rlsrachaellouisesmith
Ton up Member
Good afternoon,
I have completed this paper today and just had a few questions:
1) I included a table for the minimum capital requirement ratio rather than a graph as I thought it better displayed the change in the ratio as the changes were so small and I did not want to start the y axis on the graph with a non-zero figure. Would the table have been acceptable for marks or would it be necessary to produce a chart?
2) I included the calculation of the stressed mortality and morbidity rates in the paper but not in the Purpose statement which is where it was included in the model solution. Was it ok for this to be included anywhere?
3) The paper did not ask for a table of values to be included showing the MCR and ratio for each scenario, nor did it ask for a table of values showing the base and stressed expected net present value under each product type. Why was this included? Could these figures have been included as approximate values in the text rather than in a table?
4) What is meant by the next steps point 'Model mortality/incidence rates more for risk'? Are there other examples other than smoker status, so for example we could say mortality for annuitants and TA could be modelled by a different table?
Thank you,
Rachael
I have completed this paper today and just had a few questions:
1) I included a table for the minimum capital requirement ratio rather than a graph as I thought it better displayed the change in the ratio as the changes were so small and I did not want to start the y axis on the graph with a non-zero figure. Would the table have been acceptable for marks or would it be necessary to produce a chart?
2) I included the calculation of the stressed mortality and morbidity rates in the paper but not in the Purpose statement which is where it was included in the model solution. Was it ok for this to be included anywhere?
3) The paper did not ask for a table of values to be included showing the MCR and ratio for each scenario, nor did it ask for a table of values showing the base and stressed expected net present value under each product type. Why was this included? Could these figures have been included as approximate values in the text rather than in a table?
4) What is meant by the next steps point 'Model mortality/incidence rates more for risk'? Are there other examples other than smoker status, so for example we could say mortality for annuitants and TA could be modelled by a different table?
Thank you,
Rachael