Staff - AC
About
- Username
- Staff - AC
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,404
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
The 15% proration provision is indeed old, and is now revised up to 25%. We updated the wiki footnote to this problem to reflect this. Thank you.
-
TBIL is given to be zero in the problem. Odomirok throws in two extra items that were not mentioned in the formulas: (general and administrative) expense, and base erosion payment. The sum of these two items is 80. Odomirok implies in the text and i…
-
"Prior AYs" rows of these Schedule P parts contain data from the last diagonals of some hypothetical triangles composed of the prior AYs, each of which are evaluated as of end of the year of each column. The easiest to conceptualize is Part 4 (Ca…
-
It's a typo. The answers are for years 2015 to 2018.
-
That's ok, good luck.
-
I verify that the above formula equals 48,000.
-
Sure, good luck.
-
"Balance sheet presentation" and "Ceded reinsurance" are two distinction items provided in the text, but Odomirok does not very clearly distinguish between the two. For B or "Balance Sheet Presentation", the "B" discusses how reinsurance is prese…
-
2014 net reserve at 36mos is 900,000. This is the amount retained by primary, at 75%. So, the ceded amount, which is now commuted back, is 300,000, corresponding to the 25%.
-
The two are not contradictory. WYO is the arrangement whereby private companies write the flood policy, but it's like fronting, and the real risk-bearer is NFIP. NFIP acts as a reinsurer assuming all of the risk in this arrangement.
-
I don't see mention of Annual Statement in that wiki note:
-
Here's the excerpt from Odomirok p179: ". . . The prior row for Part 3 also provides cumulative paid data; however, it does not start with the cumulative payments from the first year that the company wrote business. Rather, it shows the payments …
-
Correction. Both the formula and the example are correct. "Value of common stock as recorded by reporting entity" is another way of saying "value of affiliated insurer's common stock owned by the reporting entity." For this, you have to multiply the…
-
The wiki has two sections for the Porter text. Is that what you need?
-
According to Odomirok p251, the formula is correct and R0 example 1 is in error. We'll adjust the wiki for this. Thanks.
-
I think the two lists can be used interchangeably, unless the question specifically asks for "RBC action levels," in which case you'd be better to stick with the RBC list. See, for example, 2019.Spring.3.
-
Yes, what you did is reasonable. By "inconsistency," I was referring to the simultaneous use of "old" and "new p4's for IBNR.
-
Sure, good luck.
-
Graham has a note on this in the Wiki, regarding his two practice problems that come right after Method 4 of Risk Transfer Testing. He says he used discounting both for 10-10 and for ERD, while old exam problem solutions did not discount for the 10-…
-
Policies-in-force are those whose terms have not yet expired. Outstanding losses are those yet to be paid on claims from policies that may be in-force or expired. In the former, you transfer outstanding losses only on policies-in-force. When the obj…
-
The three bullets have been taken word for word from the fourth paragraph of text page 14. That is, there is no further text elaboration on these bullets. However, footnote 26 on the same page gives a little bit more context to the bullet you point …
-
Thank you Graham.
-
Yes, he confirmed as well.
-
In Odomirok Table 27, I also see that a cap of the collateral is not imposed on either of 20% of overdues or disputeds, the way this problem and the wiki has it. I am pretty sure that Table 27 governs in this case. I will contact Graham now to se…
-
On questions of lists, you are correct. But if you list more than they are asking for, they will only consider the first x items you listed, the number that they asked for. In multi-step questions, if there's a bottom-line numerical answer, I bel…
-
Part a is flawed: it should be asking whether the contract qualifies for underwriting risk transfer under either of the two methods, because that is what these two methods test. Part b's question works, because there is decidedly no risk transfer…
-
I re-read that citing, and it looks like 10% of acquiring's surplus cap is only applied to SAP, not Purchasing GAAP. Sorry about the confusion.
-
It includes only LLAE.
-
Yes. That "Net" doesn't refer to "net of tax." See Item 10 in Statement of Income.
-
Clayton and Robinson-Patman are updates to Sherman to close loopholes. All three apply to insurance, after McCarran-Ferguson.