DONEGAL GROUP INC - Annual Report: 2016 (Form 10-K)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission file number 0-15341

DONEGAL GROUP INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:

(800) 877-0600

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act:    Yes  ☐.    No  ☒.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act.    Yes  ☐.    No  ☒.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ☒.    No  ☐.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ☒.    No  ☐.

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements we incorporate by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” or “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company.    Yes  ☐.    No  ☒.

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. $181,795,992.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 21,545,628 shares of Class A common stock and 5,576,775 shares of Class B common stock outstanding on March 3, 2017.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

The registrant incorporates by reference portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement relating to registrant’s annual meeting of stockholders to be held April 20, 2017 into Part III of this report.

Table of Contents

DONEGAL GROUP INC.

INDEX TO FORM 10-K REPORT

(i)

Table of Contents

PART I

Introduction

Donegal Group Inc., or DGI, is an insurance holding company whose insurance subsidiaries offer personal and commercial lines of property and casualty insurance to businesses and individuals in 21 Mid-Atlantic, Midwestern, New England and Southern states. As used in this Form 10-K Report, the terms “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Donegal Group Inc. and its subsidiaries.

Donegal Mutual Insurance Company, or Donegal Mutual, organized us as an insurance holding company on August 26, 1986. At December 31, 2016, Donegal Mutual held approximately 46% of our outstanding Class A common stock and approximately 83% of our outstanding Class B common stock. Donegal Mutual’s ownership provides Donegal Mutual with approximately 73% of the combined voting power of our outstanding shares of Class A common stock and our outstanding shares of Class B common stock. Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual have interrelated operations due to an intercompany pooling agreement and other intercompany agreements and transactions we describe in Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. While maintaining the separate corporate existence of each company, our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual conduct business together as the Donegal Insurance Group. As such, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries share the same business philosophy, the same management, the same employees and the same facilities and offer the same types of insurance products.

We have been an effective consolidator of smaller “main street” property and casualty insurance companies, and we expect to pursue opportunities to acquire other insurance companies to expand our business in a given region or to commence operations in a new region. Since 1995, we have completed six acquisitions of property and casualty insurance companies or began to participate in their business through Donegal Mutual’s entry into quota-share reinsurance agreements with them.

Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual provide their policyholders with a selection of insurance products at competitive rates, while pursuing profitability by adhering to a strict underwriting discipline. Our insurance subsidiaries derive a substantial portion of their insurance business from smaller to mid-sized regional communities. We believe this focus provides our insurance subsidiaries with competitive advantages in terms of local market knowledge, marketing, underwriting, claims servicing and policyholder service. At the same time, we believe our insurance subsidiaries have cost advantages over many smaller regional insurers that result from economies of scale our insurance subsidiaries realize through centralized accounting, administrative, data processing, investment and other services.

We believe we have a substantial opportunity, as a well-capitalized regional insurance holding company with a solid business strategy, to grow profitably and compete effectively with national property and casualty insurers. Our downstream holding company structure, with Donegal Mutual holding approximately 73% of the combined voting power of our common stock, has proven its effectiveness and success over the 30 years of our existence. Over that time period, we have grown significantly in terms of revenue and financial strength, and the Donegal Insurance Group has developed an excellent reputation as a regional group of property and casualty insurers.

We own 48.2% of Donegal Financial Services Corporation, or DFSC. DFSC is a grandfathered unitary savings and loan holding company that owns all of the outstanding capital stock of Union Community Bank, a state savings bank, or UCB. UCB has 15 banking offices, substantially all of which are located in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Donegal Mutual owns the remaining 51.8% of DFSC. For further information regarding DFSC, we refer to “Business - Donegal Financial Services Corporation” in this Form 10-K Report.

We have four segments: our investment function, our personal lines of insurance, our commercial lines of insurance and our investment in DFSC. We set forth financial information about these segments in Note 19 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The personal lines products of our insurance subsidiaries consist primarily of homeowners and private passenger automobile policies. The commercial lines products of our insurance subsidiaries consist primarily of commercial automobile, commercial multi-peril and workers’ compensation policies.

1

Table of Contents

Available Information

You may obtain our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, including this Form 10-K Report, our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, our current reports on Form 8-K, our proxy statement and our other filings pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, without charge by viewing our website at www.donegalgroup.com. You may also view on our website our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and the charters of the executive committee, the audit committee, the compensation committee and the nominating committee of our board of directors. Upon request to our corporate secretary, we will also provide printed copies of any of these documents to you without charge. We have provided the address of our website solely for the information of investors. We do not intend the reference to our website address to be an active link or to otherwise incorporate the contents of our website into this Form 10-K Report.

History and Organizational Structure

In the mid-1980’s, Donegal Mutual, as a mutual insurance company, recognized the desirability of developing additional sources of capital and surplus so it could remain competitive and have the surplus to expand its business and ensure its long-term viability. Accordingly, Donegal Mutual determined to implement a downstream holding company structure as one of its business strategies. Thus, in 1986, Donegal Mutual formed us as a downstream holding company. Initially, Donegal Mutual owned all of our outstanding common stock. After Donegal Mutual formed us, we in turn formed Atlantic States as our wholly owned property and casualty insurance company subsidiary.

In connection with the formation of Atlantic States and the establishment of our downstream insurance holding company system, Donegal Mutual and DGI entered into a proportional reinsurance agreement, or pooling agreement, that became effective October 1, 1986. Under the pooling agreement, Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States pool substantially all of their respective premiums, losses and loss expenses to the reinsurance pool, and the reinsurance pool, acting through Donegal Mutual, then cedes a portion of the pooled business, currently 80%, to Atlantic States. Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States share the underwriting results in proportion to their respective participation in the underwriting pool.

Since we established Atlantic States in 1986, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries have conducted business together as the Donegal Insurance Group. As the Donegal Insurance Group, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries share a combined business plan to enhance market penetration and underwriting profitability objectives. We believe Donegal Mutual’s majority interest in the combined voting power of our Class A common stock and of our Class B common stock fosters our ability to implement our business philosophies, enjoy management continuity, maintain superior employee relations and provide a stable environment within which we can grow our businesses.

The products Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries offer are generally complementary, which permits the Donegal Insurance Group to offer a broad range of products in a given market and to expand the Donegal Insurance Group’s ability to service an entire personal lines or commercial lines account. Distinctions within the products Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries offer generally relate to specific risk profiles within similar classes of business, such as preferred tier products versus standard tier products. Donegal Mutual and we do not allocate all of the standard risk gradients to one company. As a result, the underwriting profitability of the business the individual companies write directly will vary. However, the underwriting pool homogenizes the risk characteristics of all business Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States write directly. We receive 80% of the results of the underwriting pool because Atlantic States has an 80% participation in the pool. The business Atlantic States derives from the underwriting pool represents a significant percentage of our total consolidated revenues. However, that percentage has gradually decreased over the past few years as we have acquired a number of other property and casualty insurance companies that do not participate in the underwriting pool.

As the capital of Atlantic States and our other insurance subsidiaries has increased, the underwriting capacity of our insurance subsidiaries has increased proportionately. The size of the underwriting pool has also increased substantially. Therefore, as we originally planned in the mid-1980s, Atlantic States has successfully raised the capital necessary to support the growth of its direct business as well as to accept increases in its allocation of business from the underwriting pool. The portion of the underwriting pool allocated to Atlantic States has increased from an initial allocation of 35% in 1986 to an 80% allocation since March 1, 2008. We do not anticipate any further change in the pooling agreement between Atlantic States and Donegal Mutual, including any change in the percentage participation of Atlantic States in the underwriting pool.

In addition to Atlantic States, our insurance subsidiaries are Southern Insurance Company of Virginia, or Southern, Le Mars Insurance Company, or Le Mars, The Peninsula Insurance Company and its wholly owned subsidiary, Peninsula Indemnity Company, or collectively, Peninsula, Sheboygan Falls Insurance Company, or Sheboygan, and Michigan Insurance Company, or MICO. We also benefit from Donegal Mutual’s 100% quota-share reinsurance agreement with Southern Mutual Insurance Company, or Southern Mutual, and Donegal Mutual’s placement of its assumed business from Southern Mutual into the underwriting pool.

2

Table of Contents

The following chart depicts our organizational structure, including all of our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries, Southern Mutual and our interest in DFSC:

Relationship with Donegal Mutual

Donegal Mutual provides facilities, personnel and other services to us and our insurance subsidiaries. Donegal Mutual allocates certain related expenses to Atlantic States in relation to the relative participation of Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States in the underwriting pool they maintain. Our insurance subsidiaries other than Atlantic States reimburse Donegal Mutual for their respective personnel costs and bear their proportionate share of information services costs based on each subsidiaries’ respective percentage of the total net written premiums of the Donegal Insurance Group. Charges for these services to Atlantic States and our other insurance subsidiaries totaled $122.4 million, $108.5 million and $98.6 million for 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

Our insurance subsidiaries have various reinsurance arrangements with Donegal Mutual. These agreements include:

The purpose of the excess of loss and catastrophe reinsurance agreements is to lessen the effects of a single large loss, or an accumulation of smaller losses arising from one event, to levels that are appropriate given each subsidiary’s size, underwriting profile and amount of surplus.

The purpose of the quota-share reinsurance agreement with Peninsula is to transfer to Donegal Mutual 100% of the premiums and losses related to the workers’ compensation product line of Peninsula in certain states, which provides the availability of an additional workers’ compensation tier for Donegal Mutual’s commercial accounts. Donegal Mutual places its assumed business from Peninsula into the underwriting pool.

The purpose of the quota-share reinsurance agreement with MICO is to transfer to Donegal Mutual 25% of the premiums and losses related to MICO’s business. Donegal Mutual places its assumed business from MICO into the underwriting pool.

3

Table of Contents

We and Donegal Mutual have maintained a coordinating committee since our formation in 1986. The coordinating committee consists of two members of our board of directors, neither of whom is a member of Donegal Mutual’s board of directors, and two members of Donegal Mutual’s board of directors, neither of whom is a member of our board of directors. The purpose of the coordinating committee is to establish and maintain a process for an annual evaluation of the transactions between Donegal Mutual, our insurance subsidiaries and us. The coordinating committee considers the fairness of each intercompany transaction to Donegal Mutual and its policyholders and to us and our stockholders.

A new agreement or any change to a previously approved agreement must receive coordinating committee approval. The approval process for a new agreement between Donegal Mutual and us or one of our insurance subsidiaries or a change in such an agreement is as follows:

The coordinating committee also meets annually to review each existing agreement between Donegal Mutual and us or our insurance subsidiaries, including all reinsurance agreements between Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries. The purpose of this annual review is to examine the results of the agreements over the past year and, in the case of reinsurance agreements, over several years and to determine if the results of the existing agreements remain fair and equitable to us and our stockholders and fair and equitable to Donegal Mutual and its policyholders or if Donegal Mutual and we should mutually agree to certain adjustments to the terms of the agreements. In the case of these reinsurance agreements, the annual adjustments typically relate to the reinsurance premiums, losses and reinstatement premiums. These agreements are ongoing in nature and will continue in effect throughout 2017 in the ordinary course of our business.

Our members on the coordinating committee, as of the date of this Form 10-K Report, are Robert S. Bolinger and Richard D. Wampler, II. Donegal Mutual’s members on the coordinating committee as of such date are Dennis J. Bixenman and John E. Hiestand. We refer to our proxy statement for our annual meeting of stockholders to be held on April 20, 2017 for further information about the members of the coordinating committee.

We believe our relationships with Donegal Mutual offer us and our insurance subsidiaries a number of competitive advantages, including the following:

4

Table of Contents

In the first quarter of 2017, our board of directors and the board of directors of Donegal Mutual each undertook a review of the relationships between Donegal Mutual and DGI and determined that continuing the current relationships and the current corporate structure of Donegal Mutual and DGI is in the best interests of DGI and its various constituencies.

Business Strategy

Our strategy is designed to allow our insurance subsidiaries to achieve their longstanding goal of outperforming the United States property and casualty insurance industry in terms of profitability and service, thereby providing value to the policyholders of our insurance subsidiaries and, ultimately, providing value to our stockholders. The annual net premiums earned of our insurance subsidiaries have increased from $301.5 million in 2006 to $656.2 million in 2016, a compound annual growth rate of 8.1%.

The combined ratio of our insurance subsidiaries and that of the United States property and casualty insurance industry as computed using United States generally accepted accounting principles, or GAAP, and statutory accounting principles, or SAP, for the years 2012 through 2016 are shown in the following table:

We and Donegal Mutual believe we can continue to expand our insurance operations over time through organic growth and acquisitions of, or affiliations with, other insurance companies. We and Donegal Mutual have enhanced the performance of companies we have acquired, while leveraging the acquired companies’ core strengths and local market knowledge to expand their operations. Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual also seek to increase their premium base by making quality independent agency appointments, enhancing their competitive position within each agency, introducing new and enhanced insurance products and developing and maintaining automated systems to improve service, communications and efficiency.

We translate these initiatives into our book value growth in a number of ways, including the following:

A detailed review of our business strategies follows:

Our insurance subsidiaries focus on achieving a combined ratio of less than 100%. We remain committed to achieving consistent underwriting profitability. We believe that underwriting profitability is a fundamental component of our long-term financial strength because it allows our insurance subsidiaries to generate profits without relying exclusively on their investment income. Our insurance subsidiaries seek to enhance their underwriting results by:

5

Table of Contents

Our insurance subsidiaries have no material exposures to asbestos and environmental liabilities. Our insurance subsidiaries seek to provide more than one policy to a given personal lines or commercial lines customer because this “account selling” strategy diversifies their risk and has historically improved their underwriting results. Our insurance subsidiaries also use reinsurance to manage their exposure and limit their maximum net loss from large single risks or risks in concentrated areas.

We believe that continued expansion of our insurance subsidiaries within their existing markets will be a key source of their continued premium growth and that maintaining an effective and growing network of independent agencies is integral to their expansion. Our insurance subsidiaries seek to be among the top three insurers within each of the independent agencies for the lines of business our insurance subsidiaries write by providing a consistent, competitive and stable market for their products. We believe that the consistency of the product offerings of our insurance subsidiaries enables our insurance subsidiaries to compete effectively for independent agents with other insurers whose product offerings may fluctuate based on industry conditions. Our insurance subsidiaries offer a competitive compensation program to their independent agents that rewards them for producing profitable growth for our insurance subsidiaries. Our insurance subsidiaries provide their independent agents with ongoing support to enable them to better attract and service customers, including:

Our insurance subsidiaries appoint independent agencies with a strong underwriting and growth track record. We believe that our insurance subsidiaries, by carefully selecting, motivating and supporting their independent agencies, will drive continued long-term growth.

We have been an effective consolidator of smaller “main street” property and casualty insurance companies, and we expect to continue to acquire other insurance companies to expand our business in a given region or to commence operations in a new region.

Since 1995, we have completed six acquisitions of property and casualty insurance companies or participated in their business through Donegal Mutual’s entry into quota-share reinsurance agreements with them. We intend to continue our growth by pursuing affiliations and acquisitions that meet our criteria. Our primary criteria are:

We believe that our relationship with Donegal Mutual assists us in pursuing affiliations with, and subsequent acquisitions of, mutual insurance companies because, through Donegal Mutual, we understand the concerns and issues that mutual insurance companies face. In particular, Donegal Mutual has had success affiliating with underperforming mutual insurance companies, and we have either acquired them following their conversion to a stock company or benefited from their underwriting results as a result of Donegal Mutual’s entry into a 100% quota-share reinsurance agreement with them and

6

Table of Contents

placement of its assumed business into the pooling agreement. We have utilized our strengths and financial position to improve the operations of those underperforming insurance companies. We evaluate a number of areas for operational synergies when considering acquisitions, including product underwriting, expenses, the cost of reinsurance and technology.

We and Donegal Mutual have the ability to employ a number of acquisition and affiliation methods. Our prior acquisitions and affiliations have taken one of the following forms:

We believe that our ability to make direct acquisitions of stock insurance companies and to make indirect acquisitions of mutual insurance companies through a sponsored conversion or a quota-share reinsurance agreement provides us with flexibility that is a competitive advantage in making acquisitions. We also believe our historic record clearly demonstrates our ability to acquire control of an underperforming insurance company, re-underwrite its book of business, reduce its cost structure and return it to sustained profitability.

While Donegal Mutual and we generally engage in preliminary discussions with potential direct or indirect acquisition candidates on an almost continuous basis and are so engaged at the date of this Form 10-K Report, neither Donegal Mutual nor we make any public disclosure regarding a proposed acquisition until Donegal Mutual or we have entered into a definitive acquisition agreement.

On December 16, 2016, Donegal Mutual and Mountain States Mutual Casualty Company (“Mountain States”) announced the execution of an agreement whereby, subject to applicable regulatory approvals and the approval of the policyholders of Mountain States, Mountain States will merge with and into Donegal Mutual. We are not a party to the agreement. Donegal Mutual will be the surviving company in the merger, and the insurance subsidiaries of Mountain States, Mountain States Indemnity Company and Mountain States Commercial Insurance Company, will become insurance subsidiaries of Donegal Mutual. Mountain States and its insurance subsidiaries currently conduct business together as the Mountain States Insurance Group and offer commercial insurance products in the states of Colorado, New Mexico, Texas and Utah. Following the completion of the merger, Donegal Mutual, Mountain States Indemnity Company and Mountain States Commercial Insurance Company will market their products together as the Mountain States Insurance Group in the Southwestern region of the United States as they seek profitable growth in the region. For an indefinite period of time following the completion of the merger, Donegal Mutual will exclude the business of the Mountain States Insurance Group from the pooling agreement with Atlantic States. As a result, Donegal Mutual’s merger with Mountain States will have no impact on our results of operations. At some undetermined point in the future, we and Donegal Mutual may consider including the business of the Mountain States Insurance Group in the pooling agreement between Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States. Donegal Mutual’s merger with Mountain States therefore represents a future growth opportunity for us, consistent with the acquisition strategy we and Donegal Mutual have shared since our inception.

7

Table of Contents

The following table highlights our history of insurance company acquisitions and affiliations since 1988:

We believe that excellent policyholder service is important in attracting new policyholders and retaining existing policyholders. Our insurance subsidiaries work closely with their independent agents to provide a consistently responsive level of claims service, underwriting and customer support. Our insurance subsidiaries seek to respond expeditiously and effectively to address customer and independent agent inquiries in a number of ways, including:

8

Table of Contents

Our insurance subsidiaries periodically conduct policyholder surveys to evaluate the effectiveness of their service to policyholders. The management of our insurance subsidiaries meets on a regular basis with the personnel of the independent insurance agents our insurance subsidiaries appoint to seek service improvement recommendations, react to service issues and better understand local market conditions.

Our insurance subsidiaries maintain discipline in their pricing by effecting rate increases to sustain or improve their underwriting profitability without unduly affecting their customer retention. In addition to appropriate pricing, our insurance subsidiaries seek to ensure that their premium rates are adequate relative to the amount of risk they insure. Our insurance subsidiaries review loss trends on a periodic basis to identify changes in the frequency and severity of their claims and to assess the adequacy of their rates and underwriting standards. Our insurance subsidiaries also carefully monitor and audit the information they use to price their policies for the purpose of enabling them to receive an adequate level of premiums for the risk they assume. For example, our insurance subsidiaries inspect substantially all commercial lines risks and a substantial number of personal lines property risks before they commit to insure them to determine the adequacy of the insured amount to the value of the insured property, assess property conditions and identify any liability exposures. Our insurance subsidiaries audit the payroll data of their workers’ compensation customers to verify that the assumptions used to price a particular policy were accurate. By implementing appropriate rate increases and understanding the risks our insurance subsidiaries agree to insure, our insurance subsidiaries are generally able to achieve consistent underwriting profitability.

Our insurance subsidiaries maintain stringent expense controls under direct supervision of their senior management. We centralize many processing and administrative activities of our insurance subsidiaries to realize operating synergies and better expense control. Our insurance subsidiaries utilize technology to automate much of their underwriting and to facilitate agency and policyholder communications on an efficient, timely and cost-effective basis. We operate on a paperless basis. Our insurance subsidiaries have increased their annual premium per employee, a measure of efficiency that our insurance subsidiaries use to evaluate their operations, from approximately $470,000 in 1999 to approximately $1.0 million in 2016.

Our insurance subsidiaries maintain technology comparable to that of the largest of their competitors. “Ease of doing business” is an increasingly important component of an insurer’s value to an independent agency. Our insurance subsidiaries provide a fully automated personal lines underwriting and policy issuance system called “WritePro^®.” WritePro^® is a web-based user interface that substantially eases data entry and facilitates the quoting and issuance of policies for the independent agents of our insurance subsidiaries. Our insurance subsidiaries also provide a similar commercial business system called “WriteBiz^®.” WriteBiz^® is a web-based user interface that provides the independent agents of our insurance subsidiaries with an online ability to quote and issue commercial automobile, workers’ compensation, business owners and tradesman policies automatically. WriteFarm^® is a web-based user interface that provides the independent agents of our insurance subsidiaries with an online ability to quote and issue farm policies. As a result, applications of the independent agents for our insurance subsidiaries can result in policy issuance without further re-entry of information. These systems also interface with the policy management systems of the independent agents of our insurance subsidiaries.

Return on invested assets is an important element of the financial results of our insurance subsidiaries. The investment strategy of our insurance subsidiaries is to generate an appropriate amount of after-tax income on invested assets while minimizing credit risk through investments in high-quality securities. As a result, our insurance subsidiaries seek to invest a high percentage of their assets in diversified, highly rated and marketable fixed-maturity instruments. The fixed-maturity portfolios of our insurance subsidiaries consist of both taxable and tax-exempt securities. Our insurance subsidiaries maintain a portion of their portfolios in short-term securities to provide liquidity for the payment of claims and operation of their respective businesses. Our insurance subsidiaries maintain a small percentage (5.0% at December 31, 2016) of their portfolios in equity securities.

9

Table of Contents

Competition

The property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive on the basis of both price and service. Numerous companies compete for business in the geographic areas where our insurance subsidiaries operate. Many of these other insurance companies are substantially larger and have greater financial resources than those of our insurance subsidiaries. In addition, because our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual market their respective insurance products exclusively through independent insurance agencies, most of which represent more than one insurance company, our insurance subsidiaries face competition within agencies, as well as competition to retain qualified independent agents.

Products and Underwriting

We report the results of our insurance operations in two segments: personal lines of insurance and commercial lines of insurance. The personal lines our insurance subsidiaries write consist primarily of private passenger automobile and homeowners insurance. The commercial lines our insurance subsidiaries write consist primarily of commercial automobile, commercial multi-peril and workers’ compensation insurance. We describe these lines of insurance in greater detail below:

Personal

Commercial

10

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the net premiums written of our insurance subsidiaries by line of insurance for the periods indicated:

The personal lines and commercial lines underwriting departments of our insurance subsidiaries evaluate and select those risks that they believe will enable our insurance subsidiaries to achieve an underwriting profit. The underwriting departments have significant interaction with the independent agents regarding the underwriting philosophy and the underwriting guidelines of our insurance subsidiaries. Our underwriting personnel also assist the research and development department in the development of quality products at competitive prices to promote growth and profitability.

In order to achieve underwriting profitability on a consistent basis, our insurance subsidiaries:

Our insurance subsidiaries also review their existing policies and accounts to determine whether those risks continue to meet their underwriting guidelines. If a given policy or account no longer meets those underwriting guidelines, our insurance subsidiaries will take appropriate action regarding that policy or account, including raising premium rates or non-renewing the policy to the extent applicable law permits.

As part of the effort of our insurance subsidiaries to maintain acceptable underwriting results, they conduct annual reviews of agencies that have failed to meet their underwriting profitability criteria. The review process includes an analysis of the underwriting and re-underwriting practices of the agency, the completeness and accuracy of the applications the agency submits, the adequacy of the training of the agency’s staff and the agency’s record of adherence to the underwriting guidelines and service standards of our insurance subsidiaries. Based on the results of this review process, the marketing and underwriting personnel of our insurance subsidiaries develop, together with the agency, a plan to improve its underwriting profitability. Our insurance subsidiaries monitor the agency’s compliance with the plan and take other measures as required in the judgment of our insurance subsidiaries, including the termination to the extent applicable law permits of agencies that are unable to achieve acceptable underwriting profitability.

11

Table of Contents

Distribution

Our insurance subsidiaries market their products primarily in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwestern, New England and Southern regions through approximately 2,400 independent insurance agencies. At December 31, 2016, the Donegal Insurance Group actively wrote business in 21 states (Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin). We believe the relationships of our insurance subsidiaries with their independent agents are valuable in identifying, obtaining and retaining profitable business. Our insurance subsidiaries maintain a stringent agency selection procedure that emphasizes appointing agencies with proven marketing strategies for the development of profitable business, and our insurance subsidiaries only appoint agencies with a strong underwriting history and potential growth capabilities. Our insurance subsidiaries also regularly evaluate the independent agencies that represent them based on their profitability and performance in relation to the objectives of our insurance subsidiaries. Our insurance subsidiaries seek to be among the top three insurers within each of their agencies for the lines of business our insurance subsidiaries write.

The following table sets forth the percentage of direct premiums our insurance subsidiaries write, including 80% of the direct premiums Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States write, in each of the states where they conducted a significant portion of their business in 2016:

Our insurance subsidiaries employ a number of policies and procedures that we believe enable them to attract, retain and motivate their independent agents. We believe that the consistency of the product offerings of our insurance subsidiaries enables our insurance subsidiaries to compete effectively for independent agents with other insurers whose product offerings may fluctuate based upon industry conditions. Our insurance subsidiaries have a competitive profit-sharing plan for their independent agents, consistent with applicable state laws and regulations, under which the independent agents may earn additional commissions based upon the volume of premiums produced and the profitability of the business our insurance subsidiaries receive from that agency.

Our insurance subsidiaries encourage their independent agents to focus on “account selling,” or serving all of a particular insured’s property and casualty insurance needs, which our insurance subsidiaries believe generally results in more favorable loss experience than covering a single risk for an individual insured.

Technology

Donegal Mutual owns the majority of the technology systems our insurance subsidiaries use. The technology systems consist primarily of an integrated central processing computer system, a series of server-based computer networks and various communication systems that allow the home office of our insurance subsidiaries and their branch offices to utilize the same systems for the processing of business. Donegal Mutual maintains backup facilities and systems at the office of one of our insurance subsidiaries and tests these backup facilities and systems on a regular basis. Our insurance subsidiaries bear their proportionate share of information services expenses based on their respective percentage of the total net written premiums of the Donegal Insurance Group during the preceding calendar year.

12

Table of Contents

The business strategy of our insurance subsidiaries depends on the use, development and implementation of integrated technology systems. These systems enable our insurance subsidiaries to provide a high level of service to agents and policyholders by processing business in a timely and efficient manner, communicating and sharing data with agents, providing a variety of methods for the payment of premiums and allowing for the accumulation and analysis of information for the management of our insurance subsidiaries.

We believe the availability and use of these technology systems has resulted in improved service to agents and policyholders, increased efficiencies in processing the business of our insurance subsidiaries and lower operating costs. Key components of these integrated technology systems are the agency interface system, the WritePro^®, WriteBiz^® and WriteFarm^® systems, a claims processing system and an imaging system. The agency interface system provides our insurance subsidiaries with a high level of data sharing both to and from agents’ systems and also provides agents with an integrated means of processing new business. The WritePro^®, WriteBiz^® and WriteFarm^® systems are fully automated underwriting and policy issuance systems that provide agents with the ability to generate underwritten quotes and automatically issue policies that meet the underwriting guidelines of our insurance subsidiaries with limited or no intervention by their personnel. The claims processing system allows our insurance subsidiaries to process claims efficiently and in an automated environment. The imaging system eliminates the need to handle paper files, while providing greater access to the same information by a variety of personnel. We believe our technology systems compare favorably to those of many national property and casualty insurance carriers in terms of quality and service levels.

Claims

The management of claims is a critical component of the philosophy of our insurance subsidiaries to achieve underwriting profitability on a consistent basis and is fundamental to the successful operations of our insurance subsidiaries and their dedication to excellent service. Our senior claims management oversees the claims processing units of each of our insurance subsidiaries to assure consistency in the claims settlement process. The field office staff of our insurance subsidiaries receives support from home office technical, litigation, material damage, subrogation and medical audit personnel.

The claims departments of our insurance subsidiaries rigorously manage claims to assure that they settle legitimate claims quickly and fairly and that they identify questionable claims for defense. In the majority of cases, the personnel of our insurance subsidiaries, who have significant experience in the property and casualty insurance industry and know the service philosophy of our insurance subsidiaries, adjust claims. Our insurance subsidiaries provide various means of claims reporting on a 24-hours a day, seven-days a week basis, including toll-free numbers and electronic reporting through our website and mobile applications. Our insurance subsidiaries strive to respond to notifications of claims promptly, generally within the day reported. Our insurance subsidiaries believe that, by responding promptly to claims, they provide quality customer service and minimize the ultimate cost of the claims. Our insurance subsidiaries engage independent adjusters as needed to handle claims in areas in which the volume of claims is not sufficient to justify the hiring of internal claims adjusters by our insurance subsidiaries. Our insurance subsidiaries also employ private adjusters and investigators, structural experts and various outside legal counsel to supplement their internal staff and to assist in the investigation of claims. Our insurance subsidiaries have a special investigative unit staffed by former law enforcement officers that attempts to identify and prevent fraud and abuse and to investigate questionable claims.

The management of the claims departments of our insurance subsidiaries develops and implements policies and procedures for the establishment of adequate claim reserves. Our insurance subsidiaries employ an actuarial staff that regularly reviews their reserves for incurred but not reported claims. The management and staff of the claims departments resolve policy coverage issues, manage and process reinsurance recoveries and handle salvage and subrogation matters. The litigation and personal injury sections of our insurance subsidiaries manage all claims litigation. Branch office claims above certain thresholds require home office review and settlement authorization. Our insurance subsidiaries provide their claims adjusters reserving and settlement authority based upon their experience and demonstrated abilities. Larger or more complicated claims require consultation and approval of senior claims department management.

Liabilities for Losses and Loss Expenses

Liabilities for losses and loss expenses are estimates at a given point in time of the amounts an insurer expects to pay with respect to incurred policyholder claims based on facts and circumstances then known. At the time of establishing its estimates, an insurer recognizes that its ultimate liability for losses and loss expenses will exceed or be less than such estimates. Our insurance subsidiaries base their estimates of liabilities for losses and loss expenses on assumptions as to future loss trends and expected claims severity, judicial theories of liability and other factors. However, during the loss adjustment period, our insurance subsidiaries may learn additional facts regarding individual claims, and, consequently, it often becomes necessary for our insurance subsidiaries to refine and adjust their estimates of liability. We reflect any adjustments to our insurance subsidiaries’ liabilities for losses and loss expenses in our operating results in the period in which our insurance subsidiaries record the changes in their estimates.

13

Table of Contents

Our insurance subsidiaries maintain liabilities for the payment of losses and loss expenses with respect to both reported and unreported claims. Our insurance subsidiaries establish these liabilities for the purpose of covering the ultimate costs of settling all losses, including investigation and litigation costs. Our insurance subsidiaries base the amount of their liability for reported losses primarily upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of risk involved, knowledge of the circumstances surrounding each claim and the insurance policy provisions relating to the type of loss their policyholder incurred. Our insurance subsidiaries determine the amount of their liability for unreported claims and loss expenses on the basis of historical information by line of insurance. Our insurance subsidiaries account for inflation in the reserving function through analysis of costs and trends and reviews of historical reserving results. Our insurance subsidiaries closely monitor their liabilities and recompute them periodically using new information on reported claims and a variety of statistical techniques. Our insurance subsidiaries do not discount their liabilities for losses.

Reserve estimates can change over time because of unexpected changes in assumptions related to our insurance subsidiaries’ external environment and, to a lesser extent, assumptions as to our insurance subsidiaries’ internal operations. For example, our insurance subsidiaries have experienced a decrease in claims frequency on workers’ compensation claims during the past several years while claims severity has gradually increased. These trend changes give rise to greater uncertainty as to the pattern of future loss settlements on workers’ compensation claims. Related uncertainties regarding future trends include the cost of medical technologies and procedures and changes in the utilization of medical procedures. Assumptions related to our insurance subsidiaries’ external environment include the absence of significant changes in tort law and legal decisions that increase liability exposure, consistency in judicial interpretations of insurance coverage and policy provisions and the rate of loss cost inflation. Internal assumptions include consistency in the recording of premium and loss statistics, consistency in the recording of claims, payment and case reserving methodology, accurate measurement of the impact of rate changes and changes in policy provisions, consistency in the quality and characteristics of business written within a given line of business and consistency in reinsurance coverage and the collectability of reinsured losses, among other items. To the extent our insurance subsidiaries determine that underlying factors impacting their assumptions have changed, our insurance subsidiaries attempt to make appropriate adjustments for such changes in their reserves. Accordingly, our insurance subsidiaries’ ultimate liability for unpaid losses and loss expenses will likely differ from the amount recorded at December 31, 2016. For every 1% change in our insurance subsidiaries’ loss and loss expense reserves, net of reinsurance recoverable, the effect on our pre-tax results of operations would be approximately $3.5 million.

The establishment of appropriate liabilities is an inherently uncertain process, and we can provide no assurance that our insurance subsidiaries’ ultimate liability will not exceed our insurance subsidiaries’ loss and loss expense reserves and have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Furthermore, we cannot predict the timing, frequency and extent of adjustments to our insurance subsidiaries’ estimated future liabilities, since the historical conditions and events that serve as a basis for our insurance subsidiaries’ estimates of ultimate claim costs may change. As is the case for substantially all property and casualty insurance companies, our insurance subsidiaries have found it necessary in the past to increase their estimated future liabilities for losses and loss expenses in certain periods, and, in other periods, their estimates of future liabilities have exceeded their actual liabilities. Changes in our insurance subsidiaries’ estimates of their liability for losses and loss expenses generally reflect actual payments and the evaluation of information received since the prior reporting date. Our insurance subsidiaries recognized an increase in their liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years of $3.0 million, $7.2 million and $14.5 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Our insurance subsidiaries made no significant changes in their reserving philosophy, key reserving assumptions or claims management personnel, and they have made no significant offsetting changes in estimates that increased or decreased their loss and loss expense reserves in these years. The 2016 development represented 0.9% of the December 31, 2015 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile liability lines of business, offset by lower-than-expected severity in the workers’ compensation line of business, in accident years prior to 2016. The majority of the 2016 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern. The 2015 development represented 2.5% of the December 31, 2014 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the private passenger automobile liability, commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile lines of business in accident years prior to 2015. The majority of the 2015 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern. The 2014 development represented 5.4% of the December 31, 2013 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the private passenger automobile liability, commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile lines of business in accident years prior to 2014. The majority of the 2014 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern.

Excluding the impact of catastrophic weather events, our insurance subsidiaries have noted stable amounts in the number of claims incurred and slight downward trends in the number of claims outstanding at period ends relative to their premium

14

Table of Contents

base in recent years across most of their lines of business. However, the amount of the average claim outstanding has increased gradually over the past several years as the property and casualty insurance industry has experienced increased litigation trends and economic conditions that have extended the estimated length of disabilities and contributed to increased medical loss costs and a general slowing of settlement rates in litigated claims. Our insurance subsidiaries could be required to make further adjustments to their estimates in the future. However, on the basis of our insurance subsidiaries’ internal procedures which analyze, among other things, their prior assumptions, their experience with similar cases and historical trends such as reserving patterns, loss payments, pending levels of unpaid claims and product mix, as well as court decisions, economic conditions and public attitudes, we believe that our insurance subsidiaries have made adequate provision for their liability for losses and loss expenses at December 31, 2016.

Differences between liabilities reported in our financial statements prepared on a GAAP basis and our insurance subsidiaries’ financial statements prepared on a SAP basis result from anticipating salvage and subrogation recoveries for GAAP but not for SAP. These differences amounted to $16.8 million, $15.3 million and $14.2 million at December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the beginning and ending GAAP net liability of our insurance subsidiaries for unpaid losses and loss expenses for the periods indicated:

The following table sets forth the development of the liability for net unpaid losses and loss expenses of our insurance subsidiaries from 2006 to 2016. Loss data in the table includes business Atlantic States received from the underwriting pool.

“Net liability at end of year for unpaid losses and loss expenses” sets forth the estimated liability for net unpaid losses and loss expenses recorded at the balance sheet date for each of the indicated years. This liability represents the estimated amount of net losses and loss expenses for claims arising in the current and all prior years that are unpaid at the balance sheet date, including losses incurred but not reported.

The “Net liability re-estimated as of” portion of the table shows the re-estimated amount of the previously recorded liability based on experience for each succeeding year. The estimate increases or decreases as payments are made and more information becomes known about the severity of the remaining unpaid claims. For example, the 2006 liability has developed a redundancy after ten years because we expect the re-estimated net losses and loss expenses to be $12.5 million less than the estimated liability we initially established in 2006 of $163.3 million.

The “Cumulative (excess) deficiency” shows the cumulative excess or deficiency at December 31, 2016 of the liability estimate shown on the top line of the corresponding column. An excess in liability means that the liability established in prior years exceeded the amount of actual payments and currently re-estimated unpaid liability remaining. A deficiency in liability means that the liability established in prior years was less than the amount of actual payments and currently re-estimated remaining unpaid liability.

15

Table of Contents

The “Cumulative amount of liability paid through” portion of the table shows the cumulative net losses and loss expense payments made in succeeding years for net losses incurred prior to the balance sheet date. For example, the 2006 column indicates that at December 31, 2016 payments equal to $147.2 million of the currently re-estimated ultimate liability for net losses and loss expenses of $150.8 million had been made.

Amounts shown in the 2008 column of the table include information for Sheboygan for all accident years prior to 2008. Amounts shown in the 2010 column of the table include information for MICO for all accident years prior to 2010.

16

Table of Contents

Third-Party Reinsurance

Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual purchase certain third-party reinsurance on a combined basis. Le Mars, Peninsula, Sheboygan and MICO also have separate reinsurance programs that provide certain coverage that is commensurate with their relative size and exposures. Our insurance subsidiaries use several different reinsurers, all of which, consistent with the requirements of our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual, have an A.M. Best rating of A- (Excellent) or better or, with respect to foreign reinsurers, have a financial condition that, in the opinion of our management, is equivalent to a company with at least an A- (Excellent) rating from A.M. Best.

The external reinsurance our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual purchase includes:

The amount of coverage each of these types of reinsurance provides depends upon the amount, nature, size and location of the risk being reinsured.

For property insurance, our insurance subsidiaries have excess of loss treaties that provide for coverage of $4.0 million per loss over a set retention of $1.0 million. For liability insurance, our insurance subsidiaries have excess of loss treaties that provide for coverage of $49.0 million per occurrence over a set retention of $1.0 million. For workers’ compensation insurance, our insurance subsidiaries have excess of loss treaties that provide for coverage of $9.0 million on any one life over a set retention of $1.0 million and after exceeding an annual aggregate deductible ($1.2 million in 2016 and $1.0 million in 2015 and 2014).

Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual also purchase facultative reinsurance to cover exposures from property and casualty losses that exceed the limits provided by their respective treaty reinsurance.

For policies effective through December 31, 2014, MICO maintained a quota-share reinsurance agreement with third-party reinsurers to reduce its net exposures. Effective from December 1, 2010 to December 31, 2011, the quota-share reinsurance percentage was 50%. Effective January 1, 2012, MICO reduced the quota-share reinsurance percentage to 40%. Effective January 1, 2013, MICO reduced the quota-share reinsurance percentage to 30%. Effective January 1, 2014, MICO reduced the quota-share reinsurance percentage to 20%. Effective January 1, 2015, MICO no longer maintains a quota-share reinsurance agreement with third-party reinsurers.

Investments

At December 31, 2016, 99.8% of all debt securities our insurance subsidiaries held had an investment-grade rating. The investment portfolios of our insurance subsidiaries did not contain any mortgage loans or any non-performing assets at December 31, 2016.

17

Table of Contents

The following table shows the composition of the debt securities (at carrying value) in the investment portfolios of our insurance subsidiaries, excluding short-term investments, by rating at December 31, 2016:

Our insurance subsidiaries invest in both taxable and tax-exempt securities as part of their strategy to maximize after-tax income. This strategy considers, among other factors, the alternative minimum tax. Tax-exempt securities made up approximately 32.2%, 40.9% and 50.2% of the fixed-maturity securities in the combined investment portfolios of our insurance subsidiaries at December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

18

Table of Contents

The following table shows the classification of our investments and the investments of our insurance subsidiaries at December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 (at carrying value):

19

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the maturities (at carrying value) in the fixed maturity portfolio of our insurance subsidiaries at December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014:

As shown above, our insurance subsidiaries held investments in mortgage-backed securities having a carrying value of $263.3 million at December 31, 2016. The mortgage-backed securities consist primarily of investments in governmental agency balloon pools with stated maturities between one and 34 years. The stated maturities of these investments limit the exposure of our insurance subsidiaries to extension risk in the event that interest rates rise and prepayments decline. Our insurance subsidiaries perform an analysis of the underlying loans when evaluating a mortgage-backed security for purchase, and they select those securities that they believe will provide a return that properly reflects the prepayment risk associated with the underlying loans.

The following table sets forth the investment results of our insurance subsidiaries for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014:

A.M. Best Rating

Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries have an A.M. Best rating of A (Excellent), based upon the respective current financial condition and historical statutory results of operations of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries. We believe that the A.M. Best rating of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries is an important factor in their marketing of their products to their agents and customers. A.M. Best’s ratings are industry ratings based on a comparative analysis of the financial condition and operating performance of insurance companies. A.M. Best’s classifications are A++ and A+ (Superior), A and A- (Excellent), B++ and B+ (Good), B and B- (Fair), C++ and C+ (Marginal), C and C- (Weak), D (Poor) and E (Under Regulatory Supervision), F (Liquidation) and S (Suspended). A.M. Best bases its ratings upon factors relevant to the payment of claims of policyholders and are not directed toward the protection of investors in insurance companies. According to A.M. Best, the “Excellent” rating that the Donegal Insurance Group maintains is assigned to those companies that, in A.M. Best’s opinion, have an excellent ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders.

20

Table of Contents

Regulation

The supervision and regulation of insurance companies consists primarily of the laws and regulations of the various states in which the insurance companies transact business, with the primary regulatory authority being the insurance regulatory authorities in the state of domicile of the insurance company. Such supervision and regulation relate to numerous aspects of an insurance company’s business and financial condition. The primary purpose of such supervision and regulation is the protection of policyholders. The authority of the state insurance departments includes the establishment of standards of solvency that insurers must meet and maintain, the licensing of insurers and insurance agents to do business, the nature of, and limitations on, investments, premium rates for property and casualty insurance, the provisions that insurers must make for current losses and future liabilities, the deposit of securities for the benefit of policyholders, the approval of policy forms, notice requirements for the cancellation of policies and the approval of certain changes in control. State insurance departments also conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to the financial condition of insurance companies.

In addition to state-imposed insurance laws and regulations, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, or the NAIC, maintains a risk-based capital system, or RBC, for assessing the adequacy of the statutory capital and surplus of insurance companies that augments the states’ current fixed dollar minimum capital requirements for insurance companies. At December 31, 2016, our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual each exceeded by a substantial margin the minimum levels of statutory capital the RBC rules require.

Generally, every state has guaranty fund laws under which insurers licensed to do business in that state can be assessed on the basis of premiums written by the insurer in that state in order to fund policyholder liabilities of insolvent insurance companies. Under these laws in general, an insurer is subject to assessment, depending upon its market share of a given line of business, to assist in the payment of policyholder claims against insolvent insurers. Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual have made accruals for their portion of assessments related to such insolvencies based upon the most current information furnished by the guaranty associations.

We are part of an insurance holding company system of which Donegal Mutual is the ultimate controlling person. All of the states in which our insurance companies and Donegal Mutual maintain a domicile have legislation that regulates insurance holding company systems. Each insurance company in the insurance holding company system must register with the insurance supervisory agency of its state of domicile and furnish information concerning the operations of companies within the insurance holding company system that may materially affect the operations, management or financial condition of the insurers within the system. Pursuant to these laws, the respective insurance departments in which our subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual maintain a domicile may examine our insurance subsidiaries or Donegal Mutual at any time, require disclosure of material transactions by the holding company with another member of the insurance holding company system and require prior notice or prior approval of certain transactions, such as “extraordinary dividends” from the insurance subsidiaries to the holding company. We have insurance subsidiaries domiciled in Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin.

The Pennsylvania Insurance Holding Companies Act, which generally applies to Donegal Mutual, us and our insurance subsidiaries, requires that all transactions within an insurance holding company system to which an insurer is a party must be fair and reasonable and that any charges or fees for services performed must be reasonable. Any management agreement, service agreement, cost sharing arrangement and material reinsurance agreement must be filed with the Pennsylvania Insurance Department, or the Department, and is subject to the Department’s review. We have filed with the Department the pooling agreement between Donegal Mutual and Atlantic States that established the underwriting pool and all material agreements between Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries.

Approval of the applicable insurance commissioner is also required prior to consummation of transactions affecting the control of an insurer. In virtually all states, including the states where our insurance subsidiaries are domiciled, the acquisition of 10% or more of the outstanding capital stock of an insurer or its holding company or the intent to acquire such an interest creates a rebuttable presumption of a change in control. Pursuant to an order issued in April 2003, the Department approved Donegal Mutual’s ownership of up to 70% of our outstanding Class A common stock and Donegal Mutual’s ownership of up to 100% of our outstanding Class B common stock.

Our insurance subsidiaries have the legal obligation under state insurance laws to participate in involuntary insurance programs for automobile insurance, as well as other property and casualty insurance lines, in the states in which they conduct business. These programs include joint underwriting associations, assigned risk plans, fair access to insurance requirements plans, reinsurance facilities, windstorm plans and tornado plans. Legislation establishing these programs requires all companies that write lines covered by these programs to provide coverage, either directly or through reinsurance, for insureds who are

21

Table of Contents

unable to obtain insurance in the voluntary market. The legislation creating these programs usually allocates a pro rata portion of risks attributable to such insureds to each company on the basis of the direct premiums it has written in that state or the number of automobiles it insures in that state. Generally, state law requires participation in these programs as a condition to obtaining a certificate of authority. Our loss ratio on insurance we write under these involuntary programs has traditionally been significantly greater than our loss ratio on insurance we voluntarily write in those states.

Regulatory requirements, including RBC requirements, may impact our insurance subsidiaries’ ability to pay dividends. The amount of statutory capital and surplus necessary for our insurance subsidiaries to satisfy regulatory requirements, including RBC requirements, was not significant in relation to our insurance subsidiaries’ statutory capital and surplus at December 31, 2016. Generally, the maximum amount that one of our insurance subsidiaries may pay to us as ordinary dividends during any year after notice to, but without prior approval of, the insurance commissioner of its domiciliary state is limited to a stated percentage of that subsidiary’s statutory capital and surplus at December 31 of the preceding fiscal year or the net income of that subsidiary for its preceding fiscal year. Our insurance subsidiaries paid dividends to us of $13.0 million, $3.9 million and $11.5 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. At December 31, 2016, the amount of dividends our insurance subsidiaries could pay to us during 2017, without the prior approval of their respective domiciliary insurance commissioners, is shown in the following table.

Donegal Mutual Insurance Company

Donegal Mutual organized as a mutual fire insurance company in Pennsylvania in 1889. At December 31, 2016, Donegal Mutual had admitted assets of $469.0 million and policyholders’ surplus of $235.2 million. At December 31, 2016, Donegal Mutual had total liabilities of $233.9 million, including reserves for net losses and loss expenses of $61.8 million and unearned premiums of $53.6 million. Donegal Mutual’s investment portfolio of $273.1 million at December 31, 2016 consisted primarily of investment-grade bonds of $20.0 million, its investment in DFSC’s common stock and its investment in our Class A common stock and our Class B common stock. At December 31, 2016, Donegal Mutual owned 9,851,025 shares, or approximately 46%, of our Class A common stock, which Donegal Mutual carried on its books at $139.8 million, and 4,647,338 shares, or approximately 83%, of our Class B common stock, which Donegal Mutual carried on its books at $65.9 million. We present Donegal Mutual’s financial information in accordance with SAP as the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual requires. Donegal Mutual does not, nor is it required to, prepare financial statements in accordance with GAAP.

Donegal Financial Services Corporation

In 2000, we and Donegal Mutual formed DFSC as a unitary thrift holding company and its wholly owned subsidiary, Province Bank FSB, as a federal savings bank. In May 2011, DFSC merged with Union National Financial Corporation, or UNNF, with DFSC as the surviving company in the merger. Under the merger agreement, Province Bank FSB and Union National Community Bank, which UNNF owned, also merged to form UCB. UCB is a state savings bank with 15 banking offices, substantially all of which are located in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, and approximately $536.2 million in assets at December 31, 2016.

Because Donegal Mutual and we together own all of the outstanding capital stock of DFSC, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, or the FRB, regulates Donegal Mutual, DFSC and us as grandfathered savings and loan holding companies. As a result, Donegal Mutual, DFSC and we are subject to regulation by the FRB under the holding company provisions of the federal Home Owners’ Loan Act. However, if any of Donegal Mutual, DFSC or we were to lose this grandfathered status, they or we would become a bank holding company regulated by the FRB under the Bank Holding Company Act. UCB, as a state-chartered stock savings bank, is subject to regulation and supervision by the Pennsylvania

22

Table of Contents

Department of Banking and by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The primary purpose of the statutory and regulatory supervision of financial institutions is to protect depositors, the financial institutions and the financial system as a whole rather than the stockholders of financial institutions or their holding companies.

Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act impose quantitative and qualitative restrictions on transactions between a savings association and its “affiliates.” Affiliates of a savings association include, among other entities, the savings association’s holding company and non-banking companies under common control with the savings association such as Donegal Mutual and us and our respective subsidiaries. These restrictions on transactions with affiliates apply to transactions between DFSC and UCB, on the one hand, and Donegal Mutual and us and our insurance subsidiaries, on the other hand. These restrictions also apply to transactions among DFSC, UCB and Donegal Mutual. Because DFSC directly controls UCB and Donegal Mutual and we indirectly control UCB, DFSC, Donegal Mutual and we are subject to the Change in Bank Control Act.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Form 10-K Report and the documents we incorporate by reference in this Form 10-K Report contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include certain discussions relating to underwriting, premium and investment income volumes, business strategies, reserves, profitability and business relationships and our other business activities during 2016 and beyond. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “expect,” “plan,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “objective,” “project,” “predict,” “potential,” “goal” and similar expressions. These forward-looking statements reflect our current views about future events and our current assumptions, and are subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties that may cause our results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those we anticipate or imply by our forward-looking statements. We cannot control or predict many of the factors that could determine our future financial condition or results of operations. Such factors may include those we describe under “Risk Factors.” The forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K Report reflect our views and assumptions only as of the date of this Form 10-K Report. Except as required by law, we do not intend to update, and we assume no responsibility for updating, any forward-looking statements we have made. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

Risk Factors

Risks Relating to Us and Our Business

Donegal Mutual is our controlling stockholder. Donegal Mutual and its directors and executive officers have potential conflicts of interest between the best interests of our stockholders and the best interests of the policyholders of Donegal Mutual.

Donegal Mutual controls the election of all of the members of our board of directors. Six of the eleven members of our board of directors are also directors of Donegal Mutual. Donegal Mutual and we share the same executive officers. These common directors and executive officers have a fiduciary duty to our stockholders and also have a fiduciary duty to the policyholders of Donegal Mutual. Among the potential conflicts of interest that could arise from these separate fiduciary duties are the following:

23

Table of Contents

Donegal Mutual has sufficient voting power to determine the outcome of all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval.

Each share of our Class A common stock has one-tenth of a vote per share and generally votes as a single class with our Class B common stock. Each share of our Class B common stock has one vote per share and generally votes as a single class with our Class A common stock. Donegal Mutual has the right to vote approximately 73% of the combined voting power of our Class A common stock and our Class B common stock and has sufficient voting control to:

The interests of Donegal Mutual in maintaining this greater-than-majority voting control of us may have an adverse effect on the price of our Class A common stock and the price of our Class B common stock because of the absence of any potential “takeover” premium and may, therefore, be inconsistent with the interests of our stockholders other than Donegal Mutual.

Donegal Mutual’s majority voting control of us, certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and certain provisions of Delaware law make it remote that anyone could acquire actual control of us unless Donegal Mutual were in favor of another person’s acquisition of control of us.

Donegal Mutual’s majority voting control of us, certain anti-takeover provisions in our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and certain provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or the DGCL, could delay or prevent the removal of members of our board of directors and could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving us more expensive as well as unlikely to succeed, even if such events were in the best interests of our stockholders other than Donegal Mutual. These factors could also discourage a third party from attempting to acquire control of us. In particular, our certificate of incorporation and by-laws include the following anti-takeover provisions:

We have authorized preferred stock that we could issue without stockholder approval to make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us.

We have 2.0 million authorized shares of preferred stock that we could issue in one or more series without further stockholder approval, unless the DGCL or the rules of the NASDAQ Global Select Market otherwise require, and upon such terms and conditions, and having such rights, privileges and preferences, as our board of directors may determine. Our potential issuance of preferred stock may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us.

24

Table of Contents

Because we are an insurance holding company, no person can acquire or seek to acquire a 10% or greater interest in us without first obtaining approval of the insurance commissioners of the states of domicile of each of our insurance subsidiaries.

We own insurance subsidiaries domiciled in the states of Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin, and Donegal Mutual controls an insurance company domiciled in Georgia. The insurance laws of each of these states provide that no person can acquire or seek to acquire a 10% or greater interest in us without first filing specified information with the insurance commissioners of those states and obtaining the prior approval of the proposed acquisition of a 10% or greater interest in us by each of the state insurance commissioners based on statutory standards designed to protect the safety and soundness of us and our insurance subsidiaries.

Because we are a grandfathered unitary savings and loan holding company, no person can acquire or seek to acquire more than a 10% interest in either class of our common stock without first obtaining approval of, or an exemption from, the FRB.

We own 48.2% of the outstanding stock of DFSC, which owns all of the outstanding stock of UCB. As a result of our ownership interest in DFSC, we are a grandfathered unitary savings and loan holding company regulated by the FRB under HOLA. No person may lawfully acquire more than 10% of any class of voting security of a unitary savings and loan holding company registered under the Exchange Act, as we are, without first filing specified information with the FRB and obtaining the FRB’s prior approval of the proposed acquisition or an exemption from the FRB for such acquisition.

Our insurance subsidiaries currently conduct business in a limited number of states, with a concentration of business in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maryland and Virginia. Any single catastrophe occurrence or other condition affecting losses in these states could adversely affect the results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

Our insurance subsidiaries conduct business in 21 states located primarily in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwestern, New England and Southern states. A substantial portion of their business consists of private passenger and commercial automobile, homeowners and workers’ compensation insurance in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Maryland and Virginia. While our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual actively manage their respective exposure to catastrophes through their underwriting processes and the purchase of reinsurance, a single catastrophic occurrence, destructive weather pattern, general economic trend, terrorist attack, regulatory development or other condition affecting one or more of the states in which our insurance subsidiaries conduct substantial business could materially adversely affect their business, financial condition and results of operations. Common catastrophic events include hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, wind and hail storms, fires, explosions and severe winter storms.

If the independent agents who market the products of our insurance subsidiaries do not maintain their current levels of premium writing with us, fail to comply with established underwriting guidelines of our insurance subsidiaries or otherwise inappropriately market the products of our insurance subsidiaries, the business, financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries could be adversely affected.

Our insurance subsidiaries market their insurance products solely through a network of approximately 2,400 independent insurance agencies. This agency distribution system is one of the most important components of the competitive profile of our insurance subsidiaries. As a result, our insurance subsidiaries depend to a material extent upon their independent agents, each of whom has the authority to bind one or more of our insurance subsidiaries to insurance coverage. To the extent that such independent agents’ marketing efforts fail to result in the maintenance of their current levels of volume and quality or they bind our insurance subsidiaries to unacceptable insurance risks, fail to comply with the established underwriting guidelines of our insurance subsidiaries or otherwise inappropriately market the products of our insurance subsidiaries, the business, financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries could suffer.

The business of our insurance subsidiaries may not continue to grow and may be materially adversely affected if our insurance subsidiaries cannot retain existing, and attract new, independent agents or if insurance consumers increase their use of insurance marketing systems other than independent agents.

Our insurance subsidiaries’ ability to retain existing, and to attract new, independent agents is essential to the continued growth of the business of our insurance subsidiaries. If independent agents find it easier to do business with the competitors of our insurance subsidiaries, our insurance subsidiaries could find it difficult to retain their existing business or to attract new

25

Table of Contents

business. While our insurance subsidiaries believe they maintain good relationships with the independent agents they have appointed, our insurance subsidiaries cannot be certain that these independent agents will continue to sell the products of our insurance subsidiaries to the consumers these independent agents represent. Some of the factors that could adversely affect the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to retain existing, and attract new, independent agents include:

While our insurance subsidiaries sell insurance to policyholders solely through their network of independent agencies, many competitors of our insurance subsidiaries sell insurance through a variety of delivery methods, including independent agencies, captive agencies, the Internet and direct sales. To the extent that current and potential policyholders change their marketing system preference, the business, financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries may be adversely affected.

We are dependent on dividends from our insurance subsidiaries for the payment of our operating expenses, our debt service and dividends to our stockholders; however, there are regulatory restrictions and business considerations that may limit the amount of dividends our insurance subsidiaries may pay to us.

As a holding company, we rely primarily on dividends from our insurance subsidiaries as a source of funds to meet our corporate obligations and to pay dividends to our stockholders. The amount of dividends our insurance subsidiaries can pay to us is subject to regulatory restrictions and depends on the amount of surplus our insurance subsidiaries maintain. From time to time, the NAIC and various state insurance regulators consider modifying the method of determining the amount of dividends that an insurance company may pay without prior regulatory approval. The maximum amount of ordinary dividends that our insurance subsidiaries can pay to us in 2017 without prior regulatory approval is approximately $38.9 million. Other business and regulatory considerations, such as the impact of dividends on surplus that could affect the ratings of our insurance subsidiaries, competitive conditions, RBC requirements, the investment results of our insurance subsidiaries and the amount of premiums that our insurance subsidiaries write could also adversely impact the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends to us.

If A.M. Best downgrades the rating it has assigned to Donegal Mutual or any of our insurance subsidiaries, it would adversely affect their competitive position.

Industry ratings are a factor in establishing and maintaining the competitive position of insurance companies. A.M. Best, an industry-accepted source of insurance company financial strength ratings, rates Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries. A.M. Best ratings provide an independent opinion of an insurance company’s financial health and its ability to meet its obligations to its policyholders. We believe that the financial strength rating of A.M. Best is material to the operations of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries. Currently, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries each have an A (Excellent) rating from A.M. Best. If A.M. Best were to downgrade the rating of Donegal Mutual or any of our insurance subsidiaries, it would adversely affect the competitive position of Donegal Mutual or that insurance subsidiary and make it more difficult for it to market its products and retain its existing policyholders.

Our strategy to grow in part through acquisitions of smaller insurance companies exposes us to risks that could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

The affiliation with, and acquisition of, smaller, and often undercapitalized, insurance companies involves risks that could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. The risks associated with these affiliations and acquisitions include:

26

Table of Contents

If we cannot obtain sufficient capital to fund the organic growth of our insurance subsidiaries and to make acquisitions, we may not be able to expand our business.

Our strategy is to expand our business through the organic growth of our insurance subsidiaries and through our strategic acquisitions of regional insurance companies. Our insurance subsidiaries will require additional capital in the future to support this strategy. If we cannot obtain sufficient capital on satisfactory terms and conditions, we may not be able to expand the business of our insurance subsidiaries or to make future acquisitions. Our ability to obtain additional financing will depend on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. For example, we may not be able to obtain additional debt or equity financing because we or our insurance subsidiaries may already have substantial debt at the time, because we or our insurance subsidiaries do not have sufficient cash flow to service or repay our existing or additional debt or because financial institutions are not making financing available. In addition, any equity capital we obtain in the future could be dilutive to our existing stockholders.

A number of the competitors of our insurance subsidiaries have greater financial strength than our insurance subsidiaries, and these competitors may be able to offer their products at lower prices than our insurance subsidiaries can afford to offer their products.

The property and casualty insurance industry is intensely competitive. Competition can be based on many factors, including:

Our insurance subsidiaries compete with many regional and national property and casualty insurance companies, including direct sellers of insurance products, insurers having their own agency organizations and other insurers represented by independent agents. Many of these insurers have greater capital than our insurance subsidiaries, have substantially greater financial, technical and operating resources and have equal or higher ratings from A.M. Best than our insurance subsidiaries. In addition, our competitors may become increasingly better capitalized in the future as the property and casualty insurance industry continues to consolidate.

The greater capitalization of many of the competitors of our insurance subsidiaries enables them to operate with lower profit margins and, therefore, allows them to market their products more aggressively, to take advantage more quickly of new marketing opportunities and to offer lower premium rates. Our insurance subsidiaries may not be able to maintain their current competitive position in the markets in which they operate if their competitors offer prices for their products that are lower than the prices our insurance subsidiaries are prepared to offer. Moreover, if these competitors lower the price of their products and our insurance subsidiaries meet their pricing, the profit margins and revenues of our insurance subsidiaries may decrease and their ratios of claims and expenses to premiums may increase. All of these factors could materially adversely affect the financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries and their A.M. Best ratings.

27

Table of Contents

Because the investment portfolios of our insurance subsidiaries consist primarily of fixed-income securities, their investment income and the fair value of their investment portfolios could decrease as a result of a number of factors.

Our insurance subsidiaries invest the premiums they receive from their policyholders and maintain investment portfolios that consist primarily of fixed-income securities. The management of these investment portfolios is an important component of the profitability of our insurance subsidiaries. Our insurance subsidiaries derive a significant portion of their operating income from the income they receive on their invested assets. A number of factors may affect the quality and/or yield of their investment portfolios, including the general economic and business environment, government monetary policy, changes in the credit quality of the issuers of the fixed-income securities our insurance subsidiaries own, changes in market conditions and regulatory changes. The fixed-income securities our insurance subsidiaries own consist primarily of securities issued by domestic entities that are backed either by the credit or collateral of the underlying issuer. Factors such as an economic downturn, disruption in the credit market or the availability of credit, a regulatory change pertaining to a particular issuer’s industry, a significant deterioration in the cash flows of the issuer or a change in the issuer’s marketplace may adversely affect the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to collect principal and interest from the issuer in which they invest.

The investments of our insurance subsidiaries are also subject to risk resulting from interest rate fluctuations. Increasing interest rates or a widening in the spread between interest rates available on U.S. Treasury securities and corporate debt or asset-backed securities, for example, will typically have an adverse impact on the market values of fixed-rate securities. If interest rates remain at historically low levels, our insurance subsidiaries will generally have a lower overall rate of return on investments of cash their operations generate. In addition, in the event of the call or maturity of investments in a low interest rate environment, our insurance subsidiaries may not be able to reinvest the proceeds in securities with comparable interest rates. Changes in interest rates may reduce both the profitability and the return on the invested capital of our insurance subsidiaries.

We and our insurance subsidiaries depend on key personnel. The loss of any member of our executive management or the senior management of our insurance subsidiaries could negatively affect the continuation of our business strategies and achievement of our growth objectives.

The loss of, or failure to attract, key personnel could significantly impede our financial plans, growth, marketing and other objectives and those of our insurance subsidiaries. The continued success of our insurance subsidiaries depends to a substantial extent on the ability and experience of their senior management. Our insurance subsidiaries and we believe that our future success is dependent on our ability to attract and retain additional skilled and qualified personnel and to expand, train and manage our employees. We and Donegal Mutual have two to five-year automatically-renewing employment agreements with our senior officers, including all of our named executive officers.

The reinsurance agreements on which our insurance subsidiaries rely do not relieve our insurance subsidiaries from their primary liability to their policyholders, and our insurance subsidiaries face a risk of non-payment from their reinsurers as well as the non-availability of reinsurance in the future.

Our insurance subsidiaries rely on reinsurance agreements to limit their maximum net loss from large single catastrophic risks or excess of loss risks in areas where our insurance subsidiaries may have a concentration of policyholders. Reinsurance also enables our insurance subsidiaries to increase their capacity to write insurance because it has the effect of leveraging the surplus of our insurance subsidiaries. Although the reinsurance our insurance subsidiaries maintain provides that the reinsurer is liable to them for any reinsured losses, the reinsurance agreements do not generally relieve our insurance subsidiaries from their primary liability to their policyholders if the reinsurer fails to pay the reinsurance claims of our insurance subsidiaries. To the extent that a reinsurer is unable to pay losses for which it is liable to our insurance subsidiaries, our insurance subsidiaries remain liable for such losses. At December 31, 2016, our insurance subsidiaries had approximately $107.2 million of reinsurance receivables from third-party reinsurers relating to paid and unpaid losses. Any insolvency or inability of these reinsurers to make timely payments to our insurance subsidiaries under the terms of their reinsurance agreements would adversely affect the results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

Michigan law requires MICO to provide unlimited lifetime medical benefits under the personal injury protection, or PIP, coverage of the personal automobile and commercial automobile policies it writes in the State of Michigan. Michigan law also requires MICO to be a member of the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association, or MCCA, in order to write automobile insurance. The MCCA receives funding through assessments that its members collect from policyholders in the state and provides reinsurance for PIP claims that exceed a set retention. At December 31, 2016, MICO had approximately $48.5 million of reinsurance receivables from MCCA relating to paid and unpaid losses. The MCCA has generated significant operating deficits in recent years. Although we currently consider the risk to be remote, should the MCCA be unable to fulfill its payment obligations to MICO in the future, MICO’s financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

28

Table of Contents

In addition, our insurance subsidiaries face a risk of the non-availability of reinsurance or an increase in reinsurance costs that could adversely affect their ability to write business or their results of operations. Market conditions beyond the control of our insurance subsidiaries, such as the amount of surplus in the reinsurance market and the frequency and severity of natural and man-made catastrophes, affect both the availability and the cost of the reinsurance our insurance subsidiaries purchase. If our insurance subsidiaries cannot maintain their current level of reinsurance or purchase new reinsurance protection in amounts that our insurance subsidiaries consider sufficient, our insurance subsidiaries would either have to accept an increase in their net risk retention or reduce their insurance writings, either of which could adversely affect them.

Our equity investment in DFSC subjects us to certain risks inherent to community banking organizations.

Our equity in the earnings of DFSC primarily reflects the underlying results of operations of UCB. UCB is subject to a number of risks, which include, but are not limited to, the following:

The growth and profitability of our insurance subsidiaries depend, in part, on the effective maintenance and ongoing development of Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems.

Our insurance subsidiaries utilize Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems to conduct their insurance business, including policy quoting and issuance, claims processing, processing of incoming premium payments and other important functions. As a result, the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to grow their business and conduct profitable operations depends on Donegal Mutual’s ability to maintain its existing information technology systems and to develop new technology systems that will support the business of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries in a cost-efficient manner and provide information technology capabilities equivalent to those of our competitors. The allocation among our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual of the costs of developing and maintaining Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems may impact adversely our insurance subsidiaries’ expense ratio and underwriting profitability, and such costs may exceed Donegal Mutual’s and our expectations. In addition, while Donegal Mutual is committed to developing and maintaining information technology systems that will allow Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries to compete effectively, Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems may not deliver the benefits Donegal Mutual and we expect and may fail to keep pace with our competitors’ information technology systems. As a result, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries may not have the ability to grow their business and meet their profitability objectives.

Our insurance subsidiaries rely on Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems, and the disruption or failure of these systems or the compromise of the security of those systems that results in the theft or misuse of confidential information could materially impact adversely the business of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries.

Our insurance subsidiaries’ business operations depend significantly upon the availability and successful operation of Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems in order to process new and renewal business, service their policies, process and settle claims and facilitate processing of premium payments. In addition, in the normal course of their operations, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries collect, utilize and maintain confidential information regarding individuals and businesses. While Donegal Mutual has established various security measures to protect its information technology systems and confidential data, unanticipated computer viruses, malware, power outages, unauthorized access or other cyberattacks could disrupt those systems or result in the misappropriation or loss of confidential data. Disruption in the availability of Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems could impact the ability of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries to underwrite and process their policies timely, process and settle claims promptly and provide expected levels of customer service to agents and policyholders.

29

Table of Contents

While Donegal Mutual has identified threats to the security of its information technology systems, Donegal Mutual and we are unaware of any significant breach of the security measures Donegal Mutual maintains. A significant breach of the security of Donegal Mutual’s information technology systems that results in the misappropriation or misuse of confidential information could damage the business reputation of Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries and could expose Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries to litigation. The financial impact to Donegal Mutual, us and our insurance subsidiaries of a significant breach could be material.

Risks Relating to the Property and Casualty Insurance Industry

Industry trends, such as increased litigation against the insurance industry and individual insurers, the willingness of courts to expand covered causes of loss, rising jury awards, escalating medical costs, increasing loss frequency due to distracted driving and other factors and increasing loss severity may contribute to increased costs and result in the deterioration of the reserves of our insurance subsidiaries.

Loss severity in the property and casualty insurance industry has increased in recent years, principally driven by larger court judgments and increasing medical and automobile repair costs. The industry has also experienced increases in the frequency of automobile losses due to distracted driving, increases in miles driven due to lower fuel costs and other factors. In addition, many classes of complainants have brought legal actions and proceedings that tend to increase the size of judgments. The propensity of policyholders and third-party claimants to litigate and the willingness of courts to expand causes of loss and the size of awards to eliminate exclusions and to increase coverage limits may make the loss reserves of our insurance subsidiaries inadequate for current and future losses.

Loss or significant restriction of the use of credit scoring in the pricing and underwriting of the personal lines insurance products by our insurance subsidiaries could adversely affect their future profitability.

Our insurance subsidiaries use credit scoring as a factor in making risk selection and pricing decisions for personal lines insurance products where allowed by state law. Recently, some consumer groups and regulators have questioned whether the use of credit scoring unfairly discriminates against people with low incomes, minority groups and the elderly. These consumer groups and regulators often call for the prohibition or restriction on the use of credit scoring in underwriting and pricing. Laws or regulations enacted in a number of states that significantly curtail the use of credit scoring in the underwriting process could reduce the future profitability of our insurance subsidiaries.

Changes in applicable insurance laws or regulations or changes in the way insurance regulators administer those laws or regulations could adversely affect the operating environment of our insurance subsidiaries and increase their exposure to loss or put them at a competitive disadvantage.

Property and casualty insurers are subject to extensive supervision in their domiciliary states and in the states in which they do business. This regulatory oversight includes matters relating to:

30

Table of Contents

Such regulation and supervision are primarily for the benefit and protection of policyholders rather than stockholders. For instance, our insurance subsidiaries are subject to involuntary participation in specified markets in various states in which they operate and the premium rates our insurance subsidiaries may charge do not always correspond with the underlying costs of providing that coverage.

The NAIC and state insurance regulators are re-examining existing laws and regulations, specifically focusing on:

Changes in state laws and regulations, as well as changes in the way state regulators view related-party transactions in particular, could change the operating environment of our insurance subsidiaries and have an adverse effect on their business. The state insurance regulatory framework has recently come under increased federal scrutiny. Congress is considering proposals that it should create an optional federal charter for insurers. Federal chartering has the potential to create an uneven playing field for insurers by subjecting federally-chartered and state-chartered insurers to different regulatory requirements. Federal chartering also raises the possibility of duplicative or conflicting federal and state requirements. In addition, if federal legislation repeals the partial exemption for the insurance industry from federal antitrust laws, our ability to collect and share loss cost data with the industry could adversely affect the results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

Insurance companies are subject to assessments, based on their market share in a given line of business, to assist in the payment of unpaid claims and related costs of insolvent insurance companies. Such assessments could adversely affect the financial condition of our insurance subsidiaries.

Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to assessments pursuant to the guaranty fund laws of the various states in which they conduct business. Generally, under these laws, our insurance subsidiaries can be assessed, depending upon the market share of our insurance subsidiaries in a given line of insurance business, to assist in the payment of unpaid claims and related costs of insolvent insurance companies in those states. We cannot predict the number and magnitude of future insurance company failures in the states in which our insurance subsidiaries conduct business, but future assessments could adversely affect the business, financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

Our insurance subsidiaries must establish premium rates and loss and loss expense reserves from forecasts of the ultimate costs they expect will arise from risks underwritten during the policy period, and the profitability of our insurance subsidiaries could be adversely affected if their premium rates or reserves are insufficient to satisfy their ultimate costs.

One of the distinguishing features of the property and casualty insurance industry is that it prices its products before it knows its costs, since insurers generally establish their premium rates before they know the amount of losses they will incur. Accordingly, our insurance subsidiaries establish premium rates from forecasts of the ultimate costs they expect to arise from risks they have underwritten during the policy period. These premium rates may not be sufficient to cover the ultimate losses

31

Table of Contents

our insurance subsidiaries incur. Further, our insurance subsidiaries must establish reserves for losses and loss expenses as balance sheet liabilities based upon estimates involving actuarial and statistical projections at a given time of what our insurance subsidiaries expect their ultimate liability to be. Significant periods of time often elapse between the occurrence of an insured loss and the reporting of the loss and the payment of that loss. It is possible that our insurance subsidiaries’ ultimate liability could exceed these estimates because of the future development of known losses, the existence of losses that have occurred but are currently unreported and larger than historical settlements of pending and unreported claims. The process of estimating reserves is inherently judgmental and can be influenced by a number of factors, including the following:

If our insurance subsidiaries have insufficient premium rates or reserves, insurance regulatory authorities may require increases to these reserves. An increase in reserves results in an increase in losses and a reduction in net income for the period in which our insurance subsidiaries recognize a deficiency in reserves. Accordingly, an increase in reserves may adversely impact the business, liquidity, financial condition and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

The financial results of our insurance subsidiaries depend primarily on their ability to underwrite risks effectively and to charge adequate rates to policyholders.

The financial condition, cash flows and results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries depend on their ability to underwrite and set rates accurately for a full spectrum of risks across a number of lines of insurance. Rate adequacy is necessary to generate sufficient premium to pay losses, loss adjustment expenses and underwriting expenses and to realize a profit.

The ability to underwrite and set rates effectively is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including:

32

Table of Contents

Such risks may result in the premium rates of our insurance subsidiaries being based on inadequate or inaccurate data or inappropriate assumptions or methodologies and may cause our estimates of future changes in the frequency or severity of claims to be incorrect. As a result, our insurance subsidiaries could underprice risks, which would negatively affect our margins, or our insurance subsidiaries could overprice risks, which could reduce their volume and competitiveness. In either event, underpricing or overpricing risks could adversely impact our operating results, financial condition and cash flows.

The cyclical nature of the property and casualty insurance industry may reduce the revenues and profit margins of our insurance subsidiaries.

The property and casualty insurance industry is highly cyclical with respect to both individual lines of business and the overall insurance industry. Premium rate levels relate to the availability of insurance coverage, which varies according to the level of surplus available in the insurance industry. The level of surplus in the industry varies with returns on invested capital and regulatory barriers to withdrawal of surplus. Increases in surplus may result in increased price competition among property and casualty insurers. If our insurance subsidiaries find it necessary to reduce premiums or limit premium increases due to these competitive pressures on pricing, our insurance subsidiaries may experience a reduction in their profit margins and revenues, an increase in their ratios of losses and expenses to premiums and, therefore, lower profitability.

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock

The price of our common stock may be adversely affected by its low trading volume.

Our Class A common stock and our Class B common stock have limited liquidity. Reported average daily trading volume for our Class A common stock and our Class B common stock for the year ended December 31, 2016 was approximately 32,975 shares and approximately 556 shares, respectively. This limited liquidity could subject our shares of Class A common stock and our shares of Class B common stock to greater price volatility.

Donegal Mutual’s majority voting control of our stock, anti-takeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws and certain state laws make it unlikely anyone could acquire control of us unless Donegal Mutual were in favor of the acquisition of control.

Donegal Mutual’s ownership of our Class A common stock and Class B common stock, certain anti-takeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws, certain provisions of Delaware law and the insurance laws and regulations of Iowa, Georgia, Maryland, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wisconsin could delay or prevent the removal of members of our board of directors and could make it more difficult for a merger, tender offer or proxy contest involving us to succeed, even if our stockholders other than Donegal Mutual believed any of such events would be beneficial to them. These factors could also discourage a third party from attempting to acquire control of us. The classification of our board of directors could also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in our control.

In addition, we have 2,000,000 authorized shares of preferred stock that we could issue in one or more series without stockholder approval, to the extent applicable law permits, and upon such terms and conditions, and having such rights, privileges and preferences, as our board of directors may determine. Our ability to issue preferred stock could make it difficult for a third party to acquire us. We have no current plans to issue any preferred stock.

33

Table of Contents

Moreover, the DGCL contains provisions that prohibit certain business combination transactions under certain circumstances. In addition, state insurance laws and regulations generally prohibit any person from acquiring, or seeking to acquire, a 10% or greater interest in an insurance company without the prior approval of the state insurance commissioner of the state of domicile of the insurer. Because of our indirect control of UCB, HOLA also prohibits the acquisition of a 10% or greater interest in either our Class A common stock or our Class B common stock without the prior approval of the FRB or the granting of an exemption by the FRB.

We have no unresolved written comments from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) staff regarding our filings under the Exchange Act.

We and our insurance subsidiaries share administrative headquarters with Donegal Mutual in a building in Marietta, Pennsylvania that Donegal Mutual owns. Donegal Mutual charges us and our insurance subsidiaries for an appropriate portion of the building expenses under an inter-company allocation agreement. The Marietta headquarters has approximately 235,000 square feet of office space. Southern owns a facility of approximately 10,000 square feet in Glen Allen, Virginia. Le Mars owns a facility of approximately 25,500 square feet in Le Mars, Iowa, Peninsula owns a facility of approximately 14,600 square feet in Salisbury, Maryland and Sheboygan owns a facility of approximately 8,800 square feet in Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin.

Our insurance subsidiaries are parties to routine litigation that arises in the ordinary course of their insurance business. We believe that the resolution of these lawsuits will not have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or results of operations of our insurance subsidiaries.

Not applicable.

34

Table of Contents

Executive Officers of the Registrant

The following table sets forth information regarding the executive officers of Donegal Mutual and the Registrant as of December 31, 2016, each of whom has served with us for more than 10 years:

35

Table of Contents

PART II

Our Class A common stock and Class B common stock trade on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbols “DGICA” and “DGICB,” respectively. The following table shows the dividends declared per share and the stock price range for both classes of stock for each quarter during 2016 and 2015:

At the close of business on March 3, 2017, we had approximately 1,887 holders of record of our Class A common stock and approximately 301 holders of record of our Class B common stock.

We declared dividends of $0.55 per share on our Class A common stock and $0.48 per share on our Class B common stock in 2016, compared to $0.54 per share on our Class A common stock and $0.47 per share on our Class B common stock in 2015.

36

Table of Contents

Stock Performance Chart.

The following graph provides an indicator of cumulative total stockholder returns on our Class A common stock and our Class B common stock for the period beginning on December 31, 2011 and ending on December 31, 2016, compared to the Russell 2000 Index and a peer group comprised of seven property and casualty insurance companies over the same period. The peer group consists of Cincinnati Financial Corp., EMC Insurance Group Inc., Hanover Insurance, Horace Mann Educators, Selective Insurance Group Inc., State Auto Financial Corp. and United Fire and Casualty Co. The graph shows the change in value of an initial $100 investment on December 31, 2011, assuming reinvestment of all dividends.

Value Line Publishing LLC prepared the foregoing performance graph and data. The performance graph and accompanying data shall not be deemed “filed” as part of this Form 10-K Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section and should not be deemed incorporated by reference into any other filing we make under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent we specifically incorporate the performance graph and accompanying data by reference into such filing.

37

Table of Contents