Variable annuity deferral bonuses are working

Check out the article the Retirement Income Journal published regarding our Spring 2018 variable annuity (VA) policyholder behavior study.  Go to the article.

 

All product and company names are trademarks™ or registered® trademarks of their respective holders.


Spring 2018 Variable Annuity Study Results

Insurer Incentives Delay Lifetime Benefit Commencement

SIMSBURY, CT, May 29, 2018 – Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its spring 2018 studies of variable annuity (VA) policyholder behavior. The studies, which examine the factors driving surrender behavior, partial withdrawals, and annuitization, were based on experience from 13.9 million policyholders spanning the period January, 2008 through December, 2017. Twenty-five variable annuity writers participated in the study, comprising $948 billion in account value as of December, 2017.

“A variable annuity writer’s cost to provide guarantees depends on policyholder behavior, including surrender and income utilization,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “Each company should ask itself the basic question – is my own data enough?”

Study highlights include:

  • As the market for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit (GLWB) riders matures, it is possible to see the effects of long-dated insurer incentives to delay benefit commencement. Commencement rates are low overall, 12% in the first policy year and falling to 6-7% annually thereafter. However, usage jumps over 5 points in year 11, with the expiration of ten-year bonuses for deferring withdrawals common on many riders. In this study, we see for the first time that commencement frequency thereafter falls to an ultimate rate of about 9%. The deferral bonuses appear to have the intended effect of delaying benefit utilization. Among contracts that take a withdrawal, nearly 90% continue withdrawals in subsequent years.

  • Overall living benefit annual withdrawal frequency rates have continued to increase, and utilization has grown more efficient. Withdrawal frequency for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit riders is now 25%, up nearly two points over the rate reported in Ruark Consulting’s spring 2017 study and three points over the spring 2016 value. GLWB withdrawal frequencies have increased consistently at normal retirement age and above. Most of the increase is attributable to more efficient utilization of the rider benefit, with over half of withdrawals now at or near the maximum benefit amount.

  • The effects of moneyness (account value relative to the guarantee base) on partial withdrawal behavior differ depending on circumstances. When contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are at- or in the money, policyholders increase the frequency of standard benefit withdrawals. This is consistent with greater benefit exercise when the benefit is more valuable. The effect is more pronounced after the expiration of deferral incentives. In contrast, when contracts move out of the money, withdrawals in excess of the maximum amount are more common. This is suggestive of policyholders taking investment gains out of the contract.

  • Overall variable annuity surrender rates in 2017 have returned upward to post-crisis levels, following a secular dip in 2016. We see three regimes in the study window: Surrenders at the shock duration (the year following the end of the surrender charge period) were nearly 30% at the onset of the 2008 economic crisis; shock rates below 10% were observed during 2016; and otherwise a post-crisis regime has prevailed, with shock rates in a range of 12-16% from 2009 through mid-2015 and 13% in 2017. The 2016 dip, first observed in Ruark’s fall 2017 study, is only partially attributable to benefits moving more in-the-money during the year; it is likely that uncertainty surrounding the DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule and political factors encouraged a “wait-and-see” attitude among many policyholders and advisors.

  • The presence of a living benefit rider has a notable effect on surrender rates; contracts with a lifetime benefit rider have much higher persistency than those with other types of guarantees. Also, a contract’s prior partial withdrawal history influences its persistency. Contracts with a lifetime benefit rider that have taken withdrawals in excess of the rider’s annual maximum have surrender rates three points higher overall than other contracts with those riders.  In contrast, those who have taken withdrawals no more than the rider’s maximum have the lowest surrender rates (three points lower at the shock, for example, compared to contracts who have taken no withdrawals).
  • When calculating relative value (moneyness) for lifetime withdrawal guarantees, use of a nominal measure can be deceiving. A nominal measure fails to reflect important aspects of living benefit design, and can be inflated over time as the benefit base remains unchanged even as the account value is reduced through regular withdrawals. It may be preferable in many cases to use an actuarial measure of moneyness that incorporates interest and mortality rates. Actuarial moneyness exhibits a similar dynamic effect on lapse though with notable differences in shape. As an actuarial basis pushes a contract toward out-of-the-money by discounting the guarantee, very little exposure exists for heavily ITM contracts: nominally, 77% of GLWB exposure is in-the-money, while only 10% is in-of-the-money when measured on an actuarial scale.
  • Annuitization rates on policies with guaranteed minimum income benefit (GMIB) riders continue to decline. The overall exercise rate for the riders with a 10-year waiting period is 2.1% by account value. Rates have been falling steadily since 2010, and quarterly observed rates have stayed at or below 2% since 2014. “Hybrid” rider forms that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower exercise rates than tradition forms, which reduce the benefit in a pro-rata fashion – less than 1% for hybrid, vs. 5% for pro-rata; the increasing share of exposure in the study from the hybrid type is a partial explanation for the decrease in annuitization rates over time.

Detailed study results, including company-level analytics and customized behavioral assumption models calibrated to the study data, are available for purchase by participating companies.

For further information on results, to purchase the study, or if you have any other inquiries, click here or email Timothy Paris (timothyparis@ruark.co).


RUARK CONSULTING RELEASES SPRING 2018 VARIABLE ANNUITY STUDY RESULTS - PRESS RELEASE

# FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE #

RUARK CONSULTING RELEASES SPRING 2018 VARIABLE ANNUITY STUDY RESULTS

Insurer Incentives Delay Lifetime Benefit Commencement

SIMSBURY, CT, May 29, 2018 – Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its spring 2018 studies of variable annuity (VA) policyholder behavior. The studies, which examine the factors driving surrender behavior, partial withdrawals, and annuitization, were based on experience from 13.9 million policyholders spanning the period January, 2008 through December, 2017. Twenty-five variable annuity writers participated in the study, comprising $948 billion in account value as of December, 2017.

“A variable annuity writer’s cost to provide guarantees depends on policyholder behavior, including surrender and income utilization,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “Each company should ask itself the basic question – is my own data enough?”

Study highlights include:

  • As the market for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit (GLWB) riders matures, it is possible to see the effects of long-dated insurer incentives to delay benefit commencement. Commencement rates are low overall, 12% in the first policy year and falling to 6-7% annually thereafter. However, usage jumps over 5 points in year 11, with the expiration of ten-year bonuses for deferring withdrawals common on many riders. In this study, we see for the first time that commencement frequency thereafter falls to an ultimate rate of about 9%. The deferral bonuses appear to have the intended effect of delaying benefit utilization. Among contracts that take a withdrawal, nearly 90% continue withdrawals in subsequent years.
  • Overall living benefit annual withdrawal frequency rates have continued to increase, and utilization has grown more efficient. Withdrawal frequency for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit riders is now 25%, up nearly two points over the rate reported in Ruark Consulting’s spring 2017 study and three points over the spring 2016 value. GLWB withdrawal frequencies have increased consistently at normal retirement age and above. Most of the increase is attributable to more efficient utilization of the rider benefit, with over half of withdrawals now at or near the maximum benefit amount.
  • The effects of moneyness (account value relative to the guarantee base) on partial withdrawal behavior differ depending on circumstances. When contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are at- or in the money, policyholders increase the frequency of standard benefit withdrawals. This is consistent with greater benefit exercise when the benefit is more valuable. The effect is more pronounced after the expiration of deferral incentives. In contrast, when contracts move out of the money, withdrawals in excess of the maximum amount are more common. This is suggestive of policyholders taking investment gains out of the contract.
  • Overall variable annuity surrender rates in 2017 have returned upward to post-crisis levels, following a secular dip in 2016. We see three regimes in the study window: Surrenders at the shock duration (the year following the end of the surrender charge period) were nearly 30% at the onset of the 2008 economic crisis; shock rates below 10% were observed during 2016; and otherwise a post-crisis regime has prevailed, with shock rates in a range of 12-16% from 2009 through mid-2015 and 13% in 2017. The 2016 dip, first observed in Ruark’s fall 2017 study, is only partially attributable to benefits moving more in-the-money during the year; it is likely that uncertainty surrounding the DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule and political factors encouraged a “wait-and-see” attitude among many policyholders and advisors.
  • The presence of a living benefit rider has a notable effect on surrender rates; contracts with a lifetime benefit rider have much higher persistency than those with other types of guarantees. Also, a contract’s prior partial withdrawal history influences its persistency. Contracts with a lifetime benefit rider that have taken withdrawals in excess of the rider’s annual maximum have surrender rates three points higher overall than other contracts with those riders.  In contrast, those who have taken withdrawals no more than the rider’s maximum have the lowest surrender rates (three points lower at the shock, for example, compared to contracts who have taken no withdrawals).
  • When calculating relative value (moneyness) for lifetime withdrawal guarantees, use of a nominal measure can be deceiving. A nominal measure fails to reflect important aspects of living benefit design, and can be inflated over time as the benefit base remains unchanged even as the account value is reduced through regular withdrawals. It may be preferable in many cases to use an actuarial measure of moneyness that incorporates interest and mortality rates. Actuarial moneyness exhibits a similar dynamic effect on lapse though with notable differences in shape. As an actuarial basis pushes a contract toward out-of-the-money by discounting the guarantee, very little exposure exists for heavily ITM contracts: nominally, 77% of GLWB exposure is in-the-money, while only 10% is in-of-the-money when measured on an actuarial scale.
  • Annuitization rates on policies with guaranteed minimum income benefit (GMIB) riders continue to decline. The overall exercise rate for the riders with a 10-year waiting period is 2.1% by account value. Rates have been falling steadily since 2010, and quarterly observed rates have stayed at or below 2% since 2014. “Hybrid” rider forms that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower exercise rates than tradition forms, which reduce the benefit in a pro-rata fashion – less than 1% for hybrid, vs. 5% for pro-rata; the increasing share of exposure in the study from the hybrid type is a partial explanation for the decrease in annuitization rates over time.

Detailed study results, including company-level analytics and customized behavioral assumption models calibrated to the study data, are available for purchase by participating companies.

Ruark Consulting, LLC (www.ruark.co), based in Simsbury, CT, is an actuarial consulting firm specializing in principles-based insurance data analytics and risk management. Since 2007, Ruark’s industry- and company-level experience studies of the variable annuity and fixed indexed annuity markets have served as the industry benchmarks. Its behavioral analytics engagements range from discrete consulting projects to full-service outsourcing relationships. As a reinsurance broker, Ruark has placed and continues to administer dozens of bespoke treaties totaling over $1.5 billion of reinsurance premium and $30 billion of account value, and also offers reinsurance audit and administration services.

Ruark’s consultants are frequent speakers at industry events on the topics of longevity, policyholder behavior, product guarantees, and reinsurance. Their work and commentary have appeared in numerous industry publications. Ruark Consulting enjoys an ongoing collaboration with the Goldenson Center for Actuarial Research at the University of Connecticut, and is a member of the Bermuda International Long Term Insurers and Reinsurers Association.

# # #

FOR FURTHER INQUIRIES, CONTACT:

 

Timothy Paris, FSA, MAAA
CEO, Ruark Consulting, LLC
timothyparis@ruark.co
860.866.7786
www.ruark.co


Our recent FIA Study is in the news

Retirement Income Journal - Behavior risk is rising for FIA living benefit issuers: Ruark

The amount of client assets protected by a GLIB outside the surrender charge period—a measure of the rising behavioral risk exposure for FIA issuers—increased 82% from 2017 to 2018, according to Ruark.  Read More or view a pdf of the the article here.

InsuranceNewsNet - Annuity Owners More Likely To Hold On To Benefit Riders

Owners of fixed indexed annuities (FIAs) with guaranteed living income benefit (GLIB) riders are much less likely to surrender their contracts than they were 10 years ago, according to new research based on 3.3 million policyholders. Read More

 


Living benefit riders boost persistency

RUARK CONSULTING RELEASES FIXED INDEXED ANNUITY STUDY RESULTS

Living benefit riders boost persistency


SIMSBURY, CT, March 5, 2018 – Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its 2018 studies of fixed indexed annuity (FIA) policyholder behavior. The studies, which examine the factors driving surrender behavior and income utilization, were based on experience from 3.3 million policyholders spanning the period January, 2007 through September, 2017. A record 16 fixed indexed annuity writers participated, comprising $215 billion in account value as of September, 2017.

“Getting actuarial assumptions right can mean the difference between profitability and anti-selection, or between overhedging and underhedging,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “Ruark’s studies use industry data to provide greater insight, and more predictable and stable results, than companies can achieve when they limit themselves to their own experience.”

Ruark’s FIA studies cover products both with and without a guaranteed living income benefit (GLIB). GLIB exposure outside the surrender charge period increased 82% in this edition over 2017.

Study highlights include:

  • Overall industry surrender rates have exhibited a secular downward trend since 2007. Surrenders at the shock duration (the year following the end of the contractually defined surrender charge period) have fallen from over 50% in 2007 to 15-25% in recent quarters, and surrender rates during the surrender charge period have fallen from high single digits to below 3%. We note an industrywide dip in surrenders in 2016 and rebound in 2017; it is likely that uncertainty surrounding the DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule and political factors encouraged a “wait-and-see” attitude among many policyholders and advisors.
  • The presence of a living benefit rider has a notable effect on surrender rates; contracts with a guaranteed living income benefit (GLIB) have much better persistency than those without. Surrender rates during the surrender charge period for contracts with GLIBs are less than half those of contracts without the guarantee. Among contracts that have begun taking income withdrawals, persistency is better still; shock duration rates are approximately 15%, as compared to 26% for contracts without GLIB.
  • Credited rates have a discernable effect on surrenders. As in past studies, we note that contracts earning less than 2% exhibit sharply higher surrenders than those earning more. Additional experience in this study reveals differentiation among contracts with higher returns, as well.
  • The in-the-money effect, by which owners have higher persistency when the account value is below the guarantee base, is subtle in the case of FIAs. We find that using an actuarial moneyness basis, which discounts guaranteed income for interest and mortality rates, has much greater predictive power than a nominal measure.
  • GLIB benefit commencement rates are low: 7% overall in the first contract duration and then falling to the 2% range in years 3-10. Notably, although experience is limited, exercise rates spike in year 11, suggesting that benefit bonuses may be effective at delaying exercise. When a living benefit contract does begin taking withdrawals, it is likely to continue in subsequent years; average continuation rates are near 100%. However, utilization of the benefit is far from fully efficient. A significant proportion withdraw income in excess of the contractual guarantee, which degrades value of the guarantee in future years.
  • Commencement rates vary considerably by age and by contract size. They are also influenced by the in-the-money effect. Exercise rates increase sharply when contracts move deep in the money, as policyholders recognize the economic value of the income guarantee.
  • FIA contracts typically offer the opportunity to take 10% of account value annually in penalty-free withdrawals, often following a 1-year waiting period. This is the case for contracts with and without a guaranteed living income benefit (GLIB) rider. Base contract withdrawals have been largely stable over the past decade. Behavior differs subtlely across four groups: Those taking the full penalty-free amount; those taking less; those taking excess; and those for which no penalty applies.
  • Free partial withdrawal activity on the base contract is influenced by age and required minimum distributions, as well as contract size. Notably, withdrawal sizes spike in the year following the end of the surrender charge period, when all partial withdrawals become penalty-free. Average withdrawal sizes jump 8 percentage points following the end of the surrender charge period.

Detailed study results, including company-level analytics, are available for purchase by participating companies. For further information, please contact Timothy Paris, CEO.
Contact Tim


We're hiring!

We're excited to announce an opening for a new Data Engineer position at Ruark. The Data Engineer will be a hands-on contributor to our data analytics team, responsible for managing our data architecture and for ongoing data development. The ideal candidate will be a creative problem solver experienced in data management. For more information or to apply, please click here.


More VA Owners Are Tapping Their GLWBs For Retirement Income

Our recent VA study results have been in the news lately. Check out the article in InsuranceNewsNet.com & AdvisorNews.com

https://insurancenewsnet.com/innarticle/va-owners-tapping-glwbs-retirement-income#.WfiRrGhSyUk


Annuity Study Results Released

RUARK CONSULTING RELEASES ANNUITY STUDY RESULTS
Surrender rates increase in 2017, following 2016 dip

SIMSBURY, CT , October 17, 2017 – Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its fall 2017 studies of variable annuity policyholder behavior. The studies, which examine the factors driving surrender behavior, partial withdrawals, and annuitization, were based on experience from 13.8 million policyholders spanning the period January, 2008 through June, 2017. A record 25 variable annuity writers participated in the study, comprising $905 billion in account value as of June, 2017.
“Our client annuity writers are finding that it is more important than ever to have an evidence-based methodology for assumption-setting,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “The industry is also better appreciating the importance of policyholder behavior risk in variable annuity risk management. And as always, getting pricing assumptions right can mean the difference between profitability and unprofitable anti-selection. RCL’s industry studies provide greater insight, and more predictable and stable results, than companies can achieve by limiting themselves to their own experience when setting assumptions.”

Study highlights include:

  • Overall industry surrender rates in the first half of 2017 have returned upward to post-crisis levels, following a secular dip in 2016. We see three regimes in the study window: Surrenders at the shock duration (the year following the end of the contractually defined surrender charge period, or CDSC) were nearly 30% at the onset of the 2008 economic crisis; shock rates below 10% were observed during 2016; and otherwise a post-crisis regime has prevailed, with shock rates in a range of 12-16% from 2009 through mid-2015 and 13% so far in 2017. The 2016 dip is only partially attributable to benefits moving more in-the-money during the year; it is likely that uncertainty surrounding the DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule and political factors encouraged a “wait-and-see” attitude among many policyholders and advisors.

  • The presence of a living benefit rider has a notable effect on surrender rates; contracts with a lifetime benefit rider have much higher persistency than those with other types of guarantees. Also, a contract’s prior partial withdrawal history influences its persistency. Contracts with a lifetime benefit rider that have taken withdrawals in excess of the rider’s annual maximum have surrender rates four points higher overall than other contracts with those riders.  In contrast, those who have taken withdrawals no more than the rider’s maximum have the lowest surrender rates (three points lower at the shock, for example, compared to contracts who have taken no withdrawals).

  • Annuitization rates on policies with guaranteed minimum income benefit (GMIB) riders are low and getting lower. The overall exercise rate for the riders with a 10-year waiting period is 2.2% by account value. Rates have been declining steadily since 2010, and quarterly observed rates have stayed at or below 2% since 2014. “Hybrid” rider forms that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower exercise rates than tradition forms, which reduce the benefit in a pro-rata fashion – less than 1% for hybrid, vs. 6% for pro-rata; the increasing share of exposure in the study from the hybrid type is a partial explanation for the decrease in annuitization rates over time.

  • Overall living benefit annual withdrawal frequency rates have continued to increase, primarily as a result of increasing utilization efficiency. Withdrawal frequency for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit riders is now over 24%, an increase of two percentage points over the past 18 months. GLWB withdrawal frequencies have increased within each cohort of age and tax status, particularly at normal retirement age and above, suggesting the increase is secular. Most of the increase is attributable to more efficient utilization of the rider benefit, with over half of withdrawals now at or near the maximum benefit amount.

  • Lifetime withdrawal benefit commencement is low, 12% overall in the first duration and then falling to the 6-7% range in subsequent years. As first noted in Ruark Consulting’s spring 2017 study, exercise rates spike after year 10, indicating that benefit bonuses are effective at delaying exercise. Among contracts that take a withdrawal, nearly 90% continue withdrawals in subsequent years.
  • The effects of moneyness (account value relative to the guarantee base) on partial withdrawal behavior differ depending on circumstances. When contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are at- or in the money, policyholders increase the frequency of standard benefit withdrawals. This is consistent with greater benefit exercise when the benefit is more valuable. In contrast, when contracts move out of the money, withdrawals in excess of the maximum amount are more common. This is suggestive of policyholders taking investment gains out of the contract.

Detailed study results, including company-level analytics, are available for purchase by participating companies.

For further information on results, to purchase the study, or if you have any other inquiries, click here or email Timothy Paris.


Ruark Consulting Releases Annuity Study Results - PRESS RELEASE

# FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE #

RUARK CONSULTING RELEASES ANNUITY STUDY RESULTS

Surrender rates increase in 2017, following 2016 dip

SIMSBURY, CT , October 17, 2017 – Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its fall 2017 studies of variable annuity policyholder behavior. The studies, which examine the factors driving surrender behavior, partial withdrawals, and annuitization, were based on experience from 13.8 million policyholders spanning the period January, 2008 through June, 2017. A record 25 variable annuity writers participated in the study, comprising $905 billion in account value as of June, 2017.

“Our client annuity writers are finding that it is more important than ever to have an evidence-based methodology for assumption-setting,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “The industry is also better appreciating the importance of policyholder behavior risk in variable annuity risk management. And as always, getting pricing assumptions right can mean the difference between profitability and unprofitable anti-selection. RCL’s industry studies provide greater insight, and more predictable and stable results, than companies can achieve by limiting themselves to their own experience when setting assumptions.”

Study highlights include:

  • Overall industry surrender rates in the first half of 2017 have returned upward to post-crisis levels, following a secular dip in 2016. We see three regimes in the study window: Surrenders at the shock duration (the year following the end of the contractually defined surrender charge period, or CDSC) were nearly 30% at the onset of the 2008 economic crisis; shock rates below 10% were observed during 2016; and otherwise a post-crisis regime has prevailed, with shock rates in a range of 12-16% from 2009 through mid-2015 and 13% so far in 2017. The 2016 dip is only partially attributable to benefits moving more in-the-money during the year; it is likely that uncertainty surrounding the DOL’s proposed Fiduciary Rule and political factors encouraged a “wait-and-see” attitude among many policyholders and advisors.
  • The presence of a living benefit rider has a notable effect on surrender rates; contracts with a lifetime benefit rider have much higher persistency than those with other types of guarantees. Also, a contract’s prior partial withdrawal history influences its persistency. Contracts with a lifetime benefit rider that have taken withdrawals in excess of the rider’s annual maximum have surrender rates four points higher overall than other contracts with those riders.  In contrast, those who have taken withdrawals no more than the rider’s maximum have the lowest surrender rates (three points lower at the shock, for example, compared to contracts who have taken no withdrawals).
  • Annuitization rates on policies with guaranteed minimum income benefit (GMIB) riders are low and getting lower. The overall exercise rate for the riders with a 10-year waiting period is 2.2% by account value. Rates have been declining steadily since 2010, and quarterly observed rates have stayed at or below 2% since 2014. “Hybrid” rider forms that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower exercise rates than tradition forms, which reduce the benefit in a pro-rata fashion – less than 1% for hybrid, vs. 6% for pro-rata; the increasing share of exposure in the study from the hybrid type is a partial explanation for the decrease in annuitization rates over time.
  • Overall living benefit annual withdrawal frequency rates have continued to increase, primarily as a result of increasing utilization efficiency. Withdrawal frequency for guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefit riders is now over 24%, an increase of two percentage points over the past 18 months. GLWB withdrawal frequencies have increased within each cohort of age and tax status, particularly at normal retirement age and above, suggesting the increase is secular. Most of the increase is attributable to more efficient utilization of the rider benefit, with over half of withdrawals now at or near the maximum benefit amount.
  • Lifetime withdrawal benefit commencement is low, 12% overall in the first duration and then falling to the 6-7% range in subsequent years. As first noted in Ruark Consulting’s spring 2017 study, exercise rates spike after year 10, indicating that benefit bonuses are effective at delaying exercise. Among contracts that take a withdrawal, nearly 90% continue withdrawals in subsequent years.
  • The effects of moneyness (account value relative to the guarantee base) on partial withdrawal behavior differ depending on circumstances. When contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are at- or in the money, policyholders increase the frequency of standard benefit withdrawals. This is consistent with greater benefit exercise when the benefit is more valuable. In contrast, when contracts move out of the money, withdrawals in excess of the maximum amount are more common. This is suggestive of policyholders taking investment gains out of the contract.

Detailed study results, including company-level analytics, are available for purchase by participating companies.

Ruark Consulting, LLC (www.ruark.co), based in Simsbury, CT, is an actuarial consulting firm specializing in principles-based insurance data analytics and risk management. Since 2007, Ruark’s industry- and company-level experience studies of the variable annuity and fixed indexed annuity markets have served as the industry benchmarks. Its behavioral analytics engagements range from discrete consulting projects to full-service outsourcing relationships. As a reinsurance broker, Ruark has placed and continues to administer dozens of bespoke treaties totaling over $1.5 billion of reinsurance premium and $30 billion of account value, and also offers reinsurance audit and administration services.

Ruark’s consultants are frequent speakers at industry events on the topics of longevity, policyholder behavior, product guarantees, and reinsurance. Their work and commentary have appeared in numerous industry publications. Ruark Consulting enjoys an ongoing collaboration with the Goldenson Center for Actuarial Research at the University of Connecticut, and is a member of the Bermuda International Long Term Insurers and Reinsurers Association.

# # #

FOR FURTHER INQUIRIES, CONTACT:

Timothy Paris, FSA, MAAA
CEO, Ruark Consulting, LLC
timothyparis@ruark.co
860.866.7786
www.ruark.co


SOA - Equity-Based Insurance Guarantees Conference

We are very pleased to again sponsor and speak at the upcoming SOA Equity-Based Insurance Guarantees Conference, Nov 6-7.  Hopefully see you there!