No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Linear Stochastic Reserving Methods
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 August 2013
Abstract
In this article we want to motivate and analyse a wide family of reserving models, called linear stochastic reserving methods (LSRMs). The main idea behind them is the assumption that the (conditionally) expected changes of claim properties during a development period are proportional to exposures which depend linearly on the past. This means the discussion about the choice of reserving methods can be based on heuristic reasons about exposures driving the claims development, which in our opinion is much better than a pure philosophic approach. Moreover, the assumptions of LSRMs do not include the independence of accident periods.
We will see that many common reserving methods, like the Chain-Ladder-Method, the Bornhuetter-Ferguson-Method and the Complementary-Loss-Ratio-Method, can be interpreted in this way. But using the LSRM framework you can do more. For instance you can couple different triangles via exposures. This leads to reserving methods which look at a whole bundle of triangles at once and use the information of all triangles in order to estimate the future development of each of them.
We will present unbiased estimators for the expected ultimate and estimators for the mean squared error of prediction, which may become an integral part of IFRS 4. Moreover, we will look at the one period solvency reserving risk, which already is an important part of Solvency II, and present a corresponding estimator.
Finally we will present two examples that illustrate some features of LSRMs.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © International Actuarial Association 2012
References
Braun, C. (2004) The prediction error of the chain ladder method applied to correlated run-off triangles. ASTIN Bulletin, 35, 399–423.Google Scholar
Buchwalder, M., Bühlmann, H., Merz, M. and Wüthrich, M.V. (2006) The mean square error of prediction in the chain ladder reserving method (Mack and Murphy revisited). ASTIN Bulletin, 36, 521–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahms, R. (2008) A loss reserving method for incomplete data. SAV Bulletin, 1–2, 127–148.Google Scholar
Dahms, R., Merz, M. and Wüthrich, M.V. (2009) Claims development result for combined claims incurred and claims paid data. Bulletin Français d'Actuariat 9, 18, 5–39.Google Scholar
Halliwell, L.J. (1997) Conjoint prediction of paid and incurred losses. CAS Forum (Summer), 1, 241–379.Google Scholar
Mack, T. (1993) Distribution-free calculation of the standard error of chain ladder reserve estimates. ASTIN Bulletin, 23(2), 213–225.Google Scholar
Mack, T. (1997) Schadenversicherungsmathematik. Karlsruhe, Verlag Versicherungswirtschaft.Google Scholar
Mack, T. (2008) The prediction error for Bornhuetter-Ferguson. ASTIN Bulletin, 38, 87–103.Google Scholar
Merz, M. and Wüthrich, M.V. (2006) A credibility approach to the Munich Chain-Ladder Method. Blätter DGVFM
XXVII, 619–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merz, M. and Wüthrich, M.V. (2008) Stochastic Claims Reserving Methods in Insurance. New York – Chichester, Wiley.Google Scholar
Merz, M. and Wüthrich, M.V. (2010) Paid-incurred chain claims reserving method. Insurance: Math. & Econom., 46(3), 568–579.Google Scholar