350 likes | 367 Views
‘Reinsurance Bad Debt’ By Peter Matthews & Paul Murray CAS Reserving Seminar September 18th 2000. Reinsurance Bad Debt. Reserve for the risk of non-realisation of the full value of current and projected reinsurance recoveries. Security Risks. Slow payments Disputes Liquidations
E N D
‘Reinsurance Bad Debt’ By Peter Matthews & Paul Murray CAS Reserving Seminar September 18th 2000
ReinsuranceBad Debt Reserve for the risk of non-realisation of the full value of current and projected reinsurance recoveries
Security Risks • Slow payments • Disputes • Liquidations • Run-offs • Inadequate commutation receipts • Non-payment by intermediaries
USA Insolvencies v Combined Loss Ratios Source: A.M.Best-Insolvencies / Swiss Re - Loss Ratios
Historical USA Insolvency Rate Source: A.M.Best
Broad Brush Approach 1 Bad Debt = % of Future R/I Recoveries + Ledger Unpaid Balance Write-Off
Broad Brush Approach 2 • Assume X% future annual default rate (say 1%) • Discount future R/I recoveries at X% p.a. (PV1) • Bad Debt =Undiscounted Future R/I Recoveries -PV1 + Ledger Unpaid Balance Write-Off
Easy to calculate and explain No need to understand R/I program Not reinsurer specific Difficult to justify No use of R/I structure No use of agency security ratings (AM Best, S&P, Moody’s) Cannot measure or change influence of any one individual reinsurer Cannot react to individual large loss scenarios Cannot be used for commutation purposes Broad Brush ApproachAdvantagesDisadvantages
A More Detailed Approach • Understand outwards programs • Estimate ultimate outwards claims recoveries • Identify the reinsurers behind each outwards contract • Allocate security risk factor to each reinsurer • Sum over all reinsurers and contracts
Whole Account XL General XL Marine Casualty QS Property QS Aviation Property XL Casualty XL Casualty Property Structure of Outwards Reinsurance Program
Casualty Account - 1997 Evented Losses 1.00 xs 8.50 Cover Remaining 8.1 1.00 xs 7.50 1.00 xs 6.50 1.00 xs 6.50 6.4 Loss 1 1.00 xs 5.50 1.00 xs 5.50 4.9 1.50 xs 4.00 1.50 xs 4.00 Loss 2 3.6 1.50 xs 2.50 1.50 xs 2.50 Loss 3 US Dollars 2.5 (Millions) Loss 4 1.50 xs 1.00 1.6 Loss 5 0.9 0.75 xs 0.25 0.4 Loss 6 0.1 Loss 7 0.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 Reinstatements
Loss Types • Projected Events – Hurricanes, Earthquakes, Air Disasters • Aggregate Losses – Asbestos by Insured • Evented Losses not individually projected • Attritional Losses – Quota Share
Projected events Aggregate losses Other evented losses Attritional losses Review results - Apply Class Incurred to Ultimate Factors and present to R/I Program - Apply Class Incurred to Ultimate Factors and present to Proportional R/I Program Estimate R/I Recoveries }Present to R/I Program
Most Recent R/I Years • Review earlier years experience • Apply expected recovery loss ratios • Discuss and review results with underwriters
Calculate R/I Reserve • For each R/I contract calculate: Reserve = (O/S + IBNR) less Future Reinstatement Premiums equals R/I Reserve
Casualty Account - All Years Reinsurer Security 20.4 16.4 12.8 9.6 6.8 US Dollars (Millions) 4.4 2.4 1.2 0.4 0.0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 Disasterous Very Weak Weak Marginal Good Strong Very Strong Extremely Strong Unknown
Sample Default Rates (%) Source: Standard & Poor's
Calculate Bad Debt • Select the bad debt factor for each reinsurer appropriate to each class of business. • Apply the bad debt factor for each respective reinsurer to the reinsurance reserves within each contract. • Sum over all contracts, all programs and all years.
Casualty Account - All Years Estimated Recoveries and Bad Debt 20.4 Cover Remaining 16.4 12.8 Paid 9.6 6.8 US Dollars Good Debt (Millions) 4.4 2.4 1.2 0.4 0.0 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 Bad Debt
Closer to reality Better understanding of R/I program Auditable Allocation by reinsurer Principal to principal set-off Better feedback to Underwriters and Management Better actuarial advice w.r.t. processing and purchasing of reinsurance Observe aging of bad debt Time and effort Detailed ApproachAdvantagesDisadvantages
Future Developments • Use in DFA models • Test a wide variety of scenarios and stochastic parameters • Interact with underwriting cycle and catastrophe expectations • Optimisation and pricing of future reinsurance programs
Conclusion “Winning is not about doing one thing 100% better, but doing 100 things 1% better” Dennis Conner