file. Given the investment portfolio allocations as at September 30, 2004, the Company would expect to lose approximately 5.6% of the portfolio if the most damaging event stress tested was repeated, all other things held equal, as compared to 6.1% at September 30, 2003. Given the investment portfolio allocations as at September 30, 2004, the Company would expect to gain approximately 17.8% on the portfolio if the most favorable event stress tested was repeated, all other things held equal, as compared to 19.1% as at September 30, 2003. The Company assumes that no action is taken during the stress period to either liquidate or rebalance the portfolio and believes that this fairly reflects the potential decreased liquidity that is often associated with stressed market environments.
The Company’s fixed income portfolio is exposed to credit and interest rate risk through its portfolio of debt securities. The fixed income portfolio includes fixed maturities, short-term investments, cash and cash equivalents and net payable for investments purchased.
As at September 30, 2004, the value of the Company’s fixed income portfolio, including cash and cash equivalents and net payable for investments purchased, was approximately $26.9 billion as compared to approximately $20.8 billion at September 30, 2003. As at September 30, 2004, the fixed income portfolio consisted of approximately 89.0% of the total investment portfolio (including cash and cash equivalents, and net payable for investments purchased) as compared to approximately 87.9% as at September 30, 2003.
The table below shows the Company’s fixed income portfolio by credit rating in percentage terms of the Company’s total fixed income portfolio (including fixed maturities, short-term investments, cash and cash equivalents and net payable for investments purchased) as at September 30, 2004.
At September 30, 2004 the average credit quality of the Company’s total fixed income portfolio was “AA”.
As at September 30, 2004, the top 10 corporate holdings represented approximately 9.5% of the total fixed income portfolio and approximately 40.1% of all holdings of corporate fixed income instruments. The top 10 corporate holdings listed below utilizes a conservative approach to aggregation as it includes unsecured as well as securitized, credit enhanced and collateralized securities issued by parent companies and their affiliates.
The Company’s fixed income portfolio is exposed to interest rate risk. Interest rate risk is the price sensitivity of a fixed income security to changes in interest rates. The hypothetical case of an immediate 100 basis point adverse parallel shift in global bond curves as at September 30, 2004 would decrease the fair value of the Company’s fixed income portfolio by approximately 4.4% or $1.2 billion as compared to approximately 4.8% or $0.9 billion as at September 30, 2003. Based on historical observations, it is unlikely that all global yield curves would shift in the same direction, by the same amount and at the same time.
Equity Portfolio
As at September 30, 2004, the Company’s equity portfolio was $803.2 million as compared to $548.8 million as at September 30, 2003. As at September 30, 2004, the Company’s allocation to equity securities was approximately 2.7% of the total investment portfolio (including cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income and net payable for investments purchased) as compared to approximately 2.3% as at September 30, 2003.
As at September 30, 2004, approximately 56.0% of the equity portfolio was invested in U.S. companies as compared to approximately 58.9% as at September 30, 2003. As at September 30, 2004, the top ten equity holdings represented approximately 7.7% of the Company’s total equity portfolio as compared to approximately 4.4% as at September 30, 2003.
The Company’s equity portfolio is exposed to price risk. Equity price risk is the potential loss arising from decreases in the market value of equities. An immediate hypothetical 10% change in the value of each equity position would decrease the fair value of the portfolio by approximately $80.3 million as at September 30, 2004 as compared to $54.9 million as at September 30, 2003.
Alternative Investment Portfolio
The Company’s alternative investment portfolio (included in investments in affiliates or other investments) had approximately 50 separate investments in different funds at September 30, 2004 with a total portfolio of $1.6 billion representing approximately 5.4% of the total investment portfolio (including cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income and net payable for investments purchased) as compared to September 30, 2003 where the Company had approximately 25 separate fund investments with a total exposure of $1.4 billion representing approximately 5.9% of the total investment portfolio.
As at September 30, 2004, the alternative investment style allocation was 43% in directional/tactical strategies, 24% in arbitrage strategies, 23% in event driven strategies and 10% in multi-strategy strategies.
Private Investment Portfolio
As at September 30, 2004, the Company’s exposure to private investments was approximately $204.3 million compared to $201.9 million as at September 30, 2003. As at September 30, 2004, the Company’s exposure to private investments consisted of approximately 0.7% of the total investment portfolio (including cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income and net payable for investments purchased), as compared to 0.9% as at September 30, 2003.
Bond and Stock Index Futures Exposure
As at September 30, 2004, bond and stock index futures outstanding had a net long position value of $7.5 million. A 10% appreciation or depreciation of these derivative instruments would have resulted in realized gains and realized losses of $80.6 million, respectively. The Company may reduce its exposure to these futures through offsetting transactions, including options and forwards.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
The Company has exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations through its operations and its investment portfolio. The Company’s net foreign currency denominated payable on foreign exchange contracts as at September 30, 2004 was $74.8 million and the net foreign currency denominated receivable at September 30, 2003 was $23.9 million, with a net unrealized loss of $8.6 million as at September 30, 2004 and $0.8 million at September 30, 2003.
61
Foreign exchange contracts within the investment portfolio are utilized to manage individual portfolio foreign exchange exposures, subject to investment manager guidelines established by management. These contracts are not designated as specific hedges for financial reporting purposes and, therefore, realized and unrealized gains and losses on these contracts are recorded in income in the period in which they occur. These contracts generally have maturities of three months or less.
The Company also attempts to manage the foreign exchange volatility arising on certain transactions denominated in foreign currencies. These include, but are not limited to, premiums receivable, reinsurance contracts, claims payable and investment in subsidiaries.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
The Company carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures are effective to provide reasonable assurance that all material information relating to the Company required to be filed in this report has been made known to them in a timely fashion. There have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, internal control over financial reporting.
The Company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, does not expect that the Company’s disclosure controls or its internal controls will prevent all errors and all fraud. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. As a result of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. As a result of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. Accordingly, the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to provide reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the disclosure controls and procedures are met.
62
XL CAPITAL LTD
PART II — OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
On March 17, 2004, certain current and former directors and officers of the Company were named as defendants in a putative “shareholder derivative complaint” (Marilyn Clark, Derivatively on Behalf of XL Capital Ltd v. Brian O’Hara et al.) filed in Connecticut Superior Court by a California shareholder (the “Action”). The Company was named as a nominal defendant. The complaint alleged several causes of action including breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment during the time period “from November 2001 to the present” (the “Relevant Period”). The Action alleged that the Company maintained inadequate loss reserves for its NAC Re subsidiary (now known as XL Reinsurance America, Inc.) during the Relevant Period and that, as a consequence, the Company’s earnings and assets were materially overstated. On June 10, 2004, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s claim. Thereafter, the plaintiff moved to withdraw the complaint in this action and, on September 29, 2004, the court approved the plaintiff’s motion.
On June 21, 2004, a consolidated and amended class action complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) was served on the Company and certain of its present and former directors and officers as defendants in a putative class action (Malin et al. v. XL Capital Ltd et al.) filed in United States District Court, District of Connecticut (the “Malin Action”). The Malin Action purports to be on behalf of purchasers of the Company’s common stock between November 1, 2001 and October 16, 2003, and alleges claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder (“Securities Laws”). The Amended Complaint alleges that the defendants violated the Securities Laws by, among other things, failing to disclose in various public and shareholder and investor reports and other communications the alleged inadequacy of the Company’s loss reserves for its NAC Re subsidiary (now known as XL Reinsurance America, Inc.) and that, as a consequence, the Company’s earnings and assets were materially overstated. On November 1, 2004, all defendants filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint with prejudice. There has been no discovery in the Malin Action. The Company and the defendant present and former officers and directors intend to vigorously defend the claims asserted against them.
On June 17, 2004, William Kronenberg, III, Frank A. Piliero and David M. Rosenberg (together, the “Claimants”) commenced an arbitration against the Company before the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”) in New York, New York. The Claimants and the Company were parties to a stock purchase agreement dated June 1, 1999, pursuant to which the Company acquired the outstanding capital stock of ECS, Inc (the “Stock Purchase Agreement”). In their AAA arbitration demand, the Claimants assert claims of fraud and deceitful conduct, negligent misrepresentation, and breach of contract and a covenant of good faith and fair dealing, all relating to the allegation that the Company failed to make certain contingent payments allegedly due to Claimants under the Stock Purchase Agreement. Claimants seek $85 million (the maximum amount payable under the contingent payment provision at issue), plus punitive damages, interest, costs and attorneys’ fees. On July 30, 2004, the Company filed an Answering Statement and Motion to Stay or Dismiss the AAA arbitration. On April 13, 2004, the Company commenced a separate arbitration procedure, as provided in the Stock Purchase Agreement, but the Claimants have refused to participate in such procedure. On July 15, 2004, the Company filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, seeking an order of the Court compelling the Claimants to arbitrate the dispute pursuant to those procedures and staying or dismissing the AAA arbitration. On September 19, 2004, the District Court denied our petition. On October 22, 2004, we filed an appeal of the District Court’s decision with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The AAA arbitration is proceeding. The Company intends to vigorously defend against the Claimants’ claims.
On July 15, 2003, the Company and Messrs. Esposito and O’Hara were named in a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint (the “Amended Complaint”) filed by certain shareholders of Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd. (“ANR”) against ANR and certain present and former officers and directors of ANR in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut seeking unspecified money damages on behalf of purchasers of ANR stock. Schnall v. Annuity and Life Re (Holdings), Ltd., Civil Action No. 02-CV-2133 (GLG) (the “Schnall Action”). The plaintiffs claim that the defendants violated certain provisions of the United States securities laws by making (or being responsible as alleged controlling persons for) various alleged material misstatements and omissions in public filings and press releases of ANR. On July 19, 2004, an agreement in principle was reached with plaintiffs to settle the
63
Schnall Action. The settlement is without any admission of liability or wrongdoing and would include a nominal cash payment by the Company. The settlement is subject to certain approvals, full documentation, notice to the class, court approval and certain other steps required to consummate a class action settlement.
The Company is also subject to litigation and arbitration in the normal course of its business. These lawsuits and arbitrations principally involve claims on policies of insurance and contracts of reinsurance and are typical for the Company and for the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance industry in general. Such legal proceedings are considered in connection with the Company’s loss and loss expense reserves. Reserves in varying amounts may or may not be established in respect of particular claims proceedings based on many factors, including the legal merits thereof and other factors. In addition to claims litigation, the Company and its subsidiaries are subject to lawsuits in the normal course of business that do not arise from or directly relate to claims on policies of insurance or contracts of reinsurance.
The Company believes that the ultimate outcomes of all outstanding litigation and arbitration will not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial condition, future operating results and/or liquidity, although an adverse resolution of a number of these items could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations in a particular fiscal quarter or year.
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
(c) Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliate Purchases
The following table provides information about purchases by the Company during the quarter ended September 30, 2004 of equity securities that are registered by the Company pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act:
| | | | | | | | Total Number | | Approximate Dollar | |
| | | | | | | | of Shares | | Value of Shares | |
| | | | | | | | Purchased as | | that May Yet Be | |
| | | | | | | | Part of | | Purchased Under | |
| | | | Total Number | | Average Price | | Publicly | | the Plans | |
| | | | of Shares | | Paid | | Announced Plans | | or Programs | |
Period | | | | Purchased (1) | | per Share (2) | | or Programs | | (3) | |
| | | |
| |
| |
| |
| | |
July 1–31, 2004 | | | | 3,013 | | 84.11 | | — | | $135.4 million | |
August 1–31, 2004 | | | | 78 | | 71.42 | | — | | $135.4 million | |
September 1–30, 2004 | | | | 90 | | 73.16 | | — | | $135.4 million | |
| | | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Total | | | | 3,181 | | $83.49 | | — | | $135.4 million | |
| | | |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
(1) | | All of the shares included in each period were purchased in connection with the vesting of restricted shares granted under the Company’s restricted stock plan. All of these purchases were made in connection with satisfying tax withholding obligations of those employees. These shares were not purchased as part of the Company’s publicly announced share repurchase program. | |
| | | |
(2) | | The price paid per share is the closing price of the shares on the vesting date. | |
| | | |
(3) | | On January 9, 2000, the Board of Directors previously authorized a $500.0 million share repurchase program. The Company did not repurchase any equity securities under the program during the three or nine months ended September 30, 2004. As of September 30, 2004, the Company could repurchase up to approximately $135.4 million of our equity securities under the Company’s share repurchase program. | |
64
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
| | |
4.1 | | First Supplemental Indenture, dated August 23, 2004, to the Indenture, dated June 2, 2004, between the Company and The Bank of New York, as Trustee, incorporated by reference to the Company’s current report on Form 8-K filed on August 23, 2004. |
| | |
4.2 | | Form of Senior Note (included in Exhibit 4.1 hereto), incorporated by reference to the Company’s current report on Form 8-K filed on August 23, 2004. |
| | |
4.3 | | First Supplemental Indenture, dated September 22, 2004, to the Indenture, dated May 23, 2001, between the Company and U.S. Bank National Association, as Trustee, incorporated by reference to the Company’s current report on Form 8-K filed on September 22, 2004. |
| | |
10.1 | | 364-Day Credit Agreement, dated as of September 30, 2004, between the Company, X.L. America, Inc., XL Insurance (Bermuda) Ltd, and XL Re Ltd, as the Account Parties and Guarantors, and Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch, as the Lender. |
| | |
31 | | Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications. |
| | |
32 | | Section 1350 Certifications. |
| | |
99.1 | | XL Capital Assurance Inc. condensed consolidated financial statements (unaudited) for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2004 and 2003. |
| | |
99.2 | | XL Financial Assurance Ltd. condensed financial statements (unaudited) for the three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2004 and 2003. |
65
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.
| | XL CAPITAL LTD |
| | (Registrant) |
| | |
Dated: November 5, 2004 | | /s/ BRIAN M. O’HARA |
| |
|
| | Brian M. O’Hara |
| | President and Chief Executive Officer |
| | |
Dated: November 5, 2004 | | /s/ JERRY DE ST. PAER |
| |
|
| | Jerry de St. Paer |
| | Executive Vice President and |
| | Chief Financial Officer |
66