Everest Group - 10-K annual report 2018

Unless otherwise indicated, all financial data in this document have been prepared using accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).  As used in this document, “Group” means Everest Re Group, Ltd.; “Holdings Ireland” means Everest Underwriting Group (Ireland) Limited; “Ireland Re” means Everest Reinsurance Company (Ireland), designated activity company; “Holdings” means Everest Reinsurance Holdings, Inc.; “Everest Re” means Everest Reinsurance Company and its subsidiaries (unless the context otherwise requires); and the “Company”, “we”, “us”, and “our” means Everest Re Group, Ltd. and its subsidiaries.

Group, a Bermuda company, was established in 1999 as a wholly-owned subsidiary of Holdings.  On February 24, 2000, a corporate restructuring was completed and Group became the new parent holding company of Holdings.  Holdings continues to be the holding company for the Company’s U.S. based operations.  Holders of shares of common stock of Holdings automatically became holders of the same number of common shares of Group.  Prior to the restructuring, Group had no significant assets or capitalization and had not engaged in any business or prior activities other than in connection with the restructuring.

In connection with the February 24, 2000 restructuring, Group established a Bermuda-based reinsurance subsidiary, Everest Reinsurance (Bermuda), Ltd. (“Bermuda Re”), which commenced business in the second half of 2000.  Group also formed Everest Global Services, Inc., a Delaware subsidiary, to perform administrative functions for Group and its U.S. based and non-U.S. based subsidiaries.

On December 30, 2008, Group contributed Holdings to its Irish holding company, Holdings Ireland.  Holdings Ireland is a direct subsidiary of Group and was established to serve as a holding company for the U.S. and Irish reinsurance and insurance subsidiaries.  Effective July 1, 2016, the Company established a new Irish holding company, Everest Dublin Insurance Holdings Limited (Ireland) (“Everest Dublin Holdings”) and contributed Ireland Re to Everest Dublin Holdings.

Holdings, a Delaware corporation, was established in 1993 to serve as the parent holding company of Everest Re, a Delaware property and casualty reinsurer formed in 1973.  Until October 6, 1995, Holdings was an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of The Prudential Insurance Company of America (“The Prudential”).  On October 6, 1995, The Prudential sold its entire interest in Holdings in an initial public offering.

During the fourth quarter of 2017, the Company established a new Irish insurance subsidiary, Everest Insurance Ireland, designated activity company (“Ireland Insurance”), which writes insurance business mainly in the European markets.

During the third quarter of 2016, the Company established domestic subsidiaries, Everest Premier Insurance Company (“Everest Premier”) and Everest Denali Insurance Company (“Everest Denali”), which are being used in the continued expansion of the Insurance operations.

Effective August 24, 2016, the Company sold its wholly-owned subsidiary, Heartland Crop Insurance Company (“Heartland”), a managing agent for crop insurance, to CGB Diversified Services, Inc. (“CGB”).  The operating results of Heartland for the period owned are included within the Company’s financial statements.

The Company’s principal business, conducted through its operating segments, is the underwriting of reinsurance and insurance in the U.S., Bermuda and international markets.  The Company had gross written premiums, in 2018, of $8.5 billion with approximately 73% representing reinsurance and 27% representing insurance.  Shareholders’ equity at December 31, 2018 was $7.9 billion.  The Company underwrites reinsurance both through brokers and directly with ceding companies, giving it the flexibility to pursue business based on the ceding company’s preferred reinsurance purchasing method.  The Company underwrites insurance principally through brokers, surplus lines brokers and general agent relationships.  Group’s active operating subsidiaries, other than Ireland Insurance which is not yet rated, are each rated A+ (“Superior”) by

A.M. Best Company (“A.M. Best”), a leading provider of insurer ratings that assigns financial strength ratings to insurance companies based on their ability to meet their obligations to policyholders.

Following is a summary of the Company’s principal operating subsidiaries:

Reinsurance is an arrangement in which an insurance company, the reinsurer, agrees to indemnify another insurance or reinsurance company, the ceding company, against all or a portion of the insurance risks underwritten by the ceding company under one or more insurance contracts.  Reinsurance can provide a ceding company with several benefits, including a reduction in its net liability on individual risks or classes of risks, catastrophe protection from large and/or multiple losses and/or a reduction in operating leverage as measured by the ratio of net premiums and reserves to capital.  Reinsurance also provides a ceding company with additional underwriting capacity by permitting it to accept larger risks and write more business than would be acceptable relative to the ceding company’s financial resources.  Reinsurance does not discharge the ceding company from its liability to policyholders; rather, it reimburses the ceding company for covered losses.

There are two basic types of reinsurance arrangements:  treaty and facultative.  Treaty reinsurance obligates the ceding company to cede and the reinsurer to assume a specified portion of a type or category of risks insured by the ceding company.  Treaty reinsurers do not separately evaluate each of the individual risks assumed under their treaties, instead, the reinsurer relies upon the pricing and underwriting decisions made by the ceding company.  In facultative reinsurance, the ceding company cedes and the reinsurer assumes all or part of the risk under a single insurance contract. Facultative reinsurance is negotiated separately for each insurance contract that is reinsured.  Facultative reinsurance, when purchased by ceding companies, usually is intended to cover individual risks not covered by their reinsurance treaties because of the dollar limits involved or because the risk is unusual.

Both treaty and facultative reinsurance can be written on either a pro rata basis or an excess of loss basis.  Under pro rata reinsurance, the ceding company and the reinsurer share the premiums as well as the losses and expenses in an agreed proportion.  Under excess of loss reinsurance, the reinsurer indemnifies the ceding company against all or a specified portion of losses and expenses in excess of a specified dollar amount, known as the ceding company's retention or reinsurer's attachment point, generally subject to a negotiated reinsurance contract limit.

In pro rata reinsurance, the reinsurer generally pays the ceding company a ceding commission.  The ceding commission generally is based on the ceding company’s cost of acquiring the business being reinsured (commissions, premium taxes, assessments and miscellaneous administrative expense and may contain profit sharing provisions, whereby the ceding commission is adjusted based on loss experience).  Premiums paid by the ceding company to a reinsurer for excess of loss reinsurance are not directly proportional to the premiums that the ceding company receives because the reinsurer does not assume a proportionate risk.  There is usually no ceding commission on excess of loss reinsurance.

Reinsurers may purchase reinsurance to cover their own risk exposure. Reinsurance of a reinsurer's business is called a retrocession.  Reinsurance companies cede risks under retrocessional agreements to other reinsurers, known as retrocessionaires, for reasons similar to those that cause insurers to purchase reinsurance: to reduce net liability on individual or classes of risks, protect against catastrophic losses, stabilize financial ratios and obtain additional underwriting capacity.

Reinsurance can be written through intermediaries, generally professional reinsurance brokers, or directly with ceding companies.  From a ceding company's perspective, the broker and the direct distribution channels have advantages and disadvantages.  A ceding company's decision to select one distribution channel over the other will be influenced by its perception of such advantages and disadvantages relative to the reinsurance coverage being placed.

The Company’s business strategy is to sustain its leadership position within targeted reinsurance and insurance markets, provide effective management throughout the property and casualty underwriting cycle and thereby achieve an attractive return for its shareholders.  The Company’s underwriting strategies seek to capitalize on its i) financial strength and capacity, ii) global franchise, iii) stable and experienced management team, iv) diversified product and distribution offerings, v) underwriting expertise and disciplined approach, vi) efficient and low-cost operating structure and vii) effective enterprise risk management practices.

The Company offers treaty and facultative reinsurance and admitted and non-admitted insurance. The Company’s products include the full range of property and casualty reinsurance and insurance coverages, including marine, aviation, surety, errors and omissions liability (“E&O”), directors’ and officers’ liability (“D&O”), medical malpractice, other specialty lines, accident and health (“A&H”) and workers’ compensation.

The Company’s underwriting strategies emphasizes underwriting profitability over premium volume.  Key elements of this strategy include careful risk selection, appropriate pricing through strict underwriting discipline and adjustment of the Company’s business mix in response to changing market conditions.  The Company focuses on reinsuring companies that effectively manage the underwriting cycle through proper analysis and pricing of underlying risks and whose underwriting guidelines and performance are compatible with its objectives.

The Company’s underwriting strategies emphasize flexibility and responsiveness to changing market conditions.  The Company believes that its existing strengths, including its broad underwriting expertise, global presence, strong financial ratings and substantial capital, facilitate adjustments to its mix of business geographically, by line of business and by type of coverage, allowing it to participate in those market opportunities that provide the greatest potential for underwriting profitability.  The Company’s insurance operations complement these strategies by accessing business that is not available on a reinsurance basis.  The Company carefully monitors its mix of business across all operations to avoid unacceptable geographic or other risk concentrations.

Commencing in 2015 the Company initiated a strategic build out of its insurance platform through the investment in key leadership hires which in turn has brought significant underwriting talent and stronger direction in achieving its insurance program strategic goals of increased premium volume and improved underwriting results.  Recent growth is coming from highly diversified areas including newly launched lines of business, as well as product and geographic expansion in existing lines of business.  The Company is building a world-class insurance platform capable of offering products across lines and geographies, complementing its leading global reinsurance franchise.  As part of this initiative, the Company launched a new syndicate through Lloyd’s of London and formed Ireland Insurance, providing access to additional international business and new product opportunities to further diversify and broaden its insurance portfolio going forward.

The Company writes business on a worldwide basis for many different customers and lines of business, thereby obtaining a broad spread of risk.  The Company is not substantially dependent on any single customer, small group of customers, line of business or geographic area.  For the 2018 calendar year, no single customer (ceding company or insured) generated more than 3% of the Company’s gross written premiums.  The

Company believes that a reduction of business from any one customer would not have a material adverse effect on its future financial condition or results of operations.

Approximately 66%, 27% and 7% of the Company’s 2018 gross written premiums were written in the broker reinsurance, insurance and direct reinsurance markets, respectively.

The broker reinsurance market consists of several substantial national and international brokers and a number of smaller specialized brokers.  Brokers do not have the authority to bind the Company with respect to reinsurance agreements, nor does the Company commit in advance to accept any portion of a broker’s submitted business.  Reinsurance business from any ceding company, whether new or renewal, is subject to acceptance by the Company.  Brokerage fees are generally paid by reinsurers.  The Company’s ten largest brokers accounted for an aggregate of approximately 52% of gross written premiums in 2018.  The largest broker, Marsh and McLennan, accounted for approximately 20% of gross written premiums.  The second largest broker, Aon Benfield Re, accounted for approximately 16% of gross written premiums.  The Company believes that a reduction of business assumed from any one broker would not have a material adverse effect on the Company.

The direct reinsurance market remains an important distribution channel for reinsurance business written by the Company.  Direct placement of reinsurance enables the Company to access clients who prefer to place their reinsurance directly with reinsurers based upon the reinsurer’s in-depth understanding of the ceding company’s needs.

The Company’s insurance business writes direct business targeting commercial, property and casualty.  It also writes business through brokers, surplus lines brokers and general agents.  In 2018, Arrowhead General Insurance Agency accounted for approximately 3% of the Company’s gross written premium.  No other single general agent generated more than 2% of the Company’s gross written premiums.

The Company continually evaluates each business relationship, including the underwriting expertise and experience brought to bear through the involved distribution channel, performs analyses to evaluate financial security, monitors performance and adjusts underwriting decisions accordingly.

The U.S. Reinsurance operation writes property and casualty reinsurance and specialty lines of business, including Marine, Aviation, Surety and Accident and Health (“A&H”) business, on both a treaty and facultative basis, through reinsurance brokers, as well as directly with ceding companies primarily within the U.S.  The International operation writes non-U.S. property and casualty reinsurance through Everest Re’s branches in Canada and Singapore and through offices in Brazil, Miami and New Jersey.  The Bermuda operation provides reinsurance and insurance to worldwide property and casualty markets through brokers and directly with ceding companies from its Bermuda office and reinsurance to the United Kingdom and European markets through its UK branch and Ireland Re.  The Insurance operation writes property and casualty insurance directly and through brokers, surplus lines brokers and general agents within the U.S., Canada and Europe.

These segments are managed independently, but conform with corporate guidelines with respect to pricing, risk management, control of aggregate catastrophe exposures, capital, investments and support operations.  Management generally monitors and evaluates the financial performance of these operating segments based upon their underwriting results.

Underwriting results include earned premium less losses and loss adjustment expenses (“LAE”) incurred, commission and brokerage expenses and other underwriting expenses.  We measure our underwriting results using ratios, in particular loss, commission and brokerage and other underwriting expense ratios, which, respectively, divide incurred losses, commissions and brokerage and other underwriting expenses by premiums earned.  The Company utilizes inter-affiliate reinsurance, although such reinsurance does not materially impact segment results, as business is generally reported within the segment in which the business was first produced.  For selected financial information regarding these segments, see ITEM 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” -  Note 17 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation - Segment Results”.

The following five year table presents the distribution of the Company’s gross written premiums by its segments:  U.S. Reinsurance, International, Bermuda and Insurance.  The premiums for each segment are further split between property and casualty business and, for reinsurance business, between pro rata or excess of loss business:

U.S. Reinsurance Segment.  The Company’s U.S. Reinsurance segment writes property and casualty reinsurance and specialty lines of business, including Marine, Aviation, Surety and A&H business, on both a treaty and facultative basis, through reinsurance brokers, as well as directly with ceding companies within the U.S.  The marine and aviation business is written primarily through brokers and contains a significant international component. Surety business consists mainly of reinsurance of contract surety bonds.  The Company targets certain brokers and, through the broker market, specialty companies and small to medium sized standard lines companies.  The Company also targets companies that place their business predominantly in the direct market, including small to medium sized regional ceding companies, and seeks to develop long-term relationships with those companies.  In addition, the U.S. Reinsurance segment writes portions of reinsurance programs for large, national insurance companies.

In 2018, $1,970.0 million of gross written premiums were attributable to U.S. treaty property business, of which 52.2% was written on a pro rata basis and 47.8% was written on an excess of loss basis.  The Company’s property underwriters utilize sophisticated underwriting methods to analyze and price property business.  The Company manages its exposures to catastrophe and other large losses by limiting exposures on individual contracts and limiting aggregate exposures to catastrophes in any particular zone and across contiguous zones.

U.S. treaty casualty business accounted for $734.4 million of gross written premiums in 2018, of which 85.6% was written on a pro rata basis and 14.4% was written on an excess of loss basis.  The treaty casualty business consists of professional liability, D&O liability, workers’ compensation, financial lines, excess and surplus lines and other liability coverages.  As a result of the complex technical nature of most of these risks, the Company’s casualty underwriters tend to specialize by line of business and work closely with the Company’s pricing actuaries.

The Company’s facultative unit conducts business both through brokers and directly with ceding companies, and consists of three underwriting units representing property, casualty, and national brokerage lines of business.  Business is written from a facultative headquarters office in New York and satellite offices in Chicago and Oakland.  In 2018, $92.7 million, $39.1 million and $15.5 million of gross written premiums were attributable to the casualty, property and national brokerage lines of business, respectively.

The marine and aviation unit’s 2018 gross written premiums totaled $86.2 million, all of which was written on a treaty basis and primarily sourced through reinsurance brokers.  Of the marine and aviation gross written premiums in 2018, marine treaties represented 59.0% and consisted mainly of hull and cargo coverage.  In 2018, the marine unit’s premiums were written 65.3% on an excess of loss basis and 34.7% on a pro rata basis.  Of the marine and aviation gross written premiums in 2018, aviation premiums accounted for 41.0% and included reinsurance of airline and general aviation risks.  In 2018, the aviation unit's premiums were written 89.5% on a pro rata basis and 10.5% on an excess of loss basis.

In 2018, gross written premiums of the surety unit totaled $50.3 million, 81.1% of which was written on a pro rata basis.  Most of the portfolio is reinsurance of contract surety bonds written directly with ceding companies, with the remainder being trade credit reinsurance, mostly in international markets.

In 2018, gross written premium of the A&H reinsurance unit totaled $15.5 million, of which 74.5% was written through brokers.

The Company writes assumed business with the segregated cells of Mt. Logan Re Ltd. (Bermuda) (“Mt. Logan Re”) which represents a diversified set of catastrophe exposures, diversified by risk/peril and across different geographical regions globally.  In 2018, gross written premium totaled $10.6 million, which was all on a property excess of loss basis.

In 2018, 95.9% and 4.1% of the U.S. Reinsurance segment’s gross written premiums were written in the broker reinsurance and direct reinsurance markets, respectively.

International Segment.  The Company’s International segment focuses on opportunities in the international reinsurance markets.  The Company targets several international markets, including: Canada, with a branch in Toronto; Asia, with a branch in Singapore and its Lloyd’s Syndicate; and Latin America, Brazil, Africa and the

Middle East, which business is serviced from Everest Re’s Miami and New Jersey offices.  The Company also writes from New Jersey “home-foreign” business, which provides reinsurance on the international portfolios of U.S. insurers.  Of the Company’s 2018 international gross written premiums, 71.5% represented property business, while 28.5% represented casualty business.  As with its U.S. operations, the Company’s International segment focuses on financially sound companies that have strong management and underwriting discipline and expertise.  Of the Company’s international business, 70.9% was written through brokers, with 29.1% written directly with ceding companies.

Gross written premiums of the Company’s Canadian branch totaled $173.5 million in 2018 and consisted of 35.0% of excess property business, 25.5% of pro rata casualty business, 21.5% of excess casualty business, and 18.0% of pro rata property business.  Of the Canadian gross written premiums, 75.2% consisted of treaty reinsurance, while 24.8% was facultative reinsurance.

The Company’s Singapore branch covers the Asian markets and accounted for $199.8 million of gross written premiums in 2018 and consisted of 50.8% of excess property business, 36.8% of pro rata property business, 9.5% of pro rata casualty business and 2.9% of excess casualty business.

Gross written premium of the Company’s Singapore Lloyd’s Syndicate totaled $4.1 million primarily on property business.

International business written out of Everest Re’s Miami and New Jersey offices accounted for $1,166.5 million of gross written premiums in 2018 and consisted of 45.9% of pro rata treaty property business, 19.4% of excess treaty property business, 18.4% of pro rata treaty casualty business, 13.3% of facultative property and casualty business and 3.0% of excess treaty casualty business.  Of this international business, 60.5% was sourced from Latin America, 22.0% was sourced from the Middle East, 11.0% was home-foreign business and 6.5% was sourced from Africa.

Bermuda Segment.  The Company’s Bermuda segment writes property and casualty reinsurance through Bermuda Re and property and casualty reinsurance through its UK branch as well as through Ireland Re.  In 2018, Bermuda Re had gross written premiums of $761.7 million, virtually all of which was treaty reinsurance.

In 2018, the UK branch of Bermuda Re wrote $610.8 million of gross treaty reinsurance premium consisting of 59.8% of pro rata casualty business, 20.0% of excess casualty business, 11.1% of pro rata property business and 9.1% of excess property business.

In 2018, Ireland Re wrote $293.8 million of gross treaty reinsurance premium consisting of 34.7% of pro rata casualty business, 28.0% of pro rata property business, 19.9% of excess property business, and 17.4% of excess casualty business.

Insurance Segment.  The Insurance segment writes property and casualty insurance, including medical stop loss insurance, directly and through brokers, surplus lines brokers and general agents within the U.S., Canada and through the Company’s Lloyd’s Syndicate.  In 2018, the Company’s Insurance segment wrote $2,250.6 million of gross written premiums, of which 71.0% was casualty and 29.0% was property, principally targeting commercial property and casualty business.  Insurance business written directly through the Company’s offices represented $1,576.0 million or 70.0% of the segment’s premium and $674.6 million or 30% was written through program administrators.

The Everest Specialty Commercial unit wrote $998.2 million in premium comprised of primary and excess casualty, and sports, leisure and entertainment business of $579.0 million, direct monoline workers compensation writings of $190.0 million and property business of $229.2 million.  Everest Underwriting Partners unit wrote $458.8 million in premium comprised of $210.8 million in workers compensation program business, $46.3 million of non-standard auto business and $201.7 million of other property and casualty business.  A&H primary insurance wrote $278.9 million in premium, Lloyd’s Syndicate wrote $151.4 million and our Canadian offices wrote $77.2 million.   The Everest Specialty Underwriters unit wrote $286.1 million in premium consisting primarily of management and professional liability coverages for financial institutions and other commercial enterprises.

Geographic Areas.  The Company conducts its business in Bermuda, the U.S. and a number of foreign countries.  For select financial information about geographic areas, see ITEM 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” -  Note 17 of Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.  Risks attendant to the foreign operations of the Company parallel those attendant to the U.S. operations of the Company, with the primary exception of foreign exchange risks.  For more information about the risks, see ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Safe Harbor Disclosure”.

One of the Company’s strategies is to "lead" as many of the reinsurance treaties it underwrites as possible.  The Company leads on approximately two-thirds of its treaty reinsurance business as measured by premium.  The lead reinsurer on a treaty generally accepts one of the largest percentage shares of the treaty and is in the strongest position to negotiate price, terms and conditions.  Management believes this strategy enables it to obtain more favorable terms and conditions on the treaties on which it participates.  When the Company does not lead the treaty, it may still suggest changes to any aspect of the treaty.  The Company may decline to participate on a treaty based upon its assessment of all relevant factors.

The Company’s treaty underwriting process involves a team approach among the Company’s underwriters, actuaries and claim staff.  Treaties are reviewed for compliance with the Company’s general underwriting standards and most larger treaties are subjected to detailed actuarial analysis.  The actuarial models used in such analyses are tailored in each case to the subject exposures and loss experience.  The Company does not separately evaluate each of the individual risks assumed under its treaties.  The Company does, however, evaluate the underwriting guidelines of its ceding companies to determine their adequacy prior to entering into a treaty.  The Company may also conduct underwriting, operational and claim audits at the offices of ceding companies to monitor adherence to underwriting guidelines.  Underwriting audits focus on the quality of the underwriting staff, pricing and risk selection and rate monitoring over time.  Claim audits may be performed in order to evaluate the client’s claims handling abilities and practices.

The Company’s facultative underwriters operate within guidelines specifying acceptable types of risks, limits and maximum risk exposures.  Specified classes of large premium U.S. risks are referred to Everest Re’s New York facultative headquarters for specific review before premium quotations are given to clients.  In addition, the Company’s guidelines require certain types of risks to be submitted for review because of their aggregate limits, complexity or volatility, regardless of premium amount on the underlying contract.  Non-U.S. risks exhibiting similar characteristics are reviewed by senior managers within the involved operations.

In addition to its own underwriting staff, the Company’s insurance operations write casualty coverages for homogeneous risks through select program managers.  These programs are evaluated based upon actuarial analysis and the program manager’s capabilities.  The Company’s rates, forms and underwriting guidelines are tailored to specific risk types.  The Company’s underwriting, actuarial, claim and financial functions work closely with its program managers to establish appropriate underwriting and processing guidelines as well as appropriate performance monitoring mechanisms.

Underwriting Risk and Accumulation Controls.  Each segment and business unit manages its underwriting risk in accordance with established guidelines. These guidelines place dollar limits on the amount of business that can be written based on a variety of factors, including (re)insured company profile, line of business, geographic location and risk hazards. In each case, the guidelines permit limited exceptions, which must be authorized by the Company’s senior management. Management regularly reviews and revises these guidelines in response to changes in business unit product offerings, market conditions, risk versus reward analyses and the Company’s enterprise and underwriting risk management processes.

The operating results and financial condition of the Company can be adversely affected by catastrophe and other large losses. The Company manages its exposure to catastrophes and other large losses by:

Like other insurance and reinsurance companies, the Company is exposed to multiple insured losses arising out of a single occurrence, whether a natural event, such as a hurricane or an earthquake, or other catastrophe, such as an explosion at a major factory.  A large catastrophic event can be expected to generate insured losses to multiple reinsurance treaties, facultative certificates and direct insurance policies across various lines of business.

The Company focuses on potential losses that could result from any single event or series of events as part of its evaluation and monitoring of its aggregate exposures to catastrophic events. Accordingly, the Company employs various techniques to estimate the amount of loss it could sustain from any single catastrophic event or series of events in various geographic areas. These techniques range from deterministic approaches, such as tracking aggregate limits exposed in catastrophe-prone zones and applying reasonable damage factors, to modeled approaches that attempt to scientifically measure catastrophe loss exposure using sophisticated Monte Carlo simulation techniques that forecast frequency and severity of potential losses on a probabilistic basis.

No single computer model, or group of models, is currently capable of projecting the amount and probability of loss in all global geographic regions in which the Company conducts business. In addition, the form, quality and granularity of underwriting exposure data furnished by (re)insureds is not uniformly compatible with the data requirements for the Company’s licensed models, which adds to the inherent imprecision in the potential loss projections. Further, the results from multiple models and analytical methods must be combined to estimate potential losses by and across business units.  Also, while most models have been updated to incorporate claims information from recent catastrophic events, catastrophe model projections are still inherently imprecise.  In addition, uncertainties with respect to future climatic patterns and cycles could add further uncertainty to loss projections from models based on historical data.

Nevertheless, when combined with traditional risk management techniques and sound underwriting judgment, catastrophe models are a useful tool for underwriters to price catastrophe exposed risks and for providing management with quantitative analyses with which to monitor and manage catastrophic risk exposures by zone and across zones for individual and multiple events.

Projected catastrophe losses are generally summarized in terms of the probable maximum loss (“PML”).  The Company defines PML as its anticipated loss, taking into account contract terms and limits, caused by a single catastrophe affecting a broad contiguous geographic area, such as that caused by a hurricane or earthquake.  The PML will vary depending upon the modeled simulated losses and the make-up of the in force book of business.  The projected severity levels are described in terms of “return periods”, such as “100-year events” and “250-year events”.  For example, a 100-year PML is the estimated loss to the current in-force portfolio from a single event which has a 1% probability of being exceeded in a twelve month period.  In other words, it corresponds to a 99% probability that the loss from a single event will fall below the indicated PML.  It is important to note that PMLs are estimates.  Modeled events are hypothetical events produced by a stochastic model.  As a result, there can be no assurance that any actual event will align with the modeled event or that actual losses from events similar to the modeled events will not vary materially from the modeled event PML.

From an enterprise risk management perspective, management sets limits on the levels of catastrophe loss exposure the Company may underwrite.  The limits are revised periodically based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to the Company’s financial resources and expected earnings and risk/reward analyses of the business being underwritten.

The Company may purchase reinsurance to cover specific business written or the potential accumulation or aggregation of exposures across some or all of its operations.  Reinsurance purchasing decisions consider both the potential coverage and market conditions including the pricing, terms, conditions, availability and collectability of coverage, with the aim of securing cost effective protection from financially secure counterparties. The amount of reinsurance purchased has varied over time, reflecting the Company’s view of its exposures and the cost of reinsurance.

Management estimates that the projected net economic loss from its largest 100-year event in a given zone represents approximately 10% of its December 31, 2018 shareholders’ equity.  Economic loss is the PML exposure, net of third party reinsurance, reduced by estimated reinstatement premiums to renew coverage and estimated income taxes.  The impact of income taxes on the PML depends on the distribution of the losses by corporate entity, which is also affected by inter-affiliate reinsurance.  Management also monitors and controls its largest PMLs at multiple points along the loss distribution curve, such as loss amounts at the 20, 50, 100, 250, 500 and 1,000 year return periods.  This process enables management to identify and control exposure accumulations and to integrate such exposures into enterprise risk, underwriting and capital management decisions.

The Company’s catastrophe loss projections, segmented by risk zones, are updated quarterly and reviewed as part of a formal risk management review process.  The table below reflects the Company’s PML exposure, net of third party reinsurance at various return periods for its top three zones/perils (as ranked by the largest 1 in 100 year economic loss) based on loss projection data as of January 1, 2019, adjusted to reflect Industry Loss Warranty (ILW) purchases at the same level the Company had available during 2018.

The Company believes that its methods of monitoring, analyzing and managing catastrophe exposures provide a credible risk management framework, which is integrated with its enterprise risk management, underwriting and capital management plans.  However, there is much uncertainty and imprecision inherent in the catastrophe models and the catastrophe loss estimation process generally.  As a result, there can be no assurance that the Company will not experience losses from individual events that exceed the PML or other return period projections, perhaps by a material amount.  Nor can there be assurance that the Company will not experience events impacting multiple zones, or multiple severe events that could, in the aggregate, exceed the Company’s PML expectations by a significant amount.

Terrorism Risk.  While the Company writes some reinsurance contracts covering terrorism, the Company’s risk management philosophy is to limit the amount of exposure by geographic region, and to strictly manage coverage for properties in areas that may be considered a target for terrorists.  Providing terrorism coverage on reinsurance contracts is negotiable, and many, but not all, treaties contain exclusions which limit much of this risk.  While many property insurance policies are required to offer coverage for terrorism, this coverage is often not purchased.  However, terrorism is typically covered by worker compensation policies.  As a result, the Company is exposed to losses from terrorism on both its reinsurance and its insurance book of business, particularly its workers’ compensation and property policies.  However, the insurance book generally does not insure large corporations or corporate locations that represent large concentrations of risk.

The U.S. Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 provides some protection to the insurance book of business.  It also provides indirect protection to exposed reinsurance treaties.  However, the Company is still exposed to risk of loss from terrorism due to deductibles, co-pays and uncovered lines of business.

Reinsurance and Retrocession Arrangements.  The Company may purchase reinsurance to cover specific business written or the potential accumulation or aggregation of exposures across some or all of its operations.  Reinsurance purchasing decisions consider both the potential coverage and market conditions including the pricing, terms, conditions and availability of coverage, with the aim of securing cost effective protection.  The amount of reinsurance purchased has varied over time, reflecting the Company’s view of its exposures and the cost of reinsurance.  In recent years, the Company has increased its use of reinsurance offered through capital market facilities.

The Company participates in “common account” retrocessional arrangements for certain reinsurance treaties whereby a ceding company purchases reinsurance for the benefit of itself and its reinsurers under one or more of its reinsurance treaties.  Common account retrocessional arrangements reduce the effect of individual or aggregate losses to all participating companies, including the ceding company, with respect to the involved treaties.

All of the Company’s reinsurance and retrocessional agreements transfer significant reinsurance risk and therefore, are accounted for as reinsurance in accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) guidance.

At December 31, 2018, the Company had $1,787.6 million in reinsurance receivables with respect to both paid and unpaid losses ceded.  Of this amount, $683.8 million, or 38.3%, was receivable from Mt. Logan Re collateralized segregated accounts; $125.5 million, or 7.0%, was receivable from Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. (“Munich Re”) $122.1 million, or 6.8%, was receivable from Zurich Versicherungs Gesellschaft (“Zurich”); and $103.1 million, or 5.8%, was receivable from Resolution Group Reinsurance (Barbados) Limited (“Resolution Group”);.  The receivables from Resolution Group are fully collateralized by an individual trust agreement.  No other retrocessionaire accounted for more than 5% of our receivables.  Although management carefully selects its reinsurers, the Company is subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurance because the ceding of risk to reinsurers does not relieve the Company of its liability to insureds or ceding companies.  See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Financial Condition”.

Reinsurance claims are managed by the Company’s professional claims staff whose responsibilities include reviewing initial loss reports and coverage issues, monitoring claims handling activities of ceding companies, establishing and adjusting proper case reserves and approving payment of claims.  In addition to claims assessment, processing and payment, the claims staff selectively conducts comprehensive claim audits of both specific claims and overall claim procedures at the offices of selected ceding companies.  Insurance claims are generally handled by third party claims service providers who have limited authority and are subject to oversight by the Company’s professional claims staff.

The Company intensively manages its asbestos and environmental (“A&E”) exposures through a dedicated, centrally managed claim staff with experienced claim and legal professionals who specialize in the handling of such exposures.  They actively manage each individual insured and reinsured account, responding to claim developments with evaluations of the involved exposures and adjustment of reserves as appropriate.  Specific or general claim developments that may have material implications for the Company are regularly communicated to senior management, actuarial, legal and financial areas.  Senior management and claim management personnel meet at least quarterly to review the Company’s overall reserve positions and make changes, if appropriate.  The Company continually reviews its internal processing, communications and analytics, seeking to enhance the management of its A&E exposures, in particular in regard to changes in asbestos claims and litigation.

Significant periods of time may elapse between the occurrence of an insured loss, the reporting of the loss to the insurer and the reinsurer and the payment of that loss by the insurer and subsequent payments to the insurer by the reinsurer.  To recognize liabilities for unpaid losses and LAE, insurers and reinsurers establish reserves, which are balance sheet liabilities representing estimates of future amounts needed to pay reported and unreported claims and related expenses for losses that have already occurred.  Actual losses and LAE paid may deviate, perhaps substantially, from such reserves.  To the extent reserves prove to be insufficient to cover actual losses and LAE after taking into account available reinsurance coverage, the Company would have to recognize such reserve shortfalls and incur a charge to earnings, which could be material in the period such recognition takes place.  See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Loss and LAE Reserves”.

As part of the reserving process, insurers and reinsurers evaluate historical data and trends and make judgments as to the impact of various factors such as legislative and judicial developments that may affect future claim amounts, changes in social and political attitudes that may increase loss exposures and inflationary and general economic trends. While the reserving process is difficult and subjective for insurance companies, the inherent uncertainties of estimating such reserves are even greater for the reinsurer, due primarily to the longer time between the date of an occurrence and the reporting of any attendant claims to the reinsurer, the diversity of development patterns among different types of reinsurance treaties or facultative contracts, the necessary reliance on the ceding companies for information regarding reported claims and differing reserving practices among ceding companies. In addition, trends that have affected development of liabilities in the past may not necessarily occur or affect liability development in the same manner or to the same degree in the future.  As a result, actual losses and LAE may deviate, perhaps substantially, from estimates of reserves reflected in the Company's consolidated financial statements.

The Company’s loss and LAE reserves represent management’s best estimate of the ultimate liability.  While there can be no assurance that these reserves will not need to be increased in the future, management believes that the Company’s existing reserves and reserving methodologies reduce the likelihood that any such increases would have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.  These statements regarding the Company’s loss reserves are forward looking statements within the meaning of the U.S. federal securities laws and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions contained therein.  See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Safe Harbor Disclosure”.

Like many other property and casualty insurance and reinsurance companies, the Company has experienced loss development for prior accident years, which has impacted losses and LAE reserves and caused corresponding effects to income (loss) in the periods in which the adjustments were made.  There can be no assurance that adverse development from prior years will not occur in the future or that such adverse development will not have a material adverse effect on net income (loss).

The following table presents a reconciliation of beginning and ending reserve balances for the periods indicated on a GAAP basis:

Current year incurred losses were $5,264.3 million, $4,816.0 million and $3,434.9 million at December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively.  The increase in current year incurred losses was primarily due to an increase in attritional losses due to a 16.7% increase in premiums earned.  The $407.0 million increase in reinsurance recoverables from December 31, 2018 to December 31, 2017 is primarily related to the additional catastrophe losses incurred in 2018 as well as a retroactive reinsurance transaction with a Mt. Logan Re segregated account effective in the second quarter of 2018.

Incurred prior years’ reserves increased by $387.1 million in 2018 and decreased by $293.4 million and $295.3 million in 2017 and 2016, respectively.  The increase for 2018 was mainly due to $561.2 million of adverse development on prior years catastrophe losses, primarily related to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, as well as the 2017 California wildfires.  The increase in loss estimates for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria was mostly driven by re-opened claims, loss inflation from higher than expected loss adjustment expenses and in particular, their impact on aggregate covers.  This reserve increase was partially offset by $174.1 million of favorable development on prior years attritional losses which mainly related to U.S. and international property and casualty reinsurance business, as well as favorable development in the Insurance segment which largely related to workers’ compensation business.

The decrease for 2017 was attributable to favorable development in the reinsurance segments of $238.4 million, related primarily to property and short-tail business in the U.S. and Bermuda as well as favorable development on prior year catastrophe losses, partially offset by $37.1 million of adverse development on A&E reserves. The insurance segment also experienced favorable development on prior year reserves of $55.0 million mainly on its workers compensation business, which is largely written in California.

The decrease for 2016 was attributable to favorable development in the reinsurance segments of $468.7 million related primarily to property and short-tail business in the U.S., property business in Canada, Latin America, Middle East and Africa, as well as favorable development on prior year catastrophe losses, partially offset by $53.9 million of adverse development on asbestos and environmental (“A&E”) reserves.  Part of the favorable development in the reinsurance segments related to the 2015 loss from the explosion at the Chinese port of Tianjin.  In 2015, this loss was originally estimated to be $60.0 million.  At December 31, 2016, this loss was projected to be $16.7 million resulting in $43.3 million of favorable development in 2016.  The net favorable development in the reinsurance segments was partially offset by $173.4 million of unfavorable development in the insurance segment primarily related to run-off construction liability and umbrella program business.

Since the Company has operations in many countries, part of the Company’s loss and LAE reserves are in foreign currencies and translated to U.S. dollars for each reporting period.  Fluctuations in the exchange rates for the currencies, period over period, affect the U.S. dollar amount of outstanding reserves.  The translation adjustment line at the bottom of the table eliminates the impact of the exchange fluctuations from the reserve re-estimates.

The Company’s loss reserving methodologies continuously monitor the emergence of loss and loss development trends, seeking, on a timely basis, to both adjust reserves for the impact of trend shifts and to factor the impact of such shifts into the Company’s underwriting and pricing on a prospective basis.

At December 31, 2018, the Company’s gross reserves for A&E claims represented 2.6% of its total reserves.  The Company’s A&E liabilities stem from Mt. McKinley’s direct insurance business and Everest Re’s assumed reinsurance business.  Liabilities related to Mt. McKinley’s direct business, which had been ceded to Bermuda Re previously, were retroceded to an affiliate of Clearwater Insurance Company in July 2015, concurrent with the sale of Mt. McKinley to Clearwater Insurance Company.  There are significant uncertainties in estimating the amount of the Company’s potential losses from A&E claims and ultimate values cannot be estimated using traditional reserving techniques.  See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Asbestos and Environmental Exposures” and Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” - Note 3 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes the composition of the Company’s total reserves for A&E losses, gross and net of reinsurance, for the periods indicated:

On July 13, 2015, the Company sold Mt. McKinley to Clearwater Insurance Company.  Concurrently with the closing, the Company entered into a retrocession treaty with an affiliate of Clearwater.  Per the retrocession treaty, the Company retroceded 100% of the liabilities associated with certain Mt. McKinley policies, which had been reinsured by Bermuda Re. As consideration for entering into the retrocession treaty, Bermuda Re transferred cash of $140.3 million, an amount equal to the net loss reserves as of the closing date.  Of the $140.3 million of net loss reserves retroceded, $100.5 million were related to A&E business.  The maximum liability retroceded under the retrocession treaty will be $440.3 million, equal to the retrocession payment plus $300.0 million.  The Company will retain liability for any amounts exceeding the maximum liability retroceded under the retrocession treaty.

Additional losses, including those relating to latent injuries and other exposures, which are as yet unrecognized, the type or magnitude of which cannot be foreseen by either the Company or the industry, may emerge in the future. Such future emergence could have material adverse effects on the Company’s future financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company wrote a limited amount of life and annuity reinsurance in its Bermuda segment.  Future policy benefit liabilities for annuities are reported at the accumulated fund balance of these contracts.  Reserves for those liabilities include mortality provisions with respect to life and annuity claims, both reported and unreported. Actual experience in a particular period may be worse than assumed experience and, consequently, may adversely affect the Company’s operating results for that period. See ITEM 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” - Note 1F of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Activity in the reserve for future policy benefits is summarized for the periods indicated:

The board of directors of each of the Company’s operating subsidiaries is responsible for establishing investment policy and guidelines and, together with senior management, for overseeing their execution.

The Company’s principal investment objectives are to ensure funds are available to meet its insurance and reinsurance obligations and to maximize after-tax investment income while maintaining a high quality diversified investment portfolio.  Considering these objectives, the Company views its investment portfolio as having two components: 1) the investments needed to satisfy outstanding liabilities (its core fixed maturities portfolio) and 2) investments funded by the Company’s shareholders’ equity.

For the portion needed to satisfy global outstanding liabilities, the Company generally invests in taxable and tax-preferenced fixed income securities with an average credit quality of Aa3.  For the U.S. portion of this portfolio, the Company’s mix of taxable and tax-preferenced investments is adjusted periodically, consistent with the Company’s current and projected U.S. operating results, market conditions and our tax position.  This global fixed maturity securities portfolio is externally managed by independent, professional investment managers using portfolio guidelines approved by the Company.

Over the past several years, the Company has expanded the allocation of its investments funded by shareholders’ equity to include:  1) a greater percentage of publicly traded equity securities, 2) emerging market fixed maturities through mutual fund structures, as well as individual holdings, 3) high yield fixed maturities, 4) bank and private loan securities and 5) private equity limited partnership investments.  The objective of this portfolio diversification is to enhance the risk-adjusted total return of the investment portfolio by allocating a prudent portion of the portfolio to higher return asset classes, which are also less subject to changes in value with movements in interest rates.  The Company limits its allocation to these asset classes because of 1) the potential for volatility in their values and 2) the impact of these investments on regulatory and rating agency capital adequacy models.  The Company uses investment managers experienced in these markets and adjusts its allocation to these investments based upon market conditions.  At December 31, 2018, the market value of investments in these investment market sectors, carried at both market and fair value, approximated 52% of shareholders’ equity.

The duration of an investment is based on the maturity of the security but also reflects the payment of interest and the possibility of early prepayments.  The Company’s fixed income investment guidelines include a general duration guideline.  This investment duration guideline is established and periodically revised by management, which considers economic and business factors, as well as the Company’s average duration of potential liabilities, which, at December 31, 2018, is estimated at approximately 3.0 years, based on the estimated payouts of underwriting liabilities using standard duration calculations.

The duration of the fixed income portfolio at December 31, 2018 and 2017 was 3.0 years and 3.1 years, respectively.  The Company shortened the duration of its portfolio in recent years in response to very low available yields, particularly on securities with longer maturities.  As a result, the Company has focused on purchasing high quality, shorter duration investments and investments with floating rate yields.  These investments will be less subject to decline in market value as interest rates rise in the future, as forecasted by most investment analysts.

For each currency in which the Company has established substantial loss and LAE reserves, the Company seeks to maintain invested assets denominated in such currency in an amount approximately equal to the

estimated liabilities.  Approximately 29% of the Company’s consolidated reserves for losses and LAE and unearned premiums represent amounts payable in foreign currencies.

The Company’s net investment income was $581.2 million, $542.9 million and $473.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017 and 2016, respectively.  The increase from 2017 to 2018 was primarily due to higher income from the growing fixed income portfolio and an increase in limited partnership income, partially offset by lower dividend income from our equity portfolio.  The increase from 2016 to 2017 was primarily due to an increase in limited partnership income and higher income from the growing fixed income portfolio, partially offset by lower dividend income from our equity portfolio.

The Company had net realized capital losses for 2018 of $127.1 million.  In 2018, the Company recorded $67.3 million of net losses from fair value re-measurements, $51.7 million of net realized capital losses from sales of investments and $8.1 million of other-than-temporary impairments.  In 2017, net realized capital gains were $153.2 million due to $139.0 million of net gains from fair value re-measurements and $21.3 million of net realized capital gains from sales of investments, partially offset by $7.1 million of other-than-temporary impairments.  In 2016, net realized capital losses were $7.2 million due to $31.6 million of other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities, $28.0 million of realized capital loss from the sale of its Heartland subsidiary and $6.7 million of net realized capital losses from sales of investments, partially offset by $59.1 million of gains due to fair value re-measurements.

The Company’s cash and invested assets totaled $18.4 billion at December 31, 2018, which consisted of 87.5% fixed maturities and cash, of which 91.8% were investment grade; 8.6% other invested assets and 3.9% equity securities.  The average maturity of fixed maturity securities was 3.9 years at December 31, 2018, and their overall duration was 3.0 years.

As of December 31, 2018, the Company did not have any direct investments in commercial real estate or direct commercial mortgages or any material holdings of derivative investments (other than equity index put option contracts as discussed in ITEM 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” - Note 4 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements) or securities of issuers that are experiencing cash flow difficulty to an extent that the Company’s management believes could threaten the issuer’s ability to meet debt service payments, except where other-than-temporary impairments have been recognized.

The Company’s investment portfolio includes structured commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) with a book value of $329.9 million and a market value of $326.7 million.  CMBS securities comprising more than 97% of the December 31, 2018 market value are rated AAA by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (“Standard & Poor’s”).  Furthermore, CMBS securities comprising more than 98% of the market value are rated investment grade by Standard & Poor’s.

The following table reflects investment results for the Company for the periods indicated:

____________________________________________________

The amortized cost, market value and gross unrealized appreciation and depreciation of available for sale, fixed maturity, equity security investments, carried at market value and other-than-temporary impairments (“OTTI”) in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) are as follows for the periods indicated:

The following table represents the credit quality distribution of the Company’s fixed maturities for the periods indicated:

The following table summarizes fixed maturities by contractual maturity for the periods indicated:

The following table shows the current financial strength ratings of the Company’s operating subsidiaries as reported by A.M. Best, Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s.  These ratings are based upon factors of concern to policyholders and should not be considered an indication of the degree or lack of risk involved in a direct or indirect equity investment in an insurance or reinsurance company.

All of the below-mentioned ratings are continually monitored and revised, if necessary, by each of the rating agencies.  The ratings presented in the following table were in effect as of January 29, 2019.

The Company believes that its ratings are important as they provide the Company’s customers and its investors with an independent assessment of the Company’s financial strength using a rating scale that provides for relative comparisons.  Strong financial ratings are particularly important for reinsurance companies.  Ceding companies must rely on their reinsurers to pay covered losses well into the future.  As a result, a highly rated reinsurer is generally preferred.

A.M. Best states that the “A+” (“Superior”) rating is assigned to those companies which, in its opinion, have a superior ability to meet their ongoing insurance policy and contract obligations based on A.M. Best’s comprehensive quantitative and qualitative evaluation of a company’s balance sheet strength, operating performance and business profile.  A.M. Best affirmed these ratings on March 16, 2018.  Standard & Poor’s states that the “A+”/”A” ratings are assigned to those insurance companies which, in its opinion, have strong financial security characteristics with respect to their ability to pay under its insurance policies and contracts in accordance with their terms.  Standard & Poor’s affirmed these ratings on July 28, 2018.  Moody’s states that an “A1” rating is assigned to companies that, in their opinion, offer upper-medium grade security and are subject to low credit risk.  Moody’s affirmed these ratings on September 26, 2018.

Subsidiaries other than Everest Re and Bermuda Re may not be rated by some or any rating agencies because such ratings are not considered essential by the individual subsidiary’s customers, because of the limited nature of the subsidiary’s operations or because the subsidiaries are newly established and have not yet been rated by the agencies.

The following table shows the debt ratings by A.M. Best, Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s of the Holdings’ senior notes due June 1, 2044 and long term notes due May 1, 2067 both of which are considered investment grade.  Debt ratings are the rating agencies’ current assessment of the credit worthiness of an obligor with respect to a specific obligation.

The worldwide reinsurance and insurance businesses are highly competitive, as well as cyclical by product and market.  As such, financial results tend to fluctuate with periods of constrained availability, higher rates and stronger profits followed by periods of abundant capacity, lower rates and constrained profitability.  Competition in the types of reinsurance and insurance business that we underwrite is based on many factors, including the perceived overall financial strength of the reinsurer or insurer, ratings of the reinsurer or insurer by A.M. Best and/or Standard & Poor’s, underwriting expertise, the jurisdictions where the reinsurer or insurer is licensed or otherwise authorized, capacity and coverages offered, premiums charged, other terms and conditions of the reinsurance and insurance business offered, services offered, speed of claims payment and reputation and experience in lines written.  Furthermore, the market impact from these competitive factors related to reinsurance and insurance is generally not consistent across lines of business, domestic and international geographical areas and distribution channels.

The Company competes in the U.S., Bermuda and international reinsurance and insurance markets with numerous global competitors. The Company’s competitors include independent reinsurance and insurance companies, subsidiaries or affiliates of established worldwide insurance companies, reinsurance departments of certain insurance companies, domestic and international underwriting operations, including underwriting syndicates at Lloyd’s of London and certain government sponsored risk transfer vehicles.  Some of these competitors have greater financial resources than we do and have established long term and continuing business relationships, which can be a significant competitive advantage.  In addition, the lack of strong barriers to entry into the reinsurance business and recently, the securitization of reinsurance and insurance risks through capital markets provide additional sources of potential reinsurance and insurance capacity and competition.

Worldwide insurance and reinsurance market conditions continued to be very competitive, particularly in the property catastrophe and casualty reinsurance lines of business.  Generally, there was ample insurance and reinsurance capacity relative to demand, as well as, additional capital from the capital markets through insurance linked financial instruments.  These financial instruments such as side cars, catastrophe bonds and collateralized reinsurance funds, provide capital markets with access to insurance and reinsurance risk exposure.  The capital markets demand for these products is being primarily driven by the current low interest environment and the desire to achieve greater risk diversification and potentially higher returns on their investments.  This increased competition is generally having a negative impact on rates, terms and conditions; however, the impact varies widely by market and coverage.

Rates tend to fluctuate by specific region and products, particularly areas recently impacted by large catastrophic events.  There were numerous natural catastrophes in 2018, with total industry losses estimated to be $90 billion.  The costliest event was the Camp Wildfire in California, the deadliest and most destructive California fire on record. These 2018 catastrophe losses followed another record year of catastrophes in 2017 where total industry losses for the worldwide events were estimated at $140 billion. These catastrophe losses included an unprecedented series of catastrophes in the third quarter of 2017 with Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria, as well as a significant earthquake in Mexico City.  Additional catastrophe events occurred in the

fourth quarter of 2017 with the wildfires in California and Hurricanes Nate and Ophelia.  During 2016, catastrophe losses included the Fort McMurray Canadian wildfire, Hurricane Matthew which affected a large area of the Caribbean and southeastern United States, storms and an earthquake in Ecuador.  While the future impact on market conditions from these catastrophes cannot be determined at this time, there was some firming in the markets impacted by the 2016 catastrophes and as catastrophe losses increased in 2017, there is a growing industry consensus that there will be some firming of (re)insurance rates for the areas impacted by the catastrophes.

Commencing in 2015, the Company initiated a strategic build out of its insurance platform through the investment in key leadership hires which in turn has brought significant underwriting talent and stronger direction in achieving its insurance program strategic goals of increased premium volume and improved underwriting results.  Recent growth is coming from highly diversified areas including newly launched lines of business, as well as, product and geographic expansion in existing lines of business.  The Company is building a world-class insurance platform capable of offering products across lines and geographies, complementing its leading global reinsurance franchise.  As part of this initiative, the Company launched a new syndicate through Lloyd’s of London and formed Ireland Insurance, providing the Company access to additional international business and new product opportunities to further diversify and broaden its insurance portfolio.

Overall, the Company believes that given its size, strong ratings, distribution system, reputation, expertise and capital market vehicle activity the current marketplace conditions provide profit opportunities.  The Company continues to employ its strategy of targeting business that offers the greatest profit potential, while maintaining balance and diversification in its overall portfolio.

As of February 1, 2019, the Company employed 1,415 persons.  Management believes that employee relations are good.  None of the Company’s employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements, and the Company is not aware of any current efforts to implement such agreements.

The Company and its insurance subsidiaries are subject to regulation under the insurance statutes of the various jurisdictions in which they conduct business, including essentially all states of the U.S., Canada, Singapore, Brazil, the United Kingdom, Ireland and Bermuda.  These regulations vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and are generally designed to protect ceding insurance companies and policyholders by regulating the Company’s conduct of business, financial integrity and ability to meet its obligations.  Many of these regulations require reporting of information designed to allow insurance regulators to closely monitor the Company’s performance.

Insurance Holding Company Regulation.  Under applicable U.S. laws and regulations, no person, corporation or other entity may acquire a controlling interest in the Company, unless such person, corporation or entity has obtained the prior approval for such acquisition from the insurance commissioners of Delaware and the other states in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled or deemed domiciled, currently California and Georgia.  Under these laws, “control” is presumed when any person acquires, directly or indirectly, 10% or more of the voting securities of an insurance company.  To obtain the approval of any change in control, the proposed acquirer must file an application with the relevant insurance commissioner disclosing, among other things, the background of the acquirer and that of its directors and officers, the acquirer’s financial condition and its proposed changes in the management and operations of the insurance company.  U.S. state regulators also require prior notice or regulatory approval of material inter-affiliate transactions within the holding company structure.

The Insurance Companies Act of Canada requires prior approval by the Minister of Finance of anyone acquiring a significant interest in an insurance company authorized to do business in Canada.  In addition, the Company is subject to regulation by the insurance regulators of other states and foreign jurisdictions in which it is authorized to do business.  Certain of these states and foreign jurisdictions impose regulations regulating the ability of any person to acquire control of an insurance company authorized to do business in that jurisdiction without appropriate regulatory approval similar to those described above.

Dividends.  Under Bermuda law, Group is prohibited from declaring or paying a dividend if such payment would reduce the realizable value of its assets to an amount less than the aggregate value of its liabilities and its issued share capital and share premium (additional paid-in capital) accounts.  Group’s ability to pay dividends and its operating expenses is partially dependent upon dividends from its subsidiaries.  The payment of dividends by insurance subsidiaries is limited under Bermuda law as well as the laws of the various U.S. states in which Group’s insurance and reinsurance subsidiaries are domiciled or deemed domiciled.  The limitations are generally based upon net income (loss) and compliance with applicable policyholders’ surplus or minimum solvency and liquidity requirements as determined in accordance with the relevant statutory accounting practices.  Under Irish corporate and regulatory law, Holdings Ireland, Everest Dublin Holdings and their subsidiaries are limited as to the dividends they can pay based on retained earnings and net income (loss) and/or capital and minimum solvency requirements.  As Holdings has outstanding debt obligations, it is dependent upon dividends and other permissible payments from its operating subsidiaries to enable it to meet its debt and operating expense obligations and to pay dividends.

Under Bermuda law, Bermuda Re, Everest International and Everest Assurance are unable to declare or make payment of a dividend if they fail to meet their minimum solvency margin or minimum liquidity ratio.  As long term insurers, Bermuda Re and Everest Assurance are also unable to declare or pay a dividend to anyone who is not a policyholder unless, after payment of the dividend, the value of the assets in their long term business fund, as certified by their approved actuary, exceeds their liabilities for long term business by at least the $250,000 minimum solvency margin.  Prior approval of the Bermuda Monetary Authority is required if Bermuda Re’s, Everest International’s or Everest Assurance’s dividend payments would exceed 25% of their prior year end statutory capital and surplus.  At December 31, 2018, Bermuda Re, Everest International and Everest Assurance exceeded their solvency and liquidity requirements.

The payment of dividends to Holdings by Everest Re is subject to limitations imposed by Delaware law.  Generally, Everest Re may only pay dividends out of its statutory earned surplus, which was $3,650.6 million at December 31, 2018, and only after it has given 10 days prior notice to the Delaware Insurance Commissioner.  During this 10-day period, the Commissioner may, by order, limit or disallow the payment of ordinary dividends if the Commissioner finds the insurer to be presently or potentially in financial distress.  Further, the maximum amount of dividends that may be paid without the prior approval of the Delaware Insurance Commissioner in any twelve month period is the greater of (1) 10% of the insurer’s statutory surplus as of the end of the prior calendar year or (2) the insurer’s statutory net income (loss), not including realized capital gains (losses), for the prior calendar year.  Accordingly, the maximum amount that will be available for the payment of dividends by Everest Re in 2019 without triggering the requirement for prior approval of regulatory authorities in connection with a dividend is $365.0 million.

Insurance Regulation.  Bermuda Re and Everest International are not admitted to do business in any jurisdiction in the U.S.  These entities conduct their insurance business from their offices in Bermuda, and in the case of Bermuda Re, its branch in the UK.  Everest Assurance, by virtue of its one-time election under section 953(d) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code to be a U.S. income tax paying “Controlled Foreign Corporation”, is admitted to do business in the U.S. and Bermuda.  In Bermuda, Bermuda Re, Everest International, Everest Assurance and Mt. Logan Re are regulated by the Insurance Act 1978 (as amended) and related regulations (the “Act”).  The Act establishes solvency and liquidity standards and auditing and reporting requirements and subjects Bermuda Re, Everest International and Everest Assurance to the supervision, investigation and intervention powers of the Bermuda Monetary Authority.  Under the Act, Bermuda Re and Everest International, as Class 4 insurers, are each required to maintain a principal office in Bermuda, to maintain a minimum of $100 million in statutory capital and surplus, to have an independent auditor approved by the Bermuda Monetary Authority conduct an annual audit and report on their respective statutory and U.S. GAAP financial statements and filings and to have an appointed loss reserve specialist (also approved by the Bermuda Monetary Authority) review and report on their respective loss reserves annually.  Under the Act, Everest Assurance is licensed as a Class 3A insurer for general business and as a Class C insurer for long-term business.

Bermuda Re is also registered under the Act as long term insurer and is thereby authorized to write life and annuity business.  As a long term insurer, Bermuda Re is required to maintain $250,000 in statutory capital separate from their Class 4 minimum statutory capital and surplus, to maintain long term business funds, to separately account for this business and to have an approved actuary prepare a certificate concerning their long term business assets and liabilities to be filed annually.  Bermuda Re’s operations in the United Kingdom and worldwide are subject to regulation by the Prudential Regulation Authority (the “PRA”).  The PRA imposes solvency, capital adequacy, audit, financial reporting and other regulatory requirements on insurers transacting business in the United Kingdom.  Bermuda Re presently meets or exceeds all of the PRA’s solvency and capital requirements.

U.S. domestic property and casualty insurers, including reinsurers, are subject to regulation by their state of domicile and by those states in which they are licensed.  The regulation of reinsurers is typically focused on financial condition, investments, management and operation.  The rates and policy terms of reinsurance agreements are generally not subject to direct regulation by any governmental authority.

The operations of Everest Re’s foreign branch offices in Canada and Singapore are subject to regulation by the insurance regulatory officials of those jurisdictions.  Management believes that the Company is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations pertaining to its business and operations.

Everest Indemnity, Everest National, Everest Security, Everest Denali and Everest Premier are subject to regulations similar to the U.S. regulations applicable to Everest Re.  In addition, these companies must comply with substantial regulatory requirements in each state where they conduct business.  These additional requirements include, but are not limited to, rate and policy form requirements, requirements with regard to licensing, agent appointments, participation in residual markets and claim handling procedures.  These regulations are primarily designed for the protection of policyholders.

Licenses.  Everest Re is a licensed property and casualty insurer and/or reinsurer in all states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and Guam.  Such licensing enables U.S. domestic ceding company clients to take credit for uncollateralized reinsurance receivables from Everest Re in their statutory financial statements.

Everest Re is licensed as a property and casualty reinsurer in Canada. It is also authorized to conduct reinsurance business in Singapore and Brazil.  Everest Re can also write reinsurance in other foreign countries. Because some jurisdictions require a reinsurer to register in order to be an acceptable market for local insurers, Everest Re is registered as a foreign insurer and/or reinsurer in the following countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Peru, Venezuela and the Philippines. Everest National is licensed in 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.  Everest Indemnity is licensed in Delaware and is eligible to write insurance on a surplus lines basis in 49 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.  Everest Security is licensed in Georgia and Alabama and is approved as an eligible surplus lines insurer in Delaware.  Everest Denali is licensed in 49 states and the District of Columbia.  Everest Premier is licensed in 49 states and the District of Columbia.  Bermuda Re and Everest International are registered as Class 4 insurers in Bermuda, and Bermuda Re is also registered as a long term insurer in Bermuda.  Bermuda Re is also an authorized reinsurer in the U.K.  Everest Assurance is registered as a Class 3A general business insurer in Bermuda and a Class C long-term insurer in Bermuda.  By virtue of its one-time election under section 953(d) of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code to be a U.S. income tax paying “Controlled Foreign Corporation,” Everest Assurance may operate in both the U.S. and Bermuda.  Ireland Re is licensed to write non-life reinsurance for the London and European markets.  Ireland Insurance is licensed to write insurance for the European markets.  Everest Canada is licensed to write property and casualty insurance in Canada.

Periodic Examinations.  U.S. insurance companies are subject to periodic financial examination (usually every three to five years) of their affairs by the insurance departments of the states in which they are licensed, authorized or accredited.  U.S. insurance companies are also subject to examinations by the various state insurance departments where they are licensed concerning compliance with applicable conduct of business regulations.  In addition, foreign insurance companies and foreign branch offices are subject to examination and review by regulators in their various jurisdictions.  None of the reports of these examinations or reviews contained any material findings or recommendations.

NAIC Risk-Based Capital Requirements.  The U.S. National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) has developed a formula to measure the amount of capital appropriate for a property and casualty insurance company to support its overall business operations in light of its size and risk profile.  The major categories of a company’s risk profile are its asset risk, credit risk, and underwriting risk.  The standards are an effort by the NAIC to prevent insolvencies, to ward off other financial difficulties of insurance companies and to establish uniform regulatory standards among state insurance departments.

Under the approved formula, a company’s statutory surplus is compared to its risk based capital (“RBC”).  If this ratio is above a minimum threshold, no action is necessary.  Below this threshold are four distinct action levels at which an insurer’s domiciliary state regulator can intervene with increasing degrees of authority over an insurer as the ratio of surplus to RBC decreases.  The mildest intervention requires an insurer to submit a plan of appropriate corrective actions.  The most severe action requires an insurer to be rehabilitated or liquidated.

Based on their financial positions at December 31, 2018, Everest Re, Everest National, Everest Indemnity, Everest Security, Everest Denali and Everest Premier exceed the minimum thresholds.

Commencing in 2017, the regulatory targeted capital required by the State of Delaware, Department of Insurance was expanded to include a provision for catastrophe exposure.  Various proposals to change the RBC formula arise from time to time.  The Company is unable to predict whether any such proposal will be adopted, the form in which any such proposals would be adopted or the effect, if any, the adoption of any such proposal or change in the RBC calculations would have on the Company.

The following summary of the taxation of the Company is based on current law.  There can be no assurance that legislative, judicial, or administrative changes will not be enacted that might materially affect this summary.

Bermuda.  Under Bermuda law, no income, withholding or capital gains taxes are imposed upon Group and its Bermuda subsidiaries.  Group and its Bermuda subsidiaries have received an undertaking from the Minister of Finance in Bermuda that, in the event of any taxes being imposed, Group and its Bermuda subsidiaries will be exempt from taxation in Bermuda until March 2035.  Non-Bermuda branches of Bermuda subsidiaries are subject to local taxes in the jurisdictions in which they operate.

United Kingdom.  Bermuda Re’s UK branch and the Company’s Lloyd’s Syndicate conduct business in the UK and are subject to taxation in the UK.  Bermuda Re believes that it has operated and will continue to operate its Bermuda operation in a manner which will not cause them to be subject to UK taxation.  If Bermuda Re’s Bermuda operations were to become subject to UK income tax, there could be a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.

Ireland.  Holdings Ireland, Everest Dublin Holdings, Ireland Re and Ireland Insurance conduct business in Ireland and are subject to taxation in Ireland.

The Company’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and amendments to those reports are available free of charge through the Company’s internet website at http://www.everestre.com as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

In addition to the other information provided in this report, the following risk factors should be considered when evaluating an investment in our securities.  If the circumstances contemplated by the individual risk factors materialize, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and the trading price of our common shares could decline significantly.

Prolonged and severe disruptions in the overall public and private debt and equity markets, such as occurred during 2008, could result in significant realized and unrealized losses in our investment portfolio.  Although financial markets have significantly improved since 2008, they could deteriorate in the future.  There could also be disruption in individual market sectors, such as occurred in the energy sector in recent years.  Such declines in the financial markets could result in significant realized and unrealized losses on investments and could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, equity, business and insurer financial strength and debt ratings.

We are exposed to unpredictable catastrophic events, including weather-related and other natural catastrophes, as well as acts of terrorism.  Any material reduction in our operating results caused by the occurrence of one or more catastrophes could inhibit our ability to pay dividends or to meet our interest and principal payment obligations.  By way of illustration, during the past five calendar years, pre-tax catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance, were as follows:

We use projections of possible losses from future catastrophic events of varying types and magnitudes as a strategic underwriting tool.  We use these loss projections to estimate our potential catastrophe losses in certain geographic areas and decide on the placement of retrocessional coverage or other actions to limit the extent of potential losses in a given geographic area.  These loss projections are approximations, reliant on a mix of quantitative and qualitative processes, and actual losses may exceed the projections by a material amount, resulting in a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We are required to maintain reserves to cover our estimated ultimate liability of losses and LAE for both reported and unreported claims incurred.  These reserves are only estimates of what we believe the settlement and administration of claims will cost based on facts and circumstances known to us.  In setting reserves for our reinsurance liabilities, we rely on claim data supplied by our ceding companies and brokers and we employ actuarial and statistical projections.  The information received from our ceding companies is not always timely or accurate, which can contribute to inaccuracies in our loss projections.  Because of the uncertainties that surround our estimates of loss and LAE reserves, we cannot be certain that ultimate losses and LAE payments will not exceed our estimates.  If our reserves are deficient, we would be required to increase loss reserves in the period in which such deficiencies are identified which would cause a charge to our earnings and a reduction of capital.  During the past five calendar years, the reserve re-estimation process resulted in a decrease to our pre-tax net income in 2018 and an increase to our pre-tax income for all other years:

The difficulty in estimating our reserves is significantly more challenging as it relates to reserving for potential A&E liabilities.  At year-end 2018, 2.6% of our gross reserves were comprised of A&E reserves. A&E liabilities are especially hard to estimate for many reasons, including the long delays between exposure and manifestation of any bodily injury or property damage, difficulty in identifying the source of the asbestos or environmental contamination, long reporting delays and difficulty in properly allocating liability for the asbestos or environmental damage.  Legal tactics and judicial and legislative developments affecting the scope of insurers’ liability, which can be difficult to predict, also contribute to uncertainties in estimating reserves for A&E liabilities.

Our success depends on our ability to accurately assess the risks associated with the businesses on which the risk is retained.  If we fail to accurately assess the risks we retain, we may fail to establish adequate premium rates to cover our losses and LAE.  This could reduce our net income and even result in a net loss.

In addition, losses may arise from events or exposures that are not anticipated when the coverage is priced.  In addition to unanticipated events, we also face the unanticipated expansion of our exposures, particularly in long-tail liability lines.  An example of this is the expansion over time of the scope of insurers’ legal liability within the mass tort arena, particularly for A&E exposures discussed above.

Our active insurance company subsidiaries currently hold financial strength ratings assigned by third-party rating agencies which assess and rate the claims paying ability and financial strength of insurers and reinsurers. Our active subsidiaries that have been rated carry an “A+” (“Superior”) rating from A.M. Best. Everest Re, Bermuda Re, Ireland Re, Everest National, Everest Indemnity, Everest Canada and Ireland Insurance hold an “A+” (“Strong”) rating from Standard & Poor’s and Everest Assurance holds an “A” (“Strong”) rating from this same agency.  Everest Re and Bermuda Re hold an “A1” (“upper-medium grade”) rating from Moody’s.  Financial strength ratings are used by client companies and agents and brokers that place the business as an important means of assessing the financial strength and quality of reinsurers. A downgrade or withdrawal of any of these ratings might adversely affect our ability to market our insurance products and could have a material and adverse effect on future prospects for growth and profitability.

Consistent with market practice, much of our treaty reinsurance business allows the ceding company to terminate the contract or seek collateralization of our obligations in the event of a rating downgrade below a certain threshold.  The termination provision would generally be triggered if a rating fell below A.M. Best’s A- rating level, which is three levels below Everest Re’s current rating of A+. To a lesser extent, Everest Re also has modest exposure to reinsurance contracts that contain provisions for obligatory funding of outstanding liabilities in the event of a rating agency downgrade.  Those provisions would also generally be triggered if Everest Re’s rating fell below A.M. Best’s A- rating level.

In accordance with industry practice, we have uncollateralized receivables from insureds, agents and brokers and/or rely on agents and brokers to process our payments.  We may not be able to collect amounts due from insureds, agents and brokers, resulting in a reduction to net income.

We are subject to credit risk of reinsurers in connection with retrocessional arrangements because the transfer of risk to a reinsurer does not relieve us of our liability to the insured. In addition, reinsurers may be unwilling to pay us even though they are able to do so.  The failure of one or more of our reinsurers to honor their obligations to us in a timely fashion would impact our cash flow and reduce our net income and could cause us to incur a significant loss.

We are generally less reliant on the purchase of reinsurance than many of our competitors, in part because of our strategic emphasis on underwriting discipline and management of the cycles inherent in our business.  We try to separate our risk taking process from our risk mitigation process in order to avoid developing too great a reliance on reinsurance.  Historically, we generally purchased reinsurance from other third parties only when we expect a net benefit.  With the expansion of the capital markets into insurance linked financial instruments, we increased our use of capital market products for catastrophe reinsurance.  In addition, we have increased some of our quota share contracts with larger retrocessions.  The percentage of business that we reinsure may vary considerably from year to year, depending on our view of the relationship between cost and expected benefit for the contract period.

Because we have purchased minimal reinsurance in recent years, our net income could be reduced following a large unreinsured event or adverse overall claims experience.

Our industry is highly competitive and subject to pricing cycles that can be pronounced. We compete globally in the United States, Bermuda and international reinsurance and insurance markets with numerous competitors.  Our competitors include independent reinsurance and insurance companies, subsidiaries or affiliates of established worldwide insurance companies, reinsurance departments of certain insurance companies and domestic and international underwriting operations, including underwriting syndicates at Lloyd’s of London.

According to Standard & Poor’s, we rank among the top ten global reinsurance groups, where  more than two-thirds of the market share is concentrated.  The worldwide net premium written by the Top 40 global reinsurance groups for both life and non-life business was estimated to be $232.0 billion in 2017 according to data compiled by Standard & Poor’s.  The leaders in this market are Munich Re, Swiss Re, Berkshire Hathaway Re, Hannover Rueck SE, SCOR SE, and syndicates at Lloyd’s of London.  Some of these competitors have greater financial resources than we do and have established long term and continuing business relationships throughout the industry, which can be a significant competitive advantage.  In addition, the lack of strong barriers to entry into the reinsurance business and the entry of alternative capital market products and vehicles provide additional sources of reinsurance and insurance capacity and increased competition.

Our success has been, and will continue to be, dependent on our ability to retain the services of our Chairman, Joseph V. Taranto (age 69) and existing key executive officers and to attract and retain additional qualified personnel in the future.  The loss of the services of any key executive officer or the inability to hire and retain other highly qualified personnel in the future could adversely affect our ability to conduct business.  Generally, we consider key executive officers to be those individuals who have the greatest influence in setting overall policy and controlling operations: President and Chief Executive Officer, Dominic J. Addesso (age 65), Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Craig Howie (age 55), Executive Vice President and Chief Executive Officer Reinsurance Division, John P. Doucette (age 53), Executive Vice President, General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer, Secretary and Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Bermuda Re, Sanjoy Mukherjee (age 52) and Executive Vice President, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Everest Insurance^® Division, Jonathan Zaffino (age 46).  We currently have an agreement with Mr. Taranto to serve as a non-employee Director and Chairman of the Board through December 31, 2019, subject to Mr. Taranto’s annual election to the Board by its shareholders during its Annual General Meetings that occur over the term of the agreement.  We have employment contracts with Mr. Addesso, Mr. Howie, Mr. Doucette, Mr. Mukherjee and Mr. Zaffino which have been filed with the SEC and provide for terms of employment ending on December 31, 2019 for Mr. Addesso, April 1, 2019 for Mr. Howie, June 1, 2019 for Mr. Doucette, January 1, 2020 for Mr. Mukherjee and September 6, 2020 for Mr. Zaffino.

On January 7, 2019, the Company announced that Mr. Addesso has informed the Group’s Board of Directors that he will retire at the end of his contract term on December 31, 2019.  As a result, the Board is undertaking a search as part of its succession planning process which will include a review of internal and external candidates for the position.

The other officer agreements referenced above contain automatic renewal provisions that provide for the contracts to continue indefinitely unless sooner terminated in accordance with the contract or as otherwise may be agreed.

Special considerations apply to our Bermuda operations.  Under Bermuda law, non-Bermudians, other than spouses of Bermudians and individuals holding permanent or working resident certificates, are not permitted to engage in any gainful occupation in Bermuda without a work permit issued by the Bermuda government.  A work permit is only granted or extended if the employer can show that, after a proper public advertisement, no Bermudian, spouse of a Bermudian or individual holding a permanent or working resident certificate is available who meets the minimum standards reasonably required for the position.  The Bermuda government places a six-year term limit on individuals with work permits, subject to specified exemptions for persons deemed to be key employees of businesses with a significant physical presence in Bermuda.  Currently, all our Bermuda-based professional employees who require work permits have been granted permits by the Bermuda

government that expire at various times between January 2019 and April 2021.  This includes Sanjoy Mukherjee, the chief executive officer of our Bermuda reinsurance operation.

A significant portion of our investment portfolio consists of fixed income securities and smaller portions consist of equity securities and other investments.  Both the fair market value of our invested assets and associated investment income fluctuate depending on general economic and market conditions.  For example, the fair market value of our predominant fixed income portfolio generally increases or decreases inversely to fluctuations in interest rates.  The market value of our fixed income securities could also decrease as a result of a downturn in the business cycle that causes the credit quality of such securities to deteriorate.  The net investment income that we realize from future investments in fixed income securities will generally increase or decrease with interest rates.

Interest rate fluctuations also can cause net investment income from fixed income investments that carry prepayment risk, such as mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities, to differ from the income anticipated from those securities at the time of purchase.  In addition, if issuers of individual investments are unable to meet their obligations, investment income will be reduced and realized capital losses may arise.

The majority of our fixed income securities are classified as available for sale and temporary changes in the market value of these investments are reflected as changes to our shareholders’ equity.  Our actively managed equity security portfolios are fair valued and any changes in fair value are reflected as net realized capital gains or losses.  As a result, a decline in the value of our securities reduces our capital or could cause us to incur a loss.

We have invested a portion of our investment portfolio in equity securities. The value of these assets fluctuates with changes in the markets. In times of economic weakness, the fair value of these assets may decline, and may negatively impact net income.  We also invest in non-traditional investments which have different risk characteristics than traditional fixed income and equity securities. These alternative investments are comprised primarily of private equity limited partnerships.  The changes in value and investment income/(loss) for these partnerships may be more volatile than over-the-counter securities.

The following table quantifies the portion of our investment portfolio that consists of fixed income securities, equity securities and investments that carry prepayment risk.