World’s top 5 most valuable insurance brands retain their ranks through innovation and adaptability strategies: Brand Finance Insurance 100 2024 report

• China’s Ping An prevails as the world’s most valuable insurance brand for six years running
• LIC from India is the world’s strongest insurance brand
• NRMA Insurance from Australia is the world’s fastest-growing insurance brand
• Germany’s Allianz clocks highest Sustainability Perceptions Value of USD3.7 billion

Chinese brands continue to dominate the ranking of the world’s most valuable insurance brands, with Ping An (brand value up 4% to USD33.6 billion), China Life Insurance (brand value up 2% to USD17.5 billion) and CPIC (brand value up 1% to USD15.3 billion) defending their respective 1^st, 3^rd and 5^th places, according to a new report by Brand Finance, the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Meanwhile, Germany’s Allianz (brand value up 17% to USD24.6 billion) and France’s AXA (brand value up 4% to USD16.6 billion) retain their spots in 2^nd and 4^th place respectively to form the Top 5.

India’s LIC (brand value steady at USD9.8 billion) has become the strongest insurance brand, with a brand strength index score of 88.3 and associated AAA brand strength rating. The second strongest brand is Cathay Life Insurance (brand value up 9% to USD4.9 billion) just ahead of NRMA Insurance (brand value up 82% to USD1.3 billion).

Among the 74 brands that have seen their brand values grow from 2023’s rankings, Australia’s NRMA Insurance (brand value up 82% to USD1.3 billion) and Denmark’s Tryg (brand value up 66% to USD1.6 billion) are the fastest-growing brands in the ranking.

Alex Haigh, Managing Director of Brand Finance Asia Pacific commented:

“The continued growth of Chinese insurance brands in the global market underscores their strategic agility and relentless pursuit of innovation while their European counterparts such as Allianz and AXA demonstrate remarkable adaptability through customer-centric strategies and digital transformations.

Our research shows that these players are well poised for growth in an increasingly competitive landscape.”

Brand Finance also compiles a Sustainability Perceptions Index which determines the role of sustainability in driving brand consideration across sectors. This Index calculates the proportion of brand value attributable to sustainability perceptions, also known as Sustainability Perceptions Value (SPV). SPV is therefore the financial value contingent on a brand’s reputation for acting sustainably. From here, Brand Finance’s perceptual research is analysed alongside CSRHub’s environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance data to determine a brand’s ‘gap value’. This is the value at risk, or value to be gained, arising from the difference between sustainability perceptions and actual performance.

The latest iteration of the study finds that in the insurance sector, Allianz has the highest Sustainability Perceptions Value of USD3.7 billion and the highest positive gap value of USD299 million. Both Allianz’s perceptual and performance scores on sustainability were above the insurance sector’s average across ESG dimensions. This not only demonstrates strong external awareness of Allianz’s sustainability efforts and communications, but that the brand’s ESG performance supports this perception.

Allianz’ highest positive gap value among sector peers implies that it has the potential to generate an additional USD299 million in value given the brand’s continuous and comprehensive sustainability efforts. A positive gap value means that brand sustainability performance is stronger than perceived: brands can add value through enhanced communication about their sustainability efforts, so that perceptions are raised to fully account for the brand’s actual sustainability performance.

Brand Finance is the world’s leading brand valuation consultancy. Bridging the gap between marketing and finance for more than 25 years, Brand Finance evaluates the strength of brands and quantifies their financial value to help organizations of all kinds make strategic decisions.

Headquartered in London, Brand Finance has offices in over 20 countries, offering services on all continents. Every year, Brand Finance conducts more than 5,000 brand valuations, supported by original market research, and publishes over 100 reports which rank brands across all sectors and countries.

Brand Finance also operates the Global Brand Equity Monitor, conducting original market research annually on over 5,000 brands, surveying more than 150,000 respondents across 38 countries and 31 industry sectors. Combining perceptual data from the Global Brand Equity Monitor with data from its valuation database enables Brand Finance to arm brand leaders with the data and analytics they need to enhance brand and business value.

Brand Finance is a regulated accountancy firm, leading the standardization of the brand valuation industry. Brand Finance was the first to be certified by independent auditors as compliant with both ISO 10668 and ISO 20671 and has received the official endorsement of the Marketing Accountability Standards Board (MASB) in the United States.

Brand is defined as a marketing-related intangible asset including, but not limited to, names, terms, signs, symbols, logos, and designs, intended to identify goods, services, or entities, creating distinctive images and associations in the minds of stakeholders, thereby generating economic benefits.

Brand strength is the efficacy of a brand’s performance on intangible measures relative to its competitors. Brand Finance evaluates brand strength in a process compliant with ISO 20671, looking at Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and the impact of those on Business Performance. The data used is derived from Brand Finance’s proprietary market research programme and from publicly available sources.

Each brand is assigned a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score out of 100, which feeds into the brand value calculation. Based on the score, each brand is assigned a corresponding Brand Rating up to AAA+ in a format similar to a credit rating.

Brand Finance calculates the values of brands in its rankings using the Royalty Relief approach – a brand valuation method compliant with the industry standards set in ISO 10668. It involves estimating the likely future revenues that are attributable to a brand by calculating a royalty rate that would be charged for its use, to arrive at a ‘brand value’ understood as a net economic benefit that a brand owner would achieve by licensing the brand in the open market.

The steps in this process are as follows:

1 Calculate brand strength using a balanced scorecard of metrics assessing Marketing Investment, Stakeholder Equity, and Business Performance. Brand strength is expressed as a Brand Strength Index (BSI) score on a scale of 0 to 100.

2 Determine royalty range for each industry, reflecting the importance of brand to purchasing decisions. In luxury, the maximum percentage is high, while in extractive industry, where goods are often commoditised, it is lower. This is done by reviewing comparable licensing agreements sourced from Brand Finance’s extensive database.

3 Calculate royalty rate. The BSI score is applied to the royalty range to arrive at a royalty rate. For example, if the royalty range in a sector is 0-5% and a brand has a BSI score of 80 out of 100, then an appropriate royalty rate for the use of this brand in the given sector will be 4%.

4 Determine brand-specific revenues by estimating a proportion of parent company revenues attributable to a brand.

5 Determine forecast revenues using a function of historic revenues, equity analyst forecasts, and economic growth rates.

6 Apply the royalty rate to the forecast revenues to derive brand revenues.

7 Discount post-tax brand revenues to a net present value which equals the brand value.

Brand Finance has produced this study with an independent and unbiased analysis. The values derived and opinions presented in this study are based on publicly available information and certain assumptions that Brand Finance used where such data was deficient or unclear. Brand Finance accepts no responsibility and will not be liable in the event that the publicly available information relied upon is subsequently found to be inaccurate. The opinions and financial analysis expressed in the study are not to be construed as providing investment or business advice. Brand Finance does not intend the study to be relied upon for any reason and excludes all liability to any body, government, or organisation.

The data presented in this study form part of Brand Finance’s proprietary database, are provided for the benefit of the media, and are not to be used in part or in full for any commercial or technical purpose without written permission from Brand Finance.