1. Posts in the subject areas are now being moderated. Please do not post any details about your exam for at least 3 working days. You may not see your post appear for a day or two. See the 'Forum help' thread entitled 'Using forums during exam period' for further information. Wishing you the best of luck with your exams.
    Dismiss Notice

Incidence rate Vs Inception rate

Discussion in 'SP1' started by Vatsal Gupta, Jan 8, 2022.

  1. Vatsal Gupta

    Vatsal Gupta Made first post

    Question1:
    Could you please help me to understand what exactly do we mean by Claim Incidence rate and Claim inception rate?
    Is there any difference between the two?

    Question2:
    In chapter 13 on page 8 core reading states that:

    If a formula model, as described in earlier subjects (eg Subject CM1) and in Chapter 11, were
    being used for pricing, the last two approaches above are not available and the risk of
    adverse future experience would be allowed for by taking margins.


    For the formula model as per my understanding, we could apply only third approach i.e. risk element of the risk discount rate.
    But as per core reading, only 1st approach is applicable.
    Could you please help me to understand this concept?

    Thanks
    Vatsal Gupta
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 8, 2022
  2. Mark Willder

    Mark Willder ActEd Tutor Staff Member

    Hi Vatsal

    I'll answer your questions in turn:

    Q1 - The terms 'claims incidence' and 'claim inception' are often used used interchangeably to mean the claim rate. However, it is more accurate to use claims incidence to refer to single events that lead to a lump sum payment (eg critical illness lumps sums or PMI), and to use claims inception for claims that have a start and end point and so lead to regular payments (eg income protection or long-term care) so we have the claim incepting and then at a later date the claim terminating (eg on death or recovery).

    Q2 - The Core Reading is correct.

    We could use all three methods using a cashflow approach, ie we do a profit test by projecting the future profits (premiums plus investment return less claims less expenses plus release of reserves) and then discounting them back at the risk discount rate. We can make these calculations more prudent by adding margins to assumptions (eg assuming IP policyholders are sick for longer) or by using a higher risk discount rate (which places a lower value on the profits).

    Alternatively we can price using a formula. This is similar to the life insurance calculations you will have seen in CM1, eg an annuity is valued using the little a function. The yellow tables include similar annuity functions for income protection on page 139, although using these functions was removed from the syllabus a few years ago. We can use method 1 to add a margin to these formulae by assuming people remain in sickness for longer or using a lower rate of interest when calculating the little a functions.

    Note that there is no risk discount rate in the formula approach so we can't use it to add prudence to the formula calculation. Also note that adding prudence for the cashflow approach means a higher risk discount rate (the rate used to discount profits), while adding a margin to the investment assumption (the return earned on the cashflows) means using a lower interest rate.

    I hope these explanations help.

    Best wishes

    Mark
     

Share This Page