Annual revenues for the 15 biggest U.S. life insurance companies amounted to US$263.4 billion in 2009.
That amount represents a 1.5% drop from $267.4 billion in 2008, based on the latest Fortune 500 yearly ranking of America’s largest corporations.
The analysis below focuses on 2009 revenues and profits for America’s 15 biggest life insurers.
Included are both stock companies (owned by their shareholders) and mutual companies (owned by their policyholders).
Top Life Insurance Companies for Revenues
Among the 15 top life insurance companies, 9 insurers showed positive revenue growth in 2009 over the prior year.
In the battle between MetLife (America’s largest stock life insurance company) versus New York Life (biggest U.S. mutual life insurer), New York Life was much more successful in growing its revenues last year.
Shown within brackets below is the city where the life insurer’s head office is located.
- MetLife (New York City) … US$41.1 billion, down 25.4% from 2008
- New York Life (New York City) … $34 billion, up 8.3%
- Prudential Financial (Newark) … $32.7 billion, up 11.7%
- TIAA-CREF (New York City) … $26.3 billion, down 10.5%
- Massachusetts Mutual (Springfield) … $25.4 billion, up 35.6%
- Northwestern Mutual (Milwaukee) … $21.6 billion, down 0.6%
- AFLAC (Columbus, Georgia) … $18.3 billion, up 10.3%
- Unum Group (Chattanooga) … $10.1 billion, up 1.1%
- Guardian Life (New York City) … $10 billion, up 3.8%
- Lincoln National (Radner) … $9.1 billion, down 8.4%
- Genworth Financial (Richmond) … $9.07 billion, down 8.8%
- Principal Financial (Des Moines) … $8.8 billion, down 10.9%
- Thrivent Financial for Lutherans (Minneapolis) … $6.5 billion, up 7.5%
- Pacific Life (Newport Beach) … $5.2 billion, up 29.5%
- Mutual of Omaha (Omaha) … $5.15 billion, up 19.4%.
From a revenue perspective, the biggest winner in 2009 was Massachusetts Mutual with its top percentage gain of 35.6%. In second place was the small but nimble Pacific Life with its head office in Newport Beach, California.
The biggest loser was MetLife which saw its revenues fall by over a quarter in 2009.
Top Life Insurers for Profits
Led by Prudential, 3 of the top 15 U.S. life insurers were able to rebound from significant losses in 2008 to post formidable profits for 2009.
- Prudential Financial … US$3.1 billion profit, up from a $1.07 billion loss in 2008
- AFLAC … $1.5 billion, up 19.4%
- Unum Group … $852.6 million, up 54.1%
- New York Life… $682.7 million, up from a $949.7 million loss
- Principal Financial … $622.7 million, up 35.9%
- Pacific Life … $434 million, up from $24.5 million loss
- Northwestern Mutual … $321 million, down 33.6%
- Guardian Life … $82.9 million, down 79.7%.
Guardian Life and Northwestern Mutual were the only 2 from the above 8 life insurance companies that experienced a profit slowdown during 2009.
Top Life Insurers for Losses
The following 7 leading U.S. life insurers posted losses for the year. America’s largest lifeco MetLife went from a formidable $3.2 billion profit in 2008 to a staggering $2.2 billion loss one year later.
- MetLife … US$2.2 billion loss in 2009 ($3.2 billion profit in 2008)
- Lincoln National … $484.7 million loss ($57 million profit in 2008)
- Genworth Financial … $460 million loss ($572 million loss in 2008)
- TIAA-CREF … $459.1 million loss ($3.3 billion loss in 2008)
- Massachusetts Mutual Life … $115.1 million loss ($923.8 million loss in 2008)
- Thrivent Financial for Lutherans … $48.4 million loss ($329.7 million loss in 2008)
- Mutual of Omaha … US$17.9 million loss (compared to $58.2 million loss in 2008).
Notwithstanding the results from MetLife and Lincoln National, the good news is that 5 out of the above 7 life insurers were able to whittle down the size of their annual losses in 2009.
Sources: This article provides independent calculations and insights based on data from the Fortune 500 ranking of America’s largest corporations under the 2010 drop-down listing.
Daniel Workman - A senior business and finance writer who also does French translations, notably international trade and insurance materials.
Comments