a comparison of property liability insurance financial pricing models l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 27

A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 236 Views
  • Uploaded on

A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models. Stephen P. D’Arcy, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D. Richard W. Gorvett, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D. Department of Finance University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Presented to the Casualty Actuarial Society Spring Meeting May, 1998.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models' - elina


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
a comparison of property liability insurance financial pricing models

A Comparison ofProperty-Liability InsuranceFinancial Pricing Models

Stephen P. D’Arcy, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D.

Richard W. Gorvett, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D.

Department of Finance

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Presented to the

Casualty Actuarial Society Spring Meeting

May, 1998

comparison of loss reserving and ratemaking techniques
Comparison of Loss Reserving and Ratemaking Techniques

Loss Reserving

  • Recognizes that predicting the future is uncertain
  • Apply a number of different approaches
  • Attempt to explain outliers
  • Actuarial judgment to select final value
  • Expect variation from selected value
comparison of loss reserving and ratemaking techniques3
Comparison of Loss Reserving and Ratemaking Techniques

Ratemaking

  • Often a single model applied
  • Process relatively mechanical
  • “Correct” result is expected
comparison of loss reserving and ratemaking techniques4
Comparison of Loss Reserving and Ratemaking Techniques

Recommendation

  • Ratemaking process should be similar to the loss reserving process
    • Use a number of different methods
    • Expect model error
    • Apply actuarial judgment
actuarial vs financial models
Actuarial

Focus on supply / demand in insurance markets

Satisfy exogenous constraints

Financial

Include capital market considerations

Consider behavior of insurance company claimholders

Actuarial vs. Financial Models
objectives of paper
Objectives of Paper
  • Demonstrate the application of financial pricing models to a realistic ratemaking situation
  • Compare results from different models
  • Examine how changes in parameter values affect results
  • Discuss strengths and weaknesses of each model
  • Focus on most important parameters
methodology
Methodology
  • Identify financial pricing models
  • Determine representative company financial statements
  • Apply financial pricing models to company to determine indicated UPMs
  • Test UPM sensitivity to changes in the model parameters
  • Identify implications and need for additional research
financial pricing models
Financial Pricing Models
  • Target total rate of return
  • Insurance capital asset pricing model
  • Discounted cash flow
  • Internal rate of return
  • Option pricing model
  • Arbitrage pricing model
target total ror and insurance capm premium formulas
Target Total RoR and Insurance CAPM Premium Formulas

Target Total Rate of Return

Insurance CAPM

characteristics of company
Characteristics of Company
  • Operates in a single state
  • Writes one line of business:

Private Passenger Auto

(These assumptions avoid the need

to allocate surplus)

base case parameters
Base Case Parameters

Company

  • Equity $ 189,360
  • Expected Losses $ 193,605
  • Investment rate of return 8.0%
  • SD of investment returns 20.0%
  • Equity beta 1.00
  • Funds generating coefficient 1.18
base case parameters14
Base Case Parameters

Economic

  • Risk-free rate 5.0%
  • Market risk premium 8.0%
  • Risk Adj./Risk-free ratio 60.0%
  • U/W beta 0.0
  • SD of market returns 22.0%
  • SD of losses 48,401
  • CPI change 3.0%
  • CPI beta 0.50
  • Industrial prod. growth 2.0%
  • Industrial prod. beta 0.25
base case parameters15
Base Case Parameters

Government Policy

  • Tax rate 34.0%
  • Investment / total tax rate 80.0%
  • Tax discount factor 7.0%
base case results
Base Case Results

Model Indicated UPM

Target UPM 5.0%

Internal Rate of Return 1.7

Option Pricing 0.2

Discounted Cash Flow 0.1

Arbitrage Pricing - 2.9

Target Total Rate of Return - 3.6

Insurance CAPM - 4.9

reality check target total rate of return
Reality Check:Target Total Rate of Return

Model Target: 13%

State Farm Target: 15%

(Per 1994 KY Auto Filing)

Model UPM Indication: -3.6%

State Farm Indication: 0%

sensitivity to risk free rate
Sensitivity to Risk-Free Rate

Indicated UPM

  • Target Total RoR - 5.2% to 3.9%
  • Insurance CAPM -14.5% to - 2.9%
  • Discounted Cash Flow - 0.7% to 0.1%
  • Internal RoR - 1.2% to 11.4%
  • Option Pricing - 8.8% to 2.2%
  • Arbitrage Pricing -12.5% to - 0.9%
different concepts of surplus equity
Different Concepts of Surplus (Equity)

(1) Capital Attraction/Retention Standard

  • Recognizes that assets can be redeployed to alternative investments
  • Provides competitive return on this amount of capital

(2) Amount of Equity Capital Generating

Investment Income for Tax Calculation

  • Calculates tax impact of investment income on this initial equity
  • Reflects this taxation in premium level
slide23

“No distinction is introduced here between the market value of equity, VE, and the various accounting or book values of equity. The two may of course diverge over time, but in competitive markets the expected book and market values of new equity capital put into the insurance business should be the same. Since the Hope standard is a capital-attraction standard, it is appropriate in the analysis of returns and of target returns to treat VE as if it were new equity.”Fairley, 1979, “Investment Income and Profit Margins in Property-Liability Insurance: Theory and Empirical Results,” Bell Journal of Economics

definitions of surplus equity
Definitions of Surplus (Equity)

ModelSurplus Definition

Target Total Rate of Return 1

Insurance CAPM 1 and 2

Discounted Cash Flow 2

Internal Rate of Return 1 and 2

Option Pricing 1 and 2

Arbitrage Pricing Model 1 and 2

calculation of adjusted surplus
Calculation of Adjusted Surplus

Statutory Surplus 150,958

Equity in the UEP Reserve 20,412

Nominal - Discounted Loss Reserves 8,289

Market - Book Value of Bonds 13,928

Non Admitted Assets 946

Tax Liability on Unrealized Capital Gains (5,173)

Adjusted Statutory Surplus 189,360

Market Value of Company 220,399

relative sensitivities of variables
Relative Sensitivities of Variables

Models Are Generally More Sensitive To:

  • Level of Equity
  • Equity Beta
  • Risk-Free Rate
  • Underwriting Beta

Models Are Generally Less Sensitive To:

  • Tax Parameters
conclusions
Conclusions
  • Wide variation in indicated UPMs depending upon model and corporate / economic environment
  • Implications for insurers and regulators
    • Use several models
    • Be aware of operating environment
    • Note advantages and shortcomings of each model
  • Insurance is a complex financial transaction