Skip to main content
Log in

Optimal Decision on Dynamic Insurance Price and Investment Portfolio of an Insurer with Multi-dimensional Time-Varying Correlation

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, we propose a model of optimal insurance pricing and investment strategies, in which the insurance price, investment returns and insured losses are assumed to be correlated stochastic processes. The investment portfolio discussed in this paper contains more than one risky assets following multi-Vasicek model with time-varying correlation. To solve the optimal investment problem, we take into account the demand of insurance contracts which impacts the price of the contracts; the utility is a performance process for a specific time; we determine dynamical optimal price of an insurance contract and the optimal investment portfolio of an insurer simultaneously by maximizing the performance of the insurer. We carry out numerical analysis with an example. The results show that the Treasury Bill, generally considered as a risk-free asset, is examined to follow the similar pattern as other risky assets in terms of volatility/mean ratio; multi-Vasicek model is an appropriate model to describe the change pattern of the return of risky assets in the investment. We analyze the sensitivity of the change in important parameters of the optimal solutions. It is worth noticing that the equally weighted investment portfolio is proved to be an optimal investment strategy under some conditions; the proposed model in this paper can be used to obtain optimal solutions easily in the situation of multi-dimensional investment portfolio.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although Eq. (16) is similar in form to that presented by Zhang and Siu (2009, Eq. (4.6)), it actually is different from that of Zhang and Siu (2009). Zhang and Siu (2009) trial exponential utility function (4.6) is a uitlity function of state independence. It includes a fictious variable expressed as a market opponent which is only necessary in stochastic differential game framework. Their optimization problem is established in backward time. However, we use the forward performance process of state dependence including dynamic return process of investment portfolio and price process without the fictious variable, our optimization problem is non-Makovian and is in forward time.

  2. In general, optimizing over amount of risky assets is equivalent to optimizing over proportion of risky assets if only one kind of risky assets is considered. However, when multi-risky assets are considered at the same time and claim risk and the risk of the change of market price are integreated into consideration, optimizing over total assets (total wealth) is different from optimizing over the proportions of all kinds of risky assets invested.

  3. In Eq. (22) and all other relevant equations, \( f_{t} \) represents \( \tfrac{\partial f(t)}{\partial t} \) for convenience and \( \phi \)’s with subscripts such as \( x \),\( t \) and \( \bar{p} \) are partial differentials with regards to the subscripts. Please note that all other variables with subscript t mean that they are functions of time t.

  4. Superscript “*” indicates that the supercribed parameters stand for optimal values.

  5. Please note that subscript t is omitted for \( \Xi \),\( p \),\( q \),\( k \),\( a \) in all expressions for the first order conditions. \( \mu_{r} (t) \) is simplied as \( \mu_{r} \) and \( \sigma_{r} (t) \) as \( \sigma_{r} \). .

  6. \( \delta \) method introduced in Gourieroux and Jasiak (2001, Sect. 12.1.2) is used to estimate the error when historical data is applied to fit Multi-Vasicek model. Please note Gourieroux and Jasiak (2001, Sect. 12.1.2) only gives the formulas for estimating the asymptotic variances of parameters of \( a \) and \( b \). The formula for the asymptotic variance \( V(\hat{\sigma }_{T} ) \) in Vasicek model is as following: \( V(\hat{\sigma }_{T} ) = \left( {\tfrac{\partial }{\partial \rho }\sqrt {\hat{\sigma }_{T} } } \right)^{2} = \left( {\tfrac{{1/(\rho (1 - \rho^{2} ) + 2\rho \ln (\rho )}}{{(1 - \rho^{2} )\sqrt { - \tfrac{2\ln (\rho )}{{1 - \rho {}^{2}}}} }}} \right)^{2} V(\hat{\eta }_{T} ) \), where \( \rho \) and \( \eta_{T} \) satisfy equations of (12.11) in Gourieroux and Jasiak (2001, Sect. 12.1.2) and \( V(\hat{\eta }_{T} ) = \tfrac{{2\hat{\eta }_{T}^{4} }}{T} \), \( T \) is sample size.

References

  • Browne, S. 1995. Optimal investment policies for a firm with a random risk process: Exponential utility and minimizing the probability of ruin. Mathematics of Operations Research. 20 (4): 937–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, S. 2000. Stochastic differential portfolio games. Journal of Applied Probability 37 (1): 126–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen P. 2017. Mathematical representation in economics and finance: Philosophical preference, mathematical simplicity, and empirical relevance. In: Methods and finance. Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics, eds. Ippoliti E., Chen P, vol 34. Springer, Cham.

  • Cao, Y., and N. Wan. 2009. Optimal proportional reinsurance and investment base on Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equation. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 45: 157–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emms, P. 2007a. Dynamic pricing of general insurance in a competitive market. ASTIN Bulletin 37 (1): 1–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emms, P. 2007b. Pricing general insurance with constraints. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 40: 335–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emms, P., S. Haberman, and I. Savoulli. 2007. Optimal strategies for pricing general insurance. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 40: 15–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Emms, P., and S. Haberman. 2005. Pricing general insurance using optimal control theory. ASTIN Bulletin 35 (2): 427–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, W.H., and R.W. Rishel. 1975. Deterministic and stochastic optimal control. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gourieroux, C., and J. Jasiak. 2001. Financial econometrics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hipp, C., and M. Plum. 2000. Optimal investment for insurers. Insurance Mathematics and Economics 27 (2): 215–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Josa-Fombellida, R., and J.P. Rincón-Zapatero. 2010. Optiml asset allocation for aggregated defined benefit pension funds with stochastic interest rates. European Journal of Operational Research 201: 211–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn, O., and C. Koziol. 2006. Bond portfolio optimization: A risk-return approach. Journal of Fixed Income 15: 48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn, R. 2005. Worst-case scenario investment for insurers. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 31: 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korn, R., and F.T. Seifried. 2009. A worst-case approach to continuous-time portfolio optimization. Radon Series on Computational and Applied Mathematics 8: 327–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lilien, G.L., and P. Kotler. 1983. Marketing decision making. Manhattan: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, C., and H. Yang. 2004. Optimal investment for an insurer to minimize its probability of ruin. North American Actuarial Journal 8 (2): 11–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R.C. 1971. Optimal consumption and portfolio rules in a continuos time model. Journal of Economic Theory 3: 373–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mao, H., J.M. Carson, K.M. Ostazewski, Y. Luo, and Y. Wang. 2016a. The insurer’s optimal investment and reinsurance strategy based on stochastic differential game. Journal of Insurance Issues 39: 187–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mao, H., K.M. Ostazewski, Y. Wang and Z. Wen. 2016. Determination of optimal contribution rate and optimal investment portfolio of defined benefit pension plan under the expected shortfall constraint. In Public risk management: Perspective of theory and practice. Tome 1, eds. Piotr Tworek and Józef Myrczek.

  • Mao, H. and Z. Wen. 2019. Optimal contribution and investment in a defined benefit pension plan when the return rate of risky assets is time series correlated and cyclical change, working paper.

  • Mao, H., J.M. Carson, M.Ostazeswski Krzystof, and Z. Wen. 2013. Optimal decision on dynamic price, investment portfolio of an insurer. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 52: 239–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mataramvura, S., and B. Âksendal. 2008. Risk minimizing portfolios and HJBI equations for stochastic differential games. Stochastics: An International Journal of Probability and Stochastic Processes 80 (4): 317–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mamon, R.S. 2004. Three ways to solve for bond prices in the Vasicek model. Journal of Applied Mathematics and Decision Science 8: 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musiela, M., and T. Zariphopoulou. 2009. Portfolio choice under dynamic investment performance criteria. Quantitave Finance 9: 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pae, Y., and N. Sabbaghi. 2015. Equally weighted portfolios vs Value weighted portfolios: Reasons for differing betas. Journal of Financial Stability 18: 203–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pham, H. 2009. Continuous-time stochastic control and optimization with financial applications. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Promislow, D.S., and V.R. Young. 2005. Minimizing the probability of ruin when claims follow Brownian motion with drift. North American Actuarial Journal 9 (3): 109–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, G.C. 1986. Underwriting strategy in a competitive insurance environment. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 26: 59–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., and T.K. Siu. 2009. Optimal investment and reinsurance of an insurer with model uncertainty. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 45: 81–88.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hong Mao.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

We calculate \( \sigma_{ij} (t) \), the time-varying covariance of the returns of \( i \)th and \( j \)th risky

Assets, in a manner similar to Korn and Koziol (2006), and Mamon (2004):

$$ \begin{aligned} &{\text{Vasicek model: }}dr = a\left( {b - r} \right)dr + \sigma dW_{u} , \hfill \\& Let \, X_{i} \left( u \right) = r_{iu} - b, \hfill \\& dX_{i} \left( t \right) = - a_{i} X_{i} \left( t \right) + \, \sigma_{i} dW_{t} , \hfill \\& X_{i} \left( u \right) = e^{{ - a_{i} u}} \left( {X_{i} \left( 0 \right) + \int_{0}^{u} {\sigma_{i} e^{{a_{i} s}} dw_{s} } } \right), \hfill \\& then,r_{iu} = e^{{ - a_{i} u}} \left( {r_{iu} - b + \int_{0}^{u} {\sigma_{i} e^{{a_{i} s}} dw_{s} } } \right) + b. \hfill \\& \end{aligned} $$
$$ E(r_{iu} ) = E\left( {e^{{ - a_{i} u}} \left( {r_{iu} - b + \int_{0}^{u} {\sigma_{i} e^{{a_{i} s}} dw_{s} } } \right) + b} \right) = e^{{ - a_{i} u}} (r_{iu} - b) + b. $$

where subscript \( u \) stands for the time and the subscript \( i \) for the \( i \)th risky asset.

In the following, we calculate the time-varying covariance, \( \sigma_{ij} (t) \) for \( i \)th and \( j \)th risky assets. By Itô isometry, we have:

$$ \begin{aligned} \sigma_{ij} (t) & = Cov\left( {r_{it} (t),r_{jt} (t)} \right) = E(r_{it} (t)r_{jt} (t)) - E\left( {r_{it} (t)} \right)E\left( {r_{jt} (t)} \right) \\ & = E\left( \left( {b_{i} + (r_{i0} - b_{i} )e^{{ - a_{i} t}} + \sigma_{i} e^{{ - a_{i} t}} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{i} s}} } dw_{s} } \right)\right. \\ &\quad \left. \times\, \left( {b_{j} + (r_{j0} - b_{j} )e^{{ - a_{j} t}} + \sigma_{j} e^{{ - a_{j} t}} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{j} s}} } dw_{s} } \right) \right) \\ & \quad - \left( {b_{i} + (r_{i0} - b_{i} )e^{{ - a_{i} t}} } \right)\left( {b_{j} + (r_{j0} - b_{j} )e^{{ - a_{j} t}} } \right) \\ & = (b_{i} + (r_{i0} - b_{i} )e^{{ - a_{i} t}} )(b_{j} + (r_{j0} - b_{j} )e^{{ - a_{j} t}} ) \\ &\quad + E\left( {(b_{i} + (r_{i0} - b_{i} )e^{{ - a_{i} t}} )\sigma_{j} e^{{ - a_{j} t}} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{j} s}} } dw_{s} } \right) \\ & \quad + E\left( {(b_{j} + (r_{j0} - b_{j} )e^{{ - a_{j} t}} )\sigma_{i} e^{{ - a_{i} t}} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{i} s}} } dw_{s} } \right) \\ &\quad + \sigma_{i} \sigma_{j} e^{{ - a_{i} t - a_{j} t}} E\left( {\int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{i} s}} } dw_{s} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{j} s}} dw_{s} } } \right) \\ & \quad - \left( {b_{i} + (r_{i0} - b_{i} )e^{{ - a_{i} t}} } \right)\left( {b_{j} + (r_{j0} - b_{j} )e^{{ - a_{j} t}} } \right) \\ & = \sigma_{i} \sigma_{j} e^{{ - a_{i} t - a_{j} t}} E\left( {\int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{i} s}} } dw_{s} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{a_{j} s}} dw_{s} } } \right) \\ & = \sigma_{i} \sigma_{j} e^{{ - a_{i} t - a_{j} t}} \int\limits_{0}^{t} {e^{{(a_{i} + a_{j} )s}} } ds \\ & = \frac{{\sigma_{i} \sigma_{j} }}{{a_{i} + a_{j} }}\left( {1 - e^{{ - (a_{i} + a_{j} )t}} } \right). \\ \end{aligned} $$

Please note that \( \sigma_{i}^{2} (t) = \sigma_{ij} (t) \); when \( i = j \), \( \sigma_{i}^{2} (t) = \frac{{\sigma_{i}^{2} }}{{2a_{i} }}\left( {1 - e^{{ - 2a_{i} t}} } \right). \)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mao, H., Wen, Z. Optimal Decision on Dynamic Insurance Price and Investment Portfolio of an Insurer with Multi-dimensional Time-Varying Correlation. J. Quant. Econ. 18, 29–51 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-019-00170-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-019-00170-2

Keywords

JEL Classification

Navigation