1 / 24

Capital Management

Capital Management. 2001 CAS Annual Meeting - Atlanta, Georgia. Today’s agenda. Objectives of the project Overview of approach taken Results and insights obtained. Objectives of the Project. The client established three broad objectives for the project.

fritz-dale
Download Presentation

Capital Management

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Capital Management 2001 CAS Annual Meeting - Atlanta, Georgia François Morin, FCAS, MAAA, CFA

  2. Today’s agenda • Objectives of the project • Overview of approach taken • Results and insights obtained

  3. Objectives of the Project

  4. The client established three broad objectives for the project • Optimize the use of capital within and across the company • Know how much capital is needed to support each business, and how changes in strategy alter needed capital • Analyze performance on a consistent basis across all products, subsidiaries, countries • Independent of accounting and regulatory regimes • Improve the knowledge of the underlying risks and inform decisions as to the relationship between risk, capital and return

  5. The client sought to “operationalize” a simple conceptual value framework Risk Profile of Business Segment Required Returns on Capital Employed Actual Returns Consistently Measured Capital Required to Support Risk Value-Based Performance Assessment

  6. Working collaboratively with the client team, we were responsible for the key deliverables • Initial assessment of existing tools and capabilities • Development of conceptual framework • Software • Economic Scenario Generator -- Global CAP:Link • P/C Financial Projection System -- TAS:P/C • Life Financial Projection System -- already in place • Results Aggregator/Calculator -- custom tool • Training of staff • Assistance to business units in model development and implementation • Validation and analysis of results

  7. Overview of approach taken

  8. Economic Scenario Generator • Projected Financials • Risk Profile = • Distribution of Future • Financial Results • Economic Capital • Embedded Value Asset Behavior Model • Inflation • Interest Rates • Credit Spreads • Currency Exchange • GDP Product Behavior Model • Company Strategy • Asset Mix • Product Mix • Capital Structure • Reins/Hedging Optimization The client chose to implement a Dynamic Financial Analysis (DFA) approach

  9. A common set of economic scenarios were used, so that model results could be combined • Monthly time series variables for GDP, inflation, government bonds, credit spreads, equity returns • For each of 13 countries, including currency exchange

  10. The two sides of the framework: two measures of risk For Capital at Risk Assessment For the Value Measurement • Shareholder view • Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) approach • Based on non-diversifiable risk • Economic value = discounted value of free cash flows at the Risk Adjusted Return • Reflects the riskiness of the business compared to an equity investment • Policyholder view • Risk of ruin approach • Based on adverse scenarios • Economic Capital = amount of shareholder equity in excess of the Best Estimate Liability, required to assure payment in a high percentage of scenarios

  11. The best estimate liability • The Best Estimate Liability (BEL) is the level of assets required to pay future policyholder benefits in a best estimate scenario • The difference between statutory reserves and Best Estimate Liability is a source of funding available to meet economic capital requirements P&C Example Over reserves and discounting effect $ 625 M • The Best Estimate Liability is an economic view of the reserves • Discounted amount: allow for the financial profits on the assets backing reserves • Includes both Loss Reserves and Unearned Premium Reserves Statutory reserves $3,250 M Best Estimate Liability $ 2,625 M

  12. Security factor • The Security Factor is based on • A constant annual Risk of Ruin of 0.1% which reflects Moody’s rating assessment for AA bonds • The Risk Exposure Duration -- the length of time over which the business is exposed to adverse events multiplied by the amount of the exposure within the projection • Other measures of security were also explored

  13. P&C Example Pricing risk $700 M Economic Capital $1,600M Run-off risk $900 M Over reserves and discounting effect Statutory reserves $4,800 M Best Estimate Liability $4,000 M Economic capital • Represents the level of assets, in addition to the BEL, required to pay future policyholder benefits at a chosen Security Factor • The Economic Capital covers the volatility in: • The run-off of existing business • The future business (“pricing risk”) • Sources of funding for the Economic Capitalinclude: • The difference between the assets backing statutory reserves and the BEL • Shareholders’ equityabove the statutoryreserves

  14. Results and insights obtained from the initial implementation

  15. The initial implementation focused on key products and business segments • Models were developed and implemented for 15 business units, operating in 8 countries • 7 Life • 8 P/C • Typically, the models incorporated 90+% of the business in each unit • Client staff in each unit were trained in the economic capital approach • Each entity presented its results to a central management group; overall results presented to client board

  16. For any segment or grouping, it is possible to construct an economic balance sheet … Financial Balance Sheet Economic Components Debt Receivables Shareholder Equity Excess S/H Assets Actual Capital Debt Pricing risk Economic Capital Market Value of Invested Assets Total Assets Margin in Reserves Statutory Reserves Run-off risk Required Assets Economic Reserves

  17. By combining models, the client was able to enterprise measure diversification benefits Enterprise Diversification Benefit • Diversification effects are high between P&C businesses because the claims risks are largely uncorrelated • Life businesses exhibit high diversification due to the varied nature of the different businesses • The aggregation of Life and P&C creates little additional diversification because the dominant risk for the Group is the asset risk Economic Capital Sum of P/C Segments P/C Diversification effect Aggregated P/C Business P/C -- Life Diversification effect Aggregated Total Sum of Life Segments Aggregated Life Business Life Diversification effect

  18. Capital requirements comments • Different types of business require markedly different levels of Economic Capital • Differences in capital requirement for P/C businesses arise from three main causes • Product type • Catastrophe exposure • Asset mix • Life generally has low requirements because a proportion of reserves is policyholder deposits, which add little risk • The actual capital held is 3.5X the Economic Capital • A large proportion of the Economic Capital is covered by the over-reserve

  19. Segment A Segment B Segment C Segment D Segment E Segment F Segment G The P/C business segments have disparate economic capital requirements • Results depend on product mix, reinsurance program, and asset mix

  20. Economic Capital Ratio to Premium -- Personal Insurance 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% 450% Even within a product line, economic capital requirements vary • Results are influenced by market conditions for the product, reinsurance, and asset mix Individual Health Private Motor A B C D E Household A B C D E

  21. For the P/C businesses, the results indicated some inconsistencies in reinsurance purchasing • Decisions regarding program retentions and limits were at the discretion of the business units, without a common framework for decision making 33% 24% 21% 10% 0%

  22. Excess unmodelled assets Value of Unmodelled Excess Assets Value of modelled Excess Assets and Economic capital Excess modelled assets Economic Capital Value of renewals Best Estimate Liability Value Using the economic capital, it is possible to measure the embedded value of the business Economic Balance Sheet

  23. Value results at group level • The framework is the same as Embedded Value, with two enhancements: • Economic required capital (the capital that each business actually needs rather than that prescribed by the regulator) • Level of risk in the business (calculation of a Risk Adjusted Return) • This enhanced framework will allow us to: • Measure value creation over time (increase in value) • Calculate new business value • Sharpen the product pricing metric • Test whether different strategies create more value • To fully use this framework, we will require at least two successive calculations of value at different points in time

  24. Communication with regulators and rating agencies about capital management • Implementation of Economic Capital now allows the client to change the flow of discussions with regulators and rating agencies • In the past, discussions typically were a reaction to external agency’s assessment of capital adequacy — based on solvency tests or RBC formulas • Client now has fact-based discussions, based on concrete risk analysis and objective standard • The approach has been positively received by regulatory authorities; discussions with rating agencies are planned

More Related