TRAVELERS COMPANIES INC

This summary highlights certain information contained in this Proxy Statement, but does not contain all of the

information you should consider when voting your shares. Please read the entire Proxy Statement carefully before

voting.

Director Nominees

SUMMARY

The nominees represent a broad range of expertise, experience, viewpoints and backgrounds, as well as a mix of

tenure of service on the Board.

INDEPENDENCE9 of 10

AGE~62 years average

TENURE~6 years average

DIVERSITY~60% diverse

For a discussion of the specific considerations with respect to these nominees, see “Director Nominations—Specific

Considerations Regarding the 2025 Nominees” on page 20.

Corporate Governance Highlights

The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of The Travelers Companies, Inc. (the “Company”) is committed to high standards

of corporate governance. Highlights include:

SUMMARY

Executive Compensation Highlights

With our pay-for-performance philosophy and compensation objectives as our guiding principles, we deliver annual

executive compensation through the following elements:

SUMMARY

The Compensation Committee has adopted the following practices, among others:

Shareholder Engagement and Board

Responsiveness

Travelers has long understood and valued the importance of a comprehensive shareholder outreach program to solicit

investor feedback and perspectives on topics that are important to the Company and its shareholders. Since 2009, the

Nominating and Governance Committee has overseen a comprehensive shareholder engagement program. Under this

program, management reaches out to the Company’s largest shareholders throughout the year to facilitate a dialogue

with respect to the Company’s financial results, corporate strategy, compensation practices and environmental, social

and governance matters. Management reports on the conversations with those investors to the Nominating and

Governance Committee and, as appropriate, to the Compensation Committee.

Our shareholder engagement program continues to influence and inform the Company’s policies, practices and

disclosures. For example, in the past few years, based in part on investor input, the Company has taken the following

actions:

In 2024, the Company again took an integrated approach to its shareholder engagement efforts, including with respect

to its financial results, corporate strategy, compensation practices and environmental, social and governance matters.

Throughout the year, we also sought additional opportunities to connect directly with our investors to discuss current

and emerging trends and to hear investor feedback.

Engagement on Executive Compensation

We discuss our executive compensation program with

our shareholders each year as part of our ongoing

shareholder engagement. Our 2024 say-on-pay vote

received support from a substantial majority of our

shareholders. However, the level of support was lower

than in prior years. Accordingly, the Compensation

Committee sought additional input from shareholders

regarding various aspects of our executive compensation

program. Matters discussed included performance targets

used for performance share payouts, the use of a relative

performance metric to determine performance share

payouts, the implementation of limits on annual bonus

amounts for named executive officers and the use of

discretion in our bonus plan, among others.

Based, in part, on these extensive engagements with

our shareholders, we believe that a significant

majority of our shareholders continue to support our

approach with respect to executive compensation.

The following summarizes our conversations with

shareholders regarding some of the executive

compensation matters discussed and the Compensation

Committee’s 2025 executive compensation actions.

Approach to Annual Bonus Plan

In light of the focus of the proxy advisory firms on the use

of discretion in setting the annual cash bonus amounts in

lieu of a more formulaic approach, as part of our

extensive shareholder engagement process, we

specifically discussed with our shareholders the use of

discretion in our short-term incentive program. In

particular, we discussed the following:

•The Compensation Committee continues to believe

that a purely formulaic approach to the

determination of performance-based compensation

is not an appropriate substitute for the

Compensation Committee's informed and thorough

deliberation and the application of its reasoned

business judgment.

•The Compensation Committee believes that its

current approach, which is consistent with market

practice for companies in the financial services

industry, allows it to appropriately assess the

quality of the Company’s results and ensures that

executives are not unduly rewarded, or

disadvantaged, based purely on the application of a

mechanical formula.

•While financial and other objectives communicated

to executives each year should be considered as

part of a company’s bonus program, those

objectives should be viewed as just the beginning,

not the end, of the Compensation Committee’s

determination of the executive annual bonus.

•In exercising their prudential oversight responsibility,

regulators have long recognized that a thoughtful

independent compensation committee, steeped in

the specifics of the firm and industry, is ultimately

best suited to make executive compensation

determinations, while taking into account all relevant

factors, including a company’s short- and long-term

performance, the effectiveness of the company’s risk

management program, the company’s culture and

an executive’s leadership abilities and judgment.

•A purely formulaic approach to the determination

of performance-based compensation could result

in unintended consequences, especially in the

context of the property and casualty industry.

•In determining to maintain its present approach to

awarding annual bonuses, the Compensation

Committee took into account that the application of a

formulaic approach could be particularly damaging

in the property and casualty industry, where an

overly formulaic approach could create incentives

for management to relax underwriting or investment

standards to increase revenue and reported profit in

the near-term while creating excessive risk for

policyholders and shareholders over the longer

term.

•In an industry in which the results of management

decisions may not be evident for many years and

can only be assessed in the context of a variety of

factors, including interest rates, reserve

developments, loss trends, catastrophes, weather

and the competitive environment, among others, the

Compensation Committee believes that

compensation decisions should only be made in the

context of a specific organization and leadership

team, rather than by reference to a one-size-fits all

model.

•The Company is not aware of any evidence that

supports the proposition that companies with

formulaic compensation plans outperform those

that apply discretion. To the contrary, the Company

believes that a presumptive preference for formulaic

compensation models – without consideration of the

factors that make a given company or industry unique

– can actually lead to significant unintended

consequences that are adverse to the interests of

investors. For example, formulaic compensation plans

can incentivize organizations to emphasize short-term

quantifiable metrics that are more easily measured yet

may not necessarily align with a particular

organization's long-term objectives or risk

management profile, or appropriately reflect how the

organization's annual results were actually achieved.

Based, in part, on feedback received during our extensive

shareholder engagement process and our review of the

policies of our largest institutional shareholders, we

believe that a significant majority of our

shareholders, including nine of the top 10 largest

shareholders voting at our 2024 annual meeting,

support the use of discretion by an independent

compensation committee in the setting of annual cash

bonuses. Accordingly, the Compensation Committee

determined to maintain its present approach to setting

annual cash bonuses and did not adopt a formulaic

annual bonus plan.