We bring the recently developed framework of dependence uncertainty into collective risk models, one of the most classic models in actuarial science. We study the worst-case values of the Value-at-Risk (VaR) and the Expected Shortfall (ES) of the aggregate loss in collective risk models, under two settings of dependence uncertainty: (i) the counting random variable (claim frequency) and the individual losses (claim sizes) are independent, and the dependence of the individual losses is unknown; (ii) the dependence of the counting random variable and the individual losses is unknown. Analytical results for the worst-case values of ES are obtained. For the loss from a large portfolio of insurance policies, an asymptotic equivalence of VaR and ES is established. Our results can be used to provide approximations for VaR and ES in collective risk models with unknown dependence. Approximation errors are obtained in both cases.

This paper analyzes optimal risk sharing among agents that are endowed with either expected utility preferences or with dual utility preferences. We find that Pareto optimal risk redistributions and the competitive equilibria can be obtained via bargaining with a hypothetical representative agent of expected utility maximizers and a hypothetical representative agent of dual utility maximizers. The representative agent of expected utility maximizers resembles an average risk-averse agent, whereas representative agent of dual utility maximizers resembles an agent that has lowest aversion to mean-preserving spreads. This bargaining leads to an allocation of the aggregate risk to both groups of agents. The optimal contract for the expected utility maximizers is proportional to their allocated risk, and the optimal contract for the dual utility maximizing agents is given by “tranching” of their allocated risk. We show a method to derive equilibrium prices. We identify a condition under which prices are locally independent of the expected utility functions, and given in closed form. Moreover, we characterize uniqueness of the competitive equilibrium.

Motor insurance is a very competitive business where insurers operate with quite large portfolios, often decisions must be taken under short horizons and therefore ruin probabilities should be calculated in finite time. The probability of ruin, in continuous and finite time, is numerically evaluated under the classical Cramér–Lundberg risk process framework for a large motor insurance portfolio, where we allow for a posteriori premium adjustments, according to the claim record of each individual policyholder. Focusing on the classical model for bonus-malus systems, we propose that the probability of ruin can be interpreted as a measure to decide between different bonus-malus scales or even between different bonus-malus rules. In our work, the required initial surplus can also be evaluated. We consider an application of a bonus-malus system for motor insurance to study the impact of experience rating in ruin probabilities. For that, we used a real commercial scale of an insurer operating in the Portuguese market, and we also work on various well-known optimal bonus-malus scales estimated with real data from that insurer. Results involving these scales are discussed.

In non-life insurance, territory-based risk classification is useful for various insurance operations including marketing, underwriting, ratemaking, etc. This paper proposes a spatially dependent frequency-severity modeling framework to produce territorial risk scores. The framework applies to the aggregated insurance claims where the frequency and severity components examine the occurrence rate and average size of insurance claims in each geographic unit, respectively. We employ the bivariate conditional autoregressive models to accommodate the spatial dependency in the frequency and severity components, as well as the cross-sectional association between the two components. Using a town-level claims data of automobile insurance in Massachusetts, we demonstrate applications of the model output–territorial risk scores–in ratemaking and market segmentation.

The formulation of optimal reinsurance policies that take various practical constraints into account is a problem commonly encountered by practitioners. In the context of a distortion-risk-measure-based optimal reinsurance model without moral hazard, this article introduces and employs a variation of the Neyman–Pearson Lemma in statistical hypothesis testing theory to solve a wide class of constrained optimal reinsurance problems analytically and expeditiously. Such a Neyman–Pearson approach identifies the unit-valued derivative of each ceded loss function as the test function of an appropriate hypothesis test and transforms the problem of designing optimal reinsurance contracts to one that resembles the search of optimal test functions achieved by the classical Neyman–Pearson Lemma. As an illustration of the versatility and superiority of the proposed Neyman–Pearson formulation, we provide complete and transparent solutions of several specific constrained optimal reinsurance problems, many of which were only partially solved in the literature by substantially more difficult means and under extraneous technical assumptions. Examples of such problems include the construction of the optimal reinsurance treaties in the presence of premium budget constraints, counterparty risk constraints and the optimal insurer–reinsurer symbiotic reinsurance treaty considered recently in Cai et al. (2016).

This paper provides an optimal asset allocation strategy to enhance risk management performance in the face of a financial crisis; this strategy entails constructing a good asset model – a multivariate jump-diffusion (MJD) model which includes idiosyncratic and systematic jumps simultaneously – and choosing suitable asset allocations and objective functions for fund management. This study also provides the dependence structure for the MJD model. The empirical implementation demonstrates that the proposed MJD model provides more detailed information about the financial crisis, allowing fund managers to determine an appropriate asset allocation strategy that enhances investment performance during the crisis.

Unlike the mortality risk on which actuaries have been working for more than a century, the long-term care (LTC) risk is relatively new and as of today hardly mastered. Semi-Markov processes have been identified as an adequate tool to study this risk. Nevertheless, access to data is limited and the associated literature still scarce. Insurers mainly use discrete time methods directly inspired from the study of mortality in order to build experience tables. Those methods however are not perfectly suited for the study of competing risk situations. This article provides a theoretical framework to estimate biometric laws associated with a LTC insurance portfolio. The presented method relies on a continuous-time semi-Markov model with three states: autonomy, disability and death. The process describing the state of disability is defined through its transition intensities. We provide a formula to infer the mortality of autonomous people from the mortality of the whole portfolio, on which we have more reliable knowledge. We then propose a parametric expression for the remaining intensities of the model. In particular, incidence in LTC is described by a logistic formula. Under the assumption that the disabled population is a mixture of two latent populations with respect to the category of pathology that caused LTC, we show that the resulting intensity of mortality in LTC takes a very peculiar form and depends on time spent in the LTC state. Estimation of parameters relies on the maximum likelihood method. Our parametric approach, while inducing model uncertainty, eliminates issues related to segmentation in age categories, smoothing or extrapolation at higher ages and thus proves very convenient for the practitioner. Finally, we provide an application using data from a real LTC insurance portfolio.

This paper proposes a spatial-temporal autoregressive model for the mortality surface, where mortality rates of each age depend on the historical values of itself (temporality) and the neighbouring ages (spatiality). The mortality dynamics is formulated as a large, first order vector autoregressive model which encompasses standard factor models such as the Lee and Carter (1992) model. Sparsity and smoothness constraints are then introduced, based on the idea that the nearer the two ages, the more important the dependence between mortalities at these ages. Our model has several novelties. First, it ensures that in the long-run, mortality rates at different ages do not diverge. Second, it provides a natural explanation of the so-called cohort effect without identifiability difficulties. Third, the model is easily extended to the multiple-population case in a coherent way. Finally, the model is associated with a closed form, non-parametric estimation method: the penalized least square, which ensures spatial smoothness of the age-dependent parameters. Using US and UK mortality data, we find that our model produces reasonable projected mortality profile in the long-run, as well as satisfying short-run out-of-sample forecast performance.

For many pension schemes, a shortage of data limits their ability to use sophisticated stochastic mortality models to assess and manage their exposure to longevity risk. In this study, we develop a mortality model designed for such pension schemes, which compares the evolution of mortality rates in a sub-population with that observed in a larger reference population. We apply this approach to data from the CMI Self-Administered Pension Scheme study, using U.K. population data as a reference. We then use the approach to investigate the potential differences in the evolution of mortality rates between these two populations and find that, in many practical situations, basis risk is much less of a problem than is commonly believed.