The Risks of Hazard

As the analysis of insurer’s first half results come in, there are a few consistent refrains. In fact, they sound like broken records.

Last month there was an article published by the Tampa Bay Times (see here) on flood insurance that really stood out for The Risks of Hazard. Not only was the author, John Romano, supporting the continued expansion of private (i.e. actuarial, i.e. market-driven) flood insurance – he was advocating for the logical next step, universal flood coverage.

The Risks of Hazard takes a great interest in the protection gap because it is both an opportunity for underwriters and a shortcoming of insurance as an industry. Last week, Insurance Journal published a very informative look at the U.S. residential protection gap from a novel perspective: the policy holder’s perspective.

The insurance aspects of the protection gap are well documented, including how to write in the flood protection gap, what it looks like, and how it compares to emerging risks. But it is surprisingly rare to read about what that means to the policy holders. Happily, the Big I and Trusted Choice did some homework, and the results are stark.

Insurers are posting results for the second quarter now, and cat losses are making headlines. There were certainly a lot of claims, with Q2 driving the highest cat losses seen since Sandy in 2012. The One Brief (from Aon) published an excellent synopsis of the losses here and it makes bleak reading.

On the same day as the Aon article, Travelers published their results. Sure enough, they shared some discouraging news:

• Catastrophe losses of $333 million, up from $221 million for the same period last year, driven by wildfires at Fort McMurray in Canada and hail storms in Texas.
• Net and operating income of $664 million and $649 million, respectively, declined from the prior year quarter, primarily due to the higher catastrophe losses, higher non-catastrophe weather-related losses and lower net investment income.
• It was the smallest quarterly profit since 2012 after superstorm Sandy.

It is always exciting to find others in the industry discussing topics that we here at The Risks of Hazard consider important. When those others carry the credibility of Swiss Re and A.M. Best, it’s especially exciting. Here is an interview from A.M. Best TV, with Meg Green talking to Megan Linkin (a natural disasters expert with Swiss Re) about the protection gap
The protection gap is a favorite topic here at the Risks of Hazard. All I need to add is: What she said!