• 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.

CMP Chapter 18, 22 and 26

S

shinmo

Member
Chapter 18
Ideally, separate cashflows have different risk discount rates to reflect their inherent riskiness.
Does this mean:
- If mortality assumption is highly volatile, then risk discount rate for death benefit should be lower, so that PV(death benefit) can be higher and more reserves can be set aside?
- If investment income is highly uncertain then we use higher risk discount rate to discount these investment cashflows more?

Chapter 26
Is value-in-force same as negative reserves or PVFP component of embedded value?
How do these three differ?

Chapter 22
1) When we calculate SV on the pricing basis, are the notes referring to original or current premium basis?

2) Solution 22.11 SV for unit-linked business:
If there is reduced level allocation rates rates, why would a fixed monetary deduction be appropriate as surrender penalty?

Thanks for the help in advance!
 
1, sounds right

2. yes I think PVFP and VIF are basically the same thing (if calculated on same basis with same method). For an individual contract with a negative reserve, then yes it's VIF might be this negative reserve, as profits released now - although it's possible that even more profits might emerge in future on a realistic basis if the negative reserve is still prudent. So I wouldn't try to group this in the same category at all.

3. usually the original, so bothe pricing and policy value calculated on same basis. If current basis (which is also possible) things get more complicated.

4. If you had say 90% allocation rates then, if someone surrendered early, you'd be missing on on 10% or each future premium, which is a monetary amount. So you impose a penalty to get it back instead.
 
Back
Top