Going on the next session. Really pleased to have Prudential Financial with us today. Up on stage with me is Andy Sullivan, Chairman and CEO. Also want to acknowledge Tina Madon and the IR team in the front row. Ryan, it's been about 18 months since you took over as-
Is that all?
Something along those lines, as CEO, and you did provide a strategic update recently. I was hoping to start by summarizing the key components of your go-forward strategy and what you view as changing at the company in the new strategy.
Oh, there's a good bit that's underway and changing, and hopefully everyone had a chance to listen to our call. It's very simple and straightforward. There's four main strategic priorities. The first is narrowing our geographic footprint in our insurance businesses. I'm a huge believer in focus, and my team and I believe that Prudential had become, my words, spread too thinly.
We think it's really important to focus talent, focus capital, focus investment, if you're going to be successful. So we are narrowing our retirement and insurance business footprint. We're currently in over a dozen markets.
That'll be about half of that. In the process, raising well north of $3 billion as we exit those markets. We already have good momentum on that process. I've been asked about that announcement.
Said, "Well, we wouldn't have talked about it if we didn't have some momentum already in that regard." But narrowing the footprint isn't the objective or the goal, right? It's the enabler of what we can then do, which is really the second priority.
I'm a big believer is pick the businesses that you believe that you could compete and win in, and be a top-tier player. Because no matter the industry, the top-tier players get the lion's share of the profitability, get the lion's share of the growth, from a growth rate perspective.
We believe that our global retirement, global asset management, and what we call our select protection businesses, so life in the U.S. and Japan, and group insurance in the U.S., are businesses that we have the right set of capabilities that when we continue to invest in them, that we will be a top-tier player, and get those rewards.
Our goal, as we've said, is to be category leaders in those businesses. The third priority is about optimizing our capital deployment. There's really two aspects of this. The first aspect, and this is a change, a difference is we've taken a much more top-down oriented approach to capital deployment.
We have every intention to be, my words, just excellent capital allocators to make sure that every dollar of capital that gets allocated produces a very strong return above the cost of capital.
The other part of the third priority is shifting the mix of the business. It is really important when you have a set of businesses that are capital heavy, and our asset intensive insurance businesses are, that you have the right mix of capital light businesses. The capital light businesses are, you should think of group insurance and asset management.
Then finally, all that fueled by a change in the operating model, priority four, which many people sort of digest down to just expense reduction, but it's broader than just expense reduction.
We are really changing how we operate so that we're simpler, we're faster, we're more decisive, and as an outcome, we're taking out a significant amount of cost from the organization, $750 million between now and the end of 2028. Those four priorities, we believe, will let us exceed our potential, and I've been pretty upfront that that is the goal, is to really take this to the next level.
Great. So one of the priorities is exiting emerging markets. How are you thinking about redeploying the capital that does get freed up from those exits, and what areas are you the most focused on for redeploying the capital inorganically?
Yeah. So, the words I use on this, Ryan, is I've widened the aperture from what the previous strategy and previous team was aimed at. We used to be very focused on just asset management and very focused on only what I would call programmatic small to medium size acquisitions in the asset management space.
So first and foremost, when I say widen the aperture, there's now three different areas that we are looking at inorganic opportunities. First is asset management, second is group insurance, and third is select opportunities to expand our retirement footprint in the U.K. Maybe let me take each of those.
On the asset management side, we've again widened. We're certainly still looking at programmatic type acquisitions. Those would likely be if we do single asset class that are high multiple acquisitions, because candidly, it would be too dilutive to do very large scale things.
You could think of maybe infrastructure equity as an example of that. Those are still on the list of potentials, but we've also begun looking at more cross-asset class, broader platform that when combined with our asset management business, could produce better, stronger expense and revenue synergies.
With a particular focus, obviously, on private alternatives as the higher margin, higher growth areas, and private credit, given the connection back to the balance sheet. So that's asset management. Group insurance, we have a very strong national account group insurance business, mostly up market, mostly life and disability.
There's a great opportunity, given the set of capabilities we have, to look to continue our product diversification. And typical next set of products would be dental and vision, as an example. But also to continue to strengthen our downmarket capability.
And when I say downmarket, you have to always specify, because that's different depending on the company. We're really strong in employers that have 1,000-plus employees, so really getting down below that. Then finally, selectively looking to expand our retirement capabilities in the U.K. I'm a big believer in say what you're going to do and then do it. You've already seen us do that.
We talked about it in August, but you've already seen us do the deal with Standard Life and CVC as partners expanding into the BPA market. The important part of that deal is that it brings a new, large, sizable client to PGIM for us to manage high-fee, high-margin products like asset-backed finance, commercial loans, and direct lending. But that's the set of things that we're really focused on.
You've probably been asked this a lot, but how do you go about the sequencing of this? You're selling emerging markets. Is there a risk that you end up sitting on that capital for a while as you look for the right compelling opportunities, or do you already have certain targets in mind? Or just how do you think that sequencing will play out?
Yeah. I'm always very upfront of the sequencing of this is a complex thing. But it is an intentional sequenced capital rotation. I think the first thing that needs to be understood is you don't sell businesses and then start a process of buying businesses, because these processes are year-long, 2-year-long type processes.
So it is a safe assumption that we have both processes in flight. Part of widening the aperture on the acquisition side is that gives us an ability to get more at bats, to get more looks at platforms, and to, over time, match capital sources and capital uses. But safe to assume that we're doing both simultaneously, and we don't have an intention of raising a bunch of capital and then sitting on it, because that's not a great answer for anybody.
I guess related to this, but just how do you stay disciplined on M&A, given that the areas you're focused on, particularly probably asset management and group insurance, are also areas there's a fair amount of other likely buyers in, and it could be a competitive process to do M&A?
Yeah. So maybe a couple thoughts on this. First, you need to look at a lot of things. That's really, really important. When I talk about this, the investment banking space is a very important space. I have very good relationships with investment bankers. But I'm not a believer on relying on investment banking processes.
Most of the best acquisitions and deals I've seen in my career have been principal-to-principal relationships that have been built over time. I spend a very large portion of my time, you've heard me say this on the call, in the know and in the flow, developing principal-to-principal relationships. So we get a lot of looks, but it's also so that the counterparties know us, know we bring more to the table than just the best price, than just the price tag.
The other thing is we're an advantaged acquirer, and I really deeply believe that. When you look at asset management, obviously a number of the private alternative capabilities we look at, we have a $500 billion balance sheet.
We have probably one of the biggest balance sheets in the world, and we have the ability to bring that balance sheet to bear to help with the growth of these private alternative businesses. That is very, very attractive to counterparties.
We have an incredible liability generation engine with a brand that's second to none. That is very attractive to these counterparty asset managers. If you think about the group insurance conversation we just had, with the right complementary platform, there's incredible revenue and expense synergies that could be shared with the counterparty. We believe we're an advantaged acquirer that can bring a lot more than just paying the top dollar and paying the top multiple.
Got it. It's probably my last one on M&A, but if you do find an opportunity that is larger, that exceeds your excess capital, what other resources could you pull on to fund a larger transaction? Is there a scenario where you would also consider some portion of equity financing on an M&A deal?
Yeah. I do get asked this question quite a bit because the brains naturally went to, okay, well north of $3 billion. Everyone said, okay, that probably means 3-point whatever. That's not big enough to actually rotate. We have other sources, and other levers, and other tools.
The very next one that I would go to is we are a sizable company with very big blocks of business, so reinsurance is an important way that we can raise capital, and that's through third-party reinsurance or reinsuring through our affiliated platform, Prismic. That can bring pretty significant firepower in addition to that well north of $3 billion.
Obviously, for the right acquisition, and when I say right acquisition, it needs to be strategically down the middle, it needs to be a very good cultural fit, and it needs to pencil over the long term for the shareholder from an accretion/dilution perspective. We could suspend the buyback. We have a very high bar for that.
I want to be very clear. As you would expect, that is a very high bar, not an intention to do it, but it is a tool and a lever. You mentioned, the ultimate tool as a public company is equity issuance, and that is an even higher bar, is the way we look at it. We sort of look at that priority. The asset sales produce a level of capital, reinsurance adds to that, and we have additional levers if we see something really, really right that is even bigger.
Got it. I want to move to PGIM. Last year, you transitioned from a multi-manager model to more of a single integrated model and platform. What were the reasons that you decided to do that? How are the expense and revenue benefits emerging from that transition so far?
Yeah. The reasons were very simple. It is all about growth and customers. What has happened in the asset management space, is the world is moving from a specialist model, where the deployers of capital, the institutional providers of capital, and even the retail, used to be willing to work with dozens of asset managers.
That is changing. More and more, we see our clients, they do not want to work with dozens of asset managers. They want to work with two or three or four, and that requires those two or three or four to have much broader and deeper capabilities.
You need to be able to speak for all the different ways on the risk spectrum, and on the liquidity spectrum that they want to deploy capital. Our customers were telling us, "We want to work across.
We do not want to be called on by six different salespeople from Prudential, one for fixed income, one for private capital, one for real estate, and we want to have a strategic conversation with you." The rationale was all customer-driven and growth-driven. From a growth-driven perspective, I think we said this on the call, only 10% of our clients in PGIM have business across more than one asset class.
If you looked across other asset managers, that is a significant opportunity for us. We are absolutely on the low end of the spectrum. How is that going? Our distribution has been integrated, and we already have sold cross mandates where that number, it will take us time, and it will be over time, but we expect that 10% cross-sell rate to go up significantly over time. It is on track.
We've not lost. Part of what you worry about when you do these things in asset management is talent loss. We've not lost anybody that we didn't want to lose in the distribution system. There's the expense fallout of that. If you think about fixed income, private capital, real estate, they were run as fully separate businesses.
They had their own CEOs, their own chief technology officers, their own chief HR officers. We had six of everything. So there was a significant expense opportunity. At this point, we are ahead of pace, ahead of schedule, you should expect that we're going to be able to take north of $150 million out of that business over time. That will show up in growth rates and margins. All of what I just went through.
Just any color you can give on how the current pipeline looks at PGIM for flows?
Yeah. So the most important thing to really keep in mind on flows is, first of all, last quarter we were very pleased with. We have a tale of two cities, that anybody that's in the public equity business has a tale of two cities. The public equity business has been in, for a very long time, systemic outflow.
Our Jennison business has been in systemic outflow. Interestingly enough, everyone's business is the same, though. Earnings have been well-maintained because of how equity markets have performed over time. You got to kind of set that aside. Outside of that, we feel very good about our flow opportunities, mostly because of what I just went through.
Yeah.
The integration of the distribution force, the fact that we're starting to see cross mandates sales, but also because of the work that we've done to grow direct lending and asset-backed finance.
We are very pleased with the mandate wins that we're beginning to see. Our intention, going back to what I said of customers want to work with two, three, or four, we intend to be in that set of people that customers want to work with.
Got it. At the strategic update, one of the targets you laid out was doubling the earnings contribution at PGIM from about 12%- 25% over the long term. How much of that can be achieved organically through the revenue and expense benefits that you were just talking about? How much of that would you say is needed from an inorganic standpoint to get there?
I very much appreciate the question because, as soon as, I think, those words left my lips, the immediate focus was acquisition, acquisition. The reality is there are two levers, organic growth and inorganic growth. First, thank you. Over the long term, this you should think of over 5 years.
This is not overnight. It takes time to change business mix and move the system. About half the journey, Ryan, will come from the organic growth. You think we're covering 12%- 25%, about half, rough numbers.
We believe we have organic line of sight too, based on the things we've already just talked about. We believe very strongly we have good organic growth opportunities. Jacques and his team are already after that. In particular, we're seeing good growth in some of the more private credit-oriented, direct lending, asset-backed finance, et cetera.
That means the other half, though, has to come from inorganic. As I said earlier, we've widened the aperture. That can be in anything from plugging in an infrastructure equity business to something that's more across. Obviously, we're looking for things that are most synergistic. We're not looking for just pure scale deals, because those candidly don't When you're already scaled in an asset management business like fixed income Scale acquisitions don't work-
Yeah
because clients have concentration limits. They can't do much more fixed income necessarily with us. We have to get new clients. But half the journey organically, half inorganically, and over a 5-year period, and our confidence level is high in that journey.
Got it. You mentioned this earlier, but a few weeks ago, you did announce a new partnership in the U.K.
Yes.
On U.K. risk transfer, I think the partnerships with Standard Life and other capital providers and other asset managers. Can you give a little more information on how that will all work and how the benefits will flow through to Prudential?
Yeah, absolutely. First and foremost, that's a good example, Ryan, of when we announced things on the August call. We already have a lot of momentum in various areas that we had line of sight to getting things done, and it goes back to say what you're going to do and do what you say.
The first thing I'd say is this builds on, and I think most know this, we have a very successful top-tier longevity risk transfer business in the U.K. So we've been in the U.K. BPA longevity risk transfer space, not in the BPA, but in that general world, for over a decade.
So we have good expertise, so we're building on that longevity risk transfer business. When we do partnerships, acquisitions, anything with counterparties, we look for high-quality counterparties.
I will tell you, I know Andy Briggs and the Standard Life team very deeply. I think the world of them, they are very talented. He's done a great job at Standard Life. CVC is one of the best private capital firms in the world, and obviously extremely capable in the U.K.
That partnership, if you think of those two parties, plus what we bring to the table from our knowledge of pension risk transfer and our capabilities in PGIM, and in particular, U.S. capabilities, positions that triumvirate along with Goldman Sachs.
We're very confident that we will win business in that GBP 2 billion-plus level, and we'll win it at nice return levels. The most important aspect, though, that I would stress about this partnership is the PGIM aspect.
At the end of the day, this creates what we believe will be one of PGIM's largest clients, at the end of the day, where PGIM is managing asset-backed finance, commercial mortgage loans, direct lending, higher fee, higher margin-type products as we look to juice up the margin and grow PGIM.
Got it.
Really pleased, and we've known the Standard Life and CVC team for quite some time.
I want to shift to the cost save. I know it's not just cost, but the efficiency gains that you spoke about, the $750 million that you're targeting. I guess, just can you give us some more details on the types of things you're looking to do to achieve that how the timing of the benefits might emerge, and how you're using technology to also assist with all this?
Yeah, absolutely. First, thank you for your statement. It is more than just cost, because it really is changing how we operate across the firm. That is all about speed of decision-making and speed of execution, which a simpler, more focused firm enables you to do. We have high confidence in the expense reduction numbers.
We had put out $150 million as the first tranche of that by the end of 2027. We are well underway, well in hand, feel great about that. The $600 million additional, we have a lot of levers at Prudential that we can lean into, and I would mention a couple.
First is good old traditional organizational design or organizational simplification, getting much fewer levels in our hierarchy so we can go faster. If you looked at our tenure and, my words, our top heaviness, that has changed quite dramatically. We will continue to change more.
Second, though, is technology. I am a deep believer. It is not just AI, but infrastructure consolidation, automation, AI. That is an amazing set of tools to conduct business entirely differently than we have conducted it in the past. That is every function, every business. So when we talk about this 750, no part of Prudential will not change.
That is a little different than has been done in the past. So, in the past, not that much work, as an example, was done in Japan. We have great opportunity to be more efficient and effective across every business and every function.
So tech is big. We are heavily leaned into spending there. That is not just expense reduction, though. I want to be clear. We are doing a lot of work with AI on delivering outstanding customer experience because that will accelerate our growth rate, not just reduce expense.
The last lever I would talk about, and some may know this, some may not, Prudential, being headquartered in Newark, New Jersey, our employee footprint, compared to others, is overly focused in the Northeast of the U.S., and that is an expensive footprint. Full stop. So we have opened global capability centers in Ireland and in India, and that does not mean we are just doing outsourcing.
We are looking at whole processes and whole segments of businesses that could be better done elsewhere, but that will lower our cost of business substantially. So, obviously, this is always extremely hard work. It does impact employees, so we do it with the greatest, utmost respect and care possible, because that is who we are at Prudential. But we are confident in our ability to take that cost out.
Then what you should look for is in the asset management business, the margins to get to 30%, then over a longer period of time, given the mix shift, to go above that. Then in the insurance businesses, we are already sitting in the middle of the 8.5%-10.5% Operating Expense Ratio. We are very confident we are going to drop that by another 150 basis points over a three-year timeframe.
Got it. Free cash flow, improving free cash flow conversion was one of the outcomes that you are targeting from the strategic update. Certainly growing asset management and group insurance, where they are more capital light will help. Are there other components, though, on where you might consider pulling back from certain more capital intensive products, or is that not really part of how we should be thinking about this?
Yeah, no. So I appreciate the question, and quite naturally, and I know this. I guess I would say it this way, some investors were left a little wanting of, we want more specificity on by when and what are we going to see. So I will talk about that as well.
You recognize one of the major levers, right, is get more group insurance, get more asset management, shift to a more capital light group of businesses. But it is not just, and I said this, but it was probably I did not emphasize it well enough or right enough on the call.
It is not just the business mix across. Within businesses, we are doing a lot of work to change the product mix. So I would use our individual life business as an example. Not a lot of time is spent focusing on our VUL product.
How much is VUL accumulation versus how much is VUL Protector? One of those products is much more capital light than the other, and what I would tell you is most of what we sell today is VUL accumulation product, not Protector product. So we are changing the product mix in each business as well, and that is across group insurance, individual life, Japan.
We are doing that work all the way across. So those are two levers, but two more I would mention. Obviously, when you think of cash flow conversion, we are just becoming more productive.
I used to work in manufacturing. Our cost of goods sold, our unit cost is going down by what we are doing on what we just spoke about. So every dollar or premium that comes in produces more cash for us. Then we go back to stronger allocators of capital.
We're requiring higher levels of return and profitability for every dollar that we're deploying. That, over time, produces more cash generation. It's a combination of factors that give us confidence in over time.
I don't know if you're ready to do this yet, but on the quantification side of it, I guess anything you can share on how we should think about the progression and how to track it.
Yeah, I figured I'd let you ask the question before I answered it, but I was figuring that was next. First, we did not feel it was appropriate given the level of change that we have right now in the system to be very specific, and I take very seriously when we make commitments, we need to do what we say and we need to hit them.
We spend a lot of time on making sure when we make the commitments that the math is good and the math is strong and the math is right. When I say too much is going on, obviously we're not yet selling again in POJ. We're taking significant cost out of the organization. We have potential acquisitions in front of us. So when is the question.
We had, as you know, a set of 3-year, multi-year targets that end at the end of 2027. We pulled one of those three back in the earnings growth rate. The other ones remain in place. It's a very natural thing for us as we come to the end of that, through the end of next year, to provide the investment community with another set of multi-year plans that do get more specific-
Okay
on cash flow, amongst other things.
Great.
It's coming, but-
Okay
you need to give us some time.
Yeah. Sounds good.
You need to give us some time.
Maybe just anything you could provide in terms of an update on Japan. Do you feel like you are on track to resume the POJ sales in November? Any update, I think you have been doing some review of Gibraltar, too. Any update you can give there?
Yeah. Let me start just more broadly, I always want to make sure everyone understands our Japan platform. Because candidly, as the CEO of Prudential, the Japan platform is a privilege to have in the business. It is incredible. It is 40% of the company. There are three operating components. There is POJ, which is our life planners.
There is Gibraltar, which is our life consultants, and then there is really the independent agents and bank channel. POJ is about 40% of the Japan sales. Not insignificant. Pretty significant.
Let me just start with an update. As we dove in and looked at the issues that we are having, we, first and foremost, believe deeply we always do the right thing at Prudential. That pays off in the long term, even when the decisions are hard. I did not take lightly the decision to cease sales.
But we felt we had enough that we needed to do it so that we could put in plans to make sure that we had the sales practices, and address the conduct issues that we had experienced. I would be very clear, the conduct issues, the majority, far majority, we have great employees, so that is a great platform. It is going to come out stronger. We knew what we needed to do.
We set out the plans. We are hitting our milestones, and we are on track for what we know we need to do. That said, I think there is too much focus, just to be very honest, with is it November 6? The decision on what is the exact date of which we start selling is obviously going to be a lot of us. But there are other stakeholders that are involved in the discussions with us, including the regulators.
We want to start when we are comfortable, but others are comfortable that we are where we need to be. We are feeling really good about the progress that we have made. I say there is too much focus on it, because I have already said this publicly, we are going to reopen that business in a phased manner over a 12- 18 month period because we need to test the new controls that we have put in place.
We are making significant changes across the agency system. We want to make sure that they are operating the way that we intend. All that has been built into the math of the numbers that we have provided already. Our expectation is we are doing better than expected. It will be a phased reopening.
Got it. Maybe just stepping back from that part of Japan.
Oh, and maybe-
Oh, Gibraltar too.
Yeah. I missed that. That's important. We fully believe there are no systemic issues in Gibraltar. Just to give perspective, by the end of the day, and I don't say this arrogantly, I say this proudly. You go through something like this, I believe we will have one of the best managed, cleanest businesses in all of Japan.
If you think we have over 6 million customers in Japan, we literally have sent 6 million customers communications, reached out to them, worked with them to say, "We want to make sure that you're satisfied with our relationship, with the value that you're getting with what's being delivered." We did that with Gibraltar. We actually have had a higher response rate from customers, most of them saying, "Thank you. You're an excellent company.
We like what you're doing for us." As far as problems or issues, we've seen a much lower level than what we would've expected going out to that many people. So there are no systemic issues that we see in the Gibraltar business.
Got it. Thanks. More of a broader question on Japan, just highest interest rate environment in 25 years, aging population. How do you see the retirement growth opportunity there? Also, how much of an opportunity is there to do some asset repositioning and take advantage of the higher rates, and is that providing an earnings tailwind at this point?
Yeah. First, let me start with the retirement opportunity. It was interesting when we first hit the issues in Japan, I did have a few investors ask me, "Are you going to sell Japan? Are you going to get out of Japan?" I said, "No, that'd be crazy," right? Given Japan is one of the wealthiest countries on the planet. It has some of the longest longevity.
Candidly, because the citizens, 60% plus of the citizens had most of their money in the bank at no interest, their retirement savings need and protected income gap is greater than anywhere else.
So the opportunity is just outstanding. Candidly, that's why you see a lot of competitors piling into Japan because the opportunity is tangible, it's real, and it's going to be producing for decades to come.
We had already done a lot of work on shifting our portfolios, developing a lot of new retirement and savings products. We have had great success in those sales and in that lift. I think the market and the opportunity is great. Higher interest rates are good for insurance companies, just full stop.
The higher interest rate environment has provided us opportunity to design more attractive product. In Japan, more attractive JPY offerings. We are seeing a higher percent of our sales coming in JPY denominated, not USD denominated. Yes, it is giving us lift. The natural turnover of the portfolio with higher interest rates will provide a natural tailwind to the business.
In addition, it is far behind where the U.S. market is or even the Europe market, but there is clear evidence from my perspective that there will be more of a private alternative, private credit market that emerges over time, which means there is an asset repositioning ability for us to do.
Remember that we really have two businesses you need to think about, right? There is a USD denominated business that a good bit of that sits in our U.S. entity or in our Bermuda entity. That is U.S. assets that back that, and then there is the Japan and the JPY offerings. There is opportunity on both those sets. A lot of things that do provide natural tailwind.
Got it. In the U.S., I was hoping to get your view on the current state of the U.S. retail annuity market. I think on the one hand, Prudential has scale.
It feeds assets to PGIM. I guess on the other hand, it has become more and more competitive over time.
Yeah. First, I always start with, we want to participate in very large-scale markets that have tailwinds, because that gives you, if you're a top competitor, it gives you a lot of room to grow. Annuities fits that bill tenfold. You're seeing an annuity market that's greater than $110 billion sales a quarter.
Total market size is going to approach a half trillion dollars a year. It's incredibly big market. It's not just about price. It's about having a broad product portfolio. It's about having really deep and broad distribution relationships, and then having an incredible brand.
I know I'm biased sitting up here as the CEO of Prudential Financial, but we don't have to be the lowest priced carrier in any of our businesses, given the depth of our relationships, given our heritage, and given our brand.
That's a lot of ways that you can drive the right returns well above the cost of capital, despite the fact that there's many competitors. You need to be disciplined. If you look across, whether it's buffered annuities versus fixed annuities versus MYGA, they're not all the same level of competitiveness.
The simpler things become, the shorter duration they become, the more competitive. We pick our spots. That's also, Ryan, why you won't see me get exercised if we have quarterly sales that go up or down, because we're going to be disciplined based on what's going on in the marketplace, and we're playing the game for the long term.
My final question was on one of the outcomes that you're targeting is top quartile earnings growth at the company over the next several years, excluding the runoff of variable annuities. What are the key components that will get you to that and what's your level of confidence in achieving it?
Yeah. Well, first and foremost, just a couple of things about the goal. It's over time. This is, we'll get to the top quartile over this five-year stretch of strategy. Second, it's in earnings, not in earnings per share, because we think that's a pure You can do things around capital return that affect the earnings per share.
If you think about everything that we've talked about, we have, by focusing on a smaller set of businesses that we're already well positioned in, that we can then double down on the talent, capital, and investment, and drive ourself to that top three to five spot. We see great organic growth opportunity.
We've picked things with tailwinds where we have the right capabilities to be a top winner to produce that strong organic growth. You should expect it in global retirement, global asset management, and the select protection businesses. That's where I expect you to look for and to hold us accountable to demonstrate the growth.
Over time, to get to that top quartile growth rate, I have a high degree of confidence. What you're also probably seeing from me is I'm not making 12 month, because markets move and markets change. I know by being really good allocators of capital and being really strong executors over that longer period of time, we will produce that growth rate.
Excellent. All right. We're going to wrap it up there. Thank you very much, Andy, and the Prudential team.
I appreciate it. Thank you, Ryan.