Ch20: Product design Flashcards
Summary Card
- Product design factors
- FORCED CRAMPS accronym
- Profitability
- Marketability
- Conflicts
List 12 factors to be considered when assessing a product design
FORCED CRAMPS acronym
- Financing requirements
- Onerouseness of guarantees
- Risk characteristics
- Competitiveness
- Extent of cross subsidies
- Distribution channel
- Consistency with other products
- Regulation
- Admin systems
- Marketability
- Profitability
- Senstivity of profit
- AMPLE DIRECT FACTORS from CA1/ARM?
Meeting customer needs
Main needs met by insurance products 4
- Savings
- Protection
- Loss of income
- Conversion of capital into income
- Considering what stage they are in their lives
Profitability
Split of profits per product 3
Unit linked 5
- Premiums charged sufficient to cover benefits, expenses and provide profit margin
- Products can be broken down into 3 components:
- Protection: mortality assumpt should cover risk involved, risk will gradually change and future improvements should be allowed for
- Savings: profit on investment income, prudent inv ret assumpt
- Administration:
- expense loadings cover marginal acquisition and admin costs incurred
- tot exp covered by tot exp charge allowing for cross subsidies
- Each policy contribute to variable and fixed costs
- Unit-linked
- Risk to profitability is lower as
- investment risk largely borne by policyholder, and
- mort charges variable at company discretion
- Expense charge is also variable (NB for profitability)
- Overall charge sufficient to cover expenses and provide profit margin
- Risk to profitability is lower as
Marketability
- Innovative design features (make contract more attractive)
- Attractive benefits (understandable to market and appreciated by them)
- Attractive/ competitive charging structure (for UL + consideration of guaranteed chrgs)
- Guarantees and options (premium rates or structure)
- Distribution channel
- More comlex products req brokers to sell
- if using multiple channels, will same price be used?
Competitiveness
- Structure/level of charges/premium should be similar to competitors. Marketing should be considered.
- Find level of charges that maximize tot contrib from a product
- Balance with volume sold to max profits
- Level of expense charges is NB for competitiveness
- Certain Dbn channels may be price sensitive:
- Eg brokers wnat to find the best deal
- Set charges to cover marginal costs w/no contrib to fixed costs
- Rely on X-subsidies to contribute to fixed expenses
- Unit linked: tot chrges are compared
- Non-linked: Interest, risk and expense elements compared
- W/profits prems influence competitiveness
- Expense and mortality profit retained =>+loading in prem=> + prem
- Market maturity: PH awareness of LT inv perf and prop that is distributed to them
- Market investment characteristics: all insurers invest in uniform way. so have inv perf. so use prem and prop of profits alloc to PH
Financing requirements
Unless company has substantial capital resources, will want benefits/charges to be designed to minimise financing requirement. More scope for this under UL contracts
- Important for recently established
- have small amt of assets available to finance new business
- eg newly formed insurer sell UL business initially
- UL advantages over non-linked contracts
- no/few expense guarantees
- no/few mortality guarantees
- no/few investment return guarantees
- smaller solvency capital requirement
- Reduce strain on non linked contract
- reduce initial acquisition costs
- reduce initial administration costs
- reduce valuation strain (increase val interest rate, reduce guarantees)
- financial reinsurance
Risk characteristics
- Consideration given to the level of risk associated with proposed contract design.
- Acceptability depend on risk appetite, ability to absorb/RE risk
- well studied and quantified risk, easy to asborb risk,
- unless entering new market for that company
- If a new market => Large parameter risk
- offer unit-linked/reviewable form contract ( to avoid long term rate guarantee)
- reinsure large part of risk
- incr margins in premium rate
- offer riders rather than standalone
Onerousness of guarantees
- Company will need to consider onerouseness of any guarantees
- suffer cost not fully expected
- hold higher reserves => increasing capital strain
- Guaranteed surrender value
- compare to asset sahre @ withdrawal
- Risk of losses on early withdrawal as AS is neg
- Model using high withdrawal and large asset stress assumptions
- Investment return guarantee
- Guar SA. Guar Annuity benefits
- W/o profits needs to be considered
- immunisation to reduce financial impact of int movements
- Onerous depends on
* size (how much guaranteed)
* period of time for which it holds
* significance of reserves (for the contract)
* volume of business to which it applies
* capital available to company ( to absorb initial reserving cost/eventual real cost)
Sensitivity of profit
- unit-linked, possible to have well-matched charging structure which reduces profit sensitivity to AvE => Non-linked more sensitive.
- Factors that affect profitability
- investment return
- mortality (or other contigents, e.g. morbidity, longevity)
- expenses
- expense inflation
- persistency
- Minimise sensitivity of profits on UL
- no investment guarantees => all risk on PH
- mortality (make charge for this variable, at company’s discretion)
- expenses (make charge for this variable, at company’s discretion)
- no guaranteed surrender values
- matching (try to match income (charges) with outgo (expenses/benefit cost) as closely as possible by duration
- Redesign non linked products
- No/min SV
- Commission clawback to reduce early withdrawals
Extent of cross subsidies
- Company needs to decide on extent of any cross subsidies between different policies/products (e.g. large and small).
- Marketing advantage of single premium/charging structure may conflict with a desire to avoid complicated marketing.
- Expense (PH focusses on expenses)
- Extent expenses can be subsidized from interest and mort profits
- Extent policies cover their marginal costs vs size of prem
- incurred by policy regardless of its size
- setting policy charge which covers marginal cost may be uncompetitive
- so set charge = % prem to use x-sub on larger policies
- Fixed policy fee
- ideally even small policies should cover their own marginal admin costs
- might be a cross subsidy between small policies and large
Administration systems
System requirements of new product may limit either benefits to be provided or charging structure deployed
- simple product easier to manage
- compatibility with admin system can be extended to cover simplicity
- all parties (staff, policyholders, sales people) all benefit from simple product
- complications warranted
- by some significant advantage in terms of the factors mentioned above
Consistency with other products
Company may wish to ensure charging/benefit structures of new policy are at least similar to any existing business.
- Reduce system development (saves time)
- Less training staff (administration, sales car, staff printing and marketing literature
- Unfair to existing policyholders (if new design appears more attractive, which leads dissatisfaction and possible marketing risk
Regulatory requirements
Company must adhere to any regulatory requirements which should be taken into account in product design, e.g. maximum charges, treating customers fairly
- TCF
- meet normal standards of professional ethical behaviour
- reccommended by professional guidance
- regulatory requrement
- foster ongoing trust and good relations
Sustainable Investment options
- ESG issues have + focus, drive from regs,social resp, marketing
- Consider sustainability of investments
- Environ factors eg CO2 emmissions
- Social factors eg working conditions
- Governancne factorseg acc stds used