Manuelle Datenintegration und modellübergreifende Validierung verursachen Overhead-Kosten
Definition
The search results highlight fragmentation in catastrophe modeling infrastructure: (1) AXA's challenge statement explicitly notes that developing a single European flood model required 'more hydrological expertise from different parts of the flooding world' because existing fragmented models were insufficient. (2) Verisk, Aon, and Munich Re maintain separate global model suites, requiring firms to license and validate multiple systems. (3) Aon's Oasis Loss Modeling Framework integration is mentioned as a capability—implying that importing results from 'two or more analyses' is a manual, non-native process. (4) The need for 'high-resolution' city-level models (3m resolution for Cologne, London, Paris) suggests that firms must manually aggregate or downscale vendor models for local German claims assessment.
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: 200-400 hours/year manual model validation and data mapping per actuarial team (€15-25K labor cost); €5-15K annual licensing and API integration costs for multiple model platforms; 10-20% schedule delay in catastrophe response due to model reconciliation bottlenecks
- Frequency: Continuous (monthly updates to exposure data and climate scenarios); acute during catastrophe events (3-7 days manual reconciliation per event)
- Root Cause: Absence of standardized, integrated modeling platforms; vendor lock-in (multiple proprietary black-box models); lack of real-time data ingestion and automated validation workflows
Why This Matters
This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Claims Adjusting, Actuarial Services.
Affected Stakeholders
Actuaries (data preparation, validation), Claims IT Managers (API integration, platform maintenance), Reinsurance Analysts (model comparison, scenario analysis)
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Current Workarounds
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Related Business Risks
Unzureichende Exposurmodellierung führt zu Fehlkalkulation von Katastrophenschäden
Manuelle Schadenbewertung und Claims-Verarbeitung während Katastrophenereignisse verursacht Kapazitätsengpässe
Unvollständige Dokumentation von Katastrophenschaden-Modellierungsprozessen führt zu Betriebsprüfungs-Risiken
GoBD-Verstöße bei digitaler Dokumentation
Verzögerungen bei der Tarifgenehmigung durch BaFin
Bußgelder bei fehlerhaften AUZ-Berechnungen
Request Deep Analysis
🇩🇪 Be first to access this market's intelligence