<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en-US">
	<id>https://www.insurerbrain.com/w/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Definition%3ASupervisory_review_process_%28SRP%29</id>
	<title>Definition:Supervisory review process (SRP) - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.insurerbrain.com/w/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Definition%3ASupervisory_review_process_%28SRP%29"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.insurerbrain.com/w/index.php?title=Definition:Supervisory_review_process_(SRP)&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-05-02T09:41:46Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.43.8</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.insurerbrain.com/w/index.php?title=Definition:Supervisory_review_process_(SRP)&amp;diff=18156&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>PlumBot: Bot: Creating new article from JSON</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.insurerbrain.com/w/index.php?title=Definition:Supervisory_review_process_(SRP)&amp;diff=18156&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2026-03-15T17:13:22Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Bot: Creating new article from JSON&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;🔎 &amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Supervisory review process (SRP)&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039; is the ongoing, risk-based evaluation conducted by insurance regulators to assess whether an [[Definition:Insurance carrier | insurer]] or [[Definition:Reinsurer | reinsurer]] maintains adequate [[Definition:Capital adequacy | capital]], sound [[Definition:Risk management framework | risk management]], and effective [[Definition:Corporate governance | governance]] beyond what purely quantitative requirements can capture. In the [[Definition:Solvency II | Solvency II]] architecture that governs much of European insurance regulation, the SRP constitutes the central mechanism of Pillar 2 — complementing the quantitative capital standards of Pillar 1 and the disclosure requirements of Pillar 3. Analogous processes exist in other regulatory regimes, including the [[Definition:National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) | NAIC]]&amp;#039;s risk-focused surveillance framework in the United States and supervisory review practices mandated by the [[Definition:International Association of Insurance Supervisors (IAIS) | IAIS]] [[Definition:Insurance Core Principles (ICP) | Insurance Core Principles]].&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
📊 Under Solvency II, the SRP involves national competent authorities evaluating an insurer&amp;#039;s compliance with the full range of regulatory requirements — [[Definition:Technical provisions | technical provisions]], [[Definition:Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR) | SCR]] and [[Definition:Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR) | MCR]] calculations, [[Definition:Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) | ORSA]] quality, [[Definition:Internal model | internal model]] performance, [[Definition:Fit and proper requirements | fitness and propriety]] of key personnel, [[Definition:Outsourcing | outsourcing]] arrangements, and overall systems of governance. Supervisors draw on a combination of off-site analysis (reviewing regulatory filings, [[Definition:Actuarial report | actuarial reports]], and ORSA submissions) and on-site inspections. Where the review reveals deficiencies, supervisors have a graduated toolkit of responses: they can require management actions, impose [[Definition:Capital add-on | capital add-ons]] above the standard SCR, restrict [[Definition:Dividend | dividend]] payments, or — in severe cases — withdraw authorization. In the U.S. context, the risk-focused examination process serves a parallel function, with state examiners assessing prospective risks through a structured methodology guided by NAIC procedures. Asian regulators, including those in Singapore and Japan, conduct similar supervisory reviews calibrated to their local frameworks, often incorporating stress-testing expectations and qualitative governance assessments.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
🧩 What makes the SRP significant is that it ensures [[Definition:Regulatory compliance | regulatory oversight]] remains dynamic and judgment-based rather than purely mechanical. Quantitative capital requirements can be met on paper while underlying risks — poor [[Definition:Underwriting | underwriting]] discipline, concentrations in [[Definition:Catastrophe risk | catastrophe]] exposures, or weak [[Definition:Operational risk | operational risk]] controls — fester beneath the surface. The supervisory review is designed to catch precisely these situations. For insurers, a constructive SRP outcome builds regulatory trust and can facilitate smoother approvals for expansion, [[Definition:Internal model | internal model]] use, or innovative product launches. A troubled SRP outcome, by contrast, can trigger escalating intervention that constrains an insurer&amp;#039;s strategic flexibility. In an era of increasingly complex risks — from [[Definition:Cyber insurance | cyber]] exposures to [[Definition:Climate risk | climate change]] — the supervisory review process remains the primary mechanism through which regulators exercise qualitative judgment over the health and conduct of the insurers they oversee.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;Related concepts:&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&amp;#039;&lt;br /&gt;
{{Div col|colwidth=20em}}&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Solvency II]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Capital add-on]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR)]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Risk management framework]]&lt;br /&gt;
* [[Definition:Insurance Core Principles (ICP)]]&lt;br /&gt;
{{Div col end}}&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>PlumBot</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>