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.

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

Table 3.3 Values <strong>of</strong> E i N i• = k • for different combinations <strong>of</strong> observed periods T i<br />

and number <strong>of</strong> past claims k • for an average driver from Portfolio A (average annual<br />

claim frequency <strong>of</strong> 14.09 %).<br />

T i<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> claims k •<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5<br />

1 88.3 % 171.2 % 254.2 % 337.1 % 420.0 % 503.0 %<br />

2 79.1 % 153.3 % 227.6 % 301.8 % 376.1 % 450.4 %<br />

3 71.6 % 138.8 % 206.0 % 273.3 % 340.5 % 407.7 %<br />

4 65.4 % 126.8 % 188.2 % 249.6 % 311.0 % 372.5 %<br />

5 60.2 % 116.7 % 173.2 % 229.8 % 286.3 % 342.8 %<br />

6 55.8 % 108.1 % 160.5 % 212.8 % 265.2 % 317.5 %<br />

7 51.9 % 100.7 % 149.4 % 198.2 % 247.0 % 295.7 %<br />

8 48.6 % 94.2 % 139.8 % 185.5 % 231.1 % 276.7 %<br />

9 45.7 % 88.5 % 131.4 % 174.3 % 217.1 % 260.0 %<br />

10 43.1 % 83.5 % 123.9 % 164.3 % 204.8 % 245.2 %<br />

Table 3.4 Values <strong>of</strong> E i N i• = k • for different combinations <strong>of</strong> observed periods T i<br />

and number <strong>of</strong> past claims k • for a bad driver from Portfolio A (average annual claim<br />

frequency <strong>of</strong> 28.40 %).<br />

T i<br />

Number <strong>of</strong> claims k •<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5<br />

1 78.9 % 1531 % 227.2 % 301.3 % 375.5 % 449.6 %<br />

2 65.2 % 1264 % 187.7 % 248.9 % 310.2 % 371.4 %<br />

3 55.5 % 1077 % 159.9 % 212.0 % 264.2 % 316.4 %<br />

4 48.4 % 938 % 139.2 % 184.7 % 230.1 % 275.5 %<br />

5 42.9 % 831 % 123.3 % 163.6 % 203.8 % 244.0 %<br />

6 38.5 % 746 % 110.7 % 146.8 % 182.9 % 219.0 %<br />

7 34.9 % 676 % 100.4 % 133.1 % 165.9 % 198.6 %<br />

8 31.9 % 619 % 91.8 % 121.8 % 151.8 % 181.7 %<br />

9 29.4 % 570 % 84.6 % 112.3 % 139.9 % 167.5 %<br />

10 27.3 % 529 % 78.5 % 104.1 % 129.7 % 155.3 %<br />

Table 3.4 shows higher discounts for the bad driver, with percentages <strong>of</strong> 78.9 % after one<br />

claim-free year, 65.2 % after two claim-free years and 27.3 % after ten claim-free years.<br />

The discounts awarded to policyholders who do not report any accident to the insurance<br />

company are thus increasing with the a priori annual expected claim frequency. The more<br />

claims are expected by the insurance company on the basis <strong>of</strong> observable characteristics, the<br />

higher the discount in case no claims are reported. Note that the a posteriori expected claim<br />

frequencies remain large for a priori bad drivers since reporting no claims happens with a<br />

smaller probability.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!