Companies are uncertain of how much coverage to acquire and whether their current policies provide them with protection. One of the roots of the uncertainty stems from the difficulty in quantifying potential losses because of the dearth of historical data for actuaries and underwriters to model cyber-related losses. Furthermore, traditional general liability policies do not always cover cyber risk. In the United States, ISO’s revisions to its general liability policy form consist primarily of a mandatory exclusion of coverage for personal and advertising injury claims arising from the access or disclosure of confidential information.
Posts Tagged ‘Models’
Matthew Day, Head of Rating Agency Advisory, Strategic Advisory EMEA - Capital Optimization
What drives (re)insurer capital planning? Maybe it is risk appetite, internal dynamic capital modeling or actuarial analysis. Or perhaps it is external pressure from regulators, rating agencies or investors. In reality, it is probably a combination of all of these factors. Faced with conflicting views of what constitutes both the available capital and the assessment of the amount required relative to the risk, optimizing (re)insurer capital adequacy is likely to be a key challenge confronting a company. Rarely will the company be able to fully satisfy all the demands. Developing a management framework to evaluate, analyze and compare these divergent needs is therefore essential to extract the maximum efficiency from (re)insurer corporate capital structure.
(Re)insurers today face a degree of change and uncertainty that appears to be evolving at an ever quickening pace. Guy Carpenter has published a report, Ahead of the Curve: Understanding Emerging Risks, highlighting emerging risks facing the (re)insurance sector, including cyber-attacks, terrorism and new compensation structures for long-term bodily injuries. The report seeks to identify and categorize these risks that are now confronting the sector, as well as analyze their implications on businesses and (re)insurers.
To support the process of managing and underwriting the terrorism peril, (re)insurers utilize data management and modeling tools to analyze the risk. The dynamic nature of terrorism and the uncertainty in identifying targets and the frequency of attacks requires a specialized approach to manage the risk.
Guy Carpenter today released Part One of a two-part series report detailing a ten-year retrospective on the 2004 and 2005 Atlantic Hurricane Seasons - two landmark years that were not only significant for their weather events, but for their lasting effects on the (re)insurance industry. The report examines the meteorological conditions that contributed to the weather activity characterizing both hurricane seasons, as well as the impact on underwriting and claims adjusting practices, cat modeling, and the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund (FHCF).
Despite this increase in terrorism market capacity, it is not sufficient on its own to provide comprehensive terrorism cover in the United States. According to a Guy Carpenter (re)insurance capital study, dedicated global capital to the US (re)insurance market is estimated to be approximately USD700 billion (1). Catastrophe models that produce nuclear, biological, chemical or radiological (NBCR) event scenarios estimate losses from a large nuclear attack in Manhattan (at greater than USD900 billion) would likely exceed the total amount of capital in the US market (see figure below). The study consequently concludes that the (re)insurance sector does not have the capital necessary to withstand such a scenario. Some form of federal backstop is therefore needed if the private (re)insurance market is to continue to provide capacity to higher risk areas.