Search results

This study examines the market reaction when announcements of large dividend increases are made by more versus less rate‐regulated firms in the same industry. The insurance industry was chosen because property/liability insurers are rate‐regulated more than life/health insurers. The abnormal returns are positive and significant for all insurers but smaller than those found in previous cross‐sectional studies. Abnormal returns for the less rate‐regulated life/health insurers during the dividend increase announcement period are significantly greater than those of the more rate‐regulated property/liability insurers.

This paper aims to examine the effect of concentration in the insurance sector on insurer stability for a large set of developed and developing countries. In particular, the authors test whether concentration reduces financial fragility in the insurance sector (“concentration-stability view”) or decreases stability in the insurance sector (“concentration-fragility view”).

The authors use a data set of 14,402 firm-year observations of property-liability insurers who appear in A.M. Best’s Statement File Global database during the period 2004-2012. They use regression analyses to examine the effect of concentration on the stability of insurance firms and apply different measures of concentration.

The results provide empirical support for the “concentration- fragility view”; that is, higher levels of concentration are associated with decreases in the insurance sector’s financial stability.

The results have important policy implications, given that a primary purpose of insurance regulation is to protect policyholders against insurance firm defaults.

No previous research analyzes how recent trends in competition and consolidation, which have led to changes in insurance market concentration, affect the stability of insurance firms around the world. This research is the first paper that provides evidence on the relation between concentration and stability in the insurance sector.

This paper examines the intra‐industry effects of 120 stock split announcements within the insurance industry between 1985 and 2006. Our results of the valuation effects are suggestive of dominant competitive effects for stock splits by insurance companies, especially life insurers, thus indicating possible changes in the competitive balance of the industry. The results of our cross‐sectional analyses suggest that for non‐splitting firms with a high concentration of competition the industry effects are less favorable. Industry effects are more favorable when the valuation effects of the splitting firms are more favorable, when the splitting firms are larger, and when the non‐splitting firms are more similar to the splitting firm. Overall, our results show that both industry‐wide and firm‐specific characteristics are important to explain the cross‐sectional variation in the intra‐industry effects, and that competitive effects and contagion effects are not entirely mutually exclusive.

Recent research has examined the effect of the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, more commonly known as the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLB), on the market value of U.S. commercial banks, life insurers, property-liability insurers, thrifts, finance companies, and securities firms. This study fills a gap in our understanding of the Act by measuring the price and trading volume effects of the GLB on U.S.-listed foreign banks. A primary contribution of this study is to examine the role, if any, of two corporate governance perspectives, the stakeholder (code law), and shareholder (common law) models, in a cross-sectional analysis of foreign bank market reaction to the GLB.

Using a generalized least squares (GLS) portfolio approach, Corrado's rank statistic, and confirmed by the traditional market model approach, we find significant negative share price reactions to certain legislative announcements surrounding the passage of the GLB. Trading volume reactions corroborate the significant share price responses. In general, our results indicate that investors in foreign banks reacted negatively to key legislative action. In a cross-sectional analysis, younger, higher-risk foreign banks with less concentrated ownership and more subordinated debt from countries with higher quality accounting standards appear to have more positive (or less negative) share price reactions.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate two audit committee characteristics – independence and expertise of the audit committee – and the property‐liability insurers' financial reporting quality, which is proxied by loss reserve error.

The authors' hypotheses are tested using multivariate analysis where the loss reserve error is the dependent variable, and audit committee independence, and four types of audit committee financial expertise (accounting, finance, supervisory, and insurance expertise) are the testing variables.

It is found that accounting, finance, and insurance financial expertise are associated with more accurate loss reserve estimate. In contrast, a supervisory financial expertise and an independence audit committee are not found to be associated with better loss reserve quality.

The sample includes publicly‐held property‐liability insurers. Although the results from publicly‐held insurers could provide a good laboratory for such investigation in all insurers, they might be limited due to different organization structures of public vs private insurers.

The implications of the study are important for the SEC and NAIC. The results suggest that the requirements on the audit committee financial expertise would be necessary, even in highly regulated industry, such as property‐casualty insurance.

The paper contributes to the extant literature by studying audit committee characteristics in the insurance industry. It also contributes to the extant literature on audit committee effectiveness by decomposing the financial expertise into four types of financial expertise (accounting, finance, supervisory, or insurance expertise) and investigates which (if any) of these four types of expertise really drives the improvement of loss reserve quality.

The purpose of this study is to investigate interest rate sensitivity of the US property/liability (P/L) insurers stock returns using various return generating process models incorporating different interest rate changes such as actual interest rate changes, unexpected interest rate changes and orthogonalized market returns.

The study follows the 1974 two‐index model by Stone. In the two‐index model, three different interest rate indices are tested one at a time to examine if interest rate sensitivity of the insurers stock returns, if any, is vulnerable to an interest rate index used.

It is found that the US P/L insurers' stock returns are sensitivity to interest rate changes. The impact of actual interest rate changes on the stock returns is little different from that of unexpected interest rate changes, which is consistent with findings in the banking literature. When orthogonalized market returns are used in the models in lieu of actual market returns, the statistical significance on the estimated interest rate sensitivity of the returns improves. Consistent with extant studies of financial institution's interest rate sensitivity, the paper also reports that the interest rate sensitivity of insurer stock returns is time varying.

Due to the data availability, the period studied is between 1992 and 2001. However, the sample period does not weaken the findings of the study. In addition, future research could incorporate the insurers' balance sheet items to investigate which balance sheet items (i.e. investment in bonds, stocks and other items on asset side and reserves and other items on liability side) explain most interest rate sensitivity.

Investors can adopt the findings of this study in creating or adjusting their portfolio with the US P/L insurers in it. The insurers stock returns are more sensitive to changes in long‐term interest rate when the underwriting profit increases and the stock returns are more sensitive to changes in short‐term interest rate when the underwriting profit decreases.

Although generalization is difficult and the conclusion is not as convincing as it could be because only one underwriting cycle is sampled, it is still noteworthy to recognize that the insurers' interest rate sensitivity is closely related to the insurance industry's underwriting cycle or performance.

This is the first study reporting the association between the interest rate sensitivity of the US stock returns and the underwriting performance.

Extant research on non-financial service firms indicates that board size is a key determinant of firm performance. Property-liability (P&L) insurers, however, face a different set of agency costs and a more intense regulatory environment than most non-financial firms. Both of these factors were reinforced by the implementation of the Financial Services Modernization Act in 2000. We document a significant inverse relation between publicly traded P&L insurer performance and board size in the post-Financial Services Modernization Act period. Publicly traded P&L insurer performance, measured by market-to-book ratio, return on revenues, and the operating ratio, was enhanced for firms with smaller board sizes in 2000 and 2001. Ironically, we find that publicly traded P&L insurers on average increased board size in 2000 and 2001. In a post-Financial Services Modernization Act environment, board size appears to be related to publicly traded P&L insurer performance, but more research is necessary to develop a complete understanding of its role in P&L insurer corporate governance.

The purpose of this study is to analyze product diversification, business structure and insurer performance with a comprehensive look at the property-liability (P/L) insurance operations.

Using a panel data, this study employs an ordinary least squares regression model, fixed effects model and random effects model to examine the impact of product diversification and business structure on the performance of P/L insurers. The study assesses insurer performance using both risk-adjusted return on assets and risk-adjusted return on equity.

The study finds that product diversification is significantly negatively related to the performance of P/L insurers. The results are consistent with the diversification discount theory. The empirical results reveal that business lines have significant impacts on firm performance, particularly on the lines of fire and marine insurances. Furthermore, the interaction between product diversification and firm size implies that product diversification significantly increases the performance of large-sized insurance firms.

The study provides some valuable insights into the effects of diversification and business structure on the performance of P/L insurers in a developing country. The study’s findings suggest that management of P/L insurers should clarify their objectives and carefully assess the company’s resources when dealing with product diversification and business structure. The results have practical implications for the financial services industry in Taiwan.

Few studies utilize insurance sector data to analyze how insurers' competitiveness affects their risk-taking decisions. To fill the research gap, this study aims to investigate the relationship between insurers’ competitiveness and risk-taking decisions.

This study employs unbalanced panel data for the US property-liability insurance companies from 2006 to 2019. Two-Stage estimation is applied to address the endogeneity issue, such as the Two-Step Generalized Method of Moments, General Two-Stage Least Square and Two-Stage Quantile Regression.

The regression analysis reveals that insurers' competitiveness in their risk-taking decisions is primarily negative. The finding suggests that insurers with low (high) competitiveness tend to take more (less) risk. This study sheds light on how insurers with low competitiveness may alter their risk preference, supporting the fundamental argument of the prospect theory, the CEO hubris argument, the risk-return theory and the risk-sensitivity theory.

The critical findings of this study provide policy implications when evaluating and drafting insurance legislation. Regulators must pay close attention to insurers' riskier decisions while insurers with low competitiveness or during periods of economic recession.

This research contributes to the literature by assessing whether insurers' competitiveness influences their risk-taking decisions. The empirical findings suggest that insurers with low competitiveness take on greater risks to gamble for survivability and boost profits to strengthen their financial standing. The evidence indicates that insurers may risk-seeking or irrational decision-making when facing a competitive disadvantage.

Using a game‐theoretic model of insurance markets, Powers and Shubik in 2001 derived a mathematical expression for the optimal number of reinsurers for a given number of primary insurers. Subsequently in 2005, Powers and Shubik showed analytically that, for large numbers of primary insurers, this expression is effectively a “square‐root rule”, i.e. the optimal number of reinsurers in a market is given asymptotically by the square root of the total number of primary insurers. In this paper, we test the accuracy of the square‐root rule empirically.

The numbers of primary insurers and reinsurers existing in a range of 18‐20 different national insurance markets over a period of 11 years are used.

The empirical results are consistent with the square‐root rule. In addition, we find that the number of reinsurers may also be associated with the market's willingness to pay for risk. When the market's perception of risk is high, there is a greater supply of reinsurance to provide capacity to primary insurers.

An empirical model is presented that deals explicitly with the number of insurers and reinsurers in a market. This is of value to government policymakers and insurance regulators.