LMND · Forward model · Schreiber case

The Schreiber case, 20 quarters out

Model as of 2026-08-24

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.

Where each case comes from

From cash flow to fair value

The projected path

The published model's 20 quarters. The horizon and sliders above do not change this table.

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.