3 ms·
I assume they just don't care about exceptions, and just correlate past data to actual claims to adjust their actuarial tables. But to your point, maybe that al
by tyingq 3y ago
I assume they just don't care about exceptions, and just correlate past data to actual claims to adjust their actuarial tables. But to your point, maybe that also penalizes non-aggressive things that result in accidents.
- nickjj 3y ago> I assume they just don't care about exceptions, and just correlate past data to actual claims to adjust their actuarial tables Yep, IMO that's a problem in general. So much is based on case studies in aggregate instead of individuals. The same thing happens with medicine (at least in the US). Just because 200 people in 1 study demonstrated that X year old Y gender people who live in Z have 7.8917% more likelihood to be in an accident vs the average population which was determined by 20 other studies doesn't mean you or I have the same percent.
- falcolas 3y ago> So much is based on case studies in aggregate instead of individuals. Isn't this a good thing? Insurance is about spreading individual risk across a group. Hyper targeting the premiums of individuals according to their individual risk is the exact opposite of spreading risk.
- nickjj 3y agoIt depends on who you're optimizing for, insurance companies or individual drivers.