Journals

Journal of Risk and Insurance

The Journal of Risk and Insurance (JRI) is the premier outlet for theoretical and empirical research on the topics of insurance economics and risk management. Research in the JRI informs practice, policy-making, and regulation in insurance markets as well as corporate and household risk management.

JRI is the flagship journal for ARIA and is currently indexed by the American Economic Association’s Economic Literature Index, RePEc, the Social Sciences Citation Index, and others. Issues of the JRI, from volume one to volume 82 (2015), are available online through JSTOR. Recent issues of the JRI are available through Wiley Online Library. A subscription to the Journal of Risk and Insurance is one of the many benefits of ARIA Membership.

The JRI has opened a call for papers for a special issue on health insurance decision-making. Submissions are due by October 15, 2021. See the call for proposals.

Journal of Risk and Insurance

Volume 88, Issue 2

Estimating the relation between digitalization and the market value of insurers

We analyze the relation between digitalization and the market value of US insurance companies. To create a text-based measure that captures the extent to which insurers digitalize, we apply an unsupervised machine learning algorithm—Latent Dirichlet Allocation—to their annual reports. We show that an increase in digitalization is associated with an increase in market valuations in the insurance sector. In detail, capital market participants seem to reward digitalization efforts of an insurer in the form of higher absolute market capitalizations and market-to-book ratios. Additionally, we provide evidence that the positive relation between digitalization and market valuations is robust to sentiment in the annual reports and the choice of the reference document on digitalization, both being issues of particular importance in text-based analyses.

Read full abstract

Read Article

Journal of Risk and Insurance

Volume 88, Issue 2

The information content of the Solvency II ratio relative to earnings

We examine the information content of disclosures of solvency and earnings information of European insurance companies under the Solvency I and Solvency II regulatory regimes. Using an event-study research design, we investigate a sample of 571 announcements of 46 insurance firms during the 2012–2018 period. We find that under the Solvency I directive, investors find unexpected earnings to be informative but not the unexpected solvency ratio. However, under the Solvency II directive, both unexpected earnings and the unexpected solvency ratio are relevant to investors. Based on a decomposition of explained variance, we find that under the Solvency II directive, investors’ attention has partly shifted away from earnings information toward solvency information. Our results indicate that the disclosed solvency ratios contain value relevant information under the risk-based Solvency II framework and that the requirements under this framework shift investor attention toward solvency information and away from earnings of European insurance companies.

Read full abstract

Read Article

Journal of Risk and Insurance

Volume 88, Issue 2

Did COVID-19 change life insurance offerings?

The profitability of life insurance offerings is contingent on accurate projections and pricing of mortality risk. The COVID-19 pandemic created significant uncertainty, with dire mortality predictions from early forecasts resulting in widespread government intervention and greater individual precaution that reduced the projected death toll. We analyze how life insurance companies changed pricing and offerings in response to COVID-19 using monthly data on term life insurance policies from Compulife. We estimate event-study models that exploit well-established variation in the COVID-19 mortality rate based on age and underlying health status. Despite the increase in mortality risk and significant uncertainty, the results generally indicate that life insurance companies did not increase premiums or decrease policy offerings due to COVID-19. Nonetheless, we find some evidence that premiums differentially increased for individuals with very high risk and that some policies were removed for the oldest of the old.

Read full abstract

Read Article
Learn More Browse Journal Join to Access

Risk Management & Insurance Review

Risk Management and Insurance Review publishes high-quality applied research, well-reasoned opinion and discussion in the field of risk and insurance. Additionally, the Review provides a repository of high-caliber model lectures in risk and insurance, along with articles discussing and evaluating instructional techniques. A subscription to the Risk Management and Insurance Review is one of the many benefits of ARIA Membership.

Risk Management & Insurance Review

Volume 24, Issue 2

Market reactions to enterprise risk management adoption, incorporation by rating agencies, and ORSA Act passage

Prior literature on Enterprise Risk Management’s (ERM) value implications focuses on cost–benefit analyses of implementing an ERM program. We take a novel approach by examining the implementation dynamics and study whether the timing of firms’ adoption affects ERM’s value implication. We find that firms experienced positive (negative) abnormal returns when adopting ERM following (before) 2005 when Standard & Poor’s (S&P) issued their ERM-related rating criteria. We also find evidence that ERM firms experienced positive abnormal market reactions to this rating criteria change by S&P but find no evidence for the following change by A.M. Best. In addition, our study documents that the market rewarded ERM adopters and penalized nonadopters after November 2011 on key dates leading to the passage of the Own Risk Solvency Assessment (ORSA) Act when there was less uncertainty regarding ultimate passage of the Act. Overall, our results imply that the capital market’s view on ERM is shaped by rating agency and regulatory changes. Our findings are also consistent with the view that investors gain a greater understanding of ERM over time.

Read full abstract

Read Article

Risk Management & Insurance Review

Volume 24, Issue 2

How competitive are income annuity providers over time?

The 2019 SECURE Act provides safe harbor protections to employers who evaluate the costs of providing guaranteed income including gathering information on competing providers. Annuities can be more difficult to evaluate than mutual funds because annuity expenses can be opaque, financial strength matters, and insurer competitiveness can change over time. We find significant variation in the payout rates across providers over time. While the payout rankings of annuity companies (e.g., best to worst) are fairly sticky over the short-term, over the full period of the analysis the correlation declines effectively to zero (vs. the initial rankings). This suggests individuals or institutions who choose a single annuity provider based on income payout should revisit the decision regularly to ensure the quotes are still competitive. Companies for which immediate annuities are a higher fraction of total sales tend to rank higher and remain so more persistently over time.

Read full abstract

Read Article

Risk Management & Insurance Review

Volume 24, Issue 2

Weighted risk models for dynamic healthcare fraud detection

Despite efforts to prevent it, fraud in the United States healthcare system remains a serious and pressing issue. Since healthcare fraud is a complex and multi-faceted problem, fraud-fighting solutions must be flexible enough to address the ever-evolving nature of the crime. Here, we present a method to identify healthcare fraud in such a manner that incorporates both potential fraud as well as risky provider behavior. The proposed weighted risk model provides a framework for creating a dynamic fraud detection database that can be easily scaled up to incorporate emerging fraud schemes.

Read full abstract

Read Article
Browse Journal Join to Access