Asset Classes
Insurance-linked securities
Insurance-linked securities
Does your product fit here?
Insurance-linked securities (ILS) transfer insurance or reinsurance risk to capital markets investors. You’re essentially providing reinsurance capacity, but through a capital markets structure with collateralization, tradeable securities, and mark-to-market pricing. Your return comes from bearing catastrophe or mortality risk, not credit risk.
Products that fit here:
-
Catastrophe bonds (cat bonds): 144A or Reg S securities where principal is at risk if a specified catastrophe event occurs. The dominant ILS product, with $45B+ outstanding. You receive a coupon (SOFR + spread) for taking the risk that a hurricane, earthquake, or other catastrophe will trigger a loss of principal. See Cat bonds for full details.
-
Industry loss warranties (ILWs): Reinsurance contracts (or derivatives) triggered by industry-wide loss indices rather than a specific cedent’s losses. If US hurricane industry losses exceed $50B, the contract pays out. Faster settlement, less basis risk for investors, but no customization for the cedent.
-
Collateralized reinsurance: Traditional quota share or excess of loss reinsurance treaties where the reinsurer posts 100% collateral upfront. Eliminates counterparty credit risk, making it accessible to non-rated capital providers. The fastest-growing segment of ILS.
-
Sidecars: Quota share vehicles formed to provide capacity to a specific reinsurer. You participate proportionally in a slice of the reinsurer’s book. Typically single-year commitments with annual renewal options.
-
Mortality and longevity bonds: Principal at risk based on population mortality rates deviating from expected levels. Less common than cat bonds but growing as life insurers and pension funds seek to hedge demographic risk.
For detailed mechanics of each structure, see Collateralized reinsurance, ILWs, and sidecars.
What does NOT fit here:
-
Traditional reinsurance: If the reinsurer is not posting collateral and you’re relying on their credit, that’s traditional reinsurance with counterparty risk. ILS requires collateralization.
-
Insurance company equity or debt: Buying Swiss Re stock or Munich Re bonds exposes you to insurance company performance, but that’s corporate credit/equity, not insurance risk transfer.
-
Mortgage insurance: Credit risk on mortgages, not catastrophe risk. See relevant mortgage asset classes.
-
Surety bonds: Guarantees of contract performance, different risk profile and structure entirely.
-
Life settlements: Purchasing existing life insurance policies on the secondary market. Different underwriting, different risk drivers, different regulatory treatment.
Edge cases
Quota share sidecars vs. excess of loss sidecars: Both are ILS, but quota share sidecars take proportional risk across the cedent’s book (including attritional losses), while excess of loss sidecars only take risk above an attachment point. Excess of loss is more “cat bond-like” in risk profile.
Transformer vehicles: Some structures convert ILW contracts into bond form for investors who can only hold securities. The underlying risk is ILW-like (index triggered), but the wrapper is bond-like. Analyze based on the underlying trigger, not the wrapper.
Cat bond lite: Private placements using cat bond mechanics but without 144A registration. Smaller deal sizes ($25M-$100M), faster execution, often shorter tenors. Same risk analysis applies.
Retrocession: Reinsurance of reinsurance. Collateralized retro looks like collateralized reinsurance but sits further up the risk chain. Higher expected loss, higher spreads, more tail risk.
How capital providers will classify you
| Trigger Type | Expected Loss | Typical Spread | Collateral Requirement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parametric (single peril) | 0.5-3.0% | 200-600 bps | 100% principal |
| Industry index | 1.0-4.0% | 300-800 bps | 100% principal |
| Indemnity | 2.0-6.0% | 400-1000 bps | 100% principal |
| Multi-peril | 3.0-8.0% | 500-1200 bps | 100% principal |
| High expected loss | 5.0-15.0% | 800-1800 bps | 100% principal |
Illustrative pricing. See pricing disclaimer.
The spread multiple over expected loss (spread / EL) is the key pricing metric. A 400 bps spread on 2% expected loss is a 2.0x multiple. Market pricing typically ranges from 2.0x to 5.0x, depending on peril type, modeling confidence, sponsor quality, and market capacity.
Market benchmarks and comps
Spread and expected loss benchmarks
Cat bond spreads by risk level:
| Expected Loss | Typical Spread | Multiple | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.5-1.0% | 200-400 bps | 3.0-5.0x | Remote risk, senior attachment |
| 1.0-2.0% | 300-550 bps | 2.5-4.0x | Investment-grade equivalent |
| 2.0-4.0% | 450-800 bps | 2.0-3.0x | Core BB cat bond range |
| 4.0-6.0% | 700-1100 bps | 1.8-2.5x | Higher-risk tranches |
| 6.0-10.0% | 1000-1600 bps | 1.5-2.2x | B-rated equivalent |
| >10.0% | 1400-2500 bps | 1.3-2.0x | First loss positions |
Illustrative pricing. See pricing disclaimer.
Post-loss hard markets (like 2023 following Hurricane Ian) see multiples compress as spreads rise faster than modeled expected losses are revised upward.
Market size and growth
| Segment | Outstanding (Est. 2024) | Annual Issuance |
|---|---|---|
| Cat bonds | $45-50B | $15-18B |
| Collateralized reinsurance | $50-60B | N/A (annual renewal) |
| ILWs | $10-15B notional | N/A |
| Sidecars | $8-12B | N/A (annual renewal) |
| Total ILS | $120-140B | - |
The market has grown 3-4x over the past decade. Post-loss hard markets (2018, 2023) accelerated growth as traditional reinsurance pricing increased and sponsors sought alternative capacity.
Finding current market data
| Source | What You’ll Find | Access |
|---|---|---|
| Artemis.bm | Deal announcements, spread data, loss reports, market news | Free (registration) |
| Swiss Re Sigma Reports | Annual ILS market size, growth trends, loss statistics | Free (PDF download) |
| Guy Carpenter ILS Market Report | Quarterly issuance data, spread trends, investor sentiment | Client access |
| Aon ILS Annual Report | Market overview, pricing trends, new sponsor activity | Free (PDF download) |
| Lane Financial LLC | Secondary trading data, return indices | Subscription |
| Bloomberg ILS Index (BEILSTRR) | Total return index for tradeable cat bonds | Bloomberg terminal |
What investors focus on
1. Peril exposure
Your risk profile depends entirely on which perils you’re exposed to.
Major perils:
| Peril | Characteristics | Typical Attachment |
|---|---|---|
| US Hurricane | Largest premium volume, Florida dominates | $15-50B industry loss |
| US Earthquake | California, New Madrid; lower frequency, high severity | $10-30B industry loss |
| European Windstorm | UK, Germany, France; more predictable | EUR 5-15B industry loss |
| Japan Earthquake/Typhoon | High insured exposure, 2011 was $40B+ | Varies by peril |
Multi-peril vs. single-peril:
| Structure | Premium | Expected Loss | Modeling Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single-peril (US hurricane only) | Lower | Lower | Higher |
| Multi-peril (US hurricane + EQ) | Higher | Higher | Moderate |
| Global multi-peril | Highest | Highest | Lower |
Most investors prefer single-peril for clearer risk assessment.
2. Trigger type
The trigger determines when you lose principal. This is arguably the most important structural feature. See Trigger types for detailed analysis.
| Trigger Type | Basis Risk for Sponsor | Moral Hazard for Investor | Settlement Speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indemnity | None | Highest | 24-36 months |
| Modeled loss | Low-Moderate | Moderate | 1-3 months |
| Industry index | Moderate | Low | 12-18 months |
| Parametric | Highest | None | Days-weeks |
3. Modeling and expected loss
Catastrophe models are the analytical backbone of ILS. Three firms dominate: AIR Worldwide (Verisk), RMS (Moody’s), and CoreLogic. See Catastrophe modeling for deep dive.
Models can differ by 20-40% on the same risk. Always verify model version and consider running multiple models.
4. Climate risk
Climate change is reshaping ILS risk assessment. Historical loss data may not predict future losses. See Climate risk and emerging perils for analysis of wildfire, severe convective storm, flood, and climate-conditioned modeling approaches.
5. Sponsor quality
The cedent (sponsor) matters, especially for indemnity triggers:
| Factor | What to Assess |
|---|---|
| Financial strength | AM Best A rating or better preferred |
| Underwriting quality | Disciplined underwriting = actual losses closer to modeled |
| Track record | Repeat issuers with clean history command tighter spreads |
| Alignment of interests | Does sponsor retain risk below attachment? |
See Key participants for market landscape.
6. Collateral and structure
ILS requires full collateralization. You’re not relying on the cedent’s credit.
| Investment Type | Typical Return | Risk |
|---|---|---|
| Treasury money market funds | T-bill rate | Minimal |
| Treasury bills/notes | T-bill rate | Minimal |
| AAA-rated money market funds | SOFR - 10-20 bps | Low counterparty |
| Total return swap (TRS) | SOFR + 20-40 bps | Swap counterparty |
Deep dive guides
Explore specific aspects of ILS in detail:
Product structures
- Catastrophe bonds - Cat bond structure, pricing, deal mechanics, risk metrics
- Collateralized reinsurance, ILWs, and sidecars - Alternative ILS structures
Risk analysis
- Trigger types - Indemnity, index, parametric, and modeled loss triggers
- Catastrophe modeling - How cat models work, key outputs, model uncertainty
- Climate risk and emerging perils - Climate change impacts, wildfire, flood, SCS
Market and trading
- Secondary market trading - Liquidity, price discovery, exiting positions
- Key participants - Sponsors, investors, modeling firms, structuring agents
Investment considerations
- ESG and green ILS - ESG profile, green cat bonds, sustainability-linked structures
- ILS diligence guide - Due diligence checklist, red flags, rating agency treatment
Diligence focus areas (summary)
For comprehensive diligence guidance, see the ILS diligence guide. Key areas:
Modeling review
- Independent model run (don’t rely solely on sponsor-provided modeling)
- Model version verification (outdated versions underestimate risk)
- Exposure data quality (completeness, geocoding, construction type)
- Sensitivity analysis (attachment point, demand surge, secondary perils)
Structural review
- Trigger definition precision (read word by word)
- Development period sufficiency (18 months may be short for major events)
- Extension provisions (when can principal be trapped?)
- Collateral investment guidelines (avoid counterparty risk you didn’t sign up for)
Red flags
- Single model reliance
- Outdated model versions
- Ambiguous trigger definitions
- Short index development periods
- Excessive extension provisions
- Deteriorating sponsor ratings
- History of disputes
Historical loss experience
Cat bonds were considered nearly loss-free until 2017. Then reality arrived:
| Year | Event | Industry Cat Bond Losses |
|---|---|---|
| 2011 | Japan earthquake + tsunami | ~$300M |
| 2017 | Harvey, Irma, Maria | ~$1.1B |
| 2018 | Camp Fire, Michael | ~$150M |
| 2022 | Hurricane Ian | ~$2B+ |
Cumulative performance (1997-2024):
- Total issuance: $200B+
- Total losses: ~$4B
- Loss rate: ~2% of cumulative issuance
- Majority of bonds matured without any loss
The 2017 hurricane season was the first major stress test. Recovery rates varied by trigger type, with indemnity triggers experiencing full principal loss when reserves developed.