The main risks and vulnerabilities identified by national authorities in 2025 included traditional concerns, with cyber threats, geopolitical tensions and climate risks became increasingly prominent. Many jurisdictions highlighted that these risks are becoming more interconnected, affecting insurers through underwriting, operational and investment channels.
Global Insurance Market Trends 2026
Abstract
In 2025, most jurisdictions reported a risk environment that combined long-standing concerns with emerging sources of risk. Traditional insurance risks such as natural catastrophes, claims inflation and investment losses remain central concerns. Jurisdictions also identified a set of risks that have grown in recent years: geopolitical instability, cyber threats and climate risks. Five risk categories were identified as concerns by the majority of reporting jurisdictions: catastrophe and climate risks were flagged by 34 out of 39 reporting jurisdictions, cyber risks by 34, macroeconomic developments by 33, financial market volatility by 30, and geopolitical risks by 28 (Figure 6.1). By contrast, credit, liquidity and solvency risks were cited less frequently. The lower prominence of this latter set of risks in survey responses may reflect the overall strength of insurer capital and liquidity positions.
% of respondents identifying the risk
Note: For more details, please see the methodological notes in Annex B. Geopolitical risks were not included as a separate category in the 2024 survey and are therefore not shown for that year.
Source: OECD Global Insurance Statistics.
There are important interconnections among the risks shown in Figure 6.1. Geopolitical tensions have led to financial market volatility, particularly energy price pressures that impacted claims costs and investment returns. Macroeconomic developments such as inflation and interest rate movements influenced both underwriting and investment performance, while financial market volatility affected the value of insurers’ investment portfolios and the cost of raising capital. Geopolitical tensions have also led to increasing concerns about cyber risk, and the possibility that critical infrastructure and financial systems could be targeted by state‑affiliated cyber attacks (European Central Bank (ECB), 2025[20]).
Cyber risks were identified by 87% of reporting jurisdictions, making it one of the most cited concerns among insurance regulators and supervisors. Cyber attacks can compromise insurers’ own digital systems and operations. In Germany, a mobile phone insurer filed for insolvency in August 2025 following a ransomware attack that had locked its systems two years earlier (FSI and IAIS, 2026[21]). Nicaragua similarly reported that an insurer suffered a ransomware attack in 2025. These cases illustrate that cyber risks are direct operational threat to insurers.
Cyber risks also affect insurers through their underwriting activities, where they cover the cyber losses of policyholders, even if a significant cyber insurance protection gap remains. The global cyber insurance market reached an estimated USD 15 billion in 2025, less than 1% of total global property and casualty premiums (Munich Re, 2026[22]). Take‑up of cyber insurance varies considerably across firm size. While larger companies generally have coverage rates of between 60% and 85%, uptake among small and medium-sized enterprises is estimated at between 10% and 30% (OECD, 2026[23]).
Several jurisdictions highlighted the growing connection between artificial intelligence (AI) and cyber risks. AI enables attackers to identify software vulnerabilities faster and at greater scale, lowering the barriers to entry for cybercrime and increasing the sophistication of attacks. Korea and Lithuania both cited AI development as a factor increasing cyber risks in the insurance sector.
Catastrophe and climate risks remained among the most widely cited concerns identified by regulators and supervisors in 2025. Globally, insured catastrophe losses were lower than in 2024, and insurance companies in several European jurisdictions faced lower claims in 2025 than 2024 when significant claims resulted from severe flooding. However, regulators and supervisors anticipate that the underlying trend of more frequent and more severe weather events may continue. Poland noted that increasing catastrophe frequency could reduce reinsurance capacity and push up reinsurance prices, potentially widening protection gaps. Italy observed that the mandatory extension of natural catastrophe coverage introduced in 2025 was expected to increase insurers’ exposure to physical climate risks.
In 2025, global insured losses from natural catastrophes totalled USD 107 billion, down from USD 137 billion in 2024 although broadly in line with the ten‑year average of approximately USD 108 billion (2015‑2024). Total economic losses amounted to USD 220 billion, compared with USD 318 billion in 2024. The insured share of total economic losses reached approximately 33% in 2025, up from 30% in 2024 and above the ten‑year average of approximately 30% (Figure 6.2). The higher share of insured losses was largely driven by the relatively higher share of economic losses that occurred in countries (or resulted from perils) with higher levels of insurance coverage. In emerging markets, insurance coverage of catastrophe losses was significantly lower. Several OECD and non-OECD countries, including Bulgaria, Romania and the Slovak Republic, identified these protection gaps as a structural concern, linked to low insurance penetration and the growing frequency of weather-related events.
Note: For more details, please see the methodological notes in Annex B.
Source: OECD calculations based on data provided by Swiss Re (Swiss Re, sigma database. All rights reserved.).
Some jurisdictions have developed public-private insurance programmes to improve the availability and affordability of insurance coverage for natural hazard risks. Examples include a natural perils pool funded by insurers in Norway, a state‑backed catastrophe scheme in Iceland and the insurance compensation consortium (CCS) in Spain. These arrangements share a common goal of ensuring broad access to coverage for risks that private markets alone may find difficult to insure at affordable prices, particularly for low-frequency, high-severity events. Such arrangements can also help reduce fiscal risks for governments by limiting the need for ad hoc disaster assistance to uninsured households and businesses.
Geopolitical risks were a rising concern in 2025. Insurance markets faced impacts through two broad channels. Underwriting performance was directly affected by conflict and trade disruption, and geopolitical instability affected financial markets and investment portfolios. The conflict in the Middle East was the most frequently cited source of geopolitical risk. Specialty insurance lines, such as marine, aviation, trade credit and political violence, faced significant claims. Geopolitical tensions can also affect trade volumes and premium income for transport and cargo insurance. For example, disruptions to key shipping routes such as the Strait of Hormuz likely led some companies to redirect or reduce shipments.
The conflict contributed to energy price volatility and broader financial market uncertainty with implications for insurers’ investment portfolios. Several jurisdictions including Greece, Malaysia and the Netherlands noted that these developments could result in higher inflation, weaker investment returns and rising claims costs. Similarly, Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine remained a significant concern for most of the Central and Eastern European jurisdictions. For instance, Poland noted that an escalation of current geopolitical tensions could trigger investment outflows, currency depreciation and falling asset prices. These concerns were echoed by Lithuania and Latvia, which both cited regional security tensions as the primary geopolitical risk for insurers.