Report of the Individual Life Insurance Experience Committee

Transcription

1 Page Report of the Individual Life Insurance Experience Committee Mortality under Standard Individually Underwritten Life Insurance Between 00 and 004 Policy Anniversaries Introduction This study is the latest in continuing reports on inter-company mortality experience. The previous report discussed experience over the study period and also examined experience in the five-year period from Due to data limitations in the study, results from that study period will not be published. In addition, the actual to expected ratios in the study are materially overstated as problems with certain companies data were recently identified as part of the data validation process implemented for the experience of this study period. As a result, the study has been removed from the SOA website and it is recommended that data from that study not be used. Due to many new contributors in the study period, comparisons to previous studies are also difficult. As such, experience prior to 00 will not be discussed and direct comparisons of actual to expected ratios in preceding reports will not be made. Going forward, longer term averages and trends over time will be presented. Thirty-five companies contributed data to the Society of Actuaries for the study period and companies contributed to both observation years. This is considerably more companies than the number contributing in preceding years, increasing the face amount exposure to over $7.4 trillion. The number of deaths is just over 00,000 in the select period and 495,000 in the ultimate period. The common companies represent 96% of the total exposure. For the first time, contributors to the Intercompany Study were asked to provide information related to their preferred risk class structure. Further details on this data are described in the Risk Class Rank section below. Consistent with previous studies, this report examines mortality under standard individually underwritten life insurance and excludes rated, converted, and other guaranteed or simplified issues as indicated the individual company data submissions. Policies inforce under non-forfeiture provisions are also excluded. Due to the higher volume and higher mortality and less stringent underwriting in the lower face amount bands, the definition of standard may not be consistent among the contributing companies. The ratios of actual to expected mortality are based on the 00 Valuation Basic Tables (00 VBT) which have composite and smoker distinct versions and were based on experience from contributors to the SOA for the study period. The application of the composite or smoker distinct tables in the expected calculations relies on the smoking habit information provided in the individual company submissions. Composite tables apply to policies with unknown smoking habits. The data indicated that many companies currently code all policies issued prior to smoker distinct underwriting as smokers. Therefore, all policies with issue dates prior to 980 are assumed to be of unknown smoking habit. Inaccuracies may still exist for certain companies, particularly for policies issued in the 980s. Although high-level summaries are provided at the end of this report, more detailed results are available in Excel pivot table format from the SOA. Results based on the Basic Tables with the Milliman extension are also available in the Excel pivot format. There are two sets of pivot tables reflecting both the aggregate data and preferred only data. These files share a webpage with this report.

2 Page Select Period Results Based On 00 VBT (Appendix A) Overall, mortality experience in the 5-year select period for the study was 88% of the 00 VBT policy and 7% face amount. The variability between results policy and face amount is seen for all breakdowns except results policy size. Therefore, differences between policy count results and face amount results may be attributed to the mix of business face amount within individual reporting categories. Policies under $00,000 comprise 58% of the exposure policy, but only % of the exposure amount. Therefore, overall results on a policy count basis are weighted heavily towards the higher A/E ratios in the lower face amount categories. The actual to expected ratio for females is slightly higher than for males at 7% ( amount) compared to 7% for males. By issue age, actual to expected ratios are lowest between ages 5 and 70 at 66% - 75% ( amount). s are much higher (between 85% and 0%) at the younger ages. Mortality at issue ages and 80+ is slightly higher at 8% and 7% amount, respectively. Mortality ratios are very low in the first duration (60% amount), but increase in duration and remain relatively flat between durations and 0, except for a sharp increase at duration corresponding with the end of the contestability period. The ratios are 70%, 78%, 7%, 70%, 7%, 7% for durations,, 4-5, 6-0, -5, and 6-0 respectively. The ratio then increases to 80% in durations -5. Mortality ratios amount steadily decrease with increasing policy size, starting at 07% for policy amounts between $ and $9,999 and dropping to 6% for policies with face amounts of $500,000 to $,. The general decreasing trend is assumed to be attributed to increased underwriting at higher face amounts. Although there are only deaths at face amounts of $,500,000 and above, mortality increased in that segment to 68%. Since the ratio also increased on a policy count basis, results are not explainable just a few large claims and may be a sign of anti-selection at face amounts $,500,000 and above. Non-smoker mortality is 68% of the non-smoker 00 VBT amount compared to 85% for smokers using the smoker 00 VBT. This suggests that non-smoker mortality is improving significantly more than smoker mortality. The ratio for policies with unknown smoking habits is 85% of the composite VBT. Mortality is lower in the later study year, dropping from 7% in the observation year to 70% in the observation year. The overall mortality ratios are the same for the companies contributing in both observation years suggesting the decrease is not due to a change in the mix of companies. Ultimate Period Results Based On 00 VBT (Appendix B) Overall, ultimate experience (durations 6+) was 89% of the 00 VBT face amount. This ratio dropped from 9% to 88% between the 00-0 and observation years and is the same for the common companies. Results differ significantly for males and females. Female ultimate mortality is 00% amount, while male mortality is 87%. Mortality for males is highest between attained ages 0 and 49 at -44%. Mortality for females decreases attained age from % at attained ages 5-9

3 Page down to 78% at attained ages It then increases attained age hitting 08% at attained ages 90+. Interestingly, mortality decreases increasing face amount in the ultimate durations (as it did in the select period) suggesting some impact of underwriting may persist beyond the 5-year select period. Results By Risk Class Rank Based On 00 VBT (Appendix C, Appendix D) For the first time, contributors to the Intercompany Study were asked to provide information related to their preferred risk class structure. In particular, companies were asked to provide a rank for each preferred class policy starting with "" for the most restrictive preferred class,"" for the next most restrictive preferred class, up to the total number of classes in their preferred structure. Additionally companies were asked to provide the total number of preferred classes in their preferred structure. Overall, of the 5 companies contributed data with a preferred structure with at least some data with preferred structure information. The many different preferred class structures provided were aggregated over all companies into one combined structure with three preferred non-smoker classes (or risk class ranks (RCR)) and two preferred smoker classes. In this report, non-smoker assumes non-tobacco and smokers refer to tobacco users. For non-smokers, results in RCR Band are the aggregate results of companies best preferred class. Results in RCR Band are the results of companies residual standard class. Lastly, results for RCR Band are the results for policies that fit into neither Band nor Band. For smokers, results are included for RCR Band and RCR Band. Results for RCR Band were immaterial as most companies have only a two-class preferred class structure. It should be noted that companies with a preferred class structure for non-smokers, but one class for smokers have only risk class rank data included for non-smokers. Only data for issue ages greater than or equal to 5, durations up to 5 and face amounts of $00,000 up to $,500,000 were used in the analysis of preferred mortality. This block has over $ trillion of exposure and just over,000 deaths. Overall, mortality experience for this block of preferred business was 7% policy and 67% amount. For the non-smoker classes, mortality increases risk class rank from 54% amount for best preferred classes, to 64% for classes in the middle ranks, and to 77% for the residual standard group. For the smoker classes, mortality is 74% amount for best preferred classes and 96% of that table for the residual group. As seen in the aggregate data, within each of the risk class ranks, mortality generally decreases with increasing face amount. Differences risk class rank band persist for the 5 durations included in the study. The drilldowns RCR band, duration, and face band also follow the same patterns, but individual cell results should be viewed with caution as many of the cells particularly in the higher face amount bands have very few deaths.

4 Page 4 The Individual Life Insurance Experience Committee of the Society of Actuaries wishes to thank the following companies that contributed to the study: AAA Life Insurance AIG s American General Life Allstate Allstate Life of New York American Family Life Ameriprise AmerUs Life Columbus Life Insurance Empire General Farm Bureau Life Insurance Fidelity Investments Genworth Financial Government Personnel Hartford Life Horace Mann Insurance ING Jackson National Life Lincoln Benefit Life Massachusetts Mutual Life Metropolitan Life Mutual of Omaha New York Life North American Co-Life/Health (NACOLAH) Northwestern Mutual Ohio National Pacific Life Insurance Principal Financial Group Protective Life Protective Life & Annuity Prudential State Farm Thrivent Financial Transamerica Occidental USAA Life West Coast We acknowledge the effort of the members of the Individual Life Insurance Committee: Mary Bahna-Nolan Rick Bergstrom Sharon Brody Barry Edenbaum Jill Garofalo Dieter Gaubatz Anna Hart Edwin Hightower Edward Hui Douglas Ingle Paul Langevin Jess Mast Mel McFall Susan Miner Tony Phipps Tom Rhodes Mark Rosa Lynn Ruezinsky Jeff Schwartz Ed Wright Society of Actuaries Staff Liaison: John A. Luff MIB Representatives: Leo DiAngelo, Nancy Morse, Jan Palmbach

5 Appendix A Select Period Results Actual Deaths Policy Policy* * Policy % Policy (in millions) % Page 5 % Expected Overall 05,06 88% 7% 54,69, % $7,5, % 00.0% Issue Age % 8%,86,6 5.% $87,455.% 0.% % 85%,660,77 4.9% $94,6.% 0.% % 96%,97,09.5% $7,9.0% 0.% 0-7, 6% 0%,87,7 5.% $07,05.5% 0.4% 8-4 4,60 07% 90% 4,56,5 8.% $70,49.7%.0% 5-9 5,87 87% 74% 6,0,954.0% $678,75 9.4%.9% 0-4 9,9 80% 69% 7,574,995.9% $,7, % 6.4% 5-9,880 80% 66% 7,9,40.4% $,47,0 9.8% 9.8% ,56 8% 66% 0,59,575 9.% $,09,5 8.% 5.% ,665 87% 7% 5,656, % $89,70.% 5.8% ,466 9% 75%,0,9 4.% $40,6.% 8.6% ,057 00% 8% 407,67 0.7% $5, % 7.9% 80+,74 95% 7%,98 0.0% $6,8 0.%.7% Gender Female 85,85 89% 7% 4,77, % $,5,86.5% 6.9% Male 9,9 88% 7% 9,90,0 54.7% $4,897,0 67.5% 7.% Duration,09 85% 60%,800,7 7.0% $,046,85 4.4%.8%,9 96% 70%,56, % $90,90.5% 4.5%,45 0% 78%,5, 5.7% $706,79 9.7% 4.5% 4-5 8,940 95% 7% 6,444,6.8% $,4,60 9.5%.% 6-0 8,708 9% 70%,85,504.6% $,65,79.6%.9% -5 49,77 84% 7%,0,65 0.7% $9,88.6% 4.% , 8% 7% 9,749,6 7.8% $5,77 7.%.6% -5 44,484 98% 80% 4,89, % $,965.5% 5.5% Face Bands -9,999 55,878 07% 07%,60,97 6.% $6,745 0.%.4% 0,000-4,999 47,80 95% 94% 9,54, % $0,.7%.5% 5,000-49,999 0,9 88% 88% 8,09, % $0,8.% 5.7% 50,000-99,999,676 79% 79% 0,88,59 9.8% $600,90 8.%.% 00,000-7,868 74% 7% 4,48, 6.4% $,79, % 6.% 6,7 66% 65% 5,065,0 9.% $,45,879 0.% 5.6%,68 6% 6%,5,6 4.% $,86,64 7.7%.%,000,000 -,,68 6% 6%,06,9.9% $,74, %.9%,500, % 68% 04,64 0.% $474,86 6.5% 7.6% Smoker Status Non- Smoker 4,45 80% 68% 40,90, % $6,5,8 89.8% 80.9% Smoker 5,859 97% 85% 7,0,74.% $58,5 8.0% 5.7% Unknown* 8,00 05% 85% 6,56,95.9% $55,59.%.4% Observation Year ,6 90% 7% 6,585, % $,4, % 46.% ,474 87% 70% 8,04,98 5.% $,96, % 5.8% *Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables)

6 Appendix B-Ultimate Period Results Page 6 Actual Deaths Policy Policy* * Policy % Policy (in millions) % % Expected Overall 494,78 96% 89% 0,97,57 00% $,074 00% 00% Observation Year ,98 96% 9% 0,80,89 50% $59,58 48% 48% ,800 95% 88% 0,6,58 50% $6,49 5% 5% Gender Female 78,857 0% 00% 8,7,099 4% $0,407 5% 6% Male 5,88 9% 87%,4,57 59% $9,667 75% 84% MALE Only Ultimate Period Data Attained Age % 95% 0,545 % $,7 % 0% % 44% 9,56 % $,989 % 0% % 4% 407,7 % $,04 % 0% ,50 5% %,87,78 % $9,8 0% % ,948 0% 9%,77,868 % $5,96 7% 6% ,9 89% 8%,77,99 % $4,687 7% 6% ,870 97% 88%,58,70 % $8,485 0% % ,0 9% 87%,5,868 % $8, 9% 5% 90+ 9,94 8% 89% 44,97 % $987 % 9% Face Bands -9,999 5,4 94% 95% 8,98,99 68% $8,044 0% 7% 0,000-4,999 5,70 87% 87%,4,9 7% $8,477 4% % 5,000-49,999 7,049 8% 8% 408,5 % $,580 % % 50,000-99,999,76 79% 78%,7 % $7,5 8% 9% 00,000+,8 77% 7% 5,60 0% $7, 8% 0% FEMALE Only Ultimate Period Data Attained Age 5-9 5% % 0,05 % $,4 4% 0% % 06% 79,07 % $,80 5% 0% % 0% 44,756 4% $, 4% 0% 40-49,90 % %,076,70 % $4,740 6% % ,00 8% 78%,7,887 % $8,68 7% 8% 60-69,6 9% 88%,65,407 7% $5,6 9% % ,495 05% 00%,77,544 % $4,84 6% 8% ,998 05% 06%,0,67 6% $,65 9% 6% 90+ 0,46 0% 08% 8,77 % $84 % % Face Bands -9,999 7,48 0% 0% 7,7,964 89% $7,76 57% 66% 0,000-4,999 6,07 9% 9% 808,406 0% $9,80 0% 8% 5,000-49, % 97% 65,8 % $,88 6% 6% 50,000-99, % 9% 7,59 0% $969 % 5% 00, % 07% 7,04 0% $,054 4% 6% *Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables)

7 Page 7 Appendix C- RCR Reports (Issue Ages 5+, Duration <= 5, Face Amt 00K up to.5m, Risk Ind = ) Actual Deaths Policy Policy* * Policy % Policy (in millions) Overall,8 7% 67%,,8 $,67,77 Issue Age % % Expected % 67%,9,485.6% $8, %.6% % 66%,7,8 8.9% $594,455 8.% 6.4% 5-9, 69% 64%,07, % $77,70.0% 0.% 40-49,56 68% 6%,469, % $,07,75.8% 8.5% 50-59,597 70% 66%,6,89 4.4% $470,46 4.4% 7.% 60-69,57 77% 70% 400,459.5% $07,08.% 5.% % 79% 59,06 0.5% $9, % 7.7% % 8% 5, % $,0 0.%.9% Gender Female,75 68% 67% 4,549,76 40.% $,055,07.% 6.% Male 9,475 7% 67% 6,78, % $,, % 7.9% Duration 755 6% 57%,875, % $657,56 0.% 8.%,098 7% 65%,709,965 5.% $557,8 7.0% 9.7%,94 80% 75%,45,88.7% $48,57.% 9.7% 4-5,7 74% 70%,95, % $887,906 7.% 7.0% 6-0 4,75 70% 66%,45,4.4% $57, % 0.% -5,589 67% 64% 959,40 8.5% $6, % 5.% Face Bands 00,000-8,557 75% 75% 6,096,7 5.8% $77,96.7% 8.%,78 66% 66%,080,984 7.% $870,44 6.6% 4.0%,9 6% 6%,46,.9% $799, %.0%,000,000 -, 66 6% 6% 69,444 6.% $8,8 5.% 5.8% RCR Nonsmoker - Best Rank 4,6 60% 54% 5,59,90 47.% $,556, % 9.0% - Middle Rank,66 68% 64%,96,0 7.% $655,798 0.% 5.4% Residual Standard 5,50 80% 77%,8, % $90,40 7.9% 7.% RCR Smoker - Best Rank % 74% 4,858.7% $84,699.6% 4.6% - Residual Standard % 96% 56,8.% $57,495.8%.8% Observation Year ,954 7% 69% 4,975,0 4.9% $,9, % 4.7% ,74 69% 65% 6,56,69 56.% $,874, % 57.% *Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables)

8 Appendix D: Detailed RCR Reports Page 8 ILEC Study - Nonsmokers Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m s ^ Grand Total Ranking RCR Bands Best Rank 5.5% 5.6% 57.4% 58.% 5.% 55.6% 5.9% Middle Ranks 54.9% 54.4% 69.5% 69.9% 5.7% * 6.9% Residual Standard Rank 85.9% 87.4% 96.5% 77.% 75.8% 68.4% 77.5% * Cell has 5 or fewer deaths ILEC Study - Nonsmokers Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m Number of Deaths Grand Total Ranking RCR Bands Best Rank Middle Ranks Residual Standard Rank ILEC Study - Smokers Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m s ^ Grand Total Ranking RCR Bands Best Rank 54.5% 67.7% 00.5% 84.% 68.% 68.% 74.% Residual Standard Rank 7.% 0.%.6% 07.% 9.8% 80.6% 95.9% Number of Deaths ILEC Study - Smokers Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m Number of Deaths Grand Total Ranking RCR Bands Best Rank Residual Standard Rank ^Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables)

9 Page 9 ILEC Study Nonsmokers By Face Bands Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m s ^ Face Bands Ranking RCR Bands Grand Total 00,000- Best Rank 5.% 69.8% 7.% 66.5% 64.5% 6,7% 64.7% 00,000-00,000- Middle Ranks 64.9% 6.0% 8.% 79.% 6.% * 7.0% Residual Stand Rank 78.% 9.% 96.0% 9.4% 79.7% 74.% 8.7% Best Rank 45.% 58.0% 6.6% 56.0% 5.% 59.0% 55.4% Middle Ranks 6.7% 64.9% 60.7% 58.0% 68.5% * 6.4% Residual Stand Rank 89.7% 89.8% 0.5% 76.5% 7.7% 68.0% 77.8% Best Rank * 54.9% * 57.6% 4.8% 48.0% 47.% Middle Ranks * 55.0% 8.8% 68.0% * * 65.5% Residual Stand Rank * 90.% 8.6% 6.% 7.5% 78.0% 7.4%,000,000-,,000,000-,,000,000-, Best Rank Middle Ranks Residual Stand Rank 54.% 48.0% * 46.7% 7.4% * * 58.% 79.% 76.% * 76.7% * Cell has 5 or fewer deaths

10 Page 0 ILEC Study Nonsmokers By Face Bands Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m Number of Deaths Face Bands Ranking RCR Bands Grand Total 00,000- Best Rank ,000-00,000- Middle Ranks Residual Stand Rank ,000,000-,,000,000-,,000,000-, Best Rank Middle Ranks Residual Stand Rank Best Rank Middle Ranks Residual Stand Rank Best Rank Middle Ranks Residual Stand Rank ^*Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables) ILEC Study Smokers By Face Bands Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m s Face Bands 00,000-00,000- Ranking RCR Bands Grand Total Best Rank 8.% 94.4% 95.% 88.% 79.5% 64.7% 79.4% Residual Stand 04.8% 84.% 07.9% 0.% 85.8% 86.% 9.0% Rank Best Rank Residual Stand Rank 6.% 58.0% 05.5% 89.% * * 64.6% 95.%,000,000-,,000,000-, * * Best Rank Residual Stand * * Rank * * Best Rank * * Residual Stand Rank * Cell has 5 or fewer deaths * 6.6% * 88.7% * 8.8% * 09.0%

11 Page Face Bands 00,000-00,000- ILEC Study Smokers By Face Bands Risk Class Rank Indicator = ; Issue Ages >= 5; up to 5; Face 00K up to.5m Number of Deaths Ranking RCR Bands Grand Total Best Rank Residual Stand Rank Best Rank Residual Stand Rank Best Rank Residual Stand Rank ,000,000-, Best Rank ,000,000-, Residual Stand Rank *Expected Basis is 00 VBT, smoker distinct versions (unknown smoker status uses composite tables)