At the 1 January 2026 renewals, global reinsurance pricing fell markedly, while attachment points and terms did not ease as much as price. Turkey also saw a softening, but results differed by programme type and loss record. This article treats global data and Turkey separately and states the source of each figure.
In brief
- Per Howden Re, risk-adjusted pricing at 1 January 2026: global property catastrophe −14.7%, property retrocession −16.5%, direct & facultative −17.5%.
- Aon reported a buyers' market, with double-digit reductions for non-loss-impacted accounts in most regions.
- Per Gallagher Re, Turkey property cat renewals averaged −15% (catastrophe loss-free class; catastrophe loss-hit is N/A); in risk renewals loss-free was −10% to 0% and loss-hit +20% to +30% (separate classes).
- Price is not the only criterion: attachment point, retention, capacity and wording must be reviewed separately.
The global picture: 1 January 2026
| Segment | Change | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Global property catastrophe | −14.7% | −8% in 2025 |
| Property retrocession | −16.5% | Report text gives a 12.5–21% range |
| Direct & facultative | −17.5% | Report text gives a 15–20% range |
| London market casualty | −5% to −10% | Excess of loss programmes |
Howden presents these figures as "risk-adjusted"; the publication page does not detail the calculation method, so the figures should be read only under this report's definition. The same report gives regional examples: European programmes fell 10–20% on average (Germany 8–11%), Asia Pacific loss-free non-proportional programmes 10–20% and the US 10–20%.
Aon's January 2026 Reinsurance Market Dynamics report describes the same picture qualitatively: global reinsurer capital reached a new high of $760 billion at 30 September 2025, and supply significantly outstripped demand. In the US, preferred risks typically achieved strong double-digit reductions; in EMEA, Latin America and Asia Pacific non-loss-impacted accounts also saw double-digit discounts with few exceptions. Aon reports that limit purchased at 1/1 rose by an average of 5%.
Prices fell — what about attachment points, retentions and terms?
- Attachment points: Howden describes attachments as comparatively higher and terms as tighter overall. Per Aon, retentions and attachment points raised significantly in 2023 were largely unchanged at 1 January on a nominal basis (higher on a risk-adjusted basis).
- Terms: Per Howden, direct & facultative terms evolved rather than shifted dramatically; reinsurers were more willing to participate lower in programmes, but the moves were measured and selective. Per Aon, buyers sought to restore some cover lost in the hard market (terrorism, riots, cyber).
- Retrocession: Per Howden, outcomes varied widely depending on coverage scope, attachment points and profitability; retrocessionaires were generally unwilling to broaden cover to non-natural perils such as SRCC and terrorism.
- Facultative: Aon notes that facultative demand remained strong, capacity grew and treaty/facultative hybrid facilities came to the fore.
Not the same number: cat XL, risk XL, treaty and facultative
Property cat refers to excess-of-loss structures against event-based catastrophic losses; risk XL to single-risk structures; treaty to portfolio-based framework contracts; facultative to risk-by-risk placements. Price changes for these segments are measured separately. The percentages in this article cannot be added or summed, and an insurer's own programme may differ from these averages.
Turkey must be read separately
| Item | Gallagher Re data | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Risk — loss-free | −10% to 0% | Risk-adjusted; separate class |
| Risk — loss-hit | +20% to +30% | This class only |
| Catastrophe — loss-free | −15% (average) | Risk-adjusted; average of property cat renewals |
| Catastrophe — loss-hit | N/A | No value given in the report |
| Retention levels | Largely unchanged | After two consecutive years of substantial increases |
| Capacity (oversubscription) | Exceeded 150% in many placements, up to 200% | Particularly in top layers |
| Total Cat XL capacity | About EUR 12 billion | Including TCIP; Cat XL demand rose by over EUR 1 billion |
The +20% to +30% figure is given in the Gallagher Re table only for the "Risk loss-hit" class (loss-hit risk renewals). The table gives no value for catastrophe loss-hit (N/A). It cannot be applied to all treaty renewals, to loss-hit property cat portfolios or to the Turkish market as a whole.
Aon reports that limit purchased in Turkey rose by 10–20% because of inflation and exposure growth, partly offset by exchange-rate movements. Even when the rate falls, a larger limit means total reinsurance cost need not move in the same direction: a rate and a total premium are not the same thing.
Earthquake modelling
In its February 23, 2024 article after the Kahramanmaraş earthquakes, Moody's RMS said it intended to update its Türkiye earthquake model as part of revamping its Europe earthquake model, and that complex ruptures, time dependence and clustering needed to be reflected. It said it had processed about 500 strong-motion recordings from AFAD's network, that results are highly sensitive to the ground motion and site response models chosen, and that questions remain about the true vulnerability of the building stock. This was a statement of intent at that date; this article does not confirm the current model version.
Model output alone therefore does not set the price: different models and assumptions can give different results, and reinsurers generally also apply their own accumulation and risk-appetite limits.
Capacity, retention, wording and underwriting discipline
- Capacity: ample capacity puts downward pressure on price; in Turkey capacity was reported to exceed demand in many placements. The effect varies by programme.
- Retention: when attachment points and retentions stay high, much of the loss frequency remains with the insurer; a price decrease does not remove that burden.
- Wording: scope of cover and exclusions must be assessed independently of price. Aon reports that some cover could be restored, while Howden reports that retrocession cover for non-natural perils did not broaden; no one-way generalisation is possible.
- Underwriting discipline: Howden's "measured and selective" description and the split Gallagher Re shows in loss-hit risk renewals indicate that selectivity continues even as prices fall.
- Alternative structures: Aon notes that aggregate, frequency and earnings-protection structures and parametric solutions are on the agenda; their suitability depends on needs.
Renewal preparation for insurers
- Review the quality and currency of exposure data.
- Compare the existing retention and layer structure under different scenarios.
- Assess wording and exclusions independently of price.
- Prepare the market response of loss-hit and loss-free portfolios separately.
- Consider alternative structures (aggregate, parametric, captive) where relevant.
Neolife's role
Neolife Group is an independent insurance and reinsurance broker. In reinsurance renewals it supports the preparation of portfolio and exposure information, the review of retention and layer structure, the presentation of the reinsurance request to the market, the comparison of quotations on premium, capacity, terms and wording, and post-loss recovery follow-up. Capacity, pricing and acceptance decisions rest with the reinsurers. For details see our reinsurance brokerage services or let us arrange a meeting.
Frequently asked questions
Is the reinsurance market hardening in 2026?
At the January 2026 renewals pricing fell rather than hardened: per Howden Re, risk-adjusted global property catastrophe pricing decreased by 14.7%. Attachment points remained comparatively high and terms selective.
Which way did property cat pricing move in Turkey?
Per Gallagher Re's January 2026 report, Turkey property cat renewals moved by about −15% on a risk-adjusted average; in the report's table this figure sits in the catastrophe loss-free class, and no value is given for catastrophe loss-hit (N/A). In risk (per-risk) renewals, loss-free portfolios renewed between −10% and 0% and loss-hit portfolios between +20% and +30%; the risk and catastrophe classes are separate and must not be conflated.
Are cat XL, risk XL, treaty and facultative prices the same thing?
No. Price changes for these segments are measured separately; the percentages in the sources cannot be added together or applied directly to a given insurer's own programme.
Do attachment points and wording stop mattering when prices fall?
No. The attachment point, retention and policy terms determine the cover and the loss burden that stays with the insurer; price is not the only criterion.
What does Neolife do in this process?
As an independent insurance and reinsurance broker, Neolife supports the preparation of portfolio and exposure information, the review of retention and layer structure, the presentation of the reinsurance request to the market, the comparison of quotations and post-loss recovery follow-up. Capacity, pricing and acceptance decisions rest with the reinsurers.
Sources
- Howden — Renewal report at 1.1.2026: Re-balancing — January 2, 2026
- Aon — Reinsurance Market Dynamics, January 2026 Renewal — January 2026
- Gallagher Re — First View: Options and Opportunities (PDF, page 25: Turkey) — January 2026
- Moody's RMS — Kahramanmaraş earthquake sequence: reflections one year on — February 23, 2024
Scope note: this update does not use figures from the June 1 and July 1, 2026 mid-year renewals.