![]() |
|
|
|||||||
| FlashChat | Actuarial Discussion | Preliminary Exams | CAS/SOA Exams | Cyberchat | Around the World | Suggestions |
D.W. Simpson and Company -- Actuary Salary Surveys |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
When we are doing the pricing for GMDB, for example
the death benefit = Max(100% of Premium, Fund) (i.e. ROP feature) Since the fund value could be down to zero when there is total loss of investment, it means that the maximum death benefit = 100% Premium. If we would not put the cap on the total premium paid, then the death benefit is unlimited (since he could dump in the premium whatever they like). Is there any common product feature to cap the death element expsoure in this case? |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
However, most companies believe that this whole scenario is unlikely, and in particular, the experience of partial withdrawals does not indicate that buyers are exploiting this loophole.
__________________
Carol Marler, FSA, MAAA, A Dedicated Actuary Just My Opinion (Although this statement is my opinion, and I am an actuary, it's still not a statement of actuarial opinion, and you really shouldn't rely on it.) Updated quotes Apr 4: Spoiler: |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well..... not issuing new ones, no. But some policies are still outstanding.
From my own peering at policy data in gearing up for C3 Phase II, I noticed that those with greatly in-the-money policies had no idea about the value of their guarantee. At least, they didn't behave (partially withdrawing all but the minimum required account value) anywhere near optimally. I think most of the variable annuity features are mysteries to the people buying them, in that they don't know how to maximize their value from the guarantees. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|