X hits on this document

PDF document

DFA Insurance Company Case Study, Part I: - page 36 / 40

103 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

36 / 40

Returning again to the statutory implications, of this combined reinsurance and investment strategy. Exhibit 9 shows the impact to DFAIC's statutory surplus relative to the current asset strategy of changing only the investment strategy and of changing both the reinsurance and investment strategy.

Exhibit 9: DFAIC'a Statutory Surplus Comparisons

99th 95th

5,000,000

75th 50th 25th

4,000,(~0

5th

3,(~0.000

1St

2,000.OGO

P°~en,,,..

6,000,000

Year I

Statutory Surplus

Year 5

1,000,000

0

Current

Current

Revised

Current

StrategyO

StrategyE'

  • -

    1.0¢0.000

Reinsurance Strategy: Investment Strategy:

Current Current

Current Revised StrategyC StrategyE'

By simultaneously increasing the efficiency of their reinsurance strategy and investment strategy, DFAIC accomplishes a better economic risk/reward profile and is able to achieve a better statutory profile at the end of the five-year horizon. Thus by considering DFAIC's business holistically, our analysis indicates that we can implement a revised reinsurance strategy and take a more aggressive asset strategy, resulting in an expected economic benefit and improved long-term statutory results.

Finally, using the Tail Conditional Expectation (1-Year) approach from our sister paper ("DFA Insurance Company Case Study, Part I1:Capital Adequacy and Capital Allocation =, by S. Philbrick and R. Painter), we found that the new reinsurance program coupled with asset strategy E', increased the company's required capital by only 6%. Thus, DFAIC's actual capital is still significantly above the required minimum level. Additional details and changes in required capital under other capital adequacy measures (e.g., RBC capital adequacy ratios) can be found in that paper.

94

Document info
Document views103
Page views103
Page last viewedSat Dec 10 13:37:01 UTC 2016
Pages40
Paragraphs886
Words12361

Comments