Good day, and welcome to the ACE Limited second quarter 2013 earnings conference call. Today's call is being recorded. If you'd like to ask a question on today's call, please signal by pressing the star key, followed by the digit 1 on your touch-tone phone. For opening remarks and introductions, I would like to turn the call over to Helen Wilson, investor relations. Please go ahead, ma'am.
Thank you, and welcome to the ACE Limited June 30th, 2013 second quarter earnings conference call. Our report today will contain forward-looking statements. These include statements relating to company and investment performance, guidance, premium growth, product mix, pricing, and insurance market conditions, and integration and performance of our acquisitions, all of which are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially. Please refer to our most recent SEC filings, as well as our earnings press release and financial supplement, which are available on our website for more information on factors that could affect these matters. This call is being webcast live, and the webcast replay will be available for one month. Remarks made during the call are current at the time of the call and will not be updated to reflect subsequent material developments. Now I'd like to introduce our speakers.
First, we have Evan Greenberg, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, followed by Philip Bancroft, our Chief Financial Officer. We'll take your questions. Also with us to assist with your questions are several members of our management team. Now it's my pleasure to turn the call over to Evan.
Good morning, everyone. ACE produced record quarterly earnings that were driven by excellent underwriting and investment results. P&C premium revenue growth was particularly strong, and all divisions of the company contributed to the good financial performance. After-tax operating income for the quarter was $790 million, up 6.3%, or $229 per share, both records for the company. Our operating return on equity was 12.3%, and in the first six months of the year, we've produced over $1.5 billion in after-tax operating income with an ROE that is north of 12%. Book value in the quarter declined 2.3% due to the rise in interest rates, which reduced the unrealized gains in our investment portfolio. Given we are fundamentally buy-and-hold fixed income investors, this is in essence an accelerated recognition of a loss that would have amortized in over time anyway as our bonds mature.
The flip side, of course, is that our reinvestment rate has improved by about 60 basis points for a portfolio of similar distribution, and this will benefit our income over years to come. Tangible book value was additionally impacted by our two Mexican acquisitions, which closed during the quarter. We are excited about our prospects in Mexico, and our teams are actively engaged in bringing our vision to reality. Phil will have more to say about our book and tangible book value and the impact of rates on our investment portfolio. Our underwriting results in the quarter were again simply excellent. We produced $434 million of P&C underwriting income, up nearly 16%, with a combined ratio of 87.9. The end of the quarter was active in terms of natural catastrophes with the tornadoes in the U.S. and the floods in Europe and Canada.
Total pre- and after-tax cat losses this quarter were $81 million and $66 million respectively. Following the end of the quarter, we've had preliminary indications of additional losses that could add about $10 million pre-tax of development on these cats, and this will show up in our third quarter results. Positive prior period reserve development was up modestly from last year. Again, Phil will provide more details on these items. Similar to the first quarter, current accident year underwriting was a substantial contributor to our overall calendar year underwriting results. Current accident year underwriting income, excluding catastrophes, was up 21% over prior year with a combined ratio of 89.2. This was 1.2 points better than the second quarter last year. In fact, on a current accident year ex-cat basis, operating income was $217 per share versus $201 per share last year.
The current accident year results reflect the excellent underlying health of our current business, including global growth in earned premium, with continued margin improvement in North America as a result of better pricing and mix of business, and margin improvement internationally as a result of product and geographic mix. P&C net premiums in the quarter grew over 8.5% on a constant dollar basis, with foreign exchange negatively impacting that number by 1.5 points on a published basis. Growth came broadly from all regions of the world, with particularly strong results from North America, Asia, and Latin America. In North America, retail, commercial, and specialty P&C net premiums were up nearly 12%, while our wholesale specialty business was up over 6%. Net premiums for our agriculture business were down, in line with our expectations, due primarily to an increase in the amount of crop reinsurance we purchased.
We estimate full-year crop insurance net premiums to be down about $315 million from prior year. Again, in line with our expectations. Internationally, commercial P&C premiums in ACE International, our retail business, were up 9%. We saw growth in commercial P&C in every territory except the continent of Europe, which was flat. Latin America led with net premium growth of 25%, followed by the U.K. at 10% and Asia at 6%. Premiums in our London-based excess and surplus lines business were down 4%, where competition has increased steadily in the last few quarters, particularly in property and professional lines related businesses. In our global A&H business, net premiums were up over 6% in the quarter in constant dollars, reflecting improved growth as we predicted. Growth was driven by our ACE International business, which was up 11%, led by Latin America, Asia, and Europe.
Strong growth in our global personal lines business continued in the quarter. In the U.S., premiums in ACE Private Risk Services, our high net worth personal lines business, were up over 10%, whereas internationally, personal lines premiums were up 70%, reflecting the contributions from our acquisitions in Mexico. Excluding these, we had growth of over 20%. International life insurance revenue was up 29% on a constant dollar basis, with the strong growth coming mainly from our operations in Asia. Finally, our global re-business was down about 5%. As you know, the reinsurance market is quite competitive, with an abundance of capacity, particularly in cat. Cat pricing is down about 5% internationally and 10%-15% in the U.S. We expect these trends to continue for the foreseeable future. I want to say a few words about the current market environment.
Our commercial P&C business in the U.S. continued to benefit from an improved pricing environment with another quarter of rate on rate increases. Overall, North American pricing was up about 4%. While the rate of increase for property related pricing is moderating, casualty related pricing, in fact, accelerated modestly in the quarter, with many lines experiencing their strongest level of rate increase yet. In ACE USA, our retail business, property rates were up 4%, while casualty related pricing was up over 4.5%. New business writings grew 5% year-on-year. That's after growing new business 44% in the second quarter last year. Exposure growth added just over 3% to our premium growth rate due to increased economic activity. Our renewal retention rate, as measured by premium, was a very good 90% in the quarter.
On the U.S. wholesale side of our business, rates were up over 4.5% overall, with property rates up about 3% and casualty related lines up over 7.5%. Internationally, the retail commercial P&C rate environment remains competitive but stable, with rate growth flat in the quarter overall. Competition constrains our growth as we strive to maintain portfolio pricing. Rates internationally varied by class and by territory, but were mostly up or down 1%-2%. My colleagues and I can provide further color on market conditions and pricing trends. As I said earlier in the quarter, we completed our acquisition of ABA Seguros, Mexico's fourth largest personal lines company. As we announced on last quarter's call, we also completed Mexican surety company, Fianzas Monterrey. Both acquisitions are on track and as I already noted, are beginning to contribute to premium growth.
For example, in the quarter, about half of ACE International's 18% net premium growth came from these acquisitions. In summary, we had a great quarter and a strong 6 months performance. We fired on all cylinders. As things stand now, we expect a continued strong result for the balance of the year. With that, I'll turn the call over to Phil. We'll come back and take your questions.
Thank you, Evan. As Evan mentioned, we had an excellent quarter with record operating results. Cash flow was strong at $895 million. Based on our strong, sustained financial performance, S&P and AM Best recently affirmed all of our core ratings and changed their outlook on ACE to positive. Fitch upgraded us from double A minus to double A. Investment income was $534 million for the quarter, higher than our expected run rate, primarily due to higher than expected private equity distributions. Net realized and unrealized losses were $1.4 billion pre-tax, and $1.1 billion after tax for the quarter, resulting primarily from the effect of higher yields on our fixed income portfolio. As the Fed signaled a potential end in sight to their quantitative easing program, high grade bonds that benefited from the program were the most significantly impacted by this shift in rates.
Our blended market yield rose 60 basis points during the quarter, and our portfolio movements were in line with market conditions. We remain in an unrealized gain position of $1.3 billion after tax. Future net investment income will be positively impacted as new cash flow and portfolio turnover will be invested at these higher rates. Current new money rates are 2.9% if we invested in a similar distribution to our existing portfolio, and our current book yield is 3.7%. We estimate that the current quarterly investment income run rate will be approximately $525 million, which is subject to variability in portfolio rates, private equity distributions, and FX. Our book value per share and our tangible book value per share declined 2.3% and 4.9% respectively. Tangible book value was also affected by the impact of goodwill and intangibles arising from our Mexican acquisitions.
Tangible book value per share would have declined 2.7%, excluding these transactions. The net impact of the mark-to-market change for the VA reinsurance book was a realized gain of $35 million. This comprised a gross realized gain of about $200 million, primarily related to rising interest rates and increasing equity values, offset by hedge losses, falling credit spreads, and rising equity market volatilities, all of which reduced the gain by approximately $135 million. An additional $30 million of the gain was reduced by the timing effect, which we describe in our disclosures as the increase in fair value liability when the VA book continues to run off as we collect premiums and get closer to annuitization claims. The VA result was in line with our expectations and with our published sensitivities.
During the quarter, we had positive prior period development of $128 million pre-tax and $109 million after-tax, with about one-third coming from long tail and two-thirds from short tail lines. Our net loss reserves are up $350 million for the quarter, and our paid to incurred ratio was 83%. Our cat losses were $81 million pre-tax for the quarter, approximately half related to the Canadian floods and the remainder related principally to severe weather events in the U.S. and the European floods. Our effective tax rate fluctuates based on where our earnings emerge. In this quarter, the effective tax rate is low relative to other quarters, primarily because a greater percentage of our income was produced in lower tax jurisdictions. In addition, we had a one-off adjustment to prior year tax accruals that lowered the rate by one and a half points.
The company is issuing updated guidance for full year 2013 to account for the first half positive prior period reserve development, lower than planned catastrophe losses realized in the first half, better first half current accident year results excluding catastrophe losses, and higher net investment income in the second quarter and expected for the second half of the year. The range is $7.65 to $8.05 per share in after-tax operating income for the year. This includes estimated catastrophe losses of $260 million after tax for the second half of the year. Guidance for the balance of the year is for the current accident year only. I'll turn the call back to Helen.
Thank you. At this point, we'll be happy to take your questions.
Thank you. If you would like to ask a question, please signal by pressing *1 on your telephone keypad. If you're using a speakerphone, please make sure your mute button is turned off to allow your signal to reach our equipment. We'll take our first question from Amit Kumar with Macquarie.
Thanks. Good morning, and thanks for taking my questions. My first question relates to pricing. That color was very helpful. Over the past few days, investor focus has been on the sustainability of pricing improvement in U.S. commercial lines. Evan, what would be very helpful is your view on the pricing momentum going forward from here.
I don't hold a crystal ball that can predict the future. I can tell you that July pricing was similar to the second quarter pricing, that we've seen the same strong trend we have been seeing in casualty, which is broad-based, continue in July. That is encouraging to us. Beyond that, I simply can't predict the market, but I'm very comfortable about ACE's ability to perform and outperform in any market.
Mm-hmm. Any sort of distinction between retail and wholesale going forward?
There is some distinction. Do you want more specific granularity around that?
Yes. That would help.
Okay. I'm going to turn it to John Lupica, who maybe will give you-- because I said it's broad based, so we'll-
Yes
pick five or six lines, seven lines, and give you a sense in both the retail and the wholesale, so you'll see a little distinction. Casualty pricing in the wholesale side is a little stronger than on the retail side.
Sure. Thanks, Evan. Amit, I'll give you just a little deeper dive into the rate that we're seeing, also a little bit of the growth that we're seeing in both the U.S. retail and the E&S market. I'd like to remind you, this is our 27th month in North America that we've been able to get rates our ninth quarter and our fifth quarter of rate on rate. It's been a healthy drive for rate in North America, and it's been the best that I've seen in this cycle. When I look at North America in our largest management business, that quarter we grew the business 16%, with the rate that was up 5.8%. On a year-to-date basis, we were able to get four and a half points of rate.
In our professional lines businesses, in aggregate, we saw three points of growth, 5.7 points of rate in the quarter, and about five points of rate for the full year. When we look at our medical business and other specialty business, we saw the growth of 12%. Our quarter was up 3%, and the year was up 1.5%. In the general casualty market, the excess casualty, we saw growth of 13%, the rate of 6.3% in the quarter, and the full-year rate of 5.3%. Environmental and other casualty specialty line was up 12% in growth. Rate was up four, and on a full year basis, it was up 2.9%. In our property market, where again, the rate has been terrifically healthy in the past and in the current, we've seen our property retail growth of 26%. The quarter was 3.3% of rate.
In the year we've seen 3.7% of rate. In our E&S businesses, in our E&S property, we saw growth of 10%. Our rate in the quarter was 3.3%, and our year-to-date rate was 4.7%. In our general casualty portfolio, we saw growth of 3% in the quarter with a rate of 8 and a year-to-date rate of 8.5%. I'd like to echo what Evan had noted about July. We are seeing generally the same trends in our retail casualty market and property market in terms of rate. Risk management, early days, but we've seen it up 6.5%, excess up 5%, and the property market up 3%. Again, it certainly is early days and early trades in July.
Got it.
That gives you a better sense of both growth and also sort of the broadness of rate, and that you can see the rate in the second quarter is better than the year-to-date rate.
That's actually quite helpful. The only other quick question I have is on capital deployment. You talked about the recent acquisitions. In the past, we've spent some time talking about, I guess, a 1.5% drag on ROE. How should we think about the pipeline, I guess, of potential candidates versus the rate commentary, which you have mentioned? Does that change in any way, or is that completely independent somewhat of the strong pricing you're seeing?
The pipeline of potential opportunities from an acquisition point of view are completely independent of anything to do with pricing.
Number one. Number two, remember, generally, the analyst community, and I mean this in a positive way, you have no visibility on-
What could be potential out there. There's over 50,000 insurance companies in the world. It's a big world, and there's a vast amount of opportunity. If it meets our strategy, advances what we're doing organically in a line or a territory, and it meets our financial hurdles, and return to investors, then we'll pull the trigger, and it's all opportunistic. Beyond that, I won't really comment except that we're vigilant and we're paying attention, and we're constantly looking.
Got it. Okay. That's quite helpful. Thanks for the answers. I'll stop here. Thanks.
Welcome.
We'll go next to Mike Zaremski with Credit Suisse.
Hey, good morning.
Good morning.
My first question is in regards to ACE's dividend philosophy. Evan, you've said in the past ACE is a growth company. The dividend was raised 4% this past May, which I guess according to consensus earnings estimates implies a declining payout ratio. Should we be thinking it was raised by 4% because free cash flow growth will be subdued in the near term, or maybe we just simply shouldn't be thinking in terms of managing to a higher payout ratio over time? I have a follow-up. Thanks.
Go ahead, Phil.
I was just going to say, if you look at the history of our dividend, we've increased it about 46% since January of 2012. A pretty substantial increase. We think that those increases have enhanced returns to the shareholders in a sustained period of low interest rates, and it's enabled us to keep considerable capital flexibility.
No, it signals nothing about cash flow. In fact, as you could see, our cash flow is quite strong. We're very liquid. The payout ratio will bounce around a little bit. It'll average in a similar range over a period of time.
Okay. Got it. That's helpful. A numbers question, maybe for Phil. I noticed the expense ratio in North American insurance excluding agriculture declined by over 150 basis points versus 2Q 2012 levels. Is there a lower expense run rate dynamic taking place that we should be aware of?
I wouldn't count on the lower. There was a couple of one-off adjustments to accruals, and I wouldn't expect that to be part of the run.
If I could add just a little more detail. It really is, it's the growth in our net earned premium outpacing our expense dollars. It really is historical in our premium growth. There's nothing material in the detail.
Okay.
Expenses are growing lower than premium.
Operating leverage.
Then it bounces around a little bit by mix of business because some business attracts a higher commission line than others. So when you grow your very large account business, you're generally going to pay a lower commission than when you're growing your flow business. The acquisition ratio will bounce around quarter-to-quarter a little bit. Underlying operating expense ratio is very comfortably under control.
Thank you.
Got the mix of the two?
Got it.
Okay.
We'll go next to Jay Gelb with Barclays.
Thanks. Good morning. I want to touch base first on the underlying combined ratio in North America P&C and overseas general. We've continued to see year-over-year improvement in the first half, and the results were pretty consistent between first quarter and second quarter of this year. I'm just trying to get a read on whether you feel we were at the right baseline now, and whether you feel that result can continue to improve in those two major segments as earned pricing continues to come through.
Well, Jay, we'll see how the future. I'm not going to predict the future because short tail business, it'll have some variability around the mean to it. I don't know what you mean by Are we at a place where we're just comfortable. We're constantly striving to grow the business and do it at pricing that we think achieves an adequate rate of return. As you know, we're willing to make that trade-off in any line of business where it doesn't meet our hurdle rates, or what we think is a reasonable rate of return given this environment, and that's what the combined ratios represent. Where we see opportunity, the right business at what we think is decent enough pricing to earn a reasonable underwriting margin, we're going to keep doing that.
The mix will change a little bit quarter to quarter, and that can change the accident year combined ratio a bit. The more you get rate, and if inflation stays subdued and you keep growing the business this way, that's only benefits margin.
That makes sense. Okay. Then for Phil, with the run rate of investment income of $525 million, we saw that favorable uptick in investment yield on the portfolio. I'm wondering if we kind of roll this forward, should we expect investment income growth in the coming years as opposed to seeing a slight drag on that metric as a result of low rates?
Well, as you can see, our book yield still is above our market yield. As the portfolio turns over into the yielding market rates, if markets rates were to stay where they are, we think investment income would stay flat on that basis because new money would offset the decline in investment income that would result as the portfolio moves into the lower rate.
So that also-
I was just going to say, we are predicting, or at least internally, that interest rates will rise, but that'll be seen.
Is this also taking into account growth in the portfolio?
Yes. That's what I mean. Growth in the portfolio through new cash flow, right, tends to offset almost directly the degradation in investment income because the portfolio rolls into a lower yielding rate environment.
Okay. One last numbers question. You gave us the impact on the net for agriculture for the full year. What would that be on a gross basis?
It'll be about flat.
around $1.1 billion.
Gross.
Gross? No, much. Gross is much.
$2.5. $2.5, $2.6 gross.
Yeah. Gross is roughly $2.5 billion .
Yeah.
My mistake. That's clear. Thank you very much.
You were trying to catch me. I know that.
Thank you.
We'll take our next question from Tom Mitchell with Miller Tabak.
Morning, Tom.
I was wondering if in the United States, in particular in North America more generally, what the outlook is for growth and exposures. It looks like your premium growth exceeds your average pricing increases so that either exposures are growing in the market or you're taking market share or maybe a little bit of both. I'm just wondering what the outlook looks like to you, let's say today versus six months ago.
Well, exposure growth, that's a good way to think about it. We got exposure growth two ways. As I said in the commentary, three points of the growth came from exposure growth on our in-force portfolio, that's economic activity related. That speaks to affirming economy that is reasonably broad-based. The balance came from us growing share in classes of business where we think the pricing allows us to produce a reasonable underwriting profit. That's informed by our portfolio management that, as you know, is quite granular, quite mature, that we just focus relentlessly on in here. It's our decades-long effort. To just get more and more insightful in a more granular way about particular pockets of business that behave differently than other cohorts, where we see an opportunity, and it's there that we grow exposure.
When we like the pricing to exposure, we will grow exposure. We have the capital and the balance sheet to do it, we know our minds, we will not hesitate.
Okay. That's a very good answer. Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
We'll go next to Greg Locraft with Morgan Stanley.
Good morning. Just wanted to ask about the acquisitions and the impact in the quarter. Was any of the increase in guidance related to the acquisitions? In other words, are they accretive day one and coming through more than we had thought before?
No, not coming through more than we thought. They're not really particularly contributing towards these revised guidance estimate. Remember, the revised guidance, we did not increase our estimate for the balance of the year, current accident year. We revised our guidance based on the year-to-date results of current accident year, cat, investment income, prior period development, and then we rolled forward the investment income. Other than that, for the balance of the year, we did not increase.
Okay, good. No impact of the deals on the guidance. Great. Can you remind us about how impactful these deals will be maybe in the out years? I thought you talked a bit about them in previous quarters as the accretion dilution and when they'll help.
I did a little bit. This is what I'll make a couple of comments about them. First, I do refer you to our annual report shareholder letter that speaks to how the acquisitions we have made over the last five or seven years have performed in aggregate. How they looked versus other means of capital deployment on a return basis. I return analysts to that to begin with. Number 2, these acquisitions over a reasonable period of time on an ROE basis. When I say reasonable, looking out three years will meet or exceed our hurdle rate, our ROE hurdle rate. That's pretty good. In the early period, you always have purchase accounting that weighs on ROE. On an ROI basis, which is the underlying health of it, they are extremely accretive and doing quite well.
It's early days on Mexico, everything we see, it's on track. If anything, it's going to perform better than we expected at this moment, from what we can tell.
Okay. Can you just remind us, where does the amortization from the deals come through in the reported P&L, and how much is that now, or how much was that in the quarter?
It's included in other income. The amount in the quarter, about $20 million.
$20 million. Okay. Great. Thank you very much, and congrats on another good quarter.
Thank you, Greg.
We'll go next to Michael Nannizzi with Goldman Sachs.
Thank you. Just wanted to follow up, Evan, if I could on, you provided some growth metrics in the different businesses. Would it be possible to kind of notionally size out wholesale retail personal lines in North America? Obviously, personal line's been growing a bunch. Just trying to get an idea of what the business footprint kind of looks like today.
Yeah. We don't disclose it on a quarterly basis. I believe that we put on the website. We published at the end of last year when we did investor dinners. We published a piece that we put out, and it breaks down the revenue on an annual basis by division within, I think North America. I think we have that, and you can get that.
Okay. I'll go back and.
I don't have that in my head, but U.S. retail is the largest. After that you have wholesale business, and then after that you have Private Risk Services.
Great. Okay. That helps. Thank you. Then in thinking about.
You can go get it. You can go get the breakdown. It hasn't changed much between what we showed at year-end and what we run now.
Got it. Great. Thank you very much. Then in thinking about retail, is that an area we should assume that you're kind of taking down the whole risk, whereas maybe in the wholesale business, that's where you would write more syndicated programs? Is that breakdown not exactly right?
Yeah, no, Mike, you're not thinking of it right.
Okay.
I think of syndicated to me is much more of a London, where there's a line slip. There's a slip that goes around and everybody takes a share. That's a syndicated.
Right.
In this case, though, of taking down whole risk. In the small and middle market commercial business, one carrier will generally take down the whole risk.
Okay.
In the large account, in the upper middle market business, this varies by line of business. It's hard to paint a broad brush, but in the upper middle market and large account, it's usually a layered approach. You'll participate in certain layers. The guy who takes the primary, puts out the paper, controls the claims and the engineering, and the global servicing, that's where the real action is to me. That's where your real franchise versus just capital in a box. ACE is a lead player in that regard. They come to us.
Okay
They come to us not simply for the capacity, but for all those services. There may be others behind us who will participate in layers, and that's the capital in a box.
I see. Are you seeing any, pardon my nomenclature, I guess syndicated is definitely more of a London term, but in terms of retail or wholesale, are you seeing a divergence in some of those trends that you talked about? Whether it's in the layers, which I understand you don't participate so much in, or in the primary placements on the wholesale side, whether it's from new entrants or new capital kind of spilling out and over into these areas. Are you seeing any divergence on that basis or not really?
No, not really. Where I see divergence, the trends are the same in wholesale and retail. The wholesale side of the business naturally that's the E&S business.
You'll write E&S also. We write plenty of it on the retail side also. That's where it'll be the more difficult to place or tougher classes. Therefore, you might see, as we said, we saw over 7.5% growth in casualty rate on the E&S side, whereas it was more modest on the retail side. Same trends.
That reflects the nature of the risk, and its need for rate. We're seeing the same trend, and we're not seeing stupid competition that is somehow breaking that trend in either.
Great. Thank you very much. Then just last one quickly. Can you elaborate a bit on your comments on the reinsurance markets? I mean, you talked a little bit about additional competition there and new capital. I mean, is there anything that you think could happen over the next 12 months or so that would cause you to consider really pursuing growth on the reinsurance side, or is that just kind of out of the picture for now? Thank you very much for all your answers.
Sure. Look, there's more capital chasing to some degree, less business on the reinsurance side. You always come back in any market economy and any industry. It's that old supply demand thing, and that's what you got going on. You see particularly with a lot of visibility to investors is the cat re side. Though remember, of the overall reinsurance market, it's a small thing that casts a big shadow. There you see alternate capital coming in, capital markets, in addition to traditional players. You don't see exposures growing that much. You got that pond with more drinking out of it. In the broader reinsurance market of casualty, property, marine, the primary players have retained more business. On one hand, there is plenty of capital in reinsurance because the results have been good, so their balance sheets have grown.
Reinsurers are hungry, and as many will profess underwriting discipline, but they chase market share. For many of them, their standards are not the same as ours. For many, it's all they do for a living, and so they feel compelled. That sets the table and reinsurance is softening. How much will it soften? Will low interest rates maintain and put a floor under discipline? Remains to be seen. The way I look at it is, kind of the market you got is the market you should expect to have. We'll continue to play it as we do. If we like the trade, we'll write it. If not, you've seen what our track record is. We will shrink businesses and have no problem doing that.
We are so well spread in so many lines, in so many geographies, I'm not concerned about that for a moment.
Great. Thank you very much.
You're welcome.
We'll take our next question from Joshua Shanker with Deutsche Bank.
Hey, good morning, everyone. Evan, when you were running through your prepared remarks on growth, you gave a lot of percentages. I wonder if we can pin down the premium volume from the acquisitions in the overseas segment.
No, you cannot.
No, we cannot. Okay. Can we get a little.
They become part of the company, we don't just start, "Well, Malaysia is this big," or "Thailand is this big on organic." When we make an acquisition, we don't start distinguishing those in that regard.
No, that wasn't my interest. I just want to get an organic growth number for overseas general.
Sure. I gave you an ACE International growth number, which was 18% in the quarter, half of it was from the acquisitions. 9% organic in ACE International and 9% from the acquisitions. AOG is made up of ACE International, ACE Global Markets, and the overseas business of Combined Insurance.
I'll see what I can do to tease that out. Can we get some disclosure on the $38 million of other? Phil said there was $20 million of negative amortization expense associated with the acquisitions. What else is in there this quarter?
Josh, I read your note, I think you have the sign wrong. That's actually a $38 million expense.
That's an expense, okay.
Other expense, right? It relates primarily to the amortization.
Okay. That's it. Thank you.
Welcome.
We'll take our next question from Paul Newsome with Sandler O'Neill.
Hey, thank you, and good morning.
Good morning.
I'd like your perspective on the linkages between the insurance markets. There's a lot of talk about the market impact of Berkshire getting into the E&S market, of the soft reinsurance market. Historically, these segments have moved first in the cycle, and it drove change in the overall market. I guess yesterday Travelers was talking about auto, which is a little bit different. I guess my question is, do you think this is still a case that some of these markets just ordinarily lead the other markets? Do you think the linkages have strengthened or weakened from past cycles? I think your perspective might be quite unique in that you write a lot of these businesses, you do it globally. You may be in a better position than others to kind of see how one market will affect another.
In past cycles before this one, typically the reinsurance market that led the primary. This time around in this cycle, the primary market led, and in fact, the reinsurance market stayed stable and hardly followed. I don't see that same linkage that way, and I don't believe that the reinsurance market is a leading indicator of where the primary market is going to go. Number one. One of the reasons is the size of balance sheets on the primary side of large players, and they're much better data over the years than last cycle. Because of math and computer power and technology has changed it that way. Given their insight, they're making different kinds of decisions about how to hold retentions, how to think about exposure, and they retain much more, many do, than they did in the past.
That's what creates some of that delinkage between the two. I don't expect that somehow I'm not spooked, that somehow the reinsurance market portends the insurance market. I don't see that in front of me.
What about the excess and surplus market? That also tended to be kind of a leading indicator of the overall market, at least historically.
No, I don't think that's right either. Usually the E&S market expands or contracts with market cycles, as in a softer part of a cycle the E&S market shrinks because the traditional insurers on the retail side, they expand their appetite. They tend to write business that they have no business writing because all of a sudden they think, "Man, that price looks good relative to what I normally write. I'll write a lot of habitational business." They don't realize that that business, that they're writing it at a loss. When they then get disciplined, because as the losses roll in, then they shrink their appetite, the E&S market expands. The E&S market usually follows along that way. It doesn't lead it.
Great. Thank you. Appreciate it.
Welcome.
We'll take our next question from Vinay Misquith with Evercore.
Good morning, Vinay.
Hello, good morning. The first question is on the international growth. I believe you mentioned that there was about 9% organic growth. We've been hearing some rumblings about some sort of growth slowdown internationally. If you could help us understand, are you seeing that, or are you not seeing that in your business?
Well, I'm confused, Vinay. Help me with the question a little more.
Sure
We just published 9% growth organically and 18% without it. Do you mean the economic slowdown?
Yes. We've seen, or we've heard about sort of a slowdown in growth in emerging markets. Have you really seen it in your numbers as yet? It doesn't seem that you've seen that. Do you think that's going to negatively impact you in the future?
Well, I can't really predict the future. First of all, you do see a slowdown in major emerging markets right now, China, Brazil as two in particular. When China slows down, that leads generally most natural resource-based countries will slow down. China, where an awful lot of assemblage for export takes place, those that are doing component manufacturing, so throughout Southeast Asia, et cetera, they will slow down. As China's own consumption, if it slows down, then that will impact many other countries in Asia, and to some degree, in Latin America. We see economic slowdown. It's obviously slowed down dramatically in Brazil, as an example, and our business has slowed down in that country. We got Mexico, Colombia, Chile, the Andean countries have been doing quite well.
When I look at Asia Pacific, China, which we don't consolidate, as you know, because we own a minority position in Southeast Asia, I don't see that in our business. I don't see the economic slowdown. I was just in Indonesia and Malaysia. Those countries are doing quite well. Will they moderate, do I believe? Will they ameliorate in terms of growth? Yes. Particularly because, as I say, China casts such a big shadow. I think it'll still be relative to the developed world. It'll still be robust, relatively robust growth. At any one time, these markets are volatile. At any one time, any one country or two countries can slow down, and that can have some impact on us. On the overall, I don't see it yet. I don't see it in front of me at this moment.
Okay. That's helpful. Then two quick numbers questions for Phil, maybe. The first one is the amortization of intangibles. Phil, I think you mentioned it was $20 million.
Yes.
What number do you see for the next one year? Does that sort of slow down after 12 months? Because most of the amortization happens in the first 12 months.
Yeah, it's 12 to 18 months, and what we're going to do is put a schedule in the 10-K or 10-Q that'll lay out our expectation for the rest of the year.
That'd be great. Just the next question is on the normalized tax rate. Do you have any number for that normalized?
Perspectively, you mean? I would say-
Yes
if you looked at current accident year, ex cats, I would use a number in the neighborhood of 15%.
Okay, that's helpful. Thank you.
We'll take our next question from Jay Cohen with Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
Yes, thank you. A couple questions. First on the investment income, it seemed that the good performance in the first half largely related to private equity gains, yet you upped your expectations for the second half. Did that increase represent continued positive outlook for private equity, or was it the higher interest rates we're seeing?
It's principally the positive interest rates. As we said, the portfolio market rate was up 60 basis points in the quarter, we see that having a positive impact for the next two quarters, at least.
Got it.
Jay, the other thing you have is mortgage. Things like mortgage redemptions have slowed down, to a degree, portfolio turnover has slowed down a little bit, and that benefits it.
That's helpful. Second question was on the favorable reserve development. I'm wondering if you could give us a bit more color as far as what classes you're seeing that development in and what accident years it's coming from.
For the long tail, it's predominantly, overwhelmingly 2007 and prior. For the short tail, it's more recent years. Sean, you have any more color you want to add?
Yeah, sure. As Phil said, it's sort of two-thirds short tail, one-third long tail, Jay. On the short tail, nothing unusual there. It's just claims coming in better than expectations. On the long tail side, we reviewed North America and Tempest this quarter. As Evan said, it's predominantly 2007 and prior. You'll see this in the cube, we did have some favorable release on more recent years, but this is attributable to our shorter tail exposure on multi-claimant industrial accident and our workers' comp book. The theme is 2007 and prior, and better than expectations.
Is it fair to assume, Sean, that the claims environment on the long tail side remains fairly unchanged? Are you seeing, on the margin, any changes in the claims environment?
We're not seeing what I'd call any systemic changes in claim frequency or severity. We do see some frequency changes in our longer tail lines, but I'd call these portfolio specific and really driven by business mix as we take, Evan mentioned the portfolio management, and as we take underwriting actions to come in and out of lines and moderate our exposures with use of deductibles and SIRs and so on. I would call these changes portfolio specific, reflective of our ability to execute on portfolio management and also monitor. We've got a feedback loop, and we're now starting to see these changes in frequencies come through. I think that's the important aspect of this, is it's portfolio specific. You see it in the U.S. and non-U.S., but nothing systemic. These portfolio changes are really in line with our expectations as we execute on underwriting.
That's great, Sean. Thank you.
We'll go next to Meyer Shields with KBW.
Hello.
Caller, your line is open. Please check your mute button.
Sorry, am I coming through?
Yeah. Meyer, you're there.
Okay. Yeah, sorry about that, I hit mute. I just want to continue on that last thought about changes in the reserve environment. Are there any leading indicators-
I'll put him on speaker. Pardon me? No, go ahead.
No, I'm trying to get a sense. Are there any leading indicators that would suggest that the current environment isn't changing, but it might two or three years from now?
Well, Meyer, that's the-
Holy Grail.
Yeah, that's the holy grail. Look, no, there's no indicators. It's relatively benign. I remind you that CPI is not the indicator of insurance-related inflation. Medical inflation, while it's down, still runs around 4%. You have legal inflation that continues. By the way, on the short tail side, you have more inflation around construction materials and you get some hourly rate and all of that, particularly as housing starts, et cetera, pick up. You always have an underlying trend, and you got to know that. It's been pretty steady. We choose not to change long-term inflation factors for casualty. If it turns out to be better, it shows up ultimately in our earnings in prior period. We run a business conservatively, and anyone who's been in the casualty business for any reasonable length of time, it's not a business for optimists.
You understand that the good news comes early and the bad news comes late. We continue to play it conservatively that way, because you don't know two or three years out. If economic activity picks up, well, that's what will drive inflation. We know what's holding inflation down. It's demand side, not supply side.
No, that's very helpful. I appreciate it. I guess I have to look for the Holy Grail. On an unrelated topic-
Well, when you find it, you send it on in here. We'll be very interested.
Okay. Look at the court of appeals. Are you seeing any increased submission activity reflecting sort of the discussion about the major brokers looking to consolidate their placements among fewer carriers? Is that a relevant factor at all?
That's been a slow-moving trend for a bunch of years now. That's not new. When you talk to the major brokers, as I know you do, they'll talk to you about the thousands, the inefficiency as they see it in their own system, and thousands of carriers that they deal with, or many hundreds, and how that's not the most efficient for both client or for themselves. It's how they do business, and for many reasons that occurs, but it all comes down to human and their desire to, over time, rationalize and consolidate that. You see it show up in different activities and actions on the parts of brokers over time. That's been going on, and my sense is that will continue to a degree. It's not event related, and it's not startling, and I haven't seen anything new.
Okay. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
I always see a lot of old wine, new bottles constantly coming out. That's true of kind of any business.
Got it. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
You're welcome.
Operator, we have time for just one more question, please.
Thank you. We'll go to Brian Meredith with UBS.
Thanks. Two quick questions here. First, Phil, corporate admin expenses looked elevated in the quarter. Was there any kind of one-time items related to the closed acquisitions that don't repeat themselves?
It really wasn't related to acquisitions, but we did have some accrual changes related to some work we were doing around the stock compensation area, but nothing that I would take as an ongoing trend.
Okay. Second, Evan, I wonder if you could talk about any kind of notable changes in terms and conditions. I've heard a little bit about an increase in multi-year deals all of a sudden coming back into the market. What are you seeing? Anything that would be at all alarming?
No, I'm not. The only place I'm really seeing multi-year deals of any size has been in cat re.
Great. Thank you.
That always occurs. Other than that, no, I'm not seeing it.
Okay.
Great. Thank you everyone for your time and attention this morning. We look forward to speaking with you again at the end of next quarter. Thank you and good day.
Thank you, Sean.
Thank you. This does conclude today's conference.