IBJNews

WellPoint's first-quarter profit soars above expectations

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

WellPoint Inc.’s first-quarter profit improved modestly, but soared above the expectations of Wall Street analysts.

The Indianapolis-based health insurer responded by boosting its full-year profit forecast by 40 cents per share.

WellPoint earned $926.6 million, or $2.44 per share, in the three months ended March 31. That marks a 5.7 percent increase in profit over the same quarter last year.

Excluding investment gains and special items, WellPoint’s profit rose 2.2 percent to $891 million, or $2.35 per share.

On that basis, analysts were expecting $1.87 per share, according to a survey by Thomson Reuters. A year ago, WellPoint earned $1.95 per share, excluding special charges.

Much of the per-share profit increase is due to WellPoint’s share repurchase program, which reduced its shares outstanding by 15 percent in the past year.

Revenue for the quarter fell 1.2 percent compared to a year ago, to $14.9 billion.

“Our membership and earnings results are higher than we originally anticipated and we are continuing to become a more efficient and effective company,”  WellPoint CEO Angela Braly said in a statement.

Indeed, WellPoint added 875,000 new members to its health plans in the first quarter, seeing growth across all business lines except individual policies.

The company had 34.2 million members on March 31, and now predicts it will hold on to more of them during the year, finishing 2011 with 33.9 million members.

For the year, WellPoint now expects earnings per share of $6.70, compared with a February forecast of $6.30 per share.

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. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT