Here is the Deutche version of this aricle

1 — Why solvency ratios matter (quick primer)

Under the EU Solvency II regime, insurers must hold eligible own funds sufficient to cover two regulatory thresholds: the Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR) and the Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR). The widely quoted Solvency II ratio (or SCR coverage ratio) is simply:

Solvency II ratio = Eligible own funds ÷ SCR

A ratio of 100% means an insurer meets the regulatory SCR exactly; most prudent insurers operate above 100% and set internal target ranges (often well above 125–150%) to allow for stress, dividend policy, and business growth. For large European groups the “comfort zone” often quoted by analysts ranges from the high-teens (150%–200%) up to 300%+ for reinsurers, depending on business mix and capital strategy.

Why care? Solvency ratios are the principal public, regulator-aligned metric for financial strength under Solvency II. They show a firm’s cushion against unexpected losses and therefore matter to policyholders, counterparties, credit analysts, and shareholders.

2 — Methodology and scope of this German unsurer solvency review

• Scope: This article focuses on major German insurers and reinsurers that publish Solvency and Financial Condition Reports (SFCRs) for year-end 2024 (published in 2025). That includes global groups headquartered in Germany (Allianz, Munich Re, Talanx, Hannover Re) and large German commercial and mutual insurers (R+V, Gothaer, Versicherungskammer Bayern, etc.)

• Data sources: Primary SFCRs (company SFCR PDFs), investor presentations, and reputable rating agencies / industry analyses for 2024 and Q1 2025 updates where available. Where a group quoted ratios both with and without transitional measures, the article highlights the commonly reported figure (usually “including transitional measures”) and notes alternatives where material.

• What “strong” means here: For the large groups in scope, I consider ≥ ~200% to be a robust/strong coverage level in normal market conditions; > 250% is especially strong and typical for reinsurers; < 150% would generally prompt closer scrutiny. This threshold is contextual—not a regulatory bright line—and smaller mutuals / specialist life carriers may be comfortable at different levels depending on liquidity and business mix.

3 — Top German groups and their reported Solvency II ratios

Below I present the headline reported solvency / SCR coverage for the main groups, with source citations and short commentary on the drivers of strength.

Munich Re (Munich Re Group) — ~289% (including transitional measures)

Munich Re reported a very high Solvency II ratio at year-end 2024: around 289% (with transitional measures) and roughly 287% excluding transitionals in various disclosures; the SFCR confirms the ratio and explains the composition of eligible own funds and the SCR. The company’s large capital base and risk-diversified reinsurance business (and favourable reserve/investment movements in 2024) are key drivers.

Comment: Munich Re is a reinsurer by structure; reinsurers typically have higher Solvency II coverage ratios than primary insurers because their capital is calibrated to very large, diversified risks and they historically maintain large capital buffers. A near- or above-250% ratio is common among top reinsurers in benign markets.

Hannover Re (Hannover Rück) — ~269% (group reported)

Hannover Re’s SFCR shows a Solvency II coverage ratio in the ~260–275% range for year-end 2024 (various published figures show 269% or 273% depending on presentation). Like Munich Re, Hannover Re benefits from strong diversification, conservative capital management and high-quality own funds.

Talanx Group (HDI and subsidiaries) — ~220% (internal model / regulatory reported)

Talanx (the HDI Group) reported a regulatory Solvency II ratio of ~220% as of 31 Dec 2024 (figures cited by their investor statements and SFCR). Talanx uses an internal model for regulatory purposes in many parts of the group; their capital level reflects balance of property-casualty and life lines plus retention strategy.

Allianz Group — ~209% (Group consolidated Solvency II ratio)

Allianz Group’s SFCR shows a consolidated ratio of about 2.09 in the QRT tables — i.e., 209% (ratio of total eligible own funds to total Group SCR per the SFCR QRTs for 31 Dec 2024). Allianz is a diversified global insurer and asset manager; its size and diversified risk profile support a comfortable coverage level around this range.

Versicherungskammer Bayern (VKB) — ~210% (group)

Versicherungskammer Bayern (a large public-law insurance group active across P&C and life) publishes SFCRs that indicate a Solvency II ratio around the low-to-mid 200% area at year-end 2024. Rating commentary from Fitch/S&P for VKB also highlights capital comfortably above 200%.

Gothaer / BarmeniaGothaer (merged reporting in 2024/25) — ~190–213% (depending on entity and inclusion of transitionals)

Gothaer displays strong capital metrics (reported group or solo SII ratios vary by publication and entity): some published figures and press releases show ratios in the ~163–213% range for different legal entities or including/excluding certain items. The merger with Barmenia and other strategic shifts make direct comparability more nuanced. Analysts’ notes indicate generally robust solvency metrics, though typically below the very high levels seen at reinsurers.

R+V Versicherung — ~172% (reported improvement; analyst notes vary)

R+V’s published statements and later analyst notes indicate compliance with Solvency II and an improved coverage position; a Fitch note cited in late 2025 referenced a 172% solvency ratio at end-2024 driven by retained earnings and market movements. Depending on the legal entity and consolidation, some R+V group figures may be reported differently; nonetheless, R+V sits comfortably above regulatory minima but typically below the ~200% threshold used here to define “very strong.”

4 — What explains the variation across insurers?

Several recurring factors explain why some groups show very high solvency ratios (250%+) while others sit closer to 150–220%:

1. Business mix(reinsurance vs primary insurance): Reinsurers (Munich Re, Hannover Re) often carry larger capital buffers and have risk profiles calibrated for catastrophic peak exposures — that tends to push reported ratios higher. Primary insurers with large guaranteed life liabilities may manage capital differently.

2. Use of internal models vs standard formula: Groups that run approved internal models (Allianz, Talanx for parts of their operations) will report SCRs based on those models — which can produce materially different SCRs (and hence ratios) than the standard formula. Where internal models better reflect diversification benefits, the SCR may be lower and the ratio higher (all else equal).

3. Transitional measures and volatility adjustments: Some firms publish ratios including transitional measures or volatility adjustments; excluding those can reduce (or sometimes increase) the reported ratio. Reinsurers often report both figures. Analysts typically note both for comparability.

4. Investment performance and interest rate environment: 2024 saw movements in yields that affected asset values and technical provisions differently across life and non-life books. Rising yields can improve the capital position for life insurers (by reducing the present value of guarantees) and change the market value of fixed income holdings. These market effects influenced many 2024 solvency outcomes.

5. Management actions (retained earnings, capital issuance, buybacks, dividends): Some groups increased buffers via retained earnings or capital instruments; others reduced buffers via dividends or buybacks. Both choices show up in year-end ratios and subsequent quarterly updates.

5 — Industry trend in 2024 — broad picture

• Overall: Solvency II ratios published in 2024 showed a modest decline as a group compared to 2023 in many of the large European (and German) firms’ SFCRs. A sample analysis of SFCRs showed the sample average solvency ratio fell from about 222% (2023) to ~218% (2024) for large contributors — reflecting market movements and other dynamics. Larger reinsurers still reported very strong ratios; primary insurers’ ratios were more mixed.

• Why the dip: A combination of higher SCRs (due to add-ons or recalibrations), adverse market movements in parts of the asset mix, and provisioning changes in technical reserves led to slightly lower ratios on average. But the sample average remained comfortably above regulatory minima, and many major German groups intentionally retain larger cushions.

6 — Practical implications for policyholders, brokers and investors

1. Policyholder security: Insurers with SCR coverage comfortably above 150–200% are generally better placed to absorb stress events without needing urgent recapitalisation or regulatory intervention. Reinsurers with 250%+ ratios have especially large cushions — important given catastrophe exposure.

2. Product pricing & capacity: Strong capital buffers allow firms to write large or complex risks; reinsurers with high ratios can provide market capacity during renewals, which in turn benefits primary insurers and, indirectly, policyholders.

3. Dividends vs prudence tradeoff: Higher ratios often allow boards to pay dividends/share buybacks. Watch for post-reporting adjustments (dividend proposals, buybacks) that indicate management’s capital appetite — e.g., Munich Re’s 2024 dividend plans were discussed alongside reported ratios.

4. Analyst nuance: Solvency II ratios are necessary but not sufficient — analysts also consider the quality of own funds (Tier 1 vs Tier 2/3 composition), concentration risks in investments, reinsurance protections, and stress test sensitivities reported in SFCRs. Read the QRT tables and the SFCR narrative, not just the headline percent.

7 — Quick profiles: what to watch for in each major insurance groups

Munich Re

• Headline: Very high solvency ratio (~289% incl. transitionals at YE-2024).
• Why strong: Large capital base, strong diversified underwriting and investment results, conservative capital management and high-quality own funds. Watch for catastrophe return periods and reserve developments.

Hannover Re

• Headline: High solvency ratio (around mid- to high-200% range).
• Why strong: Similar structural reasons as Munich Re — reinsurer business model, diversified global portfolio. SFCR shows robust ratio and good sensitivities.

Allianz Group

• Headline: Group ratio ~209% at year-end 2024.
• Why notable: Very large, diversified business (P&C, life/health, asset management); internal model usage, significant eligible own funds. Allianz’s ratio places it comfortably above regulatory minima and within a conventional comfort range for a major international primary insurer.

Talanx (HDI)

• Headline: Reported ~220% (31 Dec 2024).
• Why: Mix of P&C and life, internal model use, and a capital strategy oriented to mid-200% coverage at group level.

Versicherungskammer Bayern (VKB)

• Headline: Group ratio commonly reported around ~210% at YE-2024.
• Why: Conservative public-law structure, historically strong capital management and a domestic focus.

Gothaer / BarmeniaGothaer

• Headline: Ratios vary by entity; press releases and SFCR items show robust but not extreme levels (commonly between ~160–213% depending on entity and consolidation). Note that mergers and corporate changes can affect comparability.

R+V

• Headline: Reported solvency improvements; some analyst text cited a 172% ratio at end-2024. R+V typically remains above regulatory minima but below the ~200% “very strong” benchmark used earlier in this article.

8 — How to compare apples to apples (practical checklist for insurance solvency comparison)

If you’re a policyholder, broker, investor or advisor and you want to compare solvency across insurers, do the following:

1. Check whether the figure is “including transitional measures” or “excluding.” Transitional measures can materially affect the headline. Analysts often compare both.
2. Look at the QRTs (Quantitative Reporting Templates) in the SFCR — these show the SCR, MCR, eligible own funds by tier and reconciliation items (highly informative).
3. Inspect the composition of own funds (Tier-1 unrestricted vs restricted, Tier-2, Tier-3). Higher quality Tier-1 improves resilience.
4. Review stress sensitivities in the SFCR narrative. See how interest rate shocks, credit spread moves, or catastrophe scenarios change the ratio. Reinsurers often publish sensitivity grids.
5. Account for business model differences. Reinsurers vs primary insurers; life insurers with long-dated guarantees vs P&C firms with reserve uncertainty. These differences make a single cutoff misleading unless contextualized.

9 — Insurance solvency Limitations and caveats

• Single-point in time: SFCRs report ratios at a reporting date (usually 31-Dec). Capital positions move — quarterly updates, proposed dividends, or large losses can change the picture quickly. Always check for Q1/Q2 2025 updates if you need the very latest view.
• Model / accounting differences: Internal model approval status and local supervisory treatments (Article 230 aggregation options) can affect comparability. Some groups include eligible own funds from other financial sector entities in group ratios; read the footnotes.
• Quality over quantity: A headline ratio without composition and sensitivity disclosure is limited. Tier 1 vs Tier 3 composition, reinsurance recoverables, concentration risk and liquidity matter.

10 — Conclusion — who maintains strong solvency ratios?

• Reinsurers: Munich Re and Hannover Re stand out for very strong solvency coverage at year-end 2024 (ratios well above 250–270%). That makes them among the strongest capitalised entities in German insurance.
• Large primary insurers: Allianz and Talanx reported robust coverage levels around the ~200–220% range — a comfortable buffer for a diversified global insurer. Versicherungskammer Bayern (a large domestic mutual/public insurer) also reported ~210% levels.
• Other sizeable German players (Gothaer, R+V, others) generally report Solvency II ratios above regulatory minima but often below the 200% mark used here to denote exceptionally strong cushions — still financially sound but more sensitive to market and underwriting swings.

Bottom line for users: If your primary concern is an insurer’s capital cushion per Solvency II at YE-2024, reinsurers like Munich Re and Hannover Re, and diversified groups like Allianz and Talanx, were among the most strongly capitalised German groups. For a decision that matters (e.g., placing business, buying a long-term life product, or an investment), read the insurer’s SFCR QRTs and narrative (SCR, eligible own funds by tier, sensitivity tables) and supplement with latest quarterly updates and rating agency commentary.