Posts Tagged ‘ERM’



February 10th, 2016

Meeting the Challenges: Rating Agency Advisory

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

In realizing the goal of profitable growth, (re)insurers require a trusted partner to help them manage a rapidly evolving regulatory and rating agency environment.

Rating Agency Advisory

Ratings are a key indicator for many insurers and (re)insurance buyers. Amid evolving rating agency concerns and the complexity of enterprise risk management (ERM) requirements, Guy Carpenter Strategic Advisory provides clarity. We help clients take a proactive approach to enhance risk-adjusted capitalization, build up ERM, improve communications with rating agencies and optimize rating outcomes.

Continue reading…

February 9th, 2016

Meeting the Challenges: Regulatory Advisory

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

In realizing the goal of profitable growth, (re)insurers require a trusted partner to help them manage a rapidly evolving regulatory and rating agency environment.

Regulatory Advisory

The regulatory issues facing insurers and reinsurers today often require highly specialized expertise that may not be readily accessible to clients - from taking credit for reinsurance on financial statements to complying with regulatory requirements in contract wordings to shepherding new products through the approval process. Guy Carpenter Strategic Advisory℠ has a team of professionals whose deep expertise and knowledge can help companies navigate the regulatory realm.

Continue reading…

February 8th, 2016

Rating Agency Developments, Part II; Europe and Asia Pacific

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

Europe

In anticipation of the January 2016 rollout, the European insurance industry focused squarely on Solvency II. Rating agencies refrained from instituting any new criteria.

Continue reading…

February 4th, 2016

Rating Agency Developments, Part I

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

There is a great deal of overlap between the goals of government regulators and credit rating agencies. The difference, however, is in the output, with regulators providing a license to trade, or not, and the rating agencies offering a graduated scale of relative strength. Regulatory solvency approval can be viewed as a “qualifier” or minimum standard required to be considered by a customer. A credit rating, on the other hand, can act as a “winner” or differentiating factor that results in a successful sale.

Continue reading…

February 2nd, 2016

Addressing Own Risk and Solvency Assessment/Enterprise Risk Management and Insurance Capital Standard Globally

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

In accordance with the objectives of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and European Insurance and Occupational Pension Authority (EIOPA), Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) is “people and risk-centric,” primarily employing a principles-based approach, as opposed to a rules-based approach. This means that decisions on matters related to risks are largely based on the judgment of individuals relying on underlying facts, as opposed to decisions being made mostly by following intricate sets of rules. This is similar to the principles-based approach taken by International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Although the calculation of the Solvency Capital Requirements (SCR) under Solvency II is rules based, like Insurance Capital Standard (ICS), Solvency II can be a “one size fits all” rules-based approach to capital, especially if the standard formula is used. (Re)insurers will need to find a way to incorporate ICS into their ORSA processes and the vehicle to accomplish this may be through the internal model.

Continue reading…

January 28th, 2016

Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) Framework

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

(Re)insurers that are required to implement Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA), or a similar framework such as Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP), may benefit by adopting a strong ORSA/enterprise risk management (ERM) framework. One such framework that could work on a global basis is illustrated below. 

Continue reading…

January 26th, 2016

Managing the Demands of Global and Domestic Regulation

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

There is very little doubt that (re)insurers face and will continue to face growing regulation and scrutiny both domestically and internationally. Therefore, (re)insurers should seek the most effective and efficient way to meet the growing demands of increased global regulation. What follows below is a brief discussion of the overlap of some of these new global regulatory requirements and thoughts on how (re)insurers might go about approaching them.

Continue reading…

January 18th, 2016

Regulatory Developments in the United States: Group Supervision and ORSA

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has stipulated that “the solvency framework of the U.S. system of state-based Insurance regulation has included a review of the holding company system for decades, with an emphasis placed on each insurance legal entity. In light of the 2008 financial crisis and the globalization of insurance business models, as discussed in this report, U.S. insurance regulators have begun to modify their group supervisory framework and have been increasingly involved in developing an international group supervisory framework (1).”

Continue reading…

December 21st, 2015

Integrating & Synthesizing New Emerging Risks – Within the ERM Framework

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

One purpose of enterprise risk management (ERM) is to help (re)insurers determine how much capital is needed to support the risks they assume (subject to risk tolerance). Instead of segmenting portfolios and handling each peril on a standalone basis, a robust ERM methodology would use a holistic approach to risk and capital management where threats are identified and monitored, all action plans are developed and risks are measured.

Continue reading…

December 10th, 2015

The Rise of Emerging Risk and Casualty Catastrophe Models

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

The modeling of emerging and casualty catastrophe risks remains challenging and the models continue to vary in their approach, level of development and industry acceptance. With the potential scenarios numerous, diverse and constantly changing, there is no single model or approach that could contemplate all of them. Furthermore, the various disaster scenarios with which carriers are being increasingly confronted needs to be prioritized and synthesized within their enterprise risk management framework. By their very definition, there may be limited data on hand on which to base any modeling. As a result, much of the industry continues to rely on multiple models and actuarial approaches that encompass model applications, probable maximum loss (PML) estimates, realistic disaster scenarios, experience and exposure ratings to create a broad set of scenarios and deterministic views.

Continue reading…