Sahasrabuddhe Flashcards
Criticisms of current claims development practices (3)
- does not vary trend across AYs
- does not consider development period or CY trend
- does not consider varying effect of trend on different claims layers
Necessary claims data adjustments (2)
Sahasrabuddhe
- common limit
2. cost level
Connections b/w development factors at different layers and cost levels (2)
- claim size models
2. trend
Model assumptions along with complexity (5)
Sahasrabuddhe
requires:
- selection of a basic limit
- use of a claim size model
- claims data is adjusted to basic limit and common cost level
- claim size models at maturities prior to ultimate (generally not available)
- triangle of trend indices
1-3 - simple, 4-5 complex
Adjusted data at cell (i,j)
adj data = raw data * ( LEV(n,j) at common limit / LEV(i,j) at raw limit )
Development factor for any layer and any exposure period
= age-to-ultimate for common limit * { [ LEV (X,i,n) / LEV (Y,n,n) ] / [ LEV (X,i,j) / LEV (Y,n,j) ] }
Y = starting/common limit X = ending limit
ratio of ratios w/ratio at ultimate over ratio at t
exposure periods go from n»_space; i
development periods go from j»_space; n
Development factor for any layer and any exposure period under simplified assumptions (layer lower bound at 0)
= age-to-ultimate for common limit * U / R
where U = LEV (X) / LEV (Y) at (i,n)
and R = LEV (X) / LEV (Y) at (i,j)
Development factor for any layer and any exposure period under simplified assumptions (layer lower bound <> 0)
= age-to-ultimate for common limit * ( 1 - U ) / ( 1 - R )
where U = LEV (X) / LEV (Y) at (i,n)
and R = LEV (X) / LEV (Y) at (i,j)
Decay model for R
Rj (X,Y) = U + ( 1 - U ) * decay factor
decay factor = 0 at ultimate
Impact of a smaller claim size model parameter
Sahasrabuddhe
Smaller % of losses eliminated