Title

Presentation

Operator: Good morning. And welcome to Fidelity National Financial, Inc.’s First Quarter 2026 Earnings Call. During today’s presentation, all callers will be placed in listen-only mode. Following management’s prepared remarks, the conference will be opened for questions with instructions to follow at that time. I would now like to turn the call over to Lisa Foxworthy-Parker, SVP, Investor and External Relations. Please go ahead.

Lisa Foxworthy-Parker: Thanks, Operator, and welcome, everyone. I am joined today by Michael Joseph Nolan, CEO, and Anthony John Park, CFO. We look forward to addressing your questions following our prepared remarks. F&G’s management team, including Christopher Blunt, CEO, and Connor Murphy, President and CFO, will also be available for Q&A. Today’s earnings call may include forward-looking statements and projections under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, which do not guarantee future events or performance. We do not undertake any duty to revise or update such statements to reflect new information, subsequent events, or changes in strategy. Please refer to our most recent quarterly and annual reports and other SEC filings for details on important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied.

This morning’s discussion also includes non-GAAP measures which management believes are relevant in assessing the financial performance of the business. Non-GAAP measures have been reconciled to GAAP where required and in accordance with SEC rules within our earnings materials available on the company’s investor website. Please note that today’s call is being recorded and will be available for webcast replay. I will now turn the call over to Michael Joseph Nolan.

Michael Joseph Nolan: Thank you, Lisa, and good morning. Our combined business continued to deliver outstanding financial results through the first quarter. Starting with Title, we delivered adjusted pre-tax Title earnings of $268 million, up 27% over 2025. This generated an industry-leading adjusted pre-tax Title margin of 13.1% for the first quarter, an increase of 140 basis points over 11.7% in 2025. Our first quarter results reflect continued strong performance across the business, highlighted by strength in our direct commercial, refinance, and agency businesses. Additionally, our disciplined expense management drove strong incremental margins. Looking at our Title results more closely, on the purchase front, we saw typical first quarter seasonality with sequential improvement coming off the fourth quarter.

While existing home sales remain well below the historical average, our daily purchase orders opened were up 2% over 2025, up 25% over 2025, and up 4% for the month of April versus the prior year. Our refinance volumes continue to be responsive to 30-year mortgage rates. This boosted refinance orders opened to 2,000 per day in the first quarter as mortgage rates moved into the low 6% level. Volumes subsequently moderated to 1,600 per day in the month of April as mortgage rates moved higher. Our refinance orders opened per day were up 52% over 2025, up 16% over 2025, and up 13% for the month of April versus the prior year. For commercial, volumes continued to be strong, with direct commercial revenue of $338 million in the first quarter, up 15% over $293 million in 2025.

This was driven by a 22% increase in national revenues and an 8% increase in local revenues. We continue to see growth in both national and local market daily orders, with each up 5% over 2025. Total commercial orders opened were 906 per day, up 5% over 2025, up 11% over 2025, and up 9% for the month of April versus the prior year. We also have a strong inventory of commercial deals slated to close, diversified across a broad set of asset classes including industrial, data centers, multifamily, affordable housing, retail, and energy. To bring it all together, total orders opened averaged 6,400 per day in the first quarter, with January at 5,900, February at 6,500, and March at 6,600. For the month of April, total orders opened were 6,200 per day, which was up 7% over the prior year.

As we enter the second quarter, I want to address a question we hear: How do we think about our 15% to 20% targeted annual range for adjusted pre-tax Title margin? Let me start with what we have already demonstrated. Existing home sales have been near 4 million units for more than three consecutive years, among the lowest levels in three decades, while mortgage rates have remained elevated. And yet, we delivered an industry-leading full-year 2025 adjusted pre-tax Title margin of 15.9%. That is a direct result of our scale, decades of investment in technology and automation, and our disciplined operating model that have continued to strengthen the earnings power of this business. We are confident that we can continue to deliver within our 15% to 20% annual range even if total residential volumes remain at current levels over the near term.

Once mortgage rates improve, we believe residential purchase and refinance activity will accelerate and trend toward historical levels. This recovery represents additional earnings power, given the operational leverage that we have built into our model. Beyond our residential volume recovery, the benefits of our continuous investments in technology and AI have the potential to further enhance our business. I want to spend a few minutes on AI—what we are doing and what it means for our business. Fidelity National Financial, Inc. and the Title industry hold a unique position in real estate transactions. We do not sit next to the real estate transaction; we sit inside the transactions, orchestrating complex multi-party settlements, safeguarding the movement of funds, and mitigating fraud in every transaction.

By embedding AI tools into these workflows, we can drive significant value by enhancing efficiency and our customers’ experience, reducing risk, and strengthening fraud prevention across real estate transactions. These gains come from having highly curated, deep sets of transactional data to augment AI. We have built our proprietary data by closing and insuring transactions. It cannot be replicated by simply digitizing public records regardless of how sophisticated technology becomes. As we build out our AI capabilities, we are leveraging this proprietary data alongside our deep experience and historical knowledge. And this is what sets Fidelity National Financial, Inc. apart. Usage of AI tools by our employees is growing, with more than half of our workforce using AI tools regularly, and we are deploying customized solutions across our Title and escrow operations as well as within ServiceLink, LoanCare, our real estate technology companies, agency operations, and software development.

Importantly, we are focused on implementing AI responsibly and compliantly with appropriate governance, human oversight, and risk and regulatory controls in place. We have deliberately avoided a concentrated bet on any single model or platform. Instead, we are deploying AI directly with the data and workflows each team already owns inside or alongside the technology they already use. While we already have a highly automated process for searching county records, we believe AI will have a meaningful benefit to other significant areas of real estate transactions as we integrate AI capabilities end-to-end throughout the entire Title and settlement process. We are confident that our scale, our proprietary data, our fully deployed technology, and our financial strength will continue to position Fidelity National Financial, Inc.

as an industry leader and place us at the forefront of shaping changes in our industry in a way that continues to bring value to our customers, shareholders, and employees. Turning now to our F&G segment. F&G’s assets under management before reinsurance have grown to nearly $75 billion at March 31, up 11% over the prior year. On a standalone basis, F&G reported GAAP equity excluding AOCI of $6.2 billion at quarter end and has grown its book value per share excluding AOCI to $46.51, up 70% since the 2020 acquisition. F&G’s diversified self-funding capital model is supported by its annual in-force capital generation and third-party capital through their reinsurance sidecar and strategic flow reinsurance partnerships. Together, these sources of capital provide financial strength and flexibility to invest for growth and return capital to F&G shareholders through dividends and opportunistic share repurchases.

We are very pleased with F&G as they continue to execute on their strategy toward a more fee-based, higher-margin, and less capital-intensive business model, with a focus on growing the core business and creating long-term shareholder value. Before I turn the call over to Tony, I want to take a moment to recognize our employees. I would like to extend my sincere thanks for their continued dedication to our customers, their focus on execution, and their embrace of the innovation and technology that is driving this business forward. They are the foundation of everything we are building. With that, let me now turn the call over to Anthony John Park to review Fidelity National Financial, Inc.’s first quarter financial performance and provide additional insights.

Anthony John Park: Thank you, Mike. Starting with our consolidated results, we generated first quarter total revenue of $3.2 billion. Excluding net recognized gains and losses, our total revenue was $3.3 billion, as compared with $3 billion in 2025. We reported first quarter net earnings of $243 million, including net recognized losses of $78 million, compared with net earnings of $83 million, including net recognized losses of $287 million in 2025. Adjusted net earnings were $249 million, or $0.93 per diluted share, compared with $213 million, or $0.78 per share, in 2025. The Title segment contributed $197 million. The F&G segment contributed $80 million, and the Corporate segment adjusted net earnings were zero before eliminating $28 million of dividend income from F&G in the consolidated financial statements.

Turning to first quarter financial highlights specific to the Title segment, our Title segment generated $2.1 billion in total revenue in the first quarter, excluding net recognized losses of $46 million, compared with $1.8 billion in 2025. Direct premiums increased 14% over the prior year, agency premiums increased 16%, and escrow, title-related and other fees increased 12%. Personnel costs increased 11%, and other operating expenses increased 9%. All in, the Title business generated adjusted pre-tax Title earnings of $268 million, up 27% over $211 million in 2025, and a 13.1% adjusted pre-tax Title margin in the quarter versus 11.7% in the prior-year quarter. Our Title and Corporate investment portfolio totaled $4.8 billion at March 31. Interest and investment income in the Title and Corporate segment was $99 million, excluding income from F&G dividends to the holding company.

For the remainder of 2026, we expect a range of $90 million to $95 million in interest and investment income per quarter during 2026, assuming no Fed rate cuts in the remainder of the year and stable cash balances. In addition, we expect approximately $28 million per quarter of common and preferred dividend income from F&G to the Corporate segment. Our Title claims paid of $57 million was $5 million lower than our provision of $62 million for the first quarter. The carried reserve for Title claim losses is approximately $31 million, or 2% above the 4.5% of total Title premiums. Next, turning to financial highlights specific to the F&G segment. Since F&G hosted its earnings call earlier this morning and provided a thorough update, I will provide a few key highlights.

F&G’s AUM before reinsurance increased to $74.5 billion at March 31, up 11% over the prior year. This includes retained assets under management of $56.4 billion, up 3% over the prior year. F&G reported gross sales of $3.2 billion for the first quarter, as compared with $2.9 billion in 2025. This reflects core sales of $2 billion for the first quarter, which includes indexed annuities, indexed life, and pension risk transfer, as well as $1.2 billion of funding agreements and multiyear guaranteed annuities—two products we view as opportunistic depending on economics and market opportunity. F&G’s net sales were $2.2 billion in the first quarter. This reflects flow reinsurance in line with capital targets for multiyear guaranteed annuities and fixed indexed annuities.

Adjusted net earnings for the F&G segment were $80 million for the first quarter, reflecting our approximate 70% ownership stake, compared with $80 million in 2025, which reflected our approximate 84% ownership stake. F&G’s operating performance from their underlying spread-based and fee-based businesses continues to be strong. F&G continues to provide an important complement to our Title business. The F&G segment contributed 32% of Fidelity National Financial, Inc.’s adjusted net earnings for the first quarter, as compared with 38% in 2025. From a capital and liquidity perspective, Fidelity National Financial, Inc. continues to maintain a strong balance sheet and balanced capital allocation strategy. Our track record has generated a steady level of free cash flow, allowing us to continue to invest in our business through attractive acquisitions and technology as we manage the business and continue to build for the long term.

Fidelity National Financial, Inc. has returned approximately $222 million of capital to our shareholders in the first quarter, as compared with $161 million in 2025. This reflects $140 million of common stock dividends and $82 million of share repurchases in the current period. We have remained active with share repurchases in the second quarter. From a capital allocation perspective, we ended Q2 2025 with $659 million in cash and short-term liquid investments at the holding company. During the first quarter, our cash position and cash generation funded $140 million of common dividends paid, $25 million of holding company interest expense, and $82 million in share repurchases, all while keeping pace with wage inflation and funding the continued higher spend in risk and technology required in today’s landscape.

We ended the first quarter with $495 million in cash and short-term liquid investments at the holding company. This concludes our prepared remarks. I will now turn the call back to our Operator for questions.

Operator: Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin the question and answer session. If you would like to ask a question, a confirmation tone will indicate your line is in the question queue. You may press star and 2 if you would like to remove your question from the queue. It may be necessary to pick up your handset before pressing the star keys. Ladies and gentlemen, we will wait for a moment while we poll for questions. Our first question comes from Mark Christian DeVries with Deutsche Bank. Please state your question.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts

Mark Christian DeVries: Yeah, thank you. Good morning. First question maybe for Tony. How are F&G’s earnings tracking to your expectations, and are there any disconnects that you observed between your expectations and where we in the analyst community have been modeling after these earnings?

Anthony John Park: Yeah, thanks for the question. I am probably going to turn that over to the F&G guys because it has been a bit of a frustration that the analyst expectations seem to assume a return on alternative investment, and yet when we report, they are maybe not picking up that piece. And so there seems to be a larger delta than what we see, which is actually earnings that were pretty close to in line with what we thought the consensus was. But maybe Christopher and Connor, you can weigh in a little bit here.

Christopher Blunt: Yeah, this is Chris. I would say Tony hit it. Other than there is usually a little bit of first quarter seasonality, we were actually pleased with the results. I think they were on expectation. And I do think the disconnect is around alternatives, which have obviously underperformed. Industry standard is to normalize for that, so I think in some cases it is either being normalized too high or not normalized at all. And I think our outlook there has been fairly consistent. We have redefined alts to be focused on what you actually think of with alternatives—private equity interests, anything equity-related. That is about $4 billion. So it is really not that hard to model if you look at your long-term expectation.

I think we gave a range of 12% to 14% of what you think over time that should kick in from an earnings perspective. But in terms of base spread, own distribution, reinsurance, operating leverage of driving down expenses, it has been consistent and growing. We had a little bit of noise this quarter—the fixed income yield was down. Probably two-thirds of that was more timing and one-offs as opposed to anything permanent. So—

Mark Christian DeVries: Okay, got it. And then maybe a question for Mike. On technology, I know you are kind of optimistic as this could return. How often could you see some margin lift over the next couple of years even if the market size holds its current levels?

Michael Joseph Nolan: Yes, Mark, you did cut out a little bit, but I think the question is what benefits we expect to see from AI on the margin side even if the market stays flat? Was that it?

Mark Christian DeVries: Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Michael Joseph Nolan: I cannot cite a number, but we absolutely expect margin improvement in the same-size environment over time with technology tooling like AI, just like we have seen with Title automation that we have implemented over the last couple of decades. That has been a big driver behind our margin improvement and the fact that we can get the kind of margins we are getting now in low transactional environments. But I cannot give you a number. I think that will become more apparent as we go through the balance of the year and probably see smaller wins with AI investments and AI tooling, and then bigger wins as we move into 2027 and get more advantage out of really embedded tooling in the more full settlement process.

Mark Christian DeVries: Okay. Are there specific tools that you are building on that you are more optimistic about that can more meaningfully move the needle that are worth calling out?

Michael Joseph Nolan: I do not know that I will get into specific tools, but maybe as I think of parts of the business: We said from the beginning a four-part process for us relative to AI. It first begins with really building out a risk and governance framework, which we have done and worked on the past year and a half. I think that is very important to have in place given both the opportunities for AI and the risks that come with AI tooling. Second is building literacy and diffusing the tools across the entire company. As we talked about, more than half of our employees are now using these tools regularly. Third are individual solutions inside ServiceLink, LoanCare, etc., as we talked about on the call. And then the fourth is really the area that I think will have the biggest impact, and that is when you embed tools into workflows like SoftPro and inHere that we have built at scale that no one else has.

We will get more benefit on the settlement side where you really have more of your labor and your cost in terms of the process inside the business.

Mark Christian DeVries: Got it. Thank you. Thanks.

Operator: Our next question comes from Bose Thomas George with KBW. Please state your question.

Bose Thomas George: Just sticking to the margin discussion, can you go through margins by segment, and just curious how the commercial margins look especially compared to previous peaks?

Anthony John Park: Yes, thanks, Bose. As you know, we reported 13.1% pre-tax Title margin up against 11.7%. If you break that down into our various operations or divisions, our Direct ops had roughly a 20% margin, up about 100 basis points. Agency, about a 7% margin on gross, up about 100 basis points. Our National Commercial units—so this is just the 20 or so large operations that handle exclusively commercial transactions—had a 27% margin in the quarter, up against 24% in the prior year. Our loan subservicing was down a little bit but still had a 20% margin in that business. Our home warranty business had a 16% margin versus 14% in the prior year, and our ServiceLink business, which is centralized refinance and default, had a 23% margin up against 18% in the prior-year quarter.

So really, almost to a unit, a positive improvement over the prior-year quarter. And if I just add one thing to that, Bose, in our centralized refi business inside ServiceLink, the margin lift just shows the power we have in the model—we had a 23% first-quarter margin up against 9% last year. So a little bit of extra volume can go a long way inside the efficient model that we built for the centralized platform.

Bose Thomas George: Okay, great. That is great color, thanks. And then I wanted to just ask about the buybacks. You noted it remained strong in April. Just curious how we should think about that relative to what you did last year, or just ways to think about a range this year?

Anthony John Park: Yeah, thanks, Bose. It is hard to know exactly where we will land in terms of buybacks. I did say that we remain active, and we will remain active—I firmly believe that. We bought $82 million of shares back in the first quarter, almost 2 million shares. Certainly, if we see signs of weakness, we are more active. But I would expect that once blackout windows lift, we will be back in the market on a regular cadence. Last year’s second quarter, we came in really strong—I would not necessarily expect that. That might have been to the tune of about $250 million. But having said that, I do expect that we are going to be active throughout the year.

Bose Thomas George: Okay. Great. Thanks.

Operator: Our next question comes from Mark Hughes with Truist Securities. Please state your question.

Mark Hughes: Yeah, thank you. Good morning.

Michael Joseph Nolan: Good morning.

Mark Hughes: On F&G, the question about returns—and we chatted about this on the conference call earlier—but I just wanted to make sure I am on the right track. The return on assets in the quarter was 76 bps; if you take into account the unusual items or the underperformance on the alts, you get up to about 110 bps. When we model that on a go-forward basis, would it just make more sense at this point to model it more at the 80-basis-point level and factor that into the Fidelity National Financial, Inc. earnings rather than, I think, kind of the longer-term target, which was 110, but it has been dampened here recently? Just wanted to get your sense on the best approach.

Christopher Blunt: Yeah, Mark, this is Chris. I think that would be a very conservative way to model it, but not an inappropriate way to model it. So, yeah, I think 80 bps is probably a little low as a jumping-off point, but if you said that is a jumping-off point for just pure spread income at current alts levels, then, yeah, you are more likely to have tailwinds coming from alts. We have been normalizing, and it has been five years since we have seen meaningful realizations, and every year we come in expecting that it is going to be the year of the IPO and then something happens externally. So I think we are still confident that we will see that when things normalize. But, yeah, I do not think that is an unreasonable way to think about it; it would just be a conservative way, I believe, to model it. Connor, if you agree with that?

Connor Murphy: Yeah, I think that is fair. And as we talked about some of the things that happened this quarter, there were some temporary elements this quarter—was probably about 10 basis points that we do not expect to continue, aside from the alts differential.

Mark Hughes: And just to be clear, it is been kind of that difference—between the 34 basis points this quarter—is kind of the difference in what leads to some misinterpretation or volatility perhaps, thinking back to the earlier question?

Christopher Blunt: Yeah, I think what Connor is saying is there was probably 10 bps of some other one-time effects, but if you look at it over time, quarter by quarter, alts is the big one—that is the disconnect of how do you think about that normalization. And my guess is neither stock gets a whole lot of credit for it given how long it has been since we have had realizations. But again, still optimistic that if we do start to see transaction activity pick up, that should actually become a tailwind for us.

Mark Hughes: When we think about the purchase business, moving on to Title, the growth in open orders in Q1 and a 4% for April, if I heard properly—sounds like Fidelity National Financial, Inc., at least relative to the public peers, is doing a little bit better. Is that a geographic issue, an execution issue? It may just be a few points here and there, but I am curious if there is any driver to that a little better performance.

Michael Joseph Nolan: Yeah, Mark, it is Mike. It is hard to know, but we were very pleased to see a 25% sequential improvement in the first quarter. That is above historical averages, even though we are still in an overall low environment. The 4% up in April—I do not know if it is a geographic issue or not. I do know that our recruiting has been incredibly strong, and it was very strong last year. We just had a phenomenal first-quarter recruiting effort, maybe our best ever, and we are attracting a lot of talented people to the company and they bring volume with them. So whether that is playing into those numbers, I cannot say for sure. But I am very pleased with what the field is doing in terms of just building more talent inside this organization.

Mark Hughes: Is there a kind of structural reason for that—maybe in a softer market people want to be in a bigger organization—or is it just more company specific? Curious on that.

Michael Joseph Nolan: Again, it is hard to know. I would say our recruiting is broad-based. It is across a lot of other players in the industry. Perhaps people see that we continue to invest in the business consistently regardless of the macro environment—building technology, creating good marketing tools, inHere digital transaction platform. I think we are doing a lot of things that lead this industry, and hopefully people at other organizations see that and want to be a part of it.

Mark Hughes: If I could just squeeze in one more—there is a discussion about the process to look at a way to optimize value in the owned distribution within F&G. I was curious if there is any sense of timing on process—when we might hear more about that.

Christopher Blunt: Yeah, it is probably premature to comment on the exact timing. But again, to just go back to the rationale, we have invested about $700 million in owned distribution. We see substantial opportunity to grow what we already have and make more investments. And so it is really just an exercise of what is the best way to fund that growth opportunity. Is it still underneath F&G? Is it consolidated, deconsolidated? So that is the exercise we are going through. But I would imagine the next couple of quarters we would probably have a bit of an update for you there.

Mark Hughes: Thank you very much.

Operator: A reminder to all participants, to ask a question please press star and 1 on your telephone keypad. Our next question comes from Analyst with Stephens Inc. Please state your question.

Analyst: Hey, good morning. My first one is on F&G. In mid-March, F&G announced the $100 million buyback program, which was right after the December distribution of F&G shares to Fidelity National Financial, Inc. shareholders. And I think during the F&G earnings calls today, it was mentioned that $29 million of the program was deployed in Q1. One would think that if Fidelity National Financial, Inc. has no plans to sell shares in the open market, the buyback could increase Fidelity National Financial, Inc.’s ownership stake in F&G. So how should we be thinking about this?

Anthony John Park: Yeah, it is a good question. Clearly, the reason for the distribution back in December was to get more float out into the marketplace. And so we went from roughly an 82% ownership down to a 70% ownership. But F&G shares were under pressure, and the float was not really helping, at least in the early phases of having those shares out there. I think F&G saw an opportunity to buy back their shares at a discount—real significant, almost a silly discount. And so Fidelity National Financial, Inc. does not take a position that we need to own X number of shares. We are just trying to really have value out there for the respective shareholder base. And so if that means that we close that gap from 70% to 80%, or wherever it might be, that is very possible. But again, there is no target necessarily for where Fidelity National Financial, Inc. might end up in that ownership percentage.

Analyst: Yes, alright. That is very helpful. And then turning to Title, starting with the fee per file, what can you share on what you are seeing in terms of the trajectory of fee per file for both residential and commercial?

Michael Joseph Nolan: Yes, thanks for the question. I would say that the residential fee per file has been pretty consistent year-over-year—actually flat with the first quarter of last year—and I think we have seen pricing moderate to the most extent over the past few years, so we are seeing a little bit more stability there. We saw, again, a strong, particularly national commercial fee per file in the first quarter—up almost $1,000 over the first quarter of last year. Local was up a bit as well, maybe about $500 on a fee-per-file basis. So I would say fairly stable in residential and still upside in commercial.

Analyst: Thank you. And just one last one on the outlook. Looking at the residential outlook since your last earnings call, the MBA and Fannie Mae have revised their forecast down, and they are now calling for existing home sales to be between 4.1 and 4.2 million seasonally adjusted for the year in 2026 and around 4.5 million in 2027. What is your take on that? Do you view those assumptions as conservative, or are they too aggressive?

Michael Joseph Nolan: I do not think they are aggressive. Our base case as we came into the year for residential was really upside purchase and refi with the fact that we had lower, more stable rates to start the year. Then the macro environment as we got into March and into April kind of upset the apple cart a little bit, and that is probably when Fannie and MBA revised theirs down because their 2027 forecast now looks a lot like their 2026 forecast that they had 60 days ago. It is just hard to say. What we do see, though, is—and I have commented on this before—just more sensitivity to lower rate movements than we probably have seen in prior vintages. I think it really comes down to if things stabilize, the macro environment gets a little calmer, and rates stabilize maybe in that lower-6% environment, we are going to have upside in the back half of the year in residential.

And if they do not, we will probably continue on this current trajectory. I am very pleased we had a 4% increase in purchase opens in April, and we are still driving, we think, really strong margins. Our first quarter margin, absent the 3% mortgage years, is really one of the best first quarters we have ever had. So we will perform well regardless of the environment, and we will manage the business to whatever order environment we have. We are very confident in our position.

Analyst: And if I can squeeze just one last one on capital allocation—what are you seeing in the M&A pipeline, and has there been any notable shift in activity since last quarter?

Anthony John Park: Yes, thanks. My impression is even though we have not made many acquisitions over the course of the last 12 to 15 months or so, I get the sense there is more opportunity, especially on the Title agent side. I feel like we are hearing a lot more about it. We are having more discussions, and I would expect that we have more activity this year and next than we have seen in the last two years.

Michael Joseph Nolan: I would agree with that, Tony. I think there are more conversations, I think there are more opportunities, but you never know if you are going to strike a deal. I would say just stay tuned on how that plays out over the next couple of quarters.

Analyst: Great. Thank you so much. Thanks.

Operator: And this will conclude our question and answer session. I will now turn the conference over to CEO, Michael Joseph Nolan, for closing remarks.

Michael Joseph Nolan: Thanks for joining our call this morning. We delivered strong first quarter results with our complementary businesses executing well in a dynamic environment. The Title segment is performing well in what remains a low transactional environment and is capitalizing on stronger commercial activity. We are delivering industry-leading margins and remain well positioned to benefit from a recovery in residential volumes should mortgage rates move lower. Our focus on technology and AI is contributing to our performance today, and we see potential to further enhance our business. Likewise, F&G is executing on its strategy and is focused on balancing continued growth in its spread-based business alongside the fee-based flow reinsurance, middle-market life insurance, and owned distribution strategies as they focus on delivering long-term shareholder value.

Thanks for your time this morning. We appreciate your interest in Fidelity National Financial, Inc., and look forward to updating you on our second quarter earnings call.

Operator: Thank you for attending today’s presentation. The conference call has concluded. You may now disconnect.

Receive real-time insider trading and news alerts