Updated October 2, 2026.
Direct answer: There are not three catastrophe-model vendors named RMS, AIR, and Verisk. There are two dominant lineages. Moody’s RMS is Risk Management Solutions, bought from DMGT; that deal closed September 15, 2021. AIR is the other lineage: Applied Insurance Research, folded under the Verisk name in January 2022. Trade press dated November 14, 2025 says Verisk renamed Extreme Event Solutions to Catastrophe & Risk Solutions. “Verisk’s own models” means that ex-AIR stack. ISO rating data, PCS loss estimates, and Xactware are sister products, not a third stochastic engine.
A renewal still moves when the carrier’s license, the version, or a second view changes the tail. What changed is the map of who sells the model. For the four-module workflow, use the catastrophe modeling complete guide. This page is only the naming map and where to read the rest.
The two lineages
Moody’s RMS. Risk Management Solutions was founded in 1988. Moody’s agreed on August 5, 2021 to buy it from Daily Mail and General Trust and closed the purchase on September 15, 2021. Models and software now sit inside Moody’s: RiskLink, Risk Modeler on the Intelligent Risk Platform, and a newer high-definition (HD) framework beside older detailed loss models. Not every RMS model is HD. Florida still certifies a versioned North Atlantic hurricane model on RiskLink and Risk Modeler. Moody’s said on May 28, 2025 that no RiskLink / RiskBrowser model updates were then scheduled for 2026, with a caveat that urgent science could land first on the cloud platform.
AIR, now Verisk. Karen Clark founded Applied Insurance Research in 1987. Insurance Services Office bought AIR in May 2002. Verisk was not the buyer that year; Verisk Analytics later became the holding company around the ISO businesses. On January 31, 2022 Artemis reported that Verisk was rebranding AIR Worldwide under the parent for its extreme-event business. On November 14, 2025 Captive International reported the division name moving from Extreme Event Solutions to Catastrophe & Risk Solutions, with the experts and workflows unchanged. Platforms in market: Touchstone and Touchstone Re. Verisk’s June 2025 release notes say Touchstone / Touchstone Re 2025 (13.0) is the last full release of those products, with Verisk Synergy Studio planned for June 2026 to replace both. As of October 2, 2026 this page does not treat Synergy Studio as launched. Support URLs in the 13.0 notes still pointed at air-worldwide.com. That is one science stack with a new label, not a vendor competing with itself.
Deal-announcement lines (“400 models,” “underlie the industry,” Artemis’s early-2022 cat-bond modeller share) are seller or tracker claims for those dates. They are not 2026 license share. That 2022 cat-bond figure should not be treated as current share.
What is not a third model
ISO statistical and rating data, PCS industry-loss estimates, and Xactware claims estimation sit in the same corporate family as the ex-AIR catastrophe models. They do not add a third hazard engine next to Moody’s RMS and Verisk. Verisk also markets Model Exchange as access to third-party catastrophe models. That is a shelf of other people’s models, not “Verisk peril analytics” as a separate stochastic family. A submission that cites “Verisk” and “AIR” on the same account is usually naming one lineage twice.
Distinct other families
These are not the big two, and they are not a false three-way either.
- Karen Clark & Company. Clark left AIR. KCC sells its own reference models on RiskInsight. Florida accepted KCC’s US Hurricane Reference Model 5.0 on June 11, 2025. “Most accurate” language on the vendor site is marketing.
- Cotality, formerly CoreLogic. CoreLogic announced the global rebrand on March 24, 2025. That release is a corporate identity change, not a claim that the hurricane model was new science that day. Florida’s accepted-model list still labels the organization “CoreLogic/Cotality” and accepted its Florida Hurricane Model 2025 on June 11, 2025.
- Aon Impact Forecasting, on the ELEMENTS platform. Named by the Florida commission and in Aon’s own 2025 client survey.
- Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model (Florida International University). Version 8.3 was accepted June 13, 2025.
Florida’s list of models acceptable under the 2023 hurricane standards, revised March 3, 2026, also includes Moody’s North Atlantic Hurricane Models 25.0 and Verisk’s U.S. Hurricane Model 3.0.0 (Touchstone 2024A and Touchstone 2025). Those hurricane acceptances on that list expire November 1, 2027. Insurance Journal on June 12, 2025 still named Applied Research Associates among models the commission had accepted. The March 3, 2026 list under the 2023 standards does not include ARA. Whether an older certificate is still in force was not re-checked. The acceptance list is not a license census.
Why the two numbers still disagree
Both lineages use the same four-stage skeleton: hazard, vulnerability, exposure, financial. What differs is how each stage is computed and how large and time-aware the event set is. Moody’s describes HD models as a temporal simulation on a uniform grid, with damage at coverage level, and says HD event sets can run up to eight million stochastic events. That eight-million figure is a vendor ceiling in a 2023 explainer, not a count for every peril. Verisk’s June 2025 notes describe updates to hazard, vulnerability, and the stochastic event set, plus a changed financial model in Touchstone 13.0.
A Version 25 curve and a Touchstone hurricane 3.0.0 curve can share axis labels (AAL, occurrence EP, aggregate EP, PML) and still be different distributions. Read the definitions on how to read an EP curve. This is not a scorecard. No source reviewed for this revision publishes a neutral, same-portfolio delta, so none is invented here, and this page does not repeat unverified lines about which region leans on which vendor.
Public revenue market share was not found. The only usable adoption evidence behind this revision is Aon’s 2025 survey of its own clients and prospects, plus regulatory acceptance lists. Read it as a survey, not a census. About half of respondents license no vendor and lean on a broker. Moody’s RMS and Verisk are the two predominant licenses. Verisk is wider among U.S. respondents. Moody’s is preferred in UK/EMEA. No percentages are printed here on purpose: the survey does not state a respondent count, its footer marks the PDF confidential even though the URL is public, and a one-point gap sits between the prose and a bar chart.
For how a desk actually blends those views, use model blending and sensitivity testing. For why severe convective storm, flood, and wildfire now move the program, use secondary perils. Dated releases belong on that page, not as a second explainer here.
What the desk should record
Record vendor, product (RiskLink, Risk Modeler, HD, Touchstone, Touchstone Re, RiskInsight, ELEMENTS, or the Florida public model), version, and run date. A model-year change can move technical premium and the layer a reinsurer will sell even when total insured value did not change. Florida is the clearest public version of that rule: residential rate filings use a commission-accepted model, and a 2023 Florida law lets property insurers average two or more of those accepted models.
Platform lock-in is part of model risk in 2026. Moody’s is still supporting several RiskLink generations at once. Verisk has told clients Touchstone 13.0 is the last full release and that Synergy Studio is the planned replacement. Which buttons the underwriter presses is not a footnote.
The practical choice for most carriers is which of the two dominant licenses, which version, and whether a second view is blended in: the other major vendor, KCC, Cotality, Impact Forecasting, or an internal overlay. There is still no universal “right” model. The operative one is the one that binds capacity.
FAQ
Are RMS, AIR, and Verisk three vendors?
No. Moody’s RMS is one lineage. AIR is Verisk’s catastrophe-model lineage, rebranded under the parent in January 2022 and, in trade press from November 2025, housed in Catastrophe & Risk Solutions. ISO, PCS, and Xactware are not a third stochastic model.
Who else sells a distinct model?
Karen Clark & Company, Cotality (CoreLogic until the March 24, 2025 rebrand), Aon’s Impact Forecasting, and the Florida Public Hurricane Loss Model are separate families. Florida’s March 3, 2026 acceptance list under the 2023 hurricane standards names those alongside Moody’s and Verisk. Acceptance is not the same as license share.
Why do two accepted models disagree on the same book?
Catalogs, vulnerability curves, and financial engines differ. The labels (AAL, EP, PML) do not. Compare the same metric, return period, peril scope, and financial perspective, then read the EP-curve page before arguing the tail.
What should a renewal file down?
Vendor, platform, version, and run date; whether the number is a license run, a broker-supplied view, or a blend; and which accepted Florida model (or average of accepted models) a residential filing actually used.
Sources for the dates above: Moody’s (August 5 and September 15, 2021; May 28 and June 13, 2025), Insurance Journal (May 15, 2002 and June 12, 2025), Artemis (January 31, 2022), Captive International (November 14, 2025), Verisk’s June 2025 Touchstone 13.0 release summary, Cotality (March 24, 2025), the Florida commission list revised March 3, 2026, and Aon’s 2025 Global Catastrophe Risk Management Survey (public URL; confidential legend; a survey, not a census).