What a Credit Agency's Calm Read on Insurers Does — and Doesn't — Mean for Your Renewal
Credit: Shutterstock
On July 27, 2026, Morningstar DBRS published a commentary with a reassuring headline: as smoke sweeps across the country, Canada's property and casualty insurers are relatively unscathed. The underlying numbers are not small. Year-to-date burned area had reached roughly 2.95 million hectares — above the comparable 10-year average of about 2.55 million — across nearly 900 active fires. DBRS's conclusion was that claims would likely stay limited and that insurers are well-positioned to absorb moderate losses.
That reads like good news. It is worth being precise about whose good news it is. "Unscathed" describes insurer capital, not household budgets. The reason insurers can shrug off an above-average burn year is geographic: the largest 2026 fires are concentrated in remote Northwestern Ontario and Northern Quebec, far from dense concentrations of insured property, while the two provinces with the most homeowner exposure — British Columbia and Alberta — happen to be running well below their historical averages this year.
This is an explainer about that gap. It covers what DBRS actually said and what "absorb" means in insurance terms, why area burned and insured losses can move in opposite directions, why a calmer season rarely shows up as a cheaper renewal, and what the absence of a federal wildfire backstop means for owners. It is not a climate-policy debate or a forest-management critique — it is a read on where the financial risk actually sits.
Stay on top of Canadian homeowner news
When a credit agency says insurers can "absorb" a loss year, it is making a claim about solvency, not about prices. DBRS grounded its view in the sector's financial condition heading into the season: generally adequate pricing, disciplined underwriting, strong capitalization, and combined ratios below 95% for major publicly traded carriers across 2025 and the first quarter of 2026, according to the Morningstar DBRS commentary. More favourable 2026 reinsurance conditions, as global capacity improved, added another buffer.
A combined ratio is the share of premium dollars an insurer pays out in claims and expenses; below 100% means the underwriting book is profitable before investment income. Sitting under 95% means carriers entered wildfire season with room to take losses without eroding capital. That is the whole basis for the word "absorb." It says a single bad season is unlikely to become a sector-wide capital event. It says nothing about whether your premium goes up.
Notably, DBRS observed that Canada's 2026 catastrophe-reinsurance discussions have been focused on earthquake risk rather than wildfire — a sign the industry currently views its wildfire exposure as manageable within existing structures, even as insurers themselves have urged Ottawa to put climate resilience first. For homeowners, that distinction is the first clue that insurer comfort and household cost are two separate stories.
The apparent paradox — an above-average burn year that insurers can still absorb — resolves once you stop counting hectares and start mapping insured value. Burned area only becomes an insured loss when fire reaches homes, businesses, and infrastructure that carry coverage. DBRS's point was that insurance penetration, property values, population density, and commercial activity are all relatively low in the hardest-hit Ontario and Quebec regions, so direct property claims should stay contained. Secondary claims tied to evacuation orders, additional living expenses, and business interruption were judged manageable under the current fire geography as well.
The provincial split makes the same point in reverse. British Columbia had seen about 43,000 hectares burned and Alberta about 18,000 hectares this year — a fraction of their 10-year year-to-date averages of roughly 373,000 and 380,000 hectares. Those are the provinces where wildfire risk is most tightly bound to insured property, because communities such as Fort McMurray, Jasper, and several Interior B.C. cities sit in fire-prone areas with substantial concentrations of homes. History shows what happens when a fire does reach them: the 2016 Fort McMurray wildfire caused an estimated $4.4 billion in insured damage, and the 2024 Jasper wildfire roughly $1.3 billion.
The table makes the decoupling concrete. A quiet 2026 in B.C. and Alberta is why national insured losses stay muted — even as standard home policies continue to cover wildfire smoke damage nationwide. It is not evidence that the underlying risk in those corridors has fallen — only that this year's fire ignited elsewhere.
The apparent paradox — an above-average burn year that insurers can still absorb — resolves once you stop counting hectares and start mapping insured value. Burned area only becomes an insured loss when fire reaches homes, businesses, and infrastructure that carry coverage. DBRS's point was that insurance penetration, property values, population density, and commercial activity are all relatively low in the hardest-hit Ontario and Quebec regions, so direct property claims should stay contained. Secondary claims tied to evacuation orders, additional living expenses, and business interruption were judged manageable under the current fire geography as well.
The provincial split makes the same point in reverse. British Columbia had seen about 43,000 hectares burned and Alberta about 18,000 hectares this year — a fraction of their 10-year year-to-date averages of roughly 373,000 and 380,000 hectares. Those are the provinces where wildfire risk is most tightly bound to insured property, because communities such as Fort McMurray, Jasper, and several Interior B.C. cities sit in fire-prone areas with substantial concentrations of homes. History shows what happens when a fire does reach them: the 2016 Fort McMurray wildfire caused an estimated $4.4 billion in insured damage, and the 2024 Jasper wildfire roughly $1.3 billion.
The table makes the decoupling concrete. A quiet 2026 in B.C. and Alberta is why national insured losses stay muted — even as standard home policies continue to cover wildfire smoke damage nationwide. It is not evidence that the underlying risk in those corridors has fallen — only that this year's fire ignited elsewhere.
Here is the structural fact that separates the insurer story from the homeowner story. Canada still lacks a dedicated public-private insurance backstop for extreme wildfire losses, unlike the catastrophe risk-sharing mechanisms used in some high-risk U.S. and European jurisdictions. A backstop is a government-backed layer that shares or caps catastrophic losses so that private pricing and availability do not swing entirely with each disaster. Without one, wildfire pricing and insurability pressure stay largely inside the private market — which means they surface at renewal, for households, one policy at a time.
It is a common assumption that federal disaster aid fills this role. It does not. Public Safety Canada's 2025 Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements guidelines state plainly that the program is not intended to replace all lost or damaged belongings or fully restore homes, and is "not to be a substitute for insurance"; it is designed to restore essential functions, not to make policyholders whole. Provincial programs carry a similar limit.
The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada notes that some provincial or territorial disaster-assistance programs may not be available at all if a loss was insurable. In other words, government aid is not a fallback you can plan around — it is a partial safety net that can exclude risks you were expected to insure yourself.
This is the ecosystem homeowners actually live in, and it is why policy groups have floated federal fixes for the coverage gap — with roughly one in three households estimated to lack adequate disaster coverage. Until a mechanism exists, "insurers can absorb it" and "owners are protected" remain different sentences.
The most common misread of a headline like this one is chronological: fewer insured losses this year should mean lower premiums next year. Insurance does not price that way. Carriers set rates off multi-year catastrophe loss trends, risk models, and rebuilding costs — a base that a single quiet season barely moves.
The Canadian data is unambiguous on the direction of that base. Between December 2019 and December 2025, homeowners' home and mortgage insurance premiums rose 45.0% — more than double the 21.0% rise in the all-items Consumer Price Index over the same window. The same analysis found insurers incurred more than $23 billion in catastrophic claims over six years, ranked 2024 as the costliest year on record for extreme-weather claims, and flagged Alberta as disproportionately affected. The Insurance Bureau of Canada has put catastrophic weather claims at nearly $2 billion a year since 2009, up from roughly $400 million annually between 1983 and 2008.
Two forces keep that base elevated. The first is the accumulated claims era itself — this is a decade in which insured catastrophe losses reshaped the market, not a series of isolated bad years. The second is rebuilding cost. Statistics Canada's residential building construction price index rose 2.3% year over year in the second quarter of 2026, and IBC has noted residential construction costs up 66% since 2019, with home replacement costs up 24% over that span. Even if broad inflation cools, the cost of putting a house back stays high — and that keeps both limits and premiums under pressure, the same dynamic now driving tighter coverage and higher deductibles across the market.
A news update is only useful if it changes a decision. For owners in or near wildfire-prone areas, the DBRS read points to two concrete conversations to have before the next renewal — neither of which requires personalized financial advice, just informed questions.
The first is mitigation recognition. Wildfire prevention is already funded and, in places, rewarded: federal and provincial governments, with the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre, announced roughly $104 million in 2025 to expand FireSmart programming. That recognition can reach your premium. FireSmart BC notes that a completed mitigation assessment and certification can be shared with participating insurers and may qualify owners for discounts — one listed partner advertises 15% off for a term after assessment work, plus a further 10% tied to certification. Terms are insurer-specific and change, but the mechanism exists, so it is worth asking whether yours honours it.
The second is rebuild adequacy. The Financial Consumer Agency of Canada advises owners to know what it would actually cost to rebuild and to confirm whether a policy includes guaranteed building replacement — coverage that can require insuring to full replacement cost, disclosing home improvements, and rebuilding on the same site. With construction costs where they are, a limit set a few years ago may no longer rebuild the same house.
Insurers price partly on neighbourhood-level claims history and local physical risk — including distance from fire hydrants and stations — so two similar homes can carry very different rates. When you call your broker, treat these as a checklist, not a script.
The throughline is simple. DBRS's read is accurate and reassuring on its own terms: the sector is strong, and 2026's fires are unlikely to break it. But sector strength is not a personal discount, and a quiet insured-loss year is not the same as a safe one for owners in the corridors that history keeps returning to — the same pressures now reshaping coverage and, in some areas, testing insurability. The financial risk that a backstop would share still sits, for now, with the household.
Stay on top of Canadian homeowner news
About the Author
Angela Nightingale is the Senior Editor at Homeowner.ca with two decades of experience in digital publishing and content strategy. She has owned two homes, taken on her share of DIY projects, and learned what most guides fail to mention. She writes from the belief that the best home guidance comes from people who have lived through the decisions — and her goal is always to leave readers feeling confident, not overwhelmed.
