01.06.2015 Views

Actuarial Modelling of Claim Counts Risk Classification, Credibility ...

Actuarial Modelling of Claim Counts Risk Classification, Credibility ...

Actuarial Modelling of Claim Counts Risk Classification, Credibility ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

132 <strong>Actuarial</strong> <strong>Modelling</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Claim</strong> <strong>Counts</strong><br />

Let us briefly comment on this a posteriori correction:<br />

• We see that the a posteriori corrections will be more severe as the residual heterogeneity,<br />

measured by V i = 1/a, increases.<br />

• Considering two policyholders (numbered i 1 and i 2 ) in the portfolio during T i1<br />

= T i2<br />

periods<br />

such that i 1 is a priori a better driver than i 2 , that is, i1 • < i2 •: if these policyholders<br />

do not report any claim (i.e., N i1 • = N i2 • = 0) then the corrections to be applied to these<br />

policyholders satisfy<br />

a a<br />

><br />

a + i1 • a + i2 •<br />

so that the a priori worse driver receives more discount.<br />

• If these policyholders report k ≥ 1 claims (i.e., N i1 • = N i2 • = k) then the penalties are such<br />

that<br />

a + k<br />

a + i1 •<br />

> a + k <br />

a + i2 •<br />

Hence, the penalty for the a priori bad driver is less severe than for the good one.<br />

3.3.5 Predictive Distribution and Bayesian <strong>Credibility</strong> Premium<br />

From (3.4) we know that the posterior distribution <strong>of</strong> i given past claims history is still<br />

Gamma, with parameters a+N i• and a+ i• . Therefore, the predictive distribution <strong>of</strong> N iTi +1<br />

is Negative Binomial, that is,<br />

( ) ( ) k (<br />

) a+k•<br />

a + k• + k − 1 iTi +1<br />

a + <br />

PrN iTi +1 = kN i• = k • =<br />

i•<br />

<br />

k a + i• + iTi +1 a + i• + iTi +1<br />

Furthermore, the Bayesian credibility premium is given by<br />

a + k<br />

EN iTi +1N i• = k • = iTi +1E i N i• = k • = •<br />

iTi +1 <br />

a + i•<br />

Remark 3.1 As time goes on, the Bayesian credibility premium tends to 0 for a policyholder<br />

reporting no claim. This can be seen as an unrealistic feature. An easy way to avoid this<br />

problem is to decompose N i into two parts: a component N 1<br />

i distributed according to a pure<br />

Poisson distribution that represents the claims occurring purely at random, and a component<br />

N 2<br />

i that is Negative Binomial and influenced by the driver’s abilities. This introduces a<br />

lower bound on the a posteriori claim frequency, which is no more allowed to vanish in the<br />

long term.<br />

It is worth mentioning that the Bayesian credibility premium can be cast into<br />

( a<br />

EN iTi +1N i• = k • = E<br />

a + i +<br />

)<br />

i• k •<br />

EN<br />

i• a + i• iTi +1<br />

i•

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!