IBJNews

CNO Financial Group profit beats analysts' expectations

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

A swing in investment results boosted CNO Financial Group Inc.'s third-quarter profits even as accounting charges depressed the performance of its underlying insurance businesses, the company said Tuesday.

The Carmel-based life and health insurer's investment losses and special charges from a year ago turned into slight investment gains this year, allowing it to boost third-quarter profit by 221 percent to $49.4 million. Net income per share was 17 cents, compared with 8 cents in the same quarter a year ago.

But excluding those charges, the company recorded operating profits of $47.1 million, down 13 percent from the same quarter a year ago.  Operating income was 16 cents per share, down from 29 cents per share in a year ago. Much of that decrease was due to CNO—formerly known as Conseco Inc.—issuing a significant amount of new shares in the past year.

On that basis, Wall Street analysts surveyed by Thomson Reuters were expecting 15 cents per share.

The lower profits resulted from $19 million in accounting charges for depressed earnings expectations from older insurance policies CNO still holds but no longer sells. Its Other CNO Business segment recorded losses in the quarter of $24.4 million—more than three times as large as a year ago.

That performance clouded increasing strength in CNO’s active business units, which collectively boosted their earnings by 7 percent to $130.5 million, before factoring in interest and taxes. Earnings rose at the Chicago-based Bankers Life unit and the Philadelphia-based Colonial Penn unit, but fell at Carmel-based Washington National.

Revenue for the three months ended Sept. 30 fell 6 percent to $1.05 billion. However, analysts were expecting only $980 million in revenue.

"CNO had a strong third quarter, with net income again ahead of expectations," CEO Jim Prieur said in a statement, adding, “our three core growing businesses continued to perform well.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT