1 Capital Consumption Don Mango American Re-Insurance 2003 CARe Seminar.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 PROVISIONS FOR PROFIT AND CONTINGENCIES (MIS-35) Seminar on Ratemaking Nashville, TNRuss Bingham March 11-12, 1999Hartford Financial Services.
Advertisements

Investment Appraisal Techniques
Perspectives on Capital Allocation Trent Vaughn Republic Insurance Group.
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Prentice Hall. All rights reserved. Chapter 7 Financial Operations of Insurers.
Copyright © 2008 Pearson Addison-Wesley. All rights reserved. Chapter 7 Financial Operations of Insurers.
1 Math 479/568 Casualty Actuarial Mathematics Fall 2014 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Professor Rick Gorvett Session 12: Reinsurance I October.
Stock Valuation RWJ-Chapter 8.
Capital budgeting considering risk and leverage
4. Project Investment Decision-Making
24 Performance Evaluation for Decentralized Operations Accounting 26e
Uncertainty and Consumer Behavior
Reserve Variability Modeling: Correlation 2007 Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar San Diego, California September 10-11, 2007 Mark R. Shapland, FCAS, ASA, MAAA.
8-1 Statutory Accounting 1.NAIC Annual Statement Blank 2.Differences between Statutory Accounting and GAAP admitted and non-admitted assets valuation of.
Basic Tools of Finance Finance is the field that studies how people make decisions regarding the allocation of resources over time and the handling of.
Capital Consumption Don Mango American Re-Insurance 2003 CAS Ratemaking Seminar.
Chapter 14 Risk and Uncertainty Managerial Economics: Economic Tools for Today’s Decision Makers, 4/e By Paul Keat and Philip Young.
A Comparison of Property-Liability Insurance Financial Pricing Models Stephen P. D’Arcy, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D. Richard W. Gorvett, FCAS, MAAA, Ph.D. Department.
Chapter Outline 10.1Tax Benefits Defined 10.2Progressivity in Corporate Income Tax Rates Overview Numerical Example and Additional Insights Progressivity.
Distribution-Based Pricing Formulas are not Arbitrage-Free The Risk Discount Function The Casualty Actuarial Society Spring 2003 Meeting Marco Island,
MANAGERIAL ECONOMICS.
FOOD ENGINEERING DESIGN AND ECONOMICS
Risk, Cost of Capital, and Capital Budgeting. Valuing a Project When valuing a project you need two things: Initially you were given both (Unit.
Measuring Returns Converting Dollar Returns to Percentage Returns
Chapter 12 Capital Budgeting and Risk
Essentials of Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management by Frank K. Reilly & Keith C. Brown.
Capital Allocation Survey. Purpose of Allocating Capital  Not a goal in itself  Used to make further calculations, like adequacy of business unit profits,
1 DISCOUNTED CASH FLOW MODELS (MIS-45&46) Seminar on Ratemaking Nashville, TNRuss Bingham March 11-12, 1999Hartford Financial Services.
Chapter The Basic Tools of Finance 14. Present Value: Measuring the Time Value of Money Finance – Studies how people make decisions regarding Allocation.
PowerPoint Slides prepared by: Andreea CHIRITESCU Eastern Illinois University The Basic Tools of Finance 1 © 2011 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved.
Profit Provisions Should Not Be a Function of the Firm Lee Van Slyke Provisions for Profits and Contingencies Casualty Actuarial Society Ratemaking Conference.
10/7/ Financial Economics Chapter /7/ Financial Investment Economic investment Paying for new additions to the capital stock or new.
1 Overview of Risk and Return Timothy R. Mayes, Ph.D. FIN 3300: Chapter 8.
RMK and Covariance Seminar on Risk and Return in Reinsurance September 26, 2005 Dave Clark American Re-Insurance Company This material is being provided.
Risk Load, Profitability Measures, and Enterprise Risk Management 2006 CAS Annual Meeting Session ERM 3 Presentation by Robert A. Bear, Consulting Actuary.
1 Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar September 14, 1999 Presented by: Susan E. Witcraft Milliman & Robertson, Inc. DYNAMIC FINANCIAL ANALYSIS What Does It Look.
Capital Allocation using the Ruhm-Mango-Kreps Algorithm David L. Ruhm, FCAS Enterprise Risk Management Symposium Session CS-13: Risk-Adjusted Capital Allocation.
AEG recommendations on Non-life insurance services (Issue 5) Workshop on National Accounts December 2006, Cairo 1 Gulab Singh UN STATISTICS DIVISION.
Stephen G. CECCHETTI Kermit L. SCHOENHOLTZ Understanding Risk Copyright © 2011 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
© 2012 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part, except for use as permitted in a license.
Chapter 5 Choice Under Uncertainty. Chapter 5Slide 2 Topics to be Discussed Describing Risk Preferences Toward Risk Reducing Risk The Demand for Risky.
CHAPTER TEN Capital Budgeting: Basic Framework J.D. Han.
Profit Margins In General Insurance Pricing (A Critical Assessment of Approaches) Nelson Henwood, Caroline Breipohl and Richard Beauchamp New Zealand Society.
The Application Of Fundamental Valuation Principles To Property/Casualty Insurance Companies Derek A. Jones, FCAS Joy A. Schwartzman, FCAS.
1 Research Double-Header Don Mango, FCAS, MAAA CAS Vice President of Research Director of Research and Development, GE ERC Midwest Actuarial Forum September.
A Cursory Introduction to Real Options Andrew Brown 5/2/02.
The Cost of Financing Insurance Version 2.0 Glenn Meyers Insurance Services Office Inc. CAS Ratemaking Seminar March 8, 2002.
1 RISK AND RETURN: ACTUARIAL CONSIDERATIONS (FIN - 10) FINANCIAL MODELS and RATE OF RETURN PERSPECTIVES Russ Bingham Vice President and Director of Corporate.
Riskiness Leverage Models. AKA RMK algorithm Risk/Surplus/Cost of Capital can be allocated to any level of detail in a completely additive fashion. Riskiness.
Financial Planning Skills By: Associate Professor Dr. GholamReza Zandi
Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education. All rights reserved FINANCIAL OPERATIONS OF PRIVATE INSURERS Chapter 26.
Risk Analysis in Capital Budgeting. Nature of Risk Risk exists because of the inability of the decision-maker to make perfect forecasts. the risk associated.
The Cost of Financing Insurance with Emphasis on Reinsurance Glenn Meyers ISO CAS Ratemaking Seminar March 10, 2005.
Chapter 7 Financial Operations of Insurers. Copyright ©2014 Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.7-2 Agenda Property and Casualty Insurers Life.
Myers Read Capital Allocation Discussion CAS Marco Island 2003 Gary G Venter.
Slide 1 Cost of Capital, and Capital Budgeting Text: Chapter 12.
2000 CLRS - September 18th CAS Fair Value Task Force White Paper Methods of Estimation Louise Francis Francis Analytics and Actuarial Data Mining, Inc.
26 September 2005 Stephen Lowe Survey Results / Overview of Methods CAS Limited Attendance Seminar on Risk and Return in Reinsurance.
Capital Consumption Don Mango American Re-Insurance 2002 CAS Risk and Capital Management Seminar.
Casualty Actuarial Society Insurance Accounting for Actuaries May 17, 2005  Presented by: Kevin Wick, FCAS, MAAA.
1 PROFIT AND CONTINGENCIES IN RATEMAKING (FIN - 12) Russ Bingham Vice President and Director of Corporate Research Hartford Financial Services Seminar.
Chapter The Basic Tools of Finance 27. Present Value: Measuring the Time Value of Money Finance – Studies how people make decisions regarding Allocation.
Money and Banking Lecture 11. Review of the Previous Lecture Application of Present Value Concept Internal Rate of Return Bond Pricing Real Vs Nominal.
1 RISK AND RETURN: DEBATING ALTERNATIVE MODELING “APPROACHES” (FIN - 10) Russ Bingham Vice President and Director of Corporate Research Hartford Financial.
Proceedings Paper Value Creation in Insurance – A Finance Perspective Russ Bingham CAS Annual Meeting Vice President andNov , 2004 Director.
Prepared for the Annuity Reserve Work Group By Steve Strommen FSA, CERA, MAAA May 1, 2013 POTENTIAL RESERVE METHODOLOGY.
CARe Seminar on Reinsurance Marriott Inner Harbor, Baltimore, MD
Cost-Volume-Profit Analysis
Chapter 5 Understanding Risk
PROFIT AND CONTINGENCIES (FIN-28)
Chapter Five Understanding Risk.
Presentation transcript:

1 Capital Consumption Don Mango American Re-Insurance 2003 CARe Seminar

2 Goals for Today 1. Get you to admit this is a valid alternative framework (albeit orthogonal) to capital allocation / release / IRR 2. Demonstrate how it can be practically implemented as a means of pricing reinsurance 3. Demonstrate connections to leading edge thinking in financial science

3 Problem Statements Capital allocation is a de facto paradigm  a requirement or necessity Therefore we force-fit our business into a manufacturing-based capital investment framework

4 Problem Statements But insurance capital usage is fundamentally different than it is for manufacturing, being in fact the mirror-image in time For these decision evaluation processes, capital allocation is sufficient but not necessary

5 Problem Statements Even worse, the resulting insurance IRR framework is now completely fictional (“imputed”), since no capital is actually transferred or returned However, insurance capital is actually consumed when results are worse than planned

6 Actually…  This IS capital allocation for insurance, done right  But I needed new terminology to shake loose the old thought processes

7 Two Bets Bet #1 You pay me $10 now I might pay you $50 later Bet #2 I pay you $10 now You might have to pay me $50 later

8 Payoff Diagrams

9 Bet #1 Spend then Maybe Receive You spend now, hope to receive later You spend NOW, voluntarily With the odds I give you, you can compute an expected value and decide if you want to make the bet

10 Bet #2 Receive then Maybe Spend You receive now, hope you don’t have to spend later You MAY spend LATER, involuntarily With the odds I give you, you can compute an expected value and decide if you want to make the bet

11 Capital? Bet #1 = $10 You spend $10 capital NOW no matter what The capital investment is current and certain – i.e., not contingent Allocated = spent Natural capacity constraint = your budget

12 Capital? Bet #2 = $??? I should be sure you have $40 available LATER, but you don’t spend anything NOW If Bet #2 hits, you spend $40 capital LATER Capital expenditure (= allocation) is contingent and in the future Capacity constraints = ??? Perception

13 Two Bets? Bet #1 = the manufacturing investment decision Spend then receive Bet #2 = the insurance investment decision Receive then spend

14 Allocation vs Consumption Two different but equally valid frameworks for Treating capital Evaluating insurance business segments Developing indicated prices for reinsurance Nearly orthogonal

15 Allocation vs Consumption Four questions: 1. What do you do with the total capital? 2. How do you evaluate business segments? 3. What does it mean to be in a portfolio? 4. How is relative risk contribution reflected?

16 Allocation vs Consumption

17 Allocation vs Consumption

18 Allocation vs Consumption The difference between having your own kiddie pool and joining a swim club This is THE CRITICAL SLIDE!

19 Allocation vs Consumption

20 Details of the Framework Scenario analysis Default-free discounting Scenario-level capital consumption Evaluation of capital consumption using a “quasi~utility” approach

21 Default-Free Discounting Conditional on its occurrence, a given scenario’s outcome is certain  discount at the default-free rate Risk-adjusted discounting is too clumsy Overloaded operator Try splitting out default probability from price of risk in risky debt spreads Reflect uncertainty between scenarios, not within What is uncertainty within a scenario anyway? Do you believe the scenario is possible or not?

22 Scenario Capital Consumption Experience fund From Finite Reinsurance Fund into which goes all revenue, from which comes all payments Bakes in investment income When it drops below zero, and further payments need to be made, gotta “call the parents” for some capital That capital is spent  CONSUMED

23 Experience Fund Long-Tailed LOB

24 Experience Fund Short-Tailed LOB

25

26 Scenario Capital Consumption This is more realistic than imputed capital flows. (Imputed = fictional) The capital does flow, but in the future. When a segment’s results deteriorate, the company’s capital is consumed as it is turned into additional reserves. This is what actually happens, so why don’t we model it? Why pretend?

27 Property Cat Example

28 Property Cat Example How would you do this with capital allocation? Allocate a percentage of the limit – say 5% -- based on marginal portfolio capital requirements? What does that mean? What happens if the event occurs? Where does the money to pay the claim come from? Does the sum of the marginals add up to the company’s total capital? If not, what does it mean?

29 Capital Calls (Philbrick/Painter) The entire surplus is available to every policy to pay losses in excess of the aggregate loss component. We can envision an insurance company instituting a charge for the access to the surplus. This charge should depend, not just on the likelihood that surplus might be needed, but on the amount of such a surplus call.

30 Capital Calls (Philbrick/Painter) We can think of a capital allocation method as determining a charge to each line of business that is dependant on the need to access the surplus account. Conceptually, we might want to allocate a specific cost to each line for the right to access the surplus account. In practice though, we tend to express it by allocating a portion of surplus to the line, and then requiring that the line earn (on average) an adequate return on surplus.

31 Capital Call Cost Function Risk-based overhead expense loading Pricing decision variable Application of utility theory Borch (1961): To introduce a utility function which the company seeks to maximize, means only that such consistency requirements (in the various subjective judgments made by an insurance company) are put into mathematical form.

32 Capital Call Cost Function Make the implicit explicit Express your preferences explicitly, in mathematical form, and apply them via a utility function The mythical Risk Appetite Enforce consistency in the many judgments being made

33 Implicit Preferences Preferences buried in Kreps’ “Marginal Standard Deviation” risk load approach: The marginal impact on the portfolio standard deviation is our chosen functional form for transforming a given distribution of outcomes to a single risk measure. Risk is completely reflected, properly measured and valued by this transform. Upward deviations are treated the same as downward deviations.

34 This links up with:  Utility theory in actuarial pricing – from Longley-Cook, Halliwell, Heyer and Schnapp  Probability measure change – from financial mathematics The Wang Transform – from Shaun Wang Additive Co-Measures – from Rodney Kreps Conditional Risk Charges – from David Ruhm and Don Mango, 2003 Bowles Symposium

35 Risk Charge Both Expected Utility and Distorted Probability determine a risk charge by: Risk Charge = Expected Value – Modified Expected Value How do we calculate the Modified Expected Value?

36 Expected Utility Valuex1x2…xn Probp1p2…pn ValueU(x1)U(x2)…U(xn) Probp1p2…pn Modified Expected Value = Sumproduct of Modified Values and Probabilities Utility function is the modifier

37 Distorted Probability Valuex1x2…xn Probp1p2…pn Valuex1x2…xn Probq1q2…qn Modified Expected Value = Sumproduct of Values and Modified Probabilities Probability Distortion Function is the modifier (changes p  q; impress your friends by discussing the “q-measure”)

38 Distorted Probability A.k.a. “Measure Change” (change in the probability measure) In the Black-Scholes world… Constant interest rate, complete market, no transaction costs, instantaneous perfect hedging, … …the q-measure is unique. As soon as a few of those constraints are relaxed, there are infinite q- measures, all of which work.

39 Every value is standard deviations worse If the asset return R has a normal distribution F(x), transformed F*(x) is also normal with E*[R] = E[R] – [R] = r (risk-free rate) = { E[R] – r }/  [R] = the “market price of risk”, also called the Sharpe ratio It recovers CAPM for assets, and Black-Scholes formula for Options Wang Transform

40 Risk load R(X) is a probability-weighted average of “riskiness” r(x) over outcomes of the total net loss g(x) can be thought of as the “riskiness leverage ratio” that multiplies the actual dollar excess that an outcome would entail to get the riskiness. It reflects that not all dollars are equal, especially dollars that trigger analyst or regulatory tests. Kreps’ Co-Measures

41 Conditional Risk Charge David Ruhm and Don Mango, 2003 Bowles Symposium paper pers/ruhm-mango.doc pers/ruhm-mango.doc Main principle of conditional risk charge: Each risk receives a charge that represents how much it contributes to undesirable portfolio outcomes. Generalization of Appendix B of my paper

42 Advantages of Method Additive prices. Extends aggregate risk valuation to any individual risk, including layers of risks. Handles any underlying dependence structure. Really works well for Property Cat.

43 Goals for Today 1. Get you to admit this is a valid alternative framework (albeit orthogonal) to capital allocation / release / IRR 2. Demonstrate how it can be practically implemented as a means of pricing reinsurance 3. Demonstrate connections to leading edge thinking in financial science