Does anyone know why they chose to offer renters/casualty insurance? I understand how their model is a bit different from other insurance companies, and I think that's cool. But I'm still left wondering why they thought this form of insurance (as opposed to auto, life, etc) was the easiest to attack.
Definitely the easiest insurance line to get started in for a variety of reasons. Things like easier compliance, younger and uninsured demographics that are easier to market to, and reduced complexity Regulators also don't put as much financial scrutiny in lines that don't have high caps (although they still scrutinize other aspects like consumer protection). If a "renters only" insurance agency goes under, most guar…
Lemonade files S1
191–194 of 194 posts
Re: Lemonade files S1
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
That misses a 3 key points: 1) 72% pure loss ratio is ok, but normally for these lines I'd aim for mid 60s. Nothing special to see here.. 2) It took them THREE YEARS to get there, and they were exceedingly poor at selecting and managing risk for 2 years. 161% loss ratio??!! That is flunky-level poor risk management. If they had a reinsurer, that reinsurer is probably very unhappy and unlikely to renew the treaty. 3)…
Why does LR even matter? They cede 75% of their risk so they operate more like a broker. I reckon the reason they don't cede more risk is because the re-insurers want them to have skin in the game. The re-insurers could get adversely selected if Lemonade can't price well
Re: Lemonade files S1
#193Hi all, I think this thread has been full of great discussion, and there has been many questions surrounding Lemonade's financials and strategy. I am a former investment banker, and enjoy analyzing companies in my spare (limited) time. I've been following Lemonade since 2018 so their S-1 filing piqued my interest. https://balancedview.substack.com/p/lemons-for-lemonade Long story short, I think there are two major to…
Interesting read! It took me a bit longer to get through that S1 than you though. A few points I'd love to discuss > to become more efficient versus than competitors and ultimately lower loss ratios I didn't see them explicitly mention their focus on reducing LR for their business model. I read the LR data as a metric to prove their sustainability. However, I explicitly saw them mention that they want to generate con…
On your first point, Lemonade's loss ratios are currently higher than industry average. This is likely tail weighted & driven by a few outlier claims, as their premiums underwritten are minuscule versus their large competitors. Lemonade has every incentive to continue pricing risk better, and ML is the perfect tool for this. Having spoken to CIOs (chief insurance officers) in the industry, the amount of data insurance companies generate is tremendous, and very quickly ML can spot correlations between price, claims payouts, frequency, etc. Harnessing the data as the largest insurcos are surprisingly manual & paper based, and asking the right questions to the machine is the hard part, but Lemonade has the advantage of being more nimble & not encumbered by the legacy tech stack.
Lemonade's original philosophy of taking a flat fee & donating the unpaid claims, was driven by disincentivzing fraud. They hired behavioral scientists, and this was big marketing push for their 1.0/1.5 platform. Insurance companies only have so many value levers to pull, and I think while not explicitly stated in the S-1, reading through publicly available posts & data show Lemonade is very much focused on pricing risk correctly and lower LR.
Regarding point 2, GAAP revenue (rarely use this term) is on the income statement throughout the S-1 (pg 18 is the first instance). Ceded premium to reinsurers is excluded from GAAP revenue (pg 103 has a table breakdown).
My thought is Lemonade is marketing GWP front and center on page 2, but shifting their biz to be heavily ceded to insurers, which lowers revenue. Yes, Lemonade is receiving a fee in exchange, and maybe lowering liabilities on their balance sheet. But, its not a great trade because 1) expensive CAC to cede it away, 2) they essentially become a broker, and brokers don't generate the multiples investors want, and 3) they don't take advantage of insurance float.
Re: Lemonade files S1
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately their LTV / Cac is terrible, I've provided a full teardown on what parts of the S-1 trouble me the most (unit economics and revenue growth). https://balancedview.substack.com/p/lemons-for-lemonade Their payback period isn't 2 years, not even close with 18% gross margins. Let me know what you think!
Nice analysis. For your unit economics calcs, their retention isn't 75%. That figure excludes customers that the company churns. When you include those figures into retention, the Year 1 retention is 62% and the overall 2 year retention is 44%. See here in the Customer Retention section for more details: https://www.meritechcapital.com/blog/lemonade-ipo-s-1-breakd...
Regarding retention, I chose to not incorporate regulatory or underwriting risk driven cancellation to capture demand driven cancellations only. I expect as time goes on and Lemonade's capital increases & they fine tune the underwriting model / better price risk, these Company forced cancellations will decrease, as they have the past two years.
I'd be interested to know what % of customers transfer to a competitor vs. not needing the renters / homeowners product anymore.
I do agree with you, however, that this lowers their implied customer lifetime even further, and by extension unit economics.