Abstract
Solvency II has one standard equity solvency capital requirement for type 1 or developed market stocks (39 percent) and one for type 2 or emerging market stocks (49 percent). As such, differences in financial economic risk of stock portfolios within developed or emerging markets do not influence solvency requirements. This encourages risk-seeking behavior by insurance companies, and could sustain or even create structural mispricing in the cross-section of stock returns. We argue to improve Solvency II regulation by aligning it with more sophisticated European regulation that is already in place for mutual funds. Specifically, we propose to multiply the standard solvency charge of 39 percent with the ratio of equity portfolio volatility to broad equity market volatility. This ratio will be above one for more risky portfolios and below one for less risky portfolios, meaning that high-risk stock portfolios require more solvency capital than the market, while low-risk stock portfolios require less. Our approach encompasses the existing distinction between emerging and developed markets, and reduces geography to just one of many potential sources of risk that should be recognized. The proposed approach gives better incentives to institutional investors, contributes to market efficiency, and is much less prone to regulatory arbitrage than the existing approach.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.