Marine war-risk insurance is increasingly being arranged on a voyage-by-voyage basis, as insurers demand more detailed information about vessels, routes and exposure to conflict zones. The shift reflects growing uncertainty across some of the world’s major shipping routes.
According to Frédéric Denèfle, president of the International Union of Marine Insurance, underwriters now need considerably more information than the vessel’s age, flag, classification and trading history. They also need to understand where a vessel is travelling, how long it will remain in high-risk waters and how much time it will spend loading or discharging.
The change is particularly visible in volatile waters, where single-voyage assessments have increasingly become standard. Cargo owners that have historically relied on broader annual arrangements may therefore face more detailed underwriting requirements and contract-by-contract assessments.
The heightened scrutiny comes against a significantly more dangerous maritime environment. As of September 16, 2026, the International Maritime Organization had verified 80 attacks on merchant vessels in and around the Strait of Hormuz since the current Middle East conflict began on February 28. At least 22 seafarers had died in those attacks.
Another important issue is what happens when the risk changes after insurance has already been arranged. Insurers can issue a Notice of Cancellation when circumstances deteriorate significantly. This does not necessarily mean that protection ends permanently. Instead, it can allow the insurer to reassess the exposure and potentially reinstate coverage on revised terms and pricing.
The approach has already been seen in the Gulf, where war-risk policies were repriced as conditions changed.
Capacity remains available for some exposures. In June, Lloyd’s supported a new Strait of Hormuz war-risk consortium offering up to $200 million separately for hull and protection and indemnity exposures, plus another $200 million for cargo. The development illustrates that insurance capacity can remain available even as underwriting conditions become more restrictive.
Risk mitigation measures such as naval escorts can influence underwriting decisions, but insurers cannot assume that government protection will be available for every transit. The availability and reliability of such measures therefore form part of the risk assessment.
Insurers are also paying closer attention to confiscation, expropriation, nationalisation or dispossession (CNED) risks. A vessel or cargo remaining in a high-risk area for an extended period can face a different exposure from a vessel simply transiting the area.
For this reason, the duration of a vessel’s stay in a high-risk zone, particularly while it is alongside for loading or discharge, can influence the terms and duration of coverage.
The shift has wider implications for marine insurance. War-risk underwriting is becoming increasingly dependent on real-time voyage information, route-specific exposure and changing geopolitical conditions rather than broad annual assumptions.
For shipowners and cargo interests, this means greater preparation may be required when arranging cover. For insurers, it reinforces the importance of dynamic underwriting and continuous assessment as geopolitical risks change.
The broader trend is clear: marine war-risk insurance is moving towards more customised, voyage-specific coverage, with pricing and terms increasingly reflecting the precise circumstances of each voyage.
Want to deepen your expertise beyond today’s news?
Explore practical certification courses designed for banking, risk, insurance, compliance, ESG, AI, and emerging technologies professionals.
Learn from industry experts and earn certifications from RMAI and BFSI Sector Skill Council of India.
#Insurancenews
