About a-team Marketing Services
The leading knowledge platform for the financial technology industry
The leading knowledge platform for the financial technology industry

A-Team Insight Blogs

Data Consolidation and Quality Remain an Issue in Preparation for Solvency II

Subscribe to our newsletter

Data management continues to be a drag on insurance companies preparing for Solvency II, but not all are falling behind with some using the regulatory mandate to develop data management infrastructure that will drive both compliance and business benefits from investment in Solvency II.

Moody’s Analytics’ latest Solvency II practitioner survey, which included in-depth interviews with 45 insurers companies across Europe during the last quarter of 2012 and the first of 2013, shows 24.5% of the firms surveyed are ready to comply with Solvency II, 64.5% are still developing compliance solutions and 11% are in the ‘late’ category with no tools in place.

Despite good progress by some market participants, Moody’s Analytics identifies three areas that still need to be addressed, namely: data quality management; regulatory reporting; and the ability to meet the Own Risk and Solvency Assessment requirements. The issue of embedding the risk culture that Solvency II dictates into insurance business practices is also expected to be a major undertaking for many firms.

Considering the size of the firms surveyed, Brian Heale, senior director of business development at Moody’s Analytics, says: “At one end of the spectrum, large firms have embraced Solvency II as an opportunity to enhance their risk management capabilities and infrastructure. At the other end, we find firms that are addressing the requirements as a rather superficial, regulatory tick-box exercise. These firms are not seizing the opportunity to step beyond compliance and build infrastructure that can help them understand the relationship between risk and capital, and consequently, help them make better informed decisions.”

Heale suggests the major problems for insurers readying for Solvency II are quality data management and automated regulatory reporting. He explains: “For large insurers, the problem is collating all the analytical data required from across financial, actuarial, risk and investment systems that tend to be desktop systems. The data collation and improvement task is large. For example, the regulation’s Quantitative Reporting Templates (QRTs) have 10,000 cells of data alone. Solvency II numbers depend on data and quality, and it is also necessary for firms to show the regulator they understand the requirements and are using quality data. This is not such an issue for smaller insurers, but for those with many subsidiaries consolidating data can be difficult.”

Heale notes piecemeal approaches to Solvency II compliance, but also sustainable efforts to build centralised analytical data repositories – although the build or buy debate continues here – with extract and load, data quality and data profiling tools. He says: “Many insurers have invested heavily in Solvency II and are frustrated that it has been delayed. Some have put projects on hold, but others have moved on to gain business benefits from the investment. They have the data to make better decisions on capital, which means they can decide better on what the product portfolio should be and the investment strategy.” According to the Moody’s Analytics survey, 42% of the survey sample, mostly larger firms, indicates that it has already derived business-related benefits from Solvency II spend.

The problem of regulatory reporting is also attributed to collating and consolidating data at a suitable level of granularity. With so many reports required for Solvency II, including quarterly and yearly QRTs to name just a couple, streamlined, automated reporting becomes the antidote to reporting based on resource intensive manual data collection, spreadsheets and minimal automation.

With the initial deadline for Solvency II reporting now set at January 2016, although some local regulators may bring forward interim reporting requirements, Heale leaves the readiness question in the balance, saying some insurers will and others won’t be ready to comply with the regulation.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Recorded Webinar: Adding value and improving efficiencies in sanctions screening

Sanctions have been headline news this year. They are growing in number, sanctions lists are changing on a daily basis, and there can be conflict between sanctions issued by different jurisdictions – the whole calling for financial institutions to optimise sanctions screening to reduce risk and avoid potentially punitive penalties of non-compliance. This webinar will...

BLOG

IHS Markit Automates Fund Onboarding While Ensuring KYC/AML Compliance

IHS Markit has launched Investor Onboarding, which allows fund administrators and investment managers to automate and centralise their client onboarding while meeting AML, KYC and tax-related compliance obligations. The fully hosted platform – an industry first according to IHS Markit – digitises and streamlines collection and creation of subscription, AML, KYC and tax documents for...

EVENT

RegTech Summit New York

Now in its 7th year, the RegTech Summit in New York will bring together the regtech ecosystem to explore how the North American capital markets financial industry can leverage technology to drive innovation, cut costs and support regulatory change.

GUIDE

ESG Data Handbook 2022

The ESG landscape is changing faster than anyone could have imagined even five years ago. With tens of trillions of dollars expected to have been committed to sustainable assets by the end of the decade, it’s never been more important for financial institutions of all sizes to stay abreast of changes in the ESG data...