At a roundtable hosted in Paris by Willis, a WTW business, leading voices from French banks, insurers and brokers reflected on the growing sophistication and challenges of the credit and political risk insurance (CPRI) market. As the sector adapts to regulatory shifts, new asset classes and increased demand, participants explored how collaboration, innovation and diversification are shaping the future of the market.
Roundtable participants:
- Nicolas Demoulin, global head of credit and political risk insurance, Société Générale
- Sebastien Foure, head of credit risk insurance for Emea, Crédit Agricole CIB
- Isabelle Girardet, head of structured and funded solutions, Willis Credit Risk Solutions
- Maxime Guy, senior underwriter, credit and political risk, Liberty
- Chris Hall, global head of FI sales, Willis Credit Risk Solutions (moderator)
- Pierre Lamourelle, deputy global head – specialty credit, Allianz Trade
- Svetlana Piroche, head of syndication – project financing, investor relationships officer, La Banque Postale
- Guillaume Simonnet, senior director and team leader, Willis Credit Risk Solutions
Hall: It’s a real pleasure to be in Paris, one of the most dynamic and strategically important hubs for the CPRI market globally. With a strong base of leading insurers and internationally active banks, France continues to play a pivotal role in shaping this space.
These annual roundtables – previously in London, Madrid, and now here – are a chance to step back from the day-to-day and reflect on the bigger forces influencing our industry. And 2025 has certainly given us plenty to think about.
Many of the same pressures remain: geopolitical instability, persistent macroeconomic uncertainty and relatively high interest rates. Over the past year, we’ve seen growing trade finance activity across Emea, a rebound in M&A on the back of stronger confidence and capital, and bond issuance starting to pick up again after a slow first half.
It’s a complex but compelling landscape, and today, we’ll explore how it’s playing out across the CPRI space. To kick things off, what are people seeing in the French market today? How has it evolved, and what context is important to understand its current position?
Lamourelle: The French market was the first in Continental Europe where CPRI really took off after London, playing a key early role in the product’s global evolution. It’s remarkable how far it’s come in just 15 to 20 years, from basic beginnings to a highly sophisticated insurance offering.
French banks were also early movers in using insurance capacity meaningfully – initially alongside export credit agencies (ECAs) to cover Ministry of Finance-backed commercial loans or simple structures like letters of credit (LCs).
Early on, insurers were generalists, while banks already had specialised teams by sector and geography, but that has changed.
In the early 2000s, we saw demand for pre-export finance, particularly in commodities. About a decade later, the market moved into project finance, which is now almost standard. Today, the offering is much broader and more tailored, including capital relief solutions, more sophisticated products such as derivatives or capital call facilities, and portfolio and line-by-line cover. It has evolved to meet banks’ growing needs, whether for counterparty risk or risk-weighted asset (RWA) optimisation.
What began as a simple product is now a structured, high-capacity solution.
Demoulin: When Société Générale entered the CPRI market, there were maybe 20 to 25 insurers. Today, counting reinsurers and facilitators, it’s closer to 70. Now, there’s very little we can’t place – maybe not with every insurer, but enough have the appetite to support most structures.
At our bank, insurance was recognised early as a credit risk mitigant. We started using it for capital relief nearly 20 years ago and for country risk, and over time, the benefits expanded to counterparty limits too.
A key feature is the silent cover, which lets us offload risk without transferring the loan, unlike other distribution methods.
On the other hand, the main downside is that the product is unfunded, so it doesn’t help with liquidity. But the market is already working on solutions to bring in investors alongside insurers to create a more complete, funded package.
Piroche: La Banque Postale (LBP) is still a relatively new player in the French and European market. The bank itself started in 2006, and our first corporate transaction was set up around 10 years ago.
We only started exploring the insurance market around 2020 – with the help of our historical partner, Willis. And today, it has clearly become one of the key tools used by our syndication desk.
To give you a rough idea, we probably use the insurance market for about 25% of the total volume of our syndications, but we’re still in the process of building our portfolio.
“With a strong base of leading insurers and internationally active banks, France continues to play a pivotal role in shaping this space.”
Chris Hall, Willis Credit Risk Solutions
I fully agree that the fact that this instrument remains completely silent, without transferring the loan, is key. It clearly allows us to continue developing our portfolio without disrupting the client relationship.
Simonnet: To this day, we continue to see the arrival of new users. This is good news because it means more business, but it also adds pressure on capacity, especially for the deals that everyone’s chasing.
Interestingly, most of these new users are more standardised banks, benefitting from favourable Basel treatment for credit risk insurance with AA-rated insurers when it comes to capital. We’re also seeing more second-tier banks than a few years ago, which is positive as they bring new types of transactions that insurers are keen to support for diversification.
On the insurance side, capacity keeps growing. We’re seeing new players come in regularly. One we’re expecting to launch next year is Atrium, who’ve publicly said they’re building a team.
Also worth noting, since 2024, we’ve seen a real rise in MGAs. These are typically more focused, often targeting specific asset classes – for example, leveraged finance – which wasn’t really the case before. Other markets are catching up, and we may see this model spread into areas like trade finance. That said, MGAs do bring their own challenges, particularly around underwriting authorities, policy management and claims authorities, which we all need to be mindful of.
Another big development in 2025 has been the rise of sidecars. There’s been a lot more discussion around these recently. In short, sidecars offer additional capacity from existing insurers but on separate paper and often on an automatic basis. That’s a big plus for larger users facing envelope constraints, as it brings much-needed diversification. It’s clearly becoming a more common feature of the market this year and will likely continue.
Foure: At Crédit Agricole CIB, we’ve used credit and political risk insurance for many years, but only became active in the day-to-day market in 2014, when we set up a dedicated desk. Since then, volumes have grown steadily, and this year may even be a record. That growth reflects real origination needs and the clear benefits the product delivers.
Silent cover is a big advantage, as is capital relief, but Crédit Agricole CIB mainly uses the product to manage its exposure. On some projects, having insurance in place has helped our credit committees to approve a higher commitment than we would have without insurance.
Over time, usage has broadened. We started with a few geographies and asset classes, but now the product is well known across our offices and subsidiaries. That’s been supported by a strong, diversified insurance market; it’s rare today that we can’t find capacity. For example, in real estate, three years ago only seven to eight insurers were active; now it’s closer to 15 to 20.
Performance has also been excellent. Claims are few, but when they occur, insurers have paid promptly and professionally. Even in restructurings or workouts, we’ve had strong support. That’s something we highlight internally to build trust in the product. After more than a decade of experience, it’s clear: it works, and it delivers.
Guy: In Paris, there’s broad recognition of the value of working with banks: strong relationships, solid track records and a well-understood credit environment.
Historically, French and European-based insurers were focused on export-related exposures, but as exporters lost share, banks became a more important source of business for insurers.
Insurers are active across more asset classes and, following London’s lead, are hiring ex-bankers to strengthen technical expertise. In Paris especially, we’ve seen a recent wave of hires to underwrite more complex structures, not just for long-standing bank clients but also for banks which were historically not using the CPRI market.
A few years ago, there was hesitation around these newer banks, but the market now recognises that many bring well-structured risks that fit insurers’ appetites. Combined with strong existing relationships with their clients, greater engagement with those insureds and broader product development, this points to real growth potential.
And even in areas that were seen as quite challenging not that long ago – like leveraged finance, a current buzzword – we’re seeing more appetite and activity.
Lamourelle: I agree. About 20 years ago, the insurance and bank markets were really two different, segregated worlds with their own codes and talking different languages. Today, we see much more crossover: bankers joining insurers, insurers moving into banks, and the same with brokers. That porosity has strengthened the market.
The shift from simple to more structured solutions was driven in part by banks themselves, through strong internal advocacy, showing balance sheet benefits and promoting the value of distributing risk via insurance.
In our experience, the most effective banks are those with dedicated distribution teams. A centralised model gives insurers clear access, whereas decentralised approaches make traction harder. These dedicated teams also connect us directly to deal teams, which makes a big difference.
Banks have also been very open: organising market calls, welcoming insurers and engaging across business lines. That openness builds trust, and the track record has reinforced it.
With bank assets, performance is usually clear-cut. We’re mostly insuring loans, so if there’s a loss, the policy triggers smoothly. For banks, the claims process is reliable and proven. This explains the growing success of insurance to either manage exposures or get capital relief.
“In Paris especially, we’ve seen a recent wave of hires to underwrite more complex structures, not just for long-standing bank clients but also for banks which were historically not using the CPRI market.”
Maxime Guy, Liberty
Hall: From your perspective, Isabelle, where do you see potential areas of interest or opportunity emerging? Are there particular products, structures or client needs that you think could shape the way this market develops?
Girardet: What I see today is that banks are now big users of insurance, and there’s a certain environment where more efficient solutions are being sought by FI clients. That includes portfolio solutions, wherever possible.
One area that’s also emerging is multi-asset. Ideally, if you can bring together different asset classes into one portfolio, that’s interesting. Willis recently structured a deal like that, with six different underlying trade finance assets, including some surety. It shows the opportunity in trade finance. It takes a bit of engineering and a lot of willingness from all sides, but it can be done.
Another area where I see real potential is funded solutions. This probably represents the next stage of evolution for the insurance market. It makes a lot of sense if the market wants to stay competitive to come up with solutions that match what you, as banks, need alongside traditional syndication or synthetic structures you’re already using.
Funded solutions can also provide counterparty limit relief, and while that depends on the internal setup at each bank, we know cash-funded structures usually offer the best optimisation of resources and capital. So that’s something we’re working on, with clients and the market, to develop more of.
The last area I’d flag is the private debt market, which is getting closer to both the banking and insurance markets. We’re seeing more and more activity from private debt funds in spaces that were traditionally the domain of banks. For example, a recent US$26bn data centre deal in the US, led by a large asset manager. That’s infrastructure debt, and it used to be done mainly by banks backed by insurers.
So now the question is: will these asset managers use insurance? Will they work with banks and insurers together? Will we see combined structures? There’s a lot to think about, and I believe it opens up a wide range of opportunities for anyone who figures out how to work together.
And just to end with one example of the agility of the private debt market: funding agreements. We’re seeing some insurers use them as a way to raise capital, which is then deployed into the private debt space. The Financial Times has reported that as of July 2025, the market for funding agreement-backed notes had reached around US$220bn. It’s largely US-driven, but it allows insurers to raise money almost like a bond – except it is treated as a liability and not debt – and that capital goes into private credit.
So again, it’s just one more example of how this market is evolving.
Hall: How has deal flow been this year, specifically with European underlyings, as opposed to risk elsewhere in the world?
Simonnet: Deal flow has been solid as usual. There’s often a summer lull, but this year London stayed busy with steady binding activity.
At Willis, we’ve seen consistent flow in real estate and project finance renewables, including in the US, plus strong demand around data centres from banks.
Capacity remains, but with so much liquidity, pricing is falling. It’s a buyer’s market, with sponsors pushing looser covenant structures. Insurers hesitate at first, but usually follow.
Hall: Looking ahead into 2026: what are your expectations? More of the same, or do you see an acceleration in certain sectors?
Demoulin: One specific factor worth highlighting is the implementation of Basel 3.1, which introduced the 45% loss given default rate for insurers. That’s had a direct impact on the kind of business we place with the market.
Historically, we used insurance to manage RWA on our lending and corporate finance transactions. But under the new Basel framework, the RWA benefit is less attractive, so we’ve started to see a shift in the type of business we’re placing, and I expect that to continue.
Elsewhere, we’re now seeing clear internal demand for coverage on other asset classes, like derivatives and leveraged lending. We first entered the derivatives space three or four years ago, and it’s becoming a growing trend.
On leveraged lending – one of the last asset classes where insurer appetite was still limited – we’re now seeing around a dozen markets that understand the product and are willing to go down the credit curve.
That reflects the growing expertise in the insurance market, and it’s allowing banks to place a broader range of assets than before.
Piroche: On my side, I’m really focused on project finance and LBP has a strong appetite for green assets.
We’re very committed to supporting the green transition in France and across Europe, and we’re actively looking at emerging sectors like EV charging and battery storage. Of course, it’s not always straightforward, especially when there’s merchant risk involved, so in those cases, we’re very open to partnerships with insurers to help structure the risk.
“Capacity remains, but with so much liquidity, pricing is falling. It’s a buyer’s market, with sponsors pushing looser covenant structures. Insurers hesitate at first, but usually follow.”
Guillaume Simonnet, Willis Credit Risk Solutions
We’re also looking at new geographies as we explore opportunities outside our traditional footprint. From a yield perspective, competition for green assets is intense, so we’re likely to follow our clients into Southern Europe, where we see potential.
Yes, that may mean taking on new types of risk, but we’re hopeful it will also come with future yield.
Guy: For us, it’s more of a continuation. Renewables are still growing steadily. What feels newer, though, is the return of sovereign risk in some developing markets, partly due to geopolitical tensions and US tariffs. That’s creating uncertainty and making sovereign borrowing more expensive, which could make underwriting in certain regions more challenging.
I’d also expect pro-cyclical sectors to be harder to place. Data centres, which really weren’t on anyone’s radar 18 months ago, are now a dominant theme. I think that will continue well into 2026. At some point, we’ll all need a clear, well-defined strategy, especially as we start to look at lower-rated credits in that space.
Simonnet: One area I think we’ll see more of in 2026 is aviation. Over the past couple of years, aircraft makers faced delays, supply chain issues and even strikes, so origination in that space slowed down. But with the production cycle now picking up again, we expect banks will be more active, and aviation could become a busy sector once more.
Demoulin: Just to add to that, the thing with aviation is that transactions are usually very large, and only a few insurers are positioned to write them. That means we end up consuming big lines from the same players. It’s probably one area where we’d really welcome new pockets of capacity coming into the market.
Hall: In terms of the Basel changes and how that’s reflected in business, we heard some of the adjustments Société Générale has been making. From the other banks’ perspectives, are you seeing changes to your business as a result of Basel 3.1?
Foure: It hasn’t really impacted our use of CPRI so far. Capital relief is one benefit of the product, but it was never our main objective when buying insurance.
The primary reason we use CPRI is to manage counterparty limits, not capital. So while the new regulation may not create more incentive to use the product, I also don’t think it will reduce usage. The motivation comes from risk management rather than regulatory treatment.
Piroche: On our side, we use the standardised approach, and we’ve decided to rate our project finance portfolio with the support of an independent rating agency. Naturally, our preference is to work hand in hand with highly rated insurers, since the relief is more significant – but of course, we may face different situations.
At this stage, limits aren’t our main concern, as we’re still building the portfolio. What matters most is continuing to support our clients, and we’re trying to be as creative as possible in how we do that.
In this respect, the partnership with reinsurers is key. It could open the door to new solutions, for example, portfolio approaches or more engineering-led structures, which we see as very important going forward.
Hall: No discussion these days is complete without talking about digitalisation and AI. What tools or products would you ideally like to see delivered in a more digital world? Are there things you feel are missing?
Demoulin: From my perspective, what we really need is a single platform or solution, which doesn’t exist today. There are plenty of insurtechs, but most have built systems tied to just one or two brokers. For this to work, it has to be broker-agnostic, with all underwriters and banks using the same platform. Otherwise, it just adds to the workload.
At the moment, if we want full market access, we have to run the same process in parallel across multiple platforms and with our broker, which defeats the purpose.
Ideally, we’d want a system that manages the entire policy lifecycle, from enquiry and placement, through administration, premium payment and even claims. Until then, it’s hard to make digitalisation truly efficient for banks.
Foure: I agree. We’ve made some progress in the past few years. Not so long ago, we were still stamping policies by hand. Covid definitely accelerated digitalisation, especially around signatures and processes. But the market is still missing a global system that could really make our lives easier.
Within banks and institutions, developments are happening, but they’re all quite recent. With the boost in AI, there’s now more investment. We’re starting to put in place tools that help with day-to-day tasks like documentation review and compliance checks. It’s promising, but still very new and evolving.
Lamourelle: AI is moving incredibly fast. I don’t know if the insurance market is also supporting the banks’ funding of data centres that make this possible, but within our organisation, the progress has been remarkable in a very short time.
AI is already helping with documentation review, which saves huge amounts of time when you’re dealing with hundreds of contracts. We’re also using data science and AI in risk assessments and fraud detection, and that’s been a real benefit too – while we must keep in mind that it’s an assistive technology to be driven by humans to prove efficiency.
“Where we’d like to see more is systematic support, particularly on large transactions or asset classes where appetite is limited.”
Sebastien Foure, Crédit Agricole CIB
On platforms, I know it may be a bit of a wish, but it would be ideal to have a single platform. The challenge is obvious – too many stakeholders across insurers, brokers and clients to get full alignment. But maybe the answer is to start smaller: develop a shared platform for a specific asset class, like trade finance. That could simplify placement and quoting in a meaningful way, even if a true market-wide platform remains unrealistic.
Hall: We’ve talked about some of the benefits of the product, and of course, one of the real tests is when things go wrong and a claim is paid. The industry’s track record is excellent. But we also keep hearing about a possible post-Covid uptick. Do you think that’s ever going to happen?
Demoulin: On our side, our book remains very sound in terms of claims. Depending on the year, we see none or only a handful, and that’s been consistent historically. Since Covid, the picture has improved further. Our claim track record is excellent, and I think that’s recognised by the market – one reason why insurers have continued to support us throughout the different cycles.
But it’s not just about claims. Provisions also matter. Even when insurance isn’t triggered, we still benefit on the provisioning side. Insurers also bring value when transactions need to be restructured or refinanced, by continuing to stand behind us in difficult situations.
Of course, from time to time defaults do happen, and in those cases insurers have paid – on time and as expected. But the value of the product goes well beyond claim payments.
Hall: We’re coming to the end of the discussion, so let’s finish with a quick-fire round. What’s on your Christmas wish list?
Piroche: First, I have to say we’re very happy with our partnership with Willis, and that’s really important for us.
Since my focus is project finance, my main wish would be for more insurer capacity on long-term transactions, especially in renewables. We’re working with structures of 20 to 25 years, and ideally, the cover should match the maturity of the loan.
My second wish is simpler: to see more AA-rated insurers and syndicates active in the market. And happily, that one is already coming true.
Foure: We’re very satisfied with the support we get from the insurance market. We have a strong panel, and most of the time we find what we need. Pricing has also come down in recent years, which makes the product more accessible.
Where we’d like to see more is systematic support, particularly on large transactions or asset classes where appetite is limited. Real estate is a good example: it’s hard to find capacity for office deals, yet these remain important in our portfolios. The same goes for some renewables, especially those with merchant risk, where appetite is thinner despite strong deal flow.
Another challenge is pricing misalignment on certain asset classes, like investment-grade undrawn facilities. Capacity is often there, but economics between banks and insurers don’t always match, which prevents more business from being placed.
So, in short: more consistent support across asset classes, more capacity for large project finance, and, of course, always better pricing. Not because we’re just asking for discounts, but because insurance is one distribution channel among others. To remain competitive, it needs to stay economical for banks.
Demoulin: As an early mover in this market, we’ve built a fairly meaningful insurance book. But that also means we face limit constraints, both at the sector and insurer level, so we need to find ways to recycle capacity.
Basel 3.1 will likely push us to do this across other asset classes. But beyond recycling, what’s really needed is fresh capacity. MGAs help, since they often bring appetite for asset classes that aren’t well covered. The downside is they usually rely on the same carriers, so exposures still concentrate on the same insurers. What we’d really like to see is some of the larger insurers not active in this market stepping in and writing these classes directly.
And of course, funded solutions are another avenue. If we can transfer part of our book to investors via insurer wraps, that would create more room to keep growing the business.
Girardet: On my Christmas list, I’d like to see insurers really sit down with an open mind on funded solutions. I think banks are ready; it just needs discussion, some engineering and agreement on fundamentals. If a deal doesn’t stack up, we won’t present it, but there are ways to make this work for all stakeholders.
There’s strong investor appetite, especially for leveraged loans, given the margins. If you bring investors into a deal and add insurance, the economics can be very attractive. We need to find a way to structure that, whether in infrastructure or other areas.
This is something I’m looking forward to discussing with insurers in the new year. It will require a bit of creative thinking, but it’s essential if the insurance market wants to stay competitive with asset managers. Banks are selling large portfolios to private debt funds. That’s business insurance could and should be capturing more of.
“On my Christmas list, I’d like to see insurers really sit down with an open mind on funded solutions. I think banks are ready;
Isabelle Girardet, Willis Credit Risk Solutions
it just needs discussion, some engineering and agreement on fundamentals.”
Guy: What we do value, and what many banks already provide, is excellent detail and information early in the process. Especially on structured solutions, getting comprehensive information upfront, rather than a short summary that still requires heavy underwriting, makes a big difference. It helps us avoid last-minute surprises, gives predictability on timelines and allows us to manage year-end forecasts and planning more effectively. Some banks and brokers do this really well, and striving for that level of consistency would help a lot.
Beyond that, of course, more deals. But ideally, less concentration on the same ones. Too often we see the same transactions coming from multiple banks, and we can’t satisfy everyone. Naturally, core clients get priority, but it would help to see the business spread across more projects and sectors. That’s something we also need to work on internally, to expand appetite where we can.
Simonnet: From my side, it would be fewer confidentiality issues when it comes to sharing information on transactions. Sadly, those concerns are becoming more common.
Also, speed of response. If we say it’s urgent, it really is urgent; so faster replies.
Lamourelle: My wish would simply be for more time to think and work things out, so we can stay agile.
The market backdrop is complex: global growth is under pressure, trade tensions, geopolitical risks, fiscal challenges. Corporates are adapting supply chains and pricing, while capital markets seem to carry on as if none of this matters. That uncertainty forces us to stay flexible, which is a good thing, but it also highlights the lack of visibility – particularly around regulation.
Finally, capacity. There’s plenty in the market, with many new entrants. Pricing has been discussed, but I’d stress it shouldn’t be the only adjustment variable. Insurers also have capital to remunerate, and that’s something we can’t lose sight of.
So my wish is for more visibility and more situations where capacity is fairly rewarded, because just like banks, insurers have capital that needs to earn its keep.
Hall: Thank you. I’ll take the moderator’s privilege and wish for world peace and macroeconomic stability – so, nothing unreasonable.
I found the discussion really interesting, and I hope you did too. It’s clear the French market, across banking, insurance and broking, is vibrant and engaged.
The statements and opinions made by the contributors of the roundtable discussion are those of the relevant individuals and do not necessarily represent the views of WTW. WTW is not responsible for the accuracy or completeness of the third-party views contained in this article.
WTW offers insurance-related services through its appropriately licensed and authorised companies in each country in which WTW operates. For further authorisation and regulatory details about our WTW legal entities, operating in your country, please refer to our WTW website at https://www.wtwco.com/en-gb/notices/global-regulatory-disclosures. It is a regulatory requirement for us to consider our local licensing requirements.
