SP8 - April 2020 discussion

Posting one here because I didn't see it. Mods, I hope that's fine.

So how did you find the exam?

Lifting possible responses d from the sp7 thread into the poll.

I thought the paper was lengthier than usual.

I think I'm between borderline and slightly above average pass mark

 

I agree that the paper felt very lengthy and most people Iknow had to leave a certain portion unattempted. I also feel if this was a traditional pen paper exam, most of us would not have been able to complete more than 60% of the paper. the typing speed is better than writing speed which helped, but the exam was very very lengthy.

May I ask how many marks did you leave due to length of the exam paper?

 

I was not able to attempt the question on data requirements for commercial and private motor fully.

I had only 5 minutes left by which time i felt completely drained!!

I felt that if I had maybe 10 more minutes, I could have done more justice to that question

I also made silly mistakes in the exposure curve question because I was pressed for time... I made a formula error when computing the value for the exposure curve (so all the columns in my table are right except the last one which happens to be the most important column!!)... I felt that a little bit more time and I would have figured out the error (which just required a calm head)

 

What did everybody end up getting results wise?

I failed with a 53 unfortunately . I thought I'd done better than this too

 

I received a 55. I don't have the data to back this up... but i feel that the marking this time has been rather strict.

Have asked for a SAR

I wonder what the pass mark is.

 

I've asked for SAR too, hopefully they don't take as long as they usually do sending it out. I also have a feeling that the actual pass rates won't be released. I wouldn't be surprised if all the marks have been somewhat scaled down to avoid a few more people passing

 

I passed SP8 with a mark of 66 if that's at all helpful.

 

hi. how did you ask for sar?
thanks
D

 

Anything you wish to share how you prepared for the exam? Thanks. I have to revisit my studying model

 

Send an email to this mailbox
dpo@actuaries.org.uk

 

Sorry for the slow response I've only just seen this.

I attended the Act Ed block tutorial for the first time which I found helpful. This was my second resit of the exam. What I also found most helpful was the Act Ed online classroom, and working through all of the examples/tasks as well as ASET and past papers.

I think mostly it's just a matter of practice! Hope that's helpful.

 

Received my SAR.
Dropped lots of points on:

Question 5) 3.5 & 1.5 out of 10
Question 7) 4.5 & 3 out of 11
Question 10) 2.5 & 2.5 out of 10

I felt that could’ve happened.

Obviously my main bugbear is the 15 half marks that the examiners disagreed on, but the IFoA deem acceptable to interpret exam results so wildly.

It blows my mind their acceptable standards.

A 35% pass rate is filth.

 

Yes. I also found some of the questions where one marker has given me a lot of marks and another has given me very less marks, though overall, both markers have arrived at the same mark (which was 56.75). I feel that after going through the answers, I may not have met the standards... but it woudl be great if I could understand what I did wrong as i am now worried about changing my answering style (because one marker has apparently deemed it good enough to give a lot of marks while the other is saying i've not been good enough)

 

I've looked through a couple of the questions on the examiners script, my script and my marks. I dare not look at too many or it'll give me an aneurism.

An example, Question 8 (i) for three marks
Describe the following pricing models:
(a) Tariff
(b) Qualitative
(c) Cost plus.

My answers were:
Tariff
Used in Germany – the regulator sets the premium rates or sets restrictions on the rates , requiring legitimate reason for premium rates to change
I think this matches Tariff points one and three below, unless being overly harsh

Qualitative
Used when data is sparse
We use subjective and expert opinions instead of quantitatively
I think this matches Qualitative points two and four below, unless being overly harsh

Cost plus
This is the most common used method – we use objective and statistical analysis to calculate the risk premium, and then load/adjust
I think this matches Cost plus points one and two below, unless being overly harsh

I scored 2.5 and 1.5 out of three here by the two examiners.
I was awarded two marks.

The examiners report has the following:

Tariff

1. Where the regulator has significant influence over the rates [½]
2. Regulator will either set fixed rates or provide little flexibility to insurance companies in deciding rates [½]
3. Rates may have to be filed with regulator / rating changes need their approval [½]
4. Minimum and maximum premium rates may be set by the regulator [½]
5. The companies have to differentiate themselves on the basis of marketing and qualitative factors like improved claims processing. [½]

Qualitative

1. Where we cannot determine the ‘correct’ price purely by numerical analysis [½]
2. . . . . so we must take account of subjective factors / judgment of underwriters [½]
3. Might be because of heterogeneous risks or new products. [½]
4. Or if data is incomplete or sparse or prone to errors [½]

Cost Plus

1. If sufficient data is available, prices are set based on statistically driven analysis [½]
2. Premium is the cost of expected claims loaded for expenses, profit, etc. [½]

How they can justify scoring such different marks is outrageous.
If two markers disagree on a point, to say "lets split the difference" is outrageous.

 

Sorry another one - is there a reason why Pecuniary Loss does not count as "financial loss insurance"?

 

My SAR shows my marks differed by 16. Both on the fail side which is defo my fault. But still, 16 marks. Makes you ask a lot of questions

 

Hello PeteC,

I would interpret it this way:

1. Tariff: Likely scored as 1/1 by both examiners. Seems to cover 2 points sufficiently well.

2. Qualitative: I would think the essential point here is that a quantitative approach CANNOT be used, which you have fallen short of stating in your 2nd line. Also, you imply it is used 'when data is sparse'. That is quite a restrictive statement, as it is used in other cases as well. Just 1 use case by itself seems a bit insufficient for the full 0.5 marks.

3. Cost plus: Your use of 'statistical analysis' likely gets 0.5 marks. 2nd point uses the term risk premium without defining it, which in this context (a question on a crude concept like 'cost plus pricing' would be required imo). None of the types of loadings or adjustments are mentioned either.

To be honest, I can see why 1.5 marks are given by one of the examiners. I think it is a case of writing down the obvious, as they can only give marks for what is on the script. Obvious points that you probably already knew were the meaning of risk premium, types of loadings.

I myself question the marks I have received on particular questions, which is why I'm keen to analyze and pick up where marks are being lost.
Good luck to you!

 

On a thorough analysis i've noticed that the describe questions are where i've ended up losing a ton of marks.

 

Sorry to pester...but is there a reason for this? Is it not “financial loss”, or has it been removed since I got my notes a few years ago?

 

Cheers