Study of the Connecticut Homeowner Insurance Market
And Coastal Affordability and Availability
Katharine L. Wade
Insurance Commissioner
January 12, 2017
Our homes are among our most important investments. The ability to access homeowners
insurance helps us protect that investment from a variety of risks that exist in Connecticut
– from coastal storms to severe winter weather. All homeowners benefit when there is a
competitive insurance market in the state. Competition means more choices with plans that
best suit your needs and your budget.
The Connecticut Insurance Department (CID) has taken the pulse of the market in a data
collection that took place over multi-year period stretching from 2013 through June 2015.
We wanted to make sure that carriers were writing policies in all corners of the state and
that the impacts of recent damaging weather events – Tropical Storm Irene, Superstorm
Sandy and record winters – did not have a detrimental effect on the availability of
coverage, particularly for coastal homeowners.
The CID worked with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) to
compile information from a voluntary data call of 94 homeowner insurance companies in
the traditional Personal Lines Homeowner market. The data included the number of
policies for each carrier and where those policies were issued. We also tracked premium
rates over the last three years. The CID reviews rates proposed by a company to ensure
they are actuarially justified and reports those results annually. CID reviews have helped
save homeowners more than $56 million in premium increases since 2012.
Some highlights of the report include:
• 65% of all new business written in 2014 was in the coastal counties
• Average CT premium for new policies has increased by 6.5% since 2013
• Average CT premium for new coastal policies had decreased by 1.4% between
2013 and mid-2015
• Since 2010, 19 new licensed insurers have begun or expanded their homeowners
business in Connecticut.
Our data show that the homeowners market remains competitive throughout the state and
with new carriers entering the state, there is availability along the coast. The CID will
continue to closely monitor availability, particularly in areas where this report has
identified trends that may affect future availability and affordability issues.
The CID is committed to our mission of protecting the insurance consumer. I encourage
anyone with questions or concerns about their insurance to contact the CID either
online or
by phone at 800-203-3447.
Katharine L. Wade
Insurance Commissioner
Background
A previous CID study on the availability of coastal homeowners insurance was issued
in December 2006. That study focused solely on availability. The report identified three
main factors that contributed to availability concerns for property owners who lived certain
distances from the shoreline. They were:
• More conservative reviews of insurers by rating agencies
• Cost and availability of reinsurance
• Enhanced and more detailed catastrophe models
Based on our more recent study, it is clear that those three factors no longer have the
same impact on narrowing coverage availability as had been the case in 2006. This is due
primarily due to the increased availability and affordability of reinsurance
1
, and the
industry’s development of other risk-transfer innovations which have resulted in greater
capacity in the retail homeowners market.
Although not a new factor in coverage availability, companies still depend on
catastrophe models and continue to fine tune those models. Rating agencies, regulators and
in-house risk managers all conduct financial stress tests on carriers to ensure they are
adequately capitalized to withstand the impacts of significant events.
Since that 2006 report, the state has experienced several significant weather events over
a period of several years that caused significant damage in all corners of the state.
1
Reinsurance cost and availability became very difficult following 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons. Florida, which was hit by
four hurricanes in 2004: Charley, Frances, Ivan, and Jeanne, was impacted again by several more in 2005 including Dennis,
Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
The events underscored the big risks inherent in this small New England state:
• $675 billion worth of property insured on CT coastline, 6th highest of 18 Atlantic
states
• 64% of all insured property in the state is on the coastline, 3rd behind FL and NY
• Nearly 60% of CT is forested and the state is among the most densely populated
In 2011, Tropical Storm Irene and a powerful October nor’easter struck within two
months of each other. A year later in 2012 Superstorm Sandy, a storm of historic
proportions, slammed Connecticut again. The state also experienced record winter
snowfalls that collapsed roofs and pipe-bursting extreme cold around the same time.
Insurers paid more than $1 billion in claims from those events. Until 2014, carriers in
the state-regulated market could decline new business if a homeowner didn’t have pre-
drilled or cut plywood on the premises for windows to mitigate future losses. State
lawmakers responded with public policy changes in
Public Act No. 14-175 that, in part,
prohibited this practice to ensure homeowners could obtain insurance without the plywood
conditions.
In the wake of the weather events, public policy changes and other factors, the CID felt
it necessary to re-examine the market with a voluntary data call of state-regulated Personal
Lines homeowner carriers in Connecticut.
This study was compiled with the assistance of the NAIC and presents the findings of
that data call and other market trends.
2015 Data Call Summary
The following is a summary of the survey. The full NAIC analysis of the data is
attached as Exhibit 1 of this report.
Companies: Breakdown of the types of companies surveyed. A captive agent is an
insurance agent who works exclusively for one company.
Type of Company
Group
Company
Mutual – Agent/Captive
5
8
Mutual – Agent/Independent
17
22
Mutual – Direct
5
7
Mutual Totals
27
37
Stock – Agent/Captive
3
4
Stock – Agent/Independent
18
44
Stock – Direct
6
9
Stock Totals
27
57
Grand Totals
54
94
Premiums average (2013-2015) The average premium for new policies increased 6.5
percent statewide and decreased
1.4 percent on the coast. The average premium for
renewed policies increased 8.4 percent statewide and 9 percent on the coast.
New Business
2013 Average
Premium
2014 Average
Premium
2015 Average Premium
Coastal
$1,701
$1,716
$1,678
Non-Coastal
$1,070
$1,119
$1,149
Statewide
$1,170
$1,214
$1,246
Renewals
2013 Average
Premium
2014 Average
Premium
2015 Average Premium
Coastal
$2,111
$2,221
$2,301
Non-Coastal
$1,340
$1,399
$1,453
Statewide
$1,485
$1,551
$1,610
New entrants to the CT homeowners market:
New Carriers entering CT Homeowner Market
2012
Universal North American
American Commerce
ACE
Pacific Specialty
Old Dominion
Ohio Mutual
AAA
Fidelity National
PURE
Cincinnati Companies
2015
MapFre
Stillwater
United Property & Casualty
National Specialty
2016
Narragansett
Ironshore
AM Trust
Nationwide
Change in number of companies writing homeowner insurance on the coast:
Fairfield County
Middlesex County
New Haven County
New London County
2013
43
42
43
44
2014
46
42
45
44
2015
42
39
44
44
Market Trends – Claims costs, rates and underwriting
Since 2011 Connecticut direct written premium (DWP) has grown from $1.12 billion to
$1.40 billion
2
which represents 25 percent growth. Most of this growth is due to rate
increases following the weather events the state experienced starting in 2010. The charts
2
A.M. Best Market Share report
below show the storm impacts on claims costs and the average rate increase requests that
carriers filed with the CID since 2010.
Storm
Claims
Claims Paid
Sandy (2012)
62,000
$493 million
Irene (2011)
60,000
$235 million
October Nor’easter (2011)
93,000
$247 million
Winter 2010-2011
n/a
$165 million
Year
Requested Increase
Approved Increase
2010
9.1%
8.1%
2011
4.7%
4.3%
2012
12.4%
9.7%
2013
8.5%
7.9%
2014
6.8%
4.8%
2015
4.6%
4.0%
Rate requests – CID rate reviews saved policyholders nearly $57 million
Industry Underwriting and Marketing Trends:
Carriers have filed with the Department various restrictive criteria in an effort to
mitigate exposure. Carriers attempt to back up their requirements by using models that
calculate storm surge potential and the damage that could occur to homes in certain
locations and elevations, called predictive modeling. For example, some sought to mitigate
their losses on damaged roof claims by paying based on the age of the roof or limiting the
settlement to the actual cash value. The CID has disapproved many of these filings
because a homeowner policy in Connecticut is a replacement cost policy. While the CID
understands the need for predictive modeling it is essential that the practice not be
discriminatory nor impede the availability of homeowner insurance.
Insurance agents marketing the policies for the carriers also provided anecdotal
information on availability of coverage on the shoreline. CID staff visited with agents in
each of the four coastal counties and learned that since the implementation of P.A. 14-175
in 2014 placing homeowner business in nearly all counties has been much easier. The CID
continues to monitor the issue and will begin a market conduct investigation if there is any
indication that carriers are directing agents to discourage placing new business on the
coast.
Coverage Through Non-Traditional Markets
The CID also has examined trends in the non-traditional markets such as Excess &
Surplus Lines (E&S), which is not regulated by the CID and the FAIR Plan, the plan of
“last resort.”
The
FAIR Plan does not compete in the voluntary market. It is an insurance association
that provides coverage for property owners who have been unable to obtain it elsewhere.
The policies have generally higher average premiums and provide limited coverage,
significantly lower than that found in the standard market. Since 2007, the number of
policies issued by FAIR Plan has been decreasing:
Year
No. of FAIR Plan Policies
Written Premium
2016
2,345
$3.22M
2015
2,538
$3.47M
2014
2,779
$3.67M
2013
2,829
$3.48M
2012
2,964
$3.29M
2010
3,178
$3.30M
2009
3,436
$3.23M
2008
3,817
$3.51M
2007
4,207
$3.90M
The E&S market is also a market of last resort. The carriers whose policies are placed
through the E&S market are not admitted in Connecticut, meaning the carriers and the
products in this market are not regulated by the CID to the same extent the admitted
personal and commercial markets are. Therefore consumers do not have the same
regulatory protections afforded to policyholders within the traditional or “admitted”
market and may also be offered policies with less coverage than required in the admitted
market. For example, a homeowner with an E&S policy is not protected by the Guaranty
Fund, should the carrier become insolvent. It is important for homeowners to be aware of
the regulatory distinction between the traditional and non-traditional markets. There have
been indications, however, that the E&S homeowners’ market has been growing, and this
is a trend the CID will be closely monitoring. The CID encourages homeowners to talk to
their agents or contact the CID with any questions.
Ensuring Future Availability & Affordability of Coverage
Based upon our findings, the homeowners market is currently competitive throughout
Connecticut, including the coastline. New carriers continue to enter the state and provide
consumers with competitive choices. However, the CID has identified some potential areas
of concern that require regulatory vigilance to ensure the market remains robust. Those
areas are:
Credit Ratings
An insurance company’s access to capital is linked to its credit rating. Additionally,
financial resilience, along with the continued ability to market products, are affected by a
company’s credit rating and its financial strength rating. The higher the credit rating, the
greater flexibility a company has to acquire additional capital when necessary. Access to
new capital can be vital in order for a company to continue to pay claims and remain
solvent after a catastrophic event. The Department will continue to monitor changes to
rating agencies’ standards to gauge how they may affect company ratings.
Excess & Surplus Lines Trend
The passage of Public Act 14-175 was intended to provide more coastal homeowners with
greater access to the admitted (i.e., fully regulated) market by prohibiting carriers from
refusing to issue or renew a homeowners’ policy simply because the homeowner did not
have pre-drilled and cut plywood on the premises or any type of storm shutters installed on
the house. However, the CID has identified some growth in the E&S market as the overall
premium volume has increased. One driver of such growth could be that premiums are
generally lower for the pared down offerings in an E&S homeowner policy. The CID
believes that the pricing dynamic may be inducing many consumers or their brokers to
seek out this “non-admitted” market, despite the reduced coverage and lack of Guaranty
Fund protection. As a result, the CID will include E&S carriers in subsequent data calls for
purposes of assessing availability and affordability of homeowner policies.
The CID will continue to monitor the business practices of agents, reminding them moving
a customer into the E&S market because of lower premium is not an acceptable reason for
leaving the admitted market and ultimately jeopardizes consumer protection.
Coastal Business Practices
The CID will continue to ensure that neither insurance carriers nor their agents are
engaging in business practices that discourage the marketing of policies along the coast.
The CID will remind the industry that this practice is unacceptable and may result in
market conduct investigations and penalties.
Exhibit 1
NAIC Analysis of Connecticut Homeowner Insurance Data Call
Connecticut Homeowner
Market Study
2016
Introduction & Background
The reason for the study is to determine the availability and affordability of homeowners
insurance along the coast of Connecticut.
A total of 94 companies submitted their information for this study. Forty-four companies
classified themselves as Stock-Agent/Independent, 22 Mutual-Agent/Independent, 9 Stock-
Direct, 8 Mutual-Agent/Captive, 7 Mutual-Direct, and 4 Stock-Agent/Captive.
This study will take a look at the total business written across the state as well as and in
comparison to business written in the coastal zip codes, as provided by the Connecticut
Department of Insurance.
The NAIC obtained all information contained in the study from companies who submitted
individual company data in a prescribed format.
The accuracy of the reports included in this publication depends on the accuracy of the
information contained in the company submissions. While the NAIC exercises a great deal of
care in validating and capturing data, as with any statistical project, errors can occur.
Consequently, the NAIC makes no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy
of the data and statistics in this report.
2
2014 New Business Written
65% of all new business written in 2014
was in the coastal counties.
Approximately 50% of business written in
the coastal zip codes is in Fairfield County.
New 2014 Written Premium
3%
4%
7%
32%
21%
5%
21%
7%
Fairfield County
Hartford County
Litchfield County
Middlesex County
New Haven County
New London County
Tolland County
Windham County
New 2014 Written Premium -
Coastal Zip Codes
15%
48%
32%
5%
Fairfield County
Middlesex County
New Haven County
New London County
3
2014 Renewal Business Written
68% of all renewal business written in
2014 was in the coastal counties.
Approximately 50% of business written
in the coastal zip codes is in Fairfield
County.
Renewal 2014 Written
Premium - Coastal Zip Codes
15%
50%
30%
5%
Fairfield County
Middlesex County
New Haven County
New London County
4
2014 Renewal Written Premium
4%
2%
8%
34%
21%
5%
7% 19%
Fairfield County
Hartford County
Litchfield County
Middlesex County
New Haven County
New London County
Tolland County
Windham County
Average Premiums for New Written Premium
Average premium cost has
increased by 6.5% over the
past three years for the state.
Average premium cost in
coastal zip codes has
decreased by 1.4% over the
past three years.
*2015 represents 6 months of
data.
NEW BUSINESS
2013 Average Premium 2014 Average Premium 2015 Average Premium
Coastal
$1,701 $1,716 $1,678
Non
-Coastal
$1,070 $1,119 $1,149
Statewide
$1,170 $1,214 $1,246
5
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
Coastal Non-Coastal Statewide
Average New Premiums
2013 Average Premium 2014 Average Premium 2015 Average Premium
Average Premiums for Renewal Written Premium
Average renewal premiums
has increased by 8.4% over
the past three years for the
state.
Average renewal premiums in
the coastal zip codes
increased by approximately
9% over the past three years.
*2015 represents 6 months of
data.
RENEWALS
2013 Average Premium 2014 Average Premium 2015 Average Premium
Coastal
$2,111 $2,221 $2,301
Non
-Coastal
$1,340 $1,399 $1,453
Statewide
$1,485 $1,551 $1,610
6
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
Coastal Non-Coastal Statewide
Average Renewal Premiums
2013 Average Premium 2014 Average Premium 2015 Average Premium
Average 2014 HO3 New and Renewal Premiums by County
$200,000-$399,999 Exposure Range
Fairfield
County
Hartford
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
New
Haven
County
New
London
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
2014 New HO3 Average Premium $200,000-
$399,999
$1,041 $838 $876 $985 $1,029 $1,050 $874 $852
2014 Renewal HO3 Average Premium
$200,000-$399,999
$1,283 $1,014 $1,025 $1,196 $1,261 $1,269 $1,071 $1,052
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
2014 Average Premium
2014 HO3 New and Renewal Average Premiums
$200,000-$399,999 Range
7
Average 2014 HO5 New and Renewal Premiums by County
$200,000-$399,999 Exposure Range
Fairfield
County
Hartford
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
New
Haven
County
New
London
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
2014 New HO5 Average Premium $200,000-
$399,999
$1,083 $813 $1,040 $894 $1,112 $990 $861 $927
2014 Renewal HO5 Average Premium
$200,000-$399,999
$1,134 $964 $1,040 $1,058 $1,247 $1,099 $956 $989
$-
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
2014 Average Premium
2014 HO5 New and Renewal Average Premiums
$200,000-$399,999 Range
8
Average Premiums by County - New and Renewal
2013 to 2014
9
Fairfield
County
Hartford
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
New Haven
County
New London
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
Total 2013 Total Average Premium
2,076 1,112 1,365 1,322 1,353 1,376 1,104 1,047
Total 2014 Total Average Premium
2,156 1,156 1,433 1,391 1,422 1,451 1,159 1,108
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
Average Premium
Change in Total Average Premium by County
Exposures by County - New and Renewal
2013 to 2014
10
Hartford
County
Fairfield
County
New Haven
County
New London
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
2013 Total Exposures
191,335 184,770 170,294 60,375 54,098 43,960 35,400 26,935
2014 Total Exposures
199,011 189,260 173,555 62,051 55,362 45,494 37,460 27,817
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
Average Premium
Change in Total Exposures by County
Change in New Written Premium - 2013 to 2014
The increase in
new business
written in the
coastal zip codes
was only 4.55%,
compared to
7.59% statewide.
Statewide Coastal Zip Codes
2013 New Written Premium
$111,452,207 $25,633,736
2014 New Written Premium
$119,908,405 $26,800,257
Percentage Change
7.59% 4.55%
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
$-
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
New Premium Written
Change in New Written Premium
11
Change in Renewal Written Premium - 2013 to 2014
Statewide Coastal Zip Codes
2013 Renewal Written Premium
$997,719,760 $265,848,654
2014 Renewal Written Premium
$1,071,915,692 $283,735,295
Percentage Change
7.44% 6.73%
6.20%
6.40%
6.60%
6.80%
7.00%
7.20%
7.40%
7.60%
$-
$200,000,000
$400,000,000
$600,000,000
$800,000,000
$1,000,000,000
$1,200,000,000
Premium Written
Change in Renewal Written Premium
Renewal business
written in the
coastal zip codes
increased by
6.73% compared
to 7.44%
statewide.
12
Change in Exposures - 2013 to 2014
Exposures
increased by
1.68% in the
coastal zip
codes in 2014
(the latest year
with a full 12
months of data)
compared to an
increase of
2.98%
statewide .
13
Statewide Coastal Zip Codes
2013 Total Exposures
767,168 140,981
2014 Total Exposures
790,010 143,344
Percentage Change
2.98% 1.68%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
3.00%
3.50%
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
Exposures
Change in Exposures
Fairfield
County
Hartford
County
New Haven
County
New
London
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
New 2013 Written Premium Total
$35,032,581 $23,498,310 $24,558,403 $8,349,751 $7,243,438 $5,663,180 $4,168,255 $2,938,289
New 2014 Written Premium Total
$38,481,354 $25,606,112 $25,365,099 $8,414,752 $7,667,388 $6,365,534 $4,695,030 $3,313,136
Percent Change
10% 9% 3% 1% 6% 12% 13% 13%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
$45,000,000
New Written Premium
Annual Change in New Written Premium by County
Change in New Written Premium by County - 2013 to 2014
New London County experienced the least growth from 2013 to 2014.
14
Change in New Written Premium by County
2013 to 2014 – Coastal Zip Codes
New London County
experienced most of its growth
in new premium along the
coast.
Fairfield County New Haven County New London County Middlesex County
2013 New Written Premium Total
$12,120,015 $8,487,123 $3,734,565 $1,292,034
2014 New Written Premium Total
$12,805,517 $8,479,752 $4,150,754 $1,364,235
Premium Percentage Change
6% 0% 11% 6%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
$0
$2,000,000
$4,000,000
$6,000,000
$8,000,000
$10,000,000
$12,000,000
$14,000,000
New Written Premium
Annual Change in New Written Premium by County - Coastal Zip Codes
15
Change in Renewal Written Premium by County
2013 to 2014
Fairfield
County
New Haven
County
Hartford
County
New
London
County
Litchfield
County
Middlesex
County
Tolland
County
Windham
County
Renewal 2013 Written Premium
$348,592,856 $205,897,905 $189,268,263 $74,728,636 $66,599,350 $52,438,909 $34,917,919 $25,275,922
Renewal 2014 Written Premium
$369,573,625 $221,462,702 $204,486,332 $81,590,873 $71,673,815 $56,912,468 $38,721,239 $27,494,637
Sum of Renewal Premium Change
6% 8% 8% 9% 8% 9% 11% 9%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
$0
$50,000,000
$100,000,000
$150,000,000
$200,000,000
$250,000,000
$300,000,000
$350,000,000
$400,000,000
Renewal Premium Written
Annual Change in Renewal Written Premium by County
16
Change in Renewal Written Premium by County
2013 to 2014 – Coastal Zip Codes
17
Fairfield County New Haven County New London County Middlesex County
Renewal 2013 Written Premium
$134,089,551 $80,054,393 $37,619,342 $14,085,367
Renewal 2014 Written Premium
$141,621,727 $85,809,606 $40,985,776 $15,318,186
Sum of Renewal Premium Change
6% 7% 9% 9%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
$160,000,000
Renewal Business Written
Annual Change in Renewal Written Premium by County
Coastal Business by Company Type
18
Stock-
Agent/Independ
ent
Mutual-
Agent/Independ
ent
Mutual -
Agent/Captive
Stock-Direct Mutual - Direct
Stock -
Agent/Captive
New 2014 Written Premium Total
$13,843,913 $4,617,839 $4,536,773 $1,959,287 $1,424,255 $418,189
Renewal 2014 Written Premium
$130,328,895 $73,134,669 $42,085,014 $12,851,994 $22,536,458 $2,798,266
$0
$20,000,000
$40,000,000
$60,000,000
$80,000,000
$100,000,000
$120,000,000
$140,000,000
2014 Written Premium
2014 Premiums in Coastal Zip Codes by Company Type
List of Companies by Type
Mutual – Agent/Captive
CSAA Fire & Casualty Insurance Company
Liberty Insurance Corporation
Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company
Nationwide General Insurance Company
Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Company
Nationwide Property & Casualty Insurance
State Farm Fire and Casualty Company
California Casualty Indemnity Exchange
Mutual - Agent/Independent
Allstate Indemnity Company
Allstate Insurance C
ompany
Cambridge Mutual Fire Insurance Company
Casco I
ndemnity Company
Central Mutual Insurance Company
Employers Mutual Casualty C
ompany
General Insurance Company of A
merica
Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance C
ompany
Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company
Harleysville Worcester Insurance C
ompany
Merrimack Mutual Fire Insurance C
ompany
Middlesex M
utual Assurance Company
National Grange M
utual
New England Mutual Insurance Company
New London County Mutual Insurance C
ompany
Patrons Mutual Insurance Company of Connecticut
Providence M
utual Fire Insurance Company
Republic-F
ranklin Insurance Company
Safeco Insurance Company of America
Union M
utual Fire Insurance Company
Utica First Insurance Company
Vermont Mutual Insurance C
ompany
Mutual – Direct
Amica Mutual Insurance Company
Homesite Ins
urance Company
LM Insurance Corporation
United Services Automobile Association
USAA Casualty Insurance Company
USAA General Indemnity Company
21
st
Century Premier Insurance Company
19
List of Companies by Type
Stock – Agent/Independent
AIG Property Casualty Company
American Automobile Insurance
C
ompany
American Commerce Insurance
C
ompany
ASIC Connecticut
Associate Indemnity Corporation
Automobile Insurance Company
of Hartford
Bankers Standard Insurance
C
ompany
Bunker Hill Insurance Company
Chubb National Insurance
C
ompany
Cincinnati Insurance Company
Citizen’s Insurance Company of
A
merica
Economy Premier Assurance
C
ompany
Encompass Indemnity Company
Encompass Insurance Company
o
f America
Federal Insurance Company
Fireman’s Fund Insurance
C
ompanies
General Casualty Company of
W
isconsin
Great Northern Insurance
C
ompany
Hartford Casualty Insurance
C
ompany
Hartford Fire Insurance Company
Hartford Insurance Company of
the Southeast
Hartford Underwriters Insurance
C
ompany
Integon Na
tional Insurance
Company
Kemper Independence Insurance
Company
Mass Bay Insurance Company
Massachusetts Homeland
I
nsurance Company
Merastar I
nsurance Company
Metropolitan Property and
C
asualty Insurance
National Surety Corporation
Pacific Indemnity Company
Praetorian Insurance Company
Priviledge U
nderwriters
Reciprocal Exchange
Sentinel Insurance Company,
L
imited
Standard Fire Insurance
C
ompany
The Hanover American Insurance
C
ompany
The Hanover Insurance Company
Tower Insurance Company of NH
Travelers Home and Marine
I
nsurance Company
Travelers Indemnity Company of
A
merica
Travelers Personal Security
I
nsurance Company
Twin City Fire Insurance
C
ompany
Unitrin Direct Property and
C
asualty Company
Unitrin Preferred Insurance
C
ompany
Universal North America
I
nsurance Company
Vigilant Insurance Company
20
List of Companies by Type
Stock – Direct
Electric Insurance Company
Hartford Accident and indemnity
Co
mpany
IDS Property & Casualty Insurance
Co
mpany
Metropolitan Group Property and
Ca
sualty
Property and Casualty Insurance
Co
mpany
Trumbull Insurance Company
Hartford Insurance Company of the
M
idwest
Pacific Specialty Insurance Company
Stillwater Property and Casualty
I
nsurance
Stock – Agent/Captive
Covenant Insurance Company
Farm Family Casualty Insurance
Co
mpany
Horace Mann Insurance Company
Teachers Insurance Company
21
Coastal Business by Distance From Shore
22
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
$0
$10,000,000
$20,000,000
$30,000,000
$40,000,000
$50,000,000
$60,000,000
$70,000,000
$80,000,000
0-1000 Feet 1001-2600 Feet 2601-1Mile 1.1-2 Miles 2.1-3 Miles 3 Miles+ Unknown
2014 Premiums & Exposures by Feet from Shore
Coastal Zip Codes
New 2014 Written Premium Total Renewal 2014 Written Premium Total New and Renewal 2014 Exposures
Average Premiums by Distance from Shore
23
0-1000 Feet 1001-2600 Feet 2601-1Mile 1.1-2 Miles 2.1-3 Miles 3 Miles+ Unknown
New 2014 Average Premium
$2,768 $1,780 $1,479 $1,874 $1,600 $1,781 $1,393
Renewal 2014 Average Premium
$2,900 $2,252 $1,983 $2,638 $2,172 $1,989 $1,850
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
Average Premiums
2014 Average Premiums by Feet from Shore
Coastal Zip Codes
Statewide Market Competition
Herfindahl Hirschman Index and Number of Writers
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI):
The HHI is calculated by summing the squares of the
market shares (as a percentage) of all groups in the
market. For example, if a market had only one seller, its
market share would be 100% and the HHI would be
10,000. If a market had 10 sellers, each with an equal
10% of the market, the HHI would be 1,000. Although
there is no precise point at which the HHI indicates that a
market or industry is concentrated highly enough to
restrict competition, the U.S. Department of Justice has
developed guidelines with regard to corporate mergers.
Under these guidelines, if a merger of companies in a
given market causes the HHI to rise above 1,800, the
market is considered highly concentrated. If, after the
merger, the HHI is between 1,000 and 1,800, the market
is considered moderately concentrated. An HHI of less
than 1,000 is considered not concentrated. Because
these numbers are guidelines, judgment must be used to
interpret what information the HHIs provide for a
particular market.
24
2013 2014 2015
HHI
468 448 455
Number of Writers (By
Group)
45 46 46
44.4
44.6
44.8
45
45.2
45.4
45.6
45.8
46
46.2
435
440
445
450
455
460
465
470
Statewide Market Competition
2014 Market Competition – Coastal Zip Codes
The greater the Herfindahl Hirschman Index number, the less competitive the market.
An HHI of less than 1,000 is considered not concentrated.
25
Fairfield County Middlesex County New Haven County New London County
Herfindahl Hirschman Index
817 500 516 447
Number of Companies Writing New Business
46 42 45 44
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
Market Competition in Coastal Counties
Annual Market Competition – Coastal Zip Codes
26
Fairfield
County
Middlesex
County
New
Haven
County
New
London
County
2013 Herfindahl
Hirschman Index
889 480 611 460
2014 Herfindahl
Hirschman Index
817 500 516 447
2015 Herfindahl
Hirschman Index
639 632 522 536
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index
Change in Market Competition by
County
Fairfield
County
Middlesex
County
New Haven
County
New London
County
2013
43 42 43 44
2014
46 42 45 44
2015
42 39 44 44
34
36
38
40
42
44
46
48
Number of Companies Writing New Business
Change in Number of Groups
Writing New Business by County -
Coastal Zips Only
