1. Insurance Comparison Websites: EIOPA Good Practices
Alexandra de Jong
Multi-Stakeholder Dialogue
5 March 2014

2. EIOPA European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority
Since 2011 replacing CEIOPS
EEA National Supervisory/Competent Authorities
EIOPA’s role:
“The Authority shall take a leading role in promoting transparency, simplicity and fairness in the market for consumer financial products or services (…).” [Art. 9(1) EIOPA Regulation]

3. Report on Good Practices on Comparison Websites
Content:
“good practices” for transparent and consumer-friendly websites
Non-legally binding
Timeline:
Published on 30 January 2014
Follow-up in Joint Committee of
EIOPA, EBA and ESMA

4. Outline
Consumer experience
EIOPA Good Practices
Market reality

5. Consumer experience
EIOPA Good Practices
Market reality

6. Insurance comparison websites
Definition
Insurance comparison websites
“interfaces, the objective of which is, to display to Internet users a number of insurance offers, and compare their prices and/or what is covered”
EIOPA Report on Good Practices on Comparison Websites

7. Market for online insurance comparisons
Diverse:
Number of websites per country
Products
Activities

8. Number of insurance comparison websites
> 20: CZ, ES, FR, NL, RO, UK
10 – 19: DE, GR, HU, IE, IT, LV, PL, SK
1 – 9: AT, BE, BG, DK, EE, FI, HR, LT, MT, NO, PT, SE
None: CY, IS, LI, LU, SI
Source: EIOPA Report on Good Practices on Comparison Websites, based on reporting from EIOPA Members

9. Supervisory regime Insurance Mediation Directive (IMD):
“insurance mediation”: regulated activity
Transposed into national legislation: differences
IMD2:
expected to clarify

10. Consumer experience
Supervisory response
Market reality

11. Usage Consumers planning to buy insurance in the next 12 months***:
online:
Europe: 43%
UK: 70%
FR: 21%
Trend: increasing
Sources: *** Accenture (2010): Multi-Channel Distribution Insurance Consumer Survey

12. What consumers like Popular with consumers:
Source of information
Shop around
Possibility to conclude contract online
Result: Increased transparency, decreased prices

13. Scope for improvement

14. Example: Ranking

15. Example: Ranking Is the cheapest offer also the best for me?
What are the differences between the offers?
What is covered?

16. Consumer experience
EIOPA Good Practices
Market reality

17. Example: Ranking => Not easy to understand how ranking was made
Good Practices:
Price: not the sole criterion!
Allow users to select additional criteria
Allow for easy comparison: present product features, insurance cover and limitations in a consistent way

18. EIOPA Good Practices Other areas: Criteria used to make the ranking
Information about the website
Market coverage
Dealing with potential conflicts of interest
Presentation of information
Frequency of updating the information

19. Conclusions

20. Thank you for your attention!
Alexandra de Jong
Expert
Consumer Protection and Financial Innovation Unit

21. References: EIOPA’s Report on Good Practices on Comparison Websites: