Please stand by, we are about to begin. Good day and welcome to Chubb Limited First Quarter 2016 Earnings Conference Call. Today's call is being recorded. And now for opening remarks and introductions, I'd like to turn the conference over to Helen Wilson, Investor Relations. Please go ahead.

Thank you, and welcome to our March 31, 2016 first quarter earnings conference call. Our report today will contain forward-looking statements, including statements relating to company and investment portfolio performance, pricing and business mix, economic and insurance market conditions including foreign exchange, and completion and integration of acquisitions including our acquisition of the Chubb Corporation, and potential synergies, savings and commercial and investment benefits we may realize. All of these statements are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially. Please refer to our most recent SEC filings, as well as our earnings press release and financial supplements which are available on our website, for more information on factors that could affect these matters. Now, I'd like to introduce our speakers. First, we have Evan Greenberg, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, followed by Phil Bancroft, our Chief Financial Officer. Then we'll take your questions. Also with us to assist with your questions are several members of our management team. Now it's my pleasure to turn the call over to Evan. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning. This is our first quarterly earnings report for the combined company, the new Chubb. As you know, we closed the merger of the Chubb Corporation during the quarter, the largest P&C insurance transaction ever done. Our earnings for the quarter were very good, while our premium revenue results were somewhat impacted by market conditions, foreign exchange and the merger, and I will explain. On a reported basis, after-tax operating income for the quarter was over $1 billion or $2.26 per share, compared to $2.25 per share prior year. Since we closed on January 14, our reported results are missing two weeks of legacy Chubb earnings. For comparison purposes, when adjusted for that two-week stub period, operating income…

Thank you. At this point, we'll be happy to take your questions.

Thank you. And we will go first to Kai Pan of Morgan Stanley. Kai Pan - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Good morning. Thank you. First question is on the expected merger synergy about – raised to $750 million. And also the pace of the realization seems faster than originally anticipated. So, could you give more detail about so why it's bigger now, and what's the difference from what you'd previously anticipated, as well as the pace of it? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Well, first of all, the pace of it, you already have. We gave you a chart that shows you, by year, the annualized and the realized of the expenses, I don't think anybody gives you that. And so you have that clarity already. The $750 million – the increase, it doesn't come from one place. It comes from actually many places. As we've simply done more ground-up detailed work, it comes from operations all over the world, and it's more focused in support operations and back-room than it is in any front-room activities. Kai Pan - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Okay. Outside these merger synergy and increased investment income, are there other areas you think there could potential opportunities for the combined entity? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: No. We will update you periodically if anything materially emerges beyond that. I think the real ultimate benefits, which take time, and which are really the vision of it, is revenue-related growth synergies, and those are at a very, very early stage, but we're already beginning to see benefits there in terms of the increased product capabilities we bring to customers at distribution. Kai Pan - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Then to just follow up on that, potential…

We'll take our next question from Ryan Tunis of Credit Suisse. Ryan J. Tunis - Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (Broker): Hey, thanks. Good morning. Evan, I guess my question is just on new business in North America. It sounds like that was more of an issue this quarter potentially than retention. Just wanting a little more detail on what was driving the softness there, it sounds like earlier in Q1. And what's allowed things to improve more recently? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Sure. Ryan, you see, or you heard me say it, it was more large account than it was in the middle market area, though middle-market new business was down about 4%. Large account was down around 30%. January was a much tougher month in terms of new business than February, and March was better, and April was better than March as we go forward. So we know a combination of things as we look at it. Definitely there was – it was a more competitive environment in January. And January is always a competitive month relative to other months. Matter of fact, if – I have to tell you, the softer part of cycle, you're better off to try to write your new business in the off months of a quarter. January is tough, April can be tough, March/April, and June/July is like January, the way people go after it. And they have some growth objectives that they want to achieve. So, there was some impact from that, and we see that. But in the fourth quarter, we had a lot of people – we focused for six months very intensely on planning the merger. And there were sort of 11th-hour jitters of people as we come up to close and everybody…

And we'll take our next question from Charles Sebaski of BMO Capital Markets.

Good morning. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Good morning.

First question, Evan, I guess is on the Personal Lines, on international. The growth was strong there. And curious what parts or regions you're seeing and how the brand change, I guess, is working on international. Obviously, the Chubb brand I think has better name recognition in the U.S. than it might internationally. And curious about how the international Personal Lines is going. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. So, the brand change had no impact on our revenue growth in the quarter. The growth is pretty broad-based. It came from both specialty and traditional. It came from a wide range of geographies, from Mexico to Malaysia to Europe, where we do a lot of specialty, so broad-based. In Mexico it's automobile and small commercial-related, but automobile in particular. In Malaysia it's auto and, again, specialty and small commercial-related. We write cell phone insurance out in Asia, and that had nice growth. In Europe we write cell phone-related insurance, and that had really nice growth. So, it isn't from one place nor one geography, and it isn't traditional versus specialty, it's broad-based. But it's very – when I say broad-based, we're very targeted and focused about where we choose to do Personal Lines and how we choose to do it. It's easy to put on a lot of revenue in that business. It's not easy to do it and make a decent margin.

What's the opportunity on the high-net-worth business on the international front, as opposed to how – the size of the business in the U.S.? Is that a meaningful focus for you guys now, or... Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: It's a focus. Meaningful? It's nothing like the United States. And it's not going to – I don't think of it in terms of – if I think of the U.S. as high net worth is a meaningful business, I don't think of international high net worth that way. I think of it as a good business. It's a very good business and a good opportunity. But it's really focused in a limited number of territories. UK, Australia, maybe a little bit on the continent, that's the majority of it. The balance is small pockets of high net worth, and that's mostly serviced by us out of our London operation.

Okay. Thanks. And just one final one, and maybe it's for Phil. On the tangible book value calculation that you guys do, the tangible – the goodwill is done net of tax... Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yes it is.

...which I think is different than how you did it before. Just trying to understand how that – to expect to flow through going forward? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Yeah. It would definitely be done net of tax. Goodwill and other intangibles would be reflected net of tax in our calculation of what tangible book value represents.

And will that tax basis off the goodwill, will it be fluctuating over time or going down, or is that kind of – it seemed like the goodwill, in historic, kind of stayed flat. So I'm just wondering if that's something that's going to change. Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: It should not. It would decrease in relation to the amortization of the intangibles.

Okay. Thank you very much for the answers, guys

From Barclays, we go next to Jay Gelb.

Thank you. I was hoping you could expand a bit more on the opportunity to gain market share resulting from several of the other large global commercial insurers facing some dislocation, in terms of the brokers looking to have stable capacity for their customers? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. I've talked about this a little bit in the past. And so I'm going to – I'll talk a little more about it. The first thing I'll tell you is, is it's a double-edged sword and you got to be careful. On one hand, as I said the last time, when there's a wounded animal loose, be careful. Stay out of the way and don't try to corner it. On the other hand, look, we represent – and that's what I tried to say in my commentary – we represent a very attractive market, an alternative for large accounts seeking a deep balance sheet, great underwriting expertise, as you know, great reputation for service, global capability, broad product offering and services. There are – and by the way, which has become more and more the play in large account business, your technology, your ability to deliver in a way that the service standards are met, the service expectations are met – and those standards of service have only risen, the expectations have only risen over the last decade, in the last five years and three years. People expect great data, great information in a very rapid way, self-served way where they can serve themselves. We have that technology. Very few have that. Our ability to move money, our ability to service self-insureds, our ability to risk engineer, our ability to provide primary casualty coverages, including professional lines, all over the world, and service claims, very few can do that. And we have been stable in terms of our capacity offering and our approach to underwriting and/or pricing. Sometimes the market moves closer to us, when the market is more disciplined in terms of underwriting. Sometimes the market moves further away from us because others are willing to sell something at a price we consider too cheap or at terms we consider too broad. So, on one hand, we're in a market where it's competitive and some things are being sold at prices that are below costs we think are reasonable. On the other hand, there is this pull and desire for stability and certainty and familiarity, and that is drawing more towards us. So I can tell you, we just came back from RIMS. All of us there, I have not seen a reception towards our company in – towards this company, I don't think I've ever seen the reception like I saw at RIMS. We were really popular kids on campus.

All right. Thanks for that. And then for Phil, should we still think about, in terms of share buybacks, no activity for 2016, but perhaps more likely in 2017? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: We have no plans at this point for buybacks, and we'll keep you posted as we go, as we see how our capital develops.

Thank you.

Our next comes from Michael Nannizzi of Goldman Sachs. Michael Nannizzi - Goldman Sachs & Co.: Thank you very much. Just a couple of questions, if I could, quickly on Personal Lines within the overseas segment. You mentioned the growth there. What does the profitability look like in that book? Is it closer to the segment overall, or is it closer to what you generate in the North America personalized business? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I am hardly going there. Michael Nannizzi - Goldman Sachs & Co.: All right. Okay, well then back to the U.S. Do you think that in that book, that you have an opportunity to grow at these levels of profitability? I mean, is there still enough room in that high-net-worth segment, either because of your consolidation really or because of the expansion of that market, for you to grow consistently? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. And, Michael, on international, the profitability meets our hurdle rates, and it meets our underwriting standards or we wouldn't be doing it. But I'm hardly going to put a roadmap out to others. On the domestic and margin, there's been questions to us of, well, now that you're so dominant in that business, we assume you're now going to now, in a sense, be predatory, take advantage, raise prices, et cetera. Increase margins. I think there's a naïveté about all of that, and I think that's wrong. Our approach is to earn an adequate risk-adjusted return in the business. The business does that reasonably well today. There is a lot of risk in the business. The business is regulated. You have to file your rates, and they have to be just – they have to be actuarially justified, and we…

Up next is Vinay Misquith of Sterne Agee CRT.

Hi, good morning. The first question is on the premium growth. There was a modest 1% premium decline this quarter, I guess because of competition and some integration. And curious, Evan, if you could parse out what was the bigger impact, and when do you think the drag from the integration will recede? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Vinay, I think I just have gone on about that for the last 20 minutes. And I think my commentary said it. So, I can't – if you're looking for a point estimate, a numeric estimate of what was specifically integration-related versus market-related, I can't give you that. Nobody knows that.

Okay, sure. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: But I can tell you that the market – market discipline, for those who are disciplined in underwriting, absolutely is having an impact on growth rate, and you could see that as you look at players who have reported. And that definitely has an impact on us. And you know there were times, and I've said this, I've been very clear, that there are times that revenue is for vanity, and revenue growth is for vanity, and it's best you take your eye off of that. And there are pockets of the business, many pockets of the business where I and my colleagues think that it's not an overly attractive market, and you better discriminate very carefully on what you choose to write and how you choose to write it, if you want to maintain underwriting margins. And that's our first objective. So I will shed revenue without a tear in any class, in any line of business, where we can't make an underwriting profit, period. And you know that about us. The retention rates were very high. And that to me shows me the market reaction towards us and the demand for business from Chubb, from doing business with Chubb, by both distribution and customers, and the good work of our people. When I look at the pattern of new business and how it came in, and where it came in, and the timing of it, it's very clear to me that the integration – and in discussions with our people – that the integration had an impact. And when I look at how we're moving month-to-month, I can see that beginning to recede. And people really getting on without getting out there and driving for it. So I see a combination of both impacting it. I can't do anything about the market, and that will be what it will be. But I can tell you, getting the organization focused, that is something we can do something about. And we're all focused on that. Everyone is out there. We've been to many regions, to many offices, working with our people and helping them to get on the front foot, and I feel really good about the energy level and the focus of the organization that is taking hold. And to the extent that that impacts revenue growth, you can look forward to improved results as we go forward.

No, that's helpful. The second question is for Phil. And first of all, thank you so much for the expanded disclosure. That's really helpful and is helping all of the sell-side with these – our numbers. From the expense synergies, how much of that was actually realized in the first quarter? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: So, the actual accounting saved in the first quarter was $29 million.

And that's helpful. Thank you. Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Okay.

And from UBS, we go next to Brian Meredith.

Yes, thanks. Just two quick numbers questions, and one other one just quickly. So, Phil, on the $100 million to $120 million of additional investment income, what's the after-tax number? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Let see. Let's call it $75 million on the low end of the range. So $100 million translates into $75 million.

Okay. Terrific. And then second question, exposure to couple of earthquakes we've seen recently, and some of the activity in Texas? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. We will have losses from the activity in Texas, from the earthquake in Latin America, from the earthquake in Japan. From the two earthquakes, from what we know at the moment, our losses will relatively modest. Nothing outsized. And from the losses in Texas, normal spring losses, you expect these kinds of losses in the springtime. It's the volatility of weather. More tornado-related activities, severe storm related, flooding, hail, all occurs, as we know, in the second quarter. And so this kind of activity, so far to date, what we're seeing is not producing losses beyond what we would imagine or expect.

Great. And then last question, Evan, you struck this relationship with Suning and, hopefully, I'm pronouncing that correctly, in the quarter. Could you give us – elaborate a little bit on what the potential is there for that relationship, how quickly you expect it to ramp up? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. I expect it to ramp up and begin showing – potentially, you don't know with certainty, but potentially – real premium revenue in 2017. It is direct response marketing in all its forms, digital, phone-based, predominantly of simple accident-, travel- and credit-related products, maybe some small commercial; householder's-type products to serve the customer base of Suning, that is approximately 130 million people that are active users of Suning. Suning has about 1,500 – thereabouts, I'm sure I have the number wrong, but thousands of stores throughout the country, and then they have a very large, very active online business. They serve financial needs of over 30 million customers, and we will be active – and do it in a digital way, and we will be actively marketing to those. The cooperation – it's one thing to sign one of these. It's another thing that actually operationalize. And we're just beginning the operational phase. And this is something that the real meaningful benefit will come over a few years. But Suning, in very early days, is showing to be a very active and cooperative partner and is giving us a lot of access to data, a lot of encouragement in terms of use of their distribution, and is very welcoming with building the business, and I'm grateful for that effort. So, this could be – we're cautiously optimistic this could be a great venture.

And it's on your paper or Ho Tai's paper? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: No, this is on our paper. It's on Chubb.

Great. Great. Thank you. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: We've got 100% of this.

Perfect.

We'll go next to Josh Stirling of Sanford Bernstein. Josh Stirling - Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. LLC: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking the call. So, listen, I just wanted to touch a bit more on growth from more of a long-term perspective. Obviously, we all think of you as a growth company, but with the moving pieces of the market and integration, it was obviously a flat quarter. When you, Evan, look across the portfolio and look a couple of years out, what kind of long-term organic growth rates do you guys think are potential? And I think this is an important question for us, because it's hard to figure out from the outside, given all the different growth businesses you have at legacy ACE – and in combination with, obviously, the legacy Chubb opportunity. And I would really love to get a sense of what you're shooting for, and what you think may be able to get through the cycle, kind of long-term underlying organic growth potential might be? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah. So, I'm going to answer – give you two answers. First, you didn't define growth the way I define growth. And the way, therefore, we define growth – a growth company for us. A growth company in this business is growth in book value and tangible book value. That's how you define growth in a risk business. Not revenue growth, which is an overly simplistic way. Ultimately, you have to gain revenue growth as well. So I reject that notion of what's a growth company. Number two, we will – we don't give guidance. And so I'm not going to start giving guidance about revenue growth. But I will say this to you. I firmly believe that…

We'll take our next question from Sarah DeWitt of JPMorgan.

Hi. Good morning, and congratulations on a strong first quarter at the new Chubb. I just wanted to drill down on the expense savings. How much do you expect to drop to the bottom line? My sense is legacy Chubb was somewhat underinvested in, so are the expense savings net of any reinvestment, or how much could that be? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: No. We haven't figured in – that's not net of reinvestment. And Sarah, you have a natural growth – I'm not going to give you any point estimate number. You have a – but I'll give you a way I think about it, and – two ways. One, you have a natural growth rate of expenses based on your invested base of businesses, and you can see that, you see how ACE has been disciplined in expense and Chubb was disciplined in expense. So the overall organization is disciplined that way. You then have some investments you make in new businesses. So, small commercial, as an example, or maybe you're expanding your cyber business or other businesses, and those will take investments. And then on the other side of the coin, we're – if we talk about legacy Chubb as being starved in some ways – and I think that's right – on one hand, it's technology. And so you invest in technology, but there you have a cash spend, but you then capitalize and amortize over many years. So that impact will not be, as you would imagine, sort of $1 of expense and $1 drops to the bottom. But you got a cash flow, and then you have an amortization of it. So those are what draws away from expense saved. And from the direct – coming directly all to the bottom.

Okay, great. Thank you. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: You're welcome.

And then on the reserve... Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I didn't help you worksheet manage it that much better, I got it. But we each live in our own hell.

No, no. That's helpful insight, though. And then on the reserve releases, that was higher than I would have expected. Could you just talk about the difference... Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: What did you expect?

A little bit lower than the pro forma year-ago. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: How did you do your number?

It was not that scientific, I will tell you. Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: I thought so. I'm sorry, I just had to do that. It was like, well, what do you think, how'd you do it?

More directional. But could you just elaborate, are there differences between the reserve processes at legacy Chubb and legacy ACE? For example, does one company let the reserves season for longer, or does one company take them down quicker, historically? Evan G. Greenberg - Chairman & Chief Executive Officer: Yeah, there was – the one thing I'm going to say, and then I'm going to ask a colleague of mine to give you a little more insight into it, there was not a change in reserving process, the way of thinking about reserve at either legacy Chubb or legacy ACE, that produced this. There was consistency. And I'm going to ask Sean Ringsted to now just give you a little more. Sean Ringsted - Executive Vice President, Chief Risk Officer & Chief Actuary, Chubb, Ltd.: Morning, Sarah. I think, just by way of background, as we went into the integration we found a lot of similarities between the companies, as opposed to differences, and the differences are very much at the margin. Both companies have robust processes, we've got really good teams of actuaries and good control environments, and the methods and the assumptions in the reserving methodology are pretty consistent across like products. And I think too, and you've heard Evan emphasize this on prior calls, we – both legacy companies have a conservative approach, especially to long-tail casualty lines. There are some differences, I'd put those at the margin. Clearly, our process in terms of timing and frequency of studies would be different, our reserving platforms are different, but we're working to converge those processes and expect to have that done in 2017. So I think you'll find far more similarities in the respective processes, and we're going to enjoy continuing those in the future.

Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have time for just one more person to ask questions, please.

Thank you. And we'll take our final question from Jay Cohen of Bank of America.

Great. Just two questions, I think they're relatively quick. First for Phil, the interest expense on an ongoing basis, where will that land? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: It's in our interest expense in the corporate segment.

No, I mean what's the number? Is the first quarter a good number to use going forward? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: It is. It's a complete number. All right, you know what...

Okay. Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: ...I would do – there's 14 days of the interest expense that we didn't put into operating income, so I would just gross that up, the one-sixth of the quarter that wasn't there.

That's what I figured, I wanted to check that. Thank you. And then secondly, on the investment income, the pick-up you talked about, what changes to the portfolio are you making to achieve that higher run-rate of investment income? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: Well, we've had extensive discussions with our outside managers who have a real deep expertise in asset allocation and municipal and corporate credit research, and our analysis shows that we can restructure the portfolio within securities and sectors that enhance the yield and diversify the holdings. And I just want to re-emphasize that those actions are not going to alter the risk profile of the portfolio, we'll keep the overall credit rating at AA.

Phil, is part of the benefit that Chubb had a big muni portfolio? The tax structure of the overall company, was it a bit different? Can that be restructured a bit, or is that really not... Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: I think...

...part of the game plan? Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: ...over time, I think we can more actively manage the municipal portfolio, but that'll take time, as a lot of that is long-dated. So that's certainly part of it, to change from a really high-rated long-term hold strategy to more active management in the muni portfolio. But not...

Your question was, as a percentage of the total portfolio. Philip V. Bancroft - Chief Financial Officer & Executive Vice President: We don't expect that to change.

Right.

Got it. Thanks for the answers.

Okay. Thank you, everyone, for your time and attention this morning. We look forward to speaking with you again at the end of next quarter. Thank you, and good day.

This concludes today's presentation. Thank you all for your participation.

Thank you for calling.