IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/astinb/v46y2016i02p225-263_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Correlations Between Insurance Lines Of Business: An Illusion Or A Real Phenomenon? Some Methodological Considerations

Author

Listed:
  • Avanzi, Benjamin
  • Taylor, Greg
  • Wong, Bernard

Abstract

This paper is concerned with dependency between business segments in the non-life insurance industry. When considering the business of an insurance company at the aggregate level, dependence structures can have a major impact in several areas of Enterprise Risk Management, such as in claims reserving and capital modelling. The accurate estimation of the diversification benefits related to the dependence structures between lines of business (LoBs) is crucial for (i) capital efficiency, as one should avoid holding unnecessarily high levels of capital, and (ii) solvency of the insurance company, as an underestimation, on the other hand, may lead to insufficient capitalisation and safety. There seems to be a great deal of preconception as to how dependent insurance claims should be. Often, presence of dependence is taken as a given and rarely discussed or challenged, perhaps because of the lack of extensive datasets to be publicly analysed. In this paper, we take a different approach, and consider how much correlation some real datasets actually display (the Meyers–Shi dataset from the USA, and the AUSI dataset from Australia). We develop a simple theoretical framework that enables us to explain how and why correlations can be illusory (and what we mean by that). We show with some real examples that, sometimes, most (if not all) of the correlation can be “explained” by an appropriate methodology. Two major conclusions stem from our analysis. 1.In any attempt to measure cross-LoB correlations, careful modelling of the data needs to be the order of the day. The exercise will not be well served by rough modelling, such as the use of simple chain ladders, and may indeed result in the prescription of excessive risk margins and/or capital margins.2.Such empirical evidence as examined in the paper reveals cross-LoB correlations that vary only in the range zero to very modest. There is little evidence in favour of the high correlation assumed in some jurisdictions. The evidence suggests that these assumptions derived from either poor modelling or a misconception of the cross-LoB dependencies relevant to the purpose to which they are applied.

Suggested Citation

  • Avanzi, Benjamin & Taylor, Greg & Wong, Bernard, 2016. "Correlations Between Insurance Lines Of Business: An Illusion Or A Real Phenomenon? Some Methodological Considerations," ASTIN Bulletin, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 225-263, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:astinb:v:46:y:2016:i:02:p:225-263_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0515036115000318/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Avanzi, Benjamin & Taylor, Greg & Vu, Phuong Anh & Wong, Bernard, 2020. "A multivariate evolutionary generalised linear model framework with adaptive estimation for claims reserving," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 50-71.
    2. Ioannis Badounas & Georgios Pitselis, 2020. "Loss Reserving Estimation With Correlated Run-Off Triangles in a Quantile Longitudinal Model," Risks, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-26, February.
    3. Avanzi, Benjamin & Taylor, Greg & Wong, Bernard & Yang, Xinda, 2021. "On the modelling of multivariate counts with Cox processes and dependent shot noise intensities," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 9-24.
    4. Shivam Gupta & Sachin Modgil & Samadrita Bhattacharyya & Indranil Bose, 2022. "Artificial intelligence for decision support systems in the field of operations research: review and future scope of research," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 308(1), pages 215-274, January.
    5. Eling, Martin & Jung, Kwangmin, 2020. "Risk aggregation in non-life insurance: Standard models vs. internal models," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 183-198.
    6. Benjamin Avanzi & Gregory Clive Taylor & Bernard Wong & Xinda Yang, 2020. "On the modelling of multivariate counts with Cox processes and dependent shot noise intensities," Papers 2004.11169, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2020.
    7. Avanzi, Benjamin & Taylor, Greg & Vu, Phuong Anh & Wong, Bernard, 2016. "Stochastic loss reserving with dependence: A flexible multivariate Tweedie approach," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 63-78.
    8. Benjamin Avanzi & Gregory Clive Taylor & Phuong Anh Vu & Bernard Wong, 2020. "A multivariate evolutionary generalised linear model framework with adaptive estimation for claims reserving," Papers 2004.06880, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:astinb:v:46:y:2016:i:02:p:225-263_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/asb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.