For an aggregate claims model, let denote one claim size, with expected value and variance . The total is zero when the claim count is zero. Given , independence gives
The law of total expectation and law of total variance, together with for a Poisson distribution, imply
The raw second moment appears because the random count itself contributes to the variance.
Conditional on , the moment-generating function of the sum is . Averaging with the Poisson distribution therefore gives the compound Poisson distribution transform
This is valid wherever is finite. Finite first and second moments alone do not ensure positive exponential moments; for positive claims the corresponding Laplace transform always exists.
For the independent portfolios put and . Their Poisson distribution counts add to a Poisson distribution with parameter . By Poisson-multinomial conditioning, conditional on the total count the first risk count has a binomial distribution with parameters , and the second is the remaining count. Thus one can generate the same total loss by drawing independent risk labels with these weights, then drawing each claim from its label's law. The merged severity has mixture distribution
It follows that has a compound Poisson distribution with count parameter and this severity law. This is the fixed-year version of Poisson superposition of insurance portfolios. Its expected value and variance are
Alternatively, multiplying the two independent aggregate Laplace transforms yields wherever finite, confirming the same compound Poisson distribution.
For the retained compound Poisson aggregate under per-claim reinsurance, replace each claim by its retained payment . Assume the retention is measurable, with as usual. The count parameter remains , and the severity law is the pushforward measure of the mixture severity under . Thus the retained compound Poisson aggregate has a compound Poisson distribution with that transformed severity and
Its moment-generating function is on its finite domain. For a general retention , zero retained payments can occur and are allowed as compound-Poisson marks; they may equivalently be removed by Poisson thinning. The two specified contracts retain strictly positive payments for strictly positive claims.
For quota share reinsurance the insurer retains the same fraction of each claim, so
The annual retained loss is consequently . Each transformed risk severity has probability density function for . The mixed transformed severity, with the same weights , still gives a compound Poisson distribution. Scaling the expected value and variance gives
This agrees with the general retained-claim formulas because and .
For excess of loss reinsurance the insurer pays each claim up to its retention level:
The cap applies separately to every claim. In particular the retained annual loss is , rather than a single cap on the annual total.
Let be the cumulative distribution function for the claim size on risk , and put . The retained severity on that risk has the original probability density function on and an atom of a measure at of mass . Thus has a compound Poisson distribution with rate and the mixture of these capped severity laws. The mixture's mass at is .
For the capped claim moments, use the tail integral formula for moments. Since for and is zero for ,
Substitution into the compound Poisson distribution moment formulas gives
Equivalently, the integrals are and . The annual variance uses the retained raw second moments; subtracting their squared means would omit the variation in the Poisson distribution count.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.