RNR 2012 10-K
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
Q ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012
OR
o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to
Commission File No. 001-14428
RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS LTD.
(Exact Name Of Registrant As Specified In Its Charter)
|
| |
Bermuda | 98-014-1974 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) | (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
Renaissance House, 12 Crow Lane, Pembroke HM 19 Bermuda
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
(441) 295-4513
(Registrant's telephone number)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
| |
Title of each class | Name of each exchange on which registered |
Common Shares, Par Value $1.00 per share | New York Stock Exchange, Inc. |
Series C 6.08% Preference Shares, Par Value $1.00 per share | New York Stock Exchange, Inc. |
Series D 6.60% Preference Shares, Par Value $1.00 per share | New York Stock Exchange, Inc. |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Act. Yes Q No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No Q
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes Q No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes Q No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company, as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act. Large accelerated filer Q, Accelerated filer o, Non-accelerated filer o, Smaller reporting company o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No Q
The aggregate market value of Common Shares held by nonaffiliates of the registrant at June 30, 2012 was $3,558.0 million based on the closing sale price of the Common Shares on the New York Stock Exchange on that date.
The number of Common Shares, par value US $1.00 per share, outstanding at February 20, 2013 was 44,218,306.
The information required by Part III of this report, to the extent not set forth herein, is incorporated by reference to the registrant's Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed in respect of our 2013 Annual General Meeting of Shareholders.
RENAISSANCERE HOLDINGS LTD.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
| | |
| | Page |
| | |
| |
ITEM 1. | | |
ITEM 1A. | | |
ITEM 1B. | | |
ITEM 2. | | |
ITEM 3. | | |
ITEM 4. | | |
| |
ITEM 5. | | |
ITEM 6. | | |
ITEM 7. | | |
ITEM 7A. | | |
ITEM 8. | | |
ITEM 9. | | |
ITEM 9A. | | |
ITEM 9B. | | |
| |
ITEM 10. | | |
ITEM 11. | | |
ITEM 12. | | |
ITEM 13. | | |
ITEM 14. | | |
| |
ITEM 15. | | |
| |
| | |
| | |
| | |
NOTE ON FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act"), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"). Forward-looking statements are necessarily based on estimates and assumptions that are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which, with respect to future business decisions, are subject to change. These uncertainties and contingencies can affect actual results and could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by, or on behalf of, us.
In particular, statements using words such as "may", "should", "estimate", "expect", "anticipate", "intends", "believe", "predict", "potential", or words of similar import generally involve forward-looking statements. For example, we may include certain forward-looking statements in "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" with regard to trends in results, prices, volumes, operations, investment results, margins, combined ratios, reserves, market conditions, risk management and exchange rates. This Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements with respect to our business and industry, such as those relating to our strategy and management objectives, market standing and product volumes, competition and new entrants in our industry, industry capital, insured losses from loss events, government initiatives and regulatory matters affecting the reinsurance and insurance industries.
In light of the risks and uncertainties inherent in all future projections, the inclusion of forward-looking statements in this report should not be considered as a representation by us or any other person that our objectives or plans will be achieved. Numerous factors could cause our actual results to differ materially from those addressed by the forward-looking statements, including the following:
| |
• | we are exposed to significant losses from catastrophic events and other exposures that we cover, which we expect to cause significant volatility in our financial results from time to time; |
| |
• | the frequency and severity of catastrophic events or other events which we cover could exceed our estimates and cause losses greater than we expect; |
| |
• | the inherent uncertainties in our reserving process, particularly as regards to large catastrophic events and longer tail casualty lines, which uncertainties could increase as the product classes we offer evolve over time; |
| |
• | the risk of the lowering or loss of any of the financial strength, claims paying or enterprise wide risk management ratings of RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. ("RenaissanceRe") or of one or more of our subsidiaries or changes in the policies or practices of the rating agencies; |
| |
• | risks associated with appropriately modeling, pricing for, and contractually addressing new or potential factors in loss emergence, such as the trend toward potentially significant global warming and other aspects of climate change which have the potential to adversely affect our business, any of which could cause us to underestimate our exposures and potentially adversely impact our financial results; |
| |
• | risks due to our increasing reliance on a small and potentially decreasing number of insurance and reinsurance brokers for the preponderance of our revenue; |
| |
• | the risk that our customers may fail to make premium payments due to us (a risk that we believe has increased in certain of our key markets), as well as the risk of failures of our reinsurers, brokers or other counterparties to honor their obligations to us, including as regards to large catastrophic events, and also including their obligations to make third party payments for which we might be liable; |
| |
• | a contention by the Internal Revenue Service that Renaissance Reinsurance Ltd. ("Renaissance Reinsurance"), or any of our other Bermuda subsidiaries, is subject to U.S. taxation; |
| |
• | risks associated with implementing our business strategies and initiatives, including risks related to developing or enhancing the operations, controls and other infrastructure necessary in respect of our more recent, new or proposed initiatives, and the risk that we may fail to succeed in our business or financing plans for these initiatives; |
| |
• | risks relating to operating in a highly competitive environment, which we expect to continue to increase over time from new competition from traditional and non-traditional participants, particularly as capital markets products provide alternatives and replacements for more traditional reinsurance and insurance products, as new entrants or existing competitors attempt to replicate our business model, and as a result of consolidation in the (re)insurance industry; |
| |
• | risks associated with potential for loss of services of any one of our key senior officers, the risk that we fail to attract or retain the executives and employees necessary to manage our business, or difficulties associated with the transition of members of our senior management team for new or expanded roles necessary to execute our strategic and tactical plans; |
| |
• | risks relating to adverse legislative developments that could reduce the size of the private markets we serve, or impede their future growth, including proposals to shift United States ("U.S.") catastrophe risks to federal mechanisms; similar proposals at the state level in the U.S., including the risk of new legislation in Florida to expand the reinsurance coverages offered by the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund ("FHCF") and the insurance policies written by state-sponsored Citizens Property Insurance Corporation ("Citizens"), or failing to implement reforms to reduce such coverages; and the risk that new legislation will be enacted in the international markets we serve which might reduce market opportunities in the private sector, weaken our customers or otherwise adversely impact us; |
| |
• | risks relating to the inability, or delay, in the claims paying ability of Citizens, FHCF or of private market participants in Florida, particularly following a large windstorm or of multiple smaller storms, which we believe would further weaken or destabilize the Florida market and give rise to an unpredictable range of impacts which might be adverse to us, perhaps materially so; |
| |
• | the risk of potential challenges to the Company's claim of exemption from insurance regulation under certain current laws and the risk of increased global regulation of the insurance and reinsurance industry; |
| |
• | the passage of federal or state legislation subjecting Renaissance Reinsurance or our other Bermuda subsidiaries to supervision, regulation or taxation in the U.S. or other jurisdictions in which we operate, or increasing the taxation of business ceded to us; |
| |
• | the risk that there could be regulatory or legislative changes adversely impacting us, as a Bermuda-based company, relative to our competitors, or actions taken by multinational organizations having such an impact; |
| |
• | risks associated with highly subjective judgments, such as valuing our more illiquid assets, and determining the impairments taken on our investments, all of which impact our reported financial position and operating results; |
| |
• | risks associated with our investment portfolio, including the risk that our investment assets may fail to yield attractive or even positive results; and the risk that investment managers may breach our investment guidelines, or the inability of such guidelines to mitigate risks arising out of the ongoing period of relative economic weakness; |
| |
• | risks associated with inflation, which could cause loss costs to increase, and impact the performance of our investment portfolio, thereby adversely impacting our financial position or operating results; |
| |
• | the risk we might be bound to policyholder obligations beyond our underwriting intent, including due to emerging claims and coverage issues; |
| |
• | risks associated with counterparty credit risk, including with respect to reinsurance brokers, customers, agents, retrocessionaires, capital providers, parties associated with our investment portfolio and/or our energy trading business, and premiums and other receivables owed to us, which risks we believe continue to be heightened as a result of the ongoing period of relative economic weakness; |
| |
• | risks associated with our allocation of capital to our weather and energy risk management operations, including the risks that these operations may give rise to unforeseen or unanticipated losses; |
| |
• | the risk that ongoing or future industry regulatory developments will disrupt our business, or that of our business partners, or mandate changes in industry practices in ways that increase our costs, decrease our revenues or require us to alter aspects of the way we do business; |
| |
• | acts of terrorism, war or political unrest; |
| |
• | changes in insurance regulations in the U.S. or other jurisdictions in which we operate, including risks arising out of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the "Dodd-Frank Act") or its related rule making or implementation; |
| |
• | risks that the advent of the new U.S. Federal Insurance Office or other related developments may adversely impact our business, or significantly increase our operating costs; |
| |
• | operational risks, including system or human failures; |
| |
• | risks in connection with our management of third party capital; |
| |
• | changes in economic conditions, including interest rate, currency, equity and credit conditions which could affect our investment portfolio or declines in our investment returns for other reasons which could reduce our profitability and hinder our ability to pay claims promptly in accordance with our strategy, which risks we believe are currently enhanced in light of the current uncertainty regarding U.S. fiscal policy and the ongoing period of relative economic weakness, both globally, particularly in respect of Eurozone countries and companies, and in the U.S.; |
| |
• | risks relating to our potential failure to comply with covenants in our debt agreements; |
| |
• | risks relating to the inability of our operating subsidiaries to declare and pay dividends to RenaissanceRe; |
| |
• | risks that we may require additional capital in the future, particularly after a catastrophic event or to support potential growth opportunities in our business, which may not be available or may be available only on unfavorable terms; |
| |
• | risks that certain of our new or potentially expanding business lines could have a significant negative impact on our financial results or cause significant volatility in our results for any particular period, including risks relating to our weather and energy risk operations, whose results may be more volatile than we estimate; |
| |
• | risks arising out of possible changes in the distribution or placement of risks due to increased consolidation of customers or insurance and reinsurance brokers, or from potential changes in their business practices which may be required by future regulatory changes; and |
| |
• | risks relating to changes in regulatory regimes and/or accounting rules, which could result in significant changes to our financial results, including but not limited to, the European Union ("EU") directive concerning capital adequacy, risk management and regulatory reporting for insurers. |
The factors listed above should not be construed as exhaustive. Certain of these risk factors and others are described in more detail from time to time in our filings with the SEC. We undertake no obligation to release publicly the results of any future revisions we may make to forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this Form 10-K to "RenaissanceRe" refers to RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. (the parent company) and the "Company" refers to RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd. and its subsidiaries, which principally include, but are not limited to, Renaissance Reinsurance, Glencoe Insurance Ltd. ("Glencoe"), Renaissance Reinsurance of Europe ("ROE"), Renaissance Trading Ltd. ("Renaissance Trading"), RenRe Energy Advisors Ltd. ("REAL") and the Company's Lloyd's syndicate, RenaissanceRe Syndicate 1458 ("Syndicate 1458").
We also underwrite reinsurance on behalf of joint ventures, principally including Top Layer Reinsurance Ltd. ("Top Layer Re"), recorded under the equity method of accounting, and DaVinci Reinsurance Ltd. ("DaVinci"). The financial results of DaVinci and DaVinci's parent company, DaVinciRe Holdings Ltd. ("DaVinciRe"), are consolidated in our financial statements. For your convenience, we have included a "Glossary of Selected Insurance and Reinsurance Terms". All dollar amounts referred to in this Form 10-K are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise indicated. Any discrepancies in the tables included herein between the amounts listed and the totals thereof are due to rounding.
OVERVIEW
RenaissanceRe was established in Bermuda in 1993 to write principally property catastrophe reinsurance and today is a leading global provider of reinsurance and insurance coverages and related services. Our aspiration is to be the world's best underwriter of high-severity, low frequency risks. Through our operating subsidiaries, we seek to produce superior returns for our shareholders by being a trusted, long-term partner to our customers for assessing and managing risk, delivering responsive solutions, and keeping our promises. We accomplish this by leveraging our core capabilities of risk assessment and information management, and by investing in our capabilities to serve our customers across the cycles that have historically characterized our markets. Overall, our strategy focuses on superior risk selection, superior customer relationships and superior capital management. We provide value to our customers and joint venture partners in the form of financial security, innovative products, and responsive service. We are known as a leader in paying valid reinsurance claims promptly. We principally measure our financial success through long-term growth in tangible book value per common share plus the change in accumulated dividends, which we believe is the most appropriate measure of our Company's financial performance, and believe we have delivered superior performance in respect of this measure over time.
Our core products include property catastrophe reinsurance, which we primarily write through our principal operating subsidiary Renaissance Reinsurance, Syndicate 1458, and joint ventures, principally DaVinci and Top Layer Re; specialty reinsurance risks written through Renaissance Reinsurance, Glencoe, Syndicate 1458 and DaVinci; and other insurance products primarily written through Syndicate 1458. We believe that we are one of the world's leading providers of property catastrophe reinsurance. We also believe we have a strong position in certain specialty reinsurance lines of business and a growing presence in the Lloyd's marketplace. Our reinsurance and insurance products are principally distributed through intermediaries, with whom we seek to cultivate strong long-term relationships. We continually explore appropriate and efficient ways to address the risk needs of our clients. We have created and managed several alternative capital vehicles in the past and may create additional shorter duration or other risk bearing vehicles in the future.
Since a substantial portion of the reinsurance and insurance we write provides protection from damages relating to natural and man-made catastrophes, our results depend to a large extent on the frequency and severity of such catastrophic events, and the coverages we offer to customers affected by these events. We are exposed to significant losses from these catastrophic events and other exposures that we cover. Accordingly, we expect a significant degree of volatility in our financial results and our financial results may vary significantly from quarter-to-quarter or from year-to-year, based on the level of insured catastrophic losses occurring around the world.
Our revenues are principally derived from three sources: 1) net premiums earned from the reinsurance and insurance policies we sell; 2) net investment income and realized and unrealized gains from the investment of our capital funds and the investment of the cash we receive on the policies which we sell; and 3) other
income received from our joint ventures, advisory services, weather and energy risk management operations and various other items.
Our expenses primarily consist of: 1) net claims and claim expenses incurred on the policies of reinsurance and insurance we sell; 2) acquisition costs which typically represent a percentage of the premiums we write; 3) operating expenses which primarily consist of personnel expenses, rent and other operating expenses; 4) corporate expenses which include certain executive, legal and consulting expenses, costs for research and development, and other miscellaneous costs, including those associated with operating as a publicly traded company; 5) redeemable noncontrolling interest - DaVinciRe, which represents the interest of third parties with respect to the net income (loss) of DaVinciRe; and 6) interest and dividend costs related to our debt and preference shares. We are also subject to taxes in certain jurisdictions in which we operate; however, since the majority of our income is currently earned in Bermuda, a non-taxable jurisdiction, the tax impact to our operations has historically been minimal.
The operating results, also known as the underwriting results, of an insurance or reinsurance company are discussed frequently by reference to its net claims and claim expense ratio, underwriting expense ratio, and combined ratio. The net claims and claim expense ratio is calculated by dividing net claims and claim expenses incurred by net premiums earned. The underwriting expense ratio is calculated by dividing underwriting expenses (acquisition expenses and operational expenses) by net premiums earned. The combined ratio is the sum of the net claims and claim expense ratio and the underwriting expense ratio. A combined ratio below 100% generally indicates profitable underwriting prior to the consideration of investment income. A combined ratio over 100% generally indicates unprofitable underwriting prior to the consideration of investment income. We also discuss our net claims and claim expense ratio on an accident year basis. This ratio is calculated by taking net claims and claim expenses, excluding development on net claims and claim expenses from events that took place in prior fiscal years, divided by net premiums earned.
As described in more detail below under "Segments", our reportable segments currently include: (1) Reinsurance, which includes catastrophe reinsurance, specialty reinsurance and certain property catastrophe and specialty joint ventures and (2) Lloyd's, which includes reinsurance and insurance business written through Syndicate 1458. As of December 31, 2012, we undertook a review of our reportable segments and concluded that our former Insurance segment no longer met the quantitative thresholds defined in Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") Accounting Standards Codification ("ASC") Topic Segment Reporting. These operations are not actively involved in pursuing business opportunities and are in run-off; therefore we determined they no longer require, nor warrant, separate disclosure as a reportable segment. As such, the results of operations of the former Insurance segment have been included in our Other category as noted below, and all prior periods presented herein have been reclassified to conform with the current year presentation. Our Other category primarily reflects our: strategic investments; weather and energy risk management operations; investments unit; corporate expenses, capital servicing costs and noncontrolling interests; results of our discontinued operations; and now, in addition, the remnants of our Bermuda-based insurance operations not sold pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement, as defined herein, with QBE Holdings, Inc. ("QBE").
CORPORATE STRATEGY
Our mission is to produce superior returns for our shareholders by being a trusted, long-term partner to our customers for assessing and managing risk, delivering responsive solutions, and keeping our promises. Our aspiration is to be the world's best underwriter of high-severity, low frequency risks. Our vision is to be a leader in select financial services through our people and culture, expertise in risk, and passion for exceeding customers' expectations.
Since our inception, we have cultivated and endeavor to preserve certain competitive advantages that position us to fulfill our strategic objectives. We believe these competitive advantages include:
Superior Risk Selection. We seek to build a portfolio of risks that produces an attractive return on utilized capital. We develop a perspective of the risk in each business opportunity using both our underwriters' expertise and sophisticated risk selection techniques including computer models and databases, such as Renaissance Exposure Management System ("REMS©"). We pursue a disciplined approach to underwriting and select only those risks that we believe will produce a portfolio with an attractive return,
subject to prudent risk constraints. We manage our portfolio of risks dynamically, both within sub-portfolios and across the Company.
Superior Customer Relationships. We believe our modeling and technical expertise, and the risk management products that we provide our customers, has enabled us to become a provider of first choice in many lines of business to our customers worldwide. We seek to offer stable, predictable, and consistent risk-based pricing and a prompt turnaround on our claims.
Superior Capital Management. We seek to write as much attractively priced business as is available to us and then manage our capital accordingly. We generally seek to raise capital when we forecast an increased demand in the market, at times by accessing capital through joint ventures or other structures, and seek to return capital to our shareholders or joint venture investors when the demand for our coverages appears to decline and when we believe a return of capital would be beneficial to our shareholders or joint venture investors. In using joint ventures, we intend to leverage our access to business and our underwriting capabilities on an efficient capital base, develop fee income, generate profit commissions and diversify our portfolio. We routinely evaluate and review potential joint venture opportunities and strategic investments.
We believe we are well positioned to fulfill these objectives by virtue of the experience and skill of our management team, our significant financial strength, and our strong relationships with brokers and customers. In addition, we believe our superior service, our proprietary modeling technology, and our extensive business relationships, which have enabled us to become a leader in the property catastrophe reinsurance market, will be instrumental in allowing us to achieve our strategic objectives. In particular, we believe our strategy, high performance culture, and commitment to our customers and joint venture partners help us to differentiate ourselves by offering specialized services and products at times and in markets where capacity and alternatives may be limited.
SEGMENTS
As discussed above, our reportable segments currently include: (1) Reinsurance, which includes catastrophe reinsurance, specialty reinsurance and certain property catastrophe and specialty joint ventures and (2) Lloyd's, which includes reinsurance and insurance business written through Syndicate 1458. In addition, our Other category primarily reflects our: strategic investments; weather and energy risk management operations; investments unit; corporate expenses, capital servicing costs and noncontrolling interests; results of our discontinued operations; and now, in addition, the remnants of our Bermuda-based insurance operations not sold pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement with QBE.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, our Reinsurance and Lloyd's segment accounted for 89.8% and 10.2%, respectively, of our total consolidated gross premiums written. We currently expect contributions from our Lloyd's segment to increase over time, on both an absolute and relative basis, although we cannot assure you we will succeed in meeting this goal. Operating results relating to our segments is included in "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."
Reinsurance
Our Reinsurance segment has two main units and is managed by our President and Global Chief Underwriting Officer, who leads a team of underwriters, risk modelers and other industry professionals, who have access to our proprietary risk management, underwriting and modeling resources and tools.
| |
(1) | Property catastrophe reinsurance, principally written for our own account, and for DaVinci, is our traditional core business. We believe we are one of the world's leading providers of this coverage, based on total catastrophe gross premiums written. This coverage protects against large natural catastrophes, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and tsunamis, as well as claims arising from other natural and man-made catastrophes such as winter storms, freezes, floods, fires, wind storms, tornadoes, explosions and acts of terrorism. We offer this coverage to insurance companies and other reinsurers primarily on an excess of loss basis. This means that we begin paying when our customers' claims from a catastrophe exceed a certain retained amount. |
| |
(2) | Specialty reinsurance, also principally written for our own account and for DaVinci, covering certain targeted classes of business where we believe we have a sound basis for underwriting and pricing the risk that we assume. Our portfolio includes various classes of business, such as catastrophe |
exposed workers' compensation, surety, terrorism, energy, aviation, crop, political risk, trade credit, financial, mortgage guarantee, catastrophe-exposed personal lines property, casualty clash, certain other casualty lines and other specialty lines of reinsurance that we collectively refer to as specialty reinsurance. We believe that we are seen as a market leader in certain of these classes of business. We are seeking to expand our specialty reinsurance operations over time, although we cannot assure you that we will do so, particularly in light of current and forecasted market conditions. Our specialty reinsurance business is typically significantly impacted by a comparably small number of relatively large transactions.
We believe the expertise of our underwriting and modeling team and our proprietary analytic tools, together with superior customer service, provide us with a significant competitive advantage.
Our portfolio of business has continued to be increasingly characterized by relatively large transactions with ceding companies with whom we do business, although no current relationship exceeds 10% of our gross premiums written. Accordingly, our gross premiums written are subject to significant fluctuations depending on our success in maintaining or expanding our relationships with these large customers. We market our reinsurance products worldwide exclusively through brokers, whose market has become extremely consolidated in recent years. In 2012, three brokerage firms accounted for 84.6% of our Reinsurance segment gross premiums written. We believe that recent market dynamics, and trends in our industry in respect of potential future consolidation, have increased our exposure to the risks of broker, client and counterparty concentration.
The following table shows our total Reinsurance segment gross premiums written split between catastrophe and specialty reinsurance, respectively: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| Year ended December 31, | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | |
| (in thousands) | | | | | | |
| Renaissance catastrophe premiums | $ | 733,963 |
| | $ | 742,236 |
| | $ | 630,080 |
| |
| Renaissance specialty premiums | 207,387 |
| | 144,192 |
| | 126,848 |
| |
| Total Renaissance premiums | 941,350 |
| | 886,428 |
| | 756,928 |
| |
| DaVinci catastrophe premiums | 448,244 |
| | 435,060 |
| | 364,153 |
| |
| DaVinci specialty premiums | 2,500 |
| | 1,699 |
| | 2,538 |
| |
| Total DaVinci premiums | 450,744 |
| | 436,759 |
| | 366,691 |
| |
| Total catastrophe unit premiums (1) | 1,182,207 |
| | 1,177,296 |
| | 994,233 |
| |
| Total specialty unit premiums | 209,887 |
| | 145,891 |
| | 129,386 |
| |
| Total Reinsurance segment premiums | $ | 1,392,094 |
| | $ | 1,323,187 |
| | $ | 1,123,619 |
| |
| | | | | | | |
| |
(1) | Total catastrophe premiums written includes $Nil, $Nil and $9.5 million of gross premiums written assumed from our Other category for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. |
Property Catastrophe Reinsurance
We believe we are one of the largest providers of property catastrophe reinsurance in the world, based on our total catastrophe gross premiums written. Our principal property catastrophe reinsurance products include catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance and excess of loss retrocessional reinsurance as described below.
Catastrophe Excess of Loss Reinsurance. We principally write catastrophe reinsurance on an excess of loss basis, which means we provide coverage to our insureds when aggregate claims and claim expenses from a single occurrence of a covered peril exceed the attachment point specified in a particular contract. Under these contracts, we indemnify an insurer for all or a specified portion of the losses on underlying insurance policies in excess of a specified amount, and up to an amount per loss specified in the contract. The coverage provided under excess of loss reinsurance contracts may be on a worldwide basis or limited in scope to selected geographic areas. Coverage can also vary from "all property" perils to limited coverage on selected perils, such as "earthquake only" coverage.
Excess of Loss Retrocessional Reinsurance. We also write retrocessional reinsurance contracts that provide property catastrophe coverage to other reinsurers or retrocedants. In providing retrocessional reinsurance, we focus on property catastrophe retrocessional reinsurance, which covers the retrocedant on
an excess of loss basis when aggregate claims and claim expenses from a single occurrence of a covered peril and from a multiple number of reinsureds exceed a specified attachment point. The coverage provided under excess of loss retrocessional contracts may be on a worldwide basis or limited in scope to selected geographic areas. Coverage can also vary from "all property" perils to limited coverage on selected perils, such as "earthquake only" coverage. The information available to retrocessional underwriters concerning the original primary risk can be less precise than the information received from primary companies directly. Moreover, exposures from retrocessional business can change within a contract term as the underwriters of a retrocedant alter their book of business after retrocessional coverage has been bound.
Our property catastrophe reinsurance contracts are generally "all risk" in nature. Our most significant exposure is to losses from earthquakes and hurricanes and other windstorms, although we are also exposed to claims arising from other catastrophes, such as tsunamis, freezes, floods, fires, tornadoes, explosions and acts of terrorism in connection with the coverages we provide. Our predominant exposure under such coverage is to property damage. However, other risks, including business interruption and other non-property losses, may also be covered under our property reinsurance contracts when arising from a covered peril. We offer our coverages on a worldwide basis. Because of the wide range of possible catastrophic events to which we are exposed, including the size of such events and because of the potential for multiple events to occur in the same time period, our catastrophe reinsurance business is volatile and our results of operations reflect this volatility. Further, our financial condition may be impacted by this volatility over time or at any point in time. The effects of claims from one or a number of severe catastrophic events could have a material adverse effect on us. We expect that increases in the values and concentrations of insured property and the effects of inflation will increase the severity of such occurrences in the future.
Insurance-Linked Securities. We also invest in insurance-linked securities. Insurance-linked securities are generally privately placed fixed income securities as to which all or a portion of the repayment of the principal is linked to catastrophic events; for example, the occurrence of one or more hurricanes or earthquakes producing industry losses exceeding certain specified thresholds. We underwrite, model, evaluate and monitor these securities using similar tools and techniques used to evaluate our more traditional property catastrophe reinsurance business assumed. In addition, we may enter into derivative transactions, such as total return swaps, that are based on or referenced to underlying insurance-linked securities. Based on an evaluation of the specific features of each insurance-linked security, we account for these securities as reinsurance or at fair value, as applicable, in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP"). In addition, in future periods we may utilize the growing market for insurance-linked securities to expand our ceded reinsurance buying if we find the pricing and terms of such coverage attractive.
We seek to moderate the volatility of our risk portfolio through superior risk selection, diversification and the purchase of retrocessional coverages and other protections. In furtherance of our strategy, we may increase or decrease our presence in the catastrophe reinsurance business based on market conditions and our assessment of risk-adjusted pricing adequacy. We frequently seek to purchase reinsurance or other protection for our own account to further reduce the financial impact that a large catastrophe or a series of catastrophes could have on our results.
As a result of our position in the market and reputation for superior customer relationships, we believe we have superior access to reinsurance business we view as desirable compared to the market as a whole. As described above, we use our proprietary underwriting tools and guidelines to attempt to construct an attractive portfolio from these opportunities. We dynamically model policy submissions against our current in-force underwriting portfolio, comparing our estimate of the modeled expected returns of the contract against the amount of capital that we allocate to the contract, based on our estimate of its marginal impact on our overall risk portfolio. At times, our approach to portfolio management has resulted and may result in the future in our having a relatively large market share of catastrophe reinsurance exposure in a particular geographic region, such as Florida where we historically have had a relatively large percentage of coverage exposures, or to a particular peril, such as U.S. hurricane risk, where we believe our analytical skills, claims paying history, large capacity, strong ratings and other attributes offer a competitive advantage, or where the risks or class of risks otherwise adds efficiency to our portfolio. Conversely, from time to time we may have a disproportionately low market share in certain regions or perils where we believe our capital would be less effectively deployed.
Specialty Reinsurance
We write a number of lines of reinsurance other than property catastrophe, such as catastrophe exposed workers' compensation, surety, terrorism, energy, aviation, crop, political risk, trade credit, financial, mortgage guarantee, catastrophe-exposed personal lines property, casualty clash, certain other casualty lines and other specialty lines of reinsurance that we collectively refer to as specialty reinsurance. We believe that we are seen as a market leader in certain of these classes of business. As with our catastrophe business, our team of experienced professionals seeks to underwrite these lines using a disciplined underwriting approach and sophisticated analytical tools. We are seeking to expand our specialty reinsurance operations over time, although we cannot assure you that we will do so, particularly in light of current and forecasted market conditions.
We generally target lines of business where we believe we can adequately quantify the risks assumed and where potential losses could be characterized as low frequency and high severity, similar to our catastrophe reinsurance coverages. However, we also provide other coverage where we believe our underwriting is robust and the market is attractive, and may grow in these lines over time. We also seek to identify market dislocations and write new lines of business whose risk and return characteristics are estimated to exceed our hurdle rates. Furthermore, we also seek to manage the correlations of this business with our overall portfolio, including our aggregate exposure to single and aggregated catastrophe events. We believe that our underwriting and analytical capabilities have positioned us well to manage our specialty reinsurance business.
We offer our specialty reinsurance products principally on an excess of loss basis, as described above with respect to our catastrophe reinsurance products, and also provide some proportional coverage. In a proportional reinsurance arrangement (also referred to as quota share reinsurance and pro-rata reinsurance), the reinsurer shares a proportional part of the original premiums and losses of the reinsured. The reinsurer pays the cedant a commission which is generally based on the cedant's cost of acquiring the business being reinsured (including commissions, premium taxes, assessments and miscellaneous administrative expenses) and may also include a profit factor. Our proportional reinsurance product offerings have grown in recent periods and may continue to grow in the future. These products frequently include tailored features such as limits or sub-limits which we believe help us manage our exposures. Any liability exceeding, or otherwise not subject to, such limits reverts to the cedant. As with our catastrophe reinsurance business, our specialty reinsurance frequently provides coverage for relatively large limits or exposures, and thus we are subject to potential significant claims volatility.
We generally seek to write significant lines on our specialty reinsurance treaties. As a result of our financial strength, we have the ability to offer significant capacity and, for select risks, we have made available significant limits. We believe these capabilities, the strength of our specialty reinsurance underwriting team, and our demonstrated ability and willingness to pay valid claims are competitive advantages of our specialty reinsurance business. While we believe that these and other initiatives will support growth in our specialty reinsurance unit, we intend to continue to apply our disciplined underwriting approach which, together with currently prevailing market conditions, is likely to temper such growth in current and near term-term periods.
Ventures
We pursue a number of other opportunities through our ventures unit, which has responsibility for creating and managing our joint ventures, executing customized reinsurance transactions to assume or cede risk and managing certain investments directed at classes of risk other than catastrophe reinsurance. We also provide customized weather and energy risk management solutions to various customers on a worldwide basis.
Property Catastrophe Managed Joint Ventures. We actively manage property catastrophe-oriented joint ventures, which provide us with an additional presence in the market, enhance our client relationships and generate fee income and profit commissions. These joint ventures allow us to leverage our access to business and our underwriting capabilities on a larger capital base. Currently, our principal joint ventures include Top Layer Re and DaVinci. Renaissance Underwriting Managers, Ltd. ("RUM"), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, acts as the exclusive underwriting manager for each of these joint ventures.
DaVinci was established in 2001 and principally writes property catastrophe reinsurance and certain low frequency, high severity specialty reinsurance lines of business on a global basis. In general, we seek to
construct for DaVinci a property catastrophe reinsurance portfolio with risk characteristics similar to those of Renaissance Reinsurance's property catastrophe reinsurance portfolio and a portfolio of certain lines of specialty reinsurance such as terrorism and catastrophe exposed workers' compensation. In accordance with DaVinci's underwriting guidelines, it can only participate in business that is underwritten by Renaissance Reinsurance. We maintain majority voting control of DaVinciRe and, accordingly, consolidate the results of DaVinciRe into our consolidated results of operations and financial position. We seek to manage DaVinci's capital efficiently over time in light of the market opportunities and needs we perceive and believe we are able to serve. Our ownership in DaVinciRe was 30.8% at December 31, 2012 (2011 - 42.8%). During January 2013 DaVinciRe redeemed shares from certain DaVinciRe shareholders, including us, while certain other existing DaVinciRe shareholders purchased additional shares in DaVinciRe. Subsequent to the above transactions, our ownership in DaVinciRe increased to 32.9% effective January 1, 2013.
We expect our ownership in DaVinciRe to fluctuate over time. See "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Capital Resources" for additional information with respect of DaVinci.
Top Layer Re was established in 1999 and writes high excess non-U.S. property catastrophe reinsurance. Top Layer Re is owned 50% by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company ("State Farm") and 50% by Renaissance Reinsurance. State Farm provides $3.9 billion of stop loss reinsurance coverage to Top Layer Re. We account for our equity ownership in Top Layer Re under the equity method of accounting and our proportionate share of its results is reflected in equity in earnings (losses) of other ventures in our consolidated statements of operations.
Effective January 1, 2012, we formed and launched a managed joint venture, Upsilon Reinsurance Ltd. ("Upsilon Re"), a Bermuda domiciled special purpose insurer ("SPI"), to provide additional capacity to the worldwide aggregate and per-occurrence retrocessional property catastrophe excess of loss market for the 2012 underwriting year. The original business was written by ROE, a wholly owned subsidiary of RenaissanceRe, and included $37.4 million of gross premiums written incepting between January 1, 2012 and June 1, 2012. A portion of this business was in turn ceded to Upsilon Re under a fully-collateralized retrocessional reinsurance contract, effective January 1, 2012. In conjunction with the formation and launch of Upsilon Re, $16.8 million of non-voting Class B shares were sold to external investors, and we invested $48.8 million in Upsilon Re's non-voting Class B shares, representing a 74.5% ownership interest in Upsilon Re. The Class B shareholders participate in substantially all of the profits or losses of Upsilon Re while the Class B shares remain outstanding. The holders of Class B shares indemnify Upsilon Re against losses relating to insurance risk. In addition, another third party investor supplied $17.6 million of capital through a reinsurance participation (a third party quota share agreement) with ROE alongside Upsilon Re. Inclusive of the reinsurance participation, we have a 61.4% participation in the original risks assumed by ROE related to Upsilon Re. During February 2013, Upsilon Re redeemed a portion of its outstanding third party non-voting Class B shares for $20.5 million as a result of the scheduled expiration of certain risks underwritten by Upsilon Re, subject to a holdback for development of claims and claim expenses. Following the redemption, third-party non-voting Class B Shares with a GAAP book value of $2.2 million as at December 31, 2012, remained outstanding. In addition, the Company has authorized the release of $21.9 million of collateral to a third party investor who participated in risks underwritten by ROE related to Upsilon Re through a reinsurance participation. Both Upsilon Re and the reinsurance participation are managed by RUM in return for an expense override, as well as a potential underwriting profit commission. Upsilon Re is considered a variable interest entity ("VIE") and we are considered the primary beneficiary. As a result, Upsilon Re is consolidated by the Company and all significant inter-company transactions have been eliminated.
Effective June 1, 2012, we formed and launched a managed joint venture, Timicuan Reinsurance III Limited ("Tim Re III"), a Bermuda domiciled SPI, to provide collateralized reinsurance in respect of a portfolio of Florida reinstatement premium protection ("RPP") contracts. The original business was written by Renaissance Reinsurance and DaVinci, and included $41.1 million of gross premiums written incepting June 1, 2012, of which Renaissance Reinsurance and DaVinci ceded $37.7 million to Tim Re III under a fully-collateralized reinsurance contract. In conjunction with the formation and launch of Tim Re III, $44.8 million of Tim Re III's non-voting Class B shares were sold to external investors. Additionally, $10.3 million of the non-voting Class B shares were acquired by us, representing an 18.6% ownership interest in Tim Re III. The Class B shareholders participate in substantially all of the profits or losses of Tim Re III while the
Class B shares remain outstanding. The holders of Class B shares indemnify Tim Re III against losses relating to insurance risk. In addition, another third party investor supplied $5.2 million of capital through a reinsurance participation with Renaissance Reinsurance and DaVinci, alongside Tim Re III. Inclusive of the reinsurance participation, we have a 17.1% participation in the original risks assumed by Renaissance Reinsurance and DaVinci related to Tim Re III. Both Tim Re III and the reinsurance participation are managed by RUM in return for a potential underwriting profit commission. Tim Re III is considered a VIE and we are considered the primary beneficiary. As a result, Tim Re III is consolidated by the Company and all significant inter-company transactions have been eliminated.
Effective January 1, 2013, we formed and launched a managed joint venture, Upsilon Reinsurance II Ltd. ("Upsilon Re II"), a Bermuda domiciled SPI, to provide additional capacity to the worldwide aggregate and per-occurrence retrocessional property catastrophe excess of loss market for the 2013 underwriting year. Original business was written directly by Upsilon Re II and included $53.5 million of gross premiums written incepting January 1, 2013 under fully-collateralized reinsurance contracts. In conjunction with the formation and launch of Upsilon Re II, $61.0 million of Upsilon Re II non-voting Class B shares were sold to external investors. Additionally, $76.4 million of the non-voting Class B shares were acquired by us, representing a 55.6% ownership interest in Upsilon Re II. The Class B shareholders participate in substantially all of the profits or losses of Upsilon Re II while the Class B shares remain outstanding. The holders of Class B shares indemnify Upsilon Re II against losses relating to insurance risk. In addition, another third party investor supplied $17.5 million of capital through an insurance contract with the Company related to Upsilon Re II's reinsurance portfolio. Inclusive of the insurance contract, we have a 42.9% participation in the original risks assumed by Upsilon Re II. Both Upsilon Re II and the insurance contract are managed by RUM in return for an expense override, as well as a potential underwriting profit commission. Upsilon Re II is considered a VIE and we are considered the primary beneficiary. As a result, Upsilon Re II will be consolidated by the Company and all significant inter-company transactions will be eliminated.
We currently have an ownership interest in Upsilon Re, Tim Re III and Upsilon Re II which we expect will change over time, perhaps materially so, and we may also elect to underwrite additional risks within Upsilon Re II and utilize this entity, or newly formed joint ventures, to write business in future periods. We cannot assure you that additional opportunities to grow the business we have accessed through these joint ventures, will be realized.
Ventures works on a range of other customized reinsurance and financing transactions. For example, we have participated in and continuously analyze other attractive opportunities in the market for insurance-linked securities and derivatives. We believe our products contain a number of customized features designed to fit the needs of our partners, as well as our risk management objectives.
Weather and Energy Risk Management Operations. We provide weather and energy related risk management solutions and financial products primarily through Renaissance Trading and REAL. Renaissance Trading sells financial products primarily to address weather risks, and engage in certain weather, energy and commodity derivatives trading activities, including trading securities and derivatives linked to energy, commodities, weather, other natural phenomena, and/or products or indices linked in part to such phenomena. Certain of these trading activities require the physical delivery of energy-related commodities, including natural gas. While our activities focus on products that allow various energy, utility and other customers to manage their exposures to energy related commodities, we expect our own results in this area to be volatile over time. We continually seek new markets and relationships for our weather and energy risk products, including continued leveraging of strategic affiliations and ceding risk through similar arrangements where we deem appropriate. Although there can be no assurances, it is possible that our results from these activities will increase on an absolute or relative basis over time, or in respect of any other period. As with our reinsurance operations, we seek to obtain capital support, volatility protection and other enhancements to the capital we deploy in respect of this business. However, we cannot assure you we will succeed in these initiatives in the future, or in maintaining the capital support and other related transactions currently in effect.
Strategic Investments. Ventures also pursues strategic investments where, rather than assuming exclusive management responsibilities ourselves, we instead partner with other market participants. These investments are directed at classes of risk other than catastrophe, and at times may also be directed at non-insurance risks. We find these investments attractive both for their expected returns, and also because they provide us diversification benefits and information and exposure to other aspects of the market.
Examples of these investments include our investments in Tower Hill Insurance Group, LLC. ("THIG"), Tower Hill Holdings, Inc. ("Tower Hill") and Tower Hill Signature Insurance Holdings, Inc. ("Tower Hill Signature"), (collectively, the "Tower Hill Companies"), Angus Partners, LLC. ("Angus"), Angus Fund L.P. (the "Angus Fund") and Essent Group Ltd. ("Essent"). THIG is a managing general agency specializing in insurance coverage for site built and manufactured homes. Subsidiaries of THIG, namely Tower Hill Claims Services, LLC, and Tower Hill Claims Management, LLC, provide claim adjustment services through exclusive agreements with THIG. Tower Hill is an insurance holding company. The subsidiaries of Tower Hill, along with Tower Hill Signature, write residential property insurance. We invested in the Tower Hill Companies, which operate primarily in the State of Florida, to expand our core platforms by obtaining ownership in an additional distribution channel for the Florida homeowners market and to enhance our relationships with other stakeholders. Angus and entities in the Angus Fund's investment portfolio provide commodity related risk management products to third party customers. Renaissance Trading is the primary counterparty to Angus Partner's energy risk management hedging activities. Essent provides mortgage insurance and reinsurance coverage for mortgages located in the U.S.
Business activities that appear in our consolidated underwriting results, such as DaVinci and certain reinsurance transactions, are included in our Reinsurance segment results; the results of our investments, such as Top Layer Re, our weather and energy related activities and other ventures are included in the Other category of our segment results.
Lloyd's Segment
Our Lloyd's segment includes insurance and reinsurance business written for our own account through Syndicate 1458. Syndicate 1458 commenced business by writing certain lines of insurance and reinsurance business incepting on or after June 1, 2009. The syndicate was established to enhance our underwriting platform by providing access to Lloyd's extensive distribution network and worldwide licenses. RenaissanceRe Corporate Capital (UK) Limited ("RenaissanceRe CCL"), an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, is the sole corporate member of Syndicate 1458. RenaissanceRe Syndicate Management Ltd. ("RSML"), a wholly owned subsidiary of RenaissanceRe, is the managing agent for Syndicate 1458. We anticipate that Syndicate 1458's absolute and relative contributions to our consolidated results of operations will have a meaningful impact over time, although we cannot assure you we will succeed in executing our growth strategy in respect of Syndicate 1458, or that its results will be favorable.
Syndicate 1458 generally targets lines of business where we believe we can adequately quantify the risks assumed. We also seek to identify market dislocations and to write new lines of business whose risk and return characteristics are attractive and add to our portfolio of risks. Furthermore, we seek to manage the correlations of this business with our overall portfolio, including our aggregate exposure to single and aggregated catastrophe events. We believe that our underwriting and analytical capabilities have positioned us well to manage this business.
We offer a range of property and casualty insurance and reinsurance products including, but not limited to, direct and facultative property, property catastrophe, agriculture, medical malpractice, general liability, professional indemnity, political risk and trade credit. We may seek to expand our coverages and capacity over time. As with our catastrophe and specialty reinsurance business, we frequently provide coverage for relatively large limits or exposures, and thus we are subject to potential significant claims volatility.
Other
Our Other category primarily includes the results of: (1) our share of strategic investments in certain markets we believe offer attractive risk-adjusted returns or where we believe our investment adds value, and where, rather than assuming exclusive management responsibilities ourselves, we partner with other market participants; (2) our weather and energy risk management operations primarily through Renaissance Trading and REAL; (3) our investment unit which manages and invests the funds generated by our consolidated operations; (4) corporate expenses, capital services costs and noncontrolling interests; (5) the results of our discontinued operations; and (6) as described in more details above, the remnants of our Bermuda-based insurance operations not sold pursuant to the Stock Purchase Agreement with QBE.
GEOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN
Our exposures are generally diversified across geographic zones, but are also a function of market conditions and opportunities. Our largest exposure has historically been to the U.S. and Caribbean property catastrophe market, which represented 63.4% of the Company's gross premiums written for the year ended December 31, 2012. A significant amount of our U.S. and Caribbean premium provides coverage against windstorms, mainly U.S. Atlantic hurricanes, as well as earthquakes and other natural and man-made catastrophes. The following table sets forth the percentage of our gross premiums written allocated to the territory of coverage exposure: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | |
| Year ended December 31, | Gross Premiums Written | | Percentage of Gross Premiums Written | | Gross Premiums Written | | Percentage of Gross Premiums Written | | Gross Premiums Written | | Percentage of Gross Premiums Written | |
| (in thousands, except percentages) | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Catastrophe | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| U.S. and Caribbean | $ | 857,740 |
| | 55.3 | % | | $ | 786,721 |
| | 54.8 | % | | $ | 720,250 |
| | 61.8 | % | |
| Worldwide (excluding U.S.) (1) | 139,265 |
| | 9.0 | % | | 164,112 |
| | 11.4 | % | | 113,270 |
| | 9.7 | % | |
| Worldwide | 81,595 |
| | 5.3 | % | | 124,797 |
| | 8.7 | % | | 65,500 |
| | 5.6 | % | |
| Japan | 43,238 |
| | 2.8 | % | | 49,021 |
| | 3.4 | % | | 26,188 |
| | 2.2 | % | |
| Europe | 37,113 |
| | 2.4 | % | | 31,888 |
| | 2.2 | % | | 59,480 |
| | 5.1 | % | |
| Australia and New Zealand | 18,578 |
| | 1.2 | % | | 16,818 |
| | 1.2 | % | | 6,269 |
| | 0.5 | % | |
| Other | 4,678 |
| | 0.3 | % | | 3,939 |
| | 0.3 | % | | 3,276 |
| | 0.3 | % | |
| Total catastrophe | 1,182,207 |
| | 76.3 | % | | 1,177,296 |
| | 82.0 | % | | 994,233 |
| | 85.2 | % | |
| Specialty | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Worldwide | 96,081 |
| | 6.2 | % | | 91,032 |
| | 6.3 | % | | 59,636 |
| | 5.2 | % | |
| U.S. and Caribbean | 69,070 |
| | 4.4 | % | | 49,832 |
| | 3.5 | % | | 57,461 |
| | 4.9 | % | |
| Australia and New Zealand | 28,307 |
| | 1.8 | % | | 792 |
| | 0.1 | % | | 8,934 |
| | 0.8 | % | |
| Europe | 16,429 |
| | 1.1 | % | | 3,595 |
| | 0.3 | % | | 2,786 |
| | 0.2 | % | |
| Other | — |
| | — | % | | 640 |
| | — | % | | 569 |
| | — | % | |
| Total specialty | 209,887 |
| | 13.5 | % | | 145,891 |
| | 10.2 | % | | 129,386 |
| | 11.1 | % | |
| Total Reinsurance | 1,392,094 |
| | 89.8 | % | | 1,323,187 |
| | 92.2 | % | | 1,123,619 |
| | 96.3 | % | |
| Lloyd's | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Worldwide | 75,132 |
| | 4.8 | % | | 47,605 |
| | 3.3 | % | | 16,207 |
| | 1.4 | % | |
| U.S. and Caribbean | 57,332 |
| | 3.7 | % | | 48,435 |
| | 3.4 | % | | 43,178 |
| | 3.7 | % | |
| Europe | 14,456 |
| | 0.9 | % | | 8,044 |
| | 0.6 | % | | 3,174 |
| | 0.3 | % | |
| Worldwide (excluding U.S.) (1) | 6,064 |
| | 0.4 | % | | 238 |
| | — | % | | 1,049 |
| | 0.1 | % | |
| Australia and New Zealand | 2,152 |
| | 0.1 | % | | 2,060 |
| | 0.1 | % | | 91 |
| | — | % | |
| Other | 4,851 |
| | 0.3 | % | | 5,202 |
| | 0.4 | % | | 2,510 |
| | 0.2 | % | |
| Total Lloyd's | 159,987 |
| | 10.2 | % | | 111,584 |
| | 7.8 | % | | 66,209 |
| | 5.7 | % | |
| Other category (2) | — |
| | — | % | | 282 |
| | — | % | | 2,585 |
| | 0.3 | % | |
| Eliminations (3) | (490 | ) | | — | % | | (77 | ) | | — | % | | (27,118 | ) | | (2.3 | )% | |
| Total gross premiums written | $ | 1,551,591 |
| | 100.0 | % | | $ | 1,434,976 |
| | 100.0 | % | | $ | 1,165,295 |
| | 100.0 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
(1) | The category "Worldwide (excluding U.S.)" consists of contracts that cover more than one geographic region (other than the U.S.). The exposure in this category for gross premiums written to date is predominantly from Europe and Japan. |
| |
(2) | The Other category consists of contracts that are primarily exposed to U.S. risks. |
| |
(3) | Represents $0.5 million of gross premiums ceded from the Reinsurance segment to the Lloyd's segment, for the year ended December 31, 2012 (2011 - $0.1 million of gross premiums ceded from the Reinsurance segment to the Lloyd's segment, 2010 - $9.5 million, $17.4 million and $0.2 million of gross premiums ceded from the Other category to the Reinsurance segment, from the Other category to the Lloyd's segment and from the Reinsurance segment to the Lloyd's segment, respectively). |
NEW BUSINESS
From time to time we consider diversification into new ventures, either through organic growth, the formation of new joint ventures, or the acquisition of or the investment in other companies or books of business of other companies. This potential diversification includes opportunities to write targeted, additional classes of risk-exposed business, both directly for our own account and through possible new joint venture opportunities. We also regularly evaluate potential strategic opportunities that we believe might utilize our skills, capabilities, proprietary technology and relationships to support possible expansion into further risk-related coverages, services and products. Generally, we focus on underwriting or trading risks where reasonably sufficient data may be available, and where our analytical abilities may provide us a competitive advantage, in order for us to seek to model estimated probabilities of losses and returns in accordance with our approach in respect of our then current portfolio of risks.
We regularly review potential strategic transactions that might improve our portfolio of business, enhance or focus our strategies, expand our distribution or capabilities, or to seek other benefits. In evaluating potential new ventures or investments, we generally seek an attractive estimated return on equity, the ability to develop or capitalize on a competitive advantage, and opportunities which we believe will not detract from our core operations. While we regularly review potential strategic transactions and periodically engage in discussions regarding possible transactions, there can be no assurance that we will complete any such transactions or that any such transaction would be successful or materially enhance our results of operations or financial condition. We believe that our ability to potentially attract investment and operational opportunities is supported by our strong reputation and financial resources, and by the capabilities and track record of our ventures unit.
COMPETITION
The markets in which we operate are highly competitive, and we believe that competition is in general increasing and becoming more robust. Our competitors include independent reinsurance and insurance companies, subsidiaries and/or affiliates of globally recognized insurance companies, reinsurance divisions of certain insurance companies and domestic and international underwriting operations. As our business evolves over time we expect our competitors to change as well.
Hedge funds, investment banks, exchanges and other capital market participants have been increasingly active in the reinsurance market and the market for related risk. We expect competition from, or funded by, these sources to increase. In addition, we continue to anticipate further, and perhaps accelerating, growth in financial products such as exchange traded catastrophe options, insurance-linked securities, unrated privately held reinsurance companies providing collateralized reinsurance, catastrophe-linked derivative agreements and other financial products, intended to compete with traditional reinsurance. We believe that competition from non-traditional sources such as these has recently increased and will increase further in the future. It is possible that these changing dynamics will meaningfully impact the markets in which we participate, possibly adversely. Many of these competitors or their financial backers have greater financial, marketing and management resources than we do. Further, we believe new entrants or existing competitors may attempt to replicate all or part of our business model and provide further competition in the markets in which we participate. In addition, the tax policies of the countries where our customers operate, as well as government sponsored or backed catastrophe funds, affect demand for reinsurance, sometimes significantly. Moreover, explicitly or implicitly government-backed entities increasingly represent competition for the coverages that we provide directly, or for the business of our customers, reducing the potential amount of third party private protection our clients might need or desire. We are unable to predict the extent to which the foregoing new, proposed or potential initiatives may affect the demand for our products or the risks for which we seek to provide coverage.
UNDERWRITING AND ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT
Underwriting
Our primary underwriting goal is to construct a portfolio of reinsurance and insurance contracts and other financial risks that maximizes our return on shareholders' equity, subject to prudent risk constraints, and to generate long-term growth in tangible book value per common share plus the change in accumulated
dividends. We assess each new (re)insurance contract on the basis of the expected incremental return relative to the incremental contribution to portfolio risk.
We have developed a proprietary, computer-based pricing and exposure management system, REMS©. Since inception, we have continued to invest in and improve REMS©, incorporating our underwriting and modeling experience, adding proprietary software and a significant amount of new industry data. REMS© has analytic and modeling capabilities that help us to assess the risk and return of each incremental (re)insurance contract in relation to our overall portfolio of (re)insurance contracts. We combine the analyses generated by REMS© with other information available to us, including our own knowledge of the client submitting the proposed program, to assess the premium offered against the risk of loss and the cost of utilized capital which the program presents. The REMS© framework encompasses and facilitates risk capture, analysis, correlation, portfolio aggregation and capital allocation within a single system for all of our natural hazards and non-natural hazards (re)insurance contracts.
We generally utilize a multiple model approach combining both probabilistic and deterministic techniques. The underlying risk models integrated into our underwriting and REMS© framework are a combination of internally constructed and commercially available models. We use commercially available natural hazard catastrophe models to assist with validating and stress testing our base model and REMS© results. We continually strive to improve our analytical techniques for both natural hazard and non-natural hazard models in REMS© and while our experience is most developed for analyzing natural hazard catastrophe risks, we continue to make significant advances in our capabilities for assessing non-natural hazard catastrophe risks. In addition, multiple members of our underwriting and risk management team review the models, and their respective results.
We believe that REMS© is a robust underwriting and risk management system that has been successfully integrated into our business processes and culture. Before we bind a (re)insurance risk, exposure data, historical loss information and other risk data is gathered from customers. Using a combination of proprietary software, underwriting experience, actuarial techniques and engineering expertise where we deem appropriate, the exposure data is reviewed and augmented. We use this data as primary inputs into the REMS© modeling system as a base to create risk distributions to represent the risk being evaluated. We believe that the REMS© modeling system helps us to analyze each policy on a consistent basis, assisting our determination of what we believe to be an appropriate price to charge for each policy based upon the risk to be assumed. REMS© combines computer-generated statistical simulations that estimate loss and event probabilities with exposure and coverage information on each client's (re)insurance contract to produce expected claims for (re)insurance programs submitted to us. Operationally, on a deal-by-deal basis, our models employ simulation techniques that have the ability to generate 40,000 years of loss activity. When deemed necessary, we stress test the 40,000 year simulations with simulations of up to 1,000,000 years. At a consolidated level, we frequently utilize simulations of 500,000 years to incorporate reserve risk, investment risk, expenses, and operational and other risks at a portfolio and risk assuming entity level. For natural hazards, we simulate a large range of potential industry losses in respect of events by region and peril. For some regions and perils, the extreme tails of these simulations include industry losses in excess of $600 billion. From these simulations, we generate a probability distribution of potential outcomes for each policy in our portfolio and for our total portfolio. In part, through the process described above and the utilization of REMS©, we seek to compare our estimate of the expected returns in respect of a contract with the amount of capital that we notionally allocate to the contract based on our estimate of its marginal impact on our portfolio of risks. A key advantage of our REMS© framework is our ability to include additional perils, risks and geographic areas that may not be captured in commercially available natural hazards risk models.
We periodically review the estimates and assumptions that are reflected in REMS© and our other tools. For example, the 2011 and 2010 earthquake events in New Zealand and the Tohoku earthquake provided new insight on certain aspects of hazard and vulnerability to the global earthquake science community. Utilizing internal research capabilities from our team of scientists at Weather Predict Consulting Inc. ("Weather Predict") and new research from the global earthquake science community, we updated several of our internal regional representations of earthquake risk in advance of the commercially available models. In late 2012, storm Sandy gave rise to new data relating to storm surge, flood persistence and mid-Atlantic tropical storm meteorology.
Our underwriters use this combination of our risk assessment and underwriting process, REMS© and other tools in their pricing decisions, which we believe provides them with several competitive advantages. These include the ability to:
| |
• | simulate a range of potential outcomes that adequately represents the risk to an individual contract; |
| |
• | analyze the incremental impact of an individual reinsurance contract on our overall portfolio; |
| |
• | better assess the underlying exposures associated with assumed retrocessional business; |
| |
• | price contracts within a short time frame; |
| |
• | capture various classes of risk, including catastrophe and other insurance risks; |
| |
• | assess risk across multiple entities (including our various joint ventures) and across different components of our capital structure; and |
| |
• | provide consistent pricing information. |
As part of our risk management process, we also use REMS© to assist us, as a retrocedant, with the purchase of reinsurance coverage for our own account.
Our underwriting and risk management process, in conjunction with REMS©, quantifies and manages our exposure to claims from single events and the exposure to losses from a series of events. As part of our pricing and underwriting process, we also assess a variety of other factors, including:
| |
• | the reputation of the proposed cedant and the likelihood of establishing a long-term relationship with the cedant; |
| |
• | the geographic area in which the cedant does business and its market share; |
| |
• | historical loss data for the cedant and, where available, for the industry as a whole in the relevant regions and lines of business, in order to compare the cedant's historical catastrophe loss experience to industry averages; |
| |
• | the cedant's pricing strategies; and |
| |
• | the perceived financial strength of the cedant and factors such as the cedant's historical record of making premium payments in full and on a timely basis. |
In order to estimate the risk profile of each line of non-natural hazard reinsurance (i.e., our specialty and casualty lines of business), we establish probability distributions and assess the correlations with the rest of our portfolio. In lines with catastrophe risk, such as excess workers' compensation and terrorism, we seek to directly leverage our skill in modeling for our property catastrophe reinsurance risks, and seek to appropriately estimate and manage the correlations between these specialty lines and our catastrophe reinsurance portfolio. For other classes of business, in which we believe we have little or no natural catastrophe exposure, and therefore less correlation with our property catastrophe reinsurance coverages, we derive probability distributions from a variety of underlying information sources, including recent historical experience, and the application of judgment as appropriate. The nature of some of these businesses lends itself less to the analysis that we use for our property catastrophe (re)insurance coverages, reflecting both the nature of available exposure information, and the impact of human factors such as tort exposure. We produce probability distributions to represent our estimates of the related underlying risks which our products cover, which we believe helps us to make consistent underwriting decisions and to manage our total risk portfolio.
In addition, we also produce, utilize and report on models which measure our utilization of capital in light of regulatory capital considerations and constraints. Our position in respect of these regulatory capital models are reviewed by our risk management professional staff and periodically reported to and reviewed by senior underwriting personnel and executive management with responsibility for our regulated operating insurance entities.
Enterprise Risk Management ("ERM")
We believe that high-quality and effective risk management is best achieved through it being a shared cultural value throughout the organization. We have sought to develop and utilize a series of tools and processes that support a culture of risk management and to create a robust framework of ERM within our organization. We consider ERM to be a key process which is the responsibility of every individual within the Company. ERM is managed by our senior executive team under the oversight of our Board of Directors, and implemented by personnel from across our organization. We believe that ERM helps us to identify potential events that may affect us, to quantify, evaluate and manage the risks to which we are exposed, and to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of our objectives. We believe that effective ERM can provide us with a significant competitive advantage. We also believe that effective ERM assists our efforts to minimize the likelihood of suffering financial outcomes in excess of the ranges which we have estimated in respect of specific investments, underwriting decisions, or other operating or business activities, although we do not believe this risk can be eliminated. We believe that our risk management tools support our strategy of pursuing opportunities and help us to identify opportunities that we believe to be the most attractive. In particular, we utilize our risk management tools to support our efforts to monitor our capital position, on a consolidated basis and for each of our major operating subsidiaries, and to allocate an appropriate amount of capital to support the risks that we have assumed in the aggregate and for each of our major operating subsidiaries. We believe that our risk management efforts are essential to our corporate strategy and our goal of achieving long-term growth in tangible book value per share plus the change in accumulated dividends for our shareholders.
Our ERM framework comprises three primary areas of focus, as set forth below:
| |
(1) | Assumed Risk. We define assumed risk as activities where we deliberately take risk against the Company's capital base, including underwriting risks and other quantifiable risks such as credit risk and interest rate risk as they relate to investments, ceded reinsurance credit risk and strategic investment risk, each of which can be analyzed in substantial part through quantitative tools and techniques. Of these, we believe underwriting risk to be the most material to us. In order to understand, monitor, quantify and proactively assess underwriting risk, we seek to develop and deploy appropriate tools to, among other things, estimate the comparable expected returns on potential business opportunities, and estimate the impact that such incremental business could have on our overall risk profile. We use the tools and methods described above in "Underwriting" to seek to achieve these objectives. Embedded within our consideration of assumed risk is our management of the Company's aggregate, consolidated risk profile. In part through the utilization of REMS© and our other systems and procedures, we seek to analyze our in-force aggregate assumed risk portfolio on a daily basis. We believe this capability helps us to manage our aggregate exposures, as well as to rigorously analyze individual proposed transactions and evaluate them in the context of our in-force portfolio. This aggregation process captures line of business, segment and corporate risk profiles, calculates internal and external capital tests and explicitly models ceded reinsurance. Generally, additional data is added quarterly to our aggregate risk framework to reflect updated or new information or estimates relating to matters such as interest rate risk, credit risk, capital adequacy and liquidity. This information is used in day-to-day decision making for underwriting, investments and operations and is also reviewed quarterly from both a unit level and in respect of our consolidated financial position. We also regularly assess, monitor and review our regulatory risk capital and related constraints. |
| |
(2) | Business Environment Risk. We define this as the risk of changes in the business, political or regulatory environment that could negatively impact our short term or long-term financial results or the markets in which we operate. Accordingly, these risks are predominately extrinsic to the Company and in general, our ability to alter or eliminate these risks is limited. Rather, our efforts focus on monitoring developments, assessing potential impacts of any such changes, and investing in cost effective means to attempt to mitigate the consequences of and ensure compliance with any new requirements applicable to us. |
| |
(3) | Operational Risk. We are subject to a number of additional risks arising out of operational, regulatory, and other matters. We define operational risk to include the risk that we fail to create, manage, control or mitigate the people, processes, structures or functions required to execute our strategic and tactical plans and assemble an optimized portfolio of assumed risk, and to adjust to |
and comply with the evolving requirements of business environment risk applicable to us. In light of the rapid evolution of our markets, business environment, and business initiatives, we seek to continually invest in the tools, processes and procedures to mitigate our exposure to operational risk on a cost-effective basis. As with assumed risk and business environment risk, operational risk presents intrinsic uncertainties, and we may fail to appropriately identify or mitigate applicable operational risk.
Identification and monitoring of business environment risk and operational risk is coordinated by senior personnel including our Chief Financial Officer ("CFO"), General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer ("CCO"), Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer ("CAO"), Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Risk Officer ("CRO"), Chief Information Officer and Internal Audit, utilizing resources throughout the Company.
Although financial reporting is a key area of our focus, other operational risks are addressed through our disaster recovery program, human resource practices such as motivating and retaining top talent, our strict tax protocols and our legal and regulatory policies and procedures.
Controls and Compliance Committee. We believe that a key component of our current operational risk management platform is our Controls and Compliance Committee. The Controls and Compliance Committee is comprised of our CFO, CCO, CAO, Chief Administrative Officer, CRO, staff compliance professionals and representatives from our business units. The purpose of the Controls and Compliance Committee is to establish, assess the effectiveness of, and enforce policies, procedures and practices relating to accounting, financial reporting, internal controls, regulatory, legal, compliance and related matters, and for ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations, the Company's Code of Ethics and Conduct (the "Code of Ethics"), and other relevant standards. In addition, the Controls and Compliance Committee is charged with reviewing certain transactions that potentially raise complex and/or significant tax, legal, accounting, regulatory, financial reporting, reputational or compliance issues.
Ongoing Development and Enhancement. We seek to reflect and categorize risks we monitor in part through quantitative risk distributions, even where we believe that such quantitative analysis is not as robust or well developed as our tools and models for measuring and evaluating other risks, such as catastrophe and market risks. We also seek to improve the methods by which we measure risks. We believe effective risk management is a core attribute of our culture and is a continual process that requires ongoing improvement and development. We seek from time to time to identify effective new practices or additional developments both from within our industry and from other sectors. We believe that our ongoing efforts to embed ERM throughout our organization are important to our efforts to produce and maintain a competitive advantage to achieve our corporate goals.
RATINGS
Financial strength ratings are an important factor in respect of the competitive position of reinsurance and insurance companies. Rating organizations continually review the financial positions of our reinsurers and insurers. We continue to receive high claims-paying and financial strength ratings from A.M. Best Co. ("A.M. Best"), Standard and Poor's Rating Services ("S&P"), Moody's Investors Service ("Moody's") and Fitch Ratings Ltd. ("Fitch"). These ratings represent independent opinions of an insurer's financial strength, operating performance and ability to meet policyholder obligations, and are not an evaluation directed toward the protection of investors or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any of our securities.
See "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Capital Resources, Ratings" for the ratings of our principal operating subsidiaries and joint ventures by segment, and details of recent ratings actions. In addition, S&P assesses companies' ERM practices, which is an opinion on the many critical dimensions of risk that determine overall creditworthiness. RenaissanceRe has been assigned an ERM rating of "Excellent", which is the highest rating assigned by S&P, and indicates that S&P believes RenaissanceRe has extremely strong capabilities to consistently identify, measure, and manage risk exposures and losses within RenaissanceRe's predetermined tolerance guidelines.
RESERVES FOR CLAIMS AND CLAIM EXPENSES
We believe the most significant accounting judgment made by management is our estimate of claims and claim expense reserves. Claims and claim expense reserves represent estimates, including actuarial and statistical projections at a given point in time, of the ultimate settlement and administration costs for unpaid claims and claim expenses arising from the insurance and reinsurance contracts we sell. We establish our claims and claim expense reserves by taking claims reported to us by insureds and ceding companies, but which have not yet been paid ("case reserves"), adding the costs for additional case reserves ("additional case reserves") which represent our estimates for claims previously reported to us which we believe may not be adequately reserved as of that date, and adding estimates for the anticipated cost of claims incurred but not yet reported to us ("IBNR").
The following table summarizes our claims and claim expense reserves by line of business and split between case reserves, additional case reserves and IBNR: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| At December 31, 2012 | Case Reserves | | Additional Case Reserves | | IBNR | | Total | |
| (in thousands) | | | | | | | | |
| Catastrophe | $ | 706,264 |
| | $ | 222,208 |
| | $ | 255,786 |
| | $ | 1,184,258 |
| |
| Specialty | 111,234 |
| | 80,971 |
| | 286,108 |
| | 478,313 |
| |
| Total Reinsurance | 817,498 |
| | 303,179 |
| | 541,894 |
| | 1,662,571 |
| |
| Lloyd's | 29,260 |
| | 10,548 |
| | 109,662 |
| | 149,470 |
| |
| Other | 17,016 |
| | 8,522 |
| | 41,798 |
| | 67,336 |
| |
| Total | $ | 863,774 |
| | $ | 322,249 |
| | $ | 693,354 |
| | $ | 1,879,377 |
| |
| | | | | | | | | |
| At December 31, 2011 | | | | | | | | |
| (in thousands) | | | | | | | | |
| Catastrophe | $ | 681,771 |
| | $ | 271,990 |
| | $ | 388,147 |
| | $ | 1,341,908 |
| |
| Specialty | 120,189 |
| | 49,840 |
| | 301,589 |
| | 471,618 |
| |
| Total Reinsurance | 801,960 |
| | 321,830 |
| | 689,736 |
| | 1,813,526 |
| |
| Lloyd's | 17,909 |
| | 14,459 |
| | 55,127 |
| | 87,495 |
| |
| Other | 32,944 |
| | 3,515 |
| | 54,874 |
| | 91,333 |
| |
| Total | $ | 852,813 |
| | $ | 339,804 |
| | $ | 799,737 |
| | $ | 1,992,354 |
| |
| | | | | | | | | |
Our estimates of claims and claim expense reserves are not precise in that, among other matters, they are based on predictions of future developments and estimates of future trends and other variable factors. Some, but not all, of our reserves are further subject to the uncertainty inherent in actuarial methodologies and estimates. Because a reserve estimate is simply an insurer's estimate at a point in time of its ultimate liability, and because there are numerous factors which affect reserves and claims payments that cannot be determined with certainty in advance, our ultimate payments will vary, perhaps materially, from our estimates of reserves. If we determine in a subsequent period that adjustments to our previously established reserves are appropriate, such adjustments are recorded in the period in which they are identified. During the year ended December 31, 2012, changes to prior year estimated claims reserves increased our net income by $158.0 million (2011 - decreased our net loss by $132.0 million, 2010 - increased our net income by $302.1 million), excluding the consideration of changes in reinstatement premium, profit commissions, redeemable noncontrolling interest - DaVinciRe, equity in net claims and claim expenses of Top Layer Re and income tax.
The following table presents an analysis of our paid, unpaid and incurred losses and loss expenses and a reconciliation of beginning and ending reserves for claims and claim expenses for the years indicated: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| Year ended December 31, | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | |
| (in thousands) | | | | | | |
| Net reserves as of January 1 | $ | 1,588,325 |
| | $ | 1,156,132 |
| | $ | 1,260,334 |
| |
| Net incurred related to: | | | | | | |
| Current year | 483,180 |
| | 993,168 |
| | 431,476 |
| |
| Prior years | (157,969 | ) | | (131,989 | ) | | (302,131 | ) | |
| Total net incurred | 325,211 |
| | 861,179 |
| | 129,345 |
| |
| Net paid related to: | | | | | | |
| Current year | 84,056 |
| | 299,299 |
| | 50,793 |
| |
| Prior years | 142,615 |
| | 129,687 |
| | 182,754 |
| |
| Total net paid | 226,671 |
| | 428,986 |
| | 233,547 |
| |
| Total net reserves as of December 31 | 1,686,865 |
| | 1,588,325 |
| | 1,156,132 |
| |
| Reinsurance recoverable as of December 31 | 192,512 |
| | 404,029 |
| | 101,711 |
| |
| Total gross reserves as of December 31 | $ | 1,879,377 |
| | $ | 1,992,354 |
| | $ | 1,257,843 |
| |
| | | | | | | |
Refer to "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates, Claims and Claim Expense Reserves" for additional discussion regarding the Company's reserving methodologies, including key assumptions and sensitivity analysis and a discussion regarding the Company's accounting treatment and favorable development on prior years net claims and claim expenses.
Our reserving methodology for each line of business uses a loss reserving process that calculates a point estimate for the Company's ultimate settlement and administration costs for claims and claim expenses. We do not calculate a range of estimates. We use this point estimate, along with paid claims and case reserves, to record our best estimate of additional case reserves and IBNR in our consolidated financial statements. Under GAAP, we are not permitted to establish estimates for catastrophe claims and claim expense reserves until an event occurs that gives rise to a loss.
Reserving for our reinsurance claims involves other uncertainties, such as the dependence on information from ceding companies, which among other matters, includes the time lag inherent in reporting information from the primary insurer to us or to our ceding companies and differing reserving practices among ceding companies. The information received from ceding companies is typically in the form of bordereaux, broker notifications of loss and/or discussions with ceding companies or their brokers. This information can be received on a monthly, quarterly or transactional basis and normally includes estimates of paid claims and case reserves. We sometimes also receive an estimate or provision for IBNR. This information is often updated and adjusted from time to time during the loss settlement period as new data or facts in respect of initial claims, client accounts, industry or event trends may be reported or emerge in addition to changes in applicable statutory and case laws.
Our estimates of losses from large events are based on factors including currently available information derived from the Company's claims information from certain customers and brokers, industry assessments of losses from the events, proprietary models, and the terms and conditions of our contracts. The uncertainty of our estimates for certain of these large events is additionally impacted by the preliminary nature of the information available, the magnitude and relative infrequency of the events, the expected duration of the respective claims development period, inadequacies in the data provided thus far by industry participants and the potential for further reporting lags or insufficiencies (particularly in respect of the Chilean, 2010 New Zealand, 2011 New Zealand and Tohoku earthquakes); and in the case of storm Sandy and the Thailand flooding, significant uncertainty as to the form of the claims and legal issues, under the relevant terms of insurance contracts and reinsurance treaties. In addition, a significant portion of the net claims and claim expenses associated with storm Sandy and the New Zealand and Tohoku earthquakes are concentrated with a few large clients and therefore the loss estimates for these events may vary significantly based on the claims experience of those clients. Loss reserve estimation in respect of our retrocessional contracts poses further challenges compared to directly assumed reinsurance. A significant
portion of our reinsurance recoverable relates to the New Zealand and Tohoku earthquakes. There is inherent uncertainty and complexity in evaluating loss reserve levels and reinsurance recoverable amounts, due to the nature of the losses relating to earthquake events, including that loss development time frames tend to take longer with respect to earthquake events. The contingent nature of business interruption and other exposures will also impact losses in a meaningful way, especially with regard to storm Sandy, the Tohoku earthquake and Thailand flooding, which we believe may give rise to significant complexity in respect of claims handling, claims adjustment and other coverage issues, over time. Given the magnitude and relatively recent occurrence of these large events, meaningful uncertainty remains regarding total covered losses for the insurance industry and, accordingly, several of the key assumptions underlying our loss estimates. In addition, our actual net losses from these events may increase if our reinsurers or other obligors fail to meet their obligations.
Because of the inherent uncertainties discussed above, we have developed a reserving philosophy which attempts to incorporate prudent assumptions and estimates, and we have generally experienced favorable net development on prior year reserves in the last several years. However, there is no assurance that this will occur in future periods.
Our reserving techniques, assumptions and processes differ between our property catastrophe reinsurance, specialty reinsurance and insurance businesses within our Reinsurance and Lloyd's segments, and Other category. Refer to our "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates, Claims and Claim Expense Reserves" for more information on the risks we insure and reinsure, the reserving techniques, assumptions and processes we follow to estimate our claims and claim expense reserves, and our current estimates versus our initial estimates of our claims reserves, for each of these units.
The following table represents the development of our GAAP balance sheet reserves for December 31, 2002 through December 31, 2012. This table does not present accident or policy year development data. The top line of the table shows the gross reserves for claims and claim expenses at the balance sheet date for each of the indicated years. This represents the estimated amounts of claims and claim expenses arising in the current year and all prior years that are unpaid at the balance sheet date, including additional case reserves and IBNR reserves. The table also shows the re-estimated amount of the previously recorded reserves based on experience as of the end of each succeeding year. The estimate changes as more information becomes known about the frequency and severity of claims for individual years. The "cumulative redundancy on net reserves" represents the aggregate change to date from the indicated estimate of the gross reserve for claims and claim expenses, net of reinsurance recoverable on the second line of the table. The table also shows the cumulative net paid amounts as of successive years with respect to the net reserve liability. At the bottom of the table is a reconciliation of the gross reserve for claims and claim expenses to the net reserve for claims and claim expenses, the gross re-estimated liability to the net re-estimated liability for claims and claim expenses, and the cumulative redundancy on gross reserves.
With respect to the information in the table below, note that each amount includes the effects of all changes in amounts for prior periods, including the effect of foreign exchange rates.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year ended December 31, | | 2002 | | 2003 | | 2004 | | 2005 | | 2006 | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2009 | | 2010 | | 2011 | | 2012 | |
| (in millions) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Gross reserve for claims and claim expenses | | $ | 747.9 |
| | $ | 924.4 |
| | $ | 1,295.0 |
| | $ | 2,381.4 |
| | $ | 1,811.0 |
| | $ | 1,717.2 |
| | $ | 1,758.8 |
| | $ | 1,344.4 |
| | $ | 1,257.8 |
| | $ | 1,992.3 |
| | $ | 1,879.4 |
| |
| Reserve for claims and claim expenses, net of reinsurance recoverable | | $ | 595.0 |
| | $ | 810.6 |
| | $ | 1,099.2 |
| | $ | 1,742.2 |
| | $ | 1,591.3 |
| | $ | 1,609.5 |
| | $ | 1,565.2 |
| | $ | 1,260.3 |
| | $ | 1,156.1 |
| | $ | 1,588.3 |
| | $ | 1,686.9 |
| |
| 1 Year Later | | 494.8 |
| | 661.5 |
| | 878.6 |
| | 1,610.7 |
| | 1,368.3 |
| | 1,412.6 |
| | 1,299.0 |
| | 958.2 |
| | 1,024.1 |
| | 1,430.3 |
| | — |
| |
| 2 Years Later | | 449.5 |
| | 379.5 |
| | 844.0 |
| | 1,449.1 |
| | 1,225.9 |
| | 1,199.0 |
| | 1,045.1 |
| | 857.6 |
| | 895.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 3 Years Later | | 270.8 |
| | 362.8 |
| | 749.1 |
| | 1,333.7 |
| | 1,092.2 |
| | 997.8 |
| | 961.4 |
| | 770.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 4 Years Later | | 258.7 |
| | 332.9 |
| | 717.2 |
| | 1,231.6 |
| | 911.1 |
| | 923.0 |
| | 888.7 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 5 Years Later | | 246.3 |
| | 312.2 |
| | 683.7 |
| | 1,077.8 |
| | 847.2 |
| | 878.5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 6 Years Later | | 220.2 |
| | 301.5 |
| | 628.9 |
| | 1,022.7 |
| | 823.5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 7 Years Later | | 210.8 |
| | 266.2 |
| | 609.2 |
| | 1,002.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 8 Years Later | | 186.0 |
| | 251.2 |
| | 604.5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 9 Years Later | | 174.7 |
| | 241.2 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 10 Years Later | | 167.9 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| Cumulative redundancy on net reserves | | $ | 427.1 |
| | $ | 569.4 |
| | $ | 494.7 |
| | $ | 739.4 |
| | $ | 767.8 |
| | $ | 731.0 |
| | $ | 676.5 |
| | $ | 489.5 |
| | $ | 260.3 |
| | $ | 158.0 |
| | $ | — |
| |
| Cumulative Net Paid Losses | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 1 Year Later | | 81.1 |
| | 58.0 |
| | 302.8 |
| | 354.8 |
| | 247.6 |
| | 337.1 |
| | 191.5 |
| | 182.8 |
| | 129.7 |
| | 142.6 |
| | — |
| |
| 2 Years Later | | 85.3 |
| | 100.6 |
| | 370.8 |
| | 548.4 |
| | 435.8 |
| | 469.5 |
| | 369.1 |
| | 301.5 |
| | 301.5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 3 Years Later | | 113.0 |
| | 107.5 |
| | 395.7 |
| | 712.6 |
| | 529.5 |
| | 553.0 |
| | 471.6 |
| | 420.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 4 Years Later | | 91.8 |
| | 96.4 |
| | 446.8 |
| | 782.9 |
| | 569.4 |
| | 605.7 |
| | 585.8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 5 Years Later | | 85.9 |
| | 129.8 |
| | 472.7 |
| | 812.0 |
| | 594.2 |
| | 690.4 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 6 Years Later | | 102.8 |
| | 136.1 |
| | 482.7 |
| | 833.1 |
| | 656.1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 7 Years Later | | 109.6 |
| | 137.3 |
| | 492.2 |
| | 879.1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 8 Years Later | | 103.0 |
| | 139.2 |
| | 527.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 9 Years Later | | 99.1 |
| | 152.1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| 10 Years Later | | 99.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| Gross reserve for claims and claim expenses | | $ | 747.9 |
| | $ | 924.4 |
| | $ | 1,295.0 |
| | $ | 2,381.4 |
| | $ | 1,811.0 |
| | $ | 1,717.2 |
| | $ | 1,758.8 |
| | $ | 1,344.4 |
| | $ | 1,257.8 |
| | $ | 1,992.3 |
| | $ | 1,879.4 |
| |
| Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses | | 152.9 |
| | 113.8 |
| | 195.8 |
| | 639.2 |
| | 219.7 |
| | 107.7 |
| | 193.6 |
| | 84.1 |
| | 101.7 |
| | 404.0 |
| | 192.5 |
| |
| Net reserve for claims and claim expenses | | $ | 595.0 |
| | $ | 810.6 |
| | $ | 1,099.2 |
| | $ | 1,742.2 |
| | $ | 1,591.3 |
| | $ | 1,609.5 |
| | $ | 1,565.2 |
| | $ | 1,260.3 |
| | $ | 1,156.1 |
| | $ | 1,588.3 |
| | $ | 1,686.9 |
| |
| Gross liability re-estimated | | $ | 300.8 |
| | $ | 355.4 |
| | $ | 797.6 |
| | $ | 1,608.7 |
| | $ | 1,024.8 |
| | $ | 940.8 |
| | $ | 1,030.3 |
| | $ | 821.3 |
| | $ | 974.9 |
| | $ | 1,830.4 |
| | $ | — |
| |
| Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses re-estimated | | 132.9 |
| | 114.2 |
| | 193.1 |
| | 605.9 |
| | 201.3 |
| | 62.3 |
| | 141.6 |
| | 50.5 |
| | 79.1 |
| | 400.1 |
| | — |
| |
| Net liability re-estimated | | $ | 167.9 |
| | $ | 241.2 |
| | $ | 604.5 |
| | $ | 1,002.8 |
| | $ | 823.5 |
| | $ | 878.5 |
| | $ | 888.7 |
| | $ | 770.8 |
| | $ | 895.8 |
| | $ | 1,430.3 |
| | $ | — |
| |
| Cumulative redundancy on gross reserves | | $ | 447.1 |
| | $ | 569.0 |
| | $ | 497.4 |
| | $ | 772.7 |
| | $ | 786.2 |
| | $ | 776.4 |
| | $ | 728.5 |
| | $ | 523.1 |
| | $ | 282.9 |
| | $ | 161.9 |
| | $ | — |
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
INVESTMENTS
Our investment guidelines stress preservation of capital, market liquidity, and diversification of risk. The majority of our investments consist of highly rated fixed income securities. We also hold a significant amount of short term investments. Short term investments are managed as part of our investment portfolio and have a maturity of one year or less when purchased. In addition, we have an allocation to other investments including private equity partnerships, senior secured bank loan funds, catastrophe bonds, and hedge funds; and to certain equity securities. We may from time to time re-evaluate our investment guidelines and explore investment allocations to other asset classes. Our investments are subject to market-wide risks and fluctuations, as well as to risks inherent in particular securities.
The table below shows the aggregate amounts of our invested assets: |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| At December 31, | 2012 | | 2011 | |
| (in thousands, except percentages) | | | | | | | | |
| U.S. treasuries | $ | 1,259,800 |
| | 19.8 | % | | $ | 885,152 |
| | 14.2 | % | |
| Agencies | 315,154 |
| | 5.0 | % | | 158,561 |
| | 2.6 | % | |
| Non-U.S. government (Sovereign debt) | 133,198 |
| | 2.1 | % | | 227,912 |
| | 3.7 | % | |
| FDIC guaranteed corporate | — |
| | — | % | | 423,630 |
| | 6.8 | % | |
| Non-U.S. government-backed corporate | 349,514 |
| | 5.5 | % | | 641,082 |
| | 10.3 | % | |
| Corporate | 1,615,207 |
| | 25.4 | % | | 1,206,904 |
| | 19.4 | % | |
| Agency mortgage-backed | 408,531 |
| | 6.4 | % | | 441,749 |
| | 7.1 | % | |
| Non-agency mortgage-backed | 248,339 |
| | 3.9 | % | | 104,771 |
| | 1.7 | % | |
| Commercial mortgage-backed | 406,166 |
| | 6.4 | % | | 325,729 |
| | 5.2 | % | |
| Asset-backed | 12,954 |
| | 0.2 | % | | 18,027 |
| | 0.3 | % | |
| Total fixed maturity investments, at fair value | 4,748,863 |
| | 74.7 | % | | 4,433,517 |
| | 71.4 | % | |
| Short term investments, at fair value | 821,163 |
| | 12.9 | % | | 905,477 |
| | 14.6 | % | |
| Equity investments trading, at fair value | 58,186 |
| | 0.9 | % | | 50,560 |
| | 0.8 | % | |
| Other investments, at fair value | 644,711 |
| | 10.1 | % | | 748,984 |
| | 12.1 | % | |
| Total managed investment portfolio | 6,360,647 |
| | 98.6 | % | | 6,138,538 |
| | 98.9 | % | |
| Investments in other ventures, under equity method | 87,724 |
| | 1.4 | % | | 70,714 |
| | 1.1 | % | |
| Total investments | $ | 6,360,647 |
| | 100.0 | % | | $ | 6,209,252 |
| | 100.0 | % | |
| | | | | | | | | |
For additional information regarding the investment portfolio, refer to "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Investments".
MARKETING
We believe that our modeling and technical expertise, the risk management products that we provide to our customers, and our reputation for paying claims promptly has enabled us to become a provider of first choice in many lines of business to our customers worldwide. We market our products worldwide primarily through reinsurance brokers and we focus our marketing efforts on targeted brokers and partners. We believe that our existing portfolio of business is a valuable asset and, therefore, we attempt to continually strengthen relationships with our existing brokers and customers. We target prospects that are capable of supplying detailed and accurate underwriting data and that potentially add further diversification to our book of business.
We believe that primary insurers' and brokers' willingness to use a particular reinsurer is based not just on pricing, but also on the financial security of the reinsurer, its claim paying ability ratings and demonstrated willingness to promptly pay valid claims, the quality of a reinsurer's service, the reinsurer's willingness and ability to design customized programs, its long-term stability and its commitment to provide reinsurance capacity. We believe we have established a reputation with our brokers and customers for prompt response on underwriting submissions, for fast claims payments and for providing creative solutions to our customers' needs. Since we selectively write large lines on a limited number of property catastrophe and specialty reinsurance contracts, we can establish terms and conditions on those contracts that are attractive
in our judgment, make large commitments to the most attractive programs and provide superior client responsiveness. We believe that our willingness and ability to design customized programs and to provide bespoke risk management products has helped us to develop long-term relationships with brokers and customers.
Our brokers assess client needs and perform data collection, contract preparation and other administrative tasks, enabling us to market our products cost effectively by maintaining a smaller staff. We believe that by maintaining close relationships with brokers, we are able to obtain access to a broad range of potential reinsureds. In recent years, our distribution has become increasingly reliant on a small and relatively decreasing number of such relationships reflecting consolidation in the broker sector. We expect this concentration to continue and perhaps increase.
The following table shows the percentage of our Reinsurance segment gross premiums written generated through our largest brokers:
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| Year ended December 31, | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | |
| AON Benfield | 51.5 | % | | 56.1 | % | | 53.5 | % | |
| Marsh Inc. | 21.4 | % | | 21.9 | % | | 23.1 | % | |
| Willis Group | 11.7 | % | | 12.7 | % | | 11.6 | % | |
| Total of largest brokers | 84.6 | % | | 90.7 | % | | 88.2 | % | |
| All others | 15.4 | % | | 9.3 | % | | 11.8 | % | |
| Total percentage of Reinsurance segment gross premiums written | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | | 100.0 | % | |
| | | | | | | |
During 2012, our Reinsurance segment issued authorization for coverage on programs submitted by 40 brokers worldwide (2011 – 44 brokers). We received approximately 3,228 program submissions during 2012 (2011 – approximately 3,733). Of these submissions, we issued authorizations for coverage for approximately 1,065 programs, or approximately 33% of the program submissions received (2011 – approximately 1,021 programs, or approximately 27%).
Our Lloyd's segment received approximately 3,676 program submissions during 2012 (2011 – approximately 3,390), from 45 different brokers worldwide (2011 – 46 brokers). Of these submissions, we issued authorizations for coverage for approximately 881 programs, or approximately 24% of the program submissions received (2011 – approximately 654 programs, or approximately 19%).
EMPLOYEES
At February 20, 2013, we employed 309 people worldwide (February 15, 2012 - 311, February 16, 2011 - 517). As part of the sale of our U.S.-based insurance operations, which closed on March 4, 2011, our overall headcount was reduced by 204 employees that were formerly employed in the U.S.-based insurance operations. We believe our strong employee relations are among our most significant strengths. None of our employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements. We are not aware of any current efforts to implement such agreements at any of our subsidiaries. The Company has historically looked for opportunities to strengthen its operations during periods of softening markets in anticipation of improving market conditions, however, we may from time to time reevaluate our operational needs based on various factors, including the changing nature of such market conditions and changes in our strategy or tactical plans. We currently expect to continue to experience a degree of employee growth in the U.K. and other markets, although we do not expect these increases to be material to the Company as a whole.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Our information technology infrastructure is important to our business. Our information technology platform, supported by a team of professionals, is currently principally located in our corporate headquarters and principal corporate offices in Bermuda. Additional information technology assets are maintained at the office locations of our operating subsidiaries. We have implemented backup procedures that seek to ensure that our key business systems and data are backed up, generally on a daily basis, and can be restored promptly if and as needed. In addition, we generally store backup information at off-site locations, in order to seek to minimize our risk of loss of key data in the event of a disaster.
We depend on the proper functioning and availability of our information technology platform. This includes communications and data processing systems used in operating our business. These systems consist of proprietary software programs that are integral to the efficient operation of our business (including REMS©, our proprietary computer-based pricing and exposure management system). In addition, we frequently transmit and receive personal, confidential and proprietary information by email and other electronic means, as required in connection with our business, with our internal operations and with facilitating the oversight conducted by our Board of Directors. Computer viruses, hackers, employee misuse or misconduct and other external hazards could expose our data systems to security breaches, cyber attacks or other disruptions.
We believe that the preponderance of our business and support functions utilize information systems that provide critical services to both our employees and our customers. We are also required to effect electronic transmissions with third parties including brokers, clients vendors and others with whom we do business. While we seek to ensure that our information is appropriately protected by these parties, we may be unable to put in place secure capabilities with all of them; in addition, these third parties may not have appropriate controls in place to protect the confidentiality of the information.
Cyber incidents that impact the availability, reliability, speed, accuracy or other proper functioning of these systems could have a significant impact on our operations, and potentially on our results. We also operate in a number of jurisdictions with strict data privacy and other related laws, which could be violated in the event of a significant cybersecurity incident, or by our personnel. Failure to comply with these obligations can give rise to monetary fines and other penalties, which could be significant.
We seek to protect our information systems through physical and software safeguards as well as backup systems considered appropriate by management. However, it is not practicable to protect against every potential power loss, telecommunications failure, cybersecurity attack or similar event that may arise. Moreover, the safeguards we have chosen to utilize are subject to human implementation and maintenance and to other uncertainties.
A significant cyber incident, including system failure, security breach, disruption by malware or other damage could interrupt or delay our operations. This type of incident may result in a violation of applicable privacy and other laws and could damage our reputation potentially causing a loss of customers. Management is not aware of a cybersecurity incident that has had a material effect on our operations, although there can be no assurances that a cyber incident that could have a material impact on us will not occur in the future.
We have implemented and periodically test our disaster recovery plans with respect to our information technology infrastructure. Among other things, our recovery plans involve arrangements with off-site, secure data centers in alternative locations. We believe we will be able to access our systems from these facilities in the event that our primary systems are unavailable due to a scenario such as a natural disaster. In addition, we periodically perform security penetration scenarios to evaluate our preparedness and ability to detect, alert and respond to such an incident. However, we have not prepared for every conceivable disaster or every scenario which might arise in respect of the disaster for which we have prepared, and cannot assure you our efforts in respect of disaster recovery will succeed, or will be sufficiently rapid to avoid harm to our business.
REGULATION
U.S. Regulation
Dodd-Frank Act. On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act which effects sweeping reforms of the financial services industries. The Dodd-Frank Act does not implement the federal regulation of insurance, but it does establish federal measures that will impact the U.S. insurance business and preempt certain state insurance measures. It may then lay the foundation for ultimately establishing some form of federal regulation of insurance in the future.
The Dodd-Frank Act created the Financial Stability Oversight Council ("FSOC") to identify risks to U.S. financial stability, promote market discipline and respond to emerging threats to U.S. financial stability. FSOC is authorized to designate a nonbank financial company as "systemically significant" if a nonbank financial company's material financial distress could threaten the financial stability of the U.S. Nonbank financial
companies, which may include insurance companies, designated as systemically significant by FSOC will be subject to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "Federal Reserve") and enhanced prudential standards, including stress tests, liquidity requirements, annual resolution plans or "living wills," and enhanced public disclosures. In April 2012, FSOC adopted final rules setting forth a three-stage process to evaluate whether nonbank financial companies should be designated as systemically significant. FSOC has not yet designated any company as systemically significant under the April 2012 final rules. Other related regulations required by the Dodd-Frank Act, such as how a "nonbank financial company" will be defined in connection with FSOC's designation process, have not yet been finalized. FSOC's potential recommendation of measures to address systemic risk in the insurance industry could affect our U.S.-based insurance and reinsurance operations as could a determination that we or our counterparties are systemically significant and subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve.
The Dodd-Frank Act also creates the first office in the Federal government focused on insurance - the Federal Insurance Office (the "FIO"). Although the FIO has preemption authority over state insurance laws that conflict with certain international agreements, the Dodd-Frank Act does not grant the FIO general supervisory or regulatory authority over the business of insurance. Certain functions of the FIO relate to systemic risk. Specifically, the FIO is authorized to monitor the U.S. insurance industry and identify potential regulatory gaps that could contribute to systemic risk to the insurance industry and the U.S. financial system. In addition, the FIO may recommend insurers for supervision by the FSOC.
With respect to certain aspects of international insurance regulations, the FIO represents the U.S. at the International Association of Insurance Supervisors ("IAIS"); in 2012, it participated in the IAIS's Financial Stability Committee and joined IAIS's Executive Committee. The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the Treasury Secretary and U.S. Trade Representative to enter into international agreements of mutual recognition regarding the prudential regulation of insurance ("Covered Agreements"). Significantly, the FIO is authorized to preempt state measures that (i) are inconsistent with a Covered Agreement and (ii) disfavor non-U.S. insurers subject to a Covered Agreement.
In furtherance of its duties to monitor the U.S. insurance business, represent the U.S. on an international stage and consult with the states on insurance regulation, the FIO is authorized to collect information from insurers and from state insurance regulators. The FIO is obligated to report to Congress annually on the insurance industry and any preemption actions regarding Covered Agreements. The FIO was scheduled to report to Congress by September 2012 describing the breadth of the global reinsurance market and its critical role in supporting the U.S. insurance system. In addition, by January 2012, the FIO was scheduled to report to Congress on how to modernize and improve the system of insurance regulation in the U.S. including considerations of international coordination of insurance regulation. The FIO has not yet issued either of these reports. The potential impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on our U.S. cedants and on the U.S. treatment of global reinsurance matters is not clear at this time. We are monitoring developments at the FSOC and the FIO in connection with the possible impact on our U.S. insurance and reinsurance business. It is possible the FIO will issue recommendations in respect of the reinsurance market that would, if enacted, impact our market or our operations significantly, perhaps adversely. The Dodd-Frank Act also provides for the specific preemption of certain state insurance laws in the areas of reinsurance and surplus insurance regulation.
At this time, it is difficult to predict the extent to which the Dodd-Frank Act or the resulting regulations will impact our business. However, compliance with these new laws and regulations has resulted in additional costs. Although we do not expect these costs to be material to us as a whole, we cannot be certain that this expectation will prove accurate or that the Dodd-Frank Act will not impact our business more adversely than we currently estimate.
Reinsurance Regulation. Our Bermuda-domiciled insurance operations and joint ventures principally consist of Renaissance Reinsurance, DaVinci, Top Layer Re and Glencoe. Renaissance Reinsurance, DaVinci and Top Layer Re are Bermuda-based companies that operate as reinsurers. Although none of these companies is admitted to transact the business of insurance in any jurisdiction except Bermuda, the insurance laws of each state of the U.S. regulate the sale of reinsurance to ceding insurers authorized in the state by non-admitted alien reinsurers, such as Renaissance Reinsurance or DaVinci, acting from locations outside the state. Rates, contract terms and conditions of reinsurance agreements generally are not subject to regulation by any governmental authority. A primary insurer ordinarily will enter into a reinsurance agreement, however, only if it can obtain credit for the reinsurance ceded on its statutory financial statements.
In general, regulators permit ceding insurers to take credit for reinsurance under the following circumstances if the contract contains certain minimum provisions: if the reinsurer is licensed or accredited, if the reinsurer is domiciled in a state with substantially similar regulatory requirements as the primary insurer's domiciliary
jurisdiction and meets certain financial requirements, or if the reinsurance obligations are collateralized appropriately. Recently eleven states have changed their credit for reinsurance laws. For example, effective January 1, 2011, New York requires domestic ceding insurers to exercise prudent reinsurance credit risk management. For a New York domestic ceding insurer to exercise financial prudence when entering into any reinsurance arrangement, it must take into account the recoverability of future reinsurance proceeds and the security of a reinsurer. Domestic ceding insurers are also required to monitor reinsurance programs. New York law also establishes a basis for an unauthorized non-U.S. reinsurer to reduce its reinsurance collateral obligations based on a secure rating assigned by the New York Insurance Department. Of the eleven states that have changed their credit for reinsurance laws, only New York and Florida have approved any reinsurers for collateral reduction.
The Dodd-Frank Act also addresses states' extraterritorial regulation of credit for reinsurance and the solvency regulation of U.S. reinsurers. The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits a state in which a U.S. ceding insurer is licensed, but not domiciled, from denying credit for reinsurance if the ceding insurer's domestic state recognizes credit for reinsurance for the insurer's ceded risk and is a state accredited by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (the "NAIC") (or has substantially similar financial solvency requirements). With limited exceptions, the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act affecting reinsurance became effective July 21, 2011.
As alien companies, our Bermuda subsidiaries collateralize their reinsurance obligations to U.S. insurance companies. States are expected to change their credit for reinsurance laws to comply with Dodd-Frank Act requirements. Although these changes may benefit our Bermuda based reinsurers by prohibiting states' extraterritorial application of credit for reinsurance laws and streamlining the credit for reinsurance process, states may also impose heightened standards on U.S. ceding insurers' reinsurance selections which could have an adverse impact on our business. With some exceptions, the sale of insurance or reinsurance within a jurisdiction where the insurer is not admitted to do business is prohibited. None of Renaissance Reinsurance, DaVinci or Top Layer Re intends to maintain an office or to solicit, advertise, settle claims or conduct other insurance activities in any jurisdiction, other than Bermuda, where the conduct of such activities would require that each company be so admitted.
Excess and Surplus Lines Regulation. Glencoe, domiciled in Bermuda, is not licensed in the U.S. but is eligible to offer coverage in the U.S. exclusively in the surplus lines market. Glencoe is eligible to write surplus lines primary insurance in 49 U.S. states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and is subject to the surplus lines regulation and reporting requirements of the jurisdictions in which it is eligible to write surplus lines primary insurance. In accordance with certain provisions of the NAIC Nonadmitted Insurance Model Act, which provisions have been adopted by a number of states, Glencoe has established, and is required to maintain, a trust funded to a minimum amount as a condition of its status as an eligible, non-admitted insurer in the U.S. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, effective July 21, 2011, the states are required to amend their laws to provide that any insurer listed on the NAIC/IID Quarterly listing is eligible in the state as a surplus lines insurer. Glencoe is listed on the NAIC/IID Quarterly listing. Although surplus lines business is generally less regulated than the admitted market, strict regulations apply to surplus lines placements under the laws of every state, and the regulation of surplus lines insurance may undergo changes in the future.
Legislative and Regulatory Proposals. Government intervention in the insurance and reinsurance markets in the U.S. continues to evolve. Although U.S. state regulation is currently the primary form of regulation of insurance and reinsurance, in addition to changes brought about by the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress has considered over the past years various proposals relating to the creation of an optional federal charter, repeal of the insurance company antitrust exemption from the McCarran Ferguson Act, and tax law changes, including changes to increase the taxation of reinsurance premiums paid to off-shore affiliates with respect to U.S. risks. We are unable to predict what reforms will be proposed or adopted or the effect, if any, that such reforms would have on our operations and financial condition.
In 2007, Florida enacted legislation which enabled the FHCF to offer increased amounts of coverage in addition to the mandatory coverage amount, at below-market rates. Further, the legislation expanded the ability of the state-sponsored insurer, Citizens, to compete with private insurance companies, and other companies that cede business to us. This legislation reduced the role of the private insurance and reinsurance markets in Florida, a key target market of ours. In May 2009, the Florida legislature took steps to strengthen the financial condition of FHCF and Citizens, which a government-appointed task force determined to have been impaired by issues including the crisis in the credit markets, widespread rate inadequacy, and issues arising out of the application of discounts for housing retrofits and mitigation features. A bill was passed in 2009 permitting Citizens to raise its rates by up to 10% starting in 2010 and every year thereafter until its current shortfall is corrected and Citizens has sufficient funds to pay its claims and expenses. The rate increases and cut back on coverage by
FHCF and Citizens are expected to support, over time, a relatively increased role of the private insurers in Florida, a market in which we have established substantial market share. However, we cannot assure you that this increased role will transpire, or that adverse new legislation will not be passed.
It is possible that other states, particularly those with Atlantic or Gulf Coast exposures, may enact new or expanded legislation based on the earlier Florida precedent, or may otherwise enact legislation which would further diminish aggregate private market demand for our products. Alternatively, legislation adversely impacting the private markets could be enacted on a regional or Federal level. For example, in the past, federal bills have been proposed in Congress (and, in prior congressional sessions, passed by the House of Representatives) which would, if enacted, create a federal reinsurance backstop or guarantee mechanism for catastrophic risks, including those we currently insure and reinsure in the private markets. In 2009 the Catastrophe Obligation Guarantee Act was introduced in the Senate and House (S. 886) to federally guarantee bond issuances by certain government entities, potentially including the FHCF, the Texas Windstorm Insurance Association, the California Earthquake Authority, and others. In August 2012, Congressman Albio Sires introduced the Taxpayers' Protection Act (HR 6477). The bill would establish a federal catastrophe fund where eligible states can purchase reinsurance directly from the federal government. In January 2013, Congresswoman Frederica Wilson introduced the Homeowners' Defense Act which would, if enacted, provide for the creation of (i) a federal reinsurance catastrophe fund; (ii) a federal consortium to facilitate qualifying state residual markets and catastrophe funds in securing reinsurance; and (iii) a federal bond guarantee program for state catastrophe funds in qualifying state residual markets. In January 2013, Congressman Dennis Ross introduced the Homeowners' Insurance Protection Act (HR 240), which would create a federal catastrophe reinsurance program to back up federal reinsurance programs. If enacted, any of these bills, or legislation similar to these proposals, would, we believe, likely contribute to the growth of state entities offering below market priced insurance and reinsurance in a manner adverse to us and market participants more generally, and could accordingly adversely impact our financial results, perhaps materially. Moreover, we believe that numerous modeled potential catastrophes could exceed the actual or politically acceptable bonded capacity of Citizens and of the FHCF, which could lead either to a severe dislocation or the necessity of federal intervention in the Florida market, either of which would adversely impact the private insurance and reinsurance industry. See "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Current Outlook, Legislative and Regulatory Update" for further information regarding recent legislative and regulatory proposals.
The potential for further expansion into additional insurance markets could expose us or our subsidiaries to increasing regulatory oversight, including the oversight of countries other than Bermuda and the U.S. However, we intend to continue to conduct our operations so as to minimize the likelihood that Renaissance Reinsurance, DaVinci, Top Layer Re, Glencoe, or any of our other Bermudian subsidiaries will become subject to direct U.S. regulation. In addition, as discussed above, REAL and Renaissance Trading are involved in certain commodities trading activities relating to weather, natural gas, heating oil, power, crude oil, agricultural commodities and cross-commodity structures. While REAL's and Renaissance Trading's operations currently are not subject to significant federal oversight, we are monitoring carefully new or revised legislation or regulation in the U.S. or otherwise, which could increase the regulatory burden and operating expenses of these operations. For example, certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will establish greater oversight over derivatives trading and could restrict the Company's trading activities.
Bermuda Regulation
All Bermuda companies must comply with the provisions of the Companies Act 1981. In addition, the Insurance Act 1978, and related regulations (the "Insurance Act"), regulate the business of our Bermuda insurance, reinsurance and management company subsidiaries.
As a holding company, RenaissanceRe is not currently subject to the Insurance Act. However, the Insurance Act regulates the insurance and reinsurance business of our operating insurance companies. The Company's most significant operating subsidiaries include Renaissance Reinsurance and DaVinci which are registered as Class 4 general business insurers and Glencoe and Top Layer Re which are registered as Class 3A general business insurers under the Insurance Act. The Company also has operating subsidiaries registered as SPIs under the Insurance Act, including most recently, Upsilon Re II, Tim Re III and Upsilon Re. RUM and RenaissanceRe Underwriting Management Ltd. are each registered as insurance managers under the Insurance Act.
The Insurance Act imposes solvency and liquidity standards as well as auditing and reporting requirements and confers on the Bermuda Monetary Authority ("BMA") powers to supervise, investigate and intervene in the affairs of insurance companies. Significant requirements of the Insurance Act include the appointment of an independent auditor and loss reserve specialist (both of whom must be approved by the BMA), the filing of an annual financial return and provisions relating to the payment of distributions and dividends. In particular:
| |
• | Class 3A and Class 4 general business insurers are required to submit annual statutory financial statements as part of its statutory financial return no later than four months after the insurer's financial year end (unless specifically extended). The annual statutory financial statements give detailed information and analyses regarding premiums, claims, reinsurance, reserves and investments. The statutory financial return includes, among other items: a report of the approved independent auditor on the statutory financial statements; a declaration of statutory ratios; a solvency certificate; the statutory financial statements themselves; the opinion of the approved loss reserve specialist; and details concerning ceded reinsurance. |
| |
• | In addition to preparing statutory financial statements, all Class 3A and Class 4 insurers must prepare financial statements in respect of their insurance business in accordance with GAAP or International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS"). |
| |
• | A general business insurer's statutory assets must exceed its statutory liabilities by an amount, equal to or greater than the prescribed minimum solvency margin, which varies with the category of its registration and net premiums written and loss reserves posted ("Minimum Solvency Margin"). The Minimum Solvency Margin that must be maintained by a Class 4 insurer is the greater of (i) $100.0 million, or (ii) 50% of net premiums written (with a credit for reinsurance ceded not exceeding 25% of gross premiums) or (iii) 15% of net discounted aggregate loss and loss expense provisions and other insurance reserves. The Minimum Solvency Margin for a Class 3A insurer is the greater of (i) $1.0 million, or (ii) 20% of the first $6.0 million of net premiums written; if in excess of $6.0 million, the figure is $1.2 million plus 15% of net premiums written in excess of $6.0 million, or (iii) 15% of net discounted aggregate loss and loss expense provisions and other insurance reserves. |
| |
• | In addition, each Class 3A and Class 4 insurer must maintain its capital at a level equal to its enhanced capital requirement ("ECR") which is established by reference to the Bermuda Solvency Capital Requirement ("BSCR") model. Alternatively, under the Insurance Act, insurers may, subject to the terms of the Insurance Act and to the BMA's oversight, elect to utilize an approved internal capital model to determine regulatory capital. In either case, the ECR shall at all times equal or exceed the respective Class 3A and Class 4 insurer's Minimum Solvency Margin and may be adjusted in circumstances where the BMA concludes that the insurer's risk profile deviates significantly from the assumptions underlying its ECR or the insurer's assessment of its risk management policies and practices used to calculate the ECR applicable to it. While not specifically referred to in the Insurance Act, the BMA has also established a target capital level ("TCL") for each Class 3A and Class 4 insurer equal to 120% of the respective ECR. While a Class 3A and Class 4 insurer is not currently required to maintain its statutory capital and surplus at this level, the TCL serves as an early warning tool for the BMA and failure to maintain statutory capital at least equal to the TCL will likely result in increased BMA regulatory oversight. |
| |
• | An insurer engaged in general business is required to maintain the value of its relevant assets at not less than 75% of the amount of its relevant liabilities ("Minimum Liquidity Ratio"). |
| |
• | Both Class 3A and Class 4 insurers are prohibited from declaring or paying any dividends if in breach of the required Minimum Solvency Margin or Minimum Liquidity Ratio (the "Relevant Margins") or if the declaration or payment of such dividend would cause the insurer to fail to meet the Relevant Margins. Further, a Class 4 insurer is prohibited from declaring or paying in any financial year dividends of more than 25% of its total statutory capital and surplus (as shown on its previous financial year's statutory balance sheet) unless it files (at least seven days before payment of such dividends) with the BMA an affidavit stating that it will continue to meet its Relevant Margins. Class 3A and Class 4 insurers must obtain the BMA's prior approval for a reduction by 15% or more of the total statutory capital as set forth in its previous year's financial statements. These restrictions on declaring or paying dividends and distributions under the Insurance Act are in addition to the solvency requirements under the Companies Act which apply to all Bermuda companies. |
| |
• | Unlike other (re)insurers, SPIs are fully funded to meet their (re)insurance obligations and are not exposed to insolvency, therefore the application and supervision processes are streamlined to facilitate the transparent structure. Further, SPIs are exempt from filing annual loss reserve specialist opinions and the BMA has the discretion to modify such insurer's accounting requirements under the Insurance Act. Like other (re)insurers, the principal representative of an SPI has a duty to inform the BMA in relation to solvency matters, where applicable. |
| |
• | The BMA maintains supervision over the controllers (as defined herein) of all Bermuda registered insurers. Currently the Insurance Act states that no person shall become a controller of any description of a registered insurer unless he has first served the BMA notice in writing stating that he intends to become such a controller. A controller includes the managing director and chief executive of the registered insurer or its parent company; a 10%, 20%, 33% or 50% shareholder controller; and any person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the registered insurer or of its parent company are accustomed to act. In addition, all Bermuda insurers are also required to give the BMA written notice of the fact that a person has become, or ceased to be, a controller or officer of the registered insurer within 45 days of becoming aware of such fact. An officer in relation to a registered insurer includes a director, secretary, chief executive or senior executive by whatever name called. |
| |
• | All registered insurers are required to give the BMA 14 days' notice of certain matters that are likely to be of material significance (each a "Material Change") to the BMA in carrying out its supervisory function under the Insurance Act. |
| |
• | All Bermuda insurers are required to comply with the BMA's Insurance Code of Conduct which establishes duties, requirements and standards to be complied with to ensure each insurer implements sound corporate governance, risk management and internal controls. Failure to comply with these requirements will be a factor taken into account by the BMA in determining whether an insurer is conducting its business in a sound and prudent manner under the Insurance Act. |
| |
• | Pursuant to the Insurance Act, the BMA acts as the group supervisor of the RenaissanceRe group of companies (the "RenaissanceRe Group") and it has designated Renaissance Reinsurance to be the "designated insurer" in respect of the RenaissanceRe Group. The designated insurer is required to ensure that the RenaissanceRe Group complies with the provisions of the Insurance Act pertaining to groups and all related group solvency and group supervision rules (together, the "Group Rules"). Under the Group Rules, the RenaissanceRe Group is required to annually prepare and submit to the BMA group GAAP financial statements, a group statutory financial return and a group capital and solvency return. Further, our Board of Directors has established solvency self assessment procedures for the RenaissanceRe Group that factor in all foreseeable material risks; Renaissance Reinsurance must ensure that the RenaissanceRe Group's assets exceed the amount of the RenaissanceRe Group's liabilities by the aggregate minimum margin of solvency of each qualifying member; and our Board of Directors has established and effectively implement corporate governance policies and procedures to ensure they support the overall organizational strategy of the RenaissanceRe Group. In addition, the RenaissanceRe Group is required to prepare and submit a quarterly financial return comprising unaudited group statutory financial statements, a schedule of intra-group transactions and a schedule of risk concentrations. |
| |
• | The BMA has certain powers of investigation and intervention relating to insurers and their holding companies, subsidiaries and other affiliates, which it may exercise in the interest of such insurer's policyholders or if there is any risk of insolvency or of a breach of the Insurance Act or the insurer's license conditions. |
| |
• | Under the provisions of the Insurance Act, the BMA may, from time to time, conduct "on site" visits at the offices of insurers it regulates. Over the past several years the BMA has conducted several "on site" reviews in respect of our Bermuda-domiciled operating insurers. No remedial actions were communicated to us as a result of any of the on-site reviews to date. |
| |
• | The BMA may cancel an insurer's registration on certain grounds specified in the Insurance Act. |
Given the delays announced in late 2012 in respect of the implementation timetable related to Solvency II, as discussed below, the BMA has indicated that it will remain committed to the regulatory equivalence process in relation to Solvency II for Bermuda's commercial insurance sector. However, the BMA has noted that its overall adoption of progressive, risk-based supervision will go beyond this single regulatory initiative. The BMA has expressed its desire to implement changes to Bermuda's regulatory regime on a schedule that enables Bermuda's (re)insurers to transition to enhanced requirements on a phased basis where appropriate.
Under current Bermuda law, the Company is not subject to any tax computed on profits or income or computed on any capital asset, gain or appreciation. The Company has been exempted from any such tax until March 2035 pursuant to the Bermuda Exempted Undertakings Tax Protection Act of 1966.
U.K. Regulation
Lloyd's Regulation
General. The operations of RSML are franchised by Lloyd's. The Lloyd's Franchise Board was formally constituted on January 1, 2003. The Franchise Board establishes guidelines and operates a business planning and monitoring process for all Lloyd's syndicates. RSML's business plan for Syndicate 1458 requires annual approval by the Lloyd's Franchise Board including maximum underwriting capacity. The Lloyd's Franchise Board may require changes to any business plan presented to it or additional capital to be provided to support the underwriting plan. Lloyd's also imposes various charges and assessments on its members. If material changes in the business plan for Syndicate 1458 were required by the Lloyd's Franchise Board, or if charges and assessments payable to Lloyd's by RenaissanceRe CCL were to increase significantly, these events could have an adverse effect on the operations and financial results of RSML. The Company has deposited certain assets with Lloyd's to support RenaissanceRe CCL's underwriting business at Lloyd's. Dividends from a Lloyd's managing agent and a Lloyd's corporate member can be declared and paid provided the relevant company has sufficient profits available for distribution.
By entering into a membership agreement with Lloyd's, RenaissanceRe CCL has undertaken to comply with all Lloyd's bye-laws and regulations as well as the provisions of the Lloyd's Acts and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (the "FSMA") that are applicable to it.
Capital Requirements. Capital is supplied on the basis of an annual venture, with continuing support from capital providers and the members of Lloyd's, and requires affirmation each year. The underwriting capacity of a member of Lloyd's must be supported by providing a deposit (referred to as "Funds at Lloyd's") in the form of cash, securities or letters of credit in an amount determined under the Individual Capital Adequacy regime of the U.K.'s Financial Services Authority (the "FSA"). The amount of such deposit is calculated for each member through the completion of an annual capital adequacy exercise. Under these requirements, Lloyd's must demonstrate that each member has sufficient assets to meet its underwriting liabilities plus a required solvency margin.
Restrictions. A Reinsurance to Close ("RITC") generally is put in place after the third year of operations of a syndicate year of account. On successful conclusion of a RITC, any profit from the syndicate's operations for that year of account can be remitted by the managing agent to the syndicate's members. If the syndicate's managing agency concludes that an appropriate RITC cannot be determined or negotiated on commercially acceptable terms in respect of a particular underwriting year, it must determine that the underwriting year remain open and be placed into run-off. During this period there cannot be a release of the Funds at Lloyd's of a member of that syndicate without the consent of Lloyd's and such consent will only be considered where the member has surplus Funds at Lloyd's over and above the capital requirement.
The financial security of the Lloyd's market is regularly assessed by three independent rating agencies (A.M. Best, S&P and Fitch). A satisfactory credit rating issued by an accredited rating agency is necessary for Lloyd's syndicates to be able to trade in certain classes of business at current levels. RSML and RenaissanceRe CCL would be adversely affected if Lloyd's current ratings were downgraded.
Intervention Powers. The Council of Lloyd's has wide discretionary powers to regulate members' underwriting at Lloyd's. It may, for instance, change the basis on which syndicate expenses are allocated or vary the Funds at Lloyd's requirements or the investment criteria applicable to the provision of Funds at Lloyd's. Exercising any of these powers might affect the return on the corporate member's participation in a given underwriting year. If a member of Lloyd's is unable to pay its debts to policyholders, the member may obtain financial assistance from the Lloyd's Central Fund, which in many respects acts as an equivalent to a state guaranty fund in the U.S. If Lloyd's determines that the Central Fund needs to be increased, it has the power to assess premium levies on current Lloyd's members. The Council of Lloyd's has discretion to call or assess up to 3% of a member's underwriting capacity in any one year as a Central Fund contribution.
Lloyd's approval is also required before any person can acquire control (as defined below in relation to the FSMA and giving prior notification to the FSA) of a Lloyd's managing agent or Lloyd's corporate member.
FSA Regulation
The FSA currently has ultimate responsibility for the regulation of the Lloyd's market and has substantial powers of intervention in relation to Lloyd's managing agents, such as RSML, including the power to remove an agent's authorization to manage Lloyd's syndicates. In addition, each year the FSA requires Lloyd's to satisfy an annual solvency test which measures whether Lloyd's has sufficient assets in the aggregate to meet all outstanding liabilities of its members, both current and run-off. If Lloyd's fails this test, the FSA may require the entire Lloyd's market to cease underwriting or individual Lloyd's members may be required to cease or reduce their underwriting.
Lloyd's as a whole is authorized by the FSA and is required to implement certain rules prescribed by the FSA; such rules are to be implemented by Lloyd's pursuant to its powers under the Lloyd's Act 1982 relating to the operation of the Lloyd's market. Lloyd's prescribes, in respect of its managing agents and corporate members, certain minimum standards relating to their management and control, solvency and various other requirements. The FSA directly monitors Lloyd's managing agents' compliance with the systems and controls prescribed by Lloyd's. If it appears to the FSA that either Lloyd's is not fulfilling its delegated regulatory responsibilities or that managing agents are not complying with the applicable regulatory rules and guidance, the FSA may intervene at its discretion. Future regulatory changes or rulings by the FSA could impact RSML's business strategy or financial assumptions, possibly resulting in an adverse effect on RSML's financial condition and operating results.
Regulatory Reform in the UK
The Financial Services Act 2012 will become effective on April 1, 2013. By amending the FSMA and the Banking Act 2009 the Financial Services Act will implement the UK's new "twin peaks" regulatory structure. Regulatory responsibility for insurance undertakings in the UK will pass from the FSA to two new bodies, the Prudential Regulation Authority ("PRA") and the Financial Conduct Authority ("FCA") from April 1, 2013. It is expected that Lloyd's will operate pursuant to a similar delegation of regulatory authority from these two bodies as currently granted by the FSA. However, there is still some uncertainty over how this change to the regulatory architecture in the U.K. will affect operations at Lloyd's.
Change of Control. The FSA currently regulates the acquisition of control of any Lloyd's managing agent which is authorized under the FSMA. Any company or individual that, together with its or his associates, directly or indirectly acquires 10% or more of the shares in a Lloyd's managing agent or its parent company, or is entitled to exercise or control the exercise of 10% or more of the voting power in such Lloyd's managing agent or its parent company, would be considered to have acquired control for the purposes of the relevant legislation, as would a person who had significant influence over the management of such Lloyd's managing agent or its parent company by virtue of his shareholding or voting power in either. A purchaser of 10% or more of RenaissanceRe's common shares or voting power would therefore be considered to have acquired control of RSML. Under the FSMA, any person or entity proposing to acquire control over a Lloyd's managing agent must give prior notification to the FSA of his or the entity's intention to do so. The FSA would then have sixty working days to consider the application to acquire control. Failure to make the relevant prior application could result in action being taken against RSML by the FSA. Lloyd's approval is also required before any person can acquire control (using the same definition as for the FSA) of a Lloyd's managing agent or Lloyd's corporate member.
Other Applicable Laws. Lloyd's worldwide insurance and reinsurance business is subject to various regulations, laws, treaties and other applicable policies of the EU, as well as of each nation, state and locality in which it operates. Material changes in governmental requirements and laws could have an adverse affect on Lloyd's and its member companies, including RSML and RenaissanceRe CCL.
Solvency II
Solvency II was adopted by the European Parliament in April of 2009. The timing for the implementation of Solvency II in European Member States by the European Commission ("EC"), previously scheduled for January 1, 2014 is expected to be delayed as the time frame appears unachievable. Lloyd's Solvency II implementation plans are designed to facilitate a January 1, 2016 implementation date, however Lloyd's has noted to its managing agents that this a planning assumption only and is subject to change as further clarification from the EC emerges. Upon its adoption, Solvency II will replace the current solvency requirements and implement a risk-based approach to insurance regulation. Its principal goals are to improve the correlation between capital and risk, effect group supervision of insurance and reinsurance affiliates, implement a uniform capital adequacy structure for (re)insurers across the EU Member States, establish consistent corporate governance standards for insurance and reinsurance companies, and establish transparency through standard reporting of insurance
operations. Under Solvency II, an insurer's or reinsurer's capital adequacy in relation to various insurance and business risks may be measured with an internal model developed by the insurer or reinsurer and approved for use by the Member State's regulator or pursuant to a standard formula developed by the European Commission. Lloyd's requires all managing agents to develop internal models for the syndicate they manage. The 2013 capital requirement for Syndicate 1458 was based on RSML's internal model in line with this process. We continue to monitor the ongoing legislative and regulatory steps in relation to the adoption of Solvency II.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND CLIMATE CHANGE MATTERS
Our principal coverages and services relate to natural disasters and catastrophes, such as earthquakes and hurricanes. We believe, and believe the consensus view of current scientific studies substantiates, that changes in climate conditions, primarily global temperatures and expected sea levels are likely to increase the severity, and possibly the frequency, of weather related natural disasters and catastrophes relative to the historical experience over the past 100 years. Coupled with currently projected demographic trends in catastrophe-exposed regions, we currently estimate that this expected increase in severe weather, such as tropical cyclone intensity, over coming periods will increase the average economic value of expected losses, increase the number of people exposed per year to natural disasters and in general exacerbate disaster risk, including risks to infrastructure, global supply chains and agricultural production.
Accordingly, we currently estimate that these trends will increase the risk of claims arising from our property and casualty lines of business, particularly with respect to properties located in coastal areas, among others. While a substantial portion of our coverages may be adversely impacted by climate change, we have taken certain measures, to the extent permissible by law and prevailing market conditions, to mitigate against such losses by giving consideration to these risks in our underwriting decisions. We seek to continuously monitor and adjust, as we believe appropriate, our risk management models to reflect our judgment of how to interpret current developments and information such as the studies referred to above. However, it is possible that, even after these assessments, we will have underestimated the frequency or severity of tropical cyclones or of other catastrophes. To the extent broad environmental factors, exacerbated by climate change or otherwise, lead to increases in insured losses, particularly if those losses exceed expectations and the prior estimates of market participants, regulators or other stakeholders, the markets and clients we serve may be disrupted and adversely impacted, and we may be adversely affected, directly or indirectly. Further, certain of our investments such as catastrophe-linked securities and property catastrophe managed joint ventures related to hurricane coverage, could also be adversely impacted by climate change.
An increasing number of federal, state, local and foreign government requirements and international agreements apply to environmental and climate change, in particular by seeking to limit or penalize the discharge of materials such as greenhouse gas ("GHG") into the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. Although our operations are characterized by a small number of professional office facilities, and we have not been directly, materially impacted by these changes to date, it is our policy to monitor and seek to ensure compliance with these requirements, as applicable. We believe that, as a general matter, our policies, practices and procedures are properly designed to identify and manage environmental and climate-related risks, particularly the risks of potential financial liability in connection with our reinsurance, insurance and trading businesses. However, we believe that some risk of environmental damage is inherent in respect of any commercial operation, and may increase for us if our business continues to expand and diversify by investments which we have made or may make through REAL or other subsidiaries. For example, our weather and energy risk management operations and our customers of such services could be impacted by climate change and increased GHG regulation. Likewise, certain of our investments may also be adversely affected by climate change and increased governmental regulation of, or international agreements pertaining to, GHG emissions. Moreover, our evaluation may be flawed or may reflect inaccurate or incomplete information, and it is possible our exposure to climate change or other environmental risks is greater than we have currently estimated.
At this time, we do not believe that any existing or currently pending climate change legislation, regulation, or international treaty or accord known to us would be reasonably likely to have a material effect in the foreseeable future on our business or on our results of operations, capital expenditures or financial position. However, it is possible that future developments, such as increasingly strict environmental laws and standards and enforcement policies, could give rise to more severe exposure, more costly compliance requirements, or otherwise bring into question our current policies and practices. In addition, it is possible that state insurance regulation could impact the ability of our customers, or of the Company, to manage property exposures in areas vulnerable to significant climate-driven losses. For example, if our customers or
operations are unable to utilize actuarially sound, risk-based pricing, to modify policy terms if necessary to reflect changes in the underlying risks, or to otherwise manage exposures appropriately to reflect the risk of increased loss from both large scale natural catastrophes and smaller scale weather events, our markets, customers, or our own financial results may all be adversely affected. We will continue to monitor emerging developments in this area.
GLOSSARY OF SELECTED INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE TERMS |
| |
Accident year | Year of occurrence of a loss. Claim payments and reserves for claims and claim expenses are allocated to the year in which the loss occurred for losses occurring contracts and in the year the loss was reported for claims made contracts. |
|
| |
Acquisition expenses | The aggregate expenses incurred by a company for acquiring new business, including commissions, underwriting expenses, premium taxes and administrative expenses. |
|
| |
Additional case reserves | Additional case reserves represent management's estimate of reserves for claims and claim expenses that are allocated to specific contracts, less paid and reported losses by the client. |
|
| |
Attachment point | The dollar amount of loss (per occurrence or in the aggregate, as the case may be) above which excess of loss reinsurance becomes operative. |
|
| |
Bordereau | A report providing premium or loss data with respect to identified specific risks. This report is periodically furnished to a reinsurer by the ceding insurers or reinsurers. |
|
| |
Bound | A (re)insurance policy is considered bound, and the (re)insurer responsible for the risks of the policy, when both parties agree to the terms and conditions set forth in the policy. |
|
| |
Broker | An intermediary who negotiates contracts of insurance or reinsurance, receiving a commission for placement and other services rendered, between (1) a policy holder and a primary insurer, on behalf of the insured party, (2) a primary insurer and reinsurer, on behalf of the primary insurer, or (3) a reinsurer and a retrocessionaire, on behalf of the reinsurer. |
|
| |
Capacity | The percentage of surplus, or the dollar amount of exposure, that an insurer or reinsurer is willing or able to place at risk. Capacity may apply to a single risk, a program, a line of business or an entire book of business. Capacity may be constrained by legal restrictions, corporate restrictions or indirect restrictions. |
|
| |
Case reserves | Loss reserves, established with respect to specific, individual reported claims. |
|
| |
Casualty insurance or reinsurance | Insurance or reinsurance that is primarily concerned with the losses caused by injuries to third persons and their property (in other words, persons other than the policyholder) and the legal liability imposed on the insured resulting there from. Also referred to as liability insurance. |
|
| |
Catastrophe | A severe loss, typically involving multiple claimants. Common perils include earthquakes, hurricanes, hailstorms, severe winter weather, floods, fires, tornadoes, explosions and other natural or man-made disasters. Catastrophe losses may also arise from acts of war, acts of terrorism and political instability. |
|
| |
Catastrophe excess of loss reinsurance | A form of excess of loss reinsurance that, subject to a specified limit, indemnifies the ceding company for the amount of loss in excess of a specified retention with respect to an accumulation of losses resulting from a "catastrophe." |
|
| |
Catastrophe-linked securities; cat-linked securities | Cat-linked securities are generally privately placed fixed income securities where all or a portion of the repayment of the principal is linked to catastrophic events. This includes securities where the repayment is linked to the occurrence and/or size of, for example, one or more hurricanes or earthquakes, or insured industry losses associated with these catastrophic events. |
|
| |
Cede; cedant; ceding company | When a party reinsures its liability with another, it "cedes" business and is referred to as the "cedant" or "ceding company." |
|
| |
Claim | Request by an insured or reinsured for indemnification by an insurance company or a reinsurance company for losses incurred from an insured peril or event. |
|
| |
Claims made contracts | Contracts that cover claims for losses occurring during a specified period that are reported during the term of the contract. |
|
| |
Claims and claim expense ratio, net | The ratio of net claims and claim expenses to net premiums earned determined in accordance with either statutory accounting principles or GAAP. |
|
| |
Claim reserves | Liabilities established by insurers and reinsurers to reflect the estimated costs of claim payments and the related expenses that the insurer or reinsurer will ultimately be required to pay in respect of insurance or reinsurance policies it has issued. Claims reserves consist of case reserves, established with respect to individual reported claims, additional case reserves and "IBNR" reserves. For reinsurers, loss expense reserves are generally not significant because substantially all of the loss expenses associated with particular claims are incurred by the primary insurer and reported to reinsurers as losses. |
|
| |
Combined ratio | The combined ratio is the sum of the net claims and claim expense ratio and the underwriting expense ratio. A combined ratio below 100% generally indicates profitable underwriting prior to the consideration of investment income. A combined ratio over 100% generally indicates unprofitable underwriting prior to the consideration of investment income. |
|
| |
Decadal | Refers to events occurring over a 10-year period, such as an oscillation whose period is roughly 10 years. |
|
| |
Excess and surplus lines reinsurance | Any type of coverage that cannot be placed with an insurer admitted to do business in a certain jurisdiction. Risks placed in excess and surplus lines markets are often substandard as respects adverse loss experience, unusual, or unable to be placed in conventional markets due to a shortage of capacity. |
|
| |
Excess of loss | Reinsurance or insurance that indemnifies the reinsured or insured against all or a specified portion of losses on underlying insurance policies in excess of a specified amount, which is called a "level" or "retention." Also known as non-proportional reinsurance. Excess of loss reinsurance is written in layers. A reinsurer or group of reinsurers accepts a layer of coverage up to a specified amount. The total coverage purchased by the cedant is referred to as a "program" and will typically be placed with predetermined reinsurers in pre-negotiated layers. Any liability exceeding the outer limit of the program reverts to the ceding company, which also bears the credit risk of a reinsurer's insolvency. |
|
| |
Exclusions | Those risk, perils, or classes of insurance with respect to which the reinsurer will not pay loss or provide reinsurance, notwithstanding the other terms and conditions of reinsurance. |
|
| |
Expense override | An amount paid to a ceding company in addition to the acquisition cost to compensate for overhead expenses. |
|
| |
Frequency | The number of claims occurring during a given coverage period. |
|
| |
Funds at Lloyd's | Funds of an approved form that are lodged and held in trust at Lloyd's as security for a member's underwriting activities. They comprise the members' deposit, personal reserve fund and special reserve fund and may be drawn down in the event that the member's syndicate level premium trust funds are insufficient to cover his liabilities. The amount of the deposit is related to the member's premium income limit and also the nature of the underwriting account. |
|
| |
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States ("GAAP") | Accounting principles as set forth in opinions of the Accounting Principles Board of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and/or statements of the Financial Accounting Standards Board and/or their respective successors and which are applicable in the circumstances as of the date in question. |
|
| |
Gross premiums written | Total premiums for insurance written and assumed reinsurance during a given period. |
|
| |
Incurred but not reported ("IBNR") | Reserves for estimated losses that have been incurred by insureds and reinsureds but not yet reported to the insurer or reinsurer, including unknown future developments on losses that are known to the insurer or reinsurer. |
|
| |
Insurance-linked securities | Financial instruments whose values are driven by (re)insurance loss events. For the Company, insurance-linked securities are generally linked to property losses due to natural catastrophes. |
|
| |
International Financial Reporting Standards ("IFRS") | Accounting principles, standards and interpretations as set forth in opinions of the International Accounting Standards Board which are applicable in the circumstances as of the date in question. |
|
| |
Layer | The interval between the retention or attachment point and the maximum limit of indemnity for which a reinsurer is responsible. |
|
| |
Line | The amount of excess of loss reinsurance protection provided to an insurer or another reinsurer, often referred to as limit. |
|
| |
Line of business | The general classification of insurance written by insurers and reinsurers, e.g. fire, allied lines, homeowners and surety, among others. |
|
| |
Lloyd's | Depending on the context this term may refer to (a) the society of individual and corporate underwriting members that insure and reinsure risks as members of one or more syndicates (i.e., Lloyd's is not an insurance company); (b) the underwriting room in the Lloyd's building in which managing agents underwrite insurance and reinsurance on behalf of their syndicate members (in this sense Lloyd's should be understood as a market place); or (c) the Corporation of Lloyd's which regulates and provides support services to the Lloyd's market. |
|
| |
Loss; losses | An occurrence that is the basis for submission and/or payment of a claim. Whether losses are covered, limited or excluded from coverage is dependent on the terms of the policy. |
|
| |
Loss reserve | For an individual loss, an estimate of the amount the insurer expects to pay for the reported claim. For total losses, estimates of expected payments for reported and unreported claims. These may include amounts for claims expenses. |
|
| |
Managing agent | An underwriting agent which has permission from Lloyd's to manage a syndicate and carry on underwriting and other functions for a member. |
|
| |
Net claims and claim expenses | The expenses of settling claims, net of recoveries, including legal and other fees and the portion of general expenses allocated to claim settlement costs (also known as claim adjustment expenses or loss adjustment expenses) plus losses incurred with respect to net claims. |
|
| |
Net claims and claim expense ratio | Net claims and claim expenses incurred expressed as a percentage of net earned premiums. |
|
| |
Net premiums earned | The portion of net premiums written during or prior to a given period that was actually recognized as income during such period. |
|
| |
Net premiums written | Gross premiums written for a given period less premiums ceded to reinsurers and retrocessionaires during such period. |
|
| |
Non-proportional reinsurance | See "Excess of loss." |
|
| |
Perils | This term refers to the causes of possible loss in the property field, such as fire, windstorm, collision, hail, etc. In the casualty field, the term "hazard" is more frequently used. |
|
| |
Profit commission | A provision found in some reinsurance agreements that provides for profit sharing. Parties agree to a formula for calculating profit, an allowance for the reinsurer's expenses, and the cedant's share of such profit after expenses. |
|
| |
Property insurance or reinsurance | Insurance or reinsurance that provides coverage to a person with an insurable interest in tangible property for that person's property loss, damage or loss of use. |
|
| |
Property per risk | Reinsurance on a treaty basis of individual property risks insured by a ceding company. |
|
| |
Proportional reinsurance | A generic term describing all forms of reinsurance in which the reinsurer shares a proportional part of the original premiums and losses of the reinsured. (Also known as pro-rata reinsurance, quota share reinsurance or participating reinsurance.) In proportional reinsurance the reinsurer generally pays the ceding company a ceding commission. The ceding commission generally is based on the ceding company's cost of acquiring the business being reinsured (including commissions, premium taxes, assessments and miscellaneous administrative expense) and also may include a profit factor. See also "Quota Share Reinsurance". |
|
| |
Quota share reinsurance | A form of proportional reinsurance in which the reinsurer assumes an agreed percentage of each insurance policy being reinsured and shares all premiums and losses according with the reinsured. See also "Proportional Reinsurance". |
|
| |
Reinstatement premium | The premium charged for the restoration of the reinsurance limit of a catastrophe contract to its full amount after payment by the reinsurer of losses as a result of an occurrence. |
|
| |
Reinsurance | An arrangement in which an insurance company, the reinsurer, agrees to indemnify another insurance or reinsurance company, the ceding company, against all or a portion of the insurance or reinsurance risks underwritten by the ceding company under one or more policies. Reinsurance can provide a ceding company with several benefits, including a reduction in net liability on insurances and catastrophe protection from large or multiple losses. Reinsurance also provides a ceding company with additional underwriting capacity by permitting it to accept larger risks and write more business than would be possible without an equivalent increase in capital and surplus, and facilitates the maintenance of acceptable financial ratios by the ceding company. Reinsurance does not legally discharge the primary insurer from its liability with respect to its obligations to the insured. |
|
| |
Reinsurance to Close | Also referred to as a RITC, it is a contract to transfer the responsibility for discharging all the liabilities that attach to one year of account of a syndicate into a later year of account of the same or different syndicate in return for a premium. |
|
| |
Retention | The amount or portion of risk that an insurer retains for its own account. Losses in excess of the retention level are paid by the reinsurer. In proportional treaties, the retention may be a percentage of the original policy's limit. In excess of loss business, the retention is a dollar amount of loss, a loss ratio or a percentage. |
|
| |
Retrocedant | A reinsurer who cedes all or a portion of its assumed insurance to another reinsurer. |
|
| |
Retrocessional reinsurance; Retrocessionaire | A transaction whereby a reinsurer cedes to another reinsurer, the retrocessionaire, all or part of the reinsurance that the first reinsurer has assumed. Retrocessional reinsurance does not legally discharge the ceding reinsurer from its liability with respect to its obligations to the reinsured. Reinsurance companies cede risks to retrocessionaires for reasons similar to those that cause primary insurers to purchase reinsurance: to reduce net liability on insurances, to protect against catastrophic losses, to stabilize financial ratios and to obtain additional underwriting capacity. |
|
| |
Risks | A term used to denote the physical units of property at risk or the object of insurance protection that are not perils or hazards. Also defined as chance of loss or uncertainty of loss. |
|
| |
Risks attaching contracts | Contracts that cover claims that arise on underlying insurance policies that incept during the term of the reinsurance contract. |
|
| |
Solvency II | A proposed set of regulatory requirements that would codify and harmonize the EU insurance and reinsurance regulation. Among other things, these requirements would impact the amount of capital that EU insurance and reinsurance companies would be required to hold. Solvency II was scheduled to come into effect on January 1, 2014, however this is expected to be delayed until at least January 1, 2016. |
|
| |
Specialty lines | Lines of insurance and reinsurance that provide coverage for risks that are often unusual or difficult to place and do not fit the underwriting criteria of standard commercial products carriers. |
|
| |
Statutory accounting principles | Recording transactions and preparing financial statements in accordance with the rules and procedures prescribed or permitted by Bermuda, U.S. state insurance regulatory authorities including the NAIC and/or in accordance with Lloyd's specific principles, all of which generally reflect a liquidating, rather than going concern, concept of accounting. |
|
| |
Stop loss | A form of reinsurance under which the reinsurer pays some or all of a cedant's aggregate retained losses in excess of a predetermined dollar amount or in excess of a percentage of premium. |
|
| |
Submission | An unprocessed application for (i) insurance coverage forwarded to a primary insurer by a prospective policyholder or by a broker on behalf of such prospective policyholder, (ii) reinsurance coverage forwarded to a reinsurer by a prospective ceding insurer or by a broker or intermediary on behalf of such prospective ceding insurer or (iii) retrocessional coverage forwarded to a retrocessionaire by a prospective ceding reinsurer or by a broker or intermediary on behalf of such prospective ceding reinsurer. |
|
| |
Syndicate | A member or group of members underwriting (re)insurance business at Lloyd's through the agency of a managing agent or substitute agent to which a syndicate number is assigned. |
|
| |
Treaty | A reinsurance agreement covering a book or class of business that is automatically accepted on a bulk basis by a reinsurer. A treaty contains common contract terms along with a specific risk definition, data on limit and retention, and provisions for premium and duration. |
|
| |
Underwriting | The insurer's or reinsurer's process of reviewing applications submitted for insurance coverage, deciding whether to accept all or part of the coverage requested and determining the applicable premiums. |
|
| |
Underwriting capacity | The maximum amount that an insurance company can underwrite. The limit is generally determined by a company's retained earnings and investment capital. Reinsurance serves to increase a company's underwriting capacity by reducing its exposure from particular risks. |
|
| |
Underwriting expense ratio | The ratio of the sum of the acquisition expenses and operational expenses to net premiums earned. |
|
| |
Underwriting expenses | The aggregate of policy acquisition costs, including commissions, and the portion of administrative, general and other expenses attributable to underwriting operations. |
|
| |
Unearned premium | The portion of premiums written representing the unexpired portions of the policies or contracts that the insurer or reinsurer has on its books as of a certain date. |
AVAILABLE INFORMATION
We maintain a website at http://www.renre.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K.
We make available, free of charge through our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). We also make available, free of charge from our website, our Audit Committee Charter, Compensation/Governance Committee Charter, Corporate Governance Guidelines, and Code of Ethics. Such information is also available in print for any shareholder who sends a request to RenaissanceRe Holdings Ltd., Attn: Office of the Corporate Secretary, P.O. Box HM 2527, Hamilton, HMGX, Bermuda. Reports filed with the SEC may also be viewed or obtained at the SEC Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549. Information on the operation of the SEC Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, including the Company, that file electronically with the SEC. The address of the SEC's website is http://www.sec.gov.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-K and other documents we file with the SEC include the following:
Risks Related to Our Company
Our exposure to catastrophic events and other exposures that we cover could cause our financial results to vary significantly from one period to the next.
Our largest product based on total gross premiums written is property catastrophe reinsurance. We also sell lines of specialty reinsurance products and insurance products that are exposed to catastrophe risk. We therefore have a large overall exposure to natural and man-made disasters, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, winter storms, freezes, floods, fires, tornados, hailstorms, drought and other natural or man-made disasters, such as acts of terrorism. Our relative exposure to catastrophe risk has recently increased, including as a result of the sale of substantially all of our U.S.-based insurance operations in early 2011, which diminished the diversification of our exposure to non-catastrophe perils to a degree. As a result, our operating results have historically been, and we expect will continue to be, significantly affected by relatively few events of a large magnitude.
We expect claims from catastrophic events to cause substantial volatility in our financial results for any fiscal quarter or year; moreover, catastrophic claims could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Our ability to write new business could also be affected. We believe that factors including increases in the value and geographic concentration of insured property, particularly along coastal regions, the increasing risk of extreme weather events reflecting changes in climate and ocean temperatures, and the effects of inflation may continue to increase the severity of claims from catastrophic events in the future.
From time to time, we expect to have greater exposures in one or more specific geographic areas than our overall share of the worldwide market would otherwise suggest. Accordingly, when and if catastrophes occur in these areas, we may experience relatively more severe net negative impacts from such events than our competitors. In particular, we have historically had a relatively large percentage of our coverage exposures concentrated in the U.S. southeast, and may develop other significant exposures in catastrophe-exposed zones in the future.
Through Renaissance Trading and REAL, we sell certain financial products primarily to address weather risks, and engage in certain weather, energy and commodity derivatives trading activities. The trading markets for these derivatives are generally linked to energy and agriculture commodities, weather and other natural phenomena. The results from these activities have been, and we expect will continue to be, subject to volatility, both potentially as a result of the occurrence or non-occurrence of the event or events which might trigger counterparty payments under these contracts, and as a result of the potential for variance in the reportable fair value of these contracts between periods as a result of a wide number of potential factors. While we seek to purchase financial protection for a portion of REAL's exposures, we cannot assure you we will succeed in doing so, or in monitoring the protections in place, or that these instruments will perform as we expect. It is possible that our exposures through Renaissance Trading and REAL are more volatile, or more correlated with our reinsurance exposures, than we estimate. There can be no assurance that our Renaissance Trading or REAL business will have a positive impact on our operating results or financial condition, and such businesses may negatively impact our operating results or financial condition in any given fiscal period, perhaps materially so.
Our claims and claim expense reserves are subject to inherent uncertainties.
Our claims and claim expense reserves reflect our estimates, using actuarial and statistical projections at a given point in time, of our expectations of the ultimate settlement and administration costs of claims incurred. Although we use actuarial and computer models as well as historical reinsurance and insurance industry loss statistics, we also rely heavily on management's experience and judgment to assist in the establishment of appropriate claims and claim expense reserves. However, because of the many assumptions and estimates involved in establishing reserves, the reserving process is inherently uncertain. Our estimates and judgments are based on numerous factors, and may be revised as additional experience and other data become available and are reviewed, as new or improved methodologies are developed, as
loss trends and claims inflation impact future payments, or as current laws or interpretations thereof change.
Our specialty reinsurance operations are expected to produce claims which at times can only be resolved through lengthy and unpredictable litigation. The measures required to resolve such claims, including the adjudication process, present more reserve challenges than property losses (which, on the whole, tend to be reported comparatively more promptly and to be settled within a relatively shorter period of time, although every catastrophic event is comprised of a unique set of circumstances). Actual net claims and claim expenses paid and reported may deviate, perhaps materially, from the reserve estimates reflected in our financial statements.
We expect that some of our assumptions or estimates will prove to be inaccurate, and that our actual net claims and claim expenses paid and reported will differ, perhaps materially, from the reserve estimates reflected in our financial statements. To the extent that our actual claims and claim expenses exceed our expectations, we would be required to increase claims and claim expense reserves. This would reduce our net income by a corresponding amount in the period in which the deficiency is identified. To the extent that our actual claims and claim expenses are lower than our expectations, we would be required to decrease claims and claim expense reserves and this would increase our net income.
Estimates of losses are based on, among other things, a review of potentially exposed contracts, information reported by and discussions with counterparties, and our estimate of losses related to those contracts and are subject to change as more information is reported and becomes available.
As an example, our estimates of losses from catastrophic events are based on factors including currently available information derived from claims information from certain customers and brokers, industry assessments of losses from the events, proprietary models, and the terms and conditions of our contracts. Due to the magnitude and unusual complexity of the legal and claims issues relating to these events, particularly storm Sandy, the 2011 Thailand flooding, and the 2011 and 2010 earthquakes, meaningful uncertainty remains regarding total covered losses for the insurance industry and, accordingly, several of the key assumptions underlying our loss estimates. In addition, actual losses from these events may increase if our reinsurers or other obligors fail to meet their obligations to us. Our actual losses from these events will likely vary, perhaps materially, from these current estimates due to the inherent uncertainties in reserving for such losses, including the nature of the available information, the potential inaccuracies and inadequacies in the data provided by customers and brokers, the potential lengthy claims development period, the inherent uncertainty of modeling techniques and the application of such techniques, the effects of any demand surge on claims activity and complex coverage and other legal issues.
A decline in the ratings assigned to our financial strength may adversely impact our business, perhaps materially so.
Third party rating agencies assess and rate the financial strength, claims paying ability and enterprise wide risk management of reinsurers and insurers, such as Renaissance Reinsurance, DaVinci, Glencoe, Top Layer Re and certain of our other operating subsidiaries and joint ventures. These ratings are based upon criteria established by the rating agencies. Periodically, the rating agencies evaluate us and may downgrade or withdraw their financial strength ratings in the future if we do not continue to meet the criteria of the ratings previously assigned to us. The financial strength and claims paying ratings assigned by rating agencies to reinsurance or insurance companies are based upon factors relevant to policyholders and are not directed toward the protection of investors.
These ratings are subject to periodic review and may be revised or revoked by the agencies which issue them. In addition, from time to time one or more rating agencies have effected changes in their capital models and rating methodologies, which have generally served to increase the amounts of capital required to support the ratings, and it is possible that legislation arising as a result of the financial crisis that preceded the ongoing period of relative economic weakness may result in additional changes. Negative ratings actions in the future could have an adverse effect on our ability to fully realize the market opportunities we currently expect to participate in. In addition, it is increasingly common for our reinsurance contracts to contain provisions permitting our customers to cancel coverage pro-rata if our relevant operating subsidiary is downgraded below a certain rating level. Whether a client would exercise this right would depend, among other factors, on the reason for such a downgrade, the extent of the downgrade, the prevailing market conditions and the pricing and availability of replacement reinsurance coverage.
Therefore, in the event of a downgrade, it is not possible to predict in advance the extent to which this cancellation right would be exercised, if at all, or what effect such cancellations would have on our financial condition or future operations, but such effect potentially could be material. To date, we are not aware that we have experienced such a cancellation.
Our ability to compete with other reinsurers and insurers, and our results of operations, could be materially adversely affected by any such ratings downgrade. For example, following a ratings downgrade we might lose customers to more highly rated competitors or retain a lower share of the business of our customers.
For the current ratings of certain of our subsidiaries and joint ventures, refer to "Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Liquidity and Capital Resources, Ratings" for additional information.
The emergence of matters which may impact certain of our coverages, such as the asserted trend toward potentially significant climate change and the ongoing period of relative economic weakness, could cause us to underestimate our exposures and potentially adversely impact our financial results, perhaps significantly.
In our Reinsurance business, we use analytic and modeling capabilities that help us to assess the risk and return of each reinsurance contract in relation to our overall portfolio of reinsurance contracts. See "Item 1. Business, Underwriting and Enterprise Risk Management."
In general, our techniques for evaluating catastrophe risk are much better developed than those for other classes of risk in businesses that we have entered into more recently. Our models and databases may not accurately address the emergence of a variety of matters which might be deemed to impact certain of our coverages. Accordingly, our models may understate the exposures we are assuming and our financial results may be adversely impacted, perhaps significantly. These risks may increase if we succeed in increasing the contributions from our specialty reinsurance unit or from our Lloyd's segment, either on an absolute or relative basis.
We believe, and believe the consensus view of current scientific studies substantiates, that changes in climate conditions, primarily increasing global temperatures and expected sea levels, are likely to increase the severity and possibly the frequency of natural catastrophes relative to the historical experience over the past 100 years. Coupled with currently projected demographic trends in catastrophe-exposed regions, we currently estimate that this expected increase in tropical cyclone intensity over coming periods may significantly increase the average economic value of expected losses, increase the number of people exposed per year to natural disasters and in general exacerbate disaster risk, including risks to infrastructure, global supply chains and agricultural production.
Accordingly, we currently estimate that these trends may increase claims under our property and casualty lines of business, particularly with respect to properties located in coastal and flood-exposed areas, among others. Furthermore, certain energy and agriculture-related products that we offer could also be negatively impacted by dramatically changing climactic conditions. While we believe a substantial portion of our insureds may be adversely impacted by climate change, we have taken certain measures, to the extent permissible by law and prevailing market conditions, to mitigate against such losses by giving consideration to these risks in our underwriting decisions. We continuously monitor and adjust, as we believe appropriate, our risk management models to reflect our judgment of how to interpret current developments and information such as these studies. However, it is possible that, even after these assessments, we will have underestimated the scale of the risks, such as the frequency or severity of hurricanes or other catastrophes or may have failed to identify new or increased risks. To the extent broad environmental factors, exacerbated by climate change or otherwise, lead to increases in likely insured losses, particularly if those losses exceed expectations and the prior estimates of market participants, regulators or other stakeholders, the markets and clients we serve may be disrupted and adversely impacted, and we may be adversely affected, directly or indirectly. Further, certain of our investments such as insurance-linked securities and property catastrophe managed joint ventures related to hurricane coverage could also be adversely impacted by climate change.
Emerging claim and coverage issues, or other litigation, could adversely affect us.
Unanticipated developments in the law as well as changes in social and environmental conditions could potentially result in unexpected claims for coverage under our insurance and reinsurance contracts. These developments and changes may adversely affect us, perhaps materially so. For example, we could be subject to developments that impose additional coverage obligations on us beyond our underwriting intent, particularly in Florida or Texas, or to increases in the number or size of claims to which we are subject. We believe our property catastrophe results have been adversely impacted over recent periods by increasing primary claims level fraud and abuses, as well as other forms of social inflation, and that these trends may continue.
With respect to our specialty reinsurance operations, these legal, social and environmental changes may not become apparent until some point in time after their occurrence. For example, we could be deemed liable for losses arising out of a matter, such as the potential for industry losses arising out of a pandemic illness, that we had not anticipated or had attempted to contractually exclude. Moreover, irrespective of the clarity and inclusiveness of policy language, there can be no assurance that a court or arbitration panel will limit enforceability of policy language or not issue a ruling adverse to us. Our exposure to these uncertainties could be exacerbated by the increased willingness of some market participants to dispute insurance and reinsurance contract and policy wordings. Alternatively, potential efforts by us to exclude such exposures could, if successful, reduce the market's acceptance of our related products. The full effects of these and other unforeseen emerging claim and coverage issues are extremely hard to predict. As a result, the full extent of our liability under our coverages may not be known for many years after a contract is issued. Our exposure to this uncertainty will grow as our "long-tail" casualty businesses grow, because in these lines claims can typically be made for many years, making them more susceptible to these trends than our traditional catastrophe business, which is typically more "short-tail." While we continually seek to improve the effectiveness of our contracts and claims capabilities, we may fail to mitigate our exposure to these growing uncertainties.
Because we depend on a few insurance and reinsurance brokers in our Reinsurance segment for a preponderance of our revenue, loss of business provided by them could adversely affect us.
Our Reinsurance business markets insurance and reinsurance products worldwide exclusively through insurance and reinsurance brokers. Three brokerage firms accounted for 84.6% of our Reinsurance segment gross premiums written for the year ended December 31, 2012 (2011 - 90.7%). Subsidiaries and affiliates of AON Benfield, Marsh Inc. and the Willis Group accounted for approximately 51.5%, 21.4% and 11.7%, respectively, of our Reinsurance segment gross premiums written in 2012 (2011 - 56.1%, 21.9% and 12.7%, respectively). The loss of a substantial portion of the business provided by our brokers would have a material adverse effect on us. Our ability to market our products could decline as a result of any loss of the business provided by these brokers and it is possible that our premiums written would decrease.
We are exposed to counterparty credit risk, including with respect to reinsurance brokers.
In accordance with industry practice, we pay virtually all amounts owed on claims under our policies to reinsurance brokers, and these brokers, in turn, pay these amounts over to the insurers that have reinsured a portion of their liabilities with us (we refer to these insurers as ceding insurers). Likewise, premiums due to us by ceding insurers are virtually all paid to brokers, who then pass such amounts on to us. In many jurisdictions, if a broker were to fail to make such a payment to a ceding insurer, we would remain liable to the ceding insurer for the deficiency. Conversely, in many jurisdictions, when the ceding insurer pays premiums for these policies to reinsurance brokers for payment over to us, these premiums are considered to have been paid by the cedants and the ceding insurer will no longer be liable to us for those amounts, whether or not we have actually received the premiums. Consequently, in connection with the settlement of reinsurance balances, we assume a substantial degree of credit risk associated with brokers around the world.
We are also exposed to the credit risk of our customers, who, pursuant to their contracts with us, frequently pay us over time. Our premiums receivable at December 31, 2012 totaled $491.4 million, and these amounts are generally not collateralized. At December 31, 2012, we had recorded $192.5 million of reinsurance recoverables, net of a valuation allowance of $4.5 million for uncollectible recoverables. We cannot assure you that such recoverables will ever be collected or that additional amounts will not be required to be written down in 2012 or future periods. To the extent our customers or retrocedants become
unable to pay future premiums, we would be required to recognize a downward adjustment to our premiums receivable in our financial statements. We cannot assure you that all of such amounts will ever be collected or that additional amounts will not be required to be written down in 2013 or future periods.
As a result of the ongoing period of relative economic weakness, our consolidated credit risk, reflecting our counterparty dealings with agents, brokers, customers, retrocessionaires, capital providers, parties associated with our investment portfolio and others has increased, perhaps materially so.
We undertake energy related trading activities through our operating subsidiaries, including Renaissance Trading and REAL, where counterparty credit risk is an important factor. These operating subsidiaries execute weather, energy and commodity derivative transactions whereby the value of the derivatives at any point in time is dependent upon not only the market but also the viability of the counterparty. The failure or perceived weakness of any of our counterparties has the potential to expose us to risk of loss in these situations. Although these operating subsidiaries have credit risk management policies and procedures, we cannot assure you that any of the policies or procedures will be effective. While many of the original trading positions established in our energy related trading business are partially or substantially hedged, the effectiveness of those hedges depends on the willingness and ability to pay of the parties with whom we establish the hedge positions. The failure of our policies and procedures, or the failure of one or more of our counterparties, could result in losses that substantially exceed our expectations and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
The ongoing relative weakness in business and economic conditions generally or specifically in the principal markets in which we do business could adversely affect our business and operating results.
The U.S. and numerous other leading markets around the world continue to experience challenging economic conditions, and, although conditions may be improving, we believe meaningful risk remains of returned deterioration in economic conditions, including substantial and continuing financial market disruptions. In particular, global economic markets, including many of the key markets which we serve, may continue to be adversely impacted by the ongoing financial and fiscal instability of several European jurisdictions and, increasingly, the Eurozone market as a whole, the rising prices for various agricultural and other commodities, and other factors. While many governments, including the U.S. federal government, have taken substantial steps to stabilize economic conditions in an effort to increase liquidity and capital availability, if economic conditions should weaken, the business environment in our principal markets would be further adversely affected, which accordingly could adversely affect demand for the products sold by us or our customers. Economic conditions could also be adversely affected by an increase in global political instability, which might impact the price of energy products, agricultural goods and other commodities, or otherwise harm the markets in which we participate. In addition, during an economic downturn we believe our consolidated credit risk, reflecting our counterparty dealings with agents, brokers, customers, retrocessionaires, capital providers and parties associated with our investment portfolio, among others, is likely to be increased.
U.S. taxing authorities could contend that one or more of our Bermuda subsidiaries are subject to U.S. corporate income tax, as a result of changes in law or regulations, or otherwise.
If the IRS were to contend successfully that one or more of our Bermuda subsidiaries is engaged in a trade or business in the U.S., such subsidiary would, to the extent not exempted from tax by the U.S.-Bermuda income tax treaty, be subject to U.S. corporate income tax on that portion of its net income treated as effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business, as well as the U.S. corporate branch profits tax. Although we would vigorously contest such an assertion, if we were ultimately held to be subject to taxation, our earnings would correspondingly decline.
In addition, benefits of the U.S.-Bermuda income tax treaty which may limit any such tax to income attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by one or more of our Bermuda subsidiaries in the U.S. are only available to any of such subsidiaries if more than 50% of its shares are beneficially owned, directly or indirectly, by individuals who are Bermuda residents or U.S. citizens or residents. Our Bermuda subsidiaries may not be able to continually satisfy such beneficial ownership test or be able to establish it to the satisfaction of the IRS. Finally, it is unclear whether the U.S.-Bermuda income tax treaty (assuming satisfaction of the beneficial ownership test) applies to income other than premium income, such as investment income.
Changes in U.S. tax law or regulations could increase the costs of our products and services or otherwise reduce our profitability.
On February 7, 2013, U.S. Senator Bernard Sanders introduced legislation in the U.S. Senate entitled the "Corporate Tax Dodging Prevention Act". Similar legislation was also proposed in 2012, 2011 and 2010. If enacted, this legislation would, among other things, cause to be treated as a U.S. corporation for U.S. tax purposes generally, certain corporate entities if the "management and control" of such a corporation is, directly or indirectly, treated as occurring primarily within the U.S. The proposed legislation provides that a corporation will be so treated if substantially all of the executive officers and senior management of the corporation who exercise day-to-day responsibility for making decisions involving strategic, financial, and operational policies of the corporation are located primarily within the U.S. To date, this legislation has not been approved by either the House of Representatives or the Senate. However, we can provide no assurance that this legislation or similar legislation will not ultimately be adopted. While we do not believe that the legislation would negatively impact us, it is possible that an adopted bill would include additional or expanded provisions which could negatively impact us, or that the interpretation or enforcement of the current proposal, if enacted, would be more expansive or adverse than we currently estimate.
A decline in our investment performance could reduce our profitability and hinder our ability to pay claims promptly in accordance with our strategy.
We have historically derived a meaningful portion of our income from our invested assets, which are comprised of, among other things, fixed maturity securities, such as bonds, asset-backed securities, mortgage-backed securities and investments in bank loan funds, hedge funds and private equity partnerships. Accordingly, our financial results are subject to a variety of investment risks, including risks relating to general economic conditions, market volatility, interest rate fluctuations, foreign currency risk, liquidity risk and credit and default risk. Additionally, with respect to certain of our investments, we are subject to pre-payment or reinvestment risk.
Our invested assets have grown over the years and have come to effect a comparably greater contribution to our financial results. Accordingly, a failure to successfully execute our investment strategy could have a material adverse effect on our overall results. In the event of a significant or total loss in our investment portfolio, our ability to pay any claims promptly in accordance with our strategy could be adversely affected.
The market value of our fixed maturity investments is subject to fluctuation depending on changes in various factors, including prevailing interest rates and widening credit spreads.
Increases in interest rates could cause the market value of our investment portfolio to decrease, perhaps substantially. Conversely, a decline in interest rates could reduce our investment yield, which would reduce our overall profitability. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary policies, domestic and international economic and political conditions and other factors beyond our control. Any measures we take that are intended to manage the risks of operating in a changing interest rate environment may not effectively mitigate such interest rate sensitivity.
A portion of our investment portfolio is allocated to other classes of investments which we expect to have different risk characteristics than our investments in traditional fixed maturity securities and short term investments. T