We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (17,444)
  • Industry Conferences (3)
  • Industry Job Openings (3)
  • Moore on the Market (189)
  • Negative Media (139)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (648)
  • Wink's Articles (257)
  • Wink's Inside Story (230)
  • Wink's Press Releases (97)
  • Blog Archives

  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • The Curious Case Of Bad Math & Why It Does Not Matter

    July 25, 2013 by Chris Burand

    I have recently been reminded of some of the nonsensical insurance idiosyncrasies that veterans of the industry take for granted. Several of these involve math—and bad math in particular

    1. Combined Ratios

    Combined Ratio = Loss Ratio + Expense Ratio. A ratio is a fraction. Sometime around the fourth grade most kids learn that to add fractions the denominators must be common.

    Loss ratio = losses/earned premium.

    Expense ratio = expenses/written premium.

    The denominators are not the same, so the sum of the ratios is effectively a random, meaningless number.

    For example, if losses are $7 million and earned premiums are $10 million, the loss ratio is 70.

    If expenses are $3 million and written premiums are $11 million, the expense ratio is 27.3.

    Ways of Numbers

    The combined ratio is like saying Sally has 60 percent of the apples and John has 27.3 percent of the apples and oranges. Together they have 97.3 percent of what? Apples? Oranges?

    We don’t know because we don’t know what percentage, if any, of the oranges Sally has, and we don’t know John’s ratio of apples to oranges.

    A 97.3 ratio is pretty good. But if the denominators were equalized, quite possibly in this example the combined ratio would be 100-plus on an earned basis if this particular company is growing quickly.

    Do three percentage points make a material difference?

    Three percentage points may be quite material. For an insurance company with $100 million of premium, three extra percentage points are worth $3 million of profit.

    If this were important, wouldn’t someone have addressed this basic math error by now?

    Of course. Therefore, it’s not important. No insurance company would ever take advantage of the opportunity this provides to tout better profitability than its slower-growing peers. So just keep this in mind for your next insurance trivia game.

    2. Functions In Calculus—And Insurance

    While taking a calculus class many years ago, the concept of a function was explained to me like this: The idea is mechanical. The function of a gas pump is to pump gas. The function of a budget is to limit spending. The function of a contingency contract is, theoretically at least, to generate more profits.

    Many companies must believe limiting spending is more important than making money. That must be why so many companies spend so much time budgeting every year. They would not waste time on anything that was not so critical. And this must also be why companies limit, through stability clauses in their contingency contracts, how much they will pay their agencies.

    (Editor’s Note: The stability clause gives companies permission to set a maximum amount they will pay in contingencies in any given year. The company caps its contingency expense at some percentage of net premiums.)

    I was trying to explain this to a rookie, and he just did not get it. He kept asking: “If the agencies collectively do a great upfront underwriting job, thereby creating enormous profits for the companies, why would the companies cap what they pay agents just so they do not exceed their contingency budget? Don’t they know the function of a contingency contract is to drive profits? Don’t they know that if agents create an extra 1 percent of profit, causing the company to exceed its contingency budget even by several tenths of a percent, that the company has made a great investment?”

    Obviously he has taken calculus and understands functions. He just could not understand that making budget was a gazillion times more important to companies than making more money, keeping the respect of their best agencies and building for the future.

    3. Some Things Just Don’t Add Up

    Another mathematical issue I tried to explain was how two plus two actually equals 4.5 sometimes in this industry. The example is clusters.

    Many insurance companies figured out—or agencies helped them understand—that if five agencies combine their volume, those agencies deserve to be paid more. (I have chosen five for the purposes of this example only, as it could be two agencies or one hundred agencies.)

    The way it works is this: Assume for simplicity that each agency has $500,000 premium with a company. Some companies do not think $500,000 is adequate, but they look favorably upon $2.5 million.

    So now that the company’s reports show an agency with $2.5 million rather than five agencies with $500,000, the premium is automatically more valuable. So if the company could only pay a total of 2 percent, on average, in bonuses before, they can now spend 3 percent because the report shows a bigger book of business. This math is like magic.

    Moreover, sometimes loss ratios decrease. For example, as individual agencies, if one of those agencies has a large loss on a $500,000 book, that agency would not usually earn any contingency, but the other four still would. The carrier’s combined ratio on the $2.5 million total book (math problem not withstanding) might be 100 (example only).

    But when the five combine to form an agency cluster, the cluster loss ratio is lower than the loss ratio for that one individual agency with the large loss. That means the large loss might not knock any of the five combined agencies out of a contingency. The carrier combined ratio could increase slightly to, say, 100.5 because the cluster loss is the same as the sum of the losses for the individual agencies, but the expense ratio increases while the loss ratio declines.

    The agencies make more, and the companies are happy paying more for worse results because they know $2.5 million generated by five agencies on one report is worth much more than the same premiums and losses but shown as five different agencies.

    Milo Minderbender (“Catch-22” financial genius) would be proud.

    The insurance industry is fascinating.

    It is as though the medieval alchemists who tried to turn lead into gold were several centuries ahead of their time and were searching the wrong industry. As these three simple examples prove, the folks running this industry have figured out why basic math does not apply and how by using the industry’s unique formulas and innovative concepts, they can turn losses into pluses no one thought possible.

    Originally Posted at Carrier Management on July 16, 2013 by Chris Burand.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency