During the summer both A.M. Best and Fitch assigned ‘positive’ outlooks to their current Lloyd’s market ratings. S&P did so last year.
Translating the A.M. Best rating scale to the one used by S&P and Fitch this means that Lloyd’s is rated ‘A+’ with a positive outlook by all three agencies.
While a subsequent upgrade from any one agency is not a given this suggests (absent a – truly – major loss) that a ‘AA’ range rating from one or more of the agencies is very likely in the not too distant future.
This would be both a notable step in the long-run post R&R transformation of Lloyd’s and also a profound event for the global reinsurance and specialty lines sector.
If the latter point seems like hype, consider this; only eight of the largest 40 reinsurance groups in the world have a major reinsurance carrier rated in the ‘AA’ range by S&P*. Lloyd’s paper would be rated equivalent, or close, to the strongest globally available from professional reinsurers. Yet organisations can transact business via Lloyd’s who could never begin to achieve that rating level independently.
Writing at Lloyd’s for any re/insurance group with an ability to also write via its own carriers is often seen as a ‘trade-off’. The market costs and Franchise Board oversight are seen (by some at least) as negatives, while the licences, (potential) capital efficiencies, distribution and brand are positives. The current rating is an important positive for many – but not all – and not so much that it is the overwhelming factor for much of the market’s capacity.
BUT, if the decision to trade at Lloyd’s also means the ability to offer ‘AA-‘ paper then it becomes a whole new ball game.
Even very well known ‘A’ or ‘A+’ rated groups (for their non-Lloyd’s carriers) that are active at the market might now say “of-course we can offer you ‘AA-‘ paper via our Lloyd’s platform if you prefer”. We could even finally see some true ‘credit risk’ based pricing spreads emerge. And those not active at the market would be faced with a very different ‘cost/benefit’ scenario about whether to pursue participation.
Of course, we should not confuse this with the idea that a rating is, per se, the only way re/insurers, brokers, or buyers should communicate or evaluate financial strength. At Litmus we have long argued that a balanced set of inputs should be considered. Nonetheless, there’s no avoiding the fact that a ‘AA-‘ rating in the reinsurance market is a very powerful card.
How Lloyd’s might react to any flood of participation interest is itself an issue. The rating agencies have heavily bought into the ‘selectivity’ and oversight of the Franchise Board in getting to the current rating levels (along with the demonstrated robustness of the ‘market level’ capital model). So, from both a ‘market’ and a ‘ratings protection’ perspective the Franchise Board is likely to be very cautious about any ‘upgrade driven’ participation interest.
Nonetheless the market wants risk spread in the world’s growth economies and what better way to get it than by being able to say ‘if you meet our standards you can offer ‘AA-‘ paper to your clients’; a rating level higher than that of the sovereign in most of those markets.
* Source: S&P’s Global Reinsurance Highlights 2013
Stuart Shipperlee, Analytical MD