Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/287712 
Year of Publication: 
2021
Citation: 
[Journal:] The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice [ISSN:] 1468-0440 [Volume:] 47 [Issue:] 1 [Publisher:] Palgrave Macmillan UK [Place:] London [Year:] 2021 [Pages:] 125-171
Publisher: 
Palgrave Macmillan UK, London
Abstract: 
Reinsurance and CAT bonds are two alternative risk management instruments used by insurance companies. Insurers should be indifferent between the two instruments in a perfect capital market. However, the theoretical literature suggests that insured risk characteristics and market imperfections may influence the effectiveness and efficiency of reinsurance relative to CAT bonds. CAT bonds may add value to insurers' risk management strategies and may therefore substitute for reinsurance. Our study is the first to empirically analyse if and under what circumstances CAT bonds can substitute for traditional reinsurance. Our analysis of a comprehensive data set comprising U.S. P&C insurers' financial statements and CAT bond use shows that insurance companies' choice of risk management instruments is not arbitrary. We find that the added value of CAT bonds mainly stems from non-indemnity bonds and reveal that (non-indemnity) CAT bonds are valuable under high reinsurer default risk, low basis risk and in high-risk layers.
Subjects: 
CAT Bond
Reinsurance
Risk management
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Creative Commons License: 
cc-by Logo
Document Type: 
Article
Document Version: 
Published Version

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.