advanced economic capital
TRANSCRIPT
Cliquez pour modifier le style des sous-titres du masque
Advanced (Economic) Capital Topics
Michel Rochette, MBA, FSA2009 Valuation Actuary Symposium
Anaheim, CASeptember 25th 2009
Topics General topics:
Purpose and principles of capital model development Major components of a capital model Uses of a capital model
Specialized topics: Approaches to building a capital model Validation considerations Calibration considerations Correlation in the tail: diversification Emerging risk considerations
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Purpose ¨ Risk management system of an insurer for the
analysis of the overall risk situation of the insurance undertaking, to quantify risks and determine the capital requirement on the basis of the company specific risk profile¨ CEA Groupe Consultatif
Required capital is assessed in light of: available capital & other financial resources enterprise risk management processes strategic goals & risk appetite regulatory requirements
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Principles All material risks should be covered: links to ERM
and emerging risks Models must be appropriate for the scale and
complexity of the firm Models must be dynamic and flexible Models must be embedded in the financial, strategic
and operational processes: Use Test in Solvency II Governance of models development:
Board/top management oversight and involvement documentation of models, limitations & changes internal controls over development: auditable independent review: More than peer review
Others: consistency between valuation and EC models: valuation
framework input data verifiable and controllable validation and calibration
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Major components Exposure models of key risks:
financial risks & underwriting risks: assets and liabilities models cash flows
non financial risks: operational and business models strategic risks: strategic models
Risk drivers models: ESG, catastrophic, scenarios, stochastic, EVT, competitor, behaviour, management actions
Aggregation approaches: correlation with var/cov, copulas, none
Time horizon: short-term view versus run-off approach
Confidence level: internal, regulatory, rating agencies Frequency of calculations: quarterly to monthly Valuation framework: economic, EV, EEV, MCEV Metric chosen: VAR, T-VAR, EVT
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Uses Investment decisions: existing and new Product development Strategic decisions Corporate finance decisions: financial leverage Hedging strategies External events and emerging risks Regulatory proposals: CP 37 & CP 56 in Solvency II
“…widely used and plays an important role in the course of conducting an insurer's regular business, particularly in risk management. "
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Approaches Top down economic and business scenarios:
obtain an overall EC estimates for all risks combined Stress tests:
judgmental and test specific risks and impact on capital Stochastic:
random scenarios and obtain distribution of risks Insurance approach:
Frequency, severity, recovery Factor based: used for regulatory Others:
Regression, neural networks, Bayesian, fuzzy logic, EVT Ideally: a combination and adapted to each risk and
complexity
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Validation principles Integrates both qualitative and quantitative elements Provides that the models were designed, work as
planned and are implemented correctly – quality assurance
Analyses the predictive properties of the models: testing against experience, backtesting
Iterative process to assess that assumptions & data are appropriate with a certain degree of confidence: regular cycle
Need independence of validation to satisfy basic risk management principles: internal and/or external reviews
Must go beyond the pure regulatory ticking the box
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Validation elements Model development, design, implementation and
operations: similar to IT systems controls in place like COBIT
Review of models inputs: assumptions & key risks continuous appropriate mathematics and
methodologies data accuracy
Review of basic functioning of the models: gaps to internal standards and best industry practices model replication with a different set of random
numbers stress testing and reverse stress testing: sensitivity of the
results models capture business environmental changes
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Validation elements Historical performance:
back testing to external sources: industry studies, academic papers, regulatory and rating agencies’ capital
Profit and loss attribution: comparison of actual results to risk drivers predicted by the models. Idem to a source of earnings analysis
Management oversight: has management been using the models? has management put in place processes to obtain
assurance that the models are still appropriate Documentation and independent validation25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Calibration principles For each risk drivers, should aim to calibrate four
elements: level of the risk factor and its uncertainty trend of the risk inherent volatility calamity/catastrophic/tail
Market conditions : impact on pro/counter cyclicality Frequency of calibration: at least annually and
probably more often for financial risks Should be performed before hedging Should be based on best assumption. No margin
embedded as the purposed is to estimate required capital for the risks facing the organization
Time horizon and risk measures chosen per risk category
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Calibration by risk Interest rate risk:
take into account the parallel , twists, inversion of the term structure
QIS4 tail up shocks: 94% at 1yr – low - to 40% multipliers at 10yr
interest rate volatility: usually set separately: * 1.5 Equity risk:
use different calibrations for publicly-traded, private equity, hedge funds, emerging markets
for publicly-traded: tail risk decline of 40% at 99.5% for hedge funds: recent decline around 20% implied equity volatility of around 35%
Currency risk: usually set around +/- 20% for a well-diversified portfolio
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Calibration by risk Credit, counterparty & asset risk:
in a total return context, spread risk anticipates future defaults and migration. No need for an explicit default model
spread risk varies by type of assets, rating and currency in Q1S4, spread volatility around 30% and shocks of
about 90 bps to treasuries. Probably too low given recent experience
concentration risk must be assessed for default risk: recovery assumption crucial in the 30%
to 40% range25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Calibration by risk Life underwriting risk:
QIS4 mortality rate increased by 15% permanent with a 2.5 additional per mille mortality catastrophe shock – debate in light of potential pandemic
lapse shock depends on impact. Can go as high as 100% multiplicative
longevity rate increased by a permanent 25% Operational risk: must move beyond the factor based
approach to modelling explicitly and map to insurance coverage and other internal controls
Liquidity risk: can be modeled and not simply managed
Contagion (systemic ) risk: Large FIs might be subject to additional capital if viewed as systematically important.
Strategic risk: can deplete capital and should be modeled
Reputation risk: doesn’t affect capital but value of the firm
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Correlation in the tail Correlations exist at different levels:
within a risk category:
between risk categories within an entity between legal entities: should probably be zero because
of the non-fungibility of capital and the non recognition of group capital support by Solvency II
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Market Risk Interest rate Equity FX
Interest rate 1
Equity 75% 1
FX 25% 25% 1
Correlation in the tail Recent experience seems to indicate otherwise
According to a recent Pimco study:
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Correlation to S & P 500
Early 90s
Early 2008 2008 Meltdown% yearly loss
S & P 500 1 1 37%
High-Yield Bonds
20% -30%
80% 26%
International stocks
30% -40%
70% 45% - 55%
Real Estate 30% 60% -70% 37%
Commodities 0% -20% -30% 37%
Correlation in the tail: lessons
Correlations are unstable in the tail and this what EC is trying to determine
Independent risks become dependent in extreme times: subprime business practices – operational risks › enhanced defaults - credit risk › market losses on securitized investments – market risk › capital problems at many FIs – liquidity risk › bankruptcies of many FIs – systemic risk › lawsuits by investors and regulators – legal risk › enhanced regulations – regulatory risk › diminished reputation for the financial industry –
reputation risk and loss in value
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Correlation in the tail: lessons
“When people start buying an asset, the act of them diversifying ultimately makes the asset less of a diversifier .“ Pimco’s Head of analytics
Rule: total diversification benefit should not be above 30%
One potential approach is to use Clayton copulas which measure non-linear dependency
This is difficult as we trying to assess 1 in 200 year events
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Emerging risk EC must be a forward looking process , tied to ERM
and thus must anticipate emerging risks Risk issues and impact on EC – mostly Solvency II
liquidity premium: not allowed in the calculation of the market consistent value of liabilities
discount rate: most likely the risk-free not swap rates group support: not allowed and impact on
diversification assumptions in EC calculation MVM: currently set at 6% with no diversification benefit
25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
Emerging risk Environmental risks – US based:
Fiduciary Responsibility: Legal and Practical Aspects of Integrating ESG Issues into Institutional Investment –UNEP FI
NAIC is requiring insurance companies with at least 500 million in annual premiums to start estimating and publishing an Insurer Climate Risk Disclosure Survey starting in May 2010.
NAIC seeks to determine "how insurers are altering their risk-management and catastrophe-risk modeling in light of the challenges posed by climate change. “ › direct EC implications25/09/2009 Enterprise Risk Advisory LLC
CONTACT
Michel Rochette, MBA, FSAEnterprise Risk Advisory, LLC