1st View: Property and Casualty by Country

• Reinsurance capital remained plentiful for property catastrophe programs in Australia and New Zealand and multiple reinsurers looked to increase capacity with chosen buyers to hit their budget targets
• Reinsurers sought to hold the line on any price decreases, but reductions were achieved after a loss-free 2024 in both Australia and New Zealand. Those buyers able to successfully differentiate themselves achieved significant risk-adjusted savings
• Much like the 1.7.2024 renewal, reinsurer quotations were generally closely aligned, with fewer outliers than in recent years
• Reinsurer preference remained for upper and more remote layers and there remained subdued interest in earnings covers in Australia or New Zealand. Many buyers filled gaps lower down their protection towers with structured multi-year layers, or innovative sub-layer solutions
• In some cases, larger and more volatile property and engineering risks were carved out of reinsurance treaties and placed into newly established facultative facilities.

• Proportional treaties results were impacted by a large fire loss and Typhoon Yagi loss to various degrees. While overall market commissions were flat, individual companies' terms were dependent on their own performance. Commission levels and loss protection corridors were a key area of negotiation
• Catastrophe excess of loss structures were stable and more formal quotes were obtained at quoting stage. Loss free treaties achieved meaningful risk adjusted reductions, especially earthquake-only layers. For loss-impacted contracts the increases were narrower than previous years. Placement was smooth with ample capacity
• Risk excess of loss price movement was muted compared to catastrophe excess of loss, with the focus on loss activity towards the market fire loss. Additional premium features were adopted when leaders and buyers took different views on the potential loss amount.

• Reinsurance capacity remained abundant from both domestic and overseas reinsurers
• With no catastrophe losses reported in 2023 and 2024, risk-adjusted rate reductions were observed across loss free accounts
• Proportional capacity increased from local reinsurers as facultative placements were increasingly challenging to secure
• Overseas reinsurers presented a stronger preference for excess of loss capacity but offered proportional support selectively where buyers provided comfort around technical capabilities and the ability to show sufficient portfolio steering capabilities.

• Most property treaty programs produced improved results in 2023 and 2024, driven largely by a significant reduction in the frequency of large risk and cat losses
• Quoting competition was more intense for the excess of loss placements compared to the pro rata. Reinsurer appetite for event excess of loss was particularly strong
• The whole quoting process was prolonged as initial quotes were some way off buyers' expectations but once FOTs were released the placement ran smoothly
• Buyers achieved favorable adjustments to their proportional programs, including higher minimum commissions within sliding scales, improved Loss Participation Clause trigger points, and decreased reinsured participation percentages
• Market dynamics saw the entry of a few new reinsurers, while existing reinsurers focused on defending their expiring shares.

• There were elements of softening within the property risk and catastrophe excess of loss programs with mid-single digit reductions
• Some small flood event losses on the East Coast did not affect renewals although there was a large coastal flood loss involving car storage in Klang
• This renewal also saw high single digit increases in aggregate exposure and net retained income
• Reinsurers were still reluctant to quote to lead pro rata treaties, but programs were easily completed with some new reinsurers entering this space.

• Pricing movements for loss hit programs were not as aggressive as was signalled by reinsurers prior to renewal
• Cat capacity continued to be plentiful, resulting in increased competition for business
• There was stronger interest from the market for risk excess of loss and pro rata treaties, compared with the last two years.

• The Vietnamese market still relies heavily on proportional treaties for capacity. Excess of loss treaties are mostly small with low attachments points & low limits
• The competitive nature of capacity providers remained due to the historically low natural catastrophe activity and relatively stable and profitable treaty performance
• However, Typhoon Yagi (Sept 2024) hit the property & engineering lines with approximately USD 400 million of losses, making it the largest natural catastrophe loss in this market
• Due to the way proportional treaties are structured they were less affected compared to excess of loss contracts with many of the treaties projecting a positive balance despite the loss
• Price increases for the loss-hit excess of loss varied. For those with low- to mid-sized losses, pricing remained competitive but badly loss-hit excess of loss contracts received significant increases in rate
• Commissions for proportional treaties were between 0% and -2%
• More reinsurers were willing to quote this year and following capacity was plentiful.

• Severe loss activity in certain states (Lower Austria, Tyrol) affected the property catastrophe structures of some buyers, while in the per risk segment, the continuing trend of higher fire losses led to pressure on excess of loss layers and pro rata contracts
• Property surplus treaties were under scrutiny and faced deteriorating commission terms
• Those surplus treaties that were able to show profitable results in recent years succeeded in avoiding larger commission reductions
• Catastrophe excess of loss programs with retentions below a return period of 1 in 10 years were under the most pressure
• Catastrophe aggregate and catastrophe stop loss treaties also experienced some challenges.

Cat Excess of Loss

• The region was heavily loss impacted, with Storm Boris/September Flooding causing widespread damage, creating a footprint affecting seven countries across CEE. Additionally, the western Balkans once again saw significant hailstorms
• The underlying growth of buyers' catastrophe excess of loss portfolios, driven mostly by the delayed impact of inflation, has been substantial, leading to increased capacity requirements but also more premium on contracts ceded to reinsurers. Despite the post-loss environment, retentions were not under great pressure (provided a step up had been taken within last two or three years). There were no meaningful changes to contract wordings
• The main focus was on price discovery, where we saw one of the broadest variations in pricing, resembling the 1.1.2023 renewal, as buyers and reinsurers looked to find clearing prices
• Flood was the primary pricing peril for countries that were loss impacted and created some debate as to whether views of this risk should change
• While the region saw a modest influx of new capacity from new entrants, the more significant impact came from existing players eager to deploy additional capacity in what was seen as an attractive market. This ultimately suppressed rate increases
• Additional available capacity and a well-modelled loss allowed for an orderly placement of catastrophe treaties. Buyer size did play a role again and generally larger players were able to secure more favorable terms. Over-placements were minor
• Loss-free renewals were stable in terms of capacity and support, with small variations dependent on buyer-specific portfolios
• Risk excess of loss continued to be a harder marketplace than catastrophe, driven by ongoing loss activity in the region. Retentions were under greater pressure, even those that ran loss-free, as reinsurers attempt to avoid frequency. Cash spends were also up. Some reinsurers demonstrated an increased level of appetite, but it still lagged behind the catastrophe market levels. There were minimal over-placements
• Quota share treaties that ran well renewed largely as expiring, and reinsurers' appetite remained stable. The trend of moving from proportional to excess of loss continued at the 1.1.2025 renewal, with several buyers switching to risk excess of loss structures
• However, reasonably performing surplus treaties that have held firm during recent years were able to renew. Additional capacity was secured and commissions were stable.

• Property renewals were orderly this year
• After the 2022 hail losses and Storm Ciaran in 2023, 2024 was a quieter year in terms of natural event losses in Metropolitan France. In the French overseas territories, there were several important events, including the unrest in New Caledonia and Cyclone Chido in Mayotte, which generated widespread damage resulting in a significant humanitarian crisis. Economic losses from the cyclone are expected to be substantial, but the insurance penetration rate is low (around 6% according to France Assureurs) and insured losses are currently estimated to be in the range of EUR650 million to EUR 800 million. In Luxembourg, a series of thunderstorms occurred at the end of June and touched the bottom layers of cat programs
• During the last two years, buyers have had to increase their catastrophe excess of loss retentions. For 1.1.2025, the majority of the buyers kept their retentions stable
• Additional catastrophe excess of loss capacity was bought this year, and paid reinstatements and adjustable premiums remained the norm
• Some buyers bought reinstatement premium protections and additional bottom catastrophe excess of loss layers (2nd / 3rd event cover)
• Following negotiations with CCR about the economic conditions of their protection, some buyers also sought to optimize their flood & earthquake protection under their catastrophe excess of loss or bought specific French overseas covers
• Reinsurers still struggled to support aggregate covers including natural catastrophe cover, but some increased placements were achieved
• Property catastrophe supply was plentiful, thanks to increased appetite from reinsurers. Cat excess of loss programs were over placed
• Per risk program pricing depended on individual contract performance. There was strong appetite from reinsurers for sustainable structures
• For strikes, riots and civil commotion (SRCC) cover, there was no further discussion on the attachment points but there were talks around systemic risk, certain reinsurers keen to sublimit the risk. There was also many conversations around the definition of what SRCC covers.

• The 1.1.2025 renewal was driven by an oversupply of capacity and reinsurers’ desire to grow
• Most non-proportional programs remained loss-free in 2024, despite a series of (smaller) cat events during the summer
• Buyers could buy additional limits, mostly at the top of their programs, and achieve risk-adjusted savings
• The excess supply meant even some frequency covers were (re)introduced and fully placed, Aggregate excess of loss and stop loss programs were improved on prior years but overall remained unpopular with reinsurers. Intense competition at the top end of programs led to risk-adjusted reductions of around -10%
• Mid-layers saw risk-adjusted reductions around -5% and bottom layers renewed risk-adjusted flat
• In total we saw risk-adjusted reductions for whole programs of between -5% and -1%
• The sizeable June floods only caused losses to a few covers, which then renewed with risk-adjusted increases of +10% to +15%
• Proportional treaties remained flat or saw slight reductions in commissions, due to the frequency of smaller cat events during the summer 2024
• At the end of November/beginning of December we observed an additional softening, driven by signings on larger programs being somewhat bigger than expected by some reinsurers
• Consequently, not all lines could be taken up and some reinsurers could not deploy as much capacity as planned, which fueled this additional late softening
• There was little pressure from reinsurers to increase program retentions, with reinsurers agreeing that the substantial efforts made by buyers over the last two renewals were sufficient.

• Capacity for property catastrophe was stable, as was the amount of limit purchased, with retention levels generally renewing as expiring, with modest, budget-driven increases in attachment points
• Programs were quoted by reinsurers on a case-by-case basis, influenced by the 2023 severe convective storm (SCS) loss deterioration and following an uneventful 2024 year without any relevant natural catastrophe losses
• A significant influx of new capacity from London and Bermuda, and the desire for an accelerated payback, resulted in a market softening dynamic with overall pricing levels more often flat or down on a risk-adjusted basis at firm order terms
• Buyers with larger loss deteriorations adopted a more defensive approach. Agreeing on a risk-adjusted flat view has been challenging, given the changes to the modelling landscape on SCS
• Timing also played a role as the market softened more rapidly towards the end of the renewals
• Per risk programs remained fairly volatile in performance, with the market continuing to regularly experience losses in excess of EUR10 million, and significant losses in frequency layers below that
• As a result, reinsurers' view on pricing was extremely variable depending on historical performance. However, significant flexibility was observed at firm order terms and premium volumes continued to attract capacity
• A state-backed natural catastrophe scheme, which will make it mandatory for corporates registered in Italy to obtain natural catastrophe coverage, had its rollout delayed until 31 March 2025. In general, we saw no ad-hoc cover purchased.

• Capacity remained plentiful and demand broadly unchanged, with new and additional capacity committed by reinsurers seeking to expand in the region
• The 2024 DANA rainfall event and resulting floods drove property catastrophe discussions in Spain, with some reinsurers taking a cautious approach and holding for initial loss notifications from cedants, whilst others saw it as a modellable event, mainly covered by the Consorcio de Compensación de Seguros (CCS)
• Although several non-proportional programs were loss-affected, the impacts of this event were limited, in general, either due to the relative size of the loss or contribution of reinstatement costs
• Portugal also experienced a benign year for catastrophes, with limited impact from the October Kirk storm and September Wildfires
• Most standalone Event and Risk & Event excess of loss programs renewed with broadly expiring rates (on premium) and conditions, which translated into single-digit risk-adjusted increases, following the ongoing rate strengthening in the direct insurance property market
• Some standalone loss-affected risk excess of loss programs saw double-digit risk-adjusted increases and discussions on post-loss reinstatement cost management, which included restructuring programs with retention increases and partially pre-paid reinstatements
• Most proportional programs renewed with expiring commissions, with reinsurers benefiting from the primary insurance market rate increases. Slight commission reductions were still seen in loss-affected programs, or as a result of program restructuring.

• Risk and catastrophe capacity were buoyant, compared with last year, particularly for regional retro
• There was continued upwards pressure on catastrophe attachment points, particularly in the case of programs affected by the 2024 UAE floods, alongside continued interest in structured alternatives
• Proportional renewals have renewed broadly as expiring with no significant changes to structures, financials, or wordings, other than those hit by the UAE floods. Treaties with flood losses saw a reduction in surplus lines, increased gross retentions, and pressure on the commissions level.

• Deductible levels remained relatively stable, and an additional 5% of catastrophe capacity limit was purchased
• We observed a continued return of capacity and conditions were certainly softer, with more competitive pricing outcomes achieved across the market
• Existing leaders were challenged; indeed, leaders changed on some programs. Challenger positions weren't adopted by new entrants but instead were adopted by a few longstanding market participants
• Reinsurer behavior was influenced by improved by primary market conditions
• Commercial policy rates have hardened due to capacity contraction; they are expected to remain level for the foreseeable future
• SME commercial and personal lines rates remain unchanged, although motor rates have increased due to inflationary pressures
• Primary insurers, particularly the larger ones, have instilled much more underwriting discipline — with focus not only on pricing, but also measures such as geocoding and accumulation management, rigorous surveying, increasing deductibles, imposing sub-limits, and/or risk requirements.

• The market stabilized at 1.1.2025, with a more pragmatic pricing approach from reinsurers and room for negotiation. Firm order terms were generally lower than the average original quotations
• Catastrophe programs were loss-free, meaning programs were fully placed risk-adjusted flat, and where possible, a risk-adjusted reduction
• Some per risk programs were loss affected. Risk programs have been under more scrutiny than natural catastrophe programs in general, since the European risk market has not performed well, resulting in an uptick in rates
• Pro rata programs with good results were renewed unchanged, and in some cases with a slight improvement in terms and conditions.

• The region experienced localized freeze and snow pressure natural catastrophe events, which led to losses for some buyers in 2024. Norway also recorded further deterioration from 2023's Storm Hans. Despite this, the region remained a profitable and attractive diversifying territory for many reinsurers, with most targeting growth
• Following two years of retention growth, there was stability at this renewal, with buyers welcoming the reinsurance markets' interest in the region
• Placements were oversubscribed across the board, with top layers showing meaningful increases in capacity being offered
• Conditions remained unaltered from prior years
• Loss-free programs were able to attract risk-adjusted rate decreases, particularly at the top end of programs, while loss-hit buyers were able to achieve risk-adjusted rate increases within single digits, as the rating adequacy of the last two years meant reinsurers' interest in the region was maintained
• In property per risk, the loss activity seen over the last five years continued in 2024 with some large fire claims
• In the industrial segment, because of the recent large loss frequency, we observed a significant transformation into a co-insurance market and, with this, a re-entry of large international carriers into the Nordic corporate market. Over time, this will lead to a reduction of local treaty limits and less facultative needs for peak risk exposures
• Close attention was put on original underwriting, loss limits, original lines offered, with reinsurers wanting to understand the accumulations that will occur from changes in the original market
• Reinsurers were therefore keen to look at the region with a fresh outlook and multiple reinsurers sought to grow or enter this region
• Detailed portfolio information and transparency around underwriting strategy was clearly rewarded by reinsurers. Those able to demonstrate loss-free accounts achieved risk-adjusted reductions
• Buyer-specific underwriting meant that retentions were not under pressure and no market-wide approach was adopted with regards to minimum rates online.

• The renewal market normalized for 1.1.2025, with more than enough capacity being made available by reinsurers, who demonstrated increased appetite for Swiss business
• The (smaller) catastrophe events during the summer did not impact covers in 2024, and we observed an additional softening towards the beginning of December
• Together with the above outlined general state of the market this led to healthy over placements of +10% to +25%, giving buyers room to manoeuvre on signings
• Consequently, not all lines could be taken up and some reinsurers could not deploy as much capacity as planned which then fuelled some additional softening.

• Turkey saw a relatively calm renewal following the severe market adjustment at 1.1.2024 on the back of the 2023 Kahramanmaras earthquake. This was despite the increased capacity demands by most buyers, ranging from +30% to +50% of additional limit. We estimate that an additional of EUR3 billion of capacity was needed by Turkish buyers, including any exposures from Global insurers. This puts the overall local catastrophe excess of loss market capacity at circa EUR 11B including the Turkey Catastrophe Insurance Pool
• The trend of moving away from proportional treaties continued this renewal. Some buyers switched either partially or fully to gross excess of loss structures. The move explains part of the EUR 3 billion increased capacity needed this year, with the remainder explained by inflation outpacing the depreciation of Turkish Lira, leading to higher limits in monetary terms
• Despite the trend of moving away from proportional treaties, there are still only a few gross excess of loss structures in the market. Demand for per risk excess of loss deals protecting the retained portfolio and the gross excess of loss deals were mainly met by the reinsurers. However, programs with low priorities and loss-affected bottom layers were more challenging
• The additional capacity required by the market counter-balanced any softening trends, leading to a relatively flat risk-adjusted renewal. Rates included a significant payback element on top of technical adequacy. Several international markets (including from Lloyd's of London) who entered Turkey in the 1.1.2024 renewal continued their support. At the same time, long-standing medium and large size reinsurers increased their participations materially to meet the increased demands of buyers, leading to timely placements
• Parametric products, such as 'cat-in-a-box' featured extensively, as buyers looked to complement traditional reinsurance capacity at different levels of the programs. We saw several reinsurers, both specialist and traditional writers, deploy parametric capacity, albeit still in a limited way. Additionally, to avoid any clash with traditional capacity, buyers were selective when sourcing parametric capacity from traditional writers. As such, we have not yet seen an increasing market competition in this field.

• The 2024 hurricane season was notably active for the Latin America and Caribbean region. Seasonal outlooks predicted a very active season in the North Atlantic and below-average in the Pacific and the season largely followed these outlooks - although the North Atlantic was uncharacteristically quiet during the traditional peak months. Overall, the region experienced 12 storms from the North Atlantic basin and two from the Pacific basin, which contributed to total economic losses of more than USD3.5B. The unprecedented losses in Southern Brazil due to heavy rainfall were notable
• The diverse nature of these losses and the unique characteristics of each sub-region make it difficult to draw a single general conclusion on market behavior and trends related to capacity and pricing for the 1.1.2025 renewals. However, certain patterns have emerged during the current renewal period:
  • Capacity for pro rata programs in Latin America was more balanced in terms of deployment. Many reinsurers reserved catastrophe capacity primarily to support the organic growth of existing clients, rather than pursuing significant growth or participations in new programs. Even so, some reinsurers had to reduce their percentage shares to maintain their monetary lines, as programs' limits expanded. The Caribbean experienced a more challenging trend with some reinsurers reducing pro rata capacity leading buyers to increase excess of loss limits to maintain their overall capacity
  • Capacity deployment was significantly more weighted towards excess of loss programs, resulting in greater pricing variations across the region. In most cases, capacity supply remained ample. Additionally, some reinsurers deployed more capacity on higher layers, reflecting continued shifts in underwriting appetite and strategy. While there was no shortage of capacity in the Latin America and Caribbean market for excess programs, there has been no notable influx of new reinsurers either
  • Pricing trends were varied and client- and region-specific. In Latin America, on a risk-adjusted basis, loss-free programs generally saw flat rates, with occasional modest reductions in cases where reinsurers were comfortable with existing technical pricing levels. In contrast, loss affected programs experienced rate increases aligned with loss impact to the program. Additionally, reinsurers seized opportunities to offer competing pricing for loss-affected programs, challenging existing leaders and complicating renewals for incumbents. In the case of the Caribbean, the surplus capacity remains modest enabling reinsurers to hold firm and resist rate reduction and, in some cases, continue to push for rate increases
• In summary, the Latin America and Caribbean reinsurance market continued to grapple with a dynamic landscape shaped by the potential for high-severity events, secondary perils, and the evolving underwriting strategies of reinsurers.

• 2024 marked a historical year of catastrophe losses in Canada with approximately CAD8 billion in insured losses mostly emanating from the summer events which included hail in Alberta, flooding in Ontario and Quebec, and wildfires in Jasper, Alberta
• Despite the largest historical year-to-date of catastrophe losses for Canada, the insured losses were not broadly absorbed by all primary insurers. While some experienced losses that outsized their market share, others were well below or completely unscathed. Furthermore, this same phenomenon applied to the reinsurers; as such, reinsurance pricing varied, based on reinsurers' results. Those that experienced larger underwriting deficits quoted more aggressively than those with better results
• The recent catastrophic results created more scrutiny around secondary peril pricing and continuous adjustments to reinsurance retentions, which saw further increases to those programs that hadn't made the necessary changes in prior years in line with their underlying exposure
• In general reinsurance pricing varied broadly across reinsurance programs depending on each buyer's ceded loss ratio results
• Quotes had larger variances but the movement from quotes to FOTs were much larger than had been experienced in recent years, with some reinsurers coming off their quotes well above the normal average
• Contractual terms and conditions seem to have reached a level of consistency and balance, with minimal negotiations surrounding wording and more focus on price
• Many catastrophe programs were oversubscribed with more capacity available on higher attaching layers and consequently pricing was more aggressive on higher layers with more pressure on the lower end of catastrophe programs
• Catastrophe layers with losses experienced more pressure on price but capacity availability was sufficient at the appropriate pricing levels to meet demand
• Property per risk programs focused on increasing retentions where "dollar swapping" still exists. Pricing has trended along with exposure growth, and minimal pressure on rate increases was pushed on growing portfolios, unless there were significant losses. There was also increased interest and support from international reinsurers, in addition to domestic reinsurers engaging more, buoyed by ceded margins improving over the last couple of years.

• Reinsurers generally were responsive throughout the placement process with timely feedback, pricing indications, and authorized capacity
• Quoting data indicates most reinsurers were looking to hold the line near risk adjusted flat pricing. However, in some cases, the quoting process unveiled a wide range of pricing perspectives, with certain reinsurers indicating their ability and interest to maintain/grow market share early in the placement process, while other reinsurers sought to push for higher pricing
• Retentions were largely maintained YOY, and lower layers attracted more capacity as reinsurers were looking to defend their capacity higher up in programs. Mid to upper catastrophe layers experienced the largest risk adjusted decreases
• Property per risk placement outcomes were more dependent on program experience and strength of reinsurer relationships.
• Quota share terms generally improved for buyers as the impact of rate and cost sharing mechanisms have strengthened the health of the underlying business
• As the renewal process played out, despite varying views of pricing in the quoting phase, reinsurers looked to support firm order terms with increased capacity and concurrent terms and conditions to achieve desired signings.

• Ongoing consolidation amongst UK insurance companies has resulted in a significant reduction in 'standalone' UK property cat and risk placements being purchased in recent years
• As a result, reinsurance supply outstripped demand leading to rate softening and loosening of contractual terms with hours clauses expanding and pre-paid reinstatements available.

• Overall, reinsurers demonstrated a healthy appetite for casualty and motor reinsurance business, attracting offers from both existing supporters of placements as well as new entrants
• As expected, loss-free renewals outperformed loss-affected accounts, however those buyers that could demonstrate with data and a clear strategy that their underwriting was improving the underlying portfolio, achieved better outcomes than those without the same level of granularity
• Accounts without US exposure received less pressure from reinsurers than those with US risks. This continues to be a key area of concern for reinsurers, and they expect their clients to be de-risking by reducing line deployment, restricting coverage, increasing original attachment points, and focusing on price adequacy. Buyers that could demonstrate such actions achieved more favorable results
• PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) remained a hot topic with some reinsurers trying to tighten treaty cover further but generally new restrictions were avoided where it could be shown that buyers had taken action and were actively managing exposures
• Buyers' interest in understanding and managing the casualty systemic and accumulative or clash risk within their portfolios has grown and we have seen more buyers actively modelling the underlying risk and exploring options for casualty catastrophe and clash protections.

• Overall, both domestic and internationally based reinsurers demonstrated a healthy appetite for casualty reinsurance business underwritten in Australia and New Zealand
• As expected, loss-free renewals outperformed loss-affected accounts, however buyers that could demonstrate with data that their underwriting was improving the underlying portfolio, also outperformed those without the same level of granularity
• Discussion on the impacts of inflation persisted. However, as inflation levels approach normalcy, discussions on other hot topics such as PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) and US exposures within the portfolios took over. Instead of widespread application of exclusions or reduction in limits, reinsurers generally undertook a balanced approach to understanding the buyer's approach to these exposures
• Buyers' ongoing interest in understanding and managing the casualty systemic and accumulative risk within their portfolios has grown and we have seen more buyers actively modelling the underlying risk and exploring options for casualty catastrophe protections.

• Casualty excess of loss structures were stable with more quoting activities, buyers smoothly achieved their target price.

• Appetite remained strong for General Third-Party Liability
• No large loss activity this year thus the overall treaty results remain positive.

• Appetite remained stable for General Liability programs
• Price driven by individual performance
• Reinsurers still cautious on US exposure and PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances)
• For PFAS exposures reinsurers were able to push for exclusion for US exposure or other sensitive exposures (e.g., municipalities).

Motor (France)

• After two years with high price increases, we observed more price moderation for 2025. Nevertheless, some buyers increased their retentions significantly to manage their budgets
• For specific segments, reinsurers showed a modest resurgence of interest, but there was still limited appetite for uncapitalized annuity clauses, compared with capitalized annuity clauses.

Motor (Benelux)

• The appetite of reinsurers remained unchanged and retentions were stable.

• Dynamics on long-tail business have been affected by inflation-driven adjustments to the Court of Milan indemnity tables, the point of reference for compensation of non-pecuniary damages in the market together with those published by the Court of Rome
• Accordingly, reserves have been updated over the summer, leading to risk-adjusted views for both Motor and Casualty being revised upwards. However, a growing appetite for non-catastrophe business and capacity flowing into long-tail lines of business resulted, in many cases, in firm order terms reductions, or only modest increases
• Reinsurers generally accepted the view that inflation adjustments had already been factored in in previous years, even in the absence of a formal update from the Court, and, therefore, have shown significant flexibility at renewals
• PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) and US-exposed portfolios have been a growing concern and made wording discussions more problematic.

• Loss activity has been relatively benign on Canadian casualty business with minimal movement on pricing and in many cases a decline due to competition
• Reinsurance pricing was competitive, with quotes spread out across panel of quoting markets
• There was an increase in appetite to grow on "working" or lower layer casualty business with reinsurers offering more capacity
• Reinsurers were looking to reduce cyber and per-and polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) exposure across casualty programs
• There was reduced appetite from domestic and London reinsurers for casualty clash layers.

• Overall capacity for US Casualty remained stable albeit individual reinsurer appetites shifted. Some reinsurers looked to modestly scale back positions while others looked to selectively grow
• Structures remained consistent year over year and carriers sought to maintain placement cessions
• Pricing and individual program appetite was highly dependent on individual carriers' performance trends and dynamics. Those who were able to provide detailed data and evidence-based arguments and analysis of underwriting and claims actions, were able to achieve favorable YoY pricing outcomes, preserve capacity and fortify reinsurer relationships
• Recent re-acceleration in original rates of the underlying business also helped stabilize the reinsurance market, as reinsurers took confidence in carriers' ability to continue to drive pricing adequacy. This was most prominent in Umbrella and Excess Liability portfolios but also in Primary lines.

• Pricing trends increased, as severity continued to be prevalent across all subsegments of US Healthcare
• Capacity remained adequate overall, with select reinsurers moderately flexing their appetite
• Hospital exposures continued to be the most scrutinized subsegment by reinsurers given the larger limit stretches and track record of significant 'nuclear verdicts' — with particular reinsurer attention being paid to sexual abuse and misconduct exposures
• While the state location of loss continues to be a key consideration in evaluating the potential for severity, the spread of 'nuclear verdicts' across many states - even those historically deemed as favourable — contributed to the pricing pressure
• Frequency trend continues to be flat to negative, but severity and frequency of severity trends both continue to rise
• The net result was an overall trend ranging from mid-single digits to low-double digits increases, based on subsegments and loss locations, which tend to be very buyer specific.

• Quota share terms were under pressure again this year with continued adverse development (PY 2017-2020) and ongoing negative rate, driven by US Public D&O. Modified coverage terms were used to minimize economic changes
• Capacity remained stable with some signs of expanding appetite amid early indications of the underlying market rate conditions improving
• There was increasing interest and exploration of excess of loss to supplement quota share placements, but it remained a small element in overall market
• The Transactional Liability market is evolving with reinsurer concerns around aggregation and underlying pricing, most notably for contingent liability. Capacity reduced and quota share terms were put under pressure.

• While there was continued pressure for increased rates on working layers (single claimant exposed), it was not as intense as it was around mid-year 2023
• Payroll increases played a role in counterbalancing the ongoing decreases in primary rates across all states
• Additionally, the entry of new participants in the market helped ease the pricing pressure on working layers
• Meanwhile, catastrophe capacity remains plentiful, resulting in flat rates on lines year over year.

• Concern remains around US bodily injury classes which has resulted in increased due diligence but capacity grew modestly and pricing terms were largely stable
• For portfolios with no US exposure, capacity was robust and reinsurers have been highly competitive on true international business.

• The Financial Lines reinsurance market was orderly with sufficient capacity. Despite the continued softening of original rates, primarily in D&O, the degree of reductions have begun to stabilize. Focus remains on US D&O, but overall, reinsurers showed a greater willingness to engage and differentiate cedants compared to 1/1/24
• In Transactional Liability and Contingent Liability specifically, very limited reinsurance capacity remains for Contingent Liability business, following emergence of a number of well publicized active litigations losses.