Reinsurers at the 2026 annual conference of the American Insurance & Financial Analysts (AIFA) were broadly aligned that catastrophe pricing is likely to continue declining into 2027 unless a materially larger loss event disrupts capital.
Analysts from Goldman Sachs, the investment bank and financial services firm, reports that brokers and carriers “do not expect primary property pricing will improve from YE2025 levels in 2026,” citing the strength of current underwriting returns.
Goldman Sachs said pricing at the January 1 renewals was “down 15–20%,” with similar conditions expected at mid-year. While the pace of decline has been sharp relative to historical cycles, the firm noted that expected returns on capital for property catastrophe business are “20%+ at current levels.”
Carriers added that there was no material competition on terms and conditions at 1/1, with nominal attachment points “largely holding stable,” suggesting that structural discipline remains intact even as headline rates ease.
Goldman Sachs reported that reinsurers were “largely in agreement that catastrophe pricing is likely to continue declining in 2027 absent a major event or a series of events.” Executives pointed to the traditional pattern in which rates rise quickly after large losses and then decline over several years.
For pricing to respond meaningfully and stabilise, an event larger than the Los Angeles wildfires — estimated at approximately $40 billion by Swiss Re — was discussed as a potential catalyst. Current pricing levels were described as broadly comparable to post-Hurricane Ian 2023 levels, with some fringe policies retracing toward pre-Ian 2022 levels.
Goldman Sachs also noted that reinsurers are tracking growth in alternative casualty reinsurance capacity but “do not believe that alternative capacity is having material impacts on pricing at this point.” While private capital interest is increasing, particularly in casualty, executives suggested it has yet to shift market dynamics.
On geopolitical exposure, companies characterised the ongoing Middle East conflict as “manageable (or none at all),” noting that war and civil commotion are generally excluded perils and typically written separately, often through Lloyd’s of London.
Within Goldman Sachs’ coverage universe, potential exposure was identified primarily among reinsurers and larger specialty insurers such as Fidelis Insurance Holdings, RenaissanceRe, Arch Capital Group, American International Group, Chubb and AXIS Capital.
Separately, analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods (KBW), the investment bank specialising in financial services research, described the tone among Bermuda-based reinsurers as positive despite declining property reinsurance pricing.
KBW wrote that “despite increased capacity, reinsurers have successfully maintained terms and conditions and attachment points achieved in January 2023, and cedent retention remains solid.” Executives emphasised prioritising “bottom-line profitability over top-line growth,” which KBW viewed as key to sustaining strong results and evidence that the market is “more disciplined than in the past.”
KBW added that loss trend assumptions at 1/1 renewals “varied by line of business and geography.” Reinsurers have, in their view, “pulled back on property catastrophe,” while evaluating new opportunities such as data centre protection. Casualty lines were approached cautiously due to social inflation and rising loss severity, and KBW noted that third-party capital providers’ interest in underwriting casualty reinsurance “is rising, although this hasn’t yet affected pricing.”
Across both research notes, the message from AIFA 2026 was consistent: underwriting returns remain strong and structural discipline has largely held. Unless a significantly larger catastrophe, or a series of events, materially disrupts capital, reinsurers expect property and catastrophe pricing to continue easing through 2026 and into 2027.
