Millions of Americans remain on alert for a severe weather outbreak across the country after devastating atmospheric rivers, tornadoes, and winter storms raged at the close of 2025, causing multiple deaths and significant property damage from coast to coast.
Southern California saw its wettest Christmas Eve and Day ever recorded, with more than 17 inches of rainfall in one area of Ventura County and 10 inches in parts of the San Gabriel Mountains in Los Angeles County. Downing trees and power lines, the heavy rains triggered flash flooding and mudflows that hit hundreds of homes, prompting road closures and power outages throughout the state.
Another unusual weather system spawned 13 tornadoes across the Great Lakes in late December, with six in Central Illinois alone, damaging numerous homes. Prior to last year, only five December tornadoes had been recorded in that forecast area, the last of which occurred in 2021. Frigid cold conditions followed the storm as a bomb cyclone – part of the same system that drenched California – swept from the Midwest to the East Coast.
Defined as a rapidly intensifying non-tropical storm in which pressure drops by at least 24 millibars over a 24-hour period, the bomb cyclone generated blizzard conditions resulting in power outages for more than 300,000 customers and a massive Interstate pile-up involving over 50 cars and multiple semi-trucks in Detroit, Mich. Several feet of snow buried Upstate New York, with the hardest-hit areas in the Lake Ontario snowbelt.
As conditions begin tapering off on the West Coast, the first cross-country storm of 2026 is expected to bring torrential rain and snow in the South and much of the Midwest later this week. Threats of flash flooding as well as hail, tornadoes, and damaging winds loom across both regions, with heavy rains possible in the Northeast.
As always, Triple-I urges residents to stay informed, be prepared, and follow the instructions of local authorities. Checking insurance coverage is critical to such preparation, especially as atmospheric rivers, severe convective storms, and inland flooding become increasingly common. Many noncoastal communities impacted by recent flood events lack sufficient flood protection, and Californians grappling with claims from the storms may also be unaware they need separate flood policies for flooding and mudflow.
Deals exceeding $1 billion drove insurance industry mergers and acquisitions in 2025, aligning with a surge of artificial intelligence-based megadeals in the broader M&A market, according to PwC’s U.S. Deals 2026 Outlook. While total M&A deal value rose to $1.6 trillion through November 30 – the second-highest value ever recorded – the insurance sector remained consistent, though ongoing economic uncertainty could challenge this stability.
Upward trends emerge
Owing 93 percent of its value to megadeals, the insurance industry’s deal volume totaled $31.8 billion during the second half of 2025, compared to $30 billion during the previous six months. Heading into 2026, PwC projects that both improved loss ratios and rising pressure on property and casualty rates will facilitate further deals, as the industry’s performance can attract investors while also leading carriers to seek growth through more acquisitions.
“In coming months, expect interest rate developments and an industry-wide search for growth to strongly influence insurance deals activity,” said Mark Friedman, PwC U.S. insurance deals leader.
Conversely, total M&A market value increased by 45 percent from 2024, with more than 20 percent of its 74 deals valued at $5 billion or more relating to A.I. Such market activity suggests “A.I. is significantly accelerating software and consumer goods development” by boosting portfolio strategies, operational efficiencies, and other gains across various industries, the report notes.
Ramzi Ramsey, a senior managing director at Blackstone Growth, emphasized the increasing role of A.I. as a core driver of M&A growth, arguing that “companies who are viewed to benefit from AI tailwinds are seeing outsized multiples and deal activities,” whereas “companies where AI is viewed to be a detractor, or if the AI impact is cloudy, may have no bid.”
Middle-market lags
Though still the third-largest in the past decade, overall M&A market volume rose by only 2 percent from 2024, with middle-market deals between $100 million to $1 billion slumping to their lowest volume since at least 2013. Tariff policy shifts largely fueled these figures, reflecting greater caution among dealmakers – particularly smaller businesses – as supply-chain risks became more unpredictable.
While sudden policy changes and recent trade disputes could persist into the new year, PwC’s report found that “interest rate cuts this year have already helped mid-tier corporates, and further Federal Reserve Board action in 2026 could go a long way in relieving pressure on them,” especially as current tariff policies continue to stabilize.
In combination with declining interest rates, “products that can withstand declining consumer performance and confidence” should help the insurance sector remain active in 2026, the report adds, pointing to A.I. investments as essential to maintaining “solid ground” in the M&A market.
In a year marked by severe convective storm-induced damage across the United States, timely and accurate data is more essential than ever to understand, predict, and prevent these evolving weather perils. Though federal cuts to weather monitoring and modeling have raised concerns about the industry’s capacity for risk mitigation, a new research center backed by insurers and the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) aims to help bridge the gap.
Directed by Dr. Victor Gensini, a professor at Northern Illinois University and a Triple-I non-resident scholar, the Center for Interdisciplinary Research on Convective Storms (CIRCS) will leverage the expertise of nearly two dozen scientists to develop research focused on advancing resilience against severe convective storms, which range from thunderstorms with lightning to tornadoes, straight-line winds, and hail.
Northern Illinois University and the University of Wisconsin-Madison launched CIRCS with $1.5 million in funding from NSF, as part of a joint initiative with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to create an Industry-University Cooperative Research Center (IUCRC) that can support the insurance sector.
Beyond funds under the IUCRC model, CIRCS also receives “funding for research, students, and lab equipment” from private industry members, most of whom are “insurance and reinsurance companies interested in research on convective storms,” said Gensini, who teaches in NIU’s Department of Earth, Atmosphere, and Environment. He added that CIRCS includes actuarial scientists within its panel of experts to “approach this specific peril from multiple directions.”
Rising in both frequency and severity, convective storms accounted for $42 billion in global insured losses during the first half of 2024 alone, driven by 12 U.S. storms with $1 billion or more in losses each, according to a Swiss Re report. Later Gallagher Re data supports the trend, with large U.S. thunderstorms contributing to $46 billion in insured losses through the third quarter of 2025, the fourth-costliest year on record.
Paradigm-setting research
In addition to the center’s launch, Gensini recently celebrated a major data haul gathered during the largest hail study ever conducted, known as ICECHIP – short for In-situ Collaborative Experiment for Collection of Hail in the Plains. Funded with an $11 million grant from NSF, the field study sent Gensini and more than 100 other scientists and students across the Great Plains to chase and analyze hailstorms, which facilitate as much as 80 percent of severe convective storm claims in any one year.
Collecting more than 10,000 stones for study, the researchers hope to reduce hail risk through improved forecasting, enabling residents to better protect themselves and their belongings before a hailstorm hits. As the first field campaign dedicated to studying hail since the 1970s, ICECHIP’s participants expect their data to inform research analysis for years to come, NIU reported.
“We recovered tennis-ball-sized hail or greater in about half of our instrument deployments,” Gensini said. “You hope and dream for these kinds of observations in order to push forward hail science.”
By partnering academia with industry and government agencies, CIRCS and ICECHIP showcase the kinds of collaborative, data-driven solutions needed to address climate risks in ways that respect the unique needs of all affected groups, fostering risk management strategies that can build resilience at a community level.
Severe convective storms cost insurers an estimated $46 billion in the first three quarters of 2025, Gallagher Re has reported, marking the third straight year of U.S. claims from these events through September exceeding $40 billion. Total losses from these storms – which include tornadoes, hail, straight-line winds, and drenching thunderstorms – reflect growing impacts from inland flooding and, in particular, the vulnerability of roofs to damage from these storms.
Approximately 70 to 90 percent of total insured residential catastrophic losses arise from roof-related damage, according to Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS) estimates. Though poorly maintained roofs contribute to this finding, outdated building codes exacerbate the risk, leading insurance industry leaders to advocate for widespread adoption of FORTIFIED roof standards.
Developed by IBHS, FORTIFIED standards can reduce severe weather damage in new or retrofitted homes through construction methods like sealing roof decks and anchoring roofs to wall framing using stronger nails. While such standards remain voluntary, Louisiana has modelled the proactive approach needed to facilitate adoption with the recent expansion of its Louisiana Fortify Homes Program, which began offering homeowners thousand-dollar grants to retrofit their houses along these guidelines in 2023, incentivizing roughly 40 percent of the now 10,000 FORTIFIED roofs in the state.
“FORTIFIED roofs are the long-term solution for affordable insurance in South Louisiana,” said state insurance commissioner Tim Temple, noting that his office aims to implement bigger and more standardized insurance discounts for FORTIFIED homeowners to reinforce the state’s already improved insurance rates.
An emerging trend
Though Louisiana became the “fastest-growing state” to adopt FORTIFIED standards, Alabama pioneered incentivizing them through its own Strengthen Alabama Homes program, financed by the insurance industry with more than $86 million in grants since 2016. Designed to enhance community resiliency while also lowering insurance rates, completed retrofits qualify residents for premium discounts ranging from 25 to 55 percent.
A May 2025 study from the Alabama Department of Insurance, in collaboration with the University of Alabama Center for Insurance Information and Research, showcases the program’s success, highlighting that FORTIFIED homes suffered less property damage and fewer insurance claims than homes built using other construction methods when Hurricane Sally made landfall in the state.
“The Center’s Hurricane Sally report doesn’t just quantify the effectiveness of the FORTIFIED program, it clearly demonstrates that homes can be built to survive storms, making them eminently more insurable,” said IBHS CEO Roy Wright. “This report should be a clarion call to communities across the country, urging them to implement Alabama’s multipronged approach to promoting disaster mitigation.”
Insurers answered the call in Oklahoma, North Carolina, and South Carolina, all of which boast similar programs backed by the insurance sector and accompanying premium reductions. Mississippi nearly joined their ranks before state funding for the grant program was suspended earlier this year, though insurance discounts remain available. States such as Florida, Georgia, and Minnesota also offer comprehensive insurance discounts for FORTIFIED properties, with the latter poised to fully replicate a grant program in response to mounting hailstorms.
Addressing cost concerns
While 75 percent of homeowners express willingness to invest in weather-resistant features, only 18 percent have reinforced or replaced their roofs with those materials, a recent Nationwide survey reveals. Grants help lower the cost of entry to FORTIFIED roofs for many homeowners, but it is worth noting the relative affordability of such upgrades, which can cost as little as $500 for a 2,000 sq. ft. home.
Describing the benefits of FORTIFIED standards as “measurable and increasingly essential,” Nationwide Property & Casualty president and COO Mark Berven emphasized the crucial role insurance agents play in raising consumer awareness of these risk reductions and their broad accessibility.
“Our industry needs to remind homeowners they have control in the face of severe weather events,” Berven wrote. “By investing in resilience, they can take an active role in protecting their homes, their valuables and their memories – giving them the peace of mind they’re looking for.”
By Kelley Collins, Director of Business Development and Communications, Lighting Protection Institute
Lightning strikes costs homeowners more than $1 billion a year – but it’s unclear how much businesses lose through lightning-related damage. This is because many fires at commercial properties are recorded simply as “general fire damage”, making it hard to quantify lightning-specific losses or understand true commercial exposure.
In some jurisdictions, fire inspection forms lack a designated field for lightning. Further, inspectors may not be trained nor instructed to identify lightning as a cause. As a result, lightning-related fires often go unrecognized.
Insurers can help address these gaps by collaborating with fire service professionals.
Properly designed and installed lightning protection systems (LPS) significantly reduce risk and mitigate losses. To support accurate risk assessment, encourage mitigation, and appropriately value these systems, lightning must be identified as a distinct cause of loss in claims data.
Lightning damage also extends well beyond fire. Electrical surges can destroy wiring, controls, and electronic infrastructure, resulting in expensive business interruption. Illustrative cases reveal the scale of potential loss:
• A furniture manufacturer on the East Coast incurred over $1 million in insured damages from a single strike, including structural harm, inventory losses, production downtime, and lost revenue. • A Midwestern apartment complex experienced over $50 million in claims for structural and electrical damage, as well as the displacement of residents.
These incidents demonstrate the high stakes of lightning events and the importance of mitigation. However, because consistent data across commercial properties is scarce, insurers, risk managers, and building owners lack a full picture of exposure, highlighting the need for better claims tracking to inform risk assessment and mitigation strategies.
A lightning protection system is far more than a single rod and cable. It is a coordinated network designed to intercept and safely redirect lightning energy away from structures and equipment. A compliant LPS includes five essential components:
Strike termination devices (air terminals/”rods”): metal rods that intercept a lightning strike.
Conductors: heavy braided cables that carry current toward the ground.
Grounding (earth termination): electrodes/loops that disperse energy into the earth.
Bonding / potential equalization: connecting metal and internal systems (ie. water, fire, security) so they rise/fall in voltage together, preventing side-flash.
Surge protective devices (SPDs): protect power/data/controls from transient over voltages.
Systems missing any of these elements, or not installed to national standards, are insufficient. Compliance with NFPA 780, UL 96A, andLPI 175 ensures thorough protection.
Proper installation, inspection, and maintenance are critical. Systems should be installed by certified lightning protection contractors and inspected/certified through independent third-party inspection programs. Ongoing maintenance and re-inspection, particularly after roof or structural changes or severe storms, helps ensure that the system continues to operate as intended.
Lightning protection systems, installed according to the standards, defend against both direct and indirect strikes. Direct strikes occur when a lightning bolt hits a building, potentially causing fire, structural damage, or electrical failure. Air terminals intercept the strike, and conductors safely route energy to the ground. Indirect strikes happen when nearby lightning induces surges through utility lines, piping, or the ground. SPDs, bonding, and grounding systems manage these surges, helping to protect life-safety systems, critical operations, and business continuity.
By addressing both direct and indirect risks, lightning protection systems protect property, minimize downtime, and reduce potential claims/costs.
Effective loss control begins with risk assessment. NFPA 780provides a straightforward methodology that considers local lightning frequency, building height and footprint, occupancy, and operational continuity needs. Facilities where downtime carries high costs — or where electrical or operational systems are vital to the community — should be prioritized. When risk assessment is paired with certified installation, third-party inspection, and routine maintenance, the result is fewer and less severe claims, along with more resilient operations.
Lightning damage is preventable, but tracking is not as consistent as it is for other hazards, such as flooding. Standards-compliant lightning protection systems mitigate risks and improve resilience.
Insurers can reduce claims severity and gain better insights into lightning losses by tracking incidents, incentivizing mitigation and supporting standards-based protection. In addition, there is an opportunity to collaborate with fire service professionals to address gaps in fire inspection reporting and ensure lightning-related fires are accurately identified.
Jamaica will receive a $150 million payout following devastation from Hurricane Melissa from its parametric catastrophe policy. Though one of the largest such payouts in recent years, the loss “had very little impact” on investors in the bonds backing the policy.
Investors in insurance-linked securities (ILS) “understand that these risks are part of what they cover,” said Jean-Louis Monnier, head of ILS Alternative Capital Partners at Swiss Re.
Among the strongest Atlantic hurricanes ever recorded, Hurricane Melissa became the most powerful cyclone to make landfall in the island’s history, causing an estimated $6 billion to $7 billion in damages and at least 75 deaths across the Caribbean. With a minimum central pressure of 892 millibars, the storm met the parametric thresholds for a full payout. The policy was backed by a bond issued in 2024 by the World Bank through its International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and structured by Aon Securities and Swiss Re Capital Markets.
Unlike traditional indemnity insurance, parametric insurance covers risks without sending adjusters to evaluate post-catastrophe damage. Rather than paying for damages incurred, policies pay out if certain conditions are met – for example, if wind speeds or rainfall measurements meet an established threshold. Speed of payment and reduced administration costs can ease the burden on insurers while expediting recovery for policyholders.
Determining appropriate parametric triggers is no easy task. Just a year earlier, the same policy did not pay out after air pressure levels narrowly missed the predefined minimum during Hurricane Beryl, despite widespread destruction. The ensuing backlash generated greater public and industry scrutiny over parametric coverage, including an intergovernmental “examination” into the ILS market broadly.
Monnier explained that this specific bond was designed to respond to larger events like Melissa, as part of the country’s extensive risk management strategy that encompasses many layers of protection. Parametric coverage from Skyline Partners and Munich Re, for instance, offered a partial payout after Beryl, as did the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility Segregated Portfolio Company, which issued its largest single payout in history at $70.8 million after Melissa.
In a press release on the payout, World Bank vice president and treasurer Jorge Familiar emphasized the “proactive approach” of Jamaica’s disaster risk management, noting it could “serve as a model for countries facing similar threats and seeking to strengthen their financial resilience to natural disasters.”
Estimated to reach $34.4 billion by 2033, the global parametric insurance market is growing at a rapid pace, driven by increasingly severe climate and weather-related risks. Yet many industry leaders identify parametric structures as less comprehensive – and therefore not a substitute for – traditional indemnity risk transfers. By design, parametric insurance correlates to measurable events rather than actual damages, leading to an innate basis risk when the two do not perfectly align.
Whereas indemnity coverage is “generally preferable,” parametric structures can “complement other forms of insurance” and are particularly beneficial for sovereigns, which tend to lack the granular data needed to inform underwriting and pricing of indemnity catastrophe bonds, according to Monnier.
“Many countries use both instruments, and they can be very complementary,” Monnier concluded. “There is a large global protection gap, and Swiss Re advocates for reducing that gap, whether through traditional reinsurance or by structuring capital-market solutions.”
By Loretta Worters, Vice President – Media Relations, Triple-I
Triple-I Chief Economist and Data Scientist Dr. Michel Léonard provided insurance insight to the New York City Council’s Committee on Housing and Buildings as they consider Local Bills 948-A and 1107-A. The measures aim to address New York City’s housing-affordability challenges by expanding homeowners’ ability to earn income through short-term rentals.
Léonard’s testimony focused on helping policymakers understand the protection gaps that can arise when residential dwellings are used for commercial purposes. He began by emphasizing Triple-I’s role as a nonprofit research and education organization, not a lobbying entity.
Many homeowners, Léonard noted, are unaware that standard homeowners’ policies generally exclude commercial activity, meaning hosts who fail to update their coverage may face denied claims, inadequate liability protection, or higher out-of-pocket costs if a loss occurs. Because short-term rentals fall under commercial use, homeowners who rent out their homes — whether occasionally or regularly — may inadvertently operate without appropriate coverage.
Operating a short-term rental typically requires:
Notifying their insurer,
Adhering to policy terms, and
Obtaining short-term rental-specific or commercial coverage.
Committee Chair Pierina Ana Sanchez asked what the cost impact might be for homeowners who must shift to a commercial policy. Léonard explained that, while costs vary, the more pressing issue is that many homeowners are unaware they have gaps in coverage.
This means homeowners, renters, and residents could all face significant financial or liability risks if an incident occurs. These risks are especially complex in multi-unit buildings, where short-term rental activity can affect both an individual unit’s policy and the building’s master policy—potentially increasing premiums and liability exposure for all residents. The result can be large uncovered losses, disputes, or claims that ripple throughout buildings and neighborhoods.
Homeowners insurance in New York City is significantly different from New York State. In written testimony to the New York Senate Committees on Investigations and Government Operations, Insurance, and Housing, Construction, and Community Development on Tuesday, November 18, Triple-I Chief Insurance Officer Patrick Schmid cited data from the Insurance Research Council (IRC), saying New York ranks 29th in its homeowners’ affordability study, with a 2.11 percent ratio of homeowners’ insurance expenditure to median household income. This is a lower percentage than a decade earlier for the state. According to IRC, New York’s homeowners’ insurance expenditures equal 0.39 percent of median.
Insurance in New York City is complicated, influenced by high property values, dense construction, and a challenging legal and claims environment. Rising labor and construction costs also contribute to higher premiums and more severe claims.
Coverage gaps and denied claims, even when policies are applied correctly, can lead to public misunderstandings about insurance. As Allstate CEO Tom Wilson recently noted, trust between consumers and companies is at a “tipping point” and must be reinforced through reliability and clear communication.
With its independent insight, Triple-I gave policymakers a clear understanding of the potential insurance consequences of expanding short-term rentals in residential buildings, helping them make informed decisions that balance affordability, consumer protection, and risk management.
By Jeff Dunsavage, Senior Research Analyst, Triple-I
New Yorkers – like residents of all U.S. states – have been struggling with rising costs in recent years, including the cost of home and auto insurance coverage. This week, Patrick Schmid, Triple-I’s chief insurance officer, testified to New York lawmakers about why homeowners’ insurance premiums are rising and where New York policyholders stand relative to other states.
“New York’s homeowners’ insurance market is, in fact, functioning well and remains affordable when properly contextualized,” Schmid said in written testimony to the New York Senate Committees on Investigations and Government Operations, Insurance, and Housing, Construction, and Community Development. “While premiums may appear high in absolute dollars, they are relatively average and reasonable as a percentage of household income.”
Citing data from the Insurance Research Council (IRC), Schmid said New York ranks 29th in its homeowners’ affordability study, with a 2.11 percent ratio of homeowners’ insurance expenditure to median household income ratio. This is a lower percentage than a decade earlier for the state. According to IRC – like Triple-I, an affiliate of The Institutes – New York’s homeowners’ insurance expenditures equal 0.39 percent of median home value.
“When a home costs $413,588 and insurance costs $1,602 annually (0.39% of the home’s value), the insurance premium is not necessarily the driver of unaffordability within the region,” Schmid said. “The underlying property cost, and associated replacement costs, are likely a key challenge.”
He compared New York with:
Louisiana, with a ratio of 1.18 percent (more than three times New York’s)
Mississippi, at 1.04 percent (nearly three times New York)
Alabama, at 0.78 percent (twice New York)
Florida, at 0.4 percent (1.7 times New York)
“Only 20 states have more efficient insurance costs relative to home values,” Schmid said. “This contradicts the narrative of an affordability crisis in New York’s homeowners insurance market. Our market is delivering coverage at rates that are among the most competitive in the nation when measured against the value of assets being protected.”
New Yorkers face significant cost burdens that are structural and related to a variety of factors outside of insurance, Schmid said.
The fundamental driver of insurance costs is the cost to rebuild homes, most notably:
Labor costs: Skilled trades in NY metro areas command premium wages;
Material costs: Transportation, storage, and compliance add to expenses;
Building codes: Stricter standards increase rebuilding costs but improve long-term resilience and reduce future losses; and
Land values: Property values include expensive land that doesn’t require insurance, making the actual structure component even more valuable proportionally.
Schmid cautioned against lawmakers following the temptation to intervene in insurance markets – as some states have attempted to do in recent years — emphasizing that “targeting insurance premiums would address a symptom rather than the cause, potentially destabilizing a well-functioning, competitive market without improving overall housing affordability for New York residents.”
Global insurtech funding hit $1.01 billion in the third quarter of 2025, marking three consecutive years of average quarterly funding near $1.1 billion, according to a recent Gallagher Re report. Raising $751.72 million, A.I.-based insurtechs accounted for almost 75 percent of all funding across 49 deals, raising $751.72 million, largely attributed to the commercial insurance industry’s evolving risk profile.
Fewer, bigger deals
Though down 7.3 percent from the previous quarter, third-quarter results reflected less quarterly volatility compared to the preceding three-year period, which fluctuated with greater uncertainty around a higher average of $2.7 billion. Deal count also dropped to 76 – the lowest total count since the second quarter of 2020 – as average deal size rose from $12.83 million in the second quarter of 2025 to $15.70 million.
Property/casualty insurers financed eight of the quarter’s 10 largest deals, propelling the industry’s total third-quarter funding to $690.28 million – a 90.5 percent increase from its seven-year low in the prior quarter.
Reinsurers led another dramatic market shift by backing a record sector high of 51 tech investments, suggesting “the appetite for pure venture risk is alive and well” even as investors place fewer “massive, high-risk bets” in favor of “a more balanced approach,” said Andrew Johnston, global head of InsurTech at Gallagher Re.
A.I. takes center stage
With over 25 percent of commercial lines now sold through digital channels, the report outlines how insurers can meet the demands of changing customer expectations and business practices – particularly the digital collection and storage of customer data – by leveraging A.I.
By improving data extraction, pattern identification, and fraud detection, A.I. tools streamline routine decision-making while freeing up underwriters’ capacity to build client relationships and assess complicated, high-value risks, the study found. On a concrete level, such efficiency gains include high-resolution aerial imagery to quickly verify property damages, dashcams to monitor real-time driving behaviors, and wearable IoT solutions to prevent workplace injuries, demonstrating the utility of A.I.-powered insurtechs across commercial lines.
Effective integration, however, transcends simple adoption. Freddie Scarratt, Gallagher Re’s global deputy head of InsurTech, emphasized the enduring challenges of applying A.I. to legacy administration systems and of an emerging talent gap to bridge data and A.I. literacy expertise with traditional underwriting.
Business leaders expressed similar concerns in a Gallagher Re survey released earlier this year, highlighting a skills shortage and pervasive ethical implications as barriers to A.I. adoption.
Underscoring the industry’s goal to “supercharge” underwriting judgement rather than replace it, Scarratt concluded that “the most successful (re)insurers of the future will be those that combine their expertise in relationship management, complex deal structuring, and cycle management with the speed, scale, and analytical power of A.I.”
With last week’s end of the longest U.S. government shutdown in history, Congress reauthorized FEMA’s National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).
During the shutdown, the NFIP continued to pay claims using available funds, but it could not sell or renew policies until reauthorized. These restrictions affected an estimated 1,300 property sales each day, as prospective property owners must purchase flood coverage in Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA), where private flood options – despite gaining traction – are still limited.
With millions of homeowners and countless communities relying on the NFIP, many organizations across the risk and insurance industry sent a letter urging congressional leaders to reauthorize NFIP ahead of its expiration, writing that a lapse “could further impact affordable housing, create additional challenges for small businesses, unnecessarily further increase the cost of homeownership, and must be avoided.”
While reauthorization allows NFIP insurers to retroactively issue policies for applications received during the shutdown, the measure extends their authority only through Jan. 30, 2026, leaving the program’s fate an open question. Absent a long-term NFIP authorization bill, Congress has now reauthorized the program 34 times since fiscal year 2017.
Incentivizing risk reduction
Flood risk was long considered untouchable by private insurers, which is a large part of the reason NFIP exists. While private participation in the flood market has grown in recent years, NFIP remains a critical source of protection for this growing and underinsured peril.
Beyond providing economic protection for policyholders, the NFIP also plays a critical role in promoting climate resilience, particularly through its Community Rating System (CRS). A voluntary program, the CRS rewards homeowners with premium discounts when their communities invest in floodplain management practices that exceed the NFIP’s minimum standards, with the program’s highest rating qualifying residents for a 45 percent premium reduction.
After the cancellation of other FEMA-managed initiatives like BRIC, the CRS can help provide relief where still needed. For instance, Jefferson Parish homeowners displaced following Hurricane Ida in 2021 had secured BRIC grants to elevate and reconstruct their homes shortly before the program ended, leaving these projects in limbo. But the CRS now offers residents and businesses more than $12 million in flood insurance savings annually after the parish secured a Class 3 rating – the first of its kind in Louisiana.
By incentivizing improved building codes, citizen awareness campaigns, and other resilience solutions, the CRS can ensure that vulnerable communities “will continue to benefit from a comprehensive floodplain management and mitigation plan that helps make us more resilient in the face of disasters,” said Jefferson Parish President Cynthia Lee Sheng in a statement. Notably, however, the parish earned its rating mere weeks ahead of the NFIP lapse, which delayed the discounts from appearing in new and renewed policies.
As climate and weather-related events become increasingly frequent and severe, the success of these investments will depend on proactive strategies informed by timely, granular data. Though NOAA announced it would cease tracking the country’s costliest disasters earlier this year, nonprofit Climate Central aims to fill the gap by rebuilding NOAA’s database and expanding it to track smaller catastrophes, providing insurers and other stakeholders more reliable information to understand individual disasters.
Taken together, such efforts can help insurers accurately reflect rising risks in insurance pricing while engaging with communities and businesses in solutions to keep coverage accessible. Sustaining this balance involves continuous collaboration between public and private sectors.
