special classifications Flashcards
what is the RV that is considered one of main factors in freq and severity of claims
-almost every rating algorithm has some RV that reflects geographic location of risk
Few challenges when determining indicated rates for territories
- territory tends to be high correlated with other RVs
- territories are often set to be such small areas that data in each territory may have very limited credibility
2 steps in territorial RM
- establishing territorial bounds
- determining indicated rates for each territory
Establishing territorial boundaries
- define basic geographic unit
- estimate geographic systemic risk for each geographic unit and to distinguish it from both random noise and systematic risk for other correlated non-geo RVs
GLMs can incorporate
- GLMs can incorporate geo-physical variables (rainfall) and geo-demographic variables (population density)
- still some unexplained geographic variance -> new variable to account for residual variation
spatial smoothing techniques
can be applied to residual variable to smooth results
- distance-based: credibility weighted with data from other units with weights diminishing with distance
- adjacency-based: credibility weight with data from rings of surrounding units with weights diminishing with wider rings
distance based
- easy to understand and implement but assumes distance has same impact for urban and rural risks and doesn’t consider physical boundaries
- best for weather-related perils
adjacency based
- better reflects urban and rural differences and accounts for physical boundaries better
- best for socio-demographic perils (theft)
clustering routines
-once indicated relativities are determined at basic unit level, these can be grouped into territories if desired by clustering routine
Quantile methods
Similarity methods
determining correct relativities aka ILFs for other limits has become more important over time
As personal wealth grows, people need more coverage
Inflationary trend have more impact on increased limits
More lawsuits and higher jury awards over time
why are standard RM approaches are problematic for ILFs
Generally less data at higher limits so results can be volatile
Analyses can produce results that are impractical to implement
standard ILF approach
-rates for various limits are expressed as relativities/ILFs to rate for basic limit:
rate @ limit H = ILF(H) * rate @ limit B
common assumptions for ILF approach
All UW expenses and profit are variable and don’t vary by limit
Freq and severity are independent
Freq is the same for all limits
LAS(H)
limited average severity @ limit H=severity assuming every loss is capped at H
ILFs with censored losses
have to use LAS for layers of loss
LAS(H)=LAS(B)+LAS(H-B xs B)*prob(x>B)