Good morning and welcome to the Manulife Financial Second Quarter 2020 Financial Results Conference Call. Your host for today will be Ms. Adrienne O’Neill. Please go ahead, Ms. O’Neill. Adrienne O’Neill: Thank you and good morning. Welcome to Manulife’s earnings conference call to discuss our second quarter 2020 results. We are conducting this call virtually. Our earning release, financial statements and related MD&A, statistical information package and webcast slides for today’s call are available on the Investor Relations section of our website at manulife.com. We’ll begin today’s presentation with an overview of our second quarter and an update on our strategic priorities by Roy Gori, our President and Chief Executive Officer. Following Roy’s remarks, Phil Witherington, our Chief Financial Officer, will discuss the Company’s financial and operating results. We will end today's presentation with Scott Hartz, our Chief Investment Officer who will discuss the performance of the Company's general account investment portfolio and the direct impact of markets. Following the prepared remarks which are recorded earlier this week to ensure optimal sound quality, we will move to the live question-and-answer portion of the call. We ask each participant to adhere to a limit of two questions. If you have additional questions, please re-queue and we will do our best to respond to all questions. Before we start, please refer to Slide 2 for a caution on forward looking statements and Slide 36 for a note on the use of non-GAAP financial measures in this presentation. Note that certain material factors or assumptions are applied in making forward-looking statements and actual results may differ materially from what is stated. With that, I'd like to turn the call over to Roy Gori, our President and Chief Executive Officer. Roy?

Thank you, Adrienne. Good morning everyone and thank you for joining us today. Turning to Slide 5, yesterday we announced our second quarter financial results. The coronavirus pandemic continues to disrupt economy and capital markets worldwide. And as would be expected, COVID-19 had a significant impact on our performance, including first order impacts such as policyholder experience and sales, and second order impact such as market volatility and ALDA valuations. However, I’m pleased that despite these challenging conditions, we delivered solid results, which reflect diversity and resilience of our businesses. We delivered net income attributed to shareholders of $727 million and core earnings of $1.6 million. Core ROE was resilient at 12.2% and our capital position remains strong with a LICAT ratio of 155%. Book value per share rose to $25.14, up 10% from the prior year quarter. Finally, our culture of expense discipline and the maturity of our expense efficiency program have played a crucial role in our success over the past few months, as evidenced by our expense efficiency ratio of 48.9% slightly below our 2022 targets of 50%. Turning to Slide 6, Manulife entered the downturn in a position of strength. Thanks for the work we've done over the past decade to derisk our business and reduce the company sensitivity to market movements. And the release of over $5 billion of capital for portfolio optimization activities since 2018 further strengthened our position. Our strategy, including the five priorities is sound and has not changed in light of recent events. I'm very proud of how the Manulife team executed during the second quarter, despite the very challenging backdrop that was triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. While we've already achieved our portfolio optimization targets, we've generated an additional $285 million of capital benefit year-to-date, including $20 million in the…

Thank you, Roy, and good morning, everyone. Turning to Slide 11 and our financial performance for the second quarter of 2020. As Roy mentioned, we delivered solid financial and operating results in a challenging environment. Core earnings were up 5% from the prior year quarter and core ROE was a healthy 12.2%. APE sales and NBV declined by 15% and 22%, respectively. The result that we believe is encouraging in light of the unprecedented COVID-19 containment measures that were in place to varying degrees in four markets in which we operate. And our capital position demonstrated resilience once again in the quarter. Our LICAT ratio of 155% and leverage ratio of 26% provide us with financial flexibility that is valuable in the prevailing environment of elevated market uncertainty. Of note, we will complete our annual review of actuarial methods and assumptions during the third quarter of 2020. While this review is not yet complete, preliminary indication suggests that there will be a net post-tax charge of approximately $200 million in the third quarter of 2020. This year, the review will include among other items, lapse assumptions for Canada and Japan life insurance, certain mortality assumptions in all segments, a complete review of our Canadian variable annuity assumptions, and we expect to refine certain methodologies. I will highlight the key drivers of our second quarter performance with reference to the next few slides. Turning to Slide 12. Core earnings in the second quarter of 2020 were $1.6 billion, up 5% from the prior year quarter on a constant exchange rate basis. The increase in core earnings was driven by favorable policyholder experience, the favorable impact of markets on seed money investments in segregated funds and mutual funds, and the impact of in-force business growth in Asia. These items were partially offset…

Thank you, Phil, and good morning, everyone. I'm pleased to provide you with a more in depth update of our investment related experience and the direct impact of equity markets and interest rates on our results. Slide 22 shows a recent history of our investment related experience, including losses of $916 million this quarter. Our prepared remarks on last quarter's analyst call summarized how our investment related experience is derived. Our credit experience in the second quarter was a net charge of $20 million, which we believe is a good result in this environment and reflective of the high quality well underwritten nature of our $275 billion fixed income portfolio. As a reminder, in recessionary periods, we do expect credit results to be worse than our through the cycle reserve assumptions, and thus, it's not unreasonable to expect additional losses in the future as the impacts of the recessionary environment play out. Fixed income reinvestment activities have historically generated steady gains. However, we did not benefit from this item in the second quarter of 2020, given corporate spreads tightened considerably and opportunities in the private placement and commercial mortgage sectors were limited relative to the flow of premiums needed to be reinvested. Volumes in these sectors are beginning to recover, and we expect more opportunity here, particularly after the usual summer slowdown. Hence we would expect fixed income reinvestment to revert to a more normal trends starting this fall, we wouldn't expect second half of the year gains to the extent of the first quarter of 2020 as spreads have tightened considerably, but we still believe there will be attractive investment opportunities. Although was a significant drag on our experience this quarter with a charge of $777 million were actually due to lower than expected returns, including fair value charges.…

[Operator Instructions] And the first question is from Humphrey Lee from Dowling & Partners. Please go ahead.

Good morning, and thank you for taking the questions. My first question is related to Asia. Clearly, the low new business gains were kind of offset by favorable claims experience. I was wondering if you can provide some additional color in terms of how the shelter-in-place have affected the sales activities and claims experience in Asia throughout the quarter and into July, especially given some of the countries signed to see some resurgence.

Thanks, Humphrey. This is Anil. So Asia had a sales drop of 17% year-on-year and 21% on new business value, this largely impacted on account of the COVID situation that resulted into a significant impact on the mobility of our customers, as well as our distribution partners. I do want to emphasize that our core earnings, however, grew and it just kind of points to the resiliency factor as well as the diversified nature of our business in Asia. From an outlook perspective, it's a little bit more challenging for us to predict, and I'll just explain why that's the case. So on one end, as we progressed through quarter two, we did witness some gradual relaxation of the measures, and Phil alluded to the fact that we did witness a resurgence in the month of June. Our June sales showed a year-on-year growth. But at the same time, we are also seeing the reemergence of the virus in some of the markets in Asia and specifically in Hong Kong, that's currently witnessing the third wave of the outbreak. And that obviously has resulted into additional social distancing measures, which needless to say does impact the sales activity as well as the mobility of our clients, as well as the distribution partners. So that really makes it a very challenging for us to kind of make a prediction into quarter three and quarter four of this year. I think what we are focused on is that we remain nimble to the situation on the ground and it kind of emerges. We continue to invest in technology and processes that make a non-face-to-face processes a lot more simpler. You would have noted that we continue the expansion of our distribution, mainly our agency channel, which is now up 35% as well as we are seeing a broad level of interest in our health and protection products across many of our geographies in Asia. To your second question on a policyholder experience, and I will comment first, and then kind of hand it over to Steve if he has any further comments. But it is largely on account of the positive claims experience that we are witnessing as our customers differ nonessential visits to clinics and hospitals. I should underscore, however, that as a situation normalizes the trend on claims experience or the positive claims experience is also likely to normalize. Steve, I don't know whether you had any further comments to add on policyholder experience.

Thanks, Anil. Nothing further to add to that. But if I could just sort of jump in, Humphrey, I think Anil's answer was spot on. And the only thing that I would add is that the quarter two results, certainly from a sales perspective in my mind were really very solid in light of incredibly challenging environment, as it relates to the COVID restrictions that are in place. And one of the things that really has come to the fore for us is the resiliency and the diversity of our business that Anil highlighted, but also the digitization efforts that we've put in place over the last couple of years, and that have really come to the fore in the current environment. So it continues to be, and will be an uncertain environment as we see second waves, maybe even third waves and flare ups. But we feel that we're in really good shape to navigate that and the diversity of our business and the fact that we operate across different markets, through different cycles in this crisis will certainly be an asset for us as we navigate that environment.

That makes sense. My second question is related to the U.S experience. Clearly, you had very favorable LTC related experience. Can you talk about what you saw in the quarter and then was there any difference between the experience between the active life block versus the disabled life block?

Thanks, Humphrey. It's Steve Finch here. I'll take that question. And I'll start bigger picture and then get into the details and answer your question, and Anil touched on the Asia policyholder experience. We saw a policyholder experience gains in Q2 across our insurance segments globally. So in Canada, U.S. and in Asia, 221 million pre-tax gain on policyholder experience. The biggest drivers were, as you note, in the U.S also in our group benefits business in Canada, and then to a lesser degree in Asia as Anil just outlined. So in the U.S., we saw on long-term care, we saw gains of just under a $100 million pre-tax that came through our Q2 results. The biggest driver of that was higher claim and deaths. As we've seen in the news the impact on people receiving care in facilities were disproportionately impacted by the virus. And relative to -- if we look at a four quarter trend, claim and deaths were up almost 25% over normal run rate. In addition, we saw lower incidents about 20% lower than normal. So that's less people initiating their claims. And we saw an increase in insurance, leaving care either suspending home health visits or actually leaving facilities. So both of those trends, we believe are just a delay in claims, people need the care. And in that case, we did not book a gain. So we increased our IBNR by approximately a $100 million to recognize that fact. The rest of what we're seeing in terms of direct mortality impact of COVID is primarily driven by our U.S life business, where we saw across the company about $36 million of COVID claims on life. But that was -- the vast majority was in our U.S life business. And then to round out the picture in Canada, in our group business, we saw a number of different trends we saw in our health and dental business, just less people going to receive routine care. So that was a big driver of the gains in Canada. In addition, in our long-term disability business, we saw lower incidence and higher recoveries. So I'll pause there.

So just to clarify, so in the long-term piece in the U.S was less than a $100 million positive, but then that is after you booking a $100 million IBNR reserve, is that correct?

That's correct.

And then, is there any difference between kind of the active life versus a disabled life block?

Yes. So the higher claim and deaths, that's the disabled, those are on claim that was the 24% over normal. On the active life block, there was a small gain this quarter, probably 5%to 10% higher than normal deaths, but the biggest driver was on those claim.

Got it. Thank you for the details.

Thank you. The next question is from Steve Theriault from Eight Capital. Please go ahead.

Thanks. If I could start with a question on Japan. The new business value was down over 50% year-on-year, despite APE sales down 17%. Can you give us -- probably for Anil, can you give us a bit of context here on the mix? And I'm also wondering, going back to Roy's slide on APE available to be sold via non-face-to-face methods. Is it any different for Japan versus some of your other geographies versus the 97% you show on that slide?

Yes. Thanks for the question. And Japan sales was largely impacted again on the back of the introduction of the state of emergency in response to the outbreak and that kind of severely constrained our distribution activities in Japan. Our sales in second quarter were $113 million, which were down 18% year-on-year. And again, that just kind of illustrates the level of disruption that was caught. From a product mix perspective or sales mix perspective, if you would recall, quarter two of 2019, we had very little of COLI sales, and that was largely on account of the fact that we had enforced temporary cessation of COLI sales on account of the new tax laws. We did have COLI sales in quarter two of 2020. In fact, COLI contributed to 45% of the product mix. So the fraction on COLI was there, but the product mix obviously had an impact on the margins both in terms of new business value as well as in terms of new business gain. From a -- from an action perspective, what we are focused on is, we try to kind of balance between sales and margin, given the current macroeconomic environment. We are also very focused on driving expense efficiency and we had mentioned this in the previous quarter call as well. And thirdly, we continue to onboard new MGA partners in Japan, but at the same time encourage them to offer non-COLI products to be able to enhance our distribution with respect to our non-COLI value proposition. In terms of non-face-to-face, yes, we do have products in terms of non-face-to-face in Japan. Though I must point out that the products in Japan are slightly more elaborate. So for example, in case of COLI, you typically require face-to-face interaction. So it becomes a little bit more challenging in Japan to offer all the products on a non-face-to-face basis, but yes, we do have the non-face-to-face capabilities in pretty much all markets and that includes Japan.

And is the 4% lift in sales overall for Asia in June? Is that kind of indicative for Japan or is Japan a little bit more soft?

So Japan also did see a little bit of the resurgence in June. The 4% is more attribute to overall Asia, but Japan was more able to cover some of the significant impacts of, specifically in April and May, where they were much tighter state of emergency, that was placed. And it was only over a period of time that Japan started to emerge from the state of emergency. Even till today, a lot of our employees are working from home. And again, the mobility is clearly not back to its normal levels, even with some of the relaxation that we've seen in the state of emergency in Japan.

Okay. Thanks for that color. And just a second question on the URR. Can you share -- we've heard from a couple of peers this quarter, can you share anything you're hearing or sensing on in terms of a potential URR charge, including the timing? And also, I guess, wondering if you'd consider moving earlier than usual if we are going down the road of a prescribe change.

Sure. It's Steve, I'll take that one. So on the URR, the Actuarial Standards Board in Canada is looking at the URR given where interest rates have gone and the delay of implementation of IFRS 17 by a year. Previously they had said they did not anticipate updating prior to IFRS 17, but those two factors have caused them to look at it. We expect them to go through their work through this year and give guidance next year. They have to look at the URR as well as stochastic calibration guidance that they give along with that. So we think they've got a fair bit of work to do, and we don't anticipate that it'll be finished this year. So you can count on us updating in 2021 when the guidance comes out. And just for context, remember this is their review and their methodology is based on a very long-term look back at interest rates. And the last two changes that have been made were 10 basis points and 15 basis points just to give some context. And our year-end disclosure gives a sensitivity for total company a 10 basis point reduction, it is estimated at a $350 million charge.

And I guess just the last thing. How linear is that charge progress, if it is a bit bigger than the 10 basis points?

I think, given the long look back that they've got in their historical moves, I think that guidance is pretty good in terms of if they were 15 basis points versus 10 basis points. We did take a $500 million charge when they reduced by 15 basis points.

Okay. Thanks for that.

Thank you. The next question in from Gabriel Dechaine from National Bank Financial. Please go ahead.

Good morning. I have a question for Scott or Phil or Steve on the ALDA. And I'd like to refer you to Slide 22. I recognize this year has been a tough one for ALDA valuation. But if I go back to that slide, it looks like pretty much every year, there's been some investment losses there. Just wondering what needs to happen for you to have to review some of the return assumptions in that portfolio because the potential implications are substantial.

It's Steve, I can start. And then I'll ask Scott to add to the comments. So, we do look at long-term expectations of ALDA, it's backing long-term liability. So we don't look too much at short-term volatility. The review process that we undertake, there's a very close dialogue between Scott and his team and the actuarial team. In addition, the ALDA assumptions are part of our independent third-party review process of all assumptions. And when Scott's team is evaluating deals and looking at how much they're willing to pay for assets, they've got the return assumption targets in mind, and that guides how much the price that they're willing to pay for assets. So, over the long-term we do expect to achieve the assumptions that are embedded. I'll pass it to Scott for any addition.

Yes. Thanks, Steve and thanks, Gabriel for the question. When we set these assumptions, as Steve suggested, we do both. We look backward to see what returns a bid, and we look forward to see what we're expecting to earn on the investments that we're currently making. And if you look back over the last four years on average, we've achieved our returns. And if you go back to that fifth year, the loss there was due to the oil and gas on Slide 22 that you’re referring to. But if we look at 10 -- the last 10 year history, our returns have been including the results we've seen thus far this year have been roughly 9%, which is about in line with what we're assuming. So if we look back in history, it doesn't seem to be any reason to change them. And then as we look at new investments that we're underwriting, we do believe we can achieve those returns prospectively under new investments. And as I pointed out in my prepared remarks, the sort of increased risk premiums we're seeing in some of the valuations actually provide a tailwind to the returns in the medium term.

Right. And then I guess that it's not a homogeneous portfolio. I'm just wondering like if oil and gas has had some issues. But CRE, you mentioned in your comments that if this work-from-home situation persists, you're more concerned, I forget exactly the quote here, but how many quarters or what type of time frame would we need to see experience losses or investment experience losses before we start to think about an assumption review.

So, we're going to go through periods like this. We always have our sessions where the returns are negative. We saw the great financial crisis, we saw peak to trough valuation drops of I think 35% for the market. Our portfolio did a bit better than that. So we're going to go through these periods. And if -- and it's hard to say we're office is going to go. I was sort of signaling in the near-term, I'm a little concerned what appraisers might do. The bigger question is, I think to your point, ultimately, we'll -- after we get through the pandemic, will there be less in office work? And we think there probably will be a little bit, but we also think there's strong reason some folks want to be back to the office, and we didn't really enter into this in an overbuilt situation. So just natural growth in economy will take up that slack. And we would expect over the longer term to be able to achieve those returns.

And Gabriel, just the other comment in terms of when we'll look at this, as I said, they're very long-term assumptions. We're in the middle of somewhere in the middle of a pandemic, and no one really knows how it's going to evolve. So changing very long-term assumptions, I think at this stage would be premature.

Okay. Thanks for that.

Thank you. The next question is from Doug Young from Desjardins Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Hi. Good morning. Maybe just back to you, Steve. The $200 million charge related to the review of actuarial assumptions, and I think that the release lists out a number of items that you're viewing and that could have the impact. Is there any -- is there one particular area? Obviously, you've talked about all that and that's not being part of this process. Is there one -- is there any particular area that you're reviewing that could have a disproportionate impact on that review?

Thanks, Doug. And as you know, we do a comprehensive review every year, so there's a lot of assumptions that are being reviewed. We called out certain ones. I'll draw your attention to what's causing that modest pressure in terms of increasing reserves. The Universal Life business in Canada, we're seeing lower lapses since the last study. In this low interest rate environment, people are really valuing the benefits and we're seeing it on the larger policies. People are just hanging on to these policies. A reminder for context, we've talked about before that the lapse -- the ultimate lapse rates on this business, the current assumptions are under 0.5% annually. And we expect to reduce that assumption further. So that's the one I would call out at this stage.

Okay. And then just second, on the LICAT ratio, I guess we had expected it to be a little weaker than it was, it held up rather well. Just wondering if you can do like a waterfall kind of what was the items and we know corporate spreads coming in put pressure on it. Like what were the different items that caused it essentially to be flat sequentially?

Doug, this is Phil. Maybe I should take that one. So as you point out, the -- there was a headwind to the LICAT ratio, which was the narrowing of corporate spreads in the quarter. But that was substantially offset by the impact of the new capital issuances during the quarter. And you may recall, but we had said on the call last quarter, that we would cautiously pre-finance maturing issuances, and that's what we had done during Q2. So that had a favorable impact -- a favorable short-term impact on the LICAT ratio. There's also been a small favorable impact from foreign exchange movements. But beyond those two items they're the main drivers.

Okay. And just a follow-up. I mean, Phil or Roy, I mean, you have 155% LICAT, I mean, I can do the math on what the excess capital would be at 120, 130, 140, like in your mind, like how much excess capital do you have currently, and how long are you willing to sit on this? And I guess it's nice to have in times of uncertainty, but it looks like a substantial amount of excess capital. So just wonder if you can quantify it, and how you think about it.

Yes. Thanks, Doug. Let me start and Phil might chime in as well. What we sort of worked very hard on increasing the balance sheet strength of the franchise as well as our capital position as you know, portfolio optimization was a huge focus for us over the position. As you know, portfolio optimization was a huge focus for us over the last couple of years, we set a target of $5 billion worth of capital that we wanted to free up by 2022. And at the end of '19, we deliver that target three years ahead of time, which obviously has gone a long way towards helping us get to the LICAT position of strength that we're in today and -- but hat we didn't have foresight to COVID, when we went on that -- down that path, it certainly has put us in a position of greatest strength and confidence as we navigate this challenging environment. And environments like this, balance sheet strength and capital are really front and center. We have disclosed our -- the strength of our capital position and the excess that we have over supervisory minimums, and that that's in fact included in the deck. We haven't provided other internal targets that we have, but it's suffice to say that we feel that we're in a very strong position and that will not only put us in good state to navigate the current environment, it puts us in good state as we look to the future and how we want to think about deploying capital to achieve our ambition. Obviously, organic growth is going to be our close objective and goal, but we have other flexibility and opportunity that comes with a strong capital position. Phil, I’m not sure if you would -- you want to supplement.

Yes, just a couple of supplements. So I think we will manage the balance sheet conservatively, and that's what we are doing. And I think that's prudent in the current environment of uncertainty. It's worth pointing out that we have been building the capital ratio for a number of quarters now for the reasons that Roy highlighted. But we have also been deploying capital along the way. So the deployment to reduce leverage from 30% down to below our 25% targets in Q1, we've come back above that as a result of the cautious pre-financing that's been carried out in the second quarter, but also the increase in the dividend that we announced in February 12%, that's now in the dividend run rate. And we do remain committed to the dividend policy in a progressively increasing dividend as well in line with our medium term financial operating guidance. We like the flexibility of having a strong capital position that provides us with the ability to both invest organically. As we have done this year through the renewal of our exclusive distribution arrangement with Danamon Bank in Indonesia, that was a really important strategic action for us. But also potential deployment through inorganic mechanisms that I admit the bar is high for us on that. But if something is strategically relevant, we stand ready to move.

Maybe I try it different. Like, is there a minimum LICAT that you wouldn't go below? Like, would you go below 130, do you care to throw a number in there?

Well, Doug, I'd just remind you that when we transitioned from MCCSR to LICAT, the point of transition, if I recall was 129%, and that was a strong position. The point of calibration that we gave at that time is that the old benchmark of a 200% MCCSR ratio was equivalent to a LICAT of a 115%. So I -- there's no doubt that we are in a strong position, but there's not really a -- I would certainly wouldn't call 130% the minimum.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from David Motemaden from Evercore ISI. Please go ahead.

Good morning. Just a question for Phil, just on specifically last quarter you talked about the $2.5 billion of injections to the local subsidiaries. I'm wondering if there were any additional injections during the second quarter of this year? And if so, how those were funded?

Great. David, thank you for the question and good morning. The -- you recall correctly, I did say last quarter on the call that we injected approximately $2.5 billion to our subsidiaries. Since that time we have not down streamed any further capital from MLI to our subs. And that really reflects the -- I think the relative stability from a macroeconomic perspective over the time that has passed since then, but also some of the other measures that we have taken to mitigate the sensitivity of our subsidiaries, particularly in Asia to macroeconomic factors. So the $2.5 billion injection certainly stabilize the situation and there's been no need to top that up. And I don't anticipate any further top-ups given the current macro environment.

Okay, great. And I guess just a quick follow-up before I go to my next question. Just -- I'm not even sure how meaningful the LICAT ratio is at this point, just given how much -- how important the local solvency ratios are. But if I think about the debt, that was, I guess, you issued at the HoldCo and you injected it into MLI and that's what's increasing the LICAT to 155. I guess, once you repay that debt starting in 3Q, then should we just think about the LICAT just coming back down obviously not taking into account any capital generation and other movements?

Yes, David, that's a good point. So it's fair to say that the LICAT ratio is somewhat flattered at the moment by the pre-financing activity that had been carried out in the second quarter. And that -- it is deliberate that we are pre-financing in this environment. We are being conservative, but typically we would pre-finance over a one or two quarter time horizon. We're now looking at a 12 months or beyond time horizon in order to mitigate the risk that at any point markets may close as a result of uncertainty and instability. But I think the deployment of the capital that we've raised is quite clear in the medium term. In the second quarter itself, we have redeemed $750 million of debt. There's a further $705 million -- $675 million maturing in the third quarter. And then when I look ahead to 2021, the maturities, as well as debt that becomes available for redemption is in the order of $2 billion. So I think we have a lot of flexibility here. Having said all that, I think it is an opportunistic time for us to be in the debt markets, coupon rates are at all time lows. And if we just look at the issuances in the second quarter, the coupon issuance rate was more than 70 basis points lower than the debt that we were deemed. So I do see this as an opportunity for us to rebalance our debt portfolio.

Yes, thanks, Phil. I totally agree with that as well. And then just my second question for Roy and Phil as well, just on the 10% to 12% EPS growth target that you reiterated in '21 and beyond. Hoping you can just give us a bit more of a sense for the growth rates, the earnings growth rates that you're thinking about by geography that give you confidence that you can hit that return target.

Yes. Thanks, David. I'm not going to get into any forecasting by segment or by geography. But what I would say is that, we do have confidence in our medium term targets and in particular, the 10% to 12% growth ambition as it relates to core earnings. And that confidence comes from the strength of our position that we entered this crisis from. And again, I referred to the balance sheet and the capital position earlier, and that's really allowed us to go on offense. We've been on this agenda of digitizing our franchise. For at least couple of years, we've invested more than $600 million on technology and infrastructure to support that digitization. And the current environment has just accelerated that trend, which we see as a tailwind in the long-term. Beyond that, the three macro trends that we feel are really critical to our industry and certainly to us are, a, the emergence of the middle class in Asia and the growth of that middle class. B, the aging demographics globally, which obviously translates into a significant retirement gap and quite frankly, transfer of wealth. And then finally the digitization. So those three trends were relevant before we entered COVID and are relevant today. If anything, COVID has reinforced some of those trends and in particular digitalization and the -- the greater focus on insurance and health. So, we feel that we are very well positioned, both from a function of the geographies that we operate in and the line of businesses that we run to really continue the agenda of growth that we've had over the several three, four years past. And that gives us the confidence in the outlook that we have for the longer term.

Okay, great. And you mentioned expenses being a pretty big component, and I guess you're almost there a couple of years earlier than expected on the billion dollars of net expense saves. So is there anything else that you're considering, in terms of maybe upside to those expense saves that can help you get to the 10% to 12% goal?

Yes. Great question, David. Let me start and Phil, please chime in. You're right. The focus on expenses has paid dividends for us and is paying dividends and is a great offset with some challenges that we're seeing this year. Again, to be able to declare the achievement of our billion dollar goal two years ahead of schedule, certainly is something that we're proud of, but it also just illustrates how well cost and efficiency being embraced in our organization. And I would say that it's easy to get cost out, but getting it out in a sustainable way and in a sensible way is really what's required. And for us, that means leveraging our global scale, renegotiating with vendors, looking at the digitization about processes so that we actually have these costs removed without any negative impact to the top line. So with that foundation in place, we are constantly looking at where do we go next. So costs will continue to be a focus for us beyond 2020 and beyond the achievement of our one bill target. And that will be another critical driver that gives us confidence in achieving that 10% to 12% core earnings growth. It will continue to play in the equation of our growth targets.

Yes. And this is Phil. Just to add to that, you're right to point out the anticipated achievement of the $1 billion expense efficiency target two years ahead of schedule in 2020. But it's also important to recognize that we had a second target, which is consistently achieving the 50% cost efficiency ratio and that one, although we are below 50% this quarter, there are some revenue headwinds this quarter that help with that ratio. So we're very focused on making sure that that 50% is embedded into the future. And I think an important part of that is our ability to make the cost base as variable as possible. And you can see this quarter, some of the progress we're making with expenses coming down by 5% fairly consistently across the reductions across all of our operating business segments. So I think that's where our focus will be from here, making sure that the 50% is sustainable.

Okay, great. Thanks for taking my questions.

Thank you. The next question is from Meny Grauman with Scotiabank. Please go ahead.

Hi, good morning. Just wanted to talk about portfolio optimization. And it seems to me like COVID makes additional portfolio optimization just harder to do and I'm wondering if you agree with that and sort of as a [indiscernible], is there any opportunities there that maybe are not so obvious that you can point to?

Let me start Meny and I'll hand over to Steve and Naveed, who I think could provide some supplementary comments. My final comments would be that this has been, as you know, Meny, are really important focus for us. And again, the efforts to free up $5 billion worth the capital were very significant and very helpful for us as we navigate the current environment. We still see further opportunity. Whilst we achieved our $5 billion target, we didn't feel that it was right to stop the focus in this space. So whilst we achieved our broad goal, we felt that this is still a key talent for us. If we can continue to focus in this space in a sensible way and actually year-to-date this year we've already generated more than $200 million worth of capital value. So we think that there certainly are some challenges and headwinds that the current environment presents as it relates to portfolio optimization, but at the same time, there are also opportunities. So we're going to continue to focus in that space. And we think that there is more opportunity for us to leverage. But let me hand over to perhaps Naveed and Steve.

Yes. Hi. It's Naveed here. I'd say, at the onset of the crisis there was probably a pause in the market and participants sort of figured out what was happening. And that's why you see a relatively low capital lease number for us in Q2, but we're actually getting back on track and hope to have a lot more to talk about in the upcoming quarters. I'd actually say that the current market appetite for blocks, again, sort of paused a little bit in late Q1, early Q2, but it's at the same level it was pre-crisis in my view.

And then just to the second question, just in terms of the opportunity side in M&A, you kind of touched on it, but I'm just wondering if your view of M&A has changed because of the crisis. Are you seeing the potential for any opportunistic deals out there and specifically we hear a lot about digitization. Is digitization more of an M&A opportunity in your mind now than it was even a few months ago?

Yes, thanks Meny. I will start by saying that I think we're in a fortunate position to not need M&A to achieve our medium term targets. So I think this is an important point. I think it's quite dangerous to need M&A to bolster the growth in order to achieve goals or targets that an organization set. So I will start with a comment from the outset, which is that we do not believe that we need M&A to deliver against the medium term goals that we have. We believe that there are sufficient organic opportunities through the distribution of our business and the footprint that we have to deliver those goals. So that's, in my mind, at least a great starting point. The position of strength that we have from a capital perspective does provide us greater flexibility, i.e. to deal with the crisis like this, but also opportunistically to look at opportunities to grow at a perhaps faster pace. We are being incredibly diligent when we think about M&A. We set a very high bar in terms of the expectations and the goals that we would have for M&A. And at the same time, we think it's really critical that any M&A that you do is tied very closely into your strategy, and that you can do that M&A from a position of strength and scale, and that it very much fits into your existing business thought in operation. And the short answer to your question is that, yes, we will continue to look at M&A opportunities. Closer to home for us have been some of the transactions that we've done with bank assurances as highlighted by Phil earlier, and in particular, the extension of our partnership with Danamon, which was a phenomenal partnership for us in Indonesia and the extension is something that we're delighted about, gives us further strength in that market and further growth opportunities. So we'll continue to look at M&A. But we'll look at that opportunistically with a very sensible bar.

Thanks for that, Roy.

Thank you. The next question is from Tom McKinnon from BMO Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Yes. Thanks very much. Good morning. Three questions. The first really is with respect to Canadian group experience. Steve, maybe you can comment as to what you're saying in terms of long-term disability experience. And also with respect to the benefit in policyholder experience you had in Canada on lower utilization of dental benefits and other health benefits. To what extent do you think this was just largely deferred and would we get a pickup in utilization in the ensuing quarters, and why wasn't that just sort of reflected in an IBNR? And then I have a follow-up.

Sure. Tom. And I'll start, but Mike can add some color on the Canadian experience. I think the way that we're viewing the -- and more broadly, the COVID experience is that these are temporary related to the virus. So we do expect some reversion back to more normal levels. We expect that in Canada, as well as people begin to go back to see the dentist, go back for their routine medical care. So we do expect that to revert back to normal levels over time. And I'll pass it to Mike to add more color on the Canadian experience.

Yes. It's Mike here. Steve, I think covered it very well. We did see towards the end that there was obviously a huge drop in utilization when all of the provinces were basically shut down and restricted. Through June, as the -- as provinces started to open up, we really saw people sort of reverting back to sort of normal levels. Now I will say it's very hard to predict. It's still, as you know, a very fluid environment out there. And we don't know what's going to happen with second wave, third wave and all those kinds of things. But at this point, we're sort of predicting that we're going to get back to sort of more normal levels for sort of health and dental. Your question about long-term disability, we've been very pleased with our results through the pandemic. Our teams have been very effective at getting people back to work even when it's working from home. So we have not seen any sort of abnormal trends and our thinking that that should be fairly sort of neutral experience for us going forward. But again we're watching the external environment very closely.

Okay. Thanks. And then the next question has to do with Asia. And it's the significant increase in agents. Maybe -- wondering, what’s driving that? Sometimes training and recruiting might be more difficult in this environment. How are you combating that or how are you dealing with that? And especially compliance when we see large increases in the number of agents, we just might want to be careful about compliance efforts and how is that being handled in this kind of environment, and are there any expense implications of this large increase in career agents in Asia.

Thanks, Tom. Thanks for the question. So we did witness 35% growth in agency year-on-year. But I do want to point out that this will moderate over the medium term. I think there were two markets that significantly contributed to this one was Vietnam. And again, given our market position in Vietnam, we are number one and have grown quite significantly over the last couple of years. There is a natural draw from folks who want to develop the career in agency towards Manulife. And I think the second market that drove that growth was China. And again, China is witnessing over 20% growth from a year-on-year basis in agency. China growth was also -- couple of factors there. One, to your point on digital onboarding, China -- in China, we did use a digital onboarding and recruitment, so that really acted as a force multiplier, but we are also witnessing that in professionals and certain other sectors, are choosing agency profession as a career as well. So I think there are a couple of factors that are resulting into the high growth measures or the high growth percentage that you are witnessing. I do want to call out a couple of things, however. We are not only focused on quantity. We are equally focused on quality. And I think one of the key imperatives for us is how do we then convert this agency headcount load into active agents. And towards that, our active agent account has also grown by 16%. I do want to also underscore the point that we now have in excess of 3,700 MDRT and we are one of the fastest growing company when you compare to top tier insurance companies in Asia, on MDRT. Clearly, recruiting, training as well as retention of agents is a key focus area for us. And you did point out the fact that when you see such a surge, you do have to also beef up or your risk and control framework, and we are absolutely doing that. So for example, in Asia, we have instituted a welcome call process, whereby we call customers, offers sales to ensure that customers have understood what they have bought as well as use that as a means of providing feedback and training to our new as well as our existing agents.

Okay, thanks. And just MDRT, that's million dollar round table, that's a productivity measure, correct?

That is correct. And we have 3,700 plus MDRT agents as of right now.

Okay. Thanks for that.

Thank you. The next question is from Paul Holden from CIBC. Please go ahead.

Thanks. Good morning. I want to ask a question on expected profit growth for both Canada and U.S. We've seen capital optimization measures slow, you’ve run ahead of pace on your expense savings, and we're also seeing pretty good sales growth in recent quarters out of those two businesses. So just wondering where we can expect to see expected profit growth start to accelerate?

Sure. It's Steve here. And you hit on a couple of the things that we've seen unexpected profit growth in North America. Over the last year and a bit we've disclosed that some of the legacy actions have provided some drag on the expected profit growth. If we back up and think about what do we expect, total company, we would expect approximately 6% when we look at the long-term trends, unexpected profit growth with higher growth in Asia, and then lower growth in North America because of some of those legacy business. The other thing that we are seeing currently is lower interest rates does have a -- put a drag on the earnings on in-force. That comes through over time. It does take a while for sales to come through. The size of the in-force is quite large. So it does take time for new sales to flow through to the earnings on in-force line. So, I think stepping back and sort of looking at overall company about 6%, Asia higher, North America lower is how you should think about it.

Okay. And then just a follow-up sort of to that question, and maybe more broadly on the expense savings, like where specifically should we look for that to show up in terms of the either the SOE statement or the segmented -- segment that reported?

Sure. I can start and Phil can add his thoughts. I mean, the -- I like looking at that efficiency ratio because that is how you can see that the -- that we're making progress overall in terms of our medium term objective. And then in terms of showing up in the source of earnings, it shows up in our experience line. So embedded in that experience gains line is typically where it shows up, but I like the focus of having that efficiency ratio.

Thanks, Steve. And the only point I would add there is that looking at the profit and loss account, the general expenses is a good indicator, as well as to the amount of expense benefits that are flowing through. And that's where we've really brought the expense growth rate down from the historic 7% to 9%, down to the 3% to 5%. And then this quarter, given the macro environment that we've seen, the efficiency measures that we've put in place, the variability of the cost base. We've put that back down to negative 5%. So I think that really is testament to the efficiency program that we've rolled out.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from Mario Mendonca from TD Securities. Please go ahead.

Good morning. If you could go back to ALDA just for a moment. The -- I see the way your ALDA return assumptions are on average 9.1% before the PfAD -- sorry, 9.3% before the PfAD, 6.1% after the PfAD. Could you talk maybe on a pre-PfAD basis where you would -- what asset classes are capable of generating like an 11% plus return, and maybe you compare that to the ones that the asset classes that are more around the 5% or 6% level. And of course these are pre-PfAD numbers. It would be helpful to understand what asset classes you think are still capable of delivering that in this environment.

Sure. Thanks, Mario. It's a good question because it's not a homogeneous portfolio to your point. And as we looked at the history of return, some have had higher returns, some have had lower returns and that's clearly going to be the case going forward. So if I look at the lower returning assets, I don't think we're investing in anything where we'd expect a 5% to 6% return. But maybe more in the 8% return is where we would expect things like unlevered real estate. Our real estate portfolio as a lot of our asset classes, we put in the lower end of the risk return spectrum. So it's unlevered, tends to be in sort of gateway cities. And it's hard to achieve that 9.3% return you quoted on real estate. We do some deals. We do some development and real estate, which provides some extra return that gets us there, but we would expect lower than our average return on real estate. We'd also expect that on our Timber portfolio. That again is unlevered, very stable returns, but tends to be a bit lower. Where we would see higher returns is certainly in private equity. Historically, private equity has been a much higher return asset class than that. And we would expect that going forward. Oil and gas is a bit of a conundrum and it's become a very small part of the portfolio. So it's probably not worth spending much time on, but my perspective is that it will provide a much higher return than that going forward, given how much it's been beaten down. It's a little ironic that when we have bad returns we get a lot of questions about how sustainable are your return assumptions. It's really after you've had a downturn that return should improve. We saw that after the GFC. The returns were very strong for a few years. We really expect something similar here. It's when we are bowing out high returns that I encourage you to continue to ask us those questions are those can we achieve those? So oil and gas would be higher private equity. Infrastructure is an interesting asset class. That's more probably in the middle. We could reach out on infrastructure, take more risk and generate higher returns. But again, we price having very little volatility in this portfolio and maybe it hasn't felt like that the last couple of quarters, but the return numbers as you’re seeing, our return this quarter was minus 2%, which you compare that to like what -- and that's a very bad quarter for us, what a bad quarter is for public equity markets. And it's a fraction of the volatility. So within infrastructure, which has held up actually very well and year-to-date it's on target for its returns. And that's because we stay in the more stable range, which gets us around those -- that average return we're looking for.

Okay. Just have to follow-up on that then. If you had to take assets out of all the, let's just use all those one particular big asset class, and you have to say a billion dollars out, what would be the sort of next best return you could generate outside of all of those? So if 9.3% is the average in all the -- what's the next best? Would it be an average of say 7%? I'm just trying to think about the next best would because presumably all that would be your highest returning assets though.

Yes. And with it -- I mean, I'm not sure if the question is within ALDA. Like if I took a billion out what it would be, but we have all the -- we have fixed income, we have public equity. Fixed income, clearly the returns are a lot lower and you can see where interest rates are and corporate spreads are. But there's not really much in between that we would invest in.

So the next best would be -- it would be fixed income with returns of where were those are -- those are really like 4% or 5% then?

Yes, probably even below that. Probably, 3 percentage -- 3% or 4%, I would say.

And then my final question then, I know IFRS 17 is quite a ways in the distance still, but it's something I'm starting to think about. What happens on -- in IFRS 17? Do all these sort of excess returns that are built into the reserve essentially lower reserves because of the excess returns. Do all those, let's call it lower reserves than have to be booked. Like if they're just a big charge against shareholder's equity to adjust your reserves in an IFRS 17 world because of the use of ALDA.

So Mario, this is Phil. Let me, I'll make a start on that and Steve, feel free to supplement. One of the characteristics of IFRS 17 is that the valuation of assets and liabilities are disconnected. And I think that's important because it's important to understand, because what it means is there is then greater flexibility and changes if you like to the asset portfolio to the extent changes are made, there isn't an impact corresponding impact on the liabilities. Of course, the liabilities would be valued with a discount rate that reflects the risks of those liabilities. So I think it's important when we look at our portfolio now with the current lens and with an IFRS 17 lens, we look at the underlying economic rationale for investing in various asset classes. And this is where we do believe that ALDA has an important role because it generally doesn't have maturity dates. It gives rise to stable recurring cash flows, and it's a good match therefore for our long-term liabilities. It's a good inflation hedge as well. So I think for all those reasons, we have flexibility as we enter into IFRS 17, but remain committed to ALDA. Steve, is there anything that you wanted to add?

Yes. Just a couple of additional points to expand. So for our long dated liabilities where they're not liquid. There is something bad has to happen for someone to make the claim. In IFRS 17, you apply an illiquidity premium. So that boosts the discount rate for long-term liabilities. The other interesting point is that for ALDA, and agree that we -- it is an asset class that's performed well and is very suitable for some of our long dated liabilities. One thing under IFRS 17 that is different than today is if we did change return assumptions under today's regime, that's all capitalized upfront through net income. That's not the case under IFRS 17 because of that delinking of assets and liabilities.

Okay. So there's actually some advantages then under IFRS 17 and in ALDA world is that there isn't a big massive hit when you change the assumption. But just to put a final point on. Are you saying that the illiquidity premium on the long dated liabilities would be sufficiently high, such that you would not have to take a big hit against your book value on conversion to IFRS 17 because of the ALDA?

So I think it's too early to comment on opening balance sheet. There's so many things that go into IFRS 17. So we're not prepared at this time to comment specifically on that transition balance sheet. We will provide a lot more information as we get to IFRS 17.

Thank you.

Thank you. The next question is from Nigel D'Souza from Veritas. Please go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning. Two quick questions for me. First, I just want to touch on the credit experience, and Scott, you mentioned that expect credit results run a bit worse than your cycle reserve assumptions. Any recessionary environment. And I was wondering if you could expand on that. I mean, year-to-date we've seen negative credit experience concentrated in the non investment grade bucket, which is -- which Manulife has very little exposure to. So the negative credit experience, is that just from an expectation for probability defaults to increase across the credit spectrum? What do you see the driver there? And could you touch on what drove impairments or credit experience this quarter?

Sure. Thanks for the question, Nigel. So, yes, as a reminder, our credit experience comes from two sources. One, it comes from if we impaired asset. And secondly, it comes from downgrades and then we have to put additional reserves up to allow for higher future expected defaults. And in the first quarter we saw most of the result, we had a $50 million loss relative to long-term assumptions, that was really being driven by a lot of downgrades. And that came out of oil and gas, materials, consumer cyclicals, what you might expect in this environment. In the second quarter, we've actually -- downgrades have really slowed down significantly. We didn't see a lot of downgrades. We did see impairments and they really came out of one particular area, which I did flag in the first quarter call. Within our oil and gas portfolio, we had three offshore drillers, and we ended up impairing all three of them. They have not all gone into bankruptcy, one has, but we just did not pick those. Those were going to recover. So we've impaired those and that's generated, not all of the impairment charge, but most of the impairment charge in the second quarter. So then looking forward, as time rolls on, it's obviously very much a function of how this pandemic plays out. But we do expect companies to come under increasing pressure. I think the good news and probably what's prevented more downgrades than we might otherwise expected was companies and investment grade companies, in particular, which as you point out is 97% of our book where we wouldn't really expect any impairments, but we might worry about downgrades. They've really had access to capital because of the -- these quick moves by central bank. So they've got liquidity. That can bridge them through a time period. And that prevents a lot of immediate downgrades, but the longer this plays out and the more revenues are pressured, ultimately they have the liquidity, but this -- the leverage statistics go up and we probably would expect continued heightened downgrades in this environment. I think we're feeling better about it than we were at last quarter when we talked about this. So -- but we still would expect them to be elevated. And the longer this goes on, the more pressure companies will come under.

Yes, that's really helpful. And just a last quick question on your investment related experience. I understand there's a lot of moving parts and you mentioned the lag for private equity and real estate valuations, but it sounds like the unfavorable experience that we had in the first quarter, it's largely played out and you don't expect that to continue in the second half. Is that fair to say? And is it also fair to say that you're still on track for core investment gains to restart in 2021.

Yes. Thanks. That's exactly right. I mean, I'm feeling good about where our portfolio is valued at this point relative to current conditions, right? And in fact, maybe there's a little bit of upside given the lift we saw in the public markets in the second quarter and we don't have all the second quarter parks in private equity in oil and gas. And maybe there's a little bit of a lift there. As I said, I'm a little cautious on real estate. I argue with my real estate folks, they remain convinced that values will hold from here. But anyways, to me, if I had to point to one part that could be a little soft and I just mean a little soft, I don't expect big changes. But as we see, it's a big portfolio and even small changes can matter. So where we sit now, I really do expect to achieve our comp returns for the remainder of the year and then going forward. But that's based on where we are, where the capital markets sit, what the expected course of this is and getting a vaccine probably early next year and understanding there will be other waves as we've seen in Asia and in some of the States in the U.S. But continual progress to the company -- the country is reopening. If that changes in a negative way, then of course, all bets are off. So finally, resetting the clock next year, yes, I feel good about achieving our investment gains target.

Great. Thank you. Appreciate the color.

Thank you. The next question is from Darko Mihelic from RBC Capital Markets. Please go ahead.

Hi, thank you. Good morning. And thanks for extending the call. I wanted to revisit, Steve, your comments earlier on the call. You mentioned in long-term care that you're -- you had 24%, 25% higher deaths versus the four quarter trend. And you also mentioned a 20% lower incidence. Now, when I look at the impact on net income for changes to the non-economic assumptions for long-term care, the numbers look far bigger. So in other words, with a 24% higher death rate, you should have seen a much bigger impact and 20% lower incidence, and realize it's an IBNR, but can you help reconcile your comments to your disclosure on changes to assumptions for long-term care?

Sure, Darko. Thanks. And it's really as simple as that we're seeing one quarter of variance versus our assumption. The disclosures on changes assumptions, that's if we were to change the assumption going forward. We don't expect these trends to be long-term. They're really related to what's happening with the pandemic. So these are short-term variations from our long-term assumptions. So they're not capitalized impacts.

Fair. And which is what I thought you were going to answer. But I guess the understanding that your position right now is -- from what I'm gathering is that COVID-19 is a very temporary impact on most of your books of business. What is the -- I mean, how much data do you need and what is the early work that you're seeing from the actuarial profession on COVID-19 and the potential longer-term impacts of it? I'm coming from a non actuarial background, but my early read is it's a flu, it's a bad one. The vaccine will not eradicate it. So it will therefore be with us probably forever much like H1N1. And is the early view then that this will have a simply higher mortality rate for the elderly or kind of over to you, but what's the early work in the early REIT on the actuarial profession on the longer term impacts from COVID-19, recognizing that this is really early, but I'd like to get some idea of what you're seeing so far on that side and on that angle.

Sure. And you know, I think first a reminder that we've got a diversified book of business overall where we've got exposure to mortality and longevity. So that as we've seen has provided some balance through this, through the pandemic. In terms of longer term trends, I have seen papers that are, I would call them more speculative now in terms of whether there'll be ongoing respiratory challenge for people that have had the virus. I don't think we'll know for some period of time in terms of what longer term implications might be. Not surprising, we've been quite focused on short-term, where we've seen -- the retail life insurance population generally higher means higher income than the broad population has not been impacted as badly. And then we've seen as we note in the care facilities that they've been disproportionately impacted. The longer term impacts we will wait and see and study very closely.

And how much more data do you think you need before you really move on any assumption?

So in the short-term, I think we just have to see how the pandemic plays out. We can't predict how things are going to evolve, but once -- long-term care, we believe that the people that have suspended care, they need the care. And we think we'll see that come back over the short-term. Short term is hard to define because we don't know how the pandemic will play out. It's really when will people feel safe to have caregivers in their home or go back into facilities. So I won't give you a timeframe because it does depend on how the pandemic plays out. And then we will go to school on looking at longer term trends and evaluate accordingly.

Yes, let me just add. Darko, I think you're asking a really good question. And quite frankly, it's a question that we're spending a lot of time trying to analyze and understand and anticipate as many others in the industry and certainly the actuarial profession. But it's still way too early to declare what the long-term consequences of COVID are, and there's still way too many unknowns for that. But we will definitely keep you updated as we learn more and as we get confidence as to how this will play out. And quite frankly, what's front and center right now for us is how the short-term and the medium term will pan out. That is really what's front and center and as I've said, many times, I expect that there's going to be a lot of uncertainty and volatility until we see and at scale deployment of the vaccine. And even there, there's some question marks around how effective that vaccine will be. Will it be a once and done, or will you need multiple vaccines to say immune, will the bars itself mutate. So clearly, something we watch very closely, and the question you're asking is a really good one. But the short answer is way too early to declare the long-term on this one. And navigating the short to medium term is really front and center.

Fair enough. I could appreciate that entirely. Just a last update, Steve, if you can. Premium rate increases, the size of the reserve you have there? And is there any -- has there been any negative impact or any issues with getting premium rate increases?

Sure. I can start and Naveed can add if he like. We have continued to make steady progress at achieving the premium increases that we're seeking. If you recall, we had embedded $1.9 billion in our reserves as of the last basis change. And I remain very comfortable that we're making good progress and achieved that [indiscernible].

Great. Thank you very much. Appreciate that.

Thank you. There are no further questions at this time. I'd like to turn the meeting back over to Ms. O’Neill. Adrienne O’Neill: Thank you, operator. We will be available after the call, if there's any follow-up questions. Have a nice morning, everybody.

Thank you. The conference has now ended. Please disconnect your lines at this time, and thank you for your participation.