370 likes | 482 Views
Claims/Agency metrics. Greg Taylor Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries University of Melbourne University of New South Wales Casualty Actuarial Society Special Interest Seminar on Predictive Modeling Boston, October 4-5 2006. Overview. Individual claim models “Paids” models
E N D
Claims/Agency metrics Greg Taylor Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries University of Melbourne University of New South Wales Casualty Actuarial Society Special Interest Seminar on Predictive Modeling Boston, October 4-5 2006
Overview • Individual claim models • “Paids” models • “Incurreds” models • Numerical results • Adaptive models
Example problem • Classical workers compensation cost centre allocation problem • Claim numbers at the leaves of this tree may be small Total claim cost . . . Cost centre 1 Cost centre 2 Cost centre m … … …
Measuring claims performance • Consider measuring claims performance in a segment of a long tail portfolio • Likely that adopted metric will require an estimate of the amount of losses incurred but as yet unpaid (loss reserve) • e.g. metric is expected ultimate losses per policy for a specific underwriting period = Paid to date + unpaid losses Number of policy-years of exposure = average PTD per policy-year + average unpaid per policy-year
Measuring claims performance in large portfolio segments • Let there be n policy-years of exposure and ui = i-th amount unpaid • Consider the ui to be random drawings from some distribution • Average amount unpaid is ūi = Σ ui /n = Σ {E[ui] + ui - E[ui]}/n = E[ui] + Σ {ui - E[ui]}/n E[ui] as n∞ by the large of large numbers d
Measuring claims performance in large portfolio segments (cont’d) ūi E[ui] as n∞ • E[ui] = expected size of a randomly drawn claim • This will be the result produced by most conventional actuarial methods, e.g. • Paid chain ladder • Even incurred chain ladder at early development • While E[ui] may be a good approximation to ūi for large sample sizes, it may be very poor for small ones • Leading to a highly distorted cost allocation d
Measuring claims performance in small portfolio segments • Effective estimation of small sample average claim cost must somehow take account of the properties of the individual claims
There is a need to change from this… Data Fitted Model Forecast Forecast • Conventional actuarial analysis of loss experience • Call such models “aggregate models”
…to this Forecast Model Special case of individual claim reserving – statistical case estimation
Form of such a model Forecast g() Model Y=f(β)+ε
Form of such a model Forecast g() Model Y=f(β)+ε • Yi = f(Xi; β) + εi • Yi = size of i-th completed claim • Xi = vector of attributes (covariates) of i-th claim • β = vector of parameters that apply to all claims • εi = vector of centred stochastic error terms
Form of individual claim model Yi = f(Xi; β) + εi • Convenient practical form is Yi = h-1(XiTβ) + εi [GLM form] h = link function Error distribution from exponential dispersion family Linear predictor = linear function of the parameter vector
Form of individual claim model – more specifically • How might one create an individual claim model of the “paids” type? • Aggregate paids model usually takes the form Yjk = f(j,k; β) + εjk for j = accident period k= development period • Compare with Yi = f(Xi; β) + εi Not always formulated
Form of “paids” individual claim model • Possible to mimic aggregate model by defining individual model as just Yi = h-1(ji,ki; β) + εi
Form of “paids” individual claim model • Possible to mimic aggregate model by defining individual model as just Yi = h-1(ji,ki; β) + εi • But often possible to improve on this, e.g. • Replace development period j with operational time ti (proportion of accident period’s incurred claims completed) at completion of i-th claim • Example Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)] + εi
Example of “paids” individual claim model Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)] + εi E[Yi] = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)]
Example of “paids” individual claim model (cont’d) Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)] + εi • Include superimposed inflation • Let q=j+k=calendar period of claim completion • Extend model Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+β3qi] + εi • Superimposed inflation at rate exp[β3] per period
Example of “paids” individual claim model (cont’d) Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+β3qi] + εi • We might wish to model superimposed inflation as beginning at period q=q0 Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+β3max(0,qi-q0)] + εi
Example of “paids” individual claim model (cont’d) Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+β3qi] + εi • We might wish to model superimposed inflation as beginning at period q=q0 Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+β3max(0,qi-q0)] + εi • …and we might wish to model superimposed inflation with a rate that decreases with increasing operational time Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+(β3-β4ti) max(0,qi-q0)] + εi etc etc
“Paids” estimate of loss reserve scaled to baseline $1,000M Prediction CoV = 5.3% Mack (incurreds) estimate is $887M with CoV = 10.5% Mack estimate produces negative reserves for the old years of origin “Paids” chain ladder fails completely Example of “paids” individual claim model (cont’d)
This model is very economical Contains only 9 parameters to represent many thousands of claims Example of “paids” individual claim model (cont’d)
Further extension of “paids” individual claim model Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+(β3-β4ti) max(0,qi-q0)] + εi • May include claim characteristics other than time-related, e.g. • Nature of injury • Claim severity (MAIS scale) • Pre-injury earnings Yi = exp [β0+β1ti+β2max(0,ti-0.8)+(β3-β4ti) max(0,qi-q0) + more terms] + εi
Example of “incurreds” individual claim model • Similar to “paids” model • Basic set-up is still Yi = h-1(ji,ki,qi,ti,other;β) + εi • Example Yi = exp(Ci,ji,ki,qi,ti,other;β) + εi where Ci = current manual estimate of incurred cost of i-th claim
Example of “incurreds” individual claim model (cont’d) • In fact, the model requires more structure than this because of claims and estimates for nil cost • Let (for an individual claim) • U = ultimate incurred (may = 0) • C = current estimate (may = 0) • X = other claim characteristics Model of Prob[U=0|C,X] Prob[U=0] Prob[U>0] Model of U|U>0,C=0,X Model of U/C|U>0,C>0,X If C=0 If C>0
“Paids” estimate of loss reserve = $1,000M Prediction CoV = 5.3% “Incurreds” estimate of loss reserve = $1,040M Prediction CoV = 5.3% Example of “incurreds” individual claim model (cont’d)
Static and dynamic models • Return for a while to models based on aggregate (not individual claim) data • Model form is still Y=f(β)+ε • Example • j = accident quarter • k = development quarter • E[Yjk] = a kb exp(-ck) = exp [α+βln k - γk] • (Hoerl curve for each accident period)
Static and dynamic models (cont’d) • Example E[Yjk] = a kb exp(-ck) = exp [α+βln k - γk] • Parameters are fixed • This is a static model But parameters α, β,γ may vary (evolve) over time, e.g. with accident period Then • E[Yjk] = exp [α(j)+β(j) ln k - γ(j) k] • This is a dynamic model, or adaptive model
Formal statement of dynamic model • Suppose parameter evolution takes place over accident periods • Y(j)=f(β(j)) +ε(j) [observation equation] • β(j) = u(β(j-1)) + ξ(j) [system equation] • Let (j|s) denote an estimate of β(j) based on only information up to time s Some function Centred stochastic perturbation
Adaptive reserving q-th diagonal (1|q) (2|q) Forecast at valuation date q (q|q)
Adaptive reserving (cont’d) • Reserving by means of an adaptive model is adaptive reserving • Parameter estimates evolve over time • Fitted model evolves over time • The objective here is “robotic reserving” in which the fitted model changes to match changes in the data • This would replace the famous actuarial “judgmental selection” of model
Special case of dynamic model: DGLM • Y(j)=f(β(j)) +ε(j) [observation equation] • β(j) = u(β(j-1)) + ξ(j) [system equation] • Special case: • f(β(j)) = h-1(X(j) β(j)) for matrix X(j) • ε(j) has a distribution from the exponential dispersion family • Each observation equation denotes a GLM • Link function h • Design matrix X(j) • Whole system called a Dynamic Generalised Linear Model(DGLM)
Adaptive form of individual claim models • Individual claim models can also be converted to adaptive form • Just subject parameters to evolutionary model • We have experimented with this type of model and adaptive reserving • Moderately successful
Conclusions • Effective forecast of costs of small samples of claims requires individual claim models • Such models condition the forecasts on much more information than aggregate models • Even for large samples, individual claim models may yield considerably more efficient forecasts • Lower coefficient of variation • This may save real money • Lower uncertainty implies lower capitalisation • Adaptive forms of individual claim models may further improve the tracking of claims experience over time