ART Phillip Petterson Gillian James - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – ART Phillip Petterson Gillian James PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: c7955-ZDc1Z


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

ART Phillip Petterson Gillian James


Commodity Risk Employee Benefits Lease-End risk ... Auto liability. Property. US workers compensation and auto liability only self insured as regulated programs ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:39
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 76
Provided by: miket92


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: ART Phillip Petterson Gillian James

ART Phillip Petterson Gillian James
  • General Insurance Spring Seminar
  • 19-20 May 2003
  • Scarman House

  • This presentation aims to give an overview of
    ART, however it does not cover all products that
    might be considered to fall under the ART heading
  • The opinions presented are those of the authors,
    and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
    Benfield Group

  • No simple definitions of alternative risk
    transfer (ART)
  • Originally methods by which companies financed
    part of their insurance risks
  • Hard market in the mid 1980s brought serious
    shortages in cover problems with affordability
  • Consequently financial reinsurance capital
    market products developed

  • The Art landscape can be divided into the
    following silos
  • Alternative Carriers
  • Alternative products such as
  • Alternative Risk Transfer Products (Cat Bonds)
  • Risk Financing Products (Finite structures)
  • Hybrid Structures (could be a combination of
    Capital market and traditional reinsurance such
    as a cat option)

ART (Motivators) 1
  • Regulatory or Accounting drivers
  • Solvency margin
  • Stabilisation of results
  • Regulatory arbitrage
  • Discounting of reserves
  • Taxation
  • Transfer of taxable profits / losses to a more
    favoured environment / company
  • Use of tax favoured status
  • More effective provision of cover
  • New sources of capacity and diversification

ART (Motivators) 2
  • Greater customer focus /alignment
  • May include risks otherwise uninsurable
  • Highly customised to clients specific needs no
    standard solutions
  • Integrated risk management
  • Better alignment of risk transfer to customers
    financial needs
  • Funding rather than transferring
  • Locking in terms for more than 12 months
  • Greater security of payment
  • Credit enhancing by utilising reinsurers balance
  • Credit enhancing by substituting reinsurer
    balance sheet for cash e.g. Cat Bond

Traditional View of Matrix of Operating Risks
Non- Traditional Insurable
Financial Risk
Traditional Risk
Financial Traditional Non-Traditional
Risks Insurable
Equity Risk Property Risk Price Volatility and
Stabilisation Currency Risk Liability Credit
enhancement Interest Rate Risk Casualty
Risk Residual GAP risk Commodity Risk Employee
Benefits Lease-End risk Credit Risk Business
Interruption Environmental Risks Correlation
Risk Workers Comp Cat Bonds Investment Risk D
O Performance Risk Guarantees Aviation Film
Finance Refinancing Risk
Metamorphic View Matrix of Operating Risks
Financial Risk
Non-Traditional Insurable
Traditional Risk
Alternative carriers
  • Self insurance (US)
  • Captives
  • Risk retention groups
  • Pools
  • Contingent capital

Self Insurance
  • By definition, does not provide risk transfer
  • Commonly used in the US for
  • Workers compensation
  • General liability
  • Products liability
  • Auto liability
  • Property
  • US workers compensation and auto liability only
    self insured as regulated programs

What Is a Captive?
  • Insurance or Reinsurance company
  • Generally owned through a common interest which
    may or may not primarily be engaged in the
    business of insurance or reinsurance
  • All or a significant portion of risks written in
    the captive
  • Related to the shareholders
  • Third party risks which shareholders may control

Definition of industry segments that form captives
  • Most early captives formed by industrial or
    manufacturing companies i.e. not insurance or
    reinsurance companies
  • Other types of captives were industry groups or
    associations, rent-a -captives etc
  • Their bespoke needs are different to the
    formation of insurance /reinsurance captives by
    players within the insurance and reinsurance

The common captive drivers and reasons when
captives make sense
The principle motivators
  • The assumption of uninsurable or hard to place
  • Additional retentions in a hard market
  • The creation of a Special Purpose Reinsurer (SPR)
    as a vehicle for capital market proposals such as
    Cat Bonds, Swaps, Options etc (note Tokio
    Millennium Re and MS Frontier Re)
  • The assumption of the so called Enterprise
  • Cash flow reasons (usually related to long tail
  • To enhance underwriting capacity or to assist
    growth strategy

The principle motivators
  • Other benefits
  • Regulatory arbitrage the captive is usually
    able to take advantage of a more flexible
    regulatory environment than that of the home
    domicile, which leads to financial benefits for
    example the creation of equalisation reserves
  • Taxation - the captive is able to take advantage
    of a more generous tax environment which can
    bring benefits when accumulating reserves for

Captives - Tax
  • Until 1970, use of captives was very
  • Since then, tax benefits reduced
  • In US premiums to captives with substantial third
    party business are tax deductible
  • In most European countries, company must
    demonstrate substantial risk transfer
  • Premiums must reflect underwriting risk
  • But still a number of tax advantages

The business the captive may write
  • Catastrophe business as long as it does not
    increase the overall correlation
  • Non-cat risks currently reinsured externally
    focus on high reinsurer margins and building
    balanced retained risk profile
  • Internal LPTs (loss portfolio transfers) which
    move past activities to a more beneficial
    regulatory / tax environment.
  • Specific gaps in historic risk protection e.g.
    EMF, RSI, toxic mould, passive smoking

The business the captive may write
  • Any mismatches between original coverage and
    reinsurance where captive might offer DIC (e.g.
  • PML error and/or reinstatement exhaustion cover
  • Write finite prospective risks or retrospective
    risks for example pharmaceutical liability
  • Deterioration in guaranteed annuity provisions
  • Own insurances (at least current retentions)

A summary of when does a Captive make Sense?
  • Special risk needs
  • Cost control center
  • Tax efficiency desires
  • Regulatory arbitrage
  • Increase efficiency by retaining high-frequency
  • Low-risk companies can benefit from their
    superior risk profile

Interesting Captive Facts!
  • Average premium for direct captives US223m
    although the range was from US1m to US1.98bn
  • The median premium income US316.5m
  • Reinsurance captives average is up from US107m
    to US 131m and the range is estimated to be
    between US5m to US550m
  • The median is US15.5m
  • It is expected that the direct and reinsurance
    premium volumes will increase by 24

Risk retention groups
  • Introduced in the US in 1986
  • Specialised liability insurance companies
  • Allow US companies to access liability insurance
  • Mainly professional services and healthcare (PI,
    med mal)
  • Premium close to USD 1bn

  • Arrangements between companies to protect against
    very large risks
  • Typically organised on a national basis
  • Cover a specific risk class
  • US workers compensation pools
  • Spanish natural catastrophe pool
  • Nuclear risk pool in Germany
  • UK terrorism pool

Contingent capital
  • Used since 1995
  • Deals worth USD6bn written to date
  • Provide capital after specific event
  • Purchaser has right to sell its securities
  • At pre-set price, for fixed period after
    specified event
  • Provides capital when it is most needed
  • Pre-set price is better than post-event market
  • Has been regarded as uncorrelated with other

(No Transcript)
Alternative products
  • Loss Portfolio Transfers (LPTs)
  • Adverse Development Covers (ADCs)
  • Finite quota share
  • Multi-trigger protections
  • Multi-year spread loss
  • Whole account stop Loss
  • Credit securitisation
  • Insurance securitisation

Alternative products
  • Multi year and/or multi class
  • Complement existing (re)insurance to improve
    efficiency of risk transfer
  • Expand range of insurable risks
  • New risk classes
  • Classes with insufficient market data
  • Classes close to business risks and so with
    potential moral hazard risks

Loss Portfolio Transfers (LPTs)
  • Transfer reserves for specific blocks of business
  • But this is reinsurance, not novation
  • Cedant still ultimately responsible for claim
  • So some credit risk remains
  • Policies usually have limit on maximum recoveries
  • Policies sometimes have additional features
  • sub-limits for specific classes, claims etc
  • additional premiums
  • profit share
  • co-insurance

  • Net of inuring - inuring reinsurance deemed
    fully recoverable
  • Gross with benefit of inuring protects
    against any irrecoverable inuring reinsurance
  • Claims handling may be taken on by reinsurer
  • Or claims handling agreements determine how
    cedant will manage claims
  • Potential moral hazard if cedant has ongoing

  • Cedant
  • Crystallises future investment income on reserves
  • Removes impact or reserve deterioration
  • Improves stability in earnings
  • Protects solvency
  • Retains / enhances credit rating
  • May enable MA activity
  • Reinsurer
  • Receives large premium at outset
  • May regard this as inexpensive capital source
  • Assumes risk of reserve deterioration up to
    policy limit
  • Has benefit of reserve improvements

Adverse Development Covers (ADCs)
  • Protect against reserve deterioration for
    specific blocks of business
  • Policies always have limit on maximum recoveries
  • Policies may have additional features
  • Sub-limits
  • Additional premiums
  • Profit share
  • Co-insurance

  • Cedant retains claims handling
  • Although reinsurer will impose reporting
  • Reinsurer may want features to encourage good
    behaviour once attachment point is breached
  • Common to see some co-reinsurance or profit share

  • Cedant
  • Crystallises future investment income on reserves
  • Retains benefit of reserve improvements, but
    transfers deteriorations
  • Improves stability in earnings
  • Protects solvency
  • Retains / enhances credit rating
  • May enable MA activity
  • Reinsurer
  • Assumes risk of reserve deterioration up to
    policy limit
  • But has no direct benefit from reserve
  • Rarely assumes credit risk on inuring reinsurance
  • May appear expensive compared to LPTs

ADC example
  • Booked reserves 200m
  • Company wants to protect against reserve
    deterioration to 300m
  • ADC options
  • 150m xs 150m
  • 100m xs 200m
  • 75m xs 225m
  • Cedant pays claims to excess, then reinsurer pays
    up to limit

Finite quota share
  • Quota share with finite ceded loss ratio
  • May also have loss corridor, in which cedant
    funds claims
  • Usually has sliding scale ceding commission
  • May be a financing contract
  • Commonly used is the US
  • Purchased to improve solvency position, or for
    financing benefits
  • Under increased scrutiny to ensure appropriate
    risk transfer

Finite quota share example
  • 25 QS
  • Claims ceded up to 125 loss ratio
  • Sliding scale commission
  • Maximum 30, for loss ratios lt 70
  • Reduces by 0.5 for each 1 by which loss ratio
    exceeds 70
  • Minimum 15

Multi-trigger protections
  • Multi-trigger payments for insurance losses are
    only made if a second event is triggered
  • Second event often linked to index outside
    influence of policyholder
  • Choice of index may cause accounting issues for
    US companies (FASB 133, embedded derivatives)
  • Often discussed, rarely achieved!

Multi-year spread loss
  • Insurer pays annual premium for specific coverage
    e.g. multi-peril cat
  • Premiums less margin credited to experience
    account balance (EAB)
  • Claims paid in first instance from EAB
  • When EAB is exhausted, reinsurer pays
  • May be profit or loss shares at end of term
  • Funds transferred or funds withheld

Multi-year spread loss example
  • 4 year term
  • Annual premium 3.5m
  • Payable 0.5m 1/1 and 3.0m 15 months later for
  • Payable in full 1/1 for subsequent years
  • Annual limit 10m, term limit 30m
  • 30 AP payable on the second limit, 50 on third
  • Can be cancelled at 12 months if loss free, with
    no further premium payment
  • So clean price is 0.5m p.a.
  • Accounting benefit for first (total) loss is
    6.5m (65)
  • Nominal risk transfer is 8m

Multi-year spread loss
  • Often purchased for large, infrequent
  • Provides cashflow relief, results smoothing
    following single major loss, risk transfer in the
    event of multiple major losses
  • Typically cheaper than traditional market if
    contract is loss free
  • Available where traditional reinsurance is
    unavailable e.g. for retrocession
  • Can be purchased to protect a number of classes,
    for example property, marine and aviation
  • Accounting treatment may reduce balance sheet

Stop Loss - Key Features
  • Potential for multi line, whole account coverage
  • Versatile structure allows protection of multiple
    trading entities
  • Ability to achieve multi year coverage
  • Significant profit share/loss share incentives to
    cement long term relationships
  • Potential for low attachment to achieve
    discounting benefits
  • Variable limits, variable attachment points
  • Funds transferred or funds withheld
  • Scaling of coverage to annual premium volumes

Example Contracts - Features
Example Contract - A
Example Contract - B
Example Contract - C
Example Contract A - Graphical View
Contract A, 107 net loss ratio
Credit securitisation
  • Credit securitisation structures a portfolio of
    credit risks into layers
  • Each layer has its own credit rating
  • Highest layer may be AAA
  • Lowest is equity layer
  • In event of a default, lowest layer utilised
  • By 2001 notional principle was USD1,200bn
  • Market has been hit in 2001 / 2002 by increased
    default rates
  • IAS phase 1 (2005) credit risk transfer will no
    longer be accounted as (re)insurance

Insurance securitisation
  • Transfer reinsurance risk into capital markets
    via a bond issue
  • Most issues to date are catastrophe or life
  • If the specified risk is triggered, bondholders
    forfeit interest and principal on bond to insurer
  • Often achieved by placing reinsurance with
    special purpose vehicle (SPV) that then issues
  • Removes credit risk from reinsurance
  • Frictional costs are high
  • Traditional reinsurance often cheaper

Securitisation cat bond triggers
  • Trigger may be parametric, modelled loss or
    indemnity based
  • Parametric
  • Based on objective measurable variable
  • Leaves basis risk with cedant
  • Less disclosure about cedant
  • Modelled loss
  • Based of modelled impact of trigger event on
    pre-identified portfolio
  • Leaves some basis risk with cedant
  • Requires substantive disclosure about cedant
  • Indemnity
  • Based on actual cedant loss
  • No basis risk
  • Required greatest disclosure about cedant


Accounting complications
  • To justify treatment as insurance/reinsurance -
    requires transfer of significant insurance risk
  • Transfer of significant insurance risk requires
  • Reasonable possibility for insurer to suffer
    significant loss
  • Reasonable possibility of significant range of
  • Significant - assess in context of
  • Commercial substance of contract as a whole
  • Range of outcomes reasonably expected in practice
    (not full range of possible outcomes)
  • Assessment must be on an NPV basis

  • Insurance risk - comprises either or both
  • U/w risk - uncertainty of occurrence/amount of
  • Timing risk - uncertainty re timing of claim
  • Not sufficient if insurer only receives a
    lenders rate of return under all reasonably
    possible scenarios
  • Assessment of contract performed prospectively

Accounting - US Regime
  • Guidance in FAS 113 - Accounting and reporting
    for reinsurance of short-duration and
    long-duration contracts
  • To qualify as reinsurance
  • reinsurer must assume significant insurance risk
  • must be reasonably possible for reinsurer to
    realise significant loss
  • Timing risk alone is not sufficient (i.e. tougher
    than UK)
  • Significance of loss assessed on PV of cash flows
    under the contract
  • Different accounting treatment for prospective
    and retroactive reinsurance
  • EITF 93-6 Accounting for multi-year
    retrospectively rated contracts. Deals with
  • Additional premiums payable by cedant due to loss
  • Payments to cedants due to favourable loss
  • Changes in contract coverage

Treat as
Insurance contract
Significant transfer of risk
Financing contract
If there are distinct and separable insurance and
financing elements, split into two parts for
accounting - bifurcation
Comparison of deposit and reinsurance accounting
International Accounting Standards (IAS)
  • IAS to be used by all European listed companies
    by 2005
  • Currently no reporting standard for insurance and
    insurance contracts are exempt from existing
  • Latest guidance is the Draft Statement of
    Principals (DSOP)

IAS why does it matter to ART?
  • ART is often about arbitrage between
    accounting/regulatory/economic effect
  • IAS will introduce a new accounting basis for
    valuing insurance assets and liabilities
  • Existing International standards, say on
    consolidation, already have an impact (SPVs)
  • Treatment of credit protection

  • A brief overview

The Emergence of Insurance Securitisation has
highlighted the following concerns!
  • Will Capital Market products be in the long run,
    superior to conventional reinsurance?
  • And
  • Could it replace traditional reinsurance?
  • In BG view it is not an issue of either or, but
    the concept must be seen as a tool of the risk
    financing spectrum and therefore its use will be
    determined by client needs.

Convergence of Insurance and Capital Markets
  • Many of todays products are hybrids combining
    insurance risk with capital markets techniques
  • A modern Broker must not only provide know how
    over the different traditional insurance lines
    but also offer capital markets expertise

Convergence of Insurance and Capital Markets -
  • available products
  • Traditional reinsurance
  • Finite Reinsurance
  • Double Trigger Covers
  • ILWS
  • OTC Cat Swaps
  • Securitisation
  • Exchange traded Cat Options
  • Contingent Capital arrangements

- Integrated Concept -
Return period or exposure
? 100
Financial Re Spread Loss
Traditional Reinsurance
Financial Re Funding / Working Layers
Identify and understand the underlying objectives
driving a need for Securitisation.
  • Capacity creation and or enhancement
  • Arbitraging capacity and or price inefficiencies
  • Profit smoothing by locking in price capacity
  • Eliminate Counterparty risk
  • Alternative to traditional capacity
  • A non indemnity structure facilitates cash flow
  • Maximisation of shareholder wealth
  • Balance sheet constraints or enhancement
  • Market maker / leader

Establish any underlying issues with regard to
  • The public disclosure of information
  • Volume of underwriting information required
  • Accounting, Tax Regulatory issues.
  • Legal implications (prospectus)
  • Level of risk transfer required
  • Trigger structure and Basis risk
  • Rating Agency considerations
  • Cost considerations
  • Model creation and validation.

Evaluation of competing products
Traditional Reinsurance (Price
,capacity,period) Finite structured
alternatives Catastrophe options Other contingent
capital products. Blended solutions of
traditional/options etc.
A Typical function a broker may perform
  • Analysing the risk iro
  • Determining probability of loss for single event
  • Determining probability of multiple losses
  • Stress test assumptions
  • Compare estimated loss with credit default models
  • estimate return required for investors (premium).

Excedance Probability Curve
Annual Probability of Excedence
Probability of Attachment
Expected Loss to XOL Layer
Probability of Exhaustion
Portfolio Loss
Sample Transaction Pricing
Cumulative Probability Exhausting
Spread to Libor
Expected Loss
Probability Attaching
  • 70 C 26.70 2.22 17.7 B to BB
  • 70 B 2.22 0.04 1.4 BBB to A
  • 60 A 0.04 0.00 0.005 AAA
  • 200 Total Total Expected Loss 6.79

Overview of Risk Assessment
Analytical Models
Input Data
Windstorm Database
Stochastic Techniques
Type of Analysis
Hazard Module
Earthquake Database
Building location information
Vulnerability Damage Module
Vulnerability Actual damage Databases
Values at Risk Insurance Structure
Financial Analysis Module
Modeling Considerations
  • Examples
  • Peril(s) Covered 2003 Hurricane / Windstorm
  • Geographic Region(s) Covered Florida / Germany
  • Total Coverage/Limit 54M (90 of 60M)
  • Type of Trigger Indemnity Losses / Parametric
  • Underlying Portfolio US Hurricane/Country
  • Trigger Attachment Point 70M
  • Duration 1 year or multiple years
  • Reset Mechanism Post-event Reset of Terms
  • Rated/Non-rated Rated (Moodys, Fitch)
  • Instrument Bond / Option

Modeling Challenges
  • Feasibility analysis
  • Definition of underlying exposure data
  • Limiting exclusions
  • Catastrophic loss vs background loss
  • Secondary uncertainty and demand surge
  • Timing
  • Reset and drop downs

Integrating additional resources into the time
Rating Agency Review (2-6 weeks)
Modelling (2-6 weeks)
Investor Interface (2-6 weeks)
Post-Analysis Involvement (ongoing)
Data Audit, Verification, Preparation (variable)
Feasibility Analysis (3-6 weeks)
Offering Memorandum (variable)
Designing a Suitable Structure
  • A Reinsurance contract with a Special Purpose
    Reinsurer (SPR) would be placed
  • The SPR would hedge itself in the Capital
  • Evaluate if the risk could be placed with
    different investors E.g. - First loss could be
    placed privately - Second third losses as part
    of a rated program

Designing a possible Transaction Structure
Financial Instrument(s)
Cash or Collateral
Reinsurance Contract Premium
Floating Return
Swap Counterparty
Investment Income
Placement Options Available
  • Private Placement
  • Market read to verify pricing
  • Determine whether funds required
  • Unfunded Swap Option - Collateralised by
    letter of credit
  • Funded Insurance Linked Securities Route -
    Identify potential investors and merchant
    Banking Partner