Skip to content

Evaluation

Retroactive testing

Why check unpaid estimates?
- If there has been a change in exposures, then the unpaid estimates have to be updated.
- "Are claims developing as expected, or are there any surprises?"
- A diagnostic to check if unpaid claim estimates are reasonable.
- Actual vs expected = Retroactive testing

What if actual development \(\gt\) expected development? (HUGH WHITE). Options are:
1. Reduce IBNR (speedup in reporting) Expected Claims
2. Leave IBNR unchanged (large reported claim, black swan). Future is as per expectation. B-F
3. Increase IBNR. (deterioration of claims ratio). Development

Expected Emergence

Expected Reported Claims between \(t\) and \(t+1\)

\[ (\text{Ult claims} - \text{Cum. Rept claims}_{t}) \times \dfrac{\%Rept_{t+1} - \%Rept_{t}}{1 - \%Rept_{t}} \]
  • This formula preserves current IBNR/unpaid claims
  • %rept or %paid = 1/CDF

Development for Ultimate estimates

Then the following are equivalent to Expected Reported Claims between \(t\) and \(t+1\)
- \(\text{Cum. rept claims}_{t} \times \left(LDF_{(t,t+1)} -1\right)\)
- \(\text{Ult Claims} \times(\%Rept_{t+1} - \%\mathrm{Re}pt_{t})\)

Interpolation

  • Linear interpolation within a quarter \(\to\) more reasonable expected emergence estimate than that within an entire year.
    • \(\impliedby\) Development higher for earlier maturities and decreases over time.
  • Linear interpolation assumption is not reasonable for prolonged periods
    • Most development will tend to occur earlier in the year than later in the year.