Search results

The purpose of this article is to investigate the impact of counterparty risk on the basis risk of industry loss warranties as well as on reinsurance with and without collateral under different dependence structures. The authors additionally compare the solvency and Sharpe ratio for different premium loadings and contract parameters.

The authors propose a model framework extension to account for the counterparty risk of risk transfer arrangements. Copulas are used to also take into account non-linear dependencies between risk factors, and Monte Carlo simulation is employed to derive numerical results and to conduct sensitivity analyses.

The authors show that the impact of counterparty risk is particularly pronounced for higher degrees of dependencies and tail dependent losses, i.e. in cases of basis risk levels that appear low if counterparty risk is not considered. With respect to counterparty risk management, the authors find that already partial collateralization limits counterparty and basis risk to more acceptable levels.

The study results are particularly relevant to practitioners, as insurers may not only underestimate the “true” basis risk of index-linked instruments, but also the effect of counterparty risk of reinsurance contracts along with the consequences for solvency and profitability.

The authors extend existing literature by allowing for the (partial) default of industry loss warranties and reinsurance under different dependence structures. Furthermore, the authors include profitability in addition to risk considerations. The interaction effects between counterparty risk and the basis risk of index-based alternative risk transfer instruments are largely unstudied, despite their considerable relevance in practice.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a detailed analysis of industry loss warranties (ILWs), an alternative risk transfer instrument which has become increasingly popular throughout the last few years.

The authors first point out key characteristics of ILWs important to investor and cedent, including transaction costs, moral hazard, basis risk, counterparty risk, industry loss index, and regulation. Next, the authors present and discuss the adequacy of actuarial and financial approaches for pricing ILWs, as well as the aspects of basis risk. Finally, drivers of demand and associated models frameworks from the purchaser's viewpoint are studied.

Financial pricing approaches for ILWs are highly sensitive to input parameters, which is important given the high volatility of the underlying loss index. In addition, the underlying assumption of replicability of the claims is not without problems. Due to their simple and standardized structure and the dependence on a transparent industry loss index, ILWs are low‐barrier products, which can also be offered by hedge funds. In principle, traditional reinsurance contracts are still preferred as a measure of risk transfer, especially since these are widely accepted for solvency capital reduction. However, the main important impact factor for the demand of ILWs from the perspective of market participants, i.e. large diversified reinsurers and hedge funds, is the lower price due to rather low transaction costs and less documentation effort. Hence, ILWs are attractive despite the introduction of basis risk and the still somewhat opaque regulatory environment.

An important issue for future research is how reinsureds deal with the basis risk inherent in ILWs. Another central point is the development of a European industry loss index and the creation of an exchange platform to enable an even higher degree of standardization and a faster processing of transactions.

ILWs feature an industry loss index to be triggered, and, in some cases, a double‐trigger design that includes a company indemnity trigger. ILW contracts belong to the class of alternative risk transfer instruments that have become increasingly popular, especially in the retrocession reinsurance market. There has been no comprehensive analysis of these instruments in academic literature to date. Consequently, the authors believe that this paper provides a high degree of originality.

This article examines how reinsurance coupled with new financial instruments can expand coverage to areas exposed to catastrophe losses from natural disasters, and demonstrates how reinsurance and the catastrophe‐linked financial instruments can be combined to lower the price of protection from its current level. A simple example illustrates the relative advantages and disadvantages of pure catastrophic bonds and pure indemnity reinsurance in supporting a structure of payments contingent on certain extreme events occurring. The authors suggest ways to combine these two instruments using customized catastrophe indices to expand coverage and reduce the cost of protection. This article states six principles for designing catastrophic risk transfer systems and discusses practical issues for implementation, and then concludes with suggestions for future research.

The US insurance industry has long faced the spectrum of large unexpected losses from natural catastrophes such as hurricanes and earthquakes. However, the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack clearly demonstrated a new form of catastrophic risk of man‐made origin. The damages in property and life are now well known as estimates of insured losses deriving from this event range from $40 to $54 billion. The 9/11 terrorist attacks renewed the capacity problem faced the insurance industry in the underwriting of large catastrophic risk. In that regard, this paper explores the feasibility of capital market alternatives to the conventional insurance mechanism, and analyses whether the capital market could provide extra capacity to absorb terrorism risk.

The recent trend of integrated risk management has resulted in corporations reassessing their risk management practices. Insurance derivatives and insurance‐linked securities are emerging as alternatives or complements to traditional resisurance capacity. Despite its theoretical benefits, the market for insurance‐linked transactions has not matured, due to problems of information asymmetry and lack of transparency. This article proposes a solution to resolve the conflicting interests preventing insurers/reinsurers and investors from more widely trading insurance risk.

Two strands of the literature are combined, namely the modeling of disability insurance and the design, valuation and discussion of insurance-linked securities.

This paper provides a discussion regarding the advantages and detriments of disability-linked securities in comparison with mortality-linked bonds and swaps as well as regarding potential disability-linked indices and the potential use. The discussion is followed by an introduction of a potential design and a corresponding valuation of disability bonds and swaps.

This securitization will provide useful tools for the risk management of disability risk in a risk-based regulatory framework.

No disability-linked securities have been defined and discussed so far.

Demonstrates the feasibility of, and introduces a practical approach to enhancing, reinsurance efficiency using index‐based instruments.

First reviews the general mathematical framework of reinsurance optimization. Next, illustrates how index‐based instruments can potentially enhance reinsurance efficiency through a simple yet self‐contained example. The simplicity allows the analytical examination of the cost and benefits of an index‐based contract. Finally, introduces a real‐world model that optimizes index‐based reinsurance instruments using the genetic algorithm.

Identifies the key factors that determine the efficiency of index‐based reinsurance contracts and demonstrates that, in the property catastrophe reinsurance market, the combined effect of these factors frequently allows the construction of an index‐based hedging program that is more efficient than a traditional excess‐of‐loss reinsurance contract. A robust optimization model based on the genetic algorithm is introduced and shown to be effective in optimizing index‐based reinsurance contracts.

Most financial optimization procedures are subject to parameter risk, which can adversely affect the robustness of their solutions. The reinsurance optimization approach presented in this paper is not completely immune from this problem. It remains a challenging problem for actuarial researchers and practitioners.

The concept and method proposed in this paper can be applied to designing real‐world reinsurance programs.

This paper makes two contributions to the risk finance literature: a systematic approach for evaluating the costs and benefits of index‐based reinsurance instruments, and an innovative and practical model for optimizing reinsurance efficiency.

Singapore's rapid economic progress has been accompanied by a series of experiments in medical savings and health insurance. This paper aims to examine the “three Ms” – Medisave, MediShield, and Medifund – in order to establish the way in which the policy‐instruments are expected to deliver the status required.

The paper collects evidence on both outcomes and payments.

Results show that a nation in which the median citizen is under 40 is in a strong position to rely principally on individual medical savings accounts. The paper predicts that Singapore, as its population ages, will probably rely more heavily on risk pooling and insurance.

The practical implications are that an extension of insurance is inevitable, but that earmarked savings will probably remain the first line of defence.

The paper is the first to document the Singapore experience of payment for health. It draws inferences and makes recommendations that will be of interest to policy makers both in poorer and in richer countries.