Posts Tagged ‘terror’



April 18th, 2018

Reliance on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (TRIPRA)

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

terrorism-rep-connections-banner-2In 2017, more than 800 insurers wrote USD 215 billion in TRIPRA eligible premium, with a combined policyholder surplus of USD 683 billion. Considering the current 20 percent deductible requirement and policyholder surplus as a filter, Guy Carpenter’s analysis concludes that small to midsize insurers are substantially more vulnerable to the annual increases in the TRIPRA industry trigger and their overall net retentions as a percentage of policyholder surplus.

Continue reading…

April 10th, 2018

2018 Terrorism Risk Insurance Report

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

terrorism-rep-connections-banner-2Although the number of incidents and casualties declined in 2017, terrorism remains a persistent and significant threat to businesses, governments and individuals.

Marsh’s 2018 Terrorism Risk Insurance Report, produced with support from Guy Carpenter, explores the state of the terrorism insurance marketplace, presenting data on purchasing and pricing trends. We also take a look at how the terrorism insurance market continues to innovate and respond to the needs of global organizations in light of an evolving risk landscape.

Reinsurance capacity for terrorism risks continues to develop and grow. Many insurers continue to use the commercial reinsurance markets — at least in part — to buy down their TRIPRA deductibles and buy out their co-shares at acceptable prices, especially for
conventional weapon attacks.

Continue reading…

December 7th, 2017

Scalability Critical to Developing Substantial Terrorism Market

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

c-gibbs-20-smjamie-russell-final-smCharles Gibbs, Managing Director and Jamie Russell, Vice President

Contact

  • Capacity a major limiting factor in expanding remit
  • Small number of players raising aggregation risk
  • Cover not reaching organizations that need it most

Continue reading…

October 25th, 2017

Scalability critical to developing substantial terrorism market - GC@BB Commentary

Posted at 3:15 AM ET

c-gibbs-20-smjamie-russell-final-smCharles Gibbs, Managing Director and Jamie Russell, Vice President

Contact

  • Capacity a major limiting factor in expanding remit
  • Small number of players raising aggregation risk
  • Cover not reaching organizations that need it most

Continue reading…

September 12th, 2017

Scalability Critical to Developing Substantial Terrorism Market – GC@MC Commentary

Posted at 12:30 AM ET

c-gibbs-20-smjamie-russell-final-smCharles Gibbs, Managing Director and Jamie Russell, Vice President

Contact

  • Capacity a major limiting factor in expanding remit
  • Small number of players raising aggregation risk
  • Cover not reaching organizations that need it most

Continue reading…

June 14th, 2017

Good Leaders Must Empower Others and Embrace Change, Says Former SAS Commander Butler; MMC Young Professionals’ Forum 2017

Posted at 8:32 AM ET

The lessons learned during a distinguished military career, during which the nature of the threat changed dramatically, can be applied to leading in the business world, Ed Butler, Head of Risk Analysis at Pool Re, told delegates gathered at the MMC Young Professionals’ Forum in London Wednesday.

Continue reading…

February 2nd, 2017

Public Sector Risk Financing Perspectives – Terror Risk: Part IV

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

emma-karhan-sm1Emma Karhan, Managing Director

Contact

Insurance is about the pooling of risk and providing support for impacted economies. Expanding insurance coverages to achieve these objectives against terror losses requires a more granular level of insight into the impacts of terrorist attacks. We have a relatively high level of loss impact knowledge for mature lines of business, such as property catastrophe coverages; this has been driven by losses and the ensuing needs for modeling and pricing improvements. However, the terrorism market is a less mature market that has not suffered a frequency of significantly large insured losses that would otherwise assist in a better understanding of the nature of the peril and its direct and indirect impacts on an economy. Additionally, this peril has the added complexity of unpredictable behavioral factors of terrorists that are very difficult to sensibly and consistently be included in pricing models. Consequently, the (re)insurance industry needs to devise improved transparency through innovative modeling and pricing methodologies to ensure that capital continues to support this line of business - underpinning further product development.

Continue reading…

January 31st, 2017

Public Sector Risk Financing Perspectives – Terror Risk: Part III

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

emma-karhan-smEmma Karhan, Managing Director

Contact

The (re)insurance industry needs to be more proactive in understanding and defining the boundary and extent of insured loss along with understanding the types of targets that have a higher probability of attack. Data in the Global Terrorism Database (1) identifies small businesses, retailers, tourist attractions and transportation hubs as increasingly likely targets, not iconic targets such as New York’s World Trade Center, in 2001. These smaller and less iconic targets are typically more vulnerable to the evolving type of terrorism attack (marauding arms, small explosives) that, while causing smaller direct physical damage and losses, still have the potential for significant contingent losses.

Continue reading…

January 30th, 2017

Public Sector Risk Financing Perspectives – Terror Risk: Part II

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

emma-karhan-smEmma Karhan, Managing Director

Contact

The dynamic of pricing decrease and oversupply of capital has also been driven by the industry’s need to diversify into non-natural catastrophe lines of business in the current economic environment, and the fact that the terror market has a loss ratio of almost zero percent. In 2015, Swiss Re’s Sigma report calculated that 27 terrorist events resulted in 1082 fatalities, but no insured losses. Unlike other lines of business, recent pricing and capacity trends have not been driven by a better technical understanding of the impact of losses that normally translates into improved peril understanding or advances in pricing or modeling techniques. This has generally inhibited the industry from expanding its product base for terrorism in line with the evolution of the peril, concentrating more on supporting the pools and the current established bounds of insurable loss.

Continue reading…