Participants

Abbe F. Goldstein; SVP of IR; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Alan David Schnitzer; Chairman & CEO; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Daniel Stephen Frey; Executive VP & CFO; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski; Executive VP & President of Business Insurance; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Jeffrey Peter Klenk; Executive VP and President of Bond & Specialty Insurance; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Michael Frederick Klein; Executive VP & President of Personal Insurance; The Travelers Companies, Inc.

Brian Robert Meredith; MD, Financials Research Sector Head & Global Insurance Strategist; UBS Investment Bank, Research Division

Charles Gregory Peters; MD; Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division

David Kenneth Motemaden; MD & Fundamental Research Analyst; Evercore ISI Institutional Equities, Research Division

Elyse Beth Greenspan; Director & Senior Analyst; Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division

Jamminder Singh Bhullar; Senior Analyst; JPMorgan Chase & Co, Research Division

Jian Huang; Research Associate; Morgan Stanley, Research Division

Jon Paul Newsome; MD & Senior Research Analyst; Piper Sandler & Co., Research Division

Meyer Shields; MD; Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division

Michael Augustus Ward; Research Analyst; Citigroup Inc. Exchange Research

Michael David Zaremski; MD & Senior Equity Research Analyst; BMO Capital Markets Equity Research

Ryan James Tunis; Senior Analyst of Property & Casualty Insurance; Autonomous Research US LP

Scott Gregory Heleniak; Assistant VP; RBC Capital Markets, Research Division

Taylor Alexander Scott; Equity Analyst; Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Research Division

Yaron Joseph Kinar; Equity Analyst; Jefferies LLC, Research Division

Presentation

Operator

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the third quarter results teleconference for Travelers. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference is being recorded on October 18, 2023. At this time, I would like to turn the conference over to Abbe Goldstein, Senior Vice President of Investor Relations. Ms. Goldstein, you may begin.

Story continues

Abbe F. Goldstein

Thank you. Good morning, and welcome to Travelers’ discussion of our third quarter 2023 results. We released our press release, financial statement — supplement, sorry, and webcast presentation earlier this morning. All of these materials can be found on our website at travelers.com under the Investors section.
Speaking today will be Alan Schnitzer, Chairman and CEO; Dan Frey, Chief Financial Officer; and our three segment presidents: Gregory Toczydlowski of Business Insurance; Jeffrey Klenk of Bond & Specialty Insurance; and Michael Klein of Personal Insurance.
They will discuss the financial results of our business and the current market environment. They will refer to the webcast presentation as they go through prepared remarks, and then we will take questions.
Before I turn the call over to Alan, I’d like to draw your attention to the explanatory note included at the end of the webcast presentation. Our presentation today includes forward-looking statements. The company cautions investors that any forward-looking statement involves risks and uncertainties and is not a guarantee of future performance. Actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to a variety of factors.
These factors are described under forward-looking statements in our earnings press release and in our most recent 10-Q and 10-K filed with the SEC. We do not undertake any obligation to update forward-looking statements. Also in our remarks or responses to questions, we may mention some non-GAAP financial measures. Reconciliations are included in our recent earnings press release, financial supplement and other materials available in the Investors section on our website. And now I’d like to turn the call over to Alan Schnitzer.

Alan David Schnitzer

Thank you, Abbe. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us today. Core income of $454 million for the quarter benefited from very strong underlying underwriting results and net investment income but was also impacted by elevated catastrophe losses and net unfavorable prior year reserve development. Mike will provide more context on the catastrophe losses.
The unfavorable prior year reserve development was driven by the results of our annual asbestos review in our runoff book. The reserves in the ongoing businesses of all three segments developed favorably. We are very pleased with the underlying fundamentals of our business. Underlying underwriting income of $868 million pretax was up more than 40% over the prior year quarter, driven by record net earned premiums of $9.7 billion and a consolidated underlying combined ratio which improved almost 2 points to an excellent 90.6%. The underlying combined ratios in our commercial segments remained excellent.
Our Business Insurance segment once again delivered very strong results with an underlying combined ratio of 89.7%. The underlying combined ratio in our Bond & Specialty business was also excellent at 80.7%.
Looking at the two commercial segments together, the aggregate BI BSI underlying combined ratio was 88.3% for the quarter, among our best ever.
In our Personal Insurance segment, the underlying combined ratio improved more than 5 points to 94.2% as a strong written rate from prior quarters is earning in. Our underlying results in Personal Insurance are improving and heading in the right direction.
Turning to investments. Our high-quality investment portfolio continued to perform extremely well, generating after-tax net investment income of $640 million, reflecting strong and reliable returns from our growing fixed income portfolio and solid returns from our nonfixed income portfolio.
In terms of production, thanks to great execution by our colleagues in the field and the strong franchise value they have to sell. We grew net written premiums by $1.3 billion or 14% to a record $10.5 billion.
In Business Insurance, we grew net written premiums by 16% to $5.1 billion. Renewal premium change in the segment was very strong at 12.9%, driven by renewal rate change, which accelerated year-over-year and sequentially to 7.9%. Renewal rate change was higher sequentially in every line other than workers’ comp, where overall renewal premium change remains positive and appropriate given returns in the line.
For the segment, even with higher pricing at record levels, retention remained very strong at 87%, a reflection of a rational market. New business was strong and hired broadly across the segment.
In Bond & Specialty Insurance, we grew net written premiums to a record $1 billion, achieved 91% retention of our high-quality Management Liability business and grew net written premiums in our industry-leading Surety business by 13%. Given the attractive returns, we are very pleased with the strong production results in both of our commercial business segments.
In Personal Insurance, top line growth of 14% was driven by higher pricing. Renewal premium change was 19.4% in our homeowners and other business increased to a record high 18.2% in our auto business. Another quarter of strong production across the board positions us well for the rest of the year and into 2024. We’ll hear more shortly from Greg, Jeff and Michael about our segment results.
With the end of the year in sight and 2024 on the horizon and coming into focus, we feel very well positioned for what’s ahead and quite confident. In our Business Insurance segment, written margins are expanding. Pricing has been strong and the components of core goods inflation that impact our loss costs are moderating. Medical inflation, in particular, remains benign. Nonetheless, given the duration of relevant liabilities, we continue to incorporate medical inflation and our loss costs based on the higher longer-term trends.
In terms of the top line of Business Insurance, we’re pleased that economic output and consumption so far remain robust. Given our leading workers’ compensation business, we’ve ended in particular, from the near 50-year low in unemployment, the primates labor participation rate, which is at its highest level since 2007 and ongoing wage inflation, which contributes to premium growth and margins.
As a result of strong pricing in recent years and higher fixed income NII, returns in the segment are currently attractive. Nonetheless, given the uncertainty generally in terms of weather volatility, economic and social inflation, hardening reinsurance market and the geopolitical landscape, we plan to continue pursuing strong price increases in both the property and casualty lines to achieve our overtime return objectives.
Turning to our industry-leading Bond & Specialty business. We just reached a milestone $1 billion in net written premiums and returns are terrific. And as you’ve heard, results in our personal insurance business are headed in the right direction. Earned margins are improving and additional price increases will earn in from here. We’re very pleased with our targeted marketplace execution. At same time, inflationary pressures are moderating.
In terms of the investment portfolio with interest rates at their highest levels in recent memory and most indications suggesting higher for longer, we are extremely well positioned. In the last 5 years, we’ve grown our very high-quality investment portfolio by nearly $19 billion or about 25% to more than $90 billion. 93% of the portfolio is allocated to fixed income.
As we look ahead to 2024, we expect our after-tax fixed income NII will be more than $2.6 billion. To ensure that our competitive advantages continue to distinguish us and fuel our performance. We will continue to invest in our ambitious and focused innovation priorities. We’re spending more than $1.5 billion this year on technology, inside an excellent expense ratio and with a higher proportion allocated to strategic technology investments. We’re confident that we’re working on the right priorities, executing effectively and that will see the benefits play out in growth at attractive returns going forward.
Lastly, I’ll share that we’re recently back from one of the year’s largest industry conferences where we met with many of our distribution partners. We left confident that we have the pole position with distribution in the United States and that we’re positioned to support each other’s strategic and marketplace priorities. We’re committed to being their best partner and to offering the products and services that best serve our mutual customers.
To sum it up, we remain very confident in the outlook for our business. I couldn’t be more grateful to my 30,000 colleagues who show up every day committed to our culture for standard of excellence and fulfilling our mission of creating shareholder value and our purpose of taking care of the people we’re privileged to serve. And with that, I’m pleased to turn the call over to Dan.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Thank you, Alan. Core income for the third quarter was $454 million and core return on equity was 6.9% as heavy cat activity impacted our results. We’re pleased to have once again generated record levels of earned premium this quarter and an excellent underlying combined ratio of 90.6%, a 1.9-point improvement from last year’s strong results.
This combination of growth and underlying margin improvement led to a very strong underlying underwriting gain of $684 million after tax, up $206 million or 43% from the prior year quarter. The expense ratio for the third quarter improved 10 basis points from last year’s quarter to an excellent 28% and continues to reflect the benefits of our focus on productivity and efficiency, coupled with strong top line growth.
Our third quarter results include $850 million of pretax catastrophe losses, resulting from another quarter of both frequency and severity of weather across North America.
Turning to prior year reserve development, we had total net unfavorable development of $154 million pretax. In Business Insurance, net unfavorable PYD of $263 million was driven by charges in our runoff business, including $284 million related to our annual asbestos review, as well as increased reserves for abuse and molestation resulting from the volume of claims related to the closing of the reviver window in California. This year’s asbestos charge includes an additional increase to strengthen our carried reserve position relative to the range of outcomes.
Outside of runoff in our ongoing businesses, Business Insurance had $132 million of net favorable PYD driven by favorability in workers’ comp that was partially offset by unfavorability in Commercial Auto. In Bond & Specialty, net favorable PYD of $72 million was driven by another quarter of better-than-expected results in both Surety and Management Liability. Personal Insurance had $37 million of net favorable PYD driven by homeowners and other.
After-tax net investment income of $640 million was up 27% from the prior year quarter. Fixed maturity NII was again higher than the prior year quarter, reflecting both the benefit of higher average yields and the significant growth in our portfolio of invested assets. Returns in the non-fixed income portfolio were also above the prior year quarter. With interest rates having moved higher during the third quarter, we are again raising our outlook for fixed income NII, including earnings from short-term securities to approximately $615 million after tax for the fourth quarter.
For 2024, we now expect more than $2.6 billion after tax, our highest level ever, beginning with approximately $630 million in the first quarter of 2024 and growing to approximately $690 million for the fourth quarter. New money rates as of September 30 are about 180 basis points higher than what is embedded in the portfolio.
Turning to capital management. Operating cash flows for the quarter of more than $3 billion were an all-time record. All our capital ratios were at or better than our target levels and we ended the quarter with holding company liquidity of approximately $1.7 billion. Interest rates increased and spreads widened during the quarter, and as a result, our net unrealized investment loss increased from $4.6 billion after tax at June 30, to $6.5 billion after tax at September 30.
As we’ve discussed previously, the changes in unrealized investment gains and losses generally did not impact how we manage our investment portfolio. We generally hold fixed income investments to maturity. The quality of our fixed income portfolio remains very high and changes in unrealized gains and losses have little impact on our cash flows, statutory surplus or regulatory capital requirements.
Adjusted book value per share, which excludes net unrealized investment gains and losses, was $115.78 at quarter end, up 2% from year-end and up 3% from a year ago. We returned $333 million of capital to our shareholders this quarter, comprising share repurchases of $101 million and dividends of $232 million. We have approximately $6.1 billion of capacity remaining under the share repurchase authorization from our Board of Directors.
Similar to my comments on last quarter’s call, a significant level of catastrophe losses we’ve experienced this year resulted in lower year-to-date earnings than we expected, so share repurchases in the fourth quarter will likely be lower than the quarterly share repurchases made in the first half of the year.
To sum things up, while our third quarter earnings were adversely impacted by elevated catastrophe losses, we’re pleased to post another quarter of double-digit premium growth and improved and very strong underlying combined ratio and further improvement in our outlook for fixed income NII, all of which bodes well for our business results going forward. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Greg for a discussion of Business Insurance.

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski

Thanks, Dan. Segment income for the third quarter was $468 million, with strong underlying underwriting and investment income as well as favorable prior year development in our ongoing book, offset by reserve charges in our runoff book, mostly related to asbestos. We’re particularly pleased with our exceptional underlying combined ratio of 89.7% for the quarter, which was a 30 basis point improvement year-over-year and an all-time best third quarter result.
The benefit of earned pricing was offset by normal variability in loss activity, all in netting to an excellent result. Net written premiums increased 16% to a record third quarter of $5.1 billion, driven by very strong renewal premium change of 12.9%, historically high retention of 87% and new business of $695 million.
Underneath RPC, as you heard from Alan, renewal rate change accelerated sequentially from the second quarter to 7.9% with all lines other than workers’ comp being higher. We’re thrilled with these production results and our fields continued superior execution in the marketplace.
And given our high-quality book as well as several years of meaningful price increases, improvements in terms and conditions, we’re very pleased to continue to produce historically strong retention levels.
Lastly, we’re encouraged that new business was higher than the prior year quarter broadly across the segment. While the comparison of new business to the prior year quarter benefited from a relatively modest prior year result as well as higher pricing on new business this year. We’re also pleased with the impact that our strategic investments are having on our production results.
As for the individual businesses, in select, renewal premium change remained strong at 10.3%, while retention of 85% was up 2 points from the prior year quarter. New business was up $46 million from the prior year quarter, driven in large part by the continued success of our BOP 2.0 product. We’re also encouraged with the early performance of our new state-of-the-art Commercial Auto product, which has been rolled out in 12 states.
In middle market, renewal premium change remained very strong at 10.6%, while retention remained excellent at 89%. New business was a strong $352 million. We’re pleased with the quality of the submission flow from our distribution partners during the quarter and our responsiveness in quoting and closing accounts that align with our appetite. As always, we remain vigilant around risk selection, underwriting and pricing.
To sum up, Business Insurance had another terrific quarter. We’re pleased with our execution in driving strong financial results while continuing to invest in the business for long-term profitable growth. With that, I’ll turn the call over to Jeff.

Jeffrey Peter Klenk

Thanks, Greg. Bond & Specialty posted terrific top and bottom line results for the quarter. Segment income was a record $265 million, up 10% from the very strong prior year quarter. The underlying combined ratio was an outstanding 80.7%.
Turning to the top line. We’re pleased to have delivered record net written premiums of over $1 billion. In domestic Management Liability, we again delivered record-level retention of 91%, up 2 points from the third quarter of 2022 while continuing to achieve positive renewal premium change. This result reflects the attractive returns of our high-quality book of business.
Record Surety net written premiums reflect strong broad-based demand for surety bonds and higher premium from large construction projects. So we’re pleased to have once again delivered terrific top and bottom line results this quarter, driven by our continued underwriting and risk management diligence, excellent execution by our field organization and the benefits from our value-added approach and market-leading competitive advantages. And now I’ll turn the call over to Michael.

Michael Frederick Klein

Thanks, Jeff, and good morning, everyone. In Personal Insurance, the third quarter segment loss of $193 million was significantly impacted by catastrophe losses. We experienced elevated losses from weather activity, specifically related to wind and hail events. This was another active quarter for severe convective storms across the U.S. There were 19 designated PCS events specifically related to wind, hail and tornado activity in the quarter, nearly twice the 10-year average and the highest number for a third quarter in more than a decade.
On a more positive note, the underlying combined ratio of 94.2% improved 5.1 points compared to the prior year quarter, reflecting an improvement in both automobile and homeowners. Net written premiums for the quarter grew 14%, driven by high teens renewal premium change in both domestic automobile and homeowners and other.
In automobile, the third quarter combined ratio was 103.5%. This was 8.7 points lower than the prior year quarter, which included catastrophe losses resulting from Hurricane Ian. The underlying combined ratio of 100.6% and improved 3.3 points compared to the prior year quarter, driven by the impact of earned pricing in excess of loss trend.
The quarter-over-quarter improvement in our results clearly reflects the growing impact of our pricing and non-rate actions. Underlying results in auto are headed in the right direction as the benefit of earned pricing continues to accelerate and as vehicle repair and replacement trends are moderating.
Looking ahead to the fourth quarter of 2023, it’s important to remember that the fourth quarter auto underlying loss ratio has historically been 6 to 7 points above the average for the first 3 quarters because of winter weather and holiday driving.
In homeowners and other, the third quarter combined ratio of 116.2% increased 13.9 points due to the catastrophe losses that I mentioned earlier. The underlying combined ratio of 88% improved 6.9 points, primarily due to the impact of earned pricing, a benefit from the favorable reestimation of prior quarters in the current year and a lower expense ratio.
Turning to production. Our results continue to demonstrate our disciplined market execution in a challenging marketplace. Beginning with domestic homeowners and other, renewal premium change of 19.4% was very strong. The lack of growth in policies in force reflects our continued actions to further balance rate adequacy, catastrophe risk and regulatory risk.
We expect renewal premium change in homeowners to remain consistent through year-end. Looking ahead to 2024, we expect renewal premium change to remain elevated, but moderate into low double digits as our automatic increase in limit factors returned to more normal levels in line with stabilizing industry estimates of replacement costs.
In domestic automobile, renewal premium change of 18.2% increased 2 points compared to the second quarter of 2023. Auto policies in force declined slightly, reflecting our continued efforts to manage growth while improving profitability. Going forward, we expect renewal premium change in auto to remain very strong but begin to move down from here as more of the book reaches rate adequacy on a written basis.
I’m proud of the way our team continues to respond to the dynamic environment. We are consistently evolving pricing, segmentation, underwriting and terms and conditions, while managing new business flow to ensure we deploy capacity thoughtfully in the face of market dislocation. At the same time, we’re sustaining our investments and capabilities to build our business for the future. With our leading talent, capabilities and strong distribution relationships, we are confident in our ability to generate leading returns over time. Now I’ll turn the call back over to Abbe.

Abbe F. Goldstein

Thanks, Michael. And operator, we’re ready to start questions.

Question and Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from the line of Greg Peters from Raymond James.

Charles Gregory Peters

Well, good morning, everyone. I guess my first question will focus on Business Insurance. I think you guys have now reported something like 14 consecutive quarters of year-over-year improvement in the underlying combined ratio.
I guess what I’m — where I’m going with this is just what is your longer-term target with your UCR, especially in light of what we’re seeing in the accelerating renewal rate trend? And — maybe if you don’t want to answer it that way, maybe you can triangulate for us just how the renewal rate change, which is accelerating matches up with your inflation expectations and your insurance to value initiatives?

Alan David Schnitzer

A lot in that question, Greg. It’s Alan, there’s a lot in that question. I think you’re right for starters. I don’t think we’re going to give you our targets or objectives. I think it gets too close to something it’s competitively sensitive in terms of our pricing strategies. But I guess I’d point you toward where renewal premium change is, which is at record levels.
And frankly, I always hate to get into the commentary on loss trend because as I’ve shared before, to take a single metric to define what’s going on across billions of dollars premium implies a level of precision that doesn’t exist. Every line has got its own dynamics, so on and so forth. But there wasn’t a lot of change in sort of the profile of loss activity this past quarter. So we continue to have a pretty meaningful gap between where renewal premium changes and where loss trends are. And so I think that gives you a sense. It’s why we are — it’s easy enough in my prepared remarks to share that written margins are expanding.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of David Motemaden from Evercore ISI.

David Kenneth Motemaden

Just a follow-up question on the BI underlying loss ratio. Greg, you had said that the benefit of earned pricing was offset by normal variability in loss activity. I was wondering if you could just size those components, and it sounded like non-cat weather was maybe a little bit elevated relative to normal expectations, but wondering if you could just break that down for us.

Daniel Stephen Frey

David, it’s Dan. I think we’re not going to go any further. I think what Greg said is really the way to think about it, which is as Alan just mentioned, we’ve been getting a good level of written price increase, that’s earning its way through. So there is still definitely a benefit from earned pricing.
In any given quarter, you got a handful of things that are going to go one way or the other that could be small weather, that could be base year, it could be mix changes, it could be just variability from one quarter to next. There were some good guys and some bad guys, nothing particularly significant and net result, just about offset the benefit from earned price. And again, all of inside of an underlying combined ratio that we’re really happy with it sub-90%.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Elyse Greenspan from Wells Fargo.

Elyse Beth Greenspan

I was hoping to get more color on the reserve development that you guys called out in your ongoing businesses within Business Insurance. You could tell us what the workers’ comp favorability. And then I think you called out Commercial Auto developed adversely. Could we get the numbers there? And then are there any other lines in your ongoing business that moved materially in the quarter?

Daniel Stephen Frey

Yes, Lisa, it’s Dan. So sorry, I’ll disappoint you that we’re not going to do the line by line. But comp has been pretty strongly favorable. It was pretty strongly favorable again this quarter. In our remarks, we try to call out the lines that had noteworthy movement. This quarter, Commercial Auto did have some noteworthy movement. It wasn’t dramatic, particularly in the scope of you think about the size of the reserves for the Commercial Auto book.
And what we saw in Commercial Auto this quarter is a little bit of a lengthening of the development patterns, not a terrifically new theme, but every quarter, we’re looking at all the data that comes in. This gave us an indication that maybe reserves should be carried a little higher than we were, and we’re just trying to react to that in real time as quickly as possible. Those were — there were some movement in the other lines, some good guys and some bad guys, nothing particularly noteworthy, but those were the two main drivers.

Elyse Beth Greenspan

And then you guys — you called out higher cats in the third quarter as well as other quarters this year. Are you guys contemplating making any changes to your reinsurance program heading into 2024? How do you think, I guess, changes you made over the past year could have led to higher cats this year?

Daniel Stephen Frey

So I don’t think that the changes we made would have had much of a difference. Obviously, the last few years, we’ve had that underlying cat aggregate treaty, we didn’t attach it at all in 2023. We didn’t renew it in 2024.
We get that question a couple of times. Just to remind you, in 2023, when we had that underlying cat ag treaty, we placed…

Alan David Schnitzer

2022.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Sorry, 2022. I’m a year into the future already. So 2022, we didn’t attach it. We didn’t renew it in 2023.
Even when we had it last time in ’22, we placed about 50% of a $500 million layer. So it couldn’t have been more than $250 million of recovery and it cost us a lot to have that policy. Rate online was very high for that coverage. We said in July 1 that we’d enter into a new PI-specific coastal reinsurance treaty. I think we’ll just continue to evaluate our position and what’s available to us in the marketplace from a reinsurance perspective as we look forward to 2024.
But I’d say what we sort of regularly say, which is we’re really pleased with our risk selection. We think we do a great job of segmentation and pricing. We’re going to probably keep more net than many of our peers because at the end of the day, we like our underwriting.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Tunis from Autonomous Research.

Ryan James Tunis

First question is just from Michael. In terms of homeowners, that clearly seems like a line that probably needs more rate, not less, just given where cat trends have been.
But you mentioned in your prepared remarks that we might see some premium growth deceleration because of what you referred to as automatic increase in limits. It sounded like that might have been about half of renewal premium growth. Can you just I guess, mechanically help us understand a little bit more what that increase in limits is tied to? And in the absence of that, what are some other means by which you can get more price in that line?

Michael Frederick Klein

Sure, Ryan. Thanks for the question. So just unpacking it for a second, right? So inside RPC in homeowners, there’s really two primary components. There’s rate and then there’s exposure or other RPC, which primarily is the additional premium we collect due to the coverage A limit, the dwelling limit on the home going up.
And over the past 2 years, we’ve increased coverage A amounts significantly to keep up with higher replacement cost trends that have been occurring sort of across the industry. And given those outsized increases in coverage A amounts over the last couple of years, as we take a look at our external data and information about where replacement costs are today and where trends are, we are largely caught up with that increase. And so we don’t see a need for coverage A amounts to move dramatically north from here in the near term.
So that premium that we would — that we have been collecting because coverages As have been rising, won’t be as nearly as big an element of renewal premium change in ’24 as it was in ’22 and ’23.
That said, to your point, clearly, the homeowners line continues to need great. It continues to need profit improvement, and we will continue to seek higher rate in homeowners even though the limit increases will be subsiding.
The other thing I’d point to is part of the answer in home is pricing. Another big piece of the answer is non-rate actions. And we’ve been very active in the marketplace across risk selection, payroll by apparel pricing, tighter eligibility, stricter terms and conditions to drive profit improvement in the property line as well.

Ryan James Tunis

Got it. And then just a follow-up on just Business Insurance retention. It’s interesting, like how robust that’s been. Clearly, we’re seeing personal lines retention come off as I would think you’d expect when you’re taking rate. Just — what do you guys make of that? Like why has retention been still robust, I guess, despite so many rounds of rate increases?

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski

Ryan, this is Greg. I think we start every month with retaining our high-quality book of business. So it’s been very much an intentional strategy of ours to make sure that we’re being thoughtful on our terms and conditions, our pricing and all the changes that we’re making to continuously improve margins. But given the quality of that book, it’s not a surprise for us.
It also is a an indicator of just how rational the marketplace is right now and the need for improved margins across the entire industry based on all those headwinds that Alan talked about. So we’re not surprised by it. We’re very pleased with it, and we’re very focused on it.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Jamie Bhullar from JPMorgan.

Jamminder Singh Bhullar

So first, I just had a question on Commercial Auto. And if you could just give us a little bit more insight into what’s driving the adverse development there. Some of your peers have seen that as well, and I think there are some concerns that this could be sort of the beginning of a trend given what’s gone on in Personal Auto over the past 2 years or so?

Daniel Stephen Frey

Jimmy, it’s Dan again. So yes, as we said a little while ago, Commercial Auto is really just a modification based on the most recent data that’s come in, in terms of the development of claims in Commercial Auto, particularly bodily injury claims. This is something that we’ve commented on and off probably over the last 3 or 4 quarters. Numbers have been pretty modest, the themes are not inconsistent with what we anticipated. But to get a new set of data and the data looks a little bit different than your prior estimation. And so the magnitude of some of the changes that we anticipated is a little higher.
Really the focus of this most recent strengthening is the continued sort of longer development of — or said inversely the slower closing of claims in Commercial Auto. So as that continues to lag historical closer patterns, we’re making an adjustment to reflect the most recent data.

Jamminder Singh Bhullar

And that’s just a function of repairs taking longer or something else?

Daniel Stephen Frey

This is more in the bodily injury side of Commercial Auto, so it’s not so much repairs themselves, although that’s been a factor in both Michael’s business and a smaller degree and Greg’s business, bodily injury, it’s more of the settlement of the injury client.

Jamminder Singh Bhullar

And then in Personal Auto, where are you in terms of rate adequacy on a written basis? And is — your discount has been sort of flattish. Are competitors being fairly rational and you’re seeing price increases across the board? Or are there some companies that are not adjusting due to the higher loss trend?

Michael Frederick Klein

Thanks, Jimmy. It’s Michael. I would say that when you look at our — taking the second part of the question first, when you look at our production statistics, retention is down a bit, but it’s actually been pretty resilient in the face of the rate we’ve been driving through the book, particularly given the magnitude of those numbers. And so I think that, that’s indicative of a fairly rational market and the fact that these are, again, industry-wide pressures that most competitors are dealing with.
In terms of written rate adequacy, again, last quarter, I said we’d get there in the coming quarters. Relative to the comments last quarter, we feel a little bit better sitting here today than we did 90 days ago. Given the record level of RPC that we achieved in the third quarter and the fact that we’re seeing loss trends stabilize, and that’s coming through in our underlying combined ratio.
That said, I would also say that written rate adequacy still depends on the same list of things we talked about last quarter, right? It’s the price we get. It’s how quickly loss trends moderate and how much they continue to moderate the regulatory process for getting rate approvals and our actual loss experience. But it is, at this point, very much a state-by-state conversation and we’re working each state individually and adjusting our actions accordingly.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Brian Meredith from UBS Financial.

Brian Robert Meredith

A couple of one here. First, Jeff answered some questions here. Jeff, on the Management Liability business, I think you mentioned in the quarter that there was some favorable current year development. Maybe we can quantify that and what’s going on there with the Management Liability business that you’re seeing this favorable development?

Daniel Stephen Frey

Brian, it’s Dan. So I think we’re not going to put a number — not a significant deal. The only point Jeff was trying to make is sort of when you do the comparison year-over-year, there was some favorable CYPQ, which we called out last year in the third quarter, there was some favorable CYPQ this year as well, just not as much. So the year-over-year is unfavorable given less of a good guy.

Brian Robert Meredith

Got you. Okay. That’s helpful. And the next question, I’m just curious, bigger picture in Business Insurance. Exposure growth continues to be pretty healthy. Maybe you can give us a little context around what kind of drives that exposure growth. And we think that with the economy moderating some here that exposure will — growth will start to slow here.

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski

Yes, Brian, we watch for that all the time. And as you can see in the webcast in the blue lines we give you, you can see it’s been very stable across the select business, in the middle market. And obviously, those add to the total BI business. And so it really is a function of nominal GDP economic growth and the overall inflation levels.
And clearly, we’ve seen the consumer type inflation correct somewhat from the peak of mid-2022. Where we’re really encouraged when we also look at our audit premium, which is more of a going backward view in our core middle market business, we continue to have real strong audit premium also. So both backwards and forward, we’re encouraged with how exposure is playing out in the business, and we’ll continue to report out what we see with that line.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Zaremski from BMO Capital Markets.

Michael David Zaremski

First, on Business Insurance segment. We heard loud and clear the comments about written margins expanding. Is the definition of written margins include reserve changes? Because I’m just trying to — when we look at the loss ratio, maybe, I guess, ex cat, we clearly see that in the that reserve releases or additions or whatever, right, are worse year-over-year, clearly, margins are good. I’m just trying to — are you trying to — does written margins mean — are you looking kind of forward-looking or backward looking? Any color there.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Mike, it’s Dan. So just to clarify for you. So when we’re talking about margin and not that context, we’re talking about the underlying combined ratio. So leaving to the side catastrophe losses and leaving to the side prior year reserve development.
The only other comment I’d make in that regard is when we do see changes in prior year development, we do roll forward our thinking in terms of does that impact our view of current year loss and go-forward loss. But PYD itself, as it’s booked, whether it’s favorable or unfavorable, is outside of that concept where we’re talking about underlying margins.

Michael David Zaremski

Okay. Understood. And just a quick follow-up then. Have you changed your view of forward-looking loss after this quarter? And you also called out the topping off of the asbestos and environmental that you think you used were topping off, you kind of called out an additional add. And I don’t know if you want to call out specifically what that dollar amount was.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Yes. So I don’t think we’ll split the asbestos charge beyond that. But what we wanted to get across was we did our sort of traditional deep dive in the third quarter that resulted in a figure for which we would have strengthened the asbestos reserve. We chose also to think about it in simple terms as moving higher in the range of possible outcomes for asbestos. And so we put some money on top of what the analysis otherwise would have told you for the quarter.
And then in terms of the first part of the question, we’re looking at all the factors that go into loss trend every quarter, including favorable or unfavorable PYD, there are generally small puts and takes on a pretty regular basis, nothing terribly significant in this quarter in terms of our view of loss trend.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Yaron Kinar from Jefferies.

Yaron Joseph Kinar

I guess my first question is on workers’ comp. So we saw a premium decline there year-over-year. Are there any onetime items there? Or is it just an indication of market conditions and then maybe rate compression? And maybe you can tie that into how you’re viewing this line of business and your thoughts about that into 2024.

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski

Yes, Yaron. Yes, I think you’re referencing the slight down in the net written premium for the quarter. I would point to you that year-to-date, it is just up 2%. So it wasn’t a meaningful change for the particular quarter. And obviously, where you’re seeing not the level of net written premium growth on the other product lines that we’re seeing in workers’ comp is clearly the rate pressure that the entire industry is seeing there.
That rate pressure is driven based on the bureau’s loss cost recommendations that continue to put minuses across the industry, and that’s just an indication of the health of the line. We’re the largest workers’ comp writer in the country. And on a calendar year basis, we feel terrific about the results of that, and that’s basically what’s driving some of that net written premium change that you’ve mentioned.

Alan David Schnitzer

Just to be clear, we feel great about the workers’ comp line. We feel great about our results this quarter this year, and we feel great about the outlook.

Yaron Joseph Kinar

Got it. And then my second question, also on BI. Do you have any CYPQ there? Because I did notice that the underlying loss ratio was flat year-over-year. Just given the rate commentary and RPC commentary, where I thought maybe we’d see a little bit of improvement there.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Yes, Yaron, it’s Dan. So a little earlier in the call and in Greg’s comments, we called out that, we did see some benefit from earned price. But half a dozen other things that would happen in any quarter, Could be some good guys, could be some bad guys, could be mix, could be base share, could be non-cat weather. There were some favorable and some unfavorable netted to a modest unfavorable to offset the pricing benefit, but nothing significant there.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Paul Newsome from Piper Sandler.

Jon Paul Newsome

I wanted to ask if you could help me think more about the cat load prospectively. And one of the things I was wondering about this may go to the definition to you think about cats, [important,] is if inflation is effectively pushing losses that otherwise in the past, we’ve not have been cat losses into the cat designation. And that may be how much of that may be part of why the cat load may need to go up? Just any thoughts on that would be great.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Sure, Paul, it’s Dan. I’ll start. I think the sort of second piece of the question, the answer would be yes to the degree that some of what we’ve seen in higher cat losses is the impact of inflation over the last several years and just the value of those claims going up.
So yes, over time, more things would fall into what would get designated as “catastrophes” given the threshold. Other than that, thinking about cats, we’re looking at long-term weather trends, medium-term weather trends, near-term weather trends, we’re putting more weight on nearer-term weather trends. And as both Greg and Michael have talked about trying to react with very strong pricing changes in terms and conditions and risk selection, where we think it’s appropriate.
There is also clearly an uptick in catastrophe activity this year. So last year, I think last quarter, I think, Alan, maybe gave the statistics that in the 91 days of the quarter, there were 88 days in which there was a PCS event occurring. In the third quarter, there were 92 days in the quarter. On 91 of those 92 days, there was a PCS event occurring. So the increase in catastrophes is the combination of several factors. One is there do seem to be more storms more frequently. Two, more people have moved into harm’s way in terms of where the demographic spread of risk is. And three, inflation has resulted in the impact of those costs being higher.

Jon Paul Newsome

Is there any way to think about whether or not that would have an impact on the underlying combined ratio? Should you essentially move the same claim to the cat designation from the underlying?

Alan David Schnitzer

Paul, sometimes we do see that in a quarter where it’s bucketing, where things will spill over to a cat number that would have otherwise been an underlying — that was not a big factor this quarter. It’s not like there were a bunch of close calls because of inflation spilled over into a cat designation. This was a significantly high number of severe convective storms for the third quarter that created a bunch of catastrophes. So this was not a definitional bucketing close call issue. That does happen sometimes. It didn’t happen this quarter.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Michael Ward from Citi.

Michael Augustus Ward

I was curious about Personal Auto. Just wondering if there was an impact from current year reserves on the underlying result. And if you could maybe expand on the frequency and severity trends.

Michael Frederick Klein

Sure, Michael. It’s Michael. In terms of CYPQ, not a significant amount. I mean, we called out the earned impact of pricing that really is the driver of the improvement in underlying. And then as respect to frequency and severity, frequency largely coming in, in line with expectations. If you look at external indices, miles driven is up 2% to 3%. It’s pretty consistent with the trend it’s been on.
And so not a lot to talk about on the frequency side and then really the moderating trends that I described are really coming from severity as we continue to see, in particular, physical damage severity moderate quarter-over-quarter-over-quarter as we go through 2023.

Michael Augustus Ward

And then on commercial property. Just wondering how should we think about the impact of the growth on BI margins? And could it — if there’s more volatility in non-cat property might that affect your growth appetite next year.

Daniel Stephen Frey

Mike, it’s Dan. So I think we’re very aware and cognizant of the amount of property that we’re putting on the books where we’re putting it on the books and what that’s doing to our total exposures price property with the risk load given the uncertainty and variability that can come with it. In terms of the margin from how much property you’re writing there can be a mix change over time if you think about the relative loss ratios of the lines and some of that’s driven by the duration of the liability in the lines property historically tends to run a lower underlying loss ratio than, for example, workers’ comp. So you could get a mix change over time. Tell me if that’s not responsive to your question.

Gregory Cheshire Toczydlowski

The one thing I’d add to that also is when you look at our property growth, the thrust of that growth really is being driven based on rate and exposure change we’re being active and very selective on the new business front. But when you look at what’s driving the net written premium change, it does start with rate and exposure change.

Alan David Schnitzer

And strong retention.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Meyer Shields from KBW.

Meyer Shields

So a question to start for Jeff. We’ve seen G&A expenses rise significantly faster than written premium every quarter this year. And I’m hoping you could talk to what’s going on there.

Jeffrey Peter Klenk

Absolutely. This is Jeff. Thanks, Meyer. The question on expenses is we’re definitely making strategic investments to support our future success. And broadly speaking, I’d give you two buckets. It’s employees and it’s also technology investments and think platform. But I remind you all in the context of while we’re delivering attractive returns.

Meyer Shields

Yes, that’s fair. No, that’s very helpful. Second question, and I’m obviously shooting a little bit in the dark, but it looks like last year and this year, the run rate of workers’ compensation reserve releases was a lot higher than preceding years. And I was hoping you could talk through what that change is? Is it just COVID-related frequency benefit or are there other factors?

Daniel Stephen Frey

Meyer, it’s Dan. Comp has been pretty consistently for a number of years, a pretty favorable development story. And when it is, it’s across a number of accident years. That’s continued to be the case in 2022 and 2023. We’re really just reacting to — we’ve had this conversation before.
You’ve got to be really careful with your assumption around medical cost trend given the duration of the liability, quarter goes by a bunch of claims closed. You see what actually happened in terms of severity relative to what you had previously allowed for and you make an adjustment.
And we’re really just following the numbers in that regard. We have — we’ve certainly not become any more aggressive in the way we’re reserving for workers’ comp. It’s just the mathematical output of the changes that we’ve seen.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Alex Scott from Goldman Sachs.

Taylor Alexander Scott

First one I have for you is on casualty. And specifically, I wanted to ask you about some of the comments that have come out of the larger reinsurance companies. I mean it sounds like they’ve gotten a bit more cautious in their stance on U.S. casualty in general and I guess the social inflation trends and so forth.
And certainly, you guys — it sounds like you saw a little bit of that in general liability and commercial lines. But I just wanted to see if you could provide a perspective on how big of an issue do you really think that is for the industry at this point? And is there anything unique about your exposure that sort of insulates you, whether it’s the size of business that you tend to write and that kind of thing.

Alan David Schnitzer

Yes. Alex, it’s Alan. We think that commentary is well placed. And frankly, we’ve been on that bandwagon since, I don’t know, 2018 or something like that. So we think we rang that bell very, very early. We think we’ve reacted to it consistently even during the pandemic when you might have looked at the data and thought that things were improving. We’ve said consistently, we don’t believe it. We think it’s here. We think it’s at higher levels. We think it’s inflate faster.
And so what we’ve seen is inside the underlying — the combined ratios that we’re reporting in Business Insurance. So we do think that it continues to be an important issue to watch. And we’ve taken a lot of price and in part in response to that. So it’s an issue and we think we’re on top of it.

Taylor Alexander Scott

Got it. And a follow-up I had is on the auto insurance specifically. You all obviously showed a good amount of improvement, which is great to see. How much of that is driven by the severity beginning to calm down or stabilizing at least. I mean any color you can provide on those trends and maybe specifically even repair and what you’re seeing there?

Michael Frederick Klein

Sure, Alex, it’s Michael. I’ll just clarify a couple of things I said earlier. So it really is the acceleration of earned pricing earning through and driving that underlying improvement. But when you think about the external trends, and external cost, it definitely is also a result of those external trends moderating. And we had been talking about double-digit loss cost trends, particularly in the physical damage space for a quarter upon quarter upon quarter, those trends moved into the single digit this quarter. So it was really both the earned pricing and the moderating trends driving that improvement.

Operator

Your next question comes from the line of Scott Heleniak from RBC Capital Markets.

Scott Gregory Heleniak

Just wondering if you could comment on the recent proposed reforms in the state of California really to keep private insurers from — in the state from leaving the state. Do you think that initiatives there are appropriate? Do you think they’re enough? And does that impact your strategy there either way in either direction? Just any overall kind of first views on some of the proposals out there?

Michael Frederick Klein

Sure, Scott. It’s Michael. I’ll share a couple of thoughts. First of all, the idea of regulatory reform in California is positive news. That said, I really don’t think there are enough details available to evaluate. You’ve got a framework that the governor has asked the commissioner to take action on, but the details underneath that framework and how it’s going to be implemented have yet to be defined.
And so deciding whether it’s a net positive or not and what actions to take as a result there just really aren’t enough details yet to evaluate that further. But we certainly are encouraged by the fact that California is considering regulatory reform, and we think it’s long overdue.

Operator

And we have time for one more question, Bob Huang from Morgan Stanley.

Jian Huang

Most of my questions were answered, but maybe just one thing. You mentioned on the prepared remarks about tech investments. Can you possibly unpack that a little bit what are the key technological aspect that you’re focusing on in terms of investment? I’m assuming cloud is always going to be a big part of your investment just given that there is a consumption-based expense model. But are there other IT capabilities that you would like to call out?

Alan David Schnitzer

Yes. So Bob, it’s Alan. Thank you for the question. We would be really happy to take this offline with you. We’ve talked really extensively about this over a long period of time. But broadly, the investments that we’re making across the organization fall into three buckets: one, extending our lead in risk expertise; two, providing great experiences to our customers, agents, brokers and employees; and three, optimizing productivity and efficiency.
And that happens in a lot of different ways at the enterprise level, and it happens segment by segment. But at the enterprise, broadly speaking, it’s digitizing the value chain. Digitizing the customer journey, modernizing the foundation, advanced analytics, automation, faster speed to market, getting the right price on the risk, things like that.
And in terms of what’s going on in the businesses, it’s partner integration, sales and service, better front end for customers. It’s on and on. It’s focused and it’s ambitious. But it also covers a lot of ground. So we’ve talked a lot about it extensively, and we’d be happy to meet with the insure more.

Jian Huang

Okay. And maybe just like a follow-up on workers’ comp and apologies for belaboring the point on this. Is that possible to maybe unpack a little bit in terms of how the loss ratio looks like for workers’ comp versus other parts of Business Insurance. I’m assuming this does not impact your loss cost trend of 5.5% to 6%, but just curious as to if you can give a little bit of detail there.

Alan David Schnitzer

Yes, we’re not going to break out the losses by product line, but it certainly is wrapped in the overall number that we’ve talked about historically.

Operator

Ms. Abbe Goldstein, I will turn the call back over to you.

Abbe F. Goldstein

Great. Thanks, everyone. We appreciate you joining us today for our call. And as usual, if there’s any follow-up, please feel free to reach out to Investor Relations. Have a good day.

Operator

This concludes today’s conference call. Thank you for your participation, and you may now disconnect.