Maybe, but Progressive is similar to Tesla is discussed in that it isn't exclusively a traditional insurer. They are pretty heavy into insuretech and their ease of use is unmatched.

I agree, but Progressive is also probably the most successful insurer in transitioning to insuretech. They aren't necessarily a standard insurance company. I haven't gone over their financials, so I can't give you a completely informed and educated opinion, but there is a lot more to consider than just P/E. They very well could continue to expand and cut down on expenses. Their brand recognition is unmatched and they have streamlined their business for customer ease of use on both the insured and retailer side to an impressive degree.

FYI, Chubb and Hartford are good carriers to go to for better customer service. Generally, overall customer experience is highly variable customer to customer. On top of that, the insurance industry is pretty understaffed at the moment, especially in the claims department, so that may have caused some lag in settlement.

Were your claims strictly property? Liability losses are adjusted differently than property and typically take longer to investigate and settle.

🫡

His DD was high effort, but he wasn’t looking at industry specific metrics and kind of missed the entire point of why they have the valuation they do.

During this bear market, everyone has just pointed at PE as the end all be all for all companies. It seems like everyone thinks every single company is going to be valued like INTL, or that INTL is a buy without digging deeper into their reason for their valuations. In an industry like insurance that perspective is even more skewed, because CAT losses can wreck earnings, but that does not necessarily indicate anything about future performance.

They have strong growth, are transitioning smoothly to the next gen of insurance products, good retention, a solid balance sheet and brand value. I think this is a losing bet.

It depends on the characteristics and exposures of the risk you're insuring.

Managing the cost of risk can be done in a few ways, but assuming you're talking about personal lines your best bet is balancing risk transfer (insurance) and risk retention (deductibles). For example, having a $0 deductible on your car insurance typically isn't worth the additional premium it costs you. You're better off retaining losses below a dollar threshold where you're comfortable, because first dollar coverage is expensive as shit.

I work in the commercial E&S sector, so that's where my expertise is, but the same fundamental concept of managing the cost of risk applies to any individual, or organization.

I think it depends on your time frame. Puts would have been a good play a little while ago because CAT losses have been bad this whole year, especially Q4, but now that's probably prices in. I wouldn't bet against them long term tho. I still think they have room for considerable growth.