The Risk Implications of Insurance Securitization: The Case of Catastrophe Bonds

Catastrophe (Cat) bonds are insurance securitization vehicles which are supposed to transfer catastrophe-related underwriting risk from issuers to capital markets. This paper addresses key, unanswered questions concerning Cat bonds and offers the following results. First, our findings show firms that issue Cat bonds exhibit less risky underwriting portfolios with less exposure to catastrophe risks and overall less need to hedge catastrophe risk. These results show that the access to the market for insurance securitization is easiest for firms with less risky portfolios. Second, firms that issue Cat bonds are found to experience a reduction in their default risk relative to non-issuing firms and our results, therefore, demonstrate that Cat bonds provide effective catastrophe hedging for issuing firms. Third, firms with less catastrophe exposure, increase their catastrophe exposure following an issue. Therefore, our paper cautions that the ability to hedge catastrophe risk causes some firms to seek additional catastrophe risk

The Shareholder Wealth Effects of Insurance Securitization: Preliminary Evidence from the Catastrophe Bond Market

Insurance securitization has long been hailed as an important tool to increase the underwriting capacity for companies exposed to catastrophe-related risks. However, global volumes of insurance securitization have remained surprisingly low to date which raises questions over its benefits. In this paper, we examine changes in the market value of insurance and reinsurance firms which announce their engagement in insurance securitization by issuing catastrophe (Cat) bonds. Consistent with the hitherto underwhelming contribution of Cat bonds to global catastrophe coverage, we do not find evidence that Cat bonds lead to strong wealth gains for shareholders in the issuing firm. More importantly, we report large variations in the distribution of wealth effects in response to the issue announcement. We show that the wealth effects for shareholders in firms which issue Cat bonds appear to be driven by explanations according to which Cat bonds offer cost savings relative to other forms of catastrophe risk management (and less by the potential of Cat bonds to hedge catastrophe risk). Thus, abnormal returns are particularly large for issues by firms which face low levels of loss uncertainty (which reduces the information acquisition costs in financial markets) as well as for issues during periods when prices for catastrophe coverage (including Cat bonds) are low