1 / 39

Claims Reserving for Non Life Insurance

Claims Reserving for Non Life Insurance. Craig Thorburn, B.Ec., F.I.A.A. Cthorburn@worldbank.org Phone +1 202 473 4932. Agenda. The objectives of loss reserving Techniques The role of the supervisor Illustrative examples. Objectives of Loss Reserving. The statistical basis of insurance

hoai
Download Presentation

Claims Reserving for Non Life Insurance

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Claims Reserving for Non Life Insurance Craig Thorburn, B.Ec., F.I.A.A. Cthorburn@worldbank.org Phone +1 202 473 4932

  2. Agenda • The objectives of loss reserving • Techniques • The role of the supervisor • Illustrative examples

  3. Objectives of Loss Reserving • The statistical basis of insurance • Supervisory objectives • Company objectives

  4. The Statistical Basis of Insurance

  5. The Risk of Ruin • Taking account of • Expected and unexpected events • Expected and unexpected outcomes of size of claims • Expected and unexpected timing issues • The potential for misestimating values • What is the chance that we will not have enough funds to meet our obligations? • Do we have enough resources to cover the potential adversity in outcome?

  6. At an acceptably small probability of being wrong Point where claims use up available resources Total Claims Cost Probability of Exceeding “Ruin”

  7. Supervisory Objectives • Adequacy • Normally, assessment on a “not less than reasonable” basis • Value relates to determining excess assets • Value can relate to determining solvency margin requirements

  8. Company Objectives • Economic capital requirements • Other external pressures • Ratings agencies • Solvency breach minimisation • Profit smoothing • Taxation management • Management remuneration schemes

  9. Small Numbers and Large Numbers • On the balance sheet numbers are small • On the P&L numbers are large • For example • Company seeks profit of 3% of premiums • Investment earnings are 10% pa • Business is long tail (term 4 years) • 2% increase in provisioning will eliminate the year’s profit

  10. Agenda • The objectives of loss reserving • Techniques • The role of the supervisor • Illustrative examples

  11. Techniques • Case estimates • Run-off methods • Stochastic methods • Advantages and disadvantages • Issues • Establishing assumptions • Reinsurance allowance • Quality of data

  12. Case Estimates • Each claim has a file opened when it is notified • Estimates are made, and updated, as information comes to hand • Payments made are recorded against the file • When the claim is finalised, the file is closed

  13. Run-off Methods • Use models to complete the future expected payments • Several methods are available • Assume past (observed) processes continue into the future

  14. Stochastic Methods • Full models of claims size and delay are established • Can be enhanced by simulation methods • Provide a great deal of information about the range of answers – not just one answer

  15. Advantages and Disadvantages • Case estimates do not include IBNR • Case estimates use all available information about a claim • Case estimates can be biased by management attitudes • Case estimates are easy to implement • Run-off and Stochastic methods rely on stability of procedures and quality of data • Run-off and Stochastic methods are more difficult to implement and to interpret

  16. Issues • Establishing Assumptions • Reinsurance allowance • Quality of data

  17. Questions and comments

  18. Agenda • The objectives of loss reserving • Techniques • The role of the supervisor • Illustrative Examples

  19. The role of the supervisor • What can you do? • Ratio analysis • Runoff methods • Back-testing Case Estimates • Use of Actuaries • On Site Inspections

  20. Ratio Analysis • Collect data on the numbers of claims, case estimates, and amounts of claims to date and expected by business line and accident year. • Compare company to company and period to period looking for extremes and sudden changes.

  21. Runoff Methods • Can be applied to data submitted to check answers for reasonableness • Ideally, several methods would be used

  22. Back-testing Case Estimates • Important to see how adequate they have been. • Compare last year’s case estimates with this year plus claims paid less allowance for investment income and expenses. • Similar to case estimate development method (covered later).

  23. Use of Actuaries • Interview actuaries who have done evaluations. • Read existing actuarial reports. • Compare actuarial methods and assumptions. • Seek an independent actuarial report. • Employ internal actuaries in the supervisor.

  24. On Site Inspections • Activity will depend on time taken and assessed risk • Examine actuarial data sources • Examine actuarial processes • Review assumptions

  25. Agenda • The objectives of loss reserving • Techniques • The role of the supervisor • Illustrative example

  26. Illustrations • Chain ladder method • Based on CUMULATIVE data • Can do numbers or amounts of claims incurred or paid or case estimates

  27. The Starting Point

  28. Historic data Past numbers of claims for each year • It is important to have quality data which is homogeneous • Separate business lines and categories

  29. The Objective Past numbers of claims for each year Filling in the gap…

  30. Step 1: Make the Table Cumulative

  31. Step 2: Calculate Ratios

  32. Step 3: Apply Ratios to Project Figures

  33. Actual Data I used…

  34. Comparison of Results

  35. 150 cases using average ratio • 45% proved, in hindsight, to be adequate

  36. 150 cases using worst observed ratio • 92% proved, in hindsight, to be adequate

  37. Questions and comments

More Related