GREENLIGHT CAPITAL RE, LTD. (GLRE)

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

References to “we,” “us,” “our,” “our company,” or “the Company” refer to Greenlight Capital Re, Ltd. (“GLRE”) and its wholly-owned subsidiaries unless the context dictates otherwise.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the condensed consolidated financial statements and accompanying noted included in Item 1 of this report and the audited consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes, which appear in our 2025 Form 10-K.

The following is management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) of our results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025 and the Company’s financial condition at March 31, 2026 and December 31, 2025.

All amounts are reported in U.S. dollars, unless otherwise noted. Tabular dollars are presented in thousands, with the exception of per share amounts or as otherwise noted.

Page

25

Return to table of contents

Overview

Business Overview

We are a global specialty property and casualty reinsurer headquartered in the Cayman Islands, with an underwriting and investment strategy that we believe differentiates us from most of our competitors. Our goal is to build long-term shareholder value by providing risk management solutions to the insurance, reinsurance, and other risk marketplaces.

For the three months ended March 31, 2026 (“Q1 2026”), we had a net income of $35.8 million, compared to $29.6 million over the three months ended March 31, 2025 (“Q1 2025”). The increase was mainly attributable to stronger underwriting performance, partially offset by foreign exchange losses.

The following is a summary of our financial performance for Q1 2026, compared to Q1 2025:

•Gross premiums written was $227.9 million, a decrease of 8.1%;

•Net premiums earned was $154.1 million, a decrease of 8.5%;

•Net underwriting income was $6.2 million, compared to net underwriting loss of $7.8 million;

•Total investment income was $40.4 million, a decrease of 0.2%;

•Diluted EPS was $1.05, compared to $0.86, an increase of 22.1%; and

•Fully diluted book value per share was $21.40, an increase of 4.7% since December 31, 2025.

Fully diluted book value per share is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Key Financial Measure and Non-GAAP Measures” section of this MD&A.

Outlook and Trends

Reinsurance market conditions

We continue to see increased competition from existing and new reinsurance markets, predominantly in our Open Market segment. This is putting pressure on headline rates across various classes; however, attachment points and other terms & conditions are largely holding firm. Our focus remains on maintaining a diversified portfolio that is resilient to market supply-demand pressures.

General economic conditions

There are many factors contributing to an uncertain global economic outlook, and in particular, the current Middle East conflict. With the recent increase in oil price driven by this conflict, we believe that inflationary trends of recent years could persist. We continue to consider the potential impact of relevant economic factors on our underwriting portfolio.

On the investment side, DME Advisors regularly monitors and re-positions Solasglas’ investment portfolio to manage the impact of inflation on its underlying investments and holds macro positions to benefit from a rising inflationary environment. DME Advisors remains conservatively positioned as it believes the equity markets are very expensive.

During 2025, the U.S. Administration enacted trade policies that were more aggressive than the financial markets expected, causing additional uncertainty and volatility. These policies continue to complicate the near-term outlook for economic growth and inflation. We remain vigilant to economic data and additional policies that may impact our business.

26

Return to table of contents

Key Financial Measures and Non-GAAP Measures

There have been no changes to our key financial measures, including non-GAAP financial measures, as described in the MD&A of our 2025 Form 10-K.

Fully Diluted Book Value Per Share

The following table presents a reconciliation of the fully diluted book value per share to basic book value per share (the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure):

(1) Assuming net exercise by the grantee.

27

Return to table of contents

Consolidated Results of Operations

The table below summarizes our consolidated operating results.

1 The net financial impact associated with changes in the estimate of losses incurred in prior years, which incorporates earned reinstatement premiums assumed and ceded, adjustments to assumed and ceded acquisition costs, and deposit interest income and expense, was a gain of $1.6 million and a loss of $3.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively.

28

Return to table of contents

Consolidated Results of Operations for Q1 2026 compared to Q1 2025

Basic book value per share increased by $1.11 per share, or 5.3%, to $22.00 per share from $20.89 per share at December 31, 2025. Fully diluted book value per share increased by $0.97 per share, or 4.7%, to $21.40 per share from $20.43 per share at December 31, 2025.

Net income for Q1 2026 increased by $6.1 million to $35.8 million, driven mainly by the following:

•Underwriting income: Favorable change of $14.0 million, driven by 8.6 percentage points improvement in combined ratio, which was predominantly driven by 13.8 percentage points improvement in the loss ratio, offset partially by an increase in acquisition cost ratio and underwriting expense ratio. The lower loss ratio was due to the lower CAT and large event losses, coupled with an improved prior year reserve development ratio.

•Interest expense: Decreased by $1.4 million driven by the reduction in outstanding debt.

Offset partially by:

•Foreign exchange gains (losses): Unfavorable change of $9.3 million, driven mainly by the weakening of the pound sterling against the U.S. dollar during Q1 2026, compared to the strengthening of the pound against the U.S. dollar during Q1 2025.

Results by Segment

The following is a discussion and analysis for each reporting segment.

Open Market Segment

Results for the Open Market segment were as follows:

[[GREPCENT_TABLE]]
[["","","","Three months ended March 31"],["","","","","","","","2026","","2025","","% Change"],["Gross premiums written","","","","","","","$","180,347","","","$","220,709","","","(18)","%"],["Net premiums written","","","","","","","$","151,295","","","$","195,609","","","(23)","%"],["Net premiums earned","","","","","","","$","128,981","","","$","149,641","","","(14)","%"],["Net loss and LAE incurred","","","","","","","(75,230)","","","(112,763)"],["Acquisition costs","","","","","","","(41,212)","","","(40,881)"],["Other underwriting expenses","","","","","","","(5,743)","","","(4,797)"],["Deposit interest expense, net","","","","","","","(32)","","","(149)"],["Underwriting income (loss)","","","","","","

[Excerpt truncated for page length; source filing is linked above.]

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following is management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) of the financial condition and results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2025, and 2024. Comparisons between 2024 and 2023 have been omitted from this Annual Report, but may be found in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Part II, Item 7 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed with the SEC. Accordingly, this information is incorporated by reference.

This discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto presented in “Part II, Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report. Unless otherwise noted, tabular dollars are in thousands, except per share amounts. Amounts may not reconcile due to rounding differences.

Page

54

Return to table of contents

Overview

Business Overview

We are a global specialty property and casualty reinsurer headquartered in the Cayman Islands, with an underwriting and investment strategy that we believe differentiates us from most of our competitors. Our goal is to build long-term shareholder value by providing risk management solutions to the insurance, reinsurance, and other risk marketplaces. Refer to “Part 1, Item 1. Business” for additional information.

We earned a net income of $74.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2025, an increase of $32.0 million, or 74.8% compared to the prior year, predominantly due to strong underwriting results and favorable foreign exchange movement in 2025, partially offset by lower net investment income from Innovations and lower yields on restricted cash and cash equivalents.

The following is a summary of our financial performance for the year ended December 31, 2025, compared to the prior year:

•Gross premiums written was $773.3 million, an increase of 10.7%;

•Net premiums earned was $661.1 million, an increase of 6.6%;

•Net underwriting income was $35.7 million, compared to net underwriting loss of $8.2 million;

•Total investment income was $60.2 million, a decrease of 24.4%;

•Foreign exchange gains were $8.5 million, compared to foreign exchange losses of $5.6 million;

•Diluted EPS was $2.17, compared to $1.24, an increase of 75.0%; and

•Fully diluted book value per share was $20.43, an increase of $2.48, or 13.8%.

Outlook and Trends

Reinsurance market conditions

At the January 1, 2026 renewals, we experienced greater opportunities owing to our stronger balance sheet and the upgrade of our A.M. Best Rating to A (Excellent), but we also faced a more competitive market. Rate changes for Open Market business varied significantly by line of business: property and specialty rates experienced downward pressure, whereas casualty rates increased. Attachment points and other terms and conditions mostly held firm.

Although January 1st, is not historically a significant renewal date for our Innovations portfolio, we observed more opportunities with rate holding up well. In the current market conditions, we see increasing opportunities to leverage retrocession coverage, and we will take advantage of these opportunities where they enhance our economics and risk profile.

General economic conditions

There are many factors contributing to an uncertain global economic outlook, and in particular, we believe that inflationary trends of recent years could persist. We continue to consider the potential impact of relevant economic factors on our underwriting portfolio. On the investment side, DME Advisors regularly monitors and re-positions Solasglas’ investment portfolio to manage the impact of inflation on its underlying investments and holds macro positions to benefit from a rising inflationary environment. DME Advisors remains conservatively positioned as it believes the equity markets are very expensive.

We believe trade policies will continue to cause uncertainty and volatility. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the Administration’s tariffs enacted under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) of 1977, but the Administration stated it will enact new tariffs under several other legislative acts.

Revenues and Expenses

Revenues

We derive our revenues from two principal sources:

•premiums from reinsurance on property and casualty business assumed (net of any premiums ceded) - see “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of this MD&A; and

•income from investments, including:

55

Return to table of contents

•income (or loss) generated from our investment in Solasglas, net of management fee and performance compensation;

•gains (or losses) from our other investments, including Innovations-related investments; and

•interest income on our cash and cash equivalents, fixed maturities investment portfolio and FAL.

In addition, we may from time to time derive other income from foreign exchange gains (or losses) relating to underwriting balances, net investment income from Lloyd’s syndicates, fees generated from advisory services, and fees relating to overrides, profit commissions, and fees due upon the early termination of contracts.

Expenses

Our expenses consist primarily of the following:

The extent of our net losses and LAE incurred is a function of the amount and type of reinsurance contracts we write and the loss experience of the underlying coverage. Refer to “Critical Accounting Estimates” section of this MD&A.

Acquisition costs consist primarily of brokerage fees, ceding commissions, premium taxes, profit commissions, letters of credit and trust fees, and federal excise taxes. We amortize deferred acquisition costs relating to successfully bound reinsurance contracts over the related contract term.

Underwriting expenses consist primarily of compensation costs related to our underwriting activities, in addition to an allocation of corporate overhead costs.

Corporate and other expenses consist primarily of compensation costs related to non-underwriting activities, including Innovations related investments and corporate personnel. Additionally, these also include professional fees (non-claim related), director compensation, travel and entertainment, information technology, rent, and other general operating costs, net of an allocation to underwriting expenses.

Deposit interest expense relates to the accretion costs for deposit-accounted contracts that did not meet the risk transfer condition for reinsurance accounting under U.S. GAAP.

Interest expense consists of interest paid and accrued on our debt and the amortization of the related deferred financing costs.

Key Financial Measures and Non-GAAP Measures

Management uses certain key financial measures, some of which are not prescribed under U.S. GAAP rules and standards (“non-GAAP financial measures”), to evaluate our financial performance, financial position, and the change in shareholder value. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure, as defined in SEC Regulation G, is a numerical measure of a company’s historical or future financial performance, financial position, or cash flows that either excludes or includes amounts that are not normally excluded or included in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented under U.S. GAAP. We believe that these measures, which may be calculated or defined differently by other companies, provide consistent and comparable metrics of our business performance to help shareholders understand performance trends and facilitate a more thorough understanding of the Company’s business. Non-GAAP financial measures should not be viewed as substitutes for those determined under U.S. GAAP.

We use the following non-GAAP financial measure in this Annual Report.

56

Return to table of contents

Fully Diluted Book Value Per Share

Our primary financial goal is to increase fully diluted book value per share over the long term. We use fully diluted book value as a financial measure in our incentive compensation plan.

We believe that long-term growth in fully diluted book value per share is the most relevant measure of our financial performance because it provides management and investors a yardstick to monitor the shareholder value generated. Fully diluted book value per share may also help our investors, shareholders, and other interested parties form a basis of comparison with other companies within the property and casualty reinsurance industry. Fully diluted book value per share should not be viewed as a substitute for the most comparable U.S. GAAP measure, which in our view is the basic book value per share.

We calculate basic book value per share as (a) ending shareholders' equity, divided by (b) the total ordinary shares issued and outstanding, as reported in the consolidated financial statements.

Fully diluted book value per share represents basic book value per share combined with any dilutive impact of in-the-money stock options and all outstanding restricted stock units, or “RSUs”. We believe these adjustments better reflect the ultimate dilution to our shareholders.

The following table presents a reconciliation of the fully diluted book value per share to basic book value per share (the most directly comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure):

(1) Assuming net exercise by the grantee.

57

Return to table of contents

Consolidated Results of Operations

The table below summarizes our consolidated operating results.

1 The net financial impact associated with changes in the estimate of losses incurred in prior years, which incorporates earned reinstatement premiums assumed and ceded, adjustments to assumed and ceded acquisition costs, and deposit interest income and expense, was a loss of $11.4 million in 2025 (2024: $21.8 million).

58

Return to table of contents

Consolidated Results of Operations for 2025 compared to 2024

Basic book value per share increased by $2.63 per share, or 14.4%, to $20.89 per share from $18.26 per share at December 31, 2024. Fully diluted book value per share increased by $2.48 per share, or 13.8%, to $20.43 per share from $17.95 per share at December 31, 2024.

For the year ended December 31, 2025, net income increased by $32.0 million to $74.8 million, driven mainly by the following:

•Underwriting income: Increased by $43.8 million due to 6.8 percentage points improvement in our combined ratio, driven predominantly by improved current year loss ratio and lower adverse prior year reserve development ratio. The lower attritional loss and CAT event loss ratios contributed to the lower current year loss ratio; partially offset by an increase in large event loss ratio. Refer to the “Results by Segment” section of the MD&A for further discussion and analysis.

•Solasglas investment: Solasglas returned 7.5% in 2025, compared to 9.8% in 2024. However, income from our Solasglas investment was $2.1 million higher in 2025 versus 2024, due to the growth in the Investment Portfolio.

•Foreign exchange gains (losses): $8.5 million foreign exchange gains for 2025, compared to $5.6 million foreign exchange losses for 2024, driven mainly by a stronger pound sterling movement against the U.S. dollar in 2025.

•Interest expense: Decreased by $1.5 million predominantly driven by a decrease in the average outstanding debt balance in 2025 as a result of debt repayment due strong cash flows generated from operations.

Offset partially by:

•Investment income: Decreased by $19.4 million primarily driven by lower investment income on cash and cash equivalents mainly due to lower yields, losses on Innovations investments, and lower returns on funds withheld by third party Lloyd’s syndicates. The Lloyd’s syndicates invest a portion of these funds in fixed maturity securities, equities, and investment funds. We record our share of the investment income and fair value adjustments on these securities when the syndicates report them to us, generally on a quarter in arrears. See Note 14 “Net Investment Income” of the consolidated financial financial statements for further details.

•Corporate and other expenses: Increased by $5.2 million predominantly driven by an increase in non-underwriting personnel costs, including higher incentive compensation expense as a result of strong underwriting results in 2025.

•Income tax expense: Increased by $2.7 million due to increased taxable income from our operations in Ireland and U.K.

59

Return to table of contents

Segment Results

We have two operating segments: Open Market and Innovations. The following is a discussion and analysis for each reporting segment for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024.

Open Market Segment

Results for the Open Market segment were as follows:

Gross Premiums Written

Gross premiums written by line of business were as follows:

Gross premiums written within our Open Market segment in 2025 increased by $48.4 million or 8%, compared to 2024. The increase was predominantly attributable to the following lines of business:

•Multiline:The $71.1 million, or 39%, increase was driven mostly by growth in our FAL business bound in 2025, coupled with growth from new construction and engineering business bound in 2025. This was partially offset by non-renewal of commercial auto business.

60

Return to table of contents

•Financial: The $13.8 million, or 22%, increase was mainly due to the reporting of additional premiums from previous treaty years in our mortgage business, coupled with rate and exposure growth in our transactional liability business and new surety business bound in 2025.

The above was partially offset by the decrease in our casualty, property and specialty lines of business. The significant decrease in casualty business is predominantly a result of our decision to reduce our casualty exposure through non-renewal of certain general liability and workers’ compensation programs.

Net Premiums Written

Ceded premiums written in 2025 was $50.5 million, resulting in net premiums written of $601.7 million, compared to $62.4 million and $541.4 million, respectively, in 2024. The decrease in ceded premiums written of 19% was driven by reduced quota share retrocessional activity within our property business due to lower inward premiums. Additionally in 2024, we reinstated certain retrocession excess of loss treaties in which the full coverage was deemed exhausted due to the Baltimore Bridge loss. This was partially offset mainly by additional excess of loss retrocessional coverage within our specialty business in 2025 to manage our overall exposure to aviation, marine and energy risks.

Net Premiums Earned

For our Open Market segment, net premiums earned by line of business were as follows:

Net premiums earned in 2025 increased by $64.1 million, or 13%, compared to 2024. The change is influenced by the amount and timing of net premiums written during the current year and prior years, coupled with the business mix written in the form of excess of loss versus proportional contracts. Additionally, within the financial line and certain specialty line classes, the gross premiums written for some treaties are earned over multiple years, corresponding with the anticipated risk coverage period. Similarly, the impact of scaling back our casualty business was partially reflected during 2025, and will mostly impact our casualty earned premiums in 2026.

Loss ratio

The components of the loss ratio for our Open Market segment were as follows:

61

Return to table of contents

Current Year Loss Ratio

The current year loss ratio in 2025 decreased by 3.3 percentage points to 60.5%, compared to 2024, predominantly due to improved attritional loss ratio, offset partially by a higher volume of large event losses. The CAT losses during 2025 primarily related to the California wildfire losses.

Prior Year Reserve Development Ratio

The Open Market segment’s prior year reserve development ratio improved by 1.1 percentage points in 2025 compared to 2024. Refer to Note 8 Loss and LAE Reserves to the consolidated financial statements for further details on the lines of business and prior year development.

Acquisition cost ratio

The acquisition cost ratio decreased by 0.8 percentage points in 2025 compared to 2024, due to the change in business mix, coupled with improved acquisition cost ratios for our multiline and financial lines of business. This was partially offset by an increase in acquisition cost ratio for our specialty line, mainly due to growth in quota share reinsurance treaties at higher acquisition cost ratio than for excess of loss treaties.

The key drivers for the improved acquisition cost ratio relating to the financial and multiline business were:

•Financial: Driven by our transactional liability business due to lower profit commission costs as a result of adverse loss reserve development in 2025. Additionally, the acquisition cost ratio for the mortgage business was higher in 2024 due to an increase in profit commission costs on prior years’ treaties.

•Multiline: Driven predominantly from lower acquisition cost ratio for our FAL business, in part due to higher net premiums earned base to absorb fixed brokerage and commissions for new Syndicate 3456 programs.

Underwriting expense ratio

The underwriting expense ratio decreased marginally by 0.3 percentage points to 3.7% in 2025 compared to 2024, mainly due to net premiums earned growing more than our underwriting expenses which included higher incentive compensation due to stronger underwriting performance in 2025. A lower deposit interest expense also contributed to the lower expense ratio for 2025.

Net investment income

Net investment income decreased by 25% to $32.0 million in 2025 compared to 2024, predominantly driven by lower yields on collateralized cash balances and lower returns on funds withheld by third party Lloyd’s syndicates.

Income before income taxes

Income before income taxes for the Open Market segment was $69.7 million for 2025, compared to $47.7 million in 2024, driven predominantly by strong underwriting profits; partially offset by lower net investment income.

62

Return to table of contents

Innovations Segment

Results for the Innovations segment were as follows:

Gross Premiums Written

Gross premiums written by line of business within our Innovations segment were as follows:

Gross premiums written in 2025 increased by $26.9 million, or 28%, compared to 2024. All lines of business contributed to the premium growth, particularly our multiline business due to organic premium growth and new business from Syndicate 3456.

Net Premiums Written

For the Innovations segment, ceded premiums written in 2025 was $31.4 million, resulting in net premiums written of $90.2 million, compared to $14.7 million and $80.0 million, respectively, in 2024. The increase in ceded premiums written was predominantly driven by the new whole-account retrocession program in which we have ceded 28% of Innovations-related programs incepting Q4 2024 onwards.

63

Return to table of contents

Net Premiums Earned

Net premiums earned by line of business within the Innovations segment were as follows:

Despite the significant growth in net premiums written in 2025, the net premiums earned was relatively consistent with 2024. This is influenced by the amount and timing of net premiums written during the current year and prior years, coupled with the business mix written in the form of excess of loss versus proportional contracts. Additionally, as previously noted, the whole-account retrocession program for Innovations incepted from the fourth quarter of 2024; whereas this retro program was in place for the full year in 2025. The ceded premium on the whole-account retro program is included in the multiline business in the above table.

Loss ratio

The components of the loss ratio within the Innovations segment were as follows:

Current Year Loss Ratio

The current year loss ratio in 2025 decreased by 0.5 percentage points, compared to 2024 driven mainly by improved attritional loss ratio for all lines of business, offset partially by a large event loss relating to financial line of business.

The Innovations segment was not impacted by any CAT events for the years presented in the above table.

Prior Year Reserve Development Ratio

The change in prior year reserve development was unfavorable by 0.5 ratio points. Refer to Note 8 Loss and LAE Reserves to the consolidated financial statements for further details on the lines of business and prior year development.

Acquisition cost ratio

While the acquisition cost ratio for the Innovations segment remained relatively consistent with 2024, there was variability within the lines of the business. The increase in acquisition cost ratio, mostly from our financial line, was offset predominantly by the decrease in the specialty business.

64

Return to table of contents

The increase in acquisition costs in the financial line was driven mainly by premium growth from one program at higher acquisition cost; whereas the decrease in acquisition costs in the specialty business was driven mainly by non-renewal of certain quota share reinsurance business that had higher acquisition costs.

Underwriting expense ratio

The underwriting expense ratio increased by 4.5 percentage points to 8.8% in 2025 compared to 2024, as we invested in additional underwriters and infrastructure to drive the Innovations business growth. The increase in personnel costs also included higher incentive compensation driven by the overall company’s underwriting performance in 2025.

Net investment income (loss)

The Innovations segment reported a net investment loss of $10.1 million in 2025, compared to net investment income of $0.7 million in 2024. The investment performance in 2025 was predominantly driven by our Innovations private equity portfolio, primarily due to:

•$22.3 million reversal of previously recognized unrealized gains (impairment charges) on two of our private equity holdings based on new financing rounds at a reduced enterprise value, coupled with fully impaired holdings due to financial distress and a partial debt impairment.

For impairment charges based on reduced enterprise value, we calculated the fair value using valuation models incorporating significant unobservable inputs. These include discounted cash flow analyses and option pricing models. The key inputs and assumptions used in these models include, but are not limited to, projected cash flows provided by the investee’s management, discount rates, growth rates, volatility assumptions, and current market multiples.

Partially offsetting the above impairment charges, we had the following unrealized and realized gains in 2025:

•$8.0 million of unrealized gains from six holdings as a result of latest closed financing rounds by the respective investees, for which the fair value was based on observable price changes in orderly transactions; and

•$2.1 million of realized gain on partial sales relating to two holdings.

We also earned $1.7 million of interest income on cash collateral in 2025, compared to $1.7 million in 2024. While the yield declined in 2025, the average outstanding cash collateral was higher in 2025 compared to 2024.

Income before income taxes

The loss before income taxes for the Innovations segment was $12.9 million in 2025 compared to income before income taxes of $1.8 million in 2024. The performance in 2025 was predominantly driven by net investment loss and, to a lesser extent, an increase in underwriting expenses.

Other Corporate

Runoff Underwriting Business

In late 2023, we made the decision to not renew a property business due to significant CAT losses relating to unprecedented severe convective storms in the U.S. On the quota share reinsurance treaty bound in 2023, we continued to earn premiums in 2024 and incurred additional CAT losses from severe convective storms that occurred in 2024. For the years ended December 31, 2025, and 2024, we incurred an underwriting loss of $1.8 million, and $16.8 million respectively, including prior year adverse development of $2.0 million and $6.2 million, respectively. This was partially offset by investment income of $1.0 million and $1.4 million, respectively, relating to this runoff business.

We have reported the results of the above property runoff business as part of Corporate in Note 18 Segment Reporting in the consolidated financial statements.

65

Return to table of contents

Income from Investment in Solasglas

Our share of Solasglas’ net income increased by $2.1 million to $35.7 million in 2025, compared to 2024. This increase was driven by a higher investment portfolio balance during 2025, offset partially by a lower net investment return. For the year ended December 31, 2025, Solasglas reported a net investment return of 7.5%, compared to 9.8% for 2024.

The following table provides a breakdown of the gross and net investment return for Solasglas:

1 “Other income and expenses” excludes performance compensation but includes management fees. “Net investment return” incorporates both of these amounts. For further information about management fees and performance compensation, refer to Note 16 “Related Party Transactions” of the consolidated financial statements.

For the year ended December 31, 2025, the significant contributors to Solasglas’ investment return were long positions in gold, Brighthouse Financial Inc. (BHF) and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries (TEVA). The largest detractors were a long position in Lanxess AG (LXS GY) and two single-name short positions.

For the year ended December 31, 2024, the significant contributors to Solasglas’ investment return were long positions in gold, Kyndryl Holdings (KD) and Green Brick Partners (GRBK). The largest detractors were three single-name short positions.

Each month, we post on our website (www.greenlightre.com) the returns from our investment in Solasglas.

Financial Condition

Investments

The following table provides a breakdown of our total investments:

At December 31, 2025, our total investments increased by $172.8 million, or 37.5%, to $633.1 million from December 31, 2024..

Investment in Solasglas

Our investment in Solasglas increased by $117.4 million to $504.6 million at December 31, 2025. This was predominantly driven by $81.7 million of net contributions into Solasglas, coupled with the 7.5% net investment return in 2025. The contributions were funded partially from cash flows from operations and from the partial release of restricted cash and FAL.

DME Advisors reports the composition of Solasglas’ portfolio on a delta-adjusted basis, which it believes is the appropriate manner to assess the exposure and profile of investments and reflects how it manages the portfolio. An option’s delta is the option price’s sensitivity to the underlying stock (or commodity) price. The delta-adjusted basis is the number of shares or contracts underlying the option multiplied by the delta and the underlying stock (or commodity) price.

66

Return to table of contents

The following table represents the composition of Solasglas’ investments as a percentage of the investment portfolio:

The above exposure analysis does not include cash (U.S. dollar and foreign currencies), gold and other commodities, credit default swaps, sovereign debt, foreign currency derivatives, interest rate derivatives, inflation swaps and other macro positions. Under this methodology, a total return swap’s exposure is reported at its full notional amount and options are reported at their delta-adjusted basis. At December 31, 2025, Solasglas’ exposure to gold on a delta-adjusted basis was 11.9% (2024: 10.1%).

At December 31, 2025, 94.7% of Solasglas’ portfolio was valued based on quoted prices in actively traded markets (Level 1), 4.1% was composed of instruments valued based on observable inputs other than quoted prices (Level 2), and no instruments were valued based on non-observable inputs (Level 3). At December 31, 2025, 1.2% of Solasglas’ portfolio consisted of private equity funds valued using the funds’ net asset values as a practical expedient.

Fixed Maturities

In late 2025, we began investing funds held in certain regulatory trusts for U.S. cedents in a managed fixed maturity portfolio as well as cash held by Syndicate 3456 in a Lloyd’s approved liquidity fund to generate higher yields on these assets.

The following table provides the credit quality distribution of our fixed maturity portfolio at December 31, 2025.

Our methodology for assigning credit ratings to fixed maturity securities utilizes a rules-based methodology, typically employing the middle rating of Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”), Moody’s, and Fitch ratings. When ratings from only two of these three agencies are available, the lower rating is used. When only one agency rates a security, that rating is used.

At December 31, 2025, the fixed maturity portfolio had a weighted average credit rating of AA+, a book yield of 3.8%, and an average duration of 1.3 years. See Notes 4 “Fixed Maturities” and Note 7 “Fair Value Measurements” for further details.

67

Return to table of contents

Other Investments

The other investment holdings relate to private investments made by Innovations. At December 31, 2025, other investments decreased by $10.2 million to $62.9 million, from $73.2 million at December 31, 2024. The decrease was driven mainly by net investment losses, coupled with the partial sale of two holdings during 2025. This was partially offset by $4.1 million of new investments in 2025.

While we manage a diversified Innovations-related investment portfolio, our top five holdings accounted for 53% (2024: 70%) of the total carrying value. For further information, see Note 5 “Other Investments” of the consolidated financial statements.

Restricted cash and cash equivalents

We use our restricted cash and cash equivalents primarily for funding trusts and letters of credit issued to our ceding insurers. Our restricted cash decreased by $52.4 million, or 9.0%, to $532.0 million since December 31, 2024, primarily due to transferring funds held in certain regulatory trusts for U.S. cedents into a managed fixed maturity portfolio.

Reinsurance balances receivable

Our reinsurance balances receivable decreased by $40.1 million, or 5.7%, to $664.4 million since December 31, 2024. This decrease was driven primarily by $25.8 million net reduction in funds held by cedents and $69.1 million net release of FAL; partially offset by $58.0 million increase in premiums held by Lloyd’s syndicates. The net release of FAL was as a result of substituting it with a £45 million LC in favor of Lloyd’s (see 10 “Debt and Credit Facilities”).

Loss and LAE Reserves; Loss and LAE Recoverable

Our total gross loss and LAE reserves increased by $107.0 million, or 12.4%, to $968.0 million since December 31, 2024. See Note 8 “Loss and Loss Adjustment Expense Reserves” of the consolidated financial statements for a summary of changes in outstanding loss and LAE reserves, current year CAT losses, prior period reserve development, and analysis of our incurred and paid claims development and claims duration for each of our reporting segments. In addition, refer to “Critical Accounting Estimates - Loss and LAE Reserves” within this MD&A for information on the reserving techniques, assumptions and processes we follow to estimate our loss and LAE reserves.

Our total loss and LAE recoverable decreased by $4.4 million, or 5.1%, to $81.4 million since December 31, 2024, mainly due to updated estimate for loss recoveries from prior years. Virtually all the outstanding balance is based on estimated recoveries not yet due. See Note 9 “Retrocession” of the consolidated financial statements for a description of the credit risk associated with our retrocessionaires.

Catastrophe Loss Exposure

Most of our contracts have defined limits of liability that cap our risk exposure. Once these limits are reached, we are not liable for further losses. However, some contracts, especially quota share contracts covering first-dollar exposure, lack aggregate limits.

Our property and Lloyd’s business, and to a lesser extent our casualty and other business, in the Open Market segment include contracts with natural peril loss exposure. We monitor our catastrophe loss exposure using PML (net of retrocession and reinstatement premiums), which can vary based on simulated losses and our in-force business composition.

We track natural peril PMLs globally, focusing on peak peril regions and subdividing large geographic areas into individual peril zones. For natural catastrophe PMLs, we use catastrophe models at the 1-in-250-year return period, indicating a 0.4% probability of exceeding the estimated losses in any given year.

PMLs are best estimates based on available modeled data, and actual events may differ significantly from these models. Our PML estimates cover all significant exposures from our reinsurance operations, including property, marine and energy, motor, and catastrophe workers’ compensation.

68

Return to table of contents

At January 1, 2026, our estimated largest PML at a 1-in-250-year return period for a single event and in aggregate was $138.8 million and $151.2 million, respectively, both relating to the peril of North Atlantic Hurricane, compared to $116.3 million and $129.1 million, respectively, at January 1, 2025. Our PMLs increased as we grew our clients and accessed new business that met our profitability requirements.

The below table contains the expected modeled loss for each of our peak peril regions and sub-regions for both a single event loss and aggregate loss measures at the 1-in-250-year return period.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Liquidity

Liquidity is a measure of a company’s ability to generate sufficient cash flows to meet the short-term and long-term cash requirements of its business operations. We manage liquidity at the holding company and operating subsidiary level.

Holding Company

Greenlight Capital Re is a holding company with no operations of its own and its assets consist primarily of investments in its subsidiaries. Accordingly, Greenlight Capital Re’s future cash flows depend on the availability of dividends or other statutorily permissible distributions, such as returns of capital, from its subsidiaries. The ability to pay dividends and/or distributions is limited by:

•the applicable laws and regulations of the countries in which Greenlight Capital Re’s subsidiaries operate (see Note 19 “Statutory Requirements” to the consolidated financial statements);

•the need to maintain adequate capital levels to support our reinsurance operations; and

•the need to preserve our current “A (Excellent)” rating by A.M. Best.

As a holding company, Greenlight Capital Re has minimal continuing cash needs, most of which are related to the payment of corporate and general administrative expenses and interest expenses. Our current policy is to retain earnings to support the growth of our business. We currently do not expect to pay dividends on our ordinary shares.

We anticipate positive cash flows from operations (underwriting activities and investment income) to be sufficient to cover cash outflows under most loss scenarios in the near term. Based on expected cash flows from operations, financing arrangements and redemptions from related party investment fund as needed (subject to three day’s notice to the general partner), we believe we have sufficient liquidity to cover our working capital requirements and other contractual obligations and commitments through the foreseeable future.

Operating Subsidiaries

Our sources of funds from operating subsidiaries consist primarily of premium receipts (net of brokerage and ceding commissions), investment income, and other income. We use cash from our operations to pay losses and loss

69

Return to table of contents

adjustment expenses, profit commissions, interest, and G&A expenses. Our reinsurance business inherently provides liquidity as premiums are received in advance of the time claims are paid. However, the amount of cash required to fund loss payments can fluctuate significantly from period to period due to the low frequency / high severity nature of certain types of reinsurance business we write.

The following table summarizes our sources and uses of funds:

(1) Cash includes unrestricted and restricted cash and cash equivalents - see Note 6 “Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents” of the consolidated financial statements.

Cash provided by operating activities

The $98.7 million increase in cash provided by operating activities in 2025 compared to 2024 was driven mainly by the release of FAL and higher net income. We expect cash from operations to ebb and flow with our underwriting activities. Cash inflows from underwriting activities generally include premiums, net of acquisition costs, and reinsurance recoverables. Cash outflows principally include payments of losses and LAE, payments of retrocession premiums, and operating expenses. Cash provided by operating activities may vary significantly from period to period due to the timing of these inflows and outflows.

Cash used in investing activities

The $52.6 million increase in cash used for investing activities was driven predominantly by the new fixed maturity investments transferred from restricted cash; offset partially by a lower net contribution to Solasglas in 2025.

Cash used in financing activities

Financing cash outflows in 2025 were driven mainly by the $9.8 million of share repurchases and $55.3 million of debt repayments. In 2024, we had $7.5 million of share repurchases and $13.8 million of debt repayments.

Capital Resources

The following table summarizes our debt and capital structure:

The ratio of debt to shareholders’ equity provides an indication of our leverage and capital structure, along with some insights into our financial strength. In addition to the above capital, we also have LOC facilities to support our reinsurance business operations where we are not licensed or admitted as a reinsurer (see Note 10 “Debt and Credit Facilities” of the consolidated financial statements for further information).

Debt

As a result of strong operating cash flows and a new Revolving Credit Facility, we repaid the Term loans in 2025. At December 31, 2025, we had $5.0 million of outstanding debt under the Revolving Credit Facility.

70

Return to table of contents

Total shareholders’ equity

Total shareholders’ equity increased by $72.1 million to $708.0 million since December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to the net income of $74.8 million reported for the year, coupled with $7.1 million of share-based compensation adjustment to additional paid-in capital. This was partially offset by $9.8 million of share repurchases in the open market at an average price of $13.76 per share.

At December 31, 2025, there were 33,897,709 outstanding ordinary shares, a decrease of 933,615 since December 31, 2024, mainly due to 714,044 shares repurchased and 376,686 forfeited restricted shares, offset partially by issuance of restricted shares and ordinary shares for vested RSUs.

We expect that the existing capital base and internally generated funds will be sufficient to implement our business strategy for the foreseeable future. However, to provide us with flexibility and timely access to public capital markets should we require additional capital for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, or other general corporate purposes, we have a $200.0 million shelf registration (Form S-3 registration statement) filed with the SEC, which became effective on July 5, 2024, and will expire on July 1, 2027.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

At December 31, 2025, our contractual obligations and commitments by period due were as follows:

(1) Due to the nature of our reinsurance operations, the actual amount and timing of the cash flows associated with our reinsurance contractual liabilities will fluctuate, perhaps materially, and, therefore, are highly uncertain. We have not taken into account corresponding reinsurance recoverable on unpaid amounts that would be due to us.

(2) See Note 17 “Commitments and Contingencies” of the consolidated financial statements.

(3) See Note 10 “Debt and Credit Facilities” of the consolidated financial statements.

Critical Accounting Estimates

Our consolidated financial statements contain certain amounts that are inherently subjective and have required management to make assumptions and best estimates to determine reported values. If certain factors, including those described in “Part I, Item IA. — Risk Factors,” cause actual events or results to differ materially from our underlying assumptions or estimates. In that case, there could be a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, or liquidity.

We believe the following are the critical accounting estimates used to prepare our consolidated financial statements:

•Premium recognition

•Loss and LAE reserves

•Investments valuation

The following provides a summary of our accounting policies for the above critical accounting estimates.

Premium Recognition

Gross Premiums Written

We record our property and casualty reinsurance premiums as premiums written based on our best estimate of the ultimate premiums for the contract period. Our estimates are based on actuarial pricing models, information

71

Return to table of contents

received from ceding companies, and from Lloyd’s syndicates (for FAL business). Further, we record reinsurance premiums so long as they meet the risk transfer criteria under U.S. GAAP (see “Deposit Contracts” below).

The recognition of gross premiums written will vary based on the type of the reinsurance contract as follows:

•Excess of loss contracts: typically the contracts state premiums as a percentage of the subject premiums written by the client, subject to a minimum deposit premium. The minimum deposit premium is generally based on an estimate of subject premiums expected to be written by the client during the contract term. At the inception of the contract, we record the total contractual minimum deposit premium, which is subsequently adjusted when the actual subject premium is known. Generally, the adjustment to actual is not material on an aggregate basis.

•Quota share (also known as proportional) contracts: we record our participation share of the estimated ultimate premiums in the same periods in which the underlying insurance contracts are written. For example, for a 12-month quota share reinsurance contract, we will recognize the estimated gross premiums written over 12 months, generally on a linear basis.

•For multi-year contracts: we record reinsurance premiums at the inception of the contract based on our best estimate of total premiums to be received. Premiums are recognized on an annual basis for multi-year contracts where the cedants have the ability to unilaterally commute or cancel coverage within the term of the contract.

We write mostly quota share reinsurance treaties. The following table provides a summary of our estimated gross premiums written for quota share reinsurance contracts incepting during the year:

We regularly review premium estimates. Such review includes our experience with the ceding companies, managing general underwriters, familiarity with each market, the timing of the reported information, a comparison of reported premiums to expected ultimate premiums, along with a review of the aging and collection of premiums. We evaluate the appropriateness of the premium estimates on the basis of these reviews and record any adjustments to these estimates in the period in which they are determined. Changes in premium estimates, including premium receivable on both excess of loss and quota share contracts, are not unusual and may result in significant adjustments in any period. A portion of amounts included in “Reinsurance balances receivable” in the consolidated balance sheets represent estimated premiums written, net of commissions and brokerage, that are not currently due based on the terms of the underlying contracts. Additional premiums due on a contract with no remaining coverage period are earned in full when written.

Certain contracts provide for reinstatement premiums in the event of a loss. Reinstatement premiums are written and earned when a triggering loss event occurs, based on management’s estimates of the ultimate reinstatement premiums. These estimates are subsequently adjusted when actual reinstatement premiums are known.

Net Premiums Earned

We earn premiums over the risk coverage period. Unearned premiums represent the unexpired portion of reinsurance provided. Changes in circumstances subsequent to the inception of contracts can impact the earnings period. For instance, when exposure limits for a reinsurance contract are reached, any associated unearned premiums are fully earned.

Excess of loss reinsurance contracts are generally written on a “losses occurring” or “claims made” basis over the term of the policy. Accordingly, premiums are earned evenly over the contract term, which is generally 12 months.

72

Return to table of contents

Line slip or proportional insurance/reinsurance contracts are generally written on a “risks attaching” basis, covering claims that relate to the underlying policies written during the terms of these contracts. As the underlying business incepts throughout the contract term, which is generally one year, and the underlying business generally has a one year coverage period, these premiums are generally earned evenly over a 24-month period from inception. For certain classes within financial and specialty lines of business, the underlying risk exposure period extend over several years and accordingly these premiums are earned over up to 60-months.

Deposit Contracts

If we determine that a reinsurance contract does not transfer sufficient risk to merit reinsurance accounting treatment, we report the premium we receive as a deposit liability. Similarly, we report the premium we pay as a deposit asset for ceded contracts that do not transfer sufficient risk to merit reinsurance accounting. Any income and expense on deposit-accounted contracts is calculated using the interest method and recorded in the consolidated statements of operations under “Other income (expense)” and “Deposit interest expense,” respectively.

Loss and LAE Reserves

Estimating our loss and LAE reserves involves a considerable degree of judgment, and our estimates as of any given date are inherently uncertain. Estimating loss and LAE reserves requires us to make assumptions regarding reporting and development patterns, frequency and severity trends, claims settlement practices, potential changes in legal environments, inflation, loss amplification, foreign exchange movements, and other factors. These estimates and judgments are based on numerous considerations and are often revised as (i) we receive changes in loss amounts reported by ceding companies and brokers; (ii) we obtain additional information, experience, or other data; (iii) we develop new or improved methodologies; or (iv) we observe changes in the legal environment.

Our loss and LAE reserves relating to short-tail property risks are typically reported to us and settled more promptly than those relating to long-tail risks. However, the timeliness of loss reporting can be affected by such factors as the nature of the event causing the loss, the location of the loss, whether the loss is from policies in force with primary insurers or with reinsurers, and where our exposure falls within the cedent’s overall reinsurance program.

Our loss and LAE reserves are composed of case reserves (based on claims reported to us), including ACR, and IBNR reserves. These reserves include the associated estimated claims handling costs. The following table summarizes our gross reserves for loss and LAE for each of the reportable segments, by line of business, and the runoff business at December 31, 2025:

73

Return to table of contents

We determine case reserve estimates based on loss reports received. We may establish ACR in excess of the case reserves reported by cedents if we believe the reported case reserve is inadequate based on other data points we may have. At December 31, 2025, we had no ACR. We determine our IBNR reserve estimates using standard actuarial methods and a combination of our own historical and current loss experience, insurance industry loss experience, assessments of pricing adequacy trends, and our professional judgment. In estimating our IBNR reserve, we estimate the total ultimate loss and LAE we expect to incur and subtract paid claims and case reserves.

The nature and extent of our judgment in the reserving process depend in part upon the type of business. Some of our contracts represent business with a low frequency of claims occurrence and a high potential loss severity, such as claims arising from natural catastrophes and large loss events. Given the nature of these events, traditional actuarial reserving methods may not be reliable indicators of the final outcome. As such, for contracts or losses of this type, we estimate the ultimate cost associated with a single loss event rather than perform analysis on the historical development patterns of past events to estimate the ultimate losses for an entire accident year. Specifically for catastrophe losses, we estimate our reserves for these large events on a by-contract basis by reviewing policies with known or potential exposure to a particular loss event.

For non-catastrophe losses, we apply standard actuarial methodologies in setting reserves, including paid and incurred loss development, Bornheutter-Ferguson, burning cost, and frequency and severity techniques. We supplement our analysis with industry loss ratio and development pattern information in conjunction with our own experience. The weight given to a particular method will depend on many factors, including the homogeneity within the class of business, the volume of losses, the maturity of the accident year, and the length of the expected development tail. For example, the expected loss ratio method assumes that the ratio of premiums and losses remains constant. In contrast, development methods rely on observable patterns within reported losses, both historical and newly reported, to establish a view of the ultimate loss incurred. Therefore, as an accident year matures, we may migrate from an expected loss ratio method to an incurred development method.

As a predominantly broker-market reinsurer for both excess-of-loss and proportional contracts, we rely on loss information reported to brokers by primary insurers who, in turn, must estimate their losses at the policy level, often based on incomplete and changing information. The information we receive varies by cedent and may include paid losses, estimated case reserves, and an estimated provision for IBNR reserves. Reserving practices and data-reporting quality differ among ceding companies, which adds further uncertainty to our estimation of ultimate losses. The nature and extent of information received from ceding companies and brokers also vary widely depending on the type of coverage, the contractual reporting terms (which are affected by market conditions and practices), and other factors. Due to the lack of standardization of the terms and conditions of reinsurance contracts, the differences in coverage provided to individual clients, and the tendency of those coverages to change rapidly in response to market conditions, we cannot always reliably measure the ongoing economic impact of such uncertainties and inconsistencies.

Time lags are inherent in loss reporting, especially in the case of excess-of-loss reinsurance contracts. The time lags, coupled with the combined characteristics of low claim frequency and high claim severity on such contracts, make the available data less useful for predicting ultimate losses.

In the case of proportional contracts, we rely on an analysis of a cedent’s historical experience, industry information, and the underwriters’ professional judgment in estimating reserves. We also utilize ultimate loss ratio forecasts when reported by cedents and brokers, which are ordinarily subject to three to six-month lags for proportional business. Due to our reliance on ceding companies for claims reporting, our reserve estimates are highly dependent on ceding companies’ judgment. Furthermore, during the loss settlement period, which may last several years, additional facts regarding individual claims and trends will often become known, and case law may change, affecting ultimate expected losses.

Since we rely on ceding company data in establishing our loss and LAE reserves, we maintain procedures designed to mitigate the risk that such information is incomplete or inaccurate. These procedures include: (i) comparisons of expected premiums to reported premiums, which helps us to identify delinquent client periodic reports; (ii) ceding company audits to identify inaccurate or incomplete reporting of claims and ensure that claims are actively and appropriately managed in line with agreed protocols and settlement authority limits; and (iii) underwriting reviews to ascertain that the losses ceded are covered as provided under the contract terms. These procedures are incorporated in our internal controls and are regularly evaluated and amended as market conditions, risk factors, and unanticipated areas of exposure develop.

74

Return to table of contents

We engage an independent third-party actuarial firm to perform a reserve review and opine on the reasonableness and adequacy of the aggregate loss reserves. We provide the third-party actuarial firm with our pricing models, reserving analysis, and other data. The actuarial firm may also inquire about the various assumptions and estimates used in the reserving analysis. The actuarial firm independently creates its own reserving models based on industry loss information, augmented by client-specific loss information and independent assumptions and estimates. Based on various reserving methodologies that the actuarial firm considers appropriate, it creates a loss reserve estimate for each segment in the portfolio. It recommends an aggregate loss reserve, including IBNR. In the event of material differences between our aggregated booked reserves and the actuarial firm's recommended reserves, the reserving committee would be notified, with the reserves adjusted as deemed appropriate. To date, there have been no material differences resulting from the external actuary’s reviews requiring adjustments to our booked reserves.

We monitor the development of our prior-year losses during subsequent calendar years by comparing the actual reported losses against previous estimates and current expectations. The analysis of this loss development is important to the ongoing refinement of our reserving assumptions. Each additional year of loss experience with a given cedent provides additional insight into the accuracy and timeliness of previously reported information.

Estimating loss reserves for our book of longer-tail casualty reinsurance business, which we write on both a proportional and non-proportional basis, involves further uncertainties. In addition to the uncertainties described above, casualty business is generally subject to longer reporting lags than property business, and claims often take several years to settle. During this period, additional factors and trends will be revealed, and we may adjust our reserves accordingly. Therefore, any factors that extend the time until our cedents settle claims add uncertainty to the reserving process.

The uncertainties inherent in the reserving process and the potential for unforeseen developments, including changes in laws and the prevailing interpretation of policy terms, may result in our loss and LAE reserves being materially greater or less than the loss and LAE reserves we initially established. We reflect adjustments to our loss and LAE reserves in our financial results during the period they are determined. Changes to our prior year loss reserves will impact our current underwriting results by improving our results if the prior year reserves prove redundant or impairing our results if the prior year reserves prove insufficient.

We believe that our reserves for loss and LAE are sufficient to cover losses that fall within the terms of our policies and agreements with our insured and reinsured customers based on the methodologies used to estimate those reserves. However, we can provide no assurance that actual losses will not (i) be less than or (ii) exceed our total established reserves.

Please refer to Notes 2 “Significant Accounting Policies - Loss and Loss Adjustment Expense Reserves and Recoverable” and 8 “Loss and Loss Adjustment Expense Reserves” of our consolidated financial statements for a more detailed explanation of our loss reserving methodology and the loss development tables by accident year, respectively, as required under U.S. GAAP.

Investments Valuation

We carry our investment in Solasglas at fair value, based on the most recent net asset value (“NAV”) obtained from Solasglas’ third-party administrator. Further, Solasglas’ financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, and 2023 were subject to an independent audit in which Solasglas’ external auditors issued an unqualified opinion for these years (see “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Exhibits).

Our investment in fixed maturities are recognized at fair value. For the fixed maturity portfolio managed by a third party, all fixed maturity securities are classified as Level 2 except for US Treasury securities which are classified as Level 1. Refer to Note 7, “Fair Value Measurements” for the valuation methodologies used to determine the fair value of the fixed maturity securities by asset class. For the liquidity fund, as a practical expedient, the fair value is based on NAV obtained from the fund’s third party administrator.

Other investments in our consolidated balance sheets includes private investments that do not have readily determinable fair values. We determine private equity securities’ carrying value based on the original cost, less impairment, plus or minus observable price changes in orderly transactions for an identical or similar investment of the same issuer. At each reporting date, we qualitatively consider whether the investment is impaired on the basis of certain impairment indicators. If we determine that the equity security is impaired on the basis of the qualitative assessment and the estimated fair value is less than the carrying value, we recognize an impairment loss in “Net investment income (loss)” in the consolidated statements of operations. We determine realized gains and losses

75

Return to table of contents

from other investments based on the specific identification method (by reference to cost or amortized cost, as appropriate). These gains and losses are also included in “Net investment income (loss)” in the consolidated statements of operations. Refer to Innovations Segment - Net Investment Loss in the MD&A, for the valuation techniques and key inputs used by management to calculate the fair value of certain private equity investments during 2025 as a result of our impairment review.

76

Return to table of contents