Description: This paper was published as chapter II of the 1987 Valuation Actuary Handbook. The authors discuss basic tools for analyzing cash flows, including duration, scenario testing and accumulation vs. present value approach. Discounting of cash flows is discussed including the limitations of using a level interest rate. The final section discusses discounting of interest sensitive cash flows, including a discussion of the disadvantages and advantages of duration analysis. The paper concludes that “duration analysis cannot replace traditional simulations analysis but should be seen by the valuation actuary as a valuable adjunct.”

Description: The author previously wrote about extending the general nonparallel shlft approach to duration analysis. This paper explores the immunization properties of that model. In addition, applications to asset-liability management are explored. From Actuarial Research Clearing House 1990 VOL. 2.

Description: 1992 SOA Annual Meeting, Washington, D.C. This session discussion was about the performance measurement in a risk/return context, incentive compensation as a tool for achieving effective performance, and return attribution using liability-based performance indices.

Description: The author discusses how the use of a weighted average dollar duration book yield, WADD, rather than the more traditional book yield determined by book value or market value weighting, can provide a better basis for determining the crediting rate on the liabilities.

Description: The author describes immunization with a simple illustration requiring only high school algebra rather than the ordinary and stochastic calculus that has been applied to this subject. It illustrates that if you have three invesmtents with different durations, we can take some combination of any two of them to get the same duration as the third.

Description: Survey of appointed actuaries about asset adequacy testing techniques currently being used in 2012.

Description: In this article, we summarize inflationary factors that may result in a sharp increase in interest rates and implications for life insurer convexity risk exposure, most notably to dynamic policyholder lapsation. We further provide insights into potential ALM strategies to mitigate this convexity risk. Due to the prolonged low-interest rate environment and low minimum interest rate guarantees offered to policyholders, liability convexity is higher than prior historical periods, which results in life insurers’ ALM positions being extremely vulnerable to short-term interest rate spikes. Convexity mismatches cause issues for life insurers under both rising and declining interest rate scenarios. This means that life insurers are not compensated for taking convexity risk and, therefore, convexity matching should always be considered in the asset optimization process. There are mixed signals from policymakers and financial markets regarding potential inflationary and sharply rising interest rate scenarios. The key takeaway is that life insurers are not compensated for taking convexity risk and it is the right time for insurers to review convexity exposure. There are different approaches available to mitigate convexity exposure through rebalancing of asset positions and hedges within each life insurer’s risk limits.

Description: This panel discussed studies of the risk of loss due to changes in the interest rate environment. It addressed why the C-3 risk is important and how inflation and stability in interest rates can affect the financial soundness of life insurance companies. There was also a discussion of the theoretical work being carried out to calibrate the C-3 risk of variation in interest rates and to what extent the valuation actuary can properly recognize the risk of loss from changes in the interest rate environment within the framework of valuations laws and regulations.

Description: Presented at May 1986 Spring Meeting. This session discussion is about the purposes, tools and methods available, scenario testing, updating, special issues and problems. This discussion anticipates the development of new Valuation Actuary reserve adequacy opinion requirements.

Description: This paper addresses the stochastic modeling for managing asset liability process. We start with developing a jump-diffusion process for evaluating of the liabilities of the insurance company in general. We then formulate the ALM process into a stochastic control problem. With this approach, we present a Bel|man-Dreyfus Fundamental type formula for ALM process in terms of the solution of a system of algebraic equations and partial differential equations.