Best Reinsurance Fund winner: Nephila Capital

Praised for its experience, Nephila received positive commentary from many participants.

“They are the most experienced in the business and have a team of long-term market professionals,” said one respondent.

Another said: “Nephila is an industry leader. It has quality management and has demonstrated its strong level of expertise.”

Nephila Capital was founded in 1997 in London. The company relocated to Bermuda in 1999 in order to establish a local presence and to deepen existing relationships in the world’s largest catastrophe reinsurance centre.

The company works to provide investors with superior returns in an asset class which is uncorrelated with the traditional financial market. Drawing on the natural characteristics of a non-correlated positive expected return with a comprehensive analytical overlay, market relationships and experience, Nephila seeks to provide clients with an additional expected return.

With a heavy focus on portfolio construction—at both a macro level and an operational level—the company has proved its worth as a leader in the field.

Claiming second place was Twelve Capital. The independent investment manager, which specialises in insurance investments, is based in Zurich and was formed in 2010. It received positive comments around its multi-class flexibility and professional attitude.

Aeolus, which also resides in Bermuda, provides investors with superior risk-adjusted returns and diversification benefits available from investing in the property catastrophe reinsurance and retrocession market.

Slipping into third place, the company was recognised by participants for its strong underwriting team, responsiveness and proven ability in claims payment.

CATCo and AlphaCat received very close scores with the former gaining 6.14 and the latter 6.10.

Both were recognised as excellent performers in the industry with participants praising both for their efficiency and level of knowledge.

“Nephila is an industry leader. It has quality management and has demonstrated its strong level of expertise.”

The companies in the shortlists seen here were selected based on the first stage of the research, conducted via phone interviews and open online polls. Respondents were asked to name two companies they regard highly in this category. They were then asked to give details of why they had chosen these firms.

The shortlist for this category reflects the companies mentioned the most frequently.

The researchers then approached the market a second time and, using this shortlist presented in a random order, asked respondents to score each company out of ten based on how they perceive the quality of the products, services and expertise of each. It is the results of this part of the survey that are shown here.

More than 500 respondents took part in each part of the survey respectively.

The score shows the average score out of ten that each company received in stage two of the survey.

The shortlist was presented to respondents in a random order.