RenaissanceRe RNR Q1 2026 Earnings Transcript

Image source: The Motley Fool.

DATE

Wednesday, April 29, 2026 at 11 a.m. ET

CALL PARTICIPANTS

• Chief Executive Officer — Kevin Joseph O'Donnell
• Chief Financial Officer — Robert Qutub
• President, Renaissance Reinsurance Ltd. — David Edward Marra

TAKEAWAYS

• Operating Income -- $591 million, resulting in a 22% annualized operating return on equity and $13.75 operating earnings per share.
• Tangible Book Value per Share -- Increased 1.5% to $233.49, with $357 million of retained mark-to-market losses and $353 million of share repurchases at a premium to book value as temporary drags.
• Underwriting Income -- $589 million, attributed to strong current accident year results and approximately $160 million in favorable reserve development, predominantly from Other Property.
• Adjusted Combined Ratio -- 72% company-wide, with Property Catastrophe at 19.2% and current accident year loss ratio of 10.2%; Other Property at 56.1% and current accident year loss ratio of 55.5%; Casualty and Specialty at 99.4%, matching guidance.
• Gross Premiums Written -- $3.4 billion, down 16% (or 9% excluding reinstatement premiums); Property Catastrophe essentially flat excluding reinstatement, Other Property down 7%, Casualty and Specialty down 13%.
• Fee Income -- $94 million, comprised of $48 million in management fees and $46 million in performance fees, with upside from deferred performance fees related to a return of capital by DaVinci.
• Operating Expense Ratio -- 4.1% this quarter, but expected to rise to the 5%-5.5% range over the year due to continued investment in business expansion and system buildouts.
• Share Repurchases -- 1.2 million shares for $353 million in the quarter at an average price of $289 per share; year-to-date repurchases of $458 million through April 24.
• Net Investment Income -- Down 3% sequentially from Q4 2025, attributed to lower average rates in the first two months of the quarter; composition changes include reduced gold exposure (from 5% to 2%), increased duration (from 3.0 to 3.4 years), and reallocation toward investment-grade corporate credit.
• Private Credit Allocation -- About 5% of the investment portfolio, diversified by sector and geography, emphasizing senior secured lending; company views volatility as an opportunity to selectively increase this exposure.
• Capital Partners Contributions -- Fee income and retained net investment income accounted for 15 points of the overall return on average common equity for the quarter, underlining a diversified earnings base.
• Casualty and Specialty Ceded Reinsurance -- Ceded 20% of premiums versus 13% a year prior, expanding quota share and excess-of-loss programs to manage risk and optimize returns.
• Return on Equity (ROE) -- Annualized ROE was 10.5%, including the impact of $357 million retained mark-to-market losses.
• Bermuda Substance-Based Tax Credits -- Recognition of 75% of the value this year (up from 50% prior year), with two-thirds reflected in underwriting, reducing the combined ratio by 90 basis points.
• Guidance for Q2 -- Expected Other Property net premiums earned about $350 million with mid-50s attritional loss ratio; Casualty and Specialty net premiums earned approximately $1.3 billion with high-90s adjusted combined ratio; management fees projected at $50 million and performance fees targeted at $120 million for the full year, absent major loss events.

Need a quote from a Motley Fool analyst? Email pr@fool.com

RISKS

• Management reported $357 million in retained mark-to-market losses, with about half from fixed maturity securities and half from equities, highlighting short-term pressure from higher Treasury yields.
• Gross premiums written declined 16% (or 9% excluding reinstatement premiums) across segments, reflecting competitive rate pressures and deliberate portfolio reshaping.
• Operating expense ratio is expected to increase to the 5%-5.5% range for the year, due to ongoing investments in people and systems, potentially impacting near-term margins.
• Rates in the Property Catastrophe book have declined by low- to mid-teen percentages, and Other Property pricing is under pressure, although terms and conditions remain strong.

SUMMARY

RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. (NYSE:RNR) delivered operating income and underwriting results that demonstrated the strength of its diversified earnings model, with each profit driver contributing meaningfully. Senior management reported a measured approach to capital management, executing disciplined share repurchases and portfolio optimizations against a backdrop of rate declines and ongoing market volatility. Strategic actions included increasing quota share and excess-of-loss reinsurance in the Casualty and Specialty segments, reallocating investment exposures toward higher-yielding assets, and capitalizing on favorable demand trends in core catastrophe reinsurance lines to preserve margin.

• The company characterized exposure to the Middle East conflict as limited, with loss impacts fully reserved in Specialty lines and additional retrocessional protection in place.
• Fee income outperformed expectations due to strong underwriting and one-time recognition events linked to joint venture capital returns.
• Ceded reinsurance usage in the Casualty and Specialty book was described as part of standard portfolio optimization rather than a permanent strategic change.
• Management stressed ongoing portfolio re-shaping in response to evolving social inflation trends, reducing exposure to high-risk Casualty lines, and retaining flexibility for future growth as margins warrant.

INDUSTRY GLOSSARY

• Reinstatement Premiums: Additional premiums paid to reinstate exhausted reinsurance coverage following a claim event, commonly relevant in property catastrophe reinsurance.
• Ceded Reinsurance: Portion of risk and associated premiums an insurer transfers to other reinsurers to reduce exposure, particularly used for risk management in long-tail and specialty lines.
• Attritional Loss Ratio: The proportion of insurance premiums used to pay for expected, non-catastrophe claims, excluding large or unusual losses.
• Combined Ratio: A measure of underwriting profitability, calculated as the sum of incurred losses and expenses divided by earned premiums; ratios under 100% indicate underwriting profit.
• Quota Share: A form of reinsurance where the reinsurer assumes a fixed percentage of premiums and losses for a class of business.
• Retrocessional Protection: Reinsurance purchased by a reinsurer to protect against losses from the risks it has assumed from primary insurers.
• Capital Partners: RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. term for third-party investment vehicles enabling the company to earn fee income through capital-light structures.
• DaVinci: RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd.'s specific joint venture reinsurance fund referenced as a source of deferred performance fees and capital returns.
• IBNR: Incurred But Not Reported; reserves set aside for claims that have occurred but not yet been reported to the insurer or reinsurer.

Full Conference Call Transcript

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: Thanks, Keith. Good morning, everyone. We are proud of the quarter's results, which reflect the strength of the RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. business model and the value of our three drivers of profit. Once again this quarter, underwriting, fee and investment income all contributed meaningfully to strong operating income. This is gratifying as the balanced contribution is central to the resilience we have been building and advances our strategy of reducing earnings dependency on any single market condition or source of volatility. Before discussing the quarter in more detail, let me start with the broader backdrop. Geopolitical risk is elevated. Markets continue to adjust to a higher-for-longer rate environment and the macro environment remains increasingly fragmented, highly volatile and less predictable.

Last year I said that our business is anti-correlated to this kind of environment and our results demonstrate that this remains true today. As the world becomes more uncertain and risk averse, the value of the protection we provide increases. Our business is to underwrite the volatility others seek to avoid. We manage it to reduce our customers' risk in exchange for strong returns to our shareholders. Ultimately, our strategy is to absorb volatility, manage it efficiently in the ordinary course, and produce results over time, recognizing occasional losses will occur. For the first quarter of 2026, we reported operating income of $591 million, a 22% annualized operating return on equity and operating earnings per share of $13.75.

Tangible book value per share increased by 1.5% to $233.49. This reflects two influences: retained mark-to-market losses of $357 million and share repurchases of $353 million at a premium to book value. I will address the mark-to-market losses and share repurchases in a few minutes, but we view these as temporary drags on book value per share and believe they help create the conditions for continuing strong overall performance. Turning to our three drivers of profit, we will start with underwriting. We reported strong underwriting income of $589 million driven by excellent current accident year performance and favorable prior year development. We benefited from approximately $160 million of favorable reserve development with a proportionally larger contribution from Other Property.

This reflects our proactive portfolio positioning and superior underwriting over the last several years. I want to highlight one accomplishment from the January 1 renewals that we alluded to last quarter. While rates were down low-teen percentages, our team did an excellent job positioning into a more competitive environment. As a result, top line in Property Cat this quarter stayed relatively flat excluding reinstatement premiums. Rates remain adequate and we took an above-market share of new business which demonstrates the strength of our franchise. As I wrote in our most recent shareholder letter, when rates are adequate, underwriters should be taking more risk—and we are. Meanwhile, our Casualty and Specialty adjusted combined ratio was 99.4%.

This was consistent with our guidance of high 90s and supports our view that the portfolio performed as expected. David will provide more detail on our exposure to the war in the Middle East. In summary, we have limited exposure through lines narrowly designed to cover these risks, including War on Land and Marine War. I would not characterize our share in either of these markets as being outsized. Moving now to fee income, which performed equally well this quarter. We reported total fee income of approximately $94 million. Performance fees were the main driver of the upside, reflecting strong current year underwriting results and favorable prior year development.

Capital Partners continues to be an important source of persistent and diversified earnings. It allows us to leverage our industry-leading underwriting franchise to generate capital-light fees. This complements the income we earn on our balance sheet, creating additional value from our underwriting business. That is another important source of resilience and remains a clear differentiator for RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd., especially in markets where clients value scale, reliability and flexibility. Moving to retained net investment income, it was [inaudible] for the quarter. We have executed well in difficult investment markets; as a result, net investment income remains robust. This reflects the scale of our invested assets, the quality of the portfolio, and a rate environment that remains favorable.

Fixed maturity, short term and private credit rates remained steady to higher during the quarter, which supported net investment income. Recent market moves allow us to extend duration and lock in at higher yields, which should continue to support earnings power over time. We reduced our gold position during the quarter by about half. We originally put that hedge in place to protect the portfolio against inflation and geopolitical risk, and it served that purpose well. As markets evolved, we chose to reduce the position, lock in gains and lower potential future volatility in the portfolio. Importantly, the position remained profitable both in the quarter and since inception. Let me spend a moment on the mark-to-market losses.

The same market movements that pressure current period valuations also improve reinvestment yields and support future earnings power. So while book value takes a modest mark today, prospective earnings improve tomorrow. We view that trade-off as economically constructive. In addition, these losses are largely unrealized, so this is more of an issue of timing reflecting the quarter’s shift in the yield curve. The investment portfolio remains high quality and its underlying earnings capacity remains strong. Consequently, we remain comfortable with the overall credit quality of the underwriting securities. That is also true of our private credit portfolio. About 5% of our investment portfolio is in private credit.

Our exceptional capital strength and high liquidity are the foundation for this measured allocation to private credit, which enhances our book yield due to the associated illiquidity premium. Robert will provide more color on our credit book in his comments. Shifting now to capital management where our approach remains unchanged. We have a consistent track record of strong earnings performance, excess capital and ample liquidity. That positions us to continue returning substantial capital to shareholders. And this quarter, we repurchased $353 million of our shares. We did so in a disciplined manner, allocating capital where we see favorable risk-adjusted returns.

This includes allocating to our own shares when they trade at levels we consider compelling relative to intrinsic value and future earnings power. Since 2024, we have repurchased over 20% of our outstanding shares. This total is almost 11 million shares, or $2.7 billion, up until April 24. We did this at very attractive valuations, very close to current book value, which should boost returns to shareholders with minimal dilution. At the same time, we remain well capitalized to support our underwriting portfolio, our partners and future growth opportunities. Ultimately, capital management should support long-term growth in tangible book value per share and long-term value creation for shareholders. That remains the standard we apply.

Looking ahead, the message is continuity, not change. The underwriting environment remains competitive, but rates remain adequate. Ultimately, our objective is to maximize long-term growth in tangible book value per share and operating earnings by preserving margin, constructing the right portfolio and allocating capital with discipline. That has been our approach through the cycle, and it remains our approach today. When we think about the balance of 2026, our outlook remains constructive. The underwriting portfolio is performing well and our earnings model continues to benefit from multiple diversified sources of income. With that, I will turn it over to Robert to discuss the financials in more detail and then to David to provide additional color on underwriting and renewals.

Robert Qutub: Thanks, Kevin, and good morning to everyone. We delivered a strong start to 2026 in a quarter with both geopolitical and economic volatility. Our diversified earnings model continued to produce superior returns for shareholders. We generated operating earnings per share of $13.75 and an annualized operating return on equity of 22%. Annualized return on equity was 10.5%, which included $357 million of retained mark-to-market losses. Importantly, each of our drivers of profit contributed meaningfully in the quarter, providing a diversified and resilient earnings profile. There are a few numbers that will help demonstrate this. First, 15 points, which is the contribution from fee income and retained net investment income to our overall return on average common equity in the quarter.

This provides a solid foundation of earnings each quarter that we then build upon with income from our underwriting business. Second, $589 million, which is the underwriting income we generated this quarter. This reflects disciplined risk selection and cycle management. And third, $353 million, which is the capital we returned to shareholders through share repurchases during the quarter. We continue to view our shares as attractive at current valuations and share repurchases remain an important part of our capital management strategy. Taking a step back, this performance is a continuation of the strong results we have been delivering over the last three years.

In the last four quarters alone, we have delivered $2.5 billion of operating income with an operating return on average common equity of 24%. With such a strong base of earnings, we are better able to absorb volatility from a large event in any one quarter while continuing to grow shareholder value over time. Now, I would like to turn to a more detailed view of our three drivers of profit, starting with underwriting. Let me begin with the key point. Even as rates decline in some parts of the reinsurance market, our underwriting book remains highly profitable. In the first quarter, we delivered an adjusted combined ratio of 72%, reflecting disciplined underwriting and portfolio construction.

We reported favorable development across both segments with most of it coming from Other Property where we fully retained it in our bottom line results. Property Catastrophe reported a current accident year loss ratio of 10.2% and an adjusted combined ratio of 19.2%. This reflected 11 percentage points of favorable development across a range of accident years. In Other Property, we had another excellent quarter, with a current accident year loss ratio of 55.5% and an adjusted combined ratio of 56.1%. This included 29 percentage points of favorable development, primarily from our non-cat attritional book. Casualty and Specialty remained in line with our expectations, with an adjusted combined ratio of 99.4%.

Shifting to overall gross premiums written, which were $3.4 billion, down 16% from the comparable quarter, or 9% without reinstatement premiums. It is important to remember that our results last year included the California wildfires, which increased loss activity and drove most of the $340 million of reinstatement premiums in Q1 2025. After accounting for reinstatement premiums, Property Catastrophe gross written premiums were nearly flat. Other Property was down 7% and Casualty and Specialty was down 13%. David will discuss this in more detail, but these movements reflect deliberate portfolio shaping towards the most attractive classes of business. Property Catastrophe is generally our highest margin business.

We have successfully found opportunities to deploy capital to grow selectively and help offset the impact of downward rate pressure. In Casualty and Specialty, we have continued to trim back exposure in general. We have also reduced on certain specialty classes like cyber, where rates have been under more pressure. Professional liability premiums were up in the quarter; however, this is not reflective of growth in the portfolio. It was driven by lower premium adjustments last year related to negative premium adjustments and a reclassification from professional liability to general casualty.

Looking ahead to the second quarter, we expect Other Property net premiums earned of around $350 million and an attritional loss ratio in the mid-50s, and Casualty and Specialty net premiums earned of approximately $1.3 billion and an adjusted combined ratio in the high 90s. Turning now to fee income, we generated $94 million of fees, with management fees of $48 million and performance fees of $46 million. Performance fees were higher than our expectations due to a combination of strong underwriting results, favorable development and a one-time recognition of deferred performance fees related to a return of capital by DaVinci.

Looking ahead to the second quarter, we expect management fees to be around $50 million and performance fees will vary by quarter, but should come in around $120 million for the year absent any large loss events or favorable development. Turning now to investments, retained net investment income was [inaudible]. This was down about 3% from the fourth quarter due to lower average interest rates in the first two months of the quarter. We recorded $350 million of retained mark-to-market losses in the quarter. About half of these are related to our fixed maturity portfolio and the other half related to equity losses, consistent with the volatility experienced in the broader market.

While increased Treasury yields have a short-term negative impact, they also improve reinvestment yields which support our longer-term earnings power. During the quarter, we took advantage of financial market volatility to adjust the composition of our portfolio. First, we reduced our retained investment portfolio's exposure to gold from 5% to 2%. In doing so, we realized gains from a hedge that has performed well for us and has been profitable both in the quarter and since inception. Second, we increased our exposure to high-quality investment-grade corporate credit, where spreads and all-in yields offered attractive risk-adjusted returns, and at the same time reduced our exposure to shorter-term Treasuries.

And third, through these allocation changes, we extended duration on the retained portfolio to 3.4 years from 3.0 years and increased the yield on the portfolio. In the second quarter, we expect retained net investment income to trend slightly up. Finally, I want to briefly address the private credit investments. Private credit assets are diversified across managers, sub-strategies, sectors, geographies and vintage years. We invest through institutional closed-end structures run by high-quality managers. We emphasize senior secured lending and other areas where structure, collateral and manager selectivity provide downside protection. Further, we have limited exposure to currently strained areas such as software or through BDCs. We believe current volatility provides opportunities to selectively increase our exposure to private credit.

In summary, our investment portfolio performed well and we took advantage of market volatility to incrementally improve the investment portfolio. We believe these changes will improve expected net income on a growing invested asset base. Moving now to a few comments on tax and expenses. Our overall effective tax rate for our GAAP net income was 6%. We had a few one-off items which benefited the tax rate and we expect it will return to low double digits next quarter. As a reminder, although non-controlling interest results are included in pre-tax income, we are not taxed on the earnings that belong to our Capital Partners investors which reduces our GAAP effective tax rate.

This quarter, we also benefited from the Bermuda substance-based tax credits. As you will recall, last year, we were able to realize 50% of the value; in 2026, we are able to recognize 75%. About two-thirds of the value is reflected in underwriting and had a 90 basis point impact on the combined ratio with the remainder in corporate expenses. Inclusive of the credits, our operating expense ratio for the quarter was 4.1%, up from 3.7% in the comparable quarter, or flat when you factor in the impact of reinstatement premiums in 2025.

There were a few one-time reductions in the quarter, which pushed this ratio down, but looking ahead, we continue to expect our operating expense ratio to grow to 5% to 5.5% over the year as we continue to invest in the business. Let me close now with capital management, where our earnings strength and consistency continue to generate substantial capital. During the quarter, we repurchased 1.2 million shares for $353 million at an average price of $289 per share. And through April 24, we repurchased an additional $105 million of our shares for a year-to-date total of $458 million.

We expect to continue our disciplined approach to capital management in 2026, first by seeking to deploy capital into desirable underwriting opportunities and second, by returning excess capital to our shareholders at attractive prices. In summary, I am pleased with our performance in the quarter. Each of our three drivers of profit continue to deliver strong results and demonstrate the benefits of our diversified earnings model. And with that, I will now turn the call over to David.

David Edward Marra: Thanks, Robert, and good morning, everyone. In the first quarter, we delivered strong financial results across each of our drivers of profit and differentiated RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. in the market through superior underwriting execution. I could not be more pleased with the underwriters' performance. The team retained profitable business, grew selectively and maintained underwriting discipline with a focus on preserving margin. Rate adequacy across the portfolio remains attractive and should continue to support strong shareholder returns. At each renewal, our underwriting team has two objectives. First, deliver our market-leading value proposition to clients and brokers. That supports a durable pipeline of renewable business, first-call status and favorable signings that are resilient to competition.

Second, construct the optimal underwriting portfolio across business segments to support each of our three drivers of profit and generate capital-efficient, attractive returns both in the current year and over time. Our underwriting team's excellent execution of both objectives continues to differentiate RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. We combine underwriting expertise, portfolio management and capital flexibility to identify the best opportunities. And we are able to convert those opportunities into signed business because of the value we bring to our clients. We support them consistently over the years, offer large lines, and lead market quotes, often when others will not.

We transact with them holistically across products, geographies and balance sheets, and when they have claims, we differentiate with speed of payment and claims insights. This is why we are successful in securing the lines we target even when programs are oversubscribed. It is also why we have been able to capture more than our market share of new demand and continue to shape the portfolio toward more attractive risks. Our first quarter results demonstrate the continued efficacy of these actions. Our portfolio drove underwriting income of over $580 million supported by a strong current accident year loss ratio of 53 and favorable prior year development across both segments. Let me cover our segments in more detail starting with Property.

As we discussed last quarter, the January 1 book saw Property Cat reinsurance rates down on average in the low teens for our portfolio. U.S. accounts were down closer to 10% and international and global accounts closer to 15%. At today's rates, and with favorable terms and conditions, Property Cat is still highly accretive with strong rate adequacy. We successfully deployed capital into this attractive market. We retained the majority of our portfolio and deployed $1 billion of new limit. This was a strong team effort and it demonstrates our ability to access high-quality opportunities in a competitive, but still very profitable market.

As a result, gross written premiums in Property Catastrophe—our highest margin business—were roughly flat, only down 3% from Q1 2025 excluding reinstatement premiums. Specifically, we deployed additional limit by focusing on two main areas. First, we grew on accounts and layers with the most attractive margins, such as select California deals impacted by the wildfires and certain nationwide accounts. Second, we grew with several large U.S. clients where we captured new demand on business which remains highly rate adequate. Global accounts and international business experienced more rate pressure than the U.S. portfolio. These accounts remain attractive due to the diversified portfolios we maintain with them and the pipeline of renewable business they represent.

We also saw opportunities in the retro market to purchase additional protection at attractive terms. Ceded rates were down high teens across our portfolio. We are a significant buyer of retrocessional protection and are a first call for purchasing opportunities, similar to our position in the inwards book. In addition, we upsized our Mona Lisa cat bond at significantly more attractive terms and conditions. Looking ahead, we are making good progress on the U.S. midyear renewals. We have already bound about half of our U.S. midyear portfolio; roughly half of that has been on private terms. The Florida market continues to benefit from strong pricing, reduced social inflation due to tort reform, and robust terms and conditions.

As a result of this improved environment, policies at Citizens are at a record low. The shift from public to private markets benefits the entire distribution chain, including increasing demand for reinsurance. We grew in Florida through the Validus acquisition and organically in 2025. I feel confident in the current positioning of our portfolio and our ability to access profitable business on existing programs and new demand in Q2. In Other Property, we continue to shape the book to reduce peak exposure while preserving attractive margins. The business is performing well with strong current and prior year loss ratios, reflecting the quality of our underwriting decisions and our disciplined management of the book.

Terms and conditions remain strong, but pricing is under more pressure. We are trimming exposure in the most pressured areas, and improving expected net profitability through ceded reinsurance. Turning to Casualty and Specialty, market conditions are a continuation of those experienced at January 1. We see ongoing rate increases in general liability, which are necessary in order to keep pace with loss trend, and we see increased competition in specialty and credit lines in response to recent profitability. We have been optimizing the Casualty and Specialty book through risk selection, portfolio mix and greater use of ceded reinsurance. Our team has done a fantastic job of underwriting our clients' business across the various classes they purchase.

This is especially important for the Casualty and Specialty business, as it allows us to pick the best deals within each class and construct a more diversified portfolio. In general liability, we have reduced on deals which are most exposed to social inflation. Our exposure to this class is down 40% over the last two years, but premiums are down significantly less because of rate increases. In addition, we have been proactively shifting the portfolio mix to weight the best returning business, with specialty and credit now making up more than half of the portfolio.

We have consistently used ceded reinsurance in the segment to manage risk and optimize returns, and at January 1, we found new attractive opportunities to increase these protections on long-tail lines of general and professional liability and specialty classes such as marine and energy. Today, we cede 20% of Casualty and Specialty premiums compared to 13% a year ago. As in Property, we see the entire market from an inwards and outwards perspective and are uniquely positioned to construct an optimal net portfolio. These actions are important examples of how we shape the portfolio. They allow us to stay on the right panels, preserve valuable options and enhance the overall quality of the book.

Improved margins will take time to emerge, but at the same time, we continue to benefit from the investment income generated by float on casualty reserves. So even in a period when underwriting margins in Casualty remain tight, the business continues to support book value growth and shareholder returns. Before I close, I want to address the war in the Middle East. Based on what we know today, we do not believe the war will have a significant impact on our book for several reasons. First, we have low underwriting exposure to the region. Second, war is excluded from standard property policies.

Finally, our potential exposure would come primarily from our specialty portfolios—specifically War on Land and Marine War—and we purchased retrocessional protection on these portfolios. War on Land is a line where property damage from war is explicitly covered, modeled and priced for. Some of the damaged hotels and refineries in the region have purchased this cover, but take-up rates and coverage limits are relatively small compared to property policies. Marine War coverage is included in most marine policies but can be canceled and repriced on 72 hours’ notice. We have detailed information on locations and vessels that have been hit, and we will continue to monitor developments closely as the war evolves.

Stepping back, we continue to manage our underwriting portfolio to generate attractive returns even in a competitive market. We are growing where economics are attractive and reducing where they are not. That discipline supports all three of our drivers of profit. Property is contributing mostly through underwriting income and fee income, while Casualty and Specialty is contributing mostly through fee income and investment income. All of these factors support strong shareholder returns and sustainable earnings power. And with that, I will turn it back to Kevin.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: Thanks, David. In closing, this was a strong quarter and another good example of the earnings power and resilience of our business. Each driver of profit performed well. Underwriting was especially strong, including excellent current accident year performance and significant favorable development. Fee income exceeded expectations. Net investment income remained robust, with stronger reinvestment economics supporting future earnings power. And we repurchased shares in a disciplined way while maintaining a strong capital and liquidity position. Taken together, this quarter demonstrates what RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. was built to do: generate attractive returns across environments by combining underwriting expertise, third-party capital management, and investment capability.

Three diversified drivers of profit rather than any single one allow us to deliver more consistent earnings through the cycle than we could have produced even three years ago. The market remains competitive, but opportunities remain attractive. Most importantly, we remain focused on the same objectives that guide our decisions every quarter: growing earnings, compounding book value over time and creating long-term value for our shareholders. We will now open the call for questions.

Operator: Thank you. And we will take our first question from Elyse Beth Greenspan with Wells Fargo.

Elyse Beth Greenspan: Hi, thanks. Good morning. My first question is on the midyear renewals. I was hoping—I guess it is a couple parts. You said you bound around half of the U.S. book already. So I was hoping to get a sense of the pricing you saw on what has been bound, expectations on the remainder that will be bound between now and the midyears. And then are you observing any changes in demand across that renewal?

David Edward Marra: Hey, Elyse, this is David. The Q2 that we have seen so far is pretty much a continuation of what we saw in Q1. In Q1, rates were down mid-teens as a portfolio, but that was split between closer to 10% for U.S. Cat and closer to 15% for international and global. We have seen that mostly continue. Into Q2, we are still seeing a lot of opportunities for private terms. If you recall last year in Q2, there was a lot of Florida business that we were able to access on private terms.

What we are able to do with these early renewals is lock up our capacity early at terms better than the market, and the clients are able to fill out the placement from there. We are encouraged by how the team has been able to engage in that. New demand is actually higher than we thought at January 1. If you go back a little bit, we were saying $20 billion of new demand in 2024, $15 billion in 2025, and we thought $10 billion was our estimate for 2026. That is looking closer to $15 billion now, but we will not know until all the Q2s are done.

We are seeing really good opportunities across the normal Q2s and the Florida book. That growth in demand, I would also add, is from a lot of core personal lines clients which are buying new reinsurance because they have growth in CIB and are keeping up their programs with inflation. So it is a really good combination for us to deploy capital into that.

Elyse Beth Greenspan: Thanks. And then my second question, can you give us a sense of how much losses you booked for Iran in the quarter? And I am assuming that all stays within the Specialty and Casualty segment within the combined ratio there. And then would you expect to book additional losses in Q2?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: Let me start there. As David mentioned, we are generally somewhat underexposed to the lines that are most exposed to the Iran war. We have good transparency on the ships that were hit and the other on-land targeted properties as well. Those are all reserved within our portfolio. Additionally, we are being cautious and thinking about the uncertainty from the ongoing war and being cautious about releasing IBNR within the Casualty and Specialty segment. The losses are within Specialty; they are within Marine, Marine Energy. It is fully reflected. If more happens in the second quarter, we will reflect that in the second quarter, but we feel good about where we are.

It is really just a couple of points into the Casualty and Specialty segment, but it does not foreshadow what could be happening going forward.

Elyse Beth Greenspan: Thank you.

Operator: Thank you. And we will take our next question from Joshua David Shanker with Bank of America.

Joshua David Shanker: Yes. Thank you for taking my question. In Robert's prepared remarks, he spoke about the operating expense ratio moving to somewhere around 5.5%. You said on the last conference call that you were talking 5 to 5.5%. You did 4.1% this quarter. I have a few questions. Number one, that is a lot of money—150 basis points in annual expenses. What are you investing in? And two, do you not get the offsetting tax benefit from the payroll tax adjustment? Is that not pushing that down at the same time you are guiding investors to think it is going to rise?

Robert Qutub: Josh, thanks for the question. I did address it in the prepared comments, but let me expand. The 4.1% that you saw in the first quarter was down because of some one-time items that came through, typically nonrecurring in the first quarter. The core is probably closer to the mid-4s—maybe around 4.6%. Yes, we are investing in the business. Here is how I see it: 4.5% to 5% is a relatively low expense ratio relative to the industry. We feel good about that. That gives us the opportunity to invest in people and our platform to be able to operate at scale, and we will continue to operate at scale.

Specifically, we are building out a new front office system for REMS that we have talked about before. These are significant investments and we expect to continue over time to grow. So, we need that operating expense base to be there. Yes, for expenses that we incur in Bermuda, we will get that tax credit, relative to the people and what we invest in non-people. We did reflect that whatever we are investing will come in as a small offset. And as I said, we expect to grow into this over the course of the year. It is gradual.

Joshua David Shanker: So 5.5% is not your targeted 2026 expense ratio. You expect it to creep towards 5.5% through year-end?

Robert Qutub: Five to five and a half. We have control over that in terms of how we spend it, but it will grow.

Joshua David Shanker: And are these one-time expenses, or is this an investment in capabilities that will moderate in 2027, or do you think that is going to be the new normal?

Robert Qutub: People are part of our run rate. When we build out a system in REMS, that is nonrecurring over time.

Joshua David Shanker: Okay. Thank you very much.

Operator: Thank you. And we will take our next question from Michael David Zaremski with BMO.

Michael David Zaremski: Hey, great, thanks. Going back to the commentary about the Specialty segment, the net-to-gross kind of changing, it sounds like that is a permanent change, but there was no guidance change on the combined ratio in that segment. How should we think about it? Are you laying off more tail risk? I know that segment, especially on the marine side, had some cats in recent years, even though I do not know if cats are embedded within that high-90s guidance for that segment too. Thanks.

David Edward Marra: Hey, Mike, this is David. I can address what we are doing from an underwriting perspective. In the Casualty and Specialty segment, we have used ceded reinsurance for many years. If you go back about ten years, we ceded about 28% to 30% of the book. So this is in the normal course of how we use ceded reinsurance to shape the portfolio. We see the whole market inwards and outwards, so we are able to make those trades and construct the portfolio with all that in mind.

The types of ceded reinsurance that we have grown into have been more quota share on the long-tail book, and on the Marine and Energy book, we have bought more excess-of-loss with broader coverage. Those perform distinctly different roles. The quota share provides risk income in the short term, but it also provides protection if losses deteriorate. And on the energy side, it would provide some protection for events such as the Iran war to the extent that those might grow. It is an effective way to position the portfolio and that is what we are accomplishing now. We expect to continue to see opportunities throughout the year as capacity comes into the market and the year develops.

Michael David Zaremski: Got it. That is helpful. Switching to the portfolio, Robert, you talked about some fairly material changes. At a high level, I just want to confirm—taking profits in gold puts additional assets into the fixed income bucket, which probably extended duration. So should we add an additional bump to the fixed income run rate from that reallocation? Or are there other moving parts we should think about?

Robert Qutub: Thanks for the question. There was a lot going on in the portfolio, but when you break it down, it comes in three distinct buckets. One is the gold we reduced. As Kevin pointed out in his prepared comments, we knew that was going to be a good hedge. The value accreted to us faster, so we reduced the exposure. We still have a small piece of gold in our portfolio, which we think is a prudent allocation within our investment guidelines. Second, we focused on the structure of the portfolio holding in a higher-rate-for-longer environment.

My comment about reducing short-term Treasuries that had a high yield and moving that out to investment-grade credit in a significant way allowed us to extend and lock it in; hence the duration increased. Therefore, we have higher credit quality and an impact to our new money yield that went from 4.8% to 5.1%. We view that as a good structure and a long-term position. Third, we wanted to clarify the importance of private credit to our investment portfolio. We feel good about it, and I think that is what I was trying to share.

So if you break it down, it is really those three areas with an outcome of a little bit longer duration and overall a higher yield that you will start to see trending next quarter.

Michael David Zaremski: And quickly, if you move further into private credit opportunistically, roughly what type of yields are you seeing?

Robert Qutub: We do not share specific yields. We are capturing the liquidity premium that we get above investment-grade positions, which can range from 200 to 300 basis points. It is also hard to look at it as one number because we have direct lending, distressed and secondary, and they have different return profiles over time. They are all performing within our expectations, in some cases exceeding.

Operator: And our next question comes from Andrew E. Andersen with Jefferies.

Andrew E. Andersen: Hey, good morning. On the new demand at June, is that skewing towards more traditional layers versus aggregate covers? And of the aggregate business, what is the appetite to write that?

David Edward Marra: The new demand—we prioritize the quality of the pricing, the quality of the overall risk and the quality of the buyer. We have seen demand come from sustained buyers, nationwide personal lines companies, which are a big core client base for us. There are some aggregate programs in there. Our view on aggregate is that there are good aggregates and bad aggregates. The aggregates placed in the market now and the ones that we write as part of our portfolio are well structured. They are attaching at the capital level, not the earnings level. They are also well priced, and the level of attritional losses is well understood by the market at this point.

They make an attractive piece of the overall tower. Our approach to that new demand is to go to market on the middle and bottom end regardless of whether there is an aggregate program. We can secure our line there and then use efficient capital sources on the top end as well and provide that one-stop shop across the board, achieving attractive returns that meet the program for RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. shareholders.

Andrew E. Andersen: Thanks. And on Other Property, can you talk about how durable the mid-50s attritional loss ratio is as competition increases on that line?

David Edward Marra: The Other Property book has had really good performance. It has had several years of sustained rate increases and improvements in terms and conditions. Rate is coming under pressure, but terms and conditions are still holding, and we have seen favorable claims trends. With the current pressure on rates, we have shifted some of the capacity, taken some risk off the table, and found it better priced in the Cat book—mainly some Florida risk. We have confidence in continued sustained returns on the Other Property book, and we have options to manage through some of the softening.

Robert Qutub: As I said in my prepared comments, mid-50s is where we feel comfortable given the mix of the portfolio. It will have some ups and downs based on large events that come through. Right now, mid-50s—about 55% plus or minus—is how I think about it.

Andrew E. Andersen: Thank you.

Operator: And our next question comes from Meyer Shields with KBW.

Meyer Shields: Thanks so much. When we think about this year's pricing for Florida at midyear, is there any reduction in the provision for initial skepticism over how well the reforms were going to work? In other words, besides risk-adjusted pricing, is there another discount working its way into pricing, or is that not relevant?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: We often talk in terms of risk-adjusted pricing. If we look back at our credit for the reforms when they were originally put into place, we have seen more tangible benefit from the reforms, which is coming into pricing. I would say that the overall economics within Florida are reducing on a comparable level to what we saw at January 1, and the portfolio is extremely well rated. We have good flexibility to leverage into the market. We are finding new opportunities to grow in Florida.

To give you a sense of how much we like it—relative to David's comment between Other Property and Property Cat—right now Property Cat is returning, particularly in the Tri-County area, stronger returns than some of the Other Property, and we have made some shifts there. We like the portfolio. We have begun to give more recognition for the reforms, which I think is warranted, and we continue to think the market is highly accretive.

Meyer Shields: And then a question for Robert. You gave guidance for fees in the second quarter, but the press release also noted some funds returned to some of your partners. Does that have an impact in future quarters’ management fees?

Robert Qutub: To make sure I get the question correctly—you are talking about the capital return we had this year for the joint ventures, the $730 million. That is really a distribution. Does it affect this year's performance? No. We will keep in each of the vehicles the capital we need to deploy versus our current expectations. They had a good year in 2025; you can see the NCI was $900 million plus that we earned, and returning some of that back to the investors in those funds is a good thing. That was the bulk of it, the $700 million, and we are positioned well as we underwrite in 2026.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: One thing I would add: the vehicles are about the same size this year as last year. This is really just returning earnings, and it is our normal process. We do it every year.

Meyer Shields: Okay. Thanks so much. That helps.

Operator: And our next question comes from Analyst with JPMorgan.

Analyst: Hi, thank you. Most of my questions have been answered already. Sorry about that. I will drop off.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: Sure.

Operator: Thank you. And we will move next to Ryan Tunis with Cantor.

Ryan Tunis: Thanks. Just one from me for Kevin. Kevin, I was hoping that you could remind us of the history of Ren in terms of appetite for writing for the domestic companies. I feel like at one point there were a good number, and then there were almost none. Given where the health of the market is today, how do you compare that relative history in terms of your willingness, not just to write in terms of size, but breadth of cedents?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: I have been here almost thirty years and I have seen us participate in lots of different ways in the Florida market. We remain highly influential in the Florida market even today, although it is a much smaller percent of our overall premium. In the early 2000s and late 90s, about 30% of our premium came from Florida broadly, and we participated in a highly structured way over the years. Starting five to seven years ago, we decided to take more of our Florida risk coming through nationwide programs. We always had good participations on some of the larger programs and larger writers in Florida, and then selected more aggressively as we went through the stack of domestic companies.

Right now, our participation remains split between some of the larger Florida companies, probably a little bit more breadth into the mid-tier companies, and a lot of exposure still coming from the nationwide. So it is a smaller percent of the portfolio, still large enough to drive the tail in our tail capital for the property cat portfolio for Southeast hurricane. It is a constantly evolving strategy in Florida, but it is one we know extremely well and we have all the levers to think about where best to take it: Other Property, nationwide, large domestics, small domestics.

Operator: Thank you. And our next question comes from Tracy Benguigui with Wolfe Research.

Tracy Benguigui: Thank you. Most of my questions were asked. I will just ask one. I was going through your proxy and your 2025 ROE target of 10.27% in the STI plan. It stood out given how far above you have been operating. It raises questions about potentially being in the long haul of pricing decreases, given it will take a lot for your ROE to fall to that level. But you convinced me that you could land at 15 just from NII and fees. Could you help us understand how you want investors to interpret this ROE target?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: It is not a target. It is something used formulaically to produce a change in the slope of the curve in our compensation program. We try to be careful not to put it out there as a target. It is simply a formulaic input to a formula for long-term compensation. There is no perfect way for compensation to work for the types of risk we are taking, where casualty risks are stretched seven years and volatility from Property Cat does not always reflect the performance or quality of the underwriting. It is simply a good way for us to think about how to compensate employees over the long term.

My compensation varies with the performance of the company, but more importantly, I am deeply invested in the company with a large holding and I am aligned with shareholders. One way to think about it is closer to cost of capital than a target for ROE, but it is not exactly that. It is a mechanism to change the slope of a compensation scheme.

Tracy Benguigui: Got it. Thank you.

Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Matthew Heimermann with Citi.

Matthew Heimermann: Hey, good morning. Two quick questions. First, thinking about having fewer opportunities than you do quantum of capital, and recognizing you have repurchased all the shares you issued with Validus, I am curious whether inorganic corporate development is on the table as you think about the outlook. And if so, given what you have grown into, what would be additive?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: We are well positioned to think about inorganic growth, having fully integrated our last acquisition, Validus. Nothing has changed. If we see something that advances our strategy and is financially actionable, we would take a look and be able to execute. We feel like we are a complete company with each of the components we need to continue to be successful. If something becomes available, I think we would be on the list for people to call, but we are focused on executing the strategy that we have and we see inorganic growth as an accelerant, not a change.

Matthew Heimermann: Following up on the complete platform comment, is it unreasonable to think about business development that might historically have taken place in traditional M&A terms occurring more in dedicated third-party capital solutions?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: We are always looking at adding different capital to our franchise if it serves our customers. I do not think of that necessarily as inorganic growth. If we start a vehicle or bring a new structure online, that is fundamental to our strategy, not something I would think of as inorganic even if it is a strategy that we do not otherwise attack today.

Matthew Heimermann: That is fair. For clarification, I was thinking about it more in terms of maybe there is a book of business at a subscale participant and buying an entity does not make sense, but solving for both parties with additional off-balance sheet capital could make the difference.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: We can do that. Often that type of structure is a renewal rights structure if it is a takeout from an existing book, and that is something we are comfortable doing. Those are all things that we look at. On some of the more production-focused stuff, the multiples still remain quite high though.

Matthew Heimermann: One clarifier—regarding the $15 billion of potential incremental demand at midyear, can you remind us relative to what, just to put it in underlying exposure growth terms?

David Edward Marra: The $15 billion we referenced—moving from $10 billion to $15 billion—is for U.S. Cat limit. That is limit primarily exposed to U.S. Cat buyers and U.S. Cat exposure. We had $20 billion a couple of years ago, $15 billion last year, and it is between $10 billion to $15 billion this year.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: If you use a similar rate online for that relative to the rest, that is a good way to think about the incremental exposure growth.

Operator: Thank you. Our next question comes from Alex Scott with Barclays.

Alex Scott: Hi. First one I had is on some of the comments you are making around the reduced exposure—over 40% exposure reduction to the most social-inflation-impacted parts of casualty. Could you extrapolate on what you are seeing there? What is preventing enough rate coming through so that it becomes attractive at some point? How far away are we from that? And are any initiatives in states other than Florida working? Would love to hear the thoughts behind the reduction and whether at some point that could become a growth area again.

David Edward Marra: Over the last 24 months, the market has recognized that social inflation, and inflation in general in claims, has accelerated. That is when rates started going up. Ten to twelve percent is our estimated range for loss trend, but that will vary by class and subclass. Insurers are getting rate—sometimes above that, sometimes around that. The key is trend is cumulative and that rate has to keep going or we will see slippage in loss ratios in the casualty space. We are happy with where the business is headed; insurers are doing the right things. Rate is the easiest way to measure that. Other important areas are investments in claims handling. The plaintiffs’ bar has been highly successful.

Insurers are now investing in the right data and technology, coordinating through the towers better, and making this a C-suite issue. It will take a long time for the investments to come through the numbers because of how these claims develop. We are watching that closely. The third lever for us is optimizing our own portfolio—deciding in an inflationary environment which deals we want to be on and which we do not. We have been reducing on deals most exposed to social inflation—lower layers, structures covering parts of the business most at risk, or where an insurer is not making the right adjustments in claims handling. Going forward, the business is on the right track.

We have a substantial and leadership position and are well positioned to grow if we see margins turning around. But given the length of time for margins to emerge, we are going to be cautious for now.

Alex Scott: Got it. That makes sense. Then the growth opportunity with some of the large cedents and some nationwide contracts—could you give a little more color on the opportunity? Why are you finding that more rate adequate? And should we think about mix shift—convective storm versus hurricane risk?

David Edward Marra: Stepping back, we deployed $1 billion of limit in Q1 into the market. That is the easiest metric. There have been some rate decreases, so rates are roughly flat for us, rather than showing the decreases in the market. Rate adequacy overall in U.S. Cat is still highly adequate, coming off the highs of the best markets we have seen in a generation. We are comfortable with returns in U.S. Cat. Not every Cat deal is created equal—by layer or client. Our goal is to underwrite each deal and client, ensure we have confidence in our independent view of risk, and then act. We see a wide dispersion between the best and worst deals.

The team has done a great job not only recognizing where the best deals are, but also using client relationships to lock up lines on those deals early. That is a differentiator and supports deploying capital into a high-margin business that will continue to impact returns going forward.

Operator: And our next question comes from David Kenneth Motemaden with Evercore.

David Kenneth Motemaden: Hey, thanks for squeezing me in. Just a quick one on Casualty and Specialty, on the accident year loss ratio. If I back out the Iran losses, it looks like the loss ratio deteriorated by 120 basis points year on year, and that is above where it has been running recently. Could you elaborate on what was driving that underlying movement?

Robert Qutub: If you go back and compare to last year’s first quarter, comparisons are noisy because of the wildfires and we did take some specialty losses there which would have elevated the current accident year loss ratio. As Kevin said, we printed a current accident year in the high 90s for the segment, but that included a couple of points related to the Iran war going on right now. That is a better starting point before you get events that would drive it up.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: We are not seeing an uptick in our loss ratio other than adding a couple of points for Iran. Not sure about the reconciliation you are doing, but that is not part of our dialogue in managing the book right now.

David Kenneth Motemaden: Got it. Thank you. And maybe just quickly—an update on how you think PMLs will shape up as we go through the midyear renewals? I think you had talked about flat for Southeast wind. Is that still the case, or a little higher now given more opportunities and more demand?

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: As David mentioned, we are deploying a bit more capacity into the market. That will push up our exposure for Southeast hurricane a bit. If I were giving 10,000-foot guidance, I would say relatively flat, biased to a little more exposure, but it is not going to change the overall profile of the risk we are taking as an organization.

David Kenneth Motemaden: Great. Thank you.

Operator: Thank you. This concludes our question and answer session. I will now turn the meeting back to Kevin Joseph O'Donnell for any closing remarks.

Kevin Joseph O'Donnell: Thank you for joining the call. We are proud of the results we achieved this quarter, feel like the book is in great position, and we look forward to talking to you next quarter. Thank you.

Operator: This concludes the RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call and Webcast. Disconnect your line at this time, and have a wonderful day.

This article is a transcript of this conference call produced for The Motley Fool. While we strive for our Foolish Best, there may be errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. Parts of this article were created using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on The Motley Fool's insights and investing approach. It has been reviewed by our AI quality control systems. Since LLMs cannot (currently) own stocks, it has no positions in any of the stocks mentioned. As with all our articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your use of this content, and we strongly encourage you to do your own research, including listening to the call yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. Please see our Terms and Conditions for additional details, including our Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

The Motley Fool has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.