agilon health at Jefferies 2025: Strategic Shift to Profitability

On Tuesday, 30 September 2025, agilon health (NYSE:AGL) presented at the Jefferies 2025 Healthcare Services Conference, outlining its strategic focus on profitability amid challenges in the Medicare Advantage market. The company highlighted both positive strides in cost savings and ongoing adjustments to manage risk and enhance data infrastructure.

Key Takeaways

• agilon health generated $150 million in gross savings through the ACO REACH program in 2023.
• The company is reducing Part D risk exposure from two-thirds of members in 2024 to less than 30% in 2025.
• Enhanced data pipeline implementation is improving risk score accuracy and cost prediction.
• Strategic focus on profitability includes cost control and contracting improvements.
• Anticipates improved profitability in 2026 due to macroeconomic tailwinds and strategic actions.

Financial Results

• 2023: ACO REACH program achieved $150 million in gross savings, with cost trends 300 basis points below the Medicare benchmark.
• 2024: Company growth doubled but faced macroeconomic cost challenges and flat rates.
• 2025: Emphasis on profitability with slowed growth under no downside care management fee.
• Part D Risk: Reduced from two-thirds of members in 2024 to less than 30% in 2025, with further reductions expected in 2026.

Operational Updates

• Data Pipeline: Enhanced data pipeline implemented in Q1, covering 72% of members by end of Q2, facilitating detailed member-level revenue and cost analysis.
• Contracting: Focused on securing adequate compensation for risk and value delivered, with top-level negotiations ongoing.
• Clinical Programs: New programs piloted in late 2024 and early 2025, targeting heart failure and dementia to drive value and cost savings.
• ACO REACH Program: Engaged 117,000 members, demonstrating superior savings and quality through partnership model.

Future Outlook

• 2026: Anticipates improved profitability from final rate notice and 2025 actions in contracting, cost control, and clinical programs.
• V28 Impact: Confident in offsetting V28 impact in 2026 with current data and risk adjustment improvements.
• Quality and Cost Control: Expects benefits from payer investments in quality performance and continued alignment of operating costs with membership levels.

Q&A Highlights

• Data Pipeline Impact: Provides detailed member-level data for better risk adjustment and cost prediction.
• Part D Risk Management: Strategic priority to remove Part D risk, reducing financial volatility.
• Fee-For-Service Strategy: Open to REACH-only arrangements, traditionally focused on MA book.
• Burden of Illness Program: Enhanced with AI and data to identify high-acuity disease states earlier.
• Long-Cycle Business: Financial benefits from 2025 and late 2024 changes expected to manifest in 2026 and beyond.

For further details, please refer to the full transcript provided below.

Full transcript - Jefferies 2025 Healthcare Services Conference:

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: All right, let’s kick this off. Thanks everyone for joining. I’m Jack Slevin, a Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst here at Jefferies. Really excited to be joined for a fireside chat with Jeff Schwaneke here, CFO of agilon health, a value-based care company that operates in MA risk across a number of different states. Jeff, thanks for joining us. Yeah, yeah.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Hello, can you hear me? Maybe it helps if you turn it on.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah, there we go.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Thank you. Glad to be here.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Good. Thanks, Jeff. Maybe just to kick it off, I’ll just sort of open the floor to you and say, look, a lot of things have been moving on in healthcare services, broadly regulatory, various other things. A lot of things moving for agilon health right now. Just leave the floor open for you to sort of give us a state of the union and tell us a little bit about what’s going on from your perspective.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, yeah. First, let me just, for those that aren’t familiar, maybe start out with kind of who agilon health is. Right. We’re a primary care centered value-based care company and really the partnerships with our primary care doctors is really at the center of our business model. We enter into 20-year partnerships with our primary care physicians and ultimately we believe healthcare benefits when the primary care doctor is in charge of all of the healthcare needs for their members. By empowering these primary care doctors, we’re really improving quality, patient outcomes, and ultimately lowering costs. We are currently partnered with around 2,200 primary care physicians around the country in 12 states, 30 markets. How we do this is we entered into capitated arrangements with the payers.

We take a % of premium and ultimately we’re responsible for all the healthcare costs for our members. There are some things that we’ve carved out, which I’m sure we’ll get into here a little bit later, specifically on Part D, but generally we’re responsible for the total healthcare costs of our patients and then any savings that our model generates we share with our primary care partners. We also participate in the ACO REACH program. We serve roughly 117,000 members in the REACH program. It’s been a good program for us. We have generated consistent high quality and overall cost savings for the program. I think 2023 was the last year of data that’s public. We saved gross savings dollars of $150 million and our cost trends were 300 basis points below the Medicare benchmark.

Generally what we see in our model is anywhere from a 20% to 30% reduction in admits per thousand, lower ER admissions, lower inpatient stays. In the majority of our markets we are delivering high quality. Our star scores are greater than 4 and 4.25 for the majority of our partnerships. We’re delivering high quality, which is obviously important for our payer partners. Spent a lot of time on the data pipeline, so I’m sure we’ll get into that a little bit later. An enhanced data pipeline that we went live on in Q1 is going to be a meaningful, meaningful driver for us. Last but not least, clinical programs in late 2024 and early 2025, we rolled out a bunch of new clinical programs, really integrating clinical evidence with evidence-based guidelines to identify high acuity conditions and get those members to treatment earlier.

We rolled some of those out late 2024, piloted more in 2025 and ultimately look to enhance those as we head into 2026.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, awesome. No, it’s a great, a great sort of way to frame things, and then maybe pulling it a little more near term. Medicare Advantage has been a challenging environment, you know, that hasn’t. You’ve been exposed to that like anyone else that’s, you know, involved in Medicare Advantage risk of any manner, whether it’s managed care or any sort of provider organization. At 2Q, you know, another sort of hit, a prior year development, announced a leadership transition. I can say, you know, from my impression of speaking with you and with Ron, right, the strategic pillars, some of which you just touched on and we’ll get into a little bit more here after this question, haven’t really changed. At least that’s my impression.

It’s more that with this Office of the Chairman and the leadership transition as you look for a new CEO, it’s more about sort of just ramping up the intensity on the work you’re doing. I’d love to hear just a little more as we’re a few weeks past that, you know, how that’s going. Is that the right impression? If you could speak a little about sort of like what the day to day looks like right now.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, sure. Intensity is a good word. Definitely have the intensity and the focus. I guess the way I would think about it is you have to go back to 2024 and in 2024 we doubled the size of the company. Right. Massive growth that year, really focused on scaling the platform and then obviously the macro cost trends and rates, which are pretty much flat, had an impact on the overall business. We have narrowed the focus to really drive profitability. As you think about 2025, we had membership growth, but it was primarily or most of it was under no downside care management fee. We have intentionally slowed growth. We’re focused on profitability and our primary care partners are focused on profitability as well.

I think you’re right, a lot of the levers are the same, but we’ve narrowed that focus to really what’s going to drive near term profitability. The things that I would point you to that are the same are contracting, for example. From a contracting perspective, we’re trying to ensure that we’re getting adequately compensated for the risks that we’re taking and the value that we’re delivering to our payer partners. Part D risk from 2024, 2/3 of our members had Part D risk. Now in 2025, less than 30% have Part D risk. We expect to make more progress on that as we head into next year. We’re in the middle of the contracting season for us right now, so we’ll have to see how that plays out. We do expect to make more progress on that.

Data, another important piece, obviously, in the first quarter of this year, we moved over to our enhanced data pipeline, completely changed our reserving methodology to align with that new data pipeline. Now we have a solid foundation with which to use that data to predict not only medical costs, but also risk scores, costs. I mentioned that we scaled the business significantly in 2024. Obviously we had a different growth plan then than we do now. We’re really focused on what does it take to run a business that has half a million members. I think you’ll see a focus on cost control later this year and probably early into next year as far as right sizing the platform for the membership that we have.

Last but not least, BOI and the clinical programs are paramount to what we do and our success and continuing to enhance those and ultimately get the care that the members need.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah, okay, super interesting. Maybe just to start to pick on a couple of those points. Right, so the data pipeline’s been a big discussion. Cost visibility has been a challenge for really anyone in the value-based care environment. That data pipeline was sort of your response to how do we get things better? Maybe if you could just touch a little bit on the nuts and bolts of what it’s taken to build that up, what it looks like. If you have anything quantifiable in terms of how much faster are you getting visibility to cost trend now than you were 12, 18 months ago, I’d just love to get sort of some framing around that.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah. We went live in the first quarter. At the end of the second quarter, we had roughly 72% of our members on the data pipeline. Obviously, we’re working on more in Q3, we’ll have some more in Q4, but it’s kind of diminishing returns. We started with the largest payers first, so we’re going to continue to move the needle, but it’s going to be a longer progression. I think the biggest differentiator for us on the data platform is really the detail, the level of detail of the data. I’ll just give an example. Prior to the data platform, we would get medical costs and revenue information from our payer partners through a PDF statement. It’s literally just a summarized version in PDF form. It’s one page. It has total medical costs and total revenue.

Now with the data platform, we are getting member-level revenue bifurcation and member-level cost detail down to the line item. That is extremely important for somebody in my position to obviously estimate medical cost, understand what your RAF scores, your risk adjustment scores are on a member-level basis. Sitting here today, we will be able to calculate our member-level risk scores. When January comes, we’ll actually be able to calculate our member-level RAF scores and what our paid RAF score should be for January 26. We did not have that capability sitting here a year ago. I would say it’s more of the detail that matters, not necessarily the timing. Has there been an acceleration of timing from our payer partners? I would say the large payers that were pretty good at providing data, not really much acceleration. It’s really the bifurcation of the revenue and the claims that matters.

For some of our payer partners that were maybe a little more delayed, there has been an acceleration. For some of those, I would say maybe a month, month and a half acceleration. We’ll take that, that’s good news. Really, it’s the level of detail in the revenue and the claims that matters.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, awesome. No, that’s super helpful color, and then maybe you touched on it a little before paring back Part D risk. Also been a big initiative for you. I think I can broadly say from talking to privates to other publics that are in the space, I think the notion that capitated contract provider groups shouldn’t necessarily have the Part D risk is pretty consensus at this point. Maybe you could just speak to sort of what’s the progress you’ve made on that front in terms of pulling Part D exposure out of your contracts? Is there anything as you look to 2026 with some of the things that are up in the air, you know, other areas where you’ve been able to make progress in the last couple of months?

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, you’re exactly right. I mean, the biggest struggle for us on Part D was really the timing delay. For example, we have visibility on the scripts, but ultimately we don’t know the unit cost. That’s because things like manufacturer rebates and government cost share don’t really get reconciled until 6, 7, 8 months after the year’s over. What was happening is we would get statements from payers saying this is what we think your Part D costs are, and then eight months later, you get the final answer and it’s substantially different. That caused an extreme amount of volatility in our financial results. Plus the fact that, in general, we were losing money on Part D anyway. We don’t control the formulary, and you’re right, we’re not issuing most of the prescriptions. For us, it was two things.

We want to be held accountable for things that we can control and influence, and we want to get compensated for that. The other thing is we don’t want to be risked for those things that we don’t control and don’t influence. Removing Part D was a strategic priority given the volatility and the magnitude of the changes. Again, 2/3. We had 2/3 exposure in 2024. We’re down to 30% in 2025. We have had some small wins. I would say it will be below 30% for 2026. We’re in the middle of the contracting right now with our payer partners, and how those get finalized will really determine how far or how much lower we go.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, got it. Maybe just to sort of close the loop on a little bit of the discussion around how the environment with payer contracting is developing. I guess taking a step back from my perspective, there was this rush to get into value-based care. A lot of excitement around MA risk in particular, a lot of providers that were willing to sign contracts that were not particularly advantageous or good depending on what the payer relationship was.

If you date back to, call it, 2021, 2022, my impression is if you are a large-scale provider that brings real value through things like quality and other programs to payers, there is an ability to get concessions from payers, whether it’s on the actual rate, obviously Part D risk, something you’ve had a lot of success with, or things like saying, hey, the data quality and depth of detail and speed need to be better. I guess I’d love to get your perspective on what you’re seeing on that front and the general tide of things in addition to some of the specifics we just talked about.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, you’re exactly right. I mean we are delivering exceptional quality and overall cost management to our payers, and I think they recognize that. I would say the demand for our model from our payers has been strong. They would love for us to be in more markets. You’re right. I mean what we’re looking for is the right economic construct that compensates us for the risk that we’re taking and the value that we’re delivering. I would say they have been constructive. These aren’t conversations that are at lower levels. This is at the top of the house for these large national payers and even regional payers. We definitely have their attention. I’m confident that we can get to a solution that adequately compensates us for the value that we’re delivering.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, makes a ton of sense. Maybe to zero in on some of the recent stuff. Obviously, some across the board in a few different categories, some hits on prior year or prior period development in the second quarter. If you can maybe just set the baseline on what those were. The big question I’m getting out of the quarter that we discussed, I know post quarter, I’m sure you’ve had a lot of these discussions on the risk adjustment side. You had to redraw that it only applied to a portion of your members in terms of what’s now assumed in the financials at this point or what was recognized. I’d love to get the detail on that remainder of patients where you didn’t apply that same assumption, what the genesis was for it, if you can share that with the group.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, sure. First, let me just kind of walk through the Q2 prior year development. There were really three components I would highlight. The first was we had $20 million with exited markets. These are markets that we’ve made the decision to exit and don’t carry that risk going forward. Ultimately, medical claims came in higher than we anticipated, so there was some runout on that. That was roughly $20 million. The second is $13 million associated with one payer on Part D risk. This is the phenomenon I mentioned before, where when we closed the books for the end of the year, we had information from the payer, they said, hey, here’s how much we think your Part D is, and then fast forward to the final answer and it’s $13 million worse.

The good news is we carved out that risk for that payer in 2025, so we do not have that risk heading into this year. Last was really $37 million associated with 2024 risk adjustments. The final year risk adjustment information comes from the government to the payers. We receive that as well, and ultimately our mid-year to final estimate that we had for 2024, the actual results just came. What that does is that lowers your stepping off point for 2025. The $37 million immediately lowered what our expectations were for 2025 because it’s really growth in conditions that matter because you’re leveraging 2024 into 2025. In the second quarter, we pulled down the 2025 risk adjustment information. That was really driven by the data pipeline and the mid-year.

We had received some of the mid-year files from our payer partners and that was highly correlated to our new data pipeline. We wouldn’t even have that capability a year ago. The correlation between those mid-year files and the data pipeline, which we had 72% of our members on, gave us confidence that, yeah, that’s the number. Ultimately, we adjusted for that. A lot of people are asking about what about the other 28%. Why didn’t you do some extrapolation math or something on the other 28%? The real reason is that in the 72% there was wide variability. Some were positive, some were negative, it was all over the board and it was different by payer. Ultimately, we didn’t really have any way to produce a different estimate than what we already had on the books.

We just took the position of we’re going to wait until the mid-year data comes in. We’ll get that in Q3 and Q4 and ultimately true that up when we get the information. I can’t obviously tell you what that answer is today, but we have received a lot of those, not all, but we have received the data that we need to true up the risk adjustment.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, awesome. Now, maybe taking it off of the core Medicare Advantage business, talk a little bit about fee for service. Something I think is a bit underappreciated about your business is the strength you’ve seen in those over 100,000 members in ACO REACH. I was doing my little tidy up on some of the 2024 MSSP results and noticed you all had two small ACOs there as well. I guess just thinking about the Medicare fee for service ACO side of things, there are really two questions that come to mind. One, in my mind, in REACH, you’ve had differentiated performance versus the pack. I’m curious if you have a sense of what you’re doing there that’s leading to all that success. Maybe I’ll pause there and just give you that question before we get to the second one.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, yeah, certainly. You’re exactly right. We’re one of the largest scaled participants in the ACO REACH program. We delivered superior savings and quality results. It’s really based on our partnership model. The unique part about us is we use the same model for the Medicare Advantage as we do for the ACO REACH. All the things that I’ve talked about on CARE programs and all the tools and technology that we’re giving to our partners, we do that same thing for the ACO REACH program. The great thing about the ACO REACH program is it takes a lot of the variability that causes us frustrations in the Medicare Advantage side out. You don’t have bids, you don’t have supplemental benefits, you don’t have a lot of these things that impact performance and have long tails. Medical cost trends are trued up in year.

There’s a cap on risk adjustment, and there’s a lot of things to like about that program. Ultimately, what it shows is, you know, it’s really a cost and quality program and we’ve obviously delivered superior value there. Really, it’s about the partnership model. We started in that program with our, I would say, our strongest partners who were well established and decided to participate in that with us. It’s been very successful.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. Okay, interesting. You touched on it a little bit. I guess the question I have about it is the performance there has been really strong. It was a very hot space. A lot of EC back stuff that sort of went into ACO REACH. Maybe a lot of them have not had the same level of success as you. The program technically ends at 2026 at this point, at least the way that it’s currently on the books. There’s a little bit of uncertainty around how things advance. Considering that, my question is really when you think about the ACO REACH or maybe just a general value-based care for the fee-for-service population business for you, is that something that you can press further on given the level of success you’ve had, or does it need to work with your MA model and a given partnership?

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, yeah. I mean we’ll just touch quickly maybe on the MSSP examples that you mentioned. I said those were really unique situations for us. That was really year zero of our participation in the MSSP program. You don’t get really credit for all the tools and capabilities that you bring to bear on those markets. As a matter of fact, we had budgeted those roughly at break even. The results were not outside of our expectations. One of those has seen a substantial, I would say, improvement in performance and we will continue that one as we head into 2026. The other one did not. It showed improvement, but not as much as we really wanted. Ultimately, we’re going to exit that one for 2026. Overall, I would say we know how to be successful in the MSSP program.

Right now where we are, the ACO REACH program is obviously, it’s been very successful for us and we’re going to stay in that if it makes sense.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. Okay, that makes sense. I guess maybe just to clarify my question, is that something you can have conversations with providers and say, look, maybe you just want to do REACH with us rather than the full suite of offerings? Is that something that works at this point or does it all have to be together with the Medicare Advantage book?

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: I think it’s possible, but I think we’ve led with the MA book first. That’s been where we are. I don’t think they have to be packaged together. For sure they could be separated if that’s a strategy we’ll want to go down.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, got it. Maybe we’re starting to track down on time here. Certainly not asking for any form of guidance on this. 2026 is something people start to wonder about. We’re still not all the information on bids is in. There’s a lot of different things that could be up in there, but you got a lot of experience and history in managed care broadly. I guess I’d love, you know, qualitatively if you’ve got any thoughts on puts and takes as we’re looking at 2026 for agilon health, sort of where we stand on that front.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, certainly. I think obviously we’re heading into a different macro backdrop. Specifically, for Medicare with the final rate notice. The final rate notice is going to be helpful as you move into 2026 specifically because, you know, 2025 rates were just generally flat and you have a cost trend between 5% and 6% or even north of that. Ultimately, you’re underwater on the margin line in 2025. That reverses in 2026 if you assume some consistent cost trend exiting 2025. Certainly, the rates are going to be helpful. I think all those levers that I mentioned before that we are extremely focused on, and we have daily meetings on, contracting being one of them, again, making sure that we get adequately compensated for the risks that we’re taking. We’re working on the contracting right now with our payer partners. You mentioned the bid.

I know there’s a lot of commentary around bids and what that means. I would say broadly, from everything I’ve seen, it seems to indicate that payers were bidding for more margin improvement. That would be obviously a positive for us. You think about cost control I mentioned. We really are trying to right-size our overall operating cost for the level of membership that we’re serving. Half a million members. We’ve dialed back on growth intentionally because, you know, growth is an investment generally. We’ve dialed back on growth. Clinical programs, some of these were piloted in late 2024, early 2025. We would look to roll those out across the network heading into 2026. Risk adjustment, you know, the good news is we have visibility, we have the new data pipeline so we will actually be able to calculate our member-level risk scores.

That’s a capability we didn’t have a year ago. Based on the data that we see right now, we think that we’re going to be able to offset the impact or more than offset the impact of V28, the final year of V28, heading into next year. Obviously, quality, we haven’t touched on quality too much today, but we are seeing payers put meaningful dollars into superior quality performance, which we believe we can drive. Think about, you know, as you move up the stars ladder, more dollars available for us to earn for delivering superior performance. As I think about 2026 now, cost trend, who knows? That’s a component, right? We have to figure out what cost trend is. As I think about heading into 2026, there’s certainly a lot of tailwinds. Our performance will definitely improve. The question is how much?

It’s going to be based on kind of how some of these things shake out.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, maybe just to dig in on two things you brought up there, because I think it’s interesting, the V28 piece, your RAF scores were lower, so the exposure should have been lower. I guess maybe just to dig in and say like 2024, 2025, 2026, when engaging with providers, has that changed at all? Does it feel easier in a 2026? Maybe I’ll just stop there.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yes, certainly you’re on one model now for 2025, it’s all V28. There’s no bifurcation. It has narrowed the focus, which has been helpful. We made a lot of changes to our burden of illness program exiting 2024, and we’re using AI and enhanced data and a lot of these things to move the ball forward in that area. Plus, the clinical program’s work has also been, I would say, impactful for identifying high acuity disease states earlier. That’s been helpful as well. We made a lot of changes there. As you think about 2024 and 2025 together, we more than offset the impact of V28, the V28 change. We feel pretty good that we can do that for the final year as well.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Okay, that makes sense. Maybe one more piece to dig. You mentioned the clinical programs. I know that it was something that was discussed a little more broadly a couple years ago. It sounds like there’s been progress on that front and things are running well, but maybe it’s lost a little bit of the spotlight here among other issues. I’d love to hear just a couple anecdotes or things about how the clinical programs are moving forward right now.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah, sure. We have a host of these new programs that we rolled out. Heart failure was one of them. Early diagnosis of congestive heart failure. We’ve been really successful at that. We have a palliative program, dementia. I’d say all of these programs, some of them were piloted. I think the results have been promising, and they’re really showing the ability to drive value and cost savings, avoided ER admissions, avoided inpatient stays. Some of these that we piloted, I think we’re looking to roll out more extensively across the network in the back half of 2025 and early 2026. You’re right, if you think about the levers that we have to improve near-term financial performance, it’s contracting, right. It’s the burden of illness program, risk adjustment that includes the clinical care programs, and cost management would be heavy in that. Clinical care programs.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Yeah. Okay, we’ve got two minutes left here and maybe to close out. I’ll frame it this way to say, you know, you’ve already sort of dictated what you think the priorities are and how you’re achieving that, but with an open floor again to close out for you. You know, what are the things you think investors need to be focused on with the agilon health story as you’re pushing forward into 2026?

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: I think the biggest thing people have to recognize is, and you probably already know this, we’re in a long cycle business. We have made a lot of changes and pulled a lot of levers to create financial value in the last 12 months. In our industry, a lot of that work, the financial value of that work doesn’t really show up until later. Just take the burden of illness program, you’re really working on it this year, but the financial value shows up in 2026. Quality, two years right before quality shows up. What I would say is all of these things that we’ve talked about and how we’re creating, you know, to improve the financial picture for Agilon Health, we’ve executed on all of these levers. Because we’re in a long cycle business, the fruits of that work don’t show up until later.

I’ve kind of walked through the macro 2026. I do think we have net tailwinds from a macro perspective and that in combination with all the actions that we’ve done in 2025 and late 2024, I think we’re going to see a meaningful step up in profitability and maybe, you.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Know, 30 more seconds left and it’s all good on the timing. Just to say that that’s 26 as you look at 27. No, no more V28. Presumably, to your point, long cycle business, we’ll see where payers end up on where the pricing goes. My notion would be, I don’t think things are going to get really aggressive again. If I had to make an early guess, looking at the longer term MA environment overall, still something you guys feel good about and sort of easier to get through with that position.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Yeah. Certainly. I think, listen, we are looking for meaningful progression in profitability year over year from 2025 to 2026 and 2026 to 2027. I think you’re right. Ultimately, the government has to recognize the underlying cost trends in the Medicare business. I think the rates that we have for 2026 is probably that first step.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Awesome. That’s time. Jeff, thanks so much. Really appreciate having you here and hope everyone got a lot out of the meeting.

Jeff Schwaneke, CFO, agilon health: Thank you.

Jack Slevin, Vice President and Healthcare Services Research Analyst, Jefferies: Appreciate it.

This article was generated with the support of AI and reviewed by an editor. For more information see our T&C.