Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T07:29:06.034Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

AGE-SPECIFIC ADJUSTMENT OF GRADUATED MORTALITY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 March 2018

Yahia Salhi
Affiliation:
Université de Lyon, Université de Lyon 1, ISFA, Laboratoire de Sciences Actuarielle et financière, EA2429, 50 Avenue Tony Garnier, F-69007 Lyon, France E-mail: yahia.salhi@univ-lyon1.fr
Pierre-E. Thérond*
Affiliation:
Université de Lyon, Université de Lyon 1, ISFA, Laboratoire de Sciences Actuarielle et financière, EA2429, 50 Avenue Tony Garnier, F-69007 Lyon, France Galea & Associés, 25 rue de Choiseul, Paris 75002, France

Abstract

Recently, there has been an increasing interest from life insurers to assess their portfolios' mortality risks. The new European prudential regulation, namely Solvency II, emphasized the need to use mortality and life tables that best capture and reflect the experienced mortality, and thus policyholders' actual risk profiles, in order to adequately quantify the underlying risk. Therefore, building a mortality table based on the experience of the portfolio is highly recommended and, for this purpose, various approaches have been introduced into actuarial literature. Although such approaches succeed in capturing the main features, it remains difficult to assess the mortality when the underlying portfolio lacks sufficient exposure. In this paper, we propose graduating the mortality curve using an adaptive procedure based on the local likelihood. The latter has the ability to model the mortality patterns even in presence of complex structures and avoids relying on expert opinions. However, such a technique fails to offer a consistent yet regular structure for portfolios with limited deaths. Although the technique borrows the information from the adjacent ages, it is sometimes not sufficient to produce a robust life table. In the presence of such a bias, we propose adjusting the corresponding curve, at the age level, based on a credibility approach. This consists in reviewing the assumption of the mortality curve as new observations arrive. We derive the updating procedure and investigate its benefits of using the latter instead of a sole graduation based on real datasets. Moreover, we look at the divergences in the mortality forecasts generated by the classic credibility approaches including Hardy–Panjer, the Poisson–Gamma model and the Makeham framework on portfolios originating from various French insurance companies.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Astin Bulletin 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, J. and Senthilselvan, A. (1980) Smooth estimates for the hazard function. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 42 (3), 322327.Google Scholar
Bagkavos, D. and Patil, P. (2009) Variable bandwidths for nonparametric hazard rate estimation. Communications in Statistics–Theory and Methods, 38, 10551078.Google Scholar
Cleveland, W.S. (1979) Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 829836.Google Scholar
Copas, J. and Haberman, S. (1983) Non-parametric graduation using kernel methods. Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, 110, 135156.Google Scholar
Cox, D. (1972) Regression Models and Life-Tables. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 34, 187220.Google Scholar
Currie, I.D. (2016) On fitting generalized linear and non-linear models of mortality. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 2016 (4), 356383.Google Scholar
Debón, A., Montes, F. and Sala, R. (2006) A comparison of nonparametric methods in the graduation of mortality: Application to Data from the Valencia Region (Spain). International statistical Review, 74, 215233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delwarde, A., Kachkhidze, D., Olie, L. and Denuit, M. (2004) Modèles linéaires et additifs géneralisés, maximum de vraisemblance local et méthodes relationelles en assurance sur la vie. Bulletin Français d'Actuariat, 6, 77102.Google Scholar
Fan, J. and Gijbels, I. (1995) Data-driven bandwidth selection in local polynomial fitting: Variable bandwidth and spatial adaptation. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 57 (2), 371394.Google Scholar
Fan, J. and Gijbels, I. (1996) Local Polynomial Modelling and Its Applications, volume 66, Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability. London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Felipe, A., Guill'en, M. and Pérez-Marín, A. (2002) Recent mortality trends in the Spanish population. British Actuarial Journal, 8, 757786.Google Scholar
Forfar, D., McCutcheon, J. and Wilkie, A. (1988a) On graduation by mathematical formula. Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, 115, 1149.Google Scholar
Forfar, D., McCutcheon, J. and Wilkie, A. (1988b), On graduation by mathematical formula. Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, 115, 1459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gámiz, M.L., Janys, L., Miranda, M.D.M. and Nielsen, J.P. (2013) Bandwidth selection in marker dependent kernel hazard estimation. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 68, 155169.Google Scholar
Gámiz, M.L., Mammen, E., Miranda, M.D.M. and Nielsen, J.P. (2016) Double one-sided cross-validation of local linear hazards. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Statistical Methodology), 78, 755779.Google Scholar
Gram, J. (1879) Om Rækkeudviklinger, bestemte ved Hjælp af de mindste Kvadraters Methode. Ph.D. thesis. Copenhagen: Andr. Fred. Høst & Son.Google Scholar
Gram, J. (1883) Ueber die Entwickelung reeller Functionen in Reihen mittelst der Methode der kleinsten Quadrate. Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 94, 4173.Google Scholar
Gray, R.J. (1990) Some diagnostic methods for Cox regression models through hazard smoothing. Biometrics, 46 (1), 93102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gustafsson, J., Nielsen, J., Pritchard, P. and Roberts, D. (2006) Quantifying operational risk guided by kernel smoothing and continuous credibility. The ICFAI Journal of Financial Risk Management, 3, 2347.Google Scholar
Gustafsson, J., Nielsen, J., Pritchard, P. and Roberts, D. (2009) Quantifying operational risk guided by kernel smoothing and continuous credibility: A practioner's view. Journal of Operational Risk, 1, 4355.Google Scholar
Hardy, M. and Panjer, H. (1998) A credibility approach to mortality risk. ASTIN Bulletin, 28, 269283.Google Scholar
Hougaard, P. (1984) Life table methods for heterogeneous populations: Distributions describing the heterogeneity. Biometrika, 71, 7583.Google Scholar
Jiang, J. and Doksum, K. (2003) On local polynomial estimation of hazard rates and their derivatives under random censoring. Lecture Notes-Monograph Series, 42, 463481.Google Scholar
Jones, M.C., Marron, J.C. and Sheather, S.J. (1996) A brief survey of bandwidth selection for density estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 91, 401407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lejeune, M. (1985) Estimation non-paramétrique par noyaux: Régression polynomiale mobile. Revue de Statistique Appliquée, 23, 4367.Google Scholar
Loader, C. (2006) Local Regression and Likelihood. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar
Mammen, E., Martínez Miranda, M.D., Nielsen, J.P. and Sperlich, S. (2011) Do-validation for kernel density estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 106, 651660.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J. and Sandqvist, B. (2000) Credibility weighted hazard estimation. Astin Bulletin, 30, 405418.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J. and Sandqvist, B. (2000) Proportional hazard estimation adjusted by continuous credibility. ASTIN BULLETIN, 35, 239258.Google Scholar
Nielsen, J.P., Tanggaard, C. and Jones, M. (2009) Local linear density estimation for filtered survival data, with bias correction. Statistics, 43, 167186.Google Scholar
Ramlau-Hansen, H. (1983) The choice of a kernel function in the graduation of counting process intensities. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 1983, 165182.Google Scholar
Renshaw, A., Haberman, S. and Hatzopoulos, P. (1996) The modelling of recent mortality trends in United Kingdom male assured lives. British Actuarial Journal, 2, 449477.Google Scholar
Salhi, Y., Thérond, P.E. and Tomas, J. (2016) A credibility approach of the Makeham mortality law. European Actuarial Journal, 6, 6196.Google Scholar
Tibshirani, R. and Hastie, T. (1987) Local likelihood estimation. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 82, 559567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tomas, J. (2011) A local likelihood approach to univariate graduation of mortality. Bulletin Français d'Actuariat, 11, 105153.Google Scholar
Vaupel, J., Manton, K.G. and Stallard, E. (1979) The impact of heterogeneity in individual frailty on the dynamics of mortality. Demography, 16, 439454.Google Scholar
Wand, M.P. and Jones, M.C. (1994) Kernel smoothing. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Wang, W. (2001) Proportional Hazards Regression Model with Unknown Link Function and Applications to Longitudinal Time-to-event Data. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Davis.Google Scholar
Wang, W. (2004) Proportional hazards regression models with unknown link function and time-dependent covariates. Statistica Sinica, 14 (3), 885905.Google Scholar