CGNU's market value tumbled by more than 5% yesterday after reporting disappointing growth of only 10% in first quarter life and pension sales, and thinner margins.
The UK's biggest insurer with its Norwich Union brand, which this week approved a world-wide group name change to Aviva, was seen by the market as falling behind rivals.
''The numbers were disappointing, the margins are eroding and the results were at the bottom end of expectations,'' said Tamzin Hobday, a director at WestLB Panmure.
Shares eased 43.5p to 7285p.
CGNU's two major UK rivals, Prudential and Legal & General, both beat market expectations with new business gains of 26% and 34% respectively.
Life and pension sales in the UK, CGNU's main market, rose 15% in the first quarter, but profit margins fell as the firm sold more lower-margin pensions, including stakeholder. New business profit margins were down 2.6 points to 22.9%.
Craig Burke, analyst at BNP Paribas, said: ''In the UK they are coming in with growth less than Legal's and Pru's and their margins are going down, whereas Legal's and Pru's are going up.''
Another fund manager said CGNU would have to prove in the second quarter that while growth might slow, margins were stabilising. CGNU has underperformed the UK life assurance sector by 6% this year, amid a general wariness towards insurers after a raft of bad news and huge asset write-offs last year.
Richard Harvey, chief execut-ive, blamed weak stock markets, which hit sales of equity-backed bonds and other investment products, and some seasonal factors for the lower sales growth.
CGNU's life and pensions sales have increased 30% since the merger of CGU and Norwich Union two years ago, and the group has said its aim is to increase market share by a third to 15% by 2005.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article