amotash5's picture
From amotash5 rss RSS  subscribe Subscribe

Insurance Asset Management: A Market Survey 

Insurance Asset Management: A Market Survey

 

 
 
Tags:  content management  marketing  asset management  asset management news 
Views:  257
Published:  November 08, 2011
 
0
download

Share plick with friends Share
save to favorite
Report Abuse Report Abuse
 
Related Plicks
Marketing Digital Asset Management

Marketing Digital Asset Management

From: ajhart
Views: 223 Comments: 0
Marketing Digital Asset Management
 
EDHEC Asset Management Days 2007

EDHEC Asset Management Days 2007

From: anon-591410
Views: 167 Comments: 0
EDHEC Asset Management Days 2007
 
Travel Agency Marketing Support through Marketing Resource Management

Travel Agency Marketing Support through Marketing Resource Management

From: sproutloud
Views: 546 Comments: 0
Travel Agency Marketing Support through Marketing Resource Management.

SproutLoud helps companies manage local marketing efforts for their brands. Our online marketing resource management system gi (more)

 
Digital Asset Management and Deployment Program MRM SproutLoud

Digital Asset Management and Deployment Program MRM SproutLoud

From: sproutloud
Views: 304 Comments: 0
SproutLoud Digital Asset Management and Deployment Program MRM –
SproutLoud’s asset repository will allow the Administrators to: - Control the assets that will be made a available on a per country basis - Easily make these (more)

 
rich-media-content- management

rich-media-content-management

From: manisha229249
Views: 109 Comments: 0
News and media companies require dynamic and collaborative systems to deliver up-to-date rich media contents, using innovative means to keep a tap on competition and cost. Read Infosys white paper "Approach and Benefits of Embarking Rich Media Conte (more)

 
See all 
 
More from this user
Customer Rapid Explanation

Customer Rapid Explanation

From: amotash5
Views: 166
Comments: 0

Struts Tuttorial

Struts Tuttorial

From: amotash5
Views: 2183
Comments: 0

xcel energy 10K_03/09/05

xcel energy 10K_03/09/05

From: amotash5
Views: 386
Comments: 0

one ford

one ford

From: amotash5
Views: 188
Comments: 0

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

PROGRAM OBJECTIVES

From: amotash5
Views: 165
Comments: 0

Small business workshop

Small business workshop

From: amotash5
Views: 651
Comments: 0

See all 
 
 
 URL:          AddThis Social Bookmark Button
Embed Thin Player: (fits in most blogs)
Embed Full Player :
 
 

Name

Email (will NOT be shown to other users)

 

 
 
Comments: (watch)
 
 
Notes:
 
Slide 1: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Insurance Asset Management Investment Approach & Manager Dynamics Specialized Financial Services Consultancy • 2007
Slide 3: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Insurance Asset Management: A Market Survey Over the past several years, we have worked with a number of insurers to strategically improve their general account investments, including strategic business organization, investment strategy development processes, and third party asset manager programs. As we have analyzed the insurance marketplace, we have noticed a significant lack of focus on insurance asset management as a discrete discipline. With the continuing growth of insurance asset management outsourcing, we felt that it was timely to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the scope and unique characteristics of this marketplace. We are pleased to release the findings of our Insurance Asset Manager Survey, which we conducted in partnership with Insurance Finance & Investment (IFI). Participants spanned the money management marketplace, from boutique insurance managers to diversified global institutions. Over 50 investment firms, each of which actively markets asset management services to insurance companies, kindly collaborated with us. They enabled the quantification & segmentation of insurers outsourcing preferences and the analysis of managers’ disparate business models at an unprecedented level of detail. We have sought to provide a multi-focused analysis that is of value to both insurers and the money managers that serve them. How does the unique investment philosophy of different segments of the insurance marketplace drive outsourcing decisions? How are the investment mandates given to third parties evolving? Which managers focus on specific markets and products and why? As the global insurance marketplace evolves and the on-going search for increased yields and returns continues, insurers and asset managers are increasingly developing synergistic relationships to maximize firm value, while managing investment-related risk. Successful relationships are being built on mutual collaboration, developing liability-driven investment strategies tailored to the specific needs of insurers. They utilize the breadth of resources available to third party managers. This domestic and international growth is expected to continue under dual drivers – the potential of increased portfolio returns for insurers and the opening of profitable asset gathering opportunities for managers. We hope that you find this survey to be valuable in your business, whether you are an insurer seeking new managers or a money manager seeking perspective and access to one of the largest growth segments of the marketplace. We would like to extend our particular thanks to all the participants of the 2006 survey, through whom this work has been possible. Sunny Patpatia President & CEO Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C .
Slide 5: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Table of Contents Scope of Survey & Management Profiles Survey Participants Key Findings A Market in Evolution Insurer’s Challenges A Growing Market The Global Dynamic Differentiated Needs Across the Insurance Spectrum Insurer Size Segmentation The Segmentation Dynamic Asset Class Utilization The Character of Insurance Asset Managers Role of Derivatives Conclusions 1 2 7 12 14 15 16 17 19 20 22 26 27 29 Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C .
Slide 7: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Scope of the Survey & Manager Profiles This analysis is founded principally on information collected through a comprehensive survey of asset managers serving the insurance marketplace, complemented by proprietary market data and extensive research of select insurance companies’ practices. The asset manager survey was conducted through the combination of a written survey and one-on-one communications. The survey instrument included both quantitative business measures (e.g. insurance client type breakdown) and qualitative components (e.g. investment strategy development). Except where otherwise noted, all asset and client data has been reported as of September 30, 2006. Following the initial data collection, executive management, portfolio managers, marketing, and customer relations professionals at each manager participated in strategic conversations regarding their unique approaches to the insurance marketplace. These discussions were undertaken throughout the fourth quarter of 2006 and first quarter of 2007. Research focused on the managers’ quantitative business fundamentals and their perceptions of the insurance marketplace, with topics including: − − − − − Buying preferences of different insurers Distribution of insurance client size Managers’ insurance business strategy Managers’ investment approach Degree of customization of mandates − − − − − Leading investment strategies Types of insurers engaging the managers Size of insurance mandates Insurance general account asset allocation Required service offerings to target insurers The analysis focused on general accounts, an insurer’s own corporate assets garnered from insurance product proceeds and used to back future insurance payments on products such as traditional life, fixed annuities, auto insurance, and health care programs. These were selected to emphasize their true institutional nature and insurance investment particularities, including the asset-liability management-driven investment strategies and an income orientation. Sub-advisory (i.e. separate account) assets, generally encompassing the management of subaccounts for variable annuity & variable life products, were identified separately in the survey. The sub-advisory assets of managers have been excluded from most of the analysis due to their distinct retail nature. The study focuses, rather, on institutional general accounts. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 1
Slide 8: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Survey Participants With 52 participants, the 2006 incarnation of the survey encompasses a broad selection of global money managers. More firms than ever before are focusing on insurers as a separate & discrete opportunity to gather institutional assets. Our 52 respondents reflect a nearly 50% increase over previous surveys conducted by Insurance Finance & Investment (IFI). The survey is highly representative of the insurance outsourcing marketplace, with participants in this survey managing over $748 B, which accounts for over 90% of the total insurance assets outsourced today. The survey respondents are asset managers that focus explicitly on insurers as a market. They are predominantly core fixed income or equity money managers. Alternative investment specialists (i.e. funds of funds managers, private equity firms) that service insurers as an ancillary business focus, therefore, remain largely outside the scope of this analysis. This results in an anticipated underreporting of insurers’ use of third parties to manage non-traditional investments. Insurance General Account Assets of Participants M arket: $ 804 B Survey R epresentation $ 748 B Survey participants can The majority of participating managers have trace 9% of their total assets diversified businesses, gathering assets from a under management to variety of pension, foundation/endowment, general account insurance corporate, retail, and sub-advisory clientele. clients who are not affiliated Insurance companies, however, have become with themselves. material to their business success. Survey respondents today can trace 9% of their total assets under management to non-affiliated general account insurance clients. A full range of firms now compete for insurers’ assets. The increasingly diverse nature of the insurance asset management marketplace is reflected in the breadth of the 2006 survey participants, including: 1. Insurance asset management specialists 2. The 3rd party investment operations of insurance companies 3. Investment banks leveraging broader capital raising relationships with insurers 4. Leaders in fixed income investments for pensions & other institutional clients 5. Recent entrants who have extended their focus from sub-advising to more dedicated insurance practices 6. Firms managing specialty asset classes - e.g. CDOs, bank loans, fixed income hedge funds Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 2
Slide 9: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 2007 Insurance Asset Manager Survey Participants ($ in Billions) Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 Company Deutsche Asset Mgmt. BlackRock Conning Asset Management GE Asset Management Wellington Mgmt. Company General Re-New England AM Western Asset Management State Street Global Advisors Evergreen Investment Mgmt. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. JPMorgan Asset Management AAM PIMCO Goldman, Sachs Asset Mgmt. Hyperion Brookfield AM AllianceBernstein Morgan Stanley Inv. Mgmt. Wells Capital Management Loomis, Sayles & Company Principal Global Investors Brown Brothers Harriman Prudential Investment Mgmt. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors ING Investment Management Delaware Investments Trust Company of the West Advantus Capital Victory Capital Management Munder Capital Management Voyageur Asset Management Robeco Weiss, Peck and Greer Citigroup Alternative Investments Madison Investment Advisors Capital Group International Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. WB Capital Management New York Life Inv. Mgmt. Dwight Asset Management Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC MBIA Asset Management MFC Global Inv. Mgmt. Babson Capital Management Denver Investments Advisors Hillswick Asset Management Advent Capital Management Cohen & Steers Capital Mgmt. Allegiance Capital Fort Washington Inv. Advisors Froley, Revy Investment Co. Putnam Investments Entrust Capital Highland Capital Mgmt. Total Third-Party GA 141.5 109.0 63.4 60.4 55.4 49.5 39.4 23.6 21.3 17.6 17.1 14.9 13.3 12.7 12.5 10.1 8.8 8.4 7.7 5.8 5.7 5.4 5.2 4.6 4.1 2.9 2.7 2.7 2.6 2.4 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.4 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 <0.1 N/A N/A N/A 748.5 Affiliated 0 0 2.0 31.2 0 21.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 149.2 0 1.4 69.2 0 0 2.1 57.8 0 128.6 1.6 202.9 66.7 0 9.2 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 74.7 0 108.1 18.8 0 11.5 139.7 61.8 0 0 0 0 0 22.7 0 0 0 N/A 1,180.5 Sub-Advised 1.6 N/A 0 0 102.1 1.0 0 23.3 0.8 0 0 0 33.0 23.9 0 59.3 11.9 3.1 7.4 0 0 0 0.6 0 0 1.8 0 <0.1 0.8 0 0 2.1 0 4.7 9.7 0 0 1.3 9.3 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.1 <0.1 N/A 317.9 Total Ins. 143.1 109.0 65.4 91.6 157.5 71.7 39.4 46.9 22.1 17.6 17.1 14.9 195.5 36.6 13.9 138.6 20.7 11.5 17.2 63.6 5.7 134.0 7.4 207.5 70.8 4.7 11.9 2.8 3.4 2.4 2.2 3.9 1.8 6.3 85.8 1.4 109.2 21.2 10.4 12.4 140.6 62.6 0.8 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 22.8 <0.1 20.1 <0.1 N/A 2,246.9 Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 3
Slide 10: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Please note that the following rankings are based upon an analysis of asset managers’ third-party general account assets; firms that did not supply detailed business line or regional data during the survey have been excluded from the rankings below. 2007 Life & Annuity Manager Rankings Top L&A Managers – By Total L&A AUM Asset Manager 1. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 2. GE Asset Mgmt. 3. Conning Asset Management 4. BlackRock 5. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 6. Wellington Mgmt. Company 7. Hyperion Brookfield AM 8. Prudential Investment Mgmt. 9. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 10. PIMCO 11. AAM 12. Principal Global Investors 13. Wells Capital Management 14. ING Investment Management 15. General Re-New England AM 16. JPMorgan Asset Management 17. AllianceBernstein 18. Victory Capital Management 19. Advantus Capital 20. Goldman, Sachs & Co $ in B $77.1 39.6 13.9 12.8 12.0 7.9 5.1 4.3 4.2 4.1 3.7 3.4 2.9 2.6 2.5 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.6 1.2 Top L&A Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. MFC Global Inv. Mgmt. 2. New York Life Inv. Mgmt. 3. WB Capital Management 4. Prudential Investment Mgmt. 5. Dwight Asset Management 6. Victory Capital Management 7. GE Asset Management 8. Principal Global Investors 9. Advantus Capital 10. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 11. ING Investment Management 12. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 13. Hyperion Brookfield AM 14. Wells Capital Management 15. PIMCO 16. Fort Washington Inv. Advisors 17. AAM 18. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 19. Conning Asset Management 20. Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. % 100% 91% 86% 80% 68% 67% 66% 59% 59% 56% 56% 54% 41% 35% 31% 29% 25% 24% 22% 21% 2007 P&C Manager Rankings Top P&C Managers – By Total P&C AUM Asset Manager 1. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 2. Conning Asset Management 3. Wellington Mgmt. Company 4. BlackRock 5. General Re-New England AM 6. GE Asset Management 7. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 8. AAM 9. AllianceBernstein 10. JPMorgan Asset Management 11. Brown Brothers Harriman 12. Hyperion Brookfield AM 13. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors 14. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 15. PIMCO 16. Morgan Stanley Inv. Mgmt. 17. Robeco Weiss, Peck and Greer 18. Western Asset Management 19. Voyageur Asset Management 20. Capital Group International $ in B 45.7 44.7 33.8 29.7 23.6 20.8 7.9 6.7 6.1 5.2 5.2 3.9 3.2 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.6 1.6 1.6 Top P&C Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Capital Group International 2. Froley, Revy Investment Co. 3. Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC 4. Hillswick Asset Management 5. Brown Brothers Harriman 6. Robeco Weiss, Peck and Greer 7. Madison Investment Advisors 8. Conning Asset Management 9. Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. 10. Fort Washington Inv. Advisors 11. Voyageur Asset Management 12. General Re-New England AM 13. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors 14. Wellington Mgmt. Company 15. AllianceBernstein 16. Munder Capital Management 17. Advent Capital Management 18. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 19. AAM 20. MBIA Asset Management % 100% 100% 97% 95% 91% 86% 83% 71% 71% 71% 67% 66% 62% 61% 60% 46% 46% 45% 45% 44% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 4
Slide 11: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 2007 Health Manager Rankings Top Health Managers – By Total Health AUM Asset Manager 1. BlackRock 2. Wellington Mgmt. Company 3. JPMorgan Asset Management 4. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 5. Wells Capital Management 6. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 7. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors 8. Conning Asset Management 9. PIMCO 10. Advantus Capital 11. General Re-New England AM 12. Hyperion Brookfield AM 13. AAM 14. ING Investment Management 15. Goldman, Sachs Asset Mgmt. 16. Denver Investments Advisors 17. Brown Brothers Harriman 18. Voyageur Asset Management 19. Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. 20. Dwight Asset Management $ in B $15.9 6.7 6.5 3.6 3.5 2.3 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.1 <0.1 Top Health Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Allegiance Capital 2. Denver Investments Advisors 3. Wells Capital Management 4. JPMorgan Asset Management 5. Advantus Capital 6. Advent Capital Management 7. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors 8. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 9. BlackRock 10. ING Investment Management 11. Wellington Mgmt. Company 12. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 13. PIMCO 14. Voyageur Asset Management 15. Dwight Asset Management 16. Hyperion Brookfield AM 17. Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. 18. AAM 19. Goldman, Sachs Asset Mgmt. 20. General Re-New England AM % 94% 63% 42% 38% 37% 36% 27% 20% 15% 15% 12% 11% 10% 8% 8% 7% 7% 5% 4% 3% 2007 Reinsurance Manager Rankings Top Reinsurance Managers – By Total Re AUM Asset Manager 1. BlackRock 2. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 3. Goldman, Sachs Asset Mgmt. 4. General Re-New England AM 5. Wellington Mgmt. Company 6. Western Asset Management 7. PIMCO 8. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 9. AAM 10. JPMorgan Asset Management 11. Conning Asset Management 12. Delaware Investments 13. Hyperion Brookfield AM 14. Principal Global Investors 15. AllianceBernstein 16. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 17. Wells Capital Management 18. Prudential Investment Mgmt. 19. MBIA Asset Management 20. Morgan Stanley Inv. Mgmt. $ in B $40.0 20.3 9.8 8.7 7.0 6.2 5.4 4.0 3.7 3.5 3.4 3.3 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.5 0.3 Top Re Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Cohen & Steers Capital Mgmt. 2. Delaware Investments 3. Goldman, Sachs Asset Mgmt. 4. MBIA Asset Management 5. PIMCO 6. Principal Global Investors 7. BlackRock 8. AAM 9. General Re-New England AM 10. Hyperion Brookfield AM 11. AllianceBernstein 12. JPMorgan Asset Management 13. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 14. Western Asset Management 15. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 16. Wells Capital Management 17. Wellington Mgmt. Company 18. Voyageur Asset Management 19. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 20. Robeco Weuss, Peck and Greer % 86% 80% 77% 56% 41% 41% 37% 25% 24% 21% 21% 20% 19% 16% 14% 14% 13% 13% 11% 10% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 5
Slide 12: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 2007 US Insurance Manager Rankings Top US Managers – By Total US AUM Asset Manager 1. GE Asset Management 2. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 3. Conning Asset Management 4. Wellington Mgmt. Company 5. General Re-New England AM 6. Western Asset Management 7. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 8. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 9. AAM 10. JPMorgan Asset Management $ in B $58.2 57.7 57.5 36.0 25.3 21.7 17.4 13.4 13.3 12.0 Top US Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Advantus Capital 2. Victory Capital Management 3. Madison Investment Advisors 4. Hartford Investment Mgmt. Co. 5. WB Capital Management 6. Advent Capital Management 7. Cohen & Steers Capital Mgmt. 8. Allegiance Capital 9. Froley, Revy Investment Co. 10. Fort Washington Inv. Advisors % 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99% 2007 Europe Insurance Manager Rankings Top Euro Managers – By Total Euro AUM Asset Manager 1. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 2. Wellington Mgmt. Company 3. General Re-New England AM 4. AllianceBernstein 5. Conning Asset Management 6. ING Investment Management 7. Western Asset Management 8. Delaware Investments 9. GE Asset Management 10. Robeco Weiss, Peck and Greer $ in B $62.2 8.2 5.7 4.5 4.4 3.3 3.0 2.3 2.1 1.7 Top Euro Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Robeco Weiss, Peck and Greer 2. ING Investment Management 3. Delaware Investments 4. AllianceBernstein 5. Deutsche Asset Management 6. Hillswick Asset Management 7. General Re-New England AM 8. Wellington Mgmt. Company 9. Capital Group International 10. Citigroup Alternative Investments % 77% 72% 56% 45% 43% 22% 16% 15% 13% 11% 2007 Asia Insurance Manager Rankings Top Asia Managers – By Total Asia AUM Asset Manager 1. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 2. Western Asset Management 3. PIMCO 4. Prudential Investment Mgmt. 5. ING Investment Management 6. New York Life Inv. Mgmt. 7. Wellington Mgmt. Company 8. JPMorgan Asset Management 9. AllianceBernstein 10. GE Asset Management $ in B $7.5 1.2 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.1 Top Asia Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. New York Life Inv. Mgmt. 2. ING Investment Management 3. Prudential Investment Mgmt. 4. PIMCO 5. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 6. AllianceBernstein 7. Western Asset Management 8. JPMorgan Asset Management 9. Columbia Mgmt. Advisors 10. Wellington Mgmt. Company % 55% 13% 11% 7% 5% 5% 3% 2% 2% 1% 2007 Offshore Domicile (e.g. Bermuda) Manager Rankings Top Offshore Managers – By Total Offshore AUM Asset Manager 1. Deutsche Asset Mgmt. 2. Western Asset Management 3. Wellington Mgmt. Company 4. PIMCO 5. General Re-New England AM 6. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 7. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. 8. Hyperion Brookfield AM 9. AllianceBernstein 10. JPMorgan Asset Management $ in B $15.0 13.5 9.1 7.2 4.7 4.2 3.9 2.6 1.8 1.7 Top Offshore Managers – By % of Insurance AUM Asset Manager 1. Hillswick Asset Management 2. MBIA Asset Management 3. PIMCO 4. Western Asset Management 5. Lord, Abbett & Co. LLC 6. MFC Global Inv. Mgmt. 7. Standish Mellon Asset Mgmt. 8. Delaware Investments 9. Hyperion Brookfield AM 10. Evergreen Investment Mgmt. % 65% 56% 53% 34% 27% 25% 24% 24% 21% 18% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 6
Slide 13: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Key Findings 1. Outsourcing of insurance asset management is anticipated to grow remarkably over the next five years to reach $1.9 Trillion. Insurers Increasing Outsourcing of Insurance General Account Management North America 2006 2011 (projected) $590 B $975 B $385 B Europe $165 B $815 B $650 B Asia & Other $50 B $65 B $15 B Total $805 B $1,855 B New Money $1,050 B With more than $1 Trillion expected to be outsourced over five years, many insurers will encounter challenges when selecting the right asset classes, investment strategies, and managers to best balance the risk-return dynamic for their investment needs. 2. Insurers have become a vibrant institutional market for investment advisors. 9% of the assets of participating managers are derived from general accounts today. When including sub-advised separate accounts (i.e. VA/ VL), outsourced insurance assets have reached 13% of the institutional asset management marketplace. Asset Sources of Participating Managers 3rd Party Insurance General Acts. Affiliated Insurance General Acts. Sub-Advised Insurance Separate Acts. Retail (mutual funds, high net worth) Sub-Advisory (non-insurance) 9% 14% 4% 30% 14% 26% 4% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% Pension Assets (Defined Benefit) Foundations & Endowments 0% 3. Two thirds of outsourced assets come from North America. However, insurance asset management is a global business and non-US insurers are driving the most rapid growth. Geographic Distribution of Insurance Clients by Assets Under Management (AUM) Offshore, Other, 2% 11% Asia, 4% Europe, 17% North All markets, including the United America, 67% States, are experiencing positive growth. North America has a large North America Europe Asia Offshore Other base of outsourced assets and continues to expand at 30% annually. Europe and Asia are also accelerating at 40% and 38% CAGR respectively. Offshore domiciles like Bermuda have experienced dramatic expansion, with outsourced assets increasing at a 53% CAGR over two years. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 7
Slide 14: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Key Findings (continued) 4. Property & Casualty insurers have dominated insurance outsourcing. P&C firms have been serviced more easily by managers’ institutional offerings due to their total return investment orientation, driving greater adoption of third party management in this channel. 5. Life & Annuity purveyors, however, increasingly engage third parties for their general account investments. More money managers today have developed specialized book income investments to attract life companies, and these targeted efforts are gathering life company assets at increasing rates. Migration of Outsourced Insurance Assets 100% 22% 80% 21% 60% 35% 38% 40% 16% 20% 12% 26% 0% 29% 2004 L if e & A n n u it y P r o p . & C a s u a lt y 2006 H e a lt h R e in s u r a n c e 6. All insurers, including health insurers and reinsurers, have turned increasingly to third parties. An aggregate compound annual growth rate of 35% was seen across all insurers over the past 2 years, with health growing the slowest at 15% and life & annuity expanding the most rapidly at 42%. Even health insurers and reinsurers have increasing engagements with third parties, despite declines in their total share of outsourced assets. 8 Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C .
Slide 15: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Key Findings (continued) 7. Most insurance mandates are managed differently than for other institutional clients (e.g. pensions). These specialized strategies are of particular interest to life & annuity companies. Their liability features and accounting requirements are often oriented toward generating risk-adjusted book income (39% of clients, 64% of outsourced assets), rather than total return. Managers also support significant customized investment restrictions (e.g. duration & term structure, and portfolio turnover). 70% 60% 50% Book Income vs. Total Return 61% 64% % of Business 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 39% 36% Number of Clients Assets Book Income Total Return 8. Accordingly, fixed income insurance mandates frequently follow explicit ALM and credit guidelines that encourage investment strategies to de-emphasize active interest rate and credit quality management. Average Insurance Returns Attribution Secutity Selection, 35% Sector Rotation, 28% Within this customized, book income environment, insurance asset managers primarily focus on security selection & sector allocations to drive returns (63% of returns). They reorient the portfolio primarily through new cash flows rather than active trading to limit taxable gains and losses. Managers generally also limit duration, yield curve, and credit quality management due to their inconsistency with insurers’ ALM and credit constraints (37% of returns). Credit Quality, 8% Term Structure, 12% Duration, 17% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 9
Slide 16: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Key Findings (continued) 9. Long considered the provenance of small insurers, insurance companies of all sizes now outsource general account assets. Smaller insurers have had the strongest propensity to employ third parties, with many firms outsourcing their entire investment portfolios. Managers with <$1 B in general account assets continue to dominate this sector; however mandates are comparatively small (frequently <$50 MM) and conservative. Within the mid-market ($1-5 B) many firms continue to outsource, exclusively focusing on diversifying their managers and broadening beyond core mandates. Other firms of this size have begun to reclaim select assets in-house, while continuing to employ third parties for resource intensive specialties. These specialties frequently include select fixed income classes, such as high yield and emerging markets. Outsourcing by Insurers 100% 3% 4% 3% 5% 6% 8% 80% 17% 60% 15% 40% 85% 54% 20% 0% Number of Clients Total AUM Historically, large insurers have been less likely <$1 B $1-5 B $5-25 B to outsource portfolio management functions. $25-100 B >$100 B In recent years, however, they have demonstrated a trend toward employing third parties to complement their internal investment activities on core investments as well as engaging specialists for alternative investments (e.g. hedge funds, private equity). These mandates generally represent sizable investments ($500 MM to >$1 B) and support higher fees than those of traditional core bonds. 10. Many insurance clients require that managers provide specialized servicing capabilities. A select number of managers have developed turnkey insurance investment programs, including insurance investment accounting, investment strategy development, risk modeling, and performance analysis. These specialties have allowed managers to develop a strong niche presence particularly among smaller insurers, providing essential services to insurers with limited internal resources. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 10
Slide 17: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Key Findings (continued) 11. Economies of scale influence how insurers will participate in outsourcing. Insurance Market Segmentation <$1 B Seek flexibility through mgr. diversification $1-5 B Adding complementary FI specialties $5-25 B Entering nontraditional asset classes >$25 B Outsourcing alternatives & select core FI Insurers of various sizes have differing resources, risk tolerances and capacity constraints. These factors affect an insurer’s propensity to participate in the outsourcing market. The study shows that small insurers have engaged third party managers the most. Economies of scale have presented challenges that inhibit in-house investment management. Smaller insurers have relied on managers for support with related business functions such as ALM and portfolio accounting. As their companies grow, however, insurers tend to diversify outsourcing strategies across multiple managers while selectively internalizing core investments. Larger insurers, those with assets >$5 B, utilize managers in another fashion. They often decide to complement their internal programs selectively in order to diversify assets, add capacity, enhance access to third party research, and benchmark internal investment activities. Although large insurers represent only 10% of third party relationships, they now comprise of more than 30% of outsourced assets in the market. 12. Insurance investments, while predominated by traditional fixed income (FI), increasingly include specialty allocations. Insurers are engaging third party managers for a breadth of focused investments, including high yield & emerging markets debt, income-oriented specialties (e.g. privates, commercial mortgages, mezzanine finance), real estate and public & private equity strategies. 13. Insurers are now engaging managers for derivatives oriented mandates. Insurance asset managers are employing derivatives more frequently and selectively to hedge currency & interest rate risks within liability-driven mandates. A few insurers have also begun to collaborate with asset managers to create risk-managed, absolute return strategies to be included in either capital surplus or liability portfolios. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 11
Slide 18: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 1. A Market in Evolution Insurance investments have been treated historically as a separate silo from the core insurance functions. Senior insurance executives, largely drawn from other areas of the firms, have emphasized distribution and product improvements as primary profit drivers. Executives have depended on general account investments to produce a minimum baseline of returns and to reduce risks to the company that may otherwise affect ratings. Until recently, insurers have been conservative participants in the investment marketplace. Operating under different objectives & regulatory constraints, insurers participate in the investment markets by employing methods varying from those of other institutional investors. Accounting regulations and ratings considerations have penalized insurers more for losses than they have favored consistent yields, directing insurers’ investment strategies away from active total return management. This has lead insurers to build core fixed income portfolios dominated by book income, buy & hold strategies. Smaller insurers, lacking a depth of resources, frequently have handed investments to outside management. Insurers with assets <$1 B have a tendency to engage with a small set of money managers specializing in the insurance marketplace that provide a full range of ancillary services, including actuarial/ asset-liability management, portfolio strategy, insurance accounting and performance reporting, alongside portfolio implementation. (e.g. private placements & commercial mortgages) into which they channeled most assets. Asset classes were underutilized generally in areas where firms lacked specific domain expertise. Large & mid-sized insurers, in turn, have leveraged their critical mass to maintain internal staff. Firms frequently developed one or two specialties A new competitive dynamic has emerged, however, compressing insurers underwriting margins and leading them to revisit their investment approaches. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 12
Slide 19: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 1. A Market in Evolution (continued) New competitive dynamics are increasing the challenges faced by insurers and placing renewed emphasis on the returns generated by their general accounts. expectancy coupled with declining faith in the reliability of governments’ and employers’ retirement benefits. This is driving the market’s increasing preference for savings-oriented insurance products, affecting core actuarial assumptions underlying business profitability, as well as the integrity of their investment approaches. Life insurance companies have witnessed an unprecedented lengthening of life In the property & casualty market, new direct & reinsurance entrants have combined with globalized competition to reduce pricing inefficiencies. In addition, high exposures to long-tailed liabilities, like asbestos, and the recent spate of catastrophic claims have challenged underwriting profits, thus leading P&C firms to seek alternative income drivers. The dramatic rise in captives and offshore reinsurers funded by venture capital is also leading more organizations to review insurance business practices with a start-up mentality. The new focus on returning value to owners is driving an evolution in firms’ investment behavior as well as influencing their more traditional peers. New business pressures are causing insurance company management to become more involved with their general accounts and investment practices. Whether firms are small and outsourcing their assets or large and primarily investing on their own, asset management is no longer a peripheral activity. Today, focus is being placed on implementing strategies that will best align insurance investments with the demands of specific products and corporate surplus opportunities. All efforts aim to ensure that investments are maximizing true risk-adjusted economic value for insurers. Insurers are exploring new investment and asset management practices internally and through third parties in search of improved returns. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 13
Slide 20: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 2. Insurers’ Challenges Within this new environment, insurance company executives are refocusing upon several core investment concerns: A. How can insurers know if they receive the most value for the risks in their portfolios? Many insurers, from small to large, are seeking new avenues to enhance returns. Smaller firms, while generally maintaining a conservative position, further diversify their managers, with allocations directed to best tap manager strengths. As firms move up the size spectrum, core fixed income investments become complemented by specialty strategies – bank loans, high yield, emerging markets debt. P&C firms, in particular, are penetrating alternative investment sectors – public equities, real estate, hedge funds, derivatives. Of paramount concern is which methods will best add value to the enterprise. B. What is the most effective means of managing these assets? In this environment, purveyors are looking at how they undertake their investments. Small insurers are seeking the flexibility offered by unbundling investments from strategy & servicing. Larger insurers are evaluating the value of managing assets internally versus outsourcing. Concurrently, multinationals have become more centralized, thus reducing home country asset biases and broadening the coordination of local investment programs. C. Which investments should be made? What is the best approach to diversification? To better evaluate success, insurers are implementing liability-driven investment strategies, economic capital models, and benchmarking to direct portfolio manager activities, gauge relative performance, and identify enterprise risk exposures. A movement toward greater outsourcing has occurred to address these investment concerns. Primary challenges are which strategies to externalize and how to select the appropriate managers. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 14
Slide 21: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 3. A Growing Market Many insurers are turning to third party managers in their quest to maximize returns from their general accounts, and looking to their peers to assess where and how to outsource investments. This outsourced insurance market is experiencing sustained growth, in both assets and institutions, and hence presenting high value opportunities for managers. In most markets, insurance general account assets have grown rapidly, reaching $16 Trillion globally by the end of 2006: Global Insurance General Account Assets North America Total Assets CAGR $6.3 T 7.1% Europe $7.7 T 12.5% Asia & Other $2.0 T 2.0% Total $16.0 T 8.4% *Figures above distribute offshore general account assets between North America and Europe Only 5% of the approximately $16 Trillion in total insurance general account assets have yet been outsourced to third party managers. This amount should increase rapidly over the next five years. Insurers, large and small, are expected to allocate more than an additional $1 Trillion to the global market through third party managers. Insurers Increasing Outsourcing of Ins. General Account Management North America 2006 2011 (projected) $590 B $975 B $385 B Europe $165 B $815 B $650 B Asia & Other $50 B $65 B $15 B Total $805 B $1,855 B New Money $1,050 B This presents challenges for many insurers in selecting the right asset classes, investment strategies, and managers to best balance the risk-return dynamic for their needs. Source of Assets of Participating Managers Managers have recognized the growing 9% market opportunities and have 14% responded accordingly. Today, survey participants can trace 9% of their total 4% assets under management to non30% affiliated general account insurance 14% clients. In total, these 52 firms manage 26% nearly $740 B of the current $805 B in 4% insurance general accounts outsourced to unaffiliated investment managers today. 3rd Party Insurance General Acts. Affiliated Insurance G eneral Acts. Sub-Advised Insurance Separate Acts. Retail (m utual funds, high net worth) Sub-Advisory (non-insurance) Pension Assets (D efined Benefit) Foundations & Endowm ents 0% 5% 1 0% 1 5% 2 0% 25% 30% 35% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 15
Slide 22: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 4. The Global Dynamic The outsourcing of insurance asset management has been largely a North American phenomenon, although it is becoming increasingly global in nature. Not surprisingly, survey participants are drawing their insurance clientele from similarly diverse locales. In the highly competitive North American market, firms have had strong incentives to turn to external managers for new asset classes or to better harvest the scale efficiencies of investment specialists. Furthermore, several managers based in the US have expanded their global focus aggressively. Recently, however, growth has been strong across all markets (with an average 35% CAGR) and accelerating the most outside of the US. As insurers become increasingly global, the ability to support general accounts outside of their home markets is leading firms to explore 3rd party options. In particular, offshore domiciles, such as Bermuda, have become attractive for asset managers. Offshore entities have experienced a high concentration of recent entrants (captives & reinsurers), rapid growth rates, and the relative sophistication of management opens them to a broad array of 3 rd party investments. Geographic Distribution of General Account Mgmt. Clients by AUM Offshore, 11% Asia, 4% Other, 2% Europe, 17% North America, 67% Note: Other includes Latin America, Middle East, and unspecified locales 2 Year CAGR of Outsourced Assets by Region 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% North America Europe Asia Offshore 53% 40% 38% 30% Insurance companies are turning to managers with deep specialty capabilities to complement core fixed income investments. Other insurers need to select firms with extensive cross-border and multi-currency capabilities. This plays to two types of managers: insurance specialists and firms with broad global affiliations. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 16
Slide 23: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 5. Differentiated Needs Across the Insurance Spectrum 2 Year CAGR of Outsourced Assets by Type 50% 40% Different types of insurance companies have been aggressively increasing their outsourcing of general account investments. Survey respondents experienced an aggregate compound annual growth rate of 35% across all types of insurers over the past 2 years. The insurance industry is still far from monolithic. Different insurance businesses have disparate demands and requirements from 3rd party managers. Although property & casualty assets represent only one fifth of the US general account marketplace, P&C firms have been aggressive adopters of outsourcing. Today, direct P&C insurers and reinsurers account for nearly 60% of survey participants’ insurance business. P&C companies have greater freedom to manage investments on a total return basis than life companies due to the nature of their regulatory environment and lack of interest rate sensitivity to their liabilities. Having less predictable payouts and a comparatively higher need for liquidity, P&C insurers frequently find that active management on a market value vs. book income approach is suitable. Additionally, P&C firms have been more open to capital-appreciation oriented asset classes (e.g. equities, hedge funds). For this reason, managers’ standard institutional offerings, founded on active management and total return, have been attractive to property & casualty insurers. However, even with P&C firms, these strategies require a degree of customization & constraints, due to the taxable nature of all insurance investors. 30% 20% 42% 40% 31% 35% 10% 15% 0% Life and Annuity Health Prop. & Reinsurance Total Casualty Insurance Migration of Outsourced Insurance Assets 100% 22% 80% 21% 60% 35% 38% 40% 16% 20% 12% 29% 26% 0% 2004 2006 Life & Annuity Prop. & Casualty Health Reinsurance Life insurers have been comparatively slower adopters of third party management. Although life, annuity, & health insurers share a five to one (5:1) dominance in total US general account assets (cresting $5 T vs. $1 T for P&C insurers), a much smaller share of their portfolios have yet to be outsourced. As the outsourcing market continues to open, it should generate a greater share of outsourced assets. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 17
Slide 24: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 5. Differentiated Needs Across the Insurance Spectrum (cont’d) Life companies have developed an industryspecific book income, buy-and-hold management style. The nature of their actuarially-dependent liabilities, regulations, & accounting requirements treat investment income more favorably than capital gains, thus encouraging book income strategies. Historically, insurers have shown difficulty finding managers with the required expertise. However, more managers have assembled book income investment programs to tap this underserved market, and the majority of managers today support book income mandates. This practice allows them access to a more attractive segment of the market. The overall market is greater and individual mandates also tend to be larger. Similarly, finding managers who are willing to accept more stringent restrictions than other institutional investors is critical, especially due to the demands of insurance liabilities. Many insurers seek custom liability-based managed accounts in outsourced strategies so they may dictate key criteria, like term structure, rather than invest in “off the shelf” products. Formal investment strategy & risk assessment services, with integrated ALM, are also incorporated frequently into insurance investment offers. Smaller insurers who lack internal portfolio strategists have found such services to be of significant value. Portfolio turnover is often a focus due to the taxability of insurers’ investments. Insurers may place specific targets for maximum turnover or require managers to achieve specific levels of realized capital gains & losses. Many insurers seek managers willing to collaborate with their insurance company clients on new asset inflows and anticipate liquidity events to tailor investments to their anticipated cash flows. Book Income vs. Total Return Mandates 70% 61% 60% 50% 64% % of Business 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 39% 36% Number of Clients Assets Book Income Total Return % of Firms using Liability-Driven Investment Strategies from a Specific Proportion of their Mandates % of Mandates That Are Liability-Driven 80-100% 26% 60-80% 18% 3% 40-60% 20-40% 18% 15% 0-20% None 21% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% % of Firms using Client-Defined Turnover Restrictions from a Specific Proportion of their Mandates % of Mandates with Turnover Restrictions 80-100% 9% 3% 60-80% 40-60% 9% 20-40% 3% 35% 0-20% None 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 41% 45% Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 18
Slide 25: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 6. Insurer Size Segmentation Size is another critical driver of insurer behavior. Even across business types, firms with the same size general account frequently make similar outsourcing decisions. Insurers may be divided into four general size categories: Segmentation of the $6 T US Insurance Market (1,200+ insurers) <$ 1 B 1,000+ insurers $450 B in assets Lack dedicated resources – finance professionals oversee general account investments Extensively outsource investments – primarily conservative core fixed income mandates Frequently employ managers or third party consultants for ALM, investment strategy, accounting, & related services 1-2 professionals dedicated to overseeing investments $1-5 B 100 insurers $400 B in assets Frequently employ third party managers Moderately broader restrictions (greater allowance for lower quality credits, increased allocations to structured finance) Core plus mandates with select (e.g. bank loans, global fixed income) Possess established investment functions specialty allocations $5-25 B 60 insurers $850 B in assets Frequently manage core bond portfolios internally – leverage scale through low-cost, beta-tracking approach Require 3rd party managers for alpha-producing specialty investments – expertise & market-access intensive assets (e.g. commercial mortgages, real estate) Extensive investment organizations with multiple specialties >$25 B 40 insurers $4,300 B in assets Selectively outsource alternative investments (e.g. mezzanine finance, hedge funds, distressed debt) Increasingly employing 3rd party mandates to complement internal management – seek additional capacity; performance benchmark; 3rd party opinions on holdings With differing access to resources, risk tolerances, and relative capacity constraints, insurers will contrast significantly criteria when adopting outsourcing mechanisms and selecting managers. 19 Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C .
Slide 26: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 7. The Segmentation Dynamic Outsourcing Propensity: Historically, smaller insurers have been most likely to employ third party managers, with many firms entirely outsourcing their investment function. Firms with <$1 B in general account assets continue to dominate, both in terms of the numbers of clients and volume of outsourced assets. Mandates in this market, not surprisingly, tend to be small comparatively, frequently holding less than $50 MM and investing in conservative core strategies. The mid-market insurers, with $1-5 B, are inherently in transition. As their general accounts and accompanying 3rd party mandates grow, refinement of their overall manager strategies (i.e. number of managers, allocation of assets across mandates to maximize leverage of manager specialties) becomes a prominent focus. These managers also begin to bring select assets in house. Outsourcing by Insurers – Client & Asset Segmentation 1 00% 3% 4% 3% 5% 6% 8% 17 % 80% 60% 15 % 40% 85 % 54 % 20% 0% N u m be r o f C lients T otal A U M < $1 B $2 5-10 0 B $1-5 B > $1 00 B $5 -25 B Larger insurers, with more than $5 B in their general accounts, utilize third party managers in a more strategic fashion. Asset diversification efforts have driven the establishment of many of these manager relationships, where insurers have lacked specific domain expertise. Although they make up only 10% of 3rd party manager relationships, they now comprise over 30% of all outsourced insurance assets. Servicing Requirements: Managers require different platforms to target varying segments of the insurance marketplace. Managers are using a variety of approaches, from offering turnkey strategy & investment servicing programs to income-oriented alternative investment platforms, to differentiate themselves and capture a share of the growing opportunity. Small insurers, lacking the resources to develop a large ALM and asset management organization, demand a broad breadth of investment related assistance from their managers, such as insurance investment accounting, investment strategy development, and risk modeling. A select number of managers have specifically built-out these ancillary services, to deliver a comprehensive insurance investment consulting service. Several of these managers have also developed proprietary technologies for cash flow modeling & DFA, insurance capital forecasting, asset allocation/ portfolio optimization, risk management, and reporting. Although highly resource intensive, these capabilities have differentiated them in the small insurer marketplace and assisted them in gathering new client relationships. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 20
Slide 27: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 7. The Segmentation Dynamic (continued) Small insurers, alternatively, frequently retain boutique insurance investment consultants focused on serving as an outsourced CIO function. These consultants set investment policy, as well as select and monitor one or more third party managers to invest the general account. Managers cultivating relationships such as these have an advantage in reaching the smallest insurers. Share of Participating Insurance Asset Managers Offering Insurance Specific Value-Added Services Consulting Services 30% Insurance Portfolio Accounting 40% Performance Attribution 93% Specialized Reporting 65% Investment Strategy Development 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 83% 100% Success in the smaller market is a matter of scale and efficiency. With modest mandate sizes, the most profitable managers have developed differentiated service offerings and strong market recognition to gather and maintain large client bases. The challenge for new entrants in this segment is to support the cost of building insurance-focused capabilities and brand awareness without the benefit of cash flow from an established base of insurers. Insurers with greater critical mass seek different characteristics when evaluating managers. In many instances, rather than using broad core mandates, they seek focused offerings to fill gaps in their internal investment capabilities. Investment strategy sought from managers is focused generally on optimizing the specific portfolio management mandate to liabilitydriven investment constraints, as opposed to comprehensive ALM analysis. Less insurancespecific technology is sought from managers, primarily encompassing portfolio reports & performance analytics. Currently, many managers have identified the mid tier and larger segments of the market as the most attractive. Core mandates are significantly larger, frequently $300 MM to well over $1 B. Specialty mandates, in particular, also typically require less customization. This enables managers to achieve scale and profitability from a focused client base, without the need for extensive marketing organizations or ancillary activities (e.g. actuarial services). Several managers currently in the insurance marketplace, including some of the largest participants, are also refocusing their efforts on larger mandates. These firms are not abandoning their existing client base of firms below $1 B. However, they are not as aggressively marketing or pricing mandates for new relationships with small insurers, unless significant near-term growth potential is perceived, such as with many Bermuda reinsurers, is perceived. Managers affiliated with large multinationals are leveraging their broader client relationships (e.g. investment banking, commercial credit, VA/ VL separate account subadvisory) to extend their reach up market and enhance their overall business margins. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 21
Slide 28: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 8. Asset Class Utilization Allocation of Outsourced Insurance Assets Private Placement Debt, 1.3% Corporate, 29.7% MBS, 8.9% CMBS, 4.5% ABS, 3.8% High Yield, 1.3% Muni, 6.3% Government, 12.9% Alternatives, 0.4% Public Equities, 6.3% Cash, 5.6% Global FI, 3.0% Multi-Sector Fixed Income, 11.7% Real Estate, 3.7% Convertible, 0.5% Note: The allocation above is a projection based on survey participants Fixed Income Allocations: Across all insurance companies, outsourced general account assets have been allocated primarily to fixed income investments, consistent with overall industry practice. • • Investment grade publics & 144a issues predominate A strong bias toward domestic market, local currency investments remains; although select insurers are incorporating them through core plus & specialty investments − Global, international, regional, country specific, and emerging markets account for only 3% • • High yield investments remain modest, due to economic capital & ratings concerns, as well as the corporate earnings impact of potential losses Most insurers maintain significant cash allocations, either through dedicated cash management mandates or as cash flow reserves within broader multi-asset portfolios − Liquidity for claims volatility − Reserves for acquisitions/ sales proceeds Equity Investments: Insurers have made significantly more modest equity allocations to 3rd party managers: • • Public equities have been sourced almost exclusively by the P&C direct insurers and reinsurers Alternatives to date have had a very limited (<1%) role, concentrated among the largest insurance firms 22 − Scheduled liability payments (e.g. GICs) − Capital from insurance securitizations Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C .
Slide 29: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 8. Asset Class Utilization (continued) Structure of General Account Mandates: Insurers access this breadth of strategies through several means: 1. Core- investment grade fixed income, typically in domestic market assets only 100% Mandate Types 23% 38% 75% 2. Core Plus- core bond portfolios supplemented by opportunistic allocations to high yield, international, CDOs, etc. 3. Other Multi-Assetcompletion portfolios, often rounding out separate core mandates with multiple specialties (i.e. private placement debt, EMD, & CMBS) 4. Single Asset- focused allocations to a single investment to tap focused manager expertise or market access (e.g. loan origination & deal flow for commercial mortgages) 10% 15% 8% 17% 50% 25% 39% 50% 0% # of Mandates Core Core Plus Other Multi-Asset Assets Single Asset Single asset specialty mandates are making up an increasing proportion of new business for managers. This coincides with the gradually increasing diversification of insurers’ portfolios and the increasing use of third party managers at larger insurers. Although these allocations tend to be smaller than core mandates from a similarly sized insurer, they generate typically higher revenues (i.e. management fees) & profit margins (due to a reduced dependence on special insurance services). For this reason, a number of managers have begun to market these mandates aggressively. The Breadth of Insurer-Manager Relationships: Single mandates are common due to the preponderance of multi-asset mandates (62% of manager relationships). Most smaller insurers have focused on adding managers to accommodate growth and diversify via core plus strategies, rather than add explicit allocations to asset class specific mandates. However, diversified managers, particularly those with broad fixed income offerings, have found success in cross-selling multiple products to insurers (36% of insurance clients). No. of Mandates Per Client Five or More Four 8% 3% Three 6% Two 19% One 64% Note: Most insurers employ more than one mgr. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 23
Slide 30: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 8. Asset Class Utilization (continued) Further distinctions arise across the different types of insurers, in the types of securities included in their third party mandates. While there are exceptions to the rule, certain asset classes are primarily the province of either life & health or property & casualty firms: Typical Asset Class Usage – by Insurer Type Property & Casualty Property & Casualty 24 Life & Health Government Muni Corporate Private Placements MBS CMBS ABS CDOs High Yield Bank Loans Global & EMD • • • • Commercial Mortgages Direct Real Estate REITs Preferreds/ Hybrid Convertible Mezzanine Finance Distressed Debt Public Equities Hedge Funds Private Equity Commodities Life insurers continue to actively seek out managers offering private placement & commercial mortgage investment programs consistent with their longer duration liabilities Property & casualty insurers have engaged equity managers to add highly liquid common stock investments to their capital surplus portfolios for alpha enhancement Many insurers are participating in real estate, particularly life & annuity purveyors attracted to its income orientation coupled with capital appreciation potential Participation in alternative investments are increasing gradually as familiarity grows among insurers, regulators, & ratings agencies: − Usage varies by type of insurer with life companies emphasizing yield generating mezzanine finance & distressed debt − P&C firms generally have been more attracted to the greater liquidity of hedge fund mandates than that provided by private equity or real estate investments − Speculative vehicles, such as commodities, continue to receive limited acceptance Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . Life & Health
Slide 31: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 8. Asset Class Utilization (continued) Core investment grade assets predominate at the small end of the market. As insurers grow in scale, they begin to incorporate assets with greater volatilities & lower liquidities that offer more aggressive return profiles, first for capital surplus and later in modest amounts against liabilities. Typical Asset Class Usage – by Insurer Size <$1 B $1-5 B $5-25 B >$25 B <$1 B $1-5 B $5-25 B Commercial Mortgages Direct Real Estate REITs Preferreds/ Hybrid Convertible Mezzanine Finance Distressed Debt Public Equities Hedge Funds Private Equity Commodities Fee Structure by # of Mandates Asset & Performance 5% Preformance Only 1% Government Muni Corporate Private Placements MBS CMBS ABS CDOs High Yield Bank Loans Global & EMD Fee Formats: The challenges to widely adopting performance incentives are inappropriate market indices: • Managers are typically not free unconstrained active management return; high turnover/tax strategies) to pursue (e.g. total • Index weights typically do not reflect insurers’ guidelines – credit quality, duration/ cash flow profile, maturity, sector, issuer weights, etc. Without proper benchmarks, performance fees may incent managers to take excessive risks. Two factors, however, are driving a gradual increase in the use of performance based fees: 1. The expansion of alternative mandates, where performance fees are more standard 2. The implementation by insurers of liability-based benchmarks in place of standard market indices, presenting a risk-aware framework for structuring incentives Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . >$25 B Asset Only 94% 25
Slide 32: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 9. The Character of Insurance Asset Managers Manager Types: Despite the fact that insurers are largely Respondents Total AUM fixed income investors, insurance asset Across All Clients management is not solely the domain of bond specialists. Diversified managers Alternatives, with only a secondary fixed income 8% emphasis have been successful in gaining penetration, particularly with property & Fixed Balanced, 2% Income, 57% casualty insurers who seek coordinated investment of broad bond portfolios with a focused allocation to public equities. Several equity managers have also made focused inroads into the life marketplace, generally in alternative strategies, by Equity, 33% leveraging the VA/ VL separate account sub-advisory relationships that they have developed with insurers. Alternative capabilities are still a small portion of the market. Insurers are viewing them increasingly as a key differentiator when selecting core managers, thus moving this bias away from exclusively fixed income specialists. Investment Methodologies: The majority of insurance asset managers pursue “active”, although constrained strategies. • • • With high core bond allocations, insurers require these assets to serve as return generators Requiring income, insurers desire managers that proactively select higher yielding instruments Many insurers’ strategies are not based on total return benchmarks, the foundation of many bond index products Average Ins. Returns Attribution Secutity Selection, 35% Sector Rotation, 28% Credit Quality, 8% Term Structure, 12% Duration, 17% In instances where insurers do elect to pursue a core-satellite strategy based on an indexed base portfolio, these insurers typically undertake the indexing component internally, once they have the scale & resources to support it. Third party managers are then utilized for the alpha generating satellites. Returns are generated predominantly from security selection and sector rotation, consistent with insurers’ buy & hold, book income orientation. Yield curve positioning and credit quality manipulation is limited due to tight ALM & ERM constraints. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 26
Slide 33: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 10. Role of Derivatives Recently insurers have been revisiting their derivatives and hedging programs as another lever to improve their portfolios’ risk-return profiles: Return Enhancement 1) 2) 3) Active Management Macro Policy Deployment Derivative Trading 1) 2) 3) Risk Management Product Hedging Asset-Liability Mgmt. Economic Capital Mgmt. Multiple business enhancements through the integration of Derivatives into Insurance Portfolios New Product Development Improve competitiveness by supporting higher crediting rates & novel product optionalities General Account Portfolio Increase contribution to corporate profitability via comparative yield pick-up and total value generation ERM Program Enhanced risk management flexibility & cross-organizational efficiencies (e.g. cross-hedging infrastructure) Return Enhancement: With the sustained low yield environment, insurers are facing significant challenges in achieving sufficient returns. They are turning increasingly to non-traditional strategies, including derivatives, to generate enhanced yields. More insurers are seeking fixed income absolute return strategies to incorporate them into their new product development programs and overall portfolios for improved corporate profitability. Return Enhancement Usages: Active management Absolute ret./ portable alpha strategies Opportunistic risk concentrations Leverage – margin & short positions Representative Transactions: Synthetic assets (i.e. CLNs, CDOs) Mortgage TBAs & dollar rolls Duration & yield curve management Currency arbitrage Custom structured notes Managers that have developed offerings tailored to the regulatory, accounting, & risk concerns of insurers, as well as demonstrated the ability to harvest significant additional alpha for their clients, have begun to attract insurers to their new offerings. Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 27
Slide 34: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 10. Role of Derivatives (continued) Risk Management: Insurers continue to struggle with the implementation of appropriate risk management strategies and infrastructure for systematic and event-driven risks. With increasingly complex products and investments, firms are active in formalizing their ERM programs to deploy hedging approaches optimally. Managers delivering integrated risk immunization strategies in their offerings can present a value-add, differentiated position to their clientele. Derivatives in Third Party Manager Mandates: Currency overlay services are one of the most broadly offered hedging strategies by managers to their insurance clientele. Frequently tied to global, regional or emerging markets mandates, insurers also seek managers to hedge currency risks present in internally managed portfolios. Mgrs. Offering Currency Overlay Services Provide 26% Hedged Exposures: Liability product features Asset-liability mismatch Currency exposures Credit deterioration Offshore tax liability mitigation via structured notes Multi-national enterprise business & portfolio concentrations Although the majority of these mandates are pure hedging Provide 74% strategies, a small number of mid & large size insurers have begun to engage currency overlay managers to deploy hybrid hedging / active strategies. These approaches are typically conservative, low leverage mandates, designed to primarily eliminate currency volatility, while taking small tactical positions seeking to generate modest alpha to offset the management & transaction costs of the overlay approach. Other uses of derivatives within insurance portfolios, include: A. Interest Rate Risk Immunization – interest rate swaps, options, & swaptions; treasury forwards & futures B. Synthetic Security Replication – credit default swaps; interest rate swaps, total return swaps C. Product Feature Hedges – interest rate caps & floors; equity derivatives D. Term Structure, Duration, & Convexity Management for Income Generation – interest rate swaps, options, swaptions, caps, & floors; treasury forwards & futures Do Not Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 28
Slide 35: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 11. Conclusions Both insurance companies and money managers are struggling with how to best approach the outsourced insurance asset management marketplace; the challenges include: Insurers Identification of prudent asset diversification approaches & new asset class entry strategies Setting an appropriate third party manager strategy – number of managers, allocation of mandates Selection of the optimal managers for their unique situation – management style, specialist expertise, fees Ongoing oversight of outsourced activities to ensure appropriate liability-driven, risk-adjusted performance Money Managers Selection of insurance segments – type, size – to facilitate rapid & profitable market entry & business expansion Packaging of investment offers to attract different insurance clientele Execution of distribution methodologies to efficiently reach target insurers Establishment of the optimal infrastructure to service insurance clientele in a cost effective manner Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 29
Slide 37: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice Patpatia & Associates’ Insurance Asset Management Consulting Practice: Strategic Evaluation Organizational assessment Competitive benchmarking Profitability & transfer pricing Investment, actuarial, and product integration Investment Strategy Liability-driven investment implementation Asset allocation optimization Asset diversification Derivatives Strategy Portfolio Implementation PM assembly & 3rd party manager review Performance Compensation strategy Synthetic portfolio structuring Risk Management Risk budgeting & economic capital modeling Risk modeling & hedging Reinsurance strategies Compliance Representative Clients Allianz Life Ameriprise Financial American Int’l Group Fidelity Investments ING Investment Mgmt Our Recent Publications: Portfolio Management Strategies for Insurers – outsourced & internal approaches to liabilitydriven general account investments Asset Diversification for Insurers – incorporation of specialty fixed income allocations & alternative investments for return enhancement, risk diversification, & additional capacity Derivative Strategies for Insurers – maximization & protection of value through derivatives & structured notes Investment Benchmarking Survey – a comprehensive analysis of over 50 insurers’ general account investment best practices, spanning investment policy development, assetliability strategies, asset allocation, performance benchmarking, reporting, the role of third parties, and required technologies Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . Lehman Brothers Mackay Shields Manulife Financial Payden & Rygel Prudential Financial Scottish Re The Dreyfus Corp. UBS Financial Services Wells Fargo Zurich Financial 31
Slide 38: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice The preceding was prepared by Patpatia & Associates, Inc., a strategic and execution management consulting firm specializing in servicing the insurance industry. We assist in the development and repositioning of investment services businesses in both the domestic and international markets. Our clients include insurance companies, brokerage firms, banks and investment management companies, and represent some of the largest players in the industry. For further information, please contact: Sunny Patpatia, President & CEO Patpatia & Associates, Inc. 1803 Sixth Street, Suite A Berkeley, CA 94710 Phone: (510) 559-7140 Fax: (510) 559-7145 Email: patpatia@patpatia.com Website: www.patpatia.com Copyright 2007 Patpatia & Associates, Inc. All Rights Reserved Copyright © 2007 P A T P A T I A & AS S O C I A T E S , IN C . 32
Slide 40: Patpatia & Associates, Inc. Insurance Practice 1803 Sixth Street, Suite A Berkeley, CA 94710 www.patpatia.com Specialized Financial Services Consultancy • 2007

   
Time on Slide Time on Plick
Slides per Visit Slide Views Views by Location