Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T22:43:23.372Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determinants of United Kingdom General Insurance Company Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2011

Y. Shiu
Y. Shiu
Affiliation:
Department of Finance, Tunghai University, 181, Sec. 3, Taichung-Kan Rd, Taichung, Taiwan. Tel: +886-(0)4-2359-0121 ext. 3540; Fax: +886-(0)4-2350-6835; Email: yungming@mail.thu.edu.tw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Dynamic financial analysis has become one of the important tools that actuaries use to model the underwriting and investment operations of insurance companies. The first step in carrying out the analysis is to investigate the most important factors affecting company performance. This paper identifies the determinants of the performance of United Kingdom general insurance companies using a panel data set consisting of economic data and Financial Services Authority/Department of Trade and Industry returns over the period 1986 to 1999. Three performance measures are used to capture different aspects of insurance operations. These measures are related to a number of economic and firm specific variables, chosen on the basis of relevant theory and literature. An ordinary least squares regression model and two panel data models are estimated for each of three performance measures. This paper also addresses several important econometric problems that are usually ignored in applied work in the context of panel data analysis. Based on the empirical results, this study finds that liquidity, unexpected inflation, interest rate level and underwriting profits are statistically significant determinants of the performance of U.K. general insurers.

Keywords

Dynamic Financial AnalysisPerformance DeterminantsGeneral InsurersPanel Data Analysis
Type
Sessional meetings: papers and abstracts of discussions
Information
British Actuarial Journal , Volume 10 , Issue 5 , 01 December 2004 , pp. 1079 - 1110
Copyright
Copyright © Institute and Faculty of Actuaries 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, M. & Buckle, M. (2000). The determinants of operational performance in the Bermuda insurance market. Working Paper, European Business Management School, University of Wales.Google Scholar
Baltagi, B.H. (1995). Econometric analysis of panel data. Wiley, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Bennaceur, S. & Goaied, M. (2001). The determinants of the Tunisian deposit banks' performance. Applied Financial Economics, 11, 317–319.Google Scholar
Booth, P., Chadburn, R., Cooper, D., Haberman, S. & James, D. (1999). Modern actuarial theory and practice. Chapman & Hall, U.K.Google Scholar
Bowerman, B.L. & O'Connell, R.T. (1993). Forecasting and time series: an applied approach. Duxbury Press, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Brealey, R.A. & Myers, S.C. (2000). Principles of corporate finances (sixth edition). McGraw-Hill, U.K.Google Scholar
Briys, E. & De Varenne, F. (2001). Insurance from underwriting to derivatives. Wiley, U.K.Google Scholar
Browne, M.J. & Hoyt, R.E. (1995). Economic and market predictors of insolvencies in the property-liability insurance industry. The Journal of Risk and Insurance, 62, 309–327.Google Scholar
Canadian Institute of Actuaries (1998). Standard of practice on dynamic capital adequacy testing (in effect January 1, 1999). This document is available at http://www.actuaries.ca/publications/sop_e.htmlGoogle Scholar
Carson, J.M. & Hoyt, R.E. (1995). Life insurer financial distress: classification models and empirical evidence. The Journal of Risk and Insurance, 62, 764–775.Google Scholar
Casualty Actuarial Society (2000). Dynamic financial analysis research book. This document is available at http://www.casact.org/research/dfa/index.htmlGoogle Scholar
Daykin, C.D., Pentikainen, T. & Pesonen, M. (1994). Practical risk theory for actuaries (1st edition). Chapman & Hall, U.K.Google Scholar
D'Arcy, S., Gorvett, R., Hettinger, T. & Walling, R. (1998). Using the public access DFA model: a case study. Casualty Actuarial Society Forum, 53–118.Google Scholar
Enz, R. & Karl, K. (2001). Profitability of the non-life insurance industry: it's back-to-basics time. Swiss Re. Sigma, 5, 1–37.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. (2002). User's manual: Limdep version 8.0. Econometric Software Inc., U.S.A.Google Scholar
Greene, W.H. (2000). Econometric analysis (fourth edition). Prentice Hall, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Gujarati, D.N. (1995). Basic econometrics (third edition). McGraw-Hill, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Hausman, J.A. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica, 46, 1251–1271.Google Scholar
NAIC (2001). Insurance regulatory information system: Property/casualty edition. This document is available at http://www.naic.orgGoogle Scholar
Neter, J., Wasserman, W. & Kutner, M.H. (1989). Applied linear regression models (second edition). Irwin, U.S.A.Google Scholar
Pesaran, H., Smith, R. & Im, K. (1996). Dynamic linear models for heterogeneous panels. In The econometrics of panel data. Edited by Mátyás, L. & Sevestre, P. (second revised edition). Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test of heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–838.Google Scholar