Lemonade Inc (LMND) 2025 Q3 法說會逐字稿

Good morning, and thank you all for attending the Lemonade Q3 2025 Earnings Call. My name is Brika, and I'll be your moderator for today. (Operator Instructions)

早安，感謝各位參加 Lemonade 2025 年第三季財報電話會議。我叫布里卡，我將擔任今天的主持人。（操作說明）

I will now hand over to the Lemonade team to begin.

現在我將把麥克風交給 Lemonade 團隊，讓他們開始吧。

Good morning, and welcome to Lemonade's third quarter 2025 Earnings Call. Joining us on our call today, we have Daniel Schreiber, CEO and Co-Founder; Shai Wininger, President and Co-Founder; and Tim Bixby, Chief Financial Officer. A letter to shareholders covering the company's third quarter 2025 financial results is available on our Investor Relations website at lemonade.com/investor. I would like to remind you that management's remarks made on this call may contain forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by these forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors, including those discussed in our letter to shareholders and the Risk Factors section of our Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 26, 2025.

早上好，歡迎參加 Lemonade 2025 年第三季財報電話會議。今天參加我們電話會議的有：執行長兼共同創辦人 Daniel Schreiber；總裁兼共同創辦人 Shai Wininger；以及財務長 Tim Bixby。本公司致股東信涵蓋了該公司2025年第三季財務業績，該信函已發佈在我們的投資者關係網站lemonade.com/investor上。在此提醒各位，管理階層在本次電話會議上的發言可能包含前瞻性陳述。由於各種重要因素的影響，實際結果可能與這些前瞻性聲明所指出的結果有重大差異，這些因素包括我們在致股東的信函以及我們在 2025 年 2 月 26 日向美國證券交易委員會提交的 10-K 表格的「風險因素」部分中討論的因素。

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, including adjusted EBITDA, adjusted free cash flow and adjusted gross profit, which we believe may be important to investors to assess our operating performance. Reconciliations of our 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 certain performance metrics, a definition of each metric, why each is useful to investors and how we use each to monitor and manage our business. With that, I'll turn the call over to Daniel for some opening remarks.

本次電話會議中所做的任何前瞻性陳述僅代表我們截至今日的觀點，我們不承擔更新這些陳述的義務。在今天的電話會議上，我們將提及一些非GAAP財務指標，包括調整後的EBITDA、調整後的自由現金流和調整後的毛利，我們認為這些指標對於投資人評估我們的經營績效可能很重要。我們在致股東的信中列出了非GAAP財務指標與最直接可比較的GAAP財務指標的調節表。我們致股東的信中還包含了有關我們某些業績指標的信息，包括每個指標的定義、每個指標對投資者的用途以及我們如何使用每個指標來監控和管理我們的業務。接下來，我會把電話交給丹尼爾，請他做些開場白。

Good morning, and thank you for joining us to review Lemonade's results for Q3 '25. I'm happy to report another very strong quarter. Our in-force premium grew to $1.16 billion, marking our eighth consecutive quarter of accelerating growth. Our revenue was up 42% year-on-year, while our in-force premium enjoyed 30% growth, growth rates we were not expecting before 2026. Happily, our strong top line metrics were matched by our profitability KPIs.

早安，感謝各位參與本次活動，共同回顧 Lemonade 2025 年第三季的業績。我很高興地報告，本季業績依然非常強勁。我們的有效保費成長至 11.6 億美元，連續第八個季度實現加速成長。我們的營收年增了 42%，而我們的有效保費成長了 30%，這是我們在 2026 年之前沒有預期的成長率。令人欣喜的是，我們強勁的營收指標與獲利能力關鍵指標相符。

Our gross margin climbed into the 40s, while our gross profit more than doubled to $18 million, propelling us steadily and predictably towards EBITDA profitability in Q4 of next year. All our products and regions contributed to this dynamic of accelerating top line and improving profitability, though it is worth spotlighting car, which saw 40% growth with more than half of that coming from existing Lemonade customers essentially CAC-less acquisition. That's transformative to car's unit economics as is the 16% year-on-year improvement in car's loss ratio, which came in at a lovely 76%.

我們的毛利率攀升至 40% 以上，毛利翻了一番多，達到 1800 萬美元，這推動我們穩步、可預測地朝著明年第四季度實現 EBITDA 盈利的目標邁進。我們所有的產品和地區都為加速營收成長和提高獲利能力做出了貢獻，但值得一提的是汽車業務，其成長了 40%，其中超過一半來自 Lemonade 的現有客戶，基本上無需支付獲客成本。這對汽車的單位經濟效益產生了變革性的影響，汽車的損失率也比去年同期降低了 16%，達到了令人欣喜的 76%。

Staying with loss ratios, our company-wide gross loss ratio in Q3 was 62% and our trailing 12-month loss ratio was 67%, both our lowest ever. If nothing unexpected happens in the coming weeks, I anticipate that we will set a new record once more this quarter, Q4. Against this backdrop, it's worth remembering that while declining loss ratios and expanding gross margins are a thrill, they are not per se what we are solving for. As I explained at some length during our Investor Day one year ago, the metric we are looking to maximize is gross profit dollars. Loss ratios always affect gross profit but not always as a simple counter movement, whereby lower loss ratios yield higher gross profit.

繼續看賠付率，我們公司第三季的總賠付率為 62%，過去 12 個月的賠付率為 67%，均為歷史最低水準。如果未來幾週沒有發生任何意外，我預計我們將在本季（第四季）再次創下新紀錄。在此背景下，值得注意的是，雖然損失率下降和毛利率擴大令人興奮，但這本身並不是我們真正要解決的問題。正如我一年前在投資者日上詳細解釋的那樣，我們希望最大化的指標是毛利。虧損率總是會影響毛利，但並非總是簡單的反向作用，即較低的虧損率會帶來較高的毛利。

In reality, the relationship is non-onotomic, meaning that often a higher loss ratio will yield higher gross profit. The underlying mechanics are obvious when you think about it. Given the incredible price sensitivity in insurance, each percentage reduction in price can often yield outsized returns in terms of conversion and retention. Lower prices worsen gross margins and loss ratio, yes, but the attendant boost in revenue often more than makes up for that. This means that for some parts of our business, certain products, certain channels, certain segments, a higher loss ratio and slimmer gross margins will actually translate into higher gross profit.

實際上，這種關係是非原子性的，這意味著通常較高的損失率會帶來較高的毛利。仔細想想，背後的機制就顯而易見了。鑑於保險業對價格的極度敏感，價格每降低一個百分點，往往就能在轉換率和顧客留存率方面帶來巨大的回報。降價確實會惡化毛利率和虧損率，但隨之而來的收入成長往往足以彌補這些損失。這意味著，對於我們業務的某些部分、某些產品、某些管道、某些細分市場而言，較高的損耗率和較低的毛利率實際上會轉化為更高的毛利。

Given the choice, we will always privilege dollars over percentages, which is why when we see an opportunity to trade higher loss ratios and slimmer gross margins for higher absolute gross profit dollars, we will take that trade 10 times out of 10. And indeed, as noteworthy as our loss ratio progression has been in these past two years, during that time, our gross profit has surged by 261%.

如果可以選擇，我們總是優先考慮美元而不是百分比，因此，當我們看到有機會用更高的虧損率和更低的毛利率換取更高的絕對毛利時，我們十有八九都會選擇這樣做。的確，儘管過去兩年我們的損失率有所上升，但在此期間，我們的毛利卻成長了 261%。

The full significance of this comes into sharp relief when paired with the fact that during the same time, our underlying expenses increased by single digits. This means that we've essentially transformed our variable expense into fixed costs. That's extraordinary. It's the hallmark of an AI-first company, and it is the reason why our gross profit trend line charts our path to profit and beyond. And with that, I'll hand it over to Shai.

考慮到同期我們的基本支出僅成長了個位數，這一事實就更能凸顯其全部意義了。這意味著我們基本上已經將可變支出轉化為固定成本。這真是非同尋常。這是人工智慧優先型公司的標誌，也是我們的毛利趨勢線能夠指引我們走向獲利並超越獲利的原因。就這樣，我把它交給沙伊了。

Thanks, Daniel. I wanted to shed some light on something that captures one of the ways AI shows up in our results, the LAE ratio. For those less familiar with our industry, LAE or loss adjustment expense measures the cost of handling claims as a percentage of premiums. It's a simple but powerful indicator of operational efficiency, and it is one of the few metrics that truly allows apples-to-apples comparison of the underlying efficiency of different insurance companies. It should be noted, though, that this metric is influenced by economies of scale.

謝謝你，丹尼爾。我想重點說明一點，那就是 LAE 比率，它體現了 AI 在我們的結果中的一種表現方式。對於不太熟悉我們行業的人來說，LAE（損失調整費用）衡量的是處理索賠的成本佔保費的百分比。這是一個簡單但有效的營運效率指標，也是少數的能夠真正對不同保險公司的潛在效率進行公平比較的指標之一。不過要注意的是，這項指標會受到規模經濟的影響。

And so the larger the insurer, the more they are expected to have a good LAE ratio. For reference, large carriers typically report around 9% LAE. In other words, they spend about 9% of their premium dollars to handle claims on top of the claim payment itself. I'm happy to report that our investment in automation has been paying off. And despite our relatively small size in comparison to the largest U.S.

因此，保險公司規模越大，就越需要擁有良好的損失費用率。作為參考，大型保險公司通常報告的 LAE 約為 9%。換句話說，除了理賠金本身之外，他們還要花費大約 9% 的保費來處理理賠事宜。我很高興地報告，我們在自動化方面的投資已經開始取得成效。儘管與美國最大的國家相比，我們的規模相對較小。

carriers, we reached a superior level of efficiency with an LAE of 7% on average across all of our products. In fact, in the past three years alone, we've cut our LAE ratio in half and the number of Lemonade claims adjusters actually declined, all this despite our claim volume growing 2.5-fold. Using blender, our AI-powered insurance operating system, claim adjusters are able to handle 3x the claim volume they could before, all while providing our customers with a more transparent and instant experience. But having the best-in-class LAE is not where we stop. We wanted to take this further and expect to cut the LAE ratio in half yet again in parallel with our next doubling of the business.

對於承運商而言，我們實現了卓越的效率，所有產品的平均 LAE 為 7%。事實上，光是在過去三年裡，我們就將理賠費用率降低了一半，而且Lemonade的理賠率人數實際上有所下降，而這一切都發生在我們的理賠率增加了2.5倍的情況下。透過我們以人工智慧為基礎的保險作業系統Blender，理賠員能夠處理比以往三倍的理賠率，同時也為客戶提供更透明、更快速的體驗。但擁有業界最佳的 LAE 並不是我們的終點。我們希望更進一步，並期望在業務規模再次翻倍的同時，將 LAE 比率再次減半。

With that, I hand it off to Tim, who will cover our financial performance and outlook. Tim?

接下來，我將把發言權交給提姆，他將介紹我們的財務表現和展望。提姆？

Thanks, Shai. Let's start with our Q3 scorecard. In-force premium grew 30% year-on-year to $1.16 billion, driven by customer growth of 24% and premium per customer growth of about 5%. We added a record 176,000-plus net new customers in the quarter. Gross loss ratio was 62%, an improvement of 11 points year-on-year and 5 points sequentially, while trailing 12 months gross loss ratio improved 3 points sequentially to 67%.

謝謝你，莎伊。讓我們先來看第三季的成績單。有效保費年增 30% 至 11.6 億美元，主要得益於客戶數量成長 24% 和每位客戶保費成長約 5%。本季我們新增淨客戶數創下紀錄，超過 17.6 萬。毛賠率為 62%，年減 11 個百分點，較上季下降 5 個百分點；過去 12 個月的毛賠率較上季下降 3 個百分點，達到 67%。

Prior period development was 5% favorable, driven by 2% unfavorable CAT prior period development and 7% favorable non-CAT prior period development. Total CAT in the quarter, excluding the cat prior period development was 4% -- favorable prior period development was driven primarily by home, car and EU operation, while the unfavorable CAT development was related primarily to the California wildfires in Q1. And on a net basis, prior period development was similar with non-CAT about 6% favorable and CAT 4% unfavorable for a net impact of about 2% favorable. Prior year development, which we report on a net basis, was $6.3 million favorable in Q3 and $18.9 million favorable year-to-date. Gross profit more than doubled to $80 million as did adjusted gross profit to $81 million for a gross margin of 41% and an adjusted gross margin of 42%.

前期發展有利 5%，其中受不利的巨災前期發展影響為 2%，受有利的非巨災前期發展影響為 7%。本季總CAT（不包括上期CAT發展）為4%－有利的上期發展主要由房屋、汽車和歐盟業務推動，而不利的CAT發展主要與第一季加州野火有關。從整體來看，前期發展情況類似，非巨災因素帶來約 6% 的有利影響，巨災因素帶來約 4% 的不利影響，淨影響約為 2% 的有利影響。上年同期發展（我們以淨額報告）第三季有利 630 萬美元，年初至今有利 1890 萬美元。毛利翻了一番多，達到 8,000 萬美元，調整後毛利也翻了一番多，達到 8,100 萬美元，毛利率為 41%，調整後毛利率為 42%。

These metrics use revenue as their denominator. Adjusted gross profit as compared to gross earned premium was 29% in Q3, up 11 points from 18% in the prior year. Revenue grew 42% to $195 million, while our adjusted EBITDA loss improved by about 50% in the year to a loss of $26 million. And it's worth highlighting that revenue grew fully 12 percentage points faster than IFP, a dynamic we expect to continue through at least Q2 next year, primarily due to the recent increase in retained business through our quota share reinsurance structure renewed July 1. Our Q4 revenue guidance, in fact, implies a roughly 49% year-on-year growth rate at the high end of the guidance range.

這些指標均以收入為分母。第三季調整後毛利與毛已賺保費相比增加了 29%，比去年同期的 18% 增加了 11 個百分點。營收成長 42% 至 1.95 億美元，而我們調整後的 EBITDA 虧損在一年內改善了約 50%，虧損額為 2,600 萬美元。值得強調的是，營收成長速度比 IFP 快了整整 12 個百分點，我們預計這一趨勢至少會持續到明年第二季度，這主要是由於我們透過 7 月 1 日續籤的份額再保險結構獲得的留存業務最近有所增加。事實上，我們第四季的營收預期意味著，在預期範圍的高端，年成長率約為 49%。

Importantly, adjusted free cash flow was positive for the second consecutive quarter at $18 million, while operating cash flow was positive $4 million. And we ended the quarter with just under $1.1 billion in cash and investments, of which $278 million is held as regulatory surplus. Annual dollar retention, or ADR, began to improve again as expected and was up 1 point to 85% versus the prior quarter. Operating expenses, excluding loss and loss adjustment expense, increased by $17 million or 13% to $141 million in Q3 as compared to the prior year. And let's break those expense lines down a bit.

值得注意的是，經調整後的自由現金流連續第二季為正，達到 1,800 萬美元，而營運現金流為正 400 萬美元。本季末，我們的現金和投資略低於 11 億美元，其中 2.78 億美元為監管盈餘。年度美元留存率（ADR）如預期般再次開始改善，比上一季上升 1 個百分點至 85%。第三季營運費用（不含損失和損失調整費用）比去年同期增加了 1,700 萬美元，增幅達 13%，達到 1.41 億美元。讓我們來詳細分析一下這些費用項目。

Other insurance expense grew by $4 million or 22% in Q3 versus the prior year versus a 30% growth rate of in-force premium. Total sales and marketing expense increased by $6 million or about 12% due to increased growth spend versus the prior year. In Q3, that growth spend was about $46 million, up 16% as compared to the prior year. We expect Q4 growth spend to be at a roughly similar level, which would put us at a total growth spend of about $180 million for the year. We continue to see both ROI strength and diversity across growth channels, where we've been able to maintain our LTV to CAC ratio above 3:1 across products, across channels and across geographies.

第三季其他保險支出較上年同期成長 400 萬美元，增幅為 22%，而有效保費成長率為 30%。由於成長支出較前一年增加，銷售和行銷總費用增加了 600 萬美元，增幅約 12%。第三季度，該項成長支出約為 4,600 萬美元，比上年同期成長 16%。我們預計第四季度的成長支出將大致處於類似水平，這將使我們全年的成長支出總額達到約 1.8 億美元。我們持續看到各個成長管道的投資報酬率和多樣性，我們能夠在各個產品、各個管道和各個地區保持 3:1 以上的 LTV 與 CAC 比率。

Technology development expense was up 13% year-on-year to $25 million, primarily due to increases in personnel expense, while G&A expense increased 11% as compared to the prior year to $35 million, primarily due to an increase in interest expense. Headcount decreased sequentially from 1,274 in Q2 to 1,259 in Q3 and was up about 3.5% versus the prior year and essentially flat versus 24 months ago. Our net loss was $38 million in Q3 or a loss of $0.51 per share as compared to a net loss of $68 million or $0.95 per share in the prior year. Our adjusted EBITDA loss was $26 million in Q3, significantly improved versus $49 million EBITDA loss in the prior year. We're well positioned to continue to fund this growth to expand across geographies and continue to diversify our customer mix.

技術開發費用年增 13% 至 2,500 萬美元，主要原因是人員費用增加；而一般及行政費用較前一年增加 11% 至 3,500 萬美元，主要原因是利息支出增加。員工人數從第二季的 1,274 人減少到第三季的 1,259 人，與去年同期相比成長了約 3.5%，與 24 個月前相比基本持平。第三季淨虧損為 3,800 萬美元，即每股虧損 0.51 美元，而去年同期淨虧損為 6,800 萬美元，即每股虧損 0.95 美元。第三季調整後的 EBITDA 虧損為 2,600 萬美元，與去年同期 4,900 萬美元的 EBITDA 虧損相比，有了顯著改善。我們有能力繼續為這一成長提供資金，以拓展地域範圍並繼續實現客戶群多元化。

With over $1 billion of cash investments, efficient capital surplus management and positive adjusted free cash flow, we're well positioned to fund our growth strategy without need for additional capital. Given strong year-to-date performance, we are raising our full year 2025 guidance across in force premium, gross earned premium, revenue and EBITDA loss. Our expectation for positive adjusted EBITDA for the full quarter of Q4 2026 remains unchanged. And with the recent change in our quota share ceding ratio, we expect our ceding rate to continue to decline in Q4 to roughly 40%. Our Q3 results show continued execution on and ahead of our targets, 30% premium growth, double-digit loss ratio improvement, a doubling of gross profit, revenue growth well outpacing premium growth, recurring positive cash flow and a strengthening balance sheet.

憑藉超過 10 億美元的現金投資、高效的資本盈餘管理和正的調整後自由現金流，我們完全有能力為我們的成長策略提供資金，而無需額外的資本。鑑於今年迄今的強勁表現，我們上調了 2025 年全年有效保費、毛已賺保費、收入和 EBITDA 虧損的預期。我們對 2026 年第四季整個季度的調整後 EBITDA 為正的預期保持不變。由於最近我們調整了份額轉讓率，我們預計第四季度轉讓率將繼續下降至約 40%。我們的第三季業績顯示，我們繼續按計劃完成並超額完成目標，保費增長 30%，賠付率改善兩位數，毛利潤翻番，收入增長遠超保費增長，持續正現金流，資產負債表不斷增強。

We are delivering a unique combination of growth and profitability improvement and are doing both at scale with real discipline. Let's talk through our Q4 expectations, and then we'll take some questions. For the fourth quarter, we expect in force premium at December 31 of between $1.218 billion and $1.223 billion, gross earned premium between $283 million and $286 million, revenue between $217 million and $222 million and an adjusted EBITDA loss between $16 million and $13 million. We expect stock-based compensation expense of approximately $18 million and a weighted average share count of approximately 75 million shares for the quarter. And this implies for the full year, gross earned premium of between $1.044 billion and $1.047 billion, revenue between $727 million and $732 million, and adjusted EBITDA loss between $130 million and $127 million, stock-based compensation expense of approximately $61 million and a weighted average share count for the full year of approximately 74 million shares.

我們正在實現成長和獲利能力提升的獨特組合，並以真正的自律性大規模地實現這兩點。讓我們先來談談我們對第四季的預期，然後再回答一些問題。對於第四季度，我們預計截至 12 月 31 日的有效保費在 12.18 億美元至 12.23 億美元之間，毛已賺保費在 2.83 億美元至 2.86 億美元之間，收入在 2.17 億美元至 2.22 億美元之間，調整後的 EBITDA 虧損 10 萬美元在 10 萬美元之間虧損 30 萬美元。我們預計本季股票選擇權費用約為 1,800 萬美元，加權平均股票數量約為 7,500 萬股。這意味著全年毛保費收入在 10.44 億美元至 10.47 億美元之間，收入在 7.27 億美元至 7.32 億美元之間，調整後 EBITDA 虧損在 1.3 億美元至 1.27 億美元之間，股權激勵費用約為 6,100 萬美元，全年加權平均股份數約為 700 萬美元，全年加權平均股份數約為 700 萬美元，全年加權平均股份。

And with that, I would like to pass over to Shai to answer some questions from our retail investors.

接下來，我想把麥克風交給Shai，讓他來回答一些散戶投資者提出的問題。

Thanks, Tim. We now turn to our shareholders' questions submitted through the Say platform. Paper Bag asked, with the Local and L2 announcement, what tangible things will be accelerated as the number of car states we plan to launch in 2025 and beyond changed? Are there any new products planned to be coming out faster? And will we see further operating leverage in our engineering teams?

謝謝你，提姆。現在我們來回答股東們透過Say平台提交的問題。Paper Bag 問道，隨著 Local 和 L2 的發布，隨著我們計劃在 2025 年及以後推出的汽車州數量的變化，哪些切實的事情將會加速推進？是否有計劃加快推出的新產品？我們的工程團隊能否進一步提升營運效率？

Thanks, Paper Bag. The local platform represents a major leap forward in how we build and evolve our insurance products. And yes, it's already accelerating a lot of what we do. For those who aren't familiar, Local is what we call our next-generation LLM first no-code insurance product builder. And it effectively gives our teams a new way to configure, design, test and launch complete insurance products and experiences without needing to write or deploy code.

謝謝你，紙袋。本地平台的推出標誌著我們在建立和發展保險產品方面邁出了重大一步。是的，它已經加速了我們所做的很多事情。對於不熟悉的人來說，Local 是我們對下一代 LLM 首個無代碼保險產品建構器的稱呼。它有效地為我們的團隊提供了一種新的方式來配置、設計、測試和發布完整的保險產品和體驗，而無需編寫或部署程式碼。

Local is being built in a modular way. It is already deployed and delivering value in some parts of the business, even though much work remains before local is complete. And based on the rollout so far, processes that used to take weeks can now happen in hours. And yes, it accelerates our operating leverage by freeing our engineering teams to focus on higher impact initiatives since much of the product improvements and tests we're doing can be handled directly by our product and actuarial teams with no engineering involved. Paper Bag also asked, what is the reason or rationale for the recent board seat nominations of PayPal's CMO and Meta's VP of AI Product and are there potential partnerships with either company in the works?

Local 是以模組化方式建構的。雖然在本地化完成之前還有很多工作要做，但它已經在業務的某些部分部署並創造了價值。根據目前的推廣情況來看，以前需要數週才能完成的流程，現在可以在幾個小時內完成。是的，這加快了我們的營運槓桿作用，使我們的工程團隊能夠專注於影響更大的舉措，因為我們所做的許多產品改進和測試都可以由我們的產品和精算團隊直接處理，無需工程部門參與。Paper Bag 也問道，最近 PayPal 的行銷長和 Meta 的人工智慧產品副總裁被提名為董事會成員的原因或理由是什麼？這兩家公司是否有可能建立合作關係？

Paper Bag, the rationale for the additions of Jeff and Prashant to our Board is that both of their areas of expertise, AI and brand are central to Lemonade's strategy. Jeff and Prashant each bring exceptional experience that aligns directly with where we are headed as a company. Prashant is Meta's VP of AI Products, prior to which he was Meta's VP of Generative AI, giving him a unique insight into how cutting-edge AI can be deployed at scale. Jeff is CMO at PayPal and Venmo and was previously Global Head of Marketing at Airbnb. So he has shaped some of the world's most loved and enduring consumer brands.

Paper Bag，我們之所以邀請 Jeff 和 Prashant 加入董事會，是因為他們的兩個專業領域——人工智慧和品牌——對 Lemonade 的策略至關重要。Jeff 和 Prashant 都擁有豐富的經驗，這與我們公司的發展方向完全契合。Prashant 是 Meta 的人工智慧產品副總裁，此前他曾擔任 Meta 的生成式人工智慧副總裁，這使他對如何大規模部署尖端人工智慧有著獨特的見解。Jeff 是 PayPal 和 Venmo 的首席行銷官，此前曾擔任 Airbnb 的全球行銷主管。因此，他打造了一些世界上最受歡迎、最經久不衰的消費品牌。

As we continue to leverage AI to deliver delightful customer experiences and ultimately transform the insurance industry, their experience and perspectives will be invaluable in helping guide our next phase of growth. There are no specific partnerships with either company to highlight at this time. Our rationale is strategic expertise and not corporate collaboration. There are several questions about the future of FSD and how we are positioning our car insurance product in that shifting landscape. So I'll share some thoughts responsive to that general theme.

隨著我們不斷利用人工智慧來提供令人愉悅的客戶體驗並最終改變保險業，他們的經驗和見解對於指導我們下一階段的成長將具有不可估量的價值。目前尚無與這兩家公司建立具體合作關係需要重點說明。我們的理由是策略專長，而不是企業合作。關於 FSD 的未來以及我們如何在這種不斷變化的環境中定位我們的汽車保險產品，存在著幾個問題。所以，我將分享一些與這個大主題相關的想法。

This is an area we pay close attention to. The time line for widespread autonomy is uncertain. It could take longer than the optimists predict or accelerate faster than most expect, and we're building with that range of scenarios in mind. Whenever autonomy reaches its tipping point, we believe we are well positioned to capture what many incumbents might see as a threat. The shift toward autonomy plays to our strengths.

這是我們密切關注的領域。實現廣泛自治的時間表尚不確定。實際耗時可能比樂觀者預測的要長，也可能比大多數人預期的要快，我們在建設過程中考慮了所有這些可能的情況。我們相信，一旦自治達到臨界點，我們就能很好地把握住許多現有企業可能視為威脅的局面。轉向自主化能夠發揮我們的優勢。

The future of car insurance is increasingly about pricing per mile driven and distinguishing between human and system-driven miles. Our system is built around usage-based pricing, real-time data and flexible coverage, precisely the infrastructure needed for that future. And we don't have any legacy systems or traditional business models holding us back. Lastly, there were a number of questions about our Tesla integration. We recently announced a direct integration with Tesla's API, which with proper customer consent allows us to pull driving data straight from the vehicle.

汽車保險的未來越來越取決於按行駛里程定價，以及區分人為行駛里程和系統自動行駛里程。我們的系統以按使用量計費、即時數據和靈活覆蓋範圍為核心構建，這正是未來所需的必要基礎設施。我們沒有任何遺留系統或傳統商業模式阻礙我們發展。最後，還有一些關於我們與特斯拉整合的問題。我們最近宣布與特斯拉的 API 進行直接集成，在獲得客戶適當同意後，我們可以直接從車輛中提取駕駛數據。

This gives us access to a much richer and more precise array of data than what's possible through a phone app or plug-in device. Things like seatbelt usage and more accurate trip insights, for example. It's the kind of granular telemetry that becomes critical as cars get smarter and more autonomous, data that not only sharpens our pricing and underwriting precision today but also positions us to learn directly from the evolution of FSD systems over time. As for ensuring FSD miles at near 0 cost, we aren't able to share material updates on that at the moment but promise to do so when we can. What we can say is that integrations like these are early building blocks for the future where usage-based and system-driven pricing becomes the norm and where our platform is already designed to adopt.

這使我們能夠獲得比透過手機應用程式或插件設備所能獲得的更豐富、更精確的數據。例如安全帶使用情況和更準確的行程資訊。隨著汽車變得越來越聰明、越來越自主，這種精細的遙測數據變得至關重要，這些數據不僅可以提高我們今天的定價和承保精度，還可以讓我們從 FSD 系統的發展中直接學習。至於如何以接近零成本確保 FSD 里程，我們目前還無法分享這方面的實質進展，但我們承諾一旦可以分享就會這樣做。我們可以說，像這樣的整合是未來基於使用量和系統驅動的定價模式的早期建構模組，而我們的平台已經設計成可以採用這種模式。

And with that, I'll pass it over to the moderator, and we will take some questions from the Street.

接下來，我將把發言權交給主持人，我們將回答一些來自街頭觀眾的問題。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作說明）

Tommy McJoynt with Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods.

Tommy McJoynt 與 Keefe、Bruyette 和 Woods 合作。

You noted about half of new car customers were existing Lemonade customers and thus were effectively CAC-less. How does that level compare to prior periods? And is the plan for the majority of new car customers for the foreseeable future to be CAC-less?

您指出，大約一半的新車客戶是現有的 Lemonade 客戶，因此實際上無需支付 CAC 費用。此水平與前期相比如何？在可預見的未來，大多數新車客戶是否都將不再使用中央空調？

I would say that, that 50% rate has been consistent, plus or minus for a few quarters now. So it's a good number. It's a stable number. The CAC-less approach is without question, part of our focused, driving customers to multiple policies. We've seen growth in the multiply policy rate above 5%.

我認為，50% 的利率在過去幾季一直保持穩定，上下波動不大。所以這是個不錯的數字。這是一個穩定的數字。毫無疑問，免 CAC 方法是我們專注於引導客戶購買多種保單的一部分。我們已經看到乘數政策利率成長到 5% 以上。

It has increased sequentially every quarter for quite some time. But I would think of that 50% plus or minus number is a good stable number that we expect can continue.

長期以來，該指標每季都在持續成長。但我認為 50% 左右是一個比較穩定的數字，我們預期這個數字可以持續下去。

Just to add to that, in addition to these customers being CAC-less, they are remarkable in other ways. They tend to have much better loss behaviors, loss patterns. So they are less costly not only to acquire but to service. They tend to have higher retention rates. There's a lot to love about these cross-sold customers.

補充一點，除了這些客戶無需支付客戶獲取費用外，他們在其他方面也很出色。他們的損失行為和損失模式往往要好得多。因此，它們不僅購置成本更低，維護成本也更低。他們的顧客留存率往往較高。這些交叉銷售的客戶有很多值得我們喜歡的地方。

We -- in the letter we refer to them or in my comments refer to them as CAC-less, it would be more accurate to almost think about it as negative CAC. These are customers that tend to be profitable in whatever line of business we acquire them through and then they add a car policy on to that. So it's really an important part of the business. I will just add that while 50% or as we said, over half of our customers coming this way is a big deal. It's a core plank of our strategy, always has been.

我們——在信中我們稱它們為 CAC-less，或在我的評論中稱它們為 CAC-less，更準確的說法應該是負 CAC。這些客戶無論透過何種業務管道被我們吸引，往往都能帶來利潤，然後還會額外購買汽車保險。所以這確實是業務中非常重要的一環。我還要補充一點，雖然有 50% 或如我們所說，超過一半的客戶選擇這種方式，但這意義重大。這是我們策略的核心支柱，一直都是。

That part grows more organically, whereas the one that we target is less organic, and we have dials that we can dial that up or down. So the more you find us spending on acquisition, the more that will affect those ratios over time.

那一部分成長得更自然，而我們瞄準的那部分成長得則不太自然，我們有調節旋鈕可以調節它的成長或下降。因此，我們在獲客方面的投入越多，隨著時間的推移，這些比率受到的影響就越大。

Got it. And then switching over, looking at the ceding commission revenue line, was there a contingent or profit share tailwind in that ceding commission in the third quarter? It looks like it was a higher percentage of ceded premium than it had been running at.

知道了。然後，我們再來看看轉讓佣金收入，第三季轉讓佣金是否有或有利潤分成或利潤分成帶來的利多？看起來已轉讓保費的比例比之前高。

The bulk of that ceding commission is driven by loss ratio and because the loss ratios came in quite nicely, a record low in the quarter. As you know, there's a sliding scale of commissions. So the commission varies somewhat up and down based on the loss ratio. There's a cap and a floor, a high and a low. So at some point, you cap out when your loss ratios get really, really good.

大部分轉讓佣金是由賠付率驅動的，而由於本季賠付率表現相當不錯，創歷史新低。如您所知，佣金是按比例收取的。因此，佣金會根據賠付率而略有上下波動。凡事皆有上限和下限，有高峰和低谷。所以，當你的虧損率真的非常非常好時，就會達到極限。

So that was the main driver in the quarter. And probably worth a reminder, the ceding commission that you see on the face of the P&L is about 4 points different than the actual ceding commission, and that's an accounting nuance. I think you'll see an effective ceding commission rate of about 28% in the quarter. But on a P&L basis, because of the accounting nuance, you see about 24%. So you're exactly right, a couple of points better both year-on-year and sequentially.

所以這就是本季的主要驅動因素。值得一提的是，損益表上顯示的轉讓佣金與實際轉讓佣金相差約 4 個百分點，這是一個會計上的細微差別。我認為本季實際佣金轉讓率約為 28%。但從損益表來看，由於會計上的細微差別，你會看到大約 24%。所以你說得完全正確，無論同比還是環比都提高了幾個百分點。

Jason Helfstein, Oppenheimer.

傑森·赫爾夫斯坦，奧本海默。

I'm going to try to sneak in like 2 and then a quick housekeeper. So obviously, we're seeing like impressive improvements in kind of the contribution ratio efficiency. No doubt you are finding ways to use AI to make the business more efficient. That being said, where would you rate yourself on like at a 10, this would be us using all of the AI tools out there that we could and where you are? That's question number one.

我打算偷偷帶兩個進來，然後再請個保母過來。顯然，我們在貢獻率效率方面看到了顯著的改善。毫無疑問，你們正在尋找利用人工智慧來提高企業效率的方法。也就是說，如果用10分來評價自己，你就會給自己打幾分？我們會使用所有可用的AI工具來評估你的程度。這是第一個問題。

Question number two, again, you've got the business dialed in now between kind of growth and marginal contribution improvements. Is there anything philosophically to think that you're going to lean more into growth because of the way the business is and the metrics are playing out? And then lastly, Tim, just expenses were up on a year-over-year basis and sequentially in the third quarter, like OpEx, i.e., technology and G&A more than we've seen in a while. Just is there just anything to call out from an expense standpoint in the quarter?

第二個問題，你現在已經把業務調整到成長和邊際貢獻改善之間的平衡點了。從哲學角度來看，鑑於目前的業務狀況和各項指標的發展趨勢，是否有任何理由認為你會更重視成長？最後，提姆，第三季各項支出年比和季比均有所成長，例如營運支出（即技術支出）和一般及行政費用，這些成長幅度比我們一段時間以來看到的都要大。從費用角度來看，本季有什麼需要特別指出的嗎？

Jason, -- so the AI is now -- the impact of our AI deployments, I think, is now reflected on pretty much every line in our P&L. So you're quite right. We see it almost anywhere you look. We spotlighted the LAE as a way to really provide apples-to-apples comparison and that way you can see how dramatically different it is from the incumbency. You could look at the fact that we've OpEx -- sorry, our gross profit has gone up tenfold in the last three years, whereas our headcount hasn't moved, has actually moderately declined.

Jason，——所以人工智慧現在——我認為，我們人工智慧部署的影響現在幾乎反映在我們損益表的每一項上。你說得完全正確。幾乎到處都能看到它。我們重點介紹了 LAE，以便真正進行公平的比較，這樣您就可以看到它與現有系統有多大的差異。您可以看看我們的營運支出——抱歉，是我們的毛利——在過去三年中增長了十倍，而我們的員工人數卻沒有變化，實際上還略有下降。

So there are a lot of indications of something pretty dramatic happening in terms of the AI, and we see that in terms of all the efficiencies. And if you look at the life cycle within kind of the customer engagement with Lemonade, you'll see AI everywhere. It starts with how and where we deploy the marketing dollars that attract you as a customer. So as you know, about 90% of those dollars that Tim referenced earlier that we deploy to acquire customers, about 90% of them are guided by AI, some 50 different machine learning models that optimize how we spend, where we spend based on LTV to CAC predictions of every customer, every segment, every advertising campaign. Then when you come to us, our recommendation of products and also some other settings and cross-sells during the purchase process is AI-driven.

因此，有許多跡象顯示人工智慧領域正在發生一些非常戲劇性的變化，我們從各個方面的效率提升中也能看到這一點。如果你觀察 Lemonade 的客戶互動生命週期，你會發現人工智慧無所不在。首先要考慮的是我們如何以及在哪裡投入行銷資金來吸引您成為客戶。如您所知，蒂姆之前提到的我們用於獲取客戶的資金中，約有 90% 是由人工智慧指導的，大約 50 種不同的機器學習模型根據每個客戶、每個細分市場、每個廣告活動的 LTV 到 CAC 預測來優化我們的支出方式和支出地點。當您來到我們這裡時，我們向您推薦的產品以及購買過程中的其他一些設定和交叉銷售都是由人工智慧驅動的。

And then later, when you engage with us and ask customer support or claims, and you'll see again the majority of our claims being settled without human intervention by AI. So by one measure, I would say that we score very high on your 1 to 10 scale. We really do use AI across the board. The majority of our code, software engineering is now written by AI. So we're really seeing this everywhere.

然後，之後當您與我們聯繫並諮詢客戶支援或理賠時，您會再次看到，我們的大部分理賠都是由人工智慧在無需人工幹預的情況下解決的。所以從某種意義上說，我認為我們在你們的 1 到 10 分的評分標準中得分非常高。我們確實在各方面都應用了人工智慧。我們大部分的程式碼，也就是軟體工程，現在都是由人工智慧編寫的。所以我們現在到處都能看到這種情況。

At the same time, I think if you take a zoomed out perspective and you kind of judge today by where we will be a year, two years, three years from today, I think you'd rate us as a. I think we're just getting started. And there is so much more that we see that we can do. We're scrambling to do it all. As we are doing that, the ground beneath us is shifting because models are becoming so much smarter, so much faster.

同時，我認為，如果你從更宏觀的角度來看，並以一年、兩年、三年後我們將會處於的位置來評判我們今天的情況，我認為你會把我們評為 a。我覺得我們才剛開始。我們看到還有很多事情可以做。我們正在爭分奪秒地完成所有事情。同時，我們腳下的土地也在發生變化，因為模型變得越來越智能，速度也越來越快。

So I think both we have done a lot and we have done very little, one measured against what the industry knows and the other one measured against the potential that we see coming over the course of the next few years. Another word about your second question. Can you -- Tim, do you have that?

所以我認為，從行業已知的情況來看，我們做了很多，但從未來幾年我們看到的潛力來看，我們做得還很少。關於你的第二個問題，我再補充一點。提姆，你有那個嗎？

Yes, it was about just philosophically now that everything seems to be kind of working would you consider leaning into more growth and pushing out like kind of profitability targets and then there would be housekeeping expense.

是的，現在一切似乎都朝著好的方向發展，從理念上講，您是否會考慮進一步追求成長，並設定獲利目標，然後就會產生一些日常開支。

Okay. So yes and no, and we tried to touch on this in our earlier comments. We see ourselves turning EBITDA profitable in Q4 of next year. That's not moving. I don't anticipate any change in that.

好的。所以，既是也不是，我們在之前的評論中也嘗試談到了這一點。我們預計明年第四季將實現 EBITDA 獲利。它一動也不動。我預計這種情況不會有任何改變。

That's been our expectation for some three years, and it's becoming increasingly obvious, I think, to people outside the company and why we're so confident of that. So that particular profitability metric is unlikely to change. But there are other metrics that talk to profitability, such as gross margins, which we see as more pliable. So what we are optimizing for is gross profit dollars. And in pursuit of maximizing gross profit dollars, there will be segments where we will let loss ratio rise because the elasticity of demand is such that, that will spike demand and retention in a way that offsets the margin becoming a little bit more constrained.

三年以來，我們一直抱持這樣的期望，我認為，公司以外的人也越來越清楚地認識到這一點，以及我們為什麼對此如此有信心。因此，該項獲利指標不太可能發生變化。但還有其他一些指標可以反映獲利能力，例如毛利率，我們認為這些指標更靈活。所以我們優化的目標是毛利（美元）。為了追求毛利最大化，我們會允許某些領域的虧損率上升，因為需求彈性如此之大，這將刺激需求和客戶留存，從而抵消利潤率略微受到限制的情況。

So depending on which -- pick your metric, and I'll give you a better answer, the gross profit dollars, we expect to maximize, and we don't expect to take our foot off the pedal there at all. And the ultimate EBITDA breakeven is locked in for Q4 of next year, and we're not anticipating that changing.

所以，根據你選擇的指標——選擇你的指標，我會給你一個更好的答案——毛利，我們希望最大化毛利，而且我們絕對不會在這方面放鬆努力。最終的 EBITDA 損益平衡點已確定在明年第四季度，我們預計不會發生變化。

Great. And then a couple of notes on the expense side. You're right that the tick up in this quarter was a little higher than is typical. We do see it vary quarter-to-quarter. I don't see that as a step change or an ongoing change.

偉大的。然後還有幾點關於費用方面的說明。你說得對，本季的漲幅確實比平常略高一些。我們發現它確實存在季度性波動。我不認為這是一個重大變革，也不是持續的變革。

But particularly in the quarter, growth spend, obviously, is a notable year-on-year increase, and we break that out. We're spending a bit more for tech personnel, and you see the offsets from that in efficiencies elsewhere but that's a dynamic where if you isolate that line, over time, you can see some increase there year-on-year. Some of it is just purely inflation. The team size doesn't grow dramatically but the cost goes up modestly. In G&A, our interest expense growth, and that grows with our growth spend more or less because we're -- as you know, we're financing about 80% of that growth spend.

但尤其在本季度，成長支出顯然實現了顯著的同比增長，我們將這一點單獨列出。我們在技術人員方面的投入稍微多了一些，雖然這在其他方面的效率提升上有所抵消，但這是一個動態過程，如果你單獨分析這一項，隨著時間的推移，你會發現它逐年有所增長。其中一些純粹是通貨膨脹造成的。團隊規模不會大幅成長，但成本會略有上升。在一般及行政費用中，我們的利息支出增長，並且或多或少與我們的增長支出一起增長，因為——正如您所知，我們正在為大約 80% 的增長支出提供融資。

So from an expense standpoint, it jumps out. But from an overall cash flow benefit standpoint, obviously, that's a terrific benefit to our -- the IRR measures of the company as a whole. A little bit of noise in our merchant fees, which can be seasonal, meaning they can move a little bit more or less than the premium in the quarter. So a number of little things, but the big picture is unchanged, single-digit expense growth and 30% plus top line growth, and you see that in the chart that we published, and that's what we expect going forward.

所以從費用角度來看，它非常突出。但從整體現金流收益的角度來看，這顯然對我們公司的整體內部報酬率指標來說是一個巨大的優勢。我們的商家手續費存在一些波動，這可能與季節性因素有關，這意味著它們的波動幅度可能會比季度溢價略高或略低。所以，雖然有一些小的變化，但整體趨勢沒有改變，支出成長維持個位數，營收成長超過 30%，正如我們發布的圖表所示，這也是我們對未來的預期。

Katie Sakys, Autonomous Research.

凱蒂·薩克斯，自主研究。

A couple from me. I guess, first, it sounds like there's a bit more growth scheduled for 4Q than previously messaged the last time you hosted a call. So I guess I'm just trying to reconcile the change in the IFP guide for the full year '25 given the magnitude of 3Q results relative to previous guidance. It doesn't sound like you're messaging necessarily a pull forward in growth into 3Q from 4Q, but it kind of does seem like the full year guide implies a bit of a sequential deceleration next quarter back down below the 30% growth rate. So I'm just looking for some additional color there on the change in the full year guide when 3Q IFP netted out relative to the previous guide.

我這裡也有一對。首先，聽起來第四季的成長計畫比上次您主持電話會議時傳達的訊息要多一些。所以我想我只是想解釋一下，鑑於第三季業績相對於之前的預期而言有多麼巨大，IFP對2025年全年業績指引的變化。聽起來你似乎並沒有暗示第三季的成長會從第四季提前，但全年業績指引似乎暗示下一季增速會略有放緩，回落到 30% 的成長率以下。所以我想了解一下，當第三季 IFP 淨值相對於上一年度業績指引有所變化時，全年業績指引發生了哪些變化。

Sure. Katie, your math is right. So when we have a big beat on a key metric in a quarter, then obviously, we evaluate how much of that we expect to continue forward and how much we want to make certain adjustments on the top line, that IFP number captures the entire business, not just the additional sales or the new sales or the growth rate. So while our growth spend has increased and our new sales, we expect to increase as well, we're cautious about retention. Our Q3 results were actually quite good, and we're able to overperform but we're somewhat thoughtful about that top line going into Q4 because that captures the entire business.

當然。凱蒂，你的計算是正確的。因此，當我們在一個季度中某個關鍵指標大幅超出預期時，顯然，我們會評估有多少預期能夠持續下去，以及我們希望對營收做出多少調整。 IFP 數據反映了整個業務，而不僅僅是額外的銷售額、新銷售額或成長率。因此，儘管我們的成長支出有所增加，而且我們預期新銷售額也會增加，但我們對客戶留存率持謹慎態度。我們第三季的業績其實相當不錯，我們能夠超額完成目標，但我們對第四季的營收數據還是有些謹慎，因為它反映了整個業務的情況。

The opposite is true on the other line items. So in gross earned premium and revenue, we captured not only the beat in Q3 but additional increase in Q4. So there's a little nuance there between the metrics, that's what's going on.

其他項目的情況則恰恰相反。因此，在毛保費收入方面，我們不僅在第三季超額完成目標，而且在第四季還實現了進一步成長。所以這些指標之間存在一些細微差別，這就是問題所在。

Okay. Yes. No, that makes total sense. It's just -- I mean, ADR, like to your credit, improved versus last quarter, showing upward progress there. I understand, obviously, some of that is coming from the lapping of nonrenewals on home from last year.

好的。是的。沒錯，這完全說得通。我的意思是，值得稱讚的是，ADR（平均每日出勤率）較上一季度有所改善，顯示出上升趨勢。我明白，很顯然，其中一部分原因是去年房屋租賃合約未續約造成的。

But I mean, it looks like you guys are doing well in terms of retention versus maybe we were at the start of this year. So I'm just curious about the conservatism, like you were able to exceed the 30% IFP growth rate this quarter. So what in the financial plan is potentially looking a little bit less positive as we end up the year, especially as retention continues to improve?

但我的意思是，看起來你們在員工留存率方面做得不錯，跟我們今年年初的情況相比，差距可能會大一些。所以我很好奇你們的保守作風，例如你們本季能夠超過 30% 的 IFP 成長率。那麼，隨著年底臨近，尤其是在員工留存率持續提高的情況下，財務計畫中哪些方面可能看起來不太樂觀呢？

I would think of it as all quite positive if you're looking for our view and how we see things rolling out, particularly in the fourth quarter where we're a month plus in. We have pretty good visibility. I'd remind that we continue to be really thoughtful about our home book of business. The underlying numbers actually look quite good, the loss ratio and the other metrics. But we continue to work through what we've called our clean the book exercise.

如果你想了解我們的觀點以及我們對事情發展的看法，特別是第四季度（現在已經過去一個多月了），我會認為一切都相當積極。我們這裡的能見度相當不錯。我想提醒大家，我們仍然會認真對待我們的家庭業務。實際上，各項基礎數據看起來都相當不錯，包括損失率和其他指標。但我們仍在繼續進行我們稱之為「清理帳簿」的練習。

That continues unchanged. Actually, it will have a level of impact in the second half that's similar to the first half. But that continues, and that's part of our plan. So we're growing at a 30% rate despite that sort of pruning of our customer base. So all your questions are fair, but I think we're quite optimistic I just want to be thoughtful about the parts we know about and the parts we don't yet know about, which is the remainder of the quarter.

情況依然如此。實際上，它在下半場的影響程度將與上半場類似。但這種情況仍在繼續，這也是我們計劃的一部分。儘管客戶群有所縮減，但我們仍保持著 30% 的成長速度。所以你們提出的所有問題都很合理，但我認為我們相當樂觀。我只是想認真思考我們已知的部分和我們尚不了解的部分，也就是本季剩餘的時間。

And maybe, Katie, sorry, just for the benefit of people listening on who haven't done the math as you have, our guide does anticipate a 30% next quarter at the high end of the guide. We've guided at something between 29% and 30% growth for Q4. So we're certainly not anticipating or guiding to any considerable reversal or slowdown as guided.

凱蒂，抱歉，為了那些沒有像你一樣計算過的人，我們的指南預測下一季成長率最高可達 30%。我們預計第四季成長率將在 29% 至 30% 之間。因此，我們當然不會像之前預測的那樣，預期或引導出現任何實質的逆轉或放緩。

Okay. And then if I could just sneak in one more. I can appreciate that the trailing 12-month gross loss ratio is trending well below the 73% target you guys have previously messaged. Just kind of thinking about that in the context of the changes to the quota share structure and ongoing maximization of gross profit dollars. Is 73% gross loss ratio still the right target for the business at this point?

好的。如果我能再偷偷加一個就好了。我注意到，過去 12 個月的總虧損率遠低於你們之前提到的 73% 的目標。我只是在考慮配額份額結構的變化以及毛利最大化的持續推進這個問題。目前來看，73%的毛虧損率仍是企業的合適目標嗎？

Or do you eventually see a pathway to taking that target down lower?

或者你最終是否看到了降低目標價位的途徑？

It's a great question, Katie. And to be honest, we've tried to be responsive to questions such as this one and provide a target loss ratio. But I do want to give you an insight into how we think about this, which is that there isn't a target per se. Loss ratio is an input, not an output. It's a lever which we use to optimize the business.

凱蒂，你問得好。說實話，我們一直努力回應這類問題，並提供目標損失率。但我確實想讓你們了解我們是如何看待這個問題的，那就是這個問題本身並沒有一個目標。損耗率是輸入值，而不是輸出值。這是我們用來優化業務的槓桿。

It's not necessarily evident that the business is optimal. So because we are as efficient as we are and our other cost structures are declining as they are, we are in a position to be price leaders, a thesis that we developed at some length almost a year ago during our Analyst Day on November 20 of last year, which is to say, we think that there is a structural advantage that Lemonade enjoys where in a price-sensitive market like ours, but oftentimes a 1 percentage move on price will yield a fivefold increase in conversion or other metrics. It may make sense for us to continuously refine within certain markets and certain segments get to very competitive price points. And that will put pressure on gross loss ratio. But just to give you a hypothetical, I spoke earlier about the CAC-less acquisition of great customers in the car business.

這項業務是否處於最佳狀態，這一點並不一定顯而易見。正因為我們的效率如此之高，而且我們的其他成本結構也不斷下降，所以我們有能力成為價格領導者。這個論點我們在去年 11 月 20 日的分析師日上進行了相當詳細的闡述，也就是說，我們認為 Lemonade 擁有結構性優勢，在像我們這樣對價格敏感的市場中，價格通常只需變動 1%，就能使轉換率或其他指標提高五倍。我們或許應該在某些市場和區隔領域不斷改進，以達到極具競爭力的價格點。這將給毛賠率帶來壓力。但舉個假設的例子，我之前談到了在汽車行業中無需客戶獲取成本 (CAC) 即可獲得優質客戶的情況。

Why do we need to optimize to a 73% or any other particular number for these customers where there is no cost to acquire the customer and almost no cost to service the customers. You can envisage a situation where we could lower prices so dramatically where we would be profitable with a 90% loss ratio. The math here and the degrees of freedom that we have is pretty dramatic and something that will be very, very hard for the incumbency to replicate. So we are using the data to guide us in terms of what is optimizing gross profit. At times, that will mean selling a lot more with thinner margins, at times not.

為什麼我們需要將這些客戶的最佳化目標設定為 73% 或其他特定數字？畢竟，取得這些客戶沒有成本，服務這些客戶幾乎沒有成本。你可以想像這樣一種情況：我們可以大幅降低價格，即使虧損率高達 90%，我們仍然能夠獲利。這裡所運用的數學方法以及我們所擁有的自由度都非常驚人，現任政府很難複製這個局面。因此，我們正在利用這些數據來指導我們如何優化毛利。有時這意味著要以較低的利潤率銷售更多的產品，有時則不然。

Some of our products are more price elastic, some are less, some campaigns are more elastic, some are less. So it will aggregate into a loss ratio that we will report on a quarterly basis. But we're thinking about loss ratio less and less as one big aggregate number with a target more and more as fine-tuning of optimization of by product, by campaign, by region, and that will result in different loss ratios, different product lines but always in the service of maximizing gross profit. I hope that gives you -- I hope that helps give you an insight into how we are approaching the question that you're asking.

我們有些產品的價格彈性較大，有些較小；有些行銷活動的價格彈性較大，有些較小。因此，我們將匯總成一個損失率，並按季度公佈該損失率。但我們越來越少將損失率視為一個以目標為導向的總體數字，而更多地將其視為按產品、按活動、按地區進行優化微調的目標，這將導致不同的損失率、不同的產品線，但始終是為了實現毛利潤最大化。我希望這能幫助你了解我們是如何看待你所提出的問題的。

Zachary Gunn, FT Partners.

Zachary Gunn，FT Partners。

So I also just wanted to follow up on the gross loss ratio, so down 5 points overall, up 13 points in Europe. So can you just talk a little bit about what drove that decrease in Europe? Is it benefits of scale? Was it product mix? And then just I'll get my follow-up on that topic as well.

所以我還想跟進一下毛損率，整體下降了 5 個百分點，歐洲上升了 13 個百分點。那麼，您能否談談導致歐洲市場下滑的原因？這是規模效益嗎？是產品組合的問題嗎？然後我還會收到關於這個主題的後續回饋。

I think previously, you've talked about U.K. being really strong in Europe from a growth perspective, maybe Germany being a little bit weaker. Any updates there within the European market of what you're seeing?

我認為你之前說過，從成長的角度來看，英國在歐洲非常強大，而德國可能稍微弱一些。歐洲市場有什麼最新進展嗎？

Sure, Zachary. Let me start it off and then Tim, please come in with anything that you feel I missed. Our European business is doing spectacularly well. We put a spotlight on it a couple of quarters ago, I think, but it really is. We're seeing something like 170% growth in our European business this quarter.

當然可以，扎克瑞。我先開始，然後提姆，如果你覺得我遺漏了什麼，請補充。我們的歐洲業務表現非常出色。我想，我們大概在幾個季度前就專注於這個問題，但它確實如此。本季我們歐洲業務的成長幅度約為 170%。

We're seeing our customer base doubling year-on-year and a very healthy loss ratio. I think we mentioned in the last quarter, if memory serves, that when our American business was at this -- or the size, this dimension, its loss ratio was 30 points worse than we are in Europe today. So things that are moving along the same trajectory as our U.S. business. But to some extent, we've learned lessons and built systems and to some extent, the nature of the European business allows us to do things faster.

我們看到客戶群每年翻一番，損失率非常健康。如果我沒記錯的話，我們在上個季度提到過，當我們的美國業務達到這個規模時，其損失率比我們今天在歐洲的情況要高出 30 個百分點。所以，這些事情的發展軌跡與我們在美國的業務發展軌跡相同。但在某種程度上，我們吸取了教訓，建立了系統；在某種程度上，歐洲商業的本質也使我們能夠更快地做事。

And let me just unpack that last sentence for you, which is in the U.S., as you know, regulators across the 50 states have varying requirements. But by and large, there are systems, hoops, loops that we have to jump through before we can affect price changes, not so in Europe. In Europe, there are other regulatory constraints but we have freedom or much more freedom to price and to change prices dynamically, which means that when we pick up signals in terms of pricing inaccuracies, there isn't the time lag that we have in the U.S., we're able to course correct instantly. And our systems are set up to do just that. So we are seeing that our business there is much more responsive to any signal that we pick up.

讓我來為你解讀最後一句話。你知道，在美國，50 個州的監管機構有不同的要求。但總的來說，在我們能夠影響價格變動之前，我們需要跨越一些系統、障礙和流程，而歐洲則不然。在歐洲，雖然有其他監管限制，但我們在定價和動態調整價格方面擁有更大的自由度，這意味著當我們發現定價不準確時，不會像在美國那樣存在時間滯後，我們可以立即糾正錯誤。我們的系統正是為了實現這一點而設計的。因此，我們發現，我們在那裡的業務對我們捕捉到的任何訊號都更加敏感。

And I think that as much as anything else, we've got a fabulous team. We've got lessons learned and some scar tissue from where we missed steps in the past but that more than anything else has just allowed us to move at a pace that we just can't in the U.S. Tim, anything you wanted to add to that?

而且我認為，最重要的是，我們擁有一支非常棒的團隊。我們從過去的失誤中學到了教訓，也留下了一些傷疤，但正是這些讓我們能夠以在美國根本無法企及的速度前進。提姆，你還有什麼要補充的嗎？

Yes. Just general good news across the board, I think, and particularly from a loss ratio perspective, we're starting to see some mix benefit. So as the U.K. grows and in particular, the renters book in the U.K., that sports a nice effectively low loss ratio, that starts to show up in the total. So that's part of the driver.

是的。總的來說，各方面都是好消息，尤其從賠付率的角度來看，我們開始看到一些利多因素。因此，隨著英國經濟的成長，尤其是租屋者在英國預訂的房源，由於損失率相對較低，這種成長開始體現在總數中。所以這是驅動因素的一部分。

Some of it is prior period impact, also favorable in the quarter, and that's good news. That just means when you have a younger book of business and you're more thoughtful in your reserving, you can at times have a favorable release of prior period. We saw a bit of that in our French book, which is a smaller book of business. With the U.K. heading in aggregate above the 50% level, that bodes well.

部分原因是前期影響，對本季也有利好，這是個好消息。這意味著，如果你的業務歷史較短，並且在預留資金方面更加周全，那麼有時你可以獲得前期費用的有利釋放。我們在規模較小的法國商業帳簿中也看到了一些這種情況。英國整體感染率超過 50%，是個好兆頭。

But we're also seeing nice improvements in other territories as well. We've gone from having really no home business in Europe to having a really nice and effective home product now in three of the four territories. So Europe is really hitting on all cylinders. It's still a relatively small portion of the book but it's become material, and you'll likely hear more about it from us as we go forward.

但我們也看到其他地區也出現了不錯的改善。我們從在歐洲幾乎沒有家庭業務，發展到現在在四個地區中的三個地區都擁有非常出色且有效的家庭產品。所以歐洲現在真是火力全開。雖然這部分內容在書中佔比仍然很小，但它已經成為重要的素材，隨著我們未來的發展，你們可能會聽到更多關於它的內容。

Andrew Andersen, Jefferies.

Andrew Andersen，傑富瑞集團。

Just looking at pet, it's been growing pretty well and the loss ratios seem pretty stable there. I was wondering if you could just touch on kind of the competitive environment you're seeing with pet, maybe how you feel your pricing is relative to some of the industry? And if you could maybe touch on what you're seeing in terms of loss trends there.

單從寵物數量來看，它的成長情況相當不錯，而且損失率似乎也相當穩定。我想請您談談您目前在寵物行業中看到的競爭環境，以及您認為您的定價與行業內其他公司相比如何？如果您能談談您觀察到的損失趨勢就更好了。

Yes. Again, I feel like a broken record. The things I said about the EU are also true in pet, super stable and predictable loss ratios at this point, a little bit of seasonality. The partnership with Chewy continues to hum along. about almost 5% of the business now has been driven through that partnership.

是的。我又覺得自己像個複讀機了。我之前對歐盟的評價也適用於寵物產業，目前寵物產業的損失率非常穩定且可預測，只有一點點季節性波動。與Chewy的合作持續順利，目前約有5%的業務成長都得益於這種合作關係。

From a competitive standpoint, we've done in four or five years. I think what it took pet-only providers that are really, really strong players in the market, 10 or 12 years to do. So we really like what we're seeing from a pet perspective. From a pricing perspective, I would think of it as similar to our other products where while we don't aim to be -- to underprice the product or to be price anything as a loss leader, we will often be, if not the most -- the least price, a super competitive price. So we do lose business if it doesn't satisfy our LTV model requirements but we're typically quite competitive with the strongest players.

從競爭角度來看，我們在四、五年內就做到了。我認為，那些真正實力雄厚的寵物專屬服務提供者花了 10 到 12 年的時間才做到這一點。所以，從寵物角度來看，我們非常喜歡我們所看到的。從定價的角度來看，我認為它與我們的其他產品類似，雖然我們並不打算低價銷售產品或以虧本價銷售任何產品，但我們通常會提供極具競爭力的最低價格，即使不是最低價格。所以，如果產品不符合我們的 LTV 模型要求，我們就會失去業務，但我們通常與最強大的競爭對手相比也很有競爭力。

And I just want to go back to some of the LAE comments and the potential for improvement in that ratio over time. I'm just trying to think about how you are managing kind of maintaining a similar customer service level but also taking into consideration, I imagine at some point over time, there will be a pivot back towards some more homeowners and auto will be a different or a higher mix of the book. So how do you kind of manage through the different customer service levels and the changing needs there, but also using automation efforts?

我只想回到 LAE 的一些評論，以及隨著時間的推移，該比例可能出現的改善情況。我只是想了解你們是如何在保持類似客戶服務水平的同時，考慮到隨著時間的推移，我想業務重心會逐漸轉向更多的房主，而汽車保險業務在業務組合中的佔比會發生變化或更高。那麼，你要如何管理不同的客戶服務等級和不斷變化的需求，同時還要利用自動化措施呢？

Andrew, you'll note in the letter, we break down the LAE by product. And you'll see that there's a uniformly down to the right shape to all of the curves, all of the products, including the more complex ones that you're asking about. So we are seeing that we're able to use AI across the board, across the product line to great effect and to achieve dramatic improvements in terms of automation. The very nice thing about using AI to do this work is that it's never at the cost of customer service. It is to the delight of customers.

Andrew，你會在信中註意到，我們按產品細分了 LAE。你會發現，所有曲線、所有產品，包括你問到的那些更複雜的產品，都有統一的、正確的形狀。因此，我們看到，我們能夠全面地、在整個產品線中使用人工智慧，並取得顯著成效，在自動化方面實現巨大改進。使用人工智慧來完成這項工作的好處在於，它永遠不會以犧牲客戶服務為代價。這令顧客們非常高興。

The overwhelming majority of complaints that we get, I think well over 90% for that things that humans do rather than AI does. So when we deploy AI to do these things, it's not the old thing that you used to get when you dialed United Airlines and you have to repeat yourself 7 times to be understood and press 1 and press 3 and press 5 and you knew you were interacting with a machine. These are very high level -- we only deploy the technology once it reaches very high levels of customer satisfaction. And once it does that, it usually exceeds or in the areas that we agree to let it go live, it exceeds what humans do because it's much faster. The error rate is often lower.

我認為，我們收到的絕大多數投訴（超過 90%）都是關於人類而非人工智慧所做的事情。所以，當我們部署人工智慧來做這些事情時，它不再像以前那樣了，例如你撥打美聯航的電話，你必須重複7次才能被理解，還要按1、3、5，你知道你正在和機器互動。這些都是非常高的水平——只有當客戶滿意度達到非常高的水平時，我們才會部署這項技術。一旦它做到這一點，它通常會超過或在同意讓它生存的領域內超過人類，因為它的速度要快得多。錯誤率通常較低。

So we're seeing it able to handle ever more complex things. Jason asked me earlier about kind of our scale of 1 to 10, and I think that would apply here as well, which is you can see how much we've done. And at the same time, we just think that there is a whole lot more that we can do. We really do see a blue ocean in front of us of areas that we can improve. So we're fairly bullish on kind of if you zoom out on the prospects of AGI within the next few years, which really means that machines will be able to do every activity, every intellectual activity that humans do today.

因此，我們看到它能夠處理越來越複雜的事情。Jason 之前問過我關於我們 1 到 10 的評分標準，我認為這同樣適用於這裡，你可以看到我們已經做了多少。同時，我們認為我們還有很多事情可以做。我們面前確實存在著一片廣闊的進步空間。因此，如果從長遠來看，我們對未來幾年內通用人工智慧（AGI）的前景相當樂觀，這意味著機器將能夠完成人類今天所做的每項活動，每項智力活動。

And therefore, the idea that some of these products are more complex and require humans today is both true and transient. I think in the coming years, you will find that we'll be able to deploy systems to take care of all of our customers' needs, lowering our costs and raising the level of customer delight.

因此，認為當今某些產品更加複雜且需要人類參與的觀點既是事實，也是暫時的。我認為在未來幾年，你會發現我們將能夠部署系統來滿足我們客戶的所有需求，從而降低成本並提高客戶滿意度。

And I think add a thought, sorry to interrupt. I think there's a note or 2 in the letter that's kind of elegant around this concept of shifting variable cost to fixed cost. And so if you think from a customer satisfaction standpoint or a customer experience standpoint, very specifically, in the older world, even if you automated responses or interactions with customers, you had to have a human evaluating and improving those responses. So they weren't -- so they were constantly improving and getting better. And that human evaluating those responses became a variable expense.

我想補充一點，不好意思打斷。我認為信中有一兩處註釋，對將變動成本轉化為固定成本這一概念的闡述相當精闢。因此，如果你從客戶滿意度或客戶體驗的角度來看，具體來說，在過去，即使你實現了與客戶的自動回覆或互動，你也需要有人來評估和改進這些回應。所以他們並沒有——所以他們一直在不斷進步，變得越來越好。而評估這些回饋的人工成本則變成了一項變動成本。

They had to review and think and make judgments even though they weren't actually responding to every request with the tools -- with the AI tools we now have at hand, even that review process with a human intervention can be automated such that an improvement in the response can filter out to our entire customer base in real time. And so this concept of constantly looking for variable expenses that we can convert to fixed expenses is really -- it sounds simple but I think in the world of AI, it really helps to kind of sharpen the focus on how these things actually turn into things you can see on the P&L.

即使他們實際上並沒有用工具回應每一個請求，他們也必須進行審查、思考和判斷——有了我們現在擁有的 AI 工具，即使是需要人工幹預的審查過程也可以自動化，從而使響應的改進能夠實時惠及我們所有的客戶。因此，不斷尋找可以轉化為固定支出的可變支出這一概念，聽起來很簡單，但我認為在人工智慧領域，它確實有助於集中精力關注這些支出如何轉化為損益表上可以看到的支出。

(Operator Instructions)

（操作說明）

Jack Matten, BMO Capital Markets.

Jack Matten，BMO資本市場。

This is Charlie on for Jack. I'm sorry, we joined late, so apologies if you addressed this. But we saw Shai tweeted this morning that Lemonade plans to start lowering rates. Can you elaborate more on the timing and magnitude of when you may plan to file for these rate cuts and which lines of business are you talking about specifically?

這是查理替傑克發言。抱歉，我們加入得比較晚，如果您已經回覆了，請見諒。但我們看到 Shai 今天早上發推文說，Lemonade 計劃開始降低利率。您能否詳細說明您計劃何時以及在多大程度上申請降息，以及您具體指的是哪些業務領域？

Charlie, yes, we've addressed this both in my opening comments and in answer to previous questions. So I'll keep my comments brief. I didn't see Shai tweet what was alleged. So I think what Shai said is that -- or certainly what he meant -- the point that we're trying to get across is that there is a sense in which we -- and there was a question about this, we've achieved everything that we said we were going to achieve in terms of loss ratios and they're at record lows, and we're anticipating them potentially going even lower this coming quarter. And yet, we don't always see -- this is a moment to kind of take a victory lap and we're thrilled with it and it's excellent but we don't always see lower as better.

查理，是的，我在開場白和對先前問題的回答中都提到過這一點。所以我會盡量簡短地發言。我沒看到Shai發了被指控的那條推文。所以我認為 Shai 的意思是——或者至少他的意思是——我們想要表達的觀點是，從某種意義上說——之前有人問過這個問題——我們已經實現了我們所說的所有目標，在損失率方面，損失率處於歷史低位，我們預計下個季度損失率可能會更低。然而，我們並不總是認為——這是一個值得慶祝的時刻，我們為此感到興奮，這很棒，但我們並不總是認為越低越好。

That's what we were saying. And there are times when you can optimize gross profit with higher loss ratios as well. And it can be counterintuitive because you think lower means more profit but it also means taking a hit in terms of conversion and retention and therefore, growth. And the smart thing as far as we're concerned is to optimize not for a particular loss ratio number but to optimize for gross profit. It's what we do.

我們就是這個意思。有時候，即使虧損率較高，也可以優化毛利。這可能與直覺相悖，因為你認為價格越低利潤越高，但這同時也意味著轉換率和用戶留存率會受到打擊，進而影響成長。在我們看來，明智的做法不是優化某個特定的損失率，而是優化毛利。這就是我們所做的。

And all that means is that different loss ratios for different products, different campaigns, different regions over time. There's nothing dramatic. We're not signaling any findings that are imminent or we're not guiding to a new target loss ratio or anything like that. We think the loss ratio, in fact, will continue to improve in the near term, just saying that it's important for our investors to be aligned with us about what metrics are important ultimately. And we think gross profit is the one that we're solving for and loss ratio is an input to it.

這意味著不同產品、不同行銷活動、不同地區在不同時期都會出現不同的損失率。沒什麼大事發生。我們並未暗示任何即將公佈的研究結果，也沒有給出新的目標損失率或其他類似資訊。我們認為，短期內虧損率實際上會持續改善，我們只是想說，對於我們的投資者來說，最終哪些指標很重要，這一點很重要。我們認為毛利是我們要求解的目標，而虧損率是計算毛利的輸入參數。

I hope that clarifies that.

希望這樣解釋清楚了。

Yes. Sorry about that. And I guess for my second question, I know you've already adjusted your main quota share program to retain 80% of top line. Are there any other changes regarding your broader reinsurance program that you're thinking about heading into the new year given the expectation for reinsurance costs to continue to moderate?

是的。抱歉。至於我的第二個問題，我知道你們已經調整了主要的配額分成計劃，以保留 80% 的收入。鑑於預計再保險成本將繼續趨於溫和，您在新的一年裡是否還有其他關於您更廣泛的再保險計劃的調整計劃？

Yes. I would say we're right on track with our typical approach to reinsurance, which is we're constantly thinking thoughtfully about what we might change or improve. But structurally, that renewal comes in July. We have the opportunity to add or subtract things during the course of the year, which we do almost never but we certainly have that opportunity. So we're constantly looking at those ways that we might help manage both the benefits of reinsurance from a volatility standpoint as well as managing capital surplus, and that really is the driver there.

是的。我認為我們目前在再保險方面的做法完全正確，我們一直在認真思考我們可以改變或改進哪些方面。但從結構上看，這種更新將在7月到來。我們有機會在一年中增加或減少某些東西，雖然我們幾乎從未這樣做過，但我們確實有這樣的機會。因此，我們一直在尋找各種方法，以幫助管理再保險在波動性方面的優勢以及管理資本盈餘，而這才是真正的驅動力。

But we are in a great position with the renewal that came through July 1. We're heading towards a point by midyear next year where we'll be ceding just about 20% of our premiums and losses to our quota share partners. As you know, it takes a while to flow through the book once you get to a renewal as the business renews over the course of the year. The impact of that will be such that in Q4, our effective overall seed rate might look more like around 40%. So you're seeing, as expected, that decline as we move closer and closer to the next renewal.

但隨著7月1日續約的完成，我們目前處境非常有利。到明年年中，我們將把大約 20% 的保費和損失分攤給我們的份額分成合作夥伴。如您所知，一旦進入續約階段，就需要一段時間才能流暢地讀完這本書，因為業務會在一年中不斷更新。其影響將是，到第四季度，我們的有效整體播種率可能更接近 40%。所以，正如預期的那樣，隨著我們越來越接近下一個續約日期，這種下降趨勢也隨之出現。

In the early part of the year next year, we'll start to get more serious with our partners as we have in the past and think through what that next renewal might look like.

明年年初，我們將像過去一樣，更認真地與夥伴溝通，認真思考下一次續約會是什麼樣子。

If I could just sneak in one more. Any color on the competitive environment in pet? It feels like we've been hearing more public insurance carriers talking about that business more and more.

如果我能再偷偷加一個就好了。寵物產業競爭環境如何？感覺我們越來越常聽到公共保險公司談論這項業務了。

Nothing notable. I think we're still finding -- it's funny when you kind of look at the market from a competitive standpoint, you hear about either Google algorithms changing or competitors getting more aggressive and these things definitely happen from time to time. But if we look at our Q2 results, our Q3 results, our view into our guidance for Q4, it's really steady as she goes. Even frequency and severity of claims in the quarter was not notable, and that's good news for that book of business because it is -- continues to grow in terms of its share of our overall business. So while we kind of track the competitors, it's not top of the list of the things we think about.

沒什麼特別的。我認為我們仍在發現——當你從競爭的角度看待市場時，你會聽到谷歌演算法發生變化或競爭對手變得更加激進，這很有趣，而這些事情確實會不時發生。但如果我們看一下我們第二季的業績、第三季的業績，以及我們對第四季的展望，就會發現一切都非常穩定。本季度索賠的頻率和嚴重程度並不突出，這對該業務來說是個好消息，因為它在我們整體業務中所佔的份額仍在持續增長。所以雖然我們會關注競爭對手，但這並不是我們首要考慮的事情。

The things we are doing are working. They're working well. And pet as it has been for quite some time, is a key pillar that enables us to grow at 30% plus.

我們目前採取的措施是有效的。它們運作良好。寵物業務長期以來一直是我們實現 30% 以上成長的關鍵支柱。

Our final question from the phone lines comes from [Luke Nelson] with Cantor Fitzgerald.

我們收到的最後一個電話提問來自 Cantor Fitzgerald 的 [Luke Nelson]。

I just have a couple of brief questions this morning. My first question being with card, it's roughly around 15% of IFP today. Where do you guys kind of see that mix trending long term? So is 25% the right ceiling? And are there limits on auto exposure we should be thinking about?

我今天早上只有幾個簡短的問題。我的第一個問題是關於信用卡，它目前大約佔 IFP 的 15%。你們覺得這種組合的長期發展趨勢會如何？那麼25%是合適的上限嗎？我們是否應該考慮汽車曝光量的限制？

So best indicator, I think, is to kind of think back a bit to our recent Investor Day, which is about a year ago now. So it's not quite so recent but we sketch out a plan and a vision to track and drive growth at the company from $1 billion of premium to $10 billion. And what we sketched out at that time was a CAR component of that of around 40%. I would think of that as sort of a thematic share but a pretty good one. It could be more, could be less.

所以我認為最好的指標是回顧我們最近的投資者日，那大約是一年前的事了。雖然這並非最近才提出的計劃和願景，但我們已著手製定計劃和願景，以追蹤和推動公司保費收入從 10 億美元增長到 100 億美元。當時我們設想的 CAR 組件佔比約為 40%。我認為這算是一種主題分享，而且是非常好的分享。可能更多，也可能更少。

The TAM for car is in just the U.S., not to mention Europe, which we don't have a car product in yet. But in just the U.S., it's just an enormous potential market and even just our own customer base is an enormous market for us. So there's really no restriction from a TAM perspective. It's about us optimizing the LTV to CAC, really driving that cross-sell dynamic because that's what helps us with retention. The gross loss ratio improvement was terrific.

汽車市場的潛在市場規模僅在美國，更不用說歐洲了，我們目前在歐洲還沒有汽車產品。但僅在美國，它就是一個巨大的潛在市場，即使僅我們自己的客戶群對我們來說也是一個巨大的市場。所以從TAM的角度來看，其實沒有任何限制。關鍵在於優化客戶終身價值與客戶獲取成本，真正推動交叉銷售動態，因為這有助於我們提高客戶留存率。毛賠付率的改善非常顯著。

So if you think about a mid-teens ratio today and a 40% CAR share at $10 billion, your number is not far off. 20%, low 20s is certainly within reason in the coming couple of years. We -- the nice thing about Lemonade is the mix of business is quite diverse. And so that number can ebb higher or lower, and we'll still be well able to track to our growth rate targets overall but I think CAR will end up in that range that you're thinking about.

所以，如果你考慮到目前15%左右的資本充足率和100億美元市值下40%的CAR份額，你的估計就相當接近了。未來幾年內，20%到20%出頭的資本適足率絕對是合理的。我們－Lemonade 的好處是它的業務組合非常多元化。因此，這個數字可能會上下波動，我們仍然能夠很好地實現整體成長率目標，但我認為 CAR 最終會落在您所考慮的範圍內。

Got you. That makes sense. And then just my last question is a 2-parter, and you might have touched on it previously, but I noticed retention increased to 83% but ceding commission increased as well despite the reduction in reinsurance. So can you kind of walk us through that dynamic? And where do you expect retention to trend over the next few quarters?

抓到你了。這很有道理。最後一個問題分為兩部分，您可能之前已經提到過，但我注意到，儘管再保險減少了，但留存率卻上升到了 83%，而分出佣金也增加了。能給我們詳細解釋一下這種動態嗎？您預計未來幾季用戶留存率將如何變化？

Sorry, if you could -- I think I misheard your question. Was it around ceding rate? Or was it around retention?

抱歉，如果您不介意的話——我想我沒聽清楚您的問題。是在讓與率附近嗎？或者，重點是客戶留存率？

Right. So yes, my question was, I noticed retention increased to 83%, but at the same time, ceding commission income also increased. So can you just kind of walk through the dynamic between the two? And where do you expect retention to trend over the next few quarters?

正確的。所以，我的問題是，我注意到客戶留存率提高到了 83%，但同時，佣金收入也增加了。那麼，您能簡單介紹一下這兩者之間的關係嗎？您預計未來幾季用戶留存率將呈現怎樣的趨勢？

Yes. So a couple of metrics just to pull apart there. So we disclosed a retention metric, which is a customer metric. So ADR is annual dollar retention. And just as a reminder, that's the dollars from any given cohort of business, one year later, how much have you retained.

是的。所以，這裡需要分析幾個指標。因此，我們公佈了留存率指標，這是一個客戶指標。所以ADR指的是年度美元留存率。再次提醒一下，這是任何特定批次業務的資金數量，一年後，你保留了多少。

And that number has tracked upward nicely from the 70s to the high 80s over many, many quarters consistently. It dialed back a couple of points over the past few quarters because of our home effort to clean the book, and we had some nonrenewals there that camped that number down. We've now seen that reverse as we expected. It went from 80 -- up 1 point this quarter sequentially. So it feels like we might be back on track to have that number increase.

而且，這個數字在過去許多季度都保持著從 70 多到 80 多的良好上升趨勢。過去幾個季度，由於我們內部努力清理帳目，加上一些貸款不續簽，導致貸款額下降了幾個百分點。現在，正如我們預期的那樣，情況發生了逆轉。本季較上季上升 1 個百分點，從 80 分升至 80 分。所以感覺我們可能又走上了正軌，這個數字有望繼續成長。

That's customer retention, stable and improving. From a ceding commission standpoint, that's a bit of a -- that's a different part of the business, and that's really related to the premium we share and the losses we share with our quota share partners. And so that, I'd kind of send you back to our earlier comments about the quota share renewal. So at July 1 this past year, we were ceding -- or June 30, we're ceding about 55% of our book of business. That has shifted such that it will move from 55% to about 20% over the 12 months from Q3 to Q2 that we're in right now.

這就是客戶留存率，穩定且不斷提高。從轉讓佣金的角度來看，這有點——這是業務的不同部分，這實際上與我們和配額合作夥伴分擔的保費和損失有關。所以，我想再次回到我們之前關於配額份額續約的討論。所以，去年 7 月 1 日，我們放棄了大約 55% 的業務——或者說，6 月 30 日，我們放棄了大約 55% 的業務。這種情況已經發生了變化，從第三季到我們現在所處的第二季這 12 個月裡，這一比例將從 55% 下降到大約 20%。

The commission we earn on that is a variable rate commission, and that's -- you'll see that pretty clearly outlined in our 10-Q disclosures that we'll file today, so you can kind of dig into the nuances there but we continue to get a mid-20% roughly ceding commission on all the premium that we see to that partner. And so we'll see fewer dollars. That's a good thing but we'll continue to earn a healthy commission rate on all those dollars that we see for our partners.

我們從中獲得的佣金是浮動佣金，這一點——您會在我們今天提交的 10-Q 披露文件中看到非常明確的概述，所以您可以深入了解其中的細微差別，但我們仍然會從我們看到的所有保費中獲得大約 20% 的佣金，並將這些佣金轉讓給該合作夥伴。因此，我們將看到美元數量減少。這當然是件好事，但我們仍將從合作夥伴的每一筆收入中賺取可觀的佣金。

Thank you. I can confirm that does conclude our question-and-answer session here. And I'd like to conclude the call. Thank you all for your participation. You may now disconnect, and please enjoy the rest of your day.

謝謝。我可以確認，我們的問答環節到此結束。我想結束這通通話。感謝各位的參與。現在您可以斷開連線了，請盡情享受餘下的時光。