Odomirok.19-RBC 2020.Fall

From BattleActs
Revision as of 14:29, 9 February 2021 by Graham (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{| class='wikitable' style='background-color: navajowhite' |- || <span style="color: green;">'''Updates for 2021.Spring are in progress:'''</span> This chapter may have import...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Updates for 2021.Spring are in progress: This chapter may have important updates for 2021.Spring. We will notify you through the twitter feed on our home page when updates are complete.

The Risk-Based Capital system (RBC) was introduced in 1994 to help regulators detect early signs of insolvency. It is covered in Chapter 19 in Odomirok and it's long at about 60 pages.

  Forum

  Formula Summary:   RBC

  Formula Summary:   RBC factors

Study Tips

Updates for 2021.Spring are in progress: This chapter will have important updates for 2021.Spring. We will notify you through the twitter feed on our home page when updates are complete.

The RBC chapter is like Schedule P in that the questions are mostly calculation, but RBC has more different types of calculations. This wiki article includes lots of problems for you to practice on and it's going to take a lot of time to go through them all. In addition to the problems provided in pdf format within the wiki, you should do the randomly generated problems from the quizzes until you consistently get the right answer. Since this is a Top 6 reading, you should also do as many of the old exam problems as you can. (Note however, that the 2012 problems appear to be at least partially outdated.) Most of the 2014 & prior exam problems are not included in the quizzes, but...

Remember you can access these older problems using BattleCard Filters and selecting BattleCards of lower probability in Optional Setting C.

The source text (Chapter 19 of Odomirok), which is 60 pages, includes all kinds of insanely detailed information that you don't need to know for the exam. Just learning the 6 different types of problems from the practice templates will take you long enough. Alice has curated the source text so that the wiki covers all the important stuff, boring as it is! That includes the overall calculation of the RBC ratio, the various regulator action levels, and details on calculating the individual risk charges R1, R2, R3, R4, R5. (Note that there were no text examples for the R0 calculation, and Odomirok specifically states there are issues with the R0 methodology that will be addressed in the next edition of the text.)

Estimated Study Time: up to a week (not including subsequent review time)

Source Readings: BattleActs includes all material from past exams in at least 1 of the elements of the system: wiki articles, BattleCards, BattleTables. It also covers significant material that has not appeared on past exams but that I've judged to be important. Still, it's a good idea to spend a portion of your time reviewing the source readings. You may have a different opinion on what's important and what you can skip. You cannot read all 2,500 pages in depth, but BattleActs give you the necessary background knowledge so that the time you do spend on the source readings will be much more efficient. For a little more on this click on Using the Source Material.

BattleTable

Based on past exams, the main things you need to know (in rough order of importance) are:

  • calculating RBC charges R0,1,2,3,4,5 & RBC-ratio
  • identifying action level based on RBC ratio & subsequent regulator/company actions
  • strategies for reducing RBC charges
  • comparison to IRIS ratios

The RBC questions from 2012 appear to be at least partially outdated and are highlighted in tan.

Questions held out from Fall 2019 exam: #5, 18, 19. (Skip these now to have a fresh exam to practice on later. For links to these questions, see Exam Summaries.)
reference part (a) part (b) part (c) part (d)
E (2019.Spring #13) identify:
- RBC action level + actions
materiality standard:
- propose a standard
calculate:
- R4
E (2019.Spring #15) calculate:
- R5 7,8
E (2018.Fall #18) calculate:
- RBC ratio
identify:
- RBC action level + actions
NAIC.IRIS
E (2018.Spring #18) calculate:
- change in RBC charge 7
rapid premium growth:
- impact on RBC
E (2017.Fall #17) calculate:
- RBC ratio
identify:
- RBC action level + actions
E (2017.Fall #18) financial health:
- use of RBC ratios
R0 RBC charge:
- difference vs R1,2,3,4,5
RBC vs IRIS:
- similarity & difference
E (2017.Spring #19) calculate:
- total RBC1
calculate:
- RBC RAL2
RAL actions:
- insurer & regulator
E (2016.Fall #16) RBC risk categories:
- identify 2 categories
RBC purpose:
- for regulator
E (2016.Fall #17) calculate:
- RBC ratio
identify:
- RBC action level
identify:
- RBC actions
E (2016.Spring #26) see Freihaut.Reins calculate:
- R3, R4 5
see Freihaut.Reins
E (2015.Fall #17) calculate:
- R1
calculate:
- R2
reducing R1:
- identify 2 ways
E (2015.Fall #19) calculate:
- ACL & regulator action
Odomirok.25-Solv2 Odomirok.25-Solv2
E (2015.Spring #19) components of RBC:
- describe
identifying insolvency:
- aspects of RBC
interpret RBC ratio:
- ratio = 310%
internal capital model:
- concerns (vs RBC)
E (2015.Spring #25) see Freihaut.Reins see Freihaut.Reins calculate:
- RBC ratio (R3, R4, R5) 6
E (2014.Fall #18) calculate:
- R5, total RBC 3
improving RBC ratio:
- reserving practices
limitations of RBC:
- for identifying impairment (p607 in pdf)
E (2014.Spring #20) calculate:
- R3
calculate:
- RBC
action level:
- identify action 4
E (2013.Fall #21) RBC risk categories:
- identify 2 categories
calculate:
- RBC ratio
action level:
- identify
action:
- describe
E (2012.Fall #14) see Odomirok.8-9-IS reduce RBC asset risk:
- investment changes
E (2012.Fall #20) calculate:
- R5
see NAIC.IRIS RBC vs IRIS:
- treatment of premium
E (2012.Fall #24) solvency-based frameworks:
- create a new one! W
1 The examiner's report accepted 10 different answers for this calculation problem, and the first 3 answers are almost certainly wrong. It states "Other non-insurance subsidiaries" could go into R0, R1, or R2, but it can't go into R0; it can only go into R1 or R2. The first 3 sample answers put "Other non-insurance subsidiaries" into R0. The other 7 sample answers show valid combinations based on the given information. (This was a poorly exam constructed question.)
2 RAL stands for Regulatory Action Level
3 The statement of this problem contains 2 errors. See examiner's comments in examiner's report.
4 This problem has a trick related to tabular discounts for indemnity, which should not be subtracted from surplus to get total adjusted capital. See here for details. (shout-out to TF!)
5 This was a very nasty problem because they didn't give you the RBC factors. You had to memorize them which is very unreasonable. (More on this in how to calculate R3 & R4.)
6 This is a defective question. See this forum discussion for more information.
W Alice thinks this is a totes weird question. (You can look at it, but she thinks it isn't likely to appear again.)
7 There is an error in the examiner's report solution to 2018.Spring #18a. The solution uses NWP to calculate the excess growth factor. This calculation should use GWP from the Five Year Historical Exhibit. The solution for 2019.Spring #15 does indeed use GWP which is the correct.    ← shout-out to SK!
8 This problem requires you to calculate the company average loss and LAE ratio as a 10-year average, but the given ratios are capped at 300% for each year. Odomirok states: The company average loss and LAE ratio is a straight average over the past 10 accident years of the net loss and LAE ratios provided in Schedule P, Part 1, column 31. Loss and LAE ratios for any accident year in excess of 300% are capped at that value in consideration of anomalous, one-time results.    ← shout-out to AU!

Full BattleQuiz You must be logged in or this will not work.

  Forum

In Plain English!

Alice's 1st Day (Intro to RBC)

This wiki article is the "true story" of Alice's early days in her career when she was a summer intern! Alice's "days" don't necessarily correspond to your own study days. Her "days" are short and you can probably cover more than one of her days in one of your days.

On Alice's first day of work as an actuarial intern, her mean boss dumped a stack of financial statements on her desk and told her to find out whether the company was healthy. But before she could ask him anything, he was already down the hall issuing orders to someone else. "Jackass," she thought. Poor Alice had no idea what to do. Fortunately the intern in the next cubicle overheard and peeked over the cubicle wall.

"Just calculate the RBC ratio," her new friend said. "It's all in Odomirok. The boss likes to haze the newbies on their first day, but I can help you. We'll tackle it together."

So Alice and Lakshmi spent the day pulling the relevant information from the financial statements and here is what Alice learned:

Formula: RBC ratio = TAC / ACL (sounds like tackle)
TAC = Total Adjusted Capital = 31,024,000
ACL = Authorized Control Level capital = 5,552,182
==> RBC ratio = 31,024,000 / 5,552,182 = 559%

Ok, so far so good, but WTF does 559% mean? Is that good or bad? (The following table appears near the end of chapter 19 of Odomirok)

action levels [CRAM] RANGE insurance dept action company action ASCs (Alice's Snarky Comments)
CAL (Company Action Level) 150-200% none (initially) must submit action plan to meet RBC standards raises & bonuses!
RAL (Regulatory Action Level) 100-150% commissioner may take corrective action 1 must submit action plan to meet RBC standards small raise, no bonus
ACL (Authorized Control Level) 70-100% commissioner may take control of company none (initially) take away 3 vacation days
MCL (Mandatory Control Level) ≤ 70% commissioner must take control of company 2 none (initially) fire the CEO
1 Commissioner action could include restricting new business.
2 Commissioner must rehabilitate or liquidate.

The RBC ratio of 559% for Alice's company is way above the "CAL" threshold, so it looks like the company is doing really well. (Note that the Bright Line Indicator Test from the SAO material should now make more sense.) Anyway, what a great first day of work for Alice! Go home and relax!

Alice's 2nd Day (Trend Test & Risk Categories)

Over morning coffee, Lakshmi pointed out an ommission from the above "action table" that Alice learned about yesterday. If the RBC ratio is above 200% but below 300%, the company is still not in the clear. They would still have to perform the trend test. Let COR denote Combined Operating Ratio:

Trend Test: If a company's RBC ratio is in the 200-300% range and also has a COR > 120% THEN they are subject to the CAL action from the action table.
Reminder: The COR (Combined Operating Ratio) is the sum of:
  • Loss & LAE ratio = (CY net incurred loss & LAE) / NEP
  • Expense ratio = [ (other U/W expenses) + (aggregate write-ins for underwriting deductions) ] / NWP
  • Dividend ratio = (policyholder dividends) / NEP
Recall that COR does not include investment income. (And next time you see your CEO in the break room, tell him to get the LED out.)

Anyway, Alice's new company is well above the 300% threshold so she was ready to report back to her boss that the company is in great shape, but Lakshmi stopped her.

"Not so fast," Lakshmi said. "The RBC ratio is only 1 metric. For example, what about the IRIS ratios? It's like if you had 98% in calculus on your report card but were failing physics, English, and history. It isn't likely, but when you report back to the boss, you should qualify your conclusion on the health of the company if the only thing you calculated was the RBC ratio."

You can review NAIC.IRIS for the IRIS ratios, but getting back to the RBC ratio, Alice needs to make sure she understands exactly how the 559% value was calculated. It's a long calculation that involves 6 different risk components. The charge for each component represents the amount of capital required to support that particular risk. (Each component has it's own calculation but we'll come back to that later.)

risk category risk component
[Hint: asset→ AFEC]
notation risk charge
for this company
asset risk Affiliated insurance company risk R0 0
asset risk Fixed income risk R1 553,398
asset risk Equity risk R2 4,303,948
asset risk Credit risk R3 720,373
U/W risk reserve risk R4 9,542,613
U/W risk NWP risk R5 3,591,141

You might think you'd sum these 6 charges to find the total required capital, but that isn't how it works. Rather than a simple sum, these risk charges are aggregated using this formula:

Formula: RBC Capital Required = R0 + sqrt(R12 + R22 + R32 + R42 + R52)

The part of the formula with the square root is called the covariance adjustment. (Alice's Canadian cousin told her that in Canada this is called the diversification credit. Risk is reduced by spreading or diversifying it over multiple independent categories.)

Pop Quiz!    :-o
Question: Is the covariance adjustment less than, greater than, or equal to the simple sum of R1 through R5?
Answer: The covariance adjustment is less than the simple sum of R1 through R5. (Try testing this with some simple numbers. It's a version the triangle inequality you may be familiar with from calculus.)
Question 1: what is the reason for the covariance adjustment
The reason is that risks R1 through R5 are assumed to be independent. It's unlikely that all 5 risks would reach their maximum value at the same time. The covariance adjustment reduces the required capital to reflect this assumption of independence. For example, the level of equity risk (performance of stocks) is likely not related to reserve risk. A company would be unlikely to experience both very bad investment returns and very bad underwriting results at the exact same time.
Question 2: why is R0 excluded from the covariance adjustment
Well, R0 is not indepedent of the other risks. In other words, R0 is correlated with the other risks. It represents the charge for an affiliated company (subsidiaries) and investment in an affiliate does not provide a diversification benefit.

Let's end day 2 by applying the RBC Capital Required formula from above to find that:

  • RBC Capital Required = 11,104,365

We can now calculate the denominator for the RBC ratio:

RBC denominator: ACL capital = 50% x (RBC Capital Required)

So ACL Capital = 5,552,182 (See Alice's 1st Day.) You might also want to take a quick look at part (b) of:

E (2017.Fall #18)

Do the mini BattleQuiz then go home and relax!

mini BattleQuiz 1 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Alice's 3rd Day (Ranking of Risk Charges)

Alice arrived early today so I prepared a special pop quiz she could do while eating her morning bear claw.

Pop Quiz!    :-o
Question: Based on industry totals, rank the risk charges R1 through R5 according to their relative magnitude. (You can find this information on page 233 of Odomirok)
Answer: (shout-out to wchwart9 for a memory trick for this!))
risk relative magnitude
R4 U/W risk - reserves 54%
R2 asset risk - equity 29%
R5 U/W risk - NWP 16%
R3 asset risk - credit 1%
R1 asset risk - fixed income 0%
Of course, you should also be able to explain why these rankings are the way they are. Let's start at the bottom and work up.
  • asset risk - fixed income: Although fixed-income investments can have risks (for example, inflation risk) they are generally considered very safe so their RBC charge is very close to 0. An example of a fixed income investment is a government bond. Insurance companies generally have over half of their investments in this category.
  • asset risk - credit: Aside from slow-paying customers, a significant portion of credit comes from reinsurance, but this can be at least partly controlled with sensible reinsurance arrangements.
Now let's consider the "high-value" categories:
  • U/W risk - NWP: The total U/W risk, which is the risk associated with writing policies, is by far the most significant source of risk for an insurer. The total U/W risk accounts for 54% + 16% = 70% of the total. Also, the biggest component of liabilities on the balance sheet is the reserves. The intuitive reason the NWP portion of the UW risk is smaller than the reserve portion is that NWP risk is related to the unexpired portion of written policies. So if we're dealing with annual terms, the unexpired portion will be less than 1 year. Compare this to the reserves for claims that have actually been incurred: These incurred claims may span many accident years, so the risk (and associated charges) should be greater.
  • asset risk - equity: The exact reason that equity risk lies between reserve risk and NWP risk relates to technical considerations behind the RBC formulas and is beyond the scope of the reading. But you should note that equity risk (stocks, for example) is much greater than the risk from fixed income investment (government bonds, for example)
  • U/W risk - reserves: This is the business of insurance companies and is the biggest item on the balance sheet. Insurers have the expertise (actuaries!) to take on significant risk in this category and manage it for the mutual benefit of both the insurer and society.
Just for fun, go back to the example from Alice's 2nd day and calculate how the percentages there compare to the table above. (Answer: The ordering is the same but the percentages are slightly different: 51%, 23%, 19%, 4%, 3%)

Alice's 4th Day (An Exam Problem.)

Today we're going to cover a calculation problem similar to the following exam problem:

E (2017.Fall #17)

It's a very easy problem and I'm surprised people didn't ace it. (According to the examiner's report, exam-takers made a lot of different kinds of mistakes.)

Pop Quiz A!    :-o
Given:
description scenario 1 scenario 2 scenario 3
company net loss & LAE ratio 85% 85% 85%
company expense ratio 35% 35% 35%
policyholder dividend ratio 10% 10% 10%
Total Adjusted Capital 10,000 12,000 14,000
R0 charge 0 0 0
R1 charge 800 900 1,000
R2 charge 1,700 1,300 1,300
R3 charge 400 500 300
R4 charge 13,300 10,600 8,600
R5 charge 1,400 2,100 1,200
For each scenario, find:
  • RBC ratio
  • RBC action or control level
  • appropriate regulator & company action.
Pop Quiz A Answers    :-D
Recall:
  • RBC ratio = TAC / ACL (sounds like tackle)
  • ACL capital = 50% x (RBC Capital Required)
  • RBC Capital Required = R0 + sqrt(R12 + R22 + R32 + R42 + R52)
Scenario 1:
  • RBC Capital Required = 13,511
  • ACL capital = 6,756
  • RBC ratio = 10,000 / 6,756 = 148%
==> action or control level: RAL (Regulator Action Level)
==> regulator action: commissioner may take corrective action
==> company action: must submit action plan to meet RBC standards (to commissioner of domiciliary state explaining how to increase capital or decrease risk)
Scenario 2:
  • RBC Capital Required = 10,933
  • ACL capital = 5,466
  • RBC ratio = 12,000 / 5,466 = 220%
==> action/control level: depends on results of trend test because RBC ratio is in the 200-300% range
  • COR = 85% + 35% + 10% = 130% > 120% ==> action level is CAL (Company Action Level)
==> regulator action: none (initially)
==> company action: must submit action plan to meet RBC standards (to commissioner of domiciliary state explaining how to increase capital or decrease risk)
Scenario 3:
  • RBC Capital Required = 8,842
  • ACL capital = 4,421
  • RBC ratio = 14,000 / 4,421 = 317%
==> action or control level: none (trend test not required because RBC ratio > 300%)
==> regulator action: none
==> company action: none

Trick: In the above problems, I gave you the value of TAC, but sometimes you have to calculate TAC using the formula:

TAC = PHS - (non-tabular discount) - (tabular discounts on medical reserves)
  • That seems easy enough, but keep in mind that tabular discounts can be for medical or indemnity, and the indemnity portion is not subtracted. You had to know this to correctly solve:
E (2014.Spring #20)
  • The question provided the tabular discount for indemnity and the examiner's report listed as a common mistake subtracting this indemnity discount amount. So just keep that in mind. (shout-out to TF!)

Tip: For the practice template in the mini BattleQuiz, I sometimes like to just keep pressing the New and Cheat buttons without actually doing the calculation. I find that seeing the answer immediately helps build my intuition on how the RBC ratio corresponds to the action level (without having to stop and do the whole calculation every time.)

mini BattleQuiz 2 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Day 5 (Another Exam Problem)

We covered lots of useful information above about RBC and how to do basic calculations, but we did it in a different order from Odomirok. Let's now take a step back and look at how Odomirok organized the RBC chapter. In the problems we've already done, you were directly given R0 thru R5. Now you have to learn how to calculate these charges directly from financial statement information.

page topic comment
227 Overview covered above
228 RBC Formula covered above
233 R0 detailed calculation (Odomirok states there are issues with the R0 methodology and detailed examples will be provided in a future version of the text.)
239 R1 detailed calculation: bond size, asset concentration
250 R2 detailed calculation: asset concentration
256 R3 detailed calculation: reinsurance recoverable allocation
260 R4 detailed calculation: excessive premium growth, reinsurance recoverable allocation, loss-sensitive discount, loss concentration
274 R5 detailed calculation: excessive premium growth, loss-sensitive discount, premium concentration
280 RBC Model Act covered above

As a start, let's look at an old exam problem. I didn't like how the examiner's report explained the solution, so I solved it myself in a way that made more sense to me. You can see what I did in the link below. You could have almost figured it out from what we've already covered, plus a little bit of common sense.

Solution to 2017.Spring #19

Now, here are a couple of similar practice problems but with different numbers:

2 practice problems like 2017.Spring #19

And finally, here is the link to the actual exam problem and answer. They accepted 10 different answers because they didn't provide enough information in the statement of the problem. (You had to make certain assumptions.) Anyway, it might be instructive to take a quick look at some of the alternate answers. Don't spend too long on that though.

E (2017.Spring #19)

About R0: You should probably know that it measures the risk associated with subsidiary insurance companies based on the following:

  1. stocks & bond in the subsidiary
  2. investments in alien insurance company affiliates
  3. off-balance sheet or other items

We will cover the detailed calculations for R1 through R5 in Alice's second week on the job. (The source text does not provide any examples of how to calculate R0 and there have not been any detailed calculation questions regarding R0 on recent exams.)

mini BattleQuiz 3 You must be logged in or this will not work.


Week 2: Day 1 (R1)

Now we're getting down into the weeds of the RBC calculations. There is a lot of detail here. You must practice, practice, practice! This section on R1 is quite long, but the subsequent section on R2 is much shorter because it's similar to R1.

You can click to see a summary table for R1 and R2. It might be an idea to take a quick look, but it won't mean much until you've covered the R1 and R2 details.

General

Recall that asset risk has 4 categories: AFEC

Affiliated company risk (this is the R0 charge)
Fixed income risk (this is the R1 charge)
Equity risk (this is the R2 charge)
Credit risk (this is the R3 charge)

In particular, the R1 RBC charge covers interest rate risk and default risk for fixed income investments. Odomirok lists 10 different categories of fixed income investments that receive RBC charges under R1, but it would be pretty ridiculous for the examiners to want you to memorize that list. If you get an R1 or R2 problem on the exam, I would just assume that all the investments given in the problem are subject to the basic charge. That is, as long as you use only fixed income investments for R1 and equity investments for R2.

Anyway, the 2 largest R1 categories, industry-wide are:

  • 51% of R1 charge: unaffiliated bonds (the bond size factor applies to unaffiliated bonds - see below)
  • 16% of R1 charge: other non-insurance subsidiaries

The next 2 largest categories of fixed income investments are:

  • 3% of R1 charge: mortgage loans
  • 3% of R1 charge: miscellaneous assets (cash, cash equivalents, short-term investments, nonadmitted collateral loans)

(Note that the 'Bond Size Charge' and 'Asset Concentration Charge' together accounted for another 25% of industry-wide R1 charges. Those components are explained further down.)

Today we're covering the detailed calculations for R1. We'll be basing the discussion on the exam problem below from 2015.Fall. It gives you financial statement info on stocks and bonds then asks you to calculate R1 and R2.

E (2015.Fall #17)

Anyway, let's get back to R1. Consider a simplified version of the exam problem:

quantity notation value description
basic R1 charge -- 406 this is the basic RBC charge for fixed income investments owned by the insurer
bond size charge BSC 609 an extra charge reflecting the level of diversification of the unaffiliated bond portfolio
asset concentration charge ACC 379 reflects increased risk of large concentrations of bonds
(doubles the RBC charge for the 10 largest issuers)

Given the information in the above format, calculating R1 is trivial:

Formula: R1 = basic charge + BSC + ACC

The answer is:

R1 = 406 + 609 + 379 = 1,394.

But in the exam problem, you are not given these quantities directly - you have to calculate them. If BSF stands for Bond Size Factor then here's what you need:

quantity formula
basic = Σ [ (asset values subject to basic charge) x (RBC factor) ]
BSC = BSF x (total R1 charges for bonds subject to BSF)
ACC = Σ [ (asset values subject to ACC for TOP 10 issuers) x (RBC factor) ]

We'll cover how to calculate each of these 3 components in the next few subsections. We're going to use portions of the example in Odomirok to demonstrate the calculation and then come back to the exam problem at the end of this section.

Basic R1 RBC charge

This part of the calculation is very simple. You just multiply the amount held in each fixed investment category by the RBC factor. (An exception to this formula is the RBC for Holding Companies. In that case, multiply the RBC factor of 0.225 by the holding company value in excess of the carrying value for indirectly owned insurance affiliates calculated in R0.)

Example:

item amount RBC factor RBC charge = (amount) x (RBC factor)
cash & equivalents 154,000 0.0030 462
mortgage bonds 245,000 0.0500 12,250
U.S. government bonds 6,395,684 0.0000 0
Class 02 unaffiliated bonds 4,987,460 0.0100 49,875

And assuming these are all the fixed income investments the company has, the basic R1 RBC charge is just the sum of the last column: 62,587

Notes on the RBC charge factor:

==> depends on the category of investment or class of bond
==> investments are classified according to their credit-worthiness (see also bonds)
==> the exam problem we're going to get to considers only class 02 bonds, which are high credit quality so the RBC charge is relatively low

Bond Size Charge (BSC)

To calculate the bond size charge BSC, you first need to calculate BSF (Bond Size Factor). To do this, you need the following table from Odomirok:

# bond issuers
(1)
weights
(2)
weighted # of issuers
(3) = (2) x (1)
first 50 2.5
next 50 1.3
next 300 1.0
> 400 0.9
Total

Example: If there were 325 issuers then you would fill in the above table as follows but counting only issuers of bonds subject to the BSF.

# bond issuers
(1)
weights
(2)
weighted # of issuers
(3) = (2) x (1)
first 50 50 2.5 125
next 50 50 1.3 65
next 300 225 1.0 225
> 400 0 0.9 0
Total 325 415
Then BSF = 415 / 325 - 1 = 0.277.
Pop Quiz B!    :-o
Calculate the BSF (Bond Size Factor) for the following total # of bond issuers: Click for Answer 
(a) 10
(b) 85
(c) 120
(d) 575

Notes on BSF:

==> only the following bond classes are subject to BSF
  • class 01 → 06 unaffiliated bonds
(exclude U.S. government bonds) (shout-out to DS!)
==> BSF decreases as bond count increases
==> note that if bond count > 1300 then set BSF = 0 (so no extra RBC charge for really large portfolios)

Warning: The source text states that unaffiliated classes 02-06 plus non-U.S. government bonds in class 01 are subject to the BSF. But then their example includes class 01 unaffiliated bonds. I will assume that BSF is applied to unaffiliated bonds class 01-06 and non-U.S. government bonds.

In the text example, # of bond issuers = 120, which is part (c) above and so BSF = 0.750. The final part of the BSC calculation is to multiply BSF by the R1 bond charges that are subject to to the BSF. In the text example, this value is 247,319. (This is highlighted in the next pop quiz and also explained further down when we look at the full R1 exhibit.)

BSC = 0.750 x 247,319 = 185,490.
Pop Quiz C!    :-o
Question: Sometimes you aren't given a single value for the # of bond issuers. You have to calculate that yourself. Using the data below, calculate:
(a) basic R1 charge
(b) BSF
(c) BSC
Hint: To calculate BSC, you don't multiply BSF by bond values. Rather, you multiply BSF by the R1 charges for bonds that are subject to the BSF. Click for Answer 
fixed income investment amount RBC factor # bond issuers
U.S. government bonds 8,000 0.0000 200
class 01 unaffiliated bonds 1,000 0.0030 70
class 02 unaffiliated bonds 2,000 0.0100 50
class 06 unaffiliated bonds 3,000 0.3000 90
collateral loans 5,000 0.0500 100
mortgage bonds 3,500 0.0500 100

Asset Concentration Charge (ACC)

Warning: Odomirok uses a totally different example to demonstrate the ACC calculation versus the comprehensive R1 calculation in table 88. (There is a link to the table 88 exhibit further down.) For this section, we'll use the data from their example, but the practice problems Alice created will give you 1 set of numbers for the whole R1 calculation. You're welcome. :-)

Note from the RBC charge summary table that both R1 (fixed income investment risk) and R2 (equity investment risk) have an asset concentration charge. Now, I'd like to cover the R1 calculation here and save the R2 calculation for the next section, but you can't completely separate R1 and R2. Why the heck not???!!! Alice will explain below.

The first thing you have to know is which fixed income investments are subject to the ACC: (items in green font are used in Odomirok's example)

  • unaffiliated bonds in classes 02 through 05
  • collateral loans
  • mortgage loans

This list has 3 items for the purposes of sorting (see below) but each bond class 02 through 05 subsequently receives its own RBC factor.

The first thing you have to know is which equity investments are subject to the ACC: (items in green font are used in Odomirok's example)

  • unaffiliated preferred stocks and hybrid securities in classes 02 through 05
  • unaffiliated common stock
  • investment in real estate
  • encumbrances on invested real estate
  • schedule BA assets (excluding collateral loans)
  • receivable for securities
  • aggregate write-ins for invested assets
  • derivatives

This list has 8 items for the purposes of sorting (see below) but each stock class 02 through 05 subsequently receives its own RBC factor. The example from Odomirok, whose link is provided below, uses only the investments in green font from the 2 lists above. (And the 2015 exam problem is an even more simplified version of the text example.)

Odomirok - ACC example for R1 & R2 (tables 86-87)

Why ACC for R1 & R2 can't be completely separated:

  • Note how in table 86 they sum the fixed & equity investments for each bond issuer then rank the issuers from highest to lowest.
  • For this ranking, the fixed investments are not separated from the equity investmentsthey are all mixed together.
  • This is why you cannot completely separately the ACC calculations for R1 & R2.

If I were going to write a step-by-step procedure for myself on how to calculate ACC, this is how I would do it:

step 1: gather all fixed income investments and equity investments that are subject to the ACC (see above lists)
step 2: sort the list from highest to lowest
step 3: truncate this list and keep only the top 10 rows of this table

Then these last 2 steps are done separately for R1 & R2.

step 4: sum the TOP 10 results in each separate category (classes 02 through 05 are treated separately at this step)
step 5: multiply each sum from step 4 by the appropriate RBC factor

Note that for step 4 for the text example, Odomirok assumes all bonds are class 02 and all stocks are class 05. You can see this in table 87.

ACC Concept: The asset concentration charge basically just doubles the RBC charge for the 10 largest issuers.

Pop Quiz D!    :-o
For the example in Odomirok, verify that R1 = 95 and R2 = 218. (Note that the grand ACC total in table 87 is listed as 312. But 95 + 218 = 313. Hey Odomirok, do arithmetic much? ← that's an Alice joke.)
Question: what is an ACF or Asset Concentration Factor
  • Th ACF was used in the table 87 example from above:
ACF = weighted average of RBC factors for assets subject to the concentration charge
  • Therefore, if someone tells you the ACF, you can calculate the ACC very easily with the formula below:
ACC = ACF x (total value of assets subject to the concentration charge)

You should quickly double-check the ACF value of 0.074 from the table 87 exhibit. (I found all this information hard to keep straight in my head. I had to do a lot of practice problems before I understood clearly how all the different pieces fit together.)

Full R1 Examples

So you see that calculating R1 can get messy really quickly. It isn't that the concept is hard. You just have to remember the 3 components.

Formula: R1 = basic charge + BSC + ACC

And here is a nice presentation of the full R1 example from Odomirok:

Odomirok - full R1 example (table 88) ← doesn't show details for asset concentration charge
Odomirok - full R1 example - combines 2 text examples ← my version shows details for the asset concentration charge example from table 86 & 87

Finally, here is my solution to the exam problem referenced at the top of the R1 section. Note that this exam problem is very simplified because there is only 1 category of fixed income investments (unaffiliated bonds) and then there is only 1 class of unaffiliated bonds (class 2.)

Solution to 2015.Fall #17

And here are a couple of similar practice problems but with different numbers:

2 practice problems like 2015.Fall #17

And since Alice is evil, she has created 4 more full R1 practice problems to ruin your day: :-)

4 full R1 practice problems

Just to sumarize, here are references to the components of the Odomirok R1 example:

  • tables 84-85: calculation of the BSF (Bond Size Factor)
  • tables 86-87: calculation of ACC (Asset Concentration Charge) for R1 and R2 for a company with multiple classes of fixed income and equity assets
  • table 88: calculation of total R1 for a company that has multiple classes of fixed income and equity assets

Week 2: Day 2 (R2)

General

Recall that asset risk has 4 categories: AFEC

Affiliated company risk (this is the R0 charge)
Fixed income risk (this is the R1 charge)
Equity risk (this is the R2 charge)
Credit risk (this is the R3 charge)

This section is about calculating R2. It's similar to the R1 calculation except easier because there's no BSF term (Bond Size Factor.) The only modification to the basic charge is the ACC (Asset Concentration Charge.)

If you're given basic charge = 1,365 (basic R2 charge) and ACC = 1,335 then even Ian-the-Intern can calculate R2 correctly. :-)

Formula: R2 = basic charge + ACC

The answer is:

R2 = 1,365 + 1,335 = 2,700.

Of course in the exam problem, you're not given these quantities directly - you have to calculate them. But this too is easy because it's very similar to the calculation for R1. Actually the formulas are the same – they just apply to equity assets instead of fixed income assets.

quantity formula
basic charge = Σ [ (asset values subject to basic charge) x (RBC factor) ]
ACC = Σ [ (asset values subject to ACC for TOP 10 issuers) x (RBC factor) ]

Now, calculating R2 can still get messy for the same reasons that R1 gets messy. But it isn't conceptually difficult. The text lists something like 13 different types of equity investments that have an R2 RBC charge, but I don't think it's helpful to list all of them. The 2 largest, together with the ACC for R2 account for over 90% of the R2 charge industry-wide:

  • 35% of R2 charge: unaffiliated stocks (all classes)
  • 28% of R2 charge: Schedule BA assets
  • 28% of R2 charge: ACC (Asset Concentration Charge)

One equity asset I didn't mention is holding company which is 3% of R2 industry-wide, but as with R1, its RBC calculation is a little different. You don't multiply its value by the RBC factor. Rather you multiply the RBC factor of 0.225 by the holding company value in excess of the carrying value for indirectly owned insurance affiliates calculated in R0.

Pop Quiz E!    :-o
Go back to the practice problems from the previous section and calculate R2. (the 2 practice problems like 2015.Fall #17)
Pop Quiz E Answers!    :-D
practice 01: R2 = (basic charge) + ACC = (66,400 x 0.15) + (66,400 - 1,700 - 400) x 0.15 = 19,605  ← shout-out to MM!
practice 02: R2 = (basic charge) + ACC = (33,200 x 0.15) + (33,200 - 400 - 0) x 0.15 = 9,900  ← shout-out to MM!

Now that we've covered R1 and R2, there's a comment I made in Week 2: Day 1 about allocation of the ACC (Asset Concentration Charge) that should now make more sense. Recall that the exam problem we looked at had 10 different sample answers in the examiner's report. One source of ambiguity was that they didn't tell how to allocate ACC between R1 and R2. You now know that the ACC is calculated separately for R1 and R2, but the exam problem only provided the total ACC. To properly solve the problem, you had to know how much went into R1 and how much went into R2. Since they didn't tell you, you had to make an assumption:

  • The examiners accepted any allocation of ACC between R1 and R2.

The simplest thing to do is put it all either in R1 or R2, and I opted to put it all in R2.

(shout-out to KB!)

Here's 1 final follow-up question on the ACC.

Question: in general, which assets are not subject to the asset concentration factor
  • assets deemed to be of low risk (like class 01 unaffiliated bonds or preferred stock)
  • assets that have already received the maximum charge of 0.3000 (like class 06 unaffiliated bonds)

Summary for R1 & R2

Ian-the-Intern kept getting confused when Alice asked him to calculate R1 & R2 because there were 2 things he kept jumbling up:

  • the different components, basic charge, BSC, and ACC all apply to different types of assets
  • in addition to the first point, the relevant unaffiliated classes are different for each component:
   → use classes 01-06 for basic charges
   → use classes 01-06 for BSC source text is unclear about this
   → use classes 02-05 for ACC

She made him a summary table that helped him keep things going straight (or gaily forward, whichever the case may be!)

(Note that if you print this, the background colors are not visible. I don't know why.)

item R1 R2
formula → R1 = basic charge + BSC + ACC R2 = basic charge + ACC
formula → basic charge
  = Σ [ (asset values subject to basic charge) x (RBC factor) ]
same formula as for R1, applies to different assets
types of assets subject to basic charge

(highest charge items in red font)
fixed income assets
  - unaffiliated bonds (class 01-06)
  - other non-insurance subs
  - holding companies
  - miscellaneous assets (cash, cash equivalents,...)
  - mortgage bonds
  - collateral loans
  - and other random junk 2
equity assets
  - unaffiliated stocks (class 01-06)
  - other non-insurance subs
  - holding companies
  - real estate
  - Schedule BA assets
  - and other random junk
 
formula → BSC
  = BSF x (total R1 charges for bonds subject to BSF)
not applicable
types of assets subject to BSF fixed income assets 1
  - class 01-06 unaffiliated bonds
  - non-U.S. government bonds
not applicable
formula → ACC
  = Σ [ (asset values subject to ACC for TOP 10 issuers) x (RBC factor) ]
same formula as for R1, applies to different assets
types of assets subject to ACC fixed income assets
  - unaffiliated bonds (class 02-05)
  - collateral loans
  - mortgage bonds
equity assets
  - unaffiliated preferred stocks & hybrid securities (class 02-05)
  - unaffiliated common stock
  - real estate
  - encumbrances on invested real estate
  - schedule BA assets (excluding collateral loans)
  - receivable for securities
  - aggregate write-ins for invested assets
  - derivatives
1 The source text states that unaffiliated classes 02-06 plus non-U.S. government bonds in class 01 are subject to the BSF. But then their example includes class 01 unaffiliated bonds. I will assume that BSF is applied to unaffiliated bonds class 01-06 and non-U.S. government bonds.
2 The 2014 edition of Odomirok has a discrepancy in the RBC factor for Schedule BA assets. In Table 87 on page 249, the factor is listed as 0.05, but on page 255 the factor is listed as 0.2. (shout-out to pb!)

Here are 2 problems that combine the calculation of R1 & R2.

2 practice problems for R1 & R2

And here's a quiz that covers both the R1 and R2 calculation.

mini BattleQuiz 4 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Week 2: Day 3 (R3 with intro to R4)

Recall that asset risk has 4 categories: AFEC

Affiliated company risk (this is the R0 charge)
Fixed income risk (this is the R1 charge)
Equity risk (this is the R2 charge)
Credit risk (this is the R3 charge)

Below is a link to a problem from way back in 2014 where you have to calculate R3. It's pretty easy (aside from 1 small trick) because they explicitly tell you which financial statement amounts relate to credit risk and they give you the associated RBC factors.

Without even studying this section, you could guess that to calculate R3 you have to multiply credit-related amounts by the correpsonding RBC factors. You'd probably get half the points just doing that. But to get full points, you'd have to know the trick:

E (2014.Spring #20)

If you looked at the solution, you'll see that after multiplying the credit-related amounts by the RBC factors they made an adjustment for reinsurance. That's the trick.

R3 Trick: The RBC charge for reinsurance recoverable is split 50/50 between R3 and R4 1
1 Use this split only if:
R4 > (RBC charge for non-invested assets) + ½ x (RBC charge for reinsurance recoverables)     (text is wrong. see errata. thx TD. very observant.)
Note that R3 is always greater than the right-hand-side of this inequality since the right-hand-side contains only 2 of the 3 components of R3. The 3 components of R3 are (see Assets subject to R3): non-invested assets, reinsurance recoverables, health credit risk.
Remember that R4 is the biggest component of RBC (54% industry-wide) and R3 is a small portion of the total (1% industry-wide). Therefore, this inequality should virtually always be true. And in fact, the examiner's report never even checked – they just went ahead and did the 50/50 allocation. (If by some freak occurrence this inequality were false, then 100% of the charge for reinsurance recoverable would go to R3. This could happen in the case of "limited net reserves" because then R4 could be small enough relative to R3. This reserve RBC limitation exists so the company cannot diversify away a portion of its credit risk in that situation. thx PA!)

In this problem you also have to calculate R4 but it's very easy because they give you all the components. You just have to recognize them:

  • basic loss reserving RBC charge: 400,000
  • excessive growth charge/penalty for loss reserves: 75,000

Just add them up then throw in the 50% allocation for the reinsurance recoverable charge. (See the R3 trick above.)

We'll cover the detailed calculations for R4 and R5 in further down. They are hard problems.

Assets subject to R3

I would have said what we covered above this is very likely all you need to know about R3, but Alice reminded me about part (b) of the following rather unfair problem:

E (2016.Spring #26)

The reason it's unfair is that you had know the RBC factors for the components of R3. In one of the previous quizzes, there was a practice template on calculating total RBC. To solve it, you had to know which of the financial statement items are subject to the R3 charge, but in that problem I gave you the factors. Let's step back for a moment and list all the possible R3 items. (Items in green relate to this exam problem.)

1. Non-Invested Assets:
  • Investment income due and accrued (factor = 0.01)
  • Amounts Receivable related to uninsured plans (0.05)
  • Federal income tax recoverable (0.05)
  • Guaranty funds receivable or on deposit (0.05)
  • Recoverable (parent/subs/affiliates) (0.05)
  • Aggregate Write-ins for other than Invested Assets (0.05)
2. Reinsurance recoverable (0.1)   ← for more information click to see this forum discussion
3. Health Credit Risk (accounts for 0% of P&C insurer risk)

Now, in (2016.Spring #26), you weren't given the actual RBC charges, you were given the financial statement amounts. To get the charges you had to multiply each by the correct RBC factor, which was not given. (The correct factors are in parentheses in the above list.) In other words, they expected you to memorize these factors. If you didn't memorize these factors, my advice would be to make up something reasonable like 0.05 (shout-out to PA!) and just use that across the board. Technically you'd get the wrong answer but it would let you complete the problem and if you did everything else correctly you would still get most of the points. (Alice thinks it was ridiculous to expect you to memorize the RBC factors. Don't get her started!)

R3 trick: The solution in the examiner's report explicitly checked the inequality for the R3 trick. I wonder if they deducted points for not checking, even if you correctly did the 50/50 allocation. They didn't mention it.

Here are a couple of practice problems on R3 that I think are self-explanatory. They aren't hard. Here's what you do:

  • calculate the basic charges for non-invested assets, reinsurance recoverables, and health credit risk. You do this simply by multiplying the given amounts by the RBC factors.
  • BUT for the reinsurance recoverables, make sure the amount is net of the reinsurance provision. The reinsurance provision is covered in Odomirok.14-F which is the Odomirok chapter on Schedule F (reinsurance)
  • check the allocation of the RBC charge for reinsurance provision using the TRICK mentioned above
  • then just sum the final charges for the 3 categories: non-invested assets, reinsurance recoverables, and health credit risk

Here are a few R3 practice problems.

2 practice problems for R3

There is a practice template for R3 in the quiz at the end of the next section.

Week 2: Day 4 (R4)

Recall that U/W risk (versus asset risk) has 2 categories:

  • reserve risk (this is the R4 charge)
  • NWP risk (this is the R5 charge)

Also recall that R4 is the largest component of the total RBC charge industry-wide. It accounts for over 50% of the total charge.

The calculations for R4 are quite involved but do not often appear on the exam. Nonetheless, Alice has created some practice problems for you and there is a practice template in the quiz at the end of the next section.

There are 4 components to the R4 charge, the first 3 of which you should probably know how to calculate. The last one, health stabilization, is not discussed in any detail in Odomirok.

  8% of the R4 charge: reinsurance recoverables (reinsurance RBC that was part of the R3 calculation)
91% of the R4 charge: unpaid loss & LAE reserve
  1% of the R4 excessive premium growth RBC
  0% of the R4 charge: health stabilization RBC

Most of the section on R4 in Odomirok is about calculating the RBC for unpaid loss & LAE reserve. The component for excessive premium growth RBC is almost exactly the same as for R5 and is discussed in the next section.

Before charging ahead, let's take a step back:

  • Remember how you did the RBC calculations for R1, R2, and R3? In each case, you had to know which financial statement amounts were subject to each charge. You use fixed income assets for R1, equity assets for R2, and credit-related items for R3.
  • Then you calculated the basic charge by multiplying those amounts by the appropriate RBC factor. This RBC factor might be high or low depending on whether the asset is high-risk or low-risk.
  • Then you made various adjustments to these basic charges to get the final RBC charge. For example, the bond size charge and asset concentration charge for R1.

It's the same idea for the R4 reserve component but at first it didn't look like it, at least it didn't for me. The reason was that Alice's practice problems don't provide any RBC factors.

  • For the R4 reserve component, you have have to calculate the RBC factor yourself. (The RBC factor is the quantity [[(C+1) x A] -1]. This is explained below and in the practice problem.)
  • And there is only 1 financial statement amount that's subject to this charge, net loss & LAE reserves. (Note however that the basic R4 charge for reserves is calculated separately for each line of business.)
Company RBC%: This is the C-value in the formula [[(C+1) x A] -1].
→ The Company RBC% is derived from the corresponding Industry RBC% by applying a company-specific adjustment.
→ The adjustment factor = (company L+LAE LDF)/(industry L+LAE LDF).
→ The LDFs are calculated as the (current reserve for 9 prior AYs)/(initial reserves for those AYs).
A is an adjustment for investment income and A<1.

And there are then 2 further adjustments that are made to the basic R4 reserve charge:

  • LSD or Loss-Sensitive Discount, which is subtracted from the basic charge
  • LCF or Loss Concentration Factor, which is a multiplicative adjustment

Once you've got all that, you can add in the reinsurance recoverable RBC and the excessive growth charge. We'll just assume the health stabilization charge is 0 since it is rarely a material amount for P&C insurers. (Recall that the reinsurance recoverable RBC is usually, but not always, split evenly between R3 & R4. See the section on R3 to review the details.)

Here's an example of the R4 calculation from Odomirok. It's interesting because the it also provides the annual statement locations for the various amounts that are needed for the calculation. (It's mostly Schedule P. Some of the amounts are provided by the NAIC.)

Odomirok - R4 example
Now you're ready to tackle a full R4 problem!

The problem is based on a similar problem for R5 that has appeared several times on past exams. Don't freak out when you see it. If you practice it several times, it will make more sense. It just has a lot of moving parts and you have to memorize the formulas that put all the different parts together to get the final answer. There is also a practice template in the quiz at the end of the next section on R5

4 practice problems for R4

tubaguy has a good memory trick for the R4 and R5 formulas. thx tubaguy!

And now for the nightmare scenario of an infinite number of practice problems... and you cannot stop until you get them all right...    :-O

mini BattleQuiz 5 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Week 2: Day 5 (R5)

Recall that U/W risk (versus asset risk) has 2 categories:

  • reserve risk (this is the R4 charge)
  • NWP risk (this is the R5 charge)

The calculations for R5 are complicated and unfortunately there have been exam problems that test the gory details. You can see this in the BattleTable at the top of this wiki article. The problems from 2014 and 2012 and fairly similar except for the reference to the claims-made discount in the 2012 problem. The syllabus has changed since 2012 and that problem is no longer relevant. Alice's advice is to ignore the problem from 2012. The 2014 problem covers the major details of the R5 calculation so if you know how to do it, you should be prepared for any kind of R5 question you might get on the exam.

There are 4 components to the R5 charge, but you only need to worry about the calculations for the first two.

99% of the R5 charge: written premium RBC
  1% of the R5 charge: excessive premium growth RBC
  1% of the R5 charge: health premium RBC
  0% of the R5 charge: health stabilization RBC

Odomirok says this adds up to 100%, but the given percentages obviously add up to 101%. I know it's just rounding, but it confused poor Ian-the-Intern. They could have fixed it by keeping an extra decimal. Anyway, it's not terribly important. Maybe I'm just procrastinating because R5 is such a pain to learn.

Several comments from the R4 section above also apply to R5. You are not given the RBC factor for the NWP component – you have to calculate it. (The RBC factor for the R5 NWP component is (CxA)+U-1, and is explained in the practice problem.) And there is only 1 financial statement amount that's subject to the R5 charge, net written premium. (Note however that the basic R5 charge is calculated separately for each line of business.)

There are then 2 further adjustments that are made to the basic R5 charge: (note the similarity to R4)

  • LSD or Loss-Sensitive Discount, which is subtracted from the basic charge
  • PCF or Premium Concentration Factor, which is a multiplicative adjustment

Here's an example of the R5 calculation from Odomirok similar to the R4 example from the previous section. It provides the annual statement locations for the various amounts that are needed for the R5 calculation. It's probably good to scan it. (It's mostly Schedule P. Some of the amounts are provided by the NAIC.)

Odomirok - R5 example
Now you're ready to tackle a full R5 problem!

Take a quick look at the official statement of the 2014 problem before you look at my solution: (note there were 2 errors in the statement of the problem - see examiner's report)

E (2014.Fall #18)

And here's my solution to the calculation of R5 for that problem. (Once you have R5, calculating the total RBC is easy because they directly give you R0 thru R4.) I've included a lot more explanatory details than were in the examiner's report:

Solution to 2014.Fall #18

And finally, here are 4 PDFs with practice problems similar to the 2014 exam problem but with different numbers: (It should be self-explanatory)

4 practice problems like 2014.Fall #18

Note 1: These 4 problems were generated with random numbers and problem #2 had a negative base RBC charge for WC. This negative charge for WC should probably be set to 0 before combining it with the charges for the other lines.

Note 2: In the above problems, you were given the $-value for the excessive growth charge, but it's possible you may have to calculate it from the raw data. Recall from the previous section on calculating R4 I said the excessive growth charge for R4 is almost exactly the same as for R5. Well, you can see that clearly in the 2 formulas below:

Formula: (excessive premium growth charge for R4) = (excess growth) x 0.450 x (net loss & LAE reserves)
Formula: (excessive premium growth charge for R5) = (excess growth) x 0.225 x NWP
==> (excess growth) = (average growth over last 3 years) – 10%
==> (average growth over last 3 years) is capped at 40% for each year

The hard part of the calculation (and it really isn't that hard) is the value for (excess growth). Once you have that, the corresponding charge is easy using the above formulas. Here's a pop quiz that shows you how to do it.

Pop Quiz F!    :-o
Given:
(Should use total GWP from the FIVE-YEAR HISTORICAL EXHIBIT discussed in Odomirok.12-5yr but if only NWP is given, as in 2018.Spring #18, then use NWP but note the assumption of no reinsurance.)
year GWP
2016 100,000
2017 120,000
2018 174,000
2019 191,400
Calculate the NWP excess growth charge.
Pop Quiz F Answer!    :-D
(average growth over last 3 years)
= average (120000/100000 - 1 , 174000/120000 - 1, 191400/174000 - 1)
= average (20%, 45%, 10%)      (but the growth must be capped at 40%)
~ average (20%, 40%, 10%)
= 23.3%
excess growth charge
= (excess growth) x 0.225 x NWP
= (23.3% – 10%) x 0.225 x 191,400
= 5,742

There is a web-based practice template for R5 in the next quiz, but here's a good practice problem from an old exam. There are 3 twists in this problem which are explained belolw.

E (2019.Spring #15)

Twists

  1. There are 2 lines of business. That means you have to apply equations 4 and 5 separately to each line then calculate the combined total RBC charge using equation 6.
  2. You have to calculate the excessive growth charge yourself, but it's easy. Just follow the example above
  3. You have to calculate the company L+LAE 10-year average yourself, which is easy because they give you the 10-year history from Schedule P, BUT you also have cap the L+LAE for each year at 300%. As explained in Odomirok: The company average loss and LAE ratio is a straight average over the past 10 accident years of the net loss and LAE ratios provided in Schedule P, Part 1, column 31. Loss and LAE ratios for any accident year in excess of 300% are capped at that value in consideration of anomalous, one-time results.    ← shout-out to AU!

And after 2 grueling weeks of hard work, here's the quiz for Alice's last day:

mini BattleQuiz 6 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Alice's Summer Performance Review (Old Exam Problems)

mini BattleQuiz 7 You must be logged in or this will not work.

Full BattleQuiz You must be logged in or this will not work.

  Forum

Pop Quiz B Answers

(a) BSF = 1.500 for 10 issuers
(b) BSF = 1.006 for 85 issuers
(c) BSF = 0.750 for 120 issuers
(d) BSF = 0.126 for 575 issuers
Go back

Pop Quiz C Answers

(a)
  • basic R1 charge = (8,000 x 0) + (1,000 x 0.003) + (2,000 x 0.01) + (3,000 x 0.3) + (5,000 x 0.05) + (3,500 x 0.05) = 1,348
(use all items in table)
(b):
  • relevant # of bond issuers = (# class 01 issuers) + (# class 02 issuers) + (# class 06 issuers) = 70 + 50 + 90 = 210
(remember that you only use unaffiliated bond classes 01 → 06, non-U.S. government bonds)
  • BSF = 300 / 210 - 1 = 0.429
(c)
  • (assets subject to BSF) = (1,000 x 0.0030) + (2,000 x 0.0100) + (3,000 x 0.3000) = 923
(remember that you only use unaffiliated bond classes 01 → 06, non-U.S. government bonds)
  • BSC = 923 x 0.429 = 396.0
Go back