Captive management by the number

Greg Lang (pictured), founder of the Reinsurance and Insurance Network (RAIN), continues his look at the numbers in the captive insurance industry, this time focusing on captive managers.

Did you ever wonder how many captive managers there are? Many reading this could probably name a firm or two. I could not find a single global list anywhere. I have seen a few short lists behind paywalls.  

Typically, self-reported numbers from publications or captive associations. Most surveys discuss a top 20. There are 88 domiciles. Many require managers to have a physical presence and keep books and records locally. I knew the number was more than 20. I found 228. 

The data I used came from three sources. The first were official regulatory lists published by state and territory regulators. Examples include the North Carolina Department of Insurance and Vermont’s Department of Financial Regulation. The second are trade association lists. Lists published by industry bodies, such as IMAC for Cayman, TxCIA for Texas or BIMA for Bermuda. The third was public domain research — confirmed manager names and offices found in press, regulatory filings, company websites or industry directories. 

All three sources produce real and citable data; some overstated, some outdated.  Treating each equally creates confusion.

The numbers

Using this research framework, 47 of the 88 domiciles have verifiable manager data drawn from official regulatory lists, trade association lists or both. Another 36 have confirmed public domain data – named managers, but no official published or trade list. Five domiciles are truly blank. I arrived at 228 unique firms after careful removal of duplication. I removed exact duplicates and regional office variants of the same firm counted under different names. I am sure there are errors.

The US picture

The US has the most domiciles and the most captive managers. The biggest surprise was North Carolina (NC). The NC Department of Insurance publishes an approved manager list – 85 unique firms, the largest of any domicile. Delaware is second at 83 and Utah third at 74. Vermont, the largest domicile by premium and licensed captives, publishes 23 unique firms. 

North Carolina's 85 includes all the major global firms plus a deep bench of national specialists and regional boutiques. North Carolina passed captive legislation in 2013. Thirteen years later, it built the largest approved manager roster in the world.

US domiciles have three approaches to manager oversight. The first is the pre-approved list. The regulator publishes a roster of approved managers and every captive must choose from that list. North Carolina, Vermont, Utah, Delaware, Hawaii, Nevada, South Carolina and Connecticut all operate this way. These are the domiciles where the manager data is most complete and comparable. The lists are public and updated regularly.

The second approach is case-by-case approval. The regulator approves each appointment individually, at formation or when a manager change occurs. They do not publish a cumulative list. Arizona requires manager information as part of every captive licence application.  

They also must approve subsequent changes. Georgia’s statute states that no person shall act as a service provider without commissioner authorisation. Manager applications must be filed with the captive’s certificate of authority application.

Michigan’s Administrative Code Rule requires that the captive manager submits a complete application for director’s approval before any captive may use them. Florida, Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas and Rhode Island also fall into this category. The approval requirement is real. It is just invisible because no cumulative public list is published. Approvals happen one at a time without public disclosure.

The third approach is no external manager required. Self-managed structures are permitted. Denmark, Norway, New Zealand, Germany and Liechtenstein fall into this category. Self-managed captives also exist within US domiciles and in major offshore markets such as Cayman, where I confirmed 10 self-managed captives.  Self-management also does not mean no oversight or approval process. Cayman has an approved manager list

Several US states require the captive manager to have a physical presence and to manage the captive’s books and records locally. Vermont, New Jersey, Ohio, Georgia, and Hawaii all have some form of this requirement. New Jersey’s administrative code explicitly states a captive manager must have an office in New Jersey and maintain the books and records of all licensed New Jersey captives in the state. Hawaii’s approved list of 11 reflects the same dynamic. 

This is a design feature of how some domiciles manage regulatory oversight. It also explains why managers open regional offices rather than trying to manage everything remotely. Domiciles want to increase employment. They also want premium tax revenue.

Two domiciles are worth watching. Louisiana had three captives and $424 million in premium in 2023. Louisiana created a functioning captive statue in 2025. The energy sector premium was already waiting. Michigan is the other. It passed a seven-bill legislative package in December 2025 to expand its captive market. The legislation is now there. Will the captives follow?

The non-US picture

Outside the US, Bermuda leads with 37 confirmed managers, followed by Cayman at 29. Guernsey with eight has the most of European domiciles, followed by Isle of Man, Luxembourg, and Malta at six each. 

The local manager retainment is standard across virtually every offshore domicile –  Bermuda, Cayman, Guernsey, BVI, Barbados, Anguilla, Isle of Man and most others all require that every captive retains a licensed local manager. That is why locally based management companies exist in all these domiciles. It is a regulatory design, not an accident of geography.

Barbados confirmed 17 managers via its FSC monthly PDF. 17 is a large number relative to the size of the Barbados captive market. That ratio suggests either a competitive market with meaningful capacity or smaller firms serving niche clients that larger managers have not pursued.

France is one of the fastest-growing domiciles in the world. It had 17 approved reinsurance captives in 2024. It anticipated hitting 30 some time in 2025. AXA XL, Marsh, Aon, and WTW are all confirmed managers active through public domain research. France has no official published manager list. The manager’s names and captive activity, however, are well documented.

The UK confirmed its captive insurance framework on July 15, 2025. PRA and FCA consultations are scheduled for this summer with a target launch of mid-2027. No new captive manager framework will be created. Existing insurance intermediary rules will continue to apply. 

Aon has already committed to launching a new UK-based captive management company. Marsh, Artex and WTW are all confirmed to be active in advising clients through public domain research. The UK currently has zero captives under the new framework – but the manager community is positioning.

Two domiciles are moving fast. The Bahamas is one. Two unnamed managers are in active negotiations to re-domicile significant portions of their books once the External Insurance Act reforms pass. That could change the Bahamas story quickly. Alberta, which only passed captive legislation in July 2022, has 20 captives and four captive managers per a University of Calgary policy brief. 

Who has the most physical locations?

The table below shows confirmed domicile presence for the top five managers across all data categories in my research compared to self-reported figures.

All five managers are remarkably balanced between US and non-US presence. The in-state and in-domicile presence requirements that both US states and offshore jurisdictions impose drives this.

The long tail

Below the top five, the picture shifts quickly. USA Risk Group appears in 16 domiciles, but most are US states. GPW and Associates show up in15. Davies appears in 13, reflecting its growth through US acquisition. Below those are boutique specialists.  

Captive Resources is the largest group captive manager in seven states; CIC Services is in nine states. It has a niche in Tennessee's designated manager system. Roundstone Management is active across multiple states. It is another group captive operator.

What’s surprising

Michigan’s approved manager list is identical to Vermont’s. Michigan runs its own independent approval process, so this is not the case of one state adopting another’s list. It simply reflects that the captive managers pursuing approval are the same in both states. 

Illinois is the most underappreciated state in captive management. It’s where many captive industry people work yet it is not considered much of a captive domicile. Aon's global headquarters is in Chicago. Aon is recognised as the largest manager based on the number of captives managed. Artex, owned by Arthur J. Gallagher, is headquartered in Itasca. Captive Resources is also located in Itasca. That is the world’s second and third largest captive managers and the largest independent group captive manager all within about 30 miles of each other. None domiciles captives in Illinois. Illinois is where captive management lives. It is not where captives are licensed.

The Delaware Tribe of Indians, a tribal jurisdiction, shows up on very few domicile lists. It is located in Caney, Kansas. It markets itself as an affordable domestic alternative to traditional offshore domiciles for reinsurers owned by vehicle dealers, agents and other specialised producers, such as rent-to-own stores. It has a list of 15 approved managers on its website at tribaldomicile.com.

What we still don’t know

As mentioned earlier, five domiciles remain blank: Curaçao, Egypt, Seychelles, St Lucia and St Vincent. I found no captives, captive managers, nor any manager approval process.

Curaçao has captive legislation dating to 1992 under the former Netherlands Antilles framework. That political entity dissolved in 2010. Curaçao became an autonomous country under the Kingdom of the Netherlands in that same year. With this change of legal status, the tax and regulatory climate changed. Most Curaçao captives redomiciled to Cayman or Bermuda. They don’t appear to have any active captives today. 

Egypt and Seychelles are on my domicile list as both have captive legislation. Egypt updated its FRA solvency legislation in August 2025. Egypt’s Financial Regulatory Authority (FRA) provides captive oversight. Seychelles has had captive legislation since 2016. Neither shows any current activity.

That leaves St Lucia and St Vincent – two small Caribbean domiciles with established captive legislation and functioning regulators. I found no data across multiple searches. If anyone has any information for either, I’d like to hear from you.

The self-managed captive count is another knowledge gap. Other than the 10 self-managed captives I found in Cayman, I did not capture any reliable self-managed numbers in any US domicile or in Bermuda, Guernsey, or any other major offshore domicile where self-management is permitted. The number of captives operating without an external manager is unknown

Conclusion

228 is my best estimate for a global manager number. An alphabetical list follows. The top five handle most of the premium volume. The next 50 are national specialists. The remaining 150 or so are boutique firms serving specific industries, geographies or client types. That long tail is where most of the innovation in captive structure happens. It is also where most of the regulatory risk lives.

List of  Global Captive Insurance Managers