Section A: Stochastic Reserving Flashcards
Verrall: In what situations would you want to adjust your model for expert knowledge?
- Change in payment patterns
- New legislation that limits benefits
- Decreases the potential for loss development and development factors must be adjusted.
Verrall: What is the benefit of a Bayesian model over the Mack or Bootstrap models to predict reserves?
The Bayesian approach can incorporate expert opinion into the model naturally without compromising the underlying assumptions.
- i.e. incorporates expert knowledge & its easy to implement
Two key areas where expert knowledge is applied:
- Expected losses in the BF method
- Selected individual LDFs in the Chain Ladder method
Verrall: What makes the implementation of Bayesian methodology easy?
A common problem with Bayesian methods is the difficulty deriving the posterior distribution as this may be multi-dimensional.
MCMC makes this easier by using the conditional distribution of each parameter, given all other parameters, thus making the simulation a univariate distribution.
Verrall: Describe the MCMC methodology.
- MCMC methods simulate the posterior distribution of a random variable.
- Breaks down the process using simulations
- Each of the simulations use the conditional distribution of each parameter given all the other parameters making the simulation a univariate distribution.
- By considering each parameter in turn, this creates a Markov Chain
Verrall: What is the difference between the Chain Ladder and BF method for deriving reserves?
- The BF method uses an external estimate for the “level” of each row (e.g. loss ratio, expected loss, etc.)
- The CL method uses the data in each row
Verrall: Stochastic Reserving for the Chain-Ladder Technique - Indicated the mean, variance, advantages and the disadavantages of the model.
Mack’s Model
E[Di,j] = λjDi,j-1
Var(Di,j) = σj2Di,j-1
Advantages
- parameter estimates and prediction errors (reserve ranges) are easy to get (e.g. only need a spreadsheet)
- easy to implement
Disadvantages
- since the distribution isn’t specified, there is no predictive distribution
- must estimate additional parameters to calculate the variance
Verrall: Stochastic Reserving for the Chain-Ladder Technique - Indicate the mean, variance, advantages and the disadavantages of the model.
Over-Dispersed Poisson Model
E[Ci,j] = xiyj
Var(Ci,j) = φxiyi
*xi = expected ultimate loss for year i
*yj = % of ultimate losses emerging in development period j
Note: over-dispersed means proportional NOT equal
Advantages
- doesn’t break down model if there are negative incremental values
- same reserve estimate as chain ladder
- more stable than lognormal model of Kremer
Disadvantages
- connection to chain ladder is not immediately apparent
- must estimate additional parameters to calculate the variance
Verrall: Stochastic Reserving for the Chain-Ladder Technique - Indicated the mean, variance, advantages and the disadavantages of the model.
Over-Dispersed Negative Binomial
E[Ci,j] = (λj-1)Di,j-1
Var(Ci,j) = φλj(λj-1)Di,j-1
NOTE: The reserve estimates are the same as the CL method.
→All LDFs must be > 1 (no overall negative development) or variance will be negative
Advantages
- doesn’t break down model if there are some negative incremental values
- same reserve estimate as chain ladder
- mean is exactly the same as the CL method
Disadvantages
- Column sums of the incremental losses must be positive or the variance will be negative
Verrall: Stochastic Reserving for the Chain-Ladder Technique - Indicated the mean, variance, advantages and the disadavantages of the model.
Normal Approximation to the Negative Binomial
E[Ci,j] = (λj-1)Di,j-1
Var(Ci,j) = φjDi,j-1
Advantages
- allows the possibility of negative incremental losses
- same reserve estimate as chain ladder
- mean is exactly the same as the CL method
Disadvantages
- Additional parameters must be estimated to calculate variance (same issue as Mack method)
Verrall: What is the RMSEP?
Root Mean Square Error of Prediction
Mean Squared Error of Prediction (MSEP) is how we calculate the prediction intervals and is also known as the prediction variance.
MSEP = Prediction Variance = Process Variance + Estimation Variance
RMSEP = √MSEP = Prediction Error
Verrall: What is the difference between the standard error and prediction error?
- SE is the square root of the estimation variance
- only accounts for parameter estimation error
- Prediction error is concerned with the variability of the forecast and accounts for both
- uncertainty in the parameter estimation (estimation variance)
- variability in the data being forecast (process variance)
Verrall: What are the advantages of Bayesian methods when it comes to prediction error?
- Full predicitve distribution can be found using simulation methods
- The RMSEP can be obtained directly by calculating the standard deviation of the distribution
Verrall: What are two ways the actuary can intervene in the estimation of the development factors for the chain-ladder method?
- Change a development factor in some of the rows based on external information
- Use a 5 year volume-weighted average rather than using all the data in the triangle (all year average)
Verrall: What prior distribution is used in the Bayesian Model for the BF method?
Since the BF method assumes expert opinion in each row, we specify the prior distribution as a gamma distribution; xi ~ GAM(⍺i, ßi):
E[xi] = ⍺ißi = Mi
Var(xi) = ⍺i / ßi2 = Mi / ßi
Verrall: Credibility-Weighted Bayesian Model for the BF method
Zi,j = ?
E[Cij] = ?
Verrall: How can the variance of the model be adjusted for xi?
ßi can be used to alter the variance of xi:
- if we choose prior distributions with large variances (small betas), we have low confidence (no prior knowledge) in our parameter estimates
- result is close to the CL method
- if we choose prior distributions with small variances (large betas), we have high confidence (prior knowledge) in our estimates
- result is close to the BF method
Verrall: Fully Stochastic BF model formulas
- Run a reverse chain ladder to calculate the gammas and the expected incremental losses
Verrall: Summarize the steps needed for defining a stochastic version of the BF technique.
Step 1: Estimate column parameters
Step 2: Incorporate prior information into the distributions for the parameters xi
Step 3: Use xi to determine ɣi
Step 4: Calculate the expected incremental losses using the gammas
Shapland: The goal of the ODP bootstrap model is to provide a range of possible outcomes rather than a point estimate. A point estimate is still required by ASOP 36 as we book a point estimate. That being said, list 3 reasons why stochastic reserving is beneficial.
- Could book the first moment of the distribution instead of using a deterministic approach for point estimate (as defined by ASOP 43)
- SEC looking for more reserving risk information in 10-K reports
- Rating agencies are looking to validate & improve their models and welcome input from company actuaries regarding unpaid claim distributions
- Support ERM’s dynamic risk models
- Accounting framework Solvency II and IFRS moving towards using unpaid claim distributions rather than point estimates
Shapland: Briefly describe the objectives of the “Using the ODP Bootstrap Model: A Practitioner’s Guide” monograph.
- Provide practical details on GLM’s - benefits of GLM that can tailor to statistical features of the data versus algorithms which force the data to fit to a static method.
- Promote adoption of using unpaid claim distributions by showing how the ODP bootstrap modelling can be used in practice.
- Show how to deal with practical issues such as incomplete triangles or negative incremental losses/counts.
- Show how stochastic reserving can be similar to deterministic reserving by weighting different models
- deterministic weights different methods rather than models
- Illustrate the advantage of using a complete set of risk estimation tools (both stochastic models and deterministic methods) to arrive at an actuarial best estimate.
Shapland: What is model risk?
Model Risk
The risk that the chosen model is not the same as the on that generates future losses.
→ can be addressed by weighting several models together
Shapland: What are the two key assumptions that need to be made in order to make a projection of ultimate losses for the chain-ladder method?
- The same development factor is applied to all accident years based on a volume weighted average (or some other average).
- Each accident year has a parameter that represents its level (its current cumulative loss).
- Ultimate Claims = Cumulative Loss x CLDF
- Variation of this assumption is to assume homogeneity in the exposures underlying the losses. This results in using an average loss by development period which can be used to estimate the next period losses. The issue with this is that CL method assumes AY’s are NOT homogenous.
- The BF and CC method do assume homogeneity (loss ratio, average loss, etc.) by incorporating future expected results into the reserve estimate.
Shapland: What are the advantages of a Bootstrap Model?
- Generates a distribution of possible outcomes rather than a single point estimate
- Provides more information about the results which can be used in capital modeling
- Can be modified to align with the statistical features of the data underlying the analysis
- Can reflect the fact that insurance loss distributions tend to be skewed to the right.
- the sampling process doesn’t need a distribution assumption and the underlying data is already skewed which is what the model is reflecting
Shapland: Provide an overview of the Over-Dispersed Poisson Model.
- Incremental claims q(w,d) are modeled directly using a GLM
- GLM structure uses:
- log link function
- ODP error distribution
Steps:
- Use the GLM model to estimate parameters
- Use bootstrapping (sampling residuals with replacement) to estimate the total distribution
Shapland: List the formulas that are used to parameterize the GLM.
E[q(w,d)] = mw,d
Var(q(w,d)) = ømzw,d
ln(mw,d) = ηw,d
ηw,d = ⍺w + Σd=2ßd
Shapland: What does the power Z represent in the parameterized GLM?
z is used to specify the error distribution
Error Distribution
z = 0 → Normal Distribution
z = 1 → Poisson Distribution
z = 2 → Gamma Distribution
z = 3 → Inverse Guassian Distribution
Shapland: Set up a GLM model for a 3 x 3 triangle.
Shapland: Explain how you would solve the GLM model.
Solve the ⍺ and ß parameters of the Y = X + A matrix equation that minimizes the squared difference between the vector of the log of actual incremental losses (Y) and the log of expected incremental losses, the Solution Matrix.
- Can use the iteratively weighted least squares (as in excel files), maximum liklihood or Newton-Raphson to solve for the parameters in the A vector.
Shapland: What formulas do you need to solve for the fitted incrementals in the GLM model?
Shapland: Discuss the usefulness of the Simplified GLM framework.
- The fitted incremental values using the Poisson error distribution assumption are the same as the incremental losses using volume-weighted average LDFS.
Simplified GLM Method
- Use cumulative claim triangle to calculate LDFs
- Develop losses to ultimate
- Calculate the expected cumulative triangle by using the last cumulative diagonal, dividing backwards successively by each volume weighted LDF.
- Calculate the expected incremental triangle from the cumulative triangle
Shapland: What are the advantages of the Simplified GLM Framework?
- GLM can be replaced with a simpler development factor approach and still be based on the underlying GLM framework.
- Using age-to-age factors serves as a “bridge” to the deterministic framework which allows the model to be easily explained to others.
- We can use link ratios to get a solution where there are negative incremental losses. A GLM with log-link function may not have a solution.
Shapland: Unscaled Pearson Residuals
rw,d = ?
rw,d = [q(w,d) - mw,d] / √mzw,d
Unscaled Pearson Residual AY,d = (Actual LossAY,d - Expected LossAY,d) / √Expected Incurred LosszAY,d
- Pearson residuals are desirable since they are calculated consistently with the scale parameter