IBJNews

CNO Financial sees quarterly profit soar, beating expectations

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Profit soared 80 percent at CNO Financial Group Inc. in its second quarter and topped the expectations of Wall Street analysts, the company announced Wednesday.

The Carmel-based life and health insurer earned $59.5 million in the three months ended June 30, up from $33.1 million the same period a year ago.

Those results translated to earnings of 21 cents per share, up from 12 cents per share a year ago.

Excluding investment gains, CNO earned 20 cents per share, 2 cents higher than the 18 cents analysts were expecting, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters.

CNO’s revenue rose 8 percent, to $1.03 billion, squeaking past analysts’ predictions of $1.02 billion.

“We are also pleased that CNO's capital strength continued to grow, primarily fueled by our earnings, allowing us to buy back shares and continue to pay down debt," said CNO Chief Financial Officer Ed Bonach in a prepared statement. Bonach will become the company’s CEO at the end of September when current chief Jim Prieur retires.

CNO’s profit growth was driven by its two largest units. Chicago-based Bankers life boosted its earnings before interest and taxes by 32 percent, to nearly $85 million. The Carmel-based Washington National unit saw 7-percent growth in earnings before interest and taxes, to $22.7 million.

Profit at CNO’s other unit, Philadelphia-based Colonial Penn, was flat.

CNO announced its financial results after the market closed. Its shares fell 4 percent on the day to close at $7.42 apiece. They are still up by more than 9 percent for the year.

 

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