Refused to commit on competition dynamics retail health.

On the life side, strong growth in institutional business - which partners, new additions or faster growth with existing ones? And on agency, is it fair to say we have bottomed out?

Growth in institutional business is widespread; not necessarily coming from the big partners. We were possibly the first ones to experiment with a bevy of smaller partners. New partnerships from AU and Federal should give much more than the median growth. For agency - we have seen a doubling of their VNB in this nine-month period. We took significant calls on agency in terms of commissions, efficiencies, tweaking our models, hierarchy cost. We are encouraged; however, we may not necessarily focus just on growth in agency. Top line growth is not going to be the key thing. The bottom-line growth is going to be the key thing in agency.

Is it fair to say agency will be more traditional and protection-heavy, and institutions will be ULIP-heavy?

No, not necessarily. Our agency is unique. When we moved from a mass to a mass-affluent base of customers in the last 6-7 years, we used ULIP products significantly. Now our ULIPs themselves are looking quite healthy. The pickup of term has been wholesome and systematic. As far as institutional is concerned, it differs from bank to bank. We are possibly the only truly diversified company among the top 5-6 companies on Bancassurance. We don't have one bank which would take 50% of our business.

Follow-up on GST mitigation details - 450 bps vs achieved mitigation.

Our estimation was that we will have about 4.5%, i.e., 450 basis points impact of GST. As we exit next quarter, we would have mitigated close to about 325 bps against 450 bps that we had communicated earlier. We believe that delta of 125 is a reset impact from 1st April. That will be part of our base, and we will continue to work on that. Over the last 4 quarters, we have consistently seen margin expansion of 4% to 6%-6.5% and VNB growth close to an average of about 50%. However, the base effect does start kicking in. So, the margin expansion and VNB growth will definitely taper down from here on.

Motor TP loss ratios comparatively low for first three quarters - impact of reserve releases, or normalized loss ratio going forward? On underwriting profit - combined ratio improved but underwriting losses increased - is it because NEP growth is slower?

When you do reserving, it is based on present estimation and past known records. But when the claims get settled, if the settlement is lower than the reserve created, there is a release which happens. Hence, the TP release would not happen overnight, it would happen according to claim trends and settlement quantum's because Motor TP is a long book. As long as a release is happening, it is a good sign - the company had been adequately reserved in terms of the expected claims. Regarding NEP, it is lower because we have a whole account reinsurance treaty. It is not a structural issue. For the combined ratio, we always maintain that we would be close to 100% and that is our ambition.

Follow-up on underwriting loss drivers.

The underwriting loss for the quarter will have an impact of the labor wage code one-time hit of about INR 42 crores. Also, we are writing more and more of fresh two-wheeler and four-wheeler business. Our market share both for the quarter and nine months has moved up significantly in new motor sales. And the commissions are upfronted for three-year and five-year policies. That gives a big hit on the underwriting result. But on Combined Ratio basis, it evens out. Also, for the quarter, the NEP is looking a little depressed because there was a change in the ceding percentage on the government health business. If we actually exclude the impact of that, the NEP growth actually improves for the quarter to about 5%-6%.

Very sudden spike on the annuity mix this quarter - what led to this? Retail protection growth appears moderated at 18-19%. What is the channel and product-specific strategy?

On the product mix, if you look at our mix for last 5 to 6 quarters, it is largely stable. We were the ones who started deferred annuities about 4-5 years back. When the pricing was not right, we actually retreated back. Last quarter, we actually changed our product proposition on annuity, brought in newer products. And that increased the annuity mix to about 9% to 10% which you are seeing now. In respect of retail protection, as part of our strategy, we had actually been focusing on retail protection for almost last two years. So, if you go back last two years, for every quarter, our growth on retail protection has been significantly high. Now, once the base effect kicks in, the growth will obviously come down.

Channel and product-specific strategy for Bajaj Life?

Agency has got a fairly good mix now. They have got term in focus. ULIPs, which are profitable, help us with the very high net worth individuals and wealth customers. In agency channel, we are present in the mid-segment and Tier 2, Tier 3 cities a lot more than our peers, having 600 branches. Proprietary sales largely remain ULIP-heavy but a profitable ULIP-heavy now and selling a far higher premium paying term now. Overall, as a company, our enhanced risk cover, i.e., term and riders put together, contributes to between 44%-47% of our customer base depending on which month you look at. This used to be 19% the same time last year.

On Bajaj General - motor OD loss ratio is an industry-wide phenomenon? Is it a new normal? Is it primarily because of the pricing environment?

Due to GST change, IDV dropped. And motor OD is calculated as a percentage to IDV. Due to this drop, it eventually leads to lower premium collection for the same vehicle. Also, with inflation, the cost of repairs goes up. So, the only difference this year compared to previous year has been the drop in IDV because of the GST. As I mentioned earlier, the industry would look at correcting it as it progresses.

Pricing intensity on fire and other commercial lines of business going ahead?

India is a free market except for motor third-party price. Every other pricing is dependent on the company's underwriting understanding. On the Fire portfolio, the price has softened. This is because if you look at the results for the past few quarters, the commercial line of businesses had a better loss ratio. And if you look at this year, there has not been a major NATCAT event. When the loss ratio comes down, the prices come down. Right now, the loss ratios have been good for fire. So the price has come down.

Bajaj General Opex to NWP has materially cooled off vs peers. Are you going slow on new business? How do we see Opex trends alongside the claims ratio?

Most companies are not complying with the regulations in terms of the 30% cap. But Bajaj General has been complying with it very well. It has managed its cost. It has consistently been one of the low cost multi line insurer amongst companies in the private space for quite some time. Growth, business, and cost are the two, three levers that are there, and we have been managing that very well.

Have commissions gone up for us as well in line with peers?

The regulation says that we don't worry on commission. Our expenses put together; it should be below 30%. What should be seen is the total number, not standalone that as commission moved up or come down, expenses come down. This fungibility allows business models to be created. And globally, the expense number is around this 30%, expense and commission put together.

Now that AMC is at INR 30,000 crore AUM, are you focused on mutual fund space or looking at alternates like SIF and other asset classes?

In the last couple of years, we have been focused on building out the mutual fund product suite. And we still have a little bit more work to do over there. But there are also additional opportunities that have come up, particularly with regard to SIF, PMS, as well as GIFT City. So these are on our plan for this coming financial year. And you will see us active on these fronts as well.

Follow-up on AMC alternative strategies.

We have also now set up Bajaj Alts as a separate company. And that company now has been staffed. Subject to regulatory approvals, we will be looking to start off a set of one or two alternative funds and possibly a PMS operation targeting that segment of the market, where the minimum investment required for an AIF is INR 1 crore and above. This is currently on the plan. And we hope that it will commence by end of FY '27.