• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Chap 23, p. 13, formula

E

echo20

Member
I know it's not terribly important to know the EV analysis of change formulae off by heart, but this one looks a bit iffy to me. It says the EV change from moving to a new EV projection basis will be:

Sum_over_t { [T_t(new EV basis) - T_t(old EV basis) ] / (1+r1)^t }

where r1 is the revised risk discount rate. However, the EV calculated on the old basis would have used the original risk discount rate, r, so I'd have thought the correct formula would be:

Sum_over_t { [T_t(new EV basis) / (1+r1)^t] - [T_t(old EV basis) / (1+r)^t] }

Can anyone tell me why I'm wrong and the core reading is right, or have I detected a chink in their actuarial armour? ;)
 
Can anyone tell me why I'm wrong and the core reading is right, or have I detected a chink in their actuarial armour? ;)

Surely no actuary would admit to that, especially when there's get out of jail cards such as "it depends", "we can adjust for that", or "it is correct to assume it in this circumstance" can be used.
 
I know it's not terribly important to know the EV analysis of change formulae off by heart, but this one looks a bit iffy to me. It says the EV change from moving to a new EV projection basis will be:

Sum_over_t { [T_t(new EV basis) - T_t(old EV basis) ] / (1+r1)^t }

where r1 is the revised risk discount rate. However, the EV calculated on the old basis would have used the original risk discount rate, r, so I'd have thought the correct formula would be:

Sum_over_t { [T_t(new EV basis) / (1+r1)^t] - [T_t(old EV basis) / (1+r)^t] }

Can anyone tell me why I'm wrong and the core reading is right, or have I detected a chink in their actuarial armour?

Your logic is quite right and we could do the analysis the way you suggest.

However, the Core Reading is right too. In practice we may want to separately consider the impact of changing the projection basis (as shown on page 13 of Chapter 23) and the imapct of changing the risk discount rate (which would involve the change you suggest while holding the projection basis constant).

The Core Reading approach is more suitable as we want to look separately at the impact on the operating return. Page 13 goes on to say:

"The impact of changes to the economic assumptions in the embedded value basis, including the related change in the risk discount rate, must be identified separately and excluded from the operating return in the analysis."

Best wishes

Mark
 
Thanks Mark, still not entirely convinced by the logic in the chronology of the steps but sure it's not worth arguing about!
 
Back
Top