Root (ROOT) Risk Analysis

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our Class A common stock in the public market, or the perception that these sales might occur, could depress the market price of our Class A common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We are unable to predict the timing of or the effect that such sales may have on the prevailing market price of our Class A common stock.

Our stockholders may from time to time engage in proxy solicitations, advance stockholder proposals or otherwise attempt to effect changes or acquire control over our company. Campaigns by stockholders to effect changes at publicly traded companies are sometimes led by investors seeking to increase short-term stockholder value through actions such as financial restructuring, increased debt, special dividends, stock repurchases or sales of assets or the entire company. Responding to proxy contests and other actions by activist stockholders can be costly and time-consuming and could divert the attention of our board of directors and senior management from the management of our operations and the pursuit of our business strategies. As a result, stockholder campaigns could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or, if and only if the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware lacks subject matter jurisdiction, any state court located within the State of Delaware or, if and only if all such state courts lack subject matter jurisdiction, the federal district court for the District of Delaware) is the exclusive forum for the following claims or causes of action under Delaware statutory or common law: - any derivative claim or cause of action brought on our behalf;- any claim or cause of action for breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders;- any claim or cause of action against us or any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees, arising out of or pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws;- any claim or cause of action seeking to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws;- any action or proceeding as to which the DGCL confers jurisdiction to the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware; and - any claim or cause of action against us or any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees that is governed by the internal-affairs doctrine, in all cases to the fullest extent permitted by law and subject to the court having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants. This provision would not apply to claims or causes of action brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act, or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction, or the Securities Act. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. To prevent having to litigate claims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the federal district courts of the United States will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions. In such instance, we would expect to vigorously assert the validity and enforceability of the exclusive forum provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation. This may require significant additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions and there can be no assurance that the provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions. These exclusive forum provisions may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. If a court were to find an exclusive forum provision in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may encounter additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, which could seriously harm our business.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of us that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. These provisions also could limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Class A common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our Class A common stock. In addition, because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions: - establish a classified board of directors such that not all members of the board are elected at one time;- allow the authorized number of our directors to be changed only by resolution of our board of directors;- limit the manner in which stockholders can remove directors from the board;- establish advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals that can be acted on at stockholder meetings and nominations to our board of directors;- require that stockholder actions must be effected at a duly called stockholder meeting and prohibit actions by our stockholders by written consent;- prohibit our stockholders from calling a special meeting of our stockholders;- authorize our board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to institute a stockholder rights plan, or so-called "poison pill," that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by our board of directors; and - require the approval of the holders of at least 66 2/3% of the votes that all our stockholders would be entitled to cast to amend or repeal certain provisions of our charter or bylaws. Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or DGCL, which prohibits a person who owns 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner. These provisions could discourage potential acquisition proposals and could delay or prevent a change in control transaction. They could also have the effect of discouraging others from making tender offers for our Class A common stock, including transactions that may be in your best interests. These provisions may also prevent changes in our management or limit the price that investors are willing to pay for our stock.

Changing expectations, including from governmental organizations, investors, advisory firms, employees and clients, on environmental, social and governance matters, such as environmental stewardship, climate change, diversity, equity and inclusion, pay equity, racial justice, workplace conduct and cybersecurity and data privacy, may result in increased costs (including but not limited to increased costs related to compliance and stakeholder engagement), impact our reputation, or otherwise affect our business performance. Conflicting environmental, social and governance policies within jurisdictions, such as between federal and some state policies in the United States, is leading to a complex and fragmented regulatory environment, which may be difficult to navigate, and we may not effectively anticipate or respond to regulatory changes. Negative public perception, adverse publicity or negative comments in social media, whether accurate or inaccurate, could damage our reputation or harm our relationships with regulators, investors and the communities in which we operate, if we do not, or are not perceived to, adequately address these issues, including if we fail to demonstrate progress towards any current or future environmental, social and governance goals. Any harm to our reputation could negatively impact employee engagement and retention and the willingness of customers to do business with us. We could also incur additional costs and require additional resources to monitor, report, and comply with various environmental, social and governance practices. In addition, a variety of organizations have developed ratings to measure the performance of companies on environmental, social and governance topics, and the results of some of these assessments are widely publicized. Such ratings are used by certain investors to inform their investment and voting decisions. In addition, many investors have created their own proprietary ratings that inform their investment and voting decisions. Unfavorable ratings of the Company or our industry, as well as omission of inclusion of our stock into environmental, social and governance-oriented investment funds may lead to negative investor sentiment and the diversion of investment to other companies or industries, which could have a negative impact on our stock price and our access to and cost of capital.

Under applicable state insurance laws and regulations, no person may acquire "control" of an insurer until written approval is obtained from the state insurance commissioner. Applicable law provides for a rebuttable presumption of "control" by any person which owns or acquires, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting stock of the insurance company, and a person must seek regulatory approval from the superintendent of the supervisory DOI prior to acquiring direct or indirect "control" of an insurer by filing a Form A Statement Regarding the Acquisition of Control of or Merger with a Domestic Insurer, or Form A. As part of this Form A, the entity acquiring control (as well as any controlling shareholders of such entity) will need to submit, along with other documents and disclosures, its financial statements, organizational charts and biographical affidavits for any officers, directors and controlling shareholders of each applicable entity. Would-be acquirers may find these requirements burdensome, which could deter potential acquisition proposals and may serve to delay or prevent change of control transactions, including transactions that some or all of the stockholders might consider to be desirable. These requirements may also inhibit our ability to acquire an insurance company should we wish to do so in the future.

Our Class B common stock has ten votes per share and our Class A common stock has one vote per share. As of February 18, 2026, holders of our Class B common stock collectively beneficially own shares representing approximately 55.4% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock. Our directors and executive officers and their affiliates collectively beneficially own, in the aggregate, shares representing approximately 34.3% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock. As a result, the holders of our Class B common stock are able to exercise considerable influence over matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions, such as a merger or other sale of our company or our assets, even if their stock holdings represent less than 50% of the outstanding shares of our capital stock. This concentration of ownership limits the ability of other stockholders to influence corporate matters and may cause us to make strategic decisions that could involve risks to you or that may not be aligned with your interests. This control may adversely affect the market price of our Class A common stock. Further, future transfers by holders of our Class B common stock will generally result in those shares converting into shares of our Class A common stock, subject to limited exceptions, such as certain transfers effected for tax or estate planning purposes. The conversion of shares of our Class B common stock into shares of our Class A common stock will have the effect, over time, of increasing the relative voting power of those holders of Class B common stock, including our directors and executive officers and their affiliates, who retain their shares in the long term.