In the previous edition, we decomposed the movement in capital. That helped explain what changed. But once the movement is understood, a simpler and sharper question remains. For every unit of premium we write, how much capital are we now carrying? A portfolio can grow premium, report a comfortable solvency ratio, and still become less attractive from a capital perspective. The issue is not only whether the SCR is increasing. It is whether the SCR is increasing faster than th

Capital Modelling | The SCR bridge In the previous two editions, we looked at capital from two angles. First, we made the standard SCR component view more useful by showing it over time. Then we moved from risk modules to portfolio decisions by looking at capital intensity by segment. Those views make movement and concentration visible. The next question is more direct: what actually changed the capital requirement? The Decision Question What is driving the movement from last

Capital Modelling | Capital Intensity Map In the previous edition, we improved the standard SCR component view by showing the capital requirement over time. That made movement visible. But it still left an important question unanswered: if capital is increasing, where is it being consumed most intensely, and is that capital supporting business we actually want to write? The Decision Question Which parts of the portfolio are using the most capital relative to the return they g

Capital Requirement | Making the standard view useful Capital requirement views are often treated as a compliance summary. They show how the SCR is split between insurance risk, market risk, counterparty risk, operational risk, and diversification. That is useful context. But it is rarely enough to support a decision. The question is usually not only what the SCR is made of. It is whether the capital profile is changing, why it is changing, and whether the business is still c