AdamDougall
About
- Username
- AdamDougall
- Joined
- Visits
- 61
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
Never mind, the battle card shows this as a correct answer. I'm not sure what the mark scheme was getting at.
-
I believe that question is based on 2016 Fall Q20
-
This is the main place I was thinking of in the wiki:
-
To help me remember this, I like to think that a regulator's role is to make sure everyone gets their piece of the PIE
-
I guess I was wondering why we say that parts 2 & 5 are required to analyse reserve adequacy instead of e.g. parts 2,3,4?
-
would it be possible to get this question marked with something as I had the same confusion
-
oh so in practice the $5m threshold required for certification isn't that relevant for TRIA, since it needs to hit $200m anyway. thanks!
-
On example 4, the insurer's losses are less than $5m so wouldn't that mean the criteria for loss-sharing hasn't been met? And related to that, I assume the $5m threshold only includes commercial lines? i.e. the insurance company can't have $10m o…
-
yeah ok, I wondered if this were the case. I assumed they were independent since they summed to 1. Hopefully they'd accept either answer given the ambiguity. I was beginning to question whether I misunderstood percentiles
-
Thank you, that's a much more memorable way of thinking about it
-
After reading some more, I'll have a crack myself: because the fixed assets risk covers default AND interest rate risk. Federal income tax recoverable and treasury bonds both have a risk of default if the US goes bust. But the treasury bonds have an…
-
Why in this question do we consider "federal income tax recoverable" a credit risk but e.g. treasury bonds an asset risk?