All right, great. All right, we're going to go ahead and get started here. This is sadly our last session of the KBW Insurance Conference.
Why not?
But we go out with a bang.
All right.
With Lemonade here. So thank you to Tim for joining us.
You bet.
Tim, maybe I'll start off. Some news that came out from the recent quarter, you're going to be transitioning from CFO to a board seat. So maybe talk about how did that transpire.
Sure.
Why is this the right time for that move?
Sure. At Lemonade, we try and do everything pretty methodically, including succession planning. This is not a sudden or new transition. It has been in the works for quite some time. I have been CFO with Lemonade 9+ years. I have been a CFO in New York for various companies for about 25. We have an extraordinary in-house candidate, Nick Stead, who will be taking over in January. I have been asked to join the board of directors, which is a little unique. Again, we try and do things a little differently at Lemonade. I think that will be a great opportunity for the company and for me to provide a little bit of continuity. We announced that, then January 1st will be the transition date, and Nick will take over full time at that point. He has been with the company five years.
A real superstar, a financial genius. I think he will do great work.
Mm-hmm. Surely a question for Nick, but from speaking with him, do you expect any sort of major moves in terms of changing in how guidance or sort of approaching financial presentations, anything?
I would not expect big changes.
It's one of the benefits of being able to bring an internal candidate versus an external candidate. We've been side by side with Shai and Daniel, our two founders, for years now. I wouldn't expect dramatic changes. I would hope for perhaps just a slight quality upgrade. He's a young, smart, ambitious guy. I'm sure he'll have some thoughtful ways of improving the communication and continuing to do what we do.
Mm-hmm. Yeah. All my conversations with him, I've found him to be certainly a viable candidate.
Good stuff.
for the role. All right. We'll kind of switch into the business side of things. I always think one of the most impressive things about Lemonade is the consistency of growing 30% across markets where, especially in today's softening market, everybody's clamoring for any sort of growth that you can find when you're fighting these rate headwinds. You guys are planning for 30+% growth this year. The long-term goal is 30+%. What makes 30% feasible?
Yeah. It's not a magic number. It has become a little bit of a magic number for us for a couple of reasons. Many of us come from a tech background, and the concept of the rule of 40 and being able to balance growth with profit, or in our case, progress towards profit, and we're heading that direction quite methodically, is an important one. The compounding effect of 30% or something just above 30%, which is where we've been, is over the course of a number of quarters or number of years is pretty dramatic. We also have other guideposts. Our marketing efficiency is a critical measure. We typically acquire something like 3x LTV as a ratio compared to our customer acquisition cost. That's another dynamic or another sort of a guidepost that we track. And we can grow faster.
At some point, there is a limit. You have to provide certain capital surplus ratio requirements. But the market is not an obstacle for us. These are huge markets. We are a very small player at between $1 billion and $2 billion in premium, which is where we are right now. We can grow at this pace for a very long time.
Mm-hmm. I think it was at the investor day where you laid out the goal of being a $10 billion company, and the CAGR along that way was growing at 30%. Can you talk about the mix shift in product lines that you guys are contemplating within that type growth? For people that don't know, you guys are largely Pet Insurance and Renters Insurance right now-
Yep.
makes up the majority of the book, but car insurance and homeowners insurance should be a growing piece of the business.
Yeah, that is right. We are well into the shift from primarily a renters book of business, which if you rewind back to the launch of the business almost 10 years ago, we were something like 95%-plus renters business. That has consistently shifted over time. Pet is now our largest. It is not a majority of the book of business, but it is the largest component, and that has been growing at a very rapid pace, along with car. The TAM, the total market size of pet and car, are radically different. Car is a $300 billion-ish plus business. Pet is quite a bit smaller. But it is a nice bridge transition for us. We are really strategically acquiring insurance customers, not pet customers or rent customers or car customers, but insurance customers.
Our ability now to cross-sell from a renter's policy to a home policy or from a pet policy to a car policy, all of that is well underway. The last few quarters, we have seen our pet and car books grow 50%-plus year-on-year growth rates. Our renter's book is now less than a third of the business. I would expect that mix shift to continue. A couple of years ago, our last investor day, about a year and a half ago, when we set the $10 billion benchmark, I think the implication of car at that point was something around a 40% share. Today, it is in the teens, edging toward the high teens. I would think of that as the shift over the coming years.
Mm-hmm. Do you think long-term, and maybe even beyond this $10 billion number, Lemonade should just resemble the industry premium mix, which is dominated by home and auto?
I think so. I think that is right. We have, I think, changed the market somewhat. I think the renter's market looks very different today than it looked five or seven years ago, in part because of what Lemonade has been able to do. We have been able to take what was an often unloved or hard-to-make-profit sector of the business, and change the mindset there. You will see ads now from large incumbent insurance companies that focus on renters insurance. That was not the case five years ago. I don't think we should take all the credit for that, but I do think we deserve some of the credit for that. Pet, likewise, we were able to do in four or so years what other single product pet providers took 10 or 12 years to do.
That means something is intrinsically, something is structurally working well in our approach to this market, and it is working across multiple products. I do think we have the products we need today. We can grow to $2 billion or $5 billion or $10 billion of premium without significant new product adds. We will always keep that door open, and there are additional products we might provide, but I think we have essentially what we need to get there.
Mm-hmm. Is it still the case that your typical new customer, it is the first insurance product they have ever purchased?
It is often true, but not always true at this point. We are getting better at cross-selling, but I do not think we are quite great at it yet to our own existing customers. But every day we get a little bit better. We have started to invest in brand marketing. We do not spend a lot of money, but compared to the zero spend that was three or four years ago, it is a significant increase. You will now see in key large markets where there is a density of our target customers, you will see out-of-home advertising or more general brand advertising, and that is a transition.
Our brand awareness has gone from zero to low single digits and is heading towards a rate that we like, which is heading towards a double-digit awareness. All that takes time. We are pretty good at unique approaches that do not require Super Bowl ads or dramatic spending.
That process is underway.
The college football team jersey patch is becoming pretty popular if you're-
There you go.
If you're looking to.
Well, we'll never say never.
Do you mind sharing with us the latest cross-sales stats that you guys are disclosing in terms of what percentage of either premium or customers are multi-product customers, and maybe on a new business basis?
Yeah.
Yeah.
Yes. This is really where the opportunity lies, and we are working hard to push that number up, and it does take time. We're still at that sort of between 5% and 6% rate of customers that have more than one policy. That's well below what industry norms are. It's not surprising or new information, but I think that's a gap that we are actively working to close. Part of that is just presence. We're not yet in every product in every state. One of the real benefits of the sort of explosive growth in AI model capabilities in the last several quarters is you've seen our launch pace in states accelerate dramatically. That's an area where I think that cross-sell capability will increase. Eventually, we'll have every product in 50 states in the U.S. We'll have additional products in Europe.
In Europe, we just have two products in four states. A lot of potential room left to grow there.
Mm-hmm. Is your most frequent cross-sold customer a Pet Insurance and a Renters Insurance?
It is, and we just talked about this in a couple of the meetings. All the paths are happening. That is the top path because we have a pretty high quantity of renters. All the paths seem to be happening. Most of our renters customers have a pet or two, something like 60%. Most of our customers have a car that is insured, at least one car that is insured, and that's typically with another provider, not Lemonade at this point. Those are really good indicators. I think we'll see a balance of growth, both from existing customers expanding, but also bringing in new customers. That balance may shift over the next two or three years. Not dramatically. I would expect you'll continue to see more growth coming from existing customers.
Mm-hmm. Are you fine with the conclusion of saying there's zero incremental CAC associated with cross-sales? Or is that an over-assumption?
It is absolutely true, but it's not always absolutely true. We are, and this is to the great dismay of the CFO and the finance staff, we do spend money to sell to existing customers. That's not unique to Lemonade. I would kind of send you back to the brand awareness comments I made. We have lots and lots of customers who know we have a renters product and don't necessarily know we have a homeowners product or a pet or a car product. That is an area where you can see where large incumbents who've spent billions of dollars over decades, that's how they've surmounted that challenge. We don't intend to spend billions of dollars over decades. We intend to approach that in a Lemonade way, and we are making progress on that front.
But we do have customers that come through all products and add a second product. All the different chains are definitely working.
Mm-hmm. The U.S. is certainly where I'd say more of the focus is, more of the airtime is. Europe has actually been an interesting addition to the growth story.
What is the strategic importance of being in Europe? Is it purely just diversification or another growth opportunity market? What sort of is the outlook there? Do you feel like there's still countries you could grow into in Europe and even maybe other South America-
Yeah.
or anywhere else?
Having a presence in both the U.S. and Europe is unique. It's very uncommon. We're not the only ones, but it's an awfully small group who are significantly focused on both. Part of it is because we can. It wasn't a dramatic risk nor a dramatic investment to enter Europe when we did. It took us a few years to get our arms around some of the more nuanced differences. The obvious differences of language and regionality we were familiar with, but understanding and becoming really adept at price comparison websites, for example, which is where a vast majority of business is done in Europe, took some time. Then we saw things sort of, it wasn't quite a light switch, but a pretty dramatic improvement after several years in market, such that we now have our largest territory is our newest territory.
The U.K. is our most recent launch. We have all the learnings and sort of pain points from the other three territories that we are able to bring to our launch in the U.K. We are getting better as we go. We are in four territories. We only have two products in Europe. I expect we will have more. We have talked about the potential value of a Pet Insurance product in Europe and a car product in Europe, neither of which we have yet. I think those are still to come. Europe someday should be more or less equal to the U.S. from a market size perspective. Obviously, the key focus is in the U.S., but we are seeing triple-digit growth. We are seeing loss ratios come down. It looks a lot like what we saw in the early years in the U.S. now being replicated in Europe.
Mm-hmm. To the extent that it is largely sold via price comparison sites, is there really no purpose of spending on brand awareness over there? Is that a lower priority?
Yeah. It is a different dynamic. It is not quite so black and white as that, but it does require that you invest in different ways in different territories. I do not know that there is zero benefit, but at this point, it is very focused on the direct consumer aspect.
Yeah.
In the U.S., the reason I think about this is because with Europe, you only having a couple of products, there is not really an opportunity for that graduation phenomenon. I guess my comment or question wants to be, do you still like the graduation phenomenon that you guys talked about? Probably several years ago was when you most prominently talked about it. But the idea of finding a customer early in their financial journey, with Renters Insurance or Pet Insurance, and then growing with them as their financial needs grow.
Yeah.
With new products.
Initially, that was very focused on a renter becoming a homeowner, because that is the business that we were in at that time, and that was really our only opportunity. I think it is much broader than that now, which is my comments about acquiring insurance customers versus product customers. Really all the same advantages we have seen in the U.S. are replicating in Europe, and whether that is a cross-sell. Ultimately, that is what is driving our thinking about launching a Pet Insurance product and launching a Lemonade Car product is we think we will see similar dynamics. I would say graduation is certainly interesting, but it is a broader view now, which is all these folks over time tend to acquire more goods, have more risk, have greater wealth over time, and have greater insurance needs. We see it very similar in Europe.
Mm-hmm. Have you guys disclosed what the number one Lemonade customer, in terms of how big it is, or how many products that individual has?
We have not-
Just so you can kind of think of the horizon.
Yeah. We've not done that recently, so this is pretty dated. It's quite a notable distinction. Our average premium per customer still starts with a 4. It's less than 5.
It's not $4,000?
It is not 4,000.
Yeah.
Less than $500. We do have customers that have all of our products. It is limited because that only occurs in a few states in the U.S. But it is definitely north of $10,000 per year versus $400. That is obviously a pretty dramatic increase. The average in the U.S. is somewhere between $4,000 and $5,000 a premium. I do not know if you have checked your insurance bill, but I imagine it is well into the four or maybe five digits. That is really where we are headed.
Take a second to pause and see if there is any questions before we move on. I certainly want to talk about, this has been a great, excellent conversation around the growth side of things. Ultimately, as a financial analyst, we want to see what this translates to on the bottom line.
Yep.
I think 2027 is your sort of target year to be the first year of full year positive adjusted EBITDA. What are the stepping stones? What have the stepping stones been to getting to that-
Yep.
milestone?
Yeah. Things are right on track. We've indicated that Q4 this year we expect to be our first full quarter of positive EBITDA, and that the subsequent year will be wholly positive. We've not given any quarterly guidance yet at this point. We likely will early in next year. I think this theme of the rule of 40 we like, and again, not that it's a typical insurance metric. We think keeping that balance of growth and profitability and seeing that line improve, and it's not so much the rule of 40, like 40 is the number, but the idea that we have, for some time, I think for us, an almost limitless market, and that if we can support a 30% growth rate and take the profit line from negative to positive and we're on track to do that.
Those two can kind of work in tandem. We think that's the best, has been and will be the best strategy for us. From a profit perspective, in this period it's a little bit of an optics game, right? Because negative one and positive one both are kind of zero. But we get that we live in the real world and investors and others who are watching the company, that's a pretty dramatic difference. But I do think we'll continue to lean in on growth. I think we've done a really nice job of showing that we can deliver positive adjusted free cash flow, showing we can deliver free cash flow, positive free cash flow. EBITDA positive is now just on the horizon. So I think checking these boxes as we go through are the important ones.
Being able to talk about LAE as being dramatically better than best in class, that's a really important margin impact. I'm a little less focused, I would say, on what's the exact bottom line improvement quarter over quarter, but more what's the year look like? What's the following year look like? What's the following year look like? Is the 3-to-1 LTV to CAC ratio holding? Is the cross-sell number expanding? Is the dollar retention number? These are all really important metrics that we've developed over time. If they're all improving, that bottom line will certainly follow. But in some ways we'll think of it more as an output than an input.
Mm-hmm. When you think of what could take that trajectory off track, I tend to think a lot of it is within your control, and even in the insurance risk retention that you have, it's short tail lines. You don't have much CAT risk. You don't have casualty that could develop adversely. It's really thinking about marketing dollars and hiring engineering talent maybe to oversimplify it, but it does feel like a lot of it's in your control, right, in terms of getting to that number.
I think that that's absolutely fair. We don't have an advantage in predicting the weather, and we don't pretend to. That can happen, but that tends to be a short-term thing that can affect a quarter. We've seen it a couple times over longer periods. We've had a couple years of somewhat calmer weather and less impact. The big things outside of a spike in claims are really under our control. We've got essentially, in broad strokes, about 1,300 employees at the company. Two or three years ago, we were, or four or five years ago, we were a third the size. We had about 1,300 employees. While I'm not saying that number will be static forever, we can grow 2x, 4x, 6x, and there's just no scenario that we can see where that headcount has to grow dramatically.
It will grow more than zero, but I think that's kind of a box that we can check. Every day that gets a little better with AI improvement. We can do things like launch 10 states in a year, and it used to take us several years to do that, and the team is essentially the same size as it was. So you're kind of seeing the benefits of some of these improvements we're able to make.
Am I recalling it correctly that the guidance has been or the expectation or target has been that GAAP profitability will follow one year after adjusted EBITDA turns positive?
We've said roughly a year.
Okay.
We have said that very specifically. We have not yet said this quarter we will be positive, and that is a choice we have made. We have Investor Day coming up in the fall, and we will kind of take a look at our best view, forward view at that time, and we may give a little more expansive view at that point. I would think of approximately a year later.
For us, the difference is not dramatic. It is stock-based compensation, which is a fairly static number. It is related to employees. We know how many employees we have. And interest expense, which is a pretty knowable, predictable number.
Mm-hmm. You probably haven't been in some of the meetings with a lot of the other companies, but topics like ROEs and combined ratios come up a lot. Do you have a sort of a target or a guidepost for investors that traditional insurance investors that want to think about ROE and combined ratio for Lemonade at scale, maybe call it your $10 billion premium number. If that is scale, is there an ROE and a combined ratio around that?
There is not, and that is a choice we have made, but I will answer the question. We see no evidence that says we shouldn't be best in class. Best in class is really an expense ratio side of the equation, meaning a loss ratio in the 60s, we are kind of there. Whether it ebbs and flows, and it is up and down, and obviously that can change over time. The product we are selling is paying for a customer's claims. I don't think we will have an underwriting advantage, but a lot of that we would expect to put back into the price to the customer to enable growth. A loss ratio, I would expect to be in a range that is comparable to other strong performers. The way I think about it is that is somewhere in the 60s.
The expense ratio side of the equation, I think is where the dramatic, the significant advantage is most likely to play out. Expense ratio averages, and this is our smaller part of the world, P&C and the consumer side of the business, typically around 30%. Best in class may be 15% ish. We see no evidence where we shouldn't be best in class or better. There will come a day when we'll spend some time talking about combined ratios and those kinds of metrics. That's what I'd expect us to be. That day is still a bit in the future.
Mm-hmm. We'll switch over to talk a little bit about maybe the market backdrop, and this has been a subject that's been permeating this conference and frankly, the past months or quarters. Just the soft market conditions, and especially in personal lines and what that's leading to across the competitive environment, and how that translates into rate reductions and heightened competition for acquiring customers. How do those two variables impact your go-to-market strategy now? Have you sensed a need for Lemonade to pull back because marketing dollars can't be spent as efficiently?
Candidly, it doesn't affect us a lot. It does affect us. We don't ignore these things. We're not immune to these things. But it doesn't change what we do and what our plans are to do significantly. The reason for that is we are such a small part of the market that even when we're growing at 30% plus, even when Pet Insurance is now our largest book of business, and we're starting to look like an equivalent provider as those who've been doing it for a very long time, these are still very small relative to the total market. Compare that to a GEICO, a Progressive, or an Allstate, or a State Farm. All these folks we compete with, when the market changes, they are the market, and so it really has a significant impact on them. Does it affect us at the margin? Yeah.
Do we grow 1% more or 1% less? Maybe. Is a given state or a given product going to face a little bit more of a headwind? Maybe. But the big picture is wholly unchanged. We are launching more states. We are growing 30% plus. All of the AI enablement is full speed ahead, 1,000 miles an hour. None of those fundamental strategies are much changed. 12 months from now, these factors will change.
Mm-hmm. Is the digital marketing costs for lines of business like Renters and Pet Insurance, which are the majority of your mix right now, are those correlated or sensitive to the auto side? Right now, I think of the GEICOs and the Progressives of the world are spending aggressively, mostly focused on auto. Yes, they're expanding into home as well, but does that impact the cost of customer acquisition in Pet Insurance?
I'm not sure I have a great answer to that, to be honest. For us, the channels are fairly distinct, meaning we know quite quickly which product that customer is likely to be a potential buyer of. There are certain channels that are wholly focused for us, not necessarily for everybody, on Pet Insurance versus Renters Insurance versus car insurance. There's some overlap. I think we're quite adept at quickly reallocating growth spend based on what we're seeing, what that LTV to CAC ratio is. I don't really have good data that says this shift in the car market is affecting Pet Insurance.
Yeah.
That's what I got.
That's fair.
Yeah.
We'll switch over to maybe a fun topic that I'm sure you're excited to talk about on the autonomous vehicle side. Maybe starting off for audience members that aren't familiar with Lemonade's product that you guys came out with-
Yeah.
in February. Do you want to give an overview of-
Sure.
what that was?
Yeah. We put together a product in partnership with Tesla over several months last year that is providing traditional car insurance but for those who are using a Tesla fully supervised driving or autonomous driving. What the data shows and what many studies that you may be familiar with show is that the accident rate, the frequency, not necessarily severity, but the frequency is dramatically lower for each mile, every mile that's driven under autonomous versus a human driver, something on the order of 50%. Our cost is something on the order of 50% lower for those miles driven. There are other risks that are unaffected. The tree falls in the car, that risk is unchanged. This product's in rollout mode. We're in five states at this point. It started in two, we're now in five. The N is very small.
There's not many folks who are driving many miles under fully autonomous, but it's growing pretty rapidly. It's not a premium driver for us yet, but I would think of it as an indicator of where Lemonade is headed. When we got the information and sat with Tesla and understood the data, our reaction was, "This is amazing. Let's go." They've not gotten that reaction from other players, at least not yet. There may be others that come over time. But if you go to a large car insurance provider with billions in premium and say, "I have a thing where we're going to charge 50% lower rates," it's not very interesting. To us, we're like, "Let's go. This is amazing, and we're going to learn a ton. We're going to gather data.
We're going to roll this out in as many states as we can." That's the mode we're in now. I think it's another sort of a proof point of our model, which is we're underwriting drivers. Whether they're a human driver or whether they're a software driver, just a driver. The data suggests and supports this risk level. For us, it's just another input. So it feels radically different because the human side of it obviously is radically different. But from a risk perspective, it's same data, same underwriting models, better result, and a better price for the customer.
Mm-hmm. That's a small piece, though, I guess, of Lemonade Car when you look at the absolute-
It's tiny. Yeah.
premiums and-
Yeah, yeah.
dollars associated with it.
Yep.
Maybe talk a little bit about Lemonade Car specifically and sort of what you think differentiates Lemonade Car from maybe other traditional auto insurers.
So a couple of notable differences. One, as with everything we try to do, we're very as data-driven as possible. In car, that means telematics. It means the more data we can get about your driving behavior, your driving experience, the better. The better for us in evaluating your risk, and the better for you in terms of a more accurate price. It is still very common for car underwriting to be a world of averages. If you have two customers that have a similar car and a similar background, maybe a similar credit rating, maybe a similar address, their price is going to be awfully similar, if not the same. Under a Lemonade underwriting approach using telematics-enabled data, those two individuals are going to be priced fundamentally different. Not 5% or 10% different, but significantly different pricing because it's based on their actual driving behavior.
When do they drive? How many miles do they drive? How aggressively or conservatively do they drive? That's what really drives risk, and that's what drives our underwriting model. That's thing one. Thing two is there are other car insurers who utilize telematics, but all telematics is not equal. At Lemonade, almost 100% of our car customers are being tracked almost 100% of their miles. That's not the case at any other provider. So 90-something percent times 90-something percent is 90-something percent. Other providers, and we don't have exact numbers, but it may be 10% times 10%, and now you're at 1%. So it's a radically different density of data that's being captured, and we think that's only to the benefit of evaluating risk and differentiating amongst drivers and giving a better price.
Something like, just very rough strokes, something like two-thirds of car customers are overpaying, typically, if you had a more granular view of their risk. About a third are underpaying, and the third are so much worse that they're the reason the math works out. So the more we can get at that average, we're going to be much more attractive to those folks that are overpriced. Perhaps we don't get the ones that are underpriced, and we don't necessarily want that business. So those are very distinct differences. There's some restrictions. California has different rules of what you can and can't do. That may change over time. But those are pretty distinct advantages that I think we have.
Mm-hmm. Is pay per mile still a prominent product or a piece of the mix of Lemonade Car?
It is. Customer preference tends to win out, and that's a more specific type of customer who wants to know that they're paying the lowest price but is open to more variability. The flip side of that coin is there's a benefit to saying, "All right, my rate's going to be this every month." We do provide the pay per mile product. I would layer the telematics as a more important driver than the strict pay per mile. The pay per mile aspect, you can charge a fixed rate, but we still collect that mileage data. So there's different levels of benefit to us, whether they're on the pay per mile product or even if they're not on the pay per mile.
Pause here again, see if there's any questions here before we finish up on AI. I would maybe say, AI's obviously been an important component of the Lemonade story and how you guys use it across the entire value chain in the ecosystem within Lemonade. What's maybe a use case or something sort of recent that you guys have found a use case for AI that you feel like is differentiated?
The list is pretty long. We don't have a good view into what others are doing because we tend to talk about it more than the average company because it's a core of who we are and what we do. I think a couple of areas that I might highlight, one, and these are things I think you can see outside. We launched more new states in our Renters Insurance product in the first six months of this year than in the prior three years. That's a direct effect of the ability to adapt and understand and file, in a very specific market. Every state is notably different in terms of the approval requirements, the rates and forms that you're filing, and that flows through into product.
The reason we can do that is because things that used to take both an engineer and a product manager working in tandem or a few of each that might have taken a few weeks or a few months can now be done in a few days. That enables that. You can't really shorten the regulator process, but you can really radically shorten the internal process to launch a new state, and sometimes that's an entire new product in a new state. More often it might be a feature that, in an existing state where it's a little less publicly visible, we don't make a big deal about it, but we can launch those in pretty good time.
I think another place you're seeing it is in our ability to grow the business and improve the customer experience, yet have fewer people providing that, whether it's customer service or claims support. The way you do that is automating the simple stuff and consistently moving that line, and then applying your people to the more complex or the more nuanced or the more types of claims that can benefit from more human interaction or customer support. We've seen that. We've been able to provide dramatically more claim settlements, dramatically more customer inquiries with fewer heads than we were able to two or three years ago. All of that is really AI-enabled. The last piece that's probably worth mentioning is, this came up in a couple of meetings today, which is when the pace of capabilities is increasing.
A new model comes out and that model compared to the one a week ago or a month ago or six months ago is radically different, far more complex, and the pace of that change is accelerating, not decelerating. This is all kind of stuff we know. Our model, our people, the DNA of our organization embraces that. We're able to quickly evaluate new models, determine the security level, and get what makes sense into the product and into what actually touches customers in an hour, a day, or a week, or whatever the right timeframe is. That is not common in large insurance companies. It is not common yet that someone wholly embraces something that came out last week versus six weeks ago or versus six months ago in terms of these AI capabilities. I think that's an advantage that we'll continue to carry.
Yeah. That's fair. All right, well that takes us out of time. I want to thank Tim, Lemonade for joining us and thank you all for coming to the KBW Insurance Conference.
Thank you.
Thank you.