Aegon - Earnings Call - H1 2025
August 21, 2025
Transcript
Speaker 1
Good day, and thank you for standing by. Welcome to the Aegon First Half 2025 Results Conference Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. After the speaker's presentation, there will be a question and answer session. To ask a question during the session, you will need to slowly press star one and one on your telephone. You will then hear an automated message advising your hand is raised. Please note that today's conference is being recorded. I would now like to hand the conference over to your speaker, Yves Cormier, Head of Investor Relations. Please go ahead.
Speaker 3
Thanks, Operator, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us for this conference call on Aegon's First Half Year 2025 Results. I'm Yves Cormier, Head of Investor Relations, and joining me today to take you through our progress are Aegon CEO Lard Friese and CFO Duncan Russell. Before we start, we would like to ask you to review our disclaimer on forward-looking statements, which you can find at the end of the presentation. With that, I would like to give the floor to Lard.
Speaker 0
Thank you, Yves, and good morning, everyone. I want to start today's presentation by informing you about the next steps in Aegon's transformation and running through our commercial developments before Duncan will address our results in more detail. Let me begin on slide number two with the key messages. Our strategy is to grow and transform our businesses, and we made good progress in doing so during the first half of 2025. We are on track to deliver on our strategy and on all our targets. Our operating result was €845 million, up 19% compared with last year. This increase was mainly driven by profitable business growth and less unfavorable claims experience in the U.S., but also in the U.K. and in our international segment. Operating capital generation before holding and funding expenses amounted to €576 million, decreasing by 2% over the same period.
New business strain increased, especially in our U.S. strategic assets as we grew the business. Commercial momentum remains strong across our key markets, leading to higher new life sales and more net deposits. The capital position of our operating units remains strong and above their respective operating levels. Furthermore, in the U.S., we have extended the hedging of the variable annuity portfolio to cover part of the base fee exposure, which reduces our exposure to downward equity markets further. Cash capital at holding totals over €2 billion, following the receipt of planned remittances from all our units and the completion of a €150 million share buyback in the first half of the year. On the back of the solid performance, we have increased the interim dividend by €0.03 compared with last year to €0.19 per common share.
Furthermore, today we announced a €200 million increase to the current share buyback program, which began in July. In total, we will buy back €400 million of shares during the second half of 2025. This once again demonstrates our ongoing commitment to return excess capital to shareholders unless we can invest it in value-creating opportunities. It is consistent with our plan to reduce our cash capital at holding to around €1 billion by the end of 2026. Today, we are also announcing a review of a potential relocation of our head office to the U.S. I will now move to slide number three to provide you with some background on this review. This is an important step in the transformation of our company.
In recent years, Aegon's business in the United States, which accounts for approximately 70% of Aegon's operations, has become Aegon's primary market and central to the company's strategy and long-term growth. A relocation of Aegon's legal domicile and head office to the United States is a logical step. It is expected to simplify Aegon's corporate structure, as it would align its legal domicile, tax residency, accounting standard, and regulatory framework with the geography where it conducts the majority of its business. Moreover, bringing the head office closer to our largest market allows much closer cooperation between the holding and its main business unit, which is an important enabler to grow successfully in the long term. As part of the review, we will evaluate the additional advantages that would come with being a U.S.-based company.
This includes the impact on all of Aegon's stakeholders and of making our listing on the New York Stock Exchange, our primary listing alongside our Euronext listing. Another key component of this review is the implementation of U.S. GAAP reporting, which is a complex process which would likely take two to three years to complete. Preparations for the implementation have begun. We aim to share the outcome of this review at our Capital Markets Day on December 10 of this year. With that, I will now move on to slide number four to discuss our recent commercial performance, starting with the Americas. We continued to deliver on Transamerica's transformation, growing our strategic assets during the reporting period. World Financial Group recorded a 14% increase in its number of licensed agents to over 90,000, thanks to successful recruiting efforts and improved retention.
The productivity of the agents selling life insurance products increased mainly from higher average premiums per policy. This offset a slight reduction in the number of multi-ticket agents, while it led to an increase in Transamerica's market share in WFG's U.S. life sales. This higher agent productivity at WFG was one of the key drivers of the 13% increase in new life sales in our individual life business. We also recorded strong growth of new life sales in the brokerage channel, driven by the successful launch of a fully digital experience of the whole life final expense product last autumn. Furthermore, we continued to see steady growth in the Ryla product, where net deposits nearly doubled compared with last year. In the savings & investments segment, we recorded solid net deposits in our retirement plan business over the reporting period.
This was driven by mid-sized plans, partly supported by the onboarding of a large pooled plan. Written sales continue to be strong, which we see as a positive indicator for future growth of our book. Finally, we realized further growth in the general account stable value product and in IRAs as we work to increase profitability and diversify revenue streams in the retirement plan business. Let's move on to slide number five for an update on the other units. At Aegon UK, we continued to make progress on the strategy we presented at the teach-in in June of last year. Deposits in the workplace platform can be lumpy, and in this period, we benefited from the onboarding of a larger scheme. The advisor platform business continued to be adversely impacted by ongoing consolidation and vertical integration in non-target advisor segments.
In the international segment, our joint ventures in Brazil, China, as well as Spain and Portugal all generated higher new life sales. This was partially offset by lower sales at TLB as a result of changes in the competitive landscape in Singapore. Aegon Asset Management reported solid third-party net deposits during the reporting period. Net deposits in the global platforms business were mostly attributed to alternative fixed-income products. Strategic partnerships net deposits were driven by a Chinese joint venture, which benefited from collaboration with the consumer finance platform. I will now hand over to Duncan to discuss our financial performance in more detail.
Speaker 3
Thank you, Lard. Let me start with an overview on slide seven. In the first half of 2025, the operating result increased by 19% year on year, mostly reflecting an improvement at Transamerica. Operating capital generation before holding, funding, and operating expenses decreased by 2% over the same period, mainly driven by higher new business strain. Free cash flow in the first half of 2025 amounted to €442 million, and this is a significant increase compared to the €373 million generated last year. Cash capital at holding remains very healthy, standing at €2 billion per the end of June, allowing us to announce an increase of our ongoing share buyback program.
On a per-share basis, valuation equity, which consists of the sum of shareholder equity and the CSM balance after tax, decreased by 5% in the period, mostly from the impact of unfavorable exchange rate movements on the group CSM, which are partly offset by a strong net result. Exchange rate movements were also the driver for the reduction of gross financial leverage. Lastly, the group solvency ratio decreased by 5 percentage points compared with year-end 2024 to 183%, mainly from the new share buyback program and a reservation of the 2025 interim dividend. Using slide eight, I will address the development of our IFRS net result in the first half of 2025. The operating result amounted to €845 million, coming in at the top end of the €750 to €850 million run rate range we had indicated with the full year 2024 result.
In the U.S., the operating result improved materially year on year to $685 million, within our guided range of $650 to $750 million. The result benefited from growth in our strategic assets, notably the Protection Solutions business, with some offset in distribution where the operating margin fell in the first half of 2025, as previously flagged as we invested further in the business. We had an improved result in financial assets because of less unfavorable experience variances from our onerous contracts. Claims experience was largely offset by reserve releases. Unfavorable reserve changes due to premium variances that we saw in the U.S. in the second half of 2024 continued into the first half of 2025, as we previously flagged, but to a materially lesser degree. The operating result for the UK increased, benefiting from business growth and favorable markets.
In the international segment, the operating result increased mainly from a higher CSM release in TLB and Spain and Portugal. Aegon Asset Management's operating result, as well as that of the holding, was broadly stable compared with the same period of last year. Moving on, non-operating items were in aggregate favorable in the period, driven by hedging results recorded in fair value items. Other charges amounted to €207 million, mostly because of the assumption updates in the U.S. and at TLB to address the experience we have recently seen. Finally, we booked a €50 million contribution from our stake in AFR. Looking forward to the second half of the year, we are increasing our guided operating result range for the U.S. by $50 million to $700 to $800 million, but we're keeping the group guidance at €750 to €850 million, reflecting the current exchange rates.
I'm now moving on to slide nine. Based on the strong net result and a positive contribution of the assumption updates to OCI, shareholders' equity increased slightly over the period. The CSM balance decreased over the period, mostly because of unfavorable currency movements. In U.S. dollars, the CSM of our strategic assets in the U.S. increased thanks to profitable new business, while the CSM of our financial assets decreased due to the runoff of the book, the impact of claims experience, as well as the impact of strengthening policyholder behavior assumptions. Outside the U.S., the changes to the total CSM balance were limited, with the U.K. CSM decreasing modestly on a local currency basis and the international segment CSM increasing modestly from assumption updates. Overall, valuation equity per share decreased by 5% over the first half of 2025 to €8.47 per share, mostly due to the exchange rate development.
Slide ten, operating capital generation or OCG decreased by 2% compared with the first half of 2024. OCG from the U.S. decreased by 4% or 3% in U.S. dollars. OCG from the strategic assets decreased as our investments in business growth drove higher new business strain. OCG from the financial assets increased, mostly from higher fees as variable annuity account balances increased on the back of favorable markets. Furthermore, claims experience in the period was less unfavorable than in the same period last year and included $86 million of unfavorable mortality, largely related to the universal life book. Looking through the unfavorable claims experience in the period, we continue to observe a quarterly OCG run rate for the Americas of around $200 million to $240 million. The OCG benefited from favorable markets as well as favorable non-recurring variances.
The international segment reported lower OCG with improved underwriting experience in TLB being offset by lower OCG from China. Aegon Asset Management's OCG was stable compared with the same period of last year. Looking ahead, we continue to expect OCG before holding, funding, and operating expenses of around €1.2 billion in 2025. I'm now turning to slide 11. The capital positions of our business units remained robust and above their respective operating levels. The U.S. RBC ratio decreased by 23% compared with year-end 2024 to 420%. Market movements had a 15% negative impact on this ratio. Of this, 5% was due to hedging, rebalancing, and cross effects as a consequence of elevated market volatility in April, which we flagged with the first quarter trading update. The remaining unfavorable impact was largely driven by valuation moves in our alternative asset portfolio and lower interest rates.
One-time items had a 9% unfavorable impact due to restructuring costs, the annual actuarial assumption updates, and several smaller items. For the remainder, operating capital generation in the period was offset by remittances to the group. Finally, in mid-August, we decided to expand the dynamic hedge program of our variable annuities to cover the equity market exposure of the fees of 25% of the base contract. This represents an additional lever available to us to manage our risk profile going forward, reduces our economic equity market exposure on the VA block and thus capital requirement, and further solidifies the expected runoff profile, albeit with a small negative impact on run rate OCG. In the UK, the solvency ratio of Scottish Equitable decreased by 1% to 185% as operating capital generation in the period was offset by remittances and investments in the business. Slide 12.
Cash capital at holding remains extremely healthy, standing at just over €2 billion. Free cash flow amounted to €442 million in the period and included remittances from all our units, as well as capital returns from our stake in ASR. We returned €110 million of capital to shareholders through share buybacks, and in addition, we purchased €40 million worth of shares, which will be used for share-based compensation plans. Today, we have announced a €200 million increase of the currently ongoing share buyback program, bringing it to a total of €400 million for the second half of the year. Our objective remains to reach the midpoint of the operating range for cash capital at holding, around €1 billion, by the end of 2026. Let me conclude our presentation with the final slide on page 13.
Taking into account our performance in the first half of 2025 and the outlook for our businesses, we are on track to achieve all of our financial targets for 2025. We look forward to meeting you at the Capital Markets Day on December 10th in London. At the event, we will share the conclusion of the review regarding a potential relocation of Aegon's head office to the United States. With that, I would now like to open the call for questions. Please limit yourself to two questions per person. Operator, please open the Q&A session.
Speaker 1
Thank you. As a reminder, to ask a question, you will need to slowly press star one and then one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. Please be aware that we will take and answer one question at a time before moving to the next question. Please stand by while we compile the Q&A roster. This will only take a few moments. Thank you. We will now go to the first question. Your first question today comes from the line of David Barma, Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Good morning. Thanks for taking my questions. To start with, can you talk about what drove the decision to cover 25% of the variable annuity base fee, please? Did you see that as the optimal balance between cost and protection, or is it a first step and you'd like to do more over time? I'll ask my second straight away because it's linked to that. That combined with the measures taken on the universal life block will weigh on OCG going forward, but you've reiterated the guidance. We've been in a similar situation in the past two years with mortality first and then the drag in China, both being offset by other measures. I guess I'm trying to understand how reliant OCG is to the current level of equities and to what extent stronger than expected business growth is making you comfortable with the OCG level that you're guiding for.
If you can give a bit of color on that, please. Thank you.
Speaker 0
Thanks, David.
Speaker 3
Doug? Yeah. Okay. The VA base fee hedging, David, we executed upon that in recent days. Actually, last week we executed upon it. That is an additional tool we brought into our toolkit to manage and stabilize the capital generation and the earnings profile of our using our position. We did that for a number of reasons, partly to stabilize capital, partly to bring an additional toolkit, partly because equity markets are at a good level. It is just part of our normal ongoing management unilateral actions related to financial assets. The 25% again is probably a bit of prudence on our side. We wanted to execute upon that, monitor how it works, make sure you understand it fully. In the future, once we fully have observed that, we could increase it or decrease it depending on how we view things.
One thing we do have to balance and manage when we do these things is the impact it is throwing on our capital position. That is one thing that we have been doing to monitor. The net net, it has reduced our underlying economic equity exposure on that vehicle, which I think is a good thing. In terms of OCG, actually, it is a fairly clean quarter. We have reiterated our guidance. If I take the actual reported OCG for the half year, add in our quarterly run rates, then we are still getting into our guided range of around $1.2 billion per year. Your comment on our equity sensitivity, actually, we are not particularly equity sensitive. You can see the sensitivities in our balance sheets, which are not particularly large. I think we have guided that our OCG is sensitive by plus or minus 10% to around $40 million.
Not particularly equity sensitive, to be honest.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Michael Igor Huttner from Berenberg. Please go ahead.
Hi there. I wanted to say it almost sounds like goodbye. The decision to, and I take it as a decision if you've already started doing U.S. GAAP, it sounds to me like a decision. First question on the U.S. GAAP, can you, as an indication, where will it land roughly relative to the operating profit or the OCG we've got already? The other two, I know that it's more than two questions. It's the pooled plan, how big it is, because I guess it's around $2 billion, but I don't know. Also, figures on the new business stream. Thanks. Oh, and if I may, the economic exposure, the VA benefit, how much does it reduce the capital required?
Speaker 0
Okay, Michael, that's a number of questions. Let me confirm it's $1.9 billion, the pooled plan that you're referring to as part of the retirement growth of net deposits in this half year. For the remainder, I hand over to you, Duncan.
Speaker 3
Yeah, hi Michael. On U.S. GAAP, no, it's too early to tell. I don't want to give any sort of guidance on that. It would be misleading at this stage, to be honest. On the capital requirement from the VAH, there's a small capital benefit. We are reducing the equity exposure, which will reduce the required capital by a small amount in the third quarter.
Speaker 1
Thank you.
Speaker 0
The new business stream? New business stream.
Speaker 3
I'm not entirely sure what your question was on new business stream, but if I look in the quarter, our new business stream was more or less as we anticipated. It is roughly $6 million higher than our guided run rate in aggregate.
Speaker 0
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. We will now take the next question. The next question comes to a line of Farooq Hanif from JPMorgan. Please go ahead.
Hi everybody. I just want to delve a little bit into your thinking on the re-domiciliation because you've told us obviously that you've considered this in the past or it's been on the table, particularly when you moved your regulatory domicile to Bermuda. I get the point about it makes sense from the point of view of most of your business is obviously from the U.S. I just want to understand what's changed, given that you, I believe that you've probably looked at this before. The things that come to my mind are regulators. Does it also make it easier for you to execute on some of your plans in the U.S.? Would that be a factor? For example, in terms of being able to use U.S. GAAP and just being located there. I wonder if you'd be willing to just talk a little bit more about this.
I realize you're reviewing it all, but just some of the other factors that are important. Sorry, that was a very long question. Second question, how clean is your $845 million operating profit? You did quickly run, Duncan, run through some points, but how clean do you think it is?
Speaker 0
Yeah, Farooq, I will answer your first question and take you through the rationale and everything that you asked for. Let's start to clear the question to Duncan on the financials, the second one.
Speaker 3
Yeah, it's pretty clear. It's pretty clean. We are happy with the first half, our first operating profit. We reported $845 million, as you mentioned. If there were still some negative variances, if we add back all those negative variances, which is roughly $92 million for the group, we get to an adjusted number of around $937 million, which is strong. Having said that, as we flagged for the full year, we do have a recurring VA interest execution, which usually develops to say $30 million, $35 million. Underlying around $900 million in the first half. Since NFX has weakened, and hence we're coming back into around the $850 million level, which is in the guided range. A pretty good quarter, a pretty good half year for it, to be honest.
Speaker 0
Farooq, on the rationale and everything related to what you asked on the potential move to the U.S., a couple of things here. The Aegon transformation, as we all know, is pretty profound, and we've done quite a number of steps over the last years to be where we are today. We are now ready for this next step in the transformation. At the time that we were announcing the combination of our Dutch business with ASR and then the subsequent closing of that in July, at the beginning of July 2023, we should all go back to that moment because it was a very important moment. At that point in time, we were in the middle of implementing IFRS 17. We had just implemented IFRS 17, and we were in the middle of disclosing it for the first time. That's number one.
At that point in time, there was not a U.S. GAAP available at all. That's number one. Number two, we were closing the transaction with ASR, which is a very comprehensive transaction. We needed to make sure that we embedded the group's asset appropriately operationally. We also moved, as DNB could no longer be, had no legal basis any longer to maintain to be our group regulator. We moved our legal seat to Bermuda, and then subsequently the BMA became our regulator, and we wanted to embed everything appropriately. Let's also not forget that in that same period, because we closed the transaction the 4th of July, but in June, that's a couple of weeks earlier, two weeks earlier, we had a Capital Markets Day in London where Transamerica was launching its strategy and its plan. We have two years behind us, and we can see how it's progressing.
At that time, we were at the start of that execution, and we are now two years further ahead, and we can now see that we have a conviction that our U.S. team is executing very well, and you can see that the growth, etc., is really coming through. Now the U.S. business is 70% of the overall footprint of the group. The reality is that we're now ready for this next phase of the transformation. We believe it is logical that if the U.S. is 70% of your business, located in one of the thriving largest markets in the world, it is clearly the locomotive, if you will, that is able to carry the entity to be the front part of the train that is Aegon Group. As we aim to grow the U.S.
business in the future, we want to be closer to it, and moving our holding company to our largest market is a logical thing to do. We are leaning in, that's what you're to a reality of our business, and at this point in time, we are ready to do so. We have done a lot of work, but we aim to, we need to discuss in a public domain with a number of stakeholders, one of the most important stakeholder groups being our own employees, the works councils, all the implications for them. We will, and also a number of other stakeholders, and then we will conclude the review before the Capital Markets Day and then share the results of that review with you.
I'm really sorry to jump in on taking time, but has there been any regulatory pressure to do this?
No.
Okay, thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Iain Pearce from Exane BNP Paribas. Please go ahead.
Hi, morning everyone. Thanks for taking my questions. They're all around the re-domiciliation. First, if you could just touch on what you think the main challenges will be of potentially re-domiciling. Obviously, you flag US GAAP, but just sort of what you think the main challenges with the move would be. Have you had any conversations with your main shareholder about this move? I mean, clearly that article of the association might cause some problems for them with the re-domiciliation potentially. The second one is just around the asset allocation opportunities of re-domiciling and moving to a US-regulated entity. Do you see one of the main benefits of, and is the plan to really re-risk the asset portfolio in the US and increase private asset allocations as part of this re-domiciliation? Thank you.
Speaker 0
Thank you very much, Iain. I'll take the first couple of questions, and on your last question, I'll hand it over to Duncan. If you look at the key challenges, first of all, let's clear the air for anything AFR or the association, Aegon. We cannot speak for them, obviously. They are informed, and we cannot speak for them, but they are informed that we will continue to engage with them, obviously, in the coming period. When it comes to the main challenges, we expect this move. Head office processes in the United States, we need to build down head office processes here, and we need to make sure that we do that well. U.S. GAAP is a key gating item.
We started with it, the project has started, but implementing a new accounting standard is going to take some time, and that is a key thing to make sure we do right. Of course, in the meantime, we need to make sure that this transition process is appropriately change managed, and those I would say are the key things to mention here. When it comes to the asset allocation opportunity, potentially Duncan.
Speaker 3
I see no impact on the re-domiciliation on our asset allocation choices or opportunity. We manage our entities on a local capital basis. We're already operating under the U.S. statutory regime for Transamerica, and we have asset allocation appropriate to our liabilities in that market. I see no impact on that from the re-domiciliation.
Speaker 0
Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. We will now go to the next question. The next question comes from the line of Nasib Ahmed, UBS. Please go ahead.
Morning. Thanks for taking my questions. First one on just M&A. You've still got the financial assets. There's been a big variable annuity deal where I think the counterparty managed to get over the line on the counterparty risk, and that was one of the blockers for you guys, I think. Any thoughts on kind of third-party actions on the $3.3 billion locked in? On the flip side, anything that you would potentially buy, and how does the U.S. re-domiciliation help with M&A on the acquisition side? Second one is on OCG versus IFRS in the U.S. Duncan, you've raised the guide on the IFRS by $50 million, but I think the OCG guide stays the same. What's the difference? Why haven't you raised the OCG guide in the U.S.? Thank you.
Speaker 0
Yeah, I'll take the M&A side, and then you can do financial assets, Duncan, and the piece about the OCG. On acquisitions, same as we mentioned before, it's very much linked to our strategy. We want to grow like anybody, any company wants to grow. If we see an opportunity that makes sense and that strengthens our business, and it makes sense both for financial criteria and non-financial criteria, then we will certainly look at it. We will be disciplined. We're not going to do any M&A unless we believe that we can integrate it and that we will create value for our stockholders. The U.S. is a large market. It is our largest market. Being there physically with your head office, of course, and being closer to that market on a daily basis obviously would be positioning yourself more beneficial for that.
Our M&A approach has not changed to what we mentioned before. Duncan?
Speaker 3
Two separate questions. On the financial assets, you know, we continue to look at our unilateral, bilateral, and third-party options on those sorts of businesses. We've been doing that for years. Should the transaction present itself, which we find attractive for our shareholders, if it makes sense, we'll do it. If not, we won't, and we'll focus on unilateral and bilateral actions. No real change there. We just continue to look at all our options as we have been doing for the last couple of years. On the guidance, two things. Partly, the guidance reflects what we actually see in our actuals on a clean basis in the half year. We've seen that the U.S. operating profit performed well in the first half under IFRS, and that reflects therefore in the raised guidance, which means we expect that run rate to continue.
On OCG, we performed more in line with our previous guidance, and hence that's driven the unchanged outlook there. Bear in mind, there are quite material differences in the way, for example, growth is treated under the two regimes. Under the U.S. regulatory regime, as you grow, you improve your business stream, which is pressing in the near term. Under IFRS, you close your CSM, which comes through in earnings relatively quickly. That is also an experience, just a different unit in the country.
Speaker 0
Perfect. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Sara Kwahamori from Autonomous Research US LP. Please go ahead.
Morning all. A couple of questions from mine aside, just mainly on the domiciling discussion. Obviously, it's been debated for years and does now seem a bit of a foregone conclusion, but I just wondered if you have a sense therefore on the actual project costs of the U.S. GAAP implementation. Obviously, getting closer to the U.S. business makes a lot of sense, but I just wonder where that leaves your approach on the rest of the global footprint. Thanks.
Speaker 0
First of all, the costs are going to be part of the review, and we'll update you on the outcome of the review at the Capital Markets Day. When it comes to the total footprint, as you know, we've set ourselves a perimeter in 2020 when I joined the company. We're now in that perimeter, and we have a strategy to improve and to create advantaged businesses in that perimeter, and that is unchanged.
Thanks.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Benoit Petrarque from Berenberg. Please go ahead.
Yes, good morning. The first one is actually on your ASR stack. What are your initial thoughts around your stack also going forward, looking at the potential relocation in the U.S.? It sounds like it becomes less core than before. Maybe on the potential relocation, do you plan to initiate delivering actions in the holding levels? Any plans to maybe refocus more on deliveraging next year? Thank you.
Speaker 0
Duncan, can you take both questions?
Speaker 3
Nothing changes on either of those fronts. Today we announced a review. We'll conclude on that review with the Capital Markets Day, and if we decide to proceed, it'll take two to three years. The leverage, no need to change our leverage given our footprint is what it is today. On ASR, we've been consistent that we're a long-term patient holder, and there are two potential reasons we would dispose of that. Either we have an alternative use for that, or we feel that the price is reflecting intrinsic value. No change on either based on the announcement today.
Speaker 0
Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. Your next question comes from the line of Jason Calambasis from IND. Please go ahead.
Yes, hi, good morning.
Jason, it looks like we've lost your connection. Can you hear us?
My suggestion, operator, is you move to the next question, and if Jason comes back, we'll take his question, obviously.
Thank you, sir. I will now go to the next question. Your next question is a follow-up from Michael Huttner from Berenberg. Please go ahead.
On the U.S. mortality slide 17, can you talk a little bit about the unfavorable claims experience? I remember a figure, I think, of $66 million in Q1. Normally you would have $33 million because of normal seasonality and there was $33 million on top. I just want to get a feel for which way it's going versus your assumptions. The second question is, and I'm really sorry, Lard, I didn't hear the answer on pool. I did the numbers. On the savings & investments Q2 2025, you had a $2 billion net inflow. It was zero in Q2 2024. You mentioned pooled plan, but I'm really sorry, I didn't hear the number on that. Thank you.
Speaker 0
1.9 billion.
Thank you.
The pooled plan, you guessed it was $2 billion. You're pretty close. It was $1.9 billion. For your other questions, I'll ask you to.
Speaker 3
Hey Michael, we had overall mortality in the U.S. in the second quarter that was slightly positive. I'd say more or less in line with our best estimate expectations, slightly positive. Since the mortality update we did last year, we had positive 3Q, 4Q, negative 1Q, positive 2Q this year. We remain comfortable with our overall mortality assumptions.
Brilliant. That's very helpful. Thank you.
Speaker 1
Thank you. We have no further questions at this time. I would now like to hand the call back over to Yves Cormier for closing remarks.
Speaker 0
Thank you very much, Jeremy. Before I hand over to Yves, you know, we will make sure we reach out to Jason Calambasis for his question.
Speaker 3
All right. Thank you, Operator. This concludes today's Q&A session. Should you have any remaining questions, please get in touch with us at the Investor Relations Team. On behalf of Lard and Duncan, I would like to thank you for your attention. Thanks again and have a good day.
Speaker 1
Thank you. This concludes today's conference call. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.