Comparing Solvency II and Life and General Insurance Capital approaches to capital determination of a life portfolio in the presence of stress scenarios

Kangjing Tan and Aaron Bruhn

Annals of Actuarial Science, 2019, vol. 13, issue 1, 36-66

Abstract: The European-centric Solvency II and Australian-centric Life and General Insurance Capital regimes are two examples of risk-based approaches to capital determination and risk management for life insurers. Both consist of a three-pillar structure covering capital, risk management and disclosure requirements. We apply the capital requirements of each regime to three synthetic sets of insurance policies, including a risk, annuity and combined portfolios, and consider the impact on capital arising from three separate and relatively severe stress events. Results highlight the relatively capital intensive nature of annuities, the differences between different capital regimes, the significance of solvency II’s matching adjustment and the robustness of each regime to both pandemic and economic stresses. Results also highlight the nature of diversification benefits from within each capital regime, on overall capital requirements.

Date: 2019
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/ ... type/journal_article link to article abstract page (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:cup:anacsi:v:13:y:2019:i:01:p:36-66_00

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Annals of Actuarial Science from Cambridge University Press Cambridge University Press, UPH, Shaftesbury Road, Cambridge CB2 8BS UK.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Kirk Stebbing ().