Rates vary by
Important causal Factors (may be correlated)
How do you think L.A. companies can rate their polices forthese sort of factors
This is the tendency for high risk individuuals to be more likely to buy insurance
What do you think insurance companies can do about this:
Risk classification and detailed underwriting
Exclusions for certain risks
Raising defences for certain claims
Charging additional premiums for higher risk activities
Moral Hazard refers to the situation where a person takes more risk because he knows he has insurance
Is this a big issue for life insurance
Probably not - as most people don't want to die just to make a claim
How should companies repond to this risk
Similar to adverse selection
The purpose of single figure indices is to summarise a death rate for a whole popil;ation for the purpose of comparing it with another population
Typically weighted averages would be used as they are better served for comparisons between different populations
What are the limitiations of such indices
They are 'summary' statisitics and therefore involve a loss of information
If they are weighted this can introduce biases and distortions
This is just the 'average' death rate
$$CDR=\frac{\displaystyle\sum_xE^c_xm_x}{\displaystyle\sum_xE^c_x}$$
That is simply the total observed deaths divided by the total exposed to risk
You can also think of this as:
$$CDR=\frac{\displaystyle\sum_x d_x}{\displaystyle\sum_xE^c_x}$$
$$DSDR=\frac{\displaystyle\sum_x {^sE^c_xm_x}}{\displaystyle\sum_x {^sE^c_x}}$$
If we write this as $DSDR=\frac{\displaystyle\sum_x {^sE^c_xm_x}}{\displaystyle\sum_x {^sE^c_x}} = \displaystyle\sum_x \beta_xm_x$ where $\beta_x=\frac{^sE^c_x}{\sum_x {{ }^{s}E^c_x}}$ then we can directly compare two populations as follows:
$DSDR^I - DSDR^{II} = \sum \beta_x (m^I_x - m^{II}_x)$
Trying to do this for a crude mortality rate produces a distortion effect
The comparative mortality factor allows us to create a dimensionless index. It is defined as follows:
$$CMF = \frac{DSDR}{CDR^s}=\frac{\sum { }^sE_x^c m_x}{\sum { }^sE_x^c { }^sm_x}$$
which can also be written:
$$CMF = \frac{DSDR}{CDR^s}=\frac{\sum { }^sE_x^c { }^sm_x \left( \frac{m_x}{^sm_x}\right)}{\sum { }^sE_x^c { }^sm_x}$$
The standardized mortality ratio is the ratio of the 'total observed deaths' to the 'total expected deaths'
$$SMR = \frac{\sum E^c_x m_x}{\sum E^c_x { }^sm_x}$$
It is similar to the CMF but note the different weights used
Enables easy comparison to be made between many different experiences, whereas a comparison of age specific mortality rates would be difficult to assimilate, and often subject to large sampling error.
Some indices (such as the SMR) allow mortality of different experiences to be compared against a common standard.
Some indices have practical advantages: e.g. the CDR can be calculated entirely without age specific data; the SMR can be calculated without the need for regional age specific mortality rates; i.e. the individual $m_x$.
Some indices (such as the CDR and SMR) may be sensitive to differences in age structure between populations as well as to differences in mortality, making the interpretation uncertain.
Single figure indices cannot show how the differences in mortality between regions may vary by age, hence important features of the comparisons may be overlooked.
Single figure indices are often biased towards a certain group.