CEIOPS publishes Solvency II QIS3 results
CEIOPS has released the results of the third Quantitative Impact Study, while the FSA releases results from the UK survey
FRANKFURT – The Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) has published the conclusions from its third Quantitative Impact Study (QIS3), which tested the design framework for Solvency II insurance regulation.
Some 1,027 insurance companies from 28 of the 30 states within the European Economic Area were surveyed, almost double the 514 respondents to QIS2.
QIS3 tested group supervision for the first time, and multiple approaches for some elements, contributing towards an informed adoption of the best option by the 2012 deadline – although further calibration will come with QIS4.
CEIOPS said feedback was less consistent for some more controversial topics, such as the treatment of concentration and counterparty risk, and the equity risk approach based on the duration of liabilities.
The testing also revealed the amount of change needed to comply with the minimum capital requirement (MCR) and solvency capital requirement (SCR), concluding that, despite the changes needed to adapt to a risk-orientated system, 98% of firms will meet the MCR without allocating additional capital.
CEIOPS concluded that 30% of undertakings would have 50% surplus capital under the new regime, although for 34% the surplus would decrease by the same amount – meaning that 16% of firms will need to allocate more capital to meet their SCR.
On operational risk, CEIOPS reported most firms recognised the area deserved special attention, although participants said full correlation with the other forms of risk was not possible, and demanded the recognition of diversification effects.
Worryingly, 21% of firms still did not consider an operational risk strategy necessary, and of those that did, 30% considered it unnecessary to define their risk appetites within the strategy.
Only 38% of firms collected historical loss data for op risk analysis, although a further 24% planned to in the future.
More encouragingly, 65% of respondents said a committee structure was necessary for operational risk strategy, with most of these involving the board of directors directly in the committee’s work.
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has also released the UK results. UK participation was considerably higher than for QIS2, representing 65% of life firms and 75% of non-life firms, respectively.
While UK solvency ratios would reduce, the industry as a whole would require a substantial buffer of capital greater than the SCR, with varying effect between firms. Over 80% of UK firms could report a capital surplus over the standard SCR as proposed in QIS3 and a reduction in their overall solvency ratio compared to the current requirements under the Insurance Groups Directive.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Solvency II
Lack of transposition to delay Mifid II enforcement
Some states won’t have adopted directive before June, making rule-imposition difficult, say lawyers
Capital and funding
Quants propose KVA and FVA accounting framework based on Solvency II regulation
Testing interest rate models for Solvency II applications
Alexey Botvinnik and Vladimir Ostrovski propose a validation method for interest rate models
Eiopa cuts matching adjustment risk margin
UK insurers welcome additional capital relief
Solvency II volatility dampener ineffective for euro periphery
Stress tests expose flaw in formula to calculate volatility adjustment
Solvency II technical draft too harsh, firms claim
Industry representatives call on Eiopa to soften draft specifications
Commission 'must ensure proportionality of Solvency II' rules as MEPs give green light to new regime
Omnibus II approved by European Parliament
EC to restrict deferred tax assets in Solvency II
Rules expected to be tightened on determination of future profits