CHP 36 Flashcards
Two main methods of valuation:
• Discounted cashflow approach
• Market-related approach
No matter which method is used, it is important when setting the discount rate used to value assets and liabilities that it is consistent.
1.3. Discounted cashflow method
A key long-term assumption is future investment return expected.
Future cashflows arising from liabilities are discounted using this rate.
For consistency, assets are also discounted using long-term assumptions.
The major criticism of this approach is that it places a different value on the assets than market value and thus introduces another element of risk.
1.4. Market-related approaches
Replicating portfolio: involves taking fair value of the liabilities as the market value of the portfolio of assets that most closely replicates the duration and risk characteristics of the liabilities.
The replicating portfolio can be done by using stochastic optimisation techniques (a form of asset-liability modeling). This forms the basis for the following 2 techniques:
Replicating portfolio method 1: Mark to market
This is derived from financial economics.
The inflation rate, discount rate and related assumptions are derived from market info as follows:
• Assets are taken at market value
• Liabilities are discounted at the yields on investments that match liabilities – often bonds
• The bond yield may be based on government or corporate bonds – the latter will allow for credit risk
• A better, more complicated method will use term-standard discount rates – takes shape of yield curve into account.
• Market rate of inflation is derived from the difference between yields on portfolios of fixed interest and index-linked bonds.
Replicating portfolio method 2: Bond yields plus risk premium
Starts by using a discount rate based on bond yields as in the mark-to-market method, but then adjusts it to take account of the returns expected on other asset classes as follows:
• Assets are taken at market value
• Liabilities are valued using a discount rate that is found by adjusting (usually increasing) bond yields by the addition of either a constant or a variable equity risk premium.
• Where a constant equity risk premium is used, the result is the same as mark-to-market method except value of liabilities is lower (usually).
• Variable risk premium is derived by a mix of market info and actuarial judgment (more common method)
• Some think that taking account of extra equity return is unsound unless the extra risk is taken into account. As a result some say liabilities should be valued using a risk-free rate.
1.5. Stochastic deflators
These are stochastic discount factors that can be applied to a series of cashflows under a set or realistic scenarios to product market-consistent valuations of assets and liabilities.
Because deflators are themselves stochastic functions, each real world scenario has a different deflator.
The PV of future cashflows to which deflators are applied is the expected value of the deflated cashflows.
Because stochastic deflators are based on real world scenarios, they can be set to allow for the assessment of realistic risks.
2.2. The move to market-based or fair value approaches
Two definitions of fair value:
- The amount for which an asset could be exchanged for a liability settled between knowledgeable, willing parties in an arm’s length transaction.
- The amount the enterprise would have to pay a third party to take over the liability
2.2. The move to market-based or fair value approaches
There is sometimes no secondary liquid market in many of the liabilities required to be valued. Thus the identification of fair value from a market is not practical. Because of this, fair value of liabilities needs to be estimated using market-based assumptions.
One approach is to consider the liabilities as a series of options and to use option pricing techniques to value.
2.3. Estimating fair values
The risk-free market value is the present value based on discounting future liability cashflows at the pre-tax market yield on risk-free assets. (use yield on government securities as a proxy)
Government securities, until recently have been of insufficiently long term to match all insurance cashflows. Some estimation of longer term yields was needed.
2.4. Financial risk and fair value reporting
Financial risk associated with liability cashflow is normally allowed for in a market consistent manner (either by replicating portfolio or stochastic modeling) and the use of a suitably calibrated asset model.
2.5. Mismatching risk and fair value reporting
Risk due to mismatching of assets and liabilities are excluded from fair value calculations. This is because inclusion of this risk would be inconsistent with the general principle that the fair value of liabilities should be independent of the assets held to meet them.
2.6. Non-financial risks and fair value reporting
The adjustment for non-financial risks can be achieved by either:
• Adjusting expected future cashflows, or
• Adjusting the discount rate
These will depend on:
• The amount of the risk
• The cost of the risk implied by the market risk preferences
- Different methods of allowing for risk in cashflows
- Best estimate plus margin
- Contingency loading
- Discounting cashflows at risk premium
- Different methods of allowing for risk in cashflows
3. 1. Best estimate plus margin
Add an explicit margin for risk to the best estimate assumption.
Assessment of the margins required depends on the risk involved and its materiality to the final result.
Where a risk factor has been stable for long and is not exposed to economic events, just add a percentage loading. E.g. mortality loading for persons aged 30-55 in a developed country.
In other cases a more detailed analysis of experience from various sources (perhaps stochastic) may be needed t determine a margin consistent with the risk.
- Different methods of allowing for risk in cashflows
3. 2. Contingency loading
This approach increase the liability by a certain percentage.
The choice of this “contingency loading” is another assumption and should ideally reflect the degree of uncertainty.
It will thus be expected to increase with the value of liabilities but not in a proportionate manner.
Given the analysis tools available, this approach is falling out of favour as excessively arbitrary.