I now hand the conference over to MD and CEO, Ms. Vibha Padalkar. Thank you, and over to you, ma'am.
Session on our results for the nine months ended December 31, 2020. Our results, including the investor presentation, press release, and regulatory disclosures are already available on our website as well as that of the stock exchanges. I have with me Suresh Badami, who is our Executive Director, Niraj Shah, CFO, Srinivasan Parthasarathy, our Appointed Actuary, and Kunal Jain from Investor Relations. I will run through the key highlights of our nine months FY 2021 results and would be happy to take questions post that. Starting with an update on business performance. We are witnessing a lift in customer confidence, which is also reflected in the new business premium trends for both the individual as well as the group credit protect business.
We continue to see a pickup in savings business on a sequential basis on account of an increase in both the average ticket size as well as number of policies. We have recorded a growth of 8% in terms of individual WRP during nine months FY 2021. This is on a base of 31% growth last year. Our performance compares well against the private industry, which de-grew by 6% on the base of 16% growth in nine months last year. We sold about 6.8 lakh policies, registering a YoY growth of 6%. Our market share in terms of individual WRP has increased by 214 basis points from 14.3% in nine months FY 2020 to 16.4% in nine months FY 2021. Our market share for the group and overall new business segments amongst the private sector players is at 27.3% and 22.3%, respectively.
Our product mix remains balanced, with ULIPs at 23%, non-par savings at 30%, and par at 35%. Our individual and group annuity business saw strong growth in nine months FY 2021 of 42%, with annuities contributing over 5% of our individual APE. Our constant endeavor is to identify sources and means to grow our annuity business, including empaneling corporates and introducing new product variants while ensuring appropriate pricing and risk management. We see signs of demand for individual protection reverting to normal levels after the strong surge in quarter one on the back of the pandemic and expected price increase. We remain confident about the medium to long-term prospects of protection in the country on the back of under-penetration as well as increased awareness around the need for protection. We remain focused on maintaining pricing and underwriting discipline whilst addressing this opportunity.
Growth in protection business for nine months FY 2021 stands at 17%, with a share of protection at 7% for nine months FY 2021. Renewal growth continues to trend well at 22%, with 87% being done via digital modes. While we continue to monitor collections closely and remain watchful about emerging persistency trends, we are seeing good renewal traction on our new products that have now come up for their first renewal premium collection in the last few months. New business margins continue to show an improvement on sequential as well as YoY basis on the back of growth and a favorable product mix. The NBM for nine months FY 2021 stands at 25.6%, with the value of new business in the nine-month period at INR 1,408 crores, having surpassed nine months FY 2020 value of new business. Our operating return on embedded value stands at 18.3%.
We settled 1,271 individual and 542 group COVID-related claims as of December 2020. The frequency of claims intimation has been higher in quarter three. While our actual overall experience remains within our estimates, we continue to monitor the claim trends closely and will keep reevaluating the adequacy of the COVID-19 reserve through the course of the next quarter. Our profit after tax grew by 6% to INR 1,042 crore, and our solvency position remains healthy at 202%. Next, on channel performance. We continue to see strong growth in the bank insurance channel, which has grown at 20% during nine months FY 2021. Within bancassurance, growth at HDFC Bank continues to trend well with us retaining our market share. Agency channel continues to gain gradual traction in quarter three with a focus on a profitable product mix and maintaining quality of business.
We are actively collaborating with our new bank insurance partners, including Yes Bank and SBI Capital Markets, on systems integration and commencing new business. We remain focused on tapping a new generation of customers through our online channels while expanding our geographical presence across the country, especially in non-metro. Moving on to product performance. Our focus on driving a balanced product mix backed by our suite of innovative products is enabling us to effectively meet customer demand. I'm happy to share that we have launched our new term plan, HDFC Life Click 2 Protect Life, yesterday. This plan has innovative features such as auto-balancing life cover and critical illness cover, an option to get a fixed survival payout from the age of 60 years, amongst other features. There's been a concerted effort to smoothen customer journey, refine pricing appropriately while continuing to be stringent on underwriting.
We believe that these are some of the critical building initiatives taken to address the long-term protection opportunity. Our credit protect business for quarter three stood at 95% of previous year's volumes as compared to 64% for quarter two. This has resulted in CP premiums improving to 63% of previous year's volumes for nine months FY 2021. Our balanced product mix continues to provide a natural hedge across mortality and interest rate risks. We continue to closely match our asset liability cash flows for the guaranteed savings book. While sensitivity only tests small and linear movement in interest rates, it continues to be range bound. Our risk management approach has been stress tested and validated by an external reputable actuarial firm. Based on technology, we continue to invest in digital assets with a view of simplifying and buying and servicing experience for the customer.
These include LifeEasy, an end-to-end term plan buying platform, POSP, a simplified lean journey for sale of point-of-sale products. InstaSIP, a simplified buying journey akin to the SIP way. LifeNext, a comprehensive 360 degree platform for group business providing capabilities from issuance to claims. These assets also give us an edge in a competitive multi-tie environment by enabling us to integrate with partners quicker and issue policies and service faster. To conclude, given that the vaccination drive has been initiated and the economic momentum on the ground seems sustained, we will strive for continued new business growth and an upward trajectory on new business margins whilst adhering to a conservative risk management approach. Our focus remains on ensuring a balanced product mix, diversified distribution with innovation on both new product offerings as well as technology-led solutioning being core to what we do.
A detailed disclosure on our results is available in our investor presentation. In the end, I would like to thank all of you for your continued support of our company. We are happy to take questions now.
Thank you very much. We will now begin the question and answer session. Anyone who wishes to ask a question, press star and one on your telephone. If you wish to remove yourself from the question queue, you may press star and two. Participants are requested to use handsets while asking a question. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while the question queue assembles. The first question is from the line of Suresh Ganapathy from Macquarie. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Thanks. Hi, Vibha. Just two quick questions. One is on the new labor code, which of course seeks to increase the basic pay, right? I mean, in the sense that you are seeking to have 50% of your overall salary in basic pay and thereby increasing the overall 80C limit . Do you think this has the potential to actually increase the PF amount automatically, thereby clubbing the INR 1,50,000 and therefore reducing the limit available for insurance and therefore do you think that can have an impact on your business? Point number one. The second thing is with the non-par guarantee now that your book has crossed more than a year, would you be in a position to share what is the 13-month persistency ratio there with us?
Yeah. Hi, Suresh. Non-par guarantee, actually, we already have put out the details in our investor presentation. I'll tell you the slide in a minute. While we do that, it is slide 29. We have split up in terms of traditional. If you want a further breakup, we can maybe give that to you offline, but right now we have traditional unit link protection and then overall company, wherein it is 92, but it's comfortably above 90% ratio in terms of the 13-month persistency on non-par.
Okay.
Very low surrenders and anyway, as you know, we have stress tested it. Even if there were zero surrenders or lapses rather, even then there would be no stress on the guarantee that has been given. As we stand today, it is above 90%. On your point on tax, even there we have a slide actually in our investor presentation, wherein tax is now no longer becoming really a big reason for people to buy life insurance. It used to be as high as in quarter four, as much as 40%, distribution of quarter four towards buying insurance. Now it is like number seventh or eighth reason. This is on slide 27.
Even when there was an entire change in all the allowances, even at that time, our financial consultants were not up in arms to say that this is going to impact us a lot, and really there was no murmur at all. It might be amongst a certain customer base, but is not that relevant for us. Coming back to your question, any kind of labor law changes or PF changes, we don't really expect that to be a big driver.
Okay. Finally on your distribution, there have been some of your peers where obviously some of the partners who have taken a stance not to sell certain kind of products and stuff. This is not something which you are seeing across your distribution channel, right? I mean, every distribution partner that you add is quite open to selling the entire product suite which is there, right?
Oh, absolutely. This is on slide 15 of our presentation wherein we have broken down channel-wise, segment-wise cuts. There you would see that, yeah, it is pretty much balanced. If I were to pick bancassurance, it's like a third between unit-linked, par, non-par, and so on. Absolutely. That's where different products are suitable for different types of customers, rather than just taking a simplistic view that customers don't understand it. Today customers are getting reasonably nuanced, at least amongst mass affluent, salaried and non-salaried, so they do understand as to what they're buying. Yes, I'm happy to say that it's more driven by what the suitability rather than the distribution partner not wanting to sell it.
I can only add, sorry, Vibha, on this, that, Suresh, we do work very closely with all our partners to understand what is their strategy in terms of their customer segment, their customer profile, and their comfort of product. Like Vibha said, we look at it from a customer perspective, what is the suitable product, right mix, then we also look at what is the partner strategy in terms of what kind of products we look at. At BI we have the ability to work with partners who are, let's say, 80% traditional, 20% UL, and the other way around also where people are higher on UL. The idea is to sit and work this whole piece together until we get good quality business and the right customer.
We don't have any partner which is saying, "Look, we don't want to sell this," or this is not something there. We work together and work out. Overall, because of our diversified distribution base, we're able to manage the mix which reflects in our overall-
Sorry, one last quick question, I'll squeeze in. At the margin, we are hearing that some of the pent-up demand which is there for protection has been waning off in December or November. Have you seen something like that happening, Vibha, in your portfolio?
Yes. In terms of just Google searches, it went through a peak and then has tapered off. However, within whatever was happening in terms of Google searches, we have been right up there in terms of whatever people were searching, although overall it might have gone down. Now in December, we are again seeing an uptick. Frankly, Suresh, we like it when it is more sustainable than something that is just flavor of the season, because that's usually not sustainable. We like it when people realize that they need protection. Maybe there's a lag, but we are beginning to see that lag coming through now and upwards. Let's see whether that is sustained.
I would also like to believe that it does take time, and usually we have seen, even in some of the other pandemic, a six to nine-month lag between a pandemic and really people realizing the need for buying, especially term insurance.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Thank you. Next question is from the line of Shreya Shivani from CLSA. Please go ahead.
Yeah. T his is Adarsh. I was continuing.
Sir, we are sorry, but we are unable to hear you clearly, sir. Can you take the phone off mute, please?
Yeah. I hope this is better.
Yes.
My question was on continuation to the protection trend. Whatever we imply from IRDA numbers, even December, sum assured looked like a 20% kind of protection, and probably reflecting in our protection APE also. Now, what I find a little underwhelming, if I can use that word, is now even to nine months after the spike, we've had a 17% protection APE growth, and that obviously has some pricing impact as well. The sum assured growth is actually a little underwhelming in a pandemic year. The impact should have been larger. Just want to have your little more detailed view on how you see this.
Yeah. Adarsh, savings has come back quite meaningfully in quarter three, and that's why you see as a percentage sum assured, just given the savings does have a lower amount of sum assured, optically looking like it has tapered off. That's not the case, like I explained. Also, people have been used to, in India, getting protected through savings products. I don't think that is a wrong strategy necessarily. Today, the IRRs are as competitive as some of the other products that people can invest in. To some extent, that has gone back to savings. People are also post-pandemic, towards the end of the pandemic also allocating higher ticket sizes towards savings products. That is really what you're seeing. Now, within that, HDFC Life will tend to overall grow, well, you mentioned 17%. Our NOPs have grown as well as our ticket size.
All the indicators are in the right direction. It appears subdued due to this reason.
Basically, if you sell a large pension or a non-par pension product, the protection bundled with that itself is meaningful. That is why you are seeing protection being a little, the sum assured growth in protection being less. Is that what you are trying to?
They might have bought our customers might have bought a pure term also earlier. They are looking as a bundle product. There you will see typically a 10x cover versus, say, 100x cover or 40x cover. Versus, say, quarter one. Quarter one, our term grew by 50%. H1, it grew by 38%. Versus that, it looks subdued. I'm a believer that it's not only going to be a protection story like it is made. Protection will increase gradually, but it has to be done in a calibrated manner with underwriting in mind, at least for us.
It will be for the foreseeable future, both coexisting, and slowly it will be wherein younger people buy more of protection while people above 45, for example, will continue to buy savings-led protection.
Okay. Ma'am, second question related again to protection is, from a reinsurer side do you get the comfort that the reinsurers may not ask for another hike anytime soon? Are we there or that's still uncertain for next year?
I think that will remain uncertain into the foreseeable future. That's why if you overall look at our term growth, it has been somewhat muted because especially in this quarter, we want to partner with our reinsurers. We don't want to just throw caution to the winds and ride business and take on business, whatever's coming our way. In fact, I think people will want to buy protection, but that's not necessarily what fits into our risk appetite, and certainly not what fits into reinsurers' appetite. If companies continue to write a lot of term business, which they haven't done fairly robust underwriting, at some point in time, reinsurers are going to reprice. It really depends on the collective underwriting behavior of the industry more than any one insurer or the other.
The story is by no means over, and that's why it's important that as a sector, we treat the extension of reinsurer arrangements as if it's our own risk management part of our company, as against just passing on the risk to somebody else to hold that hot potato. All of that is part of the orderly growth of selling term in a young country.
Perfect. That's it from my side. I should have started off with congrats. Your additional business volumes have been surprisingly very strong. Congrats on that.
Thank you, Adarsh.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Sanketh Godha from Spark Capital. Please go ahead.
Thanks for the opportunity. I have basically three questions. First question is on unit persistency . You have looked at unit persistency , which you are disclosing the first time, has come up by 4% year on year, especially on persistency. I can see a similar trend in 2021 too. Still I see an operating variance number of INR 80 crore. Just wanted to understand if the efficiency is behaving negatively, how we are able to see the operating variance number, whether it's largely driven by the operating leverage or mortality experience. That's first question.
Second question is the new product which you have spoken about, whether this basic product will be classified as a saving or protection, and is it like a return of premium because it involves a need to be paid out as a lump sum or income payout, then can it be said that it is more similar to a return of premium product sold by the other companies and just wanted to understand the margin of that particular product compared to a pure protection plan. That's the second one. Third, finally, one is that if you look at the protection business, you largely answered it, but just wanted to see that protection business has declined 13% in the quarter and we broadly took a 10% kind of price hike and probably we sold little more LP compared to RP in GB.
The volume impact on the growth on protection business seems to be significantly higher than what is actually reflected in 13%. Just wanted to understand that protection demand is somewhere flattening for the sector or for our company in that sense.
Right. Hi, Sanketh. Three questions that you have. I'll answer the first one, and then second one, Srini can take on the new product and third one, Niraj Shah can answer. On unit-linked, yes, you're right that the persistency does show stress, and we have flagged this off even as far back as right at the start of this quarter towards the end of last year. That's when, if you recall, we had strengthened our persistency assumptions on unit-linked portfolio. I'm happy and relieved to say that there is nothing further that we need to do, and that strengthening has helped us stay within the revised assumptions of how unit-linked book persistency is going to pan out. I hope that answers your question.
More broadly speaking, just the construct of the product is going to be, especially at the 61st month, it is somewhat difficult to retain large block because there is some reference to some of the other geographies wherein maybe 61st month is much higher, without really barriers of exit it does become a challenge. There is, as you know, the discontinued policy fund guarantee. That's what I'm alluding to as the construct of the product. Nevertheless, within the current construct whatever we had done in terms of shoring up our assumptions, we have done that in March and that suffices. Right now we have a positive operating variance on persistency.
Oh, great.
Yeah. Srini, you want to take the second point on.
Sure. P roduct?
Yeah.
Sanketh, whether it's classified as a protection or a savings on the new term product we launched yesterday. If you look at the plain vanilla term product where there is no ROP at the end, see for, say, a profile with also sum assured without ROP, the premium will be INR 60,000. This is just an example to give one profile. If a person wants to take an ROP, the premium might be, say INR 30,000 or INR 35,000. If you divide the sum assured by the premium the person is paying, it's still about 250, 300 times the premium he's paying. In my view, of such a large sum assured related to the premium one pays, it should still be an integrated protection product. That is my view, and regulators also in their true, in-depth product said this whole product is integrated with protection product.
That's my view on term insurance protection.
Okay. Just on completing that question, is it the payout, either lump sum payout or payout? How different the margin of this product would be compared to the pure term life or what we traditionally write?
The margin, we don't give product level margins, but protection typically tends to have a higher margin than company average. That's what I can tell you on the product margin.
Okay. Great. The last one on the protection growth.
Sanketh, on protection growth, like we just mentioned in the opening comments as well, for us, honestly, nothing's changed from medium to long-term perspective. Of course, we are very watchful in terms of what's happening in the near term, closer to ground in terms of what's happening due to COVID-19. We've been tracking very closely in terms of what's happening with claims. Overall basis, we are still within our estimates. There's mortality, claims is also positive. We are seeing COVID claims increase, especially towards the end of quarter two and beginning of quarter three, we started seeing that. We saw a peak coming through sometime in October. Since then, November, December have been on a lower trajectory. This is something that we need to watch.
In this environment, do we want to completely go out there and put ourselves as well as the reinsurance capital at risk? We do not want to. We will be calibrated in the short term. Quarter four with the launch of this new product and the environment improving, we are absolutely looking forward to getting back to the growth there. This is also coinciding with some of the search trends that you would have seen. It absolutely peaked in the first quarter, given all this apprehension around the pandemic, people getting extremely uncomfortable with every travel going out. Every passing month, people are getting a little more, let's just say, more normalized in terms of the way they're thinking about it. They will, with a cool head, think about protection as they should, rather than as a knee-jerk reaction. The searches have also indicated that.
Again, since December and January, we started seeing an increase in searches. Within the searches, HDFC brand as a search, we've seen a fairly consistent top of mind recall there. That's something that we are very bullish about. In terms of demand coming back, it will take a lot of things coming together for that, and we are fairly confident that from a medium to long-term perspective, there is no issue that we see there. Yeah, in the short term, we will be calibrated in our approach.
Okay, great. That's it from my bit. Yeah.
Thank you. A reminder to participants, please limit questions to two per participant. If you have any follow-ups, we request you to rejoin the queue, please. Next question from the line of Harshil Kaviwal from Frame Street Invest. Please go ahead.
Hi. Thanks for the opportunity. Two questions, I think. The first one is on the protection piece. On that, I think the reduction which we're seeing volumes, I guess that given your current reach looks like more a conscious shift to not be very aggressive in that segment in the last two-three months. Can you throw some color on what is happening on the distribution piece for us? Is this something that we want to be more selective when it comes to this channel for this segment, given the risks vary across different segments? Some broad color whether online is better than offline or a bank channel like HDFC is better than any of the other partners. Secondly, ma'am, when we look at the overall growth, bancassurance in 3Q has been an excellent growth driver, growth of 40% YoY.
When we look at the agency channel, that has been flattening out. Is it that the past Sanchay non-par did a great job with the agency channel? You think that there could be more products or differentiated combination products or something that can be done to bulk up the sales of the agency, please?
Yeah. Harshil, very good questions. I'll take the second one first on bancassurance agency. You're right that bancassurance has in the first nine months grown pretty well. The agency has been to some extent muted, but I'll give you on agency why I'm not worried at all. A couple of data points. Our quarter one de-growth was 39%, quarter two was 6%, and quarter three was almost flat. A breakeven has happened, and I have no doubt in my mind that we'll end the year with growth. Second point is that last year, agency grew over 60%, and on a nine months basis, about 32%. There is a very significant base effect as well.
Online, for example, grew about 56%, while Banca last year grew only 6%. The base effect for the different channels is very different. Optically it looks like Banca has grown disproportionately. With agency channel, another aspect is that quarter one was a bit of a struggle because just adopting digital and also accepting that COVID is here to stay for a pretty long time as against it being a one quarter problem. When that started becoming evident around June, I think that's when a lot of credit to our financial consultants and our frontline people in agency channel to embrace. I won't talk about it again because I've been mentioning these last couple of quarters are platform wise and also other modes of selling digital. That's why you see the quarter-on-quarter very significant improvement. Quality of business also has been retained.
Again, there could have been either dilution in terms of selling a lot of unit-linked or somewhat not as desirable quality of business that the channel hasn't slipped on either of that. Very much adhered to the product mix that is optimal for agency channel continuing to be a very profitable channel in terms of NBM. Very much right in terms of building blocks. Also, we are right up there with a second company in terms of ranking to add, I think, if I remember, about 18,500 agents in nine months. Again, all of that is important in terms of building block for the future, so for the rest of the year. That's really the backdrop of my fair amount of confidence that this will start evening out, and this is more a COVID-19 related aberration than anything else.
Quite frankly, even with bank insurance, given all what they were going through in core banking in the first quarter, there was a fair amount of focus on many other things, and insurance was also one of them. It is a combination of factors. On your first point about protection and how distribution. Sorry, Harshil, what were you?
On the agency part, how has the Sanchay Par been working? You think that product specifically has clicked more at the bank channel than agency channel because for us now, maintaining that balance mix requires that for both bank and agency that can be maintained.
Yeah. If you look at slide 15, Sanchay Par is 36% in the first nine months, slightly higher than bancassurance channel or really higher than other channels.
Okay. Yeah, got it.
Pretty balanced in terms of non-par savings is 36%, which is largely plus. Par is 38%, which is Sanchay Par Advantage. Term is very noticeable what Suresh is mentioning, 13% term. Actually better than where we ended last year. This is reasonably creditable because if you look at some of our peer groups, you will not find agency channel having this high level of term. It's somewhat easier in a bancassurance channel, especially if one is able to align with your distributor that you have to sell protection. Agency is a lot more dispersed, and engagement is with, in our case, over one lakh agents and counting. Really moving the needle on this one is quite creditable. That is something that we haven't diluted upon. Growth will come back. Suresh, you want to add anything?
I think broadly, Vibha, you covered it. I think, look, we are monitoring each of the channels based on right from the claims experience to the quality of business and persistency as well as growth in top line. We do kind of balance the product mix that we are looking at each of these. In agency, like Vibha mentioned, look, there is a certain retail equation which works. As the new agent addition as well as the productivity builds up post-COVID, we will see the growth coming back. Protection also we are fairly calibrated in terms of which channel will contribute to how much. Broadly, Banca, agency, and online have contributed significantly to our, and direct have contributed significantly to the protection business. I think that will continue as long as we ensure that we maintain all three aspects of the business.
Sure. Got it. Thank you.
Thank you. The next question is from Deepika Mundra from JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Hi, Vibha. Thanks for the opportunity and many congrats on a great set of numbers. My first question is if rates were to hypothetically harden from here, like you have done in the reducing rate cycle, how would you alter your product mix in that environment?
You're referring to a non-par product, presumably?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah. If you see the sensitivity, I mean, right now with hardening of interest shows negative sensitivity with me, I'm sure that's probably because of all the hedging that you put in place. Generally, how would you think about product mix in a hardening rate cycle?
The way we look at this, Deepika, is that it is all relative to what else is available in the market. We will reprice. We have a dynamic repricing governance, and in line with what is the prevailing rates that are available on, so this is for new business which you're referring to. That happens. That is number 1. Second is we will peg it to what else in terms of financial products that are available. As long as we are competitive. There is a place under the sun for products like this. Also, what is the outlook? Is this a temporary fall? Is it a more permanent or into the foreseeable future? If it's into the foreseeable future and we reduce rates, for example, usually the customer is also having a similar outlook and thinks that it could drop further, so even at a reduced rate.
For example, from the high of 6%, today we are closer to 5%, even then it is an attractive product to lock in some of your savings. I think customers are beginning to realize that it's not all equity versus debt versus ULIP. They realize that some portion they want it to completely eliminate risk in post-retirement or when they're older. That's where this product comes in as an attractive product, regardless of what it might have been a year ago or one and a half years ago. Rear view looking, I think happens lesser. We rarely encounter that with customers. It's usually forward-looking as to what is the outlook.
Just to add to that, Deepika, in terms of the hardening of interest rates, basically the sensitivity you're referring to. I mean, interest rates go up obviously from a product perspective, it becomes more attractive both for us to price as well as from a customer to buy. The implication in terms of sensitivity is really more in terms of the implication of the cash flow hedging that we have, which is excess assets which come through, which do not have a corresponding liability. This is what is causing the interest rate sensitivity that you are seeing. That is something that we are comfortable with, given that we always have the option to hold that in cash. The problem with that is that you end up losing a lot of yield necessarily.
For us, the key is that assets are matched very well with liabilities, as long as that's done to long term and the tail risk is protected. Any sensitivity that is happening on the shorter end is more a trade-off between yield and holding the assets in cash. That is a trade-off which is something that we continue to monitor, and the sensitivities as you see across periods has been fairly reasonable.
Thank you both. That's really clear. Just one follow-up from my side. Vibha you mentioned earlier that the industry should be slightly more disciplined on the mortality risk as a pool, which would potentially protect from further reinsurance rate hardening. In the current context, we've seen some competitive activity in the past year. This year, how would you think you are positioned in terms of term pricing amongst your peers, and do you see overall term pricing hardening further?
Srini, you want to take that?
Yeah, sure. Deepika, the underwriting practices have actually largely strengthened across the industry, thanks to the intervention from the reinsurance fraternity over the last eight, nine months. I would expect the quality to keep going forward as a result of all these stringent practices now being adopted should actually help build a stronger protection book going forward. As far as price hardening is concerned, already certain companies are awaiting approvals from IRDAI on increasing the prices. IRDAI approved a few products in the industry already, one of our products got approved and was launched yesterday. This is like any other product. There will be experiences that will emerge from the book that has already been written. Based on the experience, reinsurers will keep revising the prices.
If the experience are adverse, they will jack up the prices, and if the experience is favorable, they will reduce the prices. This is a continuous process. What we are now probably seeing is it's a little bit on the experiencing of the reinsurers are hardening the prices now. If they harden the prices, the companies like us also need to keep pace with them and increase the prices. So far, whatever has happened thus far is only one rate increase that has happened, but there is also, I think you alluded to this, there could be a further increase also along the line. We just need to wait and watch as to what happens. As of now, there are a number of companies which have already increased the prices over the last few months.
Okay. Thank you so much.
Thanks, Deepika.
Thank you. Next question is from the line of Prayesh Jain , IIFL Securities . Please go ahead.
Yeah. Congratulations on a good set of numbers. Firstly, on the term insurance, now continuing on that point, is there underwriting tightening that has gone on and the rejection to application ratio has gone up? Is there some kind of trend that's emerging there? Because what we are hearing is that the reinsurers are-
I can't hear you very well, sorry.
Okay, that's fine.
Yeah.
Is this better?
Yeah, it's better.
Yeah. I'm asking on the term insurance space, whether the underwriting tightening has happened, and that has caused the rejection to application ratio move higher. What we are hearing is that the reinsurers are asking for a much higher number of medical checkups, and the customer's willingness to go through medical tests is still very low. That has possibly one of the reasons why the rejection slowdown has happened. Could this be just one of the reasons? The other part of the question, the other question was on the non-life side. We heard that on the ground the demand is pretty strong. Is there a conscious effort there or a slowdown, and what is your outlook doing right for the non-life side of the business?
On the first part, I think it is inevitable when you are in the business of writing insurance, we have to evaluate risks that we take on for our balance sheet as well as the reinsurer's balance sheet in order for it to be a long-term sustainable value proposition. That's where I think one can write short-term business if one has been used to being somewhat aggressive on underwriting practices, and there is an entire spectrum. What I can say about our practices is that it is what we've been following at least for the last five, six years when we've been very active in this space before protection really became very topical. We continue to see emerging risks.
There is a fair bit of analytics that we look at every second day really to see what is emerging and what is the dynamic underwriting that we need to do without it being a one-size-fits-all, that if it's X salaried individual of this age. That's a very simplistic way of underwriting. We've long moved away from that kind of underwriting. That might form an input, but it doesn't stop with that. Yes, it is inevitable that whether we reject, whether we rate up, and various such combinations, or whether we go back with a proposal of a lower sum assured, that has to be because short-term buildup of protection number isn't that difficult to show. Really over a period of time, and you're talking over the next five, 10 years, what is the variance on mortality experience versus assumption, that's the only moment of truth.
That's what we don't want to leave a legacy to another team at HDFC Life down the line who has to be saddled with this. So we are cautious. Whether that results in higher rejection ratio or higher checks, yes, it will. More than higher, I think different checks, and those checks keep evolving and changing, so that even distribution and channels don't often know what is going to be asked because of the dynamic nature. Also to have an open book with the reinsurer to say, "Come and see whatever you want to see because we are aligned with the risks that you're seeing. Otherwise, we will push it back with you conceptually. Once we agree, then we will follow whatever it is that you're saying." There are different market practices of perhaps simple things like not asking for COVID questionnaires.
Lot of pushback with our sales teams also because market practice was not to ask for that. I think in a pandemic, how does one price against a pandemic? It is virtually impossible. We are in the law of probability. There is a reason why we have to ask, because if you don't ask, you can't reject if, for example, he or she was COVID positive at the time of taking a policy. Here we would counsel the individual to wait, and so on. These are just simple examples, but that's why my earlier point is this is nascent. If all of us just start chest thumping on one number, which is my protection percentage is X, that's not that difficult in the sense that some of these nuances we could start unraveling down.
At least we operate in the zone that we understand, risks that we reasonably have a sense as to what are we underwriting, and build this business brick by brick. On your second point on non-par, not at all about diminishing demand. It's really we believe in the balanced product mix. While we are fully hedged and we are both cash flow and duration matched, and we have been engaging with all of you on the modes of how we have done it. Nevertheless, just in the underlying philosophy that we don't want all our eggs in one basket, any basket, that's why we have brought it down very meaningfully. Nine months you saw non-par savings at 30%. In the first quarter of last year, for example, it had gone upwards of 60%.
Our ability to really steer the vehicle in a particular direction that we want to get to is something that we have demonstrated time and again, and that's where you'll see almost a third give or take in terms of exposure to any segment. That is what really has enabled us to withstand and survive a lot of volatility that we see impacting our sector time and again.
Last year there were some products. These products are about to be launched anytime now. Only one or two players have launched that product. Most of them would be launching them in the near term. Any thoughts or anything you can share?
Srini, you want to take?
Yeah. I think we should launch the products fairly soon. My hope is that from, say, first of February or so, we should have the product on our shelves.
My question was more on how do you see the product planning now in the sense that it's more of a segment where you will be writing more riskier cohorts in a smaller ticket and lower income category segment. How do you see whether you would be able to maintain the profitability as per what you're earning on the short-term plans that you're selling right now vis-à-vis switching on that front as well?
Yeah, it's certainly a new segment for us since actually as an industry we never really sold individual terms or long-term protection products for that kind of a segment, so it'll be a new experience for the entire industry. We will do underwriting, so you can always base on different parameters which one would have from the past experience and also with the reinsurer support. We will learn collectively as an industry to assess the risks that we take on board. I would expect the underwriting to get a little bit more stringent since I think the price at which the product will be launched in the industry may be slightly lower since the product is going to get to a lower middle-class segments.
I think that the way to ensure that it is financially viable is through stringent underwriting norms. I think people will adopt different underwriting styles, which should evolve over a period of time. With that, I think there will be a learning phase of X years also. Post that, some people in the realm will settle down when underwriting for certain risk segments.
All right, thank you so much.
Thank you. A reminder to participants, please limit your questions to one per participant. Should you have any follow-ups, press two to rejoin the queue, please. The next question is from the line of Hitesh Shah from Kotak Securities. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Thank you for taking my question. Ma'am, my question is on the Audit Committee report on indemnity sale by life insurance companies that came in November. From what I understand, the committee did not allow life insurers to sell indemnity independently, but they said that you could sell products of non-life insurers. Is that understanding correct and is this practically doable?
Hitesh, it is certainly doable. Frankly, when you look at if there's a single regulator, those products are approved by the same regulator. If a bank can sell insurance products, perhaps a life insurer can be a distributor to sell health indemnity and even maybe vice versa. Why not sweat our distribution channels that we have built painstakingly over the last two decades to really maximize? Also, if we were to look at keeping the customer in the center, the reason is how do you get to the customer? Today, if a customer wants to buy health insurance, does he really know who to go to for health? There's general, there is SAHI, there is fixed benefit that life insurers like us sell, and so on. We ourselves used to sell health indemnity in the past. It is quite confusing.
For overseas medical, he goes to a general insurer, and so on. If, for example, hypothetically, if a life insurer is allowed to sell indemnity, then in one conversation, you are taking the product to the customer rather than making the customer run around to various insurance company and do homework for the nth time. That is the reason behind this logic, but we are yet to hear back from the regulator.
If my understanding is correct, this will be like a commission-free income product for you and you will not be a product manufacturer. Is that understanding right?
We would like to be a product manufacturer, but it looks unlikely just given the current construct between the way there are three arms of insurers in India. In that construct, in our view, it makes a lot of sense because health penetration is woefully inadequate and life insurers, A, have done it before, and we have the distribution muscle power. It looks somewhat doubtful for that happening. We are saying that as a second-best option, and the intention is to keep customer in the center, why not allow us to also distribute like we are allowing other financial institutions to distribute?
Thank you. That's it from my side.
Thank you, Hitesh.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Rishi Jhunjhunwala from IIFL Securities. Please go ahead.
Yeah, thanks for the opportunity. Couple of questions from my side. One is just on a balance between par and non-par. Over the last 12 months or so, par, which used to be almost half of non-par in terms of size, has actually now crossing it. Just wanted to understand how are we deciding to maintain that balance between par and non-par, given that it could be customer's requirement versus our push strategy to the customer, especially when we really look at the difference between the two. For, I'm assuming 90% of the people, it is more about what we are pushing to them rather than what they exactly know what they require. Any reason why par would actually grow faster for the past nine months versus non-par, or going forward, how it can potentially pan out?
Suresh, you want to take this?
Frankly, the customers out there, we believe there's a large opportunity, whether we were to look at UL, non-par, par, pure term. Our strategy has actually been to drive a balanced product mix based on channel-level profitability and channel-level capability. The way we look at it is it's not that we are trying to pitch a par product to somebody who's got a non-par requirement. Yes, there are product value propositions which are there. A par product has a certain value proposition, and non-par has a certain value proposition. There are customers who we want to make sure are right fit for whichever product we are selling. There's a lot of effort that we do in terms of balancing the product mix through each channel. One, by building capability. Two, by ensuring that our people are trained, the reach out happens.
We do believe that over a period of time, the market is large enough for us to be able to drive a certain product mix. Right. Internally also, we keep looking at what does the par product proposition compare as compared to what is available in the rest of the industry, and as well as how does it compare to the non-par proposition internally as compared to the rest of the industry. Frankly, the product has to be good enough for us to be able to sell it to the customer, and ideally, a lot of us should be buying it ourselves. Some of us may want a non-par, some of us may want a par where there is probably a higher bonus which comes in and you find a return reasonable. We do benchmark it. I do think that, look, there is space for both.
Given that as a strategy, we want to have a balanced product mix, we do definitely make sure that the channel strategy, the drive, the capability building is all aligned to make sure that at the end of every quarter, we kind of remain within certain boundaries.
Just to add, Suresh, to that what Suresh has mentioned is that, ultimately, whatever product is sold and bought by the customer, as long as the persistency is good, it is a proof of the fact that the customer, one, has understood, and second, needs the product and is going to benefit from it over the long term. That we track very closely across these three categories.
Rishi, just to add, we launched a product called the Sanchay Maximiser. It's actually a combo of both the par and the non-par. It's a great value proposition because, from the end solution point of view, the customer can see a huge value in terms of how the product features of both actually combine. He gets a certain guaranteed component, and he gets a certain par upside. We have looked at how do we take it across to people who are looking only at par, who are looking at non-par, who may probably want a combination of both.
Understood. Just on ULIPs, right? If I really look at your ULIP, Click 2 Wealth product which is available online, seems to be the most efficient product on the street when it comes to the consumers in terms of pretty much zero charges except FMC and a little bit of mortality. Just wanted to understand our strategy around it. Are we not pushing it enough because of the low profitability? Otherwise I don't see a reason why that product should not be a super hit.
Thank you, Rishi, for that because that is something that we've been trying to also evangelize. It is exactly that. It is a very simply priced product. We haven't really gone to town in terms of allocating an ad budget for that. Yes, through word of mouth, the fact that that product is so simply priced, it is very accessible to the policyholder, and over a five-year term is definitely better than, say, an equity mutual fund. Exactly like you said, with a gap of 1.35% versus 3%-4% and fund switches that are not taxable, and I'm not even mentioning life cover that is over and above the IRR that I'm talking about, means that it's a very good wealth accumulation and especially if you take it on the life of a relatively young person.
Even more so as the mortality charges are very minimal. Yes, I think it is just that it is like I just explained. We are hoping that over a period of time, people come searching for products like this because they're used to buying digital products from HDFC Life, and they will start having this following in terms of exactly like the evolution that we saw that happened in the asset management sector. We expect that to continue to happen. Even our Click 2 Protect series, you mentioned Click 2 Invest, even other Click 2 Pension or Click 2 Retire rather, and Click 2 Protect, of course, all of that is now gathering a brand unto itself. We'll see. It will be steady growth. It's not going to be phenomenal, at least in some of these products with low visibility.
Yes, they are very good products.
Actually, Vibha, just to add, look, some of these products are meant to look at a segment which is new to us. In some sense, it is targeting the mutual fund market because these are equally comparable in terms of returns or better over a long period of time. We do believe that, look, like there is a protection space, there is an annuity space, there is clearly an online unit link space like products like Click 2 Wealth and Click 2 Invest, which by itself evolved customer will be able to come and take digitally.
Frankly, the very reason we solved for this product was that we just wanted to put to rest the time and again repeated line that one should unbundle and buy protection separately and equity investment separately. We demonstrated that this product in the current avatar of a unit-linked product can deliver superior returns while giving protection.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. The next question is from the line of Vivek Chachra from Bloomberg Securities. Please go ahead.
Thanks for the opportunity. My question is with respect to ROP return of premium versus pure term. From your perspective, how do you see that panning out going forward for industry from where we are for a country like India? Which of those products do you think will be growing at?
Srini, you want to take this?
Yeah. I think from a customer perspective, I think I just gave this example a while ago on the call. For a 1 crore sum assured, the non-ROP version will be, say, for a given profile might be at INR 3,000. Whereas the ROP version will be INR 35,000-40,000, right? If someone wants to get the money back at the end of the term, and I think the Indian psyche generally prefers the return of this premium. I think for our markets, people would prefer the premium to come back because the premium option, if you survive the term, there's nothing to be paid. I think it's a good value position.
It also in some market acts as a place of a legacy planning tool, especially if you sort of stretch the term, let's say, 80 or 90 years old, you can actually make it as a legacy planning tool as well. With that, both aspects in mind, where Indian psyche prefers the difference premium at the end of the term, and also it serves as a legacy planning tool. I think the market would probably more tend towards an ROP than a non-ROP, is my view.
Okay, great. Just a few questions. Last time, I think we discussed about protection share from HDFC Bank. How has that moved given that now the price of insurance is almost shrunk and our prices are almost comparable to what the competitors are sharing through HDFC Bank? How has that, our share of business, particularly protection share of business with HDFC Bank moved?
Suresh, go ahead.
Yeah. Look, we have always been pricing our product competitively, and we do understand that there are two other players who will offer their product at a certain price. I think it is not just the price, it is also a question of the brand, the service levels, the claim settlement ratios. We have been constantly benchmarking our overall market share as well as our term market share at the bank. I think the idea is to stay comfortable in a certain segment based on the pricing as well as on the margins, as well as on the overall claims it is supposed to come in. We have actually gained.
We had kind of recalibrated our pricing somewhere at the beginning of the year, and we did a few tweaks to our overall proposition, and we found that our market share at HDFC Bank in protection has actually gone up as what we were last year. With the launch of a new product, which is the Click 2 Protect Life, we have again re-looked at the features. It's a fantastic product if you were to go back and have a look at it, especially given the current context in terms of being able to balance between your protection as well as your critical illness health requirements. We do believe we have a winner. The pricing has been also again looked at. Like I said, the pricing has to make sure of multiple aspects. It has to make sure that the customer pricing is right.
It has to make sure that the overall margins are right and second, in today's context, the insurer is also looking at it favorably. I think our product team has done a good job of balancing all three along with the features. Yes, firstly, the overall protection in HDFC Bank has been going up. They have done a very good job in terms of focusing on the standalone term. Within that, our share is going up, and we do believe with the kind of products that we are looking at and the way we want to position ourselves, we will probably achieve better in the future.
Got it. That was the question. Thank you.
Thank you. Just as a reminder to the participants, please limit your questions to one per participant. Should you have any follow-up, request to return the queue, please. The next question is from the line of Manish Shukla from Citigroup. Please go ahead.
Good evening, and thank you for the opportunity. Vibha Padalkar the point that you mentioned earlier about propensity of Indians to look at insurance more as savings rather than protection and also the ticket size differential. Is it realistic to expect in terms of mix more than a one percentage point kind of increase per year on individual protection on an ongoing basis?
There are two aspects to this, Manish. One is that if one is not as tight on underwriting, firstly, and these are the comments I made earlier overall on our protection can grow in the short term versus medium term. Yes, one can make a sprint, and because all of you are tracking this number, and I think 50% of the call today has been towards the protection. It is not that difficult to show each year increasing by 300, 400 basis points. That is one. Second, it is also easier if sky is not the case, and you have one distributor with whom there's alignment, even if the pricing is significantly higher or reasonably higher than what could be out there.
There is perhaps not equal amounts of information or just a way of selling is that the customer does not want to compare, put it that way. One can drive protection through that. In the medium term and longer term, in a completely open architecture and open market, and decisions that are made, informed decisions that are made, I think that growing 100, 200 basis points will be more sustainable than growing 500, 600 basis points annually. It's also a graph between growth and risk appetite, and what it does to operating variance on embedded value. Most companies don't disclose what their operating variances are. They don't even disclose embedded value. On one side, we are so nascent as a sector.
On the other side, we are talking about developing on protection, and that's where I would just want to balance it out. I think what reinsurers are doing are just an early warning indicator of that. It needs to be tempered, growth as well as risk. There's a tempering, toggling between the two. From HDFC Life's point of view, it will be a big growth in protection, and savings will continue to also grow and be an important aspect of even coverage, even in terms of sum assured for us in the near term.
Specifically for you, the way annuity and individual protection businesses are growing, is it fair to assume that two to three years out, annuity might be a bigger piece than individual protection?
Undoubtedly. That's something I've always said. I think that retirement is an even bigger opportunity than protection, and the sheer numbers just show, and also a whole host of demographics of people living longer and so on, and inflation where it is. If you look at slide 14, we are very aspirational of growing our retirement corpus 3X by the time we reach 2025. That really, we put out a number in terms of our aspirations, and there is a lot of interconnectedness between various aspects of retirement, whether it's superannuation and whether it is NPS, whether it is our own pension policies and so on. It is also secure business. It also takes a little bit longer to engage, especially on government business. That's something that enthuses us. We are equally enthused by both. Protection is seeing a different here and now play.
Retirement is a slightly longer play.
Understood. Thank you. Those were all my questions.
Sure.
Thank you. The next question is from Nayan Pratik from Econom India. Please go ahead.
Yeah. Hi, ma'am. Ma'am, I just wanted to check, you talked about in savings where there is a balanced product mix and in protection there are some headwinds, which are basically that you're being cautious about that segment. In terms of VNB margins, how should I think about levers going ahead now?
We've always had several levers for us to work on our VNB margins, and that's where I think the balanced product mix comes in very handy. It's not just all eggs in the protection basket, but really it's a nuanced approach of which, what is the cost of acquisition of a channel, what does the customer want, as well as what is the underlying product construct. It has to be a three-way win-win value proposition, and calibrating that on a daily basis. We track our product mix at a sub-channel level on a daily basis. That it's really the devil is in details. Even with the Sanchay Par Advantage, which is our participating product, they're substituting if the customer is not really looking for a market-linked product, substituting it with the Sanchay Par Advantage, we'll see an uplift in terms of margins.
Likewise, some of the other product features on term could see an uplift, and so on. The product mix and the nuances on product mix is one. Costs are another feature. Persistency plays a very important aspect on margins and paying attention to persistency and either saying no to business that you think is not going to be persistent or is going to be fraudulent, as well as doing dynamic underwriting that I talked about earlier, which is risk-based underwriting than one-size-fits-all. All of that adds different pieces to margin. It's not just one lever of protection that goes into that. If protection goes down, margins go down. You won't see that one-on-one equation because of this multi-pronged approach to profitability.
Got it. Ma'am, lastly, just wanted to check, what should we look for so as to get some comfort that what are you looking for from the end markets to go aggressive on the protection side or to ramp up growth again? What changed really, ma'am, in the last two months or three months, which made you cautious? I'm just trying to look at both of these things.
Well, Pratik, we are in the midst of a pandemic. We really can't get adequately cautious. In some of the geographies, especially in the Western world, we're just not able to sell term because how does one price against a pandemic? Also with a gestation period easily of two weeks, even if the individual doesn't know that. There is no waiting period. Of course, there'll be a waiting period once we have the new term products, but right now there is no waiting period and so on. That's why the cautiousness. Also when we juxtapose that with a trend in COVID claims, it was no rocket science for us to go slow.
To your question as to what would we like, I think if, for example, there was a way wherein we could access hospital records or people could voluntarily say that, "Okay, I will share my hospital records and my single number." For example, either it's a Aadhaar number or something, but it's a unique number. Similar to, say, the U.K., you can't get availment in an NHS hospital unless you give your Social Security number. It's mandated. There is one record of each individual of all health-related treatment that has been done. Now, me as an individual, I might be able to share a score with a life insurer.
That kind of a nuanced approach is really what we're looking for, wherein we can help connect the dots rather than really be reasonably blind in terms of not having adequate information to be able to price risk.
Ma'am, wouldn't medical inspections help you in this space? I remember speaking to one of your colleagues and you said, "We have kept a lot of policies on hold because customers are really worried to go to diagnostic centers to get their medical reports." Can't that be done or that could be one of the ways to get over this, right? Where you get to know the customer profiles. I mean, the customer's medical history basis which you can sell protection, right?
In terms of having telemedicals.
No, I'm saying he can go to a diagnostic center.
In a sense, he's not going to be happy going to a diagnostic center. He was not even happy until quarter two for a home visit from one of our empanelled medical professionals. That's the challenge that we face against the pandemic. People were not even okay to come downstairs into a common area below the building to get something done. Telemedicals was the only thing that was maybe that we could make some connect with the customer. That telemedical in terms of headroom is not endless either. These are the challenges wherein, do we just go ahead and sign up somebody because he's a salaried customer, he's mass affluent. Really it makes no sense because just because with that profile, that doesn't tell us a lot about his medical profile. Sorry, Suresh, you were-
Just to add, look, frankly, it is always good to recalibrate. We have looked at the little bit of reinsurance feedback that I think the COVID-19 claims or whatever, but we do believe in the long-term protection is a large opportunity, and the idea is to build up some ecosystem from what we are seeing. There's a fair amount of analytics going in. We have a lot of learning in terms of which geography, which profile. We do understand what kind of products and pricing, what distribution. You are right in the sense that we need to look at how pre-medicals are taken care of, whether it should be pre-approved, whether it should be non-medical, whether it should be tele-underwriting. Over a period of time, how it'll all evolve is to build up further. Till some time, getting the customer on board, we are a little careful.
Over a period of time, what we will see is once the customer is on board, if we are able to drive health-related, if we are able to drive other ecosystems where we are able to work with the customer to lead a healthy life, the protection opportunity will increase all over again. Even the new product that we have launched right now, the product Life, is very well targeted to make sure to say that, "Look, you need to come and protect yourself, but as you grow older and you have more health-related concerns, you can actually shift and the product automatically shifts from.
Critical illness.
Critical illness. These are the kind of innovations which we have constantly been bringing across, and I do believe that the protection opportunity will grow. We need to be right in terms of what we as CLSA want to do at this period.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, in the interest of time, we take the last question from the line of Vinod Rajasekhar from HSBC. Please go ahead.
Yeah, thank you. Thank you for taking my question. I just wanted to know this IRDAI move towards standardization of products, so on this things like Saral Bima and so on. I'm sure it'll definitely help in terms of volumes, is there a risk of some bit of standardization of your existing product portfolio? Also, the sum assured is going to be lower than the products you currently sell, but is there a risk there and do you think it's a bit of some overreach from the regulators? How are you currently viewing this standardization move by IRDAI, and could we have a standard term policy, standard non-par product, and so on going forward?
Srini, you want to take this?
Yeah, it's a good initiative in my view, the regulator to come up with these standard-based products because it'll help customers understand what they're buying. Some standard products will also get eyeballs on this actually beneficial to the industry, I believe. Largely, I think it's a step in the right direction. Specifically on this standard term product, whether it's going to cannibalize our product, I doubt. Since you rightly mentioned the sum assured that the industry currently caters to, average sum assured is roughly around INR 70 lakhs to INR 80 lakhs for the industry. Whereas this one is kind of, it's not a price capped, but it is currently less than INR 25 lakhs given. It's not going to really cannibalize, I don't think. In terms of whether the market is going to be different, yes, it's definitely a different target market.
Yes, the price is going to compensate with the risk only time will tell. There the important aspect there that in my view is the underwriting norms that any business company follows. I think it's very important that industry doesn't get very aggressive in that section, especially in this standardized term product. Since it's an unknown market, it's better to tread with caution, at least in the initial days. Once there is some experience developed, say in next one or two years, then based on the experience, then we can probably go a little bit more aggressive. My preferred kind of strategy would be to tread with caution, do stringent underwriting in the initial days. Once the experience is developed, then we can see based on the experience, we can see how to take that forward.
Whether there will be non-par savings standard products in the future. There is a talk about annuity standards as well. I think annuity is already fairly standardized in my view, so it may not be very different from the current annuity products that companies have. Let's see how the new standard annuity products proposed are, and I think based on the success of these initial standard products, I think IRDA might come up with more such standard products is what I think.
Thanks for that.
Thank you. I'd now like to hand the conference over to Ms. Vibha Padalkar for closing comments.
Thank you, everyone, for being there on today's call. The detailed disclosure on our results is available in our investor presentation. I would like to thank all of you. Stay safe and take care.
Thank you.