• 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.

SCR life risk module

D

dubactuary

Member
I was wondering if someone could explain the rational for some of the shocks only applying where they would lead to an increase in BEL? I get that in the lapse stresses, there could be some anti-selection in mind. But what about, say, mortality?

Thanks in advance!
 
Hi - apologies that it has taken a while to answer this.

Let's think back to the basic purpose of the SCR: it is the amount of capital that an insurance company should hold in order to allow it to be able to continue to cover its technical provisions under an extreme (1 in 200 year) adverse event.

In order to assess this capital requirement, it therefore needs to consider the extent to which it has downside risk in each of the areas covered by the risk module.

For some risks, such as expense risk or mortality risk, the direction of the downside (or adverse) stress is straightforward (expenses higher; mortality higher - noting that the longevity risk sub-module covers the lower-mortality direction). For others, such as lapse risk, depending on the product and/or duration, the downside/adverse stress could be higher or lower.

I hope that addresses what you were asking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top