American Financial Group - 10-K annual report

        Senior Convertible Notes due June 2, 2033

        Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes  X   No      

        Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes       No  X  

        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, and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  X   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 incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  [X]

        Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer.  Yes  X   No      

        Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company.  Yes       No  X  

        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: $1.8 billion (based upon
non-affiliate holdings of 54,361,802 shares and a market price of $33.52 per share at June 30, 2005).

        Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the Registrant's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 78,171,344 shares (excluding 9,953,392 shares owned by a subsidiary) as of February 1, 2006.

_________________

Proxy Statement for 2006 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (portions of which are incorporated by reference into
Part III hereof).

Please refer to "Forward-Looking Statements" following the Index in front of this Form 10-K.

American Financial Group, Inc. ("AFG") is a holding company that, through subsidiaries, is engaged primarily in property and casualty insurance, focusing on specialized commercial products for businesses, and in the sale of fixed and variable annuities and various forms of supplemental insurance. AFG was incorporated as an Ohio corporation in 1997; its predecessor holding company originated in 1955. Its insurance subsidiaries have been operating as far back as the 1800's. Its address is One East Fourth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202; its phone number is (513) 579-2121. SEC filings, news releases, AFG's Code of Ethics applicable to directors, officers and employees and other information may be accessed free of charge through AFG's Internet site at: www.afginc.com.

(Information on AFG's Internet site is not part of this Form 10-K.)

At February 1, 2006, AFG's Chairman of the Board (Carl H. Lindner) and its Co-CEOs (Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner, sons of the Chairman) beneficially owned 11.8%, 7.3% and 7.3%, respectively, of AFG's outstanding Common Stock. Another son (Keith E. Lindner) publicly reported in November 2005 that he beneficially owned shares representing 8.8% of AFG's outstanding Common Stock.

The property and casualty group reports to a single senior executive and is comprised of multiple business units that operate autonomously but with certain central controls and full accountability. The decentralized approach allows each unit the autonomy necessary to respond to local and specialty market conditions while capitalizing on the efficiencies of centralized investment and administrative support functions. AFG's property and casualty insurance operations employed approximately 4,800 persons as of December 31, 2005.

The property and casualty group operates in a highly competitive industry that is affected by many factors that can cause significant fluctuations in its results of operations. The industry has historically been subject to pricing cycles characterized by periods of intense competition and lower premium rates (a "downcycle") followed by periods of reduced competition, reduced underwriting capacity due to lower policyholders' surplus and higher premium rates (an "upcycle"). After being in an extended downcycle during the 1990s, the property and casualty insurance industry experienced an upcycle with significant market firming and price increases in certain specialty markets during 2000 into 2003. Rate increases moderated during the latter part of 2003 and that trend continued during 2004 and 2005.

The primary objectives of AFG's property and casualty insurance operations are to achieve solid underwriting profitability and provide excellent service to its policyholders. Underwriting profitability is measured by the combined ratio, which is a sum of the ratios of underwriting losses, loss adjustment expenses ("LAE"), underwriting expenses and policyholder dividends to premiums. A combined ratio under 100% is indicative of an underwriting profit. The combined ratio does not reflect investment income, other income or federal income taxes.

While many costs included in underwriting may be readily determined (commissions, administrative expenses, and many of the losses on claims reported), the process of determining overall underwriting results is also highly dependent upon the use of estimates in the case of losses incurred or expected but not yet reported or developed. Actuarial procedures and projections are used to obtain "point estimates" of ultimate losses. While the process is imprecise and develops

1

amounts which are subject to change over time, management believes that the liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses are adequate.

AFG's statutory combined ratio averaged 100.0% for the period 2003 to 2005 (or 97.1% excluding a 2005 charge of $179 million related to asbestos, environmental and other mass tort matters) as compared to 100.1% for the property and casualty industry over the same period (Source: "Best's Review/Preview - Property/Casualty" - January 2006 Edition). AFG believes that its specialty niche focus, product line diversification and underwriting discipline have contributed to the Company's ability to consistently outperform the industry's underwriting results. Management's philosophy is to refrain from writing business that is not expected to produce an underwriting profit even if it is necessary to limit premium growth to do so.

Generally, while financial data is reported on a statutory basis for insurance regulatory purposes, it is reported in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") for shareholder and other investment purposes. In general, statutory accounting results in lower capital and surplus and lower net earnings than result from application of GAAP. Major differences include charging policy acquisition costs to expense as incurred rather than spreading the costs over the periods covered by the policies; reporting investment-grade bonds and redeemable preferred stocks at amortized cost rather than fair value; netting of reinsurance recoverables and prepaid reinsurance premiums against the corresponding liabilities; and charging to surplus certain assets, such as furniture and fixtures and agents' balances over 90 days old.

Unless indicated otherwise, the financial information presented for the property and casualty insurance operations herein is presented based on GAAP. Statutory information is provided for industry comparisons or where comparable GAAP information is not readily available.

Performance measures such as underwriting profit or loss and related combined ratios are often used by property and casualty insurers to help users of their financial statements better understand the Company's performance. See Note C - "Segments of Operations" to the financial statements for the reconciliation of AFG's operating profit by significant business segment to the Statement of Earnings.

2

The following table shows the performance of AFG's property and casualty insurance operations (dollars in millions):

As with other property and casualty insurers, AFG's operating results can be adversely affected by unpredictable catastrophe losses. Certain natural disasters (hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, forest fires, etc.) and other incidents of major loss (explosions, civil disorder, terrorist events, fires, etc.) are classified as catastrophes by industry associations. Losses from these incidents are usually tracked separately from other business of insurers because of their sizable effects on overall operations. AFG generally seeks to reduce its exposure to such events through individual risk selection, including minimizing coastal exposures, and the purchase of reinsurance. Total net losses to AFG's insurance operations from catastrophes, primarily hurricanes, were $60 million in 2005; $36 million in 2004; and $17 million in 2003.

In late 2002 and early 2003, AFG transferred nearly all of its personal lines business to a newly-formed subsidiary, Infinity Property and Casualty Corporation ("Infinity"). AFG sold 61% of Infinity in a February 2003 public offering and its remaining stake in Infinity in December 2003. In April 2003, AFG sold two subsidiaries that marketed automobile insurance directly to customers. The businesses sold wrote primarily nonstandard private passenger automobile liability and physical damage insurance, and to a lesser extent, homeowners' insurance.

3

AFG is focused on growth opportunities in what it believes to be more profitable specialty businesses where AFG personnel are experts in particular lines of business or customer groups. The following are examples of such specialty businesses:

Management believes specialization is the key element to the underwriting success of these business units. Each unit has separate management with significant operating autonomy to oversee the important operational functions of its business such as underwriting, pricing, marketing, policy processing and claims service. These specialty businesses are opportunistic and their premium volume will vary based on prevailing market conditions. AFG continually evaluates expansion in existing markets and opportunities in new specialty markets that meet its profitability objectives.

4

The U.S. geographic distribution of these businesses' statutory direct written premiums in 2005 compared to 2001 is shown below. Amounts exclude business written under special arrangements on behalf of, and fully reinsured to, the purchasers of the divisions sold.

The following table sets forth a distribution of statutory net written premiums for AFG's specialty insurance businesses by NAIC annual statement line for 2005 compared to 2001.

For a discussion of the performance of AFG's specialty businesses see Management's Discussion and Analysis - "Results of Operations - Property and Casualty Insurance - Underwriting."

The following table shows independent ratings and 2005 net written premiums (in millions) of AFG's major property and casualty insurance subsidiaries. Such ratings are generally based on concerns of policyholders and agents and are not directed toward the protection of investors. AFG believes that maintaining an S&P rating of at least "A-" is important to compete successfully in certain lines of business.

5

Consistent with standard practice of most insurance companies, AFG reinsures a portion of its business with other insurance companies and assumes a relatively small amount of business from other insurers. Ceding reinsurance permits diversification of risks and limits the maximum loss arising from large or unusually hazardous risks or catastrophic events. The availability and cost of reinsurance are subject to prevailing market conditions, which may affect the volume and profitability of business that is written. AFG is subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers, as the ceding of risk to reinsurers generally does not relieve AFG of its liability to its insureds until claims are fully settled.

AFG regularly monitors the financial strength of its reinsurers. This process periodically results in the transfer of risks to more financially secure reinsurers. Substantially all reinsurance is ceded to companies with investment grade or better S&P ratings or is secured by "funds withheld" or other collateral. Under "funds withheld" arrangements, AFG retains ceded premiums to fund ceded losses as they become due from the reinsurer. Excluding Infinity, Mitsui and Ohio Casualty (discussed below), recoverables from the following companies were individually between 5% and 10% of AFG's total reinsurance recoverable (net of payables to reinsurers) at December 31, 2005: Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation, American Re-Insurance Company, X.L. Reinsurance America, Inc., Berkley Insurance Company and General Reinsurance Corporation.

During 2004, AFG negotiated commutations or lump-sum cash settlements totaling $58.3 million with certain of its reinsurance carriers who have experienced deteriorating financial condition. AFG's $28.9 million loss on these commutations represents the differential between the consideration received from the reinsurers and the related reduction of reinsurance recoverable.

Reinsurance is provided on one of two bases, facultative or treaty. Facultative reinsurance is generally provided on a risk by risk basis. Individual risks are ceded and assumed based on an offer and acceptance of risk by each party to the transaction. AFG purchases facultative reinsurance, both pro rata and excess of loss, depending on the risk and available reinsurance markets. Treaty reinsurance provides for risks meeting prescribed criteria to be automatically ceded and assumed according to contract provisions. The following table presents (by type of coverage) the amount of each loss above the specified retention maximum generally covered by treaty reinsurance programs (in millions):

In addition to the coverage shown above, AFG reinsures a portion of its crop insurance business through the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation ("FCIC"). The FCIC offers both proportional (or "quota share") and non-proportional coverages. The proportional coverage provides that a fixed percentage of risk is assumed by the FCIC. The non-proportional coverage allows AFG to select desired retention of risk on a state-by-state, county, crop or plan basis. AFG typically reinsures 20% to 25% of gross written premium with the FCIC. AFG also purchases quota share reinsurance in the private market. This quota share provides for a ceding commission to AFG and a profit sharing provision. AFG currently reinsures 50% of premiums not reinsured by the FCIC in the private market. For all remaining exposures, AFG purchases stop loss protection coverage.

6

Included in the Balance Sheet caption "recoverables from reinsurers and prepaid reinsurance premiums" were approximately $283 million on paid losses and LAE and $2.2 billion on unpaid losses and LAE at December 31, 2005. These amounts are net of allowances of approximately $7 million for doubtful collection of reinsurance recoverables. The collectibility of a reinsurance balance is based upon the financial condition of a reinsurer as well as individual claim considerations.

Reinsurance premiums ceded and assumed are presented in the following table (in millions):

In connection with the transfer of a portion of GAI's personal lines business to Infinity in 2003 and the sales of the Japanese division to Mitsui in 2001 and the commercial lines division to Ohio Casualty in 1998, GAI agreed to issue and renew policies related to the businesses transferred until each purchaser received the required approvals and licensing to begin writing business on their own behalf. The Infinity agreement was effective until January 1, 2006. The Mitsui and Ohio Casualty agreements ended at the end of 2003 and in early 2001, respectively. Under these agreements, GAI ceded 100% of these premiums to the respective purchaser. In 2005, 2004, and 2003, premiums of $59 million, $91 million and $122 million, respectively, were ceded under these agreements. At December 31, 2005, AFG's recoverables from reinsurers included $456 million related to these transactions.

The consolidated financial statements include the estimated liability for unpaid losses and LAE of AFG's insurance subsidiaries. This liability represents estimates of the ultimate net cost of all unpaid losses and LAE and is determined by using case-basis evaluations, actuarial projections and management's judgment. These estimates are subject to the effects of changes in claim amounts and frequency and are periodically reviewed and adjusted as additional information becomes known. In accordance with industry practices, such adjustments are reflected in current year operations. Generally, reserves for reinsurance assumed and involuntary pools and associations are reflected in AFG's results at the amounts reported by those entities.

7

The following table presents the development of AFG's liability for losses and LAE, net of reinsurance, on a GAAP basis for the last ten years. The top line of the table shows the estimated liability (in millions) for unpaid losses and LAE recorded at the balance sheet date for the indicated years. The second line shows the re-estimated liability as of December 31, 2005. The remainder of the table presents intervening development as percentages of the initially estimated liability. The development results from additional information and experience in subsequent years. The middle line shows a cumulative deficiency (redundancy), which represents the aggregate percentage increase (decrease) in the liability initially estimated. The lower portion of the table indicates the cumulative amounts paid as of successive periods as a percentage of the original loss reserve liability. For purposes of this table, reserves of businesses sold are considered paid at the date of sale. For example, the percenta ge of the December 31, 2002 reserve liability paid in 2003 includes approximately 20 percentage points for reserves of Infinity at its sale date in February 2003. See Note Q to the Financial Statements for an analysis of changes in AFG's estimated liability for losses and LAE, net and gross of reinsurance, over the past three years on a GAAP basis.

8

In evaluating the re-estimated liability and cumulative deficiency (redundancy), it should be noted that each percentage includes the effects of changes in amounts for prior periods. For example, AFG's $179 million of special charges ($169 million for A&E and $10 million for other mass tort claims) related to losses recorded in 2005, but incurred before 1995, is included in the re-estimated liability and cumulative deficiency (redundancy) percentage for each of the previous years shown. Conditions and trends that have affected development of the liability in the past may not necessarily exist in the future. Accordingly, it may not be appropriate to extrapolate future redundancies or deficiencies based on this table.

A significant portion of the adverse development in the tables is due to A&E exposures for which AFG has been held liable under general liability policies written years ago, even though such coverage was not intended. Other factors affecting development in recent years included changes in the legal environment, including more liberal coverage decisions and higher jury awards, higher legal fees, the general state of the economy and medical cost inflation.

The differences between the liability for losses and LAE reported in the annual statements filed with the state insurance departments in accordance with statutory accounting principles ("SAP") and that reported in the accompanying consolidated financial statements in accordance with GAAP at December 31, 2005 are as follows (in millions):

In the third quarter of 2005, AFG completed a comprehensive study of its asbestos and environmental exposures relating to the run-off operations of its property and casualty group. AFG has undertaken periodic reviews of its A&E reserves with the aid of an independent actuarial firm and specialty outside counsel. As a result of its study, AFG recorded a pre-tax charge of $169 million, net of $32 million in reinsurance recoverables. For a discussion of the A&E reserve strengthening, see Management's Discussion and Analysis - "Results of Operations - Asbestos and Environmental Reserve Charge."

The following table (in millions) is a progression of A&E reserves.

9

The survival ratio, which is an industry measure of A&E claim reserves, is derived by dividing reserves for A&E exposures by average annual paid losses over the past three years. At December 31, 2005, AFG's survival ratio is approximately 21.0 times paid losses for the asbestos reserves (15.6 times excluding amounts associated with the A.P. Green settlement) and 11.5 times paid losses for total A&E reserves (9.0 times excluding A.P. Green), see Legal Proceedings for a discussion of the A.P. Green settlement. In December 2004, A.M. Best reported its estimate that the property and casualty insurance industry's three year survival ratio for A&E reserves was approximately 8.5 times paid losses at December 31, 2003.

AFG's reserves for other mass torts, net of $2.8 million in reinsurance recoverable, were $17.8 million at December 31, 2005. AFG recorded a pre-tax charge of $10 million in the third quarter of 2005 to increase its liability for other mass torts. Other mass tort paid losses and LAE were $3.6 million in 2005, $2.4 million in 2004 and $4.3 million in 2003.

The property and casualty insurance group directs its sales efforts primarily through independent property and casualty insurance agents and brokers, although portions are written through employee agents. Independent agents and brokers generally receive a commission on the sale of each policy. Some agents and brokers are eligible for a bonus commission based on the profitability of all of the policies placed with AFG by the broker or agent in a particular year. The property and casualty insurance group writes insurance through several thousand agents and brokers.

AFG's property and casualty insurance businesses compete with other individual insurers, state funds and insurance groups of varying sizes, some of which are mutual insurance companies possessing competitive advantages in that all their profits inure to their policyholders. They also compete with self-insurance plans, captive programs and risk retention groups. Due to the specialty nature of these coverages, competition is based primarily on service to policyholders and agents, specific characteristics of products offered and reputation for claims handling. Price, commissions and profit sharing terms are also important factors. Management believes that sophisticated data analysis for refinement of risk profiles, extensive specialized knowledge and loss prevention service have helped AFG compete successfully.

AFG's annuity and supplemental insurance operations are conducted through Great American Financial Resources, Inc. ("GAFRI"), an 82% owned subsidiary. GAFRI's primary insurance subsidiaries include Great American Life Insurance Company ("GALIC"), Annuity Investors Life Insurance Company ("AILIC"), Loyal American Life Insurance Company ("Loyal") and United Teacher Associates Insurance Company ("UTA"). These companies market retirement products, primarily fixed and variable annuities, and various forms of supplemental insurance. All of these companies sell their products through independent producers.

In January 2006, GAFRI sold its subsidiary, Great American Life Assurance Company of Puerto Rico ("GAPR"), for $37.5 million in cash. Excluding GAPR, GAFRI and its subsidiaries employed approximately 800 persons at December 31, 2005.

10

Following is certain information concerning GAFRI's subsidiaries (excluding GAPR)(dollars in millions).

GAFRI's statutory premiums over the last three years were as follows (in millions):

GAFRI believes that the ratings assigned by independent insurance rating agencies are important because agents, potential policyholders and school districts often use a company's rating as an initial screening device in considering annuity products. GAFRI believes that (i) a rating in the "A" category by A.M. Best is necessary to successfully market tax-deferred annuities to public education employees and other not-for-profit groups and (ii) a rating in the "A" category by at least one rating agency is necessary to successfully compete in other annuity markets. GAFRI's insurance entities also compete in markets other than the sale of tax-deferred annuities. Ratings are an important competitive factor; GAFRI believes that these entities can successfully compete in these markets with their respective ratings.

GAFRI's operations could be materially and adversely affected by ratings downgrades. In connection with recent reviews by independent rating agencies, management indicated that it intends to maintain lower ratios of debt to capital than it has in recent years and intends to maintain the capital of its significant insurance subsidiaries at levels currently indicated by the rating agencies as appropriate for the current ratings. Items that could adversely affect capital levels include (i) an extended period of low interest rates and a resulting significant narrowing of annuity "spread" (the difference between earnings received by GAFRI on its investments less amount credited to policyholders' annuity accounts); (ii) investment impairments; (iii) a sustained decrease in the stock market; (iv) adverse mortality or morbidity; and (v) higher than planned dividends paid due to liquidity needs of GAFRI's holding companies.

GAFRI's principal retirement products are Flexible Premium Deferred Annuities ("FPDAs") and Single Premium Deferred Annuities ("SPDAs"). Annuities are long-term retirement saving instruments that benefit from income accruing on a tax-deferred basis. The issuer of the annuity collects premiums, credits interest or earnings on the policy and pays out a benefit upon death, surrender or annuitization. FPDAs are characterized by premium payments that are flexible in both amount and timing as determined by the policyholder and are generally made through payroll deductions. SPDAs are generally issued in exchange for a one-time lump-sum premium payment.

Annuity contracts are generally classified as fixed rate (including indexed) or variable. With a traditional fixed rate annuity, GAFRI seeks to maintain a desired spread between the yield on its investment portfolio and the rate it credits. GAFRI accomplishes this by: (i) offering crediting rates that it has the option to change

11

after any initial guarantee period (subject to minimum interest rate guarantees); (ii) designing annuity products that encourage persistency; and (iii) maintaining an appropriate matching of assets and liabilities.

The majority of GAFRI's FPDAs are sold in qualified markets under sections 403(b), 457 and 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code. In the 403(b) and 457 markets, schools, government agencies and certain other not-for-profit organizations may allow employees to save for retirement through contributions made on a before-tax basis. In the 401(k) market, both for-profit and not-for-profit organizations may establish qualified retirement plans whereby employees are eligible to save for retirement through contributions made primarily on a before-tax basis. Federal income taxes are not payable on pretax contributions or earnings until amounts are withdrawn.

In addition to traditional fixed rate annuities, GAFRI offers indexed annuities and variable annuities. An indexed annuity provides policyholders with a crediting rate tied, in part, to the performance of an existing market index while protecting against the related downside risk through a guarantee of principal (excluding surrender charges). GAFRI purchases call options designed to offset substantially all of the increases in the liabilities associated with indexed annuities.

With a variable annuity, the earnings credited to the policy vary based on the investment results of the underlying investment options chosen by the policyholder, generally without any guarantee of principal except in the case of death of the insured annuitant. Premiums directed to the underlying investment options maintained in separate accounts are invested in funds managed by various independent investment managers. GAFRI earns a fee on amounts deposited into separate accounts. Subject to contractual provisions, policyholders may also choose to direct all or a portion of their premiums to various fixed rate options, in which case GAFRI earns a spread on amounts deposited.

Loyal and UTA offer a variety of supplemental insurance products through independent agents. Principal products include coverage for Medicare supplement, cancer, long-term care, accidental injury, short-term disability and hospital indemnity.

Although GALIC no longer issues new life insurance policies, it continues to service and accept renewal premiums on its in-force block of approximately 185,000 policies and $32 billion gross ($10 billion net) of life insurance in force.

GAFRI sells its fixed rate annuities primarily through a network of 165 managing general agents ("MGAs") who, in turn, direct approximately 1,650 actively producing independent agents. The top 15 MGAs accounted for approximately two-thirds of GAFRI's fixed rate annuity premiums in 2005. No one MGA represented more than 15% of total fixed annuity premiums in 2005.

GAFRI offers its variable annuity as an ancillary product solely through its 403(b) and 401(k) sales channels. Nearly one-half of GAFRI's variable annuity sales in 2005 were made through a wholly-owned subsidiary, Great American Advisors, Inc. ("GAA"). GAA is a broker/dealer licensed in all 50 states to sell stocks, bonds, options, mutual funds and variable insurance contracts through independent representatives and financial institutions. GAA also acts as the principal underwriter and distributor for GAFRI's variable annuity products.

GAFRI is licensed to sell its fixed annuity products in all 50 states; it is licensed to sell its variable products in all states except New York and Vermont. In 2005, no individual state accounted for more than 10% of GAFRI's annuity premiums other than California (16%), Washington (13%) and Texas (10%). At December 31, 2005, GAFRI had approximately 370,000 annuity policies in force.

12

GAFRI's insurance companies operate in highly competitive markets. They compete with other insurers and financial institutions based on many factors, including: (i) ratings; (ii) financial strength; (iii) reputation; (iv) service to policyholders and agents; (v) product design (including interest rates credited and premium rates charged); (vi) commissions; and (vii) number of school districts in which a company has approval to sell. Since policies are marketed and distributed primarily through independent agents, the insurance companies must also compete for agents.

No single insurer dominates the markets in which GAFRI's insurance companies compete. Competitors include (i) individual insurers and insurance groups, (ii) mutual funds and (iii) other financial institutions. In a broader sense, GAFRI's insurance companies compete for retirement savings with a variety of financial institutions offering a full range of financial services. Financial institutions have demonstrated a growing interest in marketing investment and savings products other than traditional deposit accounts.

Sales of annuities, including renewal premiums, are affected by many factors, including: (i) competitive annuity products and rates; (ii) the general level and volatility of interest rates, including the shape of the yield curve; (iii) the favorable tax treatment of annuities; (iv) commissions paid to agents; (v) services offered; (vi) ratings from independent insurance rating agencies; (vii) other alternative investments; (viii) performance of the equity markets; (ix) media coverage of annuities; (x) regulatory developments regarding suitability and the sales process; and (xi) general economic conditions.

Through subsidiaries, AFG is engaged in a variety of other operations, including The Golf Center at Kings Island in the Greater Cincinnati area; commercial real estate operations in Cincinnati (office buildings and The Cincinnatian Hotel), New Orleans (Le Pavillon Hotel), Cape Cod (Chatham Bars Inn), New Hampshire (Mountain View Grand Resort), Chesapeake Bay (Skipjack Cove Yachting Resort and Bay Bridge Marina), Charleston (Charleston Harbor Resort and Marina), Palm Beach (Sailfish Marina and Resort) and apartments in Louisville, Pittsburgh and Tampa Bay. These operations employed approximately 500 full-time employees at December 31, 2005.

13

The table below compares total returns on AFG's fixed income and equity securities to comparable public indices. While there are no directly comparable indices to AFG's portfolio, the two shown below are widely used benchmarks in the industry. Both AFG's performance and the indices include changes in unrealized gains and losses.

AFG's bond portfolio is invested primarily in taxable bonds. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners ("NAIC") assigns quality ratings which range from Class 1 (highest quality) to Class 6 (lowest quality). The following table shows AFG's available for sale bonds and redeemable preferred stocks, by NAIC designation (and comparable Standard & Poor's Corporation rating) as of December 31, 2005 (dollars in millions).

AFG's primary investment objective for fixed maturities is to earn interest and dividend income rather than to realize capital gains. AFG invests in bonds and redeemable preferred stocks that have primarily intermediate-term maturities. This practice is designed to allow flexibility in reacting to fluctuations of interest rates.

At December 31, 2005, AFG held $557 million in stocks, the largest of which represents an investment in National City Corporation, a Cleveland-based commercial bank. In July 2004, AFG received National City shares in the merger of Provident Financial Group and National City and realized a pretax gain of $214 million on the transaction.

AFG's insurance company subsidiaries are subject to regulation in the jurisdictions where they do business. In general, the insurance laws of the various states establish regulatory agencies with broad administrative powers governing, among other things, premium rates, solvency standards, licensing of insurers, agents and brokers, trade practices, forms of policies, maintenance of specified reserves and capital for the protection of policyholders, deposits of securities for the benefit of policyholders, investment activities and relationships between insurance subsidiaries and their parents and affiliates. Material transactions between insurance subsidiaries and their parents and affiliates generally must receive prior approval of the applicable insurance regulatory authorities and be disclosed. In addition, while differing from state to state, these regulations typically restrict the maximum amount of dividends that may be paid by an insurer to its shareholders in any twelve-month period without advan ce regulatory approval. Such limitations are generally based on net earnings or statutory surplus. Under applicable

14

restrictions, the maximum amount of dividends available to AFG in 2006 from its insurance subsidiaries without seeking regulatory clearance is approximately $299 million.

Legislation has been proposed to establish a procedure for larger, commercial insurers to be regulated under an optional federal charter. The implications of this proposal on AFG's insurance operations cannot be determined at this time.

In October 2004, the New York State Attorney General brought suit against Marsh and McLennan Companies, Inc. alleging, among other things, that the firm had manipulated the insurance market through specified conduct, including bid rigging and price fixing. The New York State Attorney General also stated that the evidence implicated certain insurance companies, none of which were AFG subsidiaries. As a result of the actions of the Attorney General, the insurance departments and attorneys general of a number of states, including Ohio, have announced investigations and have issued subpoenas and/or information requests to many insurance companies domiciled or licensed to do business in such states. While AFG is not a party to any of the litigation and has not received a subpoena in connection with this matter, it, along with other companies in the industry, has been asked to provide information to the insurance departments in a number of states where AFG does business. AFG cannot estimate the scope or bre adth of the issues that may be investigated, the results, or timeframe in which the reviews might be completed. AFG also cannot predict the impact, if any, that these matters may have on its business or the property and casualty insurance industry generally.

In response to inquiries from several insurance departments, AFG has engaged in an extensive internal review of its business arrangements with insurance producers. After a significant amount of ongoing investigation and document review, AFG has identified only two policy quotations requested by Marsh & McLennan which may have been used by Marsh in a manner similar to the actions described in the New York Attorney General's complaint against that company. The amount of these Great American quotes was less than $1 million.

Most states have created insurance guaranty associations to provide for the payment of claims of insurance companies that become insolvent. Annual assessments for AFG's insurance companies have not been material.

The NAIC is an organization comprised of the chief insurance regulator for each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. One of the NAIC's major roles is to develop model laws and regulations affecting insurance company operations and encourage uniform regulation through the adoption of such model laws in all states.

15

Following is a discussion of the most significant risk factors to investors in AFG securities.

The specialty insurance business is highly competitive and, except for regulatory considerations, there are relatively few barriers to entry. AFG's specialty insurance businesses compete with other individual insurers, state funds and insurance groups of varying sizes, some of which are mutual insurance companies possessing competitive advantages in that all their profits inure to their policyholders. AFG also competes with self-insurance plans, captive programs and risk retention groups. Major competitors in some or all of AFG's specialty lines include American International Group Inc., Berkshire Hathaway Inc., Chubb Corp., W.R. Berkley Corp., CNA Financial Corp., Philadelphia Consolidated Holdings Corp., Markel Corp., Hartford Financial Services Group, The St. Paul Travelers Companies Inc., and Zenith National Insurance Corp.

AFG's annuity and supplemental insurance businesses compete with individual insurers and insurance groups, mutual funds and other financial institutions. Competitors include ING Life Insurance and Annuity Company, Life Insurance Company of the Southwest, Midland National Life Insurance Company, Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America, Fidelity and Guaranty Life Insurance Company, Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company and Bankers Life and Casualty Company.

Competition is based on many factors, including service to policyholders and agents, product design, reputation for claims handling, ratings and financial strength. Price, commissions, profit sharing terms and interest crediting rates are also important factors. Some of AFG's competitors have more capital and greater resources than AFG, and may offer a broader range of products and lower prices than AFG offers. If competition limits AFG's ability to write new or renewal business at adequate rates, its results of operations will be adversely affected.

AFG's reliance on the independent agency market makes it vulnerable to a reduction in the amount of business written by agents. Many of AFG's competitors also rely significantly on the independent agency market. Accordingly, AFG must compete with other insurance carriers for independent agents' business. Some of its competitors offer a wider variety of products, lower price for insurance coverage or higher commissions. Loss of a substantial portion of the business that AFG writes through independent agents could adversely affect AFG's revenues and profitability.

As previously discussed under "Regulation," AFG is subject to comprehensive regulation by government agencies in the states where its insurance company subsidiaries are domiciled and where these subsidiaries issue policies and handle claims. AFG must obtain prior approval for certain corporate actions. The regulations may limit AFG's ability to obtain rate increases or take other actions designed to increase AFG's profitability.

In addition, state insurance department examiners perform periodic financial and market conduct examinations of insurance companies. Such regulation is generally intended for the protection of policyholders rather than securityholders.

There can be no assurance that existing insurance-related laws and regulations will not become more restrictive in the future or that new restrictive laws will not be enacted and, therefore, it is not possible to predict the potential effects of these laws and regulations. The costs of compliance or the failure to comply with existing or future regulations could harm AFG's financial results and its reputation with customers.

16

The failure of AFG's insurers to maintain a commercially acceptable financial strength rating would have a significant negative effect on their ability to compete successfully.

As discussed under "Property and Casualty Insurance Operations" and "Annuity and Supplemental Insurance Operations - General," financial strength ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies and

may be expected to have an effect on an insurance company's sales. A downgrade in AFG's insurers' claims-paying and financial strength ratings could significantly reduce AFG's business volumes, adversely impact AFG's ability to access the capital markets and increase AFG's borrowing costs.

AFG's results may fluctuate as a result of cyclical changes in the specialty insurance industry.

As previously discussed under "Property and Casualty Insurance Operations," the underwriting profitability of the property and casualty insurance industry has been historically cyclical in nature. The trend of AFG's underwriting results typically follows that of the industry and a prolonged downcycle could adversely affect AFG's results of operations.

AFG's property and casualty reserves may be inadequate, which could significantly affect AFG's financial results.

AFG's property and casualty insurance subsidiaries record reserve liabilities for the estimated payment of losses and loss adjustment expenses for both reported and unreported claims. Due to the inherent uncertainty of estimating reserves, it has been necessary in the past, and will continue to be necessary in the future, to revise estimated liabilities as reflected in AFG's reserves for claims and related expenses. For example, in 2005, 2004 and 2003, AFG recorded charges of $181 million (primarily the A&E charge), $140 million and $167 million, respectively, to increase reserves relating to prior accident years. The historic development of reserves for losses and loss adjustment expense may not necessarily reflect future trends in the development of these amounts. Accordingly, it is not appropriate to extrapolate redundancies or deficiencies based on historical information. To the extent that reserves are inadequate and are strengthened, the amount of such increase is treated as a charge to earnings in the period in which the deficiency is recognized.

AFG's results could be negatively impacted by severe weather conditions or other catastrophes.

AFG recorded significant catastrophe losses in 2005 and 2004, primarily due to hurricanes. Catastrophes can be caused by natural events, such as hurricanes, windstorms, earthquakes, tornadoes, hailstorms, severe winter weather, explosions and fire, and by man-made events, such as terrorist attacks and riots. The extent of losses from a catastrophe is a function of the amount of insured exposure in the area affected by the event and the severity of the event. However, a severe catastrophe or a series of catastrophes could result in losses exceeding AFG's reinsurance protection and may have a material adverse impact on its results of operations or financial condition.

Volatility in crop prices could negatively impact AFG's financial results.

Weather conditions and the level of crop prices in the commodities market heavily impact AFG's crop insurance business. These factors are inherently unpredictable and could result in significant volatility in the results of the crop insurance business from one year to the next.

A significant decline in used car prices could negatively impact AFG's financial results.

AFG's residual value business is heavily impacted by the level of used car prices. A significant decrease in the market value of used automobiles could result in significant losses and may have a material adverse impact on AFG's results of operations or its financial condition.

17

The inability to obtain reinsurance or to collect on ceded reinsurance could adversely impact AFG's results.

AFG relies on the use of reinsurance to limit the amount of risk it retains. The following amounts of gross property and casualty premiums have been ceded to other insurers: 2005 - $1.3 billion (34%); 2004 - $1.5 billion (41%); and 2003 - $1.6 billion (46%). The availability and cost of reinsurance are subject to prevailing market conditions, which are beyond AFG's control and which may affect

AFG's level of business and profitability. AFG is also subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers, as the ceding of risk to reinsurers does not relieve AFG of its liability to insureds.

The earnings on certain products sold by AFG's annuity and supplemental insurance business depend significantly upon the extent to which actual experience is consistent with the assumptions used in setting reserves and establishing and amortizing deferred policy acquisition costs ("DPAC"). These assumptions relate to investment yields (and spreads over fixed annuity crediting rates), mortality, surrenders, annuitizations and, on some policies, morbidity. Developing such assumptions is complex and involves information obtained from company-specific and industry-wide data, as well as general economic information. These assumptions, and therefore AFG's results of operations, could be negatively impacted by changes in any of the factors listed above. For example, AFG recorded pretax charges in 2005 of (i) $15.8 million to DPAC and annuity liabilities due primarily to the negative effect of lower interest rates on expected future profits of its fixed annuity operations and (ii) $13.6 million related to an unexpected increase in mortality in its run-off life operations.

The continued threat of terrorism, both within the United States and abroad, and the ongoing military and other actions and heightened security measures in response to these types of threats, may cause significant volatility and declines in the equity markets in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, loss of life, property damage, additional disruptions to commerce and reduced economic activity. Actual terrorist attacks could cause losses from insurance claims related to AFG's property and casualty and life insurance operations with adverse financial consequences. In addition, some of the assets in AFG's investment portfolios may be adversely affected by declines in the capital markets and economic activity caused by the continued threat of terrorism, ongoing military and other actions and heightened security measures.

AFG is a holding company and a legal entity separate and distinct from its insurance company subsidiaries. As a holding company without significant operations of its own, AFG's principal sources of funds are dividends and other distributions from its insurance company subsidiaries. As discussed under "Regulation," state insurance laws limit the ability of insurance companies to pay dividends or other distributions and require insurance companies to maintain specified levels of statutory capital and surplus. AFG's rights to participate in any distribution of assets of its insurance company subsidiaries are subject to prior claims of policyholders and creditors (except to the extent that its rights, if any, as a creditor are recognized). Consequently, AFG's ability to pay debts, expenses and cash dividends to its shareholders may be limited.

AFG's debt securities are rated by Standard & Poor's, Moody's and Fitch, independent corporate credit rating agencies. AFG's senior indebtedness is currently rated BBB by Standard & Poor's, Baa3 by Moody's and BBB+ by Fitch. Securities ratings are subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the assigning rating organization. A security rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securities. An unfavorable change in either of these ratings could make it more expensive to access the capital markets and may increase the interest rate charged under AFG's current multi-bank credit line.

AFG and its subsidiaries are named as defendants in a number of lawsuits. See "Property and Casualty Insurance Operations - Asbestos and Environmental Reserves ("A&E"),""Legal Proceedings," and "Management's Discussion and Analysis - Uncertainties." Litigation, by its very nature, is unpredictable and the outcome of these cases is uncertain. AFG is unable to predict the precise nature of the relief that may be sought or granted in any lawsuits or the effect that pending or future cases may have on AFG's business, operations, profitability or financial condition.

Carl H. Lindner is Chairman of the Board of Directors of AFG, and his sons, Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner, are each Co-Chief Executive Officers and Directors of AFG. Carl H. Lindner, Carl H. Lindner III and S. Craig Lindner beneficially own 11.8%, 7.3% and 7.3% of AFG's outstanding Common Stock as of February 1, 2006. Another son, Keith E. Lindner, reported in November 2005 that he beneficially owned shares representing 8.8% of AFG's outstanding Common Stock. As a result, certain members of the Lindner family have the ability to exercise significant influence over AFG's management, including over matters requiring shareholder approval.

The price of AFG's common stock as listed on the NYSE and Nasdaq National Market constantly changes. During 2004 and 2005, AFG's common stock traded at prices ranging between $26.28 and $39.49. It is expected that the market price of AFG's common stock will continue to fluctuate. AFG's common stock price can fluctuate as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond its control. These factors include but are not limited to:

• actual or anticipated variations in quarterly operating results;
• actual or anticipated changes in the dividends paid on AFG common stock;
• rating agency actions;
• recommendations by securities analysts;
• significant acquisitions or business combinations, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by or involving AFG or its competitors;

19

• operating and stock price performance of other companies that investors deem comparable to AFG;
• news reports relating to trends, concerns and other issues in AFG's lines of business; and
• geopolitical conditions such as acts or threats of terrorism or military conflicts.

Subsidiaries of AFG own several buildings in downtown Cincinnati. AFG and its affiliates occupy about half of the aggregate 650,000 square feet of commercial and office space in these buildings.

AFG's insurance subsidiaries lease the majority of their office and storage facilities in numerous cities throughout the United States, including Great American's and GAFRI's home offices in Cincinnati. A GAFRI subsidiary owns a 40,000 square foot office building in Austin, Texas, most of which is used by the company for its operations.

AFG subsidiaries own transferable rights to develop approximately 1.3 million square feet of floor space in the Grand Central Terminal area in New York City. The development rights were derived from ownership of the land upon which the terminal is constructed. Since the beginning of 1999, AFG has sold approximately 420,000 square feet of such air rights for total consideration of $22.2 million.

Please refer to "Forward-Looking Statements" following the Index in front of this Form 10-K.

AFG and its subsidiaries are involved in various litigation, most of which arose in the ordinary course of business, including litigation alleging bad faith in dealing with policyholders and challenging certain business practices of insurance subsidiaries. Except for the following, management believes that none of the litigation meets the threshold for disclosure under this Item.

AFG's insurance company subsidiaries and its 100%-owned subsidiary, American Premier Underwriters ("American Premier"), are parties to litigation and receive claims asserting alleged injuries and damages from asbestos, environmental and other substances and workplace hazards and have established loss accruals for such potential liabilities. The ultimate loss for these claims may vary materially from amounts currently recorded as the conditions surrounding resolution of these claims continue to change.

American Premier is a party or named as a potentially responsible party in a number of proceedings and claims by regulatory agencies and private parties under various environmental protection laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), seeking to impose responsibility on American Premier for hazardous waste or discharge remediation costs at certain railroad sites formerly owned by its predecessor, Penn Central Transportation Company ("PCTC"), and at certain other sites where hazardous waste or discharge allegedly generated by PCTC's railroad operations and American Premier's former manufacturing operations is present. It is difficult to estimate American Premier's liability for remediation costs at these sites for a number of reasons, including the number and financial resources of other potentially responsible parties involved at a given site, the varying availability of evidence by which to allocate responsi bility among such parties, the wide range of costs for possible remediation alternatives, changing technology and the period of time over which these matters develop. Nevertheless, American Premier believes that its accruals for potential environmental liabilities are adequate to cover the probable amount of such liabilities, based on American Premier's estimates of remediation costs and related expenses and its estimates of the portions of such costs that will be borne

20

by other parties. Such estimates are based on information currently available to American Premier and are subject to future change as additional information becomes available. In 2004, American Premier reached an agreement on the allocation of environmental clean-up costs at its former railroad site in Paoli, Pennsylvania. The settlement became final and agreed upon amounts were paid in early 2005. American Premier intends to seek reimbursement from others for portions of remediation costs incurred.

As previously reported, Great American Insurance Company and certain other insurers were parties to asbestos-related coverage litigation under insurance policies issued during the 1970's and 1980's to Bigelow-Liptak Corporation and related companies, subsequently known as A.P. Green Industries, Inc. ("A.P. Green"). These claims alleged that the refractory materials manufactured, sold or installed by A.P. Green contained asbestos and resulted in bodily injury from exposure to asbestos. A.P. Green sought to recover defense and indemnity expenses related to those claims from a number of insurers, including Great American, and in an effort to maximize coverage asserted that Great American's policies were not subject to aggregate limits on liability, and that each insurer was liable for all sums that A.P. Green became legally obliged to pay.

In February 2002, A.P. Green filed petitions for bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (In Re Global Industrial Technologies, Inc., et al, filed February 14, 2002).

In 2003, Great American Insurance Company entered into an agreement, which was approved by the bankruptcy court, for the settlement of coverage litigation related to A.P. Green asbestos claims. The settlement is for $123.5 million (Great American has the option to pay in cash or over time with 5.25% interest). The agreement allows up to 10% of the settlement to be paid in AFG Common Stock. The settlement agreement is conditioned upon confirmation of a plan of reorganization that includes an injunction prohibiting the assertion against Great American of any present or future asbestos personal injury claims under policies issued to A.P. Green and related companies. No assurance can be made that all conditions will be met; no payments are required until completion of the process. The bankruptcy court has scheduled hearings on the confirmation of the plan of reorganization beginning June 5, 2006.

21

There were approximately 9,200 shareholders of record of AFG Common Stock at February 1, 2006. In 2005 and 2004, AFG declared and paid quarterly dividends of $.125 per share. In December 2005, AFG announced its intent to increase its annual dividend to $.55 per share of common stock, or $.1375 per share quarterly. AFG paid its first dividend at that rate in January 2006. The ability of AFG to pay dividends will be dependent upon, among other things, the availability of dividends and payments under intercompany tax allocation agreements from its insurance company subsidiaries.

Under AFG's shareholder-approved Stock Option Plan, 199,166 shares of AFG Common Stock were tendered in connection with the exercise of stock options for a total of 278,264 shares in the fourth quarter of 2005 (3,819 at $34.55 in October; 86,110 at $36.47 in November; and 109,237 at $38.69 in December).

The following reflects certain information about shares of AFG Common Stock authorized for issuance (at December 31, 2005) under compensation plans.

22

The following table sets forth certain data for the periods indicated (dollars in millions, except per share data).

23

Following is a discussion and analysis of the financial statements and other statistical data that management believes will enhance the understanding of AFG's financial condition and results of operations. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the financial statements beginning on page F-1.

AFG is organized as a holding company with almost all of its operations being conducted by subsidiaries. AFG, however, has continuing cash needs for administrative expenses, the payment of principal and interest on borrowings, shareholder dividends, and taxes. Therefore, certain analyses are best done on a parent only basis while others are best done on a total enterprise basis. In addition, because most of its businesses are financial in nature, AFG does not prepare its consolidated financial statements using a current-noncurrent format. Consequently, certain traditional ratios and financial analysis tests are not meaningful.

At December 31, 2005, AFG (parent) had over $160 million in cash and securities and no amounts borrowed under its bank line of credit.

Through the operations of its subsidiaries, AFG is engaged primarily in property and casualty insurance and in the sale of retirement annuities and supplemental insurance products. With the sale of Infinity in 2003, AFG narrowed the focus of its property and casualty business to its specialized commercial products for businesses.

The property and casualty business is cyclical in nature with periods of high competition resulting in low premium rates, sometimes referred to as a "soft market" or "downcycle" followed by periods of reduced competition and higher premium rates, referred to as a "hard market" or "upcycle." The 1990's were a soft market period; prices started to harden in 2000 and accelerated significantly following the terrorist attacks in 2001. Rate increases for AFG's specialty businesses moderated during the latter part of 2003 and that trend continued during 2004. While certain specialty operations experienced higher rate levels in 2005, overall average pricing was flat for the year.

24

AFG's net earnings for 2005 were $206.6 million ($2.62 per share). Included in net earnings were the following items, net of tax and minority interest:

Significant accounting policies are summarized in Note A to the financial statements. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that can have a significant effect on amounts reported in the financial statements. As more information becomes known, these estimates and assumptions could change and thus impact amounts reported in the future. The areas where management believes the degree of judgment required to determine amounts recorded in the financial statements make accounting policies critical are as follows:

See "Liquidity and Capital Resources - Uncertainties" for a discussion of insurance reserves and contingencies related to American Premier's former operations and "Liquidity and Capital Resources - Investments" for a discussion of impairments on investments. Deferred policy acquisition costs ("DPAC") and certain liabilities related to annuities and universal life insurance products are amortized in relation to the present value of expected gross profits on the policies. Assumptions considered in determining expected gross profits involve significant judgment and include management's estimates of assumed interest rates and investment spreads, surrenders, annuitizations, renewal premiums and mortality. Should actual experience require management to change its assumptions regarding the emergence of future revenues and profits (commonly referred to as "unlocking"), a charge or credit would be recorded to adjust DPAC or annuity liabilities to the levels they wou ld have been if the new assumptions had been used from the inception date of each policy.

AFG's ratio of earnings to fixed charges, including annuity benefits as a fixed charge, was 1.82 for the year ended December 31, 2005 (2.25 excluding the A&E and other mass tort charges). Excluding annuity benefits, this ratio was 4.81 for 2005 (6.83 excluding the A&E and other mass tort charges). Although the ratio excluding interest on annuities is not required or encouraged to be disclosed under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, it is presented because interest credited to annuity policyholder accounts is not always considered a borrowing cost for an insurance company.

25

The NAIC's model law for risk based capital ("RBC") applies to both life and property and casualty companies. RBC formulas determine the amount of capital that an insurance company needs so that it has an acceptable expectation of not becoming financially impaired. At December 31, 2005, the capital ratios of all AFG insurance companies substantially exceeded the RBC requirements. The lowest capital ratio of any operating AFG subsidiary was over 3-1/2 times its authorized control level RBC.

In November 2004, AFG replaced its existing credit line with a $300 million credit facility. No amounts have been borrowed under this credit facility through December 31, 2005. Amounts borrowed bear interest at rates ranging from 1% to 2% over LIBOR based on AFG's credit rating. AFG believes that this credit agreement provides ample liquidity and can be used to obtain funds for operating subsidiaries or, if necessary, for the parent company.

During 2005, AFG repurchased $15.6 million of its 7-1/8% Debentures due 2007 and $71.2 million of its 7-1/8% Debentures due 2009 for $92.6 million in cash. Through February 2006, AFG repurchased an additional $22.1 million of its 7-1/8% Debentures due 2009 for $23.5 million in cash.

In 2004, AFG raised approximately $193 million through the issuance of common stock and 30-year Senior Debentures. The proceeds were used to retire trust preferred securities with a higher effective interest rate and for investment purposes. In addition, American Premier, sold an additional 1.3 million previously issued and outstanding AFG common shares. These shares were held for the benefit of certain unsecured creditors of American Premier's predecessor, The Penn Central Transportation Company. Proceeds from that sale ($41.5 million) were placed in escrow and used to pay American Premier's environmental claims related to its former railroad operations.

All debentures issued by AFG (and GAFRI) are rated investment grade by three nationally recognized rating agencies. Under a currently effective shelf registration statement, AFG can issue up to an aggregate of $517 million in additional equity or debt securities including 2.3 million shares of common stock remaining under a 2004 equity distribution agreement with UBS Securities LLC. The shelf registration provides AFG with flexibility to access the capital markets from time to time as market and other conditions permit.

For statutory accounting purposes, equity securities of non-affiliates are generally carried at market value. At December 31, 2005, AFG's insurance companies owned publicly traded equity securities with a market value of $556 million. In addition, Great American Insurance Company owns GAFRI and National Interstate Corporation (NYSE: "NATL") common stock with a market value of $960 million and a statutory carrying value of $689 million. Decreases in market prices could adversely affect the insurance group's capital, potentially impacting the amount of dividends available or necessitating a capital contribution. Conversely, increases in market prices could have a favorable impact on the group's dividend-paying capability.

Under tax allocation agreements with AFG, its 80%-owned U.S. subsidiaries generally compute tax provisions as if filing separate returns based on book taxable income computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Under tax allocation agreements in effect through 2005, the resulting provision (or credit) was currently payable to (or receivable from) AFG. Under a new agreement that became effective in 2006, subsidiaries will generally pay or recover taxes on a separate company tax return basis.

26

In the fourth quarter of 2005, GAFRI repurchased $20.8 million of its 8-7/8% preferred securities for $22.6 million in cash. Through February 2006, GAFRI repurchased an additional $51.5 million of its 6-7/8% Notes for $53.4 million.

The liquidity requirements of AFG's insurance subsidiaries relate primarily to the liabilities associated with their products as well as operating costs and expenses, payments of dividends and taxes to AFG and contributions of capital to their subsidiaries. Historically, cash flows from premiums and investment income have provided more than sufficient funds to meet these requirements without requiring a sale of investments or contributions from AFG. Funds received in excess of cash requirements are generally invested in additional marketable securities. In addition, the insurance subsidiaries generally hold a significant amount of highly liquid, short-term investments.

The excess cash flow of AFG's property and casualty group allows it to extend the duration of its investment portfolio somewhat beyond that of its claim reserves.

In January 2005, NATL, a majority-owned subsidiary that specializes in property and casualty insurance for the passenger transportation industry, issued 3,350,000 shares of its common stock in an initial public offering. A portion of the $40.4 million of net proceeds from this offering were used to repay NATL's $15 million promissory note to another AFG subsidiary. The remainder was used for other general corporate purposes. After the offering, AFG owns approximately 54% of NATL.

In GAFRI's annuity business, where profitability is largely dependent on earning a "spread" between invested assets and annuity liabilities, the duration of investments is generally maintained close to that of liabilities. In a rising interest rate environment, significant protection from withdrawals exists in the form of temporary and permanent surrender charges on GAFRI's annuity products. With declining rates, GAFRI receives some protection (from spread compression) due to the ability to lower crediting rates, subject to guaranteed minimums.

AFG believes its insurance subsidiaries maintain sufficient liquidity to pay claims and benefits and operating expenses, as well as meet commitments in the event of unforeseen events such as reserve deficiencies, inadequate premium rates or reinsurer insolvencies.

27

Between January 1 and February 28, 2006, AFG repurchased $22.1 million of its 7-1/8% Debentures due 2009 and GAFRI repurchased $51.5 million of its 6-7/8% Notes due 2008. The scheduled principal payments in the above table have been adjusted to reflect these repurchases. The AFG Convertible Debentures due in 2033 are included in the above table at the first put date (2008).

As discussed in Note B to the financial statements, AFG will pay additional amounts for its Farmers Crop acquisition based on customer retention. Payments are not expected to exceed $30 million over the next three years. AFG has no material contractual purchase obligations or other long-term liabilities at December 31, 2005.

Approximately two-thirds of AFG's consolidated assets are invested in marketable securities. AFG's investment portfolio at December 31, 2005, contained $14.3 billion in "Fixed maturities" classified as available for sale and $557 million in "Other stocks", all carried at fair value with unrealized gains and losses reported as a separate component of shareholders' equity on an after-tax basis. At December 31, 2005, AFG had pretax net unrealized gains of $54.3 million on fixed maturities and $55.2 million on other stocks.

Fixed income investment funds are generally invested in securities with intermediate-term maturities with an objective of optimizing total return while allowing flexibility to react to changes in market conditions. At December 31, 2005, the average life of AFG's fixed maturities was about 6-1/2 years.

Approximately 94% of the fixed maturities held by AFG were rated "investment grade" (credit rating of AAA to BBB) by nationally recognized rating agencies at December 31, 2005. Investment grade securities generally bear lower yields and

lower degrees of risk than those that are unrated or noninvestment grade. Management believes that the high quality investment portfolio should generate a stable and predictable investment return.

28

Investments in mortgage backed securities ("MBSs") represented 32% of AFG's fixed maturities at December 31, 2005. MBSs are subject to significant prepayment risk due to the fact that, in periods of declining interest rates, mortgages may be repaid more rapidly than scheduled as borrowers refinance higher rate mortgages to take advantage of lower rates. Substantially all of AFG's MBSs are investment grade quality, with approximately 98% rated "AAA" at December 31, 2005.

Summarized information for the unrealized gains and losses recorded in AFG's Balance Sheet at December 31, 2005, is shown in the following table (dollars in millions). Approximately $105 million of available for sale "Fixed maturities" had no unrealized gains or losses at December 31, 2005.

The table below sets forth the scheduled maturities of AFG's available for sale fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2005, based on their fair values. Asset backed securities and other securities with sinking funds are reported at average maturity. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because certain securities may be called or prepaid by the issuers.

AFG realized aggregate losses of $10.4 million during 2005 on $480.9 million in sales of fixed maturity securities (seven issues/issuers) that had individual unrealized losses greater than $500,000 at December 31, 2004. One of the securities was a $319.8 million U.S. Treasury Note due in 2007 that declined in value by $4.3 million (1.3%) from year-end 2004 to the sale date. The remaining six securities were "AAA" rated mortgage-backed securities, two of which increased in fair value by an aggregate of $677,000 and four of which decreased in fair value by an aggregate of $832,000 from year-end 2004 to the sale date.

Although AFG had the ability to continue holding these investments, its intent to hold them changed due primarily to deterioration in the issuers' creditworthiness or decisions to lessen credit exposure to a particular issuer or industry. Intent to hold may also change due to asset/liability management decisions, market movements and changes in views about appropriate asset allocation.

29

The table below (dollars in millions) summarizes the unrealized gains and losses on fixed maturity securities by dollar amount.

The following table summarizes (dollars in millions) the unrealized loss for all fixed maturity securities with unrealized losses by issuer quality and length of time those securities have been in an unrealized loss position.

When a decline in the value of a specific investment is considered to be "other than temporary," a provision for impairment is charged to earnings (accounted for as a realized loss) and the cost basis of that investment is reduced. The determination of whether unrealized losses are "other than temporary" requires judgment based on subjective as well as objective factors. Factors considered and resources used by management include:

Based on its analysis of the factors enumerated above, management believes (i) AFG will recover its cost basis in the securities with unrealized losses and (ii) that AFG has the ability and intent to hold the securities until they mature or recover in value. Should either of these beliefs change with regard to a particular security, a charge for impairment would likely be required. While it is not possible to accurately predict if or when a specific security will become impaired,

charges for other than temporary impairment could be material to results of operations in a future period. Management believes it is not likely that future impairment charges will have a significant effect on AFG's liquidity.

30

Net realized gains (losses) on securities sold and charges for "other than temporary" impairment on securities held were as follows (in millions):

Estimating the liability for unpaid losses and LAE is inherently judgmental and is influenced by factors that are subject to significant variation. Through the use of analytical reserve development techniques, management considers items such as the effect of inflation on medical, hospitalization, material, repair and replacement costs, general economic trends and the legal environment.

While current factors and reasonably likely changes in variable factors are considered in estimating the liability for unpaid losses, there is no method or system that can eliminate the risk of actual ultimate results differing from such estimates. As shown in the reserve development table (loss triangle) on page 8, the original estimates of AFG's liability for losses and loss adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance, over the past 10 years have developed through December 31, 2005, to be deficient (for eight years) by as much as 15.7% and redundant (for two years) by as much as 1.4% (excluding the effect of special charges for asbestos, environmental and other mass tort exposures). The average of such redundancies and deficiencies has been slightly (less than 5%) deficient. Management believes this development illustrates the variability in factors considered in estimating its insurance reserves.

Quarterly reviews of unpaid loss and LAE reserves are prepared using standard actuarial techniques. These may include (but may not be limited to):

31

Supplementary statistical information is reviewed to determine which methods are most appropriate to use or if adjustments are needed to particular methods. Such information includes:

Within each line, Company actuaries review the results of individual tests, supplementary statistical information, and input from underwriting, operating and claim management, to select their point estimate of the ultimate liability. This estimate may be one test, or a weighted average of several tests, or a judgmental selection as the actuaries determine is appropriate. The actuarial review is performed each quarter as a test of the reasonableness of management's point estimate.

The level of detail in which data is analyzed varies among the different lines of business. Data is generally analyzed by major product or by coverage within product, using countrywide data; however, in some situations, data may be reviewed by state for a few large volume states. Appropriate segmentation of the data is determined based on data volume, data credibility, mix of business, and other actuarial considerations. Overall, Company actuaries review over 500 identified line components. Point estimates are selected based on test indications and judgment.

The following table shows (in millions) the breakdown of AFG's property and casualty reserves between case reserves, IBNR reserves and LAE reserves (estimated amounts required to adjust, record and settle claims, other than the claim payments themselves).

Following is a discussion of certain variables affecting the estimation of the more significant lines of business (asbestos, environmental and other mass tort liabilities are separately discussed below). Many other variables may also impact ultimate claim costs.

An important assumption underlying reserve estimates is that the cost trends implicitly built into development patterns will continue into the future. To estimate the sensitivity of recorded reserves to an unexpected change in the trends, 1% was added to the trend that is embedded in the factors used to determine the

32

reserves for ultimate liabilities. This unexpected change could arise from a variety of sources including a general increase in economic inflation, inflation from social programs, new medical technologies, or other factors such as those listed below in connection with our largest lines of business. Utilizing the effect of a 1% change in cost trends enables changes greater than 1% to be estimated by extrapolation. Each additional 1% change in the cost trend would increase the effect on net earnings by an amount slightly (about 6%) greater than the effect of the previous 1%. For example, if a 1% change in cost trends would change net earnings by $20 million, a 2% change would change net earnings by $41 million. The estimated cumulative impact that a one percent change would have on our net earnings is shown below (in millions).

This line of business consists of coverages protecting the insured against legal liability resulting from negligence, carelessness, or a failure to act causing property damage or personal injury to others. Some of the important variables affecting estimation of loss reserves for other liability - occurrence include:

• Litigious climate
• Unpredictability of judicial decisions regarding coverage issues
• Magnitude of jury awards
• Outside counsel costs
• Timing of claims reporting

The judicial climate in some states has had some effect on certain claims in recent years with more liberal coverage decisions, expanded concepts of liability and higher jury awards. Significant case reserve strengthening has occurred in several books of business within this line. Management believes these stronger case reserves will cause future development on known claims to be less than recent historical patterns.

This line of business provides coverage to employees who may be injured in the course of employment. Some of the important variables affecting estimation of loss reserves for workers' compensation include:

• Legislative actions and regulatory interpretations
• Future medical cost inflation
• Timing of claims reporting

AFG's workers' compensation business is written primarily in California. Significant reforms passed by the California state legislature in 2003 and in 2004 have favorably impacted settlement payments. The magnitude of future cost savings depends on the implementation and interpretation of the reforms throughout the California workers' compensation system over the next several years.

This line of business consists mostly of directors and officers' liability, and professional liability, mostly for lawyers. Some of the important variables affecting estimation of loss reserves for other liability - claims made include:

• Litigious climate
• The economy
• Variability of stock prices

The general state of the economy and the variability of the stock price of the insured can affect the frequency and severity of shareholder class action suits that trigger coverage under directors' and officers' liability policies. This has caused some adverse development in the past and is judgmentally considered in reserving for this line of business.

33

Commercial Multi-Peril

This line of business consists of two or more coverages protecting the insured from various property and liability risk exposures. The commercial multi-peril line of business includes coverage similar to other liability - occurrence, so in general, variables affecting estimation of loss reserves for commercial multi-peril include those mentioned above for other liability - occurrence. In addition, this line also includes reserves for a run-off book of homebuilders business. Variables unique to estimating the liabilities for this coverage include:

• Changing legal/regulatory interpretations of coverage

• Statutes of limitations and statutes of repose in filing claims
• Changes in policy forms and endorsements

Over the years, certain portions of the homebuilders business has experienced adverse interpretations of coverage, coupled with certain statutory changes relating to liability, that caused an increase in the emergence of claims from older years. Management believes that changes in policy forms and endorsements implemented in 1998 will reduce AFG's exposure to such adverse interpretations.

In 2004, AFG recorded a loss of $28.9 million to commute $87.2 million of reinsurance recoverables with certain of its reinsurers who have experienced deteriorating financial condition. In the first quarter of 2005, AFG completed an additional agreement to help further mitigate its exposure to such reinsurers. AFG has recorded reserves for doubtful collection of reinsurance recoverables on a case by case and overall basis. These estimates are subject to significant judgment and may vary significantly depending upon the reinsurers continued willingness and ability to pay amounts due.

Asbestos reserves include claims asserting alleged injuries and damages from exposure to asbestos. Environmental reserves include claims relating to polluted waste sites.

Asbestos claims against manufacturers, distributors or installers of asbestos products were presented under the products liability section of their policies which typically had aggregate limits that capped an insurer's liability. In recent years, a number of asbestos claims are being presented as "non-products" claims, such as those by installers of asbestos products and by property owners or operators who allegedly had asbestos on their property, under the premises or operations section of their policies. Unlike products exposures, these non-products exposures typically had no aggregate limits, creating potentially greater exposure for insurers. Further, in an effort to seek additional insurance coverage, some insureds with installation activities who have substantially eroded their products coverage are presenting new asbestos claims as non-products operations claims or attempting to reclassify previously settled products claims as non-products claims to restore a portion of previously exhausted prod ucts aggregate limits. We, along with other insurers, are and will be subject to such non-products claims. It is difficult to predict whether insureds will be successful in asserting claims under non-products coverage or whether we and other insurers will be successful in asserting additional defenses. Therefore, the future impact of such efforts is uncertain.

34

Approximately one-half of AFG's net asbestos reserves relate to policies written directly by AFG subsidiaries. Claims from these policies generally are product oriented claims with only a limited amount of non-product exposures, and are dominated by small to mid-sized commercial entities that are mostly regional policyholders with few national target defendants. The remainder is assumed reinsurance business that includes exposures for the periods 1954 to 1983. The asbestos and environmental assumed claims are ceded by various insurance companies under reinsurance treaties. A majority of the individual assumed claims have exposures of less than $100,000 to AFG. Asbestos losses assumed include some of the industry known manufacturers, distributors and installers. Pollution losses include industry known insured names and sites.

Establishing reserves for A&E claims relating to policies and participations in reinsurance treaties and former operations is subject to uncertainties that are significantly greater than those presented by other types of claims. For this group of claims, traditional actuarial techniques that rely on historical loss development trends cannot be used and a meaningful range of loss cannot be estimated. Case reserves and expense reserves are established by the claims department as specific policies are identified. In addition to the case reserves established for known claims, management establishes additional reserves for claims not yet known or reported and for possible development on known claims. These additional reserves are management's best estimate based on periodic detailed "ground up" studies adjusted for payments and identifiable changes, supplemented by management's review of industry information about such claims, with due consideration to individual claim situations. Estimating ultimate liability for asbestos claims presents a unique and difficult challenge to the insurance industry due to, among other things, inconsistent court decisions, an increase in bankruptcy filings as a result of asbestos-related liabilities, novel theories of coverage, and judicial interpretations that often expand theories of recovery and broaden the scope of coverage. The casualty insurance industry is engaged in extensive litigation over these coverage and liability issues as the volume and severity of claims against asbestos defendants continue to increase.

Emerging trends, such as those named below, could impact AFG's reserves and payments:

• There is a growing interest at the state and federal level to attempt to legislatively address asbestos liabilities and the manner in which asbestos claims are resolved. These developments are fluid and could result in a comprehensive solution or piecemeal state by state solutions.
• The manner by which bankruptcy courts are addressing asbestos liabilities is in flux.
• AFG's insureds may make claims alleging significant non-products exposures.

While management believes that AFG's reserves for A&E claims are a reasonable estimate of ultimate liability for such claims, actual results may vary materially from the amounts currently recorded due to the difficulty in predicting the number of future claims, the impact of recent bankruptcy filings, and unresolved issues such as whether coverage exists, whether policies are subject to aggregate limits on coverage, whether claims are to be allocated among triggered policies and implicated years, and whether claimants who exhibit no signs of illness will be successful in pursuing their claims. A 1% variation in loss cost trends, caused by any of the factors previously described, would change net income by approximately $24 million.

From time to time, AFG has engaged independent firms to work closely with its claims staff to study the A&E reserves of its insurance company subsidiaries. The most recent study was completed in the third quarter of 2005 and resulted in AFG recording a pretax charge of $169 million to increase its A&E reserves. Absent legislative reforms, which may alter the need for an independent review, management expects to conduct another routine study in 2007. For a discussion of the A&E reserve strengthening, see Management's Discussion and Analysis - "Results of Operations - Asbestos and Environmental Reserve Charge."

In February 2003, Great American Insurance Company entered into an agreement for the settlement of asbestos related coverage litigation under insurance polices issued during the 1970's and 1980's to Bigelow-Liptak Corporation and related companies, subsequently known as A.P. Green Industries, Inc. The settlement is for $123.5 million (Great American has the option to pay in cash or over time with

35

5.25% interest), all of which was covered by reserves established prior to 2003, and anticipated reinsurance recoverables for this matter. The agreement allows up to 10% of the settlement to be paid in AFG Common Stock. The settlement has received the approval of the bankruptcy court supervising the reorganization of A.P. Green. It remains subject to the confirmation by the bankruptcy court of a plan of reorganization that includes an injunction prohibiting the assertion against Great American of any present or future asbestos personal injury claims under policies issued to A.P. Green and related companies. No assurance can be made that a plan of reorganization will be confirmed; no payments are required until completion of the process. The bankruptcy court has scheduled hearings on the confirmation of the plan of reorganization beginning June 5, 2006.

AFG tracks its A&E claims by policyholder. The following table shows, by type of claim, the number of policyholders that did not receive any payments in the calendar year separate from policyholders that did receive a payment. Policyholder counts represent policies written by AFG subsidiaries and do not include assumed reinsurance. The significant decline in policyholder counts in 2004 reflects the sale of Transport Insurance Company.

Amounts paid (net of amounts received from reinsurers) for asbestos and environmental claims, including loss adjustment expenses, were as follows (in millions):

Other mass tort claims include alleged injuries and damages from exposure to lead, silica and various chemical substances, as well as other toxic hazards. Similar to A&E, other mass tort claims are subject to uncertainties that are significantly greater than those presented by other types of claims. While management believes that AFG's reserves for other mass tort claims are a reasonable estimate of ultimate liability for such claims, actual results may vary materially from the amounts currently recorded due to the difficulty in predicting the number of future claims and unresolved issues such as whether coverage exists.

36