Actuarium

Machine-led reserving method selection

Backtests chain-ladder, Bornhuetter–Ferguson, Benktander and Cape Cod on real Schedule P triangles by leave-diagonals-out hindsight, converts errors to Bayesian model weights and recommends a blended reserve.

Open with agent
Recommended method
Chain-ladder (simple average)
Blended reserve ($000)
18,731,582
Mack total CV
13.1%
Latest diagonal
34,358,090

Model weights and backtest error

MethodReserveUltimateRMSLEBiasCellsWeight
Chain-ladder (volume-weighted) 18,680,85653,038,9468.1%-0.5%2425%
Chain-ladder (simple average)
Recommended
18,883,07353,241,1638.1%-0.0%2426%
Chain-ladder (last 3 diagonals) 18,030,81052,388,9009.7%-0.5%240%
Bornhuetter–Ferguson 18,680,85653,038,9468.1%-0.5%2425%
Benktander (iterated BF) 18,680,85653,038,9468.1%-0.5%2425%
Weighted blend18,731,58253,089,672

Why this recommendation

  • Chain-ladder (simple average) minimises hindsight error (RMSLE 8.1%, bias -0.0%) over 24 backtested cells and receives 26% of the model weight.
  • Mack total CV is 13.1%; the chain-ladder pattern is stable, so development methods are credible.
  • Early age-to-age factors are stable (CV ≤ 25%).
  • Blended reserve 18,731,582 vs. best single method 18,883,073; the blend hedges model risk (ASOP 43 §3.6.4).

Age-to-age factor CV by age: 1→2: 19% · 2→3: 10% · 3→4: 10% · 4→5: 6% · 5→6: 6% · 6→7: 4% · 7→8: 1% · 8→9: 2% · 9→10: 0%

Assumptions & limitations
  • Backtests use only diagonals observed at the time; Cape Cod requires earned premium and is dropped when the dataset lacks it.
  • Pseudo-BMA weights assume Gaussian log-errors with equal prior on methods; they measure short-horizon predictive accuracy, not tail adequacy.
  • A credentialed actuary must still select and document the method (ASOP 43); this tool ranks candidates and quantifies model risk.
Ask the tutor