Bahnemann Flashcards

1
Q

Panjer’s Recursive Algorithm

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Size view of losses

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Layer view of losses

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Expected losses in a layer

A

E[X; a; l] = E[X; a + l] - E[X; a]

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Excess loss conditional on a claim exceeding retention

A

Mean residual life at a

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Graphs of excess severity

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Mean and variance of excess claim counts

A

p = probability that a loss exceeds a

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Impact of inflation in fixed excess layer

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Impact of severity inflation on excess counts

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Impact of severity inflation on aggregate losses

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Mean and variance of aggregate losses in a layer

A

Claim contagion parameter (accounts for claims not being independent of each other)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

What the risk charge covers

A

Contingencies such as process and parameter risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

ILF assumptions

A
  1. All UW expenses and profit are variable and do not vary by limit
  2. Frequency and severity are independent
  3. Frequency is the same for all limits (may not be true due to adverse/favorable selections)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Price of a layer of coverage using ILFs

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Consistency in ILFs

A

Increasing and doing so at a decreasing rate.

Premium for successive layers of coverage of constant width will be decreasing

Violation: adverse selection, lawsuits influencing size of limits (frequency would not be the same)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Risk loaded ILFs

A
17
Q

Risk load: Miccolis approach

A
18
Q

Risk load: ISO approach

A
19
Q

Premium for policy with limit l and deductible d

A
20
Q

Pure premium after inflation

A
21
Q

LER relationship for the three different deductible types

A

Straight

Diminishing

Franchise

22
Q

Franchise deductible

A

Loss is truncated but not shifted

23
Q

Diminishing deductible

A
24
Q

Advantage/disadvantage of Panjer’s

A

Good for small frequency of claims

Only a single severity distribution can be used

25
Q

Issues with using lognormal distribution

A

No ability for loss-free scenario (ln 0 is undefined)

No easy way to reflect impact of changing per occurrence limits on aggregate limit

26
Q

Theoretical curve fit for excess severity if curve is flat

A

Exponential

27
Q

Theoretical curve fit for excess severity if curve is linear

A

Pareto

28
Q

Theoretical curve fit for excess severity if curve is decreasing exponentially

A

Gamma

29
Q

Theoretical curve fit for excess severity if curve curves up

A

Lognormal

30
Q

Theoretical curve fit for excess severity if curve is concave down

A

Weibull

31
Q

Issue with fitting excess severity curves

A

Data usually thin and volatile at the higher amounts – difficult to see a pattern

32
Q

Pricing a layer of coverage and applying a risk load

A

Can’t simply subtract risk loaded ILFs (incorrect resulting risk load)

33
Q

ILFs that account for both claim and aggregate limits

A

E[Sl;L] / (E[N] x E[X;b])

34
Q

Impact of inflation on deductibles

A
35
Q

ILF after inflation

A

ILF of the deflated limit DIVIDED by the ILF of the deflated basic limit

36
Q

Basic pure premium after inflation

A

Freq x Sev x (1 + t) x deflated basic limit