A small container ship slipped beneath the surface of the Strait of Hormuz this week, and with it went any hope among marine war underwriters that the autumn would bring a lull.
The GFS Pride, a Singapore-flagged feeder vessel with room for 2,824 containers, was hit by an unidentified projectile while transiting the strait on Tuesday. It caught fire and sank. All 21 crew were evacuated and no injuries were reported, according to Singapore's Maritime and Port Authority, which condemned the strike as a breach of international law.
The ship, built in 2008 and managed out of the United Arab Emirates, is only the second vessel to sink since US and Israeli strikes on Iran began on February 28, according to International Maritime Organization data cited by Reuters. A dry bulk carrier damaged in an earlier attack was also reported to be going down.
Tehran tells a different story. Iran's Revolutionary Guard said through state media that the ship blew up after striking a naval mine on what it called an unauthorised route. The maritime security firm Marisks said there was no independent evidence of a mine, and characterised the claim as part of a campaign to frighten commercial shipping away from the waterway.
For the shipowner's hull war cover, the distinction may matter less than it sounds. The Institute War and Strikes Clauses used widely in the London market cover hostile acts by or against a belligerent power, and separately list derelict mines and other weapons of war, as an English High Court judgment sets out. For underwriters quoting the next transit, though, the cause matters a great deal. A targeted missile strike is one risk profile. A seeded minefield is a lane-wide hazard that no escort fully neutralises.
The sinking caps a brutal run. More than 20 vessels, most of them tankers, have come under attack in Hormuz, the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman since October 1, according to UK Maritime Trade Operations reports. The IMO counts 106 confirmed incidents and 24 seafarer deaths since the conflict began, with two sailors missing and 12 injured this month alone.
Read next: Trump says Hormuz is clear. The insurance market disagrees
Pricing has followed the violence. Brokers told the Financial Times last week that additional war risk premiums for tankers in the region now run at 6% to 10% of hull value, which can mean as much as $20 million for a single supertanker voyage into the Gulf, Marine Insight reported. Before the war, the going rate was about 0.25%, according to Marsh global head of marine Marcus Baker.
The path between those two numbers has been anything but smooth, as the chart below shows. Rates eased to about 2% after the June US-Iran memorandum of understanding, the Lloyd's Market Association's Neil Roberts told Xinhua, then hit 7.5% to 10% by late July, Baker told S&P Global. By late August, quotes had eased only to 3% to 8%, even as the White House declared the strait clear of mines.
The London market's line throughout has been that capacity exists at a price. Roberts has said cover remains "available for a price," and the LMA has argued since March that safety concerns, not a lack of insurance, are what keep ships away.
Read next: Washington's $40 billion Hormuz insurance fix: zero takers
What the price buys is getting expensive to honour. A Howden Re estimate cited in August put market-wide claims across war, terror and political violence at $2 billion to $3 billion, more than the segment's estimated $1.5 billion to $2 billion in annual global premium. The broker has also argued that the Red Sea and Hormuz crises together have permanently reset the marine war risk baseline.
The GFS Pride adds a hull total loss to that tally, and possibly more. Pakistan's hydrographic office warned mariners of containers floating near the wreck, which points to cargo claims and potential wreck and debris liabilities for the ship's P&I club. Adjusting any of it will be slow: surveyors cannot easily reach the scene, and the London market is already stretched for specialist claims expertise.
The threat is spreading onshore, too. Iran-backed Houthi militants hit a Saudi Aramco administrative building in Dhahran overnight, starting a fire but injuring no one, CNBC reported, citing Saudi Arabia's energy ministry. Deadly strikes on Riyadh's main airport last week have already put aviation war underwriters on alert.
Read next: Multiple fatalities reported as drones, missiles hit Saudi international airports
The economic stakes explain why owners keep sailing. Crude exports through Hormuz averaged about 8.5 million barrels a day in the week to October 12, nearly 40% below prewar levels, according to Kpler data reported by CNBC. Washington insists the waterway is open: US Central Command said American forces helped Gulf partners move more than 19 million barrels through the strait in a single day.
But the traffic that does move is thin and nervous. Analytics firm Windward counted 13 vessels crossing on October 4, against roughly 135 a day before the war, and estimated that about one in 50 ships transiting in the third quarter was hit. Owners are now offering tanker captains up to $100,000 a month to make the run.
The rhetoric is heading the wrong way. Rear Admiral Ali Ozmaei, who took command of the Revolutionary Guard's navy in July, told Iranian state-affiliated media that Tehran is "counting the moments" until it can sink American warships, CNBC reported. President Donald Trump said last Thursday that US forces would not attack Iran before the November 3 midterm elections.
For brokers with Gulf-trading clients, that points to a few practical checks. Seven-day cancellation clauses mean terms can change mid-voyage. The Joint War Committee's Listed Areas still cover the entire Persian Gulf, and IB's earlier analysis found the committee wants sustained incident-free passage and verified demining before it budges. Route-specific wording and sanctions exposure from any Iranian transit fees remain live issues.
There is also a Washington wildcard. The US Development Finance Corp.'s $40 billion maritime reinsurance facility, led by Chubb with AIG, Berkshire Hathaway, Travelers, Liberty Mutual and Starr behind it, was built to cover ships sailing under US naval escort. It had written no business as of May. US forces have since guided tankers through the strait, but no public update on whether the facility is now writing policies could be found as of publication. For US brokers with clients weighing escorted transits, it is a question worth asking directly.
This week suggests none of those conditions is getting closer. Underwriters have been clear all year that they price risk, not press releases, and the GFS Pride just gave them fresh evidence.
Read next: Iran's insurance gambit in the Strait of Hormuz is a claim waiting to happen
