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.

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

are kept unchanged. Analysing insurance data, the actuary is able to draw conclusions<br />

about the number <strong>of</strong> claims filed by policyholders subject to a specific a posteriori<br />

ratemaking mechanism. The actuary is not able to draw any conclusions about the number<br />

<strong>of</strong> accidents caused by these insured drivers. We will come back to this important issue in<br />

Chapter 5.<br />

2.1.4 Agenda<br />

This chapter is devoted to a priori ratemaking, and focusses on claim frequencies. To make<br />

the discussion more concrete, we analyse the statistics from a couple <strong>of</strong> motor insurance<br />

portfolios. We first work with cross-sectional data (i.e. data gathered during one year <strong>of</strong><br />

observation) from a Belgian motor third party liability insurance port<strong>of</strong>olio observed during<br />

the year 1997 (called Portfolio A, already used in Chapter 1). We also show how it is<br />

possible to build a ratemaking on the basis <strong>of</strong> panel data. To this end, we use another Belgian<br />

portfolio (called Portfolio B) for which the data have been collected during 3 years (from<br />

1997 to 1999).<br />

To fix the ideas, in Section 2.2 we present the data observed during the year 1997 and the<br />

different explanatory variables available for Portfolio A. We give a detailed description <strong>of</strong><br />

all the variables and we have a first look at their influence on the risk borne by the insurer.<br />

Then, in Section 2.3, we show how it is possible to build an a priori ratemaking thanks to<br />

a Poisson regression. We illustrate the technique on the data from Portfolio A. Section 2.4<br />

addresses the problem <strong>of</strong> overdispersion. A random effect is added to the covariates to<br />

account for residual heterogeneity (vector Z i in the preceding discussion). We examine<br />

three classical models: the Poisson-Gamma (or Negative Binomial) model, the Poisson-<br />

Inverse Gaussian model and the Poisson-LogNormal model. These are extensions <strong>of</strong> the<br />

corresponding models presented in Chapter 1, to incorporate exogenous information about<br />

policyholders.<br />

In Section 2.9, we develop ratemaking techniques using panel data. Portfolio B that has<br />

been observed during three consecutive years is used for the numerical illustrations. GEE and<br />

maximum likelihood are used to estimate the parameters involved in models for longitudinal<br />

data. The final Section 2.10 <strong>of</strong>fers an extensive discussion <strong>of</strong> topics not covered in this<br />

chapter, together with appropriate references.<br />

2.2 Descriptive Statistics for Portfolio A<br />

2.2.1 Global Figures<br />

The data relate to a Belgian motor third party liability insurance portfolio observed during<br />

the year 1997. The data set (henceforth referred to as Portfolio A, for brevity) comprises<br />

14 505 policies. The observed claim number distribution in the portfolio has been described<br />

in Table 1.1. The observed mean claim frequency for Portfolio A is 14.6 %.<br />

2.2.2 Available Information<br />

The following information is available on an individual basis: in addition to the number <strong>of</strong><br />

claims filed by each policyholder (variable Nclaim) and the exposure-to-risk from which

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!