UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(513) 579-2121

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “smaller reporting“emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. 

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the Registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $7.64$8.40 billion.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the Registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 88,425,97289,312,398 shares (excluding 14.9 million shares owned by subsidiaries) as of February 1, 2018.2019.

Documents Incorporated by Reference:

Proxy Statement for 20182019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (portions of which are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof).

PART I

Business

Introduction

General

Property and Casualty Results

Property and Casualty Insurance Products

Premium Distribution

Reinsurance

Also in January 2018,2019, AFG’s property and casualty insurance subsidiaries renewed their catastrophe reinsurance coverages. For AFG’s U.S. based operations, the Company continued to place $85 million of coverage in excess of a $15 million per event primary retention in the traditional reinsurance markets but as part of the placement, eliminated its 5% participation from previous treaty years.markets. Neon placed $200$225 million of coverage in excess of a $15$25 million per event primary retention (extending to $225 million for U.S. risks only) with a 7.5% participation.retention. For the catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage, recoveries from NCM Re and Neon’s property insurance quota share apply before calculating losses recoverable from the catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance treaty. In addition to Neon’s catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage, Neon has placed a quota share treaty which covers 12.5%12.8% of Neon’s gross property losses with a $400$510 million event limit (maximum $50$65 million recoverable) which supplements its catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance coverage and property quota share coverages up to the event limit.limit; recoveries from this quota share treaty also apply before calculating losses recoverable from the catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance treaty.

An in-depth internal review of AFG’s A&E reserves was completed in the table below.third quarter of 2018 by AFG’s internal A&E claims specialists in consultation with specialty outside counsel and an outside consultant. As a result of the 2017 comprehensive external study, AFGreview, AFG’s property and casualty insurance segment recorded an $89$18 million pretax special charge in the third quarter of 2017 to increase the property and casualty group’sits asbestos reserves by $53$6 million (net of reinsurance) and its environmental reserves by $36$12 million (net of reinsurance). Over the past few years, the focus of AFG’s asbestos claims litigation has shifted to smaller companies and companies with ancillary exposures. AFG’s insureds with these exposures have been the driver of the property and casualty segment’s asbestos reserve increases in recent years. AFG is seeing modestly increasing estimates for indemnity and defense compared to prior studies. Overall, the rate of new asbestos cases received is down modestly however, increasing life expectancies in the U.S. have allowed more time for the impacts of asbestos exposure to emerge. AFG’s comprehensive external study incorporated, among other factors, the increase in projected industry ultimate losses attributable to asbestos exposures, as well as revised estimates for future claims emergence, which resulted in an increase in AFG’s provision for future asbestosstudies on certain specific open claims.

The increase in property and casualty environmental reserves in 20172018 (as well as in 2016, discussed below)2017 and 2016) was primarily associated with updated estimates of site investigation and remedial costs with respect to existing sites and newly identified sites. AFG is seeing increasedhas updated its view of legal defense costs inon open environmental claims generally, as well as a number of claims and sites where the estimated investigation and remediation costs have increased. Certain individual claims are taking a longer time to settle than originally estimated, causing AFG to increase its reserves to reflect related increased costs. As in recent past years, there were no new or emerging broad industry trends that were identified in this study. review.

Marketing

Competition

Annuity Segment

The profitability of a fixed annuity business is largely dependent on the ability of a company to earn income on the assets supporting the business in excess of the amounts credited to policyholder accounts plus expenses incurred (earning a “spread”). Performance measures such as net spread earned are often presented by annuity businesses to help users of their financial statements better understand the company’s performance. The following table shows the earnings before income taxes, as well as the net spread earned on fixed annuities, for the annuity segment both before and after the impact of fair value accounting for derivatives related to fixed-indexed (including variable-indexed) annuities (“FIAs”) (dollars in millions):

Marketing

In the education market, schools may allow employees to save for retirement through contributions made on a before-tax basis. Federal income taxes are not payable on pretax contributions or earnings until amounts are withdrawn. AFG sells its education market annuities directly through writing agents rather than through NMOsregional and MGAs.national agencies.

Competition

Investment Portfolio

General

Disclosure of Certain Activities Under Section 13(r) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

ITEM 1A

Risk Factors

Worldwide financial markets have, from time to time, experienced significant and unpredictable disruption. For example, during the financial crisis that started approximately ten years ago, the United States and many other economies experienced aA prolonged economic downturn resultingwould result in heightened credit risk, reduced valuation of certain investments and decreased economic activity. Financial markets may again experience significant and prolonged disruption, including disruption from unanticipated events. In the years following the financial crisis, the federal government has taken steps to stabilize financial markets, but such steps may not be effective.

Changes in financial markets including fluctuations in interest rates, credit conditions, equity prices and many other factors that are unpredictable and beyond AFG’s control can adversely affect the value of investments and the realization of investment income.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, approximately 84%87% of AFG’s investment portfolio holdings consisted of fixed maturity investments that are sensitive to changes in interest rates. A decline in interest rates may reduce the returns earned on new and floating-rate

fixed maturity investments, thereby reducing AFG’s net investment income, while an increase in interest rates may reduce the value of AFG’s existing fixed maturity investments, which primarily have fixed interest rates. The value of AFG’s fixed maturity investments is also subject to credit risk thatas certain investments may default or become impaired due to deterioration in the financial condition of issuers of those investments. If a decline in the fair value of a specific investment (below its amortized cost) is considered to be other-than-temporary, a provision for impairment would be charged to earnings.

InterestDespite modest increases in the past year, long-term interest rates have remained at historical lows for an extended period. In addition, central banks in some countries have recently pursued largely unprecedented negative interest rate policies in recent years, the consequences of which are uncertain. The continuation of the current low interest rate environment or a deflationary environment with negative interest rates could affect business behavior in ways that are adverse to AFG and could constrict AFG’s net investment income.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, mortgage-backed securities constituted approximately 11%9% of AFG’s fixed maturity portfolio. In addition to the risks applicable to the entire fixed maturity investment portfolio, changes in interest rates can expose AFG to prepayment risks on mortgage-backed securities. In periods of declining interest rates, mortgage prepayments generally increase and mortgage-backed securities are paid down more quickly, requiring AFG to reinvest the proceeds at the then current market rates, which may be lower than on the securities repaid.

The profitability of AFG’s annuity segment is largely dependent on the spread between what it earns on its investments and the crediting rate it pays on its annuity contracts plus expenses incurred.

Both rising and declining interest rates can negatively affect the Company’sAFG’s annuity results. Most of AFG’s annuity products have guaranteed minimum crediting rates. Although AFG could reduce the average crediting rate on a substantial portion of its traditional fixed and fixed-indexed deferred annuities during periods of low or falling interest rates, AFG may not be able to fully offset the decline in investment earnings with lower crediting rates.

During periods of rising interest rates, the CompanyAFG may experience competitive pressure to increase crediting rates to avoid a decline in sales or increased surrenders, thus resulting in lower spreads. In addition, an increase in surrenders could require the sale of investments at a time when the prices of those assets are lower due to the increase in market rates, which may result in realized investment losses.

The property and casualty insurance segment operates in a highly competitive industry that is affected by many factors that can cause significant fluctuations in its results of operations. The lines of business in this segment compete with other individual insurers, state funds and insurance groups of varying sizes, some of which are mutual insurance companies possessing competitive advantages in that all their profits inure to their policyholders. In addition, certain foreign insurers may be taxed at lower rates, which may result in a competitive advantage over AFG. The property and casualty insurance segment also competes with self-insurance plans, captive programs and risk retention groups. Competition is based on many factors, including service to policyholders and agents, product design, reputation for claims handling, price, commissions, ratings and financial strength. Peer companies and competitors in some or all of AFG’s specialty lines include the following companies and/or their subsidiaries: Alleghany Corp., American International Group Inc., American National Insurance Company, AmTrust Financial Services, Inc., Arch Capital Group Ltd., Baldwin & Lyons, Inc., Chubb Ltd., Cincinnati Financial Corp., CNA Financial Corp., Fairfax Financial Holdings Ltd. (Zenith National), The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., Lancer Insurance Company, Liberty Mutual, Markel Corp., Munich Re Group (American Modern Insurance), Protective Insurance Company, RLI Corp., The Travelers Companies, Inc., Tokio Marine Holdings, Inc. (HCC Insurance, Philadelphia Consolidated), W.R. Berkley Corp., XLAXA (XL Group Ltd.) and Zurich Insurance Group Ltd.

AFG’s annuity segment competes with individual insurers and insurance groups, mutual funds and other financial institutions. In addition, in recent years, offshore and/or hedge fund companies have made significant acquisitions of annuity businesses. Competition is based on numerous factors including reputation, product design, interest crediting rates, performance, scope of distribution, price and perceived financial strength and credit ratings. Peer companies and competitors for AFG’s annuity segment include the following companies and/or their subsidiaries: Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America, American Equity Investment Life Holding Company (Eagle Life Insurance Company), American International Group Inc., Athene Holding Ltd, Global Atlantic Financial Group Ltd. (Forethought Life Insurance Company), Lincoln National Corp., MetLife, Inc., Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, Pacific Life Insurance Company, Sumitomo Life Insurance Company (Symetra Financial Corp.) and Voya Financial, Inc.

Some of AFG’s competitors have more capital and greater resources than AFG, and may offer a broader range of products and lower prices than AFG offers. If competition limits AFG’s ability to write new or renewal business at adequate rates, its results of operations will be adversely affected.

Annuity premiums generated through financial institutions represented 54%42% of AFG’s annuity premiums in 2017 and have been a key driver in the growth of AFG’s annuity business.2018. In 2017,2018, two large financial institutions accounted for 32%34% of AFG’s total sales through financial institutions and 17%14% of AFG’s overall annuity sales. In the financial institutions annuity market, AFG competes directly against competitors’ annuities, certificates of deposit and other investment alternatives at the point of sale. Loss of a substantial portion of this business coupled with a failure to replace these financial institutions if they significantly reduce sales of AFG annuities could reduce AFG’s future growth.

AFG’s reliance on the independent agency market makes it vulnerable to a reduction in the amount of business written by agents. Many of AFG’s competitors also rely significantly on the independent agency market. Accordingly, AFG must compete with other insurance carriers for independent agents’ business. Some of itsAFG’s competitors offer a wider variety of products, lower priceprices for insurance coverage or higher commissions. A reduction in the number of independent agencies marketing AFG’s products, the failure of agencies to successfully market AFG’s products, changes in the strategy or operations of agencies (including agency consolidation) or the choice of agencies to reduce their writings of AFG products could adversely affect AFG’s revenues and profitability.

AFG purchases reinsurance to limit the amount of risk it retains. Market conditions determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance protection AFG purchases, which affects the level of AFG’s business and profitability, as well as the level and types of risk AFG retains. If AFG is unable to obtain sufficient reinsurance at a cost AFG deems acceptable, AFG may opt to reduce the volume of its underwriting. AFG is also subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers, as AFG will remain liable to its insureds regardless of whether a reinsurer is able to meet its obligations under agreements covering the reinsurance ceded. The collectability of recoverables from reinsurers is subject to uncertainty arising from a number of factors, including a reinsurers’ financial capacity and willingness to make payments under the terms of a reinsurance treaty or contract and changes in market conditions. As of December 31, 2017,2018, AFG has $3.35 billion of recoverables from reinsurances reportedreinsurers on AFG’s Balance Sheet were approximately $3.37 billion.its balance sheet.

AFG is subject to comprehensive regulation by government agencies in the states and countries where its insurance company subsidiaries are domiciled and where these subsidiaries issue policies and handle claims. In addition, the Lloyd’s marketplace sets rules under which its members operate, including Neon (AFG’s Lloyd’s syndicate). Most insurance regulations are designed to protect the interests of AFG’s policyholders and third party claimants as opposed to its investors.

The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in June 2010, mandates changes to the regulation of the financial services industry. Implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act is ongoing. The potential impacts of the Act on the U.S. insurance industry are not clear, but may affect AFG’s operations and governance in ways that could adversely affect AFG’s financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in domestic or foreign tax laws or interpretations of such laws could increase AFG’s corporate taxes and reduce earnings. OnFor example, on December 22, 2017, the U.S. enacted The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“TCJA”), which significantly reformsreformed the U.S. tax code. AFG’s deferred tax assets and liabilities have been revalued as of December 31, 2017 to reflect the newly enacted corporate tax rate. The U.S. Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service are expected to issue implementation guidance for the TCJA in 2018. Clarifications and interpretations of the TCJA may adversely affect our expected effective tax rate and the realization of deferred taxes.

As a participant in the federal crop insurance program, AFG could also be impacted by regulatory and legislative changes affecting that program. For example, the reinsurance levels that the federal government provides to authorized carriers could be reduced by future legislation. AFG will continue to monitor new and changing federal regulations and their potential impact, if any, on its insurance company subsidiaries.

On April 6, 2016,18, 2018, the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”)Securities and Exchange Commission released a final regulation that substantially expands the rangepackage of activities that will be considered fiduciary advice under the Employee Retirement Income Security Actregulatory proposals to enhance standards of 1974 and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. The regulation’s scheduled effective date was April 10, 2017. This regulation deems advisers, includingconduct owed by broker-dealers to their clients known as Regulation Best Interest. If adopted as proposed,

insurance agents, who sell annuitiesRegulation Best Interest would heighten the standards that registered representatives need to IRAs, IRA rollovers or 401(k) plansmeet when making a recommendation by requiring them to be fiduciariesact in the best interest of the retail customer at the time of the recommendation. Regulation Best Interest would require a registered representative to (i) disclose to the customer the material facts relating to scope and prohibits them from receiving compensation unless they comply withterms of the relationship, (ii) exercise reasonable diligence, care, skill and prudence in recommending a prohibited transaction exemption requiring, among other things, advisers to comply with impartial conduct standards of actingproduct that is in the customer’s best interest, making no misleading statements and receiving reasonable compensation. On February 3, 2017, President Trump issued(iii) eliminate or, at a presidential memorandum directing the DOL to examine the regulation, and on April 4, 2017, the DOL announced “the delay rule” that deferred the effective dateminimum, disclose, material conflicts of the regulation until June 9, 2017, as it continued its examination as mandated by the President’s executive order. The rule further delayed certain requirements associated with prohibited transaction exemptions, other than the impartial conduct standards, under the final regulation until January 1, 2018. On November 29, 2017, the DOL extended this transition period another 18 months. As a result, insurance agents can continue selling fixed-indexed annuities through July 1, 2019, provided the agent complies with the impartial conduct standards. Regardless, during this transition period, the increased regulatory burdens and compensation changes required of agents to comply with the prohibited transaction exemptions may negatively impact AFG’s business, results of operations or financial condition. If the final regulation is fully implemented on July 1, 2019, compliance with the prohibited transaction exemptions will likely result in additional regulatory burdens, changes to AFG’s product offerings and increased litigation risk, which could negatively impact AFG’s business, results of operations or financial condition. Management cannot currently predict the effect on AFG’s business if the DOL’s examination mandated by the President results in the proposal of significant changes to the final regulation (or a further delay of the July 1, 2019 implementation date).interests.

Existing insurance-related laws and regulations may become more restrictive in the future or new restrictive laws may be enacted; it is not possible to predict the potential effects of these laws and regulations. The costs of compliance or the failure to comply with existing or future regulations could impose significant burdens on the Company.AFG.

Financial strength ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies and may have an effect on an insurance company’s sales. A downgrade out of the “A” category in AFG’s insurers’ claims-paying and financial strength ratings could significantly reduce AFG’s business volumes in certain lines of business, adversely impact AFG’s ability to access the capital markets and increase AFG’s borrowing costs.

In addition to the financial strength ratings of AFG’s principal insurance company subsidiaries, various rating agencies also publish credit ratings for AFG. Credit ratings are indicators of a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner, are part of AFG’s overall financial profile and affect AFG’s ability to access certain types of capital. A downgrade in AFG’s credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on AFG’s financial condition and results of operations and cash flows in a number of ways, including adversely limiting access to capital markets, potentially increasing the cost of debt or increasing borrowing costs under AFG’s current revolving credit facility.

The occurrence of one or more terrorist attacks could cause significant losses from insurance claims that could adversely affect AFG’s profitability. Private sector catastrophe reinsurance is limited and generally unavailable for terrorism losses caused by attacks with nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological weapons. Reinsurance coverage from the federal government under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“TRIPRA”) is also limited. Although TRIPRA provides benefits for certified acts of terrorism that exceed a certain threshold of industry losses ($140160 million in 2017,2018, increasing by $20 million annually to $200 million by 2020), those benefits are subject to a deductible and other limitations. In 2018,2019, AFG would have to sustain losses from terrorism of over $670nearly $700 million to be eligible for reinsurance under the program. In addition, because the interpretation of this law is untested, there is substantial uncertainty as to how it will be applied to specific circumstances. Finally, the program currently expires at the end of 2020, and the elimination or modification of the program, or a failure to extend the program, could adversely affect AFG’s property and casualty insurance business through increased exposure to a catastrophic level of terrorism losses.

AFG uses computer systems and services to store, retrieve, evaluate and utilize company and customer data and information. Systems failures or outages could compromise AFG’s ability to perform business functions in a timely manner, which could harm its ability to conduct business and hurt its relationships with business partners and customers. In the event of a disaster such as a natural catastrophe, an industrial accident, a blackout, a computer virus,malicious software, a terrorist attack or war, AFG’s systems may

AFG’s computer systems are vulnerable to security breaches due to the sophistication of cyber-attacks, viruses, malware, hackers and other external hazards, as well as inadvertent errors, equipment and system failures, and employee misconduct. In addition, over time, and particularly recently, the sophistication of these threats continues to increase. AFG’s administrative and technical controls as well as other preventative actions used to reduce the risk of cyber incidents and protect AFG’s information may be insufficient to detect or prevent unauthorized access, other physical and electronic break-ins, cyber-attacks or other security breaches to AFG’s computer systems or those of third parties with whom AFG does business.

AFG has increasingly outsourced certain technology and business process functions to third parties and may continue to do so in the future. Outsourcing of certain technology and business process functions to third parties may expose AFG to increased risk related to data security or service disruptions. If AFG does not effectively develop, implement and monitor these relationships, third party providers do not perform as anticipated, technological or other problems are incurred with a transition, or outsourcing relationships relevant to AFG’s business process functions are terminated, AFG may not realize expected productivity improvements or cost efficiencies and may experience operational difficulties, increased costs and a loss of business.

The increased risks identified above could expose AFG to data loss, disruption of service, monetary and reputational damages, competitive disadvantage and significant increases in compliance costs and costs to improve the security and resiliency of AFG’s computer systems. The compromise of personal, confidential or proprietary information could also subject AFG to legal liability or regulatory action under evolving cyber-security, data protection and privacy laws and regulations enacted by the U.S. federal and state governments, Canada, the European Union (the “EU”) or other jurisdictions or by various regulatory organizations or exchanges. As a result, AFG’s ability to conduct business and its results of operations might be materially and adversely affected.

AFG receives and is required to protect certain confidentialof its third-party vendors collect and store sensitive data in the ordinary course of AFG’s business, including personal identification information fromof its employees and that of its customers, vendors, investors and other third parties that may include financial information and, inparties. In connection with AFG’s property and casualty insurance operations, data may include medical information. In addition, AFG and certain of its third-party vendors receive and store personal information in connection with AFG’s human resources operations and other aspects of AFG’s business. AFG is subject to numerous federal, state and international laws regarding the privacy and security of personal information, which laws vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. If any disruption or security breach results in a loss or damage to AFG’s data, or inappropriate disclosure of AFG’s confidential information or that of others, it could damage AFG’s reputation, affect its relationships with customers and clients, lead to claims against AFG, result in regulatory action and harm AFG’s business. In addition, AFG may be required to incur significant costs to mitigate the damage caused by any security breach or to protect against future damage.

Liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses do not represent an exact calculation of liability but instead represent management estimates of what the ultimate settlement and administration of claims will cost, supported by actuarial expertise and projection techniques, at a given accounting date. The process of estimating unpaid losses and loss adjustment expense reserves involves a high degree of judgment and is subject to a number of variables. These variables can be affected by both internal and external events, such as: changes in claims handling procedures, adverse changes in loss cost trends (including inflationary pressures on medical costs), economic conditions (including general inflation), legal trends and legislative changes, and varying judgments and viewpoints of the individuals involved in the estimation process, among others. The impact of many of these items on ultimate costs for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses is difficult to estimate. Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expense reserve estimation difficulties also differ significantly by product line due to differences in claim complexity, the volume of claims, the potential severity of individual claims, the determination of an occurrence date for a claim and lags in the time between damage, loss or injury and when a claim is actually reported to the insurer. In addition, the historic development of AFG’s liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses may not necessarily reflect future trends in the development of these amounts. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to extrapolate future redundancies or deficiencies based on historical information. To the extent that reserves are inadequate and are strengthened, AFG’s profitability would be adversely affected because the amount of any such increase would be treated as a charge to earnings in the period in which the deficiency is recognized.

Catastrophes can be caused by unpredictable natural events such as hurricanes, windstorms, severe storms, tornadoes, floods, hailstorms, severe winter weather, earthquakes, explosions and fire, and by man-made events, such as terrorist attacks. While not considered a catastrophe by insurance industry standards, droughts can have a significant adverse impact on AFG’s crop insurance results. In addition, extreme weather events that are linked to rising temperatures, changing global weather patterns and fluctuating rain, snow and sea levels could result in increased occurrence and severity of catastrophes. The extent of gross losses from a catastrophe event is a function of both the total amount of insured exposure in the area affected by the event and the severity of the event, potentially mitigated by any reinsurance coverage purchased by AFG’s insurance subsidiaries. In

addition, certain catastrophes could result in both property and non-property claims from the same event. A severe catastrophe or a series of catastrophes could result in losses exceeding AFG’s reinsurance protection and may have a material adverse impact on its results of operations or financial condition.

Weather conditions, including too much moisture (flooding or excessive rain) or not enough moisture (droughts), and the level of crop prices in the commodities market heavily impact AFG’s crop insurance business. These factors are inherently unpredictable and could result in significant volatility in the results of the crop insurance business from one year to the next. AFG’s crop results could also be negatively impacted by pests and plant disease. A large decline in the commodity prices of one or more of the major crops that AFG insures could have a material adverse effect on AFG’s results of operations or financial condition.

AFG’s international operations expose AFG to a number of additional risks. These risks include restrictions such as price controls, capital controls, currency exchange limits, ownership limits and other restrictive or anti-competitive governmental actions or requirements, which could have an adverse effect on AFG’s business and reputation. AFG’s business activities outside the United States may also be subject to political and economic risks, including foreign currency and credit risk.

AFG’s business activities outside the United States subject AFG to additional domestic and foreign laws and regulations, including the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the UK Bribery Act and similar laws in other countries that prohibit the making of improper payments to foreign officials. Although AFG has policies and controls in place that are designed to ensure compliance with these laws, if those controls are ineffective and an employee or intermediary fails to comply with applicable laws and regulations, AFG could suffer civil and criminal penalties and AFG’s business and reputation could be adversely affected. Some countries have laws and regulations that lack clarity and, even with local expertise and effective controls, it can be difficult to determine the exact requirements of, and potential liability under, the local laws. Failure to comply with local laws in a particular market may result in substantial liability and could have a significant and negative effect not only on AFG’s business in that market but also on AFG’s reputation generally.

AFG has asbestos and environmental (“A&E”) exposures arising from its insurance operations and former railroad and manufacturing operations. Uncertainties surrounding the final resolution of these asbestos and environmental liabilities continue, and it is difficult to estimate AFG’s ultimate exposure to such liabilities and related litigation. Establishing A&E liabilities is subject to uncertainties that are significantly greater than those presented by other types of liabilities. Uncertainties include the long delays between exposure and manifestation of any bodily injury or property damage, difficulty in identifying the source of the asbestos or environmental contamination, long reporting delays, the risks inherent in complex litigation and difficulty in properly allocating liability for the asbestos or environmental damage. As a result, A&E liabilities are subject to revision as new information becomes available and as claims are made and develop. Claimants continue to assert new and novel theories of recovery, and from time to time, there is proposed state and federal legislation regarding A&E liability, which would also affect AFG’s exposure. If AFG has not established adequate reserves to cover future claims, AFG’s results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

The earnings on AFG’s annuity products depend significantly upon the extent to which actual experience is consistent with the assumptions used in setting reserves and establishing and amortizing deferred policy acquisition costs (“DPAC”).costs. These assumptions relate to investment yields (and spreads over fixed annuity crediting rates), benefit utilization rates, equity market performance, the cost of call options used in the fixed-indexed (including variable-indexed) annuity business, mortality, surrenders, annuitizations and other withdrawals. Developing such assumptions is complex and involves information obtained from company-specific and industry-wide data, as well as general economic information. These assumptions, and therefore AFG’s results of operations, could be negatively impacted by changes in any of the factors listed above.

As a U.S.-based SEC registrant, AFG prepares its financial statements in accordance with GAAP, as promulgated by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, subject to the accounting-related rules and interpretations of the SEC. Changes in accounting standards, particularly those that specifically apply to insurance company operations, may impact AFG’s reported financial results and could cause increased volatility in reported earnings, resulting in other adverse impacts on AFG’s ratings and cost of capital, and decrease the understandability of AFG’s financial results as well as the comparability of AFG’s reported results with other insurers.

AFG is a holding company and a legal entity separate and distinct from its insurance company subsidiaries. As a holding company without significant operations of its own, AFG’s principal sources of funds are dividends and other distributions from its insurance company subsidiaries. State insurance laws differ from state to state but, absent advance regulatory approval, restrict the maximum amount of dividends that may be paid by an insurer to its shareholders in any twelve-month period. AFG’s rights to participate in any distribution of assets of its insurance company subsidiaries are subject to prior claims of policyholders and creditors (except to the extent that its rights, if any, as a creditor are recognized). Consequently, AFG’s ability to pay its debts, expenses and dividends to its shareholders may be limited.

Financial markets in the U.S. and elsewhere can experience extreme volatility, which exerts downward pressure on stock prices and limits access to the equity and debt markets for certain issuers, including AFG. AFG can borrow up to $500 million under

its revolving credit facility, which expires in June 2021. In addition, AFG’s access to funds through this facility is dependent on the ability of its banks to meet their funding commitments. There were no borrowings outstanding under AFG’s bank credit line or any other parent company short-term borrowing arrangements during 2017.2018. If AFG cannot obtain adequate capital or sources of credit on favorable terms, or at all, its business, operating results and financial condition would be adversely affected.

AFG, primarily in its property and casualty insurance operations and historical operations, is involved in litigation. Litigation by nature is unpredictable, and the outcome of any case is uncertain and could result in liabilities that vary from the amounts AFG has currently recorded. Pervasive or significant changes in the judicial environment relating to matters such as trends in the size of jury awards, developments in the law relating to the liability of insurers or tort defendants, and rulings concerning the availability or amount of certain types of damages could cause AFG’s ultimate liabilities to change from current expectations. Changes in federal or state tort litigation laws or other applicable law could have a similar effect. It is not possible to predict changes in the judicial and legislative environment, including in connection with asbestos and environmental claims. AFG’s business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity could also be adversely affected if judicial or legislative developments cause AFG’s ultimate liabilities to increase from current expectations.

Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner are each Co-Chief Executive Officers and Directors of AFG. Together, Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner beneficially own 12.1%10.9% of AFG’s outstanding Common Stock as of February 1, 2018.2019. Other members of the Lindner family own, directly or through trusts, a significant number of additional shares of AFG Common Stock. As a result, the Lindner family has the ability to exercise significant influence over AFG’s management, including over matters requiring shareholder approval. Such concentrated ownership could prevent an acquisition of AFG at a price which other shareholders may find attractive.

The price of AFG’s Common Stock, which is listed on the NYSE, constantly changes. During 2017,2018, AFG’s Common Stock traded at prices ranging between $85.57$84.18 and $109.41.$121.69. AFG’s Common Stock price can fluctuate as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond its control. These factors include but are not limited to:

ITEM 2

PART II

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

ITEM 6

Exchange Commission rules, some investors and lenders may not consider interest credited to annuity policyholders’ accounts a borrowing cost for an insurance company, and accordingly, believe this ratio is meaningful.

(d)	Net unrealized gains related to fixed maturities, which includes net unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, is part of accumulated other comprehensive income and is shown net of related adjustments to deferred policy acquisition costs and certain liabilities in the annuity, long-term care and life businesses.

(e)

Adjusted shareholders’ equity and adjusted book value per share exclude appropriated retained earnings and net unrealized gains related to fixed maturity securities. Management believes that investors find a measurement of shareholders’ equity excluding these items to be meaningful as (i) the unrealized gains related to fixed maturities fluctuates with changes in interest rates in a way that is primarily only meaningful to AFG if it sells those investments and (ii) appropriated retained earnings representsrepresented amounts that will ultimately inure to the debt holders of the collateralized loan obligations managed by AFG (see Note A — “Accounting Policies — Managed Investment Entities” to the financial statements). as reported under accounting guidance that was no longer applicable beginning in 2016.

GENERAL

OVERVIEW

Financial Condition

Results of Operations

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

Condensed Consolidated Cash Flows   AFG’s principal sources of cash include insurance premiums, income from its investment portfolio and proceeds from the maturities, redemptions and sales of investments. Insurance premiums in excess of acquisition expenses and operating costs are invested until they are needed to meet policyholder obligations or made available to the parent company through dividends to cover debt obligations and corporate expenses, and to provide returns to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends. Cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities as detailed in AFG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows are shown below (in millions):