the dawning of a new decade: p/c insurance overview
TRANSCRIPT
The Dawning of a New Decade:P/C Insurance Overview & Outlook
2020 & Beyond
Robert P. Hartwig, Ph.D., CPCUClinical Associate Professor of Finance, Risk Management & Insurance
Darla Moore School of Business ¨ University of South [email protected] ¨ 803.777.6782
Marco Island, FLJanuary 14, 2020
2
P/C Insurance Industry Financial Overview
CATS, Non-CAT Underwriting Losses Impacted Insurer Balance Sheets
Industry Remains Strong
2
P/C Industry Net Income After Taxes, 1991–2019F*n 2005 ROE= 9.6%n 2006 ROE = 12.7%n 2007 ROE = 10.9%n 2008 ROE = 0.1%n 2009 ROE = 5.0%n 2010 ROE = 6.6%n 2011 ROAS1 = 3.5%n 2012 ROAS1 = 5.9%n 2013 ROAS1 = 10.2%n 2014 ROAS1 = 8.4%n 2015 ROAS = 8.4%n 2016 ROAS = 6.2%n 2017 ROAS =5.0%n 2018 ROAS = 8.0%n 2019: ROAS = 8.5%
*2019 estimate based on annualized actual 1H:19 figure of $32.787B. ROE figures are GAAP; 1Return on avg. surplus. Excludes Mortgage & Financial Guaranty insurers for years (2009-2014). Sources: A.M. Best, ISO.
$14,178
$5,840$19,316
$10,870 $20,598
$24,404 $36,819
$30,773
$21,865
$3,046
$30,029
$62,496
$3,043
$35,204
$19,456 $3
3,522
$63,784
$55,870
$56,826
$42,924
$36,813
$59,994
$65,574
$38,501
$20,559
$44,155
$65,777
-$6,970
$28,672
-$10,000
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19*
Net income is up sharply in
2018/19 due to lower CATs
and the TCJA
$ Millions
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1819H1
Profitability Peaks & Troughs in the P/C Insurance Industry, 1975 – 2019E
Profitability = P/C insurer ROEs. 2011-18 figures are estimates based on ROAS data. Note: Data for 2008-2014 exclude mortgage and financial guaranty insurers.Source: NAIC, ISO, A.M. Best, USC RUM Center.
1977:19.0% 1987:17.3%
1997:11.6% 2006:12.7%
1984: 1.8% 1992: 4.5% 2001: -1.2%
10 Years10 Years
9 Years
ROEs in 2017 plunged to their lowest levels since 2008 but
rebounded in 2018 due to lower CATs and the TCJA.
ROE
1975: 2.4%
2013 9.8%
2017 5.0%
2015: 8.4%
2019E 8.5%
2018 8.0%
ROE: Property/Casualty Insurance by Major Event, 1987–2019E
5
*Excludes Mortgage & Financial Guarantee in 2008 – 2014. Sources: ISO, Fortune; A.M. Best (2018E-2019F); USC RUM Center.
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1819H1
P/C Profitability Is Influenced Both by
Cyclicality and Volatility
Hugo
Andrew, Iniki
Northridge
Lowest CAT Losses in 15 Years
Sept. 11
Katrina, Rita, Wilma
4 Hurricanes
Financial Crisis*
(Percent)
Record Tornado Losses
Sandy
Low CATs
Harvey, Irma, Maria,
CA Wildfires
2019E 8.5%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E
P/C Insurance ROE vs. Fortune 500, 1975–2019E*
*2018 Fortune 500 figure is an estimate.Profitability = P/C insurer ROEs. 2011-18 figures are estimates based on ROAS data. Note: Data for 2008-2014 exclude mortgage and financial guaranty insurers.Source: NAIC, ISO, Fortune.
1977:19.0% 1987:17.3%
1997:11.6% 2006:12.7%
1984: 1.8% 1992: 4.5% 2001: -1.2%
ROE
1975: 2.4%
2013 9.8%
2017 5.0%
2019E 8.5%
Average: 1975-2018 Fortune 500: 13.3%P/C Insurance: 9.0%
2019E* 15.0%
P/C Insurance Industry Combined Ratio, 2001–2019E*
7
* Excludes Mortgage & Financial Guaranty insurers 2008--2014. **Actual through H1 2019 was 97.3Sources: A.M. Best, ISO (2014-2019).
95.7
99.3101.1
106.5
102.5
96.4 97.097.8
100.798.0
103.7
99.2101.0
92.6
100.898.4
100.1
107.5
115.8
90
100
110
120
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19**
As Recently as 2001, Insurers Paid Out
Nearly $1.16 for Every $1 in Earned Premiums Relatively
Low CAT Losses, Reserve Releases
Heavy Use of Reinsurance Lowered Net
Losses
Relatively Low CAT Losses, Reserve Releases
Higher CAT
Losses, Shrinking Reserve
Releases, Toll of Soft
Market
Sandy Impacts
Lower CAT
Losses
Best Combined Ratio Since 1949 (87.6)
Avg. CAT Losses,
More Reserve Releases
Cyclical Deterioration
Sharply higher CATs are driving
large underwriting losses and
pricing pressure
2019 Combined Ratio Est.98.0
8
Policyholder Surplus (Capacity), 2006:Q4–2019:Q4E
Sources: ISO, A.M .Best; 2019E from Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, University of South Carolina, based on actual $802.2B through 6/3019.
($ Billions)
$487.1
$496.6
$512.8
$521.8
$478.5
$455.6
$437.1$463.0 $490.8
$511.5 $540.7
$530.5
$544.8
$559.2
$559.1
$538.6
$550.3
$567.8
$583.5
$586.9
$607.7
$614.0
$624.4 $653.4
$671.6
$673.9
$675.2
$674.2
$673.7
$676.3
$700.9
$717.0 $750.7 $781.5
$742.1 $779.5
$802.2
$817.5
$662.0
$570.7
$566.5
$505.0
$515.6
$517.9
$400$450$500$550$600$650$700$750$800$850
06:Q4
07:Q1
07:Q2
07:Q3
07:Q4
08:Q1
08:Q2
08:Q3
08:Q4
09:Q1
09:Q2
09:Q3
09:Q4
10:Q1
10:Q2
10:Q3
10:Q4
11:Q1
11:Q2
11:Q3
11:Q4
12:Q1
12:Q2
12:Q3
12:Q4
13:Q1
13:Q2
13:Q3
13:Q4
14:Q1
14:Q2
14:Q3
14:Q4
15:Q2
15:Q4
16:Q1
16:Q4
17:Q2
17:Q4
18:Q3
18:Q4
19:Q1
19:Q2
19:Q4E
Financial Crisis
Surplus (Capacity) reached record highs throughout 2019
2010:Q1 data includes $22.5B of paid-in capital from a holding company parent for one insurer’s investment in a non-insurance business.
Drop due to near-record 2011 CAT losses
The abundance of capacity/Capital will temper the amplitude of hardening in
most markets
A sharp recovery in asset prices pushed surplus to a new record
high in 2019, surpassing $800B for the first time ever
Net Written Premium Growth (All P/C Lines): 2006-2019F
Sources: A.M. Best (2006-2013, 2019F), ISO (2014-19:H1).
3.8%
0.0%
-0.4%
-4.5%
0.8%
3.2%4.2% 4.3% 4.2% 3.9% 4.1%
2.8%
4.6%
10.8%
3.0%
1.0%
-5.0%
-2.5%
0.0%
2.5%
5.0%
7.5%
10.0%
12.5%
06 07 08 09 10 11 12 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19F 19:H1
Total Net Written Premiums Show a Return to Trend for 2019. Sharp Increase in 2018 and Decline in 2019 Reflect Impacts from the Tax Cut and Jobs Act of 2017
Net Premium Growth (All P/C Lines): Annual Change, 1971—2019F
10
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19F
(Percent)1975-78 1984-87 2000-03
*Figure is actual 2018:9M vs. 2017:9M change adjusted for affects of the TCJA of 2017. Shaded areas denote “hard market” periodsSources: A.M. Best (1971-2013, 2020F), ISO (2014-19); Risk & Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina estimate for 2019.
Net Written Premiums Fell 0.7% in 2007 (First Decline
Since 1943) by 2.0% in 2008, and 4.2% in 2009, the First 3-Year Decline Since 1930-33.
2019F:3.0%2018E: 10.8%
2017: 4.6%2016: 2.7%2015: 3.5%2014: 4.2
2013: 4.4%2012: +4.2%
Outlook2019F: 3.0%2020F: 3.8%
Growth in Net Written Premium: Personal vs. Commercial, 2015 – 2018*
11
5.7%
3.1%
-1.4%
2.7%
6.6%
2.7%1.8%
4.1%
6.7%5.8%
4.8%5.8%
3.5%
1.5%
3.3%
5.3%
-2%-1%0%1%2%3%4%5%6%7%8%
Personal Lines Predominating
Diversified Commercial LinesPredominating**
All Insurers
2015 2016 2017 2018*
Annual Change in NWP
The divergence in growth between personal and commercial lines is large but may be narrowing
*2018 is an estimate based on actual data through Q4:2018. Commercial lines figure has been adjusted from actual value of 19.3% to account for distortionary affects from the TCJA 2017, which impacted reinsurance utilization, largely in the commercial segment.
Source: ISO. University of South Carolina Risk and Uncertainty Management Center.
Personal lines growth has been
much stronger than commercial lines
Commercial Lines Combined Ratio, 1990-2019F*
109.
411
0.2
118.
810
9.5 11
2.5
110.
210
7.6
104.
110
9.7
110.
2
102.
5 105.
491
.194
.510
4.4
100.
7 103.
8 107.
310
5.4
96.3
96.0
95.2
99.0
102.
197
.697
.5
102.
0
111.
1
112.
3
122.
3
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
Com
mer
cial
Lin
es C
ombi
ned
Rat
io
14
Commercial lines underwriting performance improved
materially in 2018/19 in the wake of record CATs in 2017
*2007-2012 figures exclude mortgage and financial guaranty segments.Source: A.M. Best (1990-2018). Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina (2019F).
Personal Lines Combined Ratio, 2005-2019F*
96.4
91.1
97.6
104.
5
102.
5
102.
6
107.
7
102.
7
98.4
103.
9
98.399
.3100.
9
99.5
102.
6
90
95
100
105
110
05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19F
Com
mer
cial
Lin
es C
ombi
ned
Rat
io
15
*2007-2012 figures exclude mortgage and financial guaranty segments.Source: A.M. Best (1990-2018). Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina (2019F).
Personal lines underwriting performance deteriorated from 2014-2017 as record
CATs and rising loss cost trends took their toll. Little improvement in 2018, but more
in 2019 assuming “normal” cat activity
16
Private Passenger Auto Frequency & Severity Trends in the US
Severity Trends Are Adverse, Not Offset by Declining Frequency
Private Passenger Auto Combined Ratio: 1993–2019E
101.7
101.3
101.3
101.0
109.5
107.9
104.2
98.4
94.3 95.1
95.5 98.3 100.2
101.3
101.0
102.0
102.1
101.6
102.3
104.6
106.3
102.6
97.7
97.099.5 101.1
103.5
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E
Private Passenger Auto Underwriting Performance Is Showing the Strains of Rising Frequency (and Severity) Trends in Many States
17Sources: A.M. Best (1990-2018); USC RUM Center (2019E).
18
Bodily Injury: Severity Trend Is Up, Frequency Decline Returning?
2.1% 1.7%3.6%
1.8%
4.4%5.6%
7.7%
2.9%
6.4%
-5.4%-3.8% -4.0% -4.2%
-2.2%
0.0%
-1.1%
3.4%
0.0%
-2.2% -2.2% -2.2%
3.0%2.0%
5.9%5.7%4.7%
2.9%1.1%
0.0% 0.0%
-8%-6%-4%-2%0%2%4%6%8%10%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019*
Severity Frequency
Annual Change, 2005 through 2019:Q3*
BI Severity Trend is a Major Cost Driver
*2019 figure is for the 4 quarters ending 2019:Q3.Source: ISO/PCI Fast Track data; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
19
Property Damage Liability: Severity Up and Frequency Down
1.8% 1.9%
4.1% 3.5%
6.3% 6.0%
3.9% 4.6% 5.2%
-1.6%
-3.5% -3.4%
0.6% 0.6%
-0.3%
1.4% 1.4% 1.1%
-1.7%
-3.9% -3.8%
2.9% 3.6%2.0% 2.0%
-0.4%
0.4%0.9% 1.2%0.3%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019*
Severity Frequency
Annual Change, 2005 through 2019*
Severity/Frequency Trends Have Been Volatile, But Rising Severity since 2011 Is a Concern
*2019 figure is for the 4 quarters ending 2019:Q3.Source: ISO/PCI Fast Track data; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
20
Comprehensive Coverage: Frequency and Severity Trends Are Volatile
15.4% 15.3%
-14.6%
6.5%
-1.3%
21.3%
8.6%
-9.4%-9.8%-6.3%
1.3%5.8%
-8.9%-5.6%
2.1%
-0.6% -2.1%
3.0%
15.5%
-1.4% -1.5%
12.6%
-8.1%-5.9%
3.0%
-2.1%
3.5%
-3.1%
1.8%6.2%
-20%-15%-10%-5%0%5%10%15%20%25%
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019*
Severity Frequency
Annual Change, 2005 through 2019*
Weather Creates Volatility for Comprehensive Coverage. Comprehensive Losses Are Up Modestly in 2019 after Falling in 2018 Following Severe
Losses Due Largely to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria in 2017
Severe weather is a principal cause of the spikes in both
frequency and severity
*2019 figure is for the 4 quarters ending 2019:Q3.Source: ISO/PCI Fast Track data; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
21
Collision Loss Ratio Trending Upward:Pvt. Passenger Auto, US, 2012 – 2019*
68.9% 69.5%69.4%
73.8%75.2%
77.0% 77.4%
70.7%
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019*
US
Loss Ratio
Collision Loss Ratios in Are Up Slightly in 2019
Collision loss ratio is up 0.6 points from 2018 but
still down 7.9 points since the 2016 peak
*2019 data are for the 4 quarters ending Sept. 30, 2019.Source: ISO/PCI Fast Track data; Insurance Information Institute
22
Collision Coverage: Severity Trends Are a Concern*
2.8%
1.3%
4.2%
1.4%
5.7% 5.2%
-0.1%
4.8% 5.0%
-1.8%
-3.6%
2.5%
-2.4%-1.8%
4.4%
1.4% 1.0%
-1.5% -1.8%
3.9%3.1%
0.1% 0.5%
-2.3%
-0.1%
0.0%
-1.4%-0.5%
0.9%
2.3%
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Severity Frequency
Annual Change, 2005 through 2019*
The Recession, High Fuel Prices Helped Temper Frequency and Severity, But that Trend Clearly Reversed, Consistent with
Experience from Past Recoveries, though Frequency is Subdued*2019 figure is for the 4 quarters ending 2019:Q3.Source: ISO/PCI Fast Track data; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
23
Traumatic Brain Injury Trends: On the Rise
TBI claims are an important contributor to adverse BI
severity trends in personal and commercial auto
24
Commercial Auto Liability:(Direct L/R Avg. 2017/18 – Direct L/R 2014/14)
Source: S&P Global, Assured Research; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
39 out of the 50 states experiences a deterioration in
their Commercial Auto Liability loss ration in recent
years—11 of them with deteriorations of 10+ points
Median Deterioration
= 5 pts
25
Commercial Auto Physical Damage:(Direct L/R Avg. 2017/18 – Direct L/R 2014/14)
Source: S&P Global, Assured Research; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
PD loss ratio for Commercial Auto was
approximately unchanged for the most
recent period
26
Workers Compensation Operating Environment
26
Workers Comp Results Have Improved Substantially in Recent YearsCan Gains Be Maintained?
Workers Compensation Combined Ratio: 1994–2018P
27
102.0
97.0 100.0
101.0
112.6
108.6
105.1
102.7
98.5 10
3.5
104.5 110.6 115.0
115.0
109.0
102.0
100.0
94.0
94.0
89.0
84.0
121.7
107.0115.3
118.2
80859095100105110115120125130
94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18p
Workers Comp Is an Example of a Line that Was Recently Restored to Health Through the Return of Rate Adequacy as
Well as Declining Claim FrequencySources: A.M. Best (1994-2009); NCCI (2010-2018P) and are for private carriers only..
WC results have improved markedly since 2011. The 2018 combined ratio is the
best in at least 80 years
Workers Compensation Lost-Time Claim Frequency Declined Again in 2018
29
0.3
-6.5
-4.5
0.5
-3.9-2.3
-4.5
-6.9
-4.5 -4.1 -3.7
-6.6
-4.5
-2.2
-4.3 -4.9
10.6
-3.9
-5.8
-4.0-3
-5.1-6.2
-4.8
-1.0
3.6
-0.9
-10-8-6-4-202468
1012
94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18p
IndicatedAdjusted*
Percent
Accident Year*Adjustments primarily due to significant audit activity.2017p: Preliminary based on data valued as of 12/31/2017.Source: NCCI Financial Call data, developed to ultimate and adjusted to current wage an voluntary loss cost level; Excludes high deductible policies; 1994-2017: Based on data through 12/31/17. Data for all states where NCCI provides ratemaking services, excluding WV.Frequency is the number of lost-time claims per $1M pure premium at current wage and voluntary loss cost level
Average Annual Change = –3.5%(1994–2016)
$9.8$9.5$9.2$9.7$9.7$10.3$11.5$12.5$13.6$14.9$16.4$16.9$17.5
$22.1$22.2
$21.8$21.6
$22.6$22.8$22.9$23.9$24.6
$22.3$18.1$17.6
$19.1$20.8
$21.6
-0.9%
-2.7%
+0.5%
+8.3%
+0.9%
+5.5%
+2.8%
+0.6%
+3.6%
+3.0%
+10.1%
+9.6%
+8.8%
+8.7%
+11.7%
+5.9%
+1.7%
+4.9%
-2.8%
-3.1%
+1.0%
+6.8%
5
7
9
11
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18p
IndemnityClaim Cost ($ 000s)
Accident Year
Workers Comp Indemnity Claim Costs: Sharper Increase in 2018
Average indemnity costs per claim were up 3% in
2018 to $24,600
Average Indemnity Cost per Lost-Time Claim
+3%
+4.4
%
Cumulative Change = 151%(1991-2018p)
2018p: Preliminary based on data valued as of 12/31/2018.1991-2017: Based on data through 12/31/2017, developed to ultimateBased on the states where NCCI provides ratemaking services including state funds, excluding WV; Excludes high deductible policies.
+0.4
%
+1.3
%+3
.2%
$8.1$8.2$8.1$8.8$8.9$9.6$10.9$11.8$13.0$13.9$15.7$17.0$18.3
$24.2$25.2
$25.8$26.0
$27.4$27.2$27.6$28.7$28.9
$26.5$20.5$19.2
$21.7$22.9
$25.2
0.04
0.04
+3.7
+1.9
+0.8%
-0.2%
+4.2%
+5.6% +2.4%
+5.5%
+7.0%
+4.7%
+8.1%
+7.9%
+13.6%
+6.7%
+10.2%
+8.3%
+10.1%
+7.4%
+5.1%
+9.0%
+2.1%
+1.3%
+6.8%
+5.8%
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18p
MedicalClaim Cost ($ 000s)
Accident Year
Workers Comp Medical Claim Costs: Pace of Increase Decelerated in 2018
Average indemnity costs per claim were up just 1% in 2018 to $28,900, following a sharp 4.1% increase in 2017
Average Medical Cost per Lost-Time Claim
+1%
+4.1
%
Cumulative Change = 257%(1991-2018p)
2018p: Preliminary based on data valued as of 12/31/2018.1991-2017: Based on data through 12/31/2017, developed to ultimateBased on the states where NCCI provides ratemaking services including state funds, excluding WV; Excludes high deductible policies.
-1.0
%
+1.5
%
INVESTMENTS: THE NEW REALITY
Investment Performance Is a Key Driver of Insurer Profitability
-50%
-40%
-30%
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20*
,*Through Jan. 10, 2020.Source: NYU Stern School of Business: http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~adamodar/New_Home_Page/datafile/histretSP.html; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, University of South Carolina
Tech Bubble Implosion
Financial Crisis
Annual Return
Energy Crisis
2019: +28.9%*2018: -6.2%
S&P 500 Index Returns, 1950–2020*
Fed Raises Rates
The S&P 500 was up 28.9% in 2019, the best year since 2013, following a decline of 6.2% in 2018. Trade, geopolitical tensions and election year
uncertainty will drive volatility in 2020.
Property/Casualty Insurance Industry Investment Income: 2000–2019E
$38.9$37.1$36.7
$38.7
$54.6
$51.2
$47.1$47.6$49.2
$48.0$47.3$46.4$47.2$46.6$48.9
$55.3$52.6
$39.6
$49.5$52.3
$30
$40
$50
$60
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18* 19F
Due to persistently low interest rates, investment income fell in 2012, 2013 and 2014 but showed a small (1.7%) increase in 2015—though 2016 experienced
another decline. Gains in 2018-19 are overstated due to the TCJA 2017.*2018-19 figures are distorted by provisions of the TCJA of 2017.**Estimate based on annualized H1 actual figure of $13.158B. Figure is likely also distorted by the TCJA of 2017.1 Investment gains consist primarily of interest and stock dividends. Sources: ISO; University of South Carolina, Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management.
($ Billions)
Investment income is slowly recovering. 2018/19 figures
overstate improvement due to provision of the TCJA 2017
Net Investment Yield on Property/Casualty Insurance Invested Assets, 2007–2020F*
4.4
4.0
4.6 4.5
3.7 3.83.7
3.43.7
3.2 3.1 3.1 3.2 3.2 3.2
4.6
4.23.9
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E 20F
The yield on invested assets remains low relative to pre-crisis yields. Fed rate increases beginning in late 2015 through 2018 halted the slide in
yields, but rate cuts in 2019 will preclude future gains
Sources: NAIC data, sourced from S&P Global Market Intelligence; 2017-19 figures are from ISO. 2020F is from the Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
(Percent) Investment yields remained depressed--
down about 140 BP from pre-crisis levels.
Interest Rate Forecasts: 2018–2021F
2.0% 2.2% 2.3%2.0% 2.0%
1.6% 1.7%
2.9%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
18 19 20F 21F 18 19 20F 21F
A full normalization of interest rates is unlikely until the mid-2020s, if that, nearly 20 years after the onset of the financial crisis.
Yield (%)
Sources: Federal Reserve; Wells Fargo Securities (2020-21F); University of South Carolina.
3-Month Treasury 10-Year TreasuryThe Fed’s pause in
rate hikes, its decision to
maintain large bond holdings and a weaker global economy are suppressing
interest rates—again. Significant political pressure
from President Trump could be a
factor as well.
Annual Inflation Rates, (CPI-U, %),1990–2020F
2.8 2.6
1.51.9
3.33.4
1.3
2.52.3
3.0
3.8
2.8
3.8
-0.4
1.6
3.2
2.11.51.6
0.1
1.3
2.12.42.3
2.62.9
2.4
3.23.0
5.14.9
-1.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E20F
Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics; Well Fargo Securities, 12/19 (forecasts).
Inflation remains remarkably tame despite a tight US labor market, modest economic growth, rising energy prices, tariff-induced price increases and a
rapidly rising federal budget deficit.
Annual Inflation Rates (%)
Inflation peaked at 5.6% in August 2008 on high energy and commodity crisis. The recession and the collapse of the
commodity bubble reduced inflationary pressures in 2009/10
Inflationary expectations are
consistent with the Fed’s 2% target, but trade wars or
geopolitical threats could
increase inflationary
pressure
Trade War Alert
A sustained trade war with China could
increase inflation by 0.1 to 0.4 points as
price increases are
passed through to consumers
THE ECONOMY
The Strength of the Economy Has Always Influenced Growth in Insurers’ Exposure
Base Across Most Lines
The Links Between the Economy and the P/C Insurance Industry Are Strengthening
Length of US Business Cycles, 1929-Present*
43
13 8 11 10 8 10 11 166
168 8
19
50
80
3745
39
24
106
36
58
12
92
120
73
127
0102030405060708090
100110120130
Aug.1929
May1937
Feb.1945
Nov.1948
July1953
Aug.1957
Apr.1960
Dec.1969
Nov.1973
Jan.1980
Jul.1981
Jul.1990
Mar.2001
Dec.2007
ContractionExpansion Following
Duration (Months)
Month Recession Started
Average Duration*Recession = 13.4 MonthsExpansion = 63.8 Months
* As of Jan. 2020, inclusiveSources: National Bureau of Economic Research; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, University of South Carolina.
The current economic
expansion (as of Jan. 2020)
is now the longest in US history (began
July 2009)
US Real GDP Growth*
* Estimates/Forecasts from Wells Fargo Securities.Source: US Department of Commerce, Wells Fargo Securities 12/19; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, University of South Carolina.
2.7%
1.8%
-1.3%
-2.8%
2.5%
2.2% 2.7%
4.5%
0.8% 1.4%3.5%
2.1%
1.2%3.1% 3.2%
2.9%
2.5% 3.5%
2.9%
1.1%3.1%
2.2%
1.5%
1.4% 2.5%
2.1% 2.3%
2.1% 2.2% 2.4%
2.4%
1.6% 2.1%
1.8%
4.1%
1.1% 1.8% 2.5% 3.6%
3.1%
-9%
-7%
-5%
-3%
-1%
1%
3%
5%
7%
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
20
0820
0920
1020
1120
1220
1320
1420
1516
:1Q
16:2
Q16
:3Q
16:4
Q17
:1Q
17:2
Q17
:3Q
17:4
Q18
:1Q
18:2
Q18
:3Q
18:4
Q19
:1Q
19:2
Q19
:3Q
19:4
Q20
:1Q
20:2
Q20
:3Q
20:4
Q21
:1Q
21:2
Q21
:3Q
21:4
Q
Demand for Insurance Should Increase in 2019 as GDP Growth Continues at a Steady Pace and Gradually Benefits the Economy Broadly
Real GDP Growth (%)
“Great Recession”
began in Dec. 2007
Financial Crisis
2018 GDP benefited from tax reform, but effects
wane in 2019-2020
Tax cuts help jolt growth from early 2018 to Q1 2019, but effects eventually waned.
Trade war, weaker global growth are adversely affecting US GDP growth in
2019/20.
The Economy Drives P/C Insurance Industry Premiums:2006:Q1–2019:Q2
Direct Premium Growth (All P/C Lines) vs. Nominal GDP: Quarterly Y-o-Y Pct. Change
Sources: SNL Financial; U.S. Commerce Dept., Bureau of Economic Analysis; ISO; I.I.I.; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, University of South Carolina.
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
2008:Q1
2008:Q3
2009:Q1
2009:Q3
2010:Q1
2010:Q3
2011:Q1
2011:Q3
2012:Q1
2012:Q3
2013:Q1
2013:Q3
2014:Q1
2014:Q3
2015:Q1
2015:Q3
2016:Q1
2016:Q3
2017:Q1
2017:Q3
2018:Q1
2018:Q3
2019:Q1
DWP y-o-y change y-o-y nominal GDP growth
DWP and GDP growth both appear to be decelerating
through H1 2019
Direct written premiums track nominal GDP fairly tightly over time, suggesting the P/C insurance industry’s growth prospects inextricably
linked to economic performance.
Consumer Confidence Index: Jan. 1987– Dec. 2019
Source: The Conference Board; Wells Fargo Research.
Outlook: Consumer confidence was shaken by financial volatility in late 2018/early 2019—but rebounded quickly. Consumers remain optimistic about the future, which is consistent with expectations for stronger economic growth (consumers account for nearly 70% of all
spending in the economy). Should positively influence growth of insurable exposures. Mounting trade tensions are a major threat to consumer confidence.
Consumer Confidence Index remains strong but has generally dropped in recent months. Mounting
trade tensions have taken a toll on expectations
Extremely strong labor market conditions are
buoying consumer confidence related to
their Present Situation
Consumer Expectations have been adversely
impacted by trade turmoil, home price affordability
NFIB Small Business Optimism Index:Jan. 1988–Nov. 2019
Source: National Federal of Independent Business; Wells Fargo Research.
Outlook: Small businesses are cautiously optimistic about the future
Trade wars and associated uncertainty introduced significant uncertainty in to the
markets in 2019
Small Business Optimism weakened in 2019 on fears of greater economic uncertainty (esp. trade war fears). Tax reform, reduced
regulations and strong sales have driven
investment, hiring and exposures.
NFIB Small Business Capital Spending and Expansion Plans: Jan. 1988–Nov. 2019
Source: National Federal of Independent Business; Wells Fargo Research.
Small businesses are scaling back on capital spending and hiring plans
New Private Housing Starts, 1990-2025F
1.48
1.47 1.62 1.64
1.57 1.60 1.71 1.85 1.96 2.07
1.80
1.36
0.91
0.55 0.59 0.610.78 0.92 1.00 1.11 1.17 1.20 1.25 1.26 1.29 1.31 1.37 1.41 1.45
1.45
1.351.46
1.29
1.20
1.011.19
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.3
1.5
1.7
1.9
2.1
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20F21F22F23F24F25F
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce; Wells Fargo Securities (12/19 for 2020-21F), Blue Chip Economic Indicators (3/19 for 2022-25F); University. of South Carolina, Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management..
Insurers Continue to See Meaningful Exposure Growth in the Wake of the “Great Recession” Associated with Home Construction: Construction Risk
Exposure, Surety, Commercial Auto; Potent Driver of Workers Comp Exposure
New home starts plunged 72% from 2005-2009; a net
annual decline of 1.49 million units, lowest since records began
in 1959
Job growth, low inventories of existing homes, and demographics should continue to stimulate new
home construction, but higher mortgage rates and a slowing
economy will slow the pace of growth
(Millions of Units)
Homeowners InsuranceNet Written Premium, 2000–2019F
53
$45.8$49.5
$52.2$54.8$55.2
$61.1$63.5
$66.9$71.9
$77.0$79.9$81.2
$82.8$88.2$90.5
$57.5$56.2
$32.4
$40.0
$35.2
$30$35$40$45$50$55$60$65$70$75$80$85$90$95$100
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19F
Sources: A.M. Best; USC RUM Center.
$ Billions Homeowners insurance NWP continues to rise (up 179% 2000-2019E). Reasons include rate robust
residential real estate construction in some regions, rate increases (especially in coastal zones, CA), ITV
endorsements (e.g., “inflation guards”)
The Homeowners line will generate about $2B
in new premiums annually through 2019
Auto/Light Truck Sales, 1999-2023F
55
16.9
16.5
16.1
13.2
10.411.612.7
14.4 15
.5 16.4 17
.417.5
17.1
17.2
16.9
16.4
16.4
16.2
16.4
16.5
16.7
16.7
16.9
16.617.117.517.8
17.4
910111213141516171819
99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20F 21F22F22F 23F24F25F
(Millions of Units)
New auto/light truck sales fell to the
lowest level since the late 1960s.
Job growth and improved credit market conditions boosted auto
sales to near record levels by 2015/16
Truck, SUV purchases remain strong as smaller car sales slump
Yearly car/light truck sales are slowing slightly, as demand tapers. But shifting consumer preferences for more expensive trucks, SUVs and crossovers will
contirbue continued exposure growth. PP Auto premium might grow by 3.5% - 5%.Source: U.S. Department of Commerce; Well Fargo Securities (12/19 for 2020-21F); Blue Chip Economic Indicators (3/19 for 2022-25F); Univ. of South Carolina, Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management.
US Unemployment Rate Forecast: 2007:Q1–2020:Q44.5%
4.5% 4.6% 4.8% 4.9%5.4%6.1%
6.9%
8.1%
9.3% 9.6% 10.0%
9.7%
9.6%
9.6%
8.9% 9.1%
9.1%
8.7%
8.3%
8.2%
8.0%
7.8%
7.7%
7.6%
7.3%
7.0%
6.6%
6.2%
6.1%
5.7%
5.6%
5.4%
5.2%
5.0%
4.9%
4.9%
4.9%
4.7%
4.7%
4.4%
4.3%
4.1%
4.1%
3.9%
3.8%
3.8% 3.9%
3.6%
3.6%
3.5% 3.6%
3.5% 3.6%
3.6%
9.6%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
07:Q1
07:Q2
07:Q3
07:Q4
08:Q1
08:Q2
08:Q3
08:Q4
09:Q1
09:Q2
09:Q3
09:Q4
10:Q1
10:Q2
10:Q3
10:Q4
11:Q1
11:Q2
11:Q3
11:Q4
12:Q1
12:Q2
12:Q3
12:Q4
13:Q1
13:Q2
13:Q3
13:Q4
14:Q1
14:Q2
14:Q3
14:Q4
15:Q1
15:Q2
15:Q3
15:Q4
16:Q1
16:Q2
16:Q3
16:Q4
17:Q1
17:Q2
17:Q3
17:Q4
18:Q1
18:Q2
18:Q3
18:Q4
19:Q1
19:Q2
19:Q3
19:Q4
20:Q1
20:Q2
20:Q3
20:Q4
Rising unemployment eroded payrolls
and WC’s exposure base.
Unemployment peaked at 10% in late 2009.
* = actual; = forecastsSources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics; Wells Fargo Securities (12/19 edition); Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, University of South Carolina.
The unemployment rate is expected to remain
below 4% through 2021 but trade war could change this outlook.
At 3.5%, the unemployment
rate is at its lowest reading
in 50 years.
63
Catastrophe Loss Update: Major Driver of Rate Pressure
CAT Losses for the Decade Just Ended Were Up Materially—Costliest Ever
Primary, Reinsurance and Retro MarketsAll Impacted
63
U.S. Inflation-Adjusted Cat Losses
*2018: Inflation-adjusted estimate, subject to change. 2010s is average of 2010 to 2018.
Sources: Property Claims Service, a Verisk Analytics business; Insurance Information Institute.
4037
79
104
50
1980s:$5 B
1990s: $15 B
2000s: $25 B2010s: $35 B
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
$100
80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18*
Bill
ion
s, 2
01
8 $
Average forDecade Hurricane
Andrew WTC
Katrina, Rita, Wilma
2017 – Worst year of the decade and EVER for U.S. Insured Catastrophe Losses. Average Insured Loss per Year for 1980-2018 is $19.3 B.
Harvey, Irma, Maria
US Insured Catastrophe Losses by Decade: 1980s – 2010s*
65
$15
$25
$35
$5
$33
$19
$9
$2$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
Serious efforts to mitigate against climate risk must be led by government at all levels. Requires enormous long-term infrastructure
investments that funded primarily through debt
($ Bill)
*2010s figures is the average of the years 2010-2018.Sources: Property Claims Service, a Verisk Analytics business; Insurance Information Institute.
Not Inflation Adjusted Inflation-Adjusted
Inflation-adjusted
insured CAT losses are
rising by $10 billion each
decade
Top 20 Most Costly Disastersin U.S. History—Katrina Still Ranks #1
67
(Insured Losses, 2017 Dollars, $ Billions)*
$9.3 $9.7 $10.0$11.7$14.2$14.2$15.9
$18.0$19.8$21.9
$25.3$26.0$27.1
$51.6
$5.9 $6.0 $7.1 $7.5 $7.9 $8.3
$0
$10
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
Jeanne(2004)
Frances(2004)
Rita (2005)
Torn./T-Storms (2011)
Torn./T-Storms (2011)
Hugo (1989)
Ivan (2004)
Charley(2004)
Michael(2018)
Wilma(2005)
Camp Fire(2018)
Ike (2008)
Harvey (2017)
Irma (2017)
Sandy(2012)
Maria (2017)
Northridge(1994)
9/11 (2001)
Andrew(1992)
Katrina(2005)
8 of the top 20 mostly costly insured events in US history occurred during the 2010s
Includes Tuscaloosa, AL,
tornado
Includes Joplin, MO, tornado
17 of the 20 Most Expensive Insurance Events in US History Have Occurred Since 2004
*Estimated.Sources: PCS, RMS, Karen Clark & Co; USC Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management adjustments to 2017 dollars using the CPI.
Homeowners Insurance Combined Ratio: 1990–2019F
68
113.0
117.7
158.4
113.6
101.0 109.4
108.2
111.4 121.7
109.3
98.2
94.4 100.3
89.0 95.6
116.6
105.8
106.9122.3
104.1
90.4
92.4
91.8
93.2107.2
103.9
98.0
118.4
112.7 121.7
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E
1
Homeowners Performance Improved in 2019, Following the Cat-Impacted Years of 2017 and 2018
Hurricane Ike
Hurricane SandyRecord
tornado activity
Hurricane Andrew
Sources: A.M. Best (1990-2018F); USC RUM Center for 2019E.
Hurricanes Harvey,
Irma, Maria, CA Wildfires
CA Wildfires,
Hurricanes Michael, Florence
71
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 1920E
(Percent)
US Reinsurance Pricing Is Sensitive to CAT Activity and Ultimately Impacts Primary Insurance Pricing, Terms and Conditions
Post-Andrew surge
US Property Catastrophe Rate-on-Line Index: 1990 – 2020E*
*As of January 1 each year.Source: Guy Carpenter; Artimes.bm accessed at: http://www.artemis.bm/us-property-cat-rate-on-line-index
Post-9/11 Adjustment
Post Katrina, Rita, Wilma
period
Post-Ike adjustment Adjustment
following record tornado losses in 2011 and Sandy in
2012
Record CATs in 2017 and high CAT losses in 2018 pressured US
reinsurance prices in recent years (+3.3% in 2019, +6.4% in 2018,
+4.0% in 2020E)
2020 Global RoL+5%
Non-Marine Retrocessional CAT Excess-of-Loss Index, 1992 – 2020*
*Risk adjusted.Source: Hyperion X via Artemis.bm accesses 1/12/20 at: https://www.artemis.bm/news/retrocession-rates-up-as-much-as-40-in-january-renewals-hyperion-x/
Index: 1992 = 100Average XoL
Rate on Line up ~ 20% in 2020. Factors driving
increase include reduced
availability of capital, ILS
losses, trapped collateral
73
Commercial Lines Pricing & Cyclicality
Pricing Pressures Are Intense but Rational
73
Commercial Lines Combined Ratio, 1990-2019F*
109.
411
0.2
118.
810
9.5 11
2.5
110.
210
7.6
104.
110
9.7
110.
2
102.
5 105.
491
.194
.510
4.4
100.
7 103.
8 107.
310
5.4
96.3
96.0
95.2
99.0
102.
197
.697
.5
102.
0
111.
1
112.
3
122.
3
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 12 14 16 18
Com
mer
cial
Lin
es C
ombi
ned
Rat
io
74
Commercial lines underwriting performance improved
materially in 2018/19 in the wake of record CATs in 2017
*2007-2012 figures exclude mortgage and financial guaranty segments.Source: A.M. Best (1990-2018). Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina (2019F).
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91 93 95 97 99 01 03 05 07 09 11 13 15 17 19F
Economic Shocks, Inflation:
1976: 22.2%Tort Crisis
1986: 30.5%
Post-9/112002: 22.4%
Great Recession:2009: -9.0%
ROE
2019E: +3.1%
Commercial Lines NPW Premium Growth:1975 – 2019F
Recessions:1982: 1.1%
Commercial lines is prone to far more cyclical volatility that
personal lines.
1988-2000: Period of
inter-cycle stability
Commercial lines premium
growth has been sluggish
for years, reflecting weak
pricing environment.
Note: Data include state funds beginning in 1998. Source: A.M. Best; Insurance Information Institute; Univ. of South Carolina Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, ISO.
Post-Hurricane Andrew Bump:
1993: 6.3%
Post Katrina Bump:
2006: 7.7%
2016: -1.1%
2018: +14.4%
CIAB: Average Commercial Rate Change, All Lines, 2011:Q1–2019:Q3*
76
-0.1% 0.9% 2.7
% 4.4%
4.3%
3.9% 5.0%
5.2%
4.3%
3.4%
2.1%
1.5%
-0.5%
0.1%
-0.7%
-2.3%
-3.3%
-3.1% -2.8%
-3.7%
-3.9% -3.2%
-3.3% -2.5%
-2.8% -1.3%
0.3% 1.7% 2.4% 3.5% 5.2% 6.2%
-2.9%
1.6%
1.5%
-16%
-11%
-6%
-1%
4%
9%
1Q11
2Q11
3Q11
4Q11
1Q12
2Q12
3Q12
4Q12
1Q13
2Q13
3Q13
4Q13
1Q14
2Q14
3Q14
4Q14
1Q15
2Q15
3Q15
4Q15
1Q16
2Q16
3Q16
4Q16
1Q17
2Q17
3Q17
4Q17
1Q18
2Q18
3Q18
4Q18
1Q19
2Q19
2Q19
*Latest available.Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.Source: Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers; Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, Univ. of South Carolina.
Largest increase since 2003 for some accounts
(Percent)
Renewals turned positive in late 2011
in the wake of record tornado
losses and Hurricane Sandy
Poor results in 2017/18 seem to have exerted enough
pressure on markets to push overall rates up by +6.2% as
of Q3 2019
Change in Commercial Rate Renewals, by Line: 2019:Q3
77Source: Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers; USC Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management.
Percentage Change (%)
3.2% 3.3% 3.7% 4.4% 4.6% 5.0%
8.8% 9.1% 9.8%
-2.3%
0.6% 0.8% 1.4% 1.7% 2.3%
-4.0%-2.0%0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%
10.0%12.0%
Wor
kers
Com
p
Sur
ety
Terro
rism
Cyb
er
Bro
ker E
&O
Mar
ine
EP
L
Floo
d
Bus
ines
sIn
terru
ptio
n
Con
stru
ctio
n
Gen
eral
Liab
ility
D&
O
Com
mer
cial
Pro
perty
Com
mer
cial
Aut
o
Um
brel
la
Commercial Property, Business Interruption,
Flood are reflecting record CAT losses and
pressure from reinsurance markets
Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.
Umbrella now leads all major commercial lines in terms of rate gains, exceeding Commercial Auto and CP for
the first time in Q3 2019
Change in Commercial Auto Rate Renewals:2011:Q1 to 2019:Q3
78Source: Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers; Barclay’s Capital.Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.
Perc
enta
ge C
hang
e (%
)
Commercial Auto rate gains continued to
accelerate into late 2019
Commercial Auto Combined Ratio: 1993–2019E
79
112.1
112.0
113.0
115.9
102.7
95.2
92.9
92.1
92.4 94.1 96.8 99.1
97.8103.4 106.8
106.7
103.3 108.8
110.5
111.1
108.0
106.0
118.1
115.7
116.2
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19E
Commercial Auto Results Are Challenged as Rate Gains Have Yet to Fully Offset Adverse Frequency and Severity Trends
Sources: A.M. Best (1990-2018); Center for Risk and Uncertainty Management, University of South Carolina (2019E).
Change in Commercial Property Rate Renewals:2011:Q1 to 2019:Q3
80Source: Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers; Barclay’s Capital.Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.
Perc
enta
ge C
hang
e (%
)
Commercial Property rate gains continued to accelerate into late 2019
Workers Compensation Combined Ratio: 1994–2018P
81
102.0
97.0 100.0
101.0
112.6
108.6
105.1
102.7
98.5 10
3.5
104.5 110.6 115.0
115.0
109.0
102.0
100.0
94.0
94.0
89.0
84.0
121.7
107.0115.3
118.2
80859095100105110115120125130
94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18p
Workers Comp Is an Example of a Line that Was Recently Restored to Health Through the Return of Rate Adequacy as
Well as Declining Claim FrequencySources: A.M. Best (1994-2009); NCCI (2010-2018P) and are for private carriers only..
WC results have improved markedly since 2011. The 2018 combined ratio is the
best in at least 80 years
Change in Workers Comp Renewals:2011:Q1 to 2019:Q3
82Source: Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers; Barclay’s Capital.Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.
Perc
enta
ge C
hang
e (%
)
Workers Comp rates continue to fall, consistent with
strong underwriting performance
Change in Commercial Rate Renewals, by Account Size: 1999:Q4 to 2019:Q3
83Source: Council of Insurance Agents and Brokers; Barclay’s Capital. University of South Carolina, Risk and Uncertainty Management Center .Note: CIAB data cited here are based on a survey. Rate changes earned by individual insurers can and do vary, potentially substantially.
Perc
enta
ge C
hang
e (%
)
KRW Effects
Pricing Turned Negative in Early
2004 and Remained that
way for 7 ½ years
Peak = 2001:Q4 +28.5%
Pricing turned positive in Q3:2011, the first increase in nearly 8 years
Pricing turns positive in early
2018, after falling for the past 3 ½ years
2019:Q3: +6.2%
Trough = 2007:Q3 -13.6%
88
Tort Environment: The Return of Social Inflation?
88
Tort Costs Are Under Pressure from a Variety of Different Factors
The Nation’s Judicial Hellholes: 2019 – 2020
89Source: American Tort Reform Association; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
Florida
IllinoisCook, Madison
& St. Clair Counties
Louisiana
Watch Listn CO Supreme Courtn Floridan MD General Assem.n MT Supreme Courtn PA Supreme Courtn WV Supreme Ct.
Dishonorable Mention
n AK Supreme Courtn KS Supreme Courtn OR Supreme Court
Minnesota Supreme Ct./Twin
Cities
NYC
St. LouisPhiladelphia
Court of Common Pleas
New Jersey Legislature
Oklahoma
California
Multi-District Litigation (MDL), Current Cases, as of Oct. 2019
Source: Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation from Assured Research,12/19; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
65 out of the 195 current MDL are
related to Products Liability, with
antitrust coming second at 48 (25%)
ExamplesRoundup (Monsanto)Talcum Powder (J&J)Opiates (Purdue, etc.)
Deepwater Horizon (BP)Diesel Deception (VW)
Average Jury Awards, 1999 – 2017 (latest available)
$725 $747 $756$800 $799
$1,018$1,022$950
$1,077$1,046
$654
$806
$1,098$1,010$1,042
$1,132
$1,355
$1,847
$500
$700
$900
$1,100
$1,300
$1,500
$1,700
$1,900
$2,100
1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2010 2012 2014 2016
Source: Jury Verdict Research; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
The average jury award reached an all-time record high in 2017.
Median Award = $50,000 (also a record)
Average Jury Awards, 1999 - 2017
Source: Thompson Reuters, Current Award Trends in Personal Injury (58th ed.); Ins. Info, Inst.; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
Products Liability, Business Negligence and Med Mal generate
the largest awards
Defense Costs and Cost Containment Expense as a Percent of Incurred Losses ($000), 2016 - 2018
Note: Figures are net of reinsurance and exclude state funds.Source: NAIC sourced from S&P Global Markets; Ins. Info, Inst.; Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
Personal Auto has seen the sharpest increase in
recent years
Shareholder Class Action Lawsuits*
Source: Stanford University School of Law (securities.stanford.edu); Risk and Uncertainty Management Center, Univ. of South Carolina.
164 202
163231
188
111173241
209 216
498
266
227 238
182
119 17
6 222
168
175 188
151 165
168 208271
412
402
404
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Shareholder litigation is surging, in part due to suits associated with M&A activity. Major
implications for D&O coverage.
IPO FlopsCyber
Increase in M&A
95
Talent Wars
Can the Insurance Industry Win the War for Talent?
Insurance is Not the Only Industry that is Interested in Hiring New Talent, Especially those with
Data/Analytics Skills
95
Can Insurers “Win” the War on Talent?n Hiring Needs: The industry has a stated need of hiring
some 400,000 people over the next several years
n Job Market is Tight: Insurers are doing a better job focusing their efforts—which need to be concerted
n Inclusive Approach: The industry’s approach has been to suggest that virtually everyone, from any background can build a rewarding career in the insurance industry
n So Far, So Good: To date, the industry’s diligence and efforts seem to be meeting with successw Insurers seem generally to be successful in their overall
recruiting efforts
n But What Really Works? A few key insights
Dr. Bob’s Top 5 “Do’s” for Recruiting RMI Talent1. Articulate a Career Path (at First Contact w/Student)
w Students want to see opportunities for career advancement and that you’re planning to make an investment in them
w Suggestion: Include an experienced employee on recruiting trips (5-15 years of experience, though not necessarily all with the recruiting company), not just HR people. Students can identify better with these individuals and experienced employees can share their personal experiences and career paths. Students love this.
2. Get an Early Startw With the unemployment rate hovering around 3.5% (<2.5% for college grads), the
best students are getting jobs sooner and sooner. Top students now have multiple strong offers in September of their senior year. By December, the “cream of the crop” has been recruited.
w Get into classrooms! Career fairs can be a zoo. Getting into the classroom, usually when students are juniors and first-semester seniors can be very effective for recruitment of new grads as well as interns. Social media is helpful too.
Dr. Bob’s Top 5 “Do’s” for Recruiting RMI Talent3. Institute a Formal Training Program for New Hires
wStudents want to hit the ground running and a formal training program after hiring is one of the best ways to quickly acclimate new hires to their new work environment while also making them feel welcome and comfortable with their new duties a co-workers
4. Institute an Internship ProgramwMany employers today have internship programs, but not all. An internship
program—even if very small—gives you a leg up on recruiting and many of the top students accept positions with a company for whom they interned.
Dr. Bob’s Top 5 “Do’s” for Recruiting RMI Talent
5. Support RMI Education—Consistently wStudents who major in RMI are already indicating an interest in an RMI careerwSupport RMI programs and education through scholarships, internships,
targeted contributions to a university’s RMI program, executive visits to classrooms, participation by industry executives in courses taught partly by faculty and partly by the executive (e.g., one week). A larger step would include endowing a faculty chair or professorship dedicated to the study of RMI, which would then bear the name of that company.
wGet to know a professor or two! Nobody knows these students better. This will give you an edge in recruiting new hires and interns. This relationship can also help you get into classrooms when students are making key decisions related to careers and employers.
1. Don’t Fail to Recognize that Students Will Hedge Their Bets with RMI-Industry RecruiterswYou’re not recruiting in a vacuum. Most business school students double
major and will have had two internships. In today’s tight job market, understand that you’re not just in competition with other insurers and brokers, you’re in competition with banks, investment banks, accounting and consulting firms, pension funds, investment advisory firms, real estate management firms and increasingly technology firm—and many more
Dr. Bob’s Top 3 “Don’ts” for RMI Talent Recruiting
2. Don’t Pigeon Hole Studentsw Limiting entry level hires to a claims and underwriting track is costing you quality
talent. Consider more direct hiring into Accounting, Finance, Marketing, Data Analytics and other functions. Exposing students to the core underwriting and claims functions is critical to learning the business, but if the student’s major (or second major or minor) was in another discipline, the attraction of a competing offer from a bank, investment firm, accounting firm or consulting firm may be too much to resist. Help them apply and channel their skills, talents and interests while also training them in the “art” of insurance.
3. Don’t Be ParochialwAn astounding number of insurers—even large ones—don’t look too far beyond
their headquarters or primary bases of operation for talent. This is true both for internships and entry level positions. There is sometimes a bias to recruit at local universities (perhaps because it is easier and less expensive to do so) which can lead (inadvertently) to a bias against hiring quality talent from other institutions. Sometimes also a bias to hire from same school managers attended.
Dr. Bob’s Top 3 “Don’ts” for RMI Talent Recruiting
1. P/C Insurers (Multi-Line, Commercial, Specialty, Personal Lines, Lloyd’s Syndicates)
2. Banks & Lending Institutions (National/Rgnl. Banks, Ford Mtr. CreditàCredit Risk Functions)
3. Brokers (National, Regional, Specialty, Wholesale)
4. Life/Health/Disability/A&H Insurers
5. Consulting Firms (E&Y, PwC, Deloitte, Bain, etc.àfinancial services/tech risk)
6. Wealth Management Firms
7. Real Estate Management Firms (e.g., Cushman & Wakefield)
8. Government & Defense Contractors (e.g., Boeing, Northrup-Grumman)
9. Logistics Firms (e.g., UPS)
10. Tech Firms (e.g., IBM, Amazon, Start-ups)
n Biggest Problem Area: Independent/Captive Agencies
Who’s Hiring the Most RMI Grads (Includes Double Majors)
Can Insurers Win the War for Talent?
Source: Business Insurance, 2017 Risk Management and Insurance Schools Ranking and Directory,
The number of RMI
majors is up sharply
Overall employment
is up too
104
Number of RMI Majors at USC,by Academic Year
366350
292
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
USC’s RMI program has experienced significant growth in recent years,
becoming the 3rd largest program in the US, according to Business Insurance
Academic Year
105
Enrollment in USC’s Intro to RMI Course
405350
282258
050100150200
250300350400450
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
Enrollment in USC’s Introduction to Risk Management & Insurance course is at a record
high—up 57% over the past 3 years. This reflects growth in the number of RMI majors, increased awareness of the importance of RM across all
business disciplines and increased employment, internship and scholarship opportunities
Academic Year
Thank you for your timeand your attention!
Twitter: twitter.com/bob_hartwigFor a copy of this presentation, email me at [email protected]
106