Curbing systemic risk in the insurance sector: A mission impossible?

This paper addresses the issue of systemic risk in insurance and investigates how financial markets evaluate the introduction of a new regulation addressed to global systemically important insurers (G-SIIs). We analysed the stock price reactions and the evolution of the distance-to-default of a sample of 44 of the world's largest insurers to the publication of the first list of 9 G-SIIs and the release of information regarding their new capital requirements and other policy measures. The results of our event study suggest that, overall, investors doubt the effectiveness of the new regulatory framework in reducing systemic risk in the insurance sector and curbing the moral hazard implications of a “too systemic to fail” policy.     

On the exposure of insurance companies to sovereign risk—Portfolio investments and market forces

A sovereign debt crisis can have significant knock-on effects in the financial markets and put financial stability at risk. This paper focuses on the transmission of sovereign risk to insurance companies as some of the largest institutional investors in the sovereign bond market. We use a firm level panel dataset that covers large insurance companies, banks and non-financial firms from nine countries over the time period from 1 January 2008–1 May 2013. We find significant and robust transmission effects from sovereign risk to domestic insurers. The impact on insurers is not significantly different from that on banks but larger than for non-financial firms. We find that systemically important insurers are more closely linked to the domestic sovereign. Based on European data, we show that risks in sovereign bond portfolios are an important driver of insurer risk, which is not reflected in current insurance regulation (incl. Solvency II in Europe).     

Systemic Risk,Financial Crisis,and Credit Risk Insurance

Differing from conventional insurance firms whose underwriting business does not contribute to systemic risk, credit risk insurance companies providing credit protections for debt obligations are exposed to systemic risk. We show that credit risk insurers (CRIs) underperformed conventional insurance companies during the 2007–2009 financial crisis, and such underperformance is attributed to the greater systemic risk of CRIs. We also find that the credit spreads of insured bonds increase significantly after their insurers are downgraded or put in the negative watch list. We control for alternative factors affecting bond credit spreads and the result is robust.     

中国的“影子保险”:来自监管自然实验的证据

影子保险在金融稳定中扮演着重要角色,但现有文献较多关注影子银行,对影子保险关注不足。“影子保险”即保险公司通过再保险方式将保险业务转移给不受监管或者受监管较弱的关联企业的活动,这会推高其真实的杠杆水平,增加金融体系脆弱性。然而,由于影子保险的不透明性和缺少自然实验,现有研究仅基于有限数据或模型给出简单的特征事实或结构性估计,很少能从因果关系上清楚地识别影子保险活动及其机制。本文利用中国加强对中资保险公司(处理组)再保险关联交易监管的政策冲击这一自然实验,使用微观数据和双重差分方法,识别了中国金融体系中的影子保险活动。研究发现,相关监管有效降低了影子保险活动,这一效应对集团公司的影响尤为显著;在机制方面,相关监管通过影响中资保险公司资产负债表两端的结构性调整进而降低了其风险承担行为,提高了经营稳定性。本文方法对识别金融机构的监管套利和防范系统性金融风险具有一定参考意义。     

Systemic Risk in the Insurance Sector: A Review and Directions for Future Research

This article reviews the extant research on systemic risk in the insurance sector and outlines new areas of research in this field. We summarize and classify 48 theoretical and empirical research papers from both academia and practitioner organizations. The survey reveals that traditional insurance activity in the life, nonlife, and reinsurance sectors neither contributes to systemic risk nor increases insurers’ vulnerability to impairments of the financial system. However, nontraditional activities (e.g., credit default swap underwriting) might increase vulnerability, and life insurers might be more vulnerable than nonlife insurers due to higher leverage. Whether nontraditional activities also contribute to systemic risk is not entirely clear; however, the activities with the potential to contribute to systemic risk include underwriting financial derivatives and providing financial guarantees. This article is not only likely of interest to academics but also highly relevant for the industry, regulators, and policymakers.     

中国房地产企业间系统性风险溢出效应分析——基于尾部风险网络模型

本文以2007—2021年沪深A股上市房企为样本,首先基于SIM单指数分位数回归技术提出测量系统性风险的新指标SIM-CoVaR,并结合前沿的TENET网络模型,构造跨房地产企业风险动态传染的尾部风险网络,然后采用块模型探究房地产市场系统性风险溢出的聚类性、触发机制及传播路径,最后考察网络整体结构和宏观经济变量对房地产市场系统性风险溢出的影响。研究表明:(1)我国房地产企业间存在明显的系统性风险联动性和溢出效应,在市场动荡时期房地产部门是金融风险溢出的放大器;(2)评估系统重要性节点企业时,除考虑企业规模等内部属性,还应考虑房企间关联结构,利用系统性风险指数可有效捕捉网络中系统重要性节点;(3)跨房企的系统性风险溢出具有显著的聚类特征,尾部风险网络可被划分为4个不同的功能模块,各模块的成员及其角色呈现明显的时变特性,监管部门可据此从供给端“因企施策”;(4)网络聚集性、网络效率和网络匹配性的降低能显著降低房地产市场的系统性风险溢出效应。本文从企业微观层面探讨房地产市场风险的形成机制,为促进房地产业健康发展和防范化解宏观层面的系统性金融风险提供参考。     

Systemic risk of insurers around the globe

We study the exposure and contribution of 253 international life and non-life insurers to systemic risk between 2000 and 2012. For our full sample period, we find systemic risk in the international insurance sector to be small. In contrast, the contribution of insurers to the fragility of the financial system peaked during the recent financial crisis. In our panel regressions, we find the interconnectedness of large insurers with the insurance sector to be a significant driver of the insurers’ exposure to systemic risk. In contrast, the contribution of insurers to systemic risk appears to be primarily driven by the insurers’ leverage.     

On Litigation Risk and Disclosure Complexity: Evidence from Canadian Firms Cross-Listed in the US

We find that D&O insurance premiums for Canadian firms cross-listed in the US are more than twice those of Canadian-only listed firms, and audit fees are approximately 50% higher. While this supports the view that both service-providers view the US as a more litigious environment, our findings also suggest that these differentials for cross-listed firms reflect premia for both litigation risk and the complexity of firms' financial disclosures. In particular, we show that D&O liability insurers charge differently for cross-listed firms that have different levels of disclosure; while D&O premiums are significantly higher for all cross-listed firms, they increase and then decrease with increased disclosure complexity. In contrast, audit fees increase monotonically as the filing complexity increases. We also find that auditors appear to price abnormal premiums charged by D&O insurers. Thus, audit fee premia for cross-listed firms appear to capture aspects of both litigation risk and increased disclosure complexity.     

Effects of business diversification on asset risk-taking: Evidence from the U.S. property-liability insurance industry

We investigate the effect of line-of-business diversification on asset risk-taking in the U.S. property-liability industry. The coordinated risk management hypothesis (Schrand and Unal, 1998) implies a negative relation between underwriting risk and investment risk. Consistent with this hypothesis we find that diversified insurers take more asset risk than non-diversified insurers, and that the degree of asset risk-taking is positively related to diversification extent. Our results are robust to corrections for potential endogeneity bias, selectivity bias, and alternative diversification and asset risk measures. We also provide event study evidence that further supports the coordinated risk management hypothesis. Specifically, we find that when a focused firm diversifies, it increases its asset risk relative to firms that remain focused, and when a diversified firm refocuses, it reduces its asset risk relative to firms that remain diversified.     

Auditor quality,audit fees,organizational structure,and risk taking in the US life insurance industry

Using a system of simultaneous equations, this study examines the relation among external audit monitoring, in the US life insurance industry. We find insurers with higher leverage risk and surplus risk are more likely to use Big‐4 auditors and to pay higher fees. In return, insurers hiring Big‐4 auditors and paying higher audit fees have lower leverage risk and surplus risk. Second, the results suggest that mutual life insurers have a higher leverage risk and surplus risk than stock life insurers. This evidence is in contrast to that for property–liability insurance companies. Third, we find insurers are less likely to hire Big‐4 auditors and to pay higher audit fees after implementation of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act (SOX). Finally, life insurers with Big‐4 auditors or paying higher audit fees are more likely to take lower risks after the implementation of SOX.     

Securitization and systemic risk: An empirical investigation on Italian banks over the financial crisis

This research examines the effects of securitization on the bank's risk exposure both in terms of individual expected shortfall and marginal expected shortfall as a measure of systemic risk. The relationship between securitization activity and tail risks is especially relevant in light of the consequences for financial stability, both for the individual securitizing banks and for the market as a whole, as the financial crisis 2007–2008 reveals. By using a sample of Italian listed banks over the period 2000–2009, we find that securitizing banks have, on average, higher expected losses in case of extreme events. This adds new evidence on the main findings in the literature that focused on the evidence that risk transfer through securitization is relatively insignificant compared to the risk retained by the originating bank. We show that this risk retention is in terms of an increase of tail risk. We also find that securitization increases the probability of banks to become “systemically” riskier, but we find no difference when comparing the pre-crisis with the post-crisis period. This suggests that the systemic exposures of Italian banks are still as high as before the crisis with severe implications for financial stability.     

基于动态因子Copula模型的我国银行系统性风险度量

本文基于2007年至2019年我国14家上市银行的股票收益率,构建偏态t-分布动态因子Copula模型,利用时变荷载因子刻画单家银行与整个系统的相关性,计算联合风险概率作为系统性风险整体水平的度量,基于关联性视角提出了新的单家机构系统脆弱性和系统重要性度量指标——系统脆弱性程度和系统重要性程度。该方法充分考虑了银行个体差异性和系统的内在关联性以及收益率的厚尾性和非对称性,从而能够捕捉到更多的信息且兼具时效性。研究表明:银行机构在风险聚集时期相关程度更大,联合风险概率能够准确识别出系统性风险事件且在我国推行宏观审慎评估体系以后有明显降低;整体而言,大型商业银行系统重要性水平最高,同时风险抗压能力也最强;本文使用的度量方法降低了数据获取成本且更具时效性,有助于为宏观审慎差异化监管工作提供借鉴和参考。     

Risk spillovers and interconnectedness between systemically important institutions

In this paper, we gauge the degree of interconnectedness and quantify the linkages between global and other systemically important institutions, and the global financial system. We document that the two groups and the financial system become more interconnected during the global financial crisis when linkages across groups grow. In contrast, during tranquil times linkages within groups prevail. Global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) contribute most to system-wide distress but are also most exposed. There are more links coming from G-SIBs to other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) than the other way around, confirming the role of G-SIBs as major risk transmitters in the financial system. The two groups and the global financial system tend to co-vary for periods up to 60 days Prior to their official designation as G-SIBs or O-SIIs, the prevalent news sentiment about these institutions (we measure with a textual analysis) was negative. Importantly, the systemic importance and exposure of G-SIBs and O-SIIs is perceived differently by the Financial Stability Board (FSB) and the European Banking Authority (EBA).     

我国金融机构尾部风险影响因素的非线性研究——来自面板平滑转换回归模型的新证据

“十三五”期间,我国防范化解金融风险攻坚战取得决定性成就,而在“十四五”规划开局之际,我国的金融风险形势面临新的挑战,防范风险仍是金融业的永恒主题。在此背景下,本文采用相对重要性分析技术方法,考察机构规模以及相关基本面因素对我国上市金融机构尾部风险的贡献程度。接着,本文结合边际效应分析技术考察机构规模对风险的异质性效应,深入分析“太大而不能倒”假说在中国的适用性。在此基础上,进一步运用前沿的面板平滑转换估计模型,研究机构规模与尾部风险的非线性关系,并分析基本面因素对该异质性效应的影响力度。研究结果表明,我国上市银行等金融机构规模的增加能够有效缓释我国金融系统的尾部风险,但该影响效应将随着特许权价值、资产质量、杠杆水平、成本水平、收入结构、贷款结构等基本面指标的变化而出现显著的非线性转变。在此基础上,对强化我国金融系统中的风险防控薄弱环节、提高金融机构的风险吸收能力提出建议,以期为我国深化金融业改革开放、推动高质量发展提供理论分析与实证检验的参考依据。     

Parameter risk in time-series mortality forecasts

The projection of mortality rates is an essential part of valuing liabilities in life insurance portfolios and pension schemes. An important tool for risk management and solvency purposes is a stochastic projection model. We show that ARIMA models can be better representations of mortality time-series than simple random-walk models. We also consider the issue of parameter risk in time-series models from the point of view of an insurer using them for regulatory risk reporting – formulae are given for decomposing overall risk into undiversifiable trend risk (parameter uncertainty) and diversifiable volatility. Particular attention is given to the contrasts in how academic researchers might view these models and how insurance regulators and practitioners in life offices might use them. Using a bootstrap method we find that, while certain kinds of parameter risk are negligible, others are too material to ignore. We also find that an objective model selection criterion, such as goodness of fit to past data, can result in the selection of a model with unstable parameter values. While this aspect of the model is superficially undesirable, it also leads to slightly higher capital requirements and thus makes the model of keen interest to regulators. Our conclusions have relevance to insurers using value-at-risk capital assessments in the European Union under Solvency II, but also territories using conditional tail expectations such as Australia, Canada and Switzerland.     

Organizational structure,risk-based capital requirements,and the sales of downgraded bonds

Using bond downgrades as external shocks to life insurers’ asset risk, we document several findings of the impact of organizational structure and risk factors on investment risk taking. First, we find that mutual insurers and widely-held stock insurers are more likely to sell downgraded bonds than are closely-held stock insurers. Second, we find evidence that insurers are less likely to sell downgraded bonds that remain in the same rating class than bonds downgraded to a lower rating class. The result implies that insurers sell downgraded bonds mainly because of additional capital charge is imposed, not because of downgrade itself. In other words, risk factors in risk-based capital regulation do matter on life insurers’ investment risk taking. Finally, we find that life insurers might be reluctant to sell downgraded bonds at fire-sale prices during the 2008–2009 financial crisis.     

An empirical assessment of reinsurance risk

We analyse the effect of failing reinsurance cover on the stability of Dutch insurers. As insurers often reinsure themselves with other (re)insurers, a firm's loss could spread contagiously through the sector. Using a unique and confidential data set on reinsurance exposures, we gain insight into the reinsurance market structure and perform a scenario analysis to measure contagion risks. Considering entities on a standalone basis, we find no evidence of systemic risk in the Netherlands, even if multiple reinsurance companies fail simultaneously. At group level our analysis points to the contagion risk of in-house reinsurance structures, given that such in-house reinsurance parties are generally not higher capitalised than other group members.     

Systemic risk contribution of banks and non-bank financial institutions across frequencies: The Australian experience

The Australian financial sector (AFS) is highly concentrated and interconnected. Besides, Australian banks' lending portfolios are dominated by residential mortgage loans, and 70% of insurance companies' revenues arise from non-policyholder sources. The AFS also performed relatively well during the global financial crisis (GFC). Given these distinctive features, in this paper, we examine the systemic risk contribution of Australian banks, insurance companies, and other financial services providers. We use a flexible copula-based delta conditional value-at-risk (ΔCoVaR) method across different frequencies. Further, we study the systemic risk determinants in a panel setting. We find that the major Australian banks are systemically more important than all other financial institutions. Systemic risk is typically higher after the GFC than in the pre-crisis period, despite the introduction of more stringent capital requirements. In addition, the short-term ΔCoVaR is significantly higher than the medium- and long-term ΔCoVaRs. Finally, institution-specific characteristics and market-wide variables explain the cross-sectional and time-series variation in systemic risk, and their explanatory power varies across frequencies.     

基于动态因子Copula模型的我国银行系统性风险度量

本文基于2007年至2019年我国14家上市银行的股票收益率,构建偏态t-分布动态因子Copula模型,利用时变荷载因子刻画单家银行与整个系统的相关性,计算联合风险概率作为系统性风险整体水平的度量,基于关联性视角提出了新的单家机构系统脆弱性和系统重要性度量指标——系统脆弱性程度和系统重要性程度。该方法充分考虑了银行个体差异性和系统的内在关联性以及收益率的厚尾性和非对称性,从而能够捕捉到更多的信息且兼具时效性。研究表明:银行机构在风险聚集时期相关程度更大,联合风险概率能够准确识别出系统性风险事件且在我国推行宏观审慎评估体系以后有明显降低;整体而言,大型商业银行系统重要性水平最高,同时风险抗压能力也最强;本文使用的度量方法降低了数据获取成本且更具时效性,有助于为宏观审慎差异化监管工作提供借鉴和参考。     

Risk,Capital, and Operating Efficiency: Evidence from Taiwan’s Life Insurance Market

ABSTRACT

In this article, we investigate the relationships among risk, capital, and operating efficiency for Taiwanese life insurance companies from 2004 to 2009 by using the two-stage least-square approach. We find a positive relation between inefficiency and product risk. At the same time, efficient insurers are seen as taking higher asset risk than inefficient insurers. A contrasting finding also shows that the relationship between capital and product risk is positive, while the relationship between capital and asset risk is negative. Moreover, we present a negative relationship between inefficiency and capital level, indicating that well-capitalized insurers operate more efficiently than poorly capitalized insurers.