arxiv: v1 [q-fin.mf] 8 Mar 2015

Transcription

1 Purchasing Term Life Insurance o Reach a Beques Goal: Time-Dependen Case Erhan Bayrakar Deparmen of Mahemaics, Universiy of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, arxiv: v1 [q-fin.mf] 8 Mar 2015 S. David Promislow Deparmen of Mahemaics, York Universiy Torono, Onario, Canada, M3J 1P3 Virginia R. Young Deparmen of Mahemaics, Universiy of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, Version: 15 December 2014 Absrac: We consider he problem of how an individual can use erm life insurance o maximize he probabiliy of reaching a given beques goal, an imporan problem in financial planning. We assume ha he individual buys insananeous erm life insurance wih a premium payable coninuously. By conras wih Bayrakar e al. (2014), we allow he force of moraliy o vary wih ime, which, as we show, grealy complicaes he problem. Keywords: Term life insurance, beques moive, deerminisic conrol. 1. Inroducion We considerhe problemof how an individualcan useerm life insuranceo maximize he probabiliy of reaching a given beques goal, an imporan problem in financial planning. We assume ha he individual buys insananeous erm life insurance wih a premium payable coninuously. By conras wih Bayrakar e al. (2014), we allow he force of moraliy o vary wih ime, which, as we show, grealy complicaes he problem. Please refer o Bayrakar e al. (2014) and o Bayrakar and Young (2013) for discussions of relaed lieraure. Bayrakar e al. (2014) deermined how an individual can use life insurance o maximize he probabiliy of reaching a given beques when he force of moraliy is consan. To he bes of our knowledge, ha paper is he firs o solve any beques-goal problem. Bayrakar e al. (2014) considered life insurance purchased by a single premium, wih and wihou cash value available. They also considered irreversible and reversible life insurance purchased by a coninuously paid premium; one can view he laer as (insananeous) erm life insurance. In his paper, we assume ha insananeous erm life insurance is available o he decision maker.

2 2 Specifically, he individual buys life insurance via a premium paid coninuously and can change he amoun of her insurance coverage a any ime. We believe ha erm life insurance is a more realisic produc han single-premium whole life insurance, and is simpliciy allows us o focus on how life insurance mees he individual s goals. For he laer reason, oo, we assume ha he financial marke consiss only of a riskless asse. As in Bayrakar e al. (2014), we assume ha he individual s consumpion is me by an income, such as a pension, life annuiy, or Social Securiy. Then, we consider he wealh ha he individual wans o devoe owards heirs (separae from any wealh relaed o he afore-menioned income) and seek he opimal sraegy for buying life insurance o maximize he probabiliy of reaching a given beques goal. Again, his paper differs from Bayrakar e al. (2014) in ha we allow he force of moraliy o vary wih ime. The res of he paper is organized as follows: In Secion 2, we assume ha he individual wans o maximize he probabiliy ha her wealh a deah equals (or is greaer han) a given beques level b = 1. In Secion 2.1, we formalize he ime-dependen problem ha he individual faces, along wih a verificaion lemma ha will help us solve he problem in some examples. In Secion 2.2, we examine he probabiliy ha he individual reaches her beques goal, under wo differen sraegies for purchasing erm life insurance: (1) purchasing full insurance unil deah or ruin and (2) purchasing no insurance unil wealh reaches a level ha guaranees wealh a deah will equal he beques goal. One may view Secions 2.1 and 2.2 of his paper as he exension of Secion 3.1 of Bayrakar e al. (2014) o he case for which he force of moraliy varies deerminisically wih ime. In Secion 2.3, we consider a discree-ime model hrough which one can use backwards inducion o find he opimal sraegy for purchasing erm life insurance. Secion 3 concludes he paper. 2. Maximizing he Probabiliy of Reaching a Beques Goal We begin his secion by saing he opimizaion problem ha he individual faces. In Secion 2.1, we formalize he ime-dependen problem ha he individual faces and presen a verificaion lemma ha one can use o deermine he opimal sraegy for purchasing life insurance. In Secion 2.2, we examine he probabiliy ha he individual reaches her beques goal, under wo differen sraegies for purchasing life insurance and deermine he opimal sraegy in some cases. In Secion 2.3, we consider a discree-ime model and presen a numerical example which shows ha he general soluion o he problem of maximizing he probabiliy of reaching a beques goal will no be a simple one Saemen of problem and verificaion lemma We assume ha he individual has an invesmen accoun ha she uses o reach a given beques goal of b = 1 uni. This accoun is separae from he money ha she uses o cover

3 her living expenses. The individual may inves in a riskless asse earning ineres a he coninuous rae r, which acuaries call he force of ineres, or she may purchase erm life insurance insananeously, as in Secion 3.1 of Bayrakar e al. (2014). In wo insances, specifically, in Remark 2.5 and Proposiion 2.4 below, we allow r = 0; oherwise, we assume r > 0. Denoe he fuure lifeime random variable of he individual by τ d. We assume ha he hazard rae λ = λ(), or force of moraliy, ha governs τ d is a funcion of ime. Suppose ha λ() > 0 on some inerval [0,T), in which T migh be infiniy; furhermore, suppose ha λ() is non-decreasing wih respec o ime. The individual is aged x a ime = 0; hus, we measure { ime from age x. The relaionship beween τ d and λ is given by p x = P(τ d > ) = exp } 0 λ(s)ds, and we assume ha T p x = 0, or equivalenly, T λ()d =. This 0 assumpion is he usual one for a funcion o be considered a force of moraliy; see Bowers e al. (1997). The individual buys erm life insurance ha pays a ime τ d ; his insurance acs as a means for achieving he beques moive. She buys he erm insurance via a premium paid coninuously a he rae of h() = (1+θ)λ() per dollar of insurance for some consan θ 0. Because he life insurance is erm, we assume ha he individual can change he amoun of her insurance coverage a any ime; herefore, in our coninuous-ime model, one can consider life insurance as insananeous erm life insurance. Le W() denoe he wealh in his separae invesmen accoun a ime 0. Le D() denoe he amoun of deah benefi payable a ime τ d in force a ime 0. Wih coninuously paid premium for insananeous erm life insurance, wealh follows he dynamics 3 { W () = rw() h()d(), 0 < τ d, W(τ d ) = W(τ d )+D(τ d ). (2.1) An admissible insurance sraegy D = {D()} 0 is any non-negaive process ha is independen of τ d. We do no insis admissible sraegies be such ha W() 0 for all 0 because he individual migh wish o buy insurance while risking ruin. Therefore, we modify he definiion of he maximized probabiliy of reaching he beques by effecively ending he game if wealh reaches 0 before he individual dies. Define τ 0 = inf{ 0 : W() 0}, and define he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal before ruin by φ(w,) = supp w, (W(τ d τ 0 ) 1), (2.2) D in which we maximize over admissible sraegies D. The noaion P w, means ha he probabiliy is condiional on W() = w; similarly, E w,, which we use below, means ha he expecaion is condiional on W() = w.

4 To moivae he verificaion lemma for his problem, we presen he following informal discussion. Firs, noe ha we can rewrie he expression for φ in (2.2) as follows: [ φ(w,) = supe w, D ] λ(s) s p x+ 1 {s<τ0 }1 {W(s)+D(s) 1} ds ] [ τ0 = supe w, e s λ(s )ds λ(s)1 {W(s)+D(s) 1} ds D. 4 (2.3) in which he indicaor funcion 1 A equals 1 if even A holds and equals 0 oherwise. By applying Iô s Lemma (Proer, 2004), a ype of oal derivaive, o e s λ(u)du φ(w(s),s), wih φ is as represened in (2.3), we obain he following conrol equaion, which we expec φ o solve: [ 0 = max φ +(rw h()d)φ w λ() ( )] φ 1 {w+d 1}, (2.4) D In (2.4), he indicaor funcion equals 0 or 1, and corresponding o each of hose values, we choose D o be a minimum becauseof he erm h()dφ w. Specifically,if he indicaor equals 0, hen he opimal insurance is D = 0; if i equals 1, hen he opimal insurance is D = 1 w. Thus, we can replace equaion (2.4) wih he equivalen expression, a variaional inequaliy: λ()φ = φ +rwφ w +max[λ() h()(1 w)φ w, 0]. (2.5) Denoe he safe level for he beques-goal problem by w(), ha is, φ(w,) = 1 for all w w(). We obain w() by arguing as follows: afer wealh reaches he safe level, he individual uses ineres income from wealh o purchase life insurance equal o 1 minus he curren wealh, and wealh will never drop o zero. Thus, he safe level w(s) follows he dynamics w (s) = (r +h(s)) w(s) h(s) for all s ; hus, s s w(s) = w() e (r+h(s ))ds s h(s )e s (r+h(s ))ds ds. For w() o be safe, we require ha w(s) 0 for all s ; hus, w() = h(s )e s (r+h(s ))ds ds = [h] A x+, (2.6) in which we use sandard acuarial noaion modified by a pre-superscrip[h] o indicae ha we use he moraliy law implied by reaing h() as he force of moraliy a ime. We use a pre-superscrip [h] in his manner hroughou he paper. These observaions lead us o a verificaion lemma ha saes ha a nice soluion o he variaional inequaliy (2.5) equals he value funcion φ defined in (2.2). Therefore, we can reduce our problem o one of solving (2.5), ogeher wih some boundary condiions. We sae he following verificaion lemma wihou proof because is proof is similar o ohers in he

5 lieraure; see, for example, Wang and Young (2012a, 2012b) for relaed proofs in a financial marke ha includes a risky asse. Lemma 2.1. Le ˆφ = ˆφ(w,) be a funcion ha is non-decreasing, coninuous, and piecewise differeniable wih respec o w and coninuous and piecewise differeniable wih respec o on R = {(w,) : 0 w w(), 0 T}, in which w() is given by (2.6), excep ha ˆφ migh no be differeniable wih respec o w a w = 0. (If T =, hen may equal T in he limiing sense.) Suppose ˆφ saisfies he following variaional inequaliy on R: λ() ˆφ = ˆφ +rw ˆφ [ w +max λ() h()(1 w) ˆφ ] w, 0, (2.7) 5 in which we use one-sided derivaives, if needed. Addiionally, suppose ˆφ(0,) = 0 and ˆφ( w(),) = 1. Then, on R, ˆφ equals he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal before ruin, φ. The associaed opimal sraegy for purchasing insananeous erm life insurance is given by 1 w, if λ() h()(1 w)ˆφ w 0, D(w) = 0, if λ() h()(1 w)ˆφ w 0. Remark 2.1. To show ha a candidae probabiliy of reaching he beques, ˆφ, is maximal, besides showing ha i saisfies he regulariy and boundaries condiions in Lemma 2.1, we mus show ha i saisfies he variaional inequaliy in (2.7). Specifically, we mus show ha λ()(ˆφ 1) = ˆφ +((r +h())w h()) ˆφ w and λ() h()(1 w)ˆφ w 0 wherever he candidae sraegy underlying ˆφ is o buy full insurance. Similarly, we mus also show ha λ() ˆφ = ˆφ + rw ˆφ w and λ() h()(1 w)ˆφ w 0 wherever he corresponding candidae sraegy is o buy no insurance. 2.2 Probabiliy of reaching he beques under wo differen sraegies Because, a any given momen, i is opimal eiher o purchase so-called full insurance, D() = 1 W() or o purchase no insurance, we expec ha he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques will be formed from he probabiliies associaed wih buying full insurance unil deah or ruin or wih buying no insurance unil wealh reaches he safe level. Denoe hese probabiliies by φ f and φ 0, respecively; we use a superscrip f o denoe full insurance and a superscrip 0 o denoe no insurance. If he individual buys full insurance unil deah or ruin, hen she reaches her beques goal if she dies before she runs ou of money. Her wealh follows he differenial equaion W (s) = (r +h(s))w(s) h(s), W() = w 0,

6 whose soluion is s W(s) = we (r+h(s ))ds s s ( h(s )e s (r+h(s ))ds s ) ds = e (r+h(s ))ds w [h] A 1 x+:s, for s. Wealh reaches 0 a ime f = f (w,), which uniquely solves w = [h] A 1 x+: f, (2.8) for 0 w w() and 0 T. Thus, he individual reaches her beques goal if τ d occurs before f, or φ f (w,) = 1 e f λ(s)ds = 1 f p x+ = f q x+. (2.9) One can show ha φ f saisfies he boundary-value problem (BVP) 6 { λ()(φ f 1) = φ f +((r +h())w h())φ f w, φ f (0,) = 0, φ f ( w(),) = 1, (2.10) in which he boundary condiions follow from f (0,) = and f ( w(),) = T. For compuing φ f w, i will be necessary o know f w, which we obain by differeniaing (2.8) wih respec o w: f w = e f (r+h(s))ds h( f ) which is posiive, as we expeced. I follows ha φ f w is given by, f φ f w(w,) = e (r+θλ(s))ds. (2.11) 1+θ Remark 2.2. Consider f s deermining equaion (2.8): w = [h] A 1 x+: f. If he individual were o spend all her wealh w a ime o buy erm insurance of 1, hen f is he longes erm ha she could buy. In his siuaion, he probabiliy ha she dies wih wealh equal o 1 is he probabiliy ha she dies before he end of he erm f, which equals he expression for φ f in (2.9): φ f (w,) = f q x+. Now, we compue φ 0, he probabiliy ha he individual reaches her beques goal if she buys no insurance unil her wealh reaches he safe level. In his case, φ 0 is he probabiliy ha he individual survives unil her wealh reaches he safe level, in which wealh follows he differenial equaion W (s) = rw(s), W() = w 0,

7 7 whose soluion is W(s) = we r(s ), for s. Wealh reaches he safe level w( 0 ) a ime 0 = 0 (w,), which uniquely solves w = e r(0 ) [h] A x+ 0, (2.12) when e r(t ) w w() and 0 T. Thus, φ 0 is he probabiliy ha he individual survives o ime 0. If 0 w < e r(t ), hen no soluion 0 of (2.12) exiss; noe ha T is necessarily finie if here exiss w [ 0,e r(t )). In his case, i is impossible for he individual s wealh o reach he safe level before she dies, so φ 0 (w,) = 0. Thus, we have 0, if 0 w < e r(t ), φ 0 (w,) = e 0 λ(s)ds = 0 p x+, if e r(t ) w w(). (2.13) One can show ha he second expression for φ 0 in (2.13) saisfies he BVP { λ()φ 0 = φ 0 +rwφ 0 w, φ 0 (e r(t ),) = 0, φ 0 ( w(),) = 1, (2.14) in which he boundary condiions follow from 0 (e r(t ),) = T and from 0 ( w(),) = 0. Plus, for sricly less han a fixed, one can show ha any φ of he form φ(w,) = p x+ φ f (we r( ), ) saisfies he differenial equaion in (2.14). This probabiliy of reaching he beques goal corresponds o he sraegy of waiing unil ime o buy insurance, afer which ime he individual buys full erm life insurance unil she ruins or dies. For compuing φ 0 w, i will be necessary o know 0 w, which we obain by differeniaing (2.12) wih respec o w: 0 (w,) w e r(0 ) = h( 0 ) ( 1 ) = 1 [h] A x+ 0 h( 0 ) ( e r(0 ) w ), which is negaive, as one expecs. I follows ha φ 0 w is given by φ 0 w(w,) = e 0 λ(s) ds (1+θ) ( ), (2.15) e r(0 ) w if e r(t ) w [h] A x+ = w(); oherwise, φ 0 w(w,) = 0. If T =, hen (2.15) holds for all 0 w w().

8 8 In general, i is difficul o deermine φ, bu we do have he following resul ha exends a similar resul in he case for which he force of moraliy is consan; see Proposiion 3.2 in Bayrakar e al. (2014). Proposiion 2.2. If λ() r for all 0, hen he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal before ruin is given by φ(w,) = φ 0 (w,), on R. The associaed opimal life insurance purchasing sraegy is no o purchase any life insurance unil wealh reaches he safe level w( 0 ) a ime 0, afer which ime i is opimal o buy erm life insurance of 1 w(s) for all s 0. Proof. We use Lemma 2.1 o prove his proposiion. Firs, noe ha, because λ() r for all 0, in order for T 0 λ()d = o hold, we mus have T = ; hus, φ0 = e 0 λ(s)ds. Nex, noe ha φ 0 is non-decreasing wih respec o w, φ 0 is coninuous and differeniable wih respec o w and on R, excep possibly a w = 0, and φ 0 solves he BVP given in (2.14). From Remark 2.1, all ha remains for us o show is ha λ() h()(1 w)φ 0 w 0, which, from (2.15), holds on R if and only if e r(0 ) w (1 w)e 0 λ(s)ds, for all 0 w w(). Afer subsiuing for w from equaion (2.12) and simplifying, his inequaliy becomes 0 ( ) λ(s)ds e 1 [h] A x+ 0 e r(0 ) [h] A x+ 0, which holds if he following sronger inequaliy does: 0 ( ) 0 λ(s)ds e 1 [h] A x+ 0 e λ(s)ds [h] A x+ 0, which is clearly rue. Therefore, we have shown ha φ 0 in (2.13) saisfies he variaional inequaliy (2.7). The opimal insurance sraegy follows from he fac ha φ 0 solves he conrol problem (2.4) wih D 0. Remark 2.3. When he force of moraliy is less han or equal o he force of ineres, he individual feels as if she has ime o reach he safe level; herefore, i is opimal for he

9 individualoinvesinherisklessasseandwaiunilshereacheshesafe levelbeforeshebuys any life insurance. For wealh w a ime, her wealh a ime s equals W(s) = we r(s ), and he ime ha wealh reaches he safe level, as measured from age x equals 0 (w,), as discussed in Remark 2.2. The resul of Proposiion 2.2 generalizes wha we discovered when he force of moraliy is consan; see Proposiion 3.2 in Bayrakar e al. (2014). The parallel resul for he case in which he force of moraliy is greaer han he force of ineres is no necessarily rue, ha is, if λ() > r for all 0, hen i is no necessarily rue ha φ = φ f. Indeed, we saw in Bayrakar e al. (2014) for he case of consan force of moraliy, when λ > r, i is opimal o buy full insurance only when wealh is less han a specific value, a value sricly less han he safe level; oherwise, when wealh is greaer han his specific value, i is opimal o wai o buy insurance unil wealh reaches he safe level. However, we have he following resul ha saes ha if θ = 0 and if he condiional probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime of he person is a leas r, hen φ = φ f. Proposiion 2.3. If θ = 0 and if he probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime of he person aged x, namely g() = λ() p x, saisfies g(s) r p x for all s 0, hen he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal before ruin is given by φ(w,) = φ f (w,), on R. The associaed opimal life insurance purchasing sraegy is o purchase erm life insurance of 1 w when wealh equals w unil he individual dies or ruins. Proof. We use Lemma 2.1 o prove his proposiion. Firs, noe ha φ f in (2.9) is nondecreasing wih respec o w, φ f is coninuous and differeniable wih respec o w and on R, excep possibly a w = 0, and φ f solves he BVP given in (2.10). From Remark 2.1, all ha remains for us o show is ha 1 (1 w)φ f w 0, which, from (2.8) and (2.11), holds on R if and only if or equivalenly, f A 1 x+: f (1 e r(f ) ) 0, [λ(s)e s λ(s )ds r ] e r(s ) ds 0. This inequaliy holds if he inegrand is always non-negaive, or λ(s)e s λ(s )ds r, 9

10 which holdsbecausehe lef side equalsλ(s)e s 0 λ(s )ds e 0 λ(s )ds = g(s)e 0 λ(s )ds = g(s) p x. Therefore, we have shown ha φ f in (2.9) saisfies he variaional inequaliy (2.7). The opimal insurance sraegy follows from he fac ha φ f solves he conrol problem (2.4) wih D() = 1 W(). Remark 2.4. Noe ha g(s) p x equals he condiional probabiliy densiy funcion (pdf) of he fuure lifeime random variable of he person aged x+ evaluaed a ime s given survival o ime. Thus, we could have saed he condiion in erms of his condiional pdf. Remark 2.5. Recall ha we generally assume r > 0, which implies ha T < under he condiion of Proposiion 2.3. However, if r = 0, he proof of Proposiion 2.3 shows us ha when θ = 0, we have φ = φ f on R for any force of moraliy. If r = 0, he probabiliy ha wealh will reach he safe level is 0. Inuiively i makes sense ha i is opimal for he individual o buy full insurance saring now raher han waiing because if he individual wais, hen he value of her accoun will no change, and she migh die before she begins o buy life insurance. Thus, we expec φ = φ f when r = 0 for any θ 0; his resul is rue, as we show in he following proposiion. Proposiion 2.4. If r = 0 and if θ 0, hen he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal before ruin is given by φ(w,) = φ f (w,) = 1 (1 w) 1 1+θ, independen of, for 0 w 1. The associaed opimal life insurance purchasing sraegy is o purchase erm life insurance of 1 w when wealh equals w unil he individual dies or ruins. Proof. Because r = 0, he expression for w in (2.8) becomes w = 1 e f h(s)ds = 1 (1 f q x+ ) 1+θ, 10 so (2.9) implies ha φ f (w,) = 1 (1 w) 1 1+θ for 0 w 1. The funcion φ f (w,) = 1 (1 w) 1 1+θ saisfies he regulariy and boundary condiions of Lemma 2.1, and i is sraighforward o show ha i saisfies he inequaliy 1 (1+θ)(1 w)φ f w 0, for 0 w 1. Thus, we have shown ha φ f (w,) = 1 (1 w) 1 1+θ saisfies he variaional inequaliy (2.7), and he opimal insurance sraegy follows.

11 11 Nex, we presen a heorem ha exends he resul of Proposiion 2.3. Proposiion 2.5. Suppose ha θ = 0 and ha he probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime g() = λ() p x is non-decreasing on [0,T], wih T necessarily finie. Define r = inf{ 0 : λ() r}; hen, r p x+ φ f (we r(r ), r ), if 0 w w() and 0 < r, φ(w,) = φ 0 (w,), if w() < w w() and 0 < r, (2.16) φ f (w,), if 0 w w() and r T, on R. Here, w() = e r( r ) w( r ). The associaed opimal sraegy for buying erm life insurance is as follows: (a) When 0 < r, only buy life insurance if wealh reaches he safe level; oherwise, do nohing unil ime r. (b) When r T, buy erm life insurance of 1 w when wealh equals w unil one dies or ruins, whichever occurs firs. Remark 2.6. If λ() r for all 0 and if g() is non-decreasing, hen r = 0 and he condiion on g in Proposiion 2.3 holds. Thus, i follows from Proposiion 2.3 ha φ = φ f in his case. Proof. From Remark 2.6, i is sufficien o consider he case for which λ(0) < r. If g() is non-decreasing, hen necessarily λ() is increasing wihou bound; hus, λ() r for all r. We use Lemma 2.1 o prove his proposiion. Firs, noe ha φ in (2.16) is non-decreasing wih respec o w, φ is coninuous and differeniable wih respec o w and on R, φ(0,) = 0, and φ( w(),) = 1. If 0 w w() and 0 < r, hen one can show ha r p x+ φ f (we r(r ), r ) saisfies he differenial equaion in (2.14). We nex show ha φ saisfies he inequaliy associaed wih buying no insurance, namely 1 (1 w)φ w 0, (2.17) in which, from (2.11), φ w = r p x+ e r( r ) e r(f r r) = e r (r λ(s))ds e r(f r r), wih f r defined by f r = f (we r( r ), r ).

12 12 For s r, we have λ(s) r; hus, φ w e r(f r r). Thus, w = e r( r ) A 1 x+ r : f r r, and (2.17) holds if he following sronger inequaliy holds or equivalenly, e r( r ) A 1 x+ r : f r r 1 e r(f r r), f e r( r r ) r g(s) r p x e r(s r) ds This las inequaliy is rue because, for < r s, f r r g(s) p x g( r) p x g( r) r p x = r. re r(s r) ds, If w() < w w() and 0 < r, hen he proof of Proposiion2.2 shows usha φ = φ 0 in (2.16) saisfies he inequaliy associaed wih buying no insurance unil wealh reaches he safe level, namely inequaliy (2.17). Finally, when r, from he proof of Proposiion 2.3, we know ha he inequaliy 1 (1 w) φ f w 0 holds. Thus, for r, he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques goal equals φ f, which implies ha i is opimal o buy full life insurance. Therefore, we have shown ha φ in (2.16) saisfies he variaional inequaliy (2.7) on R. The opimal insurance sraegy follows as discussed above. Example 2.1. DeMoivre s law Assume ha λ() = 1 for 0 < T, for some finie T. This force of moraliy T corresponds o a fuure lifeime random variable T(x) U(0,T), called DeMoivre s law in acuarial circles; see Bowers e al. (1997). For θ = 0, Proposiion 2.5 gives us he opimal sraegyforbuyinginsurancebecauseheprobabiliydensiyfuncionoft(x) is 1 T, aconsan, hus, non-decreasing. Specifically, if r 1 T (or equivalenly r λ() for all 0 < T), hen, for all 0 < T, i is opimal o buy full insurance unil deah or ruin, whichever comes firs. If r > 1 T, hen i is opimal o buy no insurance unil ime r = T 1 r (unless one reaches he safe level before ha ime); afer ime r, i is opimal o buy full insurance unil deah or ruin. Example 2.2. Gamma law Assume ha λ() = µ2 µ+1 for 0 and for some consan µ > 0. This force of moraliy corresponds o a fuure lifeime random variable T(x) Gamma(2,µ). If µ r, hen we

13 13 know, from Proposiion 2.2, ha φ = φ 0 on R. The probabiliy densiy funcion for T(x) is given by g() = µ 2 e µ, which decreases for > 1/µ; hus, Proposiion 2.5 does no apply. Bayrakar e al. (2014) considered he case for which he force of moraliy is consan, λ() µ. If µ > r, hen here exiss a value of wealh w such ha if w < w, i is opimal for he individual o buy full insurance, and she will do so for he res of her life or unil she ruins. On he oher hand, if w w, i is opimal for he individual o wai unil her wealh reaches he safe level and hen begin buying full insurance, which she will do for he remainder of her life. Moreover, he buy boundary w increases wih he force of moraliy µ. In he case of he Gamma law, lim λ() = µ, hus, we expec he limiing behavior of he opimal sraegy for purchasing life insurance o approach ha bound when he force of moraliy is consan. Indeed, in numerical work, when is large enough and when θ = 0, he following holds φ(w,) = max [ φ f (w,),φ 0 (w,) ] φ f (w,), if 0 w < w (), = (2.18) φ 0 (w,), if w () < w w(), for some w () (0, w()) deermined by coninuiy of φ, and w () increases wih ime o he value w from Bayrakar e al. (2014). We invie he ineresed reader o verify his resul algebraically. For concreeness, we discuss some numerical resuls. Le r = 0.02 and µ = 0.05; hus, he expeced fuure lifeime of he individual is 2 µ = 40. So, we have a middle-aged individual who, on average, has fory years o reach her goal of leaving 1 uni o her heirs. For large enough (in his case, 13.4), we verified numerically ha φ is given by (2.18); specifically, we checked ha 1 (1 w)φ f w(w,) 0 for 0 w < w () and ha 1 (1 w)φ 0 w(w,) 0 for w () w w(). Also, w () increases owards w = 0.682, he value from Bayrakar e al. (2014) when he force of moraliy equals he consan µ. However, w () increases only slowly owards w = 0.682: w (25) = 0.448, w (40) = 0.511, and w (75) = The probabiliy ha he individual survives 75 years is only 11%, and w (75) is quie low relaive o w = Even when = 150, for which he probabiliy of survival is less han one-half of one percen, w (150) = For small values of, φ does no equal he expression in (2.18) because i does no saisfy he variaional inequaliy (2.7). In fac, i is difficul o deermine wha he opimal sraegy is when is small. I appears ha he maximum probabiliy of reaching he beques is no made up of expressions involving φ f and φ 0 because i migh be opimal o buy life insurance for a while and hen wai. We now presen a negaive resul relaed o a commen a he end of he preceding example. Specifically, we show if he probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime random

14 14 variable of he individual is decreasing, hen φ φ f when = r. Proposiion 2.6. Suppose ha θ = 0 and ha he probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime g() = λ() p x is decreasing for r. Also, suppose ha λ( r ) = r. Then, for any w > 0. Proof. Given any (w, ), (2.8) can be wrien The condiion on g implies ha φ(w, r ) φ f (w, r ) f w = A 1 x+: f = er For any w > 0, we have f (w, r ) > r ; hus, w < e r r rs g(+s) e ds. p x g( r +s) r p x < g( r) r p x = λ( r ) = r. f (w, r ) From his inequaliy and from (2.11), i follows ha r re rs ds = 1 e r( f (w, r ) r ). 1 (1 w)φ f w(w, r ) < 0. In oher words, he condiion for buying full erm life insurance does no hold for any w > 0; hus, φ(w, r ) φ f (w, r ) for any w > 0. We presen anoher resul ha compares φ f and φ 0 near w = 0 and w() when λ() is sricly increasing. Proposiion 2.7. Suppose ha T = and ha λ() is sricly increasing wih respec o. Then, for any r, here exiss δ > 0 such ha and here exiss ǫ > 0 such ha φ f (w,) > φ 0 (w,), w (0,δ), (2.19) φ f (w,) < φ 0 (w,), w ( w() ǫ, w()). (2.20) Furhermore, inequaliy (2.19) holds when T <, and inequaliy (2.20) holds when T < and θ > 0.

15 15 Proof. From (2.11), we have f φ f w(w,) = e (r+θλ(s))ds. 1+θ From f (0,) = and lim w w() f (w,) = T =, i follows ha and From (2.15), we have φ f w(0,) = 1 1+θ, lim w w() φf w(w,) =. φ 0 ) e 0 λ(s) ds w(w,) = er(0 (1+θ) ( ). 1 [h] A x+ 0 From lim w 0 0 (w,) = T = and 0 ( w(),) = 0, we have and lim w 0 φ0 w(w,) = lim 0 φ 0 w( w(),) = lim 0 e r(0 ) e 0 e r(0 ) e 0 λ(s) ds ) = 0, (2.21) (1+θ) ( 1 [h] A x+ 0 λ(s) ds (1+θ) ( ) = 1 [h] A x+ 0 1 (1+θ) ( 1 [h] A x+ ), in which he limi in (2.21) follows by applying L Hôpial s rule if necessary (ha is, if lim 0 A x+ 0 = 1, whichoccursifandonlyifλ()increaseswihoubound). Theconclusions of he proposiion follow from he relaionships beween he derivaives of φ f and φ 0 a w = 0 and w() and from he fac ha he wo probabiliies are equal o 0 a w = 0 and o 1 a w = w(). Example 2.3. In he case for which T < and θ = 0, we have and lim w w() φf w(w,) = e r(t ), φ 0 w( w(),) = 1 1 A x+, which we canno order in general. For example, in he case of DeMoivre s law, we have A x+ = 1 e r(t ) ; r(t )

16 16 hus, when > r = T 1 r, φ 0 w( w(),) = e r(t ) e r(t ) er(t ) 1 r(t ) > e r(t ) = lim w w() φf w(w,), in which he inequaliy follows from he fac ha e r(t ) er(t ) 1 r(t ) < 1 when > r. Thus, φ f (w,) > φ 0 (w,) in a neighborhood of w = w(), which we already knew from Example 2.1, where we concluded from Proposiion 2.5, ha φ f (w,) > φ 0 (w,) for all w when r. On he oher hand, suppose he probabiliy densiy funcion of he ime of deah of our individual aged x is given by 2(rT 1) g() = r T 2, for 0 T. One can show ha he corresponding force of moraliy λ() is increasing and λ(0) = r, so r = 0. Because g(0) = r and because g() is decreasing, we have T 0 e r g()d < or equivalenly, A x < 1 e rt, which implies ha φ 0 w( w(0),0) = T 0 re r d, 1 1 A x > e rt = lim w w(0) φf w(w,0). Thus, φ f (w,) < φ 0 (w,) in a neighborhood of w = w(). Example 2.4. Reconsider he Gamma law from Example 2.2. The probabiliy densiy funcion (pdf) increases unil ime = 1/µ, afer which i decreases. If µ/2 < r < µ, hen r = r µ(µ r) > 1 µ, which means ha he pdf is decreasing on [ r, ). Thus, according o Proposiion 2.6, φ(w, r ) φ f (w, r ) for any w > 0 when µ/2 < r < µ. Furhermore, from Proposiion 2.7, we deduce ha φ f (w, r ) > φ 0 (w, r ) for w in an inerval (0,δ); hus, (2.18) does no hold for w (0,δ) and = r if µ/2 < r < µ. I follows ha when is large enough means some ime greaer han r in conras o he conclusion of Proposiion Discree-ime model I is insrucive o compare our coninuous-ime model wih an associaed discree-ime one. Suppose we choose a period of ime, which could be very small, and we have he opion o purchase erm life insurance for one period a a ime, wih he benefi paid a he end of he period should deah occur during ha period.

17 Consider he problem of maximizing he probabiliy of reaching he beques goal, ha is, dying wih wealh a leas equal o 1. In his discree conex, he objecive is o maximize he probabiliy of having a oal wealh of 1 a he end of he periodof deah. Le q x+k denoe he probabiliy ha an individual aged x+k dies before ime k+1, and le p x+k = 1 q x+k denoe he probabiliy ha ha individual survives o ime k +1, in which we measure age in unis of our ime period. Suppose ha our ime-of-deah random variable, as measured from age x, has a maximum value of N so ha necessarily q x+n 1 = 1. Insurance premiums are calculaed by using raes of moraliy equal o q x+k = (1+θ)q x+k. In place of he force of ineres r, we use a periodic effecive rae of ineres i. So, he cos of 1 uni of one-period erm insurance a ime k equals v q x+k, in which v = 1 1+i. A any ime k = 0,1,...,N 1, an individual wih wealh w a ha ime will eiher no purchase insurance or purchase insurance wih a deah benefi of b k = 1 (1+i)w 1 q x+k, because his amoun will resul in a oal wealh of 1 a he end of he period, if he individual were o die. Deermining he opimal sraegy is a ypical dynamic-programming problem in discree ime. Le φ(w, k) denoe he maximum probabiliy of success of an individual wih wealh w a ime k for k = 0,1,...,N 1. This maximum probabiliy is calculaed via backwards inducion as follows: φ(w,n 1) = { 1, if w v, 0, if w < v, and for k = 0,1,...,N 2, [ ( w(1+i) qx+k φ(w,k) = max p x+k φ(w(1+i),k +1), q x+k +p x+k φ 1 q x+k )],k+1. The opimal sraegy is no o purchase one-period, erm life insurance a ime k when he maximum is he firs erm in he expression on he righ, while he opimal sraegy is o purchase b k unis of life insurance when he maximum is he second erm in he expression on he righ. The opimal sraegy in his model can be quie differen from wha one migh expec. In he discree-ime model, an individual is forced o wai if her wealh is insufficien o purchase insurance for one complee period, even hough her success probabiliy could be increased by using he available wealh o purchase insurance for par of a period, if his were allowed. I is possible for he opimal sraegy o dicae buying in one period and waiing in a subsequen one. Take, for example, a case wih N = 3, q x = 0.3, q x+1 = 0.4, i = 1, and θ = 0. For an individual who sars wih a wealh of 0.3 a ime 0, he opimal sraegy is o buy a ime 0, bu hen wai a ime 1. 17

18 18 3. Summary and Conclusions We examined he opimal sraegy for purchasing insananeous erm life insurance in order o maximize he probabiliy of reaching a given beques goal, an imporan problem in financial planning. We showed ha if he force of moraliy is no greaer han he reurn of he riskless asse, hen i is opimal o wai unil reaching he safe level before buying any life insurance. On he oher hand, if he rae of reurn of he riskless asse equals 0, hen we showed ha i is opimal o buy so-called full erm life insurance unil deah or ruin. We also deermined he opimal sraegy when he probabiliy densiy funcion of he fuure lifeime random variable is non-decreasing, which is o wai unil he force of moraliy surpasses he reurn of he riskless asse and hen purchase full erm life insurance unil deah or ruin. Furhermore, we discussed a discree-ime version of he beques problem and showed ha he resuls in discree ime do no necessarily mach hose in coninuous ime because of he resricion of buying life insurance discreely. In fuure work, we will consider wo exensions: (1) we will allow he individual o consume from her invesmen accoun as she finds he opimal sraegy for purchasing life insurance o maximize he probabiliy of reaching her beques goal; and (2) furhermore, we will allow he individual o buy life annuiies o cover her consumpion, again, as she maximizes he probabiliy of reaching her beques goal. We also anicipae adding a risky asse o he financial model in hese wo exensions, which will inroduce an addiional conrol o he problem. Acknowledgmens The firs and hird auhors hank he Commiee for Knowledge Exension and Research of he Sociey of Acuaries for financially supporing his work. Addiionally, research of he firs auhor is suppored in par by he Naional Science Foundaion under gran DMS and he Susan M. Smih Professorship of Acuarial Mahemaics. Research of he hird auhor is suppored in par by he Cecil J. and Ehel M. Nesbi Professorship of Acuarial Mahemaics. References Bayrakar, Erhan and Virginia R. Young(2013), Life insurance purchasing o maximize uiliy of household consumpion, Norh American Acuarial Journal, 17 (2): Bayrakar, Erhan, S. David Promislow, and Virginia R. Young (2014), Purchasing life insurance o reach a beques goal, o appear in Insurance: Mahemaics and Economics. Bowers, NewonL., HansU.Gerber,JamesC.Hickman, DonaldA.Jones, andcecilj.nesbi (1997), Acuarial Mahemaics, second ediion, Schaumburg, IL: Sociey of Acuaries.

19 19 Proer, Philip E. (2004), Sochasic Inegraion and Differenial Equaions, Berlin: Springer- Verlag. Wang, Ting and Virginia R. Young (2012a), Opimal commuable annuiies o minimize he probabiliy of lifeime ruin, Insurance: Mahemaics and Economics, 50 (1): Wang, Ting and Virginia R. Young (2012b), Maximizing he uiliy of consumpion wih commuable annuiies, Insurance: Mahemaics and Economics, 51 (2):