LMND · Forward model · Bear case
The Bear case, 20 quarters out
Model as of
Each segment is projected from its own operating driver, rolled up into consolidated cash flow, and discounted back to a fair value per share. The assumptions below are editable — change them and every number on this page moves with them.
Lemonade reports ONE GAAP segment, personal property and casualty. The five product lines here are NOT reported as revenue: their revenue is apportioned, and that is the first thing to know about this page. What IS published, quarterly and for twelve quarters, is the IR finance dashboard's per-product breakdown of IN FORCE PREMIUM, PREMIUM PER CUSTOMER and GROSS LOSS RATIO for homeowners multi-peril, pet, car, Europe and other. Those rows carry two checks that make them usable: the per-product in-force premium sums exactly to the stated total in every quarter, and the per-product gross loss ratios, weighted by in-force premium, reproduce Lemonade's stated consolidated gross loss ratio to within a point in every quarter. Net earned premium is then apportioned across the five lines on that in-force premium mix. The apportionment assumes every product earns and cedes premium in the same proportion to its in-force book, which is not exactly true - reinsurance quota shares and earn patterns differ by product - so a line whose premium is written more heavily in one part of the year is slightly misplaced. A sixth vertical carries the rest of revenue: ceding commission income, net investment income and commission and other income, which are disclosed as line items, belong to no product, and are what makes the six sum to reported total revenue. MARGINS are derived rather than invented. Each product's gross loss ratio is disclosed, so the five margins are set as one minus that ratio, scaled by a single factor chosen so they weight-average back to the $113.2M of gross profit Lemonade reports - the same technique used for the ORCL offering margins. Homeowners at 40.4% and pet at 18.7% are therefore a consequence of the disclosed 44% and 74% loss ratios, not a judgement about either. The corporate layer then carries sales and marketing, technology development and general and administrative at 52.65% of revenue, which reconciles gross profit to the reported loss before income taxes. Two things this model does NOT capture: the driver is policies times net premium per policy, and Lemonade's own customer count is unique households, so the five policy counts sum to 3.48M against 3.31M customers - the gap is the cross-sell the strategy is built on. And premium per policy here is NET of reinsurance, about 70% of the gross figure Lemonade publishes, because the vertical revenue is net earned premium. Three things to hold in mind before reading the fair values. First, the terminal margins on the five product lines are NOT purely underwriting. Each is a seasoned loss ratio plus about 27 points standing in for Lemonade's fixed cost base being spread across a larger book. The engine holds sales and marketing, technology and general and administrative at a constant 52.65% of revenue, so operating leverage - which is the entire profitability thesis here - has nowhere else to live. Without it this model would show the loss widening forever, which contradicts both the guidance and the arithmetic of a business whose costs are mostly fixed. Read each basis margin as disclosed economics and each terminal margin as economics plus an assumption. Second, and following from the first, this model is on a GAAP-ish basis: it reconciles to the reported loss before income taxes, so it does NOT show a positive quarter in Q4 2026. That is not a disagreement with management. Lemonade's promised first positive quarter is ADJUSTED EBITDA, which excludes roughly $24M a quarter of stock-based compensation, and the base case here has the GAAP operating loss narrowing from 13% of revenue to breakeven around 2030 - the same direction, on a stricter measure, with share count held flat. Third, base lands 2026 at $1.196B of revenue against a guide of $1.214-1.220B, about 1.5% light, because the model holds each product's net-to-gross premium ratio fixed while Lemonade's reinsurance transition is still raising retention. The gap is left visible rather than tuned away.
Shares this page's scenario. Driver and horizon edits stay in your browser — the recipient sees the published model.
Latest: $630M (2031Q2E)
| Period | Value |
|---|---|
| 2024Q3 | $137M |
| 2024Q4 | $149M |
| 2025Q1 | $151M |
| 2025Q2 | $164M |
| 2025Q3 | $194M |
| 2025Q4 | $228M |
| 2026Q1 | $258M |
| 2026Q2 | $294M |
| 2026Q3E | $306M |
| 2026Q4E | $319M |
| 2027Q1E | $332M |
| 2027Q2E | $346M |
| 2027Q3E | $361M |
| 2027Q4E | $376M |
| 2028Q1E | $392M |
| 2028Q2E | $409M |
| 2028Q3E | $425M |
| 2028Q4E | $443M |
| 2029Q1E | $460M |
| 2029Q2E | $478M |
| 2029Q3E | $496M |
| 2029Q4E | $515M |
| 2030Q1E | $533M |
| 2030Q2E | $552M |
| 2030Q3E | $571M |
| 2030Q4E | $591M |
| 2031Q1E | $610M |
| 2031Q2E | $630M |
Where each case comes from
Bear case — primary sources
The primary sources this case is built from — filings, calls and posts. Where they are claims by an interested party rather than disclosures, every number in the Bear column is what happens if they are taken at face value.
Q2 2026 shareholder letter - the growth spend that is still rising
- Jul 29, 2026 sequentially in Q3 as we seek to increase investment behind Car and capitalize on the seasonal strength of Renters.
- Jul 29, 2026 Some observers have noted that growth spend has recently grown faster than IFP, but actually this is an artifact of our intentional halving of growth spend in 2023, a period during which inflationary pressures shrank the opportunities for profitable growth.
Q2 2026 finance dashboard - what the headline loss ratio contains
Bull case — primary sources
The primary sources this case is built from — filings, calls and posts. Where they are claims by an interested party rather than disclosures, every number in the Bull column is what happens if they are taken at face value.
Q2 2026 shareholder letter - the claims-cost advantage, quantified
- Jul 29, 2026 This quarter, our LAE ratio declined to a record low 5% as IFP reached $1.43 billion.
- Jul 29, 2026 The gains have been broad-based, with record-low LAE ratios across Homeowners Multi-Peril, Car, and Pet during the quarter. The gains are particularly notable in Car, where claims are inherently more complex than our other lines of business.
Q2 2026 shareholder letter - cheaper capital behind the growth
Schreiber case — primary sources
The primary sources this case is built from — filings, calls and posts. Where they are claims by an interested party rather than disclosures, every number in the Schreiber column is what happens if they are taken at face value.
Q2 2026 shareholder letter - the promise, with a number on it
- Jul 29, 2026 We steadily progress towards our first Adj. EBITDA positive quarter, which we continue to expect in Q4 2026.
- Jul 29, 2026 We continue to expect positive Adj. EBITDA in the fourth quarter of this year, with our third quarter and full year guidance implying fourth quarter Adj. EBITDA of approximately $8 million.
Q2 2026 shareholder letter - the compounding behind it
From cash flow to fair value
The published model, discounted at 11.0% a year with an exit multiple of 0.9x on revenue. The horizon and sliders above do not change this walk.
| Present value of free cash flow, 20 quarters | −$503M |
| Terminal-year revenue | $2.40B |
| Terminal-year EBITDA | −$20M |
| Exit multiple, on revenue | 0.9x |
| Terminal value | $2.16B |
| Discounted at 11.0% a year, terminal value becomes | $1.28B |
| Share of enterprise value from the terminal | 165% |
| Enterprise value | $780M |
| Net cash | $828M |
| Equity value | $1.61B |
| Shares | 0.08B |
| Fair value per share | $20.89 |
| Against the deployed price of $45.14, as of | −54% |
11% on a loss-making insurer that nonetheless holds $1.16B of investments and caps its catastrophe exposure by reinsurance - lower than a pre-revenue name, higher than a profitable one. The exit multiple is the most important number on this page and the least mechanical: 94% of the base fair value is terminal value. 1.75x sits above the roughly 1.4x a mature personal-lines direct insurer like Progressive carries, because a Lemonade still growing mid-teens with a structurally lower claims-handling cost should earn a premium to it - and below the 2.53x the market pays today, because today's multiple is paid for 32% in-force premium growth that will not still be running in 2031. Read it honestly: at 1.75x on the 2.2% terminal EBITDA margin this model projects, the implied exit is about 80x EBITDA, which means the multiple is carrying the margin expansion that happens AFTER the horizon. That is the single biggest judgement here, and it is the slider to move first.
Read the other way round: at $45.14 the market is paying 2.2x terminal-year revenue, holding every other assumption on this page fixed. That is the number to argue about.
The projected path
The published model's 20 quarters. The horizon and sliders above do not change this table.
| Quarter | Homeowners multi-peril | Pet | Car | Europe | Other, including Life | Ceding commission, investment and other income | Revenue | YoY | EBITDA | Capex | FCF | R40 | PV of FCF |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 Q3E | $98M | $102M | $46M | $14M | $5M | $41M | $306M | +57% | −$49M | $4M | −$53M | +40 | −$51M |
| 2026 Q4E | $98M | $110M | $51M | $15M | $5M | $39M | $319M | +40% | −$46M | $4M | −$51M | +24 | −$48M |
| 2027 Q1E | $99M | $117M | $57M | $16M | $5M | $38M | $332M | +29% | −$44M | $4M | −$49M | +14 | −$45M |
| 2027 Q2E | $99M | $124M | $62M | $18M | $6M | $37M | $346M | +18% | −$42M | $4M | −$46M | +4 | −$42M |
| 2027 Q3E | $99M | $132M | $68M | $19M | $6M | $36M | $361M | +18% | −$40M | $5M | −$44M | +6 | −$39M |
| 2027 Q4E | $100M | $140M | $75M | $20M | $7M | $35M | $376M | +18% | −$37M | $5M | −$42M | +7 | −$36M |
| 2028 Q1E | $100M | $148M | $82M | $22M | $7M | $34M | $392M | +18% | −$35M | $5M | −$39M | +8 | −$33M |
| 2028 Q2E | $100M | $155M | $89M | $23M | $8M | $34M | $409M | +18% | −$32M | $5M | −$37M | +9 | −$30M |
| 2028 Q3E | $100M | $163M | $96M | $25M | $8M | $33M | $425M | +18% | −$29M | $5M | −$35M | +10 | −$27M |
| 2028 Q4E | $100M | $171M | $104M | $26M | $9M | $33M | $443M | +18% | −$27M | $5M | −$32M | +10 | −$25M |
| 2029 Q1E | $100M | $179M | $112M | $28M | $10M | $32M | $460M | +17% | −$24M | $5M | −$30M | +11 | −$22M |
| 2029 Q2E | $100M | $188M | $120M | $29M | $10M | $32M | $478M | +17% | −$22M | $5M | −$27M | +11 | −$20M |
| 2029 Q3E | $100M | $196M | $128M | $31M | $11M | $31M | $496M | +17% | −$19M | $6M | −$25M | +12 | −$18M |
| 2029 Q4E | $99M | $204M | $137M | $32M | $12M | $31M | $515M | +16% | −$16M | $6M | −$22M | +12 | −$15M |
| 2030 Q1E | $99M | $212M | $146M | $34M | $12M | $30M | $533M | +16% | −$14M | $6M | −$20M | +12 | −$13M |
| 2030 Q2E | $99M | $220M | $155M | $36M | $13M | $30M | $552M | +16% | −$11M | $6M | −$17M | +12 | −$11M |
| 2030 Q3E | $98M | $228M | $164M | $38M | $14M | $30M | $571M | +15% | −$9M | $6M | −$15M | +13 | −$10M |
| 2030 Q4E | $98M | $236M | $173M | $39M | $15M | $29M | $591M | +15% | −$6M | $6M | −$13M | +13 | −$8M |
| 2031 Q1E | $98M | $244M | $183M | $41M | $16M | $29M | $610M | +14% | −$4M | $7M | −$10M | +13 | −$6M |
| 2031 Q2E | $97M | $252M | $192M | $43M | $16M | $29M | $630M | +14% | −$1M | $7M | −$8M | +13 | −$5M |
Every row is projected. A year-over-year change is shown only where the quarter it compares against exists — an em dash means there is no comparable quarter, not a flat year.
Model revisions
Assumptions are marked to reality as each quarter prints. Every change is appended here, with the fair value the model produced at the time, so the model's own history stays visible.
| Date | Fair value then | Note |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-24 | $73.75 | First build, on the 2026 Q2 basis, from the intake brief. |
| 2026-08-24 | — | Exit multiple cut from 2.5x to 1.75x. The 2.5x was anchored on Lemonade's own current EV/revenue, which made the terminal partly circular, and implied 114x the terminal EBITDA the model projects. 1.75x is reasoned from mature personal-lines comparables instead. |