Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-09T00:27:54.544Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

On Mortality Fluctuations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2016

James R. Macfadyen*
Affiliation:
Legal and General Life Assurance Society

Extract

There is nothing immutable in this world, and certainly life companies are no exception to the general rule; for in them, from year to year, we find fluctuations of every kind—in amount of new assurances—in expenses of management—in value of assets—in realized interest—in the death claims—in fact, in every branch and item of their business. Of all these variations there is none so important as that concerning the mortality experienced. The fluctuations in the other elements of a life office's affairs are trifling as compared with this, and can without difficulty be prepared for. But in the perturbations of the death claims from year to year, we are dealing with a matter that cannot be calculated on in advance —an element which, if violent, may endanger the safety of the company itself; and, even when this is not the case, will often prove a serious inconvenience to it. I have called violent mortality fluctuations inconvenient to a life office. To men acquainted with the practical as well as the theoretical side of assurance, the word will not seem exaggerated. They, at least, know how important it is that the bonus to policyholders and the dividend to shareholders, do not retrograde. The moment the bonus tide begins to ebb, there is an outcry; and variations in the mortality may thus create disgust in those already connected with an office, and at the same time add another difficulty to the already sufficiently difficult task of its agents and canvassers.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Institute and Faculty of Actuaries 1875

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* It does not follow from this that the mortality table founded on the largest number of lives is necessarily the best for adoption. The table ought to be on all fours with the mass of the lives assured, and so the nature of the business to be transacted must be considered in choosing a table. Thus a company, the bulk of whose risks lay in the more Southerly American States, would hardly be safe in adopting a table of lives drawn from the Union generally. And on the same principle, a table founded on the experience of a nation at large is not the best for use by a life office, since assurance companies create a new subdivision by medical selection.