No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
On Maximum Likelihood and Pseudo-Maximum Likelihood Estimation in Compound Insurance Models with Deductibles
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 August 2013
Abstract
Non-life insurance payouts consist of two factors: claimsizes and claim frequency. When calculating e.g. next years premium, it is vital to correctly model these factors and to estimate the unknown parameters. A standard way is to separately estimate in the claimsize and the claim frequency models.
Often there is a deductible with each single claim, and this deductible can be quite large, particularly in inhomogeneous cases such as industrial fire insurance or marine insurance. Not taking the deductibles into account can lead to serious bias in the estimates and consequent implications when applying the model.
When the deductibles are nonidentical, in a full maximum likelihood estimation all unknown parameters have to be estimated simultaneously. An alternative is to use pseudo-maximum likelihood, i.e. first estimate the claimsize model, taking the deductibles into account, and then use the estimated probability that a claim exceeds the deductible as an offset in the claim frequency estimation. This latter method is less efficient, but due to complexity or time considerations, it may be the preferred option.
In this paper we will provide rather general formulas for the relative efficiency of the pseudo maximum likelihood estimators in the i.i.d. case. Two special cases will be studied in detail, and we conclude the paper by comparing the methods on some marine insurance data.
Keywords
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © International Actuarial Association 2011
References
Dimakos, X.K. and di Rattalma, A.F. (2002) Bayesian premium rating with latent structure. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 162–184.Google Scholar
Frees, E.W., Shi, P. and Valdez, E.A. (2009) Actuarial applications of a hierarchical insurance claims model. ASTIN Bulletin, 39, 165–198.Google Scholar
Garrido, J. and Zhou, J. (2009) Full credibility with generalized linear and mixed models.
ASTIN Bulletin, 39, 61–80.Google Scholar
Gong, G. and Samaniego, F.J. (1981) Pseudo maximum likelihood estimation: Theory and applications. Annals of Statistics, 9, 861–869.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gschlössl, S. and Czado, C. (2007) Spatial modelling of claim frequency and claim size in non-life insurance. Scandinavian Actuarial Journal, 202–225.Google Scholar
Joe, H. (2005) Asymptotic efficiency of the two-stage estimation method for copula-based models. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 94, 401–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klugman, S.A., Panjer, H.H. and Willmot, G.E. (2004) Loss models. From data to decisions. Second Edition, Wiley.Google Scholar
Paulsen, J., Lunde, A. and Skaug, H. (2008) Fitting mixed-effects models when data are left truncated. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 43, 121–133.Google Scholar
Parke, W.R. (1986) Pseudo maximum likelihood estimation: The asymptotic distribution. Annals of Statistics, 14, 355–357.Google Scholar
Pierce, D.A. (1982) The asymptotic effect of substituting estimators for parameters in certain types of statistics. Annals of Statistics, 10, 475–478.Google Scholar
Rao, C.R. (1973) Linear Statistical Inference and its Applications, 2nd edn., Wiley, New York.Google Scholar
Serfling, R.J. (1980) Approximation Theorems of Mathematical Statistics. Wiley, New York.Google Scholar