Ruark Consulting Releases 2021 Variable Annuity Studies

COVID-related factors dampened 2020 policyholder activity in key sectors

Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its 2021 industry studies of variable annuity (VA) policyholder behavior, which include surrenders, income utilization and partial withdrawals, and annuitizations.

“We saw clear dampening effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on VA policyholder behavior. But while many people like to say ‘everything changed’ in 2020, that’s not exactly true,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “With the benefit of full-year 2020 data, we were able to isolate what did change – and what didn’t. Similar to what we observed during and following the Global Financial Crisis in 2007-8, this has significant financial implications for annuity companies’ modeling of future behavior, including product pricing and risk management.”

Ruark’s 2021 study spanned the period from 2008 through 2020, incorporating data from the full calendar year 2020. It thereby captured effects of COVID-19 and related market movements as they developed throughout the year. COVID-related findings include:

  • Pandemic-related factors dampened VA policyholder behavior in 2020. Extreme market activity in the first half of the year, disruption to policyholders’ usual communication patterns with advisors and agents by COVID-related social distancing, and the suspension of required minimum distributions under the CARES Act all served to depress surrender and income commencement behavior; however, the effects were not uniform, instead manifesting in specific market sectors as described below.
  • In the first half of 2020, declines in account values made guarantees relatively more valuable, leading to greater persistency.
  • As annuity sales volumes fell in 2020, VA surrender rates fell as well. However, the declines in surrender rates were concentrated among ultimate contract durations, where rates fell 1-2 percentage points independent of rider type or benefit value. Evidence suggests producers focused their attention on contracts at the shock duration (immediately following the expiration of surrender charges), leading to less turnover among the longest-dated contracts. The decline in surrenders is suggestive of a new, unique surrender regime, distinct from the regimes we observe before and after the 2008 financial crisis.

  • Tax-qualified contracts over age 70 ½ commenced GLWB utilization at sharply reduced rates in 2020, even as commencement rates for other age-tax cohorts stayed level or increased.

  • GLWB commencement rates were depressed in 2020 among contracts with the highest propensity to exercise the benefit: in-the-money contracts following the end of the deferral bonus period. Both the level and sensitivity of commencement rates were reduced.
  • GMIB annuitization rates accelerated their downward trend in 2020, but only among “hybrid” forms designed for regular withdrawals during the accumulation period.

Study data comprised 93 million years of exposure and 14.9 million policyholders from 21 participating companies, with $768 billion in account value as of the end of the study period. The study’s in-the-money exposures on GLWB contracts were 31% higher than in Ruark’s 2019 study (completed before the pandemic began) and 64% higher for deep in-the-money contracts. Among contracts issued since 2011, deep in-the-money exposure increased to 12% of total exposure, up from 6% in 2019. The study contained over 900,000 exposure years prior to withdrawal commencement for contract durations 11 and beyond, nearly tripling the comparable exposure in Ruark’s 2019 study.

Other study highlights include:

  • GLWB deferral incentives appear to be effective. Income commencement rates are low overall; less than 15% in the first year and falling to less than half of that in years 2-10. However, commencement rates more than double in year 11 with the expiration of common 10-year bonuses for deferring income, before falling to an ultimate rate. After commencement, GLWB continuation rates are over 85%.
  • Income commencement rates increase when GLWBs are more in-the-money, that is, the benefit base exceeds the account value. This effect is quite pronounced after the expiration of common 10-year deferral incentives, with commencement rates ranging from low single digits to nearly 20% depending on moneyness.

  • Annual withdrawal frequency rates for GLWB and GMIB have continued to increase and have become more efficient with approximately 68% of recent experience at the full guaranteed income amount.
  • Free partial withdrawal amounts increase after the end of the surrender charge period, similar to the familiar “shock” in surrender rates. Excess withdrawal amounts on GLWB and GMIB increase as well.
  • Contracts with GLWB and GMIB have much lower surrender rates, and this effect is even more pronounced for those limiting their partial withdrawals to the guaranteed income amount.
  • Policyholders that take systematic withdrawals on GLWB and GMIB exhibit a select-and-ultimate effect, with very low surrenders in the first systematic withdrawal year and increasing thereafter. In the fourth systematic withdrawal year and beyond, surrender rates are comparable to those of contracts that have not taken any withdrawals.
  • When calculating relative value for GLWBs, use of a “nominal” moneyness basis (account value relative to the GLWB benefit base) can be deceiving, since it fails to reflect important aspects of the product’s economics. Therefore, it may be preferable in many cases to use an actuarial basis that incorporates interest and mortality rates. Surrenders exhibit a dynamic relationship to moneyness, whether measured on a nominal or actuarial basis. On a nominal basis 80% of GLWB exposure is in-the-money, whereas on an actuarial basis only 13% is in-the-money.

  • Surrender rates vary little across distribution channels, once other drivers of surrender behavior are accounted for. The exception is where companies cannot ascertain whether a policyholder has an ongoing relationship; where the distributor-policyholder relationship is weak, surrenders are as much as 34% higher than average and 45% higher than under career agency distribution.
  • Annuitization rates for GMIBs are in the low single digits and continue to decline. “Hybrid” versions that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower rates than traditional versions which reduce the guarantee in a pro-rata fashion, especially in the first year of eligibility.
  • Factors influencing annuitization rates include age, duration, last year of eligibility, death benefit type, contract size, and moneyness. The effects of size vary depending on the benefit form and also the distribution channel, with considerably higher annuitization rates where the distributor-policyholder relationship is weak.

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


Ruark Releases 2021 Fixed Indexed Annuity Study Results

Provides first look at the effects of COVID-19 on policyholder behavior

Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its 2021 industry studies of fixed indexed annuity (FIA) policyholder behavior, which include surrenders, income utilization and partial withdrawals. Ruark’s FIA studies cover products both with and without a guaranteed lifetime income benefit (GLIB).

“This study gave us our first look at the effects of COVID-19 on FIA policyholder behavior,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “Given record low interest rates, and disruptions to sales channels, there was no way to know whether past patterns would continue. We’re intrigued by how some relationships changed -- and others didn’t.”

The study data comprised nearly 4 million policyholders from 16 participating companies spanning the 13-year period from 2007-2020, with $264 billion in account value as of the end of the period. GLIB exposure constituted 43% of exposure overall, and 47% of exposure in the last 12 study months. GLIB exposure beyond the end of the surrender charge period increased 83% over 2020 study exposure.

Highlights include:

  • Extreme market activity, and COVID-related disruption to policyholders’ usual communication patterns with advisors and agents, had mixed effects on 2020 surrender activity. Record low interest rates led to more positive market value adjustment, and contracts in the surrender charge period with a positive MVA surrendered at higher rates. For contracts beyond the shock duration, surrender rates declined, consistent with an industry-wide decline in gross annuity sales in 2020; a proportion of gross sales is attributable to exchanges of one annuity product for another.

  • Contracts with a guaranteed lifetime income benefit have much better persistency than those without, and among contracts that have begun taking income withdrawals, surrender rates are even lower. Persistency appears insensitive to nominal moneyness (the relationship of account value to the benefit base), but when an actuarial moneyness basis which discounts guaranteed income for interest and mortality rates is applied, we see that persistency is greater when the economic value is higher, as should be expected.

  • The relationship between surrender charges and surrender rates can be quantified. The study examines the relationship of persistency to the effective surrender charge, that is, the difference between account value and cash surrender value (including bonus recapture).
  • Surrenders are sensitive to external market forces as well as the absolute level of credited interest rates. Contracts earning less than 2% exhibit sharply higher surrenders than those earning more. As competitive market interest rates increase, so do surrenders, though there is some indication that a higher credited rate tempers the increase. Equity returns are negatively correlated with surrenders, but only for contracts without an income benefit.

  • Where cash surrender values are subject to market value adjustment, surrender rates for policies with a positive market value adjustment exceed those for policies with a negative adjustment. In the aggregate, policyholders act as though a positive MVA is a bonus, rather than a mechanism to make both parties whole, while surrender rates for contracts with negative MVA are similar to those for contracts with no MVA feature. Among contracts with a positive MVA, surrender rates are inversely related to equity market performance; we surmise that policyholders who are disappointed in credited returns on their FIA take advantage of the temporary offset provided by a positive MVA, and surrender at higher rates.
  • Lifetime income commencement rates are low, 7% overall in the first year following the end of the waiting period and then falling to approximately 3%in years 3 and later. There is evidence of a spike in utilization after year 10, particularly where the benefit is structured as an optional rider rather an embedded product feature. Age, tax status, and contract size all influence commencement rates.
  • We see little observable effect on GLIB utilization from COVID-19 disruptions to sales channels and capital markets, given initial 2020 indications.
  • Lifetime income utilization increases sharply when policies are in the money, that is, the benefit base exceeds the account value. After normalizing for age, tax status, and contract duration, contracts that are 25% in the money or more exercise at a 12% rate. In contrast, when contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are out of the money, at the money, or modestly in the money, policyholders exercise at a base rate of about 2%. Income commencement rates are most sensitive to moneyness following the end of the rollup period.

  • FIA contracts typically offer the opportunity to take 5-10% 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 GLIB, though free partial withdrawal frequencies and amounts are somewhat lower on contracts with a lifetime income guarantee. Free partial withdrawal activity is influenced by age and required minimum distributions, as well as contract size and the presence of a waiting period.

  • Withdrawal sizes spike in the year following the end of the surrender charge period, when all partial withdrawals become penalty-free; average withdrawal sizes for contracts without GLIB jump by 10% of account value in the year immediately following the end of the surrender charge period.

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


Ruark Releases 2020 Variable Annuity Study Results

Indications that COVID-related market activity and disruptions affected policyholder behavior

Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its 2020 industry studies of variable annuity (VA) policyholder behavior, which include surrenders, income utilization and partial withdrawals, and annuitizations.

“We expected that 2020 behavior would be different,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “By looking at industry-level data, we are better able to identify and quantify those differences – especially on current-generation products.”

Ruark’s 2020 study spanned the period from January 2008 through June 2020. The study period was designed to capture early effects of COVID-19 and related market movements. COVID-related findings include:

  • Extreme market activity in the first half of 2020, and disruption to policyholders’ usual communication patterns with advisors and agents by COVID-related social distancing, appear to have affected VA surrender and income commencement behavior
  • Contracts with guaranteed lifetime withdrawal benefits (GLWB) persisted at greater rates than expected, as current-generation products exhibited greater sensitivity to 2020 market movements than they did in the past
  • Surrender rates fell uniformly on older product types in 2020; this is suggestive of a new, unique surrender regime, distinct from the regimes observed before and after the 2008 financial crisis
  • GLWB commencement rates were depressed in 2020 among contracts with the highest propensity to exercise the benefit: in-the-money contracts following the end of the deferral bonus period. Both the level and sensitivity of commencement rates were reduced.

Study data comprised 89 million years of exposure and 13.9 million policyholders from 20 participating companies, with $675 billion in account value as of the end of the study period. The study’s in-the-money exposures on GLWB contracts were 23% higher than in Ruark’s 2019 study (and 40% higher for deep in-the-money contracts). Among contracts issued since 2011, deep in-the-money exposure increased to 9% of total exposure, up from 6% in 2019. The study contained over 740,000 exposure years prior to withdrawal commencement for contract durations 11 and beyond, more than doubling the comparable exposure in Ruark’s 2019 study.

Other study highlights include:

  • GLWB deferral incentives appear to be effective. Income commencement rates are low overall; about 13% in the first year and falling to about half of that in years 2-10. However, commencement rates more than double in year 11 with the expiration of common 10-year bonuses for deferring income, before falling to an ultimate rate. After commencement, GLWB continuation rates are over 85%.
  • Income commencement rates increase when GLWBs are more in-the-money, that is, the benefit base exceeds the account value. This effect is quite pronounced after the expiration of common 10-year deferral incentives, with commencement rates ranging from low single digits to nearly 30% depending on moneyness.

  • Annual withdrawal frequency rates for GLWB and GMIB have continued to increase and have become more efficient with approximately 65% of recent experience at the full guaranteed income amount.
  • Free partial withdrawal amounts increase after the end of the surrender charge period, similar to the familiar “shock” in surrender rates. Excess withdrawal amounts on GLWB and GMIB increase as well.
  • Contracts with GLWB and GMIB have much lower surrender rates, and this effect is even more pronounced for those limiting their partial withdrawals to the guaranteed income amount.

  • Policyholders that take systematic withdrawals on GLWB and GMIB exhibit a select-and-ultimate effect, with very low surrenders in the first systematic withdrawal year and increasing thereafter. In the fourth systematic withdrawal year and beyond, surrender rates are comparable to those of contracts that have not taken any withdrawals.
  • When calculating relative value for GLWBs, use of a “nominal” moneyness basis (account value relative to the GLWB benefit base) can be deceiving, since it fails to reflect important aspects of the product’s economics. Therefore, it may be preferable in many cases to use an actuarial basis that incorporates interest and mortality rates. Surrenders exhibit a dynamic relationship to moneyness, whether measured on a nominal or actuarial basis. On a nominal basis 80% of GLWB exposure is in-the-money, whereas on an actuarial basis only 12% is in-the-money.

  • Surrender rates vary little across distribution channels, once other drivers of surrender behavior are accounted for. The exception is where companies cannot ascertain whether a policyholder has an ongoing relationship; where the distributor-policyholder relationship is weak, surrenders are as much as 50% higher.

  • Annuitization rates for GMIBs are in the low single digits and continue to decline. “Hybrid” versions that allow partial dollar-for-dollar withdrawals have much lower rates than traditional versions which reduce the guarantee in a pro-rata fashion, especially in the first year of eligibility. Factors influencing annuitization rates include age, duration, last year of eligibility, death benefit type, contract size, and moneyness.

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


T minus 7

Hello friends of Ruark,

7 days to go!

If you have not done so already, reminder to please return your order form to us by June 30 before heading off for summer vacation. Thanks in advance, as this will help us plan for a very busy next few months. (And VA clients, prices increase 25% after June 30). We all will soon learn a lot about crisis-behavior for recent vintage products, which should mean better experience studies and better modeling.

If you still need to make your case with the budget hawks or higher-ups:

Even for large blocks, relevant industry data in a credibility-based framework has a quantifiable and compelling cost-benefit. Here is a short case study demonstrating this for GLIB/GLWB income modeling for a company that has 35% market share. If you are not using the industry data this way, why not?

And here is an even shorter one in terms of hedge breakage. We have seen that relevant industry data can consistently improve A/E results by several percentage points, which can avoid $ millions of losses due to hedge breakage.

...Data is not a budget question, it is an enterprise risk management question. Please, for your sake, our sake, and that of the actuarial profession, do the math before you decide. Let us know if we can be of any further assistance as you do. If you can find something that has better bang for the buck, we would love to hear about it.

Thanks for your ongoing support, stay safe, and have a great summer!

Kind regards,

Tim

timothyparis@ruark.co

860.866.7786


Online meeting May 20 - Highlights from 2020 FIA Industry Studies

Thanks to the many of you who joined this online meeting!

Discussion slides are here - Ruark BAAC 20200520 - 2020 FIA Industry Studies.

 

FIA folks, this one is for you.  (And yes, as shown above, GLIB income commencement is sensitive to moneyness).

We thank those of you who have already purchased our 2020 FIA industry studies of policyholder behavior. We have held online meetings with many others over the last couple months to share highlights from our 2020 FIA industry studies including our first-ever FIA mortality table. This meeting on May 20 was intended for those with whom we had not yet had a chance to meet (online). Please let me know if you would like to schedule a separate meeting to aid your purchase decisions.

Lots of data:

  • Total exposure years grew to 23 million, a 21% increase over last year's study
  • Double the exposure years for GLIB contracts past the end of the surrender charge period
  • GLIB exposure constituted 44% of exposure overall, and 49% of exposure in the last 12 study months
  • 39% increase in lifetime income withdrawals, to $5.4 billion
  • The study data comprised over 4 million policyholders from 17 participating companies spanning the 12-year period from 2007-2019, with $296 billion in account value as of the end of the period

Discussion slides are here - Ruark BAAC 20200520 - 2020 FIA Industry Studies.

Kind regards,

Tim

Timothy Paris, FSA, MAAA
Chief Executive Officer
Ruark Consulting, LLC
530 Hopmeadow Street
Simsbury, CT 06070
Mobile 860.866.7786
Email timothyparis@ruark.co
Website ruark.co
Connect with me and follow Ruark on LinkedIn®

 


Revised plans for 2020 VA industry studies

To download the discussion slides from April 24, click here.

On behalf of our team we hope that you and your families are doing well.

On April 17, we announced revised plans for our 2020 VA industry studies of policyholder behavior. We made this decision with great thought and care following discussions with most of our VA clients over the preceding few weeks. Thanks to the constructive feedback and enthusiastic support of so many, we believe that this change will not only meet your needs but provide you with far more value than what we were originally planning.

  • Our revised plan is to perform the 2020 VA studies with supplemental data through June 30 2020, target completion in November.
  • In the interim, to aid your annual assumption review process, we will make the industry-only portion of last year’s studies available now if you submit your order form for the 2020 VA studies by June 30. After that, the studies will be subject to an additional 25% charge.

We look forward to supporting you in this important work in 2020 and beyond. Please contact me with any questions - timothyparis@ruark.co.


Online meeting March 23 - Market turmoil: What does it mean for annuity policyholder behavior?

Thanks to the nearly 100 of you who participated in this online meeting!

Given the turmoil in financial markets and hearing the concerns of our annuity company clients and others in recent weeks, we expanded what would otherwise have been our Behavioral Analytics Advisory Council to an open meeting for anyone interested.  Discussion slides are here - Ruark BAAC 20200323.

Our primary focus was the brief report "Market turmoil: What does it mean for annuity policyholder behavior?" published last week (link here) by our COO Eric Halpern. Here we have real FIA and VA data and insights from past times of crisis - monthly policyholder behavior and mortality data going back to 2007 covering about 70% of the market with over $1 trillion of current account values.

With all of this great data, we are uniquely positioned to help you better manage risks, especially now.  Our insights from this data allow us to build more accurate models of policyholder behavior, with potentially less hedge breakage for VA and FIA -- how much is 1% A/E improvement worth to you?  Our predictive analytics techniques use company- and industry-level data to help you improve your pricing, valuation, and risk management models. Our approach is rigorous, transparent, and tailored to each company, allowing for quick implementation and quantification of improvement in financial risk profile from what you can do if limited to your own data.

Links to a brief case study and highlights from our recent work are below:

Let me know if you would like to arrange a call or online meeting to discuss our work products and modeling services.

Please stay tuned as we are planning other ways to keep in touch by phone and online meeting over the next few months.  Let me know if you would like us to add you to our email distribution list.  And you can continue to find updates here on our website, LinkedIn, or social media pages using the links below.

Thanks for your continued support, and we hope that you and yours stay well.

Tim

Timothy Paris, FSA, MAAA
Chief Executive Officer
Ruark Consulting, LLC
530 Hopmeadow Street
Simsbury, CT 06070
Mobile 860.866.7786
Email timothyparis@ruark.co
Website ruark.co
Connect with me and follow Ruark on LinkedIn®


Market turmoil: What does it mean for annuity policyholder behavior?

To download the full report, click here.

Executive Summary

We offer insights on expected annuity policyholder responses to recent financial market turmoil, gleaned from our studies of annuity policyholder behavior since 2007.

Variable annuity writers should expect:

  • Greater persistency overall, but elevated surrenders for at-the-money GLWB
  • Greater income utilization, especially for GLWB after the deferral incentive period and “hybrid” GMIB
  • Greater GMIB annuitization elections, especially on traditional “pro-rata” benefit forms

Fixed indexed annuity writers should expect:

  • Greater persistency for GLIB, and lower persistency without GLIB
  • Greater income utilization for GLIB

COVID-19 impact on mortality:

  • Will likely depend on the level of containment among the general population at retirement ages, with potential differences between those with and without living benefit guarantees

Ruark is uniquely positioned to help as risk management takes center stage:

  • We have the data from past times of crisis –monthly policyholder behavior and mortality data going back to 2007 covering about 70% of the market with over $1 trillion of current account values
  • We have developed predictive analytics techniques that use company- and industry-level data to help our clients improve their annuity pricing, valuation, and risk management models. Our approach is rigorous, transparent, and tailored to each company, allowing for quick implementation and quantification of improvement in financial risk profile from what they can do if limited to their own data.

To download the full report, click here.


Ruark Releases 2020 Fixed Indexed Annuity Studies

Increasing data exposure in key areas

Ruark Consulting, LLC today released the results of its 2020 industry studies of fixed indexed annuity (FIA) policyholder behavior, which include surrenders, income utilization and partial withdrawals. Ruark’s FIA studies cover products both with and without a guaranteed lifetime income benefit (GLIB).

“With new data contributors, and rapid growth in the FIA market, data exposures in key areas continue to increase,” said Timothy Paris, Ruark’s CEO. “More data enables us to do more detailed analysis, identify new patterns, and – critically – help our clients achieve meaningful risk reduction in their models.”

Among the notable increases in exposure:

  • Total exposure years grew to 23 million, a 21% increase over the 2019 study
  • Double the exposure years for GLIB contracts past the end of the surrender charge period
  • A 39% increase in lifetime income withdrawals, to $5.4 billion

The study data comprised over 4 million policyholders from 17 participating companies spanning the 12-year period from 2007-2019, with $296 billion in account value as of the end of the period. GLIB exposure constituted 44% of exposure overall, and 49% of exposure in the last 12 study months.

Highlights include:

  • Lifetime income commencement rates are low, 6% overall in the first year following the end of the waiting period and then falling to the 2-3% range in years 3 and later. There is evidence of a spike in utilization after year 10, particularly where the benefit is structured as an optional rider rather an embedded product feature. Age, tax status, and contract size all influence commencement rates.
  • Lifetime income utilization increases sharply when policies are in the money, that is, the benefit base exceeds the account value. After normalizing for age, tax status, and contract duration, contracts that are 25% in the money or more exercise at a 10% rate. In contrast, when contracts with lifetime withdrawal benefits are out of the money, at the money, or modestly in the money, policyholders exercise at a base rate of about 2%.
  • FIA contracts typically offer the opportunity to take 5-10% 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 GLIB, though free partial withdrawal frequencies and amounts are somewhat lower on contracts with a lifetime income guarantee.
  • Free partial withdrawal activity is influenced by age and required minimum distributions, as well as contract size and the presence of a waiting period. 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 for contracts without GLIB double to 20% of account value in the year immediately following the end of the surrender charge period.
  • Surrender rates continued to climb in 2019, particularly among contracts past the surrender charge period. The increase is broadly consistent with the rise in FIA sales that has been reported across the industry. While net sales have grown, a certain proportion of the increase in gross sales is likely attributable to exchanges of one FIA product for another.
  • Contracts with a guaranteed lifetime income benefit have much better persistency than those without, and among contracts that have begun taking income withdrawals, surrender rates are even lower. Persistency appears insensitive to nominal moneyness (the relationship of account value to the benefit base), but when an actuarial moneyness basis which discounts guaranteed income for interest and mortality rates is applied, we see that persistency is greater when the economic value is higher, as should be expected.
  • The relationship between surrender charges and surrender rates can be quantified. The study examines the relationship of persistency to the effective surrender charge, that is, the difference between account value and cash surrender value.
  • Surrenders are sensitive to external market forces as well as the absolute level of credited interest rates. Contracts earning less than 2% exhibit sharply higher surrenders than those earning more. As competitive market interest rates increase, so do surrenders, though there is some indication that a higher credited rate tempers the increase. In contrast, equity returns are negatively correlated with surrenders. Where cash surrender values are subject to market value adjustment, surrender rates for policies with a positive market value adjustment exceed those for policies with a negative adjustment. In the aggregate, policyholders act as though a positive MVA is a bonus, rather than a mechanism to make both parties whole, while surrender rates for contracts with negative MVA are similar to those for contracts with no MVA feature.

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


Stat and GAAP: raising the bar for data analysis and policyholder behavior modeling

Whether VM-21 for variable annuities, GAAP LDTI, or the prospect of VM-23 for fixed indexed annuities, regulatory changes are raising the bar for data analysis, use of relevant industry data, and policyholder behavior model development.  Let's discuss how our industry studies, benchmarking, and customized model development services can help you.

Contact:

Timothy Paris

timothyparis@ruark.co

860.866.7786