, the agreements that came into effect July 1 means that we're all set to grow and to go the distance, which brings us to the next hurdle we need to clear before picking up our growth rates, most notably rate approvals and loss ratio more broadly.

我們的再保險合作夥伴通過我們的配額份額計劃減輕了我們的監管資本負擔，通用催化劑通過我們的合成代理計劃減輕了我們的營運資本負擔。因此，至少從資本的角度來看，7 月 1 日生效的協議意味著我們都準備好成長並走下去，這給我們帶來了在提高增長率之前需要清除的下一個障礙，最值得注意的是更廣泛的批准率和損失率。

In my remarks last quarter, I said and I quote, "we expect our current trajectory to broadly continue, albeit with occasional hiccups when outsized CATs introduced a brief reversal." I stand by those comments. Q2 indeed saw a reversal due to outsized CAT events, but the underlying trend line continues to be in line with our expectations.

在我上個季度的講話中，我說過並引用了這一點：“我們預計目前的軌跡將大致持續下去，儘管在大型 CAT 帶來短暫逆轉時偶爾會出現一些問題。”我支持這些評論。由於 CAT 事件規模過大，第二季度確實出現了逆轉，但基本趨勢線仍然符合我們的預期。

Our rate filings have gained steam and approvals are also coming in faster now. Significantly, California approved a 30% rate increase for our homeowners product and 23% of our Pet business. It will take some time for these rates to earn in, and we still need to take more rates but we have reason to believe things are moving as they ought to.

我們的費率申請已經取得進展，批准速度也越來越快。值得注意的是，加利福尼亞州批准將我們的房主產品的費率提高 30%，將我們的寵物業務的費率提高 23%。這些利率需要一段時間才能實現，我們仍然需要採取更多利率，但我們有理由相信事情正在按其應有的方向發展。

Importantly, in parallel to our rate approvals picking up, inflation has been slowing down. This is really significant to us. And so long as these trends continue, as I said last quarter, we'll continue to expect the downward trajectory of our gross loss ratio to broadly continue, albeit with occasional hiccups when the outside CATs introduce a brief reversal.

重要的是，在我們的利率批准增加的同時，通脹也在放緩。這對我們來說確實意義重大。正如我上個季度所說，只要這些趨勢持續下去，我們就繼續預計毛損失率將繼續呈下降趨勢，儘管當外部 CAT 引入短暫逆轉時偶爾會出現一些問題。

And with that, let me hand over the call to Tim, who can provide more details on our Q2 results and the view into the second half of 2023. Tim?

接下來，讓我將電話轉交給蒂姆，他可以提供有關我們第二季度業績的更多詳細信息以及對 2023 年下半年的看法。蒂姆？

Great. Thanks, Daniel. I'll review highlights of our Q2 results and provide our expectations for the third quarter and the full year, and then we'll take some questions. It was a strong quarter across the board, with continued loss ratio progress despite CAT headwinds, really nice marketing efficiencies and impressive expense control. In-force premium or IFP, grew 50% in Q2 as compared to the prior year to $687 million.

偉大的。謝謝，丹尼爾。我將回顧我們第二季度業績的亮點，並提供我們對第三季度和全年的預期，然後我們將回答一些問題。這是一個全面強勁的季度，儘管存在 CAT 逆風，但損失率仍持續進步，營銷效率非常高，費用控制也令人印象深刻。第二季度有效保費（IFP）較上一年增長 50%，達到 6.87 億美元。

Absent the impact of the Metromile acquisition, organic annual growth was approximately 28%. Our customer count increased by 21% to 1.9 million as compared to the prior year. Premium per customer increased 24% versus the prior year to $360. This increase was driven primarily by both volume growth and mix shift, including the impact of the addition of Metromile's pay-per-mile customers and, to a lesser extent, increased price and coverage.

如果沒有 Metromile 收購的影響，有機年增長率約為 28%。與上一年相比，我們的客戶數量增加了 21%，達到 190 萬。每位客戶的保費比上一年增加了 24%，達到 360 美元。這一增長主要是由銷量增長和組合轉變推動的，包括 Metromile 按英里付費客戶增加的影響，以及較小程度上價格和覆蓋範圍增加的影響。

Annual dollar retention or ADR was flat as compared to the prior quarter and improved by 4 percentage points to 87% versus the prior year. We measure ADR on an annual cohort basis as a reminder, and this includes the impact of changes in policy value, additional policy purchases and churn.

年度美元留存率或 ADR 與上一季度持平，但比上年提高了 4 個百分點，達到 87%。作為提醒，我們每年都會衡量 ADR，其中包括保單價值變化、額外保單購買和流失的影響。

It's worth noting that our ADR may decline somewhat in coming quarters, as we recently passed the 1-year anniversary of the Metromile acquisition on July 28. This will add in a base of customers with slightly higher churn rates than the rest of our book. I expect this headwind to ADR driven by the change in product mix will dissipate over subsequent quarters.

值得注意的是，我們的ADR 在未來幾個季度可能會有所下降，因為我們最近於7 月28 日度過了收購Metromile 一周年紀念日。這將增加客戶流失率略高於我們賬簿其他部分的客戶群。我預計，產品組合變化帶來的 ADR 不利因素將在接下來的幾個季度中消失。

Our gross earned premium in Q2 increased 53% as compared to the prior year to $164 million, roughly in line with the increase in in-force premium. Revenue in Q2 increased 109% from the prior year to $105 million. The growth in revenue was driven by the increase in gross earned premium as well as a reduction in the proportion of premium ceded to reinsurers to roughly 53% in the quarter as compared to approximately 71% in the prior year.

我們第二季度的毛收入保費比上一年增長了 53%，達到 1.64 億美元，大致與有效保費的增長一致。第二季度收入較上年增長 109%，達到 1.05 億美元。收入增長的推動因素是毛收入保費的增加以及本季度分給再保險公司的保費比例從去年同期的約 71% 減少至約 53%。

Absent the change in the proportion ceded, revenue growth would be roughly in line with the growth in our gross earned premium. Our gross loss ratio was 94% for Q2 as compared to 86% in Q2 2022 and 87% in Q1 2023. The impact of CATs in Q2 was roughly 21 percentage points within the gross loss ratio. Absent the impact of all CATs in Q1 and Q2 the underlying non-CAT loss ratio showed solid improvement of roughly 8 percentage points from the prior year and roughly flat versus the prior quarter.

如果沒有讓出比例發生變化，收入增長將大致與我們毛收入保費的增長一致。我們第二季度的毛損失率為 94%，而 2022 年第二季度為 86%，2023 年第一季度為 87%。第二季度 CAT 的影響約為毛損失率 21 個百分點。如果沒有第一季度和第二季度所有 CAT 的影響，基本的非 CAT 損失率比上一年顯著改善約 8 個百分點，與上一季度基本持平。

Certainly, backing out CATs is not something we can actually do as an insurance business, but we do think providing additional transparency and detail around our results can be analytically helpful. Operating expenses, excluding loss and loss adjustment expense, increased 9% to $95 million in Q2 as compared to the prior year.

當然，作為一家保險企業，我們實際上無法取消 CAT，但我們確實認為，圍繞我們的結果提供額外的透明度和詳細信息可能會對分析有所幫助。第二季度運營費用（不包括損失和損失調整費用）比上年增加 9%，達到 9500 萬美元。

This is primarily driven by increased personnel expense, stock-based compensation expense and legal and professional fees, in large part due to the Metromile acquisition, partially offset by lower sales and marketing expense. Other insurance expense grew 55% in Q2 versus the prior year, roughly in line with the growth of earned premium.

這主要是由於人事費用、股票薪酬費用以及法律和專業費用的增加，這在很大程度上是由於收購 Metromile，但部分被銷售和營銷費用的下降所抵消。第二季度其他保險費用較去年同期增長 55%，與賺取保費的增長大致一致。

While total sales and marketing expense declined by $12 million or about 33% primarily due to lower growth acquisition spending to acquire new customers. Notably, our growth spend efficiency improved significantly in Q2, in large part due to this lower spend level.

總銷售和營銷費用下降了 1200 萬美元，即約 33%，主要是由於獲取新客戶的增長支出下降。值得注意的是，我們的增長支出效率在第二季度顯著提高，這在很大程度上是由於支出水平較低。

Each dollar spent on growth generated roughly 75% more IFP this quarter versus the prior year. We spent approximately $12.5 million for growth advertising in the quarter or roughly 50% of our total sales and marketing spend.

本季度用於增長的每一美元所產生的 IFP 比上年增加約 75%。本季度我們在增長廣告上花費了約 1,250 萬美元，約占我們銷售和營銷總支出的 50%。

Technology development expense increased 35% primarily due to the Metromile acquisition, while G&A expense increased 37% as compared to the prior year but notably decreased 6% as compared to the prior quarter. Personnel expense and head count continued to be quite stable despite continued growth in customers and premium.

技術開發費用增長了 35%，主要是由於收購了 Metromile，而一般管理費用與上年相比增長了 37%，但與上一季度相比顯著下降了 6%。儘管客戶和保費持續增長，但人員費用和員工人數仍然相當穩定。

In fact, our headcount actually decreased 2% as compared to year-end 2022 to 1,333 and has been essentially flat for 3 quarters running. Headcount increased 17% as compared to the prior year, primarily due to the acquisition in Q3 last year. Net loss was $67 million in Q2 or a loss of $0.97 per share as compared to the $68 million loss we reported in the second quarter of 2022 or a loss of $1.10 per share, while our adjusted EBITDA loss was $53 million in Q2 as compared to the $50 million adjusted EBITDA loss in the second quarter of 2022.

事實上，與 2022 年年底相比，我們的員工人數實際上減少了 2%，至 1,333 人，並且連續 3 個季度基本持平。員工人數較上年增加 17%，主要是由於去年第三季度的收購。第二季度淨虧損為6700 萬美元，即每股虧損0.97 美元，而我們在2022 年第二季度報告的虧損為6800 萬美元，即每股虧損1.10 美元，而我們第二季度調整後的EBITDA 虧損為5300 萬美元，而我們在2022 年第二季度報告的虧損為5300 萬美元。 2022 年第二季度調整後 EBITDA 虧損 5000 萬美元。

Our total cash, cash equivalents and investments ended the quarter at approximately $942 million, reflecting primarily a use of cash for operation of $97 million since year-end 2022. With these goals and metrics in mind, I'll outline our specific financial expectations for the third quarter and for the full year 2023.

本季度結束時，我們的現金、現金等價物和投資總額約為9.42 億美元，主要反映了自2022 年底以來運營現金使用量為9700 萬美元。考慮到這些目標和指標，我將概述我們的具體財務預期第三季度和 2023 年全年。

So for the third quarter, we expect in-force premium at September 30 of between $703 million and $706 million, gross earned premium between $166 million and $168 million, revenue between $102 million and $104 million, and an adjusted EBITDA loss of between $51 million and $49 million.

因此，對於第三季度，我們預計截至9 月30 日的有效保費將在7.03 億美元至7.06 億美元之間，毛收入保費將在1.66 億美元至1.68 億美元之間，收入將在1.02 億美元至1.04 億美元之間，調整後EBITDA 損失將在5100 萬美元之間4900萬美元。

We also expect stock-based compensation expense of approximately $16 million, capital expenditures of approximately $3 million and a weighted average share count of approximately 70 million shares. And for the full year 2023, we expect in-force premium at December 31 of between $710 million and $715 million, gross earned premium between $654 million and $658 million, revenue between $402 million and $408 million and adjusted EBITDA loss between $199 million and $196 million and stock-based compensation expense of approximately $62 million. We also expect capital expenditures of approximately $12 million and a weighted average share count of approximately 70 million shares.

我們還預計股票補償費用約為 1600 萬美元，資本支出約為 300 萬美元，加權平均股數約為 7000 萬股。對於2023 年全年，我們預計截至12 月31 日的有效保費將在7.1 億美元至7.15 億美元之間，毛收入保費將在6.54 億美元至6.58 億美元之間，收入將在4.02 億美元至4.08 億美元之間，調整後EBITDA 損失將在1.99 億美元至196 美元之間百萬美元和股票補償費用約 6200 萬美元。我們還預計資本支出約為 1200 萬美元，加權平均股數約為 7000 萬股。

And with that, I would like to hand things over to Shai.

說到這裡，我想把事情交給 Shai。

Thanks, Tim. We'll now turn to our shareholders' questions submitted through the Say platform.

謝謝，蒂姆。我們現在將討論通過 Say 平台提交的股東問題。

In the first question, Patrick K. asked about our plan to reach profitability between the years 2025 and 2027 as we laid out in last year's Investor Day. He asked for a time line update for when we think profitability would most likely occur.

在第一個問題中，Patrick K. 詢問了我們在去年投資者日制定的 2025 年至 2027 年實現盈利的計劃。他要求更新我們認為何時最有可能實現盈利的時間表。

Well, Patrick K., based on what we know today, we see little bit changes in our multiyear breakeven timing. When we shared long-term financial scenarios in November '22, it was before our Synthetic Agents funding and before a notable improvement in our EBITDA. So we plan to work that into our long-term planning and give a more updated view shortly.

好吧，帕特里克·K.，根據我們今天所知道的情況，我們發現我們的多年盈虧平衡時間略有變化。當我們在 22 年 11 月分享長期財務情景時，當時是在我們的合成代理融資之前，也是在我們的 EBITDA 顯著改善之前。因此，我們計劃將其納入我們的長期規劃中，並很快給出更新的觀點。

In the second question, Patrick K. wanted to know about our giveback program citing that the Lemonade Twitter feed has demonstrated the left leaning bias for the company and noting that I tweeted back that this is unintentional. He asks how the company will show political mutuality going forward?

在第二個問題中，Patrick K. 想了解我們的回饋計劃，他指出 Lemonade 的 Twitter 信息流表明了該公司的左傾偏見，並指出我在 Twitter 上回复說這是無意的。他詢問公司未來將如何展現政治互惠？

Well, Patrick, this is a topic that has always been top of mind for us since we started the company. Lemonade as you know was founded as a public benefit corporation an integrated social impact into the core of its DNA. That means that we may be vocal about topics like gun control and climate change, which can be considered political, but we stay above the fray when it comes to party politics. Beyond doing the right thing, we believe that taking a stand is important for our business and brand even when it comes at the cost of not being everyone's cup of tea.

帕特里克，自從我們創辦公司以來，這是我們一直最關心的話題。如您所知，Lemonade 是一家公益公司，將社會影響融入其 DNA 核心。這意味著我們可能會直言不諱地談論槍支管制和氣候變化等可被視為政治的話題，但在涉及政黨政治時我們會置身事外。除了做正確的事情之外，我們相信，表明立場對我們的業務和品牌也很重要，即使這要付出的代價是不能得到所有人的認可。

As I once wrote as part of our branding strategy, we'd rather be loved by some than ignored by all. We believe that being bold and having an opinion helps our brand rather than hurts it. But please take the time to read our post on this issue. And I think you'll find that while they are values driven, they are also sensible moderate and without any intentional party or political affiliation.

正如我曾經在我們品牌戰略的一部分中所寫的那樣，我們寧願被一些人喜愛，也不願被所有人忽視。我們相信，大膽並發表意見有助於我們的品牌，而不是損害它。但請花點時間閱讀我們關於此問題的帖子。我想你會發現，雖然他們是價值觀驅動的，但他們也是明智的溫和派，沒有任何有意的黨派或政治派別。

This is where I believe our giveback and the Lemonade Foundation coming to perfect alignment with our team and with our investors. As for our giveback causes, I think you will find that we offer quite a wide range of options from which most of our customers found a cause that aligns with our values.

我相信我們的回饋和檸檬水基金會將與我們的團隊和投資者完美結合。至於我們的回饋事業，我想您會發現我們提供了相當廣泛的選擇，我們的大多數客戶都從中找到了與我們的價值觀相符的事業。

Patrick, to sum up this answer, we welcome yours and other thoughts on charities you believe can be part of our giveback and have no intention of making this a politically charged program.

帕特里克，總結一下這個答案，我們歡迎您對慈善機構的想法以及您認為可以成為我們回饋一部分的其他想法，並且無意將其變成一個帶有政治色彩的計劃。

In the next question, Darren asked how many generative AI prototypes have made it into production? And what is the estimated impact on '23 and beyond? So just to give some context, last quarter, we spoke about the potential positive impact of generative AI in our business and how this is the perfect moment in time for it to be added into our already highly advanced AI and machine learning platforms.

在下一個問題中，Darren 問有多少生成式 AI 原型已投入生產？對 23 年及以後的估計影響是什麼？因此，為了提供一些背景信息，上個季度，我們談到了生成式人工智能對我們業務的潛在積極影響，以及如何將其添加到我們已經非常先進的人工智能和機器學習平台中。

Using generative AI, we plan to take our automation even further and alongside other major tech developments now going into our platform, I trust we will start to see efficiency gains in a year or so. I believe that many insurance companies will find it extremely challenging and quite risky to implement generative AI in their systems.

使用生成式人工智能，我們計劃進一步推進自動化，隨著其他主要技術的發展現在進入我們的平台，我相信我們將在一年左右的時間內開始看到效率的提高。我相信許多保險公司會發現在他們的系統中實施生成式人工智能極具挑戰性且風險很大。

For one, generative AI models are highly unpredictable by design, and it's often impossible to create a consistent and perfectly compliant result. Secondly, insurance companies who rely mostly on agents will see much less efficiency gains using this tech because more often than not, they don't communicate directly with their customers.

其一，生成式人工智能模型在設計上是高度不可預測的，而且通常不可能創建一致且完全合規的結果。其次，主要依賴代理人的保險公司使用這項技術的效率提升會少得多，因為他們通常不直接與客戶溝通。

Since we handle and control 100% of our customer communications, being able to automate a large portion of those can translate to reductions in our expense ratio, which leaves us with a compliance challenge. As we started experimenting with generative AI, it was clear that we needed a way to tame these models.

由於我們處理和控制 100% 的客戶通信，因此能夠將大部分通信自動化可以轉化為費用率的降低，這給我們帶來了合規性挑戰。當我們開始嘗試生成式人工智能時，很明顯我們需要一種方法來馴服這些模型。

Regulators require predictability and auditability, things that aren't the strong size of large language models. This has been an area of focus of ours and one which I'm proud to say we've now solved. With our new generative AI compliance platform, we're able to combine the generative capabilities of large language models with our predictable, consistent and compliant tech platform. We're now able to deploy fully compliant generative AI capabilities at scale and in a very short period of time.

監管機構需要可預測性和可審計性，而這些並不是大型語言模型的強大規模。這是我們關注的一個領域，我很自豪地說我們現在已經解決了這個問題。借助我們新的生成式人工智能合規平台，我們能夠將大型語言模型的生成能力與我們可預測、一致且合規的技術平台相結合。我們現在能夠在很短的時間內大規模部署完全兼容的生成式人工智能功能。

We're still running in lab mode, but I'm happy to report that our new generative CX technology already handles hundreds of customer e-mails and is capable of performing complex tasks with 0 intervention from our team. Our new system canceled policies handles nonrenewals adds interested parties in secondary insureds and more with new functionality coming online almost every day.

我們仍在實驗室模式下運行，但我很高興地報告，我們新的生成式 CX 技術已經處理了數百封客戶電子郵件，並且能夠在團隊零干預的情況下執行複雜的任務。我們的新系統取消保單，處理非續保，在二級被保險人中添加感興趣的各方，以及更多新功能，幾乎每天都會上線。

In parallel, we're also in advanced stages of development of features that utilize the vision capabilities of generative AI, allowing you to review documents such as VAT records, look at damage photos and more. Mixed with our existing models, we're seeing extremely positive results.

與此同時，我們還處於利用生成式人工智能視覺功能的功能開發的高級階段，讓您可以查看增值稅記錄等文檔、查看損壞照片等。與我們現有的模型相結合，我們看到了非常積極的結果。

As I mentioned before, I believe that generative AI when combined with lemonade's tech will help reduce our operating costs from building and maintaining software to how we service our customers, and I promise to share more about it soon.

正如我之前提到的，我相信生成式人工智能與檸檬水的技術相結合將有助於降低我們從構建和維護軟件到如何服務客戶的運營成本，我保證很快會分享更多相關信息。

And with that, let me hand the call over to the operator so we can take some of the questions from our friends on the street.

接下來，讓我將電話轉交給接線員，以便我們可以回答街上朋友的一些問題。

(Operator Instructions) Our first question for today comes from Yaron Kinar from Jefferies.

（操作員說明）我們今天的第一個問題來自 Jefferies 的 Yaron Kinar。

My first question or a couple of questions are on the reinsurance program. Is there a loss corridor in the new reinsurance structure? And also, maybe you can touch on the fact that you're now retaining the hurricane risk gone through the affiliated entity in Bermuda. How should we think about let's say, losses -- cap losses this quarter, net losses this quarter and net cap losses in 3Q when you have in, if they were applied with the new reinsurance program -- or not, they do the same?

我的第一個問題或幾個問題是關於再保險計劃的。新的再保險結構中是否存在損失走廊？另外，也許您可​​以提及這樣一個事實：您現在保留通過百慕大附屬實體承擔的颶風風險。我們應該如何考慮損失——本季度的上限損失、本季度的淨損失以及第三季度的淨上限損失，如果它們適用於新的再保險計劃——或者不適用，它們會做同樣的事情嗎？

Sure. So just -- Yaron, this is Tim. A couple of comments on the new reinsurance structure. So in terms of a loss quarter, no, there's not a traditional traditionally defined last quarter, there is a sliding scale commission. So it's somewhat more nuanced in our prior structure, which was a fixed static commission rate with some potential upside. So it's somewhat different. But overall, I would sort of point out the quota share ceding proportion is the same. The players are the same, so substantially unchanged.

當然。所以只是——Yaron，這是蒂姆。關於新的再保險結構的一些評論。因此，就虧損季度而言，不，沒有傳統上定義的上季度，而是有浮動佣金。因此，我們之前的結構更加微妙，這是一個固定的靜態佣金率，具有一些潛在的上升空間。所以有點不同。但總的來說，我想指出配額份額的讓出比例是相同的。球員都是一樣的，所以基本上沒有變化。

With the acceptance that you noted, we are retaining more of the CAT risk. So hurricane, for example, named hurricanes is fully excluded. If you roll back historically, our losses have been not 0, but quite low for named hurricanes and that's more a result of how we underwrite and where we're present. So no real homeowners presence in Florida and then fairly conservative underwriting in other areas where we are active with homeowners.

根據您指出的接受，我們將保留更多 CAT 風險。因此，颶風，例如，命名為颶風的颶風被完全排除在外。如果你回顧歷史，我們的損失不是0，但對於命名的颶風來說相當低，這更多是我們承保方式和我們所處位置的結果。因此，佛羅里達州沒有真正的房主存在，而在我們積極與房主合作的其他地區，承保相當保守。

In terms of other storms, obviously, in the last 2 years, we've had fairly significant and quite unique storms that were not made to hurricanes and so our existing -- or our previous reinsurance did exactly as designed, which was protect us against the most unpredictable events.

就其他風暴而言，顯然，在過去的兩年中，我們經歷了相當重大且非常獨特的風暴，這些風暴不是由颶風造成的，因此我們現有的或我們之前的再保險完全按照設計，這可以保護我們免受颶風影響。最不可預測的事件。

And those kind of performed as they should have mitigated a significant amount of those losses. That's why we're able to hit, achieve an EBITDA result, for example, this quarter despite a fairly elevated gross loss ratio. We're not designing for the things that have happened in the past, really thinking more broadly.

這些表現本應減輕大量損失。這就是為什麼我們能夠在本季度實現 EBITDA 結果，儘管毛損失率相當高。我們並不是為過去發生的事情而設計，而是真正進行更廣泛的思考。

And so we are taking on more risk. We'll use our new captive structures that we put in place, those are recent adds. That enables us to continue to be sort of capital light in our approach, but we will take on a bit more volatility risk than we would have had previously. But given the hurricane history and that exclusion, we're quite comfortable with that.

因此我們正在承擔更多的風險。我們將使用我們建立的新的專屬結構，這些是最近添加的。這使我們能夠繼續採取輕資本策略，但我們將承擔比以前更多的波動風險。但考慮到颶風歷史和排除情況，我們對此感到非常滿意。

Got it. And then my second question, the Synthetic Agents, given that it's now lowers your upfront cash burn or would potentially do so, can you see yourself updating your growth targets near term and longer term and maybe taking them up?

知道了。然後我的第二個問題，合成代理，鑑於它現在降低了您的前期現金消耗或可能會這樣做，您是否可以看到自己更新近期和長期的增長目標，並可能接受它們？

Yes, I think we will. We now have the flexibility, certainly, from a financing point of view, from a capital structure point of view to do a lot more degrees of freedom have significantly expanded. When we gave our last kind of in-depth analysis back in November during our Investor Day, we spoke about a 20% to 25% growth rate on a multiyear kind of CAGR basis as being optimal.

是的，我想我們會的。我們現在有靈活性，當然，從融資的角度、從資本結構的角度去做更多很多，自由度都顯著擴大了。當我們在 11 月份的投資者日期間進行最後一次深入分析時，我們談到以多年復合年增長率為基礎的 20% 至 25% 的增長率是最佳的。

We grow much slower and we don't get to scale grow much faster and the capital that's required along the way would be too excessive. So there was a path to profitability with the money in the bank, that path remains available to us. But now actually, we've got quite a wide corridor on one end of that. To the right of that, we can now expand significantly without meaningfully impacting our cash reserves.

我們的增長速度要慢得多，而且我們無法以更快的速度擴大規模，而且一路上所需的資本會太多。因此，有一條利用銀行資金實現盈利的途徑，我們仍然可以採用這條途徑。但現在實際上，我們的一端有一條相當寬的走廊。就其右側而言，我們現在可以大幅擴張，而不會顯著影響我們的現金儲備。

So at least from a financial point of view, from a capital requirements point of view, there are new degrees of freedom. As we mentioned, earlier, we will be constrained by other things. We still only want to grow profitably. So getting rates approved and being able to grow in places where we see the kind of LTV to CAC that we want is a precondition to accelerating our growth rates.

因此，至少從財務角度、資本要求角度來看，存在新的自由度。正如我們之前提到的，我們會受到其他事情的限制。我們仍然只想實現盈利增長。因此，獲得批准的利率並能夠在我們看到我們想要的 LTV 與 CAC 的地方實現增長是加快我們增長率的先決條件。

But as those rates come online, as our products continue their downward march in terms of the underlying loss ratio, we do hope to be able to pick up our growth rate. The one asterisk I will underline is our guidance for this year remains as we -- well, we upgraded a little bit, but it remains largely as we've spoken about in the past because we don't anticipate all those conditions coming through in the next 2 quarters.

但隨著這些利率的上線，隨著我們的產品在基本損失率方面繼續下降，我們確實希望能夠加快增長率。我要強調的一個星號是我們今年的指導方針仍然是我們——好吧，我們升級了一點，但它很大程度上仍然像我們過去談到的那樣，因為我們預計所有這些情況都不會在接下來的2個季度。

So we do think that the next 2 quarters will still be quarters where we slowed down our growth and focus on implementing those rates, earning into them. And we are hopeful that at some point in 2024, if things go to plan than earlier in the year and if they take a little bit longer, they'll take a little bit longer, but that during 2024, we will be able to reaccelerate growth.

因此，我們確實認為接下來的兩個季度仍將是我們放緩增長的季度，並專注於實施這些利率並從中獲利。我們希望在 2024 年的某個時候，如果事情比今年早些時候按計劃進行，並且需要更長的時間，那麼他們將需要更長的時間，但在 2024 年期間，我們將能夠重新加速生長。

If I might...

如果我可以...

Sorry, Yaron, if I might. I was just checking my notes here. I skipped over one of your questions, which I think is worth clarifying, which was around the reinsurance. If you look at Q2, which was notable for its combination of CATs, a very large quantity of relatively small events that aggregated to a significant number for that kind of event, we would expect to continue to be covered under the new structure. So not exactly the same, but substantially unchanged given what we saw in Q2.

對不起，亞倫，如果可以的話。我只是在這裡檢查我的筆記。我跳過了你的一個問題，我認為這個問題值得澄清，它是關於再保險的。如果你看一下第二季度，它以其 CAT 組合而聞名，大量相對較小的事件聚合為此類事件的大量事件，我們預計將繼續涵蓋在新結構下。所以不完全相同，但考慮到我們在第二季度看到的情況，基本上沒有變化。

Got it. But the sliding commission structure wouldn't have impacted the net results?

知道了。但浮動佣金結構不會影響最終結果嗎？

It would have in isolation, but again, on a sort of a macro view over the course of the year would not have a significant impact.

單獨來看，它會產生影響，但從全年的宏觀角度來看，它不會產生重大影響。

Got it. And then a quick numbers question on PYD or prior period development. Did you have any in the quarter?

知道了。然後是關於 PYD 或前期發展的快速數字問題。你這個季度有嗎？

Yes, but fairly modest. The vast majority of the impact was in period.

是的，但相當謙虛。絕大多數影響是在時期內發生的。

Do you have the number of that features?

你有這個功能的數量嗎？

Let me double check that, and I'll add that in a moment.

讓我仔細檢查一下，稍後我會添加它。

Our next question comes from Josh Shanker of Bank of America.

我們的下一個問題來自美國銀行的喬什·尚克。

Following up a little about the conversation with your own growth. You spoke in the past on conserving cash until the capital markets are more willing to embrace Lemonade's business plan, but you materially exceeded the growth guidance in 2Q '23, and this was before the capital-like agents program was put in place. Did Lemonade grow more quickly than desired? And how much control do you have for rain in the growth in the back half of the year before the rates that you're really desiring pushes through?

接下來談談你自己的成長。您過去曾談到要保存現金，直到資本市場更願意接受 Lemonade 的業務計劃，但您在 2023 年第二季度的增長指導大幅超出，而這是在類似資本的代理計劃實施之前。檸檬水的生長速度是否比預期的要快？在達到您真正想要的速度之前，您對下半年增長的降雨有多少控制？

Yes, this has been sort of a continuing theme for a couple of quarters now when we're by choice, choosing lower growth rates, lower spend rates to conserve capital. And what you see when you're in large and established growth channels is that when you dial back spend by definition, reducing your less efficient or less productive spend than what you're left with is the more efficient.

是的，這已經是幾個季度以來的一個持續主題，當我們選擇較低的增長率、較低的支出率來節省資本時。當你處於大型且已建立的增長渠道時，你會看到，當你根據定義減少支出時，減少效率較低或生產力較低的支出比剩下的支出更有效率。

And so sometimes it's difficult to predict how much more efficient you will become. And so some of the upside you've seen versus our own guidance particularly in Q1 and Q2 has really been as a result of that. So Q1 -- or sorry, Q2, for example, if we just compare Q2 to the prior year, you saw something like a 75% increase in the efficiency dollar for dollar versus a year ago.

因此，有時很難預測你的效率會提高多少。因此，與我們自己的指導相比，您看到的一些好處，特別是在第一季度和第二季度，確實是由於這一點。因此，第一季度——或者抱歉，第二季度，例如，如果我們將第二季度與前一年進行比較，您會發現與一年前相比，美元的效率增加了 75%。

Now we can't take credit for all of that. We're spending fewer dollars if we were to spend the exact same number of dollars as a year ago, I would expect that efficiency difference would not be so significant. It would likely be favorable, we consistently get better over time in increments, but it would probably not be so dramatic as you saw.

現在我們不能將這一切歸功於自己。如果我們花費與一年前完全相同的美元，我們將花費更少的美元，我預計效率差異不會那麼大。這可能是有利的，隨著時間的推移，我們會不斷地進步，但可能不會像你看到的那麼戲劇性。

So going forward into the rest of the year, we have a guidance that lays out sort of a mid-teens growth rate for the year in terms of IFP because we're updating guidance quarter by quarter, we do try and capture some of that overperformance or underperformance, which we haven't had, but the variance in what our guidance is.

因此，展望今年剩餘時間，我們的指導方針列出了今年 IFP 的中位數增長率，因為我們正在逐季度更新指導方針，我們確實嘗試捕捉其中的一些表現優異或表現不佳，這是我們沒有遇到過的，但我們的指導意見存在差異。

So I wouldn't expect -- we don't expect to sort of see that dramatic an overperformance versus our guidance, but you could see some portion of that repeat. Coming back to your own question real quickly on the prior period development, just over 1% or so, 1.3-or-so percent was prior period development and the remainder was otherwise.

所以我不希望——我們不希望看到與我們的指導相比出現如此戲劇性的超額表現，但你可能會看到這種情況的某些部分重複。快速回到你自己關於前期發展的問題，略高於 1% 左右，1.3% 左右是前期發展，其餘的是其他情況。

I think your 1.3% favorable or unfavorable.

我認為你的1.3%是有利還是不利。

Unfavorable.

不利。

Okay. And then so coming back to the growth question. I mean if I subtract the 4Q guidance from the 3Q guidance, the guidance basically implies almost no growth in 4Q. You have the 30% rate coming through in homeowners and 23% in [Patton] California. If I layer that, I mean, it does suggest that there's almost no policy count growth that your anticipation is that you can shut it down, I guess. Is that -- am I reading the numbers correctly when I think that way?

好的。然後回到增長問題。我的意思是，如果我從第三季度指導中減去第四季度指導，該指導基本上意味著第四季度幾乎沒有增長。加利福尼亞州的房主通過率是 30%，[巴頓] 是 23%。如果我將其分層，我的意思是，它確實表明幾乎沒有保單數量增長，我猜您的預期是可以將其關閉。當我這樣想時，我讀的數字正確嗎？

Josh, Daniel here. Yes, Yes. We'll, what growth we're going to do in the next 6 months will be largely skewed in Q3. It is the moving season it's when every dollar goes further. So we are taking our dollars spent and we're going to skew them towards Q3 in general. We've spoken about this in prior years.

喬什，丹尼爾在這裡。是的是的。我們將在未來 6 個月內實現的增長將在第三季度大幅傾斜。這是移動的季節，每一塊錢都會走得更遠。因此，我們將把我們的資金花在第三季度。我們在前幾年已經討論過這個問題。

Q4 gets busy for a couple of reasons. One of them is, as I said, the moving season tapers off, but also just the shopping season, the holiday season means that ad words become more costly. So we will definitely skew this towards a Q3 spend. Do we expect policy count growth in Q4? We do. But I think the board strength of your analysis holds.

第四季度變得忙碌有幾個原因。其中之一是，正如我所說，搬家季節逐漸結束，而且只是購物季節，假日季節意味著廣告詞變得更加昂貴。因此，我們肯定會將其偏向第三季度的支出。我們預計第四季度的保單數量會增長嗎？我們的確是。但我認為你的分析的董事會實力是成立的。

Our next question comes from Bob Huang of Morgan Stanley.

我們的下一個問題來自摩根士丹利的鮑勃·黃。

One quick question regarding just your commentary around AI, right? As maybe not generative AI, but AI broadly, I think in the past, you talked about machine learning, which is a much lower form of AI, so to speak, if at all, would get you to about a sub-75% loss ratio?

一個簡單的問題，關於你對人工智能的評論，對吧？也許不是生成式人工智能，而是廣義上的人工智能，我認為在過去，你談到了機器學習，這是人工智能的一種低級形式，可以說，如果有的話，會讓你損失大約75 % 以下比率？

Just as we see the continued development of AI and then continue more efficient data analytics, especially on the cloud, which is much more scalable. Can you maybe help us think about what would be the path to achieve that sub 75% loss ratio for you just given the technological implementation going forward? And how do you plan the next 2 years in the 5 years in terms of data infrastructure as well as your AI implementation?

正如我們看到人工智能的持續發展，然後繼續進行更高效的數據分析，尤其是在雲上，它更具可擴展性。您能否幫助我們考慮一下，考慮到未來的技術實施，為您實現低於 75% 的損失率的途徑是什麼？未來5年中，您在數據基礎設施以及人工智能實施方面如何規劃未來2年？

I think our AIs are pretty much where we need them to be. Our analysis has shared what LTV 6 did back in November, we have 6 graduated to LTV 8. It's worth just delineating Shai's comments were about generative AI, which is -- we spoke about it in our Investor Day, but it certainly exploded over the course of the last few months.

我認為我們的人工智能已經滿足了我們的需要。我們的分析分享了LTV 6 在11 月份所做的事情，我們有6 個升級到了LTV 8。值得一提的是，Shai 的評論是關於生成人工智能的，我們在投資者日談到了這一點，但它確實在過去幾個月的過程。

Our machine learning AIs are mature and they're much more focused in on risk assessment. So every customer that comes into Lemonade, we have about 50 different machine learning models, making predictions about likely to claim, severity of a claim, like you a channel, like to upsell, et cetera, et cetera. So we have a pretty robust infrastructure now making fairly specific and detailed predictions.

我們的機器學習人工智能已經成熟，它們更專注於風險評估。因此，每個進入 Lemonade 的客戶，我們都有大約 50 種不同的機器學習模型，對索賠的可能性、索賠的嚴重程度、喜歡你的渠道、喜歡追加銷售等等進行預測。因此，我們現在擁有相當強大的基礎設施，可以做出相當具體和詳細的​​預測。

And as we audit them, we are finding them to be holding true. So we -- our confidence in relying on these models is growing with every tuning of the cycle. The big hurdle today for us in terms of loss ratio does not lie in the domain of machine learning or AI. It's about getting regulatory approvals.

當我們審核它們時，我們發現它們是正確的。因此，我們對這些模型的信心隨著周期的每次調整而增強。如今，我們在損失率方面面臨的最大障礙並不在於機器學習或人工智能領域。這是關於獲得監管部門的批准。

And once those have been received, implementing that. So particularly in an inflation-heavy environment, let's start with -- before you even get to regulatory hurdles. The fact that you price a policy today and you don't get to amend it for another year other than in car where you get one opportunity mid-year, means that if inflation has been significant 10% as a year ago, we had let alone the 15% or 20% that you saw in the field of car and home repairs, it means that you price today and then you make your fielding a claim 6 months from now, which may be 10% higher than the price when you set it.

一旦收到這些，就實施它。因此，特別是在通貨膨脹嚴重的環境中，讓我們在遇到監管障礙之前就開始吧。事實上，你今天為一項保單定價，並且除了在年中獲得一次機會的汽車保險之外，你在接下來的一年裡都不能修改它，這意味著如果通貨膨脹率比一年前高出10%，我們就讓僅您在汽車和家庭維修領域看到的15% 或20%，這意味著您今天定價，然後您在6 個月後提出索賠，這可能比您設定時的價格高10%它。

And you don't get another bite at that apple until renewal a year later. And that is if regulators approve every bit of your filing. More likely, since regulatory processes take more time and sometimes have limitations on how much rate they'll approve and at what frequency, it may take longer than a year. And then once it's approved, you then have an earning in period because everybody who was priced at the older policy have to wait until their renewals come up, and it will take you pretty much a full year for those new rates to take effect, which is why if inflation remains high, you're in a constant race to adapt rates.

直到一年後更新，你才能再咬一口那個蘋果。也就是說，如果監管機構批准了您提交的所有文件。更有可能的是，由於監管流程需要更多時間，而且有時對批准的速度和頻率有限制，因此可能需要一年以上的時間。然後，一旦獲得批准，您就可以在一段時間內獲得收益，因為按照舊保單定價的每個人都必須等到續保，而這些新費率將需要您幾乎一整年的時間才能生效，這這就是為什麼如果通脹居高不下，你就會不斷地調整利率。

You don't have a knowledge gap. Our machines tell us exactly what rates we need to have for each risk. What we have is a time lag between when that knowledge comes in and when it actually hits our books. And that dissipates in 2 ways. One is inflation comes down as indeed it is. It's come down significantly, and we're feeling that.

你沒有知識差距。我們的機器準確地告訴我們每種風險需要多少利率。我們所擁有的只是這些知識進入我們的書本和它真正出現在我們的書本之間的時間差。這會通過兩種方式消散。一是通脹確實下降了。它顯著下降，我們已經感覺到了。

And the second one is we pick up our rate of filing and approvals, and we're seeing that as well. It will remain -- certainly if the inflation remains elevated, it will remain a cat and mouse game. I don't want to pretend that, that goes away, and we've seen this across the industry. But in the event, as we're seeing these 2 trend lines coming one on top of the other, which is decreasing inflation and increasing rate, the 2 combined to give us optimism that we've broken the back of this thing and on a path towards getting to where we need to go.

第二個是我們提高了申請和批准率，我們也看到了這一點。它將繼續存在——當然，如果通脹持續走高，這將仍然是一場貓捉老鼠的遊戲。我不想假裝這種情況已經消失，我們在整個行業都看到了這種情況。但在這種情況下，當我們看到這兩條趨勢線相互重疊時，即通脹下降和利率上升，這兩條趨勢線結合起來讓我們感到樂觀，認為我們已經打破了這一局面，並在到達我們需要去的地方的道路。

Okay. That's very helpful. But sorry, if I can just like stay on that topic as my follow-up. Then in that case, is it kind of fair to imply from what you said so far that essentially, the technological development so far is somewhat of a secondary to essentially the regulatory and the macro environment, whereas the underwriting efficiency from the tech-driven underwriting really is more of a secondary.

好的。這非常有幫助。但抱歉，如果我可以繼續討論這個主題作為我的後續內容。那麼在這種情況下，從你到目前為止所說的來看，從本質上講，迄今為止的技術發展在某種程度上是次要的，本質上是監管和宏觀環境，而技術驅動的承保的承保效率是次要的，這是否公平？確實更像是次要的。

And then the macro environment, such as catastrophe losses, the current regulatory environment, would you essentially nullify a lot of the tech advantage you're having. Is that the wrong way to think of that? Or how should I think about it at that?

然後宏觀環境，例如災難損失、當前的監管環境，是否會從根本上消除您所擁有的許多技術優勢。這樣的想法是錯誤的嗎？或者說我當時應該怎麼想呢？

It's a fair question. I'd draw your attention to a couple of things. One is have a look at our -- the loss ratios by product and the high CAT impact of this past quarter perhaps masked some of the dramatic improvements that we shared in our left and just draw your attention, look what happened to homeowners ex-CAT dropping from like 110 to the 60s over the course of the last few months when you neutralize CAT.

這是一個公平的問題。我想提請您注意幾件事。一個是看看我們的——按產品劃分的損失率和上個季度CAT 的高影響，也許掩蓋了我們在左邊分享的一些顯著改進，只是引起您的注意，看看前CAT 的房主發生了什麼當你中和 CAT 時，在過去幾個月裡從 110 左右下降到 60 左右。

As Tim said, we have to pay for CAT. This isn't an effort to sidestep our responsibility for pain for CATs, but it does demonstrate a fundamental improvement. And indeed, if you look at some of the best players in the industry and the loss ratios are some of the best known names, I won't name names, but everybody on this call knows and mostly they are, and you look at what their loss ratios were for this last quarter, you'll see that we came in significantly better than some of the best-known names in the industry suggesting a competitive advantage.

正如蒂姆所說，我們必須為 CAT 付費。這並不是為了逃避我們對 CAT 疼痛的責任，但它確實表明了根本性的改進。事實上，如果你看看業內一些最好的參與者，並且損失率是一些最知名的名字，我不會點名，但參加這次電話會議的每個人都知道，而且大多數都是這樣，你看看什麼從他們上個季度的損失率來看，您會發現我們的表現明顯好於業內一些最知名的公司，這表明我們具有競爭優勢。

So no doubt, while we are in a high inflation environment, you will see the whole industry as well as us suffer the brunt of that. That is true. But you can also see when you look kind of beneath the headline is that there is a competitive advantage emerging.

因此，毫無疑問，當我們處於高通脹環境時，你會看到整個行業以及我們都首當其衝。那是真實的。但你也可以看到，當你看到標題下面的內容時，就會發現競爭優勢正在顯現。

And as the inflation recede, I think the competitive advantage remains, it is already an evidence if you know where to look. And as times normalize, it would become more and more pronounced. And in the long term, that is how this industry has won by being superior at selecting risks and pricing them.

隨著通貨膨脹的消退，我認為競爭優勢依然存在，如果你知道去哪裡尋找，這已經是一個證據。隨著時代的正常化，這種現象會變得越來越明顯。從長遠來看，這就是這個行業通過在選擇風險和定價方面的優勢而獲勝的方式。

And I think that the technology and infrastructure that we're building affords us that advantage. Agreed that when the storm howling outside, it's hard to see that. But as the storm passed us by, I think, will become increasingly obvious.

我認為我們正在建設的技術和基礎設施為我們提供了這種優勢。同意，當外面暴風雨呼嘯時，很難看到這一點。但我認為，隨著風暴過去，它會變得越來越明顯。

Our next question comes from Jason Helfstein of Oppenheimer.

我們的下一個問題來自奧本海默的傑森·赫夫斯坦。

I want to go back when you originally kind of came up with the long-term plan, whether it's when you guys came public, et cetera. I mean look, I think regardless of your views about climate change, it does seem that storms are just seem like it's more frequent, right, whether depending on how you categorize the weather, et cetera, et cetera.

我想回到你們最初提出長期計劃的時候，無論是你們公開的時候，等等。我的意思是，我認為無論你對氣候變化的看法如何，風暴似乎確實看起來更頻繁，對吧，這取決於你如何對天氣等進行分類。

Do you feel that as a result of that, like if we're like we're starting again, you'd say we need to have a bigger business to kind of absorb the risk because it's all about kind of spreading it out. And then just how that -- again, that may have been some of the catalysts in some of the recent announcements, just how you think about that now if you reflect back 5 or 7 years.

您是否認為因此，就像我們重新開始一樣，您會說我們需要擁有更大的業務來吸收風險，因為這都是為了分散風險。然後，這可能是最近一些公告中的一些催化劑，如果你回顧 5 或 7 年前，你現在會如何看待這一點。

I'll take a back at that and then Tim come in with anything that I've omitted. Jason, that's a great question. I think that rather than suggesting a different course of action, it reconfirms us in a multi-product, multi-geography strategy. So yes, we saw some pretty severe outcomes this quarter. And of course, we're not just a homeowners business. That's a sizable minority of our business.

我會對此進行反駁，然後蒂姆會提出我遺漏的任何內容。傑森，這是一個很好的問題。我認為，它並沒有建議採取不同的行動方針，而是再次確認了我們的多產品、多地域戰略。所以，是的，我們本季度看到了一些相當嚴重的結果。當然，我們不僅僅是一家房主企業。這在我們的業務中只佔相當大的一部分。

It's a fraction of business, about 1/4 of our business. And the rest of our business is performing very, very well. And we said, again, our per product loss ratios, you see what's happening in our Pet business, which is now almost as large as our homeowners business. You see what's happening in our renters business, which is larger than our homeowners business. So our multiproduct and multi-geography is already mitigating the worst of those risks.

這只是業務的一小部分，大約是我們業務的 1/4。我們的其他業務表現非常非常好。我們再次說過，我們的每種產品損失率，你可以看到我們的寵物業務發生了什麼，現在幾乎與我們的房主業務一樣大。你可以看到我們的租房業務發生了什麼，這個業務比我們的房主業務還要大。因此，我們的多產品和多地域已經減輕了其中最嚴重的風險。

Indeed, the fact that we are able to report -- the EBITDA that we reported a beat on the bottom line and a beat on the top line, notwithstanding a 94% gross loss ratio, I think, speaks volumes to the structures that we put in place, including reinsurance. It's -- I don't want to oversell this, but if we didn't tell you our loss ratio, and we just told you financials, our P&L, you wouldn't know that this was a particularly severe loss quarter.

事實上，我們能夠報告的事實——儘管毛損失率為 94%，但我認為，我們報告的 EBITDA 的底線和頂線都好於預期，這充分說明了我們所採用的結構到位，包括再保險。我不想過分誇大這一點，但如果我們不告訴你我們的損失率，而我們只是告訴你財務狀況、我們的損益表，你就不會知道這是一個特別嚴重虧損的季度。

So there were structures in place that allow us to buffer ourselves from the last -- worst of these storms and to be able to deliver a strong EBITDA and strong top line notwithstanding. So coming full cycle, I agree with your underlying premise, which is that major catastrophes are becoming more frequent, certainly, that has been our experience.

因此，我們制定了適當的結構，使我們能夠緩衝上次最嚴重的風暴的影響，並且能夠實現強勁的 EBITDA 和強勁的營收。因此，在整個週期中，我同意你的基本前提，即重大災難正在變得越來越頻繁，當然，這是我們的經驗。

Ultimately, insurance gets a handle on that through pricing. Once you understand risks, you can price for them, there is a time lag in doing that. We discuss the regulatory and other time lags that will allow it to course correct. In the meantime, I will tell you, part of our slowing down, and we laid this out in our earlier comments and in the letter, is to focus on the areas that are less cash exposed.

最終，保險通過定價來解決這個問題。一旦您了解了風險，您就可以為其定價，但這樣做會存在時間滯後。我們討論監管和其他時間滯後，以使其能夠正確進行。與此同時，我會告訴你，我們放緩的部分原因是專注於現金暴露較少的領域，我們在之前的評論和信中闡述了這一點。

So Tim already mentioned that we are -- have been for these many years, very cautious about wildfire exposure and hurricane exposure. We understood those risks, and we're pretty conservative. We have been able to write around those. As these other risks become more palpable to us, we are sidestepping them as well. We have written stuff prior that we are now paying for.

蒂姆已經提到，多年來我們一直對野火暴露和颶風暴露非常謹慎。我們了解這些風險，而且我們相當保守。我們已經能夠圍繞這些進行寫作。隨著這些其他風險對我們來說變得更加明顯，我們也在迴避它們。我們之前已經寫過一些東西，現在我們正在付費。

But if you were to look at ourselves these many quarters, you'll see that our new sales in exposed areas are really de minimis. So we are taking course corrective actions. We are filing for the price rates that we need. We are diversifying our portfolio geographically and by product. And I think all of that translates into a healthier business as time passes up by. Tim, anything I omitted there?

但如果你審視一下我們自己這麼多個季度，你就會發現我們在暴露區域的新銷量確實微乎其微。因此，我們正在採取糾正措施。我們正在申請所需的價格。我們正在按地域和產品實現產品組合的多元化。我認為隨著時間的推移，所有這些都會轉化為更健康的業務。蒂姆，我遺漏了什麼嗎？

I would just add one thought, which is, again, if you sort of look in broad brush at several years since going public, probably one of the one of the larger surprises is in this period of more what feels like in the short term, more frequent intensity of more volatile storms, we've weathered that test nicely.

我只想補充一個想法，那就是，如果你粗略地回顧一下上市後的幾年，可能最大的驚喜之一就是在這個短期內感覺更多的時期，更頻繁、更劇烈的風暴，我們很好地經受住了考驗。

So we've seen elevated results, but they have not been too far out of line from much larger and much larger incumbents I think if we've seen -- it would have been more reasonable, I think, in this period with newer products and a much smaller base of premium to actually see more of a loss ratio challenge than we've seen. So I think that's good news. And then on the expense ratio side, I think if you just look at the consistent improvement in consistently declining losses relative to our premium line really solid improvement there, too. So I think that's been a -- we didn't set out for the last 3 years to be a test of this rigor, but I think we've weathered that test very well.

因此，我們已經看到了較高的業績，但它們與規模越來越大的現有企業並沒有太大的出入，我認為，如果我們看到的話，我認為在這個時期推出新產品會更合理而且保費基數要小得多，實際上會看到比我們所看到的更多的損失率挑戰。所以我認為這是個好消息。然後在費用比率方面，我認為如果你只看相對於我們的保費線的損失持續下降的持續改善，那也確實是堅實的改善。所以我認為，過去三年我們並沒有打算對這種嚴格性進行測試，但我認為我們已經很好地經受住了這個測試。

And just based on that like a technology question. So now that large language models and machine learning is becoming more accessible to other companies without some of the hard work that companies like yourself did as early kind of, call it, pioneers, do you think that is a competitive threat because those technologies technically were not available and are going to become more available if your competitors choose to use them for the next kind of upstart competitor, et cetera?

就以此為基礎，就像技術問題一樣。因此，現在大型語言模型和機器學習正變得越來越容易被其他公司所接受，而無需像您這樣的公司早期所做的一些艱苦工作，稱之為先驅者，您是否認為這是一種競爭威脅，因為這些技術在技術上是如果您的競爭對手選擇將它們用於下一種新貴競爭對手，等等，那麼它們將變得更加可用？

We're not too troubled by -- we're not too troubled by large competitor access to technology. It's been something that's been true forever. Certainly, there are things that are about large language models and the transition of the past year. So that are new for all of us. But having built our platform from day 1 in anticipation of just such data advantages only, I think, amplifies the advantages that we believe we have in place.

我們並沒有因為大型競爭對手獲取技術而感到太困擾。這是永遠真實的事情。當然，有些事情與大型語言模型和過去一年的轉變有關。這對我們所有人來說都是新的。但我認為，從第一天開始構建我們的平台就是為了實現這樣的數據優勢，這放大了我們認為我們擁有的優勢。

Yes, just Jason, well, Okay. I thought it's all finished. I was just going to say, if you look back at something I commented on that at the time. But when Berkshire Hathaway held their AGM a few months ago, Ajit Jain, the Vice Chair of Berkshire Hathaway spoke about GEICO and he said that we have some 500 systems and then he corrected himself. He said it's actually over 600 systems that don't talk to each other.

是的，只有傑森，好吧，好吧。我以為一切都結束了我只是想說，如果你回顧一下我當時對此的評論。但幾個月前，伯克希爾·哈撒韋公司召開年度股東大會時，伯克希爾·哈撒韋公司副主席Ajit Jain 談到GEICO 時說，我們有大約500 個系統，然後他糾正了自己。他說實際上有超過 600 個系統彼此之間不通信。

Those kinds of legacy challenges, I don't want to say insurmountable, but they certainly make it very, very difficult to overcome the kind of challenges that Shai referenced in his comments, which is these are novel and powerful technologies, but applying them seamlessly and integrating into the operations of the company is an entirely nontrivial matter.

我不想說這些遺留挑戰是不可克服的，但它們確實使得克服 Shai 在他的評論中提到的那種挑戰變得非常非常困難，這些挑戰是新穎而強大的技術，但可以無縫地應用它們融入公司的運營是一件非常重要的事情。

So just reinforcing what Tim says. I think at a headline it sounds like everybody would be able to deploy these technologies having now in other and put a lot of effort into these models and trained our own models, we rest easy that Tim's comments are exactly right. This is not a major threat to us.

所以只是強化蒂姆所說的。我認為從標題來看，聽起來每個人都能夠在其他領域部署這些技術，並在這些模型上投入大量精力並訓練我們自己的模型，我們放心蒂姆的評論是完全正確的。這對我們來說並不是一個重大威脅。

Our next question comes from Mike Zaremski from BMO.

我們的下一個問題來自 BMO 的 Mike Zaremski。

Okay. First question is just a numbers question on the catastrophe losses on a gross basis. We're calculating it was around 21 points. Is that similar on a net basis?

好的。第一個問題只是關於災難損失總額的數字問題。我們計算出大約是 21 點。在網絡基礎上是否相似？

Yes, it is.

是的。

Okay. Okay. And my follow-up, you -- Tim mentioned that in the prepared remarks that Metromile's churn rate is slightly higher than the rest of the portfolio. I was looking -- I think Metromile's annual customer retention rate, instead it was around annually back when it disclosed in 2022. Is that kind of -- is Metromile's annual retention rate kind of still around that level?

好的。好的。我的後續行動，蒂姆在準備好的評論中提到，Metromile 的流失率略高於投資組合的其他產品。我在看——我認為 Metromile 的年度客戶保留率，在 2022 年披露時大約是每年一次。是這樣嗎——Metromile 的年度客戶保留率仍然在這個水平附近嗎？

Yes. So we don't disclose that specifically, and some -- a couple of things have changed, obviously, since we took over the book are how we deal with customers, renewals and marketing, of course is more in the realm of Lemonade approach than the Metromile approach.

是的。所以我們不會具體透露這一點，顯然，自從我們接手這本書以來，我們處理客戶、續訂和營銷的方式發生了一些變化，當然更多的是檸檬水方法的領域，而不是檸檬水方法的領域。 Metromile 方法。

The retention rate is somewhat better under the period of time when they've been part of Lemonade since previously. And what's been interesting is the actual premium run rate has continued even though the customer base has declined, we've not been proactively increasing that customer base.

自從他們加入 Lemonade 以來，保留率要好一些。有趣的是，儘管客戶群有所下降，但實際的溢價運行率仍在持續，但我們並沒有主動增加客戶群。

And therefore, the churn has outpaced the growth and therefore, the customer count has declined. The premium level has been fairly steady. It has declined, but at a much more modest rate than we had originally assumed when we acquired the business.

因此，客戶流失速度超過了增長速度，客戶數量也隨之下降。保費水平相當穩定。它有所下降，但速度比我們收購該業務時最初假設的要溫和得多。

Our next question comes from Matt Smith of Halter Ferguson Financial.

我們的下一個問題來自 Halter Ferguson Financial 的馬特·史密斯。

I wanted to stick on the Metromile theme a little bit. One of the notes you made in the letter was that the auto loss ratio, we haven't really made a lot of progress on. And it would just strike me that you probably have more kind of textured and personalized data for those customers. So I'm wondering what's the plan to kind of get that loss ratio in line going forward.

我想稍微堅持一下 Metromile 主題。你在信中提到的其中一項內容是，我們在汽車損失率方面還沒有真正取得很大進展。我突然想到，您可能為這些客戶提供了更多類型的紋理和個性化數據。所以我想知道未來有什麼計劃可以使損失率保持一致。

Matt, thanks for the question. Yes, we have a good amount of clarity there, the bulk or overwhelming majority of our car business is the pay-per-mile Metromile business. And the overwhelming majority of their premiums are in California. We've got a book there that is very geographically concentrated.

馬特，謝謝你的提問。是的，我們非常清楚，我們的汽車業務的大部分或絕大多數是按英里付費的 Metromile 業務。他們的絕大多數保費都在加利福尼亞州。我們那裡有一本書，地理分佈非常集中。

And there's a waiting rate approvals there, which I hope will be coming in the not-too-distant future. That would be a big unlock for that loss ratio. But with such a concentration, we're very dependent on a single approval cycle in order to get the rates back in line with the risks.

那裡有一個等待批准率，我希望這將在不久的將來實現。這將是損失率的一個重大解鎖。但在如此集中的情況下，我們非常依賴單一審批週期才能使利率與風險保持一致。

So are you seeing -- I mean it struck me that you're not trying to grow that piece of the business until you get the loss ratios kind of in line? Are you just trying to prove that out in the California market first and then kind of expand and try to have more bundling in other geographies?

所以你看到了嗎——我的意思是，讓我震驚的是，在損失率達到一定水平之前，你不會試圖發展這部分業務？您是否只是想先在加州市場證明這一點，然後再擴張並嘗試在其他地區進行更多捆綁銷售？

We do have it in a number of states. So we are selling car in close to a dozen states. But in terms of just fixing the existing loss ratio, which is where the bulk of the results come from, you were referring earlier to the comment that said we -- from our letter that said that CAC hasn't improved dramatically. I was just explaining why our historical book hasn't improved dramatically. In terms of new sales, we are making those absolutely in the areas where we feel our rates are adequate. That just happens to account for a small part of the book.

我們在許多州都有它。因此，我們在近十幾個州銷售汽車。但就修復現有的損失率而言，這是大部分結果的來源，您之前提到了我們信中所說的評論，即 CAC 沒有顯著改善。我只是在解釋為什麼我們的歷史書沒有顯著改進。就新銷售而言，我們絕對是在我們認為價格足夠的領域進行銷售。這只是本書的一小部分。

Okay. And then if I could just switch over to the Synthetic Agents. You mentioned, again, the LTV to CAC ratio over 3 in your opening comments, Daniel I'm just curious, given kind of what you're modeling versus what your realized results have been. Is that -- what confidence do you have in that ratio kind of holding over time given the increase in CAT events that we've seen recently?

好的。然後我是否可以切換到合成代理。你在開場白中再次提到，LTV 與 CAC 的比率超過 3，Daniel，我只是很好奇，考慮到你正在建模的內容與你實現的結果的情況。鑑於我們最近看到 CAT 事件的增加，您對隨著時間的推移保持該比率有什麼信心？

It's been surprisingly perhaps constant. So we've been through as a company, as an industry, as an economy, some tumultuous years, but we've seen that overall being fairly stable, fairly constant, slightly improving over time.

令人驚訝的是，它可能是恆定的。因此，作為一家公司、一個行業、一個經濟體，我們經歷了一些動蕩的歲月，但我們看到總體上相當穩定、相當穩定，隨著時間的推移略有改善。

So I hesitate to say too much about the future, but the optimism we suggest that this is an area that we can continue to improve upon as our retention rates continue to improve as our cross-sell rates continue to improve as our new rates come online, I think there is room for optimism on that regard. We -- I'll put it in the inverse side, I see no headwinds that we're aware of.

因此，我不願對未來說太多，但我們樂觀地認為，這是一個我們可以繼續改進的領域，隨著我們的保留率不斷提高，隨著我們的新費率上線，我們的交叉銷售率不斷提高，我認為在這方面還有樂觀的空間。我們——我會把它放在相反的一邊，我認為我們沒有意識到任何阻力。

Our next question comes from Yaron Kinar from Jefferies.

我們的下一個問題來自 Jefferies 的 Yaron Kinar。

Appreciate you're providing the discipline on loss ratios by line -- but for homeowners, you offered a total number with (inaudible) loss per share.

感謝您按行提供損失率的規定，但對於房主來說，您提供了每股（聽不清）損失的總數。

Yes. We chose that carefully. We haven't disclosed the home rate at somewhat more elevated and you can probably back into it by the share of business, but we've not disclosed every line item. Just wanted to show we're making good progress. And so we'll hopefully share more over time.

是的。我們仔細選擇了這一點。我們沒有披露更高一點的房價，您可能可以通過業務份額來了解它，但我們沒有披露每一項。只是想表明我們正在取得良好進展。因此，隨著時間的推移，我們希望能分享更多。

And Yaron, I'm glad you came back in, so I can correct my earlier misstatement to you and to Josh on the prior period development. So I said it was unfavorable -- it's actually favorable by 1 percentage point. So I just wanted to correct that for the record, and for the transcript.

Yaron，我很高興你回來了，這樣我就可以糾正我之前對你和喬什關於前期發展的錯誤陳述。所以我說這是不利的——實際上有利了1個百分點。所以我只是想更正這一點以供記錄和文字記錄。

Got it. And where if I may ask...

知道了。如果我可以問的話在哪裡...

Hey, Yaron your audio broke up a little bit for us. Can you just repeat that, please?

嘿，Yaron，你的音頻對我們來說有點中斷。請您重複一遍好嗎？

Yes. Can you maybe tell us where the cyclicality came from?

是的。您能告訴我們週期性從何而來嗎？

Nothing notable. It was on only one point. So I wouldn't highlight any specific category. It was fairly material.

沒什麼值得注意的。這只是在一點上。所以我不會強調任何特定類別。這是相當物質的。

Got it. Okay. And then going back to the Synthetic Agents. Just I want to make sure I think about the accounting product. Does -- due to cause associated with the agency? Do they above the line into the sales and marketing? Or do they go below the line into (inaudible) payment?

知道了。好的。然後回到合成代理。只是我想確保我考慮了會計產品。是否由於與該機構有關的原因？他們是否從事銷售和營銷工作？或者他們是否會低於底線（聽不清）付款？

So just to sort of think about the mechanics a little bit, the expense that we spend to actually acquire customers will be unchanged and that will continue to flow through the sales and marketing expense line as in the past that's current and that will not change.

因此，稍微考慮一下機制，我們實際獲取客戶所花費的費用將保持不變，並將繼續流經銷售和營銷費用線，就像過去一樣，這是當前的，不會改變。

The incremental expense, which is the return earned by General Catalyst, the provider, the 16% IRR will show up as an interest expense. So that will be excluded from EBITDA, but in the interest expense line on the P&L.

增量費用，即提供商 General Catalyst 獲得的回報，16% IRR 將顯示為利息費用。因此，這將被排除在 EBITDA 之外，但會包含在損益表的利息支出項目中。

Our next question comes from Tommy McJoynt of Stifel.

我們的下一個問題來自 Stifel 的 Tommy McJoynt。

I wanted to go back a little bit to the new captives that you guys are introducing. I guess, just do you see them as strictly a form of capital efficiency? Or is there an opportunity for true risk transfer, where there's third-party capital behind it?

我想稍微回顧一下你們介紹的新俘虜。我想，您只是將它們視為嚴格的資本效率的一種形式嗎？或者是否有真正的風險轉移機會，背後有第三方資本？

I think we have optionality with the Cayman captive that's really wholly integrated, and we will basically retain all that risk on a consolidated basis. So that's really a capital-driven structure with the Bermuda transformer, there are opportunities and structures that exist there that are not available to us otherwise, where over time, there could be interaction with third parties.

我認為我們對開曼俘虜擁有真正完全整合的選擇權，我們基本上將在合併的基礎上保留所有風險。因此，百慕大變壓器實際上是一個資本驅動的結構，那裡存在我們無法獲得的機會和結構，隨著時間的推移，可能會與第三方進行互動。

That's not something that we've instituted yet, but there are opportunities where there could be third-party involvement. And so stay tuned as we roll those out over the coming quarters, and we'll provide more clarity when that becomes more operational.

這還不是我們已經制定的，但有機會讓第三方參與。因此，請繼續關注我們在未來幾個季度推出的這些內容，當這些內容變得更加可操作時，我們將提供更清晰的信息。

Okay. Got it. And then other question, just on the Synthetic Agents, understanding that the cadence of deploying customer acquisition spend might be lumpy and potentially pushed out a couple of quarters. Is it fair to assume that the full maximum of the $150 million financing liability would be on the balance sheet by the end of next year, just I guess, given your trajectory of marketing spend.

好的。知道了。然後是關於綜合代理的另一個問題，了解部署客戶獲取支出的節奏可能會不穩定，並且可能會推遲幾個季度。考慮到你們的營銷支出軌跡，我猜想，到明年年底，1.5 億美元融資負債的全部最高限額將出現在資產負債表上，這樣公平嗎？

So I think it's certainly possible, but I won't -- because we're not giving guidance beyond the current year, I won't say that, that is our expectation. But it's certainly within the realm of reason and again, coming back to our earlier comments, the driver of our decision there is primarily rates coming online, loss ratio improvement, the underlying sort of LTV to CAC of each of the product lines.

所以我認為這當然有可能，但我不會——因為我們不會提供超出今年的指導，我不會這麼說，這是我們的期望。但這肯定是在合理範圍內的，再次回到我們之前的評論，我們決定的驅動因素主要是上線費率、損失率改善、每個產品線的 LTV 與 CAC 的基本類型。

And so if we see that improvement continue or perhaps accelerate? And obviously, we can move the growth up higher and that would make it more likely that we have that full amount by year-end. So it's certainly possible, but not certain.

那麼，如果我們看到這種改善繼續或可能加速呢？顯然，我們可以提高增長速度，這將使我們更有可能在年底前實現全額增長。所以這當然有可能，但不確定。

Okay. Got it. And then just my last question. This is obviously your first kind of form of leverage that you're putting on the balance sheet, do you expect the rating agencies to treat this financing any differently than, I guess, what would be traditional debt on the balance sheet?

好的。知道了。然後是我的最後一個問題。這顯然是您在資產負債表上施加的第一種槓桿形式，您是否期望評級機構以不同於資產負債表上的傳統債務的方式對待這種融資？

Well, they -- I can't speak for rating agencies, the regulator. But yes, I would expect to take into account the true terms of the structure. There's essentially no recourse other than the cash flows that result from the acquired cohorts, which is significantly different is distinct from traditional debt. That said, it is a unique structure. We're not -- we're one of a fairly relatively small number of companies that are employing something like this that has these unique aspects. We're hopeful, though that, that -- those distinctions will be recognized.

好吧，他們——我不能代表評級機構、監管機構發言。但是，是的，我希望考慮到結構的真實條款。除了被收購群體產生的現金流之外，基本上沒有追索權，這與傳統債務有很大不同。也就是說，它是一個獨特的結構。我們不是——我們是少數使用具有這些獨特方面的東西的公司之一。不過，我們希望這些區別能夠得到認可。

Thank you. We currently have no further questions for today. So that concludes today's conference call. Thank you all for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.

謝謝。目前我們今天沒有進一步的問題。今天的電話會議到此結束。感謝大家的加入。您現在可以斷開線路。