Graham
About
- Username
- Graham
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,722
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Should work not. Thx.
-
I'm very appreciative that you're taking the time to go through these practice problems and let me know when you find issues! You guys are the first ones to use the PowerPack and this is how I get all the errors corrected. In this case however, I be…
-
Thx, I've fixed it.
-
This is a little bit of a confusing problem. You're right that they seem to be using "fixed expense per exposure" and "policy fee" as sort of the same thing. The distinction is this: The fixed expense is the E(F) term in the pure…
-
Yes, I thought I had corrected that. (Darn it!) It should be ok now. Thanks for letting me know.
-
So this is formula for the coinsurance penalty you're referring to, right: e = min( F, L ) – I Unless I'm missing something, that looks correct. I also tested it with a few examples and it seems to be giving the correct answer. (Note the "I&quo…
-
The short answer is yes: Settlement Rate and Disposal Rate refer to the same concept. A more nuanced answer is this: I use the term "settlement rate" in a more general way to describe how quickly the claims department is moving claims thro…
-
Hi Chatterjee, Is this what you're looking for: https://www.battleacts5.ca/wiki5/Friedland10.CapeCod#Review_of_Methods_Through_Chapter_10
-
The reason you don't use trended OLEP in the BF method is that the premiums have to be on the same basis as the losses and the losses are not trended (at least not in that step.) After you get the BF estimate of ultimate, you then trend that estimat…
-
Darn, it had to be the very first problem that had an error. 😫 Ok, I believe I've corrected it now. It's a different problem because it was randomly generated but the question and answer should match now. Thanks, that's definitely a mug-worthy obser…
-
Yup, thanks for pointing that out! I have edited the wiki article.
-
Question 1: I see what you mean. You would think the discounting would go back to policy inception, but it doesn't; it goes back to the end of the first year. That means the data for the first year doesn't have to be discounted. That's also why the …
-
Sample answer 3 uses a "sequential analysis", which is not on the syllabus so you should ignore this sample answer. According to the official syllabus, this is what you need to know from chapter 10: https://www.battleactsmain.ca/battleacts…
-
Well, you still have a month to go. I think you studied pretty thoroughly last time even though you didn't sit for the exam. It should all come back quickly. For your question, I think they are talking about how you come up with the ratio in the fir…
-
Hi Keshav, I hope your studying is going well. If I understand your question correctly, here's an example that illustrates the point. Suppose: fixed expenses = $10 current (1-year) average premium = $150 Then the fixed expense ratio based on 1 year …
-
After you calculate the credibility-weighted indicated relativity, you should normalize the results, not rebase them. (Normalizing means dividing by the total whereas rebasing means dividing by the base class.) Anyway, here's what I got following th…
-
Question 6: Spring 2016 (Q11) First, in part b.--> One of the sample answer says that the following relationship holds : Basic lts trend<Ground up trend<Excess loss trend. Please explain. In part c., I did not understand Sample Answer 1 and…
-
Question 5: Fall 2019 (Q13)--> I followed the exact same procedure you followed in the Wiki article to calculate the ILF. However, that approach leads to double counting the probability terms somehow. It's a common error that examiners' also poin…
-
You're correct. Thanks for going through it so carefully. I've made the corrections.
-
Question 4: Under Increased Limits ratemaking calculations (of your own version of the text example), for LAS(200) say, why is the calculation like LAS(100) + Prob(X>100)*LAS(100,200) and not like LAS(100) + Prob(100<X<200)*LAS(100,200)...?…
-
Yup, there was a typo in the formula. I've fixed it. Thx!
-
Yup, thx! I also sent you a message. See the small envelope under your name in the top left.
-
Question 3: Fall 2018 (Q10) part b. (Sample Answer 2)--> How does spatial smoothing help to allocate residual risk between basic geographical units selected at step #3 of establishing territorial boundaries (after we quantify systematic risk at s…
-
Yup, thx!
-
Yup, thx!
-
Question 2: Step 4a of territorial ratemaking in the Wiki article - While clustering individual units into territories , it is important to balance homogeneity, credibility and statistical significance of difference in loss experience. But, if we sp…
-
Question 1: Step 3a of territorial ratemaking in the Wiki article (Spatial smoothing methods) - Why would it not be appropriate under adjacency based smoothing to supplement the data of zip code A, say, with zip code B if they are separated by a hig…
-
Minimum premium (wiki example): Your method makes more sense than the method from Werner and if this came up on the exam, you would deserve credit for your answer. It might safer however to go with Werner's method in an exam situation. Minimum premi…
-
The quiz links in the wiki for chapter 15 were pointing to chapter 13. I've fixed them. Thx! Regarding the retrospective premium calculation, this is a more complicated topic that has been simplified in Werner. The period of computation depends on t…
-
No, that's a typo. It's fixed. Thx!