Export file:


  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text


  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

A Spatial Interpolation Framework for Efficient Valuation of Large Portfolios of Variable Annuities

1 Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 3G4, Canada
2 Department of Mathematics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, 06269-3009, USA

Special Issues: Computational Finance and Insurance

Variable Annuity (VA) products expose insurance companies to considerable risk becauseof the guarantees they provide to buyers of these products. Managing and hedging these risks requireinsurers to find the values of key risk metrics for a large portfolio of VA products. In practice, manycompanies rely on nested Monte Carlo (MC) simulations to find key risk metrics. MC simulations arecomputationally demanding, forcing insurance companies to invest hundreds of thousands of dollars incomputational infrastructure per year. Moreover, existing academic methodologies are focused on fairvaluation of a single VA contract, exploiting ideas in option theory and regression. In most cases, thecomputational complexity of these methods surpasses the computational requirements of MC simulations.Therefore, academic methodologies cannot scale well to large portfolios of VA contracts. In thispaper, we present a framework for valuing such portfolios based on spatial interpolation. We providea comprehensive study of this framework and compare existing interpolation schemes. Our numericalresults show superior performance, in terms of both computational effciency and accuracy, for thesemethods compared to nested MC simulations. We also present insights into the challenge of findingan effective interpolation scheme in this framework, and suggest guidelines that help us build a fullyautomated scheme that is effcient and accurate.
  Article Metrics

Keywords variable annuity; spatial interpolation; Kriging; inverse distance weighting; radial basis function; portfolio valuation

Citation: Seyed Amir Hejazi, Kenneth R. Jackson, Guojun Gan. A Spatial Interpolation Framework for Efficient Valuation of Large Portfolios of Variable Annuities. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2017, 1(2): 125-144. doi: 10.3934/QFE.2017.2.125


  • 1.Azimzadeh P and Forsyth PA (2013) The Existence of Optimal Bang-Bang Controls for GMxB Contracts.
  • 2.Bauer D, Kling A, Russ J (2008) A Universal Pricing Framework For Guaranteed Minimum Benefits in Variable Annuities. ASTIN Bull 38: 621-651.    
  • 3.Bauer D, Reuss A, Singer D (2012) On the Calculation of the Solvency Capital Requirement Based on Nested Simulations. ASTIN Bull 42: 453-499.
  • 4.Bishop CM (2006) Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (Information Science and Statistics), New Jersey: Springer-Verlag.
  • 5.Boyd S, Vandenberghe L (2004) Convex Optimization, New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • 6.Boyle P, Tian W (2008) The Design of Equity-Indexed Annuities. Insur: Math Econ 43: 303-315.    
  • 7.Boyle PP, Hardy MR (1997) Reserving for Maturity Guarantees: Two Approaches. Insur: Math Econ 21: 113-127.    
  • 8.Burrough P, McDonnell R, Lloyd C (1998) Principles of Geographical Information Systems, 2 Ed., Oxford University Press.
  • 9.Belanger A, Forsyth P, Labahn G (2009) Valuing the Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit Clause with Partial Withdrawals. Appl Math Finance 16: 451-496.    
  • 10.Carriere J (1996) Valuation of the Early-Exercise Price for Options Using Simulations and Nonparametric Regression. Insur: Math Econ 19: 19–30.    
  • 11.Cathcart M, Morrison S (2009) Variable Annuity Economic Capital: the Least-Squares Monte Carlo Approach. Life & Pensions 36–40.
  • 12.Chen Z, Forsyth P (2008) A Numerical Scheme for the Impulse Control Formulation of Pricing Variable Annuities with a Guaranteed MinimumWithdrawal Benefit (GMWB). Numer Math 109: 535-569.    
  • 13.Chen Z, Vetzal K, Forsyth P (2008) The Effect of Modelling Parameters on the Value of GMWB Guarantees. Insur: Math Econ 43: 165-173.    
  • 14.Chi Y, Lin XS (2012) Are Flexible Premium Variable Annuities Underpriced? ASTIN Bull 42: 559-574.
  • 15.Chiles JP, Delfiner P (1999) Geostatistics, Modelling Spatial Uncertainty, Wiley-Interscience.
  • 16.Coleman TF, Li Y, Patron MC (2006) Hedging Guarantees in Variable Annuities under Both Equity and Interest Rate Risks. Insur: Math Econ 38: 215-228.    
  • 17.Cressie NAC (1993) Statistics for Spatial Data, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • 18.Dai M, Kwok YK, Zong J (2008) Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit in Variable Annuities. J Math Finance 18: 595-611.    
  • 19.Daul S, Vidal E (2009) Replication of Insurance Liabilities. RiskMetrics J 9: 79-96.
  • 20.Dembo R, Rosen D (1999) The Practice of Portfolio Replication: A Practical Overview of Forward and Inverse Problems. Ann Oper Res 85: 267-284.    
  • 21.d'Halluin Y, Forsyth P, Vetzal K (2005) Robust Numerical Methods for Contingent Claims Under Jump Diffusion Processes. IMA J Numer Anal 25: 65-92.
  • 22.Feng R, Cui Z, Li P (2016) Nested Stochastic Modeling for Insurance Companies. Technical report, The Society of Actuaries.
  • 23.Fox J (2013) A Nested Approach to Simulation VaR Using MoSes. Insights: Financial Modelling, 1-7.
  • 24.Gan G (2013) Application of Data Clustering and Machine Learning in Variable Annuity Valuation. Insur: Math Econ 53: 795-801.    
  • 25.Gan G (2015) Application of Metamodeling to the Valuation of Large Variable Annuity Portfolios, In: Proceedings of the 2015 Winter Simulation Conference, 1103-1114.
  • 26.Gan G, Lin XS (2015) Valuation of Large Variable Annuity Portfolios Under Nested Simulation: A Functional Data Approach. Insur: Math Econ 62: 138-150.    
  • 27.Gan G, Ma C, Wu J (2007) Data Clustering: Theory, Algorithms and Applications, Philadelphia: SIAM Press.
  • 28.Gerber H, Shiu E, Yang H (2012) Valuing Equity-Linked Death Benefits and Other Contingent Options: A Discounted Density Approach. Insur: Math Econ 51: 73-92.    
  • 29.Hardy M (2003) Investment Guarantees: Modeling and Risk Management for Equity-Linked Life Insurance, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  • 30.Huang Y, Forsyth P (2011) Analysis of A Penalty Method for Pricing a Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB). IMA J Numer Anal 32: 320-351.
  • 31.Hull JC (2006) Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, 6 Ed., New Jersey.
  • 32.IRI (2011) The 2011 IRI fact book, Insured Retirement Institute.
  • 33.Krige D (1951) A Statistical Approach to Some Mine Valuations and Allied Problems at the Witwatersrand. Master's thesis, University of Witwatersrand.
  • 34.Lin X, Tan K, Yang H (2008) Pricing Annuity Guarantees under a Regime-Switching Model. North Am Actuar J 13: 316-338.
  • 35.Longstaff F, Schwartz E (2001) Valuing American Options by Simulation: A Simple Least-Squares Approach. Rev Financ Stud 14: 113-147.    
  • 36.Matheron G (1963) Principles of Geostatistics. Econ Geol 58: 1246-1266.    
  • 37.McKay M, Beckman R, Conover WJ (1979) A Comparison of Three Methods for Selecting Values of Input Variables in the Analysis of Output from a Computer Code. Technometrics 21: 239-245.
  • 38.Milevsky M, Salisbury T (2006) Financial Valuation of Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefits. Insur: Math Econ 38: 21-38.    
  • 39.Moenig T, Bauer D (2011) Revisiting the Risk-Neutral Approach to Optimal Policyholder Behavior: A study of Withdrawal Guarantees in Variable Annuities, In: 12th Symposium on Finance, Banking and Insurance, Germany.
  • 40.Oechslin J, Aubry O, Aellig M, Kappeli A, Bronnimann D, Tandonnet A, Valois G (2007) Replicating Embedded Options in Life Insurance Policies. Life & Pensions 47-52.
  • 41.Reynolds C, Man S (2008) Nested Stochastic Pricing: The Time Has Come. Prod Matters!- Society of Actuaries 71: 16-20.
  • 42.Shepard D (1968) A Two-dimensional Interpolation Function for Irregularly-spaced Data, In: Proceedings of the 1968 23rd ACM National Conference, New York: ACM, 517-524.
  • 43.Stein E, Shakarchi R (2009) Real Analysis: Measure Theory, Integration, and Hilbert Spaces, Princeton University Press.
  • 44.TGA (2013) Variable Annuities-An Analysis of Financial Stability. The Geneva Association.
  • 45.Ulm E (2006) The E ect of the Real Option to Transfer on the Value Guaranteed Minimum Death Benefit. J Risk Insur 73: 43-69.    


This article has been cited by

  • 1. Guojun Gan, Emiliano A. Valdez, Valuation of large variable annuity portfolios: Monte Carlo simulation and synthetic datasets, Dependence Modeling, 2017, 5, 1, 10.1515/demo-2017-0021
  • 2. Guojun Gan, Valuation of Large Variable Annuity Portfolios Using Linear Models with Interactions, Risks, 2018, 6, 3, 71, 10.3390/risks6030071
  • 3. Xiaojuan Cheng, Wei Luo, Guojun Gan, Gang Li, , PRICAI 2019: Trends in Artificial Intelligence, 2019, Chapter 57, 716, 10.1007/978-3-030-29894-4_57
  • 4. Kai Liu, Ken Seng Tan, Real-Time Valuation of Large Variable Annuity Portfolios: A Green Mesh Approach, North American Actuarial Journal, 2020, 1, 10.1080/10920277.2019.1697707
  • 5. Ben Mingbin Feng, Zhenni Tan, Jiayi Zheng, Efficient Simulation Designs for Valuation of Large Variable Annuity Portfolios, North American Actuarial Journal, 2020, 1, 10.1080/10920277.2019.1685394

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: 2017, Seyed Amir Hejazi, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved