Fair Values of Financial Instruments

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2011

Fair Values of Financial Instruments [Abstract]

Fair Values of Financial Instruments

(15)  Fair Values of Financial Instruments

(a) Fair values of financial instruments are determined using valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. Fair values are generally measured using quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities or other inputs, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, that are observable, either directly or indirectly. In those instances where observable inputs are not available, fair values are measured using unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. Unobservable inputs reflect the Corporation’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability and are developed based on the best information available in the circumstances. Fair value estimates derived from unobservable inputs are affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rates and the estimated amounts and timing of future cash flows. The derived fair value estimates cannot be substantiated by comparison to independent markets and are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that would be realized in a current market exchange. Certain financial instruments, particularly insurance contracts, are excluded from fair value disclosure requirements.

The methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair values of financial instruments are as follows:

(i) The carrying value of short term investments approximates fair value due to the short maturities of these investments.

(ii) Fair values for fixed maturities are determined by management, utilizing prices obtained from a third party, nationally recognized pricing service or, in the case of securities for which prices are not provided by a pricing service, from third party brokers. For fixed maturities that have quoted prices in active markets, market quotations are provided. For fixed maturities that do not trade on a daily basis, the pricing service and brokers provide fair value estimates using a variety of inputs including, but not limited to, benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, bids, offers, reference data, prepayment rates and measures of volatility. Management reviews on an ongoing basis the reasonableness of the methodologies used by the relevant pricing service and brokers. In addition, management, using the prices received for the securities from the pricing service and brokers, determines the aggregate portfolio price performance and reviews it against applicable indices. If management believes that significant discrepancies exist, it will discuss these with the relevant pricing service or broker to resolve the discrepancies.

(iii) Fair values of equity securities are based on quoted market prices.

(iv) Fair values of long term debt issued by Chubb are determined by management, utilizing prices obtained from a third party, nationally recognized pricing service.

The carrying values and fair values of financial instruments were as follows:

	December 31
	2011				2010
	Carrying		Fair		Carrying		Fair
	Value		Value		Value		Value
	(in millions)
Assets
Invested assets
Short term investments	$	1,893	$	1,893	$	1,905	$	1,905
Fixed maturities (Note 3)		37,184		37,184		36,519		36,519
Equity securities		1,512		1,512		1,550		1,550
Liabilities
Long term debt (Note 7)		3,575		4,085		3,975		4,318

A pricing service provides fair value amounts for approximately 99% of the Corporation’s fixed maturities. The prices obtained from a pricing service and brokers generally are non-binding, but are reflective of current market transactions in the applicable financial instruments.

At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the Corporation held an insignificant amount of financial instruments in its investment portfolio for which a lack of market liquidity impacted the determination of fair value.

The fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value into three broad levels as follows:

Level 1 — Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets.

Level 2 — Other inputs that are observable for the asset, either directly or indirectly.

Level 3 — Inputs that are unobservable.

The fair value of fixed maturities and equity securities categorized based upon the lowest level of input that was significant to the fair value measurement was as follows:

	December 31, 2011
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
	(in millions)
Fixed maturities
Tax exempt	$	—	$	20,203	$	8	$	20,211
Taxable
U.S. government and government agency and authority obligations		—		868		—		868
Corporate bonds		—		6,313		152		6,465
Foreign government and government agency obligations		—		6,820		3		6,823
Residential mortgage-backed securities		—		845		10		855
Commercial mortgage-backed securities		—		1,962		—		1,962
		—		16,808		165		16,973
Total fixed maturities		—		37,011		173		37,184
Equity securities		1,504		—		8		1,512
	$	1,504	$	37,011	$	181	$	38,696

	December 31, 2010
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
	(in millions)
Fixed maturities
Tax exempt	$	—	$	19,765	$	9	$	19,774
Taxable
U.S. government and government agency and authority obligations		—		829		—		829
Corporate bonds		—		6,245		165		6,410
Foreign government and government agency obligations		—		6,373		26		6,399
Residential mortgage-backed securities		—		1,329		21		1,350
Commercial mortgage-backed securities		—		1,757		—		1,757
		—		16,533		212		16,745
Total fixed maturities		—		36,298		221		36,519
Equity securities		1,537		—		13		1,550
	$	1,537	$	36,298	$	234	$	38,069

(b) The methods and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of the Corporation’s pension plan and other postretirement benefit plan assets, other than assets invested in pooled funds, are similar to the methods and assumptions used for the Corporation’s other financial instruments. The fair value of pooled funds is based on the net asset value of the funds.

Based on the fair value hierarchy, the fair value of the Corporation’s pension plan assets categorized based upon the lowest level of input that was significant to the fair value measurement was as follows:

	December 31, 2011
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
	(in millions)
Short term investments	$	—	$	45	$	—	$	45
Fixed maturities
U.S. government and government agency and authority obligations		—		204		3		207
Corporate bonds		—		289		1		290
Foreign government and government agency obligations		—		61		1		62
Mortgage-backed securities		—		175		1		176
Total fixed maturities		—		729		6		735
Equity securities		336		838		—		1,174
Other assets		21		8		18		47
	$	357	$	1,620	$	24	$	2,001

	December 31, 2010
	Level 1		Level 2		Level 3		Total
	(in millions)
Short term investments	$	—	$	64	$	—	$	64
Fixed maturities
U.S. government and government agency and authority obligations		—		167		1		168
Corporate bonds		—		272		—		272
Foreign government and government agency obligations		—		41		—		41
Mortgage-backed securities		—		157		—		157
Total fixed maturities		—		637		1		638
Equity securities		348		833		—		1,181
Other assets		15		6		18		39
	$	363	$	1,540	$	19	$	1,922

The fair value of the Corporation’s other postretirement benefit plan assets was $73 million and $65 million at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Based on the fair value hierarchy, the fair value of these assets was categorized as Level 1 based upon the lowest level of input that was significant to the fair value measurement.