Humana Inc. Price & Performance (HUM)

Hope everyone had a chance to review our press release and prepared remarks which are available on our website. Followed by a Q and A session where Jim and Celeste will be joined by George Ronnen, President of Humana's Insurance segment. Before we begin our discussion, I need to advise call participants of our cautionary statement. Certain of the matters discussed in this conference call are forward looking and involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially. Investors are advised to read the detailed risk factors discussed in our latest Form 10 ks or other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission in our fourth quarter twenty twenty four earnings press release as they relate to forward looking statements along with other risks discussed in our SEC filings. We undertake no obligation to publicly address or update any forward looking statements in future filings or communications regarding our business [indiscernible] Today's press release our historical financial news releases, and our filings with the SEC are all also available on our Investor Relations site. Call participants should note that today's discussion includes financial measures that are not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Management's explanation for the use of these non GAAP measures and reconciliations of GAAP to non GAAP financial measures are included in today's press Any references to earnings per share or EPS made during this conference call refer to diluted earnings per common share.

Finally, this call is being recorded for replay purposes. That replay will be available on the Investor Relations page of Humana's website, humana.com, later today. With that, I'll turn the call over to Jim Rechton.

You, Lisa, and good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us. I have three topics today. First, we have some new members of the team to introduce. I'm going to spend a minute talking about our performance through the framework of the four levers that drive this business. Those are the levers that were introduced in the CEO letter last summer. And I'll spend a minute on industry context. First, let me just reinforce a couple of headlines. 2024 adjusted EPS is in line with our initial guidance. This does include the investment that we made in STARZ and in growth in the back portion of the year. We are reaffirming our 2025 outlook, We remain committed to achieving at least a 3% margin in individual MA we do view 2025 as a key year in that journey. And we have some new management team members to help us bring fresh perspectives to that task. I'm pleased to introduce them today. I'll start with Celeste Malay, our new Chief Financial Officer. Celeste joins us with a lot of experience leading finance, in organizations that have worked their way through difficult external headwinds. This is a good experience given the circumstances and in our sector over the past couple of years and today.

This includes her experience at Morgan Stanley and at Fannie Mae, You will of course be hearing from Celeste today and I look forward to introducing you in a moment. We also have Michelle O'Hara joining us as Chief Human Resources Officer. Her experience has been focused on evolving HR capabilities through periods of change. She comes to us from SAIC. And we're introducing Jopin Mehta as our new Chief Information Officer. Jopin brings a wealth of experience managing large IT organizations in scale regulated industries. He also has experience using data and digital to better engage customers this is a big part of our future, we believe. He was most recently at Citi. Now let me turn to the four things that drive this business. The first of those four levers is product and experience, which drive customer growth, retention and lifetime customer value. In this area, we feel that we are moving in the right direction that we also believe that we're just scratching the surface of what be done. As a reminder, in 2024, we proved to have a good year of growth with nearly 5% membership growth despite repricing our product to reflect the elevated medical cost trend that we began to see nearly two years ago.

When we look at the most recent AEP and expectations we are accomplishing the things we wanted to achieve. We're shedding unprofitable plans, we're resetting expectations in lower margin plans, and we're shifting our membership mix with a focus on sustainable long term value. The membership losses that we've experienced have largely been consistent with our strategy. The exception to this is our position in the D SNP space, However, we are comfortable that we can quickly improve our positioning in this space. I also want to emphasize that we feel very good about the new member mix we've been attracting. The second lever is clinical excellence. This is the engine of the business. When we deliver better outcomes, we also reduce system costs. When we reduce system costs, we improve our own [indiscernible] Clinical excellence starts with delivering on STAR's performance. In the fourth quarter of twenty twenty four, we closed 650,000 care gaps. This is a significant improvement from where we started in September. We feel good about the progress that we made over the last quarter of the year And the question of course is will these steps that we've taken be enough to return us to an industry leading position in 2027?

As we acknowledged back in October, it will be tight. And ultimately it will depend on the final thresholds. Having said that, I will reemphasize that we feel good about the progress we made in the fourth quarter. We are right now putting all of our energy into measurement year 2020 that is bonus year 2028 where we have a full year of runway to drive operating Our third lever is operating with a highly efficient back office. We have made a lot of progress in this domain over the course of the last couple of years. In 2024, we improved our operating expense ratio by 40 basis points. Just to provide a few examples of what enabled this, we optimized our care model, we unified shipping activities across the enterprise, we outsource some non core capabilities and we streamlined our internal dish I'd like to note that our internal distribution team performed better this year than ever. Even while driving efficiency. Efficiency does not mean a decline in performance levels, when we do it the right way it is important for our team to note this and for our investors to recognize it. Despite the good progress over the past few years, we believe there is [indiscernible] and we expect to communicate a path towards additional efficiencies in the upcoming months.

Finally, let me touch on the last lever, which is capital allocation and growth. We feel good about the opportunities we found to expand our primary care footprint in the second half of twenty twenty four. We also feel good about the continued expansion of Medicaid organic However, in the near future, we will need to strike a balance. Priority number one is recovering MA margin, we have repeatedly said. This will require being prudent with our balance sheet as we navigate the stars recovery. And we must continue to grow our earnings capacity through organic reinvestment and through acquisitions. This is clearly a second priority, but it is a priority nonetheless. Both CinerWell and Medicaid are important enablers of our long term strategy. We will be thoughtful in identifying opportunities that make sense in our current environment that allow us to continue to grow our earnings capacity while we'll while being prudent with our balance sheet. Now let me spend just a moment on the insurance industry and on Medicare Advantage. It's been a volatile couple of years and more so it's been a volatile few months. The U. S. Healthcare system is complicated, fragmented and it's expensive. I think all of that has been pretty well established.

Americans understandably want high quality affordable care that is easy to navigate. Too often that is not what they are receiving today. There is no one company and there is no one sector that is responsible It is a system challenge. It is the challenge of our American healthcare system. Still, as I mentioned in my CEO letter last summer, Medicare Advantage plays an important role. Medicare Advantage delivers better outcomes than original Medicare. If you need evidence of this, look at the steady improvement and HEAT is performance that has been driven by MA program. Medicare Advantage operates more efficiently than original Medicare. This can be demonstrated in our recently published Value Based Care report or through the work done jointly with Harvard University looking at value based primary care. Which operates inside of a Medicare Advantage system. Medicare Advantage also enables more affordable healthcare access to seniors. There is a reason that more than 50% of eligible Americans choose Medicare Advantage. It is of good value. It makes healthcare more affordable and easier to access. And of course, Medicare Advantage program can be improved. And we are open to partnering with anyone in interested in engaging constructively to do that.

In the meantime, there are things that we, Humana, can do on our own. While we cannot fix the entire healthcare system on our own, we can make it easier for our patients and our members to navigate. We can make it easier to understand what our members will have to pay We can do more to support our members with reminders to do preventative care and to manage their chronic illnesses. We can take complicated healthcare topics and we can communicate We can provide them better service every time they call us with a question Those are the things that we can do That is our intent and that is the work that is underway within Humana Humana. This is a great company with a long successful history strong DNA and differentiated capabilities that has demonstrated it can improve outcomes for members, and patients while driving significant value for shareholders. While our long term potential remains strong, our industry is in transition facing significant regulatory and other headwinds. I have had the opportunity to lead companies in regulated industries through similar periods of volatility. It is incumbent upon us to evolve how we serve our members and operate the business to be more nimble, better able to absorb fluctuations and more consistently deliver compelling financial performance shareholder value.

As we execute on the four levers Jim has articulated, we will be stronger and better. I am thrilled to join an incredible team that will guide Humana through this I have enjoyed getting to know my team and many of my colleagues over the last several weeks It has been great to see how talented and committed the company is to serving our members and patients. I am energized by the opportunity to bring a fresh perspective and challenge the organization to rethink our norms so we are constantly improving. While at the same time ensuring the aspects of our culture that have been so critical to our past successes are retained. And enabling long term profitable sustainable growth. And I look forward to working with many of the participants on this call over the coming months. With that, I will turn the call back to Lisa to start the Q and A. Great. Thank you, Celeste. Before starting the Q and A, just a quick reminder that fairness in those waiting in the queue, we ask that you please limit yourself to one question. So operator, with that, please introduce the first caller. Our first question comes from Ann Hynes with Mizuho.

Hello. Good morning. Can you hear me? Yes. Good morning. Hey, Anne. Okay. Sorry, yes, there was a kind of a time out. Okay. I just want to focus on 2025. MLR guidance. Can you just break down the levers of the increase? What is what basis assuming, what's the overall cost trend How much is driven by IRA changes? And what the impact of the greater than expected loss of DSNP had on MLR, that would be great. Thank you. Hi, Anna, it's Celeste. Thanks for your question. So to give you some additional color on top of what we included in our prepared remarks, First, I'll give you the drivers of the decreases in the ratio, which is improving the ratio. First, the majority of the improvement is driven from the MA plan exits which all had very high benefit ratios. We also made other adjustments to our benefits in our remaining plans, which also improved the ratio. And then finally, the favorable calendar in 2025, given both how the days fall and the extra day in 2024 due to leap year. Second, the increases to the ratio, which are a drag. First, business mix changes given Medicaid is growing.

Medicaid carries a higher benefit ratio versus MA, as you know. Second, the IRA impact, which increases the benefit ratio given increased revenue with offsetting increases in claims. And third, incremental investments which are important to the long term, but increase the benefit ratio in the near term. The arrows we provided in our prepared remarks are in order of size. And we gave you the puts and takes, but we'll leave the modeling to you in terms of the impact overall. Our next question comes from Justin Lake Wolfe Research.

Thanks. Good morning. As you might expect, people are trying to look for now that you've given us 25 trying to look through to 26 and understand the moving parts there. Maybe you could just assume you're going to give us a lot more at the Investor Day once you have the outcome of the appeal. Maybe you could just frame for us if you think about it in two buckets, one, the core business Last year, you said before the rates came out disappointing, the company could grow $6 to $10 of earnings Rates seem to be coming in better Is that a reasonable framework ex the stars And then how would you think about stars relative to that give us an idea of how 2026 kind of moving parts might shape up.

Thanks. Hey, thanks Justin.

Let me just just start by acknowledging that we typically do not provide guidance that far out all the way out to 2026. And really that is driven by several of the factors that you just outlined. There's a bunch of unknowns that we're still navigating. SARS litigation is a big piece of that. The final funding for MA is a big piece of that. Obviously, the preliminary notice is out. Things can change between the preliminary notice and the final rate notice and And so we'll be waiting to see how that plays out What I can tell you is that what we are focused on differentially is how do we drive operating performance. And so what are the things that we can do fully under our control to get better at managing the business? When we do that, that leads us to a place where we can get to a compelling competitive position in the market and then look at some level pricing and benefits become easier and they take care of themselves that we're nailing that underlying operating performance. And so that's really where the orientation is right now on 2026. And when we talk about operating performance, what are we talking about?

We're talking about that second and that third lever. It's clinical excellence, and all the components that go into it and it is driving an efficient back office. Those two things more than anything else is really the focus for 2026 but we're not yet ready to provide guidance around that.

Our next question comes from Sarah James with Cantor Fitzgerald. Thank you. How do you think about the path to 3% margins Does that assume any sort of stars improvement needed to get there? How does that balance against what you're doing on cost and pricing? Do you think the book has to shrink further to get there and then think about that as being ratable or back end loaded? Thanks.

Yes. The way to think about STARS I'm sorry, the way to think about the 3% margin is yes, you would need to have a competitive SaaS position. And I'm going to go a little bit back to where I was before You need to have a reasonably normalized rate environment. And then you need to have optimal operating performance on the levers that I just described on clinical excellence, which again is STARS It is accurately understanding our patients' needs. And doing the follow-up care that goes with that, all of which then positively impacts Both quality and medical trends And then you need to optimize G and A. You need to be at a competitive place on G and A When you get those things right, you have the financial capacity to price your benefits competitively in the market and achieve 3%. So Stars is absolutely a part of that. But that's those are the operating levers that we are super, super, super focused on because those are what give you the [indiscernible] to price the right way in the market. And look, we feel like we have opportunities in every one of those. And that's that is what we're driving right now.

Some of those will hit in '26, some of those will hit after 2026. But it will be a steady march.

Jim, if I can add to that. One of the things you've talked a lot about in the past, I think to this audience is we need to get better at multiyear planning. Including getting better at looking around corners and looking ahead we have to be a lot more proactive in our decision making and planning to be much more flexible to react more quickly and we need to be better at making trade offs really creating the capacity as you called out for the most important things. We need to be ruthless about stopping things that are not driving better outcomes for our members better returns for our shareholders. And again, really focusing on creating capacity to do the things we really want to do and creating the most long term value. As part of this, we'll continue to assess how to balance the aspects of our cost structure that are fixed versus variable and how we evolve to over the longer period of time become more variable in our [indiscernible] I really believe there's an opportunity here which will allow us to absorb change faster and drive more consistent results Along with STARZ, this is one of our top priorities.

Our next question comes from Joshua Raskin with Nephron Research.

Hi, thanks. Good morning. You spoke to a few hundred million dollars of investments that are sort of off [indiscernible] details on like the major buckets of those few $100,000,000 and then are those going to be ongoing each year? Are those truly one time in nature? Then obviously the last one maybe more of a follow-up even on the prior discussion. But should we think of 2025 as a floor EPS number or do you need to win the appeal on STARZ for that to happen?

Hi. Thanks for your question. Just to be clear, we make investments in our business every year What we've called out and what's included in our guidance are incremental investments of a few hundred million dollars It's across a set of initiatives designed to improve our operating performance. So we're focused on STARZ, of course, investing in clinical excellence, membership strategies and other areas we'll share more detail as the year progresses as to where this the ratios they hit, either the operating cost ratio or the benefit ratio. And we'll leave it at that. Our next question comes from Joanna Gajuk with Bank of America. Joanna, your line may be on mute. Our next question comes from A. J. Rice with UBS.

Hi, everybody, and good luck Celeste in the new position. Look forward to working together. Let me maybe just come back to Star's comment Obviously, for 2026 payment year, a lot's riding on the appeal and so forth.

But I noticed in your prepared remarks, the way you're describing and I know this is out there, but we're also trying to just think about the earnings power of the company. Going forward. There's discussion about '27 payment year. It sounds sort of cautious about that, but then 'twenty eight sounds like the year where you think investments you're making will bear fruit and pay off. I'm trying to understand the issues around twenty six Stars seem to be totally different than what you're highlighting. Or quite different than what you're highlighting for 2027.

And maybe that's some of the underlying way in which Star's calculations are changing. I wonder if you could speak a little more to why there's a little bit of caution on '27 and whether a favorable appeal on '26 makes any difference for 2027.

And the 2028 seems like the year where you really think you'll need the payment years obviously really be back to a normalized star rating level. Yes. Hey, A. J, this is Jim. Let me take this one.

First of all, let me just start by saying we are not trying to communicate anything different about '27 than what we communicated back in October. So we are trying to hit the same tone If anything, I think what we'd say is we feel good about the operating progress that we made in the fourth quarter of the year. So that positive [indiscernible] And we are simply reiterating that, that still remains the case, right? Like there's just a bunch of uncertainty around the thresholds and we want to be clear and transparent about that.

But that is not different. 2020 so now let me try to tease apart the different pieces here real quick. So 2026, again, not much we can say about the litigation. It's progressing as you would expect. It is unrelated to 2027. So whatever happens in 2026, with the litigation does not impact performance in 2027. In 2027, I'm just going to reiterate it one more time. We feel good about the progress we made operationally in the fourth quarter I think we told everybody I know we told everybody back in October that the thresholds that that came out last year represented a different level of performance than what we had anticipated at the time. We were resetting our targets in the fourth to reflect that we were on a sprint We did sprint. We made a lot of progress. We feel good about the progress. And we don't know what the thresholds are going to look like next year. Like it's kind of that plain and simple. And then as we move into the current measurement year, so think about the activities that we're doing right now in 2025, that influence 2028 We have a whole year of runway now.

And we have the ability to layer in more buffer or more cushion to our targets. And so we feel better entering with the New Year with a full year's worth of runway. And that's really what we're trying to convey to everybody. George, is there anything I was wordy there? No, that's okay, Jim. I would just add to that, A. J. That we saw that a lot of the new things we tested in the fourth quarter of last year delivered the results we were looking for. We saw great progress from the outreach we did to our members. We saw great progress of our teams working with our providers through various means to help our providers close gaps and care. And we also have seen great progress in our working with our vendor relationship. So on every front that we talked about back in October even before that when we had our STAR [indiscernible] We have made significant progress and feel very good about that progress. As Jim said, though, we are taking a very prudent approach to how we think about setting our thresholds and targets in the future and have set them away to have them be a significant stretch to our organization to push them to continue to excel.

And so that's the reason for some of the caution you're hearing. And that we are pushing our teams We've seen great progress and feel good about where we stand right now.

Our next question comes from Ben Hendrix RBC Capital Markets.

Hey, thank you very much. You discussed in your prepared remarks higher than expected. DSNP a attrition for the year and caution around change in SEP rules. And I was wondering if you could provide some more detail around how you're thinking about the range of outcomes there? And then by extension, how is the attrition you saw in the SEP in that population kind of impact or informing your MCR guidance range?

Thanks.

I'll start and then maybe on the benefit ratio. So look, first of all, we are pleased with the outcomes of our AEP given the members we gained versus [indiscernible] We have seen that our pricing strategy worked and that we are retaining members that are on the path to necessary margin recovery and expansion that is critical to the points that Jim made before. We are seeing members that have a shift to higher life [indiscernible] We're seeing strong performance to date in markets with a strong concentration of our best value based partners, including states like Florida, Illinois and Texas.

We are seeing higher than historical percentage of our non SNF, our core members. So sales coming from members switching from our competitor MA plans And as Jim mentioned, we're seeing continued shift to our higher value distribution channels. So all those things feel good. In our pricing strategy. However, as you point out, we were retained fewer members than we expected in our dual products.

There's a lot to be learned there and we are learning from that. We have a number of pilots in the AEP that will help us progress toward our strategies moving forward and helping our D SNP repricing as Jim has called out. I would also add that when you think about the dual product, don't disconnect that from the very exciting success we've had in Medicaid RFPs. With the recent wins we've had in Georgia and Texas that takes us to 13 states. And as I think you all are aware, the connection between Medicare and Medicaid is growing stronger and the integration and the rules are coming And so having a larger Medicaid footprint successfully implementing those states will also help us going into the future. So while we've retained fewer members than we we feel good about how we're set up for the future. [indiscernible] Thanks, George. Just to come back to what I had said earlier on the benefit ratios. So the majority of the improvement that the underlying improvement is from planned exits But if you recall, we deliberately exited unprofitable plans So additional DSNP losses helps on the margin, but most of the underlying benefit improvement something we did very intentionally.

And then we also made some adjustments to benefits in our remaining plan.

So the improvements are very intentional. Just one thing I wanted to add to George's comments on DSNP is 30,000 of the DSNP losses were due to redetermination As you know, the way each state did it with varied from state to state.

So about 30,000 was included in that number. Our next question comes from Whit Mayo with Leerink Partners.

Hey, thanks. I may have missed this just wanted to get an update on expectations for Part D. Seasonality this year given all the the changes this year and the higher deductibles that we see in the market. So just any observations would be helpful. Thanks.

Hi, Whit, it's George. So as we think about our PDP strategy, we are pricing for margin given the additional risk of the IRA. And we've taken a very disciplined approach to how we're pricing that given that increased plan live you know, we're participating in the premium stabilization demonstration and we are expecting to see growth of roughly 200,000 members versus our prior expectation of flat. There are a number of competitive dynamics that are driving that. Increase including number of plans available in 25. Of course, the premium stabilization demonstration has an impact on that. And we've maintained strong relationships with our brokers. We feel good though about the way we price the product While we price for margin, we're taking a measured approach in our assumptions to our guidance given the IRA changes and given the uncertainty there. We are monitoring throughout the year the most recent data given that Part D and MAPD does complete more quickly in the drug space, We don't see any problems there at this point. We see that the current data supports our pricing strategy and tactics that we've taken.

Yes.

And just to add to that in terms of seasonality, and I'll address The seasonality in our guidance in general since the IRA is the biggest piece of it. So first, To remind you, our we expect 60% to 65% of our earnings in the first quarter which is a significant shift from last year and prior periods. And there are really four key drivers of that. [indiscernible] are the IRA changes. Which shift more responsibility to the plan but seasonality also changes because members are working through their MOOP earlier in the year and planned liability increases as the year progressed progresses versus CMS reinsurance kicking in, in the back half of the year like in [indiscernible] Second, is planned benefit design changes, including the addition of deductibles that were made in line with the focus of driving sustainment sustainable long term membership growth In both the cases of the first and the second, the member bears more expense in the beginning of the year, and we bear more expense in the end of the year shifting earnings more towards the front of the year. There are two more drivers, which are less impactful. One, and I called this out earlier, is the change in the number of days and how they fall on the calendar including the leap year in 2024 and then finally the timing of when we expect to make the investments we mentioned previously.

Our next question comes from Aaron Wright Morgan Stanley. Great. Thanks for taking my question. You touched on this a few times during the call. So I want to circle back in terms of digging into it a little bit more. But in light of that CMS push for further integration across Medicare and Medicaid and to service that decent population by 02/1930. There are some certain requirements by 2027 as well How do you think about your positioning at this point and kind of in that spirit of being proactive and looking ahead, just how do you think about that in light of your Keith's strategy and do any of these efforts, whether it's tariffs mitigation, cost savings, other initiatives detract at all from your efforts on that front?

Hi, Aaron. Thank you for the question. As we think about the further integration Medicare and Medicaid, as I said, the impressive win rate that our Medicaid team has had in increasing our footprint is really in line with our plans as we go out as we think towards 02/1930. As we've talked about have a five year plan that we started last year that carries us almost to that same period. And we are progressing very nicely along the trajectory that we expected in one Medicaid states and increasing that footprint for that future integration. Do keep in mind though that the integration applies only to those states who have moved forward with Heidi and Heidi Snips. And so when you think about that almost half the states are in that bucket. So just keep that in mind as you're thinking about the Medicaid and Medicare integration rules and how they apply. One of the things we're paying a lot of attention to as we are selectively choosing which states to participate and what states to submit our responses as we're making sure that we are looking at where our current duals are, not just where dual SNP members are, but also where duals exist in our core underlying products.

You have to look at both. And as we're doing so, we are making sure and we're ensuring that we are prioritizing those states and that we will continue to cover the dual membership that is necessary to protect our margins and to protect our growth going forward.

Yes. I just want to come back to your question about creating capacity and the way I think about it and these are all tied together in terms of our ability to deliver for shareholders as we need to do better on the clinical side and reduce operating costs to one, invest in our membership So we continue to grow profitable long term membership. Two, invest in stars. And they're not in any particular order. Three, invest in our Medicaid growth. As you probably read in our prepared remarks, there is a J curve associated with the business.

There are the initial years, we are they are a drag on our earnings. So we need to make sure that we can do that. And then four, to invest in growth in CenterWell, which we believe is better for our members. All of these things are better for our members. So we really need to think about are the things we are doing getting us to one of those four things and they tied to Jim's levers as well.

Our next question comes from Scott Fidel with Stephens.

Hi, thanks. Good morning. I was hoping to get maybe a little more visibility or insight just into the Medicaid margin trajectory and sort of how that's flowing from 2024 into 2025. I know that you were expecting Medicaid margins to be at a loss in 2024. Just curious maybe you could give us a little more pinpointing on sort of where that negative pre tax margin percentage was in 25% and then how you're thinking about I think in the prepared you commented on some incremental improvement but curious on whether you think the business will get to profitability in 2025 or still stay in that negative margin area, then if I could just sneak a quick follow-up in as well. Just would love an update just on sort of what you saw in the fourth quarter as it relates to specialty Rx trends, I know that's been sort of a key area of pressure. And specifically just around the oncology drugs, which I know have been a key area of focus. Sort of how you saw that playing out exiting the fourth quarter? Thanks. Hey, Scott. So I'll start with the Medicaid and then others can add in.

Jim, I think we'll pick up from there. Look, the Medicaid business, given all these wins in strength of our our progress there. Medicaid's emerging as strong scale business with meaningful earnings potential as we look forward. 2024, as you mentioned, did come in line with our expectations and we feel good about how we ended 2024. What we're seeing as you think about 2025 is we are going to see roughly 175,000 to 250,000 number growth in the Medicaid block of business business. That's going to come split if you think about it that way between Virginia, which is a new state that we're implementing in summer of this year, at least that's when we're expected to, given the state's recent discussions with us. And then we also are expecting an additional allocation of members from Kentucky.

So with that, we do expect some modest improvements in margin But as we've talked about and as Celeste mentioned the J curve, currently 45% of our members in 2025 are in states with less than three years of experience.

So there's still maturity to do there and we are making good progress down that maturation lines. You think about our margin recoveries in that line of business. Our most mature state Florida is performing at the expected margin that we would have for this business. So we have a proof point that not only is it our longest day, but actually it's our largest membership as well. Has matured and is in the place that we expect it to be from a margin standpoint.

The 2025 rates roughly 75% of our revenue, we now know what those rates will be for 25%. There's additional 25% that are in what is called the pre draft state that we do not have total clarity to. So overall, we're feeling good about where we are. The states have been very collaborative in helping to ensure that rates meet the acuity of the membership. And that those discussions are ongoing and are progressing well. Yes. And hey, let me just hit the specialty drugs. This will be [indiscernible] The specialty drug spend it looks very much the way it has looked the last couple of quarters. It is elevated. It is relatively stable. We're going to be talking about specialty drugs. My guess is for a long time in the [indiscernible] is the right place given what we're seeing. So yes elevated, stable, and kind of within the range of expectations that we have.

Our next question comes from Joanna Gajuk with Bank of America. Yes, hi. Thanks so much for bringing me back in. Sorry, I got disconnected. So thanks for taking the question. Maybe just a couple of follow ups and one question on the 2025 guidance. Can you give us either numerical or qualitative, I guess, commentary about specific trend outlook for 2025? And how does it compare to what you had experienced in 2024?

I guess the other piece of this equation, right, rate and order, so you understand you want to see the final rate update there. But would you Because I guess historically most of the time final rate been better than proposal, but just kind of what do you assume in your guidance for those elements will be helpful? Thank you.

Yes. Hey, let me try to tackle both of those real quick. On trends, we're really forecasting, expecting kind of normalized trend in 2025. Coming off of what was elevated trend in 2024. That's I think the kind of easiest and simplest way to describe it. And as of right now, it's obviously very early in the year. We're not seeing anything inconsistent with that.

And but a lot of data will come in over the course of the next sixty, ninety days. [indiscernible] rate notice, We're not going to do a lot of commentary on the rate notice at this time outside of the commentary that we submit to CMS. What What I will simply note is that, yes, the rate notice can change from the preliminary to the final. That's part of the reason we don't want spend a lot of time commenting on it. And when we look at the preliminary that is out there, we would say the retrospective portion of that notice reflects what we all saw in the industry over the course of the last year year and a half and the forward looking is still an open question. There's a forward looking component that I think it's a forecast, but I think we would say it probably underestimates what forward looking trend is likely to be. And so we are that's kind of how we think about it right now. And there's a lot more to let develop over the course of the next few months. Our next question comes from the line of George Hill with Deutsche Bank.

Yes. Good morning, guys, and thanks for taking the question. Guys have kind of gotten to a lot of the big picture stuff. I think I have a follow-up on Part D. Which is I guess, Jim, early given the trailing year, are you seeing anything kind of changed your margin outlook or expectation for Part D in 2025? And then kind of a follow-up is, are you guys doing anything more aggressive to manage the drug benefit in the B space, like trying to shift B drugs to D coverage such that you can do like shift financial responsibility a little bit to the government and to the manufacturers and whether or not you're seeing any success there? Thank you.

Hey, George, it's George. I'll take this. So the as I've mentioned, the early data that we have on our claims for Part D, which do process more quickly, seem to confirm our expectations for utilization that we would have with the pricing. Things look sustained on the specialty side, as Jim mentioned, and on the traditional pharmacy side, things are moving along just as we would have expected. So again, it's confirming our strategy and our tactics and how we price the product and how we priced our bids for this year. We feel good about where we are.

As far as a B2B strategy, that's not a level of detail that will go into. But we continue to look forward to the Part D product within our MAPD and we're good progress in the PDP realm.

Our next question comes from Ryan Langston with TD Hey, thanks for squeezing me in. You talked about margin pressure on Group MA. Maybe just a little bit more detail there and specifically driving that? Is that more your strategy, competitor dynamics? And then I guess how do we think about or how do you think about margin improvement in the group versus the slope of where you think you can get to an individual kind of into 2027 and beyond? And then just what is kind of included in guidance for 2025 on group? Sure. I'll start, Ryan.

The group product, we have roughly 500,000 members there. Slightly over that. In the group MA market, what I would say as opposed to the individual is somewhat less mature as an industry. There was a period of time not very long ago that we're still living in where the industry was continuing to evolve and mature and offered rate guarantee contracts for multiple years. Historically, those contracts or the long term contracts were in place. That is beginning to change. We're seeing change in the industry. We're seeing change in the way plans are responding to RFPs coming from large groups, especially when you think about large jumbo groups. And that's changing, but that will take some time to flow through the financials. We do expect margin improvement in 2026, through pricing actions as those long term contracts come up for renewal. But we will see some more pressure in 2025 that's built into our guidance for 2025.

Our last question will come from the line of Andrew Mak with Barclays.

Hi, good morning. Can you share the splits of the incremental STARS investments across the MLR and OpEx line?

And secondly, do you have any updates on the STARS mitigation effort for 2020 in the event of an unfavorable lawsuit? I know you've discussed the possibility the possibility of crosswalking the group contract, but I don't think you've committed to that plan. So any clear actions that you can point us to on the mitigation front would be helpful. Hi, Andrew. It's Celeste.

Yes, on the investments we'll provide more color as the year progresses, both in terms of the where on the income statement will flow and the impact to the ratios? But we'll do that as the year progresses. Depending on various tests and things like that, they may fall They may move throughout the course of the year in terms of where they they come in?

Yes. Hey, on the group book, I'll hit that real quick. We are still assessing that. So we have not made a decision. That's not a decision that we need to make until really late summer or even early autumn. And so we have time and depending on how a number of things play out that could influence the final decision. So once we have gotten there we'll be clear with folks. But we're not there yet.

Hey, let me just shift to saying thank you to everybody for joining us this morning and for your interest in Humana Humana. I also just want to thank the 65,000 associates that we have who are serving our members and patients every day When we help our members and our patients get the right care at the right place with the right outcomes, everybody wins. And that is what we are working to do every day and that is what our 65,000 associates are working to do every day We appreciate your support and we hope you have a great day. Thank you.

This concludes today's conference call.

Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect. [indiscernible]