The direct financial cost of annual natural catastrophes should merely be one metric to tell a much bigger story of how risk is growing. While the insurance industry sits at the front line, and understands climate change risk better than most industries, we cannot solve these issues alone.

(7/7)

The rational approach is to understand that greater annual and regional volatility in individual event behavior will bring greater losses and more “downstream” societal impacts. We must see more investment into data research and mitigation, plus ensure significant emission reduction.

(6/n)

We will further endure the growing influence of climate change on global weather patterns and individual events. However, it is crucial to stress that climate change will not translate to consistent linear growth in event frequency or intensity in all parts of the world for all perils.

(5/n)

We must recognize that the complexity of natural catastrophe events is accelerating the need to better understand how both physical and non-physical risk profiles are evolving and becoming increasingly interconnected.

(4/n)

The US accounted for the bulk of 2025 natural catastrophe losses; representing 78% ($100bn) of global insured losses. At least $92bn of the insured losses came from SCS activity (>$51bn) and the January California wildfires ($41bn).

The US endured 28 billion-dollar economic loss events.

(3/n)

While not a record breaking year, 2025 proved consequential for many communities and offered more examples of the how increasingly interconnected and vulnerable the world remains to current and future natural hazard risk.

(2/n)

This is a remarkable forecast discussion from the WPC:

"...heavy rainfall totals for Southern CA will likely occur over an 18 hour period, with widespread 4-7 inch totals, with isolated max amounts of 9"+..."

"...anomalous 850-700 mb moisture flux; 5+ standard deviations above the mean..."

(2/2)