May 21, 2012

Betting on Cat Bonds - for Hurricane Risk Transfer

 

Despite continued reports of an active Atlantic hurricane season, seven of the eight catastrophe bond transactions completed in the second quarter of 2010 included exposure to U.S. hurricane losses, according to Guy Carpenter & Company and GC Securities. The data does not point to a lack of faith in hurricane prediction, but rather to the increased interest in catastrophe bonds as a method of risk transfer. With eight catastrophe bond transactions (the one non-wind storm-based bond was for exposure to New Madrid earthquake risk in the Midwest), totaling more than $2 billion in risk capital, the second quarter of 2010 was the second-most active quarter on record.

Despite the surge in activity, however, the report revealed that total risk capital in the second quarter fell to $11.8 billion, which is a drop of slightly less than 1% from the first quarter of 2010 and 5.5% from the end of 2009. Some analysts have theorized that the rise in transactions and the corresponding drop in capital invested indicate that the cat bond market lacks enough options for the diversification of risk. The report anticipates a drop in appetite for U.S. hurricane exposure but indicates that investors still have a strong interest in U.S. earthquake, European wind, and Japanese wind and earthquake perils. 

___________

Morgan O'Rourke is editor in chief of Risk Management.

Risk Management Magazine and Risk Management Monitor. Copyright 2012 Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Risk Management Magazine  is the premier source of analysis, insight and news for corporate risk managers. RM strives to explore existing and emerging techniques and concepts that address the needs of those who are tasked with protecting the physical, financial, human and intellectual assets of their companies. As the business world and the world at large change with increasing speed, RM keeps its readers informed about new challenges and solutions....

212-286-9364

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.