Category Archives: Business Risk

Triple-I Brief: Commercial Property Insurance Shows Signs of Improvement, Stable Growth

While rising premiums have been the primary driver for commercial property insurance growth for years, a 25-quarter rate increase streak broke in early 2024. Strong risk-adjusted capitalization and adequate liquidity may sustain the stable outlook, notwithstanding formidable risks, according to Triple-I’s latest insurance brief Commercial Property: Trends and Insights.

The brief focuses on several core trends shaping opportunities and threats to the commercial property insurance segment:

  • Mounting climate and natural catastrophe risks
  • Increasing capacity in the reinsurance market
  • Lurking undervaluation risk
  • Rise of AI and technology in risk mitigation

According to a recent McKinsey report, data involving global figures for 25 primary commercial lines carriers indicate a combined ratio of 91 percent for 2023, down from a high of 102 in 2020 but holding steady from the prior year. Commercial property comprised $254 billion (or 26 percent) of premiums across these carriers.

Before 2024, the overall U.S. P&C commercial market experienced hard market conditions going back to 2018, according to NAIC data and analysis. Double-digit rate increases were the norm, particularly for properties in high-risk regions or with poor loss histories. A Marsh McLennan report shows that in Q4 2023, rate increases averaged 11 percent for more considerable commercial property risks and even higher for accounts with loss history challenges or catastrophic exposure.  Carriers have delivered steady quarterly increases since 2017 “to offset pressures from catastrophes and economic and social inflation.” Capacity constraints, driven by increased reinsurance costs, compounded this hardening, creating challenges for insurers and policyholders.

However, commercial insurers benefited from underwriting margins that outperformed the long-term average despite slowing year-over-year growth in direct premiums written, according to the 2024 S&P Global Market Intelligence U.S. Property and Casualty Industry Performance Rankings report. The top 50 of the 100 evaluated carriers was dominated by commercial line providers, with insurers focusing primarily on commercial property lines capturing three of the top 10 spots. In comparison, only two personal lines carriers ranked in the top 50.

AM Best, which maintains that insured losses in recent years have been driven primarily by secondary perils such as severe convective storms, issued its “Market Segment Outlook: US Commercial Lines” report. The analysts predict a stable market segment outlook for the U.S. commercial lines insurance sector in 2025. The company expects the commercial lines segment “will remain profitable in the aggregate and will be resilient in the face of near- and longer-term challenges.” However, relatively high claims costs, the multi-year impact of social inflation, and geopolitical risks may pose threats. The latest AM Best report focused solely on the commercial property segment (dated March 2024) advises that the Excess and Surplus (E&S) market has absorbed some of the higher risks. Still, overall secondary perils continue to be a significant “offsetting factor” for commercial property.

The damage of weather events and natural catastrophes tend to make big headlines (and rightly so), but the overall risk for commercial property isn’t limited to the destruction wrought by each disaster. It also extends to the interactions between the event outcomes and human systems. Specifically, these events can strain regional economic systems, such as decreasing the availability of rebuilding materials and labor while simultaneously amplifying demand for these same inputs. In turn, property replacement costs can soar.

Reinsurance

In 2023, major changes in reinsurance policy structures and price increases compelled insurers to decrease limits and absorb higher retentions. The policy restructurings also meant primary insurers had to retain more losses from increased secondary perils, such as floods, wildfires, and severe convective storms, that they could not cede to the reinsurance market. The insurers’ retention of loss may have allowed the incubation of increased capacity in the reinsurance market, improving late in 2023 and into early 2024.

By mid-year 2024 renewals, reinsurance appetite had grown with easing in some loss-free areas and, as applicable, underwriting scrutiny held firm in others areas. Analysts observed “flat to down mid-to high-single digits” reinsurance risk-adjusted rates for global property catastrophes. A Marsh McLennan report noted modest growth in investment and capital due to increased market capacity and underwriting interest from carriers. Late 2024 catastrophic events and any similar activities in the coming year will likely remain a primary drivers for reinsurance costs, along with the increasing cost of capital, financial market volatility, and economic inflation.

To learn more about Triple-I’s take on these and other commercial property insurance trends, read the issue brief and follow our blog.

RiskScan 2024 reveals risk priorities across the insurance marketplace

By Mary Sams, Senior Research Analyst

Cyber incidents, changes in climate, and business interruption are the chief risk concerns among key marketplace segments in the insurance industry, according to RiskScan 2024, a new survey from Munich Reinsurance America Inc. (“Munich Re US”) and the Insurance Information Institute (Triple-I) reveals.

RiskScan 2024 provides a cross-market overview of top risk concerns among individuals across five key market segments: P&C insurance carriers, P&C agents and brokers, middle-market business decision makers, small business owners, and consumers. The survey explores not only P&C risks, but also how economic, political, and legal pressures shape risk perceptions. 

Methodology

To produce a compelling snapshot of cross-market views, Munich Re US and Triple-I engaged independent market researcher RTi Research in the summer of 2024 to survey 1,300 US-based individuals.

Market surveys typically focus on a single audience, but RiskScan 2024 is a multi-segment survey offering a comprehensive view of risk perceptions and yielding comparative results between audiences. The key insights present a variety of commonalities and disparities across the five distinct target segments, covering the full range of insurance buyers and sellers across the United States.

This online survey was conducted across gender, age, geographic region, household income, business revenue, and company size. 

Two primary cohorts make up five segments of participants in the RiskScan research:

  1. consumers and small business owners (n=700) and
  1. Insurance industry participants, which included carriers, agents, and brokers as well as middle market businesses (n=600). 

Research participants were presented with various risks across five segments and then asked to select their top three risk concerns. 

Key Insights

More than one-third of respondents chose economic inflation, cyber incidents, and climate change as their top three concerns based on insurance risks and market dynamics. All three of these reflect post-pandemic news topics. Economic inflation has increased over the last several years.  Consumers and small business owners have experienced direct impacts with increased costs and industry participants have seen these impacts on increased replacement costs and P&C insurance premiums.

There are significant disparities in the ranking results between the two primary cohorts within the research. Insurance professionals tend to identify a variety of risks and have significant awareness of all risk categories, including emerging technologies. As expected, these audiences exhibit broader knowledge and awareness of risk transfer and mitigation of new and emerging risks. Consumers identified a smaller number of risks associated with more immediate and direct impacts on themselves. 

The structure of RiskScan 2024 research yields a more complete understanding of the “white space” that exists between risk perception and action. The gaps were identified along three key risk areas: 

  • Flood risk
  • cyber risks, and
  • legal system abuse

Flood risk was also indicated as one of the chief concerns for each audience. However, consumers lack awareness that flood events are typically excluded from homeowner’s policies. Industry professionals are more aware of flood coverage exclusions, the importance of purchasing flood coverage before a flood event, and the likelihood of these events occurring.

Cyber incidents are a primary concern in all five market segments. Most audiences in the research, both consumer and commercial, feel unprepared as this threat vector is constantly emerging, expanding, and changing. Many people are knowledgeable about cyber risks and are concerned about how to mitigate new cyber threats. Troubling stories have come to light as the frequency and severity of cyber threats grow.

“The knowledge gap about insurance risks demonstrates the continued need for education of consumers and businesses, especially about flood, cyber, and legal system abuse,” says Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan. “Increasing knowledge will be instrumental for the collective work needed to better manage and mitigate future risks.”

The report includes additional results for each of the five primary audiences: consumers (n=500), small business owners (n=200), insurance carriers (n=200), insurance agents and brokers (n=200), and middle market businesses (n=200).

Download the full RiskScan 2024 report to review the details. Triple-I aims to empower stakeholders by driving research and education on this and other key insurance topics. Follow our blog to keep abreast of these essential conversations.

Improved Commercial Auto Underwriting Profitability Expected After Years of Struggle

The commercial auto insurance line has struggled to achieve underwriting profitability for years, even before the inflationary conditions that have been affecting property/casualty lines more recently. This trend has been accompanied by steady growth in net written premiums (NWP).

This weakness in underwriting profitability has been driven by several causes, according to a new Triple-I Issues Brief. One is the fact that vehicles – both commercial vehicles and personal vehicles they collide with – have become increasingly expensive to repair, thanks to new materials and increased reliance on sensors and computer systems designed to make driving more comfortable and safer. This well-established trend has been exacerbated by supply-chain disruptions during COVID-19 and continuing inflation in the pandemic’s aftermath.

Distracted driving and litigation trends also have played a role.

However, Triple-I sees some light on the horizon for commercial auto in terms of the line’s net combined ratio – a standard measure of underwriting profitability calculated by dividing the sum of claim-related losses and expenses by earned premium. A ratio under 100 indicates a profit and one above 100 indicates a loss.

As the chart below shows, the estimated 2024 net combined ratio for commercial auto insurance has improved slightly since 2023, and further improvement is expected over the next two years.

These projected improvements are based on an expectation of continued premium growth – due more to aggressive premium rate increase than to increased exposure – as the rate of insured losses levels off.

Strike’s Duration Will Determine Impact on P/C Insurance Industry

 

By Michel Léonard, Ph.D., CBE, Chief Economist and Data Scientist, Triple-I 

The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) went on strike on Tuesday, Oct 1. The strike is expected to affect more than 20 ports along the Eastern Seaboard and Gulf Coast, including the ports of New York and New Jersey, Baltimore and Houston.  

Focusing specifically on the strike’s impact on the property/casualty industry – and given the specific goods transiting through those ports – the impact will be most direct for homeowners, personal and commercial auto, and commercial property. More specifically, the strike may lead to increased replacement costs and delays in the supply and replacement of homeowners’ content, such as garments and furniture; of European-made vehicles and vehicle replacement parts; and of concrete, especially for commercial construction.  

However, the strike’s impact will be significantly mitigated by current inventories for each of the impacted insurable goods and the tightness of related just-in-time supply chains. At minimum, Triple-I estimates, the strike would have to last one to two weeks to trigger further sustained increases in P/C replacement costs or accelerate a current slowdown in P/C underlying growth.   

 Another way the insurance industry would be affected is from losses from coverage protecting against adverse business costs of events, such as strikes. These coverages include, but are not limited to, business interruption, political risk, credit, supply-chain insurance, and some marine and cargo. However, most such policies have waiting periods ranging from five to 10 days, and then deductibles, before payment is triggered. As a result, losses for those lines are likely to be limited if the strike lasts less than one to two weeks.  

 Using a one to two-week timeline is helpful: The last major longshoremen’s strike in the United States – at the port of Long Beach, Calif., in 2021 – lasted one week.   

Inflation is Top Challenge for Middle-Market Firms, Chubb Study Finds

By Max Dorfman, Research Writer, Triple-I 

Inflation remains the greatest challenge for middle-market companies, according to recent research from Chubb. While the companies Chubb surveyed performed well last year, they are looking at 2024 with trepidation, with rising wages expected to continue fueling inflation. Inflation has also been affected by the Middle East conflicts, which have altered trade routes. 

As a result, nearly three-quarters of companies said they would consider increasing their insurance coverage in response to rising replacement costs of their assets due to inflation.  

“For companies that experienced operational disruptions, nearly a third acknowledged that they could have been covered if they had purchased available insurance,” the report says. “In addition to potentially being underinsured for inflated property and equipment values, companies often underestimate the time it will take to get back up and running after an insured loss, which points to the need for adequate business interruption coverage and more thorough and realistic business continuity plans.” 

Middle-market companies have struggled with inflation since the coronavirus pandemic, partially due to changing employee dynamics. Recession and talent shortage/employee retention were also considered major risks, with 10 percent of those surveyed ranking one of these as the top concern for their companies in the coming year. 

The study notes that:  

  • More than two-thirds of companies have raised worker pay in the past year, with an average increase of 5.5 percent.  
  • To retain talented employees, nearly half of companies have offered incentive compensation or retention bonuses and plan to continue that in the future. 
  • Fewer than half the respondents felt they have enough cyber insurance coverage. 

Nearly 40 percent of companies surveyed by Chubb expect to raise the prices of their products and services because of these factors.  

Other significant findings include respondents stating that small companies are less prepared for business disruptions than mid-size and large ones. This, the study says, opens an opportunity for risk-management strategies that could reduce the need for increased coverage.  

Learn More:

Triple-I “Trends and Insights” Issues Brief: How Inflation Affects P/C Insurance Premium Rates — And How It Doesn’t

Surge in U.S. Auto Insurer Claim Payouts Due to Economic and Social Inflation

Homeowners Claim Costs Rose Faster Than Inflation for Two Decades

Group Captives Offer Cost-Sensitive Companies Opportunities to Save in Face of Inflation

The latest reports from FBI and ITRC reveal that cyber incidents in 2023 broke records for financial loss and frequency.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Cybersecurity-Blog.jpg

Cyber incidents reported to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) in 2023 totaled 880,418. These attacks caused a five-year high of $12.5 billion in losses, with investment scams making up $4.57 billion, the most for any cybercrime tracked. Phishing, with 298,878 incidents tracked (down from its five-year high in 2021 of 323,972), continues to reign as the top reported method of cybercrime.

The 2023 Data Breach Report from Identity Theft Resource Center (ITRC) reveals that last year delivered a bumper crop of cybersecurity failures – 3,205 publicly reported data compromises, impacting an estimated 353,027,892 individuals. Meanwhile, supply-chain attacks increased, and weak notification frameworks further increased cyber risk for all stakeholders.

Email compromise, cryptocurrency fraud, and ransomware increase

In addition to record-high financial losses from cybercrimes overall in 2023, the report revealed trends across crime methodology and targets. Investment fraud was the costliest of all incidents tracked. Within this category, cryptocurrency involvement rose 53 percent, from $2.57 billion in 2022 to $3.94 billion. Victims 30 to 49 years old were the most likely group to report losses.

Ransomware rose 18%, and about 42 percent of 2,825 reported ransomware attacks targeted 14 of 16 critical infrastructure sectors. The top five targeted sectors made up nearly three-quarters of the critical infrastructure complaints: healthcare and public health (249), critical manufacturing (218), government facilities (156), information technology (137), and financial services (122).

Adjusted losses for 21,489 business email compromise (BEC) incidents climbed to over 2.9 billion. The IC3 noted a shift from dominant methods in the past (i.e., fraudulent requests for W-2 information, large gift cards, etc.). Now scammers are “increasingly using custodial accounts held at financial institutions for cryptocurrency exchanges or third-party payment processors, or having targeted individuals send funds directly to these platforms where funds are quickly dispersed.”

The report disclosed a $50,000,000 loss from a BEC incident In March of 2023, targeting “a critical infrastructure construction project entity located in the New York, New York area.”

The IC3 says it receives about 2,412 complaints daily, but many more cybercrimes likely go unreported for various reasons. Complaints tracked over the past five years have impacted at least 8 million people. The FBI’s recommendations for solutions to minimize risk and impact include:

  • Ramping up cybersecurity protocols such as two-factor authentication.
  • More robust payment verification practices.
  • Avoiding engagement with unsolicited texts and emails.

The scale of 2023 data compromises is “overwhelming.”

According to the ITRC, the surge in breaches during 2023 is 72 percent over the previous record set in 2021 and 78 percent over 2022. To add more perspective, the ITRC notes that “the increase from the past record high to 2023’s number is larger than the annual number of events from 2005 until 2020, except for 2017.”

Meanwhile, as the report highlights, two other outsized trends converged: increasing complexity and risk. The number of organizations and victims impacted by supply-chain attacks skyrocketed. The notification framework conspicuously weakened, too. Since some laws assign liability for notification to organizations owning the leaked data, the notification chain would stop there, leaving downstream stakeholders unaware. For example, a software company servicing nonprofits might duly notify its direct B2B customers but not the individuals served by the nonprofit organization.

The ITRC has been reviewing publicly reported data breaches since 2005, and it now has a database of more than “18.8K tracked data compromises, impacting over 12B victims and exposing 19.8B records.” This ninth report forecasts a bleak outlook for the coming year. Specifically, “an unprecedented number of data breaches in 2023 by financially motivated and Nation/State threat actors will drive new levels of identity crimes in 2024, especially impersonation and synthetic identity fraud.”

The faster a breach is identified and reported, the faster all potentially affected parties can take measures to minimize impact. However, reporting regulations can vary across jurisdictions and businesses, and their supply chain partners may hesitate to disclose breaches for fear of impacting revenue and brand reputation. ITRC outlines its forthcoming uniform breach notification service designed to enable due diligence, emphasizing swift action and coordination with business and regulatory authorities. The service will be offered for a fee to companies looking to better handle cyber risk in their supply chains and regulatory requirements. Other recommendations include the increased use of digital credentials, facial identification/comparison technology, and enhancing vendor due diligence. 

The increased risk and rising financial losses from cyber risk likely drive growth for the cyber insurance market, which tripled in volume in the last five years. Gross direct written premiums climbed to USD 13 billion in 2022. For a quick rundown of how cyber insurance coverage supports risk management for organizations of all sizes, take a look at our cyber risk knowledge hub. To learn more about the fastest-growing segment of property/casualty, look at our recent Issues Brief.

Beyond Fire: Triple-I Interview Unravels Lightning-Risk Complexity

Lightning is a more complex peril than it is often given credit for being, according to Tim Harger, executive director of the Lightning Protection Institute (LPI). In a recent interview with Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan, Harger discussed the importance of preparing for and preventing damage from this risk, which is second only to flooding when it comes to costly weather events.

People typically think about fire damage when they think about lightning. But Harger said, “Beyond the fire is the destruction of electrical wires and infrastructure that supports everything we do to communicate and to conduct business.”

If lighting strikes any of these structures, he said, “Activity is stopped.”

Harger cited the case of an East Coast furniture manufacturer that was struck.

“That one lightning strike cost them just over a million dollars in damage,” he said. “Yes, there was the typical fire that caused structural damage, but what was impacted on the ‘inside’ was even more costly. They had damaged inventory, production downtime, and loss of revenue during the repairs.”

Investment in a lightning protection system could have saved this business owner – and his insurer – the million dollars lost and prevented business interruption. Nearly $1 billion in lightning claims was paid out in 2018 to almost 78,000 policy holders, according to LPI.

“Lightning strikes about a 100 times every second,” Harger said. “When installed properly, lightning protection systems are scientifically proven to mitigate the risks of a lightning strike.”

 A lightning protection system consists of six parts: 

  • Strike termination device,
  • Conductors,
  • Grounding,
  • Surge protection,
  • Potential equalization, and
  • Inspection. 

Architects and engineers play an important role in specifying and designing these systems, and installation is completed by certified lightning protection contractors. When properly installed lightning is intercepted by the strike termination device and energy is routed through the conductors and into the grounding system, preventing impact to the structure or electrical infrastructure.

“Businesses already install fire alarms and sprinkler systems to mitigate greater risks of fires,” Harger said. “Lightning protection systems prevent a lightning strike from causing any damage. So the investment in a lightning protection system prevents personal injury and the costly impact of even one strike.”

Several insurers offer premium discounts for policyholders who invest in lightning protection systems. LPI invites insurance providers who are interested in sharing their customer incentives to contact them at lpi@lightning.org.

Group Captives Offer Cost-Sensitive Companies Opportunities to Savein Face of Inflation

By Max Dorfman, Research Writer, Triple-I

Today’s inflationary conditions may increase interest for group captives – insurance companies owned by the organizations they insure – according to a new Triple-I Executive Brief.

Group captives recruit safety-conscious companies with better-than-average loss experience, with each member’s premium based on its own most recent five-year loss history. Additionally, the increased focus on pre-loss risk management and post-loss claims management can drive members’ premiums down even further by the second and third year of membership.

“Each owner makes a modest initial capital contribution,” states the paper, Group Captives: An Opportunity to Lower Cost of Risk. “The lines of coverage written typically are those with more predictable losses, such as workers compensation, general liability, and automobile liability and physical damage.”

With these benefits, the group captive model can help to control spiraling litigation costs. This is particularly important as attorney involvement in commercial auto claims – notably in the trucking industry – drives expensive litigation and settlement delays that inflate companies’ expenses.

Indeed, a 2020 report from the American Transportation Research Institute found that average verdicts in the U.S. trucking industry grew from approximately $2.3 million to almost $22.3 million between 2010 and 2018 – a 967 percent increase, with the potential for even higher verdicts looming.

Group captives can improve control over these costs through careful claims monitoring and review, often through providing additional layers of support that improves claims adjusting effectiveness and efficiency.

“Given that members’ premiums are derived from their own loss history, this is yet another way that they are able to lower their premiums, proactively managing and controlling the losses that do occur,” the Triple-I report mentions. “Group captives can provide a viable way to protect companies across several lines of casualty insurance. Their prominence is likely to grow as economic and litigation trends continue to increase costs.”

Most companies that join group captives are safety-conscious, despite often being entrepreneurial risk takers. “While they embrace the risk-reward trade-off, they’re not gamblers,” said Sandra Springer, SVP of Marketing for Captive Resources (CRI), a leading consultant to member-owned group captive insurance companies. 

“They are successful, financially stable, well-run companies that have confidence in their own abilities and dedication to controlling and managing risk,” Springer added. “They believe they will outperform actuarial projections, and a large percentage of them do.”

Learn More:

Backgrounder: Captives and Other Risk-Financing Options

Firm Foundation:  Captives by State

White Paper: A Comprehensive Evaluation of the Member-Owned Group Captive Option

Video: Executive Exchange: Triple-I and Captive Resources

From the Triple-I Blog:

Latest Research on Social Inflation in Commercial Auto Liability Reveals a $30 Billion Increase in Claims

How Inflation Affects P&C Rates and How It Doesn’t

Inflation Trends Shine Some Light for P&C, But Underwriting Profits Still Elude Most Lines

Monetary Policy Drives Economic Prospects; Geopolitics Limits Inflation Improvement

PFAS-Related Litigation May Signal an Emerging Liability for Insurers

Max Dorfman, Research Writer, Triple-I

Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS)—a varied group of human-made chemicals used in an array of consumer and industrial products—present a new potential liability for insurers, as U.S. regulatory activity continues to change, with lawsuit outcomes indicating this is an issue that will continue to develop.

PFAS, which have existed since the 1930s, are creating concern because of how ubiquitous they are, as well as their potential to harm people’s lives. They are used in everything from Teflon coatings to food packaging to firefighting foam, due to their capacity to resist oil and moisture. These qualities are also potentially damaging because they often stay in the human body, never entirely breaking down.

Though studies surrounding PFAS are not conclusive, they have been connected to cancer, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and thyroid disease. Their pervasiveness means everyone likely has some amount of PFAS in their blood stream. There is fear about their presence in water supplies, as well.

“PFAS are water soluble and dissolve readily in soil,” said Cindy Wilk, Global Environmental Liability Expert, Allianz Risk Consulting at AGCS. “An industrial accident or firefighting incident can result in their release into water sources, making local communities vulnerable, but PFAS can also migrate quickly through groundwater pathways to contaminate areas far from their original source.”

PFAS litigation continues to rise

PFAS litigation has seen tremendous growth over the past 20 years, beginning with a lawsuit filed against DuPont, the company that makes Teflon. DuPont was accused of contaminating water from a plant in West Virginia—resulting in a settlement to provide up to $235 million for medical monitoring of over 70,000 people. Several similar lawsuits have followed.

As of 2021, more than 5,000 PFAS-related complaints have been filed in 40 courts, with 193 defendants in 82 industries.

Additionally, in 2021, the PFAS Action Act passed the House and set the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on the recent course toward developing new PFAS standards. The act does not include a liability exception for water-wastewater utilities, despite the fact that these entities are not the source of PFAS, thus causing concern that they will be the target of civil litigation

How can insurers respond?

Although the Insurance Services Office (ISO) has not produced a PFAS-specific exclusion for commercial liability policies, work is being done on a draft exclusion, which could be published in late 2022. With that process still underway, several PFAS-related exclusions are circulating, some as a modification to the Total Pollution Exclusion or by establishing a stand-alone PFAS exclusion. Still, insurers must be wary of the potential liabilities, as the Biden Administration’s regulatory focus on PFAS could lead to increased litigation.

Reinsurer Gen Re recommends that insurers:

  • Take inventory of previously underwritten risks;
  • Carefully consider new risks at submissions; and
  • Keep abreast of PFAS, both as to scientific developments and the litigation that it spawns.

Matching Price to Peril Helps Keep Insurance Available & Affordable

Setting insurance prices based on the risk being assumed seems a straightforward concept. If insurers had to come up with a single price for coverage without considering specific risk factors – including likelihood of having to submit a claim – insurance would be inordinately expensive for everyone, with the lowest-risk policyholders subsidizing the riskiest.

Risk-based pricing allows insurers to offer the lowest possible premiums to policyholders with the most favorable risk factors, enabling them to underwrite a wider range of coverages, thus improving both availability and affordability of protection.

Complications arise when actuarially sound rating factors intersect with other attributes in ways that can be perceived as unfairly discriminatory. For example, concerns have been raised about the use of credit-based insurance scores, geography, home ownership, and motor vehicle records in setting home and car insurance premium rates. Critics say this can lead to “proxy discrimination,” with people of color in urban neighborhoods sometimes charged more than their suburban neighbors for the same coverage. Concerns also have been expressed about using gender as a rating factor.

Triple-I has published a new Issues Brief that concisely explains how risk-based pricing works, the predictive value of rating factors, and their importance in keeping insurance affordable while enabling insurers to maintain the funds needed to keep their promises to policyholders. Integral to fair pricing and reserving are the teams of actuaries and data scientists who insurers hire to quantify and differentiate among a range of risk variables while avoiding unfair discrimination.

“There is no place in today’s insurance market for unfair discrimination,” the brief says. “In addition to being illegal, discrimination based on any factor that doesn’t directly affect the insured risk would be bad business in today’s diverse society.”

Learn More:

Bringing Clarity to Concerns About Race in Insurance Pricing

Delaware Legislature Adjourns Without Action on Banning Gender as Auto Insurance Factor

Triple-I: Rating-Factor Variety Drives Accuracy of Auto Insurance Ratings

Auto Insurance Rating Factors Explained