NASDAQ: SLDE

Our goal is to deliver long-term value for stockholders by focusing on underserved, coastal specialty markets where market capacity is limited and demand for insurance products is high. Coastal specialty market demand for insurance products has increased over the last few years as the larger, national insurance carriers have reduced their underwriting capacity in such markets which has created a unique market opportunity for us to capitalize on the imbalance of supply and demand. A prime example of this market shift is Florida, where large national carriers have reduced their market share of premium from 62% in 1999 to 28% in 2022, creating an opportunity for accretive expansion. We have built a highly entrepreneurial company that we believe can identify and execute on such opportunities faster and more profitably than our competitors.

We believe we have a significant technological advantage that allows us to assess, manage and price risk for individual and bulk policy acquisitions. Our technology is built to estimate future costs of policies and compare it back to our base rates to better understand profitability in real time on an individual risk basis and to assess large and/or bulk transactions. This technology enables us to only select policies that we believe to be profitable based on future reinsurance and all other perils (AOP) costs. Our underwriting technology has been an important component of our success and is backed by our proprietary approximately $8.9 trillion TIV underwriting and claims dataset, which provides us with real-time intelligence to drive superior decision making. We believe that traditional markets inefficiently and inaccurately underwrite coastal specialty risks without properly understanding prospective loss ratios and reinsurance costs. We believe other insurance companies do not have the same ability to assess these metrics in real time and their technology limits their ability to consistently select profitable policies. We believe our underwriting technology allows us to more accurately assess the future cost of each policy, which enables us to focus on profitable growth opportunities often overlooked or mispriced by our competitors. We believe our proprietary technology combined with our highly experienced and entrepreneurial leadership team allow us to make better underwriting decisions that generate higher margins for our business.

We market and write insurance policies through two channels: our independent agents and DTC. As we continue to scale our operations, we anticipate that our DTC distribution will grow through our focus on accretive market opportunities.

We have significantly grown our business and scaled it profitably in our targeted coastal specialty markets by leveraging our seasoned management team, technology and strong balance sheet. We have grown our shareholders’ equity from $102 million at the end of 2021 to $1,113 million at the end of 2025, a CAGR of 55%. In this same time period, we have grown our in force premium to $1,796 million at the end of 2025, while running an average consolidated combined ratio of 66.3%. Our return on equity and combined ratio were 57.4% and 52.1% for 2025, and 60.0% and 72.3% for 2024, respectively.

For the years ended December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, we had gross premiums written of $1,796 million and $1,334 million, policy fees of $8.2 million and $6.6 million, consolidated combined ratio of 52.1% and 72.3% and net income of $444 million and $201 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had total assets of $2.9 billion, shareholders’ equity of approximately $1,113 million and tangible shareholders’ equity of approximately $1,111 million. For the year ended December 31, 2025, we had a return on equity of 57.4% and a return on tangible equity of 57.9%.

3

Underwriting

We believe our proprietary technology, disciplined underwriting standards and highly technical underwriting talent allow us to make better underwriting decisions that generate higher margins for our business. Our underwriting strategy is focused on leveraging our approximately $8.9 trillion TIV policy level data repository, cutting edge process automation, predictive analytics and aerial imagery to make dynamic underwriting decisions and generate consistently strong risk-adjusted returns across market cycles. We believe that traditional markets inefficiently and inaccurately underwrite coastal specialty risks without properly considering potential future losses and reinsurance costs. We believe our underwriting technology allows us to assess the future cost of each policy more accurately, which enables us to focus on profitable growth opportunities often overlooked or mispriced by our competitors.

As of December 31, 2025, our underwriting team consisted of personal lines and commercial lines underwriters and is led by a committee of senior leaders. Our underwriting team is highly knowledgeable, experienced and has deep relationships with key constituents within our core markets. We amplify this expertise with advanced technology and data analytics, driving superior risk selection and best-in-class underwriting profitability. Additionally, we continue to assess the use of new technology-enabled tools to assist us with inspections as well as other components of the underwriting process.

We utilize the Duck Creek policy management system, which enables us, through partner integrations and our own proprietary technology, to calculate replacement costs and obtain real-time loss history on each application prior to binding, generate policyholder forms and manage and calculate the estimated reinsurance costs at the point of sale. The underwriting eligibility requirements that we utilize are programmed into this platform, which can easily be updated to effect desired production results. In addition to ensuring eligibility through underlying risk exposure returns and user inputs, our application is designed to capture key rating elements of a risk, such as the distance to the coast, construction materials, wind mitigation features, age of the home and roof, and loss history. We update these requirements periodically to reflect our experience with risks in certain age brackets by year built and age of roof in territories with significant wind or hail claim activity. We also have the capability to implement binding restrictions by state, county, rating territory and/or agency, providing real-time risk management in the face of catastrophe events or similarly imminent exposure. For every single-family property new risk we write, we review the aerial imagery and utilize additional AI filters on the aerial imagery to assist underwriters in determining the condition or hazards that exist on the property. If needed, we may order an inspection from a third-party vendor if they are unable to determine the current condition of the home by using aerial, oblique and panorama imagery and publicly available permit data sources. Policies which fail to meet our criteria are declined at quote or, upon completion of our new business review, are cancelled for underwriting reasons. The portfolio is managed and reviewed for compliance with our underwriting guidelines and policies may be non-renewed for a limited set of reasons, as documented in the policy forms and in compliance with statutory requirements. The underwriting criteria that we consider will continue to evolve as our business grows and expands.

We have also put in place rigorous controls over our underwriting processes with constant monitoring of operations and application of underwriting guidelines and procedures. We hold weekly meetings with the underwriters to ensure processes and standards are consistently adhered to, as well as to address any changing market conditions or issues that may arise. In addition, we conduct regular audits within the underwriting function to ensure compliance and quality. These audits review new business, endorsements, renewals, cancellations and non-renewals. The results are reviewed with the staff and action is taken to address any perceived needs. This review enables us to optimize the design and pricing of our products as well as our reinsurance program including the purchase of appropriate reinsurance coverage.

Claims

Our claims operations are a core component of our business strategy and we believe are a key competitive differentiator for us. Our three pillars of focus are customer service, accuracy and efficiency. The claims department is led by our Chief Claims Officer, who has over 30 years of claims experience.

We closely manage all aspects of the claims workflow, from processing the initial filing to offering remediation services, as we believe that it is important to have direct oversight over the claims process. We aim to handle all claims with our employees, and do not intend to outsource our attritional claims functions at any point apart from field adjusting or inspection services, where we may use outside personnel. In the limited instances where we do not handle claims in-house, such as a high-volume catastrophic event, we use a combination of inside and outside adjusters to perform examining, field adjusting, special assignments and catastrophe inspection services. These partners have been vetted, approved and trained well in advance and have committed the required resources. We maintain control over the handling process, reserving and payment authority with the outside support reporting directly to our employees.

4

We are focused on building a culture of automation and efficiency. Our claims department benefits from the implementation of workflows where certain actions are triggered based on specific claims events which reduces lower-value administrative tasks and allows for more efficient decision-making and claims resolution.

We have built a preferred vendor network to provide various mitigation services such as tarping, water mitigation and tree removal. By pre-negotiating contracts with these vendors, in the event of covered damages, we can accelerate the restoration process while minimizing repair costs. For example, during Hurricane Ian, we utilized this network to reduce costs and mitigate further damage while improving customer satisfaction. We also maintain communication with policyholders and encourage them to use our preferred vendor network to protect them from poor workmanship and fraud.

We have built-in processes and trainings for the detection and prevention of fraudulent activity in claims. We continue to research, test and pilot the use of machine learning and artificial intelligence to flag early indications of fraud and the potential for litigation.

In addition to the streamlined claims management system, we use enterprise-wide data management to create a data-driven claims life cycle. We aim to determine relationships between similar claims and outcomes and utilize predictive analytics from the data to triage, assign, investigate and evaluate claims. The use of our historical dataset with this real-time business intelligence platform provides the claims team information and performance metrics that drives improvement in efficiency, accuracy and response time and helps to avoid litigation.

Distribution

We market insurance policies through two channels: our independent agents and DTC. We are an agency-focused company and pride ourselves on our ability to provide superior customer service to both our agents and policyholders. Our management and underwriting teams have strong and well-established relationships with our distribution partners. We look to recruit independent agents through these strong relationships alongside cooperative efforts with the various states’ agent associations, and by seeking contracts with agencies currently placing significant volume with Citizens, to the extent those agents are willing to accept new appointments.

Our agents provide us with valuable input regarding market needs through agency visits, strategy meetings and feedback sessions. We provide our agents with extensive training in the use of our agency portal, product offerings, underwriting requirements and exposure management efforts. Violet, our proprietary underwriting system, allows our agents to quickly bind a policy within minutes, which we believe helps to drive improved quote and bind ratios. Most of the increased speed and efficiency of Violet is driven by process automation that pulls risk characteristics, claim history and other required data points, versus legacy systems in the insurance industry that require agents to manually input quoting data. Violet’s efficiency and speed makes it a preferred choice for our agents. We launched Violet to a small number of agencies in September of 2023 and to all Florida agencies on January 29, 2024.

In addition to our independent agent distribution network, we are also focused on building out our DTC distribution channel given the usefulness of this channel in the long-term. Our current strategy is focused on low-cost customer acquisition through embedded relationships with mortgage bankers and building trade organizations, among other low-cost channels. As we continue to scale our operations, we anticipate that our DTC distribution will continue to scale and focus on accretive market opportunities. By combining our advanced technology and superior underwriting expertise, we are able to focus our DTC distribution on select geographies that produce outsized returns.

Technology

Our technology platform is at the center of everything we do and every decision we make, helping us win profitable business. Our technology platform is built on a foundation of insurance principles which leverage Big Data and process automation. We have a proprietary approximately $8.9 trillion TIV dataset which enables us to build superior artificial intelligence and machine learning tools to streamline underwriting, claims and predictive analytics, which drive lower loss ratios by focusing risk selection on higher margin generating policies.

At the heart of our technology platform is our comprehensive, enterprise-wide data repository, which we have used to pioneer our prospective underwriting model to assess individual policy profitability at the point-of-sale. Our model estimates forward-looking reinsurance costs on a policy level basis and dynamically adjusts the reinsurance cost as the amount at risk, concentration and other factors change across the portfolio, enabling us to accurately predict reinsurance costs at the policy level.

5

We partner with an aerial imagery provider which is incorporated into our technology platform. We use post-catastrophe aerial imagery and roof damage scores for all affected risks within 48 hours of an event along with our traditional overlaid storm track information, to triage our catastrophe response and deploy our construction resources to mitigate the damage.

Automation is another key area of focus. We have automated as many business processes as possible. For example, our claims team uses robotic process automation (“RPA”) to automate the Electronic First Notice of Loss (“eFNOL”) logging process. This was particularly helpful during Hurricane Ian to track and effectively resolve outstanding claims. We also use proprietary RPA to feed data into our underwriting AI for faster and more accurate results.

Risk Management

Our risk management function is at the center of our decision-making and our day-to-day activities and is a core component of our strategy to generate superior risk-adjusted returns.

The risk management function is led by Matt Larson, our CRO, who has over 17 years of insurance experience. Our risk management team carefully manages our exposures and adheres to strict corporate risk appetite and tolerances for exposure accumulation. The team is supported by individuals with extensive experience focusing on the coastal exposed property business. We focus on reinsurance, data and company-wide analytics with a framework that allows for real-time exposure management and drives strategic growth while adhering to our corporate risk appetite. Our unique approach to risk management allows us to project our aggregations, reinsurance costs and underwriting profitability on a prospective basis. We have established key risk tolerances and exposure management measures to protect our capital base from severe events. Our goal is to hedge our risk exposure and consolidated retention caused by a catastrophe event to no more than 25% of our annual pre-tax earnings.

We license Verisk Touchstone and Moody's RMS to regularly model in-force policies and review key metrics surrounding aggregations and volatility of the portfolio. We also use the Touchstone and RMS platforms to produce PML analysis at specified intervals to validate our forecasts. We conduct regular modeling aimed at maintaining an optimal portfolio with minimal risks in higher catastrophe cost segments. Our underwriting systems are built to set territorial rules and restrictions in real-time to ensure that the Company does not exceed aggregations based on corporate risk tolerance levels. In addition, we conduct regular reviews of financial underwriting results in tandem with the underwriting team. We created a proprietary Florida building code database, which is used to validate primary and secondary risk characteristics, ensuring data accuracy for our portfolio and underwriting technology.

Reinsurance

We strategically purchase reinsurance to limit exposure to catastrophic events and protect our capital base from severe convective storms and hurricanes. Reinsurance is an important part of our risk management strategy and premiums paid to reinsurers is our single largest cost. We seek a diversified portfolio of reinsurance with the use of traditional reinsurance capacity, utilization of the FHCF and the use of multi-year catastrophe bonds. All reinsurance we purchase is on an excess of loss basis and covers all perils. We currently purchase catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance to the 143-year return period, in excess of the 130-year return period primarily used in Florida and required by our rating agency and regulators. As of June 1, 2025, 100% of our private reinsurance recoverables were either fully collateralized or derived from reinsurers rated “A-” (Excellent) by A.M. Best, or better.

Our annual reinsurance program, which is segmented into layers of coverage, protects us for excess property catastrophe losses and loss adjustment expenses. In placing our reinsurance program, we seek to obtain multiple years of coverage for certain layers through multi-year reinsurance agreements. We believe this limits uncertainty on reinsurance coverage and pricing.

The FHCF is a tax-exempt state trust fund under the supervision of the Florida State Board of Administration. The fund is operated with the objective of maintaining adequate homeowners and commercial residential insurance capacity within the state of Florida. Participation in FHCF is mandatory for Florida domestic residential property insurers. The fund provides excess of loss coverage below the cost that would be provided for similar coverage within the private market.

We treat our reinsurers as long-term partners. As such, we target underwriting profitability on a gross basis, before utilization of reinsurance, to ensure consistent support from our reinsurance partners and to protect ourselves from changes in the reinsurance market. Our sophisticated modeling and large database allow us to consider prospective reinsurance costs in our underwriting decisions, ensuring that we target profitable policies aligned with our reinsurance program. We include assumptions on individual policies and the prospective impact of each additional risk on our PML and expected reinsurance costs, which combined with multi-year reinsurance capacity limits uncertainty and unexpected increases in future reinsurance costs. Based upon catastrophe modeling, it would take an event beyond our 1-in-143-year PML to exhaust our 2025 – 2026

6

property catastrophe coverage. We currently seek to retain no more than 25% of our annual pre-tax earnings from a first-event catastrophic loss that is below the top of our reinsurance program. We believe that our reinsurance program provides adequate coverage for named storms.

By accessing catastrophe reinsurance coverage through the capital markets, we aim to diversify our sources of reinsurance capacity in a cost-effective manner and receive multi-year coverage, protecting our capital and maintaining profitability. In 2023, we executed our first two reinsurance catastrophe bonds with Purple Re Ltd. (“Purple Re”), a Bermuda special purpose insurer, which provides three years of coverage from catastrophe losses caused by certain named storms, including hurricanes. In 2024, we executed our third reinsurance catastrophe bond. In 2025, we executed our fourth catastrophe reinsurance bond, which includes two tranches. As of June 1, 2025, we have $660 million of coverage remaining through these four notes. Series 2023-1 was issued in April 2023 and expires in April 2026 and Series 2023-2 was issued in July 2023 and expires in June 2026, and Series 2024-1 was issued in April 2024 and expires in June 2027. Series 2025-1 tranches A and B was issued in April 2025 and expires in June 2028. The limit of coverage of $660 million is fully collateralized by a reinsurance trust account for the benefit of SIC. SIC makes periodic premium payments to Purple Re during this three-year risk period. Purple Re issued $660 million of principal-at-risk variable notes to fund the reinsurance trust account and its obligations to SIC under the reinsurance agreement. The maturity date of the notes may be extended up to two additional years to satisfy claims following covered catastrophic events that have occurred during the three-year term of the respective reinsurance agreement.

2025 – 2026 reinsurance program

Our 2025-2026 reinsurance program incorporates the mandatory coverage required by law to be placed with the FHCF. We also have purchased private reinsurance below, alongside and above the FHCF layer. The following describes the layers of our 2025-2026 reinsurance program:

•
Our Retention. We have a consolidated first event retention of $94.7 million of losses and loss adjustment expenses, which is made up of $77.7 million of first event captive participation and $17.0 million of captive RPP participation. We have a consolidated second event retention of $77.7 million, which is retained within the captive. We have a consolidated third event retention of $50 million, which is retained within the captive.

•
Layer Below FHCF. Immediately above and alongside our retention, we purchase $437.4 million of reinsurance from highly rated third-party reinsurers. Through the placement of prepaid layers and payment of a reinstatement premium, we have two full limits below the FHCF. To the extent that the limit below the FHCF, or a portion thereof, is exhausted in a first catastrophic event, we have purchased prepaid layers or reinstatement premium protection insurance to pay the required premium necessary for the reinstatement of this coverage.

•
FHCF Layer. Our FHCF coverage includes an estimated maximum provisional limit of 90% of $1,047.9 million, or $943.1 million, in excess of our retention and private reinsurance of $557 million. The limit and retention of our FHCF coverage is subject to upward or downward adjustment based on, among other things, submitted exposures to FHCF by all participants. The FHCF estimate is currently based on the most up-to-date 2025 rates and multiples, as of December 31, 2025. We purchase coverage alongside, above, and below the FHCF layer from third party reinsurers. The layer alongside is in the amount of $92 million. The private reinsurance is generally adjusted to fill in gaps in our FHCF coverage. The FHCF coverage cannot be reinstated once exhausted, but it does provide coverage for multiple events.

•
Purple Re Layers. As described above, we entered into a catastrophe reinsurance agreement with Purple Re, which provides coverage for $660 million of losses and loss adjustment expenses in excess of $1 billion, collateralized by the proceeds of the issuance. To the extent our FHCF and private coverage is partially or entirely exhausted by a first catastrophic event, Purple Re would provide coverage of $660 million of losses and loss adjustment expenses in excess of $607 million.

•
Layer Above. We have additional $347 million of coverage alongside and above the Purple Re 2023-1, 2023-2, 2024-1 2025-1 B, and 2025-1 A catastrophe bonds of loss and loss adjustment expense. This coverage cannot be reinstated once exhausted, but it does provide coverage for multiple events.

•
Third Event. We have an additional $32.4 million of coverage in excess of $50 million consolidated retention of loss and loss adjustment expense for a third event. This coverage is in place to protect against frequency of events.

For the twelve months ending December 31, 2025, we have purchased reinsurance from the following sources (i) the FHCF, (ii) 30 private reinsurers, which were all rated “A-” or higher by A.M. Best or S&P, (iii) four private reinsurers that have provided collateral to fully cover their exposure and (iv) a protected cell reinsurer whose shares are owned by Slide Reinsurance

7

Holdings, LLC, our wholly-owned reinsurance subsidiary. Our entire reinsurance program is placed with AM Best “A” rated reinsurers or better, fully collateralized reinsurers, or the FHCF.

Background and Slide’s Participation in the Citizens Depopulation Program

The Company began to assume policies from Citizens in the second half of 2023. Citizens is the largest homeowners insurer in the state of Florida as measured by premium in force and acts as the state-owned insurer of last resort. It is incentivized by the state to transfer policies from its books to the private market in order to reduce systemic risk to the insurance market. Citizens generally offers nine personal lines and six commercial line opportunities to assume policies over a calendar year. The Company has selectively assumed personal residential and commercial residential policies from Citizens in 23 separate assumption transactions between August 2023 and December 2025. For context, the direct earned premiums of the Citizens policies assumed by the Company during the course of 2025 prior to the date of assumption of such policies was $365,462 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2024 according to the Annual Statement of Citizens Property Insurance Corporation for 2023 and management’s calculations. In addition, the unearned premiums of Citizens policies assumed by the Company during 2024, was $227,241 thousand as of December 31, 2024 according to the Citizens Annual Statement and management’s calculations.

In order to be eligible to participate in an assumption transaction, the Company must first apply to the FLOIR for approval to assume a specified number of policies approximately four and a half months prior to the proposed assumption date. The Company prepares and submits an application showing the cumulative pro forma financial impact of assuming all policies for which it has applied and all policies it has been previously approved to assume. Approximately 45 days after the application has been submitted the Company is informed whether they have been approved for the assumption. Once Slide receives FLOIR approval indicating the maximum number of policies it may assume, Citizens provides the Company with a list of policies eligible for assumption and the relevant policy data. Slide evaluates these policies over an approximately two-week period and submits to Citizens a list of policies it would like to assume, together with estimated renewal premiums to Citizens, as discussed in more detail below under the sub-heading “—Slide’s Process and Procedures for Selecting Citizens Policies.”

Citizens then sends all private insurance company offers to the policyholder, which includes the amount of their estimated premium upon renewal. Policyholders generally have approximately six weeks to select their preferred insurance carrier. If the renewal premium for any private insurer’s offer is within 20% of Citizens’ renewal premium, the policyholder cannot elect not to participate in, or “opt out” of the assumption by such private insurer (such as the Company). If the renewal premium comparison is more than 20% of Citizens’ renewal premium, the policyholder may “opt out” of the assumption. Upon an assumption by Slide, Citizens then transfers to Slide the unearned premiums as of the effective date of the assumption transaction for the policies that have not opted out of such transaction. A policyholder may also opt-out during the 30-day period following the effective date of the assumption transaction, but only if the premium difference between Slide’s renewal and Citizens’ renewal is greater than 20%. If a policyholder opts-out during such period, Slide returns the applicable unearned premiums to Citizens.

Under the terms of its typical assumption agreements with Citizens, the Company assumes all liability and obligation for losses under the assumed policies arising on or after the effective date of the assumption transaction, and the Company directly services all policyholder claims related to such losses. Citizens remains liable for all losses under the assumed policies arising prior to the effective date of the assumption transaction and is solely responsible for servicing all policyholder claims related to such losses. All of the policies selected by the Company are annual policies which are rewritten at the Company’s rates using the Company’s coverage and forms within a year following their assumption from Citizens. From the time to initial application to assumption by the Company, the process takes approximately four and a half months.

Slide’s Process and Procedures for Selecting Citizens Policies

The Underwriting Advisory Council sets general underwriting guidelines and goals around future assumptions from Citizens; the Board of Directors has delegated the underwriting of policies, including Citizens assumptions, to the Company’s management. The underwriting guidelines rarely change but the Company’s overall goals do change from assumption to assumption, based on time of year, current portfolio distribution, reinsurance, and other market factors. The Company’s risk management team uses these guidelines and goals to analyze each policy’s initial data file provided by Citizens to determine which policies to apply for. The Company’s risk management team models the policies within the initial data file and performs reinsurance cost estimation for each policy, and the Company’s actuarial team rates the policies using FLOIR approved Slide rates and forms.

The Company’s risk management team then compares the Company’s estimated renewal premium against the estimated reinsurance costs to determine which policies are candidates for selection. Potential participants in the Citizens take-out process

8

are only permitted to select policies within 40% of Citizens’ estimated renewal premium – and therefore policies over 40% are removed from the candidate pool.

The Company’s risk management team then models the policy candidates. The model produces probable maximum loss which, along with exposure aggregation and estimated reinsurance costs, are used to calculate the most optimal policy selection. Finally, the Company’s risk management team presents the results to the Underwriting Advisory Council and a decision is made as to which policies to apply for a given renewal period.

The Company currently expects to participate in Citizens depopulation program in the short term consistent with its past practice. However, the Company continually evaluates its participation in the Citizens depopulation program, and may in the future decrease, or cease its participation in the program entirely, subject to market conditions as well as the underlying quality of the policies subject to the program. See “Risk Factors—We may pursue opportunities to participate in Citizens’ take-out program and directly assume policies issued by Citizens to policyholders who were otherwise unable to obtain private insurance. Take-out opportunities are subject to a number of timing and execution risks, and we may fail to participate in Citizens’ take-out programs on terms that are ultimately profitable to us, or at all” for more information.

Slide’s Criteria for Assuming Citizens Policies

The Company evaluates several core criteria during its underwriting process with Citizens. The most important criteria are geographic distribution, distance to coast, risk characteristics such as construction, occupancy, square footage, year of construction, roof shape, roof age, and claims activity.

A summary of the criteria for the policies assumed in calendar year 2025 is provided below and compared to the Company’s portfolio at year-end 2024. As illustrated in the tabular disclosure in the sub-sections that follow, the risk characteristics of the assumed Citizens policies closely tracks the risk characteristics of the Company’s stand-alone historical portfolio. As a result, the Company expects the financial performance of the Citizens policies it assumes to closely track the financial performance of the balance of the Company’s portfolio of policies.

In the tables that follow in each sub-heading in this section, the following terms have the meanings ascribed to them below:

•
PIF: Policies in force

•
Locations: Number of buildings

•
TIV: Total Insured Value, including Coverages A (dwelling), B (other structures), C (contents), and D (loss of use)

•
Average TIV: TIV divided by Locations

•
Premium: In force premium

•
Average Premium: Premium divided by Locations

For the reader’s reference, the “County” heading table in the sub-section “—Geographic Distribution” below includes both PIF and Locations. In contrast to personal residential policies, commercial policies commonly have multiple locations with distinct rating characteristics. In the sub-sections “—Distance to Coast”, “—Primary and Secondary Risk Characteristics”, locations are shown, not PIF, as a single commercial policy can contain more than one risk characteristic and would therefore, in management’s view, result in inaccurate PIF totals.

The Company believes that the strong correlation between the primary and secondary characteristics of the assumed Citizens policies and the Company’s historical portfolio discussed below strongly supports the Company’s expectation that the financial performance of the assumed policies will approximate that of the rest of the Company’s portfolio and that therefore the Company’s historical financial performance is the best indicator of the amount, timing and probability of future cash flows and liabilities.

Geographic Distribution

The Company evaluates geographic distribution of Citizens’ policies to enhance balance of risks and to prevent unintended concentrations of risk. Concentrations of risk increase the risk of catastrophe losses and result in higher reinsurance costs. Accordingly, the Company often selects geographical distributions that differ from its existing distributions to enhance its spread

9

of risk and reduce or maintain current reinsurance expenses. As part of its underwriting strategy, the Citizens policies selected by the Company generally have similar levels of geographic distribution as the Company’s existing policies in force and are selected in complimentary regions so as not to materially alter the geographic distribution of the Company’s policies in force. The Company uses geographic spread of risk and policy distribution to form opinions about policy distribution and the reinsurance costs associated with the portfolio.

To determine the expected loss in a given geography, frequency of events (number of events) and severity of events (e.g., Category 5 wind speeds versus Category 1 wind speeds) are considered by the Company. Having a high frequency and high severity will on average produce more loss than a low frequency and low severity relative to comparable policies. This is where the Company’s catastrophe models come into consideration, as they take into account both frequency and severity of events. When Florida is the first landfalling area in the catastrophe model the Company licenses, 34% of all events make landfall in Monroe or Miami-Dade counties and 37% of the major hurricanes (i.e., Category 3, 4 and 5) are in those two counties. In contrast, the four most Western counties in the Florida Panhandle (Escambia, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa, and Walton) make up 9% of all hurricanes and 7% of the major hurricanes. As a result, the same policy in Walton County is less risky than Miami-Dade County.

The importance of geographic distribution in the Company’s risk balancing efforts is illustrated by the combined Slide and Citizens by county table below. For purposes of evaluating risk, the Company groups Florida counties into regions. Within the catastrophe model the Company licenses, the following shows the percentage of total events that make landfall in a given region, the percentage of major hurricanes, and the percent of total insured value:

•
Southeast Florida (Miami, Broward and Palm Beach counties): 28% of all events, 35% of Category 3 through 5 events, and representing 28% of Slide’s total insured value taking into account assumed Citizens policies

•
West Central Florida (Pinellas and Hillsborough counties): 1% of all events, 1% of Category 3 through 5 events, and representing 11% of Slide’s total insured value taking into account assumed Citizens policies

•
Central Florida (Polk and Orange counties): Given that these are inland counties, there are no direct landfalling events and this region represents 10% of Slide’s total insured value taking into account assumed Citizens policies

•
Southwest Florida (Collier, Sarasota, and Lee counties): 11% of all events, 12% of Category 3 through 5 events, and representing 17% of Slide’s total insured value taking into account assumed Citizens policies

The following tables illustrate the geographic distribution by county of the number of policies in force, total insured value, average total insured value, average premium per policy and percentage of total insured value (as calculated by dividing (x) the total insured value for a given county by (y) the total insured value with respect to the aggregate policies in force) with respect to (i) the Citizens policies eventually assumed by Slide during the course of 2025 as of December 31, 2024 (ii) such information with respect to Slide as of December 31, 2024 and (iii) such information on a combined basis as of December 31, 2024 for illustrative purposes.

Citizens Policies Assumed by Slide during

2025

As of December 31, 2024

Rank

County

State

PIF

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV

Average

Premium

% of

Total

1

Miami-Dade

FL

30,564

30,796

10,361,822,983

336,467

4,258

13.9

%

2

Pinellas

FL

22,663

22,917

9,813,168,810

428,205

2,566

13.2

%

3

Broward

FL

21,780

22,149

7,550,266,424

340,885

4,094

10.1

%

4

Palm Beach

FL

18,835

19,076

5,702,458,247

298,934

3,345

7.7

%

5

Hillsborough

FL

11,899

12,020

4,993,034,126

415,394

2,494

6.7

%

6

Brevard

FL

10,550

10,582

4,668,320,107

441,157

2,511

6.3

%

7

Orange

FL

8,681

8,733

3,423,871,133

392,061

2,320

4.6

%

8

Lee

FL

6,367

6,427

2,580,121,900

401,450

2,632

3.5

%

9

Pasco

FL

5,908

5,944

2,263,187,430

380,752

1,975

3.0

%

10

Sarasota

FL

4,893

4,941

2,082,990,526

421,573

2,669

2.8

%

All Other (57 Counties)

FL

49,710

50,424

20,974,679,649

415,966

2,563

28.2

%

Total

191,850

194,009

74,413,921,335

383,559

3,053

100

%

10

Slide Policies in Force

As of December 31, 2024

Rank

County

State

PIF

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV

Average

Premium

% of

Total

1

Broward

FL

34,574

35,040

17,153,947,192

489,553

6,332

9.6

%

2

Palm Beach

FL

29,064

29,551

15,569,515,517

526,869

5,497

8.7

%

3

Lee

FL

29,975

30,136

15,284,578,352

507,187

3,670

8.6

%

4

Orange

FL

25,340

25,392

12,984,573,962

511,365

3,381

7.3

%

5

Hillsborough

FL

22,298

22,673

12,538,357,262

553,008

3,548

7.0

%

6

Miami-Dade

FL

22,312

22,836

10,470,811,175

458,522

6,146

5.9

%

7

Collier

FL

14,647

14,695

8,649,442,360

588,598

4,117

4.9

%

8

Polk

FL

17,663

17,665

7,927,053,059

448,743

2,697

4.5

%

9

Sarasota

FL

12,479

12,584

6,784,111,721

539,106

3,394

3.8

%

10

Manatee

FL

10,233

10,401

6,468,308,279

621,893

3,495

3.6

%

All Other FL (57 Counties)

FL

122,621

123,767

62,578,471,246

505,615

3,260

35.2

%

All Other SC (36 Counties)

SC

1,850

1,850

1,543,626,007

834,392

4,237

0.9

%

Total

343,056

346,590

177,952,796,132

513,439

4,040

100

%

11

Combined Citizens Policies

Assumed during 2025

and Slide Policies in Force

As of December 31, 2024

Rank

County

State

PIF

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV per

Location

Average

Premium

% of

Total

1

Broward

FL

56,354

57,189

24,704,213,616

431,975

5,465

9.8

%

2

Palm Beach

FL

47,899

48,627

21,271,973,764

437,452

4,653

8.4

%

3

Miami-Dade

FL

52,876

53,632

20,832,634,158

388,437

5,062

8.3

%

4

Lee

FL

36,342

36,563

17,864,700,252

488,601

3,488

7.1

%

5

Hillsborough

FL

34,197

34,693

17,531,391,388

505,329

3,183

6.9

%

6

Orange

FL

34,021

34,125

16,408,445,095

480,834

3,110

6.5

%

7

Pinellas

FL

35,789

36,697

16,235,099,574

442,409

3,006

6.4

%

8

Collier

FL

16,219

16,339

9,689,997,159

593,059

4,234

3.8

%

9

Polk

FL

21,071

21,131

9,204,199,385

435,578

2,617

3.7

%

10

Brevard

FL

18,889

18,993

9,064,390,396

477,249

3,108

3.6

%

All Other FL (57 Counties)

FL

179,399

180,760

88,016,046,673

486,922

2,968

34.9

%

All Other SC (36 Counties)

SC

1,850

1,850

1,543,626,007

834,392

4,237

0.6

%

Total

534,906

540,599

252,366,717,467

466,828

3,686

100

%

Distance to Coast

The Company also evaluates the distance to the coast in determining which Citizens policies to assume because policies further from the coast are less susceptible to hurricane losses, and have lower reinsurance costs. The Company utilizes AIR as its primary risk-based catastrophe model. When using AIR modeling, policies generally have higher reinsurance costs if they are closer to the coast. Small differences in distance —even as low as a third of a mile — to the coast often produce large differences in reinsurance costs, which is especially acute in properties closest to the coast.

The Company utilizes the distance to coast to determine differences in reinsurance costs for policies assumed from Citizens as compared with the Company’s portfolio, as well as the combined impact of distance to coast of both portfolios. The following tables illustrate the distance to the coast by total insured value, average total insured value and percentage of total insured value (as calculated by dividing (x) the total insured value for a given distance to coast by (y) the total insured value) with respect to (i) the Citizens policies eventually assumed by Slide during the course of 2025 as of December 31, 2024, (ii) Slide’s policies in force as of December 31, 2024 and (iii) such information on a combined basis as of December 31, 2024 for illustrative purposes.

As of December 31, 2024

Citizens Policies Assumed by Slide during

2025

Slide Policies in Force

Combined Citizens Policies Assumed

during 2025 and Slide Policies in Force

Distance to

Coast

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV

% of

Total

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV

% of

Total

Locations

TIV

Average

TIV

% of

Total

0-0.1 Miles

2,937

$

725,838,033

$

247,136

1.0

%

2,296

$

569,934,648

$

248,229

0.3

%

5,233

$

1,295,772,681

$

247,616

0.5

%

0.1-0.4 Miles

6,926

2,386,645,811

344,592

3.2

%

4,282

1,229,791,479

287,200

0.7

%

11,208

3,616,437,290

322,666

1.4

%

0.4-0.8 Miles

4,935

1,761,382,351

356,916

2.4

%

3,123

1,279,909,120

409,833

0.7

%

8,058

3,041,291,471

377,425

1.2

%

0.8-1.5 Miles

8,800

2,828,062,242

321,371

3.8

%

4,445

1,540,543,330

346,579

0.9

%

13,245

4,368,605,572

329,831

1.7

%

1.5-2.5 Miles

12,754

4,869,813,872

381,826

6.5

%

6,259

2,883,635,249

460,718

1.6

%

19,013

7,753,449,121

407,797

3.1

%

2.5-3.5 Miles

15,651

5,429,661,487

346,921

7.3

%

12,081

5,541,764,125

458,717

3.1

%

27,732

10,971,425,612

395,623

4.3

%

3.5-4.5 Miles

13,961

5,176,286,238

370,768

7.0

%

15,696

7,694,464,457

490,218

4.3

%

29,657

12,870,750,695

433,987

5.1

%

4.5-7.5 Miles

32,160

12,258,415,077

381,170

16.5

%

50,168

26,610,160,802

530,421

15.0

%

82,328

38,868,575,879

472,119

15.4

%

7.5+ Miles

65,513

26,943,171,502

411,265

36.2

%

150,304

81,779,450,313

544,094

46.0

%

215,817

108,722,621,815

503,772

43.1

%

Inland

30,372

12,034,644,722

396,241

16.2

%

97,936

48,823,142,609

498,521

27.4

%

128,308

60,857,787,331

474,310

24.1

%

194,009

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

346,590

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

540,599

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Primary and Secondary Risk Characteristics

The Company evaluates various construction characteristics when evaluating Citizens’ policies, which are important factors in mitigating loss from a hurricane event. Each of the characteristics below are important data inputs into the catastrophe modeling platform used by the Company to evaluate risk and determine reinsurance coverage and pricing. These factors are important because better construction standards perform better in catastrophe events and have lower reinsurance costs. The

12

Company utilizes this information to compare the overall risk profile of the Company’s policies to Citizens’ policies, and the change in risk profile when combined together.

Specifically, the Company generally evaluates the following risk characteristics when determining the Citizens policies it proposes to assume in a given period:

Primary Risk Characteristics:

•
Construction. Construction is important as it’s the elemental feature of the structure being insured. In Florida, based on management’s experience, masonry (i.e., bricks), wood frames, and reinforced concrete structures are the primary types of structures that are used in residences. Masonry is the most common building matter and is more structurally sound than wood frames. However, reinforced concrete structures are built to handle hurricanes better than both wood frame and masonry.

•
Occupancy. Understanding if the building is a single family, multi-family, condominium, or other occupancy is important to understand its vulnerability to hurricanes. In the Company’s catastrophe models, in general a single family performs better than multi-family and condominium.

•
Stories. The Company views the number of stories of a dwelling as a critical component when underwriting commercial residential or personal residential policies. If a structure is over seven stories, then the Company can make a reasonable assessment that its construction is superior and has a concrete roof deck, which is likely to perform better in a hurricane than a non-concrete roof deck. Concrete has great compressive strength and low tensile strength, therefore concrete suspended as a roof deck will always have to be reinforced for it to exist and function as intended based on the building code in effect.

•
Year Built. The year in which a dwelling was built is critical for the Company’s analysis of which policies it assumes, because it is the basis for understanding what building codes the structure was built in accordance with. There have been many updates over the years to the Florida Building Code (the “FBC”) which governs construction standards in Florida. Two important updates were in 1994 when building codes in Miami-Dade and Broward counties became more stringent following Hurricane Andrew and in 2002 when the rest of the state of Florida adopted similar codes following the 1994 updates to the FBC with respect to Miami-Dade and Broward counties. Older properties with less stringent building codes are likely to not perform as well as newer properties that have more stringent building codes.

•
Square Footage. Square footage is an important metric for the Company to consider in determining which Citizens policies to assume, as different size homes have different vulnerabilities; larger homes tend to be built better and perform better in wind events. In addition, square footage relative to Coverage A helps the Company determine if the coverage amounts are in line with replacement costs when reviewing prospective Citizens policies that may be assumed by the Company. For example, for a 5,000 square foot home with Coverage A in the amount of $250,000, the Coverage A per square foot is $50 – well below what it would cost to rebuild the property and therefore underinsured.

Secondary Risk Characteristics:

•
Year Roof Built. The year in which a roof is built is an important characteristic the Company evaluates in determining which policies to assume from Citizens. Newer roofs generally perform better in hurricanes and severe thunderstorms, thereby limiting downside risk to the Company over the course of a given insurance contract.

•
Roof Shape. The Company views roof shape as an important secondary characteristic as hip roofs perform better in hurricanes than gable roofs because they are engineered to have lower damageability during wind events.

•
Roof Deck Attachments. Roof deck attachments are an important metric for the Company because it indicates how the roof deck is attached to the roof rafters. There are numerous different roof deck attachment types based on the building code in place when a home is constructed. In addition, the size and strength of the nail that is holding the roof deck to the rafters and how far the nails are spaced apart are relevant metrics. The better the strength and closer nails are spaced, the better the roof performs in a hurricane (i.e., it is less likely to be damaged, resulting in a claim). On the other hand, weaker nails and further spacing between nails generally indicates that the roof is more likely to be damaged in a hurricane.

13

•
Window Protection. Window protection is an important risk characteristic because it will help to protect a home from getting wind and water intrusion into the structure’s envelope. Homes with hurricane impact glass, for example, will prevent damage better than homes with ordinary glass windows.

•
Secondary Water Resistance. Secondary water resistance is an underlayment below the roof covering designed to stop water penetration if the outer layer of the roof is damaged. This is an important risk characteristic in determining which policies to assume because roofs with secondary water resistance are engineered to reduce water penetration that can damage the structure.

•
Roof Deck. Roof deck is a key feature in the construction of flat roofs. If a roof shape is flat and not constructed with reinforced concrete slabs, it will not perform as well as ones with reinforced concrete slabs.

The following tables illustrate the primary and secondary risk characteristics with respect to the total insured value, average total insured value, and percentage of total insured value (as calculated by dividing (x) the total insured value for a given characteristic by (y) the total insured value) with respect to (i) the Citizens policies assumed by Slide during the course of 2025 as of December 31, 2024, (ii) such information with respect to Slide as of December 31, 2024 and (iii) such information on a combined basis as of December 31, 2024 for illustrative purposes. As can be seen below, the Citizens assumed policies demonstrate primary and secondary characteristics substantially similar to the Company’s historical portfolio of policies.

As of December 31, 2024

Primary Risk Characteristics

Citizens Policies Assumed by Slide during 2025

Construction

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

425

$

988,171,380

$

2,325,109

1

%

Wood Frame

35,495

14,647,383,106

412,660

20

%

Masonry

149,181

57,342,192,034

384,380

77

%

Reinforced Concrete

8,908

1,436,174,815

161,223

2

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Occupancy

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Permanent Dwelling: Single Family

164,652

$

67,298,309,579

$

408,731

90

%

Permanent Dwelling: Multi Family

1,034

410,103,185

396,618

1

%

Apartments / Condominiums

28,323

6,705,508,571

236,751

9

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Stories

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

387

$

33,105,600

$

85,544

0

%

1 story

142,709

56,055,715,233

392,797

75

%

2 story

34,083

13,424,811,347

393,886

18

%

3 story

4,101

1,260,663,198

307,404

2

%

4 to 7 stories

4,627

1,913,884,811

413,634

3

%

8 or more stories

8,102

1,725,741,146

213,002

2

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Year Built

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Pre 1995

150,710

$

55,759,401,354

$

369,978

75

%

1995—2001

11,669

5,339,513,287

457,581

7

%

2002—2008

22,184

9,685,083,766

436,580

13

%

2009 or newer

9,446

3,629,922,928

384,281

5

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Square Footage

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

604

$

130,687,500

$

216,370

0

%

< 1507 sq feet

106,034

27,853,767,405

262,687

37

%

1507-2507 sq feet

74,784

34,457,788,189

460,764

46

%

2508-5005 sq feet

11,158

7,607,455,581

681,794

10

%

5006-10010 sq feet

613

595,209,460

970,978

1

%

10010 or more sq feet

816

3,769,013,200

4,618,889

5

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

14

As of December 31, 2024

Primary Risk Characteristics

Slide Policies in Force

Construction

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

582

$

83,316,776

$

143,156

0

%

Wood Frame

68,608

37,565,300,427

547,535

21

%

Masonry

268,184

137,687,756,161

513,408

77

%

Reinforced Concrete

9,216

2,616,422,768

283,900

1

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Occupancy

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Permanent Dwelling: Single Family

304,660

$

167,253,146,785

$

548,983

94

%

Permanent Dwelling: Multi Family

1,683

797,771,314

474,017

0

%

Apartments / Condominiums

40,247

9,901,878,033

246,028

6

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Stories

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

2,782

$

353,679,534

$

127,131

0

%

1 story

267,367

135,544,443,280

506,960

76

%

2 story

59,550

35,621,395,115

598,176

20

%

3 story

5,342

2,035,722,491

381,079

1

%

4 to 7 stories

4,635

2,176,724,279

469,628

1

%

8 or more stories

6,914

2,220,831,433

321,208

1

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Year Built

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Pre 1995

197,543

$

91,474,154,293

$

463,059

51

%

1995—2001

48,292

27,850,145,939

576,703

16

%

2002—2008

75,621

42,530,263,246

562,413

24

%

2009 or newer

25,134

16,098,232,654

640,496

9

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Square Footage

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

778

$

127,120,230

$

163,394

0

%

< 1507 sq feet

119,149

$

35,695,345,001

$

299,586

20

%

1507-2507 sq feet

175,024

90,122,706,275

514,916

51

%

2508-5005 sq feet

48,017

42,761,956,866

890,559

24

%

5006-10010 sq feet

2,485

4,574,372,022

1,840,794

3

%

10010 or more sq feet

1,137

4,671,295,738

4,108,440

3

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

15

As of December 31, 2024

Primary Risk Characteristics

Combined Citizens Policies Assumed during 2025 and

Slide Policies in Force

Construction

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

1,007

$

1,071,488,156

$

1,064,040

0

%

Wood Frame

104,103

52,212,683,533

501,548

21

%

Masonry

417,365

195,029,948,195

467,289

77

%

Reinforced Concrete

18,124

4,052,597,583

223,604

2

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Occupancy

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Permanent Dwelling: Single Family

469,312

$

234,551,456,364

$

499,777

93

%

Permanent Dwelling: Multi Family

2,717

1,207,874,499

444,562

0

%

Apartments / Condominiums

68,570

16,607,386,604

242,196

7

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Stories

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

3,169

$

386,785,134

$

122,053

0

%

1 story

410,076

191,600,158,513

467,231

76

%

2 story

93,633

49,046,206,462

523,813

19

%

3 story

9,443

3,296,385,689

349,082

1

%

4 to 7 stories

9,262

4,090,609,090

441,655

2

%

8 or more stories

15,016

3,946,572,579

262,824

2

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Year Built

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Pre 1995

348,253

$

147,233,555,647

$

422,778

58

%

1995—2001

59,961

33,189,659,226

553,521

13

%

2002—2008

97,805

52,215,347,012

533,872

21

%

2009 or newer

34,580

19,728,155,582

570,508

8

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Square Footage

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

1,382

$

257,807,730

$

186,547

0

%

< 1507 sq feet

225,183

63,549,112,406

282,211

25

%

1507-2507 sq feet

249,808

124,580,494,464

498,705

49

%

2508-5005 sq feet

59,175

50,369,412,447

851,194

20

%

5006-10010 sq feet

3,098

5,169,581,482

1,668,683

2

%

10010 or more sq feet

1,953

8,440,308,938

4,321,715

3

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

16

As of December 31, 2024

Secondary Risk Characteristics

Citizens Policies Assumed by Slide during 2025

Roof Year Built

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

57,400

$

16,622,234,306

$

289,586

22

%

0 to 5 years

54,387

23,064,513,264

424,081

31

%

6 to 10 years

31,345

13,457,009,849

429,319

18

%

11 to 20 years

36,079

15,189,533,877

421,008

20

%

21 to 25 years

10,017

4,175,756,156

416,867

6

%

26 years or older

4,781

1,904,873,883

398,426

3

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Roof Shape

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

25,206

$

6,195,396,943

$

245,791

8

%

Flat

124,148

48,323,618,044

389,242

65

%

Gable End

10,163

4,473,151,893

440,141

6

%

Hip

34,492

15,421,754,455

447,111

21

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Roof Shape

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

25,389

$

6,970,840,843

$

274,561

9

%

6d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

10,643

4,165,239,802

391,360

6

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

3,168

1,216,591,404

384,025

2

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 6 on Center

154,809

62,061,249,286

400,889

83

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Window Protection

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

120,980

$

44,848,424,427

$

370,709

60

%

No Protection

438

805,549,600

1,839,154

1

%

Non-Engineered Shutters

18,412

7,806,688,486

424,000

10

%

Engineered Shutters

54,179

20,953,258,822

386,741

28

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Secondary Water Resistance

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

86,833

$

30,350,976,383

$

349,533

41

%

Secondary Water Resistance—Yes

44,352

19,317,098,168

435,541

26

%

Secondary Water Resistance—No

62,824

24,745,846,784

393,892

33

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

Roof Deck

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

184,889

$

71,077,646,501

$

384,434

96

%

Plywood

-

-

-

0

%

Reinforced Concrete Slabs

9,120

3,336,274,834

365,820

4

%

Total

194,009

$

74,413,921,335

$

383,559

100

%

17

As of December 31, 2024

Secondary Risk Characteristics

Slide Policies in Force

Roof Year Built

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

28,561

$

11,076,823,685

$

387,830

6

%

0 to 5 years

105,433

55,072,860,695

522,349

31

%

6 to 10 years

87,230

46,066,201,627

528,100

26

%

11 to 20 years

81,239

44,049,848,674

542,225

25

%

21 to 25 years

27,440

15,548,687,488

566,643

9

%

26 years or older

16,687

6,138,373,963

367,854

3

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Roof Shape

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

20,043

$

7,901,167,239

$

394,211

4

%

Flat

183,926

88,745,470,853

482,506

50

%

Gable End

14,045

5,094,802,605

362,748

3

%

Hip

128,576

76,211,355,435

592,734

43

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Roof Shape

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

84,955

$

49,539,818,576

$

583,130

28

%

6d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

36,159

17,790,537,759

492,009

10

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

4,499

2,087,856,880

464,071

1

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 6 on Center

220,977

108,534,582,917

491,158

61

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Window Protection

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

231,153

$

109,261,406,196

$

472,680

61

%

No Protection

2,402

3,931,508,700

1,636,765

2

%

Non-Engineered Shutters

17,268

8,509,723,892

492,803

5

%

Engineered Shutters

95,767

56,250,157,344

587,365

32

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Secondary Water Resistance

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

217,571

$

109,608,060,956

$

503,781

62

%

Secondary Water Resistance—Yes

97,797

54,296,554,859

555,197

31

%

Secondary Water Resistance—No

31,222

14,048,180,317

449,945

8

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

Roof Deck

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

336,831

$

173,764,375,592

$

515,880

98

%

Plywood

418

271,689,498

649,975

0

%

Reinforced Concrete Slabs

9,341

3,916,731,042

419,305

2

%

Total

346,590

$

177,952,796,132

$

513,439

100

%

18

As of December 31, 2024

Secondary Risk Characteristics

Combined Citizens Policies Assumed during 2025 and

Slide Policies in Force

Roof Year Built

PIF

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown

85,961

$

27,699,057,991

$

322,228

11

%

0 to 5 years

159,820

78,137,373,959

488,909

31

%

6 to 10 years

118,575

59,523,211,476

501,988

24

%

11 to 20 years

117,318

59,239,382,551

504,947

23

%

21 to 25 years

37,457

19,724,443,644

526,589

8

%

26 years or older

21,468

8,043,247,846

374,662

3

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Roof Shape

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

45,249

$

14,096,564,182

$

311,533

6

%

Flat

308,074

137,069,088,897

444,923

54

%

Gable End

24,208

9,567,954,498

395,239

4

%

Hip

163,068

91,633,109,890

561,932

36

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Roof Deck Attachments

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

110,344

$

56,510,659,419

$

512,132

22

%

6d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

46,802

21,955,777,561

469,120

9

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 12 on Center

7,667

3,304,448,284

430,996

1

%

8d Nails @ 6 Spacing 6 on Center

375,786

170,595,832,203

453,971

68

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Window Protection

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

352,133

$

154,109,830,623

$

437,647

61

%

No Protection

2,840

4,737,058,300

1,667,978

2

%

Non-Engineered Shutters

35,680

16,316,412,378

457,299

6

%

Engineered Shutters

149,946

77,203,416,166

514,875

31

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Secondary Water Resistance

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

304,404

$

139,959,037,339

$

459,781

55

%

Secondary Water Resistance—Yes

142,149

73,613,653,027

517,863

29

%

Secondary Water Resistance—No

94,046

38,794,027,101

412,501

15

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Roof Deck

Locations

TIV

Average TIV

% of Total

Unknown/Default

521,720

$

244,842,022,093

$

469,298

97

%

Plywood

418

271,689,498

$

649,975

0

%

Reinforced Concrete Slabs

18,461

7,253,005,876

392,883

3

%

Total

540,599

$

252,366,717,467

$

466,828

100

%

Non-Hurricane Prior Loss History

The Company also evaluates non-hurricane prior loss history in connection with the policies it assumes from Citizens. Slide does not assume policies from Citizens that have more than two non-hurricane losses because it believes that they will not perform well in the future. As illustrated by the table below, the total number of non-hurricane claims on Citizens policies assumed by the Company in 2025 is not material, as the Company assumed 194,009 policies from Citizens during the year. In other words, less than 2% of the Citizens policies assumed by the Company had any reported non-hurricane losses. The tables below summarizes the number of claims to Citizens by year of loss, prior to assumption by the Company in 2025 with respect to

19

both personal residential and commercial residential policies assumed by the Company as well as the causes of such claims for the periods presented.

Reported Non-Hurricane Claims Count by

Date of Loss

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

Personal Residential

3,758

11,201

7,992

5,997

2,511

-

Commercial Residential

1

7

-

-

1

-

Total

3,759

11,208

7,992

5,997

2,512

0

Personal Residential Claims Count by Cause of Loss

Water Damage - Non Weather Related

15,716

Wind

4,883

Water Damage - Weather Related

4,637

Hail

1,302

All Other Physical Damage

1,181

Remaining

3,740

Total

31,459

Commercial Residential Claims Count by Cause of Loss

Tree Damage

2

Water Damage

6

Lightning

1

Total

9

Hurricane Losses

The Company does not evaluate hurricane loss history as a relevant factor in determining which policies it assumes from Citizens. Among other reasons, Citizens is not required to have a reinsurance program comparable to that of a private, rated insurance company such as the Company which makes the impact of hurricane losses vastly different as between Citizens and the Company. The Company, to meet requirements of FLOIR and Demotech, purchases a reinsurance program to a minimum of the 130-year return period for the first event, and to a minimum of 50-year return period for the second event. Citizens is not required by FLOIR or any rating agency to purchase any reinsurance to any return period, and only purchased a program for a 100-year return period for the first event in 2025. For its reinsurance program that came into effect on June 1, 2025, SIC purchased $2.5 billion of reinsurance coverage with no retention, whereas, based on estimates by the Company’s management, Citizens’ retention was approximately $5.0 billion. An example of the impact of these differing reinsurance programs can be seen in the comparative impact of Hurricanes Debby, Helene and Milton to Citizens and the Company in the year ended December 31, 2024. Those hurricanes produced a pretax loss of $87.9 million for the Company, whereas based on management’s review of publicly available data, Citizens’ retained loss was approximately $1 billion.

Differences in Citizens’ and Slide’s Policy Performance

As mentioned above, Citizens was created by the Florida Legislature in August 2002 as a not-for-profit, tax-exempt, government entity to provide property insurance to eligible Florida property owners unable to find insurance coverage in the private market. By definition, as an insurer of last resort for customers that cannot find coverage in the private market, the rates and coverage of Citizens’ policies are different from what a private insurer such as the Company would offer. Similarly, the rates and coverage are different from the terms the policies assumed by the Company will have when they renew. All of the policies selected by the Company are annual policies which are rewritten at the Company’s rates using the Company’s coverage and forms within a year. Because it is a governmental entity and insurer of last resort in the state of Florida, the coverage offered by Citizens is more constrained than what the Company can offer by operation of Florida law, and therefore the loss experience of Citizens policies is vastly different to what the Company experiences. For example:

•
The Company insures properties up to $10 million in coverage, whereas the maximum coverage for Citizens policies is $700,000 for “Coverage A” (which, in the P&C insurance industry, refers to coverage of dwellings and physical structures) in the majority of Florida (with the exception of Miami- Dade and Monroe counties, where the maximum is $1 million);

•
The Company offers personal liability insurance up to $500,000, whereas Citizens can only offer up to $100,000;

20

•
The Company offers medical payments coverage up to $5,000, whereas Citizens can only offer up to $2,000;

•
The Company can offer personal property coverage up to 75% of the fair value of the underlying asset, whereas Citizen can only offer up to 50% of the fair value;

•
The Company can offer policies to homeowners in a flood zone and not require flood insurance, whereas Citizens requires flood insurance for any owner-occupied single-family homes and townhouses, as well as non-occupied rental properties located in a high-risk flood zone; and

•
The Company can offer coverage on screen enclosures (both frame and mesh), solar panels, animal liabilities, equipment breakdowns and personal property, whereas Citizens does not offer any coverage for these liabilities.

Changes in coverage affect both the net earned premium and the net loss ratio. As a result of coverage changes and the Company’s different rate schedule, the average premium on Citizens personal residential policies assumed during 2025 that were renewed during 2025 increased by 16%. However, the Company does not have access to Citizens’ loss ratios by peril or coverage type. Accordingly, the Company cannot compare the financial impact of these differences in coverage by Citizens as compared to the Company’s offerings. In addition, Citizens is not required to have a reinsurance program comparable to that of a private, rated insurance company. Given that reinsurance costs in coastal areas commonly range from 30-40% of underwritten gross premiums according to management’s estimates, Citizens’ rates are often lower than in the voluntary marketplace, resulting in lower average premiums in force. For example, Citizens’ average premium for personal residential policies in force was $3,676 as of December 31, 2024, whereas the Company’s average premium for personal residential policies in force as of December 31, 2024 was $3,924, a difference of approximately 6.7%.

Reserves

We maintain loss and loss adjustment expense (“LAE”) reserves to cover estimated liabilities for all specific claims reported and unreported claims that have been incurred but not yet reported (“IBNR”). The reserves are estimates based on actuarial projections and the expected ultimate cost to settle and administer each claim and our ultimate liability may be greater or less than the current reserves. Our reserves estimates are based upon past loss experience modified for current trends as well as prevailing economic, legal and social conditions and facts and circumstances known at the time and are subject to significant uncertainty. The reserves are maintained net of estimated related salvage and subrogation recoverables and reinsurance recoverables.

Once a claim is reported, we establish a case reserve for the estimated amount of the expected payment after an appropriate assessment of coverage, damages and any additional investigation needed, including information received from the claims adjuster. Our estimate is based on general insurance reserving practices and on the experience and knowledge of our claim adjusters regarding the nature and value of the specific type of claim. We periodically adjust case reserves based on subsequent developments associated with each claim.

IBNR reserves are established in accordance with industry practice to provide for the estimated amount of future loss and LAE payments on incurred claims that have not yet been reported to us as well as potential development on reported claims. IBNR reserves are estimated based on generally accepted actuarial reserving techniques that consider quantitative loss experience data and additional qualitative factors.

We take a conservative approach to loss reserves. We review loss reserves at least on a monthly basis using a variety of forecasting techniques that consider paid and incurred loss and LAE and reported claim counts. We update the reserve estimates as historical loss experience develops, additional claims are reported or settled and new information becomes available.

During the year ended December 31, 2025, our net incurred losses and LAE for accident years 2023 and 2024 developed favorably by $81.8 million. This favorable development was driven by a better than expected claims experience and lower loss adjustment expenses in our Florida residential policies. The following table illustrates, as of December 31, 2025, development of the estimated liability for losses and loss adjustment expenses from March 1, 2022 through December 31, 2024.

21

Period ended

December 31,

2025

(Dollars in

thousands)

Original estimated losses and loss adjustment expense

$

666,047

Re-estimated losses and loss adjustment expense one year

later

584,198

Cumulative redundancy (deficiency)

81,848

Net premiums earned

1,079,528

Investments

We maintain a conservative investment portfolio. Our investment policy aims to balance current yield, conservation of capital and the need to meet our liquidity requirements. We hold a well-diversified investment portfolio that is compliant with Florida statutes and emphasizes quality assets and preservation of capital. Our asset allocation strategy focuses on maintaining sufficient readily available funds to pay claims and expenses. We hold 100% of our assets in high quality fixed income assets and cash. Our bond portfolio has a weighted average rating of AA- and duration of 3.52 years.

Our investment portfolio is managed by a third-party investment management firm, BlackRock. BlackRock is a leading provider of investment, advisory and risk management solutions globally with $11.6 trillion of AUM, as of December 31, 2025. We regularly monitor our investment risk to balance our goals of capital preservation, income generation and the liquidity needs of our Company. Our investment policy and guidelines consider our investment approach, which seeks to build a high-quality portfolio while preserving capital and meeting our liquidity needs. The Investment Committee of SIC reviews and approves our investment policy and strategy. This committee meets on a regular basis to review and consider investment activities, tactics and new investment opportunities as they arise.

The securities in our investment portfolio are classified as “available for sale” and are carried at fair value with unrealized gains and losses on these securities reported net of tax as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Fair value represents quoted market prices traded in the public market. For those securities with unrealized losses, we intend to hold them until maturity or the point of unrealized gain.

As of December 31, 2025 we held $1,201 million in unrestricted cash and cash equivalents and $589.7 million in fixed income securities. We do not hold any equities, derivative, or alternative investments, other than interest rate swap agreements hedging exposure under our Credit Facility. A summary of our investment portfolio at December 31, 2025 is as follows:

As of December 31, 2025

Amortized

Cost

Gross

Unrealized

Gains

Gross

Unrealized

Losses

Estimated

Fair

Value

Yield

U.S. government and agencies

$

155,600

$

2,011

$

(36

)

$

157,575

3.66

%

States, municipalities and political subdivisions

$

203,485

$

3,948

$

(159

)

$

207,274

4.02

%

Corporate Bonds

$

171,501

$

3,689

$

(183

)

$

175,007

4.46

%

Asset-Backed Securities

$

49,536

$

333

$

(5

)

$

49,864

4.84

%

Total

$

580,122

$

9,981

$

(383

)

$

589,720

Competition

In general, the P&C insurance market is highly competitive, and we face competition from national and regional insurers. For example, in Florida, more than 350 companies are authorized to underwrite homeowners insurance. Some of our competitors have greater financial, marketing and management resources and experience than we do. However, we believe we have a significant technological advantage that allows us to assess, manage and price risk for individual and bulk policy acquisitions. Our technology is built to estimate future costs of policies and compare it back to our base rates to better understand profitability in real time on an individual risk basis and to assess large and/or bulk transactions. This technology permits us to only select policies that we believe to be profitable based on future reinsurance and AOP costs. We may also compete with new market entrants in the future. Competition is based on many factors, including the reputation and experience of the insurer, coverages and services offered, pricing and other terms and conditions, speed of claims payment, customer service, relationships with

22

brokers and agents (including ease of doing business, service provided and commission rates paid), size and financial strength ratings, among other considerations.

Ratings

Our insurance subsidiaries are eligible to be rated by a third-party rating agency, Demotech, Inc. (“Demotech”). Demotech’s rating process provides an objective baseline for assessing the solvency of an insurer which in turn provides insight into changes in an insurer’s financial stability. Our insurance subsidiaries have received a Demotech Financial Stability Rating of “A” for Exceptional financial stability. The Financial Stability Ratings given by Demotech serve to summarize Demotech’s opinion as to the relative ability of insurers to survive a downturn in general economic conditions as well as a downturn in the underwriting cycle and should not be interpreted as (and are not intended to serve as) an assessment of an insurer’s securities or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold an insurer’s securities. Our insurance subsidiaries do not currently have a rating from AM Best, and we do not currently intend to seek a rating from AM Best. We will continue to rely on our rating from Demotech, which management believes is in line with market practice with our competitors in the specialty homeowners and commercial residential insurance market in which we operate. Among other things, in order to receive a satisfactory rating from AM Best, we would be required to forgo certain revenues and efficiency of size.

Government Regulation

The insurance industry is extensively regulated. SIC and SSIC are subject to the laws and regulations of their domiciliary states, Florida and Rhode Island respectively, and each additional state in which they are licensed to transact insurance business, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, and South Carolina. SIC and SSIC would also be subject to the laws and regulations of any other state where we may seek to do business in the future.

Florida and Rhode Island

Florida and Rhode Island’s insurance regulatory regime provides for regulation of virtually all aspects of our business. Similar to other states, Florida and Rhode Island, have adopted several model laws and regulations as promulgated by the NAIC. State statutes and administrative rules generally require each insurance company that is part of a holding company system to register with the department of insurance in its state of domicile and to furnish information concerning the operations of the companies within the holding company system which may materially affect the operations, management or financial condition of the insurers within the system. As part of its registration, each insurance company must identify material agreements, relationships and transactions with affiliates, including without limitation loans, investments, asset transfers, transactions outside of the ordinary course of business, certain management, service, and cost sharing agreements, reinsurance transactions, dividends and consolidated tax allocation agreements. Importantly, regulated insurance companies, such as SIC and SSIC, are subject to statutory accounting requirements that are promulgated by the NAIC and adopted by the individual states. As part of such financial regulation, SIC and SSIC are required to file quarterly and audited annual financial statements with the regulator in their state of domicile, FLOIR or RIDBR. In many instances, Florida’s and Rhode Island’s insurance laws and regulations may be even more stringent than those promulgated by the NAIC or other states.

We are also subject to consent orders setting conditions for FLOIR’s approval of the Citizens assumption transactions in which we have participated. We are required by consent order to comply with the assumption agreements entered into with Citizens at the time of each assumption transaction, which requires that for the assumed policies, we must offer to renew each policy for a minimum of three years provided the policy satisfies our underwriting guidelines. We are in full compliance with all consent orders issued with regard to Citizens’ depopulation program.

As the ultimate parent company of SIC and SSIC, we are also subject to certain Florida and Rhode Island insurance laws governing insurance holding company systems. These laws, among other things, (i) require us to file periodic information with the FLOIR and RIDBR, including information concerning our capital structure, ownership, financial condition and general business operations, (ii) regulate certain transactions between SIC or SSIC and any affiliates, including the amount of dividends and other distributions that SIC or SSIC may pay, the terms of surplus notes and amounts that our affiliates can charge SIC and SSIC for services such as policy administration and claims administration and (iii) restrict the ability of any one person to acquire certain levels of our voting securities without prior regulatory approval.

23

Additional Regulatory Requirements

Additionally, we are subject to regulations administered by a department of insurance in each state in which we do business. Currently, SIC only writes insurance on an admitted basis in Florida and South Carolina and does not conduct business in other states and SSIC is not actively writing insurance in any states. These regulations relate to, among other things, policyholder notifications, premium limits relative to surplus, reinsurance requirements, participation in guaranty funds, business and claims practices, approval of policy forms and rates, solvency standards, licensing requirements, investment restrictions, limitations on dividends and affiliate transactions, single-policy risk limits, policyholder deposit requirements, accounting methods, regular examinations of the Company, financial record requirements, and reserve requirements.

FLOIR, RIDBR, and regulators in other jurisdictions where we may become licensed and offer insurance products conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to financial condition, holding company issues and other matters. In accordance with guidelines promulgated by the NAIC and adopted under applicable state law, insurance companies are generally subject to a financial examination by their domiciliary state insurance department at least once every five years. However, FLOIR and RIDBR also have discretional authority to conduct an examination whenever it is deemed appropriate. These regulatory authorities also conduct periodic examinations into insurers’ business practices. Additionally, as an insurance company operating in Florida, SIC is subject to assessments levied by Citizens, the Florida Insurance Guaranty Association, and the FHCF.

Further, all states require licensure and regulatory approval prior to the marketing of insurance products. Typically, licensure review is comprehensive and includes a review of a company’s business plan, solvency, reinsurance, rates, and forms, the character of its officers and directors and other of its financial and non-financial aspects. The regulatory authorities may prevent entry into a new market by not granting a license. In addition, regulatory authorities may preclude or delay our entry into markets by disapproving or withholding approval of our product filings.

From time to time, regulatory and legislative bodies in Florida Rhode Island, and other states have adopted or proposed new laws or regulations to address the cyclical nature of the insurance industry, catastrophic events, and insurance capacity and pricing. These regulations, which are often temporary in nature, (i) restrict certain policy non-renewals or cancellations and require advance notice of certain policy non-renewals and (ii) from a practical standpoint, limit or delay rate changes for a specified period during or after a catastrophe event. Most states, including Florida and Rhode Island also have insurance laws requiring that rate schedules and other information be filed for review by the insurance regulatory authority. The insurance regulatory authority may disapprove a rate filing if it finds that the proposed rates would be inadequate, excessive, or unfairly discriminatory. Rates, which are not necessarily uniform for all insurers, vary by many factors including class of business, hazard covered, risk location and size of risk.

Human Capital Management

As of December 31, 2025, we had 504 full-time employees. Our employees are not subject to any collective bargaining agreements, and we are not aware of any current efforts to implement such an agreement. We believe that our employee relationships are good, and we continue to explore opportunities to hire highly qualified insurance experts to expand our employee base and decrease our reliance on any individual employees.

Intellectual Property

The protection of our technology and intellectual property is an important aspect of our business. We rely upon a combination of trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights, confidentiality procedures, contractual commitments and other legal rights to establish and protect our intellectual property, which includes our proprietary algorithm for our reinsurance program. We generally enter into confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements with our employees and consultants to control access to, and clarify ownership of, our proprietary information and intellectual property.

As of December 31, 2025, we did not own any U.S. or foreign patents and do not have any U.S. or foreign patent applications pending. As of December 31, 2025, we hold one registered U.S. copyright, three registered trademarks, seven pending U.S. trademark applications and no pending foreign trademark applications, and have no registered U.S. trademarks and no registered foreign trademarks. We regard our trademarks as valuable assets in marketing our products and services, and have and will continue to use commercially reasonable efforts to protect our trademarks against infringement. We continually review our development efforts to assess the existence and patentability of new intellectual property.

24

Intellectual property laws, procedures and restrictions provide only limited protection and any of our intellectual property rights may be challenged, invalidated, circumvented, infringed or misappropriated. Further, the laws of certain countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and, therefore, in certain jurisdictions, we may be unable to protect our proprietary technology. Additionally, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. While we have confidence in the measures we take to protect and preserve our trade secrets, such measures can be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. For more information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, see “Risk Factors— Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property and Data Privacy.”

Available Information

Our internet website address is www.slideinsurance.com. We make available free of charge, through our website, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and proxy statements for our annual meeting of stockholders, as soon as reasonably practicable after each such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The SEC also makes available at www.sec.gov reports, proxy and information statements and other information filed by issuers with the SEC, such as the Company. Our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K (“Report”).

25