So what we’re doing in 2022 with capital management and as we go into €˜23 is considering all the things that you just said, that continued outlook for top line growth, where the balance sheet is from a reserve perspective, what our reinsurance programs are and what our property exposures look like. And we were very comfortable returning what we just did in the fourth quarter.
Ryan Tunis: Got it. And then a follow-up for Michael, just thinking about the rate you are taking on the homes side, is there a way to kind of compartmentalize that in terms of how much of the rate is toward attritional type losses versus how much is budgeting for higher caps? I am not sure if there is, but I would be curious if you had any perspective on that?
Michael Klein: Sure, Ryan. Thanks for the question. I would say, broadly speaking, it’s sort of hard to compartmentalize because the majority of the rate we are taking is base rate. Now again, the numbers that we give you are renewal premium change. So, just to clarify, right, renewal premium change is rate and values, and we have talked about the fact that the RPC numbers that you see certainly include both. And our outlook for 2023, where we indicate that renewal premium change is going to go north from here, is driven by further increases in both rate and values. But in terms of attritional loss versus cat loss, again, it’s fairly broad-based rate across the book. So, there is not really a significant differentiation there.
Ryan Tunis: Thank you.
Operator: Our next question comes from David Motemaden with Evercore ISI.
David Motemaden: Thanks. Good morning. Michael or actually, Dan, sorry about that. Dan, could you just elaborate a little bit more on the financial impacts of non-renewing the aggregate reinsurance outside of a higher potential catastrophe load? I think when you put it on, there was a 50 basis point headwind to the underlying combined ratio, which obviously was offset by lower cat load, but that was back in 2019, so I am sure it’s changed. It doesn’t sound like you expect a noticeable impact on the property loss ratio or the total company expense ratio. So, just wondering if you could just sort of talk through the puts and takes of non-renewing that aggregate?
Dan Frey: Sure, David. So, a couple of things, in 2022, we did not attach the treaty, right. So, we didn’t hit the underlying, so it didn’t have any beneficial impact in 2022’s results. You are right that when we first entered into the treaty, which was at the beginning of 2019, we said at the time that the impact of the incremental ceded premium from that treaty was going to have about 0.5 point adverse impact on underlying results because of the impact on the denominator. In 2019, we told you that we placed €“ it’s the same $500 million layer in all 4 years. In 2019, we have told you that we placed 85% of the layer in 2022. We only placed 45% of the layer. So, in sort of broad sweeping terms, you could expect that the absence €“ the impact in 2022 on the underlying would have been about half as much as it was in 2019. And so that’s what the year-over-year comparison will look like in 2023. So, maybe somewhere around 0.25 of a point.
David Motemaden: Got it. And then just following up on that, is that something and you also mentioned just the relative cost of goods sold advantage from buying less reinsurance. Does that benefit something you are looking to price or just allow to flow through in pricing as opposed to falling to the bottom line just based on your commentary, it sounds like that might be the case, but maybe elaborate on that as well.
