Flood Risk Intelligence
Portfolio Exposure Quantification
Run an insurance portfolio against our hazard layers. Expected annual loss, accumulation, and concentration metrics delivered as a report plus data files — no black-box.
Who it's for
Insurers, reinsurers, and brokers quantifying flood exposure across South African property portfolios.
Coverage today
Available for portfolios in regions where our hazard layers are production or beta; we will flag any gaps up front.
Who it’s for
Underwriters and portfolio managers who need a defensible, auditable view of flood exposure — not a score of unknown provenance. You send us a property list; we return the losses, the assumptions, and the evidence.
What you get
- Property-level hazard attachment (depth at agreed return periods, exposure tier).
- Expected annual loss (AAL) per property and aggregated at any policy or region grouping you specify.
- Accumulation and concentration metrics at configurable aggregation levels (grid, catchment, municipality, postcode).
- Sensitivity tests — how results change under alternative hydrology assumptions or depth-damage curves.
- Results delivered as a report and accompanying data files (CSV/Parquet, and GIS extracts where relevant).
How it works
- Scope and portfolio intake. We agree the geography, return periods, and depth-damage assumptions. Portfolio data is ingested in the format you use — policy system export, CSV, or geocoded shapefile. We flag rows we could not geocode or for which we do not have hazard coverage, before we run anything.
- Hazard attachment. Each property is intersected with the hazard layers. Where coverage is beta or roadmap, the output records that fact explicitly alongside the result; we do not silently fill gaps.
- Loss modelling. Depth at return period drives damage using agreed depth-damage curves (industry standard, your in-house curve, or a transparent blend). AAL is computed by integrating over the return-period set.
- Aggregation. Results roll up to any grouping you specify — policy, region, municipality, reinsurance treaty, custom.
- Review and iteration. You get one round of review and clarification. Re-runs under alternative assumptions are scoped as extensions.
Coverage & honesty
The quality of the portfolio result depends on where our hazard layers stand for each property. We are explicit about this in the deliverable:
- Properties in production coverage return their AAL with full methodology backing.
- Properties in beta coverage return an AAL with the regional caveat noted.
- Properties in roadmap coverage are reported as “no hazard layer” — not as zero.
A black-box score would hide this. We prefer the honest breakdown and let you decide how to treat the uncovered slice.
What this is not
This is a service engagement delivered as a report and data files. It is not a live platform, a self-service API, or a continuously updated dashboard. The consolidated platform that will host these capabilities is tracked as Insurance risk platform on our roadmap.