Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA > Group and Health Track > Group & Health Core Exam
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Not looking for a job? Tell us about your ideal job,
and we'll only contact you when it opens up.
https://www.dwsimpson.com/register


Group & Health Core Exam Old Group & Health Design & Pricing Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #81  
Old 10-31-2018, 11:25 PM
bemused bemused is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,756
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ActuaryJag View Post
Agreed that problem #3 was crap. The only thing about throwing it out though is that for those of us that made an assumption (i.e. use 2013 instead of 2015) it was a huge time sink. If I had just skipped it there is no doubt that I could have picked up some points elsewhere.

Anyway, good luck to all. I know I will need some.
I'm not sure they ever throw out problems, no matter how bad they screw up
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReturningCollegeStudent View Post
Donald trump is the only sane person running. Don't just read the headlines about him taken out of context. Listen to him talk. He has to walk a tight line to to keep the republican nomination.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 10-31-2018, 11:34 PM
BigBlackBen BigBlackBen is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bemused View Post
I'm not sure they ever throw out problems, no matter how bad they screw up
Yes. Looking through old exams while studying it did not seem they ever threw out any problem no matter how blatantly defective. Not even questions testing materials that were not included in the syllabus.

You don't need a 100/100 to get a 6.

If I get another 5 I am going to go postal
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 11-01-2018, 12:31 AM
bemused bemused is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,756
Default

I think the worst part of this test is how much of it's anti-knowledge doesn't even get tested

I realize this doesn't really relate to this sitting but there's a concerning lack of whining in this thread so I figured I'd pull double duty
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReturningCollegeStudent View Post
Donald trump is the only sane person running. Don't just read the headlines about him taken out of context. Listen to him talk. He has to walk a tight line to to keep the republican nomination.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 11-01-2018, 09:18 AM
SnareSound's Avatar
SnareSound SnareSound is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,189
Default

Did anyone try to interpolate the life question in the afternoon from the case study where the age ranges in the question were off by a year from the manual rates? I laughed out loud and wrote something about the time constraints of the work at hand dictating the accuracy here. It already was too much time to work that problem vs the allotted points.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 11-01-2018, 09:25 AM
BigBlackBen BigBlackBen is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnareSound View Post
Did anyone try to interpolate the life question in the afternoon from the case study where the age ranges in the question were off by a year from the manual rates? I laughed out loud and wrote something about the time constraints of the work at hand dictating the accuracy here. It already was too much time to work that problem vs the allotted points.
I just combined them 80/20

I think you could use anything as long as you justified it
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 11-01-2018, 09:57 AM
oswaldcobblepot oswaldcobblepot is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 359
Default

2015?!?!?!
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 11-01-2018, 10:33 AM
Sir Issac's Avatar
Sir Issac Sir Issac is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 394
Default

Here's how I solved the anti-selection question:

For each option I applied the following formula to each class of the charges:

(Average Charge X (utilization / 1000) - copay x (copay frquency / 1000)) x members.

Call that value X (total annual cost)

I divided X by number of members x 12 to get PMPM. Call that Y.

I multipled Y by actual to expected ratio to get the actuals.

I repeated this for options B and C.

Then I added up all of the actuals from all three options and divided them by all of the expecteds from all three options to get the impact of anti-selection.

Not sure if this is the correct approach, but that's how it appeared to me.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 11-01-2018, 10:34 AM
GSUACT GSUACT is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 131
Default

agree that problem #3 related to case study is such a crap, initially i thought we should say going from Statutory(as shown in goldfinger Balance sheet) reserve to GAAP reserve by removing those consertative standard(lapse, prescribed asset value, interest rate, DAC, expense allowance etc). then i think the case study doesnt have any related info to resolve this, so i think i am thinking in the wrong way.
in the end i just wrote that that the GAAP reserve should be the best estimate plus PAD(provision for adverse deviation).
it's a terrible question. but i think it looks like everyone is struggle with this one. can someone who know how to approach this question plz stand up on this forum?

Last edited by GSUACT; 11-01-2018 at 10:47 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 11-01-2018, 10:35 AM
GSUACT GSUACT is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 131
Default

i feel afternoon is much easier than morning, my afternoon point could be the same as my morning points(maybe 30 points+30 points for each).
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 11-01-2018, 10:37 AM
GSUACT GSUACT is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 131
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Issac View Post
Here's how I solved the anti-selection question:

For each option I applied the following formula to each class of the charges:

(Average Charge X (utilization / 1000) - copay x (copay frquency / 1000)) x members.

Call that value X (total annual cost)

I divided X by number of members x 12 to get PMPM. Call that Y.

I multipled Y by actual to expected ratio to get the actuals.

I repeated this for options B and C.

Then I added up all of the actuals from all three options and divided them by all of the expecteds from all three options to get the impact of anti-selection.

Not sure if this is the correct approach, but that's how it appeared to me.
i did exactly the same way as you, and i think i got some thing like 25% something for the final answer.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.35521 seconds with 11 queries