Transcript Slide 1
Preparing for Your Rating Agency Visit
Physicians Insurance Association of America (PIAA)
CEO/COO Session March 13, 2008 10:30 – 11:45 AM
Westin Kierland Hotel
Scottsdale, Arizona
Presented by Herbert E. Goodfriend
Senior Vice President
1
2
Agenda
Ratings: Holy Grail?
Preparing for the Ratings Presentation
The Presentation Itself
After the Presentation
Conclusion
Questions
3
Where Do You Fit In?
Already involved with the rating agency process?
Preparing for your first visit?
Don’t think you need a rating, but …
4
Why Do It? Holy Grail
Many financial institutions, regulators, policyholders, distribution
systems may require it
For marketing reasons – i.e., a high rating encourages
policyholder, investor and public confidence in your company
Some of the disciplines involved in preparation can be quite
instructive and useful in your internal management – ownership
assessments
Process provides:
Valuable perspective on company’s business plan and strategy
Encourages greater transparency
5
Are There Pitfalls?
Experience can be unpleasant:
Adversarial
Generational gap
High cost in terms of time and money – not a one-off
phenomenon
Once on the path, it’s difficult to get off unscathed
6
What is a Rating?
Rating is an opinion about the financial strength of your company
Rating is based on publicly available data, often supplemented with
confidential interviews with rating agency staff (“insiders”)
A high rating does NOT mean your company will survive and
thrive; it simply means that there’s a greater likelihood it will
Rating firms are not perfect; opinions inter alia may differ
Criteria change as do the people involved in setting and applying
them
7
Who are the Leading Rating Firms?
A.M. Best Company
Duff & Phelps
Fitch Ratings
Moody’s Investor Service
Standard & Poor’s
Weiss Ratings, Inc. - Different Category
8
What are They Looking For?
Rating scales tend to fall into two major categories:
Secure
Vulnerable
The common denominators among all ratings:
Solvency
Relative Performance
9
Summary of the Rating Process:
A 3-Legged Stool with Moving Parts
Capital
Business profile
Operating efficiency and profitability
Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) and Dynamic Financial
Analysis (DFA) rising in relative importance, but still in
nascent stages for most companies
10
A.M. Best Company
Founded in 1899; oldest, independently-owned rating agency
Broadest coverage
Two types of ratings:
Public data only – extracted from available statutory and reportable documents
Interactive
Consultation with company management
Quantitative analysis of financial data (“SRQ”) provided by the company
Evaluation of the company’s balance sheet strength and operating performance
Qualitative analysis of several factors including management experience
Comprehensive review including quantitative/qualitative mix of meetings, conference calls, written
correspondence and business plan
Process not driven solely by ratio analysis; evaluation includes organization(s) as whole including
holding companies and pools as well as statutory and GAAP regimens
Rated companies can request that rating not be published (classified as “NR-4”)
11
Duff & Phelps (D&P)
Founded in 1932; independently owned
Claims-paying ability rating
Companies request to be rated; can request rating not be
published
Relatively few insurance companies rated
12
Fitch Ratings
Majority-owned subsidiary of Fimlac S.A., headquartered in Paris
Fitch assigns two types of ratings:
• Requested ratings - a variety of public and non-public data plus meeting with Fitch
analysts
• Not requested ratings - designated “q” (quantitative) and based on publicly available
information
Very fixed income asset and capital oriented
Relatively few insurance companies monitored
Proprietary capital adequacy scoring (“PRISM”) for 99 insurance
groups
o 63% of non-life industry with $284 bill NWP
o e.g. Range AAA – BBB+; Average Rating 2005-2006 AA
13
Moody’s Investors Service
Founded in 1900; independently owned
“Solicited ratings” are based on public and non-public
14
information as well as meetings with Moody’s analysts
The company does almost no unsolicited ratings
Financial strength rating
Companies cannot request that rating not be published
Major force in public and private capital markets
Tend to be more conservative
Standard & Poor’s (S&P) - part 1
Founded in 1860; acquired in 1966 by The McGraw–Hill
15
Companies
Claims-paying ability rating
Quantitative ratings (“q” qualifier) based solely on publicly
available information
Companies may request to be rated or may be rated involuntarily
Companies can request that rating not be published – except for
quantitative rating
Has expanded coverage significantly in last decade = 48 U.S.
groups in all, for the most part oriented to insurers tapping capital
markets
Standard & Poor’s (S&P) - part 2
New risk-based insurance capital model
Higher charges for P-C companies but few downgrades to date
Focus is on volatility
Ratings trend positives and negatives in equilibrium:
2007 = 1 up and 1 down
Stable outlook 77% of the total
2006 = 5 up and 5 down
2005 = 3 up and 4 down
Median financial strength is “A”
16
Weiss Ratings, Inc.
Independently owned and operated at one location (Florida)
“Safety” rating
Companies cannot request ratings
No interview, formal meetings or personal relationships (“Black Box”)
Companies are rated based on publicly available information – i.e.,
formula-driven (companies are invited to provide additional
information)
Companies cannot insist that rating not be published
Dominated by life insurance coverages and health care companies; P-C
companies get less attention but on the rise
Genesis was spin-off of “John Doe” life and annuity inquiries
17
Preparing for the Presentation
You should consider the rating agency an “insider”
Use rating agency questionnaire to prep yourselves
Select a “point” person who knows his/her craft, is well organized
in such proceedings as to data selection, collection and
presentation; being an articulate, succinct speaker would help too
Pull together mission statement, business plans, projections,
GAAP-statements, as well as use of outside consultants inputs,
actuaries, counsel and portfolio managers
Determine who should attend formal meetings and who should
contribute on site; add or subtract one person from each presentation
annually
18
The Presentation Itself - part 1
What to expect re: rating agency staff – personnel, experience
and modus operandi for decisions
Prepare a timetable for delivery of written and oral presentations;
live up to schedule!
Put your best foot forward without hyperbole; avoid predictable
negative surprises, especially if they are called to the agency’s
attention by a third party
Address their previously articulated concerns head-on, with courses of
action taken and/or planned near term
Best case, modal case, worst case: 3-5 year projections
The “short leash” syndrome
Don’t knock your competition by name
19
The Presentation Itself - part 2
Get outside help if needed – it’s expected and a common practice before,
during and after
Practice, practice, practice
Take notes of all questions, who asked them, who replied and especially, agency
calls for action
Ask for the rating you want and MERIT
The letter grade is important but don’t forget the “Outlook”; it could well be
pre-cursor to letter grade rating change
Stable
Positive
Negative
Under Review
Penalty Box
20
After the Visit – part 1
Circulate notes among all participants
Set time frame for responding to call to action
As agency time for decision-making approaches, call agency
counterpart to inquire if additional data are needed
Check galley proof carefully BEFORE signing
If decision is adverse, clarify issues carefully with possible
additional visit
Prospect for overturning adverse rating is not high. Agency
loathe to overturn its analysts and “committees”
21
After the Visit - part 2
Submit operational and financial data on a regular, consistent
basis supplemented by comments where appropriate
If special issues arise such as financing, recapitalization, key
ownership and management changes, alert agency ASAP to
likely impact
Similarly, if projections change materially from previously
submitted ones, give agency heads up as to why, so as to
maintain confidence
22
Hot Buttons - part 1
Industry risk - ERM
Too much capital accretion vs. need for more capital
Financial flexibility (capital requirements and capital sources)
Management and corporate strategy
Parental commitment as to resources. Leverage – access to capital
Business review – underwriting results
Capitalization
Liquidity
23
Hot Buttons - part 2
Outsourcing – quality control; cost savings vs. give-ups
Unique exposures
Financial market dependency
Regulatory and judicial room for maneuver
Materiality of change since last meeting
Reinsurance stress tests
24
Hot Buttons - part 3
Competitive situation
Distribution
Traditional
Avant Garde/New Age
Demutualization/Mutual Holding Company Structure
Use of captives and RRGs: Some are being rated
Managed care links
Expense ratios
25
Hot Buttons - part 4
Investing in a low-interest rate environment; policy vs.
reality; asset liability matching (ALM); sub-prime exposure
Reserves – releases:
2004 and prior accident years – modestly redundant or on
26
target since then
Regulatory developments
Profitability; the cyclical phase of declining margins is at hand
Group inter-relationships
Parent company and subsidiaries issues
“Micro” Issues
Can you have and do you enjoy a sustainable advantage in a keenly
competitive business?
Balance sheet strength
Statutory
NAIC risk-based capital (RBC) and parochial measurements
Investment portfolio
27
Proprietary – i.e., Best’s Capital Adequacy Ratio (BCAR); Fitch and S&P
Risk measurements – stress tests and ERM
Quality
Liquidity
Income Flows
New Internal Revenue Service opinions on RRGs and captives
Enterprise Risk Management - part 1
What is it? Risk and capital needed
Diversification
Accumulation and aggregation correlation
Mitigation measures
Return on adjusted capital
Who likes it and sponsors it?
Consultants, Ernst & Young, Wall Street; Standard & Poor’s
Origins were in other businesses
Only now getting footprints; likely to rise in relative importance
28
Enterprise Risk Management - part 2
What can it mean to you?
Cost/benefit analysis – frees up capital but only a few do it well
Culture unto itself
Competitive differentiation
Benchmarking: S&P codes 125 companies: “Excellent (6)”; “Strong
(11)”; “Adequate (105)” and “Weak (3)”
Drivers of change and challenges
29
Med Mal Insurance Trends – part 1
2006 was peak earnings year; rate declines accelerating in GL
30
standard lines, down 71%; NWP growth slowing
Skeptical view of industry category affects rating agency collective
judgments
Reinsurance - more available here and abroad; at lower cost
Slower new growth in units and dollars expected
More consolidation, mergers and poolings in emerging softer
market -- it's started already
Stock buy-backs, where pertinent
Med Mal Insurance Trends - part 2
Agency overview not limited to carriers - TPAs, claims
organizations and advisory- medical consultative enterprises
are in the swim too
More problematic growth in RRGs and captives, especially start-
ups
IRS is on the loose again looking for revenue founts from RRGs
and captives
Continuing relatively high medical-hospital and pharmaceutical
costs, unlike inflation in overall terms
31
Med Mal Insurance Trends – part 3
Loss ratios to hover around 75%, ex-LAE
Good combined ratios at + or - 90% for first half 2008
Pressure on cash flows in 2008 due to lower or flat fixed
income securities yields, and slowing volume growth with
lowered premium rates
Ergo - must not depend on investment returns to buoy
slackening operating profitability
Reasonably healthy reserves for accident and calendar years
32
Long Term Rating Agency Concerns
Volatility
Pricing and reserving adequacy
Regulatory and legislative changes
Populism - the election syndromes, aided and abetted by the
media focus on “booboos”; consumerism
33
Long Term Rating Agency View Pluses
Emerging tort reform: mixed trends in such jurisdictions as
34
Illinois, Maryland, Pennsylvania and West Virginia
Claims frequency moderation
Adequate reserves pro tem
Present premium rates good (albeit for how long?)
Big med-mal claims at hospitals on the wane as to frequency
and severity, but still too long at 33 months on average
What You May Anticipate from Rating
Agencies - part 1
Some “movement on the beach”:
Ratings upward but not too many
Outlooks likely to remain “stable” to “cautious”, especially after
mid year 2008
Recommendation to diversify lines and geography
Expand only if infrastructure can handle it, before the
fact
Pay more attention to the media coverage of your
business and region
35
What You May Anticipate from Rating
Agencies - part 2
Notable exception to rational behavior in the market
place: New York where its pool has large deficit
Concern as to where and who are the new doctors,
especially surgeons
More self-discipline of the medical profession clearly
needed, says the public
Greater use of special law courts and administrative
proceedings
36
Questions?
37