Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Storebrand Analyst Conference Call. My name is Anna, and I will be your coordinator for this meeting. For the duration of the call, you will be on listening only. However, at the end of the presentation, you will have opportunity to ask questions. If any time you need assistance, please press star zero on your telephone keypad, and you will be connected to an operator. I will now hand you over to your host, Kjetil Krøkje, to begin today's conference. Thank you.
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to Storebrand's third, Q4 2015 conference call. My name is Kjetil Ramberg Krøkje, and I'm Head of Investor Relations at Storebrand. Together with me, I have Group CEO Odd Arild Grefstad, CFO Lars Aa. Løddesøl, Finance Director Sigbjørn Birkeland, and Head of Economic Capital Ulf-Inge Eriksen. In the presentation today, Odd Arild will give an overall view of the development in the quarter and 2015, and Lars will give some more detail on some elements in the results. The slides will be similar to the analyst presentation released this morning and are available on our webpage. After the presentation, the operator will open up for questions. To be able to ask questions, you'll need to dial into the conference call.
I'll now lead the word to Storebrand's CEO, Odd Arild Grefstad, who will start the presentation on slide number two.
Thank you, Kjetil. Storebrand delivers a group result before amortization and longevity reserve strengthening of NOK 275 million for the Q4, and NOK 1.762 billion for the full year. The result is affected by significant special items during the quarter, as we announced in a press release on January 28, and Lars will come back on this in more detail later. The operation of Storebrand is showing strong underlying growth in fee and administration income, which grew by 8.2 percentage points, adjusted for currency effects and discontinued business. On the right-hand side, you see some key figures from 2015. We are experiencing strong customer and premium growth in the insurance segment. Premium grew by 17%, with strong sales of individual P&C.
We are also experiencing strong growth in non-guaranteed pension, and premium growth in 2015 was 25%. In the Q4, we decided to charge the result with the expected amount of the remaining reserve strengthening for longevity. In total, we have reserved almost NOK 1.8 billion in 2015. In two years, two years have now passed since we entered into the reserve strengthening scheme with a need of NOK 12.4 billion, of which now 83% is completed. The estimated Solvency II margin for the Q4 is 168%, with transitional rules, which is an increase from the 146% in the Q3. The estimated Solvency II margin without transitional rules is 124%.
I will get back to these figures in more detail later on in the presentations. Let's then move to slide number three. Adaptation to Solvency II and reserve strengthening has affected Storebrand in the past three to five years. The transformation and adaptation of our business towards Solvency II has been strong, and it has been a core focus for us to do this without asking our shareholders on additional capital. Storebrand has successfully entered Solvency II without raising new equity and now has a strong solvency position of 168%, including transition rules, and 124%, excluding transition rules. As previously mentioned, the expected equity charge for longevity is also finalized in this quarter.
This further shows that the company is returning to a normalized situation, and we expect also the underlying Solvency II to increase ahead. There is still, of course, challenges ahead, in particular relating to the management of the guaranteed reserves in a low interest rate environment. We see strong market preparations, especially in the Q1 of 2016, with falling shares, with falling interest rates, and also increase in credit spreads. There's also a remaining of NOK 2 billion in longevity reserve to do going forward. With these factors given, the board of directors have proposed no dividend for 2015, but plan to pay a dividend for 2016. Let's move to slide number four, just showing that Storebrand is in a-...
fundamental transformation, and that we still work, of course, with also handling our guaranteed balance sheet going forward. While we also will make sure that we continue the strong growth within savings and insurance. Moving down to slide number five, longevity. We see that we have satisfied, we are very satisfied with having reserved a total of NOK 10.2 billion of the NOK 12.4 billion in the need for longevity. And this is done now in two years, out of the seven years we have to do this reservation strengthening. We have also substantially built buffers to ensure that we will both meet our, meet our interest rate guarantee going forward, and also meet the remaining longevity reservation needed.
By having charged the result with about NOK 1.8 billion for longevity strengthening into 2015, we expect that the owner's share of the longevity strengthening is now completed. Moving down to slide number six, we have divided the paid-up policy back book into four different segments. We have allocated held-to-maturity bonds in these different segments, and three of them actually have from 60%-90% in asset allocation to this held-to-maturity bond portfolio. This is the main reason why we expect to have about or around 4% in return in this portfolio for the next few years. After 2020, the interest rate guarantee drops to 3%, and we also have, in 2015, built NOK 16 billion of new held-to-maturity bond portfolios, with a yield above 3% and a 13 years average life.
That is done, of course, as you understand, in a low interest rate environment. And this is in average, a double-A-rated bond portfolio. In total, this portfolio is now above NOK 100 billion, and will be in average, on our books for the next eight years. If we then move to slide number seven, the Solvency II position in Storebrand has been strengthened by 22 percentage points to 168% at the end of 2015. Excluding transition rules, the solvency margin is 124%, 20 percentage points strengthening from Q3. The development in the solvency position from third to the Q4 is affected by several factors. There is, of course, positive results.
There's also this change in the interest rate curve in SBP as lars will revert to, and there is also a change in the modeling of tax. There's also some factors that have affected the solvency ratios negatively. For instance, one example is that we have changed the modeling horizon from 30 to 60 years. The most important change, though, is that we have changed our accounting for tax effects going into the Solvency II stress. Storebrand has not previously accounted for this in our book, and including this tax stress, it leads to a strengthening in the solvency position for the group at approximately 17 percentage points. Another effect of improved modeling is that the sensitivity in the Solvency II numbers is reduced.
We are well aware that there is a, of course, a volatile market, financial markets in 2016. As I have already mentioned, stocks and interest rates have fallen, and spread, credit spreads has, increased. This has, of course, as we see from the sensitivities, an effect on our Solvency II numbers in Q1 2016. If we then move to slide number eight, as you know, we have working with the cost for a long time, and we continue doing that, in a very strong way going forward. We delivered a cost reduction of NOK 400 million between 2012 and 2014. Our Capital Markets Day, we launched a cost-income target of 60% to balance the need for a high cost discipline and growth in savings and insurance.
In 2015, Storebrand has increased costs due to increased number of staff within insurance and savings, as well as costs related to restructuring. But adjusted for this restructuring cost, we have a cost-income level of below 60%. During the Q4, restructuring was implemented in the customer area in Norway and Sweden, and that led to a workforce reduction of about 80 employees. We see that in relation to the sale of Storebrand Baltic, the number of employees in Storebrand is dramatically reduced, and we also move from a quick fixed cost base and transformed into a viable cost base. In 2016, we begin the process of transferring business processes and IT to our strategic partner, Cognizant. This will result in additional restructuring costs in 2016.
However, it turns into a situation where it will be lower cost in 2017 and 2018. So we are now guiding on a lower cost base in 2018 compared to the nominal cost base in 2015, and this is the same as NOK 300- 400 million in a real cost reduction. Moving into slide number nine, we see that the growth is coming through in savings and insurance. I already talked about the growth within insurance, and we see also strong growth here in unit-linked reserves of 22%, driven by growth in premiums of 35%.
Also, NOK 4.7 billion in conversion from paid-up policies into investment choice, and this is done in a market that has been somewhat weak when it comes to financial markets in 2015. We also see strong growth over asset management business of 7%, and it's also very encouraging to see that the growth within our banking activities is now picking up. Retail banking is instrumental in the success in our private market strategy going forward. Then let's move to slide number 10, where we see that the growth in premiums in unit-linked has been strong in 2015. We met the level of more than 50% premium income within non-guaranteed in 2014. This trend has continued very strong in 2015.
And we are also very happy to see that a lot of very important customers in Norway and Sweden have chosen Storebrand SPP as their pension provider during 2016. The last slide for me is slide number 11. It shows very much the same picture as we have already talked about, the switch from guaranteed business into non-guaranteed savings and insurance. And the waterfall to the left is showing that the income reduction in guaranteed pension and comes from discontinued business in the public sector, but it's more than taken up by the growth of the savings area, where we have strong growth in 2015. So with that, I give the words to Lars to take us through some of the numbers.
Good afternoon, everyone. I will start on page 13, and I will only comment on two pages, but I will spend some time on the first page, page 13, to help you understand the numbers. As both the 2014 and 2015 numbers were significantly impacted by one-off effects, I have in this first page, 13, Storebrand Group adjusted, tried to normalize the results above the line and then explain the special effects under the line here. So let's start with fee and administration income. It's-- and one more comment, I will comment on the full year numbers as they, as the quarterly numbers are impacted by some periodic effects. So the full year numbers for 2015 versus 2014.
Fee and administration income, as Odd Arild Grefstad said, adjusted for currency and not discontinued business, is up 8.2%. The risk result in the life and pension business for life and pension is down significantly from 2014 to 2015. In 2014, we could take into the income the risk adjustment fund. That was not possible in 2015 for regulatory reasons, and instead, the risk adjustment or risk utilization fund has been used to strengthen longevity reserves. The insurance premiums are up significantly from 2014 to 2015, up by 17%, but the claims are up significantly as well. Netting these two effects, we see there's a strengthening result from these two lines of NOK 31 million. The operational cost is up by approximately NOK 150 million.
That is less than the combination of normal inflation and a strengthening Swedish kroner versus the Norwegian kroner. So we have been able to keep a relatively good cost control, hiding the fact that we have made significant investment in new customers and digitalization, and we've been reallocating resources in the group. The financial result is significantly down from NOK 349- 73, and that is a result of lower return on company portfolios in Norway and Sweden, where we are impacted by the low interest rate environment in both countries. In 2014, we benefited from falling interest rates in terms of increased bond values and also a much higher interest rate level into the year.
During 2015, we've been hurt by a low interest rate environment throughout the year, with Swedish rates stabilizing below zero and Norwegian rates stabilizing at a low level. That gives a more normalized result before profit sharing and loan losses, falling from NOK 2.6 billion to NOK 2.2 billion from 2014 to 2015. Then we have net profit sharing and loan losses, and the result, the fall in the result here comes primarily from profit split in the Swedish operation, where again, there was a benefit during 2014 of falling rates, giving bond price gains, and also gains from the equity markets. This has not been the case in 2014-2015, and the results are significantly weaker.
Of the NOK 480 million in difference here, NOK 460 million is due to lower profit split in the Swedish operation. That gives a result before amortization, write downs, and the special items, falling from just short of NOK 3 billion to a little more than NOK 2 billion. The special items are as follows: There is a the... we have strengthened disability reserves in the Norwegian operation by NOK 100 million in the Q4 of 2015. In 2014, there was a release of reserves, especially from the Swedish operation, of NOK 224 million, weakening the overall risk result and risk reserves by NOK 324 million.
On the operational cost side, we've taken NOK 97 million in a charge for laying off people and reorganization in 2015, while in 2014, we discontinued the defined benefit scheme we had for employees in Norway, and that released pension liabilities of NOK 571 million. Then we have a financial result, minority share result. We sold a large property in Norway, actually in January, but the part of the profit that went to a minority shareholder is for accounting purposes, taken into our result, and then it's taken out again as the minorities share all the results, so we're deducting that here, or adjusting for that as a special item.
Last but not least, in the Swedish operation, we've done two changes to our assumptions. We have taken the discount curve that we use for the accounting purposes and made that the same as the one we use for solvency purposes. That has, by using a lower interest rate curve to discount liabilities, the liabilities have increased in value, so that gives a negative effect in the accounting result. We have also made changes to the cost allocation between traditional products and non-guaranteed products, and between sales and maintenance of the product portfolio. That has a positive effect. The net effect of the two is NOK 265 million loss in the Q4.
However, that should also be seen in the context of improving results in the long term going forward, and it's part of the management actions that we do to make the company well prepared for Solvency II. Below the... or the last line on this page is a provision for longevity. By taking NOK 1.764 billion in a charge for 2016, we basically take away all expected charge to shareholders of longevity strengthening for the future. We no longer have the NOK 90 million or NOK 90-140 million that we've had in charges towards the shareholders' result on a quarterly basis for the last couple of years.
This has now been neutralized by this one-off charge. On page 14, very briefly, it's the same results put together, the special items and the normalized items put together. In addition, we show here the result before tax, and the tax, which is a positive contribution in the quarter and in for the full year 2016. That is a result of a risk management within the property portfolio or real estate portfolio that we have, where we've dissolved some holding companies as part of our risk management structure. These holding companies had a tax loss, which then benefits the company results with a tax loss carryforward, really, giving a positive tax result for the quarter and for the year 2015.
On the following page 15, that's broken into the three main business areas: savings, insurance, and guaranteed pensions, where savings is developing very well, adjusted for these one-off items. Insurance is relatively stable, while guaranteed pensions continues to be in run-off and with lower results. That finalizes the introduction from our side, and we are now opening up for questions.
Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. If you change your mind and wish to withdraw your question, please press star one again. You will be advised of when to ask your question. The first question comes from Peter Elliott from Kepler Chevreux. Please go ahead, your line is now open.
Thank you very much. I have three questions, please, actually. The first one was on the dividend, where you said you plan to pay one for 2016. I guess I'm just trying to interpret a little bit how we should think of the plan. Because I'm thinking if it's a fairly firm intention, then I'm just sort of wondering why I'm kind of struggling a little bit that, you know, a token dividend in twenty fifteen wouldn't really have changed much in the scheme of things in terms of the balance sheet, but I guess would have been taken very well.
So I'm just wondering, you know, whether that's a sort of a hope for 2016 or a reasonably firm intention. The second thing was on the paid-up book. I think that's grown sort of 12% versus the previous year. And in particular, in Q4 seems to be quite high, the increase. I'd understood from previous guidance that, you know, Q4, sorry, the Q1 or the start of the year could seasonally show quite a lot of growth, but thereafter it should be fairly muted. So I'm just wondering what we should expect there going forward, and if there's anything you can do to reduce that growth rate? And then finally, if I could fit in one more.
You've shown some very helpful sensitivities in terms of, you know, the running yield over the next five years, and you mentioned about the eight-year average duration for liabilities. But I'm just wondering, for the tail, is there any sort of sensitivity you can give, or have you done sort of work on, you know, what reinvestment rates you would need over the long term to keep being able to pay that and how that compares to current new money rates? Sorry for the length of those. Thank you very much.
Well, thank you. Let's start with the dividend discussion. It's very clear that we look upon our Solvency II numbers in the end of 2015 as a strong numbers. I'm very satisfied with the development of our Solvency II position during the year and now by the start of the regime in the Q1 of 2016. And of course, there is also, as you see from the sensitivities, quite a strong impact on falling interest rates in combination with falling shares and also credit spreads widening, as we have seen in the Q4.
You should think about this as a situation where we now are entering into a position where we are able to pay a dividend. That there has been two long periods that Storebrand has not been paying a dividend. But when we start paying a dividend again, that is, of course, meant to be for every following years going forward. And we like to be very sure that we are able to fulfill that commitment. And you just look upon the guidance from the board here as a very clear signal.
They have never said this before, I think, when they came out with this kind of numbers, what they guided on, they have a clear intention of paying a dividend for 2016. Should we then move to the next question? Yeah, on the reinvestment rates, I guess, Lars touched upon it on the new money rates, or actually, Daniel. We've done NOK 16 billion in the held-to-maturity portfolio now at above the 3% level. And that is, of course, with today's interest rates. And we view that as sufficient to uncover the risk, the reinvestment risk in the, again, these portfolios as of today. I think this is a very important topic.
Of course, what we have done now is to invest to ensure our paid-up policy portfolios in the period around 2025-2030. And we know that the interest rate guarantee is then peaking below, down below the 3% level. And we have been able to invest NOK 16 billion at an average of 3.1% in 2015, and that is still with average of the total portfolio, the rated portfolio. And of course, credit spreads, it's also increased, so we see that we will have opportunities also to fill up in the paid-up, up in the, the held-to-maturity bond portfolio during 2016.
With respect to the paid-up policy growth, it's correct that it's a strong growth in the Q4 as a consequence of certain companies converting there in the Q4. I don't have a...
... I can't be a lot more specific than that. We have guided that we think that there will be approximately NOK 8 billion in additional paid-up policies, coming out of, or coming in 2016. So you will see, you will see continued growth in the paid-up policy book for the next few years.
Okay, thanks very much.
The next question comes from Matti Aaltonen from Danske Bank. Please, your line is now open.
Yes, good afternoon. It's Matti Aaltonen here from Danske. A few questions, please. I want to follow up on Peter's the dividend side. I'm just looking at your dividend policy, and obviously also some of your peers have said that a kind of payout ratio, IFRS-based payout ratio probably doesn't fit this, this world, especially taking into account you haven't paid a dividend for many years, even though the payout policy would have suggested one. So the question is, basically, are you considering about changing the dividend policy, for example, at the Capital Markets Day, in order for us to get a bit more kind of clarity on what are the key drivers there? Or is it just still the 35% of profits before amortization?
The second question is regarding DB Norway. The fee and admin income was up quite a lot quarter-on-quarter. Was it just that Q3 was unusually poor, or why was it so strong? And then also on the Unit-Linked Norway, the operational cost was up, I guess, for the reserve increases. But could you give us the figure for Unit-Linked Norway, please? Thanks.
Just to comment on the dividend again, I think you are absolutely right, that the new regime now entering into Solvency II fully makes it very clear that we need to look into the dividend policy, and we will do that. We will, of course, be much more clear on the capital position and situations and how to look at these issues when we come back to you on the Capital Markets Day.
Yeah. On the DB margin, that was a little bit stronger in the Q4, but overall a little bit weaker for the full year. It's a little bit weaker for the full year since a lot of the public sector contracts have moved out, and there, of course, some costs may still be left. That's, I guess, the main explanation.
In terms of growth, the Defined Benefit premiums are significantly low quarter by quarter throughout the year.
But the income was up quite a lot. So is it the kind of one should be looking at the full year average as a normal run rate, or-
Yeah, I think the year average is a better proxy than looking at the movement from the third to the Q4, which is more of a periodization effects on the piece.
Unit-Linked Norway operational cost was up. How much of this was related to reserve increases? I guess it had to do with that a bit.
Yeah, we have, we have sent out. Or on the web page, Matti, there's a, there's an Excel spreadsheet which divides the restructuring costs down on the, on the different, the different sub-segments. So there it's disclosed for, per sub-segment.
In addition, there were increased sales bonuses in that area in the Q4 as a result of very good sales during 2014, and also somewhat higher marketing spend.
Great. Very helpful. Thanks.
The next question comes from Johnny Owen from UBS. Please, your line is now open.
Hi there. Good afternoon. Thanks for taking my questions. I've got two. The first is just a point of clarification, really. I mean, I hopefully spoke to the IR department about the tax treatment announced on January the 28th, just to do with the real estate portfolio being sold. I guess I'm just struggling here a little to see how the DTA has arisen, just given that there's been no economic loss as far as I'm aware. You sold down the assets, but you transferred the money out as dividends, and then it just seems like there's a loss on the tax accounting, but not economically.
You know, my somewhat basic understanding of tax legislation is that normally that follows substance rather than form, whereas here it seems to be following the form. So if you could just talk a bit about that, that would be, that'd be very useful. Secondly, around credit, you know, clearly it's become a bigger issue for the sector this year, and we still don't have any sensitivities from Storebrand to credit spreads, or defaults. So I was just wondering if you could perhaps give us a steer on this and also comment that it would be, you know, it'd be great to get some of those sensitivities as soon as we can. So those are my two. Thanks very much.
Okay. If I start with the tax, you have a fair point. However, the way the, when we sold down in real estate a few years ago, in order to efficiently reinvest the funds in bonds and equities, we were allowed to take a dividend around some holding companies, where you then got a tax loss. When this holding company has been dissolved since, then that is the tax consequence. I agree that this is strange, but the, there is an asymmetry in the way they handle tax for life companies and non-life companies in the Norwegian legislation, and this is a consequence of that asymmetry.
I agree that it's not necessarily logical, but it's a consequence of the tax legislation, and it's this has been fully transparent the whole way. And the dividends that were taken and the way they were taken were approved by the authorities at the time they happened. So this is not any fixing of the books or anything. It's a consequence of tax accounting, the way it works in Norway.
And that, that's helpful. Thank you. And so the dividends have been approved by the authorities, and has the tax treatment also subsequently been approved by the authorities, or is it still pending?
No, but it's fully transparent in the way we have reported to the tax authorities, and we expect them to look at this, in the light of the big effects. But, we also have third party opinion, clarifying that this is the consequence of something we've done operationally. You know, sometimes you get, negative tax effects, and in this case, we've got a positive tax effect of something that we've done operationally to improve the business.
Okay, thank you.
When it comes to your question regarding sensitivities on credit, I can confirm that that will be presented on the Capital Markets Day.
Okay. And can you give us any sort of steer for now?
What I can say is that, you know, most of our portfolio in Norway is in a held-to-maturity bond portfolio that really reduces the risk, the credit risk element into Solvency II. So it's more on the mark-to-market, the bonds that we are carrying in Sweden and also partly in Norway, but maybe Lars if you-
Yeah, I mean, operationally, this is, of course, it gives us good reinvestment opportunities. So, if the higher credit spreads doesn't reflect a higher default risk, and then of course, this gives better reinvestment opportunities in the market. When it comes to the solvency position, credit spread widening, it will of course be negative on the solvency position. However, as David is saying, a lot of this risk is actually handled in the held-to-maturity bond portfolio. But we will come back with the sensitivities on the Capital Markets Day.
Okay, thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, a kind reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. We have another question from Matti from Danske Bank. Please go ahead, your line is now open.
Yes, thanks. Just to follow up, could you give us some guidance on where would the full Solvency II ratio stand as of today? I know you've given some of the sensitivities, but, would be helpful if you could point us to a figure. Thanks.
Well, I think it's fair to say that this is quite, quite complicated elements altogether that needs to be done. We do that, of course, on a quarterly basis. We try to also get more monthly basis calculations and are doing that in a better and better way as we go along. I think for this time being, it's more for us to look at the sensitivities that we have provided. And of course, we have provided the sensitivities we think is the most important ones. And basically, you can see that almost half of our stress test that we have shown in both the interest rates and when it comes to shares has actually occurred during the Q1.
So that means that you, of course, can look at the impact of that, and that will, well, I think be close to 10 percentage points, in itself. And on top of that, you will also see some impact from credit spreads. And also a combination of this is something different than just a single stress in itself. But I think that is the most I can say about these sensitivities, by now, as such.
All right. Thanks a lot.
The next question comes from Johnny Owen from UBS. Please go ahead, line is now open.
Just a very quick follow-up. Thank you. I was wondering if you could tell us anything about the status of the SCR ex transition at year-end, just how much it was. That would be, that'd be really helpful. I mean, we had some disclosure around it. From memory, it was Q3 2014, but we haven't had much since then. So if you could give us a steer, that would be, that'd be great.
The SCR as of Q4 was NOK 28 billion.
Sorry, could you repeat?
Twenty-eight billion.
28. Thank you very much. Thank you.
The next question comes from Andy Sinclair, from Bank of America. Please go ahead, your line is now open.
Thanks very much, Yvonne. Just one question, actually. Just looking at your dividend guidance around the 35% payout ratio, essentially under normal conditions. I just really wondered, now that-
... we have the shareholders' contribution to the longevity buffer building complete. What is to prevent this from being taken as normal conditions now, with the market volatility that we've had recently, mean that you would consider this to be still abnormal conditions? Thanks.
Well, as I said, we will guide tomorrow on this, when we come back, to that Capital Markets Day. I think, it's a fair statement that we now have finished, shareholders', portion of, longevity reservations. Although it is still NOK 2.2 billion left before we have finalized the total longevity reservation, means that we need to ensure that we take, the surplus, the customers', return, over the next years to also build the remaining 17% of this, longevity reservation.
Sorry, just following on from that. About how long do you expect it to take for that sort of NOK 2 billion to be built?
Well, that is very much, I think, you see that there is strong buffers that is possible to utilize to do this. So it can be done quite soon. But then again, we have a five year horizon on it. And of course, some contracts have a high guarantee and also low part still that is being fulfilled with the longevity. So I think that if you ask from a straight risk management point of view, we should use some time to finalize this and ensure that we have the buffers available, both for low interest rate levels in itself, for the interest rate guarantee, and for the longevity reservation.
But it is very clear that if we need and if we like to do, we can fulfill this reservation on the remaining NOK 2.2 billion much faster than these remaining five years.
Thank you.
The next question comes from Francisco Sherwood from Deutsche Bank. Please go ahead, your line is now open.
Hi, thank you for taking my question. I have a really quick one, as a follow-up to the question posed by the gentleman from UBS regarding the SCR figures. I was wondering, so of that NOK 28 billion that you've disclosed for Q4, can you provide a breakdown? Or are you in a position to provide a disclosure as to how that breaks down into various risk sub-modules, in terms of life, non-life, et cetera? And is this... If you cannot, today at least, is this something that we could expect going forward? Thank you.
I think that's a good question, and I think it's something that we will prepare for the Capital Markets Day. And [microsoft]?
I'd also like to add that if you look at the Capital Markets Day for 2014, there's SCR is broken down by risk type, and it's probably a good rough guidance for what it is now as well.
Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, we will do one more reminder. If you would like to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone keypad. There are no questions coming through, so I will hand the call back. Thank you.
Okay. Before we end up, I would just like to remind you all that we're present in London tomorrow at 2:00 P.M., and I hope to see some of you there. And lastly, I would like to remind you that we are holding our Capital Markets Day on May the thirteenth in London. So if you'd like to attend, please go and register on our website. And I think with that, we say thank you and have a good afternoon.
Thank you for joining today's conference. You may now replace your handsets and end the call. Thank you.