Important properties of Bayesian models (2)
Verrall
2. easily implemented
Main ways expert knowledge can be incorporated in reserve estimates (2)
2. limit data informing the LDF selection
BF estimated reserve formula
Verrall
estimated reserves = expected loss * % reported * (product of age-to-age factors - 1)
expected loss = m-sub i
> > to make incremental change = expected loss * % reported * (age-to-age factor - 1)
Key difference between the CL and BF methods
Verrall
BF incorporates external expert knowledge for the level of each row vs. the CL which is based on the data
Stochastic CL reserving methods and what each one estimates (4)
*ODP estimates incremental losses, all others can be used to estimate cumulative OR incremental losses
Advantage of Mack’s CL method
Verrall
simple - parameter estimates and prediction errors can be obtained with a spreadsheet
Disadvantages of Mack’s CL method (2)
Verrall
2. must estimate additional parameters to calculate variance
Expected value and variance of incremental claims using ODP methodology
(Verrall)
E[ incremental claims ] = ultimate loss * % emerged
» E[C-sub ij] = x-sub i * y-sub i
Var( incremental claims ) = mean * dispersion factor
Advantage of the ODP model
Verrall
produces reserve estimates that are the same as the CL method
Disadvantages of ODP model (2)
Verrall
Expected value and variance of incremental AND cumulative claims under the over-dispersed negative binomial model
E[ incremental claims ] = (age-to-age factor - 1) * prior cumulative claims
= (lambda-sub j - 1) * D-sub i, j-1
E[ cumulative claims ] = age-to-age factor * prior cumulative claims
= lambda-sub j * D-sub i, j-1
Var(incremental claims) = Var(cumulative claims) = dispersion factor * age-to-age factor * (age-to-age factor - 1) * prior cumulative claims
*constant dispersion factor
Advantage of the over-dispersed negative binomial model
results in reserve estimates that are the same as the CL method, with a clearer connection
Disadvantage of the over-dispersed negative binomial model
column sum of incremental claims must be positive
Enhancement to the normal approximation of the negative binomial model (over the over-dispersed negative binomial)
alters the variance to allow for negative incremental claims
Expected value and variance of incremental AND cumulative claims under the normal approximation to the negative binomial model
E[ incremental claims ] and E[ cumulative claims] are the same as the over-dispersed negative binomial model
Var(incremental claims) = Var(cumulative claims) = dispersion factor * prior cumulative claims
*dispersion factor for each column
Advantage of the normal approximation to the negative binomial model
allows for negative incremental claims
Disadvantage of the normal approximation to the negative binomial model
must estimate additional parameters to calculate variance
Advantages of Bayesian methods (2)
Verrall
Expected value and variance for prior distribution for BF method
E[x-sub i] = alpha-i / beta-i = m-i
Var(x-sub i) = alpha-i / beta-i^2 = m-i / beta-i
Bayesian credibility model for expected incremental claims
E[ incremental claims ] = Z-sub i,j * E[ CL incremental claims] + (1 - Z-sub i,j) * E[ BF incremental claims]
Z-sub i,j = cumulative % emerged / (beta-i * dispersion factor + cumulative % emerged)
Column parameters (gamma-sub i) and expected incremental claims
“reverse CL approach”
gamma-i = 1 + (BF resere for AY i / future development period incremental losses for all prior AYs)
E[ incremental claims] = (gamma-i - 1) * sum(incremental losses from prior AYs in column j)