13
Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City, Utah

Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Pricing Large Accounts © Converium Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA March 13, 2006 Page 1 Large Account Pricing: State of the Industry Loss Rating Continues to Play Dominant Role in Pricing Large Accounts Some Carriers Only Use Loss Rating Models

Citation preview

Page 1: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition?

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA

WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts2006 CAS Ratemaking SeminarSalt Lake City, Utah

Page 2: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 2

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006

Large Account Pricing: State of the Industry

Loss Rating Continues to Play Dominant Role in Pricing Large Accounts

Some Carriers Only Use Loss Rating Models

Page 3: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 3

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Defined

A pricing approach that allows you to spend a lot of quality time with your favorite underwriter…

Page 4: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 4

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Defined

Page 5: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 5

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Defined

Pricing model that gives full credibility for account experience within often subjective “primary” occurrence layer

Expected excess losses often extended from “primary” via industry ELFs

Seldom incorporates manual loss costs

Loss Cost per Unit of Exposure Selected

Page 6: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 6

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Doesn’t Come Cheap

Significant Resource Investment

Programming/Testing of Model

Maintenance/Updating of Factors

Data Verification, Input and Calculation

Education and Control

Page 7: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 7

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Weaknesses

Credibility

Which Insureds Qualify?

Selecting Primary i.e. 100% Credibility Loss Limit

Page 8: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 8

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Weaknesses

NCCI Experience Rating Plan

-

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

Expected Loss(000s) Limited to 10%SRP

Cred

ibili

ty Z(p)

Z(e)

Z *

Page 9: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 9

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Weaknesses

Prone to Subjectivity

Selecting “Primary” Loss Limit

Weighting Loss Rates

Difficult to Preserve Value as Benchmark

Price Monitors/Management Reports

Page 10: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 10

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Loss Rating Weaknesses

Subjectivity Weighting Loss Rates

DEVELOPMENT OF $75,000 LOSS PICKSACME Corporation

IncurredLosses Estimated Ultimate Losses Selected TrendedTotal Excess of Loss Dev. B - F Ultimate Loss

Cov. P olicy P eriodP remium ELR Limits $75,000 Method Method Losses Cost Wghts

WC 05/22/02 92,076 0.80 11,339 0 23,588 49,591 36,589 0.59 0.805/22/01 71,183 0.80 11,636 0 13,415 19,186 16,300 0.27 105/22/00 85,065 0.80 191,547 19,779 181,626 175,462 175,462 2.41 0.5 *

05/22/99 66,277 0.80 25,947 0 26,572 27,193 26,883 0.44 105/22/98 72,345 0.80 95,958 0 97,835 97,068 97,452 1.72 0.8 *

386,946 336,427 19,779 343,035 368,500 352,685 0.91

Page 11: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 11

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006

Appeal of Loss Rating – Quantitative

Can use client’s own development experience.

Can sometimes capture impact of risk changes obscured by experience rating.

More years involved in calculation than 3 used by experience rating. Although parameter shift diminishes value of older years.

Greater insight into insured operations can emerge. Really this should be captured through underwriting process.

Page 12: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 12

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006

Appeal of Loss Rating – Qualitative

Marketing: Insureds want to see credit for their own experience…except for that one bad year.

Actuaries: Opportunity for greater transactional involvement

Page 13: Loss Rating Models: Value Proposition? Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAA WC-4 Perspectives on Pricing Large Accounts 2006 CAS Ratemaking Seminar Salt Lake City,

Pricing Large Accounts

Page 13

© Converium

Brian Ingle, FCAS, MAAAMarch 13, 2006Optimizing Loss Rating Value

Define Minimum Size Client Based on Industry Standard - E.g. minimum 50% credibility under NCCI X-Mod Rating

Incorporate Industry Loss Cost Estimate Into Model – Since NCCI X-Mod Credibility Always < 1

Cap Loss Limitation at 10% State Reference Point

Use NCCI X-Mod Credibility to Weight Industry and Client Specific Loss Cost

Use Loss Rating Only When Credible Client Specific Development Triangles Available

Capture Average Loss Indication as Well as Selected for Management Reports