Actuarial Outpost Guo's LTAM study guide available now
 Register Blogs Wiki FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

 Long-Term Actuarial Math Old Exam MLC Forum

#11
07-17-2018, 05:03 PM
 SIGUS Member CAS SOA Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 50

ordered!! Thanks!
#12
07-19-2018, 09:10 AM
 Yufeng Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 127
what's out from MLC syllabus

Question: I have the old fall 2017 or spring 2018 MLC manual written by Author XYZ. I want to re-use it without buying a new one. Of course, I will read the two new study notes. What parts of the old MLC manual can I skip?

I got emails like this and want to answer it here to save time.

(1) UL. Type A UL is always a pain. You have to solve two equations to find the account value and COI (a chicken-egg puzzle). Not sure why AMLCR does this way. I have never heard of any UL product design where two equations are solved to calculate AV and COI. UL admin system is complex already due to policy loans, bonus interest rate, early withdrawals, secondary guarantee, guideline premium, MEC testing, etc. Who wants to add complexity by solving two equations? Any way, goodbye UL!

(2) Reversionary bonus (a.k.a paid-up additions), a big pain. The profit is used to purchase paid up additions and the face amount increases each year. You have to keep track of the increasing face amount and its reserve. Goodbye paid-up additions!

(3) Non-diversifiable risk. A moderate pain with tedious probability calculations. Goodbye!

(4) Policy modifications. This is minor; no harm learning it or not learning it. But you can say goodbye.

(5) Retrospective reserve. Though not on the syllabus, this concept is good to know.

#13
07-19-2018, 10:28 AM
 Gandalf Site Supporter Site Supporter SOA Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Middle Earth Posts: 30,956

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Yufeng (1) UL. Type A UL is always a pain. You have to solve two equations to find the account value and COI (a chicken-egg puzzle). Not sure why AMLCR does this way. I have never heard of any UL product design where two equations are solved to calculate AV and COI. UL admin system is complex already due to policy loans, bonus interest rate, early withdrawals, secondary guarantee, guideline premium, MEC testing, etc. Who wants to add complexity by solving two equations? Any way, goodbye UL!
Don't UL admin systems just program the solved result formula of solving the two equations? That would, of necessity, involve testing whether the corridor would apply to decide which solved result formula to use. Some candidates for MLC may have memorized the shortcuts for those situations.

But as you say, it's gone. No need for LTAM candidates to study it now.
#14
07-19-2018, 11:46 AM
 Yufeng Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 127

Good point Gandalf. It's not hard for the admin system to solve two equations using the solution formula.

I'm curious to know whether that pure-math approach was ever used in practice. I gather that most actuaries would avoid that complex approach and use simple approximation.
#15
07-26-2018, 09:47 AM
 Yufeng Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 127
how two new study notes are tested in LTAM sample questions

I took a quick look of how the two new study notes (Mary Hardy and Loss Model) are tested in the sample LTAM.

What's not surprising -- Most topics from the two study notes are covered in the sample LTAM questions.

What's surprising - 3 minor topics (at least to me) are tested in the sample LTAM.

These 3 topics are:
(1) Disability off period. If the 2nd disability incident occurs X months after the first and X<= disability off period, then the 2nd disability incident is treated as continuation of the first without kicking off a new waiting period. This is tested in the multiple choice section S1.1. In handsight, this is a critical concept for disability insurance.

(2) WA.24 (2 points) -- tail corrections to Kaplan-Meier survival estimator.

(3) WA.25 (1 point) -- advantage of stochastic mortality model CBD M7 over the original CBD model.

I'm sorry to say that these 3 topics are the only ones that I didn't cover in my LTAM manual. Sigh!

If you are using my LTAM manual, please still read the original two study notes. SOA is expert in exposing exam takers who guess what's to be tested and what's not and who try to take shortcuts.

Previously in MLC, one minor topic "zeroized reserve" was tested again and again.

Good luck and thanks for reading.
#16
07-30-2018, 04:59 PM
 SIGUS Member CAS SOA Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 50

If you can do these sample problems with enough brief explanations of the salient concepts (proofs or key notes or shortcuts) that should be enough for buyers of your manual. I believe.

Thanks for accepting to do so.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Yufeng I took a quick look of how the two new study notes (Mary Hardy and Loss Model) are tested in the sample LTAM. What's not surprising -- Most topics from the two study notes are covered in the sample LTAM questions. What's surprising - 3 minor topics (at least to me) are tested in the sample LTAM. These 3 topics are: (1) Disability off period. If the 2nd disability incident occurs X months after the first and X<= disability off period, then the 2nd disability incident is treated as continuation of the first without kicking off a new waiting period. This is tested in the multiple choice section S1.1. In handsight, this is a critical concept for disability insurance. (2) WA.24 (2 points) -- tail corrections to Kaplan-Meier survival estimator. (3) WA.25 (1 point) -- advantage of stochastic mortality model CBD M7 over the original CBD model. I'm sorry to say that these 3 topics are the only ones that I didn't cover in my LTAM manual. Sigh! If you are using my LTAM manual, please still read the original two study notes. SOA is expert in exposing exam takers who guess what's to be tested and what's not and who try to take shortcuts. Previously in MLC, one minor topic "zeroized reserve" was tested again and again. Good luck and thanks for reading.
#17
09-05-2018, 09:04 AM
 Yufeng Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 127
update on my study guide on Mary Hardy DII with waiting period chapter

In case you use my book or downloaded my sample chapter on Mary Hardy study note on DII with waiting period and max benefit periods.

I updated this chapter by correcting many notation errors. To my relief, all the calculations were all correct. Here's the link to the latest update on this chapter:

http://deeperunderstandingfastercalc...I_20180904.pdf