EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Some criticism to a general model in Solvency II: an explanation from a clustering point of view

I. Albarrán (), P. Alonso-González () and J. M. Marin ()
Additional contact information
I. Albarrán: U. Carlos III
P. Alonso-González: U. de Alcalá
J. M. Marin: U. Carlos III

Empirical Economics, 2017, vol. 52, issue 4, No 6, 1289-1308

Abstract: Abstract It is a well-known fact that heterogeneity is one of the characteristics of the insurance market, and it is relevant to classify and characterize companies by means of their financial properties and different risk profiles. So, it may not be adequate to use a general model for all the companies operating in the European market, as the one proposed by the Directive 2009/138/CE. Solvency II is a general regulatory model such that the volume of own resources will be determined depending on risks based on a calibration reached considering the average behaviour of companies. In order to criticize this approach, we have obtained a characterization of the profiles of companies using a PAM clustering methodology, adapted for longitudinal data, and we have studied the evolution of the obtained groups of companies under a Bayesian approach. In this way, we have introduced a multinomial general dynamic linear model to study the probabilities of the companies to be included into each group. The characterization and identification of these groups suggest that an unique regulatory model may be unsuitable. We have used data from DGSFP (Spanish insurance regulator), with public information about the balance sheets and income statements from years 1999 to 2011.

Keywords: Longitudinal multinomial model; PAM; Solvency II; M21; M41 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00181-016-1107-3 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:empeco:v:52:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1107-3

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer. ... rics/journal/181/PS2

DOI: 10.1007/s00181-016-1107-3

Access Statistics for this article

Empirical Economics is currently edited by Robert M. Kunst, Arthur H.O. van Soest, Bertrand Candelon, Subal C. Kumbhakar and Joakim Westerlund

More articles in Empirical Economics from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla ().

 
Page updated 2020-04-23
Handle: RePEc:spr:empeco:v:52:y:2017:i:4:d:10.1007_s00181-016-1107-3