ERM Ch.2 Flashcards
3 steps in the evolutionary process
- Deterministic Project Analysis
- Risk Analysis
- Certainty Equivalent
Risk Management Decisions should be
- Objective
- Consistent
- Repeatable
- Transparent
Steps to allocate cost of risk
- Estimate an Aggregate Loss Distribution
- Quantify the impact of the loss outcomes on the organization
- Assign a cost to each amount of impact
- Attribute (allocate) the cost back to each risk source
Corporate risk tolerance depends on
- Organization’s size
- Financial resources
- Abiltiy & willingness to tolerate volatility
Advantages of Economic Capital
- Provides a unifying measure for all risks across an organization
- More meaningful to management than formulaic RBC or capital adequacy ratios
- Forces firm to quantify the risks it faces & combine them into a probability distribution
- Provides a framework for setting acceptable risk levels for the organization as a whole & for individual business units
Asset Liability Modeling Approach
- Start w/ models of asset classes, liabilities & current business operations
- Define risk metrics
- Define return metrics
- Time Horizon
- Constraints
- Simulations
- Efficient frontier graph
- Liabilities, in particular future loss reserves, can be modified
- Results should be reviewed to identify the simulations that the preferred portfolio performed poorly
Value of Reinsurance
- Provides stability
- Frees up captial
- Adds to the value of the firm
Deterministic Project Analysis
Singe deterministic forecast of cash flows. Calculate a NPV or IRR. May do sensitivity analysis by varying some of the input assumptions. Uncertainity is handled judgementally.
Risk Analysis
The critical inputs have a distribution. These are fed into the model, and the output is a distribution of outcomes. Can be NPV or IRR. Uncertainty is handled judgementally, though a good portion has been moved into the distributions.
Certainty Equivalent
Has the additional step of running the output through a utility function. Formalizes some of the risk assessment so it can be applied consistently.
Should we strive for certainty equivalent?
Argument 1: Since the investors in the company are only compensated for systemic risk, and not compensated for firm-specific risk; the company shouldn’t be concered with firm-specific risk.
Argument 2: Hard to identify systemic vs. firm-specifc risk. Market-based information is too noisy for management to be able to do a proper CBA and make tradeoff decisions.
Market Value
Book Value + Franchise Value
2 papers analyzed by Mango - Spetzler
- Measure the utility curve for managers of a firm
- Which minimum level (p) would you accept a project
- Compared risk tolerance of different managers within a firm
- Create a transparent, objective mathematical expression of the corporation’s risk/reward tradeoffs
2 papers analyzed by Mango - Walls
- Focused on oil projects - Upfront investment -> Project may either succeed or fail
- Certainty Equivalent - The fixed amount that the firm is indifferent between taking the risky portfolio or the fixed amount
- Calculates the efficient frontier of portfolios & then uses the risk tolerance of the firm to select where on the frontier to select the best portfolio
- Questions:
- How much risk are we willing to tolerate?
- How much reward are we willing to give up for a given reduction in risk & vice versa?
- Are the risk-reward tradeoffs available along the efficient frontier acceptable to us?
One method to allocate the cost of risk capital
- Allocate Capital in a risk adjusted way
- Apply a hurdle rate to determine the cost of captial for each business unit
- Called Return on Risk-Adjusted Capital - RAROC