Five reasons Q2 was different


Many of the names remained the same, but second-quarter cat bond issuance activity was different from the norm, says Tom Johansmeyer, assistant vice president, reinsurance services, marketing at ISO/Verisk Insurance Solutions.

johansmeyer-thomas-portrait-2.jpgDespite the fact that many of the names remained the same, second-quarter issuance activity was much different in 2016 than in previous first halves. You can learn more in Does Size Matter? PCS Q2 2016 Catastrophe Bond Report.

1. Smaller and familiar: Issuance activity fell 26 percent by capital raised, 12.5 percent by transaction volume. Thus, while there were only slightly fewer transactions, those completed were much smaller, with average size dropping 21.5 percent to a bit above $200 million. The absence of large second-quarter transactions—such as Sanders Re, Everglades Re, and Kilimanjaro Re—contributed significantly to this change.

Also, the market saw few new entrants in the first half of 2016. Only two first-time sponsors entered the catastrophe bond market in 2016, one using Property Claim Services (PCS) data for independent catastrophe designation.

Johansmeyer, catastrophe, bond, market, issuance, second-quarter, ISO/Verisk, transactions

More on this story

Were you slaughtered by basis risk in Japan?

Intelligent Insurer