Marine war has spent much of 2026 at the top of the news agenda, after the US-Israeli conflict with Iran that began in late February disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and sent war-risk premiums climbing.
Yet despite its long history, marine war remains a highly specialised class, requiring a detailed understanding of its development, policy wordings and the nuances of the risks involved. “It's one of the oldest classes in the world, and yet it's a class that requires a very specific depth of knowledge,” said Bruce Carman (pictured), CEO of HIVE Underwriters.
There is a huge amount of money in the market right now because of the Hormuz disruption, he said, but some underwriters are still working out how to write the class profitably, and the answer isn’t simply to increase rates. For Carman, whose own background is in aviation war risks, the opportunity lies in niches where specialist knowledge and reliable data give underwriters an edge.
“What we’re talking about in specialty insurance is non-homogeneous risk, whereas the commercial lines sector is about homogeneous risk where they can model things easier,” he said.
His space team is a case in point: each launch and satellite is different, and data scientists help underwriters distil the analytics behind their decisions.
Carman doesn’t claim deep knowledge of parametric, climate or cyber. He sees parametric and climate as good bedfellows, closely tied to the ILS market, but because parametric isn’t about indemnity, it sits some way off HIVE’s agenda for now. Cyber is a different matter, and one he is looking at. It is a fast-growing class, he said, and its development will be closely tied to how agentic AI grows across the market.
Telling a genuinely underserved class from one that is simply hard to price is a question best left to the actuaries. He would look to around two decades of past data – loss triangles, loss ratios and occurrences – coupled with a forward view of claims inflation and litigation costs, which can be quite specific to each class.
Classes that may carry a long tail, such as AI-related casualty or cyber, are really tricky when it comes to matching third-party capital. “You’ve got to have really good data to be able to get long-tail classes matched on a delegated basis,” he said.
Carman is not convinced carriers are handing MGAs more capacity than they used to. In his own corner of aviation, Carman has seen established MGA relationships face greater scrutiny, while newer entrants can find it increasingly difficult to secure capacity. “Those carriers, as they go into a soft cycle, are becoming more selective,” he said.
What has shifted, as he sees it, is the movement of talent across the market. “I would say there's been a shift in talent away from the major carriers towards the more entrepreneurial MGA sector,” he said.
There are areas where carriers are looking at diversified specialty plays, but an MGA needs a track record of outperformance to start that conversation. Once a niche is proven, the risk is complacency. “The minute you sit in the comfy chair with the pipe and slippers, you’re done,” he said.
For brokers assessing whether an MGA has genuine specialist expertise, Carman’s test is the same: experience backed by market outperformance. He applies it when underwriting teams pitch to HIVE, starting from a premise of belief but needing to be confident they will stand up when he takes them to capacity providers.
“Everyone will tell you they’re best in class, but then a little due diligence goes a long way. So I’m wary of the shiny pitch deck with no track record,” he said. He would rather back an underwriter who underpromises and overdelivers. “Specialism counts.”
More interest and capacity are coming into marine war, but Carman said specialist knowledge, experience and disciplined underwriting will still decide who writes it profitably.
