Guy Carpenter and its sister company, Oliver Wyman, the international management consulting firm, published the third annual Insurance Risk Benchmarks in September of 2013. We highlight the report here again.
Posts Tagged ‘capital’
Capital management using risk-based capital models and capital allocation is a central component of risk management practices. We have investigated this topic as a new chapter for our 2013 ERM Benchmark update. In this context, Table 3 shows the portion of companies that publish concrete data on their excess capital - the amount of capital retained in excess of a certain target amount. Table 3 also shows both the portion of companies using risk-based capital models in the risk management process and the portion giving some indication of the methodology of the capital allocation process.
Table 1 (below) quantifies the proportion of companies in the sample that disclose the method as well as the specific level of various risk quantifications. Compared to our previous ERM benchmark study, a new metric referring to catastrophe risk has been added. Taking advantage of the increased level of disclosure and transparency on catastrophe risk exposure, we have extended our reports to include this in view of its importance in the economic capital approach of (re)insurers.
2013 Update General Observations
Before focusing on the results of the latest study, we would like to reaffirm the definition of risk profile, risk appetite and risk tolerance found in our previous publications:
In April and October 2009, Guy Carpenter published two briefings titled “Risk Profile, Appetite and Tolerance: Fundamental Concepts in Risk Management and Reinsurance Effectiveness.” This briefing is an update of those studies that summarizes the information publicly disclosed on enterprise risk management (ERM) measures.
Guy Carpenter released its latest Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Benchmark Review that provides an in-depth analysis of risk management practices and policies of 67 insurance and reinsurance companies located in Europe, United States, Bermuda, and Asia-Pacific. Based on publicly-available data from financial and risk reports, Guy Carpenter’s ERM Benchmark Review reveals that most (re)insurers are managing capital with metric-based frameworks and are publishing more about their risk management targets than seen in Guy Carpenter’s 2009 analysis. Capital market, legislative, and regulatory influences, such as the approaching implementation of Solvency II, are expected to further compel company managements to better recognize and analyze the risks of their enterprises.
The growing influence of alternative markets capacity is pressuring traditional reinsurers’ business model and challenging them to compete against a model with lower-cost of capital that continues to enter the reinsurance market. Most reinsurance companies have responded to the challenge by leveraging their incumbent status on reinsurance programs, offering similar or better terms and similar or reduced pricing. Particularly, traditional players are emphasizing their ability to efficiently provide reinstatements, which are seen by many as a critical part of core reinsurance programs, particularly for working reinsurance layers. Traditional players are also hedging their bets and creating their own capital markets divisions to attract, manage and utilize capital from third-party sources whether in the form of fund management, managed accounts or sidecars. This will allow reinsurers the opportunity to securitize the most capital-intensive parts of the business while providing valuable cost-efficient capacity in other business lines.
Influence from direct capital markets’ participation in reinsurance programs, coupled with catastrophic insured losses well below historical averages in 2013, put significant pressure on global catastrophic reinsurance pricing. As a result of significantly reduced pricing (relative to recent years), approximately USD7.1 billion worth of new property/casualty (P&C) catastrophe bonds were issued in 2013 - the second largest record year for P&C issuance. The year included seven new sponsors - American Coastal, American Modern, AXIS Capital, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), QBE, Renaissance Re and the Turkish Catastrophe Insurance Pool - who collectively secured USD1.46 billion of catastrophe bond capacity. In addition to new sponsors, another prevalent change in the market was the increasing use and acceptance of indemnity-based triggers. Given that spreads have tightened between indemnity and other trigger types, sponsors were inclined to take advantage of investors’ openness to indemnity triggers to reduce coverage basis risk without a material increase in pricing relative to non-indemnity trigger pricing.
GC Securities, a division of MMC Securities Corp., a U.S. registered broker-dealer and member of FINRA/SIPC, today released an analysis of activity and trends within the catastrophe risk market from the fourth quarter of 2013, also including the outlook for 2014. According to the report, influence from direct capital markets’ participation in reinsurance programs, coupled with catastrophic insured losses well below historical averages in 2013, put significant pressure on global catastrophic reinsurance pricing. As a result of significantly reduced pricing, relative to recent years, approximately $7.1 billion worth of new property and casualty (P&C) catastrophe bonds were issued in 2013 - the second highest record year for P&C issuance.